Millennials: A boil on the butt of the work ethic

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:
13 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

What happened to pride in your work or loyalty to those that hired you?

To be fair - I have seen very few companies actually be loyal to their employees. Most companies are loyal to profits. Why should employees be different. Be loyal to your family (and yes, that could brothers in from the rig..). But most companies are not worthy of your loyalty. 

Wow Rasmus I feel sorry for the companies you have had experience with!!

I'm firmly with Doug on this one

The amount of BS companies have to put up with these days is ridiculous

We had a "lady" who "worked" for us for 3 days. First day 30 minutes late. Second day 45 minutes late. Third day 1 hour late.

We told her she wasn't suitable for the job. She then came back 1 week later stating she had Fibromyalgia which apparently can you give you a bad back but "comes and goes" (although this had never been stated previously). When challenged through the grievance hearing she claimed she also had Fibrofog. Fibrofog apparently is a condition where you can forget what you have previously said and therefore it wasnt her fault she had forgotten to tell us about her Fibromyalgia.

What she had also neglected to say was that her partner was an employment lawyer!

Long story short my company had to settle at £8K out of court otherwise it would have cost £12K even if the case had been dismissed. This type of thing is becoming all too common in the UK right now.

This would not have happened 20 years ago!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for my rant guys

I'm starting to sound like Doug!

where's that safe space again Tom? lol

 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Rob Plant said:

where's that safe space again Tom? lol

 

shutterstock_shutterstock_432341560.thumb.jpg.7adc85684028288dbeca6960d915c074.jpg

We keep it hidden here, and behind shatter-proof glass and sound-proof doors, so people can safely curl up into a fetal position or bang their head against the wall in a hissy fit without hurting others.  The sound-proof door is really effective at allowing us to totally ignore the b*tthurt moaning in the safe spaces.

Win - win solution, really.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 9/22/2019 at 11:12 PM, Douglas Buckland said:

 

I read the article ‘Millennials Really Do Ruin Everything, And Big Oil Is Next’, by Julianne Geiger, this morning. Apparently, once again, the message is that we must placate this generation in an effort to survive. I refuse to buy this nonsense and I think that it is unhealthy to do so. 

I feel the need to point out that you are making my point exactly. This industry in particular (and others too of course, but I don't care about any other industry) has done a lot of head-burying in the sand, and the only one losing here is them. Because the millennial generation has earned the label of lazy, entitled, safe-space seekers, some in the industry have stubbornly decided they will not "placate" this generation.

But there are only two choices here: get on board with this generation, or don't. The tech industry is happy to. And that is why oil will get the leftovers when it comes to manpower and investment dollars. It's not about right, wrong, good, bad. It's just a fact. You can't dismiss an entire generation from the workforce, despite their perceived faults. Today you might not need them like you will 5-10 years from now; lots of 55+ people are still working (39% of this generation are still working). That won't be the case for too much longer. So put on your muck boots and break out those safe spaces, flex schedules, and food trucks, or go broke. You don't have to like it. And I guess you don't have to buy it :) . It was a free article.

R2020

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rodent said:

The tech industry is happy to. And that is why oil will get the leftovers when it comes to manpower and investment dollars.

The oil Industry in general has not really been known for attracting the best scholars in the world, probably one of the only industries where you could join barely able to write but could rise to the top of the corporate chain. Now since we have attracted some of the more educated amongst us (not me included) the key positions are being filled be degreed cannon fodder who cannot tie their own shoe laces or make a decision without having a dinosaur to fall back on. We never had Safe Spaces with Bean Bags on rigs they were normally available after a short ride on a helicopter at home.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

12 hours ago, James Regan said:

Now since we have attracted some of the more educated amongst us (not me included) the key positions are being filled be degreed cannon fodder who cannot tie their own shoe laces or make a decision without having a dinosaur to fall back on.

I don't quite think that is a 100 % fair statement. There are several degreed people that have worked their way from the bottom and are capable and good at making decisions. There are also still many old school heavy hitters that don't want to change the way they do things; almost akin to luddites. 

 

The oil industry is headed for big changes - fundamentally it will change from a growth industry to an industry focusing on increasing efficiencies. Whether we like it or not. There are big opportunities still but it requires a different approach.  

We can either love it or leave it. We cannot change it. I for one am looking for opportunities in "new offshore" instead of dreaming of days that are not going to come back. 

Edited by Rasmus Jorgensen
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The oil industry is headed for big changes - fundamentally it will change from a growth industry to an industry focusing on increasing efficiencies. 

Can you explain your rationale for tis statement? Just curious...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

16 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Rasmus managing and leading are 2 different things entirely!

I agree on the definitions. But in the real world today leading is required to get success. Managing is a thing of the past. I care about the results and not getting the terminology right. 

Edited by Rasmus Jorgensen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Wow Rasmus I feel sorry for the companies you have had experience with!!

I'm an employer. Not an employee. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today you might not need them like you will 5-10 years from now

Hopefully in 5-10 years they will have figured out that the world is neither a fair or nice place and that regardless of the onboarding and team building exercises nobody will give a damn about you unless you are adding value to the company.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

14 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

The oil industry is headed for big changes - fundamentally it will change from a growth industry to an industry focusing on increasing efficiencies. 

Can you explain your rationale for tis statement? Just curious...

I look at this from a perspective of offshore, but I think it is somewhat of a harbinger.

6 - 7 years ago all that mattered was finding more oil and achieving first oil. The cost to get there was almost irrelevant. Today it is about producing as efficiently (cheap) as possible; I personally like BPs term advantaged oil (because I like reading Spencer dale). In the North Sea the hype is standardization. In other regions they various forms of innovation or simply beat the subbies down in price. 

I see 2 things that both gives me hope and frigthens me

1) Shale. For all the jokes we make about shale they are achieving one thing - a slow and steady costs reduction to a manufacturing process. 

2) Offshore wind. Look at how costs have decreased; forget the absolute numbers - look at the curve. This is what costs reductions due to standardization is looking like. 

Am a little busy, so cannot elaborate further, but I hope above makes sense... 

Edited by Rasmus Jorgensen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Today you might not need them like you will 5-10 years from now

Hopefully in 5-10 years they will have figured out that the world is neither a fair or nice place and that regardless of the onboarding and team building exercises nobody will give a damn about you unless you are adding value to the company.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every oilfield eventually goes into decline in regards to production. As these fields decline it is simply good business to find efficiencies to get the remaining, producible oil to surface (enhanced oil recovery, salvaging slots on a platform, etc...).

At the same time, for an oil company, especially one playing in the offshore arena, they MUST find ‘replacement barrels’ for those which they are producing to keep the shareholders happy and to stay in business.

The North Sea is in decline.

Exploring for, then reducing to possession, new oil has little to do with ‘efficiencies’...as there is no infrastructure or process there to make more efficient. It has more to do with employing new seismic technology and new ways to interpret the data, experienced geophysicists and geologists, a little magic and the willingness to take risks.

The drilling operations have always been chasing efficiencies as ‘time is money’ - alot of money! Any drilling team worth it’s salt is continually evaluating operations for NPT (non-productive time) and ways to mitigate it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

Sorry for my rant guys

I'm starting to sound like Doug!

where's that safe space again Tom? lol

 

I can’t believe you said this!😂

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Exploring for, then reducing to possession, new oil has little to do with ‘efficiencies’...as there is no infrastructure or process there to make more efficient. It has more to do with employing new seismic technology and new ways to interpret the data, experienced geophysicists and geologists, a little magic and the willingness to take risks.

You misunderstood (or I was unclear). At some point (and I think soon) oil demand will stagnate and start a slow decline. We've discussed this over and over. More fuel efficient cars, thorium reactors, renewables, etc all will make a dent. Why must produced barrels be replaced? Also remember waste to oil. 

27 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

The North Sea is in decline.

2009 - 2014 the North Sea was booming with activity. Loads of satelites being developed. Not any more. why do you think that is ? 

28 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Every oilfield eventually goes into decline in regards to production. As these fields decline it is simply good business to find efficiencies to get the remaining, producible oil to surface (enhanced oil recovery, salvaging slots on a platform, etc...).

very true. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If and when this trade war gets resolved I think we’ll see an increase in demand for oil. EV’s, wind, solar, etc....are years away from replacing oil, if ever.

The North Sea has been in decline for years. The big players are getting out to spend their resources elsewhere and were selling their assets to the smaller players who are more efficient, less bureaucratic, more agile and without the huge overheads. These outfits can chase the remaining reserves and still turn a good profit.

Then the oil price dropped and became more volatile making any budget hard to operate in. This is probably the cause of the recent inactivity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

 

shutterstock_shutterstock_432341560.thumb.jpg.7adc85684028288dbeca6960d915c074.jpg

We keep it hidden here, and behind shatter-proof glass and sound-proof doors, so people can safely curl up into a fetal position or bang their head against the wall in a hissy fit without hurting others.  The sound-proof door is really effective at allowing us to totally ignore the b*tthurt moaning in the safe spaces.

Win - win solution, really.

 

Does that rainbow motif mean what I think it means?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Does that rainbow motif mean what I think it means?

Yes it does!

3blnhh.jpg.1688a5e023743aac415df1c97b90fb21.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

28 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Hmmm....

Be careful Douglas, I almost got dragged into one the places a day ago, by mentioning Don Lemon, if the safe space is inhabted by Don Lemons I'm not going there. I wouldn't be safe anymore...

Could we demand a Safe Space for non Millennial - oh I'm so stupid I have one its called a worksite. (Desk or place of work)

Edited by James Regan
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

1 hour ago, Douglas Buckland said:

The North Sea has been in decline for years. The big players are getting out to spend their resources elsewhere and were selling their assets to the smaller players who are more efficient, less bureaucratic, more agile and without the huge overheads. These outfits can chase the remaining reserves and still turn a good profit.

Independents have been a large integrated part of the North Sea for a long time. To me the majors selling out is more about avoiding the decom liabillity. And again - the independents are not really doing any developments now, they are just running the assets. Look at companies like Rever offshore (used to be Bibby), harkand offshore; they were dimensioned for CAPEX work in the North Sea. Now that there are only IRM work they are dying. 

for the avoidance of doubt - I try focus on the longterm as I would like to get another 30 years in the offshore industry. 

Edited by Rasmus Jorgensen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

If and when this trade war gets resolved I think we’ll see an increase in demand for oil. EV’s, wind, solar, etc....are years away from replacing oil, if ever.

The North Sea has been in decline for years. The big players are getting out to spend their resources elsewhere and were selling their assets to the smaller players who are more efficient, less bureaucratic, more agile and without the huge overheads. These outfits can chase the remaining reserves and still turn a good profit.

Then the oil price dropped and became more volatile making any budget hard to operate in. This is probably the cause of the recent inactivity.

The idea of demand for oil stagnation is not that much oil. 1.3 mbpd is typical growth in  a current 100 mbpd market. 4 years ago I guessed peak oil to happen around 2030 +/- 3 years. I haven’t really seen any new data to suggest a change to that guess. 

2050 is entirely a different animal. There are many unknowns. climate change weather, ocean warming, health care costs, coastal displacement etc. could cause political action like a carbon tax. Something like that will definitely kill at least 1/2 the oil market. 2050 is not that far down times road.

If I/others are wrong about climate change and it’s effects, electric cars will still compete but maybe oil retains the let’s say a 110 bd market. 

The good thing about predictions is time doesn’t stop and the picture becomes more clear. 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

15 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Independents have been a large integrated part of the North Sea for a long time. To me the majors selling out is more about avoiding the decom liabillity. And again - the independents are not really doing any developments now, they are just running the assets. Look at companies like Rever offshore (used to be Bibby), harkand offshore; they were dimensioned for CAPEX work in the North Sea. Now that there are only IRM work they are dying. 

I discussed this with a very well informed person the other day and it makes sense to pass the logistics and costs of decommisioning on to someone else, yes smaller companies will eek out the rewards of maximising recovery from the major IOCs who have smartly sold off the assets.The decommissioning of these assets will fall on the shoulders of the smaller companies, who will conveniently go bankrupt and leave it to the government to remove or develop in to wind farms, from experience there is no shortage of wind in the north sea.

Edited by James Regan
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

Independents have been a large integrated part of the North Sea for a long time. To me the majors selling out is more about avoiding the decom liabillity. And again - the independents are not really doing any developments now, they are just running the assets. Look at companies like Rever offshore (used to be Bibby), harkand offshore; they were dimensioned for CAPEX work in the North Sea. Now that there are only IRM work they are dying. 

for the avoidance of doubt - I try focus on the longterm as I would like to get another 30 years in the offshore industry. 

I’d be happy with another 5 years on the dirt rigs...just about anywhere!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0