Thread regarding ExxonMobil Corp. layoffs

Dear CEO, if you want your data doctored, send that request to EMIT. We have a lot of doctors in EMIT and you won't be disappointed.

Article is littered with falsehoods and inaccuracies, like most.

I hope their supervisors also got HW3ed for their blatant disregard for their employees ethical concerns.

Money Penny, don’t blame 007 for (Mr) M’s misdeeds. M will make 007 a scapegoat here.

“The employees were neither qualified nor informed enough to offer an opinion, let alone a make a credible complaint,” Norton said.

😂😂😂😂. You are a PhD scientist employed by the company (credible and informed) making a hypothesis backed-up by data to reach a conclusion (not an opinion, but admittedly falls slightly short of fact.). No evidence that an equally-qualified scientist provided a conflicting conclusion (which goes back to credible and not an opinion.). And you clearly made your complaints internally first, but we’re disregarded and ultimately let go.

Honestly, though, this thought process by management prevails throughout the company….usually on little things. I can see how some manager is SO used to treating his technical folks like this, that suddenly he uses the same technique in a much more damaging way.

@aem+1j5mYsu7 Silly goose, managers don’t get fired for going the extra mile to hide corruption. They get promoted. Look to Angola and ask for agent 007.

Nice copyright violation, OP

Makes you wonder if any executive, VP, Director, or Manager lost their job over these whistleblowers allegations.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/10/06/exxonmobil-whistleblowers-wrongful-termination/

ExxonMobil ordered to reinstate fired whistleblowers who alleged fraud
The Labor Department ordered the company to re-hire and provide back pay to two scientists who accused it of inflating projections
Image without a caption
By Evan Halper
October 6, 2022 at 7:26 p.m. EDT

When ExxonMobil announced unexpectedly bullish targets for pumping oil out of Texas and New Mexico in the spring of 2019, the news sparked confusion for two scientists at the company.

That confusion grew into alarm as the scientists began to suspect management planned to pin what they saw as a potentially fraudulent forecast on them.

Damian Burch and Lindsey Gulden would soon complain to ExxonMobil’s human resources investigators that Burch’s team was pressured to doctor data to make it look like the company was poised to generate billions of dollars more in oil than it was, according to interviews and the findings of a Labor Department investigation.

Burch said he was so unnerved at being directed to gin up a scientific outlook bolstering the company CEO’s misleading public statements that he named the file: “Please_do_not_turn_this_into_a_lie.xlsx.”

Eventually, the company acted on the concerns raised by the scientists, according to the federal investigation: It fired them.

“I had never seen anything like this before,” said Burch, who worked at the company for more than a decade and holds a doctorate in applied mathematics. “Management said to just override the experts so we can get to the number the CEO has already blasted to the public. We could not find any evidence to support it. The science did not support it. The data did not support it. Nothing supported it.”

Now, federal labor officials at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration have ordered the oil giant to reinstate the two and pay them hundreds of thousands of dollars in back pay and damages in a case that has implications extending beyond the careers of these computational scientists. Exxon officials say they plan to appeal the order before an administrative law judge.

“We reject all claims made by the former employees and will defend the company accordingly,” Exxon spokesman Casey Norton said in an email. “The terminations in late 2020 were unrelated to the ill-founded concerns raised by the employees in 2019.”

“As we have stated throughout, we welcome the opportunity to meet with OSHA to provide additional information or witness interviews, as necessary,” Norton wrote. Company officials said the scientists were not fired for blowing the whistle to federal agencies, but for violating company policies.

The company argues the scientists misunderstood the data and that Exxon was able to exceed targets they disputed. “The employees were neither qualified nor informed enough to offer an opinion, let alone a make a credible complaint,” Norton said.

The Labor Department’s action could become a springboard to a more expansive targeting of fossil fuel companies, which already are facing unprecedented pressure from regulators and shareholders to reveal more about their operations. Companies like ExxonMobil are being pushed to be more transparent not just about their earnings projections and oil reserves, but also their exposure and contribution to climate change as regulators pursue rules requiring extensive new reporting on company emissions and their impact.

“If they can defraud investors and the public about this and get away with it, how can they be trusted with anything related to something as important as confronting climate change?” asked Gulden, who also worked at ExxonMobil for more than a decade, after earning a doctorate in geoscience.

ExxonMobil sees things differently. The company has said in court filings and public statements that the scientists misunderstood the projections and that investors were never misled.

In a court filing earlier this year, the company produced a letter from the Securities and Exchange Commission that said the agency had no plans to take any action after investigating whistleblower claims that the company duped shareholders. The filing came as ExxonMobil defended itself in a shareholder lawsuit in which the plaintiffs, including the state of Rhode Island, interviewed a dozen former employees and contractors who echoed the concerns of the fired scientists. That complaint against Exxon was dismissed late last week by a judge who found the plaintiffs had not provided adequate evidence to show company executives intentionally defrauded investors. But the judge’s order also invited the plaintiffs to refile their complaint with more such evidence.

The company continues to argue it is hitting its drilling targets.

The Labor Department findings, however, suggest ExxonMobil’s problems may be far from over. It concluded that the company violated laws meant to protect whistleblowers. Its central finding was that ExxonMobil fired Burch and Gulden because it suspected they brought their concerns to the media. Under federal law, according to the department, employees may not be fired for leaking information that reveals potential fraud against shareholders.

Burch and Gulden “suffered financial hardship and mental anguish because [Exxon] illegally retaliated against them,” according to the Labor Department’s findings, which were released Thursday. “The terminations were devastating for Complainants, who are high level professionals, neither of whom had ever been terminated from a position.”

In addition to offering the scientists their job back, the department also directed Exxon to pay Gulden more than $385,000 and Burch more than $366,000 in back pay and damages.

The department rejected company arguments that it could legally take action against employees for discussing company business with the media without authorization.

The journey of the two scientists from longtime employees to whistleblowers is a cautionary tale for an oil industry facing stepped-up legal and regulatory pressures as it struggles to transition into the new energy economy. The disclosure rules the SEC is advancing around corporate exposure to climate change will bring new scrutiny to how companies like ExxonMobil manage and manipulate their data.

The company was already under the microscope over allegedly false statements. It is a defendant in 20 lawsuits filed by states, cities and counties alleging that it lied to shareholders and the public for decades about its climate science, concealing internal findings that the continued use of fossil fuels could have catastrophic consequences. While the company prevailed in a suit filed by New York, judges in other large cases have rejected ExxonMobil’s efforts to have them dismissed.

“If they can defraud investors and the public about this and get away with it, how can they be trusted with anything related to something as important as confronting climate change?” asked Gulden, who also worked at ExxonMobil for more than a decade.

• lol, definitely do not trust Exxon and their low carbon solutions, greenwashing, gas lighting, bullsh-t.

Re-instate sounds like he-l, financial compensation should be the solution

Seems they might get PIP’d in next performance assessment.

Probably not feeling welcome.

Probably should just be awarded a generous severance package instead of return to a potentially hostile work environment.

That sounds accurate. Management pressure employees to doctor data to support whatever story they want to spin. In recent times, they don’t outright fire you. Performance assessment is the we-pon of choice to intimidate employee to comply.

From the article: “Management said to just override the experts so we can get to the number the CEO has already blasted to the public.”

Surprised Pikachu

What a perfect example of what goes on all. the. time. at this company

That was a thorough read. Imagine going back to work in the cheese grater that fired you? That would be a riot. No thanks.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/10/06/exxonmobil-whistleblowers-wrongful-termination/