In this low price environment. Thing is the IPF ranking system is flawed. If the number is 30% in UA like I was told, good luck finding 30% of staff with average IPF lower than 0.85 like Anonymous136143 heard
17 replies (most recent on top)
HOW ME AND MY FAMILY WAS TOTALLY CURED FROM COPD,CHRONIC PANCREATITIS,IDIOPHATIC PULMONARY FIBROSIS,
I was diagnosed of COPD disease in January 2014,then my mom, diagnosed of IDIOPHATIC PULMONARY FIBROSIS(IPF) and my father was diagnosed of CHRONIC PANCREATITIS.. me and my family was so frustrated till one day my father came across a forum where so people was writing about a herbal doctor from south Africa, who sells herbal medicines to cure all kinds of diseases, We contacted this herbal doctor via his email drmapipaherbalmedicinehome(at)gmail(dot)com and his website www(dot)drmapipaherbal(dot)weebly(dot)com and bought herbal medicine from him. He sent it to me through courier service and i received it within 2days. i used it as instructed and me and my family was totally cured of the disease within 30days of usage, all thanks to DR Mapipa.is three months now we are living free and happy,please viewers this testimony is real ...call +12177593329
The poster sounds like an HR rep. How can you justify getting rid of "low performers" when Shell doesn't have an honest system to determine who those people are? At first it was .85 and now it's 1.0? Next it'll be the 1.2s and below. Shit, why not get rid of everyone and let the BG employees fill the roles? Or... just move the entire damn company to India!
IPFs are nothing more than a legal "grey area" that gives managers the uncontestable power to make or break people's careers. Why do you think you're not supposed to discuss them with your peers? Given there's no black-and-white performance rubric that equates certain achievements to certain numbers, it's a baseless system.
It doesn't matter what was defined as "low performer" or "meets expectation". HR demanded the IPF scale fall out on a bell curve centered at 1.0. Once it was determined that Shell needed to cut 30%, they are going to cut the bottom 30% of the bell curve no matter what was said at yearly reviews. The brutal part is next year for anyone that remains, the IPF bell curve will now be readjusted with the remaining "high performers". 30% of them will now fall below a .85 IPF and will be the next 30% cut if oil prices stay low. This will lead to fundamental shift in Shell culture. It will now be a super competitive culture that rewards back stabbing and knowledge hoarding which I don't think will be a good thing for a company that likes to specialize in mega projects.
Anonymous136746 just made a great point! How can Shell run a 30% "low performer" staff? Makes no sense to me. And Anonymous137026 is absolutely right. .7/.8, depending on the year, meets expectations. It is not considered low performance. It meant, "You are doing fine for the year so keep it up". From my understanding only a subjective select few get above 1.0. They are cutting off at a .85 according to another post. That means people were lied to when they received those consecutive .8s and .9s, with the assumption that they were meeting expectations. I would imagine that .5s or .6s would be the ones to get canned but I guess that doesn't make the 30% cut. Shell hires the smartest and brightest people so .85 is the loophole they've found? This is absolute bullshit! This is both unfair and deceiving. No wonder they make you sign that long legal letter in order to receive that severance. Read the fine print. It's not a severance folks, it actually a SETTLEMENT!!!
Judging by the quality of comment on this posting Shell will be making the right decision if they let you dinosaurs go. @138312 - big man eh! Naming someone on a public forum.
Anonymous137842 Tell us who this person is! very curious since I happen to know a few just like that!
Haha! You need to tell us who's? And if you are so sure, did you witness it?
@Anonymous137842 you're reaching. You can get no more than a 0.9 when you join after Sepyember so there's no way you know someone who got a 1.0 after 2 months!
Do you guys know if we'll be posting for our jobs like Transition '09. I thought it'll be for those not mapped in the new org charts but I keep hearing these rumors
@Anonymous137649, how do you get back to back 1.2's and still fear getting cut for "poor performance". Sorry...doesn't add up. If you're saying the truth, then there's more to your situation. But will Shell you just never know...so may a**holes in management!
Ha! Having over 1.0 for 2 years straight is not that impressive. I know a guy that got a 1.0 and was only here 2 months. LOL. I even know a lady that has gotten years of consecutive 1.0+. She is a total "B$#CH" and everyone absolutely hates her!!! They promoted her to senior engineer, then lead, then team lead, then to the top of the food chain in less than 2 years! I'm pretty sure she doesn't suck cock... I may be wrong... but she is definitely a part of the good ole boys and girls club. Now she spends her time walking employees out the door.
Last guy must have been a really good cocksucker to get two consecutive years of over 1.0
Shell has a slick way of calculating this number. Low performance has nothing to do with the last IPF but rather an average of the last 3-4 years. Ironically employees that were hired in the last 2-3 years don't have a shot. For example, if an employee comes in at the end of the year they are automatically given the standard .8 or .9. Then even if they get a 1.2 the next year their average becomes skewed because Shell is calculating 3 solid years of IPF. My question is what are they using for the 3rd number in the equation? Would someone with only 2 IPF scores receive a ZERO for the 3rd year? If so, and I think its the case, your average 3 year IPF would be drastically skewed. .8 + 1.2 + 0 = .6. I think this is how they are getting rid of a good portion of people. The only survivors would be the ones with consecutive 1.0 or higher for the last 3-4 years. These are the ones allowed to move around and survive through the MOR process. But remember, this number is arbitrary. Shell could even say that everyone with an average less that 1.0 are low(er) performers. We don't know where they are drawing the line. I personally got a .9, 1.2, and 1.2. I was told this week that according to the average in my bracket I was a low performer. Looking for a new job now.
Anonymous137026 I agree, there was this big push a couple of years ago to make the bell curve for IPFs "wider". This led to some okay performers winding up with 0.8s and 0.7s and the some otherwise good performers getting 1.2s and 1.3s depending on how politically visible you are. Too bad mgt is going to rely on the flawed ranking of the past few years to cut people in this round and other rounds to follow :(. My job is safe for the time being but I know some good guys that have been told they no longer have a job...
Not only is the IPF system flawed, it's super subjective. And when you provide guidance like "the new 'meeting expectations' number is 0.7" then it leads me to believe Paul Goodfellow knew this layoff sort of thing was coming. But now he's moved on so he bears no responsibility for putting a system in place that caused otherwise healthy, prudent, productive workers to lose their jobs. He's a MAJOR corporate asswipe.
how many staff in UAD? and what percentage of the 6500 cuts is in US and Canada?
I just don't understand all the nonsense posted about only low performers leaving. How can Shell have a) 30% "low performers" b) weren't you all told that the low performers were already notified and gone by Aug 30th? and c) the 30% is over and above the low performers and contractors??? Or is everyone just in denial because something of this scale has never happened in Shell? Its 1 in 3, people! One in 3 will be gone by Nov 30th, and its not your IPF. Its your salary. Wake up and smell the coffee.