Well I really can’t believe someone here thinks that Ford can eliminate 50 percent of their engineers and the company will do just fine. Really? Half of Ford’s engineers are paid for nothing? Does anyone else think so?
If anyone actually thinks so, I would love to hear their explanation.
11 replies (most recent on top)
@2ikw+19VZdV1Q
Your spot on.
My work is transiting to BEV's and AV's. Our workload is ramping up but once we solve the model issues with the powertrains it will be pretty much plug and play operation after that. The only thing that will change is the top-hats and electronics. My job will go away but like you that light at the end of the tunnel is brighter everyday. Good luck!
As the company transitions out of ICE to EV there will be some HC reduction. Also this not only impacts the salary but the hourly as well studies have EV will reduce HC by 30-40%. Also look at the numbers of programs or market segments Ford decided to pull out. That effects both Salary and Hourly.
I am glad to near the end of the tunnel. I tell my kids when they graduated college to 1) Stay out of the automotive business 2) leave the state of Michigan. Both kids have jobs in the south in tech business and are doing very well.
Getting back to the current state. In 2018 I heard a VP state the company will reduce the PD HC worldwide by 25% over the next three years.
In looking at how Ford is staffing Mexico . That looks like the older technologies are going south of the border. This past week Ford pulled the plug on investment into one of the American Plants. I expect to see the engine and casting plants shutdown. That will hit both hourly & salary. expect that over the next 5-10 years.
Maybe just top grade the ones you have and eliminate “I don’t care what the print says” from their vocabulary. Be a good start.
Way too broad and ignorant of a statement, most likely coming from someone who does not work at Ford or in the auto industry in general. Who ever you are you don't understand how vehicles are designed and built.
Lets start with what areas exactly would they recommend cutting 50% of the engineering? I in my area that would leave 3 engineers with 53 technicians and trades to support a 2 shift operation with a large workload. Additionally, mandatory government certifications would not get done and we would not be able to sell product.
That is not to say there can't be cuts, but at my vantage point I'm not sure where. It doesn't matter to me one way or another, retiring at the end of the year.
I have yet to hear a coherent argument that Ford could get rid of half its engineers
The biggest question is can Ford do fine without half of its products.
I think Yes.
IMO an engineering company would be better off whether it is Ford or anyone else to eliminate 50% of the non engineering roles and go back to being an actual engineering company.
From my experience and what I have seen as part of Ford engineering, I think it might be possible. But I also read the posting the OP is referring to, and I don't think it was directed at just engineers, but all salaried employees.
But don't get rid of the engineers working on Project Apollo - they are not just getting paid for doing nothing (OP's words of this posting, not mine). They are working on designing clear N95 face masks, box fans in cardboard frames for filtrations systems, and other innovative PPE devices.
Clearly this is a core competency of an automotive company that cannot be reduced or eliminated. Any business expert within Ford can see the benefits to the bottom line of the company. Maybe Ford doesn't know that there are medical device companies that already do have core competencies in these products? Not to mention, quality at Ford isn't too great lately. I can only imagine the legal and warranty costs of medical device type lawsuits. No worries, I am sure we have great design FMEA's on these products. We are really good at those processes with the cars and truck we design.
So, maybe every department/product group can't lose 50% of their engineers, but over the entire company — Oh Yeah. Quite possible. Just the pet projects (all of them earmarked advanced of course) throughout the company alone (and the related kingdoms) could be significant. Add in redundant work already done by suppliers, dead weight/underperformers in many areas. The list goes on. It is possible.
From the supplier side the caliber of engineering at Ford has diminished greatly. Look at the high reliance on the supplier community in the design and technology development. Had a senior engineer make last minute changes on design so his expertise could be displayed. When the design changes caused a failure, the engineer worked to hide his late change from Ford. Confident that this is not an isolated issue and part of a very incompetent layer in the organization. My family won’t ever drive a Ford.
A huge problem is that Ford continues to hire engineers, then after a few years, they transfer to non engineering roles. Benefit is that they can enjoy a special type of classification and potentially be safe from reduction because they "were once" an engineer. Problem is they do not possess the proper business background to perform those roles...and have then lost all engineering skills. That is why Ford has so many engineers, but yet never enough for the work. So yes, you could cut 50% with no effect because so many are squatting in business roles.
50% is a good guess, in some groups 30% are contributing
In a group you will find
- engineers who have stopped contributing as they will retire in the next 10 years
- engineers in name only
- engineers who are so wet behind their ears that they are negative value as experienced engineers must spend time training them