I just read somebody complain that new employees (up to five years at EM) are disproportionately affected when it comes to removals through PIPs. Here, I always read about older employees being significantly more affected because of their higher pay. What's the truth?
11 replies (most recent on top)
Anyone can be PIPed except the illuminated in Dallas and all the other execs regardless of how much they have failed.
It’s all the rest where the downward pressure and arbitrary criteria are applied.
Younger folk are just an easier target, as litigation is less likely and they are less woven into the fabric.
PIPs are just a motivation tool to make us all better in this perfect system of “meritocracy.”
If you have under a couple years of service, you’re Pipped at NI, not just NSI.
Source: I was a supervisor forced to PIP an employee in his second year even though he wasn’t NSI.
If there's a comfort being the best of the rest, take comfort.
The truth is everyone is at risk. Many young people are resigning.
As someone stated, once PIP’d you’re finished. You may be told you passed the PIP and then PIP’d the next year or two. After all, if you suck so bad, what makes you think you would have been so good the next year? You think it’s possible that someone who sucks got so much better and that others who were so great now suck worse than you after only one year? Be reasonable! Yes, you could win the lottery, but it is extremely unlikely.
Let the Hunger Games or Squid Game (your choice) begin! Others already started, you are already so far behind.
Correct, older employees are targeted (those with 14+ years after college) and newer employees are mixed in in the right proportions (all have to be approved by HR) to avoid lawsuits. The companies position is that yes, we may lose some new employees, but so what? They didn’t do much anyway and we are ExxonMobil, we’ll just hire more. People want to work for us.
A process designed by total dim-wits who make the mistake of taking us for even worse dim_wits.
All age categories are affected, but in different ways and for different reasons.
The oversized, repeated PIPs are custom designed to target older, more “expensive” employees who are outside the scope of regular layoffs, like the one from Nov 2021. That means Retirement Eligible (55+) and those Near Retirement Eligible (52-55), the latter as they reach 55 (hence the recurrent nature of these extraordinary PIPs).
However, in order to avoid age discrimination lawsuits the older employees have to be mixed with younger ones to a proportion that mimics the natural age distribution, in order to maintain the illusion that those vile low performers are evenly spread.
The company knows perfectly well that virtually no RE will put up with the PIP and they will go for the (forced) retirement instead, but has no particular reason to get rid of the younger employees used for masking purposes. These younger employees will be encouraged to take the PIP, because the passing rate supposedly is 90% (which of course doesn’t count those who retired or went for the PIL at some point or another).
The young ones who passed the PIP will be forever tarnished but very useful; at first they will work very hard, desperately trying to improve their status, and when time comes they will be fodder for the next layoff, regardless of their work.
It all seems very clever, except that usually “the best of the best” that we hire are at least smart enough to figure this game and look for a more normal work place.
Probably we're all being f***ed more or less equally.
The ranking process is a SHAM!!! => PIP is a SHAM!!!
The truth is that regardless of your age, you should be ashamed of working for a company that makes you wonder who is next to be kicked off. Go find job elsewhere