I don't like to criticize, however, I really wonder if Exxon can still attract good employees. How many new hires do you know who have great skills and work ethic? I know very few of them.
There are some exceptions, but in my opinion, this is not enough if the leadership wants the company to survive in the future.
10 replies (most recent on top)
Only desperate and totally uninformed people would want a job at today’s EM.
@1bfu Name three essential activities you perform at work daily that would require at least a 3.5 GPA.
Unless you’re heavily involved in research or nuanced applications of cutting-edge technologies (not happening in O&G) then a 2.5 GPA should be fine.
All new hires really have to do is maintain systems and follow instructions. Since that’s all you’re doing (if you’re even doing that) you shouldn’t be complaining.
@1tuq The guy with woman problems again.
What happened? Ugly divorce(s)? Mommy problems? Secretly into dudes?
Many times I have seen EM interview 20 candidates for engineering jobs, 18 male candidates and 2 female candidates. If target is 3 job offers, those two females get offers then 1 job offer goes to one of the 18 mal s interviewed.
Not saying right or wrong, just saying this has been going on for several years now.
I think someone said it correctly in another thread: warm pulse, an appropriate degree, and enthusiasm for ExxonMobil probably gets you far in the interview process.
Yes, I recall when a 3.5 GPA was borderline too low. Not certain if this is still a part of campus recruiting. However, I do hear hushed discussions of candidates being ‘too good’ and unlikely to accept….with more emphasis placed on wide interviewing in the ‘middle band’ in hope of finding the right fit. When you have midpoint compensation targets and a compensation structure that is somewhat antiquated….and poor culture over the past couple years….this is what you get.
I also cringed at TG’s claim of acceptance rate. If that is being set as a metric, I can only imagine HR is targeting a band of candidates where that acceptance rate is achievable. Unfortunately, with top-down metrics in ExxonMobil, people will do pretty silly stuff to deliver the numbers….usually not to the best interest of the company.
The few I’ve worked with have been very good. Haven’t seen any quality drop- just a drop in number being hired. Also seen an increase in the number who’ve left the company, often to other high performing roles and industries. Which I would say supports that they were high quality to begin.
@ptf You seem surprised that top talent might not want to start off in a stagnant/declining industry full of grumpy old men.
You people must have a very high opinion of yourselves. Clearly you’re out of touch.
Exxon incoming / college grad / junior talent has been sh-t and bottom barrel for at least a decade - I say this at someone who worked at a competitor
Go on to a college campus and give a kid 2 job offers - one says Exxon with no annual bonus and a Woodlands HQ
Other says Chevron / Shell / etc with an annual bonus and downtown location - base salary same or higher vs. XOM
Easy choice
@OP If you don’t like the quality of the candidates, train them.
If you’re unable/unwilling to train them, don’t complain.
If you can’t stop complaining, find another place to work where you’ll be less miserable and complain less.
If you can’t find another place to work, and you can’t afford to stop working, get therapy and dedicate some time to self-reflection. Don’t make it the problem of your employer or co-workers; none of us are paid enough to put up with it.
Que the whining about so-called “diversity hiring” from the disgruntled over-50s.
Of course the guy who has problems with women will jump on the thread to get in his two cents about how (in his view) nothing that’s female is qualified to sit across from him in an Exxon office.
The rest I don’t feel like describing right now, but it’ll be self-explanatory once the posts start going up.