Royal Dutch Shell Plc  .com Rotating Header Image

SHELL HAS FALLEN FROM GRACE SAYS RETIRED SHELL EXEC

This has been a pretty abysmal story of failed management, insensitivity to the Pensioner community and obfuscation. I appreciate that you personally do not have the Shell heritage connection that I and most of my 30,000 fellow Shell pensioners have. Some of us, like me, may be critics but that is based on how Shell once was and sadness that in all too many areas it has fallen from grace.

By John Donovan

Printed below is the reply letter from retired Shell executive Paddy Briggs to Shell UK Limited Chair, Sinead Lynch on the subject of Shell’s ruthless cost-cutting at the expense of support services to 28,000 Shell UK pensioners.

READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH: Shell Chair admits unequal Shell pensioner support 

Since Paddy is enjoying an active retirement with photographs of his travel exploits appearing on Facebook, I know that his interest is not self-motivated. He has acted out of concern for less fortunate fellow Shell pensioners.

His letter speaks for itself.

LETTER FROM PADDY BRIGGS TO SHELL UK CHAIR SINEAD LYNCH

Tuesday, 04 July 2017

Sinead Lynch
UK Country Chairman Shell UK Ltd
Shell Centre
London SE1 7NA

Dear Sinead

PLR Scheme

Thank you for your letter of 7th June regarding my question at the recent RDS AGM.

I posed my question during the session on Board remuneration deliberately in order to highlight the fact that the relatively low cost PLR Scheme had been axed, primarily for cost reasons, at a time when the RDS Board is paying itself individual compensations orders of magnitude higher than the annual PLR scheme cost. This was the substantive point and I’m sorry that you haven’t addressed it.

I have been close to the PLR scheme for fifteen years in various capacities – in particular fairly recently as a Trustee Director of the Shell Contributory Pension Fund. For the past five years or so my view is that the Scheme has been inexpertly managed by Shell. At no time has there been proper grip on the activity and both the Company and the TSU/SCPF have abrogated responsibility. It is not surprising that the scheme has floundered somewhat – although the PLRs have in the main fulfilled their tasks with integrity and competence.

The review carried out last year – driven by cost considerations – did not properly consult with stakeholders. The closure of the scheme, announced last December was precipitate and apparently final. I accept that since then an effort has been made to try and create something that will fulfil the minimum Pensioner Welfare tasks that Shell and its Pensioner organisations need. But this was a knee-jerk reaction to protests about the PLR scheme withdrawal rather than being the outcome of a proper study.

This has been a pretty abysmal story of failed management, insensitivity to the Pensioner community and obfuscation. I appreciate that you personally do not have the Shell heritage connection that I and most of my 30,000 fellow Shell pensioners have. Some of us, like me, may be critics but that is based on how Shell once was and sadness that in all too many areas it has fallen from grace. The withdrawal of the PLR scheme was not in itself, perhaps, a matter of the highest concern to the RDS Board or even within Shell UK. But the scheme deserved a better fate and I am very sad that it didn’t get one

Yours Sincerely

Patrick S Briggs

cc. Chad Halliday, Chairman Royal Dutch Shell

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: