He works at Ford, but drives a Dodge. He says the company's "Ford Only" parking spaces are unfair after his car was towed. What do you think?Read more: https://on.wews.com/2vYMxym
Posted by News 5 Cleveland on Sunday, August 12, 2018
Ford Employee Parks Dodge In "Ford Only" Parking Spot, Car Towed And Allegedly Damaged
Every once a while, you find a piece of news and as it pops up, it seems to really make you scratch your head and wonder what’s been going on. In this one, we observe a little bit of an odd rule but one that I guess could be understandable. However, when it was violated and the violator was put through the relevant consequences, things really seemed to take an odd turn. The rule is ages old and has been put in place by Ford as a measure to make sure that brand loyalty is about as high as it can possibly be. However, you can definitely see where the controversy might lie.
If you go to one of Ford’s production facilities, you might just find that there’s parking up front that’s reserved for the employees who have purchased one of Ford’s vehicles. This might seem like some sort of a joke, in terms of actual enforcement, however, this employee found out the hard way that, when he didn’t comply, the consequences would be pretty tough. As it turns out, his Dodge branded vehicle would be towed from the spot when somebody noticed that it wasn’t obeying the rule that was clearly posted at the parking spot. However, when you hear the employee talking about how the vehicle was damaged when it was towed and that it cost him $170 to be able to recover the car, you have to wonder just how effective these rules really are.
Local news caught up with the situation as you see in the report below that allows you to be able to catch this employee’s recollection of the events along with what he thinks isn’t really a fair policy at his workplace. After listening to both sides of this one, be sure to tell us what you think of this workplace debacle that has a non-Ford branded car being removed from an employee’s place of work. Is this a clear case of the rule being posted and someone simply not following it, being forced to deal with the consequences or should the regulation not be in place at all?