Thread regarding Chevron Corp. layoffs

Today, Friday October 6, as TS Nate enters the GOM and oil production fields are shutting in and the rig count is down by 2, one would expect the WTI Crude price to be increasing today. But the opposite is taking place. WTI is down 3% at midday and Brent is down a lot too. End of the summer swoon or a sign of times to come? Chevron is about ready to make personnel cutbacks in SJVBU and in other places. They know a lot more than they’re willing to admit publically.

You said it OP, “Oil is coming back”... down!

Bankruptcies happen all the time and no company is too big to fail. Our industry is being severely disrupted. Chances are you will not lose all your pension, only a portion. There are options, I think to sell or convert the revenue stream to a lump sum but at a steep discount. Not pretty.

The Chevron pension plan is extremely well funded compared to most O&G corporations. I have done in depth research on many SEC filings of major corporations and found that of most of them Chevron's ability to support their pension is well above average. There are a few envious laid off workers on here with no pension who would like you to believe otherwise. That is simply not true and not based in reality. Sure the pension is not 100% funded but most are not. In fact fully funded pension plans are a rarity. Please do not be misled by the depressed nay-sayers with no job, no life, and no prospects.

Chevron better get on the stick with their pension plan. I don’t think we have to worry about any short term funding no problems, but in the long term (12 or 15 years out), if Chevron does fall short of the PPA requirements, they will have to make good on all pension obligations to the extent of having to sell assets to prop up the funding. I’m confident that long before that scenario plays out, Chevron would either cut back on its pension plan or announce it is ending it. Whatever the employee has accrued to that day is an obligation Chevron must honor. The PBGA will step in only after Chevron sells off all its assets and still has a balance to pay.

@11tyr, When demand for anything wanes, so does the price. That’s a fundamental law of economics. Why is solar energy prices falling? Because the demand for that kind of energy is dropping off. Thanks to deregulation of laws that were up to recently hobbling the coal and nuclear energy industry.

If solar costs continue to plunge oil will be kaput in 10 years and Chevron will be bankrupt. I wouldn't touch the annuity with a ten foot pole. It is equivalent to taking the lump sum and investing the entire amount in CVX stock. And the pension guarantee fund is even more tenuous. Congress could wipe it out any time.

the argument is whether or not the pension fund has a deficit or is underfunded. its not about whether or not you take a lump sum or annuity. all pension payments regardless of how you choose to get paid, come out of the same fund.

people arguing that the fund is 100% funded are not basing this on fact. every annual 10k Chevron has ever filed with the SEC shows a pension deficit. so far no one has been able to successfully refute this and all they reference is some letter they see or research they have done. well a 10k is an official financial disclosure document that backs up the balance sheet and is posted on the investor relations website, so everyone is welcome to take a look. whatever you are looking at outside of this takes a back seat. the figures reported to SEC/investors have to be accurate unless chevron is making false financial disclosures.

as for whether or not chevron's pension funding status is any better or worse than other companies. its about in the middle. not terrible, but not the best either. the % of the underfunded amount changes year-to-year.

the issue with an underfunded pension is similar to social security. there aren't any issues with meeting social security payments now, but its projected to not have the necessary funds to meet all future obligations cause people are pulling out more than what the fund is taking in.

chevron pays into the pension every year and it shows up on the balance sheet and income statement cause its considered a liability. chevron meets current obligations, but the pension payments will grow in the future as more people retire. not really any issue now, but it may materially impact cash flow in the future especially if business doesn't pick-up. chevron could choose to either increase payments or to let the fund drop in % funded. its a much bigger issue if the company were to go bankrupt. the pension would essentially freeze at whatever its currently funded at with no further company contributions, which would screw over everyone still either receiving payments or were looking to take a lump. hence, the ideal case is to have a fully funded pension.

Oil does seem like it's coming back. At least a little. That's the best way and probably the best we're gonna see for some time. Gotta take every penny you can get. Glass half full. Of WTI !!!!!!!!

You guys arguing about the lump sum vs annuity again? It's really a personal decision, for instance, if you have a small amount and plan on just rolling it over or whatever, there's no sense in fussing with the annuity. Or if you have a large amount and rather have it available for heirs, then you also would take the lump sum. In most cases, however, for retiree's with a sound footing, no children who have failed to launch, or that you want to ruin their future by spoiling them with unearned income, they pick the annuity. This has been discussed ad nauseam on this site. The logic is the CVX annuity cannot be matched on the open market and it's a nice hedge against a volatile market and sequence of return risk. Most have other investments also. I see one poster going on and on about the stability of the CVX pension fund. First time I've heard of that. All the research that I've done indicates that it is very well funded compared to most corporations and also backed by the pension guaranty agency. Why would someone go on about that anyhow? I sense a bit of jealousy in most of those rants. The lump sum would negate that argument anyway.

Now THIS is the post of a real intellectual: "haha form 10k is way too complicated for 10una to understand. too many words and numbers. going to need powerpoint with big letters"

Very believable. Keep em comin' you two. I'll get the popcorn!

haha form 10k is way too complicated for 10una to understand. too many words and numbers. going to need powerpoint with big letters and sentences with 5 words or less....

10una, form 10k filed in 2017, F-56. Bottom chart. Funding status: ($4.7B) pension deficit. If you going to reference financial statements you should at least look at them. You do realize that numbers in ( ) mean negative right? That's B as in billion btw. How you going to spin that as being stable? Unless of course you suggesting that Chevron is falsifying it's financials. #Can't argue with stupid.

You shouldn't even lower yourself to respond back 10wvk and afford this guy the dignity. It's pretty obvious the guy has been drinking the Chevron koolaid for too long and its still in his system. He was probably a company yes man who still volunteers to this day to hold Watson's d--k whenever he takes a piss. Sadly, this is the kind of retiree who would jump at the chance to come back and be around senior leadership again so he can once again drop to knee, mouth agap and foaming, beating out everyone else to hover over executive crotch ready to go at a moment's notice. How blissful if must be for him to relive those days when he got those hard earned promotions.

10vwk, you are so right! I agree 100%. "You can't reason with stupid" is why no one takes posts like yours seriously. "I used to be in charge of putting together the financial statements for the company." - LMAO! Too funny!

No, you used to be in charge of cleaning the toilets, idiot. Nice try. You would need to know math to do that, and you know nothing, much less math. You need to try a little harder to make your fake posts more believable. Lame.

10syp I didn't post twice! I used to be in charge of putting together the financial statements for the company. You assume way too much and you are coming off as ignorant. I'm glad you referenced the investor relations site. Maybe you should actually take a look at some of the files posted there and try to make sense of what you are looking at before you make any unfounded claims and boast that Chevron is really any different than any of its competitors. But I guess in the end of the day what's the point of even trying to reason with you, can't really argue with stupid.

10qcz, Thanks for posting twice, no need to repeat your lies, though. Compared to other majors, the Chevron pension happens to be on VERY stable footing. sorry to burst your little butthurt loser bubble, snoflake. Keep repeating your lies, though. You fit in quite well here with the rest of the losers - LMAO!

All of the infor that you need is right here, people, and it paints a very good picture for Chevron. http://www.chevron.com/investors/financial-information#secfilings

Everyone, Pension or lump sum - Enjoy your retirement, except for the one laid off butthurt deadwood nay-sayer who enjoys posting falsehoods and repeating himself - 10qcz ... ROTFL!

ok so i used to to be in finance so i can speak on somethings - folks i just wanted to point out that pension vs lump sum all come out of the same fund. chevron basically projects out how much it thinks future payouts (lump sum, annuities, etc) will look like vs what's currently available in the fund and it has to show that as either a positive/negative figure in their financial statements (as does every public company). there's been some rule changes lately on how pensions would show up as liabilities cause companies weren't fully disclosing them. now whether or not future payments will actually look that way....ehhh its kind of an estimate, but its not too difficult to come up with a reasonable one. chevron has historically ran a deficit. 101xr's comments are harsh, but they are true at least when it comes to just the pension. i don't support all his/her comments but the pension one is accurate. there's tons of info in the 10k filings. its a lot more detailed than the letters they send out, which I have always found to be somewhat misleading.

10ouy you obviously drank way too much koolaid in the office. you don't have facts to back up sh-- that the pension is on stable footing. you likely haven't seen any of the 10k's chevron has been filing or taken a closer look at the balance sheet. not that you would understand what its showing anyways cause facts and figures are beyond your comprehension. if the pension is so stable why would chevron show deficits in official financial regulatory filings? maybe you possess some alternative facts that aren't publicly disclosed. hey you could be a whistle blower to the SEC and pad your supposed amazing retirement.

The Chevron pension plan is on very stable footing and is in much better shape than many of your competitors, funding-wise. Sure, there's a chance you take but that's with any annuity. And Chevron's is backed by the PBGC which says a lot. For most people that guarantees at least 75% if not all of your annuity, depending on the value (up to$60,136 a year as of 2016). That's nothing to be frowned upon. Go ahead and trust the recently run up stock market after a bull run. Be my guest.

@10aqt, Many of your retired coworkers are likely to tell you they took the lump sum, when they really chose the annuity. Not so much those under 50, but the older retirees. The “group think” at work is to prefer the lump sum over the fixed annuity, but in reality after one retires, is to chose the safety of a guaranteed income stream. That is if the retiree is older and has a fairly large 401k portfolio to have to invest. The reasoning is there’s no need to put all your eggs in one basket.

10aqt, If you check the pension threads you will find that more people have chosen the pension over the lump sum , since it is actuarilly equivalent, cannot be beat on the open market and the pension has more "utility value" for financial security for older folks. Many do not want to play the market with a stock-heavy asset allocation which is not wise in retirement, and have healthy 401k's in addition if they feel like doing that in any event. The lump sum people are the outliers, they are typically the younger foolhardy folks. There are a few life conditions which would make the lump sum a better choice, but not many people meet that criteria and their children are successful, of people with better jobs such as Chevron personnel, so no need to leave a huge inheritance, which is not wise to start with, more abuse that than not. That's just from the data found online.

10bhs, the comment was that Electric vehicles, including batteries, and all of their components use "3 to 4 times" the ENERGY CONSUMPTION to produce, making them, including the fuel cost after conversion, not considering renewable, less energy efficient overall. No one said anything about them being "easier" to produce, although their price tags would indicate just the opposite.

Let me know when they become "affordable" also. I would be happy to own one.

Their heavy reliance on hydrocarbons for component manufacture will keep you guys in business for a long time. I personally am retired but would still like to see my former coworkers gainfully employed.

I don't actually know any Chevron retirees who chose the pension over the lu,p sum. It seems like very few would have a reason to make that choice. So, the pension funding is not really an issue for many.

10wfk's comments on the pension are correct. I don't know where people on here are getting the idea that the pension is fully funded...I don't think its ever been in Chevron's entire history. People might be confusing fully funded versus meeting current obligations. Chevron meets their current pension obligations (ie. payments to recipients now), but it doesn't have enough assets in the fund to meet all future obligations, which is what a fully funded pension means.

Wow Zwox, I understand you trying to defend Chevron and all, but you haven't stated any actual facts yourself. All you did was give your own opinion. First off, I think its kind of strange that a retiree is even on this discussion board, but that aside, it is true that Chevron is having some financial problems as of late. I mean its not like the company is doing all these layoffs and divestments because it wants to. The reality is there is a solvency issue. Chevron doesn't really generate enough cash lately to pay the dividend, fund normal company operations, and pay for capital projects. That's why you see all the debt accumulation, layoffs, and asset sales. Its not like this is a secret either. SWAT did mention his master financial plan several times already. Its not like any of the earnings calls lately have been grossly optimistic either. What's really troubling is if you look at the actual earnings presentations and some of the assumptions the number crunchers are making - a large chunk of financial stability at Chevron depends on oil being stable and not falling. If oil prices were to crater again it would cause significant financial stress.

zppy well if the pension is fully funded that isn't what is getting reported out officially. as of the end of 2016, the is pension underfunded by like $4.8B. its in the latest 10k filing posted on the investor relations site - http://www.chevron.com/investors/financial-information#secfilings

take a look at page 90 (FS-56). im sorry to say whatever letter they send u is probably not showing the entire picture.

i mean this is hardly unique to CVX, most companies purposely underfund the pension so they can free up cash and use it for somewhere else. the problem is pension payouts can eat into cash flow if its underfunded by too much, especially if payouts keep increasing and cash flow isn't. also, when companies go bankrupt or business goes south they typically freeze the pension at whatever value it is funded up to. and keep in mind that the US government only insures pensions up to a certain value, which is usually less than what u were supposed to get. basically if cvx went belly-up tomorrow unless the fund dramatically increased in value, you are looking at a less than whole pension payout. typically creditors and investors get their money back first....pensions almost never get fully funded during bankruptcies.

actually the comments about electric vehicles having equivalent energy consumption in production and in use as a petrol car are not true. in terms of production, electric vehicles are actually easier to produce due to less parts.

in terms of use, electric vehicles convert about 59-62% of electricity to power at the wheels. petrol cars only convert around 17-21% of the energy stored in gasoline to power at the wheels. these are EPA numbers from 2011 btw. its probably improved some since then.

also, its far less energy intensive to generate electricity from burning coal or natural gas than it is to refine oil into fuel.

Zxwk, Your thoughts are false and your reasoning is wrong. As one poster already pointed out, you already made a few incorrect comments about CVX and their solvency and pension program.

It is becoming more and more clear that not only do you know nothing, but you are most likely not a CVX employee at all but a troll. Your rant reads like that of a grade-school kid trying unsuccessfully to write an essay. Incidentally, I am already happily retired and my position/expertise is in a field not exclusive to Oil and Gas, and I have worked in many different industries throughout my long career. This "if you only worked in O&G that's all you know" claim applies to very, very few and even they can find wok elsewhere if they are willing to try. The experience counts. Any experience. You can find a job, just not at the exact same pay and benefits, but not too much less. I hope that you are not describing your own condition and are just so sad and torn up that you need to project upon others. Good luck in finding a job, and also a better understanding of industry and the evolution and details of various modern technologies which you apparently don't have any knowledge of. Maybe take a few online courses while you are idle, that will speak volumes for your ambition when you need to interview. Good luck and shake the depression.

@Zxwk, the CVX employee pension fund does not have a deficit. Where did you ever get that thought? Every employee and retiree gets an annual report on the health of our pension fund. The fund’s bottom line has been growing for the last 3 consecutive years and it has never been in financial trouble.

zvkj you obviously just one of those CVX lifers with golden handcuffs just waiting around to retire. Of course it's in your best interest that the industry stays around till then. It's not like oil and gas skill set really transfers to other jobs outside of the industry. But keep in mind that the coal industry basically said they would be around forever and look at what happened. They been in steady decline for over a decade and didn't do sh-- to get themselves out of it. Never say never man. When computers first came out they said it would be a niche market and now everyone walks around with one. 100 years ago the first plane took off and they thought for the longest time that aviation would be limited to just military and wealthy travellers.

But let's get real u honestly think CVX is going to get by with oil at 60 or lower. Demand has essentially flat lined in the US. Even consumption in China has stalled and they are aggressively moving to electric. So it's up to emerging markets to carry demand....But let's get real they aren't able to fully compensate for the lack of consumption in developed markers...U know the cash flow CVX is sh--, selling assets is an unsustainable policy, oh and btw all that debt will have to start repayment soon. Where the hell do u think all the free cash is gonna go? It sure as hell isn't going to go to fund the pension deficit. CVX's only real strategy is hope that oil prices increase, which they have absolutely no control over. That's not much of a business strategy but pretty every commodities company lives or dies by the price its commodity.

And let's face it if u had job security u sure as heck would not be on here.

Zvcd your boring seemingly infinite diatribe is long on hope and short on facts. For one, No, after converting the fuel source - Oil, NG, Coal, Nuclear, etc, to electric and considering energy of construction the electric vehicle is not any more energy efficient. " The Nissan Leaf probably goes two to three times as far as any modern small diesel car (60mpg) on the same amount of energy (given losses between production and car for the electric), but it costs three to four times as much money because of all the extra energy used to develop and construct it."

If one day the Earth's populations moves to majority renewable energy - wind, solar, etc. then the math will be different. Unfortunately for you and me that will not happen in our lifetimes at the rate that it is progressing currently and not in your children or grandchildren's lifetimes either.

It's only a matter of time before electric cars are running on unicorn farts and rainbow dust.

the electric car revolution is coming and its going to kill big oil. u see whats happened with coal, that's your future. transportation, specifically motor vehicles, is by far the biggest consumer of oil. what do u think is going to happen when most cars become electric? and yes, most electricity is still being generated by fossil fuels, but u do realize that electric cars are inherently more efficient and they don't burn/use-up the same equivalent amount of oil that a petrol car would. plus, electric cars are getting increasingly more efficient with each generation. its only a matter of time before electric cars reach price equivalency or less versus comparable petrol cars. so if every car suddenly became electric, its going to put a real dent in fuels consumption. plus batteries and electricity transmission are by far the biggest bottlenecks with renewable energy, but like most technical issues, its only a matter of time before they get resolved, so whose to say fossil fuels will even be the dominate form of electricity generation in the future.

CVX has been involved in oil for +100 years and now suddenly its going to become what a battery maker or utility company? as if CVX really has the capital or resources to pull something like that off. u honestly think a company as conservative and dinosauric as CVX, run by stodgy old farts who have absolutely zero experience reinventing a business, is going to survive something like this? there's basically zero resources being put into new business ventures by CVX or any oil major. its extremely rare to see big cap companies completely reinvent themselves outside of tech and no chance in hell CVX has the right board or senior leadership to pull this off. most of the execs at CVX are just trying to survive so they can retire and finally cash out. u need almost like a tech entrepreneur like Musk to pull something like this off.

i mean oil will always be around for the other stuff - lubes, plastics, etc. but u don't need anywhere near the upstream/downstream assets that exist nowadays to support something like that.

plus pretty much every major tech company is throwing money at the electric revolution too. and its not like tech doesn't have money. they have been increasingly expanding into other industries. tech has the money and cash flow that cash strapped CVX would kill for. but most importantly, they have the money to really go after and resolve a lot of the technical hurdles holding back electricity. and things in tech move fast i mean look at what iPhones did to motorola and nokia. ppl said it would never sell and 3 years later the biggest phone makers went bankrupt and got chopped into pieces and sold off.

sadly ppl i go back to coal...its nothing but last ditch mergers and bankruptcies on the horizon for big oil. its going to be a long slow death, but then rapidly pick-up before it craters for good.

John Watson is about the only one I know that said $100 oil was here forever. The best leadership.

What were folks saying in the first half of 2014? Oil will be at $100+ forever? And no one seemed to anticipate the upcoming drop, but once it started dropped everyone said they saw it coming

Very true. Oil to stay in $43 to $53 range for another two years minimum, barring any major war or geopolitical event. And once any situation like this happens, will be Bev quickly over and oil will continue in the low $40 to low $50's all over again. Not good for the energy sector. More layoffs to come.

Oil is not making a comeback. It is stuck between $44 - $50 for quite a while to go.

aftz, interesting piece of information and definitely an argument for rising oil prices in the future. Makes me think sadly that the amount of pollution (water, air, trash, etc.) being produced on our earth is going up proportionately.

-aftz the only real question is when will the tipping point come, the point where actual demand equals total possible output.

Yes, it does take a real numbnut to not realize everything that we use in our lives daily that require the Hydrocarbons derived from crude to be manufactured, including the phones and devices we connect to the Internet on. And no, it's not available from any one refinery anywhere in the world, and definitely not the tiny Pascagoula one.