Jump to content

The Way Forward Part II


Recommended Posts

It is clear what the "Way Forward" is about: an exercise in plant closings, layoffs, and product development cuts. Silver Tounge Mark summed it up best yesterday: We are potentially going further, faster and deeper."

 

Some questions:

 

1) What does "further, faster, and deeper" mean? More than 14 plants will be closed? More programs cut?

 

2) Will Ford cancel the "Low Cost" plant? It probably would be a good idea.

 

3) Will Ford kill before 2012 models such as the Crown Victoria and Grand Marqus?

 

4) Will Ford kill Mercury and/or Lincoln?

 

5) Will union people be asked to give up more benefits?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is clear what the "Way Forward" is about: an exercise in plant closings, layoffs, and product development cuts. Silver Tounge Mark summed it up best yesterday: We are potentially going further, faster and deeper."

 

Some questions:

 

1) What does "further, faster, and deeper" mean? More than 14 plants will be closed? More programs cut?

 

2) Will Ford cancel the "Low Cost" plant? It probably would be a good idea.

 

3) Will Ford kill before 2012 models such as the Crown Victoria and Grand Marqus?

 

4) Will Ford kill Mercury and/or Lincoln?

 

5) Will union people be asked to give up more benefits?

"it is clear" yeah. Whatever. Someday I would like to figure out what it is about being negative that makes you think you're right. Maybe it's because life is full of crap.

 

1) Plant closings, buyouts, and headcount reductions (white collar as well) accelerated.

 

2) Ford will not cancel the low cost plant. Their future is tied to being able to build hundreds of thousands of small cars cheaply. Or, I guess, they could just build thousands and thousands of Explorers and hope things change. Cheese moved, move with it.

 

3) Possibly.

 

4) No.

 

5) You will next year. I would see major changes to job security, in exchange for salary increases and healthcare that will still be the envy of white-collar stiffs everywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's like saying, "This time we REALLY mean it". The past few years, I've been hearing it so much, I just don't believe it anymore.

 

Plus, most people (as the media journalist have proved) won't believe a restructuring is taking place unless 1) Posts Profits 2) New vehicles introduced. And moreso, of the latter, which is what stays on people's mind.

 

When things are good, new vehicles are introduced. When things are bad, vehicles are killed. If the public can't see positive things such as vehicle introductions with a company in financial limbo, they write a mental obituary over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"it is clear" yeah. Whatever. Someday I would like to figure out what it is about being negative that makes you think you're right. Maybe it's because life is full of crap.

 

1) Plant closings, buyouts, and headcount reductions (white collar as well) accelerated.

 

2) Ford will not cancel the low cost plant. Their future is tied to being able to build hundreds of thousands of small cars cheaply. Or, I guess, they could just build thousands and thousands of Explorers and hope things change. Cheese moved, move with it.

 

3) Possibly.

 

4) No.

 

5) You will next year. I would see major changes to job security, in exchange for salary increases and healthcare that will still be the envy of white-collar stiffs everywhere.

 

 

Why do you think I'm negative? Does the truth hurt? I don't live with my head in the sand like some people. This garbage that Ford calls "management" is leading the company into bankruptcy. Will you finally open your eyes then? Come on now, two restructurings in the same year? You call that good management?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would you call it?

Conservative.

 

Anyway, Ford's management is not, literally, garbage. Therefore your statement is an exaggeration. Furthermore, your exaggeration quite obviously skews negative. Hence the statement that you are being negative.

 

The only justification that you have for calling Ford management garbage is that you seem to think it a fit description. This is not sufficient. If Ford management were literal garbage, you would be quite correct. In any other sense you are being excessively negative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Conservative.

 

Anyway, Ford's management is not, literally, garbage. Therefore your statement is an exaggeration. Furthermore, your exaggeration quite obviously skews negative. Hence the statement that you are being negative.

 

The only justification that you have for calling Ford management garbage is that you seem to think it a fit description. This is not sufficient. If Ford management were literal garbage, you would be quite correct. In any other sense you are being excessively negative.

 

Conservative? I call loosing a third of my market share neglect. Regarding the garbage statement, we need to get our definitions straight. You see, garbage are things I have no use for, and choose to rid myself of them-they are worthless. In that sense current Ford management is garbage- I (and may others I presume) have no use for them. Perhaps I should have used other adjectives to describe the management so that even you would understand: inept, ignorant, neglectful, arrogant, isolated, out of touch. Is that enough for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You see, garbage are things I have no use for

Ah. So we're not talking about human beings here, we're talking about things. Apparently, at some point, that whole "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men were created equal" crap just ceases to apply to people that you strongly disagree with. They stop being individuals with consciences, souls even, and become mere 'things I have no use for'. Scary.

 

I think I've about had my fill of this subject. You feel free to pick it up whenever you get over this irrational hatred.

Edited by RichardJensen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah. So we're not talking about human beings here, we're talking about things. Apparently, at some point, that whole "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men were created equal" crap just ceases to apply to people that you strongly disagree with. They stop being individuals with consciences, souls even, and become mere 'things I have no use for'. Scary.

 

I think I've about had my fill of this subject. You feel free to pick it up whenever you get over this irrational hatred.

 

Hatred? No- I am just thinking of Ford's management the same way they think of its employees and customers- as nameless faceless numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hatred? No- I am just thinking of Ford's management the same way they think of its employees and customers- as nameless faceless numbers.

Yes. I'm sure Bill Ford routinely refers to employees and customers as 'garbage that I have no use for'.

 

BTW, did you know that Ford has stopped doing business with suppliers that do not meet its standards for employee treatment? Ford is the first business in this industry to impose workplace standards on its Tier 1 suppliers, and the first business to suspend purchasing from suppliers that fail to meet those standards.

 

Garbage indeed.

Edited by RichardJensen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. I'm sure Bill Ford routinely refers to employees and customers as 'garbage that I have no use for'.

 

BTW, did you know that Ford has stopped doing business with suppliers that do not meet its standards for employee treatment? Ford is the first business in this industry to impose workplace standards on its Tier 1 suppliers, and the first business to suspend purchasing from suppliers that fail to meet those standards.

 

Garbage indeed.

 

Actions speak louder than words. Junior lives in a different world than we do. You honestly think that you could stoll up to his office and say, "hey Bill, I have a problem here on the floor can we hammer it out?" There would be about four bodygaurds on you before you could get within 100 feet of him.

 

Regarding the supplier thing- it is nice, but chairity begins at home. They are concerned about human treatment halfway around the world, yet they tap their own loyal employees who have been with the company for decades on the sholder, hand them a white box, give them five minutes to clean out their desk and escort them out in front of their peers like they were criminals? If that happened to me, I would feel disgrace- and yes I would fell like I am "garbage." Why is Ford not conerned about the way they treat people in their own home office.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actions speak louder than words. Junior lives in a different world than we do. You honestly think that you could stoll up to his office and say, "hey Bill, I have a problem here on the floor can we hammer it out?" There would be about four bodygaurds on you before you could get within 100 feet of him.

 

Regarding the supplier thing- it is nice, but chairity begins at home. They are concerned about human treatment halfway around the world, yet they tap their own loyal employees who have been with the company for decades on the sholder, hand them a white box, give them five minutes to clean out their desk and escort them out in front of their peers like they were criminals? If that happened to me, I would feel disgrace- and yes I would fell like I am "garbage." Why is Ford not conerned about the way they treat people in their own home office.

From what I've heard you can get that kind of access to Anne Stevens when she's at a plant (and unlike Bill Jr, she could probably give you an answer). And, really, do you think Bill could do his job better if everyone had walk-in access to his office? Who wouldn't be there trying to 'hammer out a problem they're having down on the floor'? Does lack of access mean that he, ipso facto, views all employees as soulless drones?

 

Regarding the security guards and the termination procedure: At larger firms, you have to treat every dismissal the same way otherwise you get sued, and that way, unfortunately has to be the way you would dismiss someone that you suspect would try to steal confidential documents or sabotage company data. It's not a question of deliberately dehumanizing workers. It's a question of legal liability. If dismissals are handled in a non-uniform manner, you've got severe legal problems.

 

Ford management, as a whole, do not care for this means of dismissal. However, they open themselves up for all sorts of lawsuits if they don't. Serious. Most policy that tends to dehumanize workers, to strip them of their individuality, stems from liability concerns. Big companies have big wallets... Big wallets attract contingency lawyers looking for their next big score.

 

BTW, Ford's post-dismissal worker assistance program is a darn sight better than what a lot of companies do. Here in Sioux Falls, Gateway terminated about 2,000 jobs and offered little more than an opportunity for one-on-one sessions with Job Service reps. In a cafeteria.

Edited by RichardJensen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I've heard you can get that kind of access to Anne Stevens when she's at a plant (and unlike Bill Jr, she could probably give you an answer). And, really, do you think Bill could do his job better if everyone had walk-in access to his office? Who wouldn't be there trying to 'hammer out a problem they're having down on the floor'? Does lack of access mean that he, ipso facto, views all employees as soulless drones?

 

Regarding the security guards and the termination procedure: At larger firms, you have to treat every dismissal the same way otherwise you get sued, and that way, unfortunately has to be the way you would dismiss someone that you suspect would try to steal confidential documents or sabotage company data. It's not a question of deliberately dehumanizing workers. It's a question of legal liability. If dismissals are handled in a non-uniform manner, you've got severe legal problems.

 

Ford management, as a whole, do not care for this means of dismissal. However, they open themselves up for all sorts of lawsuits if they don't. Serious. Most policy that tends to dehumanize workers, to strip them of their individuality, stems from liability concerns. Big companies have big wallets... Big wallets attract contingency lawyers looking for their next big score.

 

BTW, Ford's post-dismissal worker assistance program is a darn sight better than what a lot of companies do. Here in Sioux Falls, Gateway terminated about 2,000 jobs and offered little more than an opportunity for one-on-one sessions with Job Service reps. In a cafeteria.

 

Regarding the first statement- yes I do! You could learn a lot from randomly walking in a plant and talking to people, in the very least ditch the executive dining room he eats and and eat lunch with the rest of us.

 

Regarding the dismissal, here is how I would handle it. Everyone in a given department is called into a meeting Friday afternoon, told to collect their valuables, and told to wait by their phone for a call on Monday whether they have a job or not. If they are dismissed, tell them where they can go to get inforamtion, etc. and disable their badges. At least this way their dignity can be preserved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is clear what the "Way Forward" is about: an exercise in plant closings, layoffs, and product development cuts. Silver Tounge Mark summed it up best yesterday: We are potentially going further, faster and deeper."

 

While I dont believe we'll see product development costs cut (which would be stupid since thats the hallmark of making profit!)..I wonder what plan Ford is going to opt for now and how many plans they have to go before they run out of them.

 

Its a very difficult business situation for them, between gas prices and material costs. I'm sure yourself has felt the pinch of rising gas prices, I know I sure have since they are almost what I pay for my car payment, just to get myself to and from work!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To get back on point after all this "garbage" garbage, I think there's a couple of points that need to be made.

 

Ford does not sell enough cars to support all the manufacturing plants they currently have. The factories are kept at an operating percentage that is below effecient and profitable.

 

Since there is no immediate likelyhood the Ford will magically jump production, plants will need to be closed and realigned. Does that mean workers will be layed off? Yes. Does that mean management needs to be reduced, YES. I'm sorry American workers are being laid off, but that's business. If they are not laid off, Ford goes bankrupt and a whole shitload of people are done.

 

If the people being laid off don't like it, tough shit. You should have been buying American cars and getting your friends and family to be buying American.

 

Ford has some hard decisons to make. Are they the same decisions others would make, probably not. Did Nasar and some of the other guys make mistakes early on who to lay off, Yes. But that doesn't change the present situation. I have more faith that Fields is getting Ford in the right direction than any other previous management.

 

So, if you don't like what Ford is doing, you can go to some other maker. And I mean for a job or a car. Quit your bitchin' or STFU. Either way, I don't really care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the first statement- yes I do! You could learn a lot from randomly walking in a plant and talking to people, in the very least ditch the executive dining room he eats and and eat lunch with the rest of us.

 

Regarding the dismissal, here is how I would handle it. Everyone in a given department is called into a meeting Friday afternoon, told to collect their valuables, and told to wait by their phone for a call on Monday whether they have a job or not. If they are dismissed, tell them where they can go to get inforamtion, etc. and disable their badges. At least this way their dignity can be preserved.

1) Log in to your Ford employee suggestion site, and say you think every VP+ executive should spend a day in a Ford production facility every month. With something like 100 plants, Bill Ford would need 8 years to visit all of them. But there are plenty of executives that could learn from a day at a plant (and from hosting a town-hall style meeting). After all, it is the core of the business.

 

2) Suggest that if Ford doesn't get rid of the executive dining room they should at least serve what the rest of you eat, and have to serve themselves cafeteria style. I doubt executives will be moving meetings off site in order to get better food. Not if Bill says he 'expects' his lieutenants to follow both letter and spirit of the directive.

 

3) This dismissal method would likely also generate lawsuits (hostile work environment and 'intentional inflection of emotional distress' would be the complaints).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's like saying, "This time we REALLY mean it". The past few years, I've been hearing it so much, I just don't believe it anymore.

 

Plus, most people (as the media journalist have proved) won't believe a restructuring is taking place unless 1) Posts Profits 2) New vehicles introduced. And moreso, of the latter, which is what stays on people's mind.

 

When things are good, new vehicles are introduced. When things are bad, vehicles are killed. If the public can't see positive things such as vehicle introductions with a company in financial limbo, they write a mental obituary over it.

 

 

one problem is, Ford pretty much has to do #2, and quite a bit of it, before #1 can happen (in addition to all the other changes proposed). they've already started, but are only about 1/3rd done.

 

and actually rolling out the new vehicles is the last step in a long strategic planning for products. further, any other new product decisions that are made now won't be ready until 2-3 yrs from now (ahem Bronco, b-car, NA Focus, Ranger whatever). perhaps the biggest product change, the Edge isn't even out yet and look how many of us have been waiting a year or more for that. 2008 may be great in comparison to '06 and '07, but that's the absolute earliest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

J.M. Keynes, "When my information changes, my opinion changes. What do you do, sir, with new information"

 

Emerson: "Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of simple minds"

 

I suppose, in drafting the Way Forward timeline, Ford could've assumed that we would see steady $3/gallon gas, and increased violence in the Mid-East leading to increased speculatory ventures with oil prices. But they didn't.

 

As things have changed--obviously--beyond what most in the industry predicted for gas prices and the decline in BOF SUV and truck volume, should Ford a) stick to a slower pace, or b ) quicken the pace?

 

Recall that Ford was the first auto maker to state publicly that fuel prices were impacting BOF SUV sales, and that the decline in this segment was systemic, and would continue. Recall Bob Lutz insisting as recently as the beginning of 2005 that the BOF SUV market would once again top 1M units.

 

It would be one thing if most analysts were predicting more aggressive increases in energy and raw materials prices. However, it seems quite clear that Ford's estimates of energy costs, buying habits, and raw materials costs were more or less on a par with industry wide estimates.

Edited by RichardJensen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, Guys...enough with the semantical arguments. I think we all agree that Ford Motor Company has problems and they were generally caused by Executive Level Management. I was let go as part of the 4,000 in January. Our department recovered several million in 05' no one could have guessed they would

dismiss 2/3 of the dept in 06'.

 

The faster and deeper nvoluntary seperations, for white collar. It is the buzz of the salaried staff that offers are on the way. It was rumored that they would offer voluntary buy-outs, but now the word is involuntary so they can control the departments, number of people..etc. Closings of plants can't be accelerated without Union agreement...which may come in 06, so that plants can close in 07'....they can't wait until the National table to hammer out the who/where.

 

Also, they called all of the LL4 and above into meetings on Wednesday to discuss the financial news - it was stated that although the numbers were bad, they were closer to budgeted expectations than originally thought. Translation : Slick Mark knew all along that more cuts were coming, and the happy talk has been nothing but a face for several months.

 

 

 

Guys, Guys...enough with the semantical arguments. I think we all agree that Ford Motor Company has problems and they were generally caused by Executive Level Management. I was let go as part of the 4,000 in January. Our department recovered several million in 05' no one could have guessed they would

dismiss 2/3 of the dept in 06'.

 

The faster and deeper nvoluntary seperations, for white collar. It is the buzz of the salaried staff that offers are on the way. It was rumored that they would offer voluntary buy-outs, but now the word is involuntary so they can control the departments, number of people..etc. Closings of plants can't be accelerated without Union agreement...which may come in 06, so that plants can close in 07'....they can't wait until the National table to hammer out the who/where.

 

Also, they called all of the LL4 and above into meetings on Wednesday to discuss the financial news - it was stated that although the numbers were bad, they were closer to budgeted expectations than originally thought. Translation : Slick Mark knew all along that more cuts were coming, and the happy talk has been nothing but a face for several months.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slick Mark knew all along that more cuts were coming, and the happy talk has been nothing but a face for several months.

Why I said Ford management was conservative is connected with Bill Ford's description of Ford employees as 'family'.

 

Ford has offered targeted buyouts because they don't want to cut more staff than necessary. The 'happy face' for the past few months, along with the '02 restructuring, were predicated on 'best case' scenarios that did not pan out.

 

It is clear that on the HR side, Ford wants to avoid staff reductions. It's one of the reasons why they've moved so slowly, compared to GM. By deferring many plant closings to the end of the Way Forward program, the hope was that they might not need to close them. A better than expected turnaround might have opened the way for Ford to take one or two plants off the chopping block.

 

--

 

On the product development side, Ford faces a different problem where conservative tendencies may be blunting the desire for immediate change. It is clear that there are people in the organization that are not comfortable with the sharply reduced development timeframes, new working relationships, and increased flexibility/"chaos" of GPDS. These people need to find their way out. Ford needs to make it very attractive for people that don't like where Ford is going to get out.

Edited by RichardJensen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I dont believe we'll see product development costs cut (which would be stupid since thats the hallmark of making profit!)..I wonder what plan Ford is going to opt for now and how many plans they have to go before they run out of them.

 

Its a very difficult business situation for them, between gas prices and material costs. I'm sure yourself has felt the pinch of rising gas prices, I know I sure have since they are almost what I pay for my car payment, just to get myself to and from work!

 

Gas prices are a bummer. Unfortunately in Friday's Wall Street Journal, Don LeClaire head beancounter stated that new product is one of the areas that is being targeted for reduction.

 

J.M. Keynes, "When my information changes, my opinion changes. What do you do, sir, with new information"

 

Emerson: "Foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of simple minds"

 

I suppose, in drafting the Way Forward timeline, Ford could've assumed that we would see steady $3/gallon gas, and increased violence in the Mid-East leading to increased speculatory ventures with oil prices. But they didn't.

 

As things have changed--obviously--beyond what most in the industry predicted for gas prices and the decline in BOF SUV and truck volume, should Ford a) stick to a slower pace, or b ) quicken the pace?

 

Recall that Ford was the first auto maker to state publicly that fuel prices were impacting BOF SUV sales, and that the decline in this segment was systemic, and would continue. Recall Bob Lutz insisting as recently as the beginning of 2005 that the BOF SUV market would once again top 1M units.

 

It would be one thing if most analysts were predicting more aggressive increases in energy and raw materials prices. However, it seems quite clear that Ford's estimates of energy costs, buying habits, and raw materials costs were more or less on a par with industry wide estimates.

 

Are gas prices going to be this high forever? Probably not. It has been estimated that $30 for the price of a barrel of oil goes towards psychological fear factors. In other words, the price of a barrel of oil should be $45. With that being said, the real price of a gallon of gasoline should be about $1.80. Toyota, Chrysler, and GM are not panicking over the price of oil why is Ford? Either Ford is brillinat and the others in the dark, or vice versa.

 

1) Log in to your Ford employee suggestion site, and say you think every VP+ executive should spend a day in a Ford production facility every month. With something like 100 plants, Bill Ford would need 8 years to visit all of them. But there are plenty of executives that could learn from a day at a plant (and from hosting a town-hall style meeting). After all, it is the core of the business.

 

2) Suggest that if Ford doesn't get rid of the executive dining room they should at least serve what the rest of you eat, and have to serve themselves cafeteria style. I doubt executives will be moving meetings off site in order to get better food. Not if Bill says he 'expects' his lieutenants to follow both letter and spirit of the directive.

 

3) This dismissal method would likely also generate lawsuits (hostile work environment and 'intentional inflection of emotional distress' would be the complaints).

 

1) I am not a Ford employee, but every time I written suggestions to Junior about product, I get a nice letter from the PR department saying to direct all my correspondence to them so they can essentially hand me a bunch of BS. Regarding plant visits, how many plants does Ford have in a 100 mile radius of Detroit? Spend a couple of hours at each of them a few days a week.

 

2) Perks like the executive dining room (which by the way serves gourmet seven-course meals) and private planes that fly Mark Fields from Dearborn to his enclave in Palm Beach two times a week are basically a slap in the face to the Ford employees. Yes, ditching them would be more symbolic than financial, but not doing so speaks volumes. But Dr. Z of Chrysler ate lunch with the employees, and I think that we can both agree he did a decent job of turning things around.

 

3) You don't think that escorting people out in front of their peers, is not intentional enfliction of emotional distress or a hostile work environment? If you knew the person was being fired, why subject her/him to disgrace? Ford has the discrimination lawsuits filed against them to prove it.

 

 

 

To get back on point after all this "garbage" garbage, I think there's a couple of points that need to be made.

 

Ford does not sell enough cars to support all the manufacturing plants they currently have. The factories are kept at an operating percentage that is below effecient and profitable.

 

Since there is no immediate likelyhood the Ford will magically jump production, plants will need to be closed and realigned. Does that mean workers will be layed off? Yes. Does that mean management needs to be reduced, YES. I'm sorry American workers are being laid off, but that's business. If they are not laid off, Ford goes bankrupt and a whole shitload of people are done.

 

If the people being laid off don't like it, tough shit. You should have been buying American cars and getting your friends and family to be buying American.

 

Ford has some hard decisons to make. Are they the same decisions others would make, probably not. Did Nasar and some of the other guys make mistakes early on who to lay off, Yes. But that doesn't change the present situation. I have more faith that Fields is getting Ford in the right direction than any other previous management.

 

So, if you don't like what Ford is doing, you can go to some other maker. And I mean for a job or a car. Quit your bitchin' or STFU. Either way, I don't really care.

 

Agreed, Ford does not have enough cars to support its manufacturing base. However, the point of this is why is this the case? Why is Toyota, Nissan, Honda, and Chrysler filling their plants? Ford's product is lame. How does downsizing fit into this? When you lay people off- management and hourly alike- you are spending massive amounts of money to close plants and buyout employees. This action saps money from all other areas including product development. Not to mention the talent that is lost and the legacy costs that are rising because of all the new retirees on the roles. Less money for product development means less sales equals more layoffs and plant closings. There is going to come a point in time- and I am afraid that it will be real soon- that Ford will have so much legacy cost, and not enough revenue to support it because of stale product that bankruptcy is inevitable. Junior promised that Ford would not shrink itself into oblivion, but that is exactly what is happening.

 

From 1983 to about 1999, everyone knew that when Ford came out with a product that it was going to be successful based on the styling, and quality would be pretty decent- that was Ford's MO. Aside from the F-150 and Mustang what is Ford mostly known for today? False promises of "innovation" and "Bold Moves"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Dr. Z of Chrysler ate lunch with the employees, and I think that we can both agree he did a decent job of turning things around.

 

You don't think that escorting people out in front of their peers, is not intentional enfliction of emotional distress or a hostile work environment?

I don't think he did a decent job. Chrysler's recovery was an inch deep. It involved no major changes in product planning or manufacturing. Just flashier stuff. With more Mercedes parts. When you have a progressive disease, you can only treat the symptoms so long.

 

No, I don't. And the lawsuits against Ford do not involved the MEANS of termination, they challenge the grounds. Ford's termination procedure is SOP at almost every Fortune 500 corporation out there, and it has been upheld in court. Terminating someone is intentional infliction of emotional distress. If Ford's process imposed excessive emotional distress (e.g. announcing over PA systems the names of those terminated, strip searches for confidential materials, 'drumming' someone out, letting other people know the reason for the termination, etc. those all involve unreasonable infliction of emotional distress), then there would be problems. But since, as mentioned, Ford's methods impose about the same amount of distress as methods used almost everywhere else...

 

Also, on gas prices... I suspect that we may see a bubble burst in oil prices at some point in time. However, it is not prudent for Ford (most dependent on SUVs and trucks of the Big 3) to act on such assumptions. They need to diversify now.

Link to comment
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.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
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

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...