 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / March 2007The insanity of Ford
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070309/BUSINESS01/703090343 All Ford workers will get bonuses Those who took buyouts also get one After a $12.7-billion loss last year and widespread buyout programs, Ford Motor Co. tried to boost morale Thursday by announcing that everyone would be getting a bonus. The bonuses will be $500 for UAW workers and $300 to $800 for nonmanagement salaried workers, and most will be paid out next Thursday. Salaried managers will receive slightly higher bonuses. ------------------- As one who works for a tier 1 supplier in the Detroit area, this is insanity. I have little hope for my state and for the auto industry. > http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070309/BUSINESS01/703090343 > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > As one who works for a tier 1 supplier in the Detroit area, this is > insanity. I have little hope for my state and for the auto industry. It may be insanity but there is a reasoning behind it. 1) It is to pacify workers when the CEO still gets a huge (hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars) bonus when the company is losing money. (I don't know if Ford's CEO in particular did) 2) It is to try and keep remaining employees from jumping ship. Once people see those they worked with get sacked, they start looking to leave so often a bonus is paid out in some form or fashion to the survivors. (although for a huge company like ford, it's surprising) On Mar 9, 10:46 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote: > In article <1173452007.993971.208...@q40g2000cwq.googlegroups.com>, Larry Bud wrote: > >http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070309/BUSINESS01/7... [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > leave so often a bonus is paid out in some form or fashion to the > survivors. (although for a huge company like ford, it's surprising Believe me, the remaining employeese won't jump ship. We have a 1 state recession in Michigan right now with a 6.9% unemployment rate (worst in the NATION). The job market sucks. The 6.9% is misleading too, because thousands of people have left the state. I'm leaving my current company who's going out of business (MAJOR Tier 1 supplier... $4 billion business 2 year ago) for an 18% pay cut and less benefits, and I'm the lucky one. But at least I'm leaving the automotive industry, which is usually somewhat difficult to do in Southeast Michigan. When it's good, there's nothing better, but when it's bad, there's nothing worse. But hey, at least we reelected Gov. Granholm last year, and the best she can come up with is to raise taxes on everybody! > Believe me, the remaining employeese won't jump ship. We have a 1 > state recession in Michigan right now with a 6.9% unemployment rate > (worst in the NATION). The job market sucks. The 6.9% is misleading > too, because thousands of people have left the state. Must be reason number one then.... http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070301/AUTO01/703010411 Ford ups CEO bonus Mulally gets extra $1M; total reward now at $6M Bryce G. Hoffman / The Detroit News Ford Motor Co. said Wednesday its board of directors approved a $6 million stock option bonus -- $1 million more than was previously promised -- for new CEO Alan Mulally. > But hey, at least we reelected Gov. Granholm last year, and the best > she can come up with is to raise taxes on everybody! Of course, revenue is down. > http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070309/BUSINESS01/703 > 090343 [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > insanity. I have little hope for my state and for the auto > industry. Ford is near bankruptcy and they're giving out bonuses?? You have to wonder what is going on. I guess if you're sure BK is gonna happen you might as well just give the money away instead of letting the creditors get it. > http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070309/BUSINESS01/7... > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > As one who works for a tier 1 supplier in the Detroit area, this is > insanity. I have little hope for my state and for the auto industry. I have to tell you, Larry, I worry about your state and the auto industry as well. All we see are bad reports out of the auto industry. They're getting tromped by Toyota and they still don't change a thing they're doing. Michigan has been taking a beating for years and it keeps getting worse. Yet amid all the employees - the people REALLY doing the work - getting laid off, upper management compensation continues to increase. There's a posting about an INCREASED stock option bonus for the new CEO. It's ridiculous. The company is falling apart. These board members act as though THEY own the company, not the stock holders. They're criminal in their actions. Who in the heck ever start acting like these outrageous compensation packages were normal? Especially when a company is FAILING. Yea, I have major fears for your state and the auto industry in general, and especially the hard working people who work in the auto industry. I hope things get better, but thanks to the high level of greed and mismanagement, I seriously doubt it's going to happen anytime soon. And that is very sad. Charles R. Whealton Charles Whealton @ pleasedontspam.com > http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070309/BUSINESS01/7... > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > As one who works for a tier 1 supplier in the Detroit area, this is > insanity. I have little hope for my state and for the auto industry. I have to tell you, Larry, I worry about your state and the auto industry as well. All we see are bad reports out of the auto industry. They're getting tromped by Toyota and they still don't change a thing they're doing. Michigan has been taking a beating for years and it keeps getting worse. Yet amid all the employees - the people REALLY doing the work - getting laid off, upper management compensation continues to increase. There's a posting about an INCREASED stock option bonus for the new CEO. It's ridiculous. The company is falling apart. The board members act as though THEY own the company, not the stock holders. There SHOULD be laws that make their actions criminal. How is that acting in the best interest of the stock holders? Who in the heck ever start acting like these outrageous compensation packages were normal? Especially when a company is FAILING. Yea, I have major fears for your state, the auto industry, and especially the hard working people who are doing the REAL work in the auto industry. I hope things get better, but thanks to the high level of greed and mismanagement, I seriously doubt it's going to happen anytime soon. And that is very sad. Charles R. Whealton Charles Whealton @ pleasedontspam.com > Yea, I have major fears for your state, the auto industry, and > especially the hard working people who are doing the REAL work in the > auto industry. I hope things get better, but thanks to the high level > of greed and mismanagement, I seriously doubt it's going to happen > anytime soon. And that is very sad. For good reason. The Big 2.5 have been hitching their wagons to trucks and truck-based platforms for years. And when sales fall, they pull poor imitations of past vehicles out as the "new thing." Nobody buys them, of course. The new GT is magnificent. But at over $100k, who's going to buy it? Hell, if I had that kind of money, I wouldn't buy it. Then the management and their apologists scream that it's the union's fault. Of course it is - they design the cars, and choose the markets to target, and what business strategy to pursue... Ooops. They don't do any of that. Does anyone REALLY believe that if they turned those shops non-union that somehow the quality of the cars would increase to Honda or Toyota level? Or the desirability? My aunt wanted a Solstice. Then she drove one, and complained about how cheap the whole thing was. If it had felt like it was quality-made, she most certainly would have bought one. (I recommended a Miata or even a used S2000, but she wanted a Pontiac...) There's only one American vehicle I'd buy if they suddenly had a half- price sale - a minivan. But only because we need one anyway, now that the family has outgrown the current station wagon. (Sidenote: even if the Big 2.5 sold a full-sized station wagon, it wouldn't be big enough for all we want to do. It has to be a van or van-alike to address our transportation needs in one vehicle.) E.P. >>Yea, I have major fears for your state, the auto industry, and >>especially the hard working people who are doing the REAL work in the [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > > E.P. I'd probably buy a square-body Cherokee, except that they aren't making them anymore :( Make mine a 4.0 straight six - oops, they aren't making that anymore either - and a manual transmission. A pickup truck body based on the same chassis would be nice, too - except they used to make that, but don't anymore, either. nate  Signaturereplace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel > >>Yea, I have major fears for your state, the auto industry, and > >>especially the hard working people who are doing the REAL work in the [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > A pickup truck body based on the same chassis would be nice, too - > except they used to make that, but don't anymore, either. The vehicle you describe doesn't have enough interior volume. 7-place seating, either. We had some friends who had this exact vehicle. The six was strong, and I liked that. The ride was truck-like - not a big fan. The rear seating sucked a.s - no good for transporting the in- laws. One of the uses to which my impending minivan will be put. While I don't like the idea of driving a minivan around, it's hard to beat the volume+use+ride comfort:price ratio. I'll still have the S6. ;) E.P. >>>>Yea, I have major fears for your state, the auto industry, and >>>>especially the hard working people who are doing the REAL work in the [quoted text clipped - 50 lines] > > E.P. Well... all I really want a truck for is to use as a TRUCK. Current best possibility is an extended cab F-150, but that's really bigger than I need, and large enough it might be a PITA parking it in my small driveway. All I'd ever use it for is hauling "stuff" so a Cherokee or Comanche would be ideal. Actually, what I'd really like is to have my great-grandfather's old Willys-built J10 4WD, but that was sold long before I was of legal driving age :( Next choices would be a pre-73 Chevy or pre-"new Ram" Dodge or any Studebaker pickup, but all of the above are scarcer than hen's teeth around here. Apparently everyone in this area has subscribed to the "newer = better" theory so trying to find a cheap old beater is near impossible. nate Signaturereplace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel > > The vehicle you describe doesn't have enough interior volume. 7-place > > seating, either. We had some friends who had this exact vehicle. The [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > driveway. All I'd ever use it for is hauling "stuff" so a Cherokee or > Comanche would be ideal. Yeah, if all I needed the vehicle for was transporting "stuff", a truck with a canopy would be ideal. Unfortunately, the vehicle also has to make comfortable all-day trips to the grandparents' homes, transport multiple kids + friends, be able to transport gear and stuff out of the weather while potentially also transporting kid(s), and still be able to get relatively decent fuel mileage. I wish a manual diesel minivan existed. (Yes, a VW Vanagon with a TDI conversion works, but who's gonna do that work, LOL.) It doesn't have to tow, or transport a lot of very heavy stuff. > Actually, what I'd really like is to have my great-grandfather's old > Willys-built J10 4WD, but that was sold long before I was of legal [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > subscribed to the "newer = better" theory so trying to find a cheap old > beater is near impossible. Out here in the west, finding an old beater truck is not tough. Finding a decent classic like you're talking about is. Pre-73 Chevs and GMC full-size fleetsides are dime-a-dozen here. Of course, you pay as much to transport them back East as you would purchasing them. Studes? Good luck. Haven't seen anything but car-show quality Stude pickups for years. Heck, an Audi club buddy of mine just picked up a '76 GMC diesel pick- up with 50k miles for $500. Damn thing looks and runs great. The bastard. :) E.P. >>>The vehicle you describe doesn't have enough interior volume. 7-place >>>seating, either. We had some friends who had this exact vehicle. The [quoted text clipped - 44 lines] > > E.P. Y'all suck. :) yeah, the Studebaker think is a long shot, it just so happens that that's where a lot of my mechanical expertise is (I've worked on Studes, Chevies, and some slant-six MoPars, not to mention a long string of VW's which is really not applicable to a discussion of trucks) and you have to admit, that an old Stude C-cab towing a trailer with my '55 Stude coupe on it would look freakin' cool :) There is an old guy down the streets with a 60's or early 70's Ford Ranger (as well as a '51? I think? Ford coupe) and I'm tempted to knock on his door and ask him if he wants to sell (since he's got another truck in the driveway) but a) I'm really not enamored of Fords and b) I have a feeling that he'd name a price I couldn't afford. Yeah, cost is the issue with transporting - my budget is about $2K and depending on location half to all of that could be eaten up by shipping cost. I'd LOVE to have a pre-73 Chev, I just like the body style. My dad has a '73 which I also like, but if I'm buying for myself, I want what I want. Plus from all accounts the trailing-arm suspension of the earlier trucks is actually better than the leaf-spring suspension of the 73-up. nate Signaturereplace "roosters" with "cox" to reply. http://members.cox.net/njnagel > Nobody buys them, of course. The new GT is magnificent. But at over > $100k, who's going to buy it? Hell, if I had that kind of money, I > wouldn't buy it. I feel that car could be made such that it would sell for $70K without losing all that much beyond a hand built image. It could become a mass produced car with good design and engineering for manufacturability judging by what I saw the show stand. > Then the management and their apologists scream that it's the union's > fault. Of course it is - they design the cars, and choose the markets > to target, and what business strategy to pursue... The bad union contracts are a problem, but it comes into play when they build cars people want. Since they refuse to build cars people want, well it's moot. Unless they develop cars assbackwards... Let me rephrase part of that, they refuse to build cars people want in sufficent volume. They get a car like the GT500 and they won't build them to meet demand. > Ooops. They don't do any of that. Does anyone REALLY believe that if > they turned those shops non-union that somehow the quality of the cars [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > she most certainly would have bought one. (I recommended a Miata or > even a used S2000, but she wanted a Pontiac...) I figure when MBAs and finance people run the company they decide on a price for the car first, then the margin they want, then the engineers have to work with the union labor costs so it all comes out of the part cost to make targets that were idiotic to start with. It makes sense to me that they do it this a.s-backwards way because then of course the immediate place to cut/attack is the labor cost. The real way is to come up with a product concept, maybe a prototype in the process and find what people _will_ pay for it. Figure out what your labor and development costs will be. Figure out what the parts cost will be, and then build it if it makes sense. On Mar 10, 8:20 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote: [snip on-the-money analysis] We *do* agree on car stuff. :) E.P. tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS@yahoo.com (Brent P) said in rec.autos.driving: >> Then the management and their apologists scream that it's the union's >> fault. Of course it is - they design the cars, and choose the markets [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >build cars people want. Since they refuse to build cars people want, >well it's moot. The bad union contracts *are* management's fault - after all, it was management that signed those bad contracts. When the unions came up with the ridiculous idea of forcing Ford to pay workers even when there is no work for them to do, management should have stuck to its guns and said "no." Instead they caved in, and now when gas prices go up and people stop buying gas-guzzling SUVs, Ford cannot cut back on SUV production because it would still have to pay all those workers anyway. So they keep the lines going and force a bunch of unsellable cars down dealers' throats AND pay out millions in buyer incentives to get people to buy them. ANY OTHER BUSINESS in America can cut back production during the slow periods, but not the US automakers. Now that the UAW has bled Ford dry what are they going to do? Some of those workers might find jobs at non-union shops like Toyota and Honda. Some workers might try to retire, although with Ford bankrupt their pension plan and medical benefits aren't likely to last very long. The rest are going to find jobs at Wal-Mart, or the local gas station, or as Truckers, or some other menial job that requires few skills. I bet it sucks to spend your entire life in expectation of certain entitlements, only to have them evaporate just as you reach retirement age. I wonder if all the smug UAW negotiators who scored those juicy concessions from Ford back in the day are still smiling? SignatureI'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it! > I wonder if all the smug UAW negotiators who scored those juicy > concessions from Ford back in the day are still smiling? The UAW union leaders probably did quite well for themselves money wise. Too many unions in the US forgot that they really need the support of people who work outside the industry (whatever it is) their membership works in to be effective in the long term. What they ask for has to seem reasonable to the customers of the company's products too. Not only for political support, but support in the marketplace. Much of what the UAW asked for and demanded seems insane to people outside the UAW. I think most people could support X weeks of severance per year working at the company for some reasonable value of X. Getting paid to sit in a jobs bank until the end of time seemingly, nope. Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Scott en Aztlán said in rec.autos.driving: > The bad union contracts *are* management's fault - after all, it was > management that signed those bad contracts. When the unions came up [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > cars down dealers' throats AND pay out millions in buyer incentives to > get people to buy them. Or they could do like any other intelligently run company would do and start making products that the public is demanding. Granted, it will taks some investment on their part to design and re-tool assembly lines to produce fuel efficient cars that people want now, but that's better than to produce gas guzzling SUVs that will either be sold at deep diacounts (if they can sell them at all), sold in the following model year as used vehicles at a huge loss or sent to the crusher when they don't get sold at all. Oh, wait. We are talking about Ford. Why am I using the words "intelligently run company," in a paragraph discussing Ford?? ;) > ANY OTHER BUSINESS in America can cut back production during the slow > periods, but not the US automakers. Now that the UAW has bled Ford dry > what are they going to do? Some of those workers might find jobs at > non-union shops like Toyota and Honda. Some workers might try to Toyota, Honda, Kia etc... would do well not to hire them.... > retire, although with Ford bankrupt their pension plan and medical > benefits aren't likely to last very long. The rest are going to find > jobs at Wal-Mart, or the local gas station, or as Truckers, or some > other menial job that requires few skills. I bet it sucks to spend > your entire life in expectation of certain entitlements, only to have > them evaporate just as you reach retirement age. I'll just have to wait untill I retire with social security and mediscare long since bankrupt, defaulted and gone to answer that question.... > I wonder if all the smug UAW negotiators who scored those juicy > concessions from Ford back in the day are still smiling? Actually, they probablly are. Its not *their* pay/benefits/retirement on the chopping block..... -- D river R eturns O n F oot > Oh, wait. We are talking about Ford. Why am I using the words > "intelligently run company," in a paragraph discussing Ford?? ;) If ford was an intelligently run company I'd own a GT500 or Ford GT right now. But they have failed to bring their best products to market in any meaningful way. They exist as token collectables. At worst, if Ford had kept making the GT as a super car, eventually there would be used ones people like me could afford. (and probably less costly to keep running than it's used counterparts from ferrari and porsche) If they had thought about it as a production car they could have something to compete with the corvette and viper. The GT500 is just a self induced marketing clusterf**k that has allowed dealers to up prices by 50% to about 20K over sticker. Making dealers a couple very profitable sales each while hurting ford and turning loyalists away. > I'll just have to wait untill I retire with social security and > mediscare long since bankrupt, defaulted and gone to answer that > question.... I wish I could stop sending money down that hole. Putting the money in my mattress is better than social security will be for me. Last time I calculated from that notice what I would have to live to just to break even on a stick cash in the mattress basis I would need to be over 90 or close to it. And that's provided they don't jack up collections. necromancer <55_sux@worldofnecromancer_nospam_noway.org> said in rec.autos.driving: >Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Scott en Aztlán >said in rec.autos.driving: [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >Or they could do like any other intelligently run company would do and >start making products that the public is demanding. Ford WAS making vehicles that people demanded. The F-150 is the best selling vehicle in America. Ford's gargantuan SUVs were selling like hotcakes. The problem is, the public's whims change faster than Ford can design and produce new vehicles to match. >> Some of those workers might find jobs at >> non-union shops like Toyota and Honda. Some workers might try to > >Toyota, Honda, Kia etc... would do well not to hire them.... Maybe. Some of those workers might be completely ruined by a lifetime of cushy, overpaid work and will never be happy at a realistic pay rate. But I'm sure some will be happy to have a job and will be salvageable. SignatureI'm a wreckless driver and damn proud of it! > Ford WAS making vehicles that people demanded. The F-150 is the best > selling vehicle in America. Ford's gargantuan SUVs were selling like > hotcakes. The problem is, the public's whims change faster than Ford > can design and produce new vehicles to match. It has little to do with speed to market, but not using the 15 years they had selling trucks to develop appropiate passenger cars to have on the market, even if they didn't sell much. It's not like the japanese automakers didn't jump on the SUV bandwagon... but they didn't adbandon their passenger car lines in the process. Ford and GM pretty much put all their eggs in one basket. I know ford has cars they sell overseas that could really help them here in the USA. If were in charge I would have engineering teams tooling those products up here in the USA with all the appropiate changes. But ford probably downsized every engineer that wasn't on a current project and probably killed many good passenger car development projects instead. Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Brent P said in rec.autos.driving: > I know ford has cars they sell overseas that could really help them here > in the USA. If were in charge I would have engineering teams tooling > those products up here in the USA with all the appropiate changes. Really. I wouldn't mind having one of those "Sportka," cars for an around town car.... See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLdcGSRHaaY SignatureAunt Judy demonstrates its lack of understanding of the concept of "</killfile>," and "<killfile>," and what a "thread," is: "Now that takes nerve. You claim to killfile me TWICE in the same thread and you expect people to take you seriously???" Ref: http://tinyurl.com/r5qp9 On Mar 10, 12:13 pm, "Chuck Whealton" <chuck_wheal...@yahoo.com> wrote: > >http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070309/BUSINESS01/7... > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > industry. They're getting tromped by Toyota and they still don't > change a thing they're doing. My company is going out of business at the end of June. We were a MAJOR Tier 1 supplier. $4 billion interior maker. Capeting, acoustics, plastics. The whole shebang. Between mismanagement in our company, the poor culture inside the company, the down fall of the manufacturers, and the rising cost of oil (raw materials for plastics killed us), the combination was too much to handle. I'm in IT and was able to find another job (my job was scheduled to end March 31) after approx 2 months of looking. There ARE jobs out there, but it all depends on how much of a pay cut you're willing to take. Mine was around 18%, but my new job is outside of automotive, so maybe I'll actually get a raise (haven't had one in 3 years). I believe in the next 5 or 6 years we're going to see one automotive company in Michigan. With this crazy governor that was just reelected, whose solution to helping people in hard times is to raise their taxes, and with yet another corrupt Detroit Mayor, it's a freakin' joke. > I believe in the next 5 or 6 years we're going to see one automotive > company in Michigan. With this crazy governor that was just > reelected, whose solution to helping people in hard times is to raise > their taxes, and with yet another corrupt Detroit Mayor, it's a > freakin' joke. In a generic sense... not specifically MI... They raise the taxes, take in the money then skim off what they can get away with and then give the rest as services or checks to the 'needy'. That's socialism in practice. (not theory, just practice. Theory is different and ignores that corrupt people are attracted to government like moths to a flame) Far too many people buy into it thinking they'll get something out of it not realizing it just dooms the state,city,whatever to a condition where businesses won't locate there (not to mention the survivors leaving along with people who can support themselves) and will keep the people living there poor and dependent on government. Harvey, IL is a pretty good example of what business down turn plus corruption results in after three decades. Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), Larry Bud said in rec.autos.driving: > I believe in the next 5 or 6 years we're going to see one automotive > company in Michigan. With this crazy governor that was just > reelected, whose solution to helping people in hard times is to raise > their taxes, and with yet another corrupt Detroit Mayor, it's a > freakin' joke. What I see is Ford and GM becoming subsidiaries or brands under a foreign manufacturer's name - much like what happened with Chrysler when Daimler-Benz bought them; though I understand that Daimler is trying to unload Chrysler..... -- D river R eturns O n F oot |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.