Ok, something about the layoff numbers "reported" by Halliburton vs the actual number of folks plucked from their work area and escorted off the property since December just doesn't add up in my view.
As I understand it, before the recent mass layoffs began, Halliburton employed at least 70,000 people - at least. From what I've been able to gather from various news sources since January of this year, Halliburton has "announced" cuts of no greater than 10 percent of its total workforce. Correct?
If that figure is accurate, then approximately 90 percent Halliburton employees have kept their jobs since the cuts began. I find that figure utterly ridiculous and insulting, as it's quite obvious to me that the cuts are significantly greater than what has been reported by Halliburton, at least publicly.
Anyone have any thoughts on why the actual vs reported numbers are so obviously disparate? There must be a motivation behind underreporting the real totals.
What could be the downside of reporting a realistic number or percentage of cuts? Halliburton's industry counterparts are cutting their respective workforces in similar fashion, and the plummet in oil prices seems to be driving the cuts, so why not provide a more accurate, realistic figure that is consistent with market conditions?