Posted on 01/27/2006 8:14:40 AM PST by oxcart
Employees at Ford's Dearborn Truck Plant in Dearborn, Mich., will have to drive Ford Motor Co. vehicles to work or park across the street, the plant manager announced earlier this week.
The new parking policy, which is scheduled to take effect Feb. 1, was instituted by plant manager Rob Webber just as Ford reported losses of $1.6 billion from its North American auto operations in 2005 and Monday announced plans to close 14 plants and cut 30,000 jobs as it tries to reverse losses and respond to declining U.S. market share.
(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...
well I would be okay because I drive a Land Rover which is owned by Ford and they also own Jaguar, Mazda, and Jaguar that will help the C.E.O's
Where would you be more inclined to buy a used Ford -- on Ford lot or on a competitor's? Why?
Yes, the scenarios are endless and yours are all strawmen.
No one is being terminated. Employees who comply with this policy are given preferential treatment. It's good for the employee and employer both to increase sales of their products. This encourages it.
If you don't like a condition that an employer places on you, QUIT! I've been fired for less. I've quit for less, but I don't deny the employer's right to run his place of business as he sees fit.
That should bolster employee morale and shore up for Fords
poor profit margin for the fiscal year.
The hell they are. They are all real-world examples of things that happen to real people every day.
No one is being terminated. Employees who comply with this policy are given preferential treatment. It's good for the employee and employer both to increase sales of their products. This encourages it.
I am old. I am crippled. I cannot walk 3/4 of a mile -- twice a day -- unless I wish to die trying on my very first day.
For me, the "treatment" is onerous in extremis.
If you don't like a condition that an employer places on you, QUIT! I've been fired for less. I've quit for less, but I don't deny the employer's right to run his place of business as he sees fit.
Ah, but in the current economy, I need my job. So, I elect for the option I outlined in my post #207.
Enjoy.
PS: My employer may have the "right" to stick it to me. However, to whatever extent I have the ability to make him hurt himself as he does it, I will take that option, to whatever extent I am allowed by law.
I know of no law prohibiting me from driving a POS Ford. (And from my own personal experience, I won't have to search too hard to find one!)
PPS: I am dismayed by the uber-libertarianoid groopthynk that suggests that "the employer" has all the rights to do as he chooses to "the employee", and "the employee" can either take it or leave it.
Where I come from, any "contractual situation" is TWO-sided, with EACH side having "bargaining position".
To give ALL bargaining power to ONE side, and none to the OTHER, is to take us back, if not to outright slavery, at the very least, to the "I owe my soul to the company store" days.
None for me, thanks. You think you have a right to stick it to me? Fine. But beware the nasty objects stored in my bodily orifices.
LMAO....Ohhhh too bad !
Dear Ford ! I was gonna buy a new "chick magnet" mustang like my buddy Patton did until I saw this crap imposed by your company representative Rob Webber .
Guess it's gonna have to be a C6 Corvette instead .......damn they don't make plastic magnets do they ?
Being Ford's property, they are entitled to put in place whatever rah-rah go team rules they want, no matter how ineffective to the bottom line and onerous to the empolyees they may be. And we are free to point out that they are ineffective and onerous.
You also seem to believe that one can quit a job, almost on a whim, and immediately find new employment that allows one a similar lifestyle. This may be true for you, but it is not for many (if not most) other Americans. Often, one must keep a less-than-perfect job and try to improve it, rather than jump ship and expect immediate rescue.
I think, before going through all of the trouble to attempt to repair a locked-up solenoid, I'd just replace it with a $10 aftermarket one (of the type used to add keyless entry to cars without power locks).
I imagine it's really fun when a solenoid locks up in the locked position (with the door closed, naturally).
I'm pretty sure that my '96 Contour (which uses motors for the door locks) is designed so that a motor failure or lockup will not prevent the door from being locked. (It works fine with the battery out and you do not hear the motor moving at all when you lock or unlock it in that condition).
That's not that great of a discount, and the tax consequences make it less attractive than that.
Basically, the employee discount just covers the depreciation hit from driving it off the lot.
Good for him. Loyalty should be rewarded. A close-in spot is a small thankyou for employees who have pride in their products.
These men do not work in vacuum. What they do on the job and where they spend their money does help to determine whether they have a job.
No one is making them buy a Ford. They just don't get preferential parking. If enough of them decide that their own product isn't worth buying, the buying public will notice as well. Then they don't have to worry about which lot they park in.
Maybe, just maybe, it'll be the nudge that wakes them up to reality.
They are strawmen as to the situation at hand. You don't lose your job, just a perk.
I am old. I am crippled. I cannot walk 3/4 of a mile -- twice a day -- unless I wish to die trying on my very first day.
Another false argument. If you are that bad, working that 1st 8 hour shift will kill you even if you parked at the door which, even with a 'sit on your ass all day job' federal law protects you with handicapped parking.
For me, the "treatment" is onerous in extremis.
Sorry to hear that. How is that my (the employer) problem? You better make yourself damn valuable to me because the job is mine, not yours.
Ah, but in the current economy, I need my job. So, I elect for the option I outlined in my post #207. Enjoy.
Fine, but I have a feeling that your attitude would give me plenty of reason to can you.
PS: My employer may have the "right" to stick it to me. However, to whatever extent I have the ability to make him hurt himself as he does it, I will take that option, to whatever extent I am allowed by law.
You're a union member who doesn't understand economics, aren't you?
I know of no law prohibiting me from driving a POS Ford. (And from my own personal experience, I won't have to search too hard to find one!)
I'm sure that there are plenty as they have been assembled by people with the mindset that you exhibit here -- "Stick it to the man". Pathetic.
PPS: I am dismayed by the uber-libertarianoid groopthynk that suggests that "the employer" has all the rights to do as he chooses to "the employee", and "the employee" can either take it or leave it.
Where I come from, any "contractual situation" is TWO-sided, with EACH side having "bargaining position".
I was right. Union.
To give ALL bargaining power to ONE side, and none to the OTHER, is to take us back, if not to outright slavery, at the very least, to the "I owe my soul to the company store" days.
Here's another tune, "Cry me a river."
None for me, thanks. You think you have a right to stick it to me? Fine. But beware the nasty objects stored in my bodily orifices.
Union organizer? Look, I've been in management all of my working life except for perhaps the first 6 months of a new career. As management, I've always tried to make the job as pleasant as possible for the employees within the confines of reality. This is one of those realities. Both the union and management have made horrible choices over the years and now both are paying for it. The employer owns the job and he owns the parking lot. If you can't or won't or are unable to comply with this policy and can't walk from the back of the lot, get a ride to work with a buddy that will drop you at the door.
These guys should make the most of their job while it lasts. I'm not sure how long the combination of union extortion and Ford stupidity will be able to sustain them.
The benefit is greater than not having it.
Depreciation is a fact of life but it's real impact is if you trade early and often. The insurance to stay legal cost me more every year than the depreciation on the car.
Again you harp on taxes as though the company has any control over that. BTW, can you cite the section of the tax code that covers this tax?
Why do you look a gift horse in the mouth? Can't you just appreciate the fact that you get the benefit of a few thousand dollars in savings that others don't?
I'm trying to remember the last 'employee purchase' that I handled. I'm going back 10 or 12 years, so the memory is hazy, but IIRC, the total discount was about $6000 on a $25,000 car. Complain all you want, that's a damn good benefit that wasn't available to me as a dealership employee but was available even to the cousin of a guy who worked for a supplier. And the last time I looked, auto workers were not underpaid.
I find it hard to believe that this is a conservative board where this discussion is taking place.
My references to 'sell' and 'lot' were to another poster who talked about his experience in a dealership.
But let's say that you go visit the Maytag repairman and discover that he has a Sears washer and dryer. Would you be more or less likely to buy a Maytag?
If your neighbor who builds Fords drives a new Chevy, will that increase or decrease your inclination to buy a new Ford?
And yes, realistically, if they have any brains they be sure to build the cars better because their friends and family will be driving them. And if they had any decency they just build them right because people's lives and livelihoods depend on them. And finally, if they had any common sense, they'd know that their freaking jobs depended on making the best car possible despite union promises to the contrary.
However, in the union mentality workforce, there are no brains, no decency, and certainly no common sense.
The laws of economics are as immutable as the laws of physics. You can only push them so far before they break. Ford and GM are both at the breaking point. This move is the tap on the shoulder that says, "Look out!"
1)I can't cite the section of the tax code that covers gifts to employees but at least one GM supplier puts the discount on the paycheck as taxable income (and, I suspect, they all do).
2)The employee discount (for GM vehicles anyway) is nowhere near $6000 on a $25k car. More like $2000.
3)We're discussing why someone might choose NOT to take advantage of their employer discount, and I've given you two reasons. (1) the tax consequences and (2) it's not as big of a discount as is commonly thought. (I am well aware of what the current GM employee/supplier discounts for 2006 models are, and I'm well aware that employees of at least one GM supplier get the discount added to their paycheck as taxable income).
4)Cousins of GM or GM supplier employees aren't eligible for GM employee/supplier discounts.
5)Maybe Ford's deal is sweeter, but I think likely not.
Clarification: The amount of the employee discount is added to taxable income in the respective box of the W2 form.
Clarification #2: The taxable amount of the discount is also automatically withheld from your gross pay for several consecutive paychecks.
On GM vehicles, it's 5% of MSRP that is considered a "taxable fringe benefit" when you use the employee discount. Not quite as bad as the whole thing being taxed (since your tax consequences on a $25k vehicle you get a $2k discount on are only $1250), but still a consideration.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.