Look, I get being unhappy. This place gives plenty of reasons. But if you're at the point where you're just bringing everyone down, maybe it's time to go. The constant complaining, the negativity, it gets into the walls. It becomes part of the culture. If you can't find a way to be even a little okay here, leaving might help you and help the people who stay.
29 replies (most recent on top)
When you say that HR told you that adjustments were made to achieve distribution required by law, this does not mean required by US law, it means to comply with requirements of EM Law Department.
Simply an effort to avoid getting sued.
Achieving that target distribution does move people on the rank list unrelated to their assessments. Like getting Bonus Points for the group you belong in.
@tm can we all gather in front of the cube on April 1, hold hands and sing kumbaya together? That'd be so epic.
If there's some kind of HR adjustment, maybe that adjustment made for a variety of reasons.. like protecting favourites, pushing hipos, or getting rid of someone that nobody likes.
I am not sure who you are talking to OP because every single person I talk to is acting the way you described the problem isn’t us it is the company. I don’t think putting our heads in the sand and singing kumbaya is the answer
@kd I was literally there and it’s a fact. Go peddle your naysaying somewhere else. It happens with gender and certain groups of underrepresented minorities. It happens because the company doesn’t want to get sued for discrimination. This is literally one of the only reasons HR departments exist. Ask around to someone you trust, if such a person exists in your life.
There seem to be doubters but an HR manager verbally told me that the numbers are adjusted and inferred that meeting the target distributions was required by law.
Formerly this was done days after ranking meetings so movements were not known until the RGs were published online. If you did not have 2 people together, you could have had an adjustment on an employee position in ranking and not noticed it. In the last 5 or so years the HR rep in the ranking session can perform the analysis and make adjustments prior to closure of the ranking session.
I had one person noticeably move. HR said it was because multiple top ranked persons in that ethnicity transferred to other departments, making that group lite at the top so all persons in that ethnicity had to be shifted upward to meet the target distribution.
Not sure if there is any law to meet a specific distribution but there is no doubt that the adjustments are done.
@jh Nah, trolls change tactics all the time. Dude is just switching it up so he doesn’t catch another ban.
@jb LoL this is such bull$hit 😂😂😂
@jb Of all the things that never happened, this never happened the most.
@k1 Take this BS elsewhere.
HR moving anyone of any ethnicity up or down an agreed rank list based on their ethnicity seems illegal. At the very least is unethical.
Whenever judging such an activity, just swap the ethnicity and see if that activity seems legitimate.
I guess in a way it is not as bad as paying someone 1/10th the normal salary based on nationality.
Looks like one commenter owes another commenter $100.
@j8 Former manager here. They used to take all the ranking results and “roll them up” and do some “demographic checks” the day after the meeting. What you got back from HR was a corrected list where certain people’s numbers moved, sometimes significantly, to prevent the appearance of bias. They do this every year. Still do. You’re not wrong.
I was never passed over for any position given to a DEI person.
I was not PIPd. Still here under this bias system.
I am just commenting about DEI and you obviously have an issue justifying in your mind that DEI does not exist and trying to convince yourself that you actually earned your position.
There is no denying that HR told me that the person reporting to me received 28 RG points just because of his demographic. HR said those types of adjustments were required to reach target distribution and tried to convince me it was legal to give undeserving RG bonus points based on demographics.
@et I agree, it’s a problem…
For YOU.
$50 says you got passed-up for a position you thought you deserved, found out they hired/promoted someone ethnic instead of you, and threw a man-tantrum over it. Another $50 says you were let go via a PIP for being a general AH. For most functional adults, this would initiate a cycle of self-reflection. Instead, you just keep coming here to whine about DEI.
@et Have you tried therapy?
Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be g-y,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.
@b3 you mean the demographic of mediocre white men?
Yes, DEI is a problem. Please understand that nearly all persons that fit into minority categories anre outstanding ant what they do and deserve the highest respect but there are instances of people being chosen or moved up because of the demographic they are in.
I once had a minority engineer that was ranked exactly between 2 other non minority engineers. The entire ranking meeting agreed to the placement of all 3 of my direct reports in that order. When their RGs were posted online for communication, the minority was 28 RG points above the other two. I contacted HR about this obvious mistake and was told the person was given the 28 additional points because HR did an evaluation and his demographic averaged lower that the target. Basically he was gifted unearned RG points and ranked above people that outperformed him simply because he was in a certain group. This is what we refer to as DEI, when someone receives something not earned. Other people in his demographic earned their rankings, I know for a fact he did not earn that ranking. People that complain about DEI are simply complaining about unearned undeserved treatment upward.
@b3 DEI again? Really??
@OP Far too many of you keep looking to your job for happiness and meaning. My suggestion is that you stop doing do immediately.
I get downvoted into oblivion every time I say this (not sure why), but I’ll say it again:
Work is a business/financial transaction. When you took the job, what actually happened was that the employer purchased access to skills that you marketed to them, for an adjustable base price and a set period time in relation to that price. Stop treating your job like your spouse. Show up, do what it says in the description, go home. Simple.
People who are constantly negative and complain are a major drain. I totally understand why people are upset. I am too for all the same reasons....but its best to try to keep a bit positive for the sake of others
The root causes of unhappiness:
Forced ranking. Everyone on every team fighting for survival and trying to take credit for the work of others in hopes of not getting PIP’d.
False ranking. People on the fast track are required to get top rankings even if not have a clue about what their department does and even if they directly caused major blunders. I have seen a Supervisor get dropped because he told the bad truth about a sponsored id--t in a ranking meeting.
Falsely ranking someone as Needs Significant Improvement to meet a layoff quota. This makes 50+ percent of employees miserable. If the PIP percent was the result of performance assessments then that might be valid, but announcing the PIP percentage prior to any assessments is simply a layoff quota.
Location/pay gap ranking considerations. An expert in the USA that corrects BTC errors will get ranked lower than the BTC engineer that makes the errors. Tracking of the multitude of errors from BTC is forbidden because the people making the errors only cost 1/10 to 1/8 as much as industry norms.
Continually promoting incompetent persons from certain demographics despite poor performance and obvious incompetence. Industry experts are given supervisors and managers that cannot form complete sentences about what their departments do. Top that off with an incompetent DEI boss communicating to an expert the he Needs Significant Improvement just because he is over 50 and can be replaced with 5 BTC staff and still save 50 percent of his costs.
All the above root causes could be solved by EM Executives and a wonderful working culture could be formed, but EM Executives choose to keep the status quo in hopes to increase attrition.
@a4 I think the number of downvotes to your comment is telling of the type of people that work at Exxon (or perhaps just the type of people on this site). The fact that not purposely spreading negativity or making the people around you feel worse is receiving dislikes is mind boggling and makes me question how people were raised and what type of value system they follow.
@aj
whimper whimper against the dying of the light
There will always be losers but there is good news! Losers in one area can be winners in another. Never stop looking for a better job and you will eventually be a good fit and a winner. And, if it does not happen, then it wasn’t meant to be. But, there is still good news! You might be a winner in the next life! And, so on.. so never give up. Peace.
@ OP culture>or lack there of?
well if you don't have standards
you will always be happy
you also will have buildings collapse, planes fall out of the sky, and botched surgeries
Some people just like to spread negativity. Personally doesn’t align with my values.