Thread regarding ExxonMobil Corp. layoffs

New Hires and Layoffs

According to the information available, new hires that started after 10/01/2019 will not be considered as part of the involuntary layoffs. Can this statement be trusted?

by
| 2185 views | | 11 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+17HEEFtZ

11 replies (most recent on top)

New hire that was hired after 10/1/19. My supervisor confirmed that I am not in scope for the upcoming cuts.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2iks+17HEEFtZ

FAQ says new hires are 'protected' (exact word), so if new hires can be made redundant and are ineligible from severance benefit, how can they be 'protected'.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2gbc+17HEEFtZ

You aren’t protected from layoffs...just means you don’t get the benefits from the involuntary package if you were let go

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1lnr+17HEEFtZ

New hires are not eligible for involuntary separation benefits. This, however, does not mean new hires are protected from the layoff.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1zmp+17HEEFtZ

I wouldn't trust it. I was a new hire and was supposed to be protected, but I was laid off. (1.5 years in company)

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1mhn+17HEEFtZ

They'll be let go the next ranking cycle instead. New hires were supposed to be protected from this past ranking cycle as well

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1hot+17HEEFtZ

New hires are protected. That is accurate.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1eyn+17HEEFtZ

No. Sure why you won't trust it? They let go quite a bit of them during the 2020 ranking cycle. In all honesty, someone just starting at ~100k is not the problem the $200k+ employees are who they are really aiming at.

Besides, The next performance cycle is coming up. Plenty of time to cut them there also.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cvv+17HEEFtZ

New hires started in October? I would think pretty much every new hire started Aug/Sept

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @evf+17HEEFtZ

You are not ranked and won’t be for this next ranking cycle if you started in Oct or later

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @zod+17HEEFtZ

It’s quite specific and unambiguous; I would trust it.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @qtw+17HEEFtZ

Post a reply

: