Thread regarding BP PLC layoffs

Botched non-re-org re-org

KD is a disaster. MA needs to get rid or her before she does too much damage. They’ve been saying for months that we’re not doing a re-org, and now we’re being told to expect major changes in September. People are freaking out and speculating the worst case scenarios. She is a completely unqualified. Makes you wonder how she even got promoted to this level?

by
| 2172 views | | 19 replies (last August 12, 2024) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1tWuf3vb

19 replies (most recent on top)

My favorite is how they can cleanly say there won't be a headcount reduction....because yeah there will probably be an increase in headcount with all the roles moving to GBS and them adding in layers on layers of middle management back in

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2xrd+1tWuf3vb

Omg bp sounds so chaotic. I’m glad I checked here before accepting my job offer. So many red flags 🚩

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2ahw+1tWuf3vb

Not sure how much more blunt they could be?

How about saying layoffs, instead of all this corporate coded BS? We CAN read between the lines. bp hires smart people. For them to use this soft language makes me feel at least that we are id--tic children who want to be treated gently.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1zfm+1tWuf3vb

I think what is irking people is that they asserted that the post reinvent company would be "right-sized" for a long time and here we are again..

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1mvo+1tWuf3vb

Always expect to lose your job. You are just a number in a ledger. You are expendable.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1pvm+1tWuf3vb

Not sure what you’ve been watching but Murray said we need to lose 2B. And while there don’t be a company wide ‘reinvent’ each function would be ‘streamlining’ and ‘simplifying’. He also mentioned a transformation office had been stood up to manage all of this. Not sure how more blunt he could have been?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1upy+1tWuf3vb

Erm the LT clearly said there could be some incidental job losses but not much. They said repeatedly that head count reduction is not the goal and there will only will be minimal job losses. Then last week they had leaders signal down the line that employees should expect major change within a month. The LT is disingenuous.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1dwu+1tWuf3vb

They’ve been pretty clear there will be layoffs. Anyone pretending different is disingenuous.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1jfr+1tWuf3vb

I’m pretty sure everyone read between the lines. When LT said there would be no layoffs, we all called BS and didn’t believe them. But they blatantly lied. They easily could have said we need to save costs and are they have not decided how to do it yet. Instead they literally said they will not have coordinated layoffs. That is how leadership loses trust among employees.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1szj+1tWuf3vb

I find it comical that people still can't read between the lines during townhalls and then get upset and feel they are lied to. The writing was on the wall when they said we need to make changes for efficiency and then announced $2bn savings. How else are they going to save $2bn. Headcount and Asset sales. If management told us about re-org months earlier then people will be anxious and no work will get done like during re-invent. If they keep us in the dark then people are oblivious thinking they will not be affected then when time comes closer, wham they tell us the news then it will only be 1Q where work doesn't get done versus half the year.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1aik+1tWuf3vb

@wql+1tWuf3vb they were going to be bad since last year's were just before the BL debacle. Add in no change at the top with pretty much the same names and poor performance in the market, the scores will tank indeed

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1yor+1tWuf3vb

Reinvent was 10000 people for 3bn or cost savings. Sounds like we going for 2/3rd of that number. Small difference is target is over a longer period of time - 2026. Let’s see how this pan out.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1tdy+1tWuf3vb

@1cst+1tWuf3vb you are 100% right on the money. Should have been someone from the technical side. Add into the mix, that MA was a major part of BL's strategy, and we all know how that went. They should have made a bold decision to bring in someone from outside. They could have begged Gilvary to come back, or brought back Bob Dudley out of retirement for a couple of years to steady the ship. BP needed a clean break from BL's woke nonsense.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1rip+1tWuf3vb

Never make a CFO the CEO. They see people as cost.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1cst+1tWuf3vb

The timing is perfect to tank Pulse scores. The LT will ignore the bad results and claim employees are anxious about change. Classic bp move.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @wql+1tWuf3vb

Every one of the former CEO's leadership team should have been gotten rid of. A fresh start at the top was needed. On Monday, it will be 11 months since he has been out of a job. Notice how nobody is clamouring for him. If Abu Dhabi take him on, they need their heads looked at. Enjoy the rest of the weekend everyone.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ptr+1tWuf3vb

@OP+1tWuf3vb you ask: "Makes you wonder how she even got promoted to this level?". I could make a couple of suggestions. One of the two suggestions is that there seemed to be a push by a former CEO to promote people on the basis of personal characteristics like gender, rather than competence. Box ticking, being seen to be woke etc.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @lue+1tWuf3vb

Yeah, they have all lied to us. Blatantly. On every call since Murray took over people have been asking about another reinvent. They always said no re-invent is coming, some small adjustments maybe, but nothing else.

Liars.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @iup+1tWuf3vb

Chaos and bumbling incompetency = bp

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @xur+1tWuf3vb

Post a reply

: