Thread regarding ExxonMobil Corp. layoffs

Fair and Not Fair...

There is a sense of unfairness in these layoffs... It is also unfair that people are not given proper compensation for being laid off.

But let’s be fair: when I joined 15 years ago, it was explained to me that, really, the ranking is there for EM to identify the top for Dallas level senior management and the bottom to be ready for the next lay-off. The old forced ranking system was there to select the bottom 3-5-10-15 % or whatever management wanted to let go. So, the old EM, brutal as it was had a system prepared. Moreover, to avoid the small a...hole effect (aka any 1st or 2nd supervisor punishing anybody that they did not like) one could only move so many points in the ranking each year. Brutal but some sense of fairness.

In their infinite wisdom the new nobodies with Texan or British accent that run the company - and their HR - forgot about these principles when they decided to have buckets, to pretend that it is a new and friendlier system (which first line supervisors love since it is also less work for them - it is enough to put a person in a bucket instead of ranking her vs others in the same bucket, thus the enthusiasm). And they put the NSI to 5% (not 3% that was before).

Separately though they realized that the numbers did not work. How are you going to cut OPEX by 15%? Simple math. And this happened BEFORE COVID by the way.
So, oops, we need to fire more. So, we cannot go back to the old system so let’s tell everybody to put 8% in the NSI bucket.

This is what happened. And of course, since some supervisors are nasty, they paid back middle third employees that they disliked by putting them down to NSI.

The company had to act to fix OPEX. We do have indeed low performers. So simple.

Of course, we all know that we are where we are not because of them but because of the decisions of managers that the “inbreeding” promotes.

by
| 5033 views | | 11 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+16tNQSMj

11 replies (most recent on top)

@1hcp+16tNQSMj - you’re 100% correct. No “safety net” anymore, for up/down moves. I would imagine they’re going to stay like this now, as it suits their needs. Although people may have guessed that the safety net had gone (by reading some of the comments in other threads too), it was worth spelling it out clearly for everyone to see.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2lbm+16tNQSMj

People are missing the biggest change that was made. The max drop being capped at 19 RGP being removed was the biggest change. That was put in place to protect employees from a supervisor getting rid of them even when they had been highly ranked the year(s) before. Could not drop more than one quintile in any one ranking cycle. Now, supervisors can, and did, drop employees multiple quintiles. And it could happen to anyone with the bad luck to be saddled with a supervisor that builds themselves up by tearing their staff down. Now more than ever, of you don’t have a sponsor that’s highly regarded, you are screwed.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1hcp+16tNQSMj

@evj+16tNQSMj - if you REALLY believe that they changed the system (by going to the new “friendlier-sounding” buckets), then you must be the biggest fool on this forum. No-one in their right mind heard about the “new” system and thought that ANYTHING had changed. It was only when they informed staff that the NSI group had expanded (up to 8-12%) that people started to think something different was happening.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1eap+16tNQSMj

Desperate times call for desperate measures.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @nep+16tNQSMj

Yep, throw in the focus on "behaviours", and there is no limit to the arbitrariness of the new system! A manager's dream - can hit anybody for any reason and not worry about any consequences. All fall in line now, or else!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @vdt+16tNQSMj

It is true that many employees have made many complaints regarding the ranking system in the past. Some had focused on the forced ranking.

But most were really about issues related to ranking and not the ranking itself. Funny thing, these issues were never addressed and in fact it is what brought to the fore with the amateurish actions of the current senior management this summer.
In particular:
Employees had been complaining about lack of transparency that was made abundantly obvious this summer with the “new” system too.
That supervisors were not providing justification other than such is the system (heard it many times this summer).
That people were told just their “third” without their vector so that they were blindsided when they found themselves at the bottom (same thing as we hear with the new system).
I know - I am sure you all know - cases of people on assignment whose ranking suffered with the old system. I know of high ranked employees this year that after 1 year assignment became NSI.
People were complaining that because ranking was tied to promotions, people on fast track were always occupied top spots. Likely still the case. To the best of my knowledge the link of ranking and promotions has not been explained (maybe not even decided).

So, as original poster seems to imply, forced ranking is a tool. Problem was how it was applied. New system did not address most issues and made the process more arbitrary and even more open to manipulation by supervisors.

The new system, as everything under Rex and Darren, is an exercise of useless c-ap in beautifully prepared powerpoints

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rrl+16tNQSMj

I worked as a contractor before being hired on. As a contractor I was able to thrive and learn. As a result, I was able to get more work done than people around me and did not have a clear understanding of why.
The ranking system, because it is not used properly by a lot of Managers that face no accountability for this, lowers morale and hinders learning. Employees spend more time trying to manipulate systems and management in an effort to improve ranking.
If better morale and less bitterness existed these people could grow and thrive. Too many people have been stuck in ranking or even dropped in ranking dropped due to age or the inbreeding system of good old boys managers and supervisor that mark them for any reason they choose, or simply competing with others became part of the inbreeding circle - some which have committed gross misconduct to get there. The XOM ranking system, because there is no real accountability for those in charge, is a detriment to employees and the company as a whole.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gfv+16tNQSMj

Say that YOU don't care, not that NOBODY cares...

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @lpt+16tNQSMj

Employees have been complaining for years rank system was horrible and unfair, no transparency. Probably one of the top employee complaints,. This came up repeatedly at management forums, q&as. They listened and changed the system. Now we want to go back?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @evj+16tNQSMj

This actually sums up the issues quite well thank you for your insight.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ymn+16tNQSMj

good nobody cares about your rant.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ida+16tNQSMj

Post a reply

: