If your biggest gripe is working for a company with lousy leadership, you're still doing better than a lot of people. Some are struggling just to keep the lights on or figure out how to feed their kids. Wanting better is valid but let’s not pretend a steady paycheck and decent benefits mean nothing. Like it or not, being able to take care of your family in this economy is no small thing.
7 replies (most recent on top)
What sort of sorry excuse for a lesson is the comment below. You don’t even explain the balance theory part, just name dropping a theory like a fox and paper tiger.
Let me show you how balance theory “might”’ fit in:
Once an influencer’s reputation is tarnished, even if the incriminating behavior is proven to be false later on, it leaves a lasting effect on the influencer. Not every person will receive the updated news, and hence most users will continue to accept the context that collapsed when they first encountered the incriminating information.
In the domestic abuse case of Depp v. Heard, there is a stigma attached to the male frequently being the abuser… The assumption that we automatically believe the male in this case is supported by Amber Heard when she privately told Johnny Depp, ‘Tell them, I, Johnny Depp, I’m a victim, too, of domestic violence, and it was a fair fight, and see if people believe or side with you.’ Following the trial, it was found that Johnny was not the aggressor.
False accusations happen due to lack of penalty for the accuser, but the Depp v. Heard discourse provides more context for similar cases that do not receive the same media attention in the future.
According to a psychologist named Fritz Heider, there are certain types of triads that we find stable and others that we find unstable. If we consider a triad as a triangle with each end representing a node and the link between each node representing a relationship with a balanced or unbalanced state, we can conclude that the damage has been done in the Johnny Depp issue. The triad is balanced at first, and subsequently unbalanced. Because the causation for the triad becoming unbalanced was unwarranted, the balance in the original triangle would never revert to its previous state just because a side was chosen in the preceding moment.
There are no takebacks; once it is thrown, it is permanently tossed”.
The impacts are irreversible despite a claim’s retraction… Due to the mainstream exposure of the Depp v. Heard case, we saw a man’s default judgement of being guilty change societal expectation at a historical level. This illustrates the importance of context being interpreted correctly.
With the speed with which news spreads, even if the defamation is corrected and proven to be incorrect, the impact on your business or person does not always go away, as demonstrated by Johnny Depp’s withdrawal from the sixth installment of the Pirates of the Caribbean movie series.
While cancel-culture and bullying may impact one’s mental health, it can also affect a person’s means to provide for themselves financially when they are dependent on the income it brings. This can also alter their behavior on social media. What an individual may be terminated for may prove to be incorrect or misconstrued.
You can make a statement ten years ago and it will still feel as if you are making it now; the dimension of time is nonexistent. We build up an image and spend lots of time perfecting it, yet a single thing against us online can tear it all down.
It’s not that, it’s the ambiguous loss after being taken advantage of that does further damage to your career onward. Once something is thrown, it’s thrown and you cannot take back certain things. Example is using balance theory and looking at the case of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard (not sure how her last name is spelled). Amber’s accusation led to the loss of a partnership with Depp and the continued Pirates of the Caribbean series. Once it was found fabricated, the damage was done and The makers of the Pirates of the Caribbean tried to take Depp back but the damage is done.
Consider the time in limbo fighting against it. It is impossible that every person that heard the defamation had heard when it was cleared up. You can’t take back reputational damage.
@gv+1jthww99f Between 45 and 60 years of age.
Ex-coworkers in the same age range who did upskill / keep their skills current did find other employment post Ford, ageism didn’t seem to hold them back. A couple did relocate for employment.
@eb+1jthww99f How old were they? Because the reason that I am not spending too much time upskilling, is ageism. Companies are selecting younger people, and I cannot blame them. Any of those 20 years my junior, is already a seasoned veteran, with longer years ahead of them. Nothing I can do about ageism, so why spend time on learning an skill that may be overshadowed by my age?
The future belongs to the young ones. I live in the present, and plan for the short term future. I already talked to my wife about it, and she agrees. We have no debt, around a million bucks in cash if needed to be, and our expenses are going down, excepting the health related bills. So the idea is to work until we die or cannot keep it going, but taking it easy. My wife is already working part time, and I'll be working at Ford while I can. And no, I am not the bottom employee in my team. I actually contribute and fix issues.
However, I strongly agree with you, @eb+1jthww99f. Young people should be aware that ageism happens, they have limited time to develop their careers, and Ford is not a good place to be for long time. If I were 3 decades younger, I would have left this company immediately.
I always appreciate that at least I’m not at Chrysler…
Another perspective is that staying at Ford is ensuring you are severely limiting your future employment. You normalize bad behaviors and erode your skills, then once FoMoCo moves your cog out of the USA you’ll be saying “would you like fries with that?”
Start figuring out an exit plan now. Stop wasting time watching TV, playing video games, on social media. Spend that time upskilling. In the past week I have seen laid off ex-coworkers working in various retail jobs: Lowes, Home Depot, Meijer, Starbucks. Also saw one working for TSA at DTW. All tried unsuccessfully to find employment post Ford in their fields.
@OP. I have the "perspective" and I appreciate having an steady income. However, I really doubt we'll keep having an steady income if the company goes bankrupt, and it will, if leadership doesn't take some drastic measures, like cutting the losses on Model E.