Thread regarding ConocoPhillips layoffs

It really is happening

As a manager (now retired), I was pressured often to give rankings to justify who we wanted to keep and who the company wanted to let go. And, salary and the ability to lower payroll costs played a big role. So, there were high performing employees whose ranking was lowered. While younger and cheaper employees were high graded even though their performance did not justify the ranking. It was not necessarily an objective look at performance. It was determining the end result and working the rankings backwards.

Reposted from @3vvb+1cqyboth so that everybody can see what kind of cr-p is happening here.

by
| 2896 views | | 7 replies (last )
Post ID: @OP+1cyU8h4g

7 replies (most recent on top)

"You are so happy that you now spend your afternoons and evenings on this forum trolling and being angry. If this is happy, I'd hate to have seen sad!"

This is a site to post information about the company, not to personally attack people. Why are you spending your afternoons and evenings on this forum and then passing judgement on someone you don't know? While working for COP, I occasionally read this site for information...some good, some not so good because my previous employer left me in the dark about a lot things. I have worked for several companies during my 20+ career and non of them were dysfunctional like COP. When you feel like something is not right, you look for ways to validate your suspicions and this site provides that validation. I think people should have a right to know what is really going on so I'm passing along my experiences.

by
|
Post ID: @cdvd+1cyU8h4g

Either krn is an HR troll or a low level manager who doesn’t understand how they are manipulated by “the process”. I’ve seen superior ratings given automatically to people on maternity leave even though they only worked 1/2 of the year and the person who had to pick up all the slack was given an average rating and then laid off. This practice fulfilled the woke vision of Her Highness and was a frequent talking point in D&I presentations. As a first line supervisor or manager, it is difficult to give a 3 or 4 to a under performing high p-t because they have a high level sponsor who will look bad. I’ve seen older SGL 17 and 18 level employees receive 3 ratings when they deserved a 1 or 2 because they were at the end of their career or we weren’t concerned about losing them.. but we gladly took their large proportionate shares of merit budget and stock allocations for redistribution among the lower levels. Realize 1/2 of the 18s are eligible for a large amount of stock. So there really is an incentive if you want to circumvent the intent of the program. On the last point, it is generally true that promotions occur more frequently early in the career but not for high pots and managers. While the average employee has maybe 6 promotions over a career, it takes 20 grade level promotions to get from SGL 12 to 32. Only one person gets to be CEO but promotions are frequent for the high p-t who is chosen to get to a 21+ level. So the statements made by people are not a bunch of lies. They are observations of actual experiences.

by
|
Post ID: @7nyq+1cyU8h4g

Most of this original posting is just not true. A bunch of lies to try and make people unhappy.
While it is true there is some discretion in ratings, and some people can make bad choices, there are processes in place to make that difficult to do. If the person who made this claim was a real manager at COP, they would know this.
Secondly, budgets are set for performance ratings that there is no incentive to promote a junior person more than a senior person. Again, a real manager would understand this.
Finally, it is perfectly normal for people who are early in their career to be promoted more frequently than a senior person. As you move up the ranks, there are fewer positions to fill.

by
|
Post ID: @6krn+1cyU8h4g

"Why should I stay? I didn't, I left and I am much, much happier!"

You are so happy that you now spend your afternoons and evenings on this forum trolling and being angry. If this is happy, I'd hate to have seen sad!

by
|
Post ID: @6ahs+1cyU8h4g

It’s all about being principled. I never gave in. Other managers did. They were given better ratings. Some were promoted. Despite excellent results, I was passed over and eventually eliminated. If more of the managers had held their ground then, we wouldn't be in the state we are today. It’s a slippery slope when you abandon what is right.

by
|
Post ID: @2ulb+1cyU8h4g

Here's one for your consideration... I know of a superior employee who was laid off to save the job of an inferior employee because the latter was the son of a friend of a supervisor in the BU.

Oh kids, if you only knew what really goes on behind the scenes. One day your protected, the next day your the sacrificial lamb in a dirty horse trade. Don't EVER believe corporate America cares about you.

by
|
Post ID: @ova+1cyU8h4g

I guessed this was happening. I'm an former employee that was in a support role. When I was non-exempted, I always received 1's and 2's and told I did a great job. But as soon as I was moved to exempt and now "technically" qualified for stock if I received a 1 or 2, I only received 3's. I was still told that I did a great job and one of the best at my position. In the 8 years I was at COP, I don't ever remember being told any areas I needed to improve. I received the same promotions and same rating as my peers in similar roles who did very little or did their job and no more. Why should I stay? I didn't, I left and I am much, much happier!

by
|
Post ID: @vss+1cyU8h4g

Post a reply

: