Bank CEOs Says Robots Can Replace Half of Citigroup and Deutsche Bank Employees

Mike Mish Shedlock

Investment bank CEOs believe machines will take over ‘lower-value tasks’. 50% of employees are at risk.

The Financial Times reports Citi Issues Stark Warning on Automation of Bank Jobs.

Citigroup has 20,000 technology and operations staff. That about 40% of the banks total number of employees. Those jobs are at risk.

In an FT interview, Jamie Forese, Citi president, commented “We’ve got 20,000 operational roles. Over the next five years could you make it 10,000?”

Deutsche Bank Wants to Chop Half of Its 97,000 Headcount

In a separate FT interview last year, Deutsche Bank CEO commented on the need to Cut Tens of Thousands of Jobs.

“We employ 97,000 people,” John Cryan told the Financial Times. “Most big peers have more like half that number.”

“We’re too manual, which can make you error-prone and it makes you inefficient. There’s a lot of machine learning and mechanisation that we can do.”

Cuts Coming

Cuts are coming and those are not all low-paying jobs.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock

Comments (12)
No. 1-12
Stuki
Stuki

Shouldn’t be too hard, to build a machine with an open slot for Powell to deposit a few billion of freshprint into every month. And which otherwise does nothing useful nor interesting at all.

hmk
hmk

The main beneficiary of AI and robots would be the corrupt crony capitalist political class ruining our country. It sounds scary but could it get any worse than it is now.? If you think about it decisions could be made on the basis of what is good for the country and not for the politician himself. Problem solved...

JonSellers
JonSellers

My new term is technoBS. TechnoBS is anytime someone makes a claim that some technology is going to change the world, when the technology doesn't actually exist in sufficient robustness to meet said claim. The claim that AI is going to lead to the reduction of tens of thousands of jobs in banking is technoBS. if it weren't, it would have already happened. Might it happen in the future? Maybe. But so may flying cars and 3D printed jet-packs. I'm not holding my breath.

Realist
Realist

Technology has already changed banking dramatically, and will continue to change it in the future, which means different jobs, and possibly fewer jobs. The advent of automatic teller machines, and online banking are two such examples. This has reduced the need for human tellers, and has resulted in an increase in financial consultants who assist individuals with loans, mortgages, investments, insurance etc.

WildBull
WildBull

Then came the fountain pen, the type writer, the adding machine, the IBM mainframes, the word processor, the PC ... All the time the economy grew while millions of jobs were shed. Creative destruction at its finest.

Tony_CA
Tony_CA

If any of these predictions are remotely correct, why in the world is our political class continually pushing for open - less restrictive immigration? It as if our leaders have become oblivious to the current situation.

Brother
Brother

We are moving toward a tellerless retail bank. I see atm’s set up inside bank’s with lines 10 people long. The service manager is the one teller handling the few irate customer transactions avoiding losses. Calling them on the phone you end up pushing buttons and navigating the robot. Front office and back is slowly going away. Expect bonuses at the top for a job well done.

Greggg
Greggg

Here's the prototype for Wells Fargo:

Realist
Realist

Tony CA “if any of these predictions are remotely correct, why in the world is our political class continually pushing for open - less restrictive immigration? It as if our leaders have become oblivious to the current situation.” Not all politicians want immigration. Those that want to see more immigration probably have the following reasons: First: economic growth is a combination of productivity growth x population growth. Since population growth is slowing dramatically in the US, this leads to less economic growth. By bringing in more immigrants, you can boost your economic growth. Second: demographically, the US is becoming a nation with more and more retirees. As a result, the participation rate of workers in the economy has fallen from 68% to 62%. If you bring in a lot of immigrants in their 20s and 30s, you can boost the number of workers supporting the elderly. As Mish pointed out recently, there is a pension and health care crisis coming as the elderly become a larger share of the population. Third: There is a shortage of skilled workers in the US. There are more jobs sitting empty, than there are unemployed people. If you bring in a lot of highly skilled immigrants, you can help solve this problem. Fourth: The US was built by immigrants. It is a country of immigrants. Why on earth would you stop now?

KidHorn
KidHorn

My local Capital One has eliminated tellers all together. All transactions must be done via ATM. They have a couple of desks for people opening accounts and handling loans.

MissionAccomplished
MissionAccomplished

I just see artificially low interest rates enabling an artificial future and can't help but think there is a discontinuity lurking out there somewhere.

MissionAccomplished
MissionAccomplished

Why? Well if we are so freaking global let them reap all these benefits back home in their own countries instead of plugging up mine. My Silicon Valley iCrap will cost even less if Mandeep only pays Dharavi rent.

What is the benefit to me?


Global Economics

FEATURED
COMMUNITY