Thread regarding Chevron Corp. layoffs

This is a Farce!

Why bother with this bs? The job owners already have preferred candidates. It’s so bad that they’re telling people who want to apply to not waste their time. What is the point of any of this? Why are they torturing us? Why not do a nice clean lay-off?

by
| 4575 views | | 17 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+16vAt5x4

17 replies (most recent on top)

The OP and I think everyone else senses the outcome correctly— the job owners already have 99% of their job openings already selected. Why put everyone through the mill? Simple— for appearances sake only, to give the appearance of fairness and that everyone has a fair chance at a job. We all know better. It’s all a farce.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bafz+16vAt5x4

This whole thing stinks to high heaven. You can hear the hollowness in people’s voices; everyone’s either a nervous wreck or a cold lump. This entire year long Drama has been a disaster. People are beyond wrecked. Productivity is in the toilet and the stress levels are in the stratosphere. Sadly It’s not over yet.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @bqgo+16vAt5x4

Obviously if you are happy with someone in a position and they are doing a reasonable job you will generally keep them over an unknown that would take time to get up to speed. Common sense. In BUs there are a few EOI backfills, but that is about it (even those probably have someone already chosen to sit). The center is doing a more complete reorganization but despite all the talk about “unprecedented openness” the logic driving the new organization is completely opaque even for most job owners. This could have been done much better, pulling out the EOIs first, and then explaining the reorganization logic at the level of the actual job applications. Who cares who is the new vp of this or that: how is my unit and team being reorganized (beyond changing their labels) and why! I have no idea where I would fit because job descriptions are so vague and organization concepts have no granularity. Good luck every!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3gfm+16vAt5x4

In talking to job owners I get the impression they plan to save the people in their group and aren’t really considering others from outside the group. I agree with the OP. I don’t think management really needs to put us through all this if they already know who is going to have the job.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3cvx+16vAt5x4

This reorg scheme and template was borrowed from Unocal of the old. In the end, guess what happed to Unocal? This also tells you that the remnants of Unocal are in charge of Chevron affairs- I saw it in Unocal and trying to apply my experience now in Chevron while the musical chair is still open.
Good luck everyone.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2ejg+16vAt5x4

Be thankful, you have be given time to prepare.
Be strong, you can endure change.
Be hopeful, all is not lost and you have more to accomplish.
Have faith in yourself, you can do what is needed to survive.
Have faith in something greater than yourself, find peace in a higher power.
Have the courage to persevere, all great stories include a challenge.
Accept the unknown and embrace what comes next.
Acknowledge your strength, own your story.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2jtf+16vAt5x4

All these slow and tedious EOI and ROM processes are to shield CVX from future (former) employee lawsuits.

In the meanwhile, bend over, get your KY jelly ready, and prepare to get ROMed.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1gab+16vAt5x4

@idk. You are exactly the problem with Chevron. If you don't agree to a know all, he/she is to nice and they're a holes. There is no. ice way to tell you're wrong not that you will admit it. That's the problem with Chevron. Everyone have to be nice with each other to the point of stupid and group hugs. Imagine the quality of decisions now for a minute :)

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1ndi+16vAt5x4

so FUNNY, of course, people get the jobs who are liked, another way of saying this is they don't keep the a–holes onboard. We all know it only takes one nasty person to ruin a team, just like in sport, better to have team of nice people all pulling for the team than some dysfunctional team member who infects the whole body. It is well known that one employee (a know it all, even if they DO know it all, who treat his teams members like sh– doesn't work) no one wants to work with them. I've see quite a few in my time and they are usually doing it to put others down to make themselves feel important and sabotage others around them., they usually get put as far away from the customer as possible and fired as soon as they are not needed. You sound like one...

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @idk+16vAt5x4

Always has been always will be.
Applying for positions isn’t real it’s just something you have to do here. If your job or role is gone and if someone doesn’t tell you what job to post for you probable don’t have a place in the new org. They know who is going in every seat except for a handful of them.

In Wells we are cutting 30%-40% plus the expats are coming home so it’s more like 50%. That’s every other seat.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kyu+16vAt5x4

In my 25 years ROM experience with CVX the selection is based on who is "likeable" factor rather than true values and integrity. 100% likeable criteria. I wonder how I survive so long as a rude French engineer in such liberal company. I think this time I will get it for sure. Too many id–ts around me.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @lzv+16vAt5x4

Some roles have strong incumbents or an outstanding candidate already identified. Other roles are more open and could benefit from a diverse array of applicants.

I don't see how this is the fault of the job owner. They are being transparent and honest. This allows you to better direct your efforts.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dnp+16vAt5x4

It would’ve been a lot easier and a lot cheaper if Chevron just laid off the low performers and the people they don’t want to keep. This is maddening for people that have been working their a$$ off and have the results and recognition to show for it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rht+16vAt5x4

Simple. Don't like it? Move on then.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @aih+16vAt5x4

The job owners get to select their preferred candidates and prioritize them without independently then later in the year will decide what their rankings are independently. Lots of opportunities for abuse. What is the mechanism ti ensure fairness? None. Just an complicated upward survey that cannot pinpoint actual deficiencies that has no teeth. Sounds like a recipe for disaster - for the lower level employees. Who came up with this system?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gme+16vAt5x4

Yes, sometimes you must be cruel to be kind. That is a lesson for this whole “open reorganization”. In the end a complete reorg would be dysfunctional because much in the old org evolved that way because that’s what works. Easier to restructure management than make true revolutionary changes and most times gradual focused evolution leads to better outcomes than top down revolution anyway. True openness would share the truth: all this stays, this bit is new, we decided this must go, and when the music stop only these few chairs are really open. Most chairs are already oversubscribed by those close by or those already seated, they will not be filled from outside the neighborhood (with the exception of a few SME positions that opened up by an EOI). It was nuts not to get all the EOI on the table before this round began. I suspect EOIs will be less of an issue in R4 because the overall demographic is younger (at least for petro techs), so that should progress more like a regular layoff (half from here, a few from there ... try to keep the favorites but also be diverse). Good luck.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @pvb+16vAt5x4

At least they’re honest do we don’t waste one of our four shots.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dlh+16vAt5x4

Post a reply

: