General Motors wants to hire younger engineers in 20s and 30s

Makes sense because many young people won't touch their products and will go to other companies and drive a Subaru WRX, Mitsubishi EVO, BMW 3 Series, Nissan 370Z and not even think about GM!

I'm a young person, granted not on an engineers income and I can't afford a 3 series, EVO, STI, barely a 370Z the way I want it trimmed. But hey, try living in the NYC area with an income that would easily afford me these toys in Kansas.

penn you have somewhat of a good point but you forget GM still sales the most cars in the US so young people are buying GM cars also the Camaro is a very popular car bought buy young people.

UAW you are right about the Camaro but it has not sold a lot of cars yet, I think production is capped at 35-40,000 cars a year? I jsut wish they would make a spare tire standard in the camaro or at least run flats instead of a tire inflation kit with Gunk!

Whelan if you live in the NYC area you need a subway pass not a car! I live in Jersey and trust me it is expensive here...plus driving 30,000 miles a year blows! If you want to make more money learn how to trade options and manage risk if you want to learn more let me know.

That sounds thrilling, moving to the Detroit area to design GM vehicles...I'd rather design toaster ovens for Black and Decker.

you don't think enough of your own talents to believe that you could possibly make a difference at GM? I'm assuming that you live in America... you wouldn't be interested in helping turn things around for an American company? you must be a kid.

your attitude is selfish, irresponsible, and honestly quite stupid. you'd never do anything to help make things better, but one day you'll look around and say 'what happened to my country???'... BE the change that you want to see, or don't complain when nothing changes.

Anything that makes the nation stronger as a whole ultimately benefits you as an individual. You should want GM to sell cars, pay their taxes, and help to make sure that the US military is well-funded and equipped with superior technology... Or so that the US government can pay its debts and continue to provide services to its citzens. America was great once, because people cared.

My apologies, I didn't realize it was my patriotic duty to help this money-sucking parasite turn itself around.

Capitalism is what made this country great; the strongest companies rise to the top and help keep the economy strong. GM failed and they deserve to die.

my point exactly... if you were old enough to remember when GM was more than that, you wouldn't feel that way. Capitalism made some people rich. Hard work, personal sacrifice, and - yes - patriotism made America great... and we're not talking about a government bailout here, we're talking about a hypothetical young American engineer working for GM.

Badgewhore, idiots like you are why America is not so great anymore.

uaw1-

for once, i fully agree with your comments here. capitalism as practiced in america is a degenerate, dog-eat-dog system. it thrives on having workers out bid each other DOWNWAARD just to have a job.

even then, many american companies outsource overseas for EVEN CHEAPER labor!

They just said they would hire them to take over the executives positions. Wow, so do your job, keep under the radar and you'll have some sweet job security in the future.

Thank you for reading and responding to the article.

hmmm.... imo, these new positions should all be r&d positions. Less can go wrong with such fresh engineers, it allows more creative freedom, and you can cherry pick the best of those engineers to incorporate their ideas into mass production.

Joe, here is your chance. Finish your school fast and you may become the next exec of GM.

Cheap labor! But do you really want young and inexperienced people designing vehicles designed to protect your most prized possession, your family?

Might as well, since Toyota can't get it right with their experienced crew.

Considering these younger engineers would have had better training and up-to-date methods, yes I would RATHER have my family in one of the young'ns vehicles.

those killer toyotas got that way 'cuz toyota got crappy pedals from an AMERICAN supplier.

maybe CTS should hire EXPERIENCED engineers who won't use cheap parts that can kill people.

I hope no one accuses GM of discrimination...

Toyota made this move just a few months ago, and I think it's necessary. Get those new guys with fresh minds who build cars to impress the world in order to impress their boss. Less of those crappy all-about-business and cost-cutting boring things.

Of course, taking in younger engineers is also a great cost-cutting technique as we all have noticed. All the automakers should build a big, highly publicized internship program or something.

I am skeptical of the notion that hiring younger engineers with make their cars more desirable to younger people on a fundamental level. I think it misses the point slightly. Engineers execute engineering functions, and on a fundamental level it isn't difficult to engineer a car that younger people like: make it fast and make it handle. It does not require a younger person to do that. There would likely be a value added in terms personal interaction with the car and the "bells and whistles" sort of things with younger people though.

The thing that, in my mind, gives supreme value addition, by being the result of having someone younger handle it, is probably design.

I don't mean engineering isn't important- lord, I have a (advanced) degree in engineering- I am just not sure that is where I would start.

As far as them taking over for executives when they retire, I am not sure I have seen that in automotive companies. Generally, executives at automotive companies are businessmen. Chemical and Petroleum companies have a tendency to be run by engineers.

^^I disagree. Speed and handling is not the end all be all. If that were the case the CTS-V wouldnt be dominated by the geriatrics. Youngins are interested in a sporty look; something that is current, stands out, and makes a statement.

Don't be negative UAW, it is unbecoming (feel free to call me a hypocrite). I am sure of lots of things, by the way.

Delan,

That is what I was getting at- I don't mean that speed and handling are all they want. I am saying that from an engineering perspective that is more what they want.

The thing though that really adds value for them is design. Engineers don't design cars though- it isn't an engineering function.

I say: Forget about the engineers' age, and look at their capabilities. If a 25 year-old engineer is as good as a 50 year-old, then sure, hire him (or her). But hiring on "youth" is like hiring on "visible minority" to meet a quota -- You take a trip down a hill, paved with good intentions.

Take note that Ferrari, BMW, Porsche, Lexus, and just about every successful auto-maker I can think of, got to where they are today by hiring the right person for the job (well, that and solid management), and typically, that isn't someone who has "youth" listed amongst his strongest credentials.

I think new blood is exactly what they need. 'Good' is objective, no one - regardless of age - should be considered if they can't create functional, safe products. The younger engineers will just bring a fresh perspective into the products. One of the reasons for GM's crappy cars was that the cars were designed to satisfy older customers with the cheapest possible production methods. By making cars this way, GM alienated many young buyers, who expect more from their cars.

GM was in business and a successful car company for many decades before Ferrari, Porsche, BMW, or Lexus existed; so they don't need to take notes from any of them on that.

Believe it or not, following in GM's footsteps (Cadillac was the first car ever built with interchangeable parts; enclosed roof; electric starter; a wheel to steer and pedals for gas & brakes) was a part of how those companies 'got to where they are today.'

So GM has the basics of building cars down, now it's about winning back respect and sales from young customers. That's where the younger engineers come in, they should know more about what features young consumers want in their cars and how they should operate and be presented.

pushrod27: GM used to make "something for everyone." They even made the Cadillac back in the days when "The Cadillac of [X]" meant "the best of the best."

Then the competition beat them, in just about every way conceivable. In the 1970s, during The Energy Crisis, Japan showed up with notably higher fuel efficiency. In the 1980s, Korea showed up with notably inexpensive cars. Then in the 1990s, Mercedes started taking "luxury" down-market, with the 190E for the working classes. Toyota and Honda became known for surprisingly good value for the dollar, and a pretty nice car over all. Toyota and Nissan spun off into the up-market with Lexus and Infinity. Everywhere, the competition was spanking the Big Three's collective butts. And the Big Three responded with bleets of unfair trade practices, advantages of a cheap labor force, currency advantages, and so forth. *Anything* other than "they beat us at our own game -- they do what we've been doing, just better."

The same condition persists today, even with Asian-owned companies operating on American soil, in American-built factories, using American labor, to build "Asian" cars. It seems the bankruptcy of Chrysler (the first time), AMC, Jeep/Eagle, etc., didn't wake anyone up in Michigan.

Please don't get me wrong! I am mightily impressed by American Inginuity. The US had, and has some of the most innovative minds around, as well as some of the sharpest business leaders anywhere. They just don't happen to be in the automotive industry. To help you understand why, I refer to something Bill Gates said when a reporter asked him "How did Microsoft get to where it is today?" His reply: "We behaved as though Apple could kill us, at any moment."

I truly wish the Big Three can return to their former glory, in any capacity. I have a lot of faith in American Inginuity, especially when their back is up against the wall, and no bail-out is available. The truly great Americans will surprise us all. Hopefully, they have an interest in building great American cars.

Hmmm....sounds enticing. Maybe I should apply...

Badgewhore: Young people don't need anymore distractions in their cars, they need to focus and learn how to drive better.

THANKS CAPTAIN OBVIOUS. It stated that the hiring of younger engineers would be to get their PERSPECTIVE on computer use in vehicles and/or to some day run the company. It didnt say anything about putting the "kids" (as you put it) as head of anything.

you're one to talk. you are by far one of the dumbest people I have ever encountered.

SMH.......oh dear!

lol Badgewhore, you aren't supposed to react that way... makes you seem insecure. It's like somebody laughing at you saying you must have a small penis and you reacting by say "No way! it's totally a foot long!" People will just roll their eyes and your reputation will continue to diminish.

badgewhore IS SMART. anyone can tell from the insights and (sometimes biting to adversaries) HUMOR in his comments. few people here make me laugh as much as Badgie does!

otoh, joe advertises his stupidity in deigning to 'know' how badgewhore is 'supposed' to react.

with regard to the thread title, GM does desparately need fresh blood.

some guy in california mentioned that most ordinary people in california just do not buy GM or other domestics. ALL the d3 cars he sees on the freeways are 1) rentals 2) fleet cars of state and utility bodies, or 3) from out-of-state rubes, as evidenced by the plates and confused seeming drivers!

i lived in CA a few decades ago, and i saw inklings of this trend EVEN THEN.