Is CLO providing any learning value to the organization? Failed to convince business to merge Webcat to CareerConnect learning - both of these leads should be fired for wasting and mismanaging company money by allowing (disagreeing on merge) to keep both learning systems in place. And now all theh care is providing BS core value and mgmt. trainings. Nothing for functional training. So why the CLO gang still exist?
17 replies (most recent on top)
@1lon. Over my 30 years at XOM prior to the last 5 years I was only familiar with the PIP in individuals with 10 years or less of service and most of them less than 5 years of service. About 2015 there was an apparent wave of RE people that suddenly couldn't do there job and needed the help and encouragement of the PIP. That encouragement went into overdrive in 2020 conveniently about the time the company was bleeding casg case due to poor management decisions amplified by the Covid pandemic. No one with the possible exception of you believe a word of your bs. Good luck to you in the New Year!
1lon - HR man, I had colleagues with outstanding contributions forced to retire by being put in NSI. Tell us what legal means the company could have used to throw them out other than the new combination of completely undeserved bottom ranking and extended MLRP.
While you’re at it, please explain why in the 2020 layoff employees older than 52 (NRE and RE) were absolutely excluded from the voluntary plan and we were explicitly told by our management that is was done to avoid legal issues. Don’t tell me that’s not true, I know what I’ve heard and our managers are not dummies.
@1lon+1eyQmGo4
C’mon… say it… don’t be shy… we know you want to say it!
The oversized endless PIP is good for the employees and it’s part of their benefit package!
@1cuf+1eyQmGo4 We pick a salary point we want and then go find which group of companies we can use to say we benchmark against. We intentionally don’t include a number of companies and ignore the higher quality companies in an area. For instance, for EMIT we exclude any company that is IT focused, such as all of FAANG, even though that’s where a lot of people are quitting to go to. They will never be included since they would throw us off hitting our target benchmark average.
@1asx+1eyQmGo4 It’s sad you’re THAT conspiratorial to think we would intentionally PIP and fail the PIP for a number of younger employees just so we can balance out the numbers of older people. If firing only old people was the goal, you realize there are countless SIGNIFICANTLY easier, still legal, ways to do that right? You can’t seriously thing that when we bring in new employees that ALL of them are destined to be excellent? Even the best companies don’t get every hire right, and people change over time so it’s not even possible to always get it right.
I’m not really sure how I’m bragging when I’ve said multiple times that there’s significant problems with XOM? Maybe you should read what I say and actually use some common sense instead of just rant about things you have no knowledge of what’s actually going on.
@1pid+1eyQmGo
@1shi+1eyQmGo4
@bmj+1eyQmGo4
Now we know who you are; you certainly didn’t sound like a regular worker.
You’re one of those cr_ooks with “special skills” that the company hires to try to hide the traces of illegal age discrimination under “statistical data” by concocting a mix of experienced and new hires, until “the HR data” concerning the PIP victims look like a normal distribution.
You’re one of those people who determines how many workers can be cheated out of their full pension and how many younger employees need to have their career ended or ruined in order to make the company lawsuit-proof.
Obviously you don’t understand that we all see through you, that regular workers despise you and you have zero credibility.
But dishonesty and arrogance always go together, so please continue to post and brag here, we might get more nuggets of information about the company’s dirty dealings.
@1pid+1eyQmGo4 You said. “Which btw we totally lie about who we benchmark against, but that’s another story.”
Tell the story, pls. I’ve no doubt the public fodder on salary benchmarks is BS, but I’d like to to hear what really happens, or at least your version of it..
@1rbs+1eyQmGo4 Spoken like someone who doesn’t have access to the HR data. The fact is the PIP numbers AND the number of people who didn’t pass PIP were proportionally the same for each age group, broken into 5 year age buckets. It just makes more noise when someone who has been around for 25 years gets PIPed vs someone who has been here for 5 years. But the actual numbers don’t lie. Some people do get by with some BS and go from average to great because of politics definitely. Same as any company, you’ll never truly get a perfect ranking. The top is definitely flawed here, but the bottom really isn’t. Managers have incentive to play politics at the top, but they also have incentives to get rid of those who truly don’t provide value at the bottom. Of the 10 people I know who were PIPed, I liked some of them personally but they just weren’t that talented and had a very aging and useless skill set. They largely were given busy work towards the last few years because they could barely do more than an MSP, which is disturbing because our MSP is complete garbage.
And just because you were ranked at the bottom of the middle third a few years ago doesn’t mean you provide value at the level we need. It just means you provided more value that people who were even lower than you before. But more doesn’t mean enough necessarily.
I don’t really care if you call it relative or forced or PIP ranking or whatever term you give it. The reason I know at both places that they did force rank and then fire people is because at the second company I was involved in that decision making. We had very specific words we had to use so that people didn’t think it was a forced ranking, but it straight up was. At the first, I was not involved in the decision making but a few of my friends there were.
I find it hilarious that people on here think that we PIP people who don’t deserve it. When you look at the follow up data HR collects 6 months after someone on PIP quits or is fired, and compare it to people who quit who weren’t on PIP, it’s funny how, when account for age and CL, the ones we PIPed go to clearly worse companies with much much lower pay. And these arent self reported where there is some bias to who fills out the forms, this is collecting the company data from people’s social media, usually LinkedIn, and then cross referencing it with the companies we use for benchmarking. Which btw we totally lie about who we benchmark against, but that’s another story.
We definitely promote plenty of people who don’t deserve it though. EM management has a ton of problems and blows. But you just don’t know the actual whole data behind the PIP here and the employees we are letting go of. When you look at it, we do largely get who we PIP correct and without bias towards age, race, or gender. On the top end totally different, huge bias to white men. But on the bottom it’s pretty even.
@1shi+1eyQmGo4
So you are one of those shameless EM people, who after two years of layoff and mega-PIPs pretend that those PIPed were somehow “low performers”, and the ranking somehow reflects reality and we should all know if we’re in the bottom 25%.
For your information, EM ranking is massively faked, first and foremost because those with powerful sponsors will always be on top, absolutely regardless of performance.
Second, you might be shocked to find out that EM is systematically using the mega-PIP to target experienced, higher salary employees, who were always ranked low simply because they’re in the same CLs as young supervisors and managers with massive sponsors.
Third, if you would be able to add how many people EM has eliminated in the last two years, you would realize that the entire lower third pre-2020 is gone; the company just manufactures “low performers” through absurd forced ranking, out of workers that the same flawless ranking system considered solid middle third just a couple of years ago.
It’s also interesting how in these other companies where you have supposedly worked before, which didn’t have “relative ranking” (you don’t like the real term - forced ranking - do you!) Tyou just somehow knew, even without forced ranking, that those laid off would have been ranked low. What crystal bowl allows you such magic conclusions?
This simply stinks like very regular EM management BS. Keep it for office meetings, where everybody has to pretend they don’t see the brown stuff you’re spouting.
@zot+1eyQmGo4 It’s not a disguised layoff, everyone knows it’s a layoff. But again, with a direct layoff it’s goodbye tomorrow. With PIP I get some time to figure things out and get to say I quit, which looks better than I got fired.
@ceq+1eyQmGo4 I’ve worked briefly at two other companies. Both places “didn’t do relative ranking” but when it got time to let people go, it magically was people who would, if it was done, be at the bottom of ranking! They didn’t just throw a dart at the dart board, it was the people on the bottom. And if someone is completely shocked about being in the bottom 25%, let alone the bottom 8%, then they need a serious reality check. It’s really not that hard to look at your peers and know you’re not one of the best around. The only companies that can claim they don’t do relative ranking are companies that are experiencing massive levels of growth, and that’s because they have so many new jobs opening up they can promote purely on skill. But once your high level openings aren’t growing rapidly, you have to start ranking people.
It’s taught in like sophomore level business classes and like week 2 of MBA, I really think this should be taught to more people because so many people don’t seem to get it.
@bmj+1eyQmGo4
I'm guessing Exxon is the only employer you have ever had, because that is not the way it works at other companies. In most companies you have a heads up that you are not meeting expectations. At ExxonMobil since the stupid performance system is relative, 99% of the time you have no clue that you are about to be hit with a PIP. The "poor performance" doesn't pop up until you are compared at a 12 hour long meeting with other people that probably don't even do the same work as you. Trust me, I was a manager that had to do this cr-p. I have only ever had 1 person that TRULY deserved a PIP, and that person knew it (because I was having to constantly correct them, and I am VERY hands off in my management style) and left before the performance process.
@ bmj+1eyQmGo4
Actually many companies just use the honest layoff system when they know they need a workforce reduction, instead of twisting it into a lie and trying to make their “most valuable assets” appear responsible for the company failures. One thing that is the same - you can collect unemployment in either instance, which tells one it is a disguised lay off.
The only training I've had in 2 years was the ranking propaganda. Nothing else.
@fbd+1eyQmGo4 Personally I don’t mind that PIP is a thing. My options are either be fired at random for poor performance without any heads up like many companies since I’m at will employment, or be put on PIP where I have a few months to find a new job and “quit” instead of be fired. I’ll take PIP any day. Makes me much less anxious tbh. Only place that does neither of these is being a teacher and teaching tenure. Otherwise you’re either fireable at moments notice or have a PIP process.
Why don't we all just get out of here?
Yup, like the CLO made training on why the PIP is good for us. Ha! This was the most gutted lie the company wants employees to believe in. I wonder how these liars saying PIP is good sleep at night on their golden mattress!
There are a few things required legally and a few things that prevent lawsuits against the company (ie we have employee training against bad action X, therefore this is a rogue actor who did X so sue him the company isn’t liable).
But otherwise yea BS time waster.
TG and all of her minions leading HR teams have destroyed and continue to destroy employee value prop at ALL levels and they are still in business.