Thread regarding Shell Oil layoffs

Really, How Bad Can Shell Be At Staff Admin?

How poor are personnel and career management at Shell, really? That’s a question, not a statement.
Doge fires 1,000s on bogus poor performance allegations; many having to sue to get their jobs back.
Ford warns employees they risk firing for not complying with RTO orders.
Meta and GM terminate by impersonal, surprise emails and/or texts, after blocking intranet access.
Many staffers at lots of companies agonize over cutbacks and layoffs.
Is Shell actually so much worse? By comparison, how different can Shell be at personnel management and career offerings? Is the grass really greener elsewhere?


by
| 1091 views | | 6 replies (last December 6) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1kbpcww96

6 replies (most recent on top)

Yes. You need to be Brit or Dutch, a technical water-walker or have a well connected guardian angel. Otherwise, you’re indigenous cost reduction fodder.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @h0+1kbpcww96

Yes, the grass is greener elsewhere (not Shell).

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ce+1kbpcww96

Yes, Shell is noticeably worse in these areas. The issues people experience are not imagined. Compared to other companies, Shell’s personnel management is inconsistent, mostly reactive, and heavily influenced by frequent (yearly) restructuring. Career offerings suffer because repeated divestments disrupt continuity, advancement paths are unclear, mobility is unpredictable, and development frameworks are repeatedly reset before they mature. Benefits are diminishing. Other companies handle talent development with more stability and coherence, so the grass can indeed be greener elsewhere. The frustrations people feel reflect real structural problems, not individual perception. If you are considering Shell, I would advise you to move on and look elsewhere.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cd+1kbpcww96

For years, Shell’s LT has repeated the motto ‘Change is Constant,’ making perpetual change our default state. The world will always shift, and that is inevitable. However, organizations choose whether they remain anchored or unstable. The internal instability we experience today is the direct result of Shell LT’s choices.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @cc+1kbpcww96

Yes, shell is the worst because they pretend to care.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @b3+1kbpcww96

Shell is at the top of toxic places. So yes even then the grass can be greener elsewhere. Good luck with holding on to your ar-e every 2 years for reorgs and becoming just another sl--e dead weight for the world at shell.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @a7+1kbpcww96

Post a reply

: