08
Deloitte Partners Splurge on “Lavish Mansions” as Juniors Dodged on Education
Posted by The Spy | Posted in Deloitte, Firm Gossip | Posted on 9.21am
We published a report last year on the seemingly oppressive education conditions that Big4 accounting firm Deloitte forced upon junior staff. Our anonymous Deloitte spy noted in that post, in respect of those studying to become a CA, that:
if you fail 1 subject you get a warning, 2 subjects a written warning and 3… you’re fired!
Following on from that story, we received the following excellent comments from a Deloitte spy last week:
Hi guys … a couple of pieces of news from Tax at Deloitte. Following on from your story regarding the requirement for analysts to re-pay the firm should they fail any CA programs it is worth noting the firm has let down tax analysts re their Masters program too. The grads that started last year were promised that they could complete 2 subjects per semester, thus allowing them to finish their Masters within 2 years. Well come the GFC these promises turned to dust. Not only were the grads not allowed to complete any subjects last year but now the firm will only fund one subject per semester, doubling the time to get a Masters (this change impacted all Masters students btw as even those who had commenced their study already were held back to one funded unit per semester).
Our Deloitte spy then proceeded to give us yet another insight into the besieged Deloitte Tax group (thanks for the comprehensive work!):
In other news there are rumblings within the non Corporate Tax groups in the wider Tax group (eg TP and Indirect). These groups consistently exceed target but until Corp reaches target (never going to happen) no bonuses will be paid to seniors and above in the specialty groups. Well not quite no bonuses…the partners in these groups have been raking in huge bonuses on the back of their staff bringing in the dollars. This is clearly evident from the 2 huge mansions just constructed by 2 of the Indirect PArtners Jon Graham and John Koutsogiannis, not to mention the lavish personal spending by TP partners of late.
Is your partner splashing the cash while you starve? Do you partners impose harsh education conditions?
Send the Firm Spy your news and views!
Related posts
- Deloitte Loses Audit Seniors While Non-Equity Partners Score Bonuses Thanks to the Deloitte spy who sent us the following...
- Rumour; Clayton Utz Graduates Dodged By Partners Thanks to the Clayton Utz spy who made the following...
- Desk Emptying Frenzy; Minter Ellison Juniors Allegedly Leaving Firm En Masse The lateral mobility of junior staff in the post-GFC era...
- ‘Fail 3 CA Subjects & You’re Fired’; Deloitte CA Policy In response to our articles profiling the CA policies of...
- The Deloitte Delinquent; Spy Reveals Shocking New Rumours In what must be among the most candid insider assessments...
Loading... 
Loading ...
Yeah, yeah the firm cut back on Masters during the GFC - but we didn’t sack anyone, and we took on all the grads we promised jobs to.
And the partners have nice houses - surprise, surprise. We also have a group that’s expanding, a group that’s schooling the ATO where it matters and a group that’s going pretty well overall.
And yes this comes from inside DTT, but trust me I’m not your usual sycophant. Just a team member happy to stick up for his team when it deserves it.
Green dotter…Deloitte didn’t sack anyone because they simply performance managed people out of the system to ensure they cut down on numbers while not having to make redundancy payments…tut tut..haven’t you seen how many people around you have left in the last 12 months alone?
As with the masters program…it is clearly misleading and deceptive conduct…differentiating Deloitte’s grad program to potential grads on the strength of its masters program but the grads are getting a complete different deal once they’ve signed on the dotted line…the worse thing is that the firm refuses to acknowledge that it was for cost cutting purposes but rather couched it as better supporting its employees’ educational needs by balancing work and study commitments…
And your team has obviously cacooned you well or you’re simply not looking up and smelling the “bad” air…
Hmm with the use of the American spelling for ‘gr(a)y’ I think you’ve given yourself away as a certain big talking under performer who was managed out of indirect my friend.
If it is you, and sincere apologies if not as I would hate to be tarred with that brush, you should realise the Indirect group at DTT has grown massively in the last 4 years. In numbers and revenue.
That being said I agree now that the group is ticking over a re-visit of the cost cutting for the masters program would be appreciated by the grads I’d imagine.
I agree with Green Dotter; I’m not your usual firm ‘line-toer’ and wouldn’t ordinarily post to sites like Firmspy, and yet I find the singling out of Jon G and John K in this article as fairly petty and mean-spirited.
In the past four years, the two Jo(h)ns - along with more recently Rodger Muir- have taken Deloitte Indirect Tax from strength to strength. So they have nice houses..? They have also turned a fairly modest corner of the Deloitte practice into something of a market innovator, and at no small risk to themselves.
Clearly, it would be a problem if the partner group was unwilling to share the spoils with the team, but that is not my experience (at least in Indirect Tax- I haven’t got much visibility of what’s going on in the other specialty groups). I think the high retention rates and generally happy demeanour of the team are testament to how we feel we’re being treated by the powers that be.
The only query I would have for Green Dotter regards the identity of the ‘Gray Dotter’- I’m medium-termer with the group, and I can’t recall any American team members (let alone any that have been managed out). I can, however, recall several Canadians. Can I suggest you are confusing Mr or Ms Gray with someone whose provenance is from north of the 49th parallel??
I would like to add 2 Deloitte Private Partners to the list of splashing out. In the midst of the GFC you have Tara Hill splash out on a million dollar home in Mosman and Bernard Gild divulging how he was putting another $100,000 into his super. $100,000 may not seem a lot but let me tell you for someone earning $90,000 a year and who is forced to live a mediocre life on such a salary, it is very demotivating.
Green Dotter I hate to tell you that Deloitte have used the “Performance Management” system to get rid of staff so as to avoid redundancies. Just look at Deloitte Private, one of the worst performing clusters in the group who struggle to meet plan, had to take that approach to cut costs. The funny thing is that you dont see any of the partners disappearing… an example is Tara Hill, newly appointed partner for almost 2 years, does not appear to bring in many new clients to the firm. All she does all day is worry about her resourcing schedule - so please tell me where the underperformance lies?? And she is on approximately $300,000 a year!! I have absolutely no loyalty to Deloitte!!
It doesn’t seem too controversial to say that if you fail three subjects, you’re out, does it? Seems like a pretty reasonable requirement for an employee. My firm didn’t have that requirement with PLT, but I think perhaps firms should have it, considering how people treated it/how often you hear of people plagiarising assignments for PLT.
No AHDI I did mean a yank. Think hard, she was in the group for just a short, but noisy, period and is now with another ‘Big 4’.
I have to say, I never had an issue with the fact that if you failed subjects you eventually get kicked out. I really don’t understand why anyone is making a hoo-ha about that. If you fail a subject 3 times, surely that raises serious questions about your knowledge levels, time management skills, etc, etc.
I think 3 and out is fair. Particularly because it is a subjective 3 and I know a few people who have been given a few chances above and beyond 3 due to extenuating circumstances, ie, workloads or whatever.
Not allowing people to study as many subjects as they want to if they are not failing them when they do is pretty misleading and deceptive though, to ‘change policy’ half way through an enterant’s degree.
When the green dot changed their CA policy for EVERYONE last year though I thought that was appauling and definitely misleading and deceptive. It wasn’t so much the fact that if you failed you are out, that I agree with it was the fact that if you left you were now liable for all your CA costs, including CA leave, course materials, etc, etc, etc. I don’t have a problem with this being the policy that gets signed GOING IN to the firm, that is, if you are made aware of it from the start, but to drop it on the people who were three or four subjects into their CA in an attempt to ensure they can’t leave was pretty rude.
I was just glad I had finished my CA when they brought it in because I found the policy change insulting, in that they tried to claim it would be retrospective. How stupid do they think everyone is?
Anonymous - you sound both bitter and unrealistic. You are also clearly a free loader. If you have no loyalty to someone who gives you $90k a year why don’t you go somewhere else where you’d be happy??
Perhaps you can find a company where they don’t reward senior staff (or the owners of the business) and you can live in a happy utopia of sitting on your backside getting paid to moan about how tough the real world is?
Big deal that a younger partner buys a million dollar house - have a look out there and tell me where that sort of house price is uncommon? Having worked as long as she has, she should be able to afford such a house.
And if a senior partner is putting more money into his super then isn’t that a good thing? He is getting closer to retirement and is acting sensibly - though I’d guess from your moaning you never bothered to work too hard to figure that sort of stuff out. You are probably waiting for someone to give it to you because you clearly deserve a free ride in life…
Personally I think partners should not be named on sites such as this unless you have the guts to sign it off yourself…
Maybe you should moan to a family of 4 living on $45k a year that your poor little salary just won’t do and you want more??
Its a shame that for some reason you managed to avoid any performance counselling because you really are clearly a waste of a desk. Perhaps Deloitte made a mistake in avoiding making redundancies - though you’d probably have put your hand up to get a payout.
Talk Straight, there is nothing wrong with partners spending money on nice houses and there is nothing wrong with a partner adding money to their super.
What I don’t understand is how partners are still getting such large bonuses when the rest of the team goes without any sort of pay rise. Fine, cut the fruit boxes, cut the tissues, cut the stationary supply. But if you’re going to retrospectively change the training program for all the analysts - then I expect to see some sacrifices at the partner level too. But no, partners still get to fly to Gold Coast to stay at the Palazzo Versace for the partner conference and all partners are still getting bonuses paid out!
And don’t make this a personal issue by implying that whoever posts on this site is a poor under-performing “waste of a desk”. Partners at Deloitte need to understand their employees better instead of turning a blind eye to the level dissatisfaction around the office. If you’re not making your employees happy, then don’t be surprised that articles like these get posted up.
Talk Straight, judging by the way you’re aggressively defending everything, you’re clearly some indignant Deloitte tax partner who is oblivious to the dissatisfaction around the office.
And it’s completely unethical what the partners decided to do about the training program. When employees decided to join Deloitte, one of the reasons was the training that was promised. You can’t try and attract top talent by promising them something and then when they join, you decide to change the terms of the contract completely.
Talk straight, just chill dude!! You obviously very loyal to Deloitte!! WOW - I didnt think that existed. Probably is a bit poor to name and shame but sometimes that also just the reality of how people are feeling. There is a lot of unhappiness - this is just evident from the comments on this site. The question is, how do you fix it?
As for signing off, I would suggest that you dont act so hypocritical. I would like to see you sign off your real name!! Lets be real here mate.
Re the discussion around Deloitte Indirect Tax.
Whilst I am not the type to ever post something on FS and definitely not the type of person to ‘toe the company line’, the personal attack on Jon Graham and John Koutsogiannis has compelled me to say something.
This seems like a typical case of tall poppy syndrome, where those who are successful are cut down and criticised for their success – quite pathetic really.
So what if our Indirect Tax partners are remunerated well and hence can afford ‘lavish’ mansions? What we are forgetting is that Deloitte partners are remunerated based on performance. In a time where the vast majority of Indirect Tax practices are struggling and in some cases even contracting, Deloitte Indirect Tax have been able to recognise continuous growth over the last number of years in both head count and revenue.
5 years ago, it was fair to say that Deloitte Indirect was a clear number 4. However, over the last few years, through their commitment to innovation and a faith in the quality of their people, the Jo(h)n’s have taken us to be arguably the premier Indirect Tax team in Australia; this being recognised when the International Tax Review named Deloitte the ‘Indirect Tax Firm of the Year’ in Australia for 2008. As AHDIT says, this success has been at no risk to themselves, as the Jo(h)n’s put their reputations on the line and kept faith in their vision for Deloitte Indirect Tax.
So I ask, are the Jo(h)n’s not deserved in being rewarded for their commitment to our team and their ability to grow our practice? Offcourse they are. By Deloitte recognising the successes of our leadership, this gives us something to be proud of and something tangible to aspire too. I know I would be rather working for a successful team with successful leadership, as opposed to one that didn’t have those attributes.
So what about the employees like us, I here you say? Well it’s true that we’ve had no bonuses during the GFC, that’s a well known fact and there’s no denying that - this not being specific to Indirect Tax. However, that hasn’t stopped the Deloitte Indirect Tax leadership from continually recognising and, importantly, rewarding the hard work of our team.
In my time at Deloitte Indirect Tax, I have never seen the team so engaged and happy. Our level of staff turnover is at an all time low and I can safely say that the team are well and truly behind the Jo(h)n’s and Rodger - who by the way has been a welcome addition to the team and very much is in the Deloitte Indirect Tax mould, truly a stand up guy.
So to all those haters outside Deloitte Indirect Tax – I say good luck to you. Our team is successful, happy and harmonious. We enjoy working in the team we do, and we wouldn’t have it any other way. If you don’t believe me, just look to the comments of Green Dotter and AHDI above.
it is laughable how the posters think that staff are the ones bringing in the dollars. it has always been the case that up to partner level you are learning on the job. if you dont like it just leave and stop wasting floor space.
Brown Dot said “it is laughable how the posters think that staff are the ones bringing in the dollars. it has always been the case that up to partner level you are learning on the job. if you dont like it just leave and stop wasting floor space.”
It is laughable that you don’t realise that mistreatment of staff has contagion effects and impacts on your bottom line. How do you think staff exoduses look to clients? How do you think lacks of continuity look to clients? Would you employ a services organisation to do work for you if all the staff did was sit around and tell you their working environment was terrible?
Wake up to yourself, you are losing money because of such narrow minded attitudes as you have displayed here.
It also shows your lack of professionalism as a partner to come on a site such as this and try to combat grievances anonymously. I understand why the underlings do it, for fear of reprisal from such obvious tyrants as yourself, but you show a complete lack of ability to realise and deal with the issues by coming on here and insulting people with genuine feedback about internal issues, that would otherwise not have been raised.
You want to be a real leader, rather than just a pretender? Call a meeting to discuss the grievances. Don’t hide behind insults through anonymity on a public website.
I certainly will not be encouraging my current employer to call Deloitte for any tax or other services any time soon… I’ll make sure another one of the Big 4 does our R&D claim. You are a disgrace.
LOL @ Brown Dot; last time I checked there was plenty of floor space to go around… Maybe staff are finding it better to get their “learning on the job” somewhere else?