IBJNews

Subaru to add 100 jobs as part of $75 million expansion

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Subaru of Indiana Automotive Inc. plans to add 100 jobs at its auto plant in Lafayette by the end of 2014, the company announced Wednesday.

The new employees will be needed for a 52,000-square-foot expansion of the plant, which will allow Subaru to make more of its fast-selling Outback and Legacy vehicles. Construction on the $75 million expansion is expected to begin this summer.

Subaru already employs 3,600 at its Lafayette facility, with 600 workers added in the past three years. The plant produces nearly 171,000 cars a year. The expansion will allow production to ramp up to 180,000 vehicles annually, even without having employees work overtime

"The expansion of SIA's capacity is necessary to meet the growing demand for Subaru vehicles in the North American market," said Tom Easterday, executive vice president of SIA. "The success of the SIA-built Legacy and Outback is the result of innovative design focused on the needs of our customers, a strong reputation for quality and reliability, and consistently achieving top safety ratings."

The Indiana Economic Development Corp. offered Subaru up to $950,000 in tax credits and up to $50,000 in training grants based on the company's job-creation plans. The city of Lafayette will consider a property-tax abatement for the plant expansion.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

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. I'm a CPA who works with a wide range of companies (through my firm K.B.Parrish & Co.); however, we work with quite a few car dealerships, so I'm fairly interested in Fatwin (mentioned in the article). Does anyone have much information on that, or a link to such information? Thanks.

  2. Historically high long-term unemployment, unprecedented labor market slack and the loss of human capital should not be accepted as "the economy at work [and] what is supposed to happen" and is certainly not raising wages in Indiana. See Chicago Fed Reserve: goo.gl/IJ4JhQ Also, here's our research on Work Sharing and our support testimony at yesterday's hearing: goo.gl/NhC9W4

  3. I am always curious why teachers don't believe in accountability. It's the only profession in the world that things they are better than everyone else. It's really a shame.

  4. It's not often in Indiana that people from both major political parties and from both labor and business groups come together to endorse a proposal. I really think this is going to help create a more flexible labor force, which is what businesses claim to need, while also reducing outright layoffs, and mitigating the impact of salary/wage reductions, both of which have been highlighted as important issues affecting Hoosier workers. Like many other public policies, I'm sure that this one will, over time, be tweaked and changed as needed to meet Indiana's needs. But when you have such broad agreement, why not give this a try?

  5. I could not agree more with Ben's statement. Every time I look at my unemployment insurance rate, "irritated" hardly describes my sentiment. We are talking about a surplus of funds, and possibly refunding that, why, so we can say we did it and get a notch in our political belt? This is real money, to real companies, large and small. The impact is felt across the board; in the spending of the company, the hiring (or lack thereof due to higher insurance costs), as well as in the personal spending of the owners of a smaller company.

ADVERTISEMENT