Thread regarding Halliburton Co. layoffs

Schlum announced more layoffs (~21K), HAL will follow

Follow the leader...

by
| 3075 views | | 8 replies (last )
Post ID: @OP+166FhL1e

8 replies (most recent on top)

He never said in May that layoffs for the year would be done by June. He said at that time “THIS reduction would be completed by June”. However, he flat out stated in a company earnings report that ALL layoffs for the year will be done by September. He said at that point we will be right sized for the current and expected future markets. Again, why lie about that in an earnings report? Stock holders love when you reduce your overhead. It means bigger gains for them. So he would have no incentive to not state it outright if there would be more. In fact it would be better for his bottom line to state if more would happen. Because the stock price would rise.

by
|
Post ID: @dxid+166FhL1e

"Ours will be done by Sept per the CEO" . You actually believe this. He said the same back in May they'd be done by June. The guy lies through his teeth and can't be trusted. Wake up!

by
|
Post ID: @deih+166FhL1e

Its too bad Eric Box hasn't been told the truth from the PSL VPs and Technology Directors.

by
|
Post ID: @axju+166FhL1e

You are incorrect. The 21,000 is already completed. It was stating they recently did it, not that an Additional 21,000 are being let go.

From the Houston business Journal

“The largest single portion of those charges was $1 billion of severance costs associated with reducing Schlumberger’s workforce by more than 21,000 employees or 1/5 of their workforce. More information about the workforce reduction was not included in the release, but it appears that most, if not all, of those job cuts have already taken place.

by
|
Post ID: @3khr+166FhL1e

Halliburton hasn’t stopped with layoffs at any point over the past four months. Read further down this board for proof. Layoffs will continue as needed to continue adjustments to market conditions.

However, Halliburton was ahead of Schlumberger with layoffs because US Land, especially shale, cratered hardest and first. And Halliburton, being heavily US centered, was far more involved and exposed to that crash so it had to lay off employees fast and hard. Schlumberger, being more internationally oriented, was less exposed to the US Land crash and had more time to wait and watch the market before cutting staff.

by
|
Post ID: @1lth+166FhL1e

b—s— Halliburton gonna cut lots more, you're just wishing it's over!

by
|
Post ID: @fir+166FhL1e

Per the WSJ Halliburton has stated we are 75% done with our cuts with only small overseas reductions left. But Schlum is only 40% done, hence why such the large number. We are almost done. Quit worrying people for no reason

by
|
Post ID: @dpe+166FhL1e

Ours will be done by September per the CEOs latest earnings press release. You have to remember Schlum is twice our size and hadn’t really had the level of layoffs we have. Quit worrying so much.

by
|
Post ID: @hzo+166FhL1e

Post a reply

: