I recently went through an interview process for a role in upstream. Not a normal process and the interviews some of the strangest I’ve ever had. I was asked for pay slips then after some months of radio silence was made an offer. The offer claimed Aramco is a “wealth building opportunity”, yet the package on offer was 30% less than my current comp. Seriously, who moves jobs for a pay cut? I politely refused!
10 replies (most recent on top)
@10d all significantly less than it used to be; and not acceptable to a competent westerner!
“ yet the package on offer was 30% less”
There’s your answer.
I think some people fail to see the entire picture and dont look past base pay...in addition to that you have:
- expat premium
- commodity adjustment
- repat money every year
- bonus (SAIP)
- Possible overtime (dpt specific)
- Tax benefit - for Americans less but you do pay less due to foreign income exemption
housing here is not free but im sure that paying 500 dollars per month is way less than your mortgage now.
Life in KSA is not easy but it can be worthwhile.
hmmm strange - maybe this was only the base pay not including commodity and expat premium? does not sound right...u can always counter offer - what do u have to lose?
Welcome to the modern day aramco. A shadow of its former self. Pay for expats is now terrible.
I can relate at least from an interview perspective of it being strange.
I interviewed for a position with the organization a few weeks ago, and unfortunately the experience did not leave a positive impression.
The interview panel consisted of three interviewers. During much of the interview, two of the panelists initially appeared openly disengaged. They were multitasking with their microphones unmuted, which made it clear they were not fully vested in the conversation. As a candidate, it came across as unprofessional, rude, and gave the impression that they were not particularly interested in the interview or in hearing what the interview candidate had to say.
When questions were asked, the discussion often felt more like an opportunity for the 2 disengaged interviewers (who finally got involved) to showcase their own knowledge than understand whether the candidate had the experience and background aligned with the role. While challenging technical interviews are expected, there was little genuine interest in assessing overall fit or having a meaningful two-way conversation.
Every candidate invests significant time preparing for an interview. Regardless of whether a candidate is ultimately selected or whether the position is later cancelled, they deserve an engaged, respectful, and professional interview experience. Unfortunately, that was not my experience.
Good decision to refuse. Aramco was good before during my time, but not anymore.
The local workforce is becoming self-sustainable.
These is nothing sustainable about what Aramco is doing to manage its costs. Consider Aramco's SG&A costs: 2019 $9.77 bil, 2025 $22.27 bil. More than double! Now look at Exxon's SG&A costs: 2019 $11.40 bil, 2025 $11.13 bil. Flat. Both companies have been cutting pay and benefits for workers, but that stinginess is showing up in Exxon's financials but not showing up in Aramco's financials.
Management offers Expats pathetic compensation while spending like a drunken sailor.
Aramco was once a great place to work. I know not many are left who remember that. The best of the best were identified, screened, and brought in. They were needed. The jobs they filled were dependable jobs.
They no longer are needed. The company has matured. The local workforce is becoming self-sustainable. The employment model has changed to fill needed seats for short sprint periods then empty them when the next set of leadership comes in. There is no need to seek the best and the job is not dependable. They can settle.
It is best to say thank you and move on.
@OP Under those circumstances; good move. That place is not for everyone.