• Feb 20th 2008 at 4:25PM
  • 20
Ford is making significant strides to turn its North American operations around. In 2006, it was able to cut almost 34,000 workers from its payroll after one round of buyouts and is looking to cut even more of its workforce this year through another payoff program that's being offered to 54,000 UAW-represented workers.
While it's mortgaged everything in its arsenal to keep afloat through the tough times, FoMoCo is planning to hand out bonuses this year, as it did last March.

According to the Freep, the bonus plan is sitting on the table in front of Ford's Board of Directors, awaiting approval and it will likely cover some 23,700 salaried and 64,000 hourly workers in North America. Most salaried employees walked home with somewhere between $300 and $800 last year, with higher-ups paid "several thousand dollars to $15,000 or more."

While we understand that keeping moral high in these troubling times is important, with Ford posting a net loss of $2.7 billion last year, it seems that the major "bonus" for workers is that they are still employed at the Blue Oval.

[Sources: Detroit Free Press, Reuters]


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 20 Comments
      • 7 Years Ago
      Yes, a cash bonus would likely improve employee morale but does little for morals or ethics.
      • 7 Years Ago
      Keeps The Economy Going? How Could You People Applaud This? Cutting 34000 Workers To Be Able To Afford Bonuses For The Rest Is Appalling. How About 34000 Workers Who Kept Their Jobs And Working Is What Keeps The Economy Going.
      • 7 Years Ago
      Bonuses for FoMoCo top management. Are they kidding? You can now get a bonus for making outrageously bad decisions at very turn? Ford does great in Europe with stylist offerings and does terrible in NA with the industry's most boring line up and they get a bonus for this?

      What is next - if they drive FoMoCo into Chapter 11 then they would get an even bigger bonus?
      • 7 Years Ago
      When I was in the service, I was told that management is responsible when things go wrong.

      Losing billions of $$ is not an example of things going right. So why are they getting higher bonuses, or bonuses at all? Simply makes no sense, no matter how you spin it.
      • 7 Years Ago
      Giving bonuses while firing others at the same time. Brilliant!!!! Those fired employees will be so happy that those who got to keep their jobs also got bonuses to boot, while they just got the boot. How about giving the CEO a hugh bonus too, for a job well done.
        • 7 Years Ago
        I bet most of those people who were "fired" left on their own accord. Just because a person takes a buyout doesn't mean they were fired. And for those who work(ed) in plants that were closed or are scheduled to close are offered the chance to work in another plant or somewhere else.

        My father was offered a buyout but refused because of the lack of jobs here in Michigan. He could have used that money to possibly put a down payment on a new house somewhere else but the majority of that money would have to go into fixing up our current home and go towards trying to sell this place...it didn't make financial sense.

        I say screw the execs and give more money to the little guy...who most likely busts his/her butt to do their job.
      • 7 Years Ago
      keeps the economy going.
        • 7 Years Ago
        "How can Ford claim credit for the Miata when they only own 1/3 of the company? "

        1/3 = controlling interest with regards to Japanese co. Mazda is constantly prodding Ford to invest more, but there's little point. They share platforms, vehicle components, etc. They can claim credit. Get your facts straight.
        • 7 Years Ago
        Haha! You're kidding, right? The link you provided represents a fluffy PR article that spins and skews the stats.

        Yes, Ford claims 5 segment leaders in initial quality to Toyota's 4 this year, but:

        1) Initial quality is one thing; long term quality is another. Ford still lags Toyota significantly in J.D. Powers' long term quality studies.

        2) One of Ford's claimed segment leaders is a Mazda through and through (MX-5 Miata) and 2 of the remaining 4 segment leaders are heavily based on Mazdas (Milan and Lincoln MKZ). How can Ford claim credit for the Miata when they only own 1/3 of the company? At best, Ford has 4 segment leaders, tying Toyota, and 2 of them are basically Mazdas anyhow!

        3) Look closely at the "problems per 100 vehicles" scores by competing brand and segment:

        Luxury brands: Lexus = 94, Lincoln = 100, Volvo = 129. Winner = Toyota.

        Mainstream brands: Toyota = 112, Ford = 120, Mazda = 163 (second to last!!!). Winner = Toyota.

        Alternative/niche brands: Scion = 123, Mercury = 113. Winner = Ford (with kudos to Mercury).

        Funny how Ford takes credit for the Miata, but there's no mention of Mazda coming in 2nd to last overall in the study. I suppose Ford "owns" Mazda when it's statistically convenient, but they don't when it's not, eh?

        No bonuses are deserved at Ford until they start turning the ship around.

        -SimianSpeedster
      • 7 Years Ago
      The shareholders should get dividens.
      • 7 Years Ago
      The bonuses are largely designed to keep talented employees from jumping ship to other auto companies. I think this is sometimes referred to as "brain-drain." It's a problem at companies who are in the red, because no one wants to hang around long enough to be associated with the failure. However, a time of crisis is exactly when you need your best employees. In the long run, it's probably money well spent.
        • 7 Years Ago
        "How can Ford claim credit for the Miata when they only own 1/3 of the company?"

        Here's your own words.

        Yes, you did claim Ford technically owns 1/3 of Mazda. Good for you....but you proceeded to use it as a qualifier for why they shouldn't be citing the Mazda Miata as a segment leader in their brand portfolio. It is, in fact, exactly why they should be citing it.

        "If manufacturers can claim ownership by virtue of component sharing, I guess Ford will have to start counting Tata in its ratings once they buy Jaguar and Chrysler can still claim Mercedes-Benz (or the other way around)."

        This is foolishness. Ford claims ownership because they own them. Further, Tata never "owned" Ford. WTF are you talking about. Now you venture into broken logic due to your losing argument.

        "In any event, your "parts sharing" logic is flawed."

        No. They share components and vehicle platforms by virtue of Ford's ownership, not vice versa. The only flaws I can see are in your half-ass argument.

        "In any event, if Ford wants credit for Mazda, then they also get saddled with the 2nd lowest performing brand in the study. Congrats..."

        It's possible to have bright spots in a lineup and draw attention to said vehicles...even in the midst of an overall low ranking. You'd have to be a complete jackass to not understand the logic.

      • 7 Years Ago
      By the way:
      Excluded from this bonus is the European workforce - as they were last year! Ford of Europe's workforce makes the money - Ford US workforce gets the bonus! But everybody at FoE got a 3 little Ford-pins instead - maybe to be sold on ebay...
      • 7 Years Ago

      As to the Hourly getting Bonus's that makes sense but the Exec's getting bonuses is yet again rewarding bad behavior and/or management.

      Hourly deserve it, as they did what was required of them by the company to produce whatever was green lighted but the Executive have done nothing I can see help make this a profitable company. FORD seems to be looking to get rid of Mercury Brand and had to sell other Automotive Brand Business to make FORD look better on paper.
      • 7 Years Ago
      "...with higher-ups paid "several thousand dollars to $15,000 or more."

      From a business stand point that makes absolutely no sense if your company posted a loss....ESPECIALLY a loss of 2.7 billions dollars. I can't even see we they would give out the "$300 and $800" bonuses to hourly. Bonus are "generally" to reward employees because the company did above and beyond their expectations.


      Ok Timmy, you got 2 F's on your report card, so here is a Playstation 3.

      Just.....doesn't.......make......sense......
        • 7 Years Ago
        You're thinking of a bonus in the strict classical sense. In reality, at the executive level actual job performance doesn't mean that much because you can always explain away why your group or org didn't get the results it was goaled on. And if you did make goal then hooray, it was all because of you! An exec is just a private sector politician so as long as you understand that then all this bs they spew makes a lot more sense.
    • Load More Comments