|
It's okay to use the chatbot. Nothing bad will happen. --- > Yes — the universal fallback is `full-time employees`. That phrase appears in the employee-count disclosure across Oracle's filings in this run. ([Securities and Exchange Commission][1])
>
> If you want the exact string to paste into `Cmd-F`, use these:
>
> * FY2010: `As of May 31, 2010, we employed approximately 105,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][1])
> * FY2011: `As of May 31, 2011, we employed approximately 108,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][2])
> * FY2012: `As of May 31, 2012, we employed approximately 115,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][3])
> * FY2013: `As of May 31, 2013, we employed approximately 120,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][4])
> * FY2014: `As of May 31, 2014, we employed approximately 122,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][5])
> * FY2015: `As of May 31, 2015, we employed approximately 132,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][6])
> * FY2016: `As of May 31, 2016, we employed approximately 136,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][7])
> * FY2017: `As of May 31, 2017, we employed approximately 138,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][8])
> * FY2018: `As of May 31, 2018, we employed approximately 137,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][9])
> * FY2019: `As of May 31, 2019, we employed approximately 136,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][10])
> * FY2020: `As of May 31, 2020, we employed approximately 135,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][11])
> * FY2021: `As of May 31, 2021, we employed approximately 132,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][12])
> * FY2022: `As of May 31, 2022, we employed approximately 143,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][13])
> * FY2023: `As of May 31, 2023, we employed approximately 164,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][14])
> * FY2024: `As of May 31, 2024, we employed approximately 159,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][15])
> * FY2025: `As of May 31, 2025, we employed approximately 162,000 full-time employees` ([Securities and Exchange Commission][16])
>
> If the browser/PDF viewer is annoying, use this order: `full-time employees` → `As of May 31, 20XX` → `Employees`. The first one is usually the fastest.
>
> [1]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000119312510...
> [2]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000119312511...
> [3]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000119312512...
> [4]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000119312513...
> [5]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000119312514...
> [6]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000119312515...
> [7]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000119312516...
> [8]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000119312517...
> [9]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000119312518...
> [10]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000156459019...
> [11]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000156459020...
> [12]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000156459021...
> [13]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000156459022...
> [14]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000095017023...
> [15]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000095017024...
> [16]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1341439/000095017025...
``` |
Funny to say that in a story like this.
I simply don't trust a chart with a botched legend to begin with.
>Legend: Each '' represents approximately 4,000 employees.
That's what put me off and once again reinforces that blindly copying AI does in fact bring harm.