Is it true that HR gives A directive to managers to not communicate at all with subordinates who’ve been let go?
34 replies (most recent on top)
9fzh+18JbmOAo
You just appear to be another incompetent manager that can’t see past his nose nor have the ability to infer information. It’s ok, I crossed many paths of those like you. Your time will come as well. 🥂cheers
And this is why you were labeled NSI!
@9fzh+18JbmOAo Very true to what you say....mistakenly put the wrong post ID below. I do not agree with @9anz+18JbmOAo
@9anz+18JbmOAo Very true!!
Someone is a little salty. Where you classified as NSI?
Funny how the conversation goes from being previously HiPo and dropped buckets to going to HR and being placed in those buckets. Lol. You obviously have nada. Zilch. Squat. Good luck forking out money for nothing!
@9anz+18JbmOAo
It goes way deeper than you could ever imagine. The PIP was just the set up and opportunity...
There’s plenty of discrimination, documentation of less than ethical behavior, trips to HR that helped get people placed on PIP, etc...Those that KNOW, KNOW!
Lol. Where does it legally say that previous HiPo cannot be NSI? Especially if you are having to go back years to find examples. The PIP process is entirely legal. Doubt that lawsuits will settle anything unless you can prove it was race/age related that that placed you into that bucket.
Most likely you got dropped into that bucket because your team no longer wanted you over others.
I smell a class action lawsuit. For those of us that were ousted on our a– as low performers, having been high performers for the last decade should find each other and compare lawyers. Exxon would be sh–ting in their pants!
Yes...I know about this "guidance" and it is really sad
Exactly!!
@5iba+18JbmOAo Well said! Agree with you 100%!
@5kva+18JbmOAo What about those employees PIP'd in July, that had more than 20 years with the company, didn't receive severance, obviously lost their medical insurance at an older age, and they still cannot find work today? I agree with what you say about management. And your post further supports this notion that management wants to clearly make a distinction between PIP'd and Laid Off (when in fact the PIPs are disguised lay-offs). In years past, those PIP'd were likely those who missed deadlines, made repeated mistakes, skipped meetings with no excuse, repeatedly late with no excuse, etc. Of those PIP'd in July that I personally knew, none of them fit this description. Very sad to see how this plays out and see just how dysfuntional management truly is. Just sad.
A group of us were told to join a Facebook page to keep in touch with those on the IV (Involuntary) Separation Program to ensure they were doing ok and report back to the Manager. WTH??? I feel bad for those good people who were released and I do hope they are doing ok. But, I’m not going to play the spy game. For what?? To see if any lawsuits are coming your way? You’ll know that soon enough...Geez!! Can management stoop any lower?? What you should be worried about is those id–t Supervisors and Managers trading out people because they prefer to work with people who look like them. That’s discrimination stupid!!
Sums up the morals of this company. All in order to save money for the dividend. Well.. Actually.. This money went to pay the bonuses of the executives and DW.
@2ntu+18JbmOAo Agree with you. As you probably also know, in most cases, those PIP'd did not truly have bad performance. If those PIP'd employees for whatever reason were chosen to be "let go", it should have been handled at least similarly to the involuntary layoffs. I know several PIP'd who had 25-30 years service. The difference in 3 months PIL pay and true severance pay is huge. And to add insult to injury, "no contact" or help as a reference for those PIP'd because that would be helping a "bad employee.". This is f'n sad! Really sad.
I have written my state rep and am starting to advocate for better employment laws. Financial reasons I get it, but not layofffs through pips. And being let go should be for laid out issues not things like “you don’t seem part of the team when you stand up in meetings instead of sitting at the table”
It was really sh!tty what was done to pip’d people.
May be some confusion with terminology. Company can’t rescind your severance package, but they absolutely can and will rescind your unpaid executive compensation if you take another job after leaving EM for any reason including retirement. May not apply to everyone, but if you were a manager of any importance, EM holds all the cards for up to 7 years after you leave if you want to be paid what you earned. If it’s a small dollar amount you can ignore EM, but for many, it is too much to lose even if another job awaits you. It’s how EM controls when and if you can retire for execs.
@jsl, there is no legal recourse in the US.
They can’t renege on severance if you find another job.
If a supervisor learns you have a new job your severance pay is in peril. Some go silent so they don’t accidentally find out.
For layoff some leeway to POP policy has been implied by posts from BPs about letting good people go. PIP narrative is performance was low so makes sense you aren’t allowed to provide recommendations
For PIPd policy is to not write letters of recommendation.
It’s not a good company and doesn’t pay the best.
This company is full of sh–. The HR org doesn't even do verbal communication for employment (you know, what's requested by just about everyone outside of this company). Staying employed with this company is like staying on the titanic while it's sinking.
Wow, seems a real d!c move on the company.
We can be really great at our job, but if the company has 1,000 of us and only needs 50, some really good employees are going to be let go. Basic business. Nothing personal.
Maybe if the people (HR) that are part of the process were ethical about the whole process, they wouldn't have to worry about the company being sued.
Depends on the manager. My experience does not match what OP is suggesting.
I tried this with my previous supervisor, he said that all supervisors were told to refer to HR for reference and the HR just sends out a letter of employment with salary at the time of layoff. This is done to shield the company from any legal proceedings. i.e. if your supervisor thinks you are the best thing since sliced bread, how come they lay you off? There may be a legal recourse there. So no feedback at all. Sorry.
The corporation could, as a corporation, hardly care about whether layoffs and PIPs get a job. They just want to keep current employees from writing letters of recommendation. The website LinkedIn has thrown a kink in that. I’m not going to get laid off or demoted immediately for a LinkedIn post, until Public Affairs picks up on a key word I use in the recommendation. They do monitor these sites. I’ve had to have a discussion, or two, with my subordinates who have posted derogatory statements about the company, mostly on Facebook. The request of having these discussions came to me from Public Affairs (GA).
Not HR, but Lawers (Tx).
Probably outside lawers.
Employees should not talk nor write letters of recommendation, linkedin notes, etc. Basically the company is doing all it can to not assist any of those let go find new employment.
With a slogan such as "we are in this together", it's incredibly evident that the company just wants you to work your a– off with little assistance from the company to help you when it's done with you. Yeah yeah, we get it, it's a business and not a charity case. But with HR policies that highly discourage (with threat from PIP and career stagnation) current employees from letting perspective recruiters know what a good employee former employees have been is kind of a slap in the face. Especially employees that have no other connections outside of exxonmobil because they bought into the career for life mentality.
What a backwards company. Kicked out of dow and now very evident 2nd to Chevron in USA. This is obviously a sinking ship with the captain continuing to drill holes in the side versus trying to fix things.
Highly suggested, not ordered.