IBJNews

Cummins to cut as many as 1,500 jobs; Indiana impact unclear

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Responding to a sputtering global economy, Columbus-based Cummins Inc. said late Tuesday afternoon that it expects to cut 1,000 to 1,500 jobs by the end of 2012. The diesel engine manufacturer also cut its forecast for full-year revenue to about $17 billion from $18 billion.

“We continued to see weak economic data in a number of regions during the third quarter, increasing the level of uncertainty regarding the direction of the global economy,” CEO Tom Linebarger said in a statement. “As a result of the heightened uncertainty, end customers are delaying capital expenditures in a number of markets, lowering demand for our products.”

The company made the announcement after the markets closed Tuesday. In after-hours trading, Cummins shares, which had been up about 20 percent for the year,  tumbled 5 percent to $86.16.

It's not clear how the cuts will affect employment in Indiana. The company has 8,000 workers in the state and about 44,000 workers overall.

Cummins shifted to cost-cutting mode this summer following a spate of torrid growth. Over two years, Cummins had quadrupled profits.

This spring, company officials outlined plans to increase annual revenue to $30 billion by 2015, a goal it now appears unlikely to achieve.

In his statement, Linebarger said: “Responding quickly and strategically during these challenging economic times will pave the way for Cummins to emerge stronger as a company when markets inevitably rebound. Taking these actions now will allow us meet customer needs, maintain strong financial performance and allow us to capitalize on future growth opportunities.”

ADVERTISEMENT

  • addendum
    You don't cut customers.
  • Lead In and What?
    The email lead-in story says 8,000 workers in Indiana and 16,000 overall. The article says 8,000 in Indiana and 44,000 overall. Which is it? Rick Corporations have some allegiance to their employees. But, since employees usually represent the largest cost to a company, they are the first (the last priority) to get cut. You can't cut investors because they have to sell their stock. Executive management could be cut somewhat but you need most of them to strategically run the company. You don't customer's, their the life blood of the company; you need them to have any jobs. Corporations are not social organizations with the sole priority of employing at any cost. If so, you'd have no company ... and no jobs. That's the way it's always been. Some companies are better than others at preserving jobs.
  • Global corporation priorities
    1. Shareholders 2. Executive Management 3. Customers 4. Shareholders 5. Exexutive Management 6. Customers . . . n. Employees
  • Wow...
    It seems like Cummins cuts jobs one month and then announces additions the next month. Seems odd to me that they appear to manage their business (and the lives of their employees) on a monthly or quarterly bases. Seems they need some new forecasters!

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. PJ - Mall operators like Simon, and most developers/ land owners, establish individual legal entities for each property to avoid having a problem location sink the ship, or simply structure the note to exclude anything but the property acting as collateral. Usually both. The big banks that lend are big boys that know the risks and aren't mad at Simon for forking over the deed and walking away.

    2. Do any of the East side residence think that Macy, JC Penny's and the other national tenants would have letft the mall if they were making money?? I have read several post about how Simon neglected the property but it sounds like the Eastsiders stopped shopping at the mall even when it was full with all of the national retailers that you want to come back to the mall. I used to work at the Dick's at Washington Square and I know for a fact it's the worst performing Dick's in the Indianapolis market. You better start shopping there before it closes also.

    3. How can any company that has the cash and other assets be allowed to simply foreclose and not pay the debt? Simon, pay the debt and sell the property yourself. Don't just stiff the bank with the loan and require them to find a buyer.

    4. If you only knew....

    5. The proposal is structured in such a way that a private company (who has competitors in the marketplace) has struck a deal to get "financing" through utility ratepayers via IPL. Competitors to BlueIndy are at disadvantage now. The story isn't "how green can we be" but how creative "financing" through captive ratepayers benefits a company whose proposal should sink or float in the competitive marketplace without customer funding. If it was a great idea there would be financing available. IBJ needs to be doing a story on the utility ratemaking piece of this (which is pretty complicated) but instead it suggests that folks are whining about paying for being green.

    ADVERTISEMENT