Key Takeaways
- Low wages drive disengagement: Young Ford workers earned just $17/hour, forcing many to work dual shifts at Amazon and Ford, surviving on 3-4 hours of sleep .
- Farley’s historic response: CEO Jim Farley converted temp workers to full-time roles with higher pay and benefits, mirroring Henry Ford’s 1914 wage hike to $5/day (double the average) .
- Systemic industry challenges: U.S. manufacturing jobs pay $25/hour (~$51,890/year) versus the national average of $66,600, deterring Gen Z despite 3.8 million job openings by 2033 .
- Global pressures: Ford faces competition from China’s EVs, which dominate 70% of the global market with superior tech and lower costs , while tariffs aim to rebalance U.S. manufacturing .
Why Young Workers Rejected Ford
Older employees bluntly warned CEO Jim Farley: “None of the young people want to work here.” The reason? $17/hour wages. This pay forced younger staff into exhausting dual shifts—clocking 8 hours at Amazon, then 7 hours at Ford, with just 3–4 hours for sleep. One worker even collapsed from fatigue mid-shift. Gen Z increasingly avoids manufacturing, citing stagnant wages that haven’t kept pace with inflation or living costs. While trade school enrollment rises, factory jobs remain seen as “last-resort” work .
Jim Farley’s Playbook: Back to 1914
Facing a labor revolt, Farley resurrected Henry Ford’s 1914 strategy. Back then, Ford doubled wages to $5/day—not for altruism, but to stabilize his workforce and enable workers to buy Model Ts. Similarly, Farley transitioned temp workers to full-time roles after 2019 UAW negotiations. This granted profit-sharing, healthcare, and higher pay. “It wasn’t easy. It was expensive,” he admitted, but essential for competitiveness .
Table: Ford’s Wage Evolution
Henry Ford’s Legacy: Genius or Ghoul?
Henry Ford’s $5/day wage is lauded for creating America’s middle class. Yet former workers called him the “Mussolini of Highland Park.” His factories hid gruesome realities:
- Brutal speed-ups: Workers monitored 12+ machines (up from 4), causing injuries from burst grinding wheels .
- Wage cuts disguised: Transfers between departments slashed pay; $7/day pledges in 1929 masked layoffs of 30,000 .
- Union suppression: Ford’s “servicemen” beat protesters during the 1932 Dearborn Massacre .
His duality—workplace innovation versus worker exploitation—frames modern labor tensions .
Why U.S. Factories Can’t Attract Gen Z
Despite 3.8 million U.S. manufacturing jobs projected by 2033, young workers flee. The core issue: pay gaps. Factory roles average $25/hour ($51,890/year), trailing the national $66,600. Farley argues for German-style apprenticeships starting in junior high, but U.S. underinvestment persists. Meanwhile, the 2023 UAW strike forced faster temp-to-full-time conversions and wage hikes—a move Farley called “completely unnecessary” but inevitable .
China’s EV Dominance: Ford’s “Humbling” Wake-Up Call
Farley’s wage fixes collide with a bigger threat: China. After testing Xiaomi’s SU7 EV, he called China’s progress “the most humbling thing I’ve ever seen.” Why?
- Tech superiority: Huawei/Xiaomi systems integrate phones seamlessly; Apple/Google “decided not to go in the car business.”
- Cost control: Xiaomi’s $35,000 SUV undercuts Tesla’s Model Y.
- Scale: China builds 70% of global EVs .
Tariffs offer temporary relief, but Ford still sources 15% of F-150 parts from China. Reshoring could add “thousands” to vehicle costs .
Ford’s Bet on American Manufacturing
Globalization once punished Ford for U.S. production. Now, tariffs level the field. Farley notes rivals face $2,000–$3,000/vehicle subsidies abroad, while Ford’s domestic focus (85% U.S.-made parts) finally “advantages” it. The F-150 remains America’s top revenue-generating consumer product. Yet hurdles linger: wiring looms and bolts aren’t made stateside anymore. “We need to be industrially independent,” Farley insists—or risk Australia/UK-style deindustrialization .
The Human Cost of “Efficiency”
Labor disputes haunt Ford’s legacy. In 2009, subsidiary Visteon sacked 610 UK workers with minutes’ notice after secretly planning closures for years. Workers occupied factories, trashed offices, and confronted bosses at mansions. At Enfield, 70+ people slept in paint shops, surviving on microwaved meals. This “post-Fordist struggle” revealed how outsourcing fractures worker security—echoing Henry Ford’s union-busting .
Workers in the Age of AI
The Ford Foundation warns that tech could deepen inequality. Automation threatens 3.8 million jobs, but solutions like universal basic income ignore worker agency. Instead, they advocate:
- Worker-centered policies: Elevate groups like National Domestic Workers Alliance.
- Corporate accountability: End “shareholder primacy” driving wage stagnation.
- Global solidarity: 80% of Global South workers face precarity; U.S. labor shifts could worsen this .
As Farley rebuilds Ford, balancing automation with dignity remains existential.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Why did young Ford workers need second jobs?
A: $17/hour wages ($35,360/year) couldn’t cover living costs. Many worked back-to-back shifts at Amazon and Ford, averaging 3–4 hours of sleep .
Q: How did Henry Ford’s 1914 strategy influence Jim Farley?
A: Both linked pay to business outcomes: Ford wanted workers to afford Model Ts; Farley tied full-time conversion to retention and quality .
Q: What’s deterring Gen Z from manufacturing?
A: Wages. Factory jobs pay ~$51,890/year versus the U.S. average of $66,600. Work is also seen as unstable and physically taxing .
Q: Why does Farley call China’s EVs “humbling”?
A: Their tech (e.g., phone-car integration) outpaces U.S. rivals, and they control 70% of the global EV market .
Q: How do tariffs help Ford?
A: They counter foreign subsidies of $2,000–$3,000/vehicle, making Ford’s U.S.-focused production more competitive .
Comments
Post a Comment