Thread regarding ConocoPhillips layoffs

What goes around comes around

When I left COP, I was offered a job for 20% more. This just made me realize how underpaid I was. 3 yrs after I left I was offered 15% more than I was making at the competitor to come back to COP. I am still at COP and have received promotions. But the best promotion was the one I gave myself by leaving. I had a good reputation when I left and that is why I was hired back. I don't think there is anything wrong with knowing your worth in the marketplace. I will never let COP underpay me again. A 35% raise is what I received by taking action. I did not rely on complaining to get it done. I spoke with my work and my feet.

by
| 3295 views | | 12 replies (last )
Post ID: @OP+1duMPSHl

12 replies (most recent on top)

If only we lived in a first world country. One can only imagine a civil society where rule of law was imposed, borders existed, life was valued, people were safe, a future was bright, individual freedoms were cherished… guess I’m homesick for 2019.

by
|
Post ID: @Djvy+1duMPSHl

If you're so passionate about it, you should run for congress, and if elected, push through tax reform legislation instead of whining about it on layoff.com.

by
|
Post ID: @5hpr+1duMPSHl

So what? Why should taxes be progressive at all. Put a standard deduction and flat tax scheme with no additional deductions in place. Totally fair. The rich pay their share. No loopholes. Taxes are done in an hour. Everyone has skin in the game.

by
|
Post ID: @5uil+1duMPSHl

Impressive. We've got someone here who remembers pulling in over $200k/yr in 1960 (the threshold above which a 91% tax rate would have applied in 1960 if filing single). According to my handy dandy US Inflation Calculator, that's equivalent to over $1.8M/yr today.

Bringing the conversation back to reality, $120k/yr today (top 88th percentile) is equivalent to just under $13k/yr in 1960, and anything between $12k and $14k would have been taxed at 43% in 1960 if filing single (30% if married and filing jointly).

All kidding aside, income taxes were very high on the upper class in the 60s and 70s, but the rates on the middle class were much closer to the rates of today. There are hundreds of managers and technical staff at COP who pull in $200-400k/yr, but I doubt they'll be subjected to the same tax burden as the ultra rich of the past, regardless of the rhetoric emanating from Washington DC.

Certainly I wish my tax burden was lower, but I also wish the government would stop printing money and raising the debt limit. The only way to change that is through financial literacy and the ballot box.

by
|
Post ID: @5vew+1duMPSHl

Mainstream ? Remember the 91% federal rate under Kennedy? Or the 70% rate under Carter? Might as well get laid off at those rates. Sprinkle in SALT and FICA and there really is little incentive to work. Oh wait. That is the key to total control.

by
|
Post ID: @4ile+1duMPSHl

Don't worry about the crazy proposals put forth by the "progressives." Mainstream Democrats will never support them because they too have most of their net worth tied up in equities.

by
|
Post ID: @4ckr+1duMPSHl

It’s all moot. The current administration has proposed increasing RMDs on your investment accounts and subjecting capital gains to ordinary income taxation rates. All the rules keep changing making retirement plans very challenging. One proposal requires a 50% distribution of all funds in an IRA above a certain threshold thus placing the individual in the highest tax bracket for that year. 42% vanishes immediately.

by
|
Post ID: @4adf+1duMPSHl

Unfortunately, HR terminates unprotected individuals with a defined pension benefit plan long before they reach 30 years of service, let alone 35+ years. Happened to me. Fortunately, I viewed the pension as a unknown quantity, and invested most of my income in the stock market. My investments are now worth five times my actual pension payout.

by
|
Post ID: @2vik+1duMPSHl

It’s not how much you make but how much you save and invest. The payout on those old pensions was pretty impressive. For someone with 35+ years, the lump sum was about 13 times your annual final salary. That’s kind of hard to save even with a 35% job hopping raise. Just saying. It’s a moot point though since the newbies are ineligible for pensions. Better use that raise to max out on the 401K.

by
|
Post ID: @2mrt+1duMPSHl

You can job hop and have a higher net worth than someone that tries to coast and claim loyalty to a company just for the “pension”.

by
|
Post ID: @1xim+1duMPSHl

Now that we no longer have a pension whose value is dependent on continuous service, job hopping is a viable option. A big reduction in overall compensation but who looks at long term net worth anymore. It’s all about that paycheck. You had better put some aside for those golden years.

by
|
Post ID: @1log+1duMPSHl

Post a reply

: