GM offers buyout to "majority" of US white-collar workforce

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

GM offers buyouts to 'majority' of U.S. salaried workers

WWW.CNBC.COM

---

GM will offer voluntary buyouts to a "majority" of its U.S. white-collar employees, according to a letter sent to workers Thursday from CEO Mary Barra.

 

Quote

 

General Motors will offer voluntary buyouts to a “majority” of its U.S. white-collar employees, as it aims to cut $2 billion in structural costs over the next two years, according to a letter sent to workers Thursday from CEO Mary Barra.

 

The “Voluntary Separation Program,” or VSP, comes after the Detroit automaker said last week it would terminate about 500 salaried positions globally. It will be offered to all employees who have spent five or more years at the company.

 

GM expects to take a pre-tax charge of up to $1.5 billion related to the buyouts, according to a public filing Thursday by the company.

 

“Employees are strongly encouraged to consider the program,” GM said in an emailed statement to CNBC Thursday. “By permanently bringing down structured costs, we can improve vehicle profitability and remain nimble in an increasingly competitive market.”

 

 

[CitizenVectron]

Will this make their vehicles as reliable as Japanese vehicles?

[Uaarkson]

1 minute ago, CitizenVectron said:

Will this make their vehicles as reliable as Japanese vehicles?

The reliability will not change, but the prices and grill heights will continue to increase.

[AbsolutSurgen]

It's no longer the 90s.

[Spork3245]

8 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

Will this make their vehicles as reliable as Japanese Korean vehicles?

 

FTFY

[Uaarkson]

Buick killing it. Too bad they can’t make the shit in Flint anymore.

[CitizenVectron]

4 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

 

FTFY

 

Fair enough...but the major American makers still in the mediocre range, especially compared to Toyota, Hyundai, etc. 

[Spork3245]

2 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

Fair enough...but the major American makers still in the mediocre range, especially compared to Toyota, Hyundai, etc. 

 

Unless they're in the top 6 they're in mediocre range?

It's also worth noting that this list changes WILDLY every year except for Kia and Toyota/Lexus. Lincoln was almost bottom in 2020 or 2021, now they're number 13/32.

[CitizenVectron]

4 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

 

Unless they're in the top 6 they're in mediocre range?

It's also worth noting that this list changes WILDLY every year except for Kia and Toyota/Lexus. Lincoln was almost bottom in 2020 or 2021, now they're number 13/32.

 

Are you saying Ford and GM have as reliable vehicles as Toyota and Kia, etc? That was my main point that started this discussion.

[SuperSpreader]

1 minute ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

Are you saying Ford and GM have as reliable vehicles as Toyota and Kia, etc? That was my main point that started this discussion.

 

They're not Unreliable. 

[finaljedi]

26 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

“Employees are strongly encouraged to consider the program,” GM said in an emailed statement to CNBC Thursday. “By permanently bringing down structured costs, we can improve vehicle profitability and remain nimble in an increasingly competitive market.”

 

I want to find the business school sociopath who created that line and erase them from history.  Every single layoff email I've ever seen from every company I've worked for has had that line or some very near variation.  "While the cuts were painful, we are now poised to be nimble/ agile in an increasingly competitive/evolving market".  I assume MBAs are handed out with a flash drive that has this template.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

3 minutes ago, finaljedi said:

 

I want to find the business school sociopath who created that line and erase them from history.  Every single layoff email I've ever seen from every company I've worked for has had that line or some very near variation.  "While the cuts were painful, we are now poised to be nimble/ agile in an increasingly competitive/evolving market".  I assume MBAs are handed out with a flash drive that has this template.

The flash drive cost money. They had chatgpt write it

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

Also losing long term institutional knowledge is not the best move, at least in engineering. Who gives a damn about HR or whatever

[Greatoneshere]

6 minutes ago, finaljedi said:

 

I want to find the business school sociopath who created that line and erase them from history.  Every single layoff email I've ever seen from every company I've worked for has had that line or some very near variation.  "While the cuts were painful, we are now poised to be nimble/ agile in an increasingly competitive/evolving market".  I assume MBAs are handed out with a flash drive that has this template.

 

As an MBA holder, I can confirm - to MBA holders everything is just business and so there are no morals since "everything is just business" and if we tell you you lost your job because the company can do better without you, then fuck your feelings. It's so weird we've turned into a crony capitalist/hyper capitalist society!

[Guest]

Reliability in auto manufacturing has increased over time such that relative reliability is misleading. Similar to safety scores. The worst car on the road today is safer than the best car on the road 20 years ago.

[Zaku3]

23 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

 

Unless they're in the top 6 they're in mediocre range?

It's also worth noting that this list changes WILDLY every year except for Kia and Toyota/Lexus. Lincoln was almost bottom in 2020 or 2021, now they're number 13/32.

 

Dodged a bullet getting a 2023 I hope.

[Spork3245]

21 minutes ago, CitizenVectron said:

 

Are you saying Ford and GM have as reliable vehicles as Toyota and Kia, etc? That was my main point that started this discussion.

 

Oh, I didn't realize that Chevy and Dodge weren't "major" here. I think you're confusing "GM" with "GMC".

[stepee]

Yo guys check out my reading comprehension,  I read the title and thought “wow, that’s amazing!” because I read it as GM essentially offering a job to all Americans because they were hiring so much.

[Zaku3]

1 hour ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

As an MBA holder, I can confirm - to MBA holders everything is just business and so there are no morals since "everything is just business" and if we tell you you lost your job because the company can do better without you, then fuck your feelings. It's so weird we've turned into a crony capitalist/hyper capitalist society!

 

I will never forget Patrick Wyman's explaintion of a capitalist society. Gonna paraphrase but we have always had individual capitalists through out history. They won't call themselves that until the word was invented but they acted in a way we would associate with a capitalist. 

 

A capitalist society as opposed to a society with capitalists is society saying hey it's okay to rip people off and in fact you should be lauded for it. 

 

That was in reference to 1500s ish Europe.

[Uaarkson]

1 hour ago, sblfilms said:

Reliability in auto manufacturing has increased over time such that relative reliability is misleading. Similar to safety scores. The worst car on the road today is safer than the best car on the road 20 years ago.

Safer for the driver maybe, not so much for everyone else 

[LazyPiranha]

Has there been a year where Land Rover WASN’T on the bottom?

[AbsolutSurgen]

7 minutes ago, Uaarkson said:

Safer for the driver maybe, not so much for everyone else 

Not true.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

7 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

Not true.

Not safe for pedestrians is the clear implication, other vehicle occupants are also safe

[finaljedi]

2 hours ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

The flash drive cost money. They had chatgpt write it

 

Write me an email announcing the layoff of 10000 employees from my large automobile manufacturer

 

Dear Employees,

 

It is with deep regret and sadness that we announce the layoff of 10,000 employees from our automobile manufacturing company, effective immediately. This decision has been made after careful consideration of the current market conditions, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the industry, and the need to streamline our operations to remain competitive.

 

We understand that this announcement may come as a shock to many of you, and we want to assure you that we have explored all possible options before arriving at this difficult decision. We have taken into account the impact this will have on our employees and their families, and we will do everything in our power to ensure that those affected by the layoffs are treated fairly and with respect.

 

We understand that this is a challenging time, and we want to support our employees through this transition. We will be providing severance packages, including compensation and benefits, to those impacted by the layoffs. We will also be providing job placement assistance and career counseling services to help our employees find new opportunities as quickly as possible.

 

We want to emphasize that this decision was not taken lightly, and we remain committed to our mission of providing safe, reliable, and affordable vehicles to our customers. We are confident that with the dedication and hard work of our remaining employees, we will emerge from this difficult period stronger and more resilient than ever before.

We appreciate the contributions of all of our employees and want to express our deepest gratitude for your hard work and dedication to our company. We understand that this is a challenging time for everyone, and we are committed to supporting our employees through this transition.

 

Please know that we are available to answer any questions or concerns you may have, and we will be providing more information in the coming days about the specifics of the layoff process.

Sincerely,

[Your Name]

[Your Title]

[Automobile Manufacturer]

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, Uaarkson said:

Safer for the driver maybe, not so much for everyone else 

 

 

2 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Not safe for pedestrians is the clear implication, other vehicle occupants are also safe

I don’t think there is any population adjusted data to support this. Features such as crash avoidance and emergency braking technology makes a 2023 SUV on average much safer for pedestrians than a 2003 SUV of the same make and model.

 

If something has changed leading to more pedestrian deaths and serious injury, it is the growing share of vehicles that are inherently more dangerous to pedestrians.

[AbsolutSurgen]

They other thing that has changed is that smart phones are now ubiquitous -- both for pedestrians and drivers.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

23 minutes ago, LazyPiranha said:

Has there been a year where Land Rover WASN’T on the bottom?

 

Not that I'm aware of.

 

It reminds me of Jaguar in the 1970s/1980s which spurred a lot of jokes about their reliability (or lack thereof).

[Spork3245]

1 minute ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

 

Not that I'm aware of.

 

It reminds me of Jaguar in the 1970s/1980s which spurred a lot of jokes about their reliability (or lack thereof).

 

An 80s or even early 90s Jag will one day suddenly start changing radio stations when you go to turn on the windshield wipers.

[CitizenVectron]

The other thing to consider (in terms of pedestrian safety) is that while individual types of vehicles may be safer for pedestrians (which I actually doubt, in terms of large SUVs and trucks), the ratio of which type of vehicle is on the road has massively changed. In many places, truck-sized vehicles are now the majority as SUVs have become the standard vehicle, and they have also increased in size at the same time.

[b_m_b_m_b_m]

19 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

 

 

I don’t think there is any population adjusted data to support this. Features such as crash avoidance and emergency braking technology makes a 2023 SUV on average much safer for pedestrians than a 2003 SUV of the same make and model.

 

If something has changed leading to more pedestrian deaths and serious injury, it is the growing share of vehicles that are inherently more dangerous to pedestrians.

I consider SUV shorthand for dangerous vehicles here as they have larger, and higher fronts to vehicles and larger blind spots, all of which are inherently more dangerous to pedestrians as you noted. Combined with 

16 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

They other thing that has changed is that smart phones are now ubiquitous -- both for pedestrians and drivers.

this and you’ve got a dangerous recipe for increased pedestrian fatalities. Though I will say equivocating the responsibilities of the pedestrian and the person controlling a multi thousand pound vehicle is just stupid. 
 

We need automotive regulation with pedestrian safety standards, and a re-engineering of urban roads to increase pedestrian safety which especially includes road engineering to drop vehicle speed

[Jason]

49 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

Not safe for pedestrians is the clear implication, other vehicle occupants are also safe

 

It's also not true for people not using their own Sherman tank sized vehicle as a grocery wagon. These giant pickups and SUVs will ride up on top of regular sedans in a collision. In the US, pickups and SUVs are only crash tested against each other, not against normal cars. 

[CitizenVectron]

2 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

It's also not true for people not using their own Sherman tank sized vehicle as a grocery wagon. These giant pickups and SUVs will ride up on top of regular sedans in a collision. In the US, pickups and SUVs are only crash tested against each other, not against normal cars. 

 

The solution is to build sedans like those low bots in battle bots, so that when SUVs "hit" them they end up ramping into the air and flipping, but the car is unscathed.

[Chris-]

6 minutes ago, Jason said:

 

It's also not true for people not using their own Sherman tank sized vehicle as a grocery wagon. These giant pickups and SUVs will ride up on top of regular sedans in a collision. In the US, pickups and SUVs are only crash tested against each other, not against normal cars. 

I once saw this happen after a drive-by in Philadelphia. 

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, b_m_b_m_b_m said:

I consider SUV shorthand for dangerous vehicles here as they have larger, and higher fronts to vehicles and larger blind spots, all of which are inherently more dangerous to pedestrians as you noted. Combined with 

Yes, there are more (quantitatively) dangerous vehicles on the road, but relative to the same category 20 years ago, they are not more (qualitatively) dangerous.

 

If you were to replace every 2020-2023 SUV with the same make/model from 2000-2003, you would have worse death/injury stats due to much worse braking tech.

 

Another way to think about it is that SUVs today have a lower rate of death/serious injury for pedestrians than 20 years ago, despite nominally having a higher total.

 

That isn’t to say we shouldn’t move for safer design standards for pedestrians as we could lower both relative and nominal rates fairly easily just by lowering max grill heights and such.

[CitizenVectron]

10 minutes ago, sblfilms said:

Yes, there are more (quantitatively) dangerous vehicles on the road, but relative to the same category 20 years ago, they are not more (qualitatively) dangerous.

 

If you were to replace every 2020-2023 SUV with the same make/model from 2000-2003, you would have worse death/injury stats due to much worse braking tech.

 

Another way to think about it is that SUVs today have a lower rate of death/serious injury for pedestrians than 20 years ago, despite nominally having a higher total.

 

That isn’t to say we shouldn’t move for safer design standards for pedestrians as we could lower both relative and nominal rates fairly easily just by lowering max grill heights and such.

 

Definitely true, but there are more SUVs on the road today than in 2003. I would wager that sedans in 2003 were safer for pedestrians than SUVs today.