Henry Ford..a True Patriot

• Footwedge

  Interesting that this story that I've harped several times here on these boards hit AOL title topics tonight. Maybe we should have a poll and see who would rather work for Henry and who would rather work for Quaker Oats?
  
  Business owners who view their labor as merely a cost on a balance sheet are idiots.
  
  http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/08/30/dear-american-companies-heres-how-to-fix-the-economy/?icid=maing-grid7|maing6|dl13|sec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D200734
• Terry_Tate

  

  Footwedge;1261492 wrote:Business owners who view their labor as merely a cost on a balance sheet are idiots.

  
  Any business owner who does that is an idiot, you are correct.
• Con_Alma

  Human capital is a company's most valuable asset...until it's cost exceeds it's value.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  "And because one company's employees are another company's customers,"
  
  Yes, and not necessarily yours, the whole Henry Ford thing is so hackneyed and stupid I can't believe even Footwedge brings this up.
  
  Does anyone think that the janitor at the NYC Four Seasons could afford to stay a night there? That the worker at the BMW factory in South Carolina should just go in and buy an X-5? That the secretary at Cravath, Swaine and Moore should expect to pay $800 an hour to have someone draft their will? Do Bombardier workers buy their own Lear jets?
  
  That doesn't mean employees shouldn't be respected, but they should be paid according to skill and production, not some of sort of half-assed communist scheme.
• believer

  

  Manhattan Buckeye;1261618 wrote:That doesn't mean employees shouldn't be respected, but they should be paid according to skill and production, not some of sort of half-assed communist scheme.

  The bottom-line
• queencitybuckeye

  Footwedge;1261492 wrote:Interesting that this story that I've harped several times here on these boards hit AOL title topics tonight. Maybe we should have a poll and see who would rather work for Henry and who would rather work for Quaker Oats?
  
  Business owners who view their labor as merely a cost on a balance sheet are idiots.
  

  Correct, costs go on the income statement.
• gut

  queencitybuckeye;1261686 wrote:Correct, costs go on the income statement.

  reps
• O-Trap

  

  Footwedge;1261492 wrote:Business owners who view their labor as merely a cost on a balance sheet are idiots.

  
  I agree with this. As a matter of fact, those who know this tend to compete well in the marketplace.
  
  I will suggest that there is a difference between a naturally competitive advantage and a mandate, though.
  

  queencitybuckeye;1261686 wrote:Correct, costs go on the income statement.

  lol'd
• O-Trap

  

  Con_Alma;1261510 wrote:Human capital is a company's most valuable asset...until it's cost exceeds it's value.

  This needs quoted.
• jhay78

  

  Henry Ford . . . a True Anti-Semite:
  
  http://history.hanover.edu/hhr/99/hhr99_2.html
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Ford
  

  In Germany, Ford's anti-Semitic articles from The Dearborn Independent were issued in four volumes, cumulatively titled The International Jew, the World's Foremost Problem published by Theodor Fritsch, founder of several anti-Semitic parties and a member of the Reichstag. In a letter written in 1924, Heinrich Himmler described Ford as "one of our most valuable, important, and witty fighters."[SUP][60][/SUP]
  
  Ford is the only American mentioned in Mein Kampf.[SUP][61][/SUP][SUP][62][/SUP] Adolf Hitler wrote, "only a single great man, Ford, [who], to [the Jews'] fury, still maintains full independence...[from] the controlling masters of the producers in a nation of one hundred and twenty millions." Speaking in 1931 to a Detroit News reporter, Hitler said he regarded Ford as his "inspiration," explaining his reason for keeping Ford's life-size portrait next to his desk.[SUP][63][/SUP] Steven Watts wrote that Hitler "revered" Ford, proclaiming that "I shall do my best to put his theories into practice in Germany," and modeling the Volkswagen, the people's car, on the Model T.[SUP][64][/SUP]
  

• Footwedge

  queencitybuckeye;1261686 wrote:Correct, costs go on the income statement.

  And the income statement is included in processing a balance sheet. Try again.
• Footwedge

  Manhattan Buckeye;1261618 wrote:Does anyone think that the janitor at the NYC Four Seasons could afford to stay a night there? That the worker at the BMW factory in South Carolina should just go in and buy an X-5? That the secretary at Cravath, Swaine and Moore should expect to pay $800 an hour to have someone draft their will? Do Bombardier workers buy their own Lear jets?

  Is there a point somewhere here? If there is, let me know. Has nothing to do with what I posted.
  

  That doesn't mean employees shouldn't be respected, but they should be paid according to skill and production, not some of sort of half-assed communist scheme.

  So increased pay...which leads to better production, more interested employees in doing a great job, a much, much, much less rate of absenteeism and theft....not to mention the huge cost savings in retaining workers, thus saving the constant retraining costs...apparently means nothing to you. Hopefully, you don't own your own business.
• Footwedge

  jhay78;1262125 wrote:Henry Ford . . . a True Anti-Semite:
  
  http://history.hanover.edu/hhr/99/hhr99_2.html
  
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Ford

  Way to stay on topic dude. Ford also hated unions and wanted the US to take no part in WWI. Show me where Ford didn't hire Jews. Go.
• O-Trap

  

  Footwedge;1262271 wrote:So increased pay...which leads to better production, more interested employees in doing a great job, a much, much, much less rate of absenteeism and theft....not to mention the huge cost savings in retaining workers, thus saving the constant retraining costs...apparently means nothing to you.

  So you're saying that people should get raises ("increased pay") in HOPES that they up their production? You don't believe in earning something before you get it, then?
• Footwedge

  Con_Alma;1261510 wrote:Human capital is a company's most valuable asset...until it's cost exceeds it's value.

  That's nice....care to comment on Ford? Obviously his huge wage increase across the board as a "cost" never approached "exceeding it's value" now did it?
• Footwedge

  O-Trap;1262285 wrote:So you're saying that people should get raises ("increased pay") in HOPES that they up their production? You don't believe in earning something before you get it, then?

  There is no "hope" about it. As a business owner yourself, you want to improve your bottom line? Pay your people 10-15 percent more than the competetion...and watch what happens.
  
  This is not rocket science....
• gut

  Footwedge;1262295 wrote:Ding, ding. ding!! As a business owner yourself, you want to improve your bottom line? Pay your people 10-15 percent more than the competetion...and watch what happens.
  
  This is not rocket science....

  Depends on whether or not those are skilled positions and the person's ability to add value. You don't gain anything paying unskilled labor over market rates, unless it's piece work. People who don't do the job or don't show-up get fired in non-union shops.
• jmog

  Footwedge;1261492 wrote:Interesting that this story that I've harped several times here on these boards hit AOL title topics tonight. Maybe we should have a poll and see who would rather work for Henry and who would rather work for Quaker Oats?
  
  Business owners who view their labor as merely a cost on a balance sheet are idiots.
  
  http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/08/30/dear-american-companies-heres-how-to-fix-the-economy/?icid=maing-grid7|maing6|dl13|sec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D200734

  The point you, and the author of the article are ignoring, is that adjusted for inflation even his new higher wage was only $15/hr ($120 per day/8 hrs).
  
  If Ford or GM were paying their employees this much we wouldnt have had the automotive crisis we did.
  
  Instead they were/are making twice (or more) that much.
  
  Some people just fail at math I guess.
• Footwedge

  gut;1262298 wrote:Depends on whether or not those are skilled positions and the person's ability to add value. You don't gain anything paying unskilled labor over market rates, unless it's piece work. People who don't do the job or don't show-up get fired in non-union shops.

  No...the unskilled are the most susceptible to do a much better job if paid more than the next guy does. And what I mean by "better job" encompasses a lot of things...which I mentioned up above.
  
  Promptness
  Overall attendence
  Retention
  Positive attitude.
  
  A business owner who understands these things will reap the benefits far exceeding the puny increase of pay he delves out.
  
  15 years ago, I "retrained" my main coating contractor's thnking on this, and he made a fortune by doing so. He had his laborers always calling off, coming in late, doing crappy work, no pride, having to do call backs..the list was endless. I told him to bump their pay from minimum wage to 10 bucks an hour. He never dreamed he could improve his company by doing that. His company was saved and he made a small fortune.
• O-Trap

  

  Footwedge;1262295 wrote:There is no "hope" about it. As a business owner yourself, you want to improve your bottom line? Pay your people 10-15 percent more than the competetion...and watch what happens.
  
  This is not rocket science....

  That definitely works for the purpose of getting the better employees, no doubt. The best will go where the money is.
  
  I thought you were saying that the money will make the same employee better, and that won't. If anything, it has been my experience that paying a mediocre employee a better wage solidifies the mediocre behavior.
• Footwedge

  jmog;1262305 wrote:The point you, and the author of the article are ignoring, is that adjusted for inflation even his new higher wage was only $15/hr ($120 per day/8 hrs).
  
  If Ford or GM were paying their employees this much we wouldnt have had the automotive crisis we did.
  
  Instead they were/are making twice (or more) that much.
  
  Some people just fail at math I guess.

  Nobody missed any point there chief. The inflation adjustment factor that you cite was in fact listed in the article. Nice reach though.
• gut

  Promptness - fired if you're late
  Overall attendence - fired if you don't show up
  Retention - if you're paying market rates, then fire the supervisor
  Positive attitude - doesn't really do shit for the bottom line
  
  If you want above market rates, then you have to earn it. I would only do this via bonuses or profit sharing. You don't just hand-out above market wages and expect to reap big gains. The best approach - and I've seen it multiple places - rewards them with above market rates if and only if productivity and quality improves.
  
  I'd also suggest it's a short-term placebo effect. People in non-incentive based systems become complacent. Always. If you have a culture that tolerates the issues you claim paying more fixes, the fix will only be temporary before people start backsliding. I've seen that, too.
• Footwedge

  O-Trap;1262315 wrote:That definitely works for the purpose of getting the better employees, no doubt. The best will go where the money is.
  
  I thought you were saying that the money will make the same employee better, and that won't. If anything, it has been my experience that paying a mediocre employee a better wage solidifies the mediocre behavior.

  Don't know how many you employ, but if it is more than a few, you need to change your way of thinking. Because your thinking is stinking thinking...and losing thinking.
  
  You pay your guys a little more...let them know you are paying them more than the competition is, and your productivity soars.
  
  Occasionally, you will have to deal with a drunk or whatever. You fire him and move on. Most human beings will respond positively to a good deal. It is proven.
• gut

  O-Trap;1262315 wrote:That definitely works for the purpose of getting the better employees, no doubt. The best will go where the money is.
  
  I thought you were saying that the money will make the same employee better, and that won't. If anything, it has been my experience that paying a mediocre employee a better wage solidifies the mediocre behavior.

  And, in practice, what drives above market rates is not typically "pay better = better employees" but a premium for specific skillsets that make that employee more valuable to your company (vs. others).
• Footwedge

  gut;1262319 wrote:Promptness - fired if you're late
  Overall attendence - fired if you don't show up
  Retention - if you're paying market rates, then fire the supervisor
  Positive attitude - doesn't really do shit for the bottom line

  SMH. Apparently this thread has flown right over your head. Not surprised. These things you listed will virtually disappear. It happens everywhere. The slickest business owners, both large and small, know this...and increase their bottom lines....not to mention improving the work life for himself...and his employees.