Heard this today from a reliable source. Good luck everyone.
11 replies (most recent on top)
Ford management Sucks!
31,000 Salaried 'Resources' x .25 % = 7,750 . . . So that's pretty close to the 8,000 number that's being tossed about . . .
Cuts already started in May. The Engineering jobs were not "lost" in N. America, they are backfilled by the folks in Mexico and Brazil. And can be done apparently well especially remotely (since WFH) and with little time differences. I guess it will help achieve their profit "targets" at the expense of American white collars.
And the UAW wants a cost of living adjustment in their hourly workers contract.
Ford just made a bunch of temp workers full timers. Got to keep the UAW thieves happy and cut salaried people
EXACTLY!! I have been saying that for quite some time and I get ripped apart for it.
Also, the language stated, "UP TO" and then everyone ignored "up to" and then repeated
8000 cuts over and over. Morale doesn't need to sink any further.
People should know by now to take the media with a grain of salt.
As long as the 25% comes entirely from the LL ranks, sound good!
Heard - 80% of the reduction will be from PD related roles (engineers, purchasing, finance) and 20% will be IT. Any one else here this?
Be careful with these kinds of things. Is this 25% of HR needs to be broomed? 25% of all salaried? 25% across the board including hourly?
Percentages are funny numbers. A good statistician can use percentages to paint any picture they want. Companies have played that game for DECADES with pay increases.
"We gave you a 10% pay increase. That is virtually unheard of!" However, 10% of 0 is still 0! Spinning numbers with percentages is a shell game.
I read elsewhere that between April's layoff, and then Purchased Services and Agency cuts, Ford is already in 2300 job cut range this year. We've also seen the media say 4000 -8000 job cuts. That is a huge range. And likely that includes the 2300 that have already been cut.
In short, you have to be careful with the rumors on this board. Lots of predictions have been made here that have not come to fruition. Not trying to say everything here is bunk, but take everything with a grain of salt.
Why would HR be tasked? LL's have no say?
I heard that same thing.
25% of what ? Needs to be 73.2% of all LL5+ !!