Citigroup Mandates Future Job Offer Disclosures to Halt Buy-Side Talent Drain

Citigroup Inc. has introduced a contentious employment disclosure policy for junior bankers, mandating that first-year analysts report any future-dated job offers from competing firms. The initiative, outlined in an internal memo reviewed by Bloomberg, requires a one-time “attestation” with potential annual renewals, aiming to deter junior talent from transitioning to buy-side roles—such as private equity—before completing their investment-banking training. This move aligns Citigroup with peers like Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase, which have similarly sought to curb talent poaching through loyalty oaths and termination threats for early departures [1].

The policy has drawn sharp criticism from legal and HR experts, who label it “draconian,” “unethical,” and “soul-killing.” Joshua Bienstock, a labor attorney and professor at the New York Institute of Technology, argues that such disclosures create an “oppressive” work environment that risks driving top talent away from major firms. He highlights a 2024 SHRM study indicating Gen Z prioritizes workplace flexibility over competitive salaries, suggesting these measures could backfire by diminishing morale and loyalty. “The brightest talent will question why they need institutions like Goldman Sachs when alternatives offer less restrictive environments,” Bienstock said, noting that young professionals increasingly value autonomy over high compensation [1]. Paul Webster of Page Executive North America echoed these concerns, warning that such policies may paradoxically reduce employee loyalty rather than strengthen it.

Critics also flag potential legal vulnerabilities. Bienstock predicts legislative pushback, drawing parallels to New York State’s 2023 failed attempt to ban non-compete agreements for all employees. A proposed 2025 bill by Sen. Sean Ryan, which would restrict non-competes to highly compensated workers, underscores a broader regulatory skepticism toward employer-imposed restraints. Bienstock anticipates similar scrutiny for Citigroup’s disclosures, given New York’s historical “disdain” for such restrictive practices. He warned that these policies disproportionately penalize junior employees for market realities, stifling career autonomy while banks prioritize retention [1].

The industry-wide crackdown began in early 2025, with JPMorgan Chase threatening to terminate analysts who accepted future buy-side offers before completing 18 months of employment. Goldman Sachs introduced quarterly loyalty oaths, while Citigroup now follows suit. These measures aim to counter the “on-cycle recruiting” frenzy, where junior bankers secure buy-side roles months in advance, often before their banking training concludes. However, the effectiveness of such tactics remains uncertain. Bienstock and Webster caution that while banks seek to protect their interests, the long-term consequences—including talent attrition and reputational damage—could outweigh any short-term gains.

As the debate intensifies, the investment banking sector faces a critical juncture. Balancing talent retention with employee rights has become a high-stakes challenge, with legislative and cultural shifts poised to redefine the industry’s approach to recruitment. The outcome may hinge on whether firms can adapt their strategies to align with evolving workforce expectations—or risk further alienating the next generation of professionals.

Source: [1] [Citi Takes Leaf Out of Goldman’s Loyalty Oath Playbook] [https://fortune.com/2025/07/25/citigroup-goldman-sachs-business-employment-hiring-loyalty-oaths/]