31–40 of 110 posts
There is a lot of value and scale at Bombardier. What is likely to happen is some private equity firm will form a syndicate and purchase the company - cut it into pieces, slash management, remove the fat etc. It will be a 3-5 year process. Worth highlighting I am not saying this with disdain for the private equity industry. One of its intanigble benefits is that it serves as an agent of dramatic change for companies…
> Chief Executive Officer Alain Bellemare said he did not expect the job cuts, which include 1,500 workers in Quebec and 500 in the rest of Canada, would affect the company's talks with the federal government over a $1 billion investment in its CSeries jet program. "Hey Federal Government, we'd like you to help us out to the tune of a billion dollars, because we're such a big important employer here in Canada... also…
There are hundreds of millions of people in North America. Why do people act like gaining or losing a couple thousand jobs is some kind of earth-shaking development? I get that losing jobs sucks for the people involved, but sometimes I even see US jobs reports delivered as breaking news in national newspapers. Why?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have horrible management, which is where the "layoffs" should happen. They have great engineers, skilled craftsmen, workers, etc., but the upper ranks and board of directors are full of patronage and incest.
I think a more appropriate final word here would be "nepotism".
There are hundreds of millions of people in North America. Why do people act like gaining or losing a couple thousand jobs is some kind of earth-shaking development? I get that losing jobs sucks for the people involved, but sometimes I even see US jobs reports delivered as breaking news in national newspapers. Why?
Firing people has an exponential effect.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually it was a very good place to work - lots of extremely smart people, which is probably why I remember the apparent failure (or unwillingness) to make that inference.
Maybe they were aware of it. There's still no way a small or even large company can change the dynamics at play. Government can sometimes change things by deficit spending on infrastructure, but that's a tough sell to voters somehow.
> Chief Executive Officer Alain Bellemare said he did not expect the job cuts, which include 1,500 workers in Quebec and 500 in the rest of Canada, would affect the company's talks with the federal government over a $1 billion investment in its CSeries jet program. "Hey Federal Government, we'd like you to help us out to the tune of a billion dollars, because we're such a big important employer here in Canada... also…
I don't think this is inconsistent at all. They're laying off mostly people in their rail division, which is based in Germany and doing poorly. They're asking for some government support for the aerospace group, which is based in Canada and doing ok, but facing lots of competition from Airbus and Embraer, which also receive government support.
Do you mean Canadian government support? Not US?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think this is inconsistent at all. They're laying off mostly people in their rail division, which is based in Germany and doing poorly. They're asking for some government support for the aerospace group, which is based in Canada and doing ok, but facing lots of competition from Airbus and Embraer, which also receive government support.
>", but facing lots of competition from Airbus and Embraer, which also receive government support." Do you mean Canadian government support? Not US?