Thread regarding Ford layoffs

Layoffs a Sign of Poor Management

When will management take responsibility for how they have run the company into the ground with all the layoffs the past few years.

From Fortune Magazine:

“Layoffs are definitely a confession of poor management,” Jeffrey Pfeffer, a professor of organizational behavior at Stanford Business School, told me. His reasoning: Research shows that generally, layoffs don’t improve a company’s fortunes. Quite the opposite: They don’t reliably raise a company’s profits or stock price, but they do reliably reduce remaining employees’ morale, commitment, productivity, and trust. University of Colorado professor Wayne Cascio, who has spent a career studying layoffs, concludes, “As a group, the downsizers never outperform the non-downsizers.”

“Companies that have gone through heavy layoffs can attest even decades later to the damage they inflicted: Famously, Hewlett-Packard faced a crisis of survival when World War II ended. Most of its revenue from a major customer, the U.S. government, suddenly evaporated. The cliff-like drop in government spending overall triggered a deep recession. To avoid certain demise, the company laid off 60% of its employees. Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard were so traumatized by the experience that they resolved never to let a mass layoff happen again, and in their 30 remaining years of running the company, they never did.”

“Aren’t there difficult moments when layoffs are the best of bad options? Yes, says Peter Cappelli, a management professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, but those moments are rare. “The evidence seems pretty clear that except for really unusual situations—the company is about to go under, it’s the start of the Great Recession—large layoffs actually seem to hamper the ability to restart when things improve,” he tells Fortune. “There is good evidence for this from financial data.” For example, voluntary employee turnover increases significantly at companies that conduct mass layoffs. The total costs of turnover—severance costs of those laid off, plus recruiting and training replacements when business recovers—can be 1.5 to 2.5 times a given job’s annual salary. “All in all,” writes Cascio, “the significant indirect costs associated with employment downsizing may wipe out the direct savings in labor costs.”

https://apple.news/AFcmtSOfUSuSTRUkswwhMsQ

by
| 3161 views | | 25 replies (last April 21, 2023) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1mbqqOnW

25 replies (most recent on top)

@4wwl+1mbqqOnW "Automation will be a larger part of manufacturing which will save money" Really!? Do you mean that before or after Ford get rid of the union? Because the union has been the only thing stopping Ford factories to become more automated. Keep drinking the Kool Aid, and you'll end with nothing.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4mus+1mbqqOnW

I don't think about who is better.

Yes, I did come from extreme wealth. Now I am in a senior leadership position at a major corporation. I dont have to think about vehicle purchases or insurance or gas. But I do care about those things as for everyone else. My children technically would never have to work. But I put them through the best private schools and they have all gone on to become physicians and executives themselves. And I've invested in many housing properties so that the incoming rents will be enough to support them and their families for years to come.

I want good things for people like you too. I know that you people like to work with your hands so I donate to trade schools each year. You should encourage your children to consider trade school. There is a lot of pride that comes with building or repairing things.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4wpa+1mbqqOnW

@4wwl+1mbqqOnW So you admit what an entitled elitist you are, and that you want the demise of the USA workforce. What makes YOU worthy? Your parents had money? All will have to answer to God (I am sure you don't believe in) including you. The Hondas and Toyotas you put down are much better/more reliable cars than the garbage Ford makes, so I will gladly drive them, and if I do buy and EV it will never be garbage made by Ford. You can have the cars you think are good and the poor folk you think are your slaves will have the better cars. You are not better than us, and you are not in control even if you are a legend in your own mind.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4pde+1mbqqOnW

The whole “war” on fossil fuels is misguided. It is waged by organizations and government entities that profit from the game. Energy prices are increasing because the green energy is unreliable so you must have a full backup of fossil/nuclear fuels for when green energy is not available. So you pay for both fossil and green.
Fun fact when it is extremely cold or extremely hot the wind blows less out on the plains. So as we saw in Texas the wind turbines freeze because they are not moving, and well then people freeze, pipes burst etc. Go visit the farmers who allow banks of wind turbines to be planted on their land and what will you see? A propane tank that heats and cools the buildings. And a gas/diesel tank for the farm machinery.

And for all the greenies who claim banks of batteries can store green energy so we don’t need fossil fuels — during the last Texas freeze the battery banks provided 15 minutes of backup power. The power industry calculated that every square inch of Texas could be covered with lithium batteries and still that would not be enough battery storage to handle one day of power requirements for the state. Oh but we are improving battery storage you say, get real the improvements are incremental at best. The fossil fuels expended to produce a battery means the battery must be in service for 7 years to repay the fossil fuel debt.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4mdl+1mbqqOnW

@4wwl+1mbqqOnW

if there are a lot of people at ford who think like this, toyota and honda are going to crush us again like the did in the 80s:

"The days when Henry Ford wanted to make vehicles that average Americans could afford are far behind us."

civic in the late 80's commanded about 1.8x the price of escort.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4qwf+1mbqqOnW

@4exd+1mbqqOnW

Workers may not be able to own cars. That's correct.

The days when Henry Ford wanted to make vehicles that average Americans could afford are far behind us.

We will be selling EVs at considerably higher prices. Our work force will be considerably smaller which will save money. Automation will be a larger part of manufacturing which will save money. Engineering - and anything else - will be offshored to low cost countries which will save money. All of this will lead to much higher profit margins and overall profits - even with lower sales volumes.

Let poorer people buy Honda Fit or Civic and Toyota Corolla or Camry. Wealthy Americans want large status vehicles like SUVs and trucks. That's where Ford will lead.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4wwl+1mbqqOnW

OMG @4pcc+1mbqqOnW a global town hall being held in the train station is a justification for all the $ wasted on the train station? Meanwhile Ford has multiple other sites that the town hall could be held at - the glass house, the conv center, etc.
JF holding town hall there is yet another cya press stunt.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4aph+1mbqqOnW

To the comment about the train station: the next Global town hall will be at Michigan Central (sign up to attend in person if you haven't already done so). So don't tell us it has no use to the company. It is expected that JF will comment on how Michigan Central fits in Ford's transformation.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4pcc+1mbqqOnW

@wty+1mbqqOnW So you workers should not have houses, then I guess they should not have cars either, at least not expensive Fords. So I assume all the workers you don't pay enough are expected to buy your cars? LOL, NA WAS your biggest market, I just have to laugh at you. You think there are enough "elites" like you to buy your cars? Why should they buy your cars when they can get much better deals? Reaping what you sow would be totally fair.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4exd+1mbqqOnW

@2oew+1mbqqOnW Because Bill Ford said so!!! LMAO.. Last month an article in the WS journal said BF only qualifications was the last name. Sorry but his track record does not put him in the same category as Alfred Sloan. Far from it..
1- Failure as CEO between 01-06. Alan bailed him out after his family kicked him out.
2- Hackett, Billy said the same thing. Best CEO. So does this mean the kiss of death for Farley? Is this like having a number #1 ranking on sports illustrated?
3- My favorite.. The train station. Why? What is it? I have heard three different stories from senior management as to what this will be? I know what it is a waste.

So you see that comment does not hold water...

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @4qjm+1mbqqOnW

Post id @2oew+1mbqqOnW
Give it up. The whole time Jim Hackett was CEO Bill Ford was saying he was the best leadership has ever had, and that he was the visionary that would transform Ford. As we all know the guy was one of the worst CEOs Ford ever had. The same is true for DF and JF.
Yeah we have all heard of the Ford Transformation plan. It is a crock. The real plan is to get government bailouts and handouts, and to try to coerce the government to mandate that customers must buy the cr-p they produce. Not gonna happen.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3fkh+1mbqqOnW

@2oew+1mbqqOnW I think you need that little "WHITE SUIT". I know 2unh+1mbqqOnW. He took a package in 2021. Like a lot of other people of all makes and sizes that were in that company he cared.
Just because Bill Ford said so does not mean it is the "Bible of Management". You forget he was the CEO and he was also asked to step down ( basically fired) in the spring or 2006 by his own family or they would dump the family stock that is public record.. So I guess that proves 2unh point. Rank does not mean you know what you are doing. A king is not born he is made.
You sound like if Bill Ford told you to jump off a cliff you would do it with out hesitation.

So let us all know when that plane lands :)

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3rbe+1mbqqOnW

Post ID: @2unh+1mbqqOnW

Your post has falsehoods if you are directing it at Ford. I am certain you do not work for Ford, or if you did, it was long ago.

We do have the right leadership and management team, right now. Doug Field for example. Bill Ford himself has stated we have the best leadership in the company's history.

Our team does have a vision, it is called the Ford+ Transformation Plan. The plan is already in play. Maybe you have heard of it?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2oew+1mbqqOnW

@1yue+1mbqqOnW You are totally clueless. If you do not have the right management team with a Vision and a realistic plan then all this is a pipe dream. You might as well put on a little white suit and go around yelling "THE PLANE BOSS".
All I hear from people like you is Well we just diversify and the problem goes away! Sorry it takes more than just s-x & color.
Competent is the start. Courage to stand up an point out an error.
Instead we have Yes people, Go with the flow, afraid to speak up.
I personally don't care if we have a minority or woman running the company just want to see a team of people that know what they are doing. I know that is a lot to ask for people like you.
As a poster on this website stated we have had some very good minorities and women who were not YES MEN and who asked questions or saw something wrong. They left or retired early. Because like a lot of us white males they were tired.
Most of the promotions I had seen were FOF (Friends of the family).

To be truthful If I was just graduating from school again in my early 20s I would not even entertain the thought of an interview or offer from Ford. Totally different company than when i hired in.

We were lucky with Alan but all he did was delay the inevitable. This demise has been going on since 1995. Our market share continues to decline. We have CEO who proclaims to be a PRODUCT GUY but since he has hired in. We have lost market share and the company has left certain car segments to the competition. Soon that competition will take over the truck market. Doug Fields sorry. His resume and time on the job speaks for itself. Sorry I am not convinced JF or DF or even Bill Ford will lead the company to a path of growth.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2unh+1mbqqOnW

@wty+1mbqqOnW How manymore generations of your family will siuck off the Ford te-t? Probably not that many, as the further away we get from Henry Ford, the worse things get.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2luq+1mbqqOnW

As long as the new hires are comprised of a diverse range of races, genders, ethnicities, nationalities, s--ual orientations, and ages.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1yue+1mbqqOnW

@wty+1mbqqOnW While I agree that many companies just trade labor for money, in the case of FMC before 2004, it also traded loyalty to the company for a pension. Even the compensation these employees receive is lower than the market, due to the pension.

Now, OP is making a known point in the business world, and you being the only @sshole that didn't get it, makes me think you are manager material at Ford. Let me spell it for you. Well managed companies should have a core of employees to support "business as usual". When there is a higher demand, companies should hire contractors and/or offer OT to the core employees to cover the increased demand. Hiring a lot of employees just to let them go afterwards, when the demand no longer exists, is a BAD business decision (OP explains this very well), and as you may guess it, managers are the one making these faux decisions.

In the case of Ford, the company is making the worst mistake: letting go the core employees, the ones that should be more loyal to the company because of their pension. If the company is willing to let go the more loyal core employees, what would happen to the rest? Well, many are not willing to wait for it, and they are leaving.

I can attest to this, since the most knowledgeable employees on different teams that interact with mine, have left Ford, and their replacements are not as good as the ones that left. One of the consequences is delays in delivery because the replacements cannot pick up the slack.

Then we don't hire more talent, but friends and family, overburdening the few that can do the work. So another consequence of overworked and low morale employees is lack of quality. Do you believe the rest of the world didn't notice we are the kings of recalls? We are losing market share, and in time, we'll go under, unless something drastic is done, and please don't give me the BEV BS answer. The issue is no longer resolved by generating a new product, since even the BEVs are coming with quality issues. Drastic as replacing BoD, Bill Ford, Farley and all the clowns, with actually talented leaders.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1omx+1mbqqOnW

@wty - ur kind of an a-hole. Why are u even on a layoff site? I’m wondering if this is a post from JF. Sounds like something someone on the spectrum would say and also from a guy who goes around thinking he is always the smartest person in the room.

People r complex. We don’t work as many hours that a company needs us to as the company will always want more for nothing. The biggest asset of the company is the human asset. The sooner you learn that, the better. Until then go work with robots. You will be much happier.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1gbn+1mbqqOnW

Remember the old saying, "those who can do, those that can't teach".

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1aql+1mbqqOnW

@wty+1mbqqOnW your mindset is why I left ford last year October. Utterly ridiculous. You even contradicted yourself in your statement. You say a company owes you nothing and then immediately after, you say all a company owes you is a salary. And then continue to babble nonsense afterwards. You sound as ridiculous as Jim f does when he talks. Goodness

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1bap+1mbqqOnW

@wty
Is that you Jimmy Car Car?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1lpn+1mbqqOnW

@wty . . . uh - this site is about layoffs after all and OP is presenting more of a study about it than doing any complaining. You are the complainer here.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @zhi+1mbqqOnW

There are numerous signs of poor management at Ford, with the end result being recalls, lawsuits, declining market share and billion dollar losses.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @kbu+1mbqqOnW

@wty you missed the point
Those companies that treat employees poorly are unable to attract and retain top talent.
Those companies continue to fair worse the more institutionalized layoffs become.
Ford’s mediocrity is a testament to this. Top talent leaves and advises other top talent (coworkers, friends, family, professional network) to steer clear of Ford. Ever notice that the trend of generations of workers has ceased at Ford except for the useless varieties?

Now Ford has to move its operations to low cost countries to get “talented” people to apply for jobs.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @tsv+1mbqqOnW

I am so tired of you cry babies complaining about layoffs.

Our company doesn't owe you anything. No company owes its employees anything.

All a company owes is a competitive salary. And that doesn't mean you get to own a home or vehicle or new iphone. It just means competitive when compared to the other companies in the area.

You may have to rent your home, or have roommates, or use taxis or busses or ride bikes, or not get married, or put off having children - or not have them at all. And you'll be expected - required - to work as many hours as the company needs.

We hire the work force when we need it. And we down size when we no longer need them.

And companies are allowed to make money for themselves and their shareholders. Limiting production to keep supply low and demand high - perfectly acceptable. Making employees return to offices for local government tax incentives - perfectly acceptable. Limiting unions - perfectly acceptable.

If you don't like it - work somewhere else.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @wty+1mbqqOnW

Post a reply

: