Ford needs 4,200 more workers to go
Ford is stuck between a rock (the United Auto Workers union) and a hard place (having too many unionized hourly workers). In order to get some of those workers out the door, the Blue Oval is forced to offer them heavy incentives just to leave. There are ten such incentive packages currently offered at various Ford manufacturing plants. According to reports, the magic number of workers from which the automaker would like to divorce itself is 4,200. It's as simple as having more people than jobs, which is a concern outside of Ford as well and one reason many workers are hesitant to let go of the job they already have. To make this transition easier for current employees, Ford has set up a website that offers tips and alternative job postings for its workers to pursue. Yeah, it's gotten that bad.
[Source: The Detroit Free Press]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
paul34 6:38PM (9/11/2008)
Ouch. I just saw a KFC logo in the companies to pursue section.
Would you like a drink with that?
Tough times for sure.
Reply
Geeky1 6:50PM (9/11/2008)
"Ford is stuck between a rock (the United Auto Workers union) and a hard place (having too many unionized hourly workers). In order to get some of those workers out the door, the Blue Oval is forced to offer them heavy incentives just to leave."
Proof, once again, that unions are dinosaurs that have no place in a modern economy.
Reply
No Welfare for GM 7:27PM (9/11/2008)
Totally agree, those damn unions ruined Ford, they did the whole Firestone thing, they decided to build bigger and bigger SUVs in the face of raising gas prices. (sarcasm)
By the way Fords answer to increase in gas prices are Flex and Edge, today Ford said that they will cut 500 workers because these vehicles do not sell. Ford also wants to cut an entire shift because theres no demand. So the question i have is who approved Flex and Edge, Mullay and Bill "The lip" Ford or UAW? Who was the smart guy who said that people will continue to buy SUVs? was it Gettelfinger or Mullay/"Lipman"?
Who's the smart guy who made sure that Honda gets two totally new Civics in the same span it takes Ford to make minor refreshments for Focus.
I am a FIERCE union hater, but when it come to auto industry the fault is on a handful of people.
Wagoner, Ford, Lutz, LaSorda
The Luigiian 9:05PM (9/11/2008)
@NoWelfareforGM: Dude, c'mon. He never said unions were why Ford is in its current situation.
I understood his comment to mean that the unions have become so ridiculously strong against their employer that the employer can barely fire someone without giving them thousands of dollars and literally begging them to get out the door.
This is depressing and pathetic. The UAW, if it cared about its workers, would allow some of their jobs to be cut so that the vast majority would be allowed to keep theirs without fear of the employer declaring bankruptcy.
That One Person 10:05PM (9/11/2008)
Hey Welfare, you got numbers to back up the idea that the Flex and Edge don't sell?
Brian 10:39PM (9/11/2008)
Why do people think that unions are the most evil thing on the planet? The union line workers aren't the ones who poorly mananged the company to where it is today. And they are the ones who usually take the hard hits so executives can keep there million dollar pay wages and bonuses.
In our world today we are more productive in every industry. We use modern technology available so we can do more with less labor power everywhere. That means more profitable corporations nowadays. So where is exactly is all the money going? CEOs pockets. They make more than 300 times what there average worker makes in that company. In the 1970s it was just 30 times. Think about that 300 number. That means it would take you 300 years to make what they make in 1 year. Yet they still continue to cut jobs just to boost their bonuses every year too.
Ever noticed ever since unions have slowly gone away payrolls haven't kept up with inflation and health benefits are getting cut? The gap between the wealthy and the poor has been getting bigger and bigger over the years too. The middle class, which represents alot of buying power in this country, has been dissapearing at an alarming rate. That further contributes to the economic slowdown. Walmart is the worse contributer of this. When they move into an area where the grocery workers are making $16 an hour with a 40 hour work week and good benefits, they come in and put them out of business with their cheap China goods only paying their workers $9 an hour, consider full time 28 hours a week, and has a healthcare plan they can't even afford now. When they complain Walmart tells them to go on welfare and try and get medicade. When the union grocery store goes out of buisness that grocery job market is downgraded. Why would anyone support that? So you can have your groceries for a few cents cheaper?
Lets look at other nonunion and union jobs make in this country. Construction: A union worker might make between $18-$28 an hour while a nonunion might make only between $10-$14 an hour. A union mechanic might make close to $30 an hour while a nonunion might make around $15 an hour.
Some people believe that unions had their time when we had kids working in factories and job safety didn't matter. I think unions serve a different purpose today. They make sure people are getting payed a livable wage, they KEEP ILLEGALS OUT, and make sure that the guy working to feed his family doesn't get fired because the boss is just having a bad day or because he has been there too long and makes too much money. Unions get a bad rep because of whats happened to our manufacturing industry. Instead of imposing taffirs on imported goods such as steal, white good, and cars a long time ago, we let them dump them here. We couldn't compete with 3rd world cheap labor. So the unions got the bad rep when those companies went out of buisness. But tarriffs will never happen so as manufacturing jobs are replaced by more SERVICE JOBS those can be union. Think about it. You can't move service jobs to other countries. So if they were more unionized maybe the middle class won't dissapear.
Randy 7:38PM (9/12/2008)
You know. I used to think Unions were a complete waste! Then someone high up in the automotive food chain enlightened me when he said "manufacturers actually like unions, it give the companies more of a guarantee that workers will be around to fullfill demand of products and also helps them know if there is a moral problem spreading which could potentially hurt quality".
I still think Unions suck in this day, I mean our forefathers needed them, there's just to much money grubbing going on.
Anyway!
Rich 7:11PM (9/11/2008)
lol nice picture
10/10
Reply
stephen 10:20PM (9/11/2008)
How many people does ford have left? Every week or two they drop some 4 digit figure of workers I'm losing track.
Reply
brock 11:54PM (9/11/2008)
Heckuva job, Dubya!
Reply
BoxerFanatic 2:22AM (9/12/2008)
Does "dubya" build cars, that I am not aware of?
Like him or not, the President of the United States doesn't bear that responsibility.
The president is merely the most obvious elected figure, he doesn't micromanage everything that goes on in the government, actually, less than a third of the government.
And certainly none of the private industries in the US.
It is the other side of the aisle who does want to micromanage everything they can get their hands on, and wants more control, rather than less. Although the difference is amazingly slight as of late.
But perhaps we should get back to something relevant.
firing people, buying out people, but they want low interest, high-risk loans from the taxpayers.
And the IRS wants more and more of my pay. I won't be buying a Ford, even if the IRS left me with enough to do so.
What goes around comes around, for unions, for managment, regular people, and politicians.
LJKelley 2:18AM (9/12/2008)
Unions are not the fault. Ford needs to make a good product, especially cars with good MPG and perhaps a hybrid or EV.
They are asking people to leave all the time, as they continue to make bad decisions. Bringing the european models over is one of the few good ones.
But to suggest the Union is at fault, or is a problem is wrong. A Union's job is to keep as many people employed as possible at the best rate. They have been flexible in rates and allowing layoffs. But Ford just keeps making awful products and gambled and lost. But cutting wages constantly and firing people is not the solution. You don't reep tons of profit in the good times and then fire your hard working employees in the hard times. They followed your orders and built your bad designs. They made you millions in the good times.
The Unions are forcing Ford to actually help them find a Job and keep them financially afloat while they find that job. Workers didn't make bad decisions, Ford did. So I think the Unions are working because they are making Ford not innoncent people pay for Ford's bad decisions.
Reply
Aki 2:17PM (9/12/2008)
Brian brings up classic flawed arguments of pro-union thinking.
"Lets look at other nonunion and union jobs make in this country. Construction: A union worker might make between $18-$28 an hour while a nonunion might make only between $10-$14 an hour. A union mechanic might make close to $30 an hour while a nonunion might make around $15 an hour."
You COMPLETELY miss the point of what makes unions a drain to companies. Unions realize that asking for higher wages looks bad, so they mask the raises by putting it into pension and benefits. So although the hourly wages look similar between union and non union workers, the benefits cost an additional 50-70 THOUSAND dollars, PER worker. That is where the financial drain is. Either you're ignorant or you're hiding this (as all union workers tend to do).
The "CEO makes so much money!" argument is so stupid. I'm asking you to do simple math, so brace yourself:
1) Let's say a CEO makes $100 million a year.
2) Let's say GM loses $7 billion a year in benefits and pension.
$7 billion versus $100 million--which one costs more? Difficult math, I know. According to GM, the company spent 103 BILLION dollars from 1993 to 2007 to pay for healthcare and pension. That's not even counting hourly wages. That amounts to about $7.5 BILLION dollars burned EVERY YEAR, not even counting wages, R&D costs, material cost.
Is it any wonder why the Big 3 are crumbling?
Unions rely upon deception and lies to stay afloat. Don't ever buy the BS that union workers make similar money, or that executive pay costs more. That's the biggest bunk they've tried pulling on the rest of America.
Reply
Brian 3:02PM (9/12/2008)
You must have missed one of my points. UAW WORKERS ARE NOT THE ONES WHO POORLY MANAGED THE D3 TO WHERE THEY ARE TODAY. Yet they take the biggest hit. When the D3 lost a ton of market share in this country is when they were considered the problem. At one time GM had enough money to buy several countries. Even in the early 90's. All with union labor. If the executives would have properly managed the company and didn't lose all of their market share the union would have never been a burden.
I don't know how many different places you haved lived in your life but there is a difference in union pay and nonunion pay. Take what nonunion workers make in TN. Then take the same job and look what a union worker makes in lets say New Jersey. Its a big difference.
Not every job has a pension either. Most are all gone today. Mainly now what they are fighting for is there health benefits and pay wages. Since our government has failed us in taking care a its own people, workers have to fight for them from their employer.
Tagg 11:39PM (9/12/2008)
Bingo!
Another thing unions do to a company is make it inflexable to changing market condition. If "it" hits the fan Ford, GM, and Chrysler have to pretty much wait years to adapt and by then it's too late.
Then you get the product cycle argument. the Big 3 profit margins are much slimmer than the Japanese automakers so they have less money to turn their product over. Now they have to use that money to buy off employees to get to the right size comparative to their volume.
It's not the 1950's anymore.
Aki 4:40PM (9/12/2008)
Of course, mismanagement is partly to blame. But the union is also a factor in mismanagement of the company. How?
Very often, you'd have to pick somebody in management that knows how to deal well with unions, but not as well in other respects. Unions impact not only labor overhead, but a myriad of other issues.
Yes, Ford management is largely to blame for myopic initiatives focusing on trucks and SUVs. But that still doesn't change the reality that they *lose* money for every vehicle sold. Whereas companies like Toyota can weather the damage when market demands shift (aka Tundra sales plummeting), companies with higher overhead like Ford are hit even harder. So while Toyota reports reduced profits, Ford gets hit with extra billions in losses. You still can't deny how unions are detrimental to staying competitive with other companies.