Thread regarding Imperial Oil Limited layoffs

IMO Shareholder here.

1. Talent Attraction and Retention: Limiting Canadian roles to primarily transactional work may reduce opportunities for career growth, making it harder to attract and retain top talent.
2. Loss of Expertise: Imperial has built a strong base of oilsands expertise over decades. A significant portion of this knowledge will be lost in a short time.
3. Alignment of Interests: Key decision-making roles being based outside Imperial (e.g., Houston) may reduce alignment with Imperial’s long-term interests.
4. Location Challenges: Edmonton is not currently a hub for upstream technical talent. Many employees may eventually seek opportunities back in Calgary even though they say they are "mobile" just to save their job. Backfilling roles in Edmonton for upstream technical talent will be very difficult, especially given point 1 above.
5. Business Case: IMO has outperformed Canadian energy peers, the broader market, and ExxonMobil over multiple time horizons, which raises questions about the urgency for such a significant change.
6. Alternative Approach: Downsizing could have been achieved gradually through attrition and performance management, minimizing disruption.
7. The purported cost savings of $150M per year are not material given the $62B market capitalization of the company , and likely loss in NPV due to factors 1-6 above.

@fq That's true but firing an employee who is a very insignificant shareholder isn't going to matter to anyone else. The bottom line is what they care about. The image is already out there.

@fk for the most part yes but they can't do things that are detrimental to minority shareholders hence the whole shenanigans about corp separateness

@cp you do actually. What are you even talking about? They set the rules. The rest is lip service.

@b5 All global business centers are not incompetent. Budapest are very good in the services they perform.

@bz First off. It won’t save money long term.

Second. Thats not how it works. If you own 70% of a publicly traded company, you don’t get to just ignore the rest of the shareholders.

As a shareholder wouldn't you want cost savings?

If you want to call the shots buy 70% of the company and vote on things.

Why would a shareholder care about saving money for the company? No one cares about the people being laid off. It will be outsourcing to India and bringing in Indians to replace others. Whatever they can't find a way for AI and other tech to replace.

@b2 Do you even work at IOL?

If you do you would know how incompetent the global business centers are. How much time they eat up of people here trying to fix their mistakes or stop them from doing things totally wrong. They can’t problem solve, its really really bad.

The business will suffer for this.

Also a shareholder - I think this is a good move by IOL

Shareholder here.

I wish XOM to make the most money possible.