[willy4110]

Wouldn't many of the employees who were layed off have been the ones hired back on as part of the 17000 hirees?

 

[marlon_jbt]

When I was hired in 2010, I was told that there were only 150 people laid off in the entire corporation.

They all took buyouts. Hourly and salary.

 

[MoparNorm]

Wouldn't many of the employees who were layed off have been the ones hired back on as part of the 17000 hirees?

If the employee took the buyout, many of those workers were restricted from returning.

 

[dfarc]

If the employee took the buyout, many of those workers were restricted from returning.

They could probably just re-apply and start from scratch all over again, and ofcourse in the 2nd tier.

 

[MoparNorm]

They could probably just re-apply and start from scratch all over again, and ofcourse in the 2nd tier.

Kind of hard to get a 45-50 year old worker with 20 years of experience, to come back at a pay level they last saw in 1994.
I suppose some might, but it would be a small number.

 

[dfarc]

Kind of hard to get a 45-50 year old worker with 20 years of experience, to come back at a pay level they last saw in 1994.
I suppose some might, but it would be a small number.

My point was simply that they could return, not that they would. I'm sure if Chrysler seen them as valuable employees and they wanted to return...it would likely happen. Brampton has lost a 3rd shift twice. First time buyouts were offered, and some who did reapplied when we hired again.

 

[larryv]

Part of the problem with retirees returning is that, once they again become actives, their pensions go on hold. So if they're coming back at the lower tier, it's likely just a few more dollars a month than their pension.
Given that choice, they'd be better off financially to take a minimum wage job with another employer and keep drawing their pension.