A Ford employee says he lost his job after being accused of stealing a $1.95 cookie, only for the company to later realize he’d actually paid for it.
60-year-old Kurt Kromm had worked at Ford’s Kentucky Truck Plant for 11 years, but told Shifting Gears he was fired after the company believed security footage showed him taking a cookie from the break room without paying.
152 Comments
victorz@lemmy.world · 321 pts · 30d
Who puts cookies in the break room and expects you to pay for it.
It's cookies.
They're cheap.
Treat your workers.
Treat your colleagues.
Edit: very curious to hear the mindset of the few down voters of this.
azimir@lemmy.ml · 112 pts · 30d
Lolz. Public corporations don't care about your well being. If there is an ROI on any action, it's worth taking and if that means no cookies because it ensure the shareholders get a fraction of a percent return, then no cookies for you.
I'm working hard to leave my current corpo. They're down to the "bring the dry pen back to get a new one" stage of bean counting. That's a sinking ship to disembark from ASAP.
victorz@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 30d
Last two companies I worked for treat their workers to a lot of goodies, like food, after work parties, stuff like that. Not everyone is that stingy. But of course, they only care in order to make workers happy to make more money for the company.
In the end, it's all about the moolah.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 29d
thats pretty much with tech, all these conferences they go to are AI, and they get all these goodie bags, and free "ice cream", so they dont end up rebelling or "kicking and screaming out the door" when they are laid off.
victorz@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 29d
Kinda curious about the quotes around "ice cream" tbh
kuberoot@discuss.tchncs.de · 1 pts · 29d
It's fine for companies to be motivated by money, what matters is that they make the right decisions. Regulations help with that, but this very post is a clear example of how a money-motivated company can instead try to squeeze their employees for more money instead of spending money on them to hopefully increase productivity.
victorz@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 29d
Definitely.
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 28d
Why doesn't UAW pay for this with their dues?
GM alone pays $17M a year for Viagra.
ponca@piefed.social · 1 pts · 29d
My current company pantry has a lot of snacks, because they are bought by employees using company money. Angry employees buy a lot.
MrFinnbean@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 30d
If large company needs to count bullshit like that, they are not in a healthy position.
Whostosay@sh.itjust.works · 12 pts · 30d
Craziest shit is that has to cost way more than just buying an extra box of fucking pens
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 29d
FIFY.
Their actions are not even competent by their own worldview - this kind of corporate management invariably sacrifice long term hard to measure yet large positive outcomes for the company (such as the gains from keeping highly trained personnel who stuck around because of goodwill towards the company rather than having the constant hiring and training costs as well as lower productivity from high turnaround) for miniscule but easy to measure immediate gains (like saving the equivalent of 1% of a single average worker's salary by not providing free cookies).
There really is no point in penny pinching if its going to increase employee turnaround in a domain were experience makes a significant difference.
Mirshe@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 29d
Loss of experience isn't a trackable metric, you can't put it in a spreadsheet, so it doesn't exist to the company.
Aceticon@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 29d
Exactly.
MrFinnbean@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 27d
You can absolutelly put it on to spreadsheet. Its just that its not a metric companies calculate normally.
I recommend everybody who is training new employees to track the time the training really takes, how much it takes away from your normal work effiency and how long it takes until newbies are ready to work shift solo. Do it enough times and you get average for new employers and you can calculate real life cost for new hires.
Then compare that to numbers the experienced guy would get during that time and how much money the employees training newbies would make. You get clear monetary difference between training new vs. keeping the old. If the experienced guy is competent they will always get better numbers on short term.
Then calculate median time people work in that position.
Now you can show a number that says: Hey, fire this guy and on average you loose this amount of money for new hire and if you want new employee who stays in the house as long as this guy you are firing has stayed, you need to go trough the training process this many times on average.
anonymouse2@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 28d
The cost of hiring and training a new employee is something a company of that size should know, and it's definitely more than the cost of a $2 cookie.
MrFinnbean@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 27d
Most companies i have worked in have just decited in a meeting a number for how much they think new hire costs.
That number rarely is even close the real number.
Sanguine@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 23 pts · 30d
Gotta milk every last cent out of us. Honestly the absurdity and cruelty only make the revolution come that much faster and if they are cruel enough we won't even have any moral hangups about it (for those that would).
yucandu@lemmy.world · 14 pts · 30d
Same people that expect YOU to work hard enough to generate millions in revenue while THEY take 99% of it.
victorz@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 29d
Scum.
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 30d
If it ain't in a vending machine, it should be free.
I have definitely seen vending machines at various office over the years.
binarytobis@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 29d
My current company contracts someone to keep a few fridges and shelves in the break room stocked with higher grade convenience-store style food. The prices are pretty cheap, so I suspect they actually lose money on the deal. If I grabbed some food and just walked away with it, that would technically be stealing. I doubt they would confront me about something that small, though. Ford is obviously wrong to fire someone over a cookie.
It always seemed like a no-brainer to me to provide subsidized food for expensive salary workers who may be willing to work unpaid overtime if they don’t have to leave to get dinner, at least from a logic self-serving point of view.
DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world · 198 pts · 30d
They didn't fire him for stealing the cookie. They fired him because he's old and probably earning twice what a new hire who could do his job would earn. The cookie was just an excuse.
Every employer, big and small, has a collection of petty rules on the books that are only there to be enforced against people they want to get rid of "justifiably" and not have to pay unemployment.
dis_honestfamiliar@lemmy.sdf.org · 11 pts · 30d
This tactic goes by the lawful name of at will employment.
chiliedogg@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 29d
At will employment isn't a magic trick, and this case demonstratesit clearly. It means employees can be terminated without cause. But if employees are terminated without cause they get to claim unemployment. That's why they manufacturered a reason here - to keep him from being able to claim unemployment.
It also allows them to term employees for illegal reasons. An older employee making more money and approaching pension can't be fired and denied pension for being old. But if they steal a cookie? Absolutely.
quick_snail@feddit.nl · 5 pts · 30d
I think unemployment is paid to the State while they are working, no?
impairedimperator@lemmy.zip · 5 pts · 30d
Companies get penalized if a lot of their former employees start getting unemployment.
one_old_coder@piefed.social · 194 pts · 30d
That's why. I guess Ford won't have to pay him some retirement package.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 6 pts · 29d
they did it to soon, most of them try to get rid of the employee months before they become 65
ripcord@lemmy.world · -20 pts · 30d
There are 35-year-olds that have worked for Ford longer.
devaly@ani.social · 125 pts · 30d
Should sue for defamation and damages
Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io · 48 pts · 30d
Law suit territory. Time for a comfortable retirement.
Dnb@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 24 pts · 30d
Seems like a slam dunk case. What a joke of a company. Hope they fire everyone who thought it was smart to fire this guy. Huge waste
Whostosay@sh.itjust.works · 2 pts · 30d
Yeah the fire people committee will get right on firing themselves
PapaStevesy@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 30d
Wrongful termination for sure, idk about defamation. I think it'd be hard to argue being accused of stealing a cookie actually hurt your reputation in any meaningful way.
eltrain123@lemmy.world · 12 pts · 30d
If the employee isn’t ready to retire, being fired for theft of company property is something that will absolutely effect their reputation.
PapaStevesy@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 29d
Fair point! I'd still lead with the wrongful termination personally, but also IANAL so take that with the block of salt it deserves.
iltoroargento@startrek.website · 13 pts · 30d
I think Kromm should give them a first hand lesson in the riddle of steel...
blimthepixie@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 8 pts · 30d
Howez man if you're going to use an Arnie meme in this context then use this:
FenrirIII@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 30d
For modern cars, it's the riddle of aluminum
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 2 pts · 28d
goddamnit that got a snort out of me, hah!
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 4 pts · 30d
Kromm is the best God, because he is the worst God.
Other Gods offer power, strength, abilities, riches...
Kromm?
Kromm offers nothing.
Yet if you please Kromm..... you will already have all that you need.
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 30d
Should buy a Komatsu D355A and a mig welder.
nomy@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 30d
Should accept the job offer elsewhere and sue the fuck out of Ford for wrongful termination. It’s the only thing they understand.
Telodzrum@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 30d
lol for what?
The only damages are one week’s pay.
RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world · 102 pts · 30d
You don't just fire a $200k worker over a $2 cookie without looking for a reason to fire them.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 7 pts · 29d
200k+year is the reason, they just try to obfuscate by saying it something else, and stealing is the easiest to accuse and harder to prove. they probably expect the person to accept it and not lawyer up, because lawyers are expensive.
Witchfire@lemmy.world · 84 pts · 30d
Why are employees expected to pay for cookies in the break room?
Oh right, capitalism. Human decency be damned.
AmidFuror@fedia.io · -48 pts · 30d
Under socialism, employers must supply free cookies in breakrooms.
MrFinnbean@lemmy.world · 33 pts · 30d
My employer offers free fruits in breakrooms. Life safers when you have low bloodsugar.
That coupled with other benefits like free gym, company paying half of any bicycle i buy and discounts with local massagers have made me healthier and i have turned down an job offer from better paying job because they had worse benefits.
quick_snail@feddit.nl · 1 pts · 30d
quick_snail@feddit.nl · 0 pts · 30d
Where do you work?
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world · 20 pts · 30d
Historically every job provided all workers a meal, often two if it was a long day. This didn't stop being the norm until clocks and factories became common.
T156@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 29d
It's also a win-win for the company. Happy, well-fed workers work better, and hang around longer.
captainlezbian@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 29d
And you can ensure that they're at least eating one healthy meal which can increase their focus and stamina
driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br · 12 pts · 30d
Technically yes. The employees own the company, and part of the company expenses, it's make sure the break room have free cookies.
krisevol@lemmus.org · -19 pts · 30d
They just steal your paycheck instead lol
Tyrq@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 18 pts · 30d
Cause capitalists arent interested in taking your tax money to enrich themselves either.
Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world · 73 pts · 30d
At my last job they have a policy of people who retire are allowed to cash out Extended Illness Bank (EIB) hours at full hourly wages if you are over a certain age and have a certain number of years with the organization. The bank is maxed max out at 400 hours.
One day I was in HR working for a reporting meeting. An employee who was less than a month from hitting the age/tenure threshold was being fired for a miniscule reason.
ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world · 45 pts · 30d
Yep. I remember having to temporarily sit at the desk of some department head to address a network problem, whose desk was covered in paperwork involving some poor custodian who was asking for a medically necessary limited period of light duty as a result of a work-related injury, and this director's handwritten notes all over it, with shit like "if she can't do the job she shouldn't be here, let's draw a line under this," etc. It was clear exactly what they were getting at; they ALL knew the law, hence the handwritten notes and vague language. The casual nature of it was revolting.
cecinestpasunecommunication@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 22 pts · 30d
Corpos aren't human in any way that matters.
kablez@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 30d
The corporate mentality. All the behaviours of a psychopath. None of the medical explanation.
A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 30d
Because high level corporate people are psychopaths.
Statistically speaking, psychopathic traits/tendencies are very beneficial and actively selected for, for climbing the corporate ladder.
Now, obviously, they don't go "Hey, you're a psychomath, lets promote you 3 rungs up", its that psychopaths have the charisma, manipulation, can backstab without feeling guilt, etc necessary to lift themselves up while pushing others down.
nforminvasion@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 29d
Or that ages of "wives tales" are actually true and wealth really does something to our psyche. It's true to say that immoral people get into these positions and make the rules, but I think it's overly simplistic to believe that is the entire reason.
The more terrifying analysis is that people do change and not always for the better. The system is stupidly good at corrupting people and power/wealth do something to our monkey brains that is insanely antisocial. People unfortunately absolutely do become worse in the system, and it is designed that way.
kablez@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 29d
They say the fish rots from the head down, and the same applies to organisations. Rot sets in when leadership becomes obsessed with short term gains, prioritises optics over substance, and treats excellence as a performance rather than a standard to live up to.
When you follow the money to the top, especially in publicly listed companies, it gets pretty grim. You see the same small circle of people rotating across boards, often lacking deep, tangible understanding of what they're overseeing, appointed more for status and connections than competence.
Meanwhile, the people who actually built and sustain the company, the ones whose livelihoods depend on it, barely factor into the equation. They're seen as nothing more than furniture that gets passed along with a company acquisition. Culture flows from that reality. When leadership rewards self serving behaviour, people adapt accordingly.
That's how you end up with environments that feel psychopathic, not necessarily because individuals start that way, but because the system consistently selects for and reinforces it.
My 2c anyway.
A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 29d
My dude.
theres literally been studies about this.
Its because they start that way. Corporate environments are a fertile ground for psychopathic tendencies to produce results.
cecinestpasunecommunication@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 3 pts · 30d
If I were 20 again, I think id do pretty well there.
CADmonkey@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 29d
At a previous job the general manager was trying to coach me on how to talk to people who had been hurt on the job, in an attempt to talk them out of going to the ER or urgnt care for treatment. I never had to do it, but my intent was to do the opposite of that if I was ever put in that situation. I can lie too, assholes.
That company went out of business in 2024.
SupraMario@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 30d
And I hope they sued the fuck out of that company. Age discrimination is illegal as fuck.
Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world · 6 pts · 30d
Not when it's a right to work state.
SupraMario@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 30d
Right to work has nothing to do with ferdal law
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 29d
right to work doesnt mean theycant fire you, they just need a reason to, but they can alleged any number of reasons to fire you wether that is through performance, or time stealing or another. at will is they can layoff, fire without most reasons.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 8 pts · 29d
sounds like the one in the article, and an another story i heard years back. a a stewardess was 60-70+yo in her airline job, and the airline accused her of stealing and fired her, she was earning 200k+/year plus other benefits, and she was on the verge or retiring. they knew what they were doing. they are probably figure people wouldnt notice and she would accept it, or they mightve calculated the potential lawsuit costs of firing her.(using this as a template to fire people before they even have a chance to sue).
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 68 pts · 29d
its not an accident, they often use this excuse to get rid of legacy employees in other industries so they dont have to pay them more down the line, like when they retire or they are set to get more in investments in thier retirements, or thier salary is too high or thier insurance is costing them too much, they just got caught with thier hand in the cookie jar.
they are like testing the waters with the 60yo, then they can apply it to other employees. especially him being 60, likely will retire in 5ish years, ford likely knew that and trying to get rid of him now, but someone in managment made a mistake, and miscalculated when they should get rid of him.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 29d
If I had to guess, I'd say we're way past the "testing" stage and doing this at industrial scale. This just happened to be the kind of egregious implementation of policy that trickles into the news cycle.
For every Kurt Kromm, I'll bet there's a dozen employees fired due parking tickets or misentered vacation or failure to meet some impossible milestone in they're performance plans. More traditional and acceptable routes for firings.
This was just a particularly lazy, sloppy execution
BeMoreCareful@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 29d
It's worse without unions, but setting expectations beyond capacity and pointing a camera at points of failure is key to a good turnover rate.
If you're looking at 300-400% turnover then you don't really end up with that sort of issue in the first place.
sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 65 pts · 30d
100% this is 'we want to fire this guy because he made somebody one or two or three levels above him on the totem pole look really foolish'.
Its the same bullshit as 'oh you don't get your security deposit back because ... we decided you scratched something, somewhere'.
HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club · 57 pts · 30d
Yeah. If your company is looking that closely into your behavior, they are looking for an excuse instead of a reason.
PapaStevesy@lemmy.world · 26 pts · 30d
Or as someone else here said, he was getting too close to retirement or some other kind of seniority/longevity-based benefit that the company didn't want to pay out.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 29d
this is the reason, plus there are other stories that backup the claim, close to retirement, or seniority, about to get more benefits, bam fired the next day.
captainlezbian@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 29d
I miss when you only didn't get the security deposit back
MojoMcJojo@lemmy.world · 45 pts · 29d
It wasn't about the cookie
espentan@lemmy.world · 18 pts · 29d
But to even think of using it as an excuse..
In Norway/most of Europe a lawyer would've had a field day with this case.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 28d
they are hoping the employee wont lawyer or if they do it would be expensive for them.
NikkiDimes@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 28d
At will employment baybeee
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 5 pts · 28d
it was about his pay, benefits, retirements.
nexguy@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 29d
A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world · 43 pts · 30d
Why isnt there free cookies in the breakroom?
Why are they nickle and diming employees for snacks that give them the energy to do their job well and full?
MangoCats@feddit.it · 25 pts · 29d
$1.95 is more than a nickel and a dime... that's a profit center for several people in the supply chain.
AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 29d
Inflation about to hit our lexicon.
kevinsky@feddit.nl · 36 pts · 29d
Even if he did steal this cookie, imagine valueing your employees so little.
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world · 16 pts · 29d
I've gone through psych evals in corporate hiring that ask a bunch of bullshit "would you steal a penny to feed a starving orphan" questions, intended to weed out anyone with an ounce of conscience.
They mostly just teach you to lie to your boss
bluesheep@sh.itjust.works · 4 pts · 29d
Jesus Christ. Should've followed it up with the question, "why is the company purposely withholding a penny when it could be used to feed a starving orphan?"
It's like with overly strict parents; the only thing they are teaching their kids is how to lie and sneak around
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 28d
they want brownosers, in case the higher ups get caught with something unethical, they want lies to protect them.
Echolynx@lemmy.zip · 14 pts · 29d
Imagine having cookies in the break room that you have to pay $2 for... wtf.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 28d
its ford.
SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca · 1 pts · 28d
You get free cookies?
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 28d
they will just make some other excuse to "fire" him. like his attendance, his workload, being mean to others,,,etc.
lol_idk@piefed.social · 35 pts · 30d
Union didn’t help him at all
BillyClark@piefed.social · 37 pts · 30d
Uhhh.... It didn't help him as much as it should have, but my understanding from watching a video about this yesterday is that he already got paid back for the time after he was fired because of the union. So, it did help him some.
PP_BOY_@lemmy.world · 32 pts · 30d
UAW is an awful organization that's basically a "good old boy"'s club. Most reps are just a revolving door of former execs from the Big 3 anyway who work with their buddies to keep workers at bay.
Getting off topic but I'm all for increasing Union membership in this country, but think we also need to discuss the rot that's in the ones that do exist.
Jarix@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 30d
Reading the best democracy money can Buy was a really good read
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 29d
union usually dont help when a person gets fired for stealing wether thats true or not.
dev_null@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 30d
What would they help him with though? He had proven he has paid and they reversed course on the firing.
lol_idk@piefed.social · 1 pts · 29d
They didn’t stop him from getting fired for a stupid reason to begin with
f1error@lemmy.world · 34 pts · 29d
At one point in my life, I coveted and desired to own a Ford above all else.
Today, I can proudly say I have never owned a Ford, and I will NEVER own a Ford. Ford has become an exceptionally shitty company in the past decade or more. For all the history they have, I hope/desire/wish they will cease to exist in the near future.
moopet@sh.itjust.works · 13 pts · 29d
There always used to be a joke in the UK about Fords being cheap on the second-hand market. You could get parts easily, so they were cheap to maintain, as well. But you'd see the ads saying 50k miles, new clutch, new exhaust, new CVs, bearings, etc. because they fell apart all the time. This was back when Japanese cars were proving to the world how reliable cars could be. Nobody I knew wanted a Ford, though some people got them if they were really cheap.
Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 29d
Someone round my way has a Capri, I've seen it driving around a few times. Looks like early 80s, I have no idea how they've managed to keep that fucker alive. Actually looks in pretty good condition too.
Frenchgeek@lemmy.ml · 2 pts · 29d
He gets a new one each time he needs to drive.
kmacmartin@lemmy.ca · 4 pts · 29d
I had two family cars that were Fords in the late 80s and 90s. One (Taurus) had its front windshield randomly explode on a hot summer day, and its oil pan later rusted out. The other (Mustang) somehow had no back seat floor by the time it was 10 years old (completely rusted out).
I have no idea how they treated their employees back then, but you weren't missing much when it came to the vehicles unless you're talking about a time before I was around.
ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 29d
I rented a Taurus back in the early '90s for a thousand-mile drive. At one point the window crank (which some cars still came with back then) fell off in my hand, fortunately with the window still closed as this was in December. I reported this when I returned the car and the rental place was like "yeah, of course it did" and they didn't even charge me anything extra.
I had a buddy who went to the GM institute for college and then went to work for GM in the late '80s. His first project involved tearing apart a Lexus and an Infiniti when these first came out and counting the number of production defects they found. He said a typical American car at the time had 300-400 defects. The Inifiniti they tore down had 2; the Lexus had 0.
projectsquared@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 29d
It’s a shame. My parents owned two ford vans for my entire childhood and both served my family extremely well for more than two decades. I have owned three and they have all been excellent. I can’t say that I’d buy a new ford with everything that I’ve read recently.
iocase@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 29d
I used to be a Honda/Toyota fan but now Chinese EVs are looking like the future on all fronts... Quality, safety, features, range, and most importantly price. They completely wallop every other manufacturer.
BigTwerp@feddit.uk · 1 pts · 29d
Do you have a Chinese EV?
I've had extended test drives in a few plus long term hire for work and they definitely aren't better than the European counterparts in any way.
I suppose if you are from the US they would seem good quality, though since Americans have astonishingly low quality expectations in their domestic vehicles.
Chinese EV are a bit cheaper at the moment partly because USA tariff means there is global oversupply elsewhere and partly because the Chinese government allows them to be sold at a massive loss.
Here in the UK they sell them but there are huge issues with getting basic service parts and if it needs accident repair (like a new wing mirror, any glass, lamps) it isn't going to happen and you won't be legally allowed to drive without a wing mirror in the UK.
Chinese manufacturing industry doesn't have to complete with european environmental or labour standards and they have a lax approach to where the raw materials come from to say the least.
Make no mistake, the price will go up if they reach a monopoly level.
If you buy a cheap Chinese EV you are personally contributing to undermining the society we live in, exploiting child labour, and polluting our air and seas. I wouldn't want that in my conscience.
rumba@lemmy.zip · 4 pts · 29d
They don't really seem to do that. Any industry that the Chinese government points at and decides to dominate, it just happens.
Look at solar. It was expensive as hell and super slow to advance. They decided that they were going to do solar now. They set up a city, offered people an increased basic income to move there, Told the banks to offer extremely favorable loans to companies that were going to make solar/solar components. It's been decades now and the prices haven't increased.
Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of problems with a lot of their humanitarian issues, but when they poked at tesla and said, let's do those next. It's just China doing what China does, and in the end, the worst of it will be putting the west's auto manufacturing out of business. They've ready done it with textiles, plastics and consumer electronics.
BigTwerp@feddit.uk · 2 pts · 29d
When china decides to dominate an industry it doesn't "just happen" they set out to undercut all established business and keep losing money until none remain. That's a strategy, it's not organic.
To put it in context; almost all mobile phones are built in china. The period between 'generations' in mobile phone architecture is about 4 years, give or take a few months. They only need to undercut the non-chinese manufacturers for 4 years before the cost of re-tooling for the next generation of product exceeds any ability to recoup that cost and the opposition goes bust.
For vehicles a production platform is used for 8 to 12 years before it becomes obsolete. This is why a lot of European car makers seem slow to adopt ev; they were invested in the previous generation that couldn't easily be adapted to EV use.
Now we are seeing VW and BMW producing actual designed EV's and they are very good (the new 3 series will set the bar for quality). Renault have the excellent Renault 5, if you are in the market for a hot hatch.
I don't think we will know the outcome of this for a decade or so.
One thing is for sure: letting China put domestic production out of business is very very bad indeed. This isn't a dig at China per se, the principle applies whatever countries are involved (Microsoft and the USA are a similar example). India is also picking up pace in the EV market and will give China competition.
On the plus side; the Chinese might be very good at copying things and scaling up production quickly but they don't innovate in the same way as the west. Their laws on intellectual property means they don't need to take risks with R&D but that also means their corporate culture doesn't reward risk taking (as much as there is any risk in a state backed business).
FatVegan@leminal.space · -3 pts · 29d
Since they really like to film your face while driving and love stealumg data for... Reasons, that's a no for me
Senal@programming.dev · 10 pts · 29d
Im not defending privacy overton pushing shenanigans, they are all bullshit.
But that face camera thing is about to become an EU mandate.
All the companies are gearing up for data suction (EU or otherwise), if they don't already have a robust system in place.
China is bad for it, yes, but so is everyone else.
It's all bullshit from all sides
edit: I have since been updated on the actual wording of the mandate and it doesn't specify face cameras specifically, just some mechanism for dealing with drowsy/distracted drivers.
I expect most companies to do this with camera's but it's not a specific camera mandate.
rumba@lemmy.zip · 2 pts · 29d
The face camera is actually a really good idea. And for a few hundred dollars, that driver is not alert let's pull off the road safely could be handled in car, on local models and never have to send any fucking telemetry off to anywhere.
But of course, that info will be sold.
Senal@programming.dev · 2 pts · 29d
In principle that application of a face camera holds up, subjectively.
In practice that won't be it's primary use case.
It absolutely will bes sold, even if they are banned from saving face profiles directly (which ostensibly they are, for now) it'll just be "anonymous'" data collection. Until they get caught, then they'll pay a cost of doing business tax (fine) and continue on their way.
It's just another vector for creeping changes that invade privacy for the benefit of corporations out the continued tightening population control of governments.
In this case, think ring doorbells + GPS as an opening gambit.
Like how courts orders for "all of the phones in a particular area at a particular time" are a thing, but with a mandatory face cam.
edit : because these are the type of activities that go on at these companies, unchecked mostly.
edit edit : God dammit ford
cyclonedusk@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 2 pts · 29d
SAME, FAM!! \o/
fuck ford, good goddamn riddance.
Echolynx@lemmy.zip · 1 pts · 29d
They really had some great marketing hold on young people.
DaddleDew@lemmy.world · 32 pts · 30d
But the executives can get away with making decisions that kill innocent people to save a few bucks.
tangeli@piefed.social · 11 pts · 30d
But the executives can get away with stealing an employee's pension that he actually earned.
Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works · 7 pts · 30d
They get away with both, and plenty more
Thebeardedsinglemalt@lemmy.world · 7 pts · 30d
Making short-sighted decisions that fails, lays off 8,000 employees, gets a govt bail out, flies home on the corporate jets, uses the bailout money to give a huge bonus and buy a new corporate jet
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 29d
like a parasite, they jump to another company before they the flak for ruining the previous company,.
Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 27 pts · 30d
anon_8675309@lemmy.world · 24 pts · 30d
Age discrimination.
Etterra@discuss.online · 18 pts · 30d
Companies love firing people rather than letting them retire. Hell even the government loves to do it. It happened to my dad, he got forced into early retirement after 30 years of government service. The union really failed him.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 4 pts · 29d
govt unions are pretty toothless from what ive seen, even the USPS is pretty weak(the president loves trump) and the postmaster is the actual "president" of the union.
Etterra@discuss.online · 1 pts · 28d
Except the Chicago PD (and likely the LAPD) Union. They're like a fucking shadow government.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 2 pts · 27d
police unions arnt true unions, they just know how to strongarm the cities to give what they want
SayJess@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 20 pts · 30d
The snack shop at my place of employment charges $4.69 for a Tyson chicken patty sandwich. Ya know, the patties that cost $0.85 per patty if you buy a pack at the store. Tuna on wheat? $4.00.
It does have a slice of American cheese on it though.
FahrenheitGhost@lemmy.world · 4 pts · 29d
Ah yes. That tasty "cheese product".
666dollarfootlong@lemmy.world · 17 pts · 30d
Thats some fantastic labor law right there
PattyMcB@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 30d
Ford is really kicking ass lately. In a bad way
Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus · 5 pts · 30d
The mental image i got is that they are kicking their own ass using a broken leg. Pretty accurate if you ask me - it hurts doubly every time you do it.
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 3 pts · 29d
thier own ass, so thats good.
baines@lemmy.cafe · 3 pts · 30d
when has ford ever been the good guy
PattyMcB@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 30d
I didn't say they were... but the company has been successful in the past
ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 30d
Exactly. Ford is the company that took "fines for illegal actions as a normal cost of doing business" to the next level. There are others, but they're pretty much at the top of the list, IMO.
DamienGramatacus@lemmy.world · 15 pts · 30d
Unfair dismissal
dev_null@lemmy.ml · 1 pts · 30d
Would such a suit make sense, given they reversed course after he has proven he did pay?
Tollana1234567@lemmy.today · 1 pts · 29d
they wanted to avoid paying out all the benefits come with working that long. plus retirements.
Krudler@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 29d
Yes because they "poisoned the well". He's got them by the nut sack.
olenkoVD@lemmy.dbzer0.com · 14 pts · 29d
What the fuck
melsaskca@lemmy.ca · 7 pts · 29d
Johnny Cash enters the chat...
MunkyNutts@lemmy.world · 8 pts · 29d
Well, it's a '49, '50, '51, '52, '53, '54, '55, '56, '57, '58, '59 automobile
It's a '60, '61, '62, '63, '64, '65, '66, '67, '68, '69, '70 automobile
melsaskca@lemmy.ca · 2 pts · 28d
"Well the headlights, they were quite a sight, with two on the left and one on the right..."
Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works · 6 pts · 30d
Just replace him with AI! That should work!
jaybone@lemmy.zip · 5 pts · 30d
What are they on the honor system in their break room?
ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 30d
That and surveillance cameras, apparently.
dan69@lemmy.world · 3 pts · 29d
It’s 100% some new eager to the position/role security kid who hasn’t made any progress so they chose to pick on the tiniest infringement to be able to get a nickel raise at the end of year.