Thread regarding General Motors layoffs

To those who say these layoffs are the norm.

Layoffs have always been a part of the American automotive scene. The difference is that in the past they, and GM specifically, have only done layoffs when times are bad. This is something new and it is troubling for the following reasons.

1) GM had a large hiring spree literally months ago. To start massive layoffs so soon after said hiring spree means that either Barra and staff are woefully incompetent or they have adopted the 'hire and fire' approach to employment where they will hire large amounts of people and then cull the herd to keep what they deem suitable. This is an approach that is typically used by job shops or less reputable companies.

2) It appears GM did not layoff the large number of middle and upper management that they had initially leaked to the media. Early articles said around 25% of the executive staff would be cut. Anyone who has ever been an employee of GM knows how bloated the middle and upper management ranks are. It appears that GM has laid off relatively few executive staff compared to the working ranks. If I am wrong about the cuts to the executive staff then I think GM has a chance to survive but if it is business as usual then I give them another 10 years until the next bankruptcy.

by
| 1283 views | | 4 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+XLBox2g

4 replies (most recent on top)

GM created a group called the bundle group a number of years ago, to tackle a monstrous assignment. You would find no younger than maybe mid thirties, to forty plus fill these roles, because experience was required to complete this task, and youth and inexperience had no place in accomplishing it's goal. These were the times will before MB was even on the radar. She was bouncing around between departments, unable to keep her position. In the meantime, thousands were hired to complete a program to much success.

Men, women, racial preferences were never a factor. You were either capable, or not. You were either talented and hired, or not. Much different than todays' environment. Today, we reward everyone equally across race and gender, qualifications be damned. It's the recipe for a 2nd, 3rd, or 4th place loser.

It's also the reason I believe whole-heartedly, GM won't be around past a decade or so. Just imagine if GM pulls a Lemans Bros, and all the market share that could become available among it's competitors. It would be wonderful. Jobs wouldn't be displaced, only reallocated.

It would be the ultimate vindication for those that did see it coming ahead of its time.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @3gha+XLBox2g

The layoffs weren't about performance.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1tgh+XLBox2g

I was laid off and told to reapply. I was at GM for close to 3 years and am 30 years old. They needed to offset average bc they were getting rid of people 68 in our group.

Fyi my CAP reviews for the 3 years I was there were stellar and always received bonus and raises

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1wmf+XLBox2g

The hiring spree that's been going on for the last couple of years were mostly NCHs.

Both the voluntary and involuntary layoffs targeted older employees. Voluntary was only open to employees with 12+ years experience.

Some younger employees were laid off too to hide it, but they were apparently told to reapply for their jobs.

I think this hiring binge was done deliberately to get rid of older employees and shift the average age of remaining GM employees down a decade or two.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ghy+XLBox2g

Post a reply

: