Thread regarding Chevron Corp. layoffs

No pretending required, just know the facts

Many people have been rejected. Everyone who tried, from what I've heard.

Just to let you guys know, if anyone still follows this thread, I contacted my lawyer and gave him all the specifics of the new offer and he said there is no case there to be had, like one of the last posts below. So we got what we got and have to live with it or go somewhere else. I am looking around now for something better, but it doesn't look good.

Not sure why people are defending CNRL. Lawyers will represent you. There are a lot of differences between positions such as compensation structure, job descriptions and schedules. Chevron HR has told people they did not review the offers.

Yes, Chevron likely has an obligation to review the offer from CNRL to determine whether it was "substantially similar" before denying you severance. This obligation arises from their duty as your original employer under Alberta law and common law principles regarding termination and the sale of business assets. Here’s why:

1.  Chevron’s Duty as the Original Employer

    •    When a business or its assets are sold, the original employer (Chevron) has an obligation to ensure that employees' rights are respected during the transition. If the new employer's (CNRL) offer does not meet the "substantially similar" standard, Chevron may still be responsible for severance or termination pay.
    •    Chevron cannot simply shift responsibility to CNRL without first verifying that the employment transition meets legal standards.

2.  Duty to Act in Good Faith

    •    Employers in Alberta are required to act in good faith when dealing with employees, particularly during terminations or transitions. This duty includes reviewing the terms of CNRL’s offer to determine whether it aligns with your previous employment.
    •    A failure to review the offer and ensure its similarity could be seen as a breach of this duty.

3.  Responsibility Under Common Law Principles

    •    The Alberta courts have consistently ruled that if an employer denies severance because a comparable role is available, the onus is on the employer to prove the new offer is substantially similar.
    •    If Chevron refused severance without conducting a review of the offer, they could be seen as acting unreasonably.

4.  Implications of Denying Severance Without Review

    •    If Chevron failed to assess CNRL’s offer before denying your severance claim, you could argue that they have not met their obligations under Alberta’s Employment Standards Code or common law.
    •    This failure could strengthen your case for severance, as Chevron cannot simply defer to CNRL without verifying the offer's adequacy.

Chevron has said they did not review the offers to ensure they were similar. This came directly from HR manager at CBU.

Also the offer expired before we were terminated so chevron did not make an attempt to mitigate. The court ruling below applies to the situation.

https://www.hrreporter.com/focus-areas/employment-law/job-offer-from-successor-employer-before-termination-not-opportunity-to-mitigate/381757

Not sure why this is even an ongoing thread topic anymore. CNRL went to a lot of effort to ensure the offers are identical or better in terms of pay and benefits. Your compensation trajectory after joining CNRL can be different than it was at Chevron but that is just normal business. You are not guaranteed your old progression anywhere, even Chevron. I don't think most attorneys will give you the time of day, much less a court.

No, that information is incorrect that you received. You must have heard a false rumor. All of my coworkers who received the offer said the same thing and the offer was the same or better than what we have now. Are you the one who has been trolling this site? Your post seems suspicious as well as verifiably false.

It was lower and the job and schedule were different and it was the only option. What are you even talking about??

Also chevron did not review the offers to ensure they were similar. Chevron made no attempt to mitigate for their employees. People have and will be filing demand letters and when they get compensation maybe you will finally shut the f up, maybe.

Unfortunately, there is no basis for legal action unless you are offered a job at clearly lower pay and told that is your only option. If you have that documented, you can decline it and talk to Chevron about compensation. That is not the case here from all I have talked to. So, you need to take it and move on.
Or, like one dummy I know, refuse the offer then try to complain and ask for it back!

Yes, Chevron likely has an obligation to review the offer from CNRL to determine whether it was "substantially similar" before denying you severance. This obligation arises from their duty as your original employer under Alberta law and common law principles regarding termination and the sale of business assets. Here’s why:

1.  Chevron’s Duty as the Original Employer

    •    When a business or its assets are sold, the original employer (Chevron) has an obligation to ensure that employees' rights are respected during the transition. If the new employer's (CNRL) offer does not meet the "substantially similar" standard, Chevron may still be responsible for severance or termination pay.
    •    Chevron cannot simply shift responsibility to CNRL without first verifying that the employment transition meets legal standards.

2.  Duty to Act in Good Faith

    •    Employers in Alberta are required to act in good faith when dealing with employees, particularly during terminations or transitions. This duty includes reviewing the terms of CNRL’s offer to determine whether it aligns with your previous employment.
    •    A failure to review the offer and ensure its similarity could be seen as a breach of this duty.

3.  Responsibility Under Common Law Principles

    •    The Alberta courts have consistently ruled that if an employer denies severance because a comparable role is available, the onus is on the employer to prove the new offer is substantially similar.
    •    If Chevron refused severance without conducting a review of the offer, they could be seen as acting unreasonably.

4.  Implications of Denying Severance Without Review

    •    If Chevron failed to assess CNRL’s offer before denying your severance claim, you could argue that they have not met their obligations under Alberta’s Employment Standards Code or common law.
    •    This failure could strengthen your case for severance, as Chevron cannot simply defer to CNRL without verifying the offer's adequacy..

Chevron did not review the offers to ensure they were similar. Also the offer expired before we were terminated so chevron did not make an attempt to mitigate. They sc--wed up and have to pay up.

Yes, Chevron likely has an obligation to review the offer from CNRL to determine whether it was "substantially similar" before denying you severance. This obligation arises from their duty as your original employer under Alberta law and common law principles regarding termination and the sale of business assets. Here’s why:

1.  Chevron’s Duty as the Original Employer

    •    When a business or its assets are sold, the original employer (Chevron) has an obligation to ensure that employees' rights are respected during the transition. If the new employer's (CNRL) offer does not meet the "substantially similar" standard, Chevron may still be responsible for severance or termination pay.
    •    Chevron cannot simply shift responsibility to CNRL without first verifying that the employment transition meets legal standards.

2.  Duty to Act in Good Faith

    •    Employers in Alberta are required to act in good faith when dealing with employees, particularly during terminations or transitions. This duty includes reviewing the terms of CNRL’s offer to determine whether it aligns with your previous employment.
    •    A failure to review the offer and ensure its similarity could be seen as a breach of this duty.

3.  Responsibility Under Common Law Principles

    •    The Alberta courts have consistently ruled that if an employer denies severance because a comparable role is available, the onus is on the employer to prove the new offer is substantially similar.
    •    If Chevron refused severance without conducting a review of the offer, they could be seen as acting unreasonably.

4.  Implications of Denying Severance Without Review

    •    If Chevron failed to assess CNRL’s offer before denying your severance claim, you could argue that they have not met their obligations under Alberta’s Employment Standards Code or common law.
    •    This failure could strengthen your case for severance, as Chevron cannot simply defer to CNRL without verifying the offer's adequacy.

Court ruling is the same chevron situation

https://www.hrreporter.com/focus-areas/employment-law/job-offer-from-successor-employer-before-termination-not-opportunity-to-mitigate/381757

Read this link, applies to chevron people with CNRL offers

Everyone get your demand letters in, chevron is asking for more time, they are nervous and will likely try to settle everyone and they said they don’t want to go to court

"massive payday" ROTFLMMFAO! What a deluded little, small, pathetic subhuman. So instead of actually working for a living, actually contributing to society, your goal is to file fraudulent lawsuits in search of a "massive payday" Sure, roll the dice. You first. You're not getting any buy-in from the rest of us.

If you accept the CNRL job, your option to file a lawsuit for a massive payday is gone. You have to refuse the offer based on your view that it is inadequate. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Ask any attorney.

I am so happy to see all of this bullying backfiring on CBU. The results so far are astonishing. They are reaping what they sowed. CBU's Legal and HR departments never learned that bullying and intimidation are ineffective when confronted with collective action.

Chevron needs to learn how to be a responsible corporation, but unfortunately, it will be a hard lesson for them.

@5mac, no one is "scared" but you my friend. And you're showing it by posting and posting your senseless whining posts that no one reads. You have long bulleted posts of mumbo jumbo created by Chat-GPT. Woop-de-doo. you're really special.

No, @5mac, but that's hilarious. There is no CBU, CVX, CNRL etc. on this thread down-voting it except employees, if that. Get a drip dude and shed the tin-foil hat. If you think that just because YOU, the one fool who keeps posting unpopular ideas and readers come along and downvote your drivel means anything except that you have unpopular opinions I have a bridge to sell you.

If you wanna know how Chevron is scared, find any other CBU post that exceeded 60 replies and had tbis number of down ones for anything against CBU

Civil claims are not fraudulent. Chevron attorneys using the big words and the empty threat despite being humiliated in every single labour dispute.i heard this from Chevron legal myself that they lost a claim with Alberta Employment Standards and Chevron HR sc--wed really bad to the ppint they even fined CBU on the top of the claim

CBU as an employer has a very bad reputation with wvery single government labour agency.

Back to topic, the fail safe fair steps are

• Accept CNRL job offer at least until you get something better

• Calculate how much Money will you use until retirement. This is your own opinion

• Send them in the same day you accept the offer a demand letter for what they owe you. This way you register Chevron debt to you and you have two years to claim it as a statutory period in Alberta.

= Now you are boy under pressure to make any decision or a court application. You have a pay cheque coming and you van decide if Chevron do not pay it's debt to you if you want to go ro court for a collection order yourself or hire a lawyer on contingency basis or even drop it all together.

• - Contact your MP and MPP and tell them how these billions are leaving Canada how Chevron treates it's employees who created this value

Good luck everyone

Don’t need a job. Enjoy being a corporate slave for your remaining years.

@5ugr, I have one now, 100% and also one lined up for the future, whether I get laid off, quit or not, because I prepared, how about you?
Either way, good luck.

Well let us know in a year if you think it’s decent there

I just want a decent job, I didn't get into O&G as a career working a low level position expecting to get rich overnight. If you're trying to get rich in O&G as a typical employee you're in the wrong business. There are literally hundreds of obvious better ways to get rich as long as you have the talent and ability. Is there anyone working for CVX thinking they were going to "be rich"?

CNQ is a dividend stock, you don’t get dividends when holding options. 15-20% of your total compensation is tied directly to how CNQ performs. The stock peaked in April 2024 and difficult to see where more growth will come from. The US tariffs will also not help CNQ. Ignore this all you want and say CNRL will be great and you’ll be rich but you’re risking a lot working for and investing in one company.

CBU is scared? Good grief I don't think I've seen any CVX as delusional as on this thread.
Why don't YOU get a life and quit trying to recruit honest employees to become criminals and make fraudulent claims?

“CBU are very scared now. They know that someone is showing people their rights other than the hired lawyers (which was a conflict of interest)

Plain and simple, the company made 6.5 Billion (with a B) dollars form the work of the people and then throw them out as damaged and used goods to a lower position and they try to manipulate the system and intermediate them so they do not seek compensation

What is fair is 300K as a minimum to everyone accepts CNRL position. This is fair compensation and in the big scheme of things it is only 60 Million or so which is less than 1% of the value these people have created for Chevron.

Stand your grounds and fight for your rights and what you deserve.“

CVX was non op in AOSP (no value in AOSP created in that me to CVX, this is a fact) and the duvernay was worth maybe 1-1.5B. An asset any other operator would have turned into 2.5-3B in value. I may sell my CNRL stonk because they are picking up so many useless employees

Why do you even care if people are not accepting the offer and seeing what they can get? How does it affect you at all? Get a life.

Lots of discussion in this thread. Unfortunately, there is no basis for legal action unless you are offered a job at clearly lower pay and told that is your only option. If you have that documented, you can decline it and talk to Chevron about compensation. Otherwise, you need to take it and move on. Or, like one dummy I know, refuse the offer then try to complain and ask for it back!

There will be more than one that will be pursuing legal action.

"lawyers in this forum"??? dude. You should seriously see someone about the paranoia and everything else you're suffering from. Now if you claim that you have been severely psychologically affected and diminished mentally you may have a case, from the looks of your posts on this thread. Other than that, what's with the terminal entitlement syndrome?

Uuuuhhh Buh Bye. I'm sure they're all shakin' in their boots to have to deal with one whining entitled complainer who thinks the world owes them something for nothing.
Good riddance.

The only reason Chevron unleashed their lawyers in this forum to discourage people from asking for their rights is the fact that there is a real court case.

We are not stupid. I personally learned a lot in the last few days. I normally do not like posts here but this time it was helpful.

Wait for my demand letter this Friday. You forced my hand, I am forcing yours

What is this one endless posting guy trying to do, con others to join his team of one to pursue a fraudulent legal case just because he doesn't want to man-up and work a slightly different job for the same pay and benefits? Looking for a windfall payout when there is none? There's nothing to base it on, junior. The Future of Chevron is no guarantee either. Do you want a job with the same benefits, at least for now, or would you like to find another one somewhere else? You literally have no case, as it should be. You are being offered an equivalent job. Quit whining and get back to work.

Must have been ALOT of effort to match the base and provide no info on the performance bonus……but they made sure to include they can move you to another location.

At chevron we have a historical track record of salary increases. At CNRL we know salaries are lower and have heard from Devon people theirs stayed flat for years.

Why are you trying to discourage people for pursuing legal action? If you’re going over just shut up and go.

CNRL went to a lot of effort to ensure the offers are identical or better in terms of pay and benefits. Your compensation trajectory after joining CNRL can be different than it was at Chevron but that is just normal business. You are not guaranteed your old progression anywhere, even Chevron. I don't think most attorneys will give you the time of day, much less a court.

Have fun at the sweatshop getting 15-20% lower total compensation. Hope the stock price drops and the options are worthless.

What do you say now that base compensation in the offer same as CBU, plus stocks. All those rumours about 30% less blah blah just wasn’t true. Again. So much hype and whining. We have a Job and if you don’t like it don’t accept or accept and get a paid while you look the another. There’s never guarantees in any job that you’re there until retirement then get some fantasy package on top.

@3vnp, those aren't "our steps". There is no "our". There's just you. Do as you please but you're not getting any support for your fraudulent bogus claims of victimhood.

Do NOT accept the CNRL job if you plan to sue. Reject it with a statement as to why the salary is too low.