24/7 rig site job - Logger Halliburton Employee Review

2.0
20 Aug 2013
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

You can make good money, but you are going to be working a lot to get it. They hire just about anyone, and they don't waste much time when it comes to sending offer letters.

Cons

It's a 24/7 job. The management of Sperry, the side that does mud logging and mwd is very unorganized. You will be called out at the last minute a lot, only to make it to the rig and find out that the managers knew days ago but forgot or waited to tell you. They will tell you there isn't any work, 2 hrs later they will tell you they need you at a rig tomorrow, and 2 hrs after that they will tell you nevermind. I think they do it on purpose to the new people just to see how much they can get away with. Not a lot of opportunities to move out of the field and into a more technical role. No work/life balance, especially in the first year. The promotion system makes it very arduous to move up. It's good if you want to make some good money for a few years after school, but after that you may want to move on. After a few years the salary doesn't match the amount of work you perform. They lose about 25% of the field hands per year, either because they are overworked, don't like the job, or don't see where they can move up. From what I've seen Schlumberger (geoservices) pays more, has better technology, better training, and more capable personnel.

Explore other reviews about Halliburton

5.0
28 May 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Culture is great. Lots of opportunity to grow.

Cons

Company doesn't have work from home option.

1.0
22 Jun 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Halliburton looks strong on the outside, especially on a resume, and the brand name still carries weight in the industry. Some teams work on interesting projects, and if you get a fair manager, you can learn a lot about large-scale B2B operations.

Cons

If you land under the wrong manager, performance improvement plans (PIPs) can be used as a weapon, not a coaching tool. I was put on a PIP that contained inaccurate claims even after I shared detailed evidence and context. I provided several solid pieces of documentation to HR to rebut the accusations, yet nothing meaningful was investigated or corrected in my case. HR felt more like a shield for management than a neutral party. In my experience, they protected internal politics instead of looking at facts and evidence. There is a culture of quiet compliance. Many people stay 10+ years because the pay and brand are “safe,” but they are hesitant to challenge unfair treatment or speak up about toxic behavior. Corporate hierarchy is heavy, and real decisions seem to depend more on who is backing your manager than on actual performance or documented facts.

1
See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All