This is very interesting. It begs a huge question: What are the boundaries of what an employer can ask of an employee? This rang two bells with me. First - I've never driven new cars. I SOLD new cars for three years, and saw first-hand the depreciation one experiences. We used to have what we called "The $5,000 bump" at the end of the dealership's driveway. That meant that as soon as the person drove their new car over that bump, they lost $5,000. That was 30 years ago - now it would be more like a $15,000 bump. Plus, I like older cars and I hate car payments. My cars have always been clean, attractive, and well maintained, but they aren't new. Second - I had a situation a number of years ago where, after I had been employed with a company for over a year, they made a request that I move closer to them. I lived near Kansas City at the time, but not in it. I was always on time to work, fulfilled every requirement and then some, and in fact, worked more hours than they asked me to. I felt that this was beyond acceptable bounds, and I told them so. Not long after, I separated from the company. If this employee's car is one that they use to visit customers, then I can see it; their image is contingent upon the image projected by the salespeople. But there's no indication of that. The issue is that they don't see the vehicle as being "appropriate looking" for the person and their role. They are using a rather tenuous "you might be susceptible or irresponsible" grounds for this email. My opinion: This is out of bounds. I have a feeling that a court might see it the same way. I can't help but notice that this is dated January, 2020, before the world went crazy and before the hiring market changed. What do you think?
Ailsa Henley
1y
As a consumer, I had a flooring sales person arrive at my home in a Maserati. I did NOT go with that company because I felt that based upon the price they quoted and the car he drove likely the markup was unreasonably high. In this case, if he had arrived in a work truck or middle of the road car, I may have considered his pitch a bit more. I also had a realtor show up to a rural ranch property I was selling in a Tesla and heels who I did not give the listing to because in part, I felt she did not understand the value of the property or rural properties. The listing went to a guy who arrived in a nice truck wearing boots who walked the entire property with me. In both these cases the vehicle the sales person was driving definitely added or detracted from my overall impression, but in very different ways. I do agree this email sounds out of bounds and if this was a concern, then perhaps a company leased car would have been a good solution.
Chuck Vogt
1y
These people have simply overstepped their boundaries.
Sam Caloroso
1y
I would have focused on the sentence about not knowing and personally I would have added that my car fits my life style at this point. Judge my performance as a measuring tool. It’s all about performance not perception.
I totally agree with you on this very important subject.
Car should be provided by employer.
Sales Manager
1yThis is interesting, because I am actually writing something up right this second that I have been asked many times in my career, "what kind of car do I need for outside sales?" and then I took a break and this is the first thing I see. On this particular one, unless the vehicle is used for company business or otherwise truly offensive for the role, then this is a major overreach to me. To say nothing of all the assumptive language, tone and implications of financial ruin. I wouldn't want to work for a company like this. I sure would like to see the car before making a sweeping judgment though! On the other hand, one time I took my wife's car to the plant (and it was a nice SUV-bought a year old with the depreciation factored in and I got a smoking deal on it-plus my wife has a great job and can afford it either way), and my boss was clearly surprised that I had a car that nice. LOL. So I'm not sure what is more offensive…