Ford bans competitors' vehicles from lot (http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/27/news/companies/ford_parkinglot/index.htm?cnn=yes)

Wow... how bullshit is that? I wonder if Mazda vehicles and other Ford family brands are affected? Either way it's still a dumbass move. I can only see this ending badly for Ford...

1) Physically divides factory employees between Fords and non-Fords
2) Increases pressure on the non-Ford employees
3) Practically puts the blame for Ford's miserable performance on that population of employees
4) Gradeschool behavior towards said employees
5) Further degradation of employee morale and factory culture
6) Could ultimately lead to decreased prodct quality

This makes no sense - there's absolutely no basis for this move. It's not going to increase sales because it's not like factory employees are going to buy a new car so they can park closer to the factory! Maybe a few, but it's incremental at best.

Discuss.

-P23

Sales often come down to a few simple thing:

Image and Morale.

By only allowing the employees to park their Ford's at the plant, this presents a strong visual image for anyone passing by. I live only a few minutes from Hyundai's National Headquarters in OC and it is quite awe inspiring to drive by and see that many Hyundai's.
I remember once uttering, "Wow, I know those employees must get a good deals on cars but to have THAT many...hmm...maybe their cars are getting better"

Also, how discouraging can this be for employees...Here you are with your branch new '06 Eddie Bauer Explorer and you see a new Escalade parked right next to you! Doesn't exactly make you feel good about your company or what you drive, does it?

And cue Bascho right about.....

I seem to remember him saying something to the effect that employees were encouraged but not FORCED at his building lot

This is not a Ford mandated change.....this is one assy plant in Michigan that will enforce this rule starting Feb 1, 2006. The parking lot effected is only the one next to the building which can only hold 15% of the employees cars anyway. There is an employee lot across the street where employees may park non-Ford family vehicles. By ' Ford Family' they mean any Ford, Mercury, Lincoln, Mazda, Land Rover, Jaguar, Aston Martin and Volvo. I think this new rule is a great idea. Here Ford is in a climate of decreasing market share do to the foreign competition. You have a parking lot next the building that holds 15% of the employees of that facility. The people in that lot need to have a special voucher to park there. Starting 2/1/2006, in order to get a voucher, you will have to drive a 'Ford Family' vehicle. Is that really so unfair? Hello, employees contributing to the decreasing market share should not be rewarded with a parking voucher at a Ford facility. That would be like letting the Pepsi trucks park in the Coca Cola parking lot.

If they built cars people wanted to buy, maybe they could sell some.

And cue Bascho right about.....


You knew I would chime in on this one :D:

I seem to remember him saying something to the effect that employees were encouraged but not FORCED at his building lot


It is a quiet rule around the company. The Dearborn Truck Plant Manager is just making it a written rule at his facility. I for one applaud him for doing this. And a lot of people are correct in saying that Ford did not have the greatest selection over the last few years......but Ford employees have other Ford Family brands to choose from. A ford employee is hard pressed to explain that the vehicle they needed was not represented in the 8 brands available to them.

It seems fair enough, not really that big of a deal - they aren't doing anything extreme like firing anyone for not owning ford-family

It seems fair enough, not really that big of a deal - they aren't doing anything extreme like firing anyone for not owning ford-family

Believe me....there are a lot of people that feel that way though. The last round of cuts (2 years ago) was tied directly to market share.....so a lot of people wanted the cuts to be owners of competitive vehicles. I can kinda understand that thought process......when people around you are being let go it's sad. When they tell you it's because market share has dropped you can understand the motivation....but then when you go out into the parking lot and see a bunch of Toyotas or Hondas.....it makes you think, "why aren't those people the first to go...they are contributing to the problem." I don't know how it is in other industries, but I assume it's the same. If I worked for Dell computers and they were letting people go because of decreasing sales.....and then some jerk-off that gets to keep his job walks by with a Gateway laptop under his arm...I would be pissed. I doubt you see too many people drinking Pepsi in the break rooms of the Coca Cola factory......or Subway execs buying their lunch at a Quiznos.

Sorry bascho, I don't buy your rationale for this. It's juvenile and degrading to employees, even if they say they agree with it. Granted, it's a small lot, a small number of cars, but it's indicative of a corporate culture gone rancid.

Companies in this century don't give a hoot about employees when it comes to layoffs, why should employees be forced to 'bow and sweep' by owning the company's product to receive even the smallest favor in return outside of their employment contract? Was this made know to them when they got hired?

Ford might get an education (and certainly better press) if instead of banning employees 'other' cars in certain places, they lined up management and product designers as employees drove in with these "renegade cars' to ask "Why did you by this?" and then really listen.

Improvements in feature, styling, and engineering resulting in increased sales should be a collaborative effort between manufacturer and the consumer. Employees are consumers and should be allowed free choice without censure of any form from their employer.

I was at the Mustang / Mazda6 plant last year, and right there in the back parking lot was a White Pearl RX8. One of the techs asked what I drove, and I said a Titanium one of those and pointed at the RX8. :)

This has always been a bed of controversy for auto makers. GM did it in KC while I was there. They had separate lot for other makes at the old Leeds plant. That plant has been torn down and there is nothing there now.

i think what they are doing is ok... im pretty sure that they get a good discount and deals when buying a new car... im with bascho is not like they are getting fire. for example big companies have selected parking lots for the gm, manager employee of the month, etc. etc. thats the way i see it if ur drive one of their cars u get better parking lot for supporting the company///

This policy is ridiculous, but I guess desperate times call for desperate measures :Wconfused

Boeing has the same policy. No Airbus planes allowed in the employee parking lot. :Eyecrazy:

IMO if the parking lot holds 15% of employee's cars and is visible to the general public, then I think its a excellent idea to only allow Ford/Family cars in the lot.

Its another necessary step in being more professional and showing the corporate image which is extremely important, you have to take every advantage you can.

If though the general public cant see the lot, I don't see the point.

This really isn't anything new. Franchise agreements for decades have included stipulations about selling direct competition vehicles form other manufactures on the same property. Some places this is more true than others, but the general idea is an old one.

My question would be, why wouldn't you a drive a car from the Ford family in the first place?

I would always want to work for a company with products I can be enthusiastic about. Unless someone is driving some special oldtimer (s)he's attached to, I don't see why this person would not want to drive a car from the manufacturer (s)he's working for. After all this is a free country no-one is forced to work for Ford.

Most of the cars I've owned were Mazdas and I don't even work for that company.

That would be like letting the Pepsi trucks park in the Coca Cola parking lot.


:rofl:

It seems perfectly fair and reasonable to me. It's like requiring a certain dress code and a lot of places have that. It's good for the image, helps people connect, kind of like everyone on a team wearing the same uniform. I wouldn't think very highly of a company whose own employees won't buy their products. I don't think the parking ban for one lot next to the building is a problem. They are not saying the employees absolutely have to drive a Ford family vehicle to park on any of their parking lots, just the most visible lot. I can't see why this should be such a controversy.

If they had said that the other lot was somehow inconvenient and it was a real hardship to park elsewhere then I would have a problem with this! If they threatened to fire or layoff people based on their choice of vehicle I would have a problem with this! Since it is simply they have to park across the street it's not even worth this much media coverage! As far as all of the buying into what your company makes...it's a job! I'm pretty sure if a Ford plant closed leaving the population there without jobs and a Chevy, or Chrysler plant popped up in it's place those same people would jump to the competitions plant anyway (might I add more than likely driving Ford products). Imagine someone sitting at home (if they still have one) and saying they will not work at this plant because dammit I built this Ford that I own and I will only work for Ford.....not going to happen!

[QUOTE=globi]My question would be, why wouldn't you a drive a car from the Ford family in the first place?
QUOTE]

So, what's fords' alternative to a porsche? How about a mini cooper? Where's fords 2 seater roadster? How about a 400hp 4 dr lux sedan? Where's fords entry level sports car? How about fords awesome handling sports car? Where's fords minivan with stowaway seats and roll down rear windows? Where's fords awd rally car? Where's fords alternative to a bmw?

I'd have a big problem with this, as ford does not even offer any of these, as if they are telling us that the company knows what we want and they offer what they offer and thats that. This attitude is the reason that Ford is in the situation it's in. If honda, mitsu, toyota, BMW, Saab, or even chrysler offer something that ford has no alternative for, then ford should be looking at thier marketing and engineering to fix the problem, not trying to coerce it's employee's into buying something that they have to settle for instead of something they want.

[QUOTE=globi]My question would be, why wouldn't you a drive a car from the Ford family in the first place?
QUOTE]

So, what's fords' alternative to a porsche? How about a mini cooper? Where's fords 2 seater roadster? How about a 400hp 4 dr lux sedan? Where's fords entry level sports car? How about fords awesome handling sports car? Where's fords minivan with stowaway seats and roll down rear windows? Where's fords awd rally car? Where's fords alternative to a bmw?

I'd have a big problem with this, as ford does not even offer any of these, as if they are telling us that the company knows what we want and they offer what they offer and thats that. This attitude is the reason that Ford is in the situation it's in. If honda, mitsu, toyota, BMW, Saab, or even chrysler offer something that ford has no alternative for, then ford should be looking at thier marketing and engineering to fix the problem, not trying to coerce it's employee's into buying something that they have to settle for instead of something they want.

"Ford family"

Want a Porsche competitor: Aston Martin (at least for higher end Porsches)
Want luxury: Volvo, Jaguar, Lincoln, Aston Martin
Want luxury performance: Volvo S60R/V70R (not 400hp, but handle better than any Lexus, not to mention looking better)
Want a luxury SUV: Land Rover, Lincoln, Volvo
Want a 2 seat roadster: Miata/Mx-5
Want a great handling sports car: Miata, Rx-8, Mustang
Want an entry level sports car: Miata, Rx-8, Mustang
Want an awd rally car: import an Escort Cosworth (I'd rather have one of those than the so called rally cars from Mitsubishi or Subaru)
Want a Mini Cooper: buy a Mini Cooper and park across the street

At least, that's my understanding of "Ford family"

Two words:

Screw Ford.

"Ford family"

Want a Porsche competitor: Aston Martin (at least for higher end Porsches)
Want luxury: Volvo, Jaguar, Lincoln, Aston Martin
Want luxury performance: Volvo S60R/V70R (not 400hp, but handle better than any Lexus, not to mention looking better)
Want a luxury SUV: Land Rover, Lincoln, Volvo
Want a 2 seat roadster: Miata/Mx-5
Want a great handling sports car: Miata, Rx-8, Mustang
Want an entry level sports car: Miata, Rx-8, Mustang
Want an awd rally car: import an Escort Cosworth (I'd rather have one of those than the so called rally cars from Mitsubishi or Subaru)
Want a Mini Cooper: buy a Mini Cooper and park across the street

At least, that's my understanding of "Ford family"


Well done therm8....I was just going to respond with the same list.

[QUOTE=globi]My question would be, why wouldn't you a drive a car from the Ford family in the first place?
QUOTE]

So, what's fords' alternative to a porsche? How about a mini cooper? Where's fords 2 seater roadster? How about a 400hp 4 dr lux sedan? Where's fords entry level sports car? How about fords awesome handling sports car? Where's fords minivan with stowaway seats and roll down rear windows? Where's fords awd rally car? Where's fords alternative to a bmw?

I'd have a big problem with this, as ford does not even offer any of these, as if they are telling us that the company knows what we want and they offer what they offer and thats that. This attitude is the reason that Ford is in the situation it's in. If honda, mitsu, toyota, BMW, Saab, or even chrysler offer something that ford has no alternative for, then ford should be looking at thier marketing and engineering to fix the problem, not trying to coerce it's employee's into buying something that they have to settle for instead of something they want.

You are confusing the issue. This is not a Ford rule as a company....it's a rule at one assy plant in Michigan. It's not every parking lot.....it's the voucher only lot next to the building. All that is happening is a special requirement of owning a Ford-Family product in order to qualify for the voucher. The auto industry is highly competitive and giving special recognition to those employees that support their company buy buying the products that keep it alive is not a bad thing.

I have a feeling that the people that have reacted negatively to this issue are people that do not work for a company that makes anything. When you work for a company that actually produces something, selling the products that you produce is how you keep jobs. Yes, Ford, GM and DCX all had boring cars that were of low quality.....4 YEARS AGO. All three have products in JD Powers Top 10 Total Quality lists......Nissan, Mitsubishi & Subaru never have any listed in Top 10. But guess what.....public perception is that the BIG 3 crank out low quality, boring crap. The public perception is a very hard thing to crack. People always say to the Big 3, hey why don't you drive a Toyota and learn something......guess what, they have been driving the competition's cars for 2 decades or more. And by the way, they have learned a lot. The Big 3 turn out some very high quality, highly styled cars....but the perception has not changed. How many Big 3 haters have driven a Big 3 product in the last 2 years? Before my RX8, I had a new Ford every two years.....pick-up trucks, SUV's and cars.....never had a single issue. Never broken down, never had a rattle, never had a squeek.

Two words:

Screw Ford.


Who do you work for?

"Ford family"

Want a Porsche competitor: Aston Martin (at least for higher end Porsches)
Want luxury: Volvo, Jaguar, Lincoln, Aston Martin
Want luxury performance: Volvo S60R/V70R (not 400hp, but handle better than any Lexus, not to mention looking better)
Want a luxury SUV: Land Rover, Lincoln, Volvo
Want a 2 seat roadster: Miata/Mx-5
Want a great handling sports car: Miata, Rx-8, Mustang
Want an entry level sports car: Miata, Rx-8, Mustang
Want an awd rally car: import an Escort Cosworth (I'd rather have one of those than the so called rally cars from Mitsubishi or Subaru)
Want a Mini Cooper: buy a Mini Cooper and park across the street

At least, that's my understanding of "Ford family"

I'm sorry but a $169,000 astin may be snooty in many cirsles but it in no way compares to a porsche. Save yourselve $60 grand and get a better car.

In the lux department Astin and jags are way over priced for what you get and I would buy a bmw/merc/acura/lexus/audi/caddy over any volvo linc any day.

In lux sports, how about a chrysler 300 with a hemi. Fords got no comparison. Not to mention the sports cars offered in the group above. The TL, RL, IS, 330...just no ford comparison.

Ok, I may go along with the miata, but ford only owns 30% of Mazda and doesn't even touch most of Mazda's line up. Ironically the mazda 6 is the only one with ford input and it's the only mazda rated as not recommended by Consumer Digest.

Mustang as a great handling sports car. Don't think so. The mustang is a great muscle car and if I wanted a muscle car it would be on the list, but again, there are other alternatives. Again the rx8 and miata, I give you, but I highly doubt that this was the intention. Could you imagine driving by a ford plant and nothing but mazda's parked outside. Not the marketing they were thinking.

Sorry but mitsu and subby own this segment right now. There is not a better awd car available without spending tons more.

This is not to bash ford, which honestly I don't like, but this old style thinking that the company has decided that they make exactly what you need and you have to choose from what they decide to offer, instead of making the cars people want. Ask yourself, why does toyota, honda, and even now hyundai sell so many cars. Most are boring, underpowered, unimaginative, and not cheap. People will pay for something if they think the value is worth the costs. Sure ford offers some cars in some segments of the market, but I and many others have decided that for the price of whats offered, and sometimes what's not offered....there are better choices.

rodrigo67, what do you do for a living?

rodrigo, you need to realize that this is only directed at people that work for Ford.

I would hope that someone that does not like Ford would not work for Ford. Again no-one is forced to work for Ford.
Why work for a company you don't like and be miserable?

I'm sorry but a $169,000 astin may be snooty in many cirsles but it in no way compares to a porsche. Save yourselve $60 grand and get a better car.

In the lux department Astin and jags are way over priced for what you get and I would buy a bmw/merc/acura/lexus/audi/caddy over any volvo linc any day.

In lux sports, how about a chrysler 300 with a hemi. Fords got no comparison. Not to mention the sports cars offered in the group above. The TL, RL, IS, 330...just no ford comparison.

Ok, I may go along with the miata, but ford only owns 30% of Mazda and doesn't even touch most of Mazda's line up. Ironically the mazda 6 is the only one with ford input and it's the only mazda rated as not recommended by Consumer Digest.

Mustang as a great handling sports car. Don't think so. The mustang is a great muscle car and if I wanted a muscle car it would be on the list, but again, there are other alternatives. Again the rx8 and miata, I give you, but I highly doubt that this was the intention. Could you imagine driving by a ford plant and nothing but mazda's parked outside. Not the marketing they were thinking.

Sorry but mitsu and subby own this segment right now. There is not a better awd car available without spending tons more.

This is not to bash ford, which honestly I don't like, but this old style thinking that the company has decided that they make exactly what you need and you have to choose from what they decide to offer, instead of making the cars people want. Ask yourself, why does toyota, honda, and even now hyundai sell so many cars. Most are boring, underpowered, unimaginative, and not cheap. People will pay for something if they think the value is worth the costs. Sure ford offers some cars in some segments of the market, but I and many others have decided that for the price of whats offered, and sometimes what's not offered....there are better choices.


Your personal bias is getting the way of the facts.

Watched any Mustang racing lately? Driven one? They do handle very well.

Driven a late model Volvo lately? I'd drive one over any Japanese psuedo luxury make any day. I'd drive one over any competing Audi. I'd drive one over any Mercedes. I'd drive one over any competeing BMW but the M3. Maybe that's just me. If it came down to Caddy's, I'd probably take the Caddy, but then I like the new ones.

Ford Family is just that. It's family of cars. That includes Mazda.

How did giving a giant, poor to average handling sedan a Hemi make it luxury sport?

Ford has a long way to go. The same goes for GM. The behemoths are slow to change, but they've begun. They're still #1 and 2 in the world. It takes alot to implement progress in such a giant corporation, but they'll get there.

Ford's just promoting their own bottom line, and a little esprit de corps. And they have that right. You asked for options, I gave them to you. If those choices don't suit the employees, then they can park across the street.

I can see where you're coming from with the entire "Dress Code" or investing in your company idea, but this is not "investing in your company." The rule implemented by that facory's foreman is a rule aimed at identifying those in the workforce who they can point to and say "joe over there, he drives a Chevy. He's why you're getting laid off."

Let's also look at dress codes...

Dress codes:
Neiman Marcus - Sure, you may have to wear a suit, but you can buy any suit you want, from anywhere you want
Macy's - Same deal, no requirements on wearing the Alfani line
WalMart - No requirements to buy WalMart brand, but employees probably shop there anyway
Banana Republic - no requirements on wearing BR crap.

However, oftentimes employees end up shopping at the brand they work for. Why? Probably for one of two reasons:
A) They chose to work there because they like the product and therefore buy the product
B) They get employee discounts on these products that they like or need

In Dearborn, MI, you don't choose to work somewhere because you like the product. You get your ass a job at the factory because they are the only ones with a factory in your town, are the only ones who have a couple job openings for skilled and unskilled labor, and the ones who (used to) have a decent pension plan so you can at least grow old without starving.

In fact, if you're getting an employee discount, the well known M-plan, and you're still buying a competitor's car, that's gotta be saying something pretty embarassing for Ford...

What I wish would happen for this factory is that the exclusive parking lot will end up at 20% capacity, and the one across the street to be overflowing with vehicles.

Maybe that will finally get Ford to do something about their line-up.

If I had any say in the matter, I would start with getting rid of that ridiculous blue oval. It looks like they're still slapping on excess badges from the 1960s... It looks ridiculously out of place on such cars as the Ford GT. Sure there's history behind the oval, but when a company needs to change the public's perception, changing the brand logo will instantly shift consumers' thinking. It doesn't have to be a drastic change to a stylized "F" but rather an update that brings the style up-to-date. In today's world of typing, computers and the internet, the script writing of the Ford oval screams "out-of-date." However, with the entire retro look coming back, maybe they won't have to...

-P23

Correction: Excess badges from the 70s (http://www.anglia-models.co.uk/fordlogo.htm) with an oval and script lettering dating back to 1911... :Eyecrazy:

I can see where you're coming from with the entire "Dress Code" or investing in your company idea, but this is not "investing in your company." The rule implemented by that facory's foreman is a rule aimed at identifying those in the workforce who they can point to and say "joe over there, he drives a Chevy. He's why you're getting laid off."

It's not like that at all. No one is being fired for driving a competitors vehicle. And for a little background info on the Plant.....it's the Rouge plant (the one that gets all the press for being the most advanced assembly plant on the planet). This is the plant that you visit if you take the Rouge Factory Tour at Greenfield Village. This is a high visability plant for Ford and the street that divides the parking lots is the one the Tour buses travel....along with press and industry analysts and environmentalists. Having a high visability parking lot, next to your most famous factory in the heart of Motown filled with Ford-family vehicle is a huge statement. Remember this lot is only holds 15% of the employees cars. And I can say without a doubt that it will not be hard to fill that lot with Ford oval vehicles let alone Ford-family vehicles. If you are not from Michigan or have never been to Michigan then you might not understand this.....but 80% of the cars on the road here are Big 3 product. It's not like Cali where Toyota and Honda are King. Yes, there are plenty of Toyotas and Hondas and everything else you can name....but Michigan is a Big 3 state. This rule is not going to be a problem with most employees....in fact, the employees affected are UAW.....what products do you think they buy?


Neiman Marcus - Sure, you may have to wear a suit, but you can buy any suit you want, from anywhere you want
Macy's - Same deal, no requirements on wearing the Alfani line
WalMart - No requirements to buy WalMart brand, but employees probably shop there anyway
Banana Republic - no requirements on wearing BR crap.

You can't compare retailers of other people's products to a company that makes products. I worked in retail a long time ago, and I have friends that work retail now. The two are not the same.....their is no product loyalty in retail. You don't make anything, so buying a product sold at that store only supports that store.

However, oftentimes employees end up shopping at the brand they work for. Why? Probably for one of two reasons:
A) They chose to work there because they like the product and therefore buy the product
B) They get employee discounts on these products that they like or need

You forgot reason C) They like having a job and support the company that supports their family.


What I wish would happen for this factory is that the exclusive parking lot will end up at 20% capacity, and the one across the street to be overflowing with vehicles.

Never happen. And that is a strange thing to wish for.


[If I had any say in the matter, I would start with getting rid of that ridiculous blue oval. It looks like they're still slapping on excess badges from the 1960s... It looks ridiculously out of place on such cars as the Ford GT. Sure there's history behind the oval, but when a company needs to change the public's perception, changing the brand logo will instantly shift consumers' thinking. It doesn't have to be a drastic change to a stylized "F" but rather an update that brings the style up-to-date. In today's world of typing, computers and the internet, the script writing of the Ford oval screams "out-of-date"

-P23

That's a great idea......get rid of arguably the most recognized brand and symbol in the world :banghead:

It's not like that at all. No one is being fired for driving a competitors vehicle. And for a little background info on the Plant.....it's the Rouge plant (the one that gets all the press for being the most advanced assembly plant on the planet). This is the plant that you visit if you take the Rouge Factory Tour at Greenfield Village. This is a high visability plant for Ford and the street that divides the parking lots is the one the Tour buses travel....along with press and industry analysts and environmentalists. Having a high visability parking lot, next to your most famous factory in the heart of Motown filled with Ford-family vehicle is a huge statement. Remember this lot is only holds 15% of the employees cars. And I can say without a doubt that it will not be hard to fill that lot with Ford oval vehicles let alone Ford-family vehicles. If you are not from Michigan or have never been to Michigan then you might not understand this.....but 80% of the cars on the road here are Big 3 product. It's not like Cali where Toyota and Honda are King. Yes, there are plenty of Toyotas and Hondas and everything else you can name....but Michigan is a Big 3 state. This rule is not going to be a problem with most employees....in fact, the employees affected are UAW.....what products do you think they buy?

Of course I know Michigan is such a huuuuge Big 3 state. Why do you think you're getting so defensive on this company? I've got a friend who works for Bosch, and yea, he's proud to drive home the prototype Cadillac on occasion. He's proud of his job, loves his company, supports it any way that he can. Here you've got Ford employees who would rather drive competitor cars. See the problem? Who in their right mind wouldn't want to support their company? But for some reason, the drive to buy a better car overwhelms the thought of buying a Ford.

Also, if visibility were truly the problem, they would have implemented this rule from the very beginning. Rather, it's a reactionary move to a souring market share. I'll grant you that part of it could be for visibility purposes as a reactionary move, but you've got to admit that there's definitely a fair amount of "screw em, they can park across the street" sentiment from the foreman as well.


You can't compare retailers of other people's products to a company that makes products. I worked in retail a long time ago, and I have friends that work retail now. The two are not the same.....their is no product loyalty in retail. You don't make anything, so buying a product sold at that store only supports that store.


Of course there's product loyalty in retail. That's what a brand logo is for - recognition, perception of quality, and loyalty. Why do you think they have huge hoodies with the words GAP and POLO across the front?

You forgot reason C) They like having a job and support the company that supports their family.

It's hard to be proud of poor worksmanship, and that's coming from personal experience. And they're really supporting employees' families with pension underfunding of $7.3B.

Never happen. And that is a strange thing to wish for.

I was being facetious - but it would be funny, and it would get the point across.

That's a great idea......get rid of arguably the most recognized brand and symbol in the world :banghead:

See what I wrote. I did not say "get rid of" but rather "update". For example, look at what Intel has done with their logo. Also, see my point above on the reason for having a logo/brand in the first place. When that logo earns the reputation for low-quality and boring cars, there's a pretty good reason to shift it.

The fact that it's one of the most visible logos in the world actually helps. If they shift their logo just a bit, replace it with something a little faster, a little sleeker, but still maintaining that link to their heritage, and then slap it onto a whole new line-up of exciting and quality vehicles, it will scream to the world "Ford is back, and better than ever. Forgive us for the Fiesta and the Taurus. We're getting off our asses and now our line-up will knock you off your feet. Buy me.

-P23

I work at a Ford dealership and now the Ford Employees are starting to boycott any vehicle that Ford sells that is not produced in the US. So for instance the Fusion, the car that Ford Mo. Co. says is the "the most important car we've launched since the Taurus" is a car that they absolutely refuse to buy because it's built in Mexico.

I understand some of this, but they need to understand that if they don't support the company, they will lose EVEN MORE jobs.

I don't drive Ford products, but I have sold them sucessfully for over 10 years now at the same dealership. They offer NOTHING in the way of cars that I would ever buy. The cars are boring and bland and they are built with little to no creativity in mind. The ONLY car they've built so far that I would consider driving is the Fusion, but even that would be a stretch. But come on, telling people they can't drive their car to work and park there because it's not a Ford is fucking assinine. What if I didn't work for Ford and owned a Honda and got hired there. Does this mean that now I have to buy a Ford so I can park at work. Fuck that.

These narrow minded short sighted ideas are why they are FIRING 30,000 of you.

It is a quiet rule around the company. The Dearborn Truck Plant Manager is just making it a written rule at his facility. I for one applaud him for doing this. And a lot of people are correct in saying that Ford did not have the greatest selection over the last few years......but Ford employees have other Ford Family brands to choose from. A ford employee is hard pressed to explain that the vehicle they needed was not represented in the 8 brands available to them.

You sir are a moron if you belive this is a good idea. If I was an employee I would be calling my lawyer.

IMO if the parking lot holds 15% of employee's cars and is visible to the general public, then I think its a excellent idea to only allow Ford/Family cars in the lot.

Its another necessary step in being more professional and showing the corporate image which is extremely important, you have to take every advantage you can.

If though the general public cant see the lot, I don't see the point.

That is fine, just as long as ford supplies eveyone of it's employees with a new car....

I had a new Ford every two years.....pick-up trucks, SUV's and cars.....never had a single issue. Never broken down, never had a rattle, never had a squeek.
By having "a new Ford every two years," does this mean you were selling/trading in Fords when they reached the age of 2? Or did you have numerous near-new Fords? The reason I ask is that I think a more true evaluation of the products would require one to to keep them for several years.

My take on the subject is that I think the plant has chosen the wrong criteria for the nearby lot parking privilege. Instead of rewarding employees who drive their products, they should reward employees who consistently show a dedication to quality. Yes, it's subjective... But that's the message they need to send to their troops.

Unfortunately, I imagine that they would have a difficult (if not impossible) time implementing such a program with the union. I expect the union would object on the basis that the subjective nature of such a program would make it impossible to guarantee fairness of opportunity for everyone to be recognized and to earn the benefit.

Also, for what it's worth, this vehicular discrimination in parking lots is nothing new... The UAW has been doing it for years:

http://www.mackinac.org/media/images/1999/vpt99-01a.jpg
Sign posted in 1999 at UAW Local 659's parking lot in Flint, Michigan (Source (http://www.mackinac.org/article.aspx?ID=1645))

Regarding the idea of changing the Ford logo... I have to agree that I think it may be time for that.

Yes, there is a cost... The oval and scripted font is recognizable and has a long history.

However, they're in a "change or die" mode, and it makes sense that they change the logo as a statement that they're evolving as a new company... (At least they'd better be evolving!)

I have even thought about an idea of their launching a new nameplate altogether. Just look at what Toyota accomplished with Lexus some fifteen years ago and Scion just a couple years back.

Of course they'd have to do a better job of it than GM did with the Geo nameplate, which eventually just got absorbed into the Chevrolet line.

The point is... Ford is obviously suffering from a negative image, whether true or just perceived. Redressing themselves with a fresh logo, as an integral component in a positive public relations campaign, would go a long way towards giving people an opportunity to give them another chance at their business.

They would sure make a big splash with a new warranty program that kick all of its competition and prove that they're serious about quality. Imagine a new logo with a marketing blitz boasting a 10-year / 100K mile, bumper-to-bumper warranty with no deductible, free of charge, with the purchase of any Ford vehicle. That could give them the edge they need and would (hopefully) allow them to finally wean off their factory-to-dealer incentive addictions.

When possible I try to buy things made by Philips because they own the company I work for, thereby helping to support my livelihood (primary job in medical field). It may or may not be the absolute best product there is, but it is pretty good for most stuff. Besides, on high end stuff I get a pretty huge discount, up to 80% on their 40-plus inch ambient light flat panel TVs. At that price it's impossible to find a similar quality product at the same price. Why wouldn't I buy from my parent company???

I think it is the same with buying a car. With what the average cars are that I see, Ford and/or Ford family vehicles fit nicely into the average vehicle range. You may prefer something a little different but unless you are looking at more of a speciality kind of vehicle or something high-end and exotic, why wouldn't you make every effort to support your company and thereby helping to support yourself, especially with a wide vehicle brand selection in the Ford family?

I'm with the camp that says updat the logo...maybe they could do something like reversing the colors! What I mean by that is where there is blue in the logo put silver and where there is silver put blue!

As for the pride in what you make issue, like mentioned before not everybody that works in these plants work there by choice. Okay, there is a choice end up out on the street with nothing or get a job with the biggest thing going in your area! In this world (even the almighty U.S.) there are a lot of people who work in a particular field out of necessity. The key is keep the food on the table and the roof over your head and that can be done with Ford or with any other company that you luck up and find a job with. I'm pretty sure that the foreign car companies that have plants in the U.S. are not importing the people working the assembly lines. These are Americans making ends meet and it just so happened that a foreign car company popped up instead of one of "The Big 3".

I hope Ford and GM figure things out and get it right for the sake of those who have jobs with these companies (and not at the cost of alienating those who prefer another make)!

I'll make it simple. No one care if you guys don't like it. It IS right and it IS standard practice across almost all industries. There are no Pepsi, Asahi, Itoen or other competitor's product available at Coke. You walk into their plants and there are vending machines everywhere set to "free"... and they only serve Coke products (which includes Minute Maid and other brand names used in Canada, Europe, etc.). Microsoft ain't using RedHat on their employee's desktops. Symantec ain't running McAfee on their network.

I'll make it simple. No one care if you guys don't like it. It IS right and it IS standard practice across almost all industries. There are no Pepsi, Asahi, Itoen or other competitor's product available at Coke. You walk into their plants and there are vending machines everywhere set to "free"... and they only serve Coke products (which includes Minute Maid and other brand names used in Canada, Europe, etc.). Microsoft ain't using RedHat on their employee's desktops. Symantec ain't running McAfee on their network.

The difference with that example and the Ford example is this! Does anybody get treated differently if they bring a Pepsi packed with their lunch? Not likely! Granted with free drinks available people probably don't pack drinks with their lunch but this is just an example! While I don't think it's a big deal it is different than Pepsi vs Coke, Symantec vs McAfee, or Microsoft vs RedHat!

Easy rule to implement when you probably get your Ford for free.

Of course I know Michigan is such a huuuuge Big 3 state. Why do you think you're getting so defensive on this company? I've got a friend who works for Bosch, and yea, he's proud to drive home the prototype Cadillac on occasion. He's proud of his job, loves his company, supports it any way that he can. Here you've got Ford employees who would rather drive competitor cars. See the problem? Who in their right mind wouldn't want to support their company? But for some reason, the drive to buy a better car overwhelms the thought of buying a Ford.

Also, if visibility were truly the problem, they would have implemented this rule from the very beginning. Rather, it's a reactionary move to a souring market share. I'll grant you that part of it could be for visibility purposes as a reactionary move, but you've got to admit that there's definitely a fair amount of "screw em, they can park across the street" sentiment from the foreman as well.



[QUOTE=portero23]Of course there's product loyalty in retail. That's what a brand logo is for - recognition, perception of quality, and loyalty. Why do you think they have huge hoodies with the words GAP and POLO across the front?

Yes, there is brand loyalty in retail when the only products sold at that store are the store brands. Gap and Old Navy are very much like the auto industry.....they make a product and sell it through their own store network. I was referring to your examples of Walmart and Macy's.....which sell products from other companies. You can buy Lucky jeans at a lot of retailers....so why stay loyal to Macy's? Polo is the same thing, you can buy Polo just about anywhere....so where is the loyalty to the retailer? Yes, brands have loyalty, retailers do not. The only reason I used retailers as an example is that anyone working in retail does not understand what is like to work for a company that MAKES products.


It's hard to be proud of poor worksmanship, and that's coming from personal experience. And they're really supporting employees' families with pension underfunding of $7.3B.

I am not going to get into this issue too deep, because it would take to long to explain. The Big 3 are in a unique situation that no other automobile company can relate to. Ford and GM have been around close to 100 years....over that time period they've accrued a combined 1.5 million retired employees with health coverage and pensions. Ford and GM were founded in a country with privatized medicine. Toyota, Nissan, Honda, BMW, etc have never had this burden. Is the pension underfunded....perhaps on paper. But Ford has $25 Billion in cash right now.....thats right $25 billion in CASH. I can promise you that no one recieving a pension has missed a check....no matter what the press says about underfunded pension accounts.



See what I wrote. I did not say "get rid of" but rather "update". For example, look at what Intel has done with their logo. Also, see my point above on the reason for having a logo/brand in the first place. When that logo earns the reputation for low-quality and boring cars, there's a pretty good reason to shift it.

The fact that it's one of the most visible logos in the world actually helps. If they shift their logo just a bit, replace it with something a little faster, a little sleeker, but still maintaining that link to their heritage, and then slap it onto a whole new line-up of exciting and quality vehicles, it will scream to the world "Ford is back, and better than ever. Forgive us for the Fiesta and the Taurus. We're getting off our asses and now our line-up will knock you off your feet. Buy me.

-P23


There is no need to change the trademark at all. Ford is not dying....far from it. they just announced a $2 billion profit for 2005. The reason for the restructure is the changed climate of the US. In the rest of the world, Ford is flourishing, sales are up 46% in India for 2005. 30,000 is a big # to most people....but Ford has 134,000 people working in the US alone and 348,000 world-wide. 30,000 being cut is not because the company is dying.....it's because it was stupid to have that many people doing redundant work. My dept lost 10 people last week......every single one of them should have been fired years ago. Good people are not being cut from the company......bad ones are. Anyone that is worth keeping is being reassigned to other posts in the company.

I work at a Ford dealership and now the Ford Employees are starting to boycott any vehicle that Ford sells that is not produced in the US. So for instance the Fusion, the car that Ford Mo. Co. says is the "the most important car we've launched since the Taurus" is a car that they absolutely refuse to buy because it's built in Mexico.

UAW employees no doubt. All the salaried employees are picking up the Fusion, Milan and Zephyr in record #'s. I have no sympathy for the UAW....the once stood for fairness and now they stand for greed. I really hope the UAW will cease to exist in the next 2 decades.....I would even contribute $$$ to see this happen.



I don't drive Ford products, but I have sold them sucessfully for over 10 years now at the same dealership. They offer NOTHING in the way of cars that I would ever buy. The cars are boring and bland and they are built with little to no creativity in mind. The ONLY car they've built so far that I would consider driving is the Fusion, but even that would be a stretch. But come on, telling people they can't drive their car to work and park there because it's not a Ford is fucking assinine. What if I didn't work for Ford and owned a Honda and got hired there. Does this mean that now I have to buy a Ford so I can park at work. Fuck that.

These narrow minded short sighted ideas are why they are FIRING 30,000 of you.

This is not a Ford mandate....how many times do I have to fucking say that. The people affected by this rule at the Dearborn Truck Plant are UAW workers and 99% already drive a Ford-family product. The press has made this into a bigger issue than it is. If I had to bet how many people will lose their voucher over this new rule, I would say less than 20 people. You can own a Honda and work for Ford.....but at the Dearborn Truck Plant you'll have to park across the street in the lot for the other 85% of the employees.......chances are you already do.

rodrigo67, what do you do for a living?

Bascho, I work for a company that supports all the computer/networking needs of car dealerships. I have about 80 car dealers in my area and have at least one of most companies ( no super exoctic stuff). Being a car enthusiest I keep an eye on what companies are putting out, price, options, etc. I also get alot of feedback from owners, parts dept, and service depts ( not as much from the sales guys because....well you know). So when an owner or a parts manger or sales manager tells me don't ever buy one of these or one of those and it's something they sell, I'm sure they know what they're talking about ( and yes, this does happen).

In my area, my ford dealers are still doing well on truck sales ( just not as well as before) but the 500's are barely moving, they have sold a few fusions, and can't keep mustang GT's in stock, but have lots of v6's available.

You sir are a moron if you belive this is a good idea. If I was an employee I would be calling my lawyer.

Well if you were affected by this rule, than you would be a UAW member who has been used to this rule at all the Local Union Halls throughout the USA. Not to mention your lawyer would be provided to you by the UAW who fully supports this new rule.

I'll make it simple. No one care if you guys don't like it. It IS right and it IS standard practice across almost all industries. There are no Pepsi, Asahi, Itoen or other competitor's product available at Coke. You walk into their plants and there are vending machines everywhere set to "free"... and they only serve Coke products (which includes Minute Maid and other brand names used in Canada, Europe, etc.). Microsoft ain't using RedHat on their employee's desktops. Symantec ain't running McAfee on their network.

Japan8. I wonder if that includes ford cars built in mexico. Does buying a mexican ford save jobs in the US? When will ford start separating thier parking lots into domestic fords, foreign fords and others?

Bascho, I work for a company that supports all the computer/networking needs of car dealerships. I have about 80 car dealers in my area and have at least one of most companies ( no super exoctic stuff). Being a car enthusiest I keep an eye on what companies are putting out, price, options, etc. I also get alot of feedback from owners, parts dept, and service depts ( not as much from the sales guys because....well you know). So when an owner or a parts manger or sales manager tells me don't ever buy one of these or one of those and it's something they sell, I'm sure they know what they're talking about ( and yes, this does happen).

In my area, my ford dealers are still doing well on truck sales ( just not as well as before) but the 500's are barely moving, they have sold a few fusions, and can't keep mustang GT's in stock, but have lots of v6's available.


Do you work for DCS?

I agree that dealers know the ins and outs of the product they sell and of course they will disuade their friends and acquaintances away from 'problem vehicles'. But if you think this a Ford only problem then you are crazy. Every dealer of every product will be know about all the problems with their particular brand......and every brand has issues. The thing that separates the good from the bad in the public's view is how those problems were handled. Toyotas breakdown....Honda's breakdown.....but it's how quickly they get the customer taken care of that makes the perception of a quality car company. I agree 100% that Ford has dropped the ball in the past with regards to Ford-to-dealer relations. Many dealers hated working with FCSD for a long time.....but that had changed in the last few years. Ford has been proactive about involving the dealer network in designing a process that meets their needs. Go and ask your dealers if they feel the relationship with Ford has improved in the last 2 years.

As far as the Five Hundred's sales are concerned.....they are way beyond the expectations. Ford purposely replaced the Taurus with 2 vehicles because they wanted to split the market. Splitting the market for a midsized Ford meant that they would not have 300,000 customers a year like they had with the Taurus.....it means they anticipated 150,000 Fusion customers and 150,000 Five Hundred customers. Guess what, they had more than expected for both vehicles. Not to mention we learned a lot about what Americans wanted as fas as content. The projected mix for the Five Hundred included only 17% Limited AWD........after a year of sales, the actual mix was 51% Limited AWD. This told Ford that they have a lot of room for adding content to bring the mix in-line with expectations. Ford has a bunch of knock-outs right now....and next fall with the Edge and MKX in the mix, 2006/7 is going to be a good year for Ford NA.

That is fine, just as long as ford supplies eveyone of it's employees with a new car....


No need to supply a free car. The employee discount is enough of a reason...believe me. I have a 2005 Shinka with appearance and rotory accent that I got in August of 2005 for $28K out the door. The sticker was $34K. Now, I know that the 2005's are selling even lower now....but a Shinka for $28K in August was a great deal....and that was because of employee discount.

Japan8. I wonder if that includes ford cars built in mexico. Does buying a mexican ford save jobs in the US?

I know you asked Japan8, but I am going to respond. Does buying a Ford car built in Mexico save jobs in the US....actually, YES. Here is why, if the Fusion sells like 'gang-busters', then Ford will need to expand capacity to build a larger # of Fusions. This expansion would be in the US as that is where Ford has excess capacity.


When will ford start separating thier parking lots into domestic fords, foreign fords and others?

Never

As far as the Five Hundred's sales are concerned.....they are way beyond the expectations. Ford purposely replaced the Taurus with 2 vehicles because they wanted to split the market. Splitting the market for a midsized Ford meant that they would not have 300,000 customers a year like they had with the Taurus.....it means they anticipated 150,000 Fusion customers and 150,000 Five Hundred customers. Guess what, they had more than expected for both vehicles. Not to mention we learned a lot about what Americans wanted as fas as content. The projected mix for the Five Hundred included only 17% Limited AWD........after a year of sales, the actual mix was 51% Limited AWD. This told Ford that they have a lot of room for adding content to bring the mix in-line with expectations. Ford has a bunch of knock-outs right now....and next fall with the Edge and MKX in the mix, 2006/7 is going to be a good year for Ford NA.

Well, I guess your zeal for the company you work for is good, but you couldn't be more wrong. According to Ford's press release on 2005 US Car Sales (http://media.ford.com/newsroom/release_display.cfm?release=22189), they only sold 108K Five Hundreds and 17K Fusions. Hardly overwhelming support from the buying public. When you take into account that first year sales are typically much higher than subsequent years, I don't see anything good for Ford in the near future. Do you think these boring new Fords will be able to put any kind of dent in Camry (431K) or Corolla (341K) sales?

bascho answered the question for me. Thanks.

Yes the car situation is the same as Coke v Pepsi and moreso in the case of Microsoft and Symantec. I actually work at these fortunte 500 technology companies and I'm TELLING you that this is how it is. No speculation, hearsay or whatever. This is fact. They extensively use their own products and their employees also use the products. No one is forcing you to use them, but you'd be stupid not to. You can either get them free or discounted and more importantly you have to deal with the products in your job. The best way to know them... strengths and weakness... is to use them. How can you help Ford to make a better car when you have never owned a recent offering? You gotta own/use something to be able to know its strengths and weaknesses... Lastly... it's just a team/corporate image thing... driving a Honda Accord when you work for Ford is rude. When your job gets cut because the company lost a billion dollars... I hoep you're the first to go... how are you helping the team by buying the competition? Drive whatever you want? Go ahead... just don't expect anyone to consider you a "team player" either.

The best way to know them... strengths and weakness... is to use them. How can you help Ford to make a better car when you have never owned a recent offering? You gotta own/use something to be able to know its strengths and weaknesses...


How is the guy who bolts on the transmission (for example) going to learn any more about his job by driving a Ford? It just doesn't make sense. My company manufactures flight controls and engine controls for various aircraft. Will I be able to do my job any better if my company says that I can only fly on planes that use my company's equipment?


Lastly... it's just a team/corporate image thing... driving a Honda Accord when you work for Ford is rude.

This is probably true. However, why shouldn't someone be allowed to drive an STi, Evo, MBs, BMWs, Porsches, etc. Ford doesn't make any vehicles in the same class as these.

When your job gets cut because the company lost a billion dollars... I hoep you're the first to go... how are you helping the team by buying the competition? Drive whatever you want? Go ahead... just don't expect anyone to consider you a "team player" either.

Ford should be able to operate because it makes good products that people WANT to own, not because the company forces its employees/suppliers to drive their vehicles. This is a market economy. People should be purchasing the vehicles that are the best for them, not the vehicles that someone else tells them to buy. I believe that this has contributed to some of the domestic's problems. For a long time, there were too many domestic leghumpers who refused to buy foreign cars. So, the big 3 continued to pump out crap because they knew there were idiots who would buy their inferior vehicles. Now, these people are starting to turn around and buy the best car for them, which, in a lot of cases, is a foreign car, causing domestic sales to plummet.

How is the guy who bolts on the transmission (for example) going to learn any more about his job by driving a Ford? It just doesn't make sense. My company manufactures flight controls and engine controls for various aircraft. Will I be able to do my job any better if my company says that I can only fly on planes that use my company's equipment?



This is probably true. However, why shouldn't someone be allowed to drive an STi, Evo, MBs, BMWs, Porsches, etc. Ford doesn't make any vehicles in the same class as these.



Ford should be able to operate because it makes good products that people WANT to own, not because the company forces its employees/suppliers to drive their vehicles. This is a market economy. People should be purchasing the vehicles that are the best for them, not the vehicles that someone else tells them to buy. I believe that this has contributed to some of the domestic's problems. For a long time, there were too many domestic leghumpers who refused to buy foreign cars. So, the big 3 continued to pump out crap because they knew there were idiots who would buy their inferior vehicles. Now, these people are starting to turn around and buy the best car for them, which, in a lot of cases, is a foreign car, causing domestic sales to plummet.

Eric,

A lot of what you say is true. But you are blowing the parking lot thing out of proportion. If Ford mandated a change to all parking lots at all it's facilities, then yes that would be extremely unfair. I agree that if your favorite car is an EVO or STi and you live in the US, obviously Ford-family brands do not offer the car for you....and that is ok. No single company can build a car for everyone's wants and needs.....which is why their are over 200 brands sold thoughout the world. But how can someone who just bought a Mercedes C230 honestly say that Jaguar did not fill their need? There are always examples of niche automobiles that cannot be met with your companies offerings....but that is not the problem. There are tons of Jeep Wranglers in our parking lot.....not one of them ever gets shit about it.....why, because Ford doesn't offer anything like it. I am sure you will see the same thing happen at Toyota, they don't offer anything like the Corvette.....but do you think a Toyota exec can pull up in a new Vette and not get looks from his peers. How many of you work in a business that is as competitive as the auto industry? Remember, there are over 200 brands sold in world.....does your company have 200 competitors?

And those that feel it is ok to work for a company that makes a certain product.....I hope you also feel that they have no right to complain if their job is lost do to downsizing based on decreased market share. If you depend on Ford to feed, shelter and cloth your family.....why would you not buy their products to ensure you keep that job. What is more important, you having a EVO or feeding your 8 month old daughter? And if you feel that compromise is too difficult, then why not go get a job at Mitsubishi? oh....probably because they don't offer any jobs in the US.

Hey, I couldn't care less about this mandate from Ford. In fact, it is probably a good idea. I was just arguing against some of the logic that is being thrown as reasons why this mandate came out. I think if Ford is going to offer you this benefit that is worth thousands and thousands of dollars, you should probably take them up on it (ie employee pricing on vehicles). However, people like myself get some enjoyment out of driving, especially driving a well balanced, exciting car. Outside of some of the Mazdas, Ford just doesn't have anything exciting to offer.

How is the guy who bolts on the transmission (for example) going to learn any more about his job by driving a Ford? It just doesn't make sense. My company manufactures flight controls and engine controls for various aircraft. Will I be able to do my job any better if my company says that I can only fly on planes that use my company's equipment?

He can see the transmission in action. Maybe from there he notices things during assembly that may be related to NVH or such problems he has noticed when driving the car. Pretty simple.



This is probably true. However, why shouldn't someone be allowed to drive an STi, Evo, MBs, BMWs, Porsches, etc. Ford doesn't make any vehicles in the same class as these.

Whoever said life was fair? Don't like it? Go work for Honda or Porsche instead.


Ford should be able to operate because it makes good products that people WANT to own, not because the company forces its employees/suppliers to drive their vehicles. This is a market economy. People should be purchasing the vehicles that are the best for them, not the vehicles that someone else tells them to buy. I believe that this has contributed to some of the domestic's problems. For a long time, there were too many domestic leghumpers who refused to buy foreign cars. So, the big 3 continued to pump out crap because they knew there were idiots who would buy their inferior vehicles. Now, these people are starting to turn around and buy the best car for them, which, in a lot of cases, is a foreign car, causing domestic sales to plummet.

And the employee purchases alone are going to make or break Ford's sales? :eyetwitch :hahano:

He can see the transmission in action. Maybe from there he notices things during assembly that may be related to NVH or such problems he has noticed when driving the car. Pretty simple.

Riiiight, cause that's how things work. Some schmoe off the assembly line walks into the chief engineer's office and says, "Hey, since I've been driving my new Fusion, I have found a design flaw in the transmission that all the design and test engineers must have missed." :rofl:


And the employee purchases alone are going to make or break Ford's sales? :eyetwitch :hahano:

That could go either way. Then why bother making them drive only Ford vehicles?

Riiiight, cause that's how things work. Some schmoe off the assembly line walks into the chief engineer's office and says, "Hey, since I've been driving my new Fusion, I have found a design flaw in the transmission that all the design and test engineers must have missed." :rofl:

And you just proved you don't know shit. THAT is how it's done at Toyota for fact. :icon_no2:


That could go either way. Then why bother making them drive only Ford vehicles?

See earlier post... corporate image, morality and also to make your employees better aware of what the company makes... what's good and bad about them. Stuff like that.

THAT is how it's done at Toyota for fact. :icon_no2:


Reference?

It's called TQM (http://www.isixsigma.com/library/content/c031008a.asp). But if you follow the link, you'll see that Ford has also implemented this program (supposedly...?).

[QUOTE=Japan8]And you just proved you don't know shit. THAT is how it's done at Toyota for fact. :icon_no2:


I was reading about Toyota awhile back and the article said that if someone came up with an idea on how to improve something, make it better, faster, more efficient, carwise or work production wise, everyone on that worker's line got a bonus for helping their company by pointing out a potential problem. They reward them for this. They have a "suggestions box" kind of thing where employees can leave this info for them and people do go through and read them regularly and if there is need for clarification on something they will talk to the employee about their concerns.

Um sti_eric there you go. Sorry to be an ass, but... you may now remove foot from mouth. Two other people have not only posted to confirm what I said, but one even gave you a link.

Game. Set. Match.

Nobody has posted anything showing that assembly line workers drive vehicles around and report engineering design defects to the engineering team.

The article posted by sharward is about Six Sigma. I know all about Six Sigma. My company uses it. It is about process improvement, not about assemblers figuring out manufacturing or engineering problems by driving a car around.

BunnyGirl posted about a suggestion box. My company has these, too. If, as an assembler or an engineer, you discover a better way to do your job, then you bring it up to your immediate superior.

There is no way an assembly line worker will figure out a better way to do his job by driving a car around. He will figure out that out by doing his job repeatedly.

Logic > you
Please show me where a toyota (or any manufacturing line worker) can improve his process by driving a car.

All Toyota employees in Japan (and proably the US) drive Toyotas.

but that's another story.

This is really getting off track. I didn't originally even really mean that by driving the car they can do engineer type stuff and directly suggest product improvements on their assembly line based upon that. Rather they can support the company they work for... own at least one car from them. Know the car. They build the damn things all day and they have never even driven one? That's sound pretty stupid to me. And if it sucks... well as they say for all consumers... "let Ford know". I don't work for Ford. Ford may have addition focus group/"let Ford know" type things internally as well. If I ran marketing and/or product development... I know I would.

I just had this thought that relates to the buying what you build thing! Maybe I am wrong but...if you work for a company (Ford) and get paid by that company then what sense does it make to put your paycheck back into that company besides keeping them afloat! It would seem to me that unless you are buying a new model more frequently that the money is just going right back into your pocket (of course that would be over an extended period of time) and not really helping or hurting the company besides saying they moved this many vehicles this year. Ford's profit has to come from outside the company not from inside! Think of it this way, if only Ford employees purchased Ford vehicles then the company would more than likely slowly die...the reason would be they would be paying the buyer back the money and also buying materials to produce the vehicle and basically all they would be doing is sending money out! Buying your own product is just treading water and can be offset by increasing sales outside the company!

^^ the point isn't to help sales. Not really. It's more of a coporate image, "team player" and just plain old... if you work there and think the prodcuts are crap... why are you still there? Sure you can't change the company... big companies and especially big, OLD companies move like glaciers and are FULL of red tape. But damn it... shouldn't people be TRYING to take pride in their work? Or maybe that is part of what the problem really is...

^^ the point isn't to help sales. Not really. It's more of a coporate image, "team player" and just plain old... if you work there and think the prodcuts are crap... why are you still there? Sure you can't change the company... big companies and especially big, OLD companies move like glaciers and are FULL of red tape. But damn it... shouldn't people be TRYING to take pride in their work? Or maybe that is part of what the problem really is...

That response I gave was more to the idea that someone would be taking food out of their own baby's mouth by not buying what they build.

The twist to the whole logic of "if you think the products are crap" thing is that not everyone works there out of choice! There are people (and I mean a lot of people) who work places purely in the interest of keeping a roof over their head and food on the table. Jobs are not always about liking what you build, sell, etc...the very core of it is survival. Everyone is not well off enough to say well I don't like Fords so I will just not work there or I will work for less with less benefits at McDonalds! I have a family member that made some mistakes earlier in his life and he is trying to make an honest living. The jobs that are open to him are not the best jobs in the world but he has a wife and children to feed. He is working on becoming a truck driver...why, because it will provide for a better quality of life for his family than McDonalds!

The pride thing is another thing as well. Honestly, I don't take pride in everything I have to do but I do it to the best of my ability as I am sure many others do in the interest of keeping their job and advancing!

For me, the bottom line of this whole discussion is about principle. If you want to give me incentive for buying a product from the company I work for, great - this is the way it should be. If you want to penalize me for NOT buying it, then you can get screwed, because this is simply wrong, regardless of who has done it in the past..

I LOVE the company I work for, which is a homebuilder, and I did buy a house from them. If they wanted to penalize me in ANY way for buying from another builder, I would be totally pissed. It doesn't matter if I can get the same product, or even a better product from my company for the same or better price. It's absurd to limit my choices, IN ANY WAY, by penalizing me for buying another builder's house.

I am tired of hearing about how minor the penalty is, or how it only affects certian people. Bullshit. It's still wrong.

You whine about a "penalty" of having to park across the street where 85% of people do already... and oh shit.. you just happened to have been parking there all along. :rolleyes:

Don't think of it as a penalty. That is just media drama. This is a reward... an incentive to buy from the Ford family. Just like getting an employee discount. You can make the discount out to be a "penalty" too... "Ford is trying to force me or coerce me into buy Ford, when I like HOnda and Honda cars are better"... so what... to be "fair" and "equal" Ford should give employees discounts on any and all cars they buy? :rolleyes: You work at Ford. Expect Ford products to be discounted for you and other incentives for staying with company products.

It's no big deal.

The people that have to park across the street will just end up being the ones who make the lunchtime beer run so no one has to lose their buzz while they're on the line. It's pretty sad that right across the street from most Ford plants there is a liquor store that would go under if the plant shut down.

Talking about beer:
In the early nineties we visited BMW in Munich and to my very surprise they had a few empty beer bottles on the shelves of the assembly line. (The 'tour-guide' told us: This is Munich, you know.)

Talking about beer:
In the early nineties we visited BMW in Munich and to my very surprise they had a few empty beer bottles on the shelves of the assembly line. (The 'tour-guide' told us: This is Munich, you know.)

Yes, but they never intentionally placed an empty beer bottle inside the frame of a yet-to-be assembled vehicle, to rattle and roll much to the new owner's chagrin, because they were pissed off at a manager about something.

You whine about a "penalty" of having to park across the street where 85% of people do already... and oh shit.. you just happened to have been parking there all along. :rolleyes:

Again, you are missing the point. If this negatively affects 1 person, it doesn't matter how much, it's still wrong.

EXAMPLE: I used to park in that lot one day a month, if I got there early. Now, I'm not allowed because I drive my granddaddy's old chevy to work. It's not about how much inconvenience this causes me, or if any at all. We call this discrimination here in America. This causes division among employees, and I agree with the crowd who finds this policy stupid. :bootyshak

Don't think of it as a penalty. That is just media drama. This is a reward... an incentive to buy from the Ford family. Just like getting an employee discount.

This is not a reward. A reward would be if they built a new better parking lot and only allowed Ford vehicles to park there. A penalty is when folks who could previously park anything they wanted anywhere they wanted are now restricted. There is definately a difference.

That Ford allowed this to happen says a lot about Ford and their culture. They should've had a sense of Esprit De Corp at Ford that any employee working for them shouldve reflected. How can you work for a company and not respect what it produces. You don't be in the Army and root for the Navy at the Army Navy game. This reflects on the state of the American workforce, and by that I mean company and employee. In America we can work for a company but not take pride in that company.

American workers all through the 80's worked for the big 3 reaping the benefits of big unions. More bebefits, more pay, more time off, heck we'll even get you a deal to get paid when you're not even working, but don't stand behind what you make. Don't speak up and say "Hey, let's make a product we can be proud of." We always want to blame the companies but we need to look at ourselves. Who are the companies but the individuals who make it up. The reason why tha Japanese are ahead of us is because way back when we were making junk they were allowing any person on the assembly line to stop it to make a correction. That's what its about, making corrections in a timely manner. Taking pride in what you do, not collecting a paycheck.

Now we have those same Americans working on the same soil for Japanese companies who make sure they instill in their employees a sense of pride in what they belong to. Go look at any Honda factory in the US and I bet most of the cars their are Hondas. It's not just about getting more benefits but about benefiting the company who in turn can benefit you and your children.

It's almost as if the bif 3 have to go so something better can come up in it's place, and as far as FORCING your employees to take stock in what they build, well that's just a flawed concept.

It's no big deal.

The people that have to park across the street will just end up being the ones who make the lunchtime beer run so no one has to lose their buzz while they're on the line. .

you never had a beer at lunch?

This is not a reward. A reward would be if they built a new better parking lot and only allowed Ford vehicles to park there. A penalty is when folks who could previously park anything they wanted anywhere they wanted are now restricted. There is definately a difference.

Uh no. That kind of thing happens all the time. They decided to make the choice spaces reserved for "employee of the month" and other such "rewards". Now you can't park there anymore. Case in point... The Orlando Sentinel (Tribune Media Corporation) has all the choice parking spaces reserved... "visitor" parking or for "Employee of the Month", "Salesperson of the Month", "Vice President", etc.

Wah wah... cry me a frickin' river...

Again, you are missing the point. If this negatively affects 1 person, it doesn't matter how much, it's still wrong.

EXAMPLE: I used to park in that lot one day a month, if I got there early. Now, I'm not allowed because I drive my granddaddy's old chevy to work. It's not about how much inconvenience this causes me, or if any at all. We call this discrimination here in America. This causes division among employees, and I agree with the crowd who finds this policy stupid. :bootyshak

Typical american thinking. Read my post before this one. It happens. It's normal. It's not discrimination. People whining about fricking parking privledges being discrimination utterly disgusts me when in this day and age situations of DWB and other types of police harrassment happen all the time. :icon_no2:

Japan8, I understand there are social difference's between cultures. The japanese have a much better team concept then americans do. That said, it is our individualism that makes us who we are. Everything from our homes, fashion to our cars. For one company to tell us what we should or shouldn't do, is unacceptable.

I understand the concept of pride in your product, but you don't eat a hershey bar if you want a salad. There are many classes of car that ford just does not have a offering in, and to expect your employees to put aside thier personal taste to tow the company line is not reasonable.

Yes, it would be nice to have a parking lot full of fords. If it were that important to ford, I don't see why they wouldn't make thier employee's such a great deal om ford cars that the workers would think it a reward to buy one. Imagine if you didn't have such an idiotic policy and the parking lot was still filled with fords...

I understand it is not a punishment, but ford is trying to coerce it's employees to buy a product they otherwise might not have bought. Let's see, if you give the company money, you get favorable treatment, but if you don't, then you do not. Nope, nothing wrong with that right?

Freedom of choice is a wonderfull thing...in the end, it's the only freedom we all really have.

Uh, I'm NOT Japanese, buddy. I just live here.

Ford isn't bribing anyone. You work at a department store like Dillard's and you get an employee discount. You work for Citigroup and the company offers special employee loans and "bonus" for employee stock purchases. Companies encouraging their employees to buy from them/buy their prodcuts... oh my God... unheard of! This is bribery! :rolleyes:

You aren't being told to buy Ford or get fired tomorrow. You aren't being told that you can't drive your non-Ford family car to work. You aren't even being told that you have to park a mile or more away because your car isn't Ford family. You can buy whatever you want. Even if you buy Ford there is no guarantee that you'll even get the pass for the closer space. There are a limited number of spaces... :doh: :wallbash:

Look. If you can't get this... oh well. Not my problem. :dunno:

Typical american thinking. Read my post before this one. It happens. It's normal. It's not discrimination. People whining about fricking parking privledges being discrimination utterly disgusts me when in this day and age situations of DWB and other types of police harrassment happen all the time. :icon_no2:

I respect your opinion, but at the same time, you are still talking about this not being "as bad" as something else. I must admit, I really don't care if these guys have to park an extra 100 feet from the plant then they might've the day before. I am speaking in concepts, and we are not on the same page, which is ok. If I worked at Ford, you bet your ass I'd have a blue oval on my ride. But I wouldn't expect better treatment from my employer as a result.

I respect your opinion, but at the same time, you are still talking about this not being "as bad" as something else. I must admit, I really don't care if these guys have to park an extra 100 feet from the plant then they might've the day before. I am speaking in concepts, and we are not on the same page, which is ok. If I worked at Ford, you bet your ass I'd have a blue oval on my ride. But I wouldn't expect better treatment from my employer as a result.


Well that's your problem. Whether you like it or not it is standard accepted practice across all industries and even on principle I have no problem with it. Even on pure principle you are still missing the point.

I was not refering to it as "not being "as bad" as something else". I was plainly stating that it is a joke to consider it "discrimination." Offering incentives... rewards to your employees for loyalty isn't discrimination. If for some reason you didn't have equal access/opportunity... like say Ford was doing this only for people who own Ford GT's... that's a different story. But since that isn't the case, it's fair. The whole Ford family covers a wide range of prices and markets. No they don't have everything like an Evo competitor. So buy the Evo instead... you aren't being forced to buy the Ford. This is the same as employee discounts. You are paying more to buy a non-Ford. It's unfair that people who buy a Ford get to pay less?! You think Ford should offer a voucher of some type for those people?!

OK Japan8. Looks like we're pretty much not going to agree. Everyone knows that all companies offer incentives to their employees, and you insult my intelligence by repetitively stating that. I am still amazed that you somehow spun this preferential treatment to certian employees into an "incentive" in your mind. Until we can agree on what a perk or incentive is, I guess this is a dead issue between us. So, good luck convincing everyone else, I'm on to the next topic. Enjoy your time overseas. :)

you never had a beer at lunch?

I have had "A" beer at lunch, but I am also not building vehicles. I'm not operating machinery at the risk of the safety of the others I work with. I'm not building a vehicle that weighs 7000 lbs and travel at 80 MPH just a few feet away from another vehicle. I am not building something that needs to be safe enough to carry my family and friends. You also won't find me passed out in a bathroom stall and have to carry me to medical and send me home in order for me just to return to work the next day to do this all over again.

Is it possible to respect the rights of the property owner to make such a policy while also thinking it's a very bad idea?

What the company and union wanted to do is demonstrate and show a bit of favortism towards how many of its employees do drive the company's product, which is certainly their right and they're welcome to do that... Yet the unintended outcome of that move has been a nationwide spotlight that underscores the fact that some/many of its employees do not drive its product! :scratchhe

I really do see this issue from both sides... Yet in the end, I must say that I lean towards disagreeing with the policy -- not so much for the reasons many have stated here, but for the more pragmatic one of it having more unintended consequences that I believe outweigh whatever minimal benefits there might have been.

Even if the policy were reversed now, the damage has been done already. They may as well just let the policy stand and not fan the flame any more.

The most unfortunate thing is: If this story had broken, and the name of the manufacturer had been temporarily kept out of view, I think most people would have guessed it was one of the "big three," and probably would have narrowed it down to two (GM or Ford). I could be way off base on that... But I'm pretty sure I would have guessed right.

I just think the whole thing is sad, no matter what side of the issue one chooses.

^^ THAT I agree with...

OK Japan8. Looks like we're pretty much not going to agree. Everyone knows that all companies offer incentives to their employees, and you insult my intelligence by repetitively stating that. I am still amazed that you somehow spun this preferential treatment to certian employees into an "incentive" in your mind. Until we can agree on what a perk or incentive is, I guess this is a dead issue between us. So, good luck convincing everyone else, I'm on to the next topic. Enjoy your time overseas. :)

OK.. thanks for playing. :)

No one tried to insult your intelligence. Just because you are choosing a narrow view/interpretation of what consitutes as an incentive doesn't make it not true.

It's funny... people forget what things they have that are benefits and privledges until they end up in a situation where they don't have them... and yes i am still talking about within the US. Go work for Washington Mutual Bank in downtown Seattle and drive to work each day. After having to pay for downtown parking for awhile, let's have this conversation again.

It's funny... people forget what things they have that are benefits and privledges until they end up in a situation where they don't have them... and yes i am still talking about within the US. Go work for Washington Mutual Bank in downtown Seattle and drive to work each day. After having to pay for downtown parking for awhile, let's have this conversation again.

If a perk or "reward" at a job is there from the beginning, removing that perk or reward at a later date does not make that perk or reward an incentive, rather, the fact that part of the experience of work for you has been diminished can be viewed logically as a penalty. While said perk or reward may not be a part of all jobs, if it was a part of your job, and is then taken away, it is a penalty. Thats as simply as I can put it. Moreover, making it selective based on what type of car you own is about as arbitrary a criteria you could choose. The type of car you drive has no bearing on your job performance, and could reflect something as simple as it being a gift from a family member when you did not have the funds to buy anything else, or the best value for money you could find for what you personally need.

While being told that you have to park 100 feet further away from your work every day may not be a big deal, it is the basic concept that is as un-american as communism.

Before taking any job, I'm sure most people evaluate many aspects of the job: is there a better job available to me? How far is the commute? do i have to pay for parking? How much am I being paid? Thus comparing working in downtown Seattle to working for a Big 3 assembly plant, is comparing apples to oranges. Sure they're both jobs, but at one its understood that parking is extremely limited, and the other has several large lots to park in. Suppose you worked in downtown seattle, and paid for parking every day, and one day the Central park accross the street from your job said they wouldn't park your vehicle any more for you, so you had to find street parking, and this decision was based on you driving a type of car that wasn't approved by your employer. Would you feel discriminated against?

You can find unfairness in every company in every industry. One person's unfair treatment is another person's special treatment.......and yes, that IS the AMERICAN WAY. I understand some people thinking this action is completely unfair or unethical.....but that is a really extreme response. Again, this is one assembly plant in one city in one state. The total # of people effected is less than 3,000, of which 98% already drive a Ford branded or Ford-family product. I could understand some of your outrage if this was all Ford facilities....but it's not.....and it's not going to be. If any other plant wanted to do this....believe me, they would have. Hopefully this thread goes the way of the RX7 and just dies soon. The complaints from people who don't even work for Ford and are not effected by this rule are laughable.

If a perk or "reward" at a job is there from the beginning, removing that perk or reward at a later date does not make that perk or reward an incentive, rather, the fact that part of the experience of work for you has been diminished can be viewed logically as a penalty. While said perk or reward may not be a part of all jobs, if it was a part of your job, and is then taken away, it is a penalty. Thats as simply as I can put it. Moreover, making it selective based on what type of car you own is about as arbitrary a criteria you could choose. The type of car you drive has no bearing on your job performance, and could reflect something as simple as it being a gift from a family member when you did not have the funds to buy anything else, or the best value for money you could find for what you personally need. While being told that you have to park 100 feet further away from your work every day may not be a big deal, it is the basic concept that is as un-american as communism.

Un-american? Communism? :rolleyes: Yep... we are definitely in the days of McCarthy-ism again...

But it wasn't a perk or reward that existed. There is free company parking. You park where there is an open space. Only 20% of the cars can park there due to the number of spaces. If you get to work early or due to the timing of your shift you manage to get a space. Otherwise you park across the street. 9 times out of ten... you end up parking across the street. If you got lucky enough to park in the 20%, you lose it when you go out to lunch by car. On this alone, I don't see your point.


Before taking any job, I'm sure most people evaluate many aspects of the job: is there a better job available to me? How far is the commute? do i have to pay for parking? How much am I being paid? Thus comparing working in downtown Seattle to working for a Big 3 assembly plant, is comparing apples to oranges. Sure they're both jobs, but at one its understood that parking is extremely limited, and the other has several large lots to park in. Suppose you worked in downtown seattle, and paid for parking every day, and one day the Central park accross the street from your job said they wouldn't park your vehicle any more for you, so you had to find street parking, and this decision was based on you driving a type of car that wasn't approved by your employer. Would you feel discriminated against?

If my employer was an automaker I wouldn't. It's arbitrary when it's actually arbitrary... look it up... from websters: existing or coming about seemingly at random or by chance or as a capricious and unreasonable act of will . It's not at all by chance, unreasonable or random if the company's business is making cars.

Working in downtown Seattle and working in an assembly plant in BFE aren't exactly the same, but I wasn't just arguing about the assembly plant, but Ford as a whole... including the main corporate offices. That's quite a bit more "apples to apples"... wouldn't you say?

Okay hypothetically, let's say I ride in a Ford to work, but what about the tow truck that's pulling it? What if it's a Chevy, can I still use the special parking lot?

It's no big deal.

The people that have to park across the street will just end up being the ones who make the lunchtime beer run so no one has to lose their buzz while they're on the line. It's pretty sad that right across the street from most Ford plants there is a liquor store that would go under if the plant shut down.

Hey now, I'll have you know that they are simply trying to support american jobs by buying domestic beers and genuine Tenessee whiskey. Those who indulge in those uppity european liquors will have to get their buzz in the alleyway across the street before returning to work, Ford will not tolerate foreign liquor in their lunchroom.

:patriot:

Okay hypothetically, let's say I ride in a Ford to work, but what about the tow truck that's pulling it? What if it's a Chevy, can I still use the special parking lot?

Good one!

Wow, another reason to hate Ford... Even when I wouldn't spend an iota of my time attempting to ever own one within the totality of my existence... What pieces of chit!

Seriously, for them to even have this problem, further more having to have this issue posted on CNNMoney only further proves that the childish issue's they deal with are more important too them than the pieces of shit they make... and this time I use an s...

If somebody bought a car based on what it was and instead of who made it, then they are the people you want working for you... Followers don't create knew idea's, they follow the old ones till they die like idiots...

Ford will not tolerate foreign liquor in their lunchroom.

:patriot:

hahaha :yelrotflm

Uh...


HOLY THREAD REVIVAL BATMAN!

I hope they made concessions for the people who owned the car before they started working there.

I could see making special benefit packages to workers - produce so many car without flaws the company supplies you with a new car - as you move up the ladder and have senority, the car gets, bigger and better - of they say this type of car is made for age bracket -X- the worker fits into that group and so it will advertise to his peers...A worker owned car is a living advertisement...and it really looks bad to have workers paid so low they can't afford the car!

A SUCCESS PLAN FOR FORD:

Pretend I'm Ford's new VP of Badassery Concering Domestic Brands (VP- BACDB)--

First, I agree with everyone who says update the logo. Keep the basic logo the same, just get a darker, pearlescent shade of blue and updated lettering.

Next, they don't need new designers, they need a shipping company. Get Europe and Australia on the line and get the damn Mondeo over here, and its ST220 brother, as well as the euro Focus (and it's ST model). Trash the Windstar or whatever the hell they call it now (freesomething) and replace it with the S-Max minivan. Get rid of that 500 shitwagon and replace it with the Aussia Falcon. Love or hate the Chrysler 300, you can't deny that they sell very well, and one of those Falcons with the Boss 260 engine is the answer to it. And I'd take a good hard look at the Falcon with the Barra 245XR6 Turbo I6 if I was looking to buy an Evo killer with comfort. They could even afford to trash the Crown Vic (official car of the ancient Phonecians) and revive the legendary Fairlane name with the car already being sold by that name down under. Now THAT'S luxury.

Third: revamp Mercury. Right now it's stagnant and listless, without an individual model to its name. Scrap the whole lineup, change the logo to something cool, and rebirth it as a sport lineup. Remember that Ford Reflex concept? It's the new Mercury Cougar now, bitches. Change only the grill and the badges, leave the rest, even the gullwing doors. Drop in the turbo Duratech 5 from the Aussia Focus XR5T. Rear-wheel drive only,please. Complement that with the British Focus Cabriolet, rebadged as a Sable. (Who's the asshole who decided not to sell that thing in America?) Get rid of the Grand Marquis, only people who are clinically dead drive them. Remember that new Fairlane? Give it that beautiful aluminum Jag V-8. It's the new Mercury Park Lane, and it better be good, because that baby's going up against Beemers, Lexuses, and Merc's. It needs to be just as good, but a couple grand cheaper than a low-end 5-Series or S-Class, and to keep it from pirating Jag's sales.

Keep pushing that hybrid Escape, some damn fools will buy it. But for those of us who aren't idiots and want to save on gas, we need the Fiesta. There, I said it. Bring over the little hatch from England with the 1.6L engine pushing 98hp. Go head-to-head with the Toyota Yaris.... that Fiesta will do 0-60 in a year but it'll do it at 42 miles to the gallon.

Now for Lincoln. Used to be, back in the time Bruce Springsteen sang about in "Born to Run," the biggest and most powerful cars were Lincolns. Well, it needs to happen again. Remember those concepts? I'm sick of these expensive brainstorms sitting around with nothing ever done with them. There's two I want to see coming out the door now... the MKR and the MK9. I want that new 3.5L Turbo V-6 for the MKR put into production (we're gonna need for the upcoming Cougar XL7). The MK9's V8 was a nice idea, but it put out less power than a Mustang's. Not good, and certainly not for sharing. There's a 5.0 liter AJ engine (from the same family of Jag engines that power the Aston Vantage and Land Rover) that's never been used in a road car. Good for 550bhp. Slap that sucker in there, and make it cost like a Merc E-Class AMG, only a little less. How's that for a "bold move"?

Oh, and we're bringing in some Mazda guys to do an engineering audit on all our chassis's, and some Aston guys to help with interior design.

---

Man, if I worked there, I would turn that place around in half a goddamn minute. Ford needs to hire me right now.