Stellantis Points Blame at California for Layoff Announcement

by Chris Teague

Published: December 8th, 2023

stellantis points blame at california for layoff announcement

When all else fails, blame the government. Stellantis, whose brands include Jeep, Dodge, Chrysler, and Fiat, recently announced layoffs that it blamed on the selective application of California Air Resource Board (CARB) rules. The move could impact thousands of jobs at the company’s Jeep factories in Detroit and Ohio, where it builds the Grand Cherokee, Wrangler, and Gladiator.

The announcement comes after a long drama between the automaker and the state of California. The company decided to limit allocations of its electrified vehicles to states complying with CARB regulations, which meant that non-CARB states got few if any, hybrids from the automaker. Stellantis’ issue is that the state worked with BMW, Ford, Honda, and Volkswagen in 2020 to agree to a different playbook.

That agreement judges emissions compliance across all 50 states, not just those complying with CARB standards. Stellantis believes its absence from that agreement puts it at a significant disadvantage, but it didn’t get left out unknowingly. The automaker applied to join the group but was denied over what it said was retaliation for criticizing CARB’s authority to create emissions rules. Stellantis has filed a complaint with the state over what it called an “underground regulatory scheme.”

We can debate whether or not California overstepped, but it doesn’t change the fact that Stellantis has been slower to move on EVs than other automakers despite the success of Jeep’s 4xe vehicles. The layoffs could also just as easily be related to losses from the recent UAW strikes, as other automakers – some included in the CARB agreement – have announced layoffs.

[Image: Stellantis/Jeep]

Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.

#Stellantis #Jeep #Uaw #California

Chris Teague

Chris grew up in, under, and around cars, but took the long way around to becoming an automotive writer. After a career in technology consulting and a trip through business school, Chris began writing about the automotive industry as a way to reconnect with his passion and get behind the wheel of a new car every week. He focuses on taking complex industry stories and making them digestible by any reader. Just don’t expect him to stay away from high-mileage Porsches.

More by Chris Teague

Comments

Join the conversation

2 of 55 comments

NJRide on Dec 11, 2023

Stellantis deathwatch, down to 8.5% market share in US in November. That is lower than after both bankruptcies of Chrysler.

Like Reply
Carson D on Dec 13, 2023

There are so many cheerleaders here for authoritarians who apply laws to parties based on the acquiescence that those parties exhibit. They'll come for you soon enough.

2 Reply

Recent Comments

W Conrad I'm not afraid of them, but they aren't needed for everyone or everywhere. Long haul and highway driving sure, but in the city, nope.
Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.