You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
7 points

I just can’t understand the rationale for all that. Was it all for cost cutting? You would think after 140 years they would be relatively stable.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

My guess is that they made two contradictory policies and didn’t realize the combined effect.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points
*

Ah my mistake to omit that bit.

It was new ownership combined with an actual need for new machinery. The old lines were multiple decades old and being held together by creative engineering.

Now new more efficient machinery and some redundancies would be normal and kind of expected. But the manner in which it was done was the issue. Immediately alienated the entire workforce and lost the most skilled workers to boot. All tied together with a nice little bow of utterly incompetent planning regarding the implementation and procurement process. The final cherry on top was the complete inability to market the new product.

It was sad seeing a company that was profitable with good brand recognition and actual competitive advantages literally piss it all away inside 12 months of a 140 year history.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Asklemmy

!asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Create post

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it’s welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Icon by @Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de

Community stats

  • 11K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.7K

    Posts

  • 311K

    Comments