"Gusto utilizes a redundant system of leading banking partners to facilitate our payroll processing and services to provide peace of mind for the unexpected." was the interesting part to me. I wonder if this is standard practice. It sounds like Rippling did not do this where Gusto did but that may be misleading. Anyone in the industry have insight?
This article is slightly click-baity. The payments are delayed in some cases, not held out altogether. From what I'm hearing so far, Rippling has changed banks over night and has instructed all clients to update the ACH filters accordingly. Only payroll cycles caught in-between will be affected, but even then they are delayed, but not held.
Yesterday afternoon, Rippling learned that Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) had solvency challenges. We have been working with SVB to ensure timely payments to our customers’ employees. However, this morning we learned that the FDIC had stepped in and taken control of SVB.
We are reaching out to you because you have a payroll that has already been processed for 3/15/2023. Currently, these funds may be sitting with SVB. We are closely monitoring the FDIC takeover and what it means for this pay run. We ask that you please reach out to your bank and request that your bank return any ACH transactions debited from your account by Rippling into SVB under the premise that the transaction(s) are unauthorized, since the bank has ceased operations and is unable to honor the payments.
If the bank agrees to issue a return, you will then need to send a wire to Rippling for the full amount of the 3/15/2023 payroll run by Tuesday 3/14/2023 at 12 PM PST. This help center article has updated wire instructions. Your 3/15/2023 payroll will be marked as Non-sufficient Funds (NSF) on Rippling’s end, but as long as we have received the wire, Rippling will issue employee payments for 3/15/2023 via our new banking partner, JP Morgan Chase & Co.
If the bank does not agree to issue a return, we will follow up with additional instructions. If you have questions, please reach out to our support team.
1. Businesses processing payroll through Rippling wired money to Rippling's account as SVB
2. Rippling would now normally use that money to pay the businesses employees.
3. Before that could happen, SVB went upside-down. Some of the money may be lost, the rest is frozen.
4. The businesses owe their employees their pay, but may not have enough money to simply pay for payroll a second time.
5. Rippling owes the money to the businesses (respectively, has an obligation towards the businesses to pay their payroll), but may not have the money to do so after some amount of funds just disappeared and another larger amount just got frozen for an unknown amount of time.
6. Employees of these businesses won't be receiving their pay on time, and may not be able to receive it at all if the money they're supposed to be paid with is gone and neither their employer nor Rippling can afford to cover the loss and goes bankrupt.
Edit: based on a tweet linked elsewhere in this thread, Rippling is putting up its own money to make sure payroll goes through, so it should indeed just be one business day of delay + possibly additional small delays because some companies didn't make the necessary adjustments to keep future payroll runs working.
"Hey, your paycheck won't be coming today and I need you drop what your doing and make an emergency change to our apis so that we can use JP Morgan Chase. We're going to have to skip all the usual test environments."
The article headline is clickbait. They're immediately doing payouts through JP Morgan Chase now; the only delay is because some payouts were in flight when they got stuck in SVB, so if a payout was started via SVB a few days ago and was going to arrive today (because bank transactions aren't instantaneous), the new payouts will take a few days to arrive via JP Morgan Chase.
So people are not receiving their promised money on time? Sounds like the title is accurate. Not everyone has the float to handle an unexpected delay in money. People can also suffer liquidity events.
> Clickbait … is designed to attract attention and to entice users to [engage with] content, being typically deceptive, sensationalized, or otherwise misleading. - Wikipedia
This is literally clickbait. Y’all need to chill. It’s sensationalized and misleading relative to the severity of todays events.
The title is “technically correct” but it sensationalizes it for sure. Reading that title you expect Rippling to be going under or severely impacted. Which it sounds like so far they’re not (again relatively).
The employees of the companies which outsourced their payroll operations to Rippling did not receive the ACH credits to their account on the specified date and time. This is not clickbait. Payment did not occur as scheduled. Payments have been delayed.
Rippling’s EPO service is technically an employer however and D&O doesn’t cover missed payroll. If they miss a payroll due to this, it’ll be on their EPO board to cover the cost no?
Couldn’t one check and see which bank your ACH transfer was sent from?
I guess it depends on your bank whether this is readily visible, but if not, should be available through a simple phone call to a rep that’s allowed to see more than end-users are exposed to.
If you look at your bank you may be able to see the originating bank for your last direct deposit - or if you get an actual paystub it may list the bank.
This website's tracking consent pop-up is unlawful: unticking each spyware service one at a time rather than a one-click opt-out is not permitted by the GDPR.
Do businesses not do any risk assessments to prevent things like this from happening? Especially a business that is providing a critical service to businesses.
Why are they using a regional bank to handle this?
[+] [-] edgyquant|3 years ago|reply
https://mobile.twitter.com/GustoHQ/status/163424676119459433...
[+] [-] SyzygistSix|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ISL|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hoofhearted|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vladaionescu|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jmvoodoo|3 years ago|reply
Hi Rippling Customer,
Yesterday afternoon, Rippling learned that Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) had solvency challenges. We have been working with SVB to ensure timely payments to our customers’ employees. However, this morning we learned that the FDIC had stepped in and taken control of SVB.
We are reaching out to you because you have a payroll that has already been processed for 3/15/2023. Currently, these funds may be sitting with SVB. We are closely monitoring the FDIC takeover and what it means for this pay run. We ask that you please reach out to your bank and request that your bank return any ACH transactions debited from your account by Rippling into SVB under the premise that the transaction(s) are unauthorized, since the bank has ceased operations and is unable to honor the payments.
If the bank agrees to issue a return, you will then need to send a wire to Rippling for the full amount of the 3/15/2023 payroll run by Tuesday 3/14/2023 at 12 PM PST. This help center article has updated wire instructions. Your 3/15/2023 payroll will be marked as Non-sufficient Funds (NSF) on Rippling’s end, but as long as we have received the wire, Rippling will issue employee payments for 3/15/2023 via our new banking partner, JP Morgan Chase & Co.
If the bank does not agree to issue a return, we will follow up with additional instructions. If you have questions, please reach out to our support team.
Thanks, The Rippling Team
[+] [-] dhruvrrp|3 years ago|reply
Ref: https://twitter.com/parkerconrad/status/1634315187837861889
[+] [-] codetrotter|3 years ago|reply
That would still be a disaster for me. But I guess that says more about me and my lack of financial stability, than it says about anyone else..
[+] [-] tgsovlerkhgsel|3 years ago|reply
If I understand it correctly:
1. Businesses processing payroll through Rippling wired money to Rippling's account as SVB
2. Rippling would now normally use that money to pay the businesses employees.
3. Before that could happen, SVB went upside-down. Some of the money may be lost, the rest is frozen.
4. The businesses owe their employees their pay, but may not have enough money to simply pay for payroll a second time.
5. Rippling owes the money to the businesses (respectively, has an obligation towards the businesses to pay their payroll), but may not have the money to do so after some amount of funds just disappeared and another larger amount just got frozen for an unknown amount of time.
6. Employees of these businesses won't be receiving their pay on time, and may not be able to receive it at all if the money they're supposed to be paid with is gone and neither their employer nor Rippling can afford to cover the loss and goes bankrupt.
Edit: based on a tweet linked elsewhere in this thread, Rippling is putting up its own money to make sure payroll goes through, so it should indeed just be one business day of delay + possibly additional small delays because some companies didn't make the necessary adjustments to keep future payroll runs working.
[+] [-] berkle4455|3 years ago|reply
If the money was sitting in an account at SVB, which it was, it’s at risk.
[+] [-] Arrath|3 years ago|reply
Decent of Rippling to cover overdraft fees of those affected, at least.
[+] [-] readthenotes1|3 years ago|reply
"Hey, your paycheck won't be coming today and I need you drop what your doing and make an emergency change to our apis so that we can use JP Morgan Chase. We're going to have to skip all the usual test environments."
[+] [-] ummonk|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 0cf8612b2e1e|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] nighthawk454|3 years ago|reply
This is literally clickbait. Y’all need to chill. It’s sensationalized and misleading relative to the severity of todays events.
The title is “technically correct” but it sensationalizes it for sure. Reading that title you expect Rippling to be going under or severely impacted. Which it sounds like so far they’re not (again relatively).
[+] [-] briffle|3 years ago|reply
FedNow instant payments are supposed to go live this spring/summer. Feels like it should have been 10 years ago.
[+] [-] n0us|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jjulius|3 years ago|reply
Oh? Okay, let's see, it starts with...
>SF payroll firm Rippling has to delay payouts...
And then you said...
>The only delay is because...
So, two sentences later you've confirmed the headline's accuracy yourself.
[+] [-] woah|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] parker_mountain|3 years ago|reply
so there are in fact delayed payouts.
[+] [-] walrus01|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mtillman|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] DeathArrow|3 years ago|reply
And is JP Morgan safe from having similar issues with SVB?
[+] [-] jonathankoren|3 years ago|reply
Eeeek! Talk about failing up!
https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/26/sec-fines-zenefits-nearly-...
[+] [-] mabbo|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Scoundreller|3 years ago|reply
I guess it depends on your bank whether this is readily visible, but if not, should be available through a simple phone call to a rep that’s allowed to see more than end-users are exposed to.
[+] [-] bombcar|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wlonkly|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] HarryHirsch|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ddevault|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|3 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] impulser_|3 years ago|reply
Why are they using a regional bank to handle this?
[+] [-] colechristensen|3 years ago|reply
Payroll being delayed a few days is indeed annoying, but it's not the end of the world.
[+] [-] smileysteve|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] frgtpsswrdlame|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] andrewxdiamond|3 years ago|reply
I expect the email contains much more specific instructions and an actual process to follow. These things take time to write, even at SEV1 priority.
The CEO is biasing towards speed of notification, so they tweet some quick details out ASAP while the PR team gets moving.
That’s just my perspective tho. I am assuming many things
[+] [-] flappyeagle|3 years ago|reply
[+] [-] hackernewds|3 years ago|reply