Drive a Ford or Park Across the Street

 

At first, I thought it kinda silly. But now that I think about it, it makes perfect sense.

 

Makes sense to me. You wouldn't have a Pepsi machine at a Coca-Cola plant.

 

I saw where a guy that worked for Miller beer got fired after he was photographed for the newspaper at a bar drinking a competitor's brew.

Miller Beer Employee Fired For Drinking Bud Light

 

Yes, there is precedent for this sort of thing, so it makes sense.

Now, the one thing that confused me, was how was a Chrysler a better deal for someone that works at Ford? Perhaps, Ford should so somethign about that.

 

Yeah, that's like the same story of the kid who wore the pepsi shirt to school on "Coca-Cola Day" in Atlanta (I think).

 

Chrysler has been doing something similar since forever. They have a lot close to the plant which is Chrysler products only, and one further away which is "everyone else".

 

This is a two sided coin IMO

I know a GM facility in St. Catherines is making employees do the same thing.

To me, a car is a big-ticket item and the second largest expense you usually make. 4 years of car payments is a lot different than buying Kodak over Fuji, Pepsi over Coke, etc. etc.

The big mistake that the big 3 are doing here is they are not asking why their employees are looking elsewhere. Once again, because this is such a big expense, it is unfair to force someone to comprimise just to tout the party line. Price shouldn't be an issue, considering these cars are sold to their own employees at cost.

The flipside is that as a representative of the company you work for, you should drive a product from the company that puts food on your table. I just don't think you should be bullied to do it because a competitor offers something that fits your needs better.

 

I think as long as you're on the company time, you should support your company, but they shouldn't force you with your personal choices. A person should be able to go out and get whatever they want, whatever the cost. A company forcing employees to buy their product only makes me think that the company cannot compete on the market.

What's next? General Mills people can't buy Frosted Flakes? McDonald's employees can't get an Arby's Melt?

You can't force pride on to someone. And if anything, forcing them to do something will only make them not want to do it even more.

 

Well, what you're missing, is Ford isn't forcing anyone to buy a Ford. They're just giving them a secondary incentive to do it (i.e. park closer).

 

Ok...so now they're being discriminatory. If you don't drive a Ford, you can't park close.

Ya...that'd fly if it were, if you're not white, you can't park close.

 

They have a choice. Come to work in a Ford and park where you want (closer) or in a competitor's vehicle and park where we want you (far away). It makes sense to me. When I worked at Dr Pepper you didn't dare bring any other brand anywhere near the place or have it while in uniform. It doesn't create a very good image when you openly prefer the competition over your own products.

 

I work for Burger King and eat In & Out burgers whenever I can! Freedom of choice is what this Country is all about and I call
on Ford doing this.

 

I've biked past the Ford Winstar, sorry Freestar plant in Oakville here, and probally 1/4 to 1/3 of cars in the lot were Fords. Not a good sign. If they tried to implement the same thing there, the Ford drivers would have some pretty open parking choices.

 

I don't think its too evil a move. I understand both sides, you can't tell people what to do with their money especially with such a big expense. But at the same time they should realize that this company could go bankrupt without better sales.

The important aspect of all this, in my opinion: WHY ARE PEOPLE SO AFRAID OF WALKING??!!? Sheesh! If getting a chrysler is really important to you, then suck it up and park across the street and walk for a couple minutes. I realize these places have big parking lots, but camman! I walk 15 minutes to school every day and it feels great! Good fresh air.

 

I totally agree. While on the clock or in uniform, you should not parlay your competitors wares as you are representing the company; however, your personal property and choices should not be mandated. A car is also substantial outlay of cash not a Coke. What about conditions where there are things in a competitors car options that Ford doesn't have? What if you prefer the styling of the 300C to a Five Hundred?

<!--QuoteBegin-mustang_sallad@January 27, 2006, 7:50 PM
WHY ARE PEOPLE SO AFRAID OF WALKING??!!?

Quoted post

[/quote]
Its not an excercise thing, its a company infringing on your freedom of choice to purchase the property you see fit to buy.

Anybody care to comment how many of the 30,000 being laid off own Fords? How is Ford taking care of these folk that are supporting the company through their purchases?

 

This kind of policy is silly. However, Ford should look into why some of its workers don't buy Ford vehicles - especially if they are comparable ones that cost more. If this was the policy at other manufacturers, imagine how empty the lots would be at (insert expensive European brand here)'s company parking lot! Of course, they're not as afraid of walking, or mass transit. BTW, I walk to work (no parking available).

 

All of these people should buy and drive mustangs. They would want to park in the farther lot anyway just to get away from the busy parts...problem solved

 

This is the policy at other manufacturers. They're not forcing you to buy a Ford, just park your comopetitor vehicle away from the door.

 

They are still free to buy whatever car they want. They just aren't free to park on Ford's private property. If Ford were firing people who didn't own ford's, that'd be another thing. That's definitely infringing on your freedom, cause working is a necessity. Parking in the lot is just a privilege. If somebody wants a non-Ford car that badly, they shouldn't have too much of a problem going for a 10 minute walk across the parking lot for it.