My friend said that he did, but I thought that he did not. His policy of Welfare Capitalism promoted better working conditions for the workers so that they could produce more, but it didn't support unions. To my knowledge he was very much against them, and even gave people positions to squash union organizing.
2007-05-29 17:52:06 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Surely your friend jests. Henry Ford never supported labor unions and would come back if he could, to fight them.
2007-05-29 17:55:46 · answer #1 · answered by LodiTX 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Henry Ford Unions
2016-12-18 15:26:48 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You both are correct. He paid his workers one of the highest wages for that era and felt betrayed when his workers attempted to unionize. Felt unions in the long run would stifle his company and make it uncompetitive.
Considering how poor Ford is doing currently against Asian competition, he may have been right.
2007-05-29 17:55:35 · answer #3 · answered by The Oracle 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, Henry Ford may have done some nice, paternalistic things like raising wages, teaching night classes, etc, but he hated unions. I've seen some impressive footage of his goons beating the hell out of early unionists.
2007-05-29 17:57:30 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
Henry Ford paid his workers high wages and did all sorts of humanistic things like holding night classes for the workers and taking care of their families.
He believed that only he knew what was best for his workers instead of union chiefs, who he thought would stifle his company's growth.
2007-05-29 18:14:48 · answer #5 · answered by ong x 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
After the impressive and considerate comments by skill of Imperial, there is little or no to function. consistent with hazard the toughest element to 'get' and understand is how social concepts, values and 'stances' have replaced so extensively, after the horrors of the 2nd.W.W. and, for that rely later events which altered our theory of 'race,' bigotry and political correctness. it truly is hard to image a time whilst it replaced into 'well known' to be racist or antisemitic. yet lots of the British Aristocracy have been, as have been top type individuals. In those days, for that strata of Society, it replaced into O.ok. to confer with Blacks as '*******' and Jews as 'untrustworthy bloodsuckers and money grabbers.' The revelations of the Holocaust certainly replaced attitudes yet 'Politically remarkable' took care of something. they might have long previous on thinking the old way, yet now it replaced into now no longer O.ok. to particular themselves in the old techniques. So the Fords, Lindberghs and Kennedys stored a plenty decrease profile after the Holocaust. They now no longer might desire to assert, 'Jewish money enthusiasts' whilst viewing 6 million bodies strewn throughout some a hundred and fifty Nazi concentration Camps, lots of them nevertheless mendacity lifeless in the railway wagons that extra them there, terrible skeletons of figures somewhat human - all 'blood sucking money loving Jews' who have been truly only tailors and carpenters and housewives and teenagers is all, only human beings like us.
2016-10-09 02:56:16 · answer #6 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He did not support them. He was a communist who printed and distributed a newsletter for Hitler. And he hated unions.
2007-05-29 18:02:49 · answer #7 · answered by lcmcpa 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no
2007-05-29 17:53:58 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋