A bit of a rant here. Is anyone else tired of these Europeans in the US on expat assignments in JG1+ roles? They come here and take the highest paying US jobs and know Fu-k all about our basins. They act like managing a multi basin field is an easy task but fail to make anything better when they’re in role. They’re a--holes to our service and equipment providers. A few short years later they’re off with a nice retirement package and no better of a business unit. Would love to see Shell revert back to its Shell US days and let the American assets be run by Americans.
28 replies (most recent on top)
I spent 4 years on a flagship GOA project where only 6 out of 26 on the team were Americans. 1 was fired, 1 early retired, 2 left the company, and us other two became the punching bags... I managed to get out of that mess, only to be dropped into an ever deepening DEI disaster of unqualified bosses, often multiple layers deep, that couldn't (or wouldnt) make any decisions on anything, so that the entire organization was effectively incapable of making a decision that wasn't 'no'. Getting laid off was a relief.
@19d
You have to be trolling.
Objectively, it is clear that Shell leadership is selecting substantially less qualified women over more qualified men. Heck, it is even mathematically provable that with the sizes of the populations in the industry that women with lower qualifications are being selected over more qualified men.
i’m not sure on the “why” but it’s clear that we have lost our ability to drill for new oil and gas which is quite amazing.
all we do is double down in proven reserves. great way to not exist in 10 years, but hey - as long as wael won’t lay you off for spending money on something besides stock
US wells management at LC+ level are pretty much all non Americans. All they spew in Franchise Franchise Franchise because they don’t know how to get a hole in the ground in the US basins. The GOA is one of the most complicated places to work and you can’t come in from a single play basin and expect to be technically competent to work here.
it’s not a DEI issue if the white men are 60-40 and the women are 70-30 or better
once again you seem to not understand the situation
it seems that we actually have the same idea in that the best candidate for the job should win. you simply think white men are mediocre and being unfairly chosen. so i have to ask you - why do we need to preferentially hire women and minorities instead of being better and fairer at determining who is the better talent if the white men are truly worse?
shouldn’t it be that if we hire fairly white men don’t get picked? of so, why does dei support quotas over merit?
During Reshape (in Europe) we had our boss say that the applications would be reviewed and the ranked with the best candidate put at the top of the list. The list would then be "viewed through a diversity lens" before the final decision was made. As a pale stale straight British male I knew it was time to jump before I was pushed.
@19d
@19d+1jy2k4fjs
The problem with your argument is the fact that we can plainly observe that less qualified women are being placed in roles over more qualified men just because of gender. If it was a more capable or qualified person being placed in the role there would be no need to call it DEI. AND get this, White and Asian men would not complain about a qualified person being put in the roles. You seem to presume that they're merely picking between two or three co-equal candidates... the problem is that it is so blatantly obvious that they're scraping low to avoid picking a man or worse yet an American White man.
- DEI is crazy unfair
- Europeans look at the US as colonies to be stripped of resources
- The biggest uptick in Shel share price is when there is a rumor that Shel could become a US company Europeans hate this. Europeans seek to keep control of Shell.
- Even the Catholic church finally picked an American White male to lead... Shell is probably 50 years behind that
@198 the comment is in a post about UK leaders in the US, and the discussion was about Edwin Verdonk's town hall, which was for the Gulf business, so the reference to white males was apropos to the comment. I don't know what they do in India and it's not relevant to the comment. In the US, the people complaining about DEI (men and women) begin their arguments from the assumption that the non-white person must have been 70-30, but they were chosen because they were "DEI" over a white man who must have been 80-20 or 90-10. The reality is that 60-40 white guys have been chosen for a long time and nobody blinked an eye until someone said we needed to consider a broader spectrum of competition. My point was in agreement with you that job fitness isn't binary. It's not bashing white men. I'm sure some of them are 90-10 and should be chosen, but only if other people have been looked at with the same objective criteria and found to be less qualified. If the non-white, or non-male person is equally qualified on all objective criteria, maybe they should be chosen until we get to a point where the US and much of the world is not so lopsided in favor of white men.
@18q
@18q+1jy2k4fjs
"it's pretty unlikely that any manager would state, flat out, that "DEI" was "more important" than merit."
BUT that is literally what he said!!!! Moreover, it is in Shell's 2020-2021 DEI training!!!!!!! The slides still exist, you can search for them on the search from the internal main web page!!!! It is still there. They argue that diversity will be more profitable than merit. Plus, they cite California and EU mandates directing to having 40% women on the board. And that is why DEI at Shell is more about male or female instead of race.
Don't argue in your feelings, argue with facts. The facts are there, look it up. The its unlikely shows you just don't know and are willing to discard facts that don't fit your narrative. "I'm sawry that I hurt your fee fees" DEI is just that awful it shouldn't be supported. I'm someone who knows the facts and I am not arguing feelings.
Dude, That was literally the meeting that had stopped the old way menti was used to EVP and SEG townhalls. They used to get questions live through that. The responses delivered by Edwin and the vitriol that was in the menti got that method stopped. Try looking up archived townhalls... can't do that anymore because of this specific meeting
@18q
DEI actually has been more about selecting less qualified women over more qualified men. He-l yes, there is also a HUGE amount of Indians hiring Indians. The folks most adversely effected are white men.
I'm not saying they're hiring completely unqualified people... just less qualified.
Imagine the job requires basic math (+,-,/,*). But you can choose either basic math or basic math with calculus and differential equations. So, you choose basic math only because DEI and the person gets the job done. Mediocrity over meritocracy. Plain and simple!
wrong. in your world, if one candidate is 80% there and one is 70% there, you pick the 70% if they’re diverse to pump your diversity numbers
job fitness isn’t binary. DEI is used to justify a trade off of worse fit over merit
it’s comical how you don’t even understand the views you’re mocking. i have seen the above scenario happen multiple times, with various percentage of fit. also the biggest example of racial hiring in shell isnt white men - it’s indian men hiring their own cast and dialect.
white men are just your punching bag. you act like you’re about stopping racial imbalance and unfairness when in reality everything is about taking white men down a peg and nothing else is even visible to you
@15j - it's pretty unlikely that any manager would state, flat out, that "DEI" was "more important" than merit. Wanting to consider diversity, equity, and inclusion in promotion or hiring decisions means not automatically assuming, as has been done for centuries, that white males have more merit or are better qualified than non-white, non-males. You act like it's a binary choice. In your world, if you care about merit, you pick a white guy because, of course, the white guy is always the best, or if you care about "DEI", you pick non-white person, who, of course isn't going to be qualified. That's not how it works.
@17n ya I know here has been a big push to move PTEs out of US and want more of them spread out across the world.
The JG1 UK expat manager of my department in Houston was repatriating. As second in command with a career of international finance experience, I expressed my interest in the position to the UK senior boss.
When he contacted me privately I was told “we don’t want an American in that position”.
When the job was OR posted, the description said “all nationalities are encouraged to apply”.
Fact. Remember what you’re dealing with.
Shell was never a US company. Maybe it will be after all soon
I still often think that the Europeans do harbor some animosity towards the US.
I remember screen-shotting the Menti comment in Edwin Verdonk's townhall meeting in 2021
Miserable complaining Americans, they don't like anything that is created outside of the US, Sack the lot of them.
That comment had 135 likes! This had something to do with supporting Petrosigns... that program that had been in development for 20 years at that point and still shows no signs of use today at 25 years of devlopment.
In that same townhall Edwin clearly stated that DEI was considered more valuable than merit. I don't think Edwin felt that but knew he had to repeat that Shell training sound bite.
Good times, Good times
Yeah the foreign whites really are the worst
@a9 I was stunned my British manager called us US employees “indigenous.” They really are such a- holes
oh 100%. indians only hire indians and even then, they apply the caste system. you can check fishbowl, which is essentially indian “the layoff” as an app and they admit it and call out others on it and talk about lawsuits about it. absolute mess.
@qj
That's probably true. In my experience, the Indians show preference to fellow Indians over merit or perhaps prejudice towards non-Indians. Maybe they just look upon each other and see an opportunity for DEI? But then even among Indians the cast system is also applied. It is just that they look at all others as the lowest cast.
if it’s any consolation, the entire company will be run by indians regardless of whatever we do for revenue at the time within 5-10 years
its absolutely crazy how oil and gas is the biggest outsourcer in the world but takes zero heat
But the Euro-bosses bring so much competence to the table.
Check out this article by the IMF that compares European companies, productivity and business performance to those in the US:
https://www.imf.org/en/Blogs/Articles/2024/09/11/how-to-awaken-europes-private-sector-and-boost-economic-growth
Fire Amelichons in UK. Like Kristolopheles.
Then Shell will insource it like with AT&T for network services, move it to the bright capable India and save millions. Just another day for your average letter category leader.
They are bullies to our service providers. Our shear volume of work lets them get away with it but they’re completely eroding trust in service companies. When - not if - our activity levels decline and we don’t have a disproportionate amount of work in the Gulf, those service providers are going to be happy to sc--w over Shell.
I don't want Shell US in American hands. It'll somehow end up being owned by Israel if Shell US is run by Americans.
Make no mistake - Shell’s European rulers consider US employees indigenous staff and as such, the in-country locals don’t really figure into their long term planning. Arrogance and the mantle of superiority are ingrained in the UK’s attitude towards Yanks. Some think they’re more British than the Queen.
Totally agree. You think the UK people would let Americans run their assets?