Thread regarding ExxonMobil Corp. layoffs

@1zft+1pG7tEEr
Now I understand. That explains the behaviors. Money and perceived prestige are the incentives. But what a way to live to wait for the payout. A waste of a career and the potential to do something greater.

Agree with poster that they should be more upfront about this.

@1lmu You are absolutely correct. Not much incentive at all to be a low level exec. The question is compared to what? A small percentage raise is far better than the late career CL 28 or 29 curve combined with a ranking of VG or below. People in that group (most of us older workers) get raises less than inflation for the last 10 to 15 years. Ask any older worker. And here’s a request for older workers: please be open about your situation with all your mid career colleagues. I know it’s embarrassing but we need to be open about this so that younger workers can understand the choice they make by staying here. The company is only getting away with it because we stay isolated and silent on salary matters.

@1plm is it really only CL34+ that gets more than RSUs, such as a cash bonus. What about 30+. What’s the point of getting to executive CL30 if just marginally more RSU and no other bonus? I hear salaries don’t go up more than few percent and it’s cut throat in assessment so presume there is something more.

An important point missed in this discussion is that late career people rarely get many RSUs. Younger and mid career people need to be warned that the ranking system is stacked against older workers and most of us end up in the bottom half. They did change the rules last cycle to throw VG a small RSU bone, but nothing like what the mid career people get. Also the size of the RSU award depends on your Potential, which will drop in your early/mid 40s unless you are one of the chosen few who get the nod for the executive promotion. As a real example, I’ve had a typical career, top of the rank list for 20 years, then derailed in my 40s and sitting at VG. My outstanding RSUs make up exactly 0.6% of my net worth.

Well, at least this better explains the # of execs that become paper pushers in those last 5-10 years. The system incentivizes that, it seems:

• Sitting on sizable unvested RSUs
• Ranking and potential fall due to age, so motivation to work in a rigged-system decreased.
• You cannot early-retire and find meaningful employment elsewhere (assuming you are considering employment in a similar field.)

What else can you do? Apparently work just enough to stay out of NSI, draw salary, and wait for your RSUs to vest.

The company should payout unvested RSUs when person takes retirement, no strings attached. Would probably get rid of a lot of dead wood….and seriously, those late-lifers are unlikely to be a threat. Have them sign an NDA and then pick whatever suits their fancy in the last 10 years of employment. They deserve it.

@1duf If you don’t know, you don’t know, so why post an opinion negating the views from those who do know?

You can work, just not in a commercial or managerial type position where your insider knowledge would be a factor. Generally no problem at all for technical positions.

The 65 thing is for CL34+ where there is an additional bonus system, not for the RSUs. They sign up for age 65 when they accept the CL34 promotion. IMHO, not a choice any rational person would make.

Seriously? Am I reading here that early retirement can constitute cancellation of unvested RSU? …and especially if you chose to find a bridge-job between 55-65? That hardly seems fair.

Is this why people are always saying that ‘executives are told when they can retire.’ I never fully understand that statement. Is that the sway the company has over them? Their unvested RSUs?

Imagine 30 years with the company, you worked hard, and you want to retire 10 years early on good terms to explore something else. Hardly seems fair that they have a pot of your money with a ‘hook’ in it…..especially considering inflation, raising health care costs etc.

Jeesh, you just don’t win with this company…even if you can play the game long enough.

The only string attached to the RSU is that you stay with the company until distribution. I’m not aware of any incentive officers or forfeitures due to negative actions after you leave. Contrary to the previous post, there is nothing that would prevent you from working for another company. Nor do you need to get permission. Exxon does not own your career after you leave.

If they don’t want you to work for another company, then they need to compensate you for not working. Of course, you are still obligated to keep information confidential.

I retired at 56 and continue to receive RSUs on schedule. You get a letter warning you that they can be forfeited due to any actions that are negative to the Company's image....

I left early and the RSU that were granted are mine. The one that have not been granted are forfeited. I didn’t figure it was worth me staying for the little bit of RSU. The biggest financial impact on my retirement calculation was the rising interest rates.

Technically, RSUs are fortified if you retire earlier than the mandated retirement age of 65. However, when you retire prior to 65, you get a letter from the incentive office which explicitly grants you continued access to these RSU’s, assuming you adhere to the terms of the agreement. Note: if you desire to work post your xom retirement, you need to inform the Incentive Office of this and the kind of work you plan to do … they will provide you a letter with their position on whether this work is consistent with the RSU agreement. Remember, they can cancel them at time for any reason ….

Yes, absolutely you keep them when you retire. They vest according to the original schedule.

Can lose them if you work competing with the company or take any action against the company’s interests.

As below, that is true I think. I assume you also lose any unvested if you resign.

No, once granted they are yours, unless you get fired for inappropriate actions.