Thread regarding Ford layoffs

I worked at Chrysler and Ford, family members worked at GM, Chrysler and Ford.

They are more similar than different

• good places for the inept and lazy to hide their entire careers
• long term employees are ill equipped to work anywhere else, they know one small thing and office politics.
• there is a lot of cross pollination between the three companies as that is the only employment opportunity for the type of employee who willingly chooses life time employment of this type. And the innovative, highly productive, highly motivated seek employment elsewhere.
• focus on hierarchy over knowledge

Now where they are different is leadership

• Ford is all about press releases over substance, and all about the illusion of a Dearborn family
• GM is more substance and practical business sense
• Chysler at present is making up its mind what it will be

Ford right now is a hot mess.
All the grown ups have left the room.
There is a significant gap between the leadership press releases and reality and soon there will be a reckoning.
There is a significant deficit in knowledge, skills and aptitude in the working ranks, the true tech specs have all been cut, the up and coming talent quit in droves.
The newly minted experts and tech specs in name only claim they are working hard, but need more staff. The staff claims they are working hard but the results are sub par with cost and time overruns. The GSR blame the LL, the LL blame the GSR. The grown ups who use to step in and get things done were released, so the circular blame game goes on forever.
Ford most of the remaining Ford employees, look in the mirror you are the problem with Ford. If the first thing in your mind was it is some other guys fault and there is nothing you can do, again, look in the mirror you are the problem. You choose your path every day.

I was a contractor @ Chrysler & GM and a salaried GSR # Ford.

• Chrysler had many ex-Ford guys who were let go from Ford for good reasons.
• GM had a "socialist" atmosphere - lots of low-paid employees - but technically smartest.

As a contractor, I was paid better than GM salaried guys.

• Ford used to be great, but has since fallen in company rankings.

Options :

1. Get out of Detroit - did that & I am happy.
2. Look @ Indiana & Ohio suppliers.
3. Look @ other industries.

I'm at GM now. Was at Ford for about 5 years. I noticed: GM benefits and salaries are much better than Ford. Ford is pretty cheap. That said, I liked the family feel of Ford.

Also depends on your function.

I've spoken about this in the past. While I have no experience internal with Ford, FCA and GM are polar opposites in some regard.

I consider FCA to be the high strung teenager/young 20 year old that hauls bu-t to get things done. They make mistakes, and move very fast, yet surprisingly get results at the cost of leaving money on the table. I see this all the time. GM is the older, and much more slower moving grandparent. Usually much too slow however. Not even a mother or father figure, but older, yet sometimes wiser and much more refined.

Everything GM does is slow. A 10 minute on the spot meeting at FCA, is a two hour meeting at GM, that we have to block in days or weeks ahead. Where GM is fitting parts and going through the phases, FCA is already on the next phase before they even test products. Those products get disposed of at times - never to be used. It's that stupidly fast.

Now, with that said. The internal systems used for their design and engineering...

Hands down GM wins in this category. Their Teamcenter and NX software is more stable, than most any other corporation you will find. FCA's version is one of the most unstable, you will ever find. It's the difference between driving a Cadillac, verses a beater. At GM, they've been using these systems for a very long house, and most everything is managed in-house. There are onsite IT that can help refine how checkmate works, if you have an "in" with certain people. FCA outsources to a 3rd party, and has only been using the software for a relatively short time in the automotive world. FCA is become so much of a MUTT over the last few decades, each buyout, takeover, merger, adds new requirements to the processes. Imagine if 30%-50% of the time was spent "doing something process wise", before you can do your job. I see people quit because of this demand. GM is login, and go.

So, each has their pros and cons. I'm sure Ford has their own pros and cons. It ultimately comes down to how well you are paid, to deal with all the troubles, issues, or demand that is required of you.

A lot of it depends on your immediate management! That will make or break your career at that company.
You will find some sort of politics at any large corporation. But Ford started out great only to start the downward spiral when Nasser took over. I worked at GM too. They had their time as well. But the 80s and 90s were not good to GM product line up was not solid. Lutz did some good things. But again, He is a "True Car Guy". Not a Pretender like JF.

GM, by far. More professional all around.

I made the "circuit" being a contractor engineer and found there are advantages and disadvantages. FCA and GM seem to have more technology, however GM and FCA had much more formal and uptight culture. Ford is definitely more informal. I am on site at Ford and happy so far. Just remember, it is hard to judge a company overall since different departments are run almost like separate businesses. One department can be a nightmare, while another one, will be the best job ever.