If the headcount reduction target is not met by the end of 2020 as not enough retirement-eligible employees choose to leave, forced involuntary separation will happen and those retirement-eligible employees will be the primary target. The decision will be made by HR (not local business teams).
19 replies (most recent on top)
why are people so quick to defend the retirement eligible group? I get (and support) fair treatment for older employees who aren't quite at that point, but there are many who need to just take their millions and ride off into the sunset
No matter what there will be 1900 people who will be separated from the Company...whether it will be 1900 RE or 1900 involuntary or a combination. 1900 people will be gone by 2Q21.
I suspect that HR has a list of 1900 people on the involuntary list and they already know how many REs there are (actually that list has to legally be provided to the REs).
Here's the deal, the company has already determined that they can manage without the involuntary folks. So, even if the REs "save" them from being cut, I would imagine the involuntary & a lot of the REs are gone in the next ranking session or at least some of them. The company has already determined they are dispensable. (maybe the involuntary are more at risk because of potential age discrimination if they let go all REs)
Those of us in the company have seen the breakdown numbers for each organization. In some of the orgs, there are not enough REs to cover the targets. For example using fake numbers, if X_Company says they have to separate 100 people but yet they only have 50 eligible for the voluntary program...then we know at least 50 are going involuntarily. it is doubtful that all 50 RE will take the package so really more than 50 people will be in the involuntary program. It is going to be a grim time for many.
If they really wanted a lot of the REs to go, they probably should have sweetened the pot.
I'm just curious why the NRE's were ineligible. Does anyone know if there is some law protecting them? I thought it might be because they need to give them 1-3 yrs to hit 55 and that might be too expensive. And, are NRE's only safe this go around?
@ehw+17H92gg5: He said PIP is not a tool to reduce headcount? That is true in a normal year. However, 2020 is not a normal year and about 1600 NSI employees were let go via that route. With 1900 left to go, I would say the PIP was quite the effective tool to run off a large number of retirement eligible and non-retirement eligible employees very cheaply.
@jfy - They can terminate our employment without using the PIP progress. DW said clearly the PIP is not the tool to reduce headcount.
RE employees can also be involuntary but without severance. Don’t assume involuntary means they will only target younger employees and you’ll be safe.
please go retire and get out of the way, you have a secure pension and medical. Better they target retirement eligible rather than mid career who will have a very hard time replicating the income.
In the mid term, it is best interest of corporate to do involuntary- that is only legitimate way to truly reduce long term headcount. Otherwise you are simply accelerating retirement and not making a dent in future years.
@qtg - you're wrong. If you are retirement eligible and decline the voluntary program, you are still not safe. You could still be terminated (and receive no compensation). Even if you do survive, you will almost certainly be NSI'd in the next ranking cycle, as the company has already marked you for exit.
@mwt - they won't have many expensive severances (high salary 40-somethings, getting 52 weeks pay). They will be saved for another PIP-NSI exercise in 2021.
Forcing out retirement eligible employees first is AGE DISCRIMINATION and a brain drain on the company. If Exxon persists in doing so Exxon should go under completely. Retirement eligible people have just as much right as younger employees - if their careers are not advancing as they believe it should then they are the problem. Some of these people complaining want everything handed to them on a silver platter without having to do the hard work to earn it!
If the company is cutting employees as cheaply as possible, why are they allowing some to pass the PIP? My location has quite a few that has passed.
I’m glad they’re forcing out the retirement eligible employees first. Many of them are impeding the career advancement of later generations.
@mwt+17H92gg5: Yes, and that cheapness and disregard for employees was shown by the way they treated the 1600 employees who were newly labeled NSI and thrown to the curb as part of this employee reduction exercise.
1900 more employees to go until the next round of PIPs next summer!
The company wants to cut employees as cheaply as possible. That is why they are offering a very small voluntary severance to retirement eligible employees. They will get a small number of 60+ employees to take it and then they will quickly move to the more expensive involuntary severances (ie. 49 year old with 25 years of service).
In short, they simply want to avoid the cost of paying a large severance to a large number of very long service retirement eligible employees.
Companies like Chevron skip all the BS games and just provide a fair severance to all based on service. The ExxonMobil way is to make things complicated, chase pennies and treat employees like garbage.
False. 52-54 year olds are ineligible for both programs and 55+ year olds can only be separated from the company via the voluntary program.
Retirement eligible employees are not part of the involuntary program. If retirement eligible employees do not leave with the voluntary program, then they are risking being pip’d next year.
They should be the primary target, why should the company target younger employees and then have the eligible employees retire in a few years?
PIP is not the tool to meet the headcount reduction target. There could be a mandatory retirement age for non-executives and it may be perfectly legal. Just guessing.
Bogus. By the time pip comes you have already 6 months! The
you guessing? or know something?