Does anyone know the upcoming PIP percentage target with certainty? Has this been communicated to managers yet?
25 replies (most recent on top)
Annandale will be hammered again…even with wage and management leaving in droves, soon there will be no one to manage…..tick,tick,tick…..
It doesn’t matter whether CL35 and above are subject to the “mandatory” 8% NSI policy. All that does is put a few Execs onto a PIP program which undoubtedly will be easy for them to pass - probably no change at all to what they’re doing.
I reckon the only resignations or retirements we hear about are due to damaged egos and the realisation that they are the lowest ranked in their ivory tower group. I don’t think there is any intention to remove any Execs.
8% for this year again. Senior execs bonuses don’t pay for themselves. We still haven’t hit the $6 billion structural savings target and you know how much Darren likes to hit his targets.
@2amv+1facRZuo completely false. This was done in past years to avoid PIPing people in higher CL groups and part of the uproar last year was due to mandatory 8% across every CL grouping.
PIP is not just by CL as HR has to approve all NI and NSI. They need to ensure that when we PIP a deserving minority, woman, or anyone older than 39, we need to PIP a white male under 39 so that it doesn’t appear to be discrimination. Look at last year, it wasn’t 8% from all rank groups - lower CL groups were PIP’d at a much higher percentage than higher CL groups. This is why the ranking process is not a fair or accurate process. HR openly stated that NRE were exempt - that means others (tributes) were unfairly PIP’d to get the numbers DW wanted. We can PIP a white male under 38 and they can’t sue for any kind of discrimination, problem solved.
EM still needs to get to its 2023 target headcount reduction so if you’re vocal about wanting to keep your job then they’ll PIP you and if you act like you don’t care then they’ll keep you because they know you’ll leave soon
They don’t go by position (SLS, etc) when it comes to PIP, it’s always been based on assessment group which is by CL (for example in many areas it’s 20-25, 26-27, 28-29, 30+) so 8% of each group will be PIPed. The 26-27 and up groups will be bad again this year because in the past “ranking” system there were years if not decades of shenanigans that clustered both favorite and non-favorite people around certain points to game the system. I for one am glad there are people feeling the pain at the higher CLs as there are still plenty of them who don’t belong at that level. The company for too long has suffered from too much bloat, and needs to install an “up or out” system like the US Military officer corps for management instead of putting them out to pasture in comfortable but useless “advisor” jobs.
I am a SLS and have not been told anything about 8% affecting me does this mean I am safe or not?
25% of RE’s
3% non RE/NRE
0% NRE
8% average
There’s a great point in a post on this thread. Last year, some functional areas, harder hit by the layoff in 2020, have asked and received waivers from the 8% PIP and got only 3% instead.
This is obvious proof that the oversized, systematic PIP has nothing to do with performance and absolutely is about disguised, targeted personnel reductions.
I hope the media gets that and highlights that EM’s official statements were a bunch of lies.
“ If you are a good performer and get unfairly PIPed, be vocal about it”
Seriously?
You don’t know that the process is without review and without appeal?
This is like the Soviet Union, the only thing you can do is vote with your feet.
Seems like CL35 and up are exempt from PIP even when they completely sc--w up and cost EM billion$
Sounds credible that SLS and DH are now on the firing squad as there aren’t many ICs left anymore. Also the ratio of SLS to IC is much higher than companies we are benchmarked against. What does a DH actually do? No one reports to them yet they aren’t ICs either. I can see why anyone with a BS or less will be let go, after all why pay for a BS when you can get a MS or PhD for about the same cost? XOM can brag about the percentage of MS and higher cost to their customers (outside customers or their managers) even if it is just window dressing. Would you pay the same price for a Nurse Practitioner as you would for a MD? As a manager would you rather have MS and PhDs reporting to you than BSs?
If you are a good performer and get unfairly PIPed, be vocal about it. Meeting quotas shouldn’t involve your education level or your age. If they have a problem with your performance, make them say what it is. And make sure it is systematic and quantifiable. No ‘one time’ comment from a manager and no ‘we just don’t think you are as good as your peers’ generalizations.
They say we all own the PDS process….so it is up to us to hold managers accountable for this 8%. And then if you still end up there, really consider if it is worth sticking around in this job market. Passing PIP is not improving your performance. It is just exposing you to a mildly abusive (or at least dysfunctional) micromanaging to meet someone’s scorecard targets.
This thing with the SLS PIP is just bull
I can only hope this is true. Wonder if this is part of the R&D re-org (CS&I), or unilateral. Either way, fingers crossed that management has to pay the piper this round!
Was told it will be 8% again this year, difference is it is going up higher in the organization to SLS and DH. I’m a SLS and was told this by my manager. Was also advised to update my resume and look around as my manager said they might not be able to protect me. I was told that higher paid people with a BS degree and less are targets, those with a MS and higher are somewhat safe this round unless they really screwed up. I am a CL 26 with only a BS and not a minority or woman so I am worried. Anyone hearing anything similar? I’m taking the 4+ months to actively look around at what is out there so I’ll be ready if my number is up.
Finding the right balance of older higher-paid personnel and younger 'poor' performers is quite difficult. but 8% is what was promised. And 8% it will be.
DW already said in his interview on cnbc that structural savings in 2022 similar to 2021. So I assume we will see 8% just like last year
Heard it’s 8% again. Costs are not low enough, based on one exec and apparently we can’t improve our cost position through PIP.
Originally people were saying it would be another 8%, but it looks like now even Dallas realizes it’s going to be more harmful than they wanted it to be
@glr+1facRZuo No, because we are Exxon and we don't do layoffs. We only do PIP's and VIP's, which are Not Layoffs(TM)
Wait! If we have variable NSI percentages depending on the organization and the required skill set, isn’t it like openly admitting that NSI is exactly a tool to layoff people from the organizations that are not needed?
Doesn’t this prove the point that everything was exactly what management denied it was?
3-8% depending on the organization. HR is now tasked with how to be more selective in their PIPs to get the numbers down, but, be more sensitive to required skill sets.
Probably won’t be communicated until sometime within the next month.
Have heard at least one VP share optimism that it’s going back to 3% but they couldn’t confirm what it will be. Seems Dallas had not finalized.