TomServo92

Well said Jeff!

GRAYPNY

How many of those 30,000 employees that lost their jobs drove a Ford?

Galaxie

Exactly,

Loyalty is a two-way street

I would guess 30% of the big 3's engineering staff are from 3rd party contract agencies. Every one of these workers probably works harder than the deadbeats in engineering, out of hope they will get full-time. They are hired as "temporary" workers, yet are there for years at a time. The agencies take a nice cut and these working stiffs get much less than their full-time equals, without any of the benefits. 500 of these contract workers got laid off from GM in Warren recently, no severance, no nothing, 2 days notice. Why would you be loyal to a company like that? If I was one of those 500 "contract" workers, i'd be sure no one I know was buying a GM

/rant off

GhostTX

Private property in the sense that if you have nothing to do with Ford, you cannot park there. Its a public company and it cannot discriminate on where people can and cannot park that is not illegal in nature (ie, handicap).

When you work for a company, you are in agreement that you provide a service to the company (assembly, accounting, etc) and in return, they will compensate you (payment). Under no circumstances is the agreement that the company will dictate what you can and cannot purchase in order for you to get certain perks, unless you have specifically have signed a contract stating to such things.

Besides, what sense does this make that if you are a A+++ employee, but you like the styling of a Neon to a Focus, that you are going to be shunted to the outskirts while "Bob", who does nothing buy pick his nose all day, gets to park closer because he has a Fiesta? I see this policy of Ford's doing nothing but backfiring on them and putting an even bigger rift between employees morale and the company.

jcopin

im sorry to have to say this..but bringing this to a racist level is just stupid and your a f%$^% moron for doing so

jcopin

try going to a yankee game with a boston hat on...

burningman

Personally I think this is rediculous policy....and i hate to say it but when i first read this the very first thing that came to my mind was a certain lady trying to get a seat on a bus that wasn't in the back.

I'm not dragging racism into this but the methodology is the same.

I think that it's ok to tow the company line when you are on the clock but if my car is parked and I'm inside doing my job then it shouldn't matter what i drive.

Evil_Capri

I have no issue with this policy.

hiznherponies

You all are losing sight of what is really at stake here, the reason Ford is having to lay of 30,000 is that they are not selling enuf product!!! No one is required to go out and purchase a Ford so they can work there, just the ones who chose to not buy a Ford must also chose where they park. This is not a new thing, its been going one for quite some time, but mostly its been against the imports, and not all of the plants are like this, too. St. Louis was like this, but Flat Rock doesn't care what you drive, heck, we've got Porsche's, M-B's, Hondas, Toyotas, everything you can think of!!! And don't even think that its just the company, its really mostly the unions that try to enforce this rule. Down at the Union House in downtown Detroit, last year they tried to enforce this no imports rule on the Marines that they were allowing to use their lot. Only prob. was most of the Marines were overseas in Iraq and really couldn't comply with this. Needless to say, after the media got hold of it, the union backed down. All I'm saying is that its your right to drive what you want, but since its company property, they can say what can park where ever they want. There's some companies with assigned parking, i.e., you park where you are told to or not at all.

GhostTX

Well, I'm glad you're so polite in arguing my point. Any more intelligent arguments you care to make?

<!--QuoteBegin-burningman@February 1, 2006, 1:22 PM
Personally I think this is rediculous policy....and i hate to say it but when i first read this the very first thing that came to my mind was a certain lady trying to get a seat on a bus that wasn't in the back.

I'm not dragging racism into this but the methodology is the same.

Quoted post

[/quote]
Exactly.

HastaLaVista

Bringing racism into it is baseless and misguided. To compare this to racism in any way, shape, or form, including the methodology used, is ridiculous and an insult to those who have had to deal with racism.

It's a stupid policy that treats the symptom rather than the problem, but it's their property and they can do what they want as long as they're not breaking any laws, including those against discrimination.

GhostTX

Why? Its the same stupid logic that brought us racism, that somehow being in a particular class, or having certain possesions gives more "rights" than others that work just as hard. I'll agree its not a 1:1 comparison, but the underlying logic is the same.

HastaLaVista

"Being in a particular class"? You cannot be serious. Do you get angry at the supermarket when people get to go into the "10 items or fewer" lane? That's discrimination by "class" as well.

On one hand you have people who have been denied jobs, housing and equal rights; people being killed because of who they are, a whole group oppressed and treated as less than human because of their race.

On the other hand you have a group of people who have to walk a little further to work every morning.

If you cannot understand that comparing racism to a longer walk to work in the morning is a completely asinine analogy, I seriously doubt there's anything I can write here to convince you otherwise.

AnotherMustangMan

I dont understand why this is so hard to get. I won't be able to explain my point of view any better than Jeff (Hastalavista too) already has...but really this only makes sense.

You guys act like its a repression of employee rights for Ford to make this policy, I say it would be a repression of Ford's rights if THEY didn't get to choose who parks on THEIR property.


This would be like me going to a concert (ticketless) and whining that their policy of prohibiting non-ticketholders from entering is prejudice.

GhostTX

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(HastaLaVista @ February 1, 2006, 6:35 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
"Being in a particular class"? You cannot be serious. Do you get angry at the supermarket when people get to go into the "10 items or fewer" lane? That's discrimination by "class" as well.

On one hand you have people who have been denied jobs, housing and equal rights; people being killed because of who they are, a whole group oppressed and treated as less than human because of their race.

On the other hand you have a group of people who have to walk a little further to work every morning.

If you cannot understand that comparing racism to a longer walk to work in the morning is a completely asinine analogy, I seriously doubt there's anything I can write here to convince you otherwise.
[/b][/quote]
I do when they blatantly have more than 10 items. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif[/img] I fail to see your argument there anyway. I'm not saying this is racism, I'm saying that Ford is discriminating against people for what they have. I was merely pointing out that if Ford made a policy of whites get to park closer than blacks, people would get in a twist about it.

Ford is imposing a "class" structure of have and have nots. You either have a Ford product or you don't and as such the company is treating you differently. Now, regardless of how good or dedicated of an employee you are to Ford, you are being discriminated because of a personal purchase choice that doesn't have anything to do with your ability to do your job. When you go to work for a company, you do not arbitrarily agree to buy or use the product they make. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

burningman

well said Ghost!
I bet the policy would be retired real quick if somone got hit by a bus crossing the street on the way to work.

Knight

Yeah i think its bogus. I am a manger of a cell phone store that sells T-mobile. I don't care if my employees use other wireless carriers... when they are at work they sell t-mobile to the customers which is what their job is.

Maybe ford should start building quality veichles to get their emplyees to buy their cars rather then changing the parking rules... [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif[/img]

Zastava_101

Do they think that they're gonna get new customers by making rules like this one?

If somebody told me "Drive Chrysler or park somewhere else" - I would never buy Chrysler (even though 300C is my favorite new car).

1999 Black 35th GT

I see both points of the arguement here but I myself am of the belief that you should stand behind what you sell, produce, market, or what else you do for a job.

That why I work for Ford. I could not honestly go work at say a GMC dealership and try to sell the vehicle with pride. I just couldn't stand behind the product.

This is just the way I feel personally. I don't think its really wrong to enforce this. If on their personal time these workers want to own another make, hey thats cool.

This is just my opinion, thats all.

Zastava_101

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(1999 Black 35th GT @ February 2, 2006, 3:23 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I see both points of the arguement here but I myself am of the belief that you should stand behind what you sell, produce, market, or what else you do for a job.
[/b][/quote]

You should, but you don't have to.

Let's say that you lose your job at Ford and then go to work for Chevrolet. Does that mean that you have to trade your F-150 for Silverado?