What a bad joke. Look at all the posts on this board trying to interpret what the layoff announcement means. Leave it to XOM to design a layoff that is obtuse, vague and perplexing.
The fact that highly educated people are confused about what company management just announced is a clear sign of what is wrong with our company. Our management is filled with incompetent clowns. I fear we are doomed if we don’t replace our management.
@1pfu - if you decline the voluntary offer, you will be ineligible for the involuntary program. This does NOT mean that you are protected; it means that you won't be offered severance when they terminate you.
@1pfu+17FrTBFY here:
I do not think that many of the eligible people will take the offer, other than those that would have retired already but stayed because of the rumors for a package. The math do not work otherwise.
So, the company simply does not want to reduce the overpaid, useless, older people, the ones that you see in meetings and you are wondering WTF are they doing.
The company does not want to give incentives to the expensive, near-retirement ones either, and, instead, they will fire younger people, both less expensive and with more years to give, because they will not have the “right skills”.
Someone please tell me how this makes sense. Because for me, this is exactly another demonstration of a clueless senior leadership.
But wait, this is the plan: to get us so disgusted that we quit!
If you work in BIG OIL
it’s a known fact the European majors are very good to their people. And chevron.
@1pfu+17FrTBFY: You are not missing anything. There is no incentive to take it in your case.
The objective is to layoff as cheaply as possible. They figure they can get a few 60 year olds to take it since they were planning to leave anyway. Doesn’t cost much. They will then be willing to pay an actual severance to the non-retirement eligible employees in an involuntary phase to achieve the desired target.
In contrast, Chevron just declares a layoff and pays a fair severance to all without all the BS games.
Ok. Let’s see - I am 58, with 25 years. I had planned to work for 2 more years. And they offered me 4 months to retire. But they also told me that if I don’t take the package I am protected. So, if I don’t take the package, I keep my job for the time, and then I have to face NSI in the summer. But even then, they will let me retire after 3 months next November, after 12 Total months of pay and one more year in the retirement calc. Why then take the package? Any thoughts?
No id–ts here, uncertain times and complicated. Recommend you seek clarity from your manager or leader you trust.
The management team was very clear. If you don’t understand after reading what’s on the company page, I’m not sure what to tell you.
Go look at the HR website. It’s clearly explained.
Please explain your enlightenment. Does “not eligible for involuntary” mean not eligible to be let go or not eligible for the #weeks per pay for each service year if subsequently let go? Why does a person who is laid off get more severance pay than someone who accepts a package? Reading between the lines does not make one an id–t, but to the contrary. When the BS is deep, it is a great skill.
You are the id-t, Darren
I was on the call this morning, and got the follow up email which spells everything out. Anyone who finds this layoff "vague and perplexing" is an id–t.
How do you replace the people that decides? We have to watch it decline before the real push will come in.. DW is terrible..