Pajamas asked me to respond to a piece they had posted on Monday attributing Ford’s financial woes to an American Family Association Boycott based on the automaker’s pro-gay policies.
After reviewing the company’s history over the past few years, I concluded that the company’s financial woes had more to do with the management of its past CEO, William Clay Ford, Jr., great-grandson of Henry Ford than those policies. Here’s the first few paragraphs of my piece. Go to Pajamas for the rest!
In his piece on Monday, Todd Blumer suggests that the American Family Association’s (AFA) boycott of Ford Motor Company for is policy of “giving money to gay rights groups, offering benefits to same-sex couples and actively recruiting gay employees” has led to that American automaker’s downfall and possible future bankruptcy.
Blumer paints a grim pictue of Ford’s financial outlook, noting its declining sales, finding that the “dropoffs at Ford are far worse than those seen during the same time period at the company’s Metro Detroit counterparts at General Motors and Chrysler.” Indeed, his circumstantial evidence is pretty strong. The AFA announced the boycott in May 2005, the company’s sales have pretty much been tumbling ever since.
In 2005, Ford enjoyed a modest profit. The following year, the company would suffer a loss of over 12 billion.
To attribute Ford’s decline entirely to the AFA boycout would require one to ignore other problems impacting the automaker over the past few years. To be sure, that boycott may well have play a part in Ford’s financial freefall, but it was far from the primary factor.
You can read the rest here.
UPDATE: The Auto Prophet offers an interesting post on this issue which echoes some of my thoughts. I don’t agree with all he has to say, but he does note that the AFA chose Ford while other companies are equally gay-friendly and believes they chose Ford because “it’s high profile, American, and in bad financial shape. If the AFA had chosen Dell, for example, their leverage would have been dramatically less.” With that, I agree. Read the whole thing!
For years Jews boycotted Ford because Henry Ford was antisemitic and to a certain degree, supported Hitler.
Such boycotts may make the aggrieved party feel better about themselves, but rarely effects the large corporation.
It must make the AFA feel very good about themselves, that they can glom onto a purely business world situation, and feel that they are the cause. Other than that, I’m not sure what feathers they have in their cap.
Ford’s decline, as unfortunate as it is for such a great American icon, has nothing to do with the AFA Boycott. The company’s problems also has nothing to do with high labor/union costs, as Ford suggests. Sure, unnecessarily high labor costs can REDUCE profitability, but it doesn’t explain why Americans are buying fewer and fewer Ford cars. It all comes down to Ford not recognizing what Americans want in cars and then giving them what they want. Americans want vehicles that are designed well and that are technologically innovative. If you ask an average car buyer why s/he isn’t going to buy a Ford, it’s because Fords are designed poorly, both aesthetically and technologically. The sooner Ford is willing to acknowledge their mistakes, the sooner it can get back on the road to profitability.
I agree with Andrew. I gave up on Ford with my last Explorer. Back in 1984, I got my first Ford 4×4, a Bronco… back when they were still called trucks, not SUVs. I traded in several times to get a newer one, but always a Bronco or Explorer. Since I love to camp and hike in the mountains, I actually used the 4×4. When I started looking to trade two years ago, I discovered Ford had finally sold out and made the Explorer nothing more than a 4 wheel drive mini van. I couldn’t even get it in manual transmission. I love my new Nissan Xterra, 6-speed, 4×4, TRUCK!
But, I did write a letter to Ford telling them why I no longer drive a Ford. They’ve totally forgotten the people who 4×4’s were originally made for.
By the way, I’d never even heard about the AFA boycott. I don’t know if many others have either.
So AFA would rather thousands of people lose their jobs than have a handful of gay employees bet a few benefits. I guess that tells you a lot about the priorities of this organization. I’m not sure this is the cause-effect relationship that has led to Ford’s decline but it’s despicable that people would want to boycott a company for treating all it’s employees with respect. And you wonder why I have such a negative view of these right wing groups?
But of course, Houndentenor, you wouldn’t care one whit about “jobs” and whatnot if a company was forced into bankruptcy by the boycott of a gay group, would you?
I don’t know that any gay group has ever boycotted anyone into bankruptcy. Please give examples.
I support human rights for everyone. I will refuse to do business with a company if I know they violate those human rights. Since I don’t have a lot of money to spend or investments nothing I do is going to make that large of an impact but I prefer to think of it as patronizing businesses that behave ethically rather than punishing anyone else.
I used to get the hate mail from right wing groups at a Fortune 500 Company. They objected to campus recruiting of gays (along with other minorities) back in the late 90s when everyone was having trouble recruiting. All the company was doing was promising potential employees that they would be treated as fairly as anyone else. For that people canceled their business with the company. (Sorry to be vague.) Fortunately the company didn’t cave but the letters were hateful. “Catering to homosexuals” was a commonly used phrase (which to me sounded like they were coming around with trays of mini-quiches…but no hors d’oerves for the straights! LOL).
Yes we should do business with companies that treat gay employees the same as straight employees whenever possible. I don’t see how that is at all the same as this.