I wouldn't assume they did not do so. In other words, perhaps they already reported it.Wasn’t trying to be funny - dead serious. Workers that are aware that they are building a defective product should report the problem to their supervisor and/or quality control employees.
Right. And that's why you never blame the guy on the line.You can report it all you want but if someone that makes more money than you says it’s fine then they just keep going down the line.
Only those who have no reason rely on labels.I always had a feeling that you were pro-union and anti-management.
Except no, research shows that's generally not the case except when management spurs it on. Why did you think unions were created in the first place? Because managers were too nice?I have felt for some time that many unionized workforce’s in the USA develop an “us against them” mentality, which is fostered by their leadership. Quality and professional work ends up taking a backseat to the “us” mentality.
As they did when Fiat came in and introduced its various tools for checking the alignment of each car's body panels.The company made a big marketing splash about its testing to improve quality (which was nothing magical as most of the industry does the same already).
It has been my experience in life that marginal employees that do shoddy work often blame others, and do not take responsibility and have pride for their own work.
Seriously? You're putting these back to back, without any separation so we can forget the first one?I have never worked in any type of assembly plant (auto or otherwise)
That is the American auto industry reality almost 100% of the time.There is that ideal world, and then there is reality. And the reality is that in many places, the workers who are told they are 'empowered' to shut down the line are the first to be eliminated; and the line never really gets shut down.
There were studies done from the 1960s onwards saying that the people who build cars tend to care more about quality than the plant managers.Actually, what I've seen in my 37 years at the various iterations of Chrysler, is that the UAW guys DO care and it's short sighted management that doesn't.
Chrysler around 1997-99. Yes, they did implement that, briefly, but Daimler killed it.I could be wrong but I recall seeing a video from the original Chrysler or maybe Diamler Chrysler saying and showing how they stopped the line when a worker sees an issue with the vehicle.
Hadn't we already decided it was a fake?Well they had only one shot to launch this thing right—you can flush the toilet now, this thing is done
Or new supervisors, because they might be flagging cars only to have others pass them through.I would also say that whatever person or persons that are inspecting these on the line must need new glasses.
They were fired and the union issued a statement saying "yes, they were fired."Yes it's been a couple years. I don't think they were fired. I imagine most people do a lot of things they shouldn't do on break. What's dumb is to do it out in public.
That really limits your choice of cars to... none.I wouldn't want to drop $80,000 and need a loaner in the first 60,000 miles.
TARP research...Yes, the thing is (despite people who think somehow they could be perfect developers/testers) things are going to go wrong. It's how you treat people when things go wrong that will influence people's perception of your brand. When service writers are taught to respond "they all do that" or "it's just the way a Jeep is" you're not going to impress them.