http://bigthreeauto.procon.org/ - Analysis of Big 3 vs Toyota / Honda and Bailout

[brunes]

This site is very interesting. Some good numbers:

- Toyota has the same market share as Ford and GM, even though they have less than half the employees

- Big 3 CEOs earned tens of millions last year even while falling into bankruptcy, while Toyota CEO earns less than 1 million

- The amount of income tax GM paid in 2007 basically equals it's loss. Ford got a tax refund.

http://bigthreeauto.procon.org/

[Thalo]

Can you imagine the hysteria that would come from the unions if Ford or GM decided to upgrade its factories and cut half its labor force voluntarily? That's how unions are destroying our economy. Ban them all.

[dash riprock]

Can you imagine the hysteria that would come from the unions if Ford or GM decided to upgrade its factories and cut half its labor force voluntarily? That's how unions are destroying our economy. Ban them all.

What we should all remember is the CAW is saying they will not participate in any wage or benefit cuts to improve the Big 3's competitiveness. There attitude is hand the money over and shut the f@#* up.

During the last negotiations this spring/summer, Buzz Hargrove was asked about the disadvantage the big 3 had versus toyota/honda due to labour costs. Buzz stated that the CAW refused to be compared to the transplants. Problem is, consumers do, and they will make a decision based on what is best for them. Buzz also told a website in an interview around the same time he told GM they were going to go bankrupt. That didn't stop him from demanding contract improvement though...

What I have always found odd, is the lack of support the big 3 get from the public sector unionized workers. Go to any school, hospital, gov't agency, and the % of vehicles(newer) from imports is off the charts.

[voodoo401]

GM paid over 37 billion to the Gov. more then Honda and Toyota combined plus when you add all the employees paying income tax the government can’t afford to loose the big 3 (Heard on the radio that Honda and Toyota do not make engines or transmissions in NA and quite a few other parts).
I would not support a bail out but I would support forcing the other companies making most of the high dolar items in NA and not just for assembly.

[AllWheelDrift]

GM paid over 37 billion to the Gov. more then Honda and Toyota combined plus when you add all the employees paying income tax the government can’t afford to loose the big 3.
Why not? It seems to me those people won't become permanent welfare bums. They will find other jobs and continue to pay taxes. Likewise, something will rise out of the ashes of the Big 3. It's not like the resources they have and use will just vanish.

The real problem is the big 3 are not in a position where restructuring can save them. Either they become essentially nationalized by the government redistributing tax dollars to them on a continuous basis which even the government is fighting by demanding a sustainable plan from them, or they are allowed to fail, wiping out their pension liabilities and union contracts, allowing one or more competative auto manufacturers to rise from their ashes.

[dash riprock]

Why not? It seems to me those people won't become permanent welfare bums. They will find other jobs and continue to pay taxes. Likewise, something will rise out of the ashes of the Big 3. It's not like the resources they have and use will just vanish.

The real problem is the big 3 are not in a position where restructuring can save them. Either they become essentially nationalized by the government redistributing tax dollars to them on a continuous basis which even the government is fighting by demanding a sustainable plan from them, or they are allowed to fail, wiping out their pension liabilities and union contracts, allowing one or more competative auto manufacturers to rise from their ashes.

Sad but true. Our stimulas money will be sucked up by GM/Ford/Chrysler liabilities in a nanosecond.

[Goober56]

What we should all remember is the CAW is saying they will not participate in any wage or benefit cuts to improve the Big 3's competitiveness. There attitude is hand the money over and shut the f@#* up.

During the last negotiations this spring/summer, Buzz Hargrove was asked about the disadvantage the big 3 had versus toyota/honda due to labour costs. Buzz stated that the CAW refused to be compared to the transplants. Problem is, consumers do, and they will make a decision based on what is best for them. Buzz also told a website in an interview around the same time he told GM they were going to go bankrupt. That didn't stop him from demanding contract improvement though...

What I have always found odd, is the lack of support the big 3 get from the public sector unionized workers. Go to any school, hospital, gov't agency, and the % of vehicles(newer) from imports is off the charts.

Demanding contract improvement? Do you live in a bubble, or can you not read? The loss of 3 weeks vacation is not an improvement. The loss of COLA for the first part of this agreement is not an improvement. The loss of Dock & Janitorial jobs is not an improvement. The merging of trades is not an improvement. If you can show me what improved in the last contract then I will shake your hand and buy you a beer, because clearly these things are not improvements.

The CAW has been in concessionary mode since the 2005 contract and for people to say the workers need to give more aren't really informed as to what is happening. The current state of the Big3 is quite simply piss poor management at its best. Holding on to truck platforms while gas was sky rocketing was insane, and when the bottom fell out, so too did their profits.
Don't blame the workers for this mess, they signed on the bottom line for a decent job with decent pay and benefits, things I would wish that any of you people here would have. Unskilled labour is a misused term. People are basically surrendering their bodies to do some of these jobs. I bet you would all be stunned to know that these people don't sleep and do crossword puzzles all day. Nope, these people are doing their part, every day, 1000+ times a day. Whether its working in the dust in a foundry or in the oilmists of an engine plant, or the obtuse angles of installing parts on a B&A line.

Here is a couple other links you might be interested in:

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/11/23/opinion-the-real-cost-of-unionized-auto-workers-70-hour-try/

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/countdown-worst-person-taking-70-hour-auto

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=1026e955-541c-4aa6-bcf2-56dfc3323682

And for those who say "Let them go under, they get unemployment anyways", that is such an ignorant statement on so many levels. If the Big3 go under you have the immediate impact of these people out of work, then as the ripple rolls outward you lose part suppliers and equipment manufacturers. Not to mention all the businesses in these communities. The simple fact of the matter is when a GM goes down a lot more comes with it.

I suggest you actually read both sides of the story before you start targeting people who have no control over whats happening right now. And please don't buy into the media outlets who's sole purpose in life seems to be causing panic and to polarize the publics view one way or the other.

[slavka012]

And for those who say "Let them go under, they get unemployment anyways", that is such an ignorant statement on so many levels. If the Big3 go under you have the immediate impact of these people out of work, then as the ripple rolls outward you lose part suppliers and equipment manufacturers. Not to mention all the businesses in these communities. The simple fact of the matter is when a GM goes down a lot more comes with it.


I don't give a damn, it's capitalism. Besides, you exaggerate. Those cars still need to be made, so most people will remain in business. There will be some fat trimming, that's for sure. I can't believe the workers get more than 70 bucks per hour.

[Goober56]

I don't give a damn, it's capitalism. Besides, you exaggerate. Those cars still need to be made, so most people will remain in business. There will be some fat trimming, that's for sure. I can't believe the workers get more than 70 bucks per hour.

Did you even bother clicking on those links? Just an FYI workers in the transplant factories make equal wages. And for all those American gov't types who are against this Bailout package, make sure you look in their backyard. Chances are they have already supported some factory or another with hundreds of millions in grease money.

[slavka012]

I did click, for the sake of an argument. I don't care what they write there, either.

Bottom line, if GM was not unionized, they could turnaround in a split second. Get rid of half of the staff, slash the wage to the rest, close some plants and become profitable company again. With union they just can't do that.

[florch]

I don't begrudge anyone a good wage, but when your business is no longer competitive or sustainable because from the executives down people make more than their competitors, to make second rate and increasingly irrelevant products, it can't last forever.

If you're upset as a line worker I can understand this. It's a very traumatizing time knowing that you have a skill set limited to one trade or industry and that your one lucky break is disappearing and you are faced with some or all of: upgrading, retraining, moving and decreased future salary expectations.

But guess what? Nobody owes you anything. I don't want to bail out someone who is overpaid relative to their skills or competition. If the big three were as efficient as their competitors, cars would be much cheaper. Why should I pay for crappy overpriced cars and a bailout too? If one cent goes in, it should be after bankruptcy, every single supplier and employee contract is opened and made competitive with Toyota and Honda, and new dollars go directly into making fuel efficient vehicles requiring far less man-hours per unit.

I've been through the turmoil of job loss - my industry is chaotic as well, and I must sound harsh, but I feel for you, I really do. But the sense of entitlement and worth tied to an occupation is only hurting you. Be thankful for the good years, but you'll be happier with your life if you take this opportunity to find something more rewarding.

[pitz]

Big part of the problem at GM/Ford/Chrysler is that every time they cut staff, they end up cutting their non-unionized engineers (so-called 'white collar' staff) -- the very people who are needed to create the designs and improve the processes so that the companies can produce competitive products in the future.

If these firms don't start investing aggressively in R&D, no matter what happens bailout-wise, they *will* be roadkill in the global auto market. Delivering engine designs of the 1970s in currently shipping products is severely behind the curve. Personally I say, shut down the factories for 2 or 3 years, put the professionals to work designing good cars that are efficient, retool everything, and open up. Keeping production of obsolete models in place with bailout money is a recipe for disaster.

I've personally been to a number of Chrysler, Ford, and GM factories in Canada, been on the production line, and have seen some of the blueprints for those production lines. What's striking is that half of the blueprints still bear the old Chrysler logo, from the 1980s and early 1990s. These factories are not modern at all, they're obsolete relics of the past cranking out cars innefficiently, while competitors are employing best-in-class technology.

[Goober56]

Big part of the problem at GM/Ford/Chrysler is that every time they cut staff, they end up cutting their non-unionized engineers (so-called 'white collar' staff) -- the very people who are needed to create the designs and improve the processes so that the companies can produce competitive products in the future.

I agree with you 100% here. Being in a trade it was frustrating working with outside engineering firms who were not on site to OK changes to plans because they messed them up. The problem lies in upper and mid management bloat. And while you can harp at the production people all you like the fact is that the Toyotas are 100 times more efficient running plants with less management.

I've personally been to a number of Chrysler, Ford, and GM factories in Canada, been on the production line, and have seen some of the blueprints for those production lines. What's striking is that half of the blueprints still bear the old Chrysler logo, from the 1980s and early 1990s. These factories are not modern at all, they're obsolete relics of the past cranking out cars innefficiently, while competitors are employing best-in-class technology.

Don't slap a label on all those plants, the plants in my area are pretty darn flexible.

I think what people don't realize here is that the Big3 are asking for low interest loans, IE Money that will be paid back with interest. Not an endless stream of blank checks that the banks ask for and get without any strings or oversight.

[dash riprock]

Demanding contract improvement? Do you live in a bubble, or can you not read? The loss of 3 weeks vacation is not an improvement. The loss of COLA for the first part of this agreement is not an improvement. The loss of Dock & Janitorial jobs is not an improvement. The merging of trades is not an improvement. If you can show me what improved in the last contract then I will shake your hand and buy you a beer, because clearly these things are not improvements.

The CAW has been in concessionary mode since the 2005 contract and for people to say the workers need to give more aren't really informed as to what is happening. The current state of the Big3 is quite simply piss poor management at its best. Holding on to truck platforms while gas was sky rocketing was insane, and when the bottom fell out, so too did their profits.
Don't blame the workers for this mess, they signed on the bottom line for a decent job with decent pay and benefits, things I would wish that any of you people here would have. Unskilled labour is a misused term. People are basically surrendering their bodies to do some of these jobs. I bet you would all be stunned to know that these people don't sleep and do crossword puzzles all day. Nope, these people are doing their part, every day, 1000+ times a day. Whether its working in the dust in a foundry or in the oilmists of an engine plant, or the obtuse angles of installing parts on a B&A line.

Here is a couple other links you might be interested in:

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/11/23/opinion-the-real-cost-of-unionized-auto-workers-70-hour-try/

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/countdown-worst-person-taking-70-hour-auto

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=1026e955-541c-4aa6-bcf2-56dfc3323682

And for those who say "Let them go under, they get unemployment anyways", that is such an ignorant statement on so many levels. If the Big3 go under you have the immediate impact of these people out of work, then as the ripple rolls outward you lose part suppliers and equipment manufacturers. Not to mention all the businesses in these communities. The simple fact of the matter is when a GM goes down a lot more comes with it.

I suggest you actually read both sides of the story before you start targeting people who have no control over whats happening right now. And please don't buy into the media outlets who's sole purpose in life seems to be causing panic and to polarize the publics view one way or the other.


Sorry to have upset you, but it was Buzz who stated that there would be no concessions in the last contract(his legacy right?). If your costs are beyond what the market is willing to pay, you have a problem. I do not begrudge you your income or benefits, you negotiated them well. If your income was 25% higher, I would be fine with it. I am not forced to buy your vehicles(though there are two Big 3 vehicle's in my driveway), so price your services and products as you see fit. Problem I have is when the taxpayer is asked to subsidize a private business. And it is fair to point out this is not the first time the automakers have asked to be subsidized. Ken Lewenza is demanding taxpayer dollars and flatly rejecting that the CAW come to the party and help make their employers profitable. I have a problem with that.

And compared to the concessions the UAW gave(and they announced more today), you did extremely well in the last negotiations. I hope that GM is able to ride out this storm and thrives in the future. I personally will continue to make the country of origin an important part of my purchasing habits. Good luck.

[Newbieinvestor]

Can you imagine the hysteria that would come from the unions if Ford or GM decided to upgrade its factories and cut half its labor force voluntarily? That's how unions are destroying our economy. Ban them all.
Yes!

Especially government unions:!:

[pitz]

I agree with you 100% here. Being in a trade it was frustrating working with outside engineering firms who were not on site to OK changes to plans because they messed them up.


My comments were aimed more towards longer-term R&D, and not immediate production engineering, but yeah. I know that Japanese (and probably Korean) firms are unique in that they actually require that professional engineers that design cars and design assembly lines spend some time on the production line.

Where, heaven forbid, if a non-union engineer goes onto a CAW or UAW production line and starts working..... Grievances, strikes, walkouts, you name it. In this environment, maybe even bricks through windows.


The problem lies in upper and mid management bloat. And while you can harp at the production people all you like the fact is that the Toyotas are 100 times more efficient running plants with less management.


Because everyone is on the same team, right? Whereas the big 3 North American firms have failed to create a culture of engagement.


I think what people don't realize here is that the Big3 are asking for low interest loans, IE Money that will be paid back with interest. Not an endless stream of blank checks that the banks ask for and get without any strings or oversight.

"low interest loans" are subsidies, and represent resources that could have been expended building things with legitimate economic demand, such as infrastructure.

Upgraded infrastructure creates tangible economic benefits. Creating millions of cars for which there is no market creates nothing. Keeping the auto manufacturers running in the absence of demand is just as bad as lighting entire blocks of houses on fire just to keep housing prices up. Similar tactics were tried during the Great Depression and they failed miserably.

[Newbieinvestor]

I've personally been to a number of Chrysler, Ford, and GM factories in Canada, been on the production line, and have seen some of the blueprints for those production lines. .
So that's what happened!

The 'big 3' believed your rantings on "hyperinflation coming" in the summer and the fact the opposite happened has led them to the brink!

Let's face facts: union auto workers are overpaid. Big 3 should go bankrupt, ditch the unions, and allow for people to reapply at market salaries.

You'd have a full qualified and hard-working labour force for less than $30/hour, easy.

And this labour force would actually get haircuts.

[Goober56]

Sorry to have upset you, but it was Buzz who stated that there would be no concessions in the last contract(his legacy right?). If your costs are beyond what the market is willing to pay, you have a problem. I do not begrudge you your income or benefits, you negotiated them well. If your income was 25% higher, I would be fine with it. I am not forced to buy your vehicles(though there are two Big 3 vehicle's in my driveway), so price your services and products as you see fit. Problem I have is when the taxpayer is asked to subsidize a private business. And it is fair to point out this is not the first time the automakers have asked to be subsidized. Ken Lewenza is demanding taxpayer dollars and flatly rejecting that the CAW come to the party and help make their employers profitable. I have a problem with that.

And compared to the concessions the UAW gave(and they announced more today), you did extremely well in the last negotiations. I hope that GM is able to ride out this storm and thrives in the future. I personally will continue to make the country of origin an important part of my purchasing habits. Good luck.

You didn't upset me, it just strikes a chord with me that everyone thinks we are multi-millionaires who don't deserve a decent wage. You frown at the auto companies yet happily sign away any money to keep the banks rolling. Remember that these companies gave these things to us. There was no gun pointed at anyones head. Frankly if they were too dumb to figure out just exactly what they should have gave, instead of what they gave then thats their fault.

The simple truth here is that we could work for free but your car prices won't go down an inch. I was shown a pie graph in a meeting one time in relation to the different costs associated with a vehicle. The smallest piece of that graph was a 5% slice that was labelled "Labour & Inventory".

Also don't make the mistake that Hargrove, and now Lewenza, speak for the entire CAW. While they are generally supported by the old boys network most of us have our own opinions.

Lastly if they want our help, don't ask for it every damn year. Come up with a viable business plan, present it to the membership and lets go. Don't come to us with your tin cup every 6 months and say we need more help, obviously the people in charge are not doing their job properly.

[Newbieinvestor]

everyone thinks we are multi-millionaires who don't deserve a decent wage. .
There's the problem.

Your "deserving" of a "decent wage" is a fake construct.

What's a "decent wage?" Let the market decide.

I'm sure someone at Walmart wants $75/hour.

If the big 3 dump the unions, and have open hiring, they would have a full labour force within a few weeks at half of current wages/perks. This new force would work for what they think is a 'decent' wage.

Auto unions are spoiled dinosaurs.

As soon as the big 3 dump their unions, they will become competitive and won't need to beg for government welfare to survive.

[pitz]

The 'big 3' believed your rantings on "hyperinflation coming" in the summer and the fact the opposite happened has led them to the brink!


Nothing would save the big 3, hyperinflation or hyperdeflation. Both cause a collapse in business production because risk premia in pricing inputs and outputs become unnacceptably high.


Let's face facts: union auto workers are overpaid. Big 3 should go bankrupt, ditch the unions, and allow for people to reapply at market salaries.


Overpaid or underpaid, the problem is that union and management inflexibility has left an industry that has not been able to focus on productivity and supply chain efficiency.

Car manufacturers offshore have suppliers located in the same building, on the same campus, building up subassemblies, which are then fed into the main integrator's assembly line.

The UAW/CAW does not allow this integration because they want all workers under the same roof to be a member of the same union.


You'd have a full qualified and hard-working labour force for less than $30/hour, easy.


Agreed. Maybe even higher than $30/hour if the company could build a car that was well-researched, easier to build with automated machines, and could provide enough value to the consumer to justify paying a premium price.

Germany's auto industry does quite well paying good wages because, ostensibly, they produce, for the most part, a premium product that attracts a higher price in the marketplace. Why are people willing to pay for Mercedes compared to Chrysler? Because they're convinced that a Mercedes is better engineered, will last longer, and will provide overall long-term lower cost of ownership.

Industry can, and must share its gains, its profits with labour. But neither management, nor labour can be cancers on a business, or an entire industry, when there is a desperate need for engineering revitalization.


And this labour force would actually get haircuts.

Make people work smarter, not for less. Nuke management, nuke the unions, bring in some qualified professional engineers to run the companies as technical businesses. It might be a financial disaster at first, but at least things would get done, and efficiencies could eventually be realized as the grunt work is done.

Set the goalpost very high. "All new GM/Ford/Chrysler cars must get an average of 60mpg or better". Pour the money into engineering. Rehabilitate those factories, rebuild the supply chains, and then go build cars that make sense. The status quo isn't good enough anymore.

[Goober56]

Where, heaven forbid, if a non-union engineer goes onto a CAW or UAW production line and starts working..... Grievances, strikes, walkouts, you name it. In this environment, maybe even bricks through windows.

I doubt you will ever see a strike or walkout from the Big3, at least in Canada, from now until the end of time. Saying that, the first line in the master agreement reads: "The union understands that the company has the right to manage its business." Engineers, how ever few there might be, are allowed to do their jobs.
If how ever someone was to come down and start doing a union job, then there would be a problem. Again no strike or walkout.


Because everyone is on the same team, right? Whereas the big 3 North American firms have failed to create a culture of engagement.


There was a time when small work groups were new in our plants, we all thought it was a great idea. What they have turned into, even from the get go, was the company pretending to care what we thought and not acting on anything. They still do it today, but attendance is poor because they clearly don't care what the people think. Even though they tell you otherwise.
"low interest loans" are subsidies, and represent resources that could have been expended building things with legitimate economic demand, such as infrastructure.

Upgraded infrastructure creates tangible economic benefits. Creating millions of cars for which there is no market creates nothing. Keeping the auto manufacturers running in the absence of demand is just as bad as lighting entire blocks of houses on fire just to keep housing prices up. Similar tactics were tried during the Great Depression and they failed miserably.

I agree with you. But where is the real money made in this world? Its off the backs of the workers themselves, and mostly in the manufacturing industry. Clearly we live in an age where the powers that be want to rid themselves of actually having to make things, ergo, we farm it out to the China's of the world. And as we erode the lower income into middle income tax base the rest of us suffer as well. A GM, Ford, Chrysler bankruptcy doesn't just affect those companies. The thousands of parts suppliers, who will go under sending hundreds of thousands more to the street, not to mention the suppliers of those suppliers. The communities where the money is spent loses. Things like UnitedWay and other charities suffer and in the end it will affect you to.

Its not just bad business that has put the Big3 where its at today. Right now its a monster combination of things coming together in giant wave of disaster. #1 Gross mismanagement. #2 Foreign borders closed to NA Vehicles, while they dump happily over here. #3 Of course the credit crunch.

Ford is really the only one I see coming out of this with out a lot of pain. I think they saw what was coming in regards to the credit crunch and planned accordingly. Also the fact that their plan to congress was just for access to a $9billion dollar line of credit, just in case.

As for these things not working out? Ask Chrylser how it worked out for them in the early 80s, then ask the US government how they made out from that deal.

The point here folks is that I don't begrudge you for making money crunching numbers, or doing whatever is you do. We are all in the pile of crap fighting for a decent life for our families, and in the end thats all we want. And its not for you to tell me what I should be making, nor is it for me to tell you that. You should be fighting along side your neighbors and supporting each other.

[dash riprock]

You didn't upset me, it just strikes a chord with me that everyone thinks we are multi-millionaires who don't deserve a decent wage. You frown at the auto companies yet happily sign away any money to keep the banks rolling. Remember that these companies gave these things to us. There was no gun pointed at anyones head. Frankly if they were too dumb to figure out just exactly what they should have gave, instead of what they gave then thats their fault.

The simple truth here is that we could work for free but your car prices won't go down an inch. I was shown a pie graph in a meeting one time in relation to the different costs associated with a vehicle. The smallest piece of that graph was a 5% slice that was labelled "Labour & Inventory".

Also don't make the mistake that Hargrove, and now Lewenza, speak for the entire CAW. While they are generally supported by the old boys network most of us have our own opinions.

Lastly if they want our help, don't ask for it every damn year. Come up with a viable business plan, present it to the membership and lets go. Don't come to us with your tin cup every 6 months and say we need more help, obviously the people in charge are not doing their job properly.


Have a problem with the "no one held a gun to their heads" argument. The UAW and Caw both employed the tactic of selecting a target each contract round. Strikes were the gun to the head of the manufacturer targetted as they saw customers leave to their competitors, while bills continued to pile up. It is an extremely effective tool to gain wage, benefit, and work place rules improvements.


How long have you worked for GM? My curiosity makes me ask this . What has been the CAW response to their members over the years to the growth of imports, especially Honda and Toyota who have Ontario plants? Why have the CAW not been succesful in organizing these transplants? I don't think management took them serious enough, wondering about the union

[Goober56]

There's the problem.

Your "deserving" of a "decent wage" is a fake construct.

What's a "decent wage?" Let the market decide.

I'm sure someone at Walmart wants $75/hour.

If the big 3 dump the unions, and have open hiring, they would have a full labour force within a few weeks at half of current wages/perks. This new force would work for what they think is a 'decent' wage.

Auto unions are spoiled dinosaurs.

As soon as the big 3 dump their unions, they will become competitive and won't need to beg for government welfare to survive.

You have to be kidding me right? I am not exactly sure what you do, but I am willing to bet that someone would come in and do it for half or less of what you make now. This is not the point. And for the last time autoworkers DON'T MAKE $70 AN HOUR.

The unions don't control the product management. The unions don't design the vehicles in the pipe line. The unions don't buy parts from suppliers. The unions have nothing to do with managing the day to day business decisions that need to be made. The unions put pieces of a vehicle together, thats all we control. I'm not exactly sure where your hatred of unions and autoworkers come from but damn bro you need to cool off a bit.

[Goober56]

Have a problem with the "no one held a gun to their heads" argument. The UAW and Caw both employed the tactic of selecting a target each contract round. Strikes were the gun to the head of the manufacturer targetted as they saw customers leave to their competitors, while bills continued to pile up. It is an extremely effective tool to gain wage, benefit, and work place rules improvements.

Because in the end its a relic of the old days and pretty much meaningless. A strike in this day in age would mean some kind of gigantic issue such as touching the pensions of those already retired etc. (The union has a pretty strong belief that you were told you would get $X/month in retirement that you should maintain that, and that would probably be the only thing I could see them striking over).


How long have you worked for GM? My curiosity makes me ask this . What has been the CAW response to their members over the years to the growth of imports, especially Honda and Toyota who have Ontario plants? Why have the CAW not been succesful in organizing these transplants? I don't think management took them serious enough, wondering about the union

I actually work for Ford for 14 years, until the new year then I'll be at a new job. Some unions have tried, but the main reason they aren't unionized is because they make the same money and benefits that we already enjoy. So I guess they market has already dictated as the previous poster suggested.

The thing you have to understand, especially if you have never worked in a factory like this is the fact that in all the time I have been at Ford, they have striven to be Toyota. They talk about Toyota this and Toyota that, and I have no issue with that. Toyota is a successful company and clearly their process should be studied and utilized. Every year there is a new acronym for some process, that just gets changed every year. Ford talks a big game but thats all they do is talk.

Saying that I have no problem buying a Toyota or a Honda built here in Canada. Because that supports jobs in Canada, my neighbor and your neighbor. I live by the Buy what your neighbors build motto. If I can't find Canadian made, I look for US, rarely do I buy off shore products, thats just because of what I believe.

[pitz]

Saying that, the first line in the master agreement reads: "The union understands that the company has the right to manage its business." Engineers, how ever few there might be, are allowed to do their jobs.


But if their jobs infringe on work that is done by union members, then the policy of the unions is to grieve. Non-union engineering staff cannot be sent down to the floor to do anything but what is directly considered engineering. They are not allowed to spend a couple days learning the process of installing motors in a hands-on way. They can go down to the line and observe union workers installing motors, but they can't actually install the motors themselves.

That's where Japanese/Korean/German, and the Big 3 differ philosophically. All engineering staff from the J/K/G firms are expected to spend time on the production floor, not only observing work, but actually doing it. Do that on a UAW/CAW big-3 line, and watch the fur fly.



If how ever someone was to come down and start doing a union job, then there would be a problem.


Exactly! Even though, occaisonal performance of union jobs by management is essential so that the professionals in management can formulate more efficient, more productive, and safer ways of doing the job.



Again no strike or walkout.


Ultimately, any auto maker that unilaterally abolished union scope clauses in a UAW/CAW manufacturing plant would face a strike. The grievance/arbitration process might grind its wheels for a few years, but the eventual outcome would be a strike. This is why the power of unions must be broken in the industry, and management replaced as well.


There was a time when small work groups were new in our plants, we all thought it was a great idea. What they have turned into, even from the get go, was the company pretending to care what we thought and not acting on anything. They still do it today, but attendance is poor because they clearly don't care what the people think. Even though they tell you otherwise.


Exactly... Which is exactly why management must be nuked as well, for incompetence. I'm not in favour of any unilateral solution such as "let's just get rid of unions", or "fire all the managers, they don't know what they're doing". The problem exists on both ends, and inflexibility and incompetence and a failure to appreciate reality on both ends is destroying the industry and the economy.


I agree with you. But where is the real money made in this world? Its off the backs of the workers themselves, and mostly in the manufacturing industry.


But overcapacity in manufacturing destroys, not creates wealth. Whether its building cars that aren't wanted, flying airplanes around that are empty, or burning down blocks of new houses to keep prices up -- it all serves to lower living standards.

Autoworkers have skills that are also very useful in infrastructure construction and development. There's no doubt in my mind that autoworkers that are trained in installing car stereos could easily be trained to run fibre optic trenching machines. The steel factories can make parts for new bridges and factories, instead of car parts. The world is not going to end if we stop manufacturing cars for a few years and put the workers to other uses.


As for these things not working out? Ask Chrylser how it worked out for them in the early 80s, then ask the US government how they made out from that deal.


On a risk-adjusted basis, the US government didn't make anything, IIRC. I'd say that such a bailout even cost the country because the death of Chrysler would have meant a replacement firm would have sprung up free of many of the problems that are now causing the serious crisis today.


The point here folks is that I don't begrudge you for making money crunching numbers, or doing whatever is you do. We are all in the pile of crap fighting for a decent life for our families, and in the end thats all we want. And its not for you to tell me what I should be making, nor is it for me to tell you that. You should be fighting along side your neighbors and supporting each other.

And that's exactly what I'm doing. But the economy will only get better once cancers are excised from it, and new tissue (industries, highly productive, efficient, and best-in class) is allowed to form. If the cancer can be cut out, why not cut it out instead of just endlessly treating it with chemo and radiation.

[Newbieinvestor]

You have to be kidding me right? I am not exactly sure what you do, but I am willing to bet that someone would come in and do it for half or less of what you make now. This is not the point. And for the last time autoworkers DON'T MAKE $70 AN HOUR.

The unions don't control the product management. The unions don't design the vehicles in the pipe line. The unions don't buy parts from suppliers. The unions have nothing to do with managing the day to day business decisions that need to be made. The unions put pieces of a vehicle together, thats all we control. I'm not exactly sure where your hatred of unions and autoworkers come from but damn bro you need to cool off a bit.
Strong evidence of what I'm writing about. That attacks, the accusations ("hatred"), the insults.

I'm not kidding at all. Unions are a BIG part of the problem for the North American automakers.

No one likes to be told they are the problem. However, it's the reality.

The Big 3 need to end all contracts with the unions and have open hiring.

It's that simple.

[Goober56]

And that's exactly what I'm doing. But the economy will only get better once cancers are excised from it, and new tissue (industries, highly productive, efficient, and best-in class) is allowed to form. If the cancer can be cut out, why not cut it out instead of just endlessly treating it with chemo and radiation.

Several auto analyst sites have concluded that Ford's quality is on par with Toyota's, I'm really not sure how much further you expect to get. Clearly Toyota is the benchmark.

[Goober56]

Strong evidence of what I'm writing about. That attacks, the accusations ("hatred"), the insults.

I'm not kidding at all. Unions are a BIG part of the problem for the North American automakers.

No one likes to be told they are the problem. However, it's the reality.

The Big 3 need to end all contracts with the unions and have open hiring.

It's that simple.

Err did I miss something? I am quite sure I didn't attack, insult or accuse you of anything. I was just stating my point that autoworkers do not make $70 an hour, for some reason you refuse to believe it...
So whats with your hatred of everything union? I am trying to understand where you are coming from.

[pitz]

Several auto analyst sites have concluded that Ford's quality is on par with Toyota's, I'm really not sure how much further you expect to get. Clearly Toyota is the benchmark.

Toyota makes money, and up until the recent crash, was able to grow its market share.

Ford, not so. So whatever Toyota is doing must be working better than that of Ford.

[Newbieinvestor]

Err did I miss something? I am quite sure I didn't attack, insult or accuse you of anything. I was just stating my point that autoworkers do not make $70 an hour, for some reason you refuse to believe it...
So whats with your hatred of everything union? I am trying to understand where you are coming from.
The automakers do not need unions. That's not "anti-union", that's just life.

How much do you earn/hour?

[Goober56]

Toyota makes money, and up until the recent crash, was able to grow its market share.

Ford, not so. So whatever Toyota is doing must be working better than that of Ford.

I'm not disagreeing with you, in fact its been that way for years. But the quality of product, referring to your earlier post, must play a part, no? Ford's problem is that when they should have been developing cars they were hung up with their trucks and SUVs for the huge profits off them.

The automakers do not need unions. That's not "anti-union", that's just life.

How much do you earn/hour?

Straight up, $34 with everything all in (benefits etc), probably $44ish.

[dash riprock]

Because in the end its a relic of the old days and pretty much meaningless. A strike in this day in age would mean some kind of gigantic issue such as touching the pensions of those already retired etc. (The union has a pretty strong belief that you were told you would get $X/month in retirement that you should maintain that, and that would probably be the only thing I could see them striking over).




I actually work for Ford for 14 years, until the new year then I'll be at a new job. Some unions have tried, but the main reason they aren't unionized is because they make the same money and benefits that we already enjoy. So I guess they market has already dictated as the previous poster suggested.

I asked this in an earlier post. Why is there no union solidarity when it comes to purchasing vehicles? Seems to me that the CAW plus the CLC etc has done nothing in educating their union brothers and sisters on why they should buy an union built vehicle

The thing you have to understand, especially if you have never worked in a factory like this is the fact that in all the time I have been at Ford, they have striven to be Toyota. They talk about Toyota this and Toyota that, and I have no issue with that. Toyota is a successful company and clearly their process should be studied and utilized. Every year there is a new acronym for some process, that just gets changed every year. Ford talks a big game but thats all they do is talk.

My experience working for the Gov't was the same. Identify the new managerial trend, hire consultants, organize workshops, write report on its successes, repeat again next year.
Saying that I have no problem buying a Toyota or a Honda built here in Canada. Because that supports jobs in Canada, my neighbor and your neighbor. I live by the Buy what your neighbors build motto. If I can't find Canadian made, I look for US, rarely do I buy off shore products, thats just because of what I believe.

As I mentioned in a previous post, that is what I believe as well for several reasons including self interest.

good luck with your new career

[AllWheelDrift]

Several auto analyst sites have concluded that Ford's quality is on par with Toyota's, I'm really not sure how much further you expect to get. Clearly Toyota is the benchmark.
Maybe the quality is there, but their reputation probably hasn't quite caught up, and there's a lot more to making a car that people want to buy than just quality. Athetics are a big factor, and how about performance and fuel economy?

[Goober56]

As I mentioned in a previous post, that is what I believe as well for several reasons including self interest.

good luck with your new career

I think your post got messed up there a bit, but I get the gist of what you were saying. I would never tell you that you better buy a Ford product or else. I've stated my belief in buying Canadian and its getting harder and harder every day, but I do it. In the end if you support your country the rest will take care of itself, if you support another country, well good luck with that.

[Goober56]

Maybe the quality is there, but their reputation probably hasn't quite caught up, and there's a lot more to making a car that people want to buy than just quality. Athetics are a big factor, and how about performance and fuel economy?

These things the union can't control, which is what this last flurry of posts was about.

[AllWheelDrift]

These things the union can't control, which is what this last flurry of posts was about.
I wouldn't exactly say the union is able to control quality. Influence perhaps, but design, process and parts/materials probably have more to do with quality as long as you don't have incompetant workers.

If the cost of union workers means the companies can't spend enough on engineering then I argue the unions are a factor in other parts. Then again, given the obscene salaries of executives, they should be able to find some money for engineering from there.

[Caillo]

And for the last time autoworkers DON'T MAKE $70 AN HOUR.



You're right! They make $73 an hour:

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=39499

The fact is Goober the problems with the big 3 are management, the CAW and the economy:

1) Management: The big 3 management have been implementing short-term strategies ever since the 80's. Their only concern was "how can we make money over the next 3 years", while Honda and Toyota asked: "How can we make money over the next 20 years". This is why Honda and Toyota have enjoyed significant quality advantages throughout the 90's and have a huge head start on hybrid technology, compared to the big 3.

2) CAW/UAW: While times were good, the CAW/UAW took the big 3 for a ride: at every turn they threatened to, and sometimes did, go on strike which cost GM/Ford and Chrysler MILLIONS of dollars per DAY. They milked all 3 to the absolute fullest, to the point where an non-skilled auto-assembler made $73 an hour (what other job in the world can you have no formal training/skill and make $73 an hour???). Furthermore, contracts were set up in a way which made it virtually impossible to fire an employee, resulting in non-productive employees (ones who constantly call in sick, do a poor job, etc.) being able to retain employment despite efforts for them to be removed.

Then, when times went sour, the CAW/UAW dug their feet in and barely budged.

3) The economy: The purchase of a car is the second biggest investment people will make in their lives. Therefore, for the majority of people, credit is essential in being able to purchase a new car. With the current liquidity crisis in the U.S., credit has gone dry and so has the demand for cars, which is killing the big 3.


That's pretty much how I see it. While we cant do anything about #3, we can change #1 and #2. Management needs to shape up or ship out and think more long term while the UAW and CAW need to make real concessions. Only then will these companies be saved.

If Ken Lewenzaa continues to insist that no concessions be made, he may soon run out of auto-workers to represent.

[CeoOfKFC]

They need to stop printing money. Ron Paul explains the truth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blFDaEFcrw8

[Goober56]

You're right! They make $73 an hour:

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=39499

2) CAW/UAW: While times were good, the CAW/UAW took the big 3 for a ride: at every turn they threatened to, and sometimes did, go on strike which cost GM/Ford and Chrysler MILLIONS of dollars per DAY. They milked all 3 to the absolute fullest, to the point where an non-skilled auto-assembler made $73 an hour (what other job in the world can you have no formal training/skill and make $73 an hour???). Furthermore, contracts were set up in a way which made it virtually impossible to fire an employee, resulting in non-productive employees (ones who constantly call in sick, do a poor job, etc.) being able to retain employment despite efforts for them to be removed.

Then, when times went sour, the CAW/UAW dug their feet in and barely budged.


That's pretty much how I see it. While we cant do anything about #3, we can change #1 and #2. Management needs to shape up or ship out and think more long term while the UAW and CAW need to make real concessions. Only then will these companies be saved.

If Ken Lewenzaa continues to insist that no concessions be made, he may soon run out of auto-workers to represent.

Heres a quote from your link:


“That includes the hourly pay, plus the benefits they’re receiving and all the other costs to General Motors, Ford and Chrysler, including legacy costs – retirement costs, pensions, and so on – so it’s looking at the total labor costs per hour worked for workers,” Perry said.

Do you understand the math there? They are taking absolutely every single cost related to a worker, whether he is working or not as noted above, and dividing that among their current worked hours. I direct you to these links especially the second link:

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/11/23/opinion-the-real-cost-of-unionized-auto-workers-70-hour-try/

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/countdown-worst-person-taking-70-hour-auto <-- about 1:45 in.

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=1026e955-541c-4aa6-bcf2-56dfc3323682

I can't force you to read anything, but if you actually care at all about having a real debate about this, do yourself a favour and read it.

In regards to the CAW digging in... Come up with a plan then. We won't concede to knee jerk reactions and things we don't think will work. Come up with a plan and prove to us that it will work.

As I have stated in earlier posts we have, at least at Ford, given up a lot in these last few contracts, we are willing to work with the company because clearly our jobs depend on the fact that the company will do well. Don't base your opinion on autoworkers through Ken Lewenza, none of us had a say as to who was to take over from Hargrove. Lewenza wasn't my choice.

[Goober56]

They need to stop printing money. Ron Paul explains the truth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blFDaEFcrw8

I agree with you, but Pandora's box was opened with the ever growing Bank Bailouts, and hows that working out?
I like at the end of that video about the perks the execs get.

[Newbieinvestor]

I agree with you, but Pandora's box was opened with the ever growing Bank Bailouts, and hows that working out?
I like at the end of that video about the perks the execs get.
Did you ever think of joining the CAF?

[Caillo]

Do you understand the math there? They are taking absolutely every single cost related to a worker, whether he is working or not as noted above, and dividing that among their current worked hours. I direct you to these links especially the second link:




You know what, I was gonna write out a big reply, but I know how "union guys" handle this type of stuff, so I'm just gonna save my breath... If you think your total compensation is fair, then fine.. Whatever... You won't find a lot of support outside the union hall or plant turnstiles FYI.

Just remember, you guys cashed in big when times were good... Now times are tough and if you're not willing to make real concessions then you won't have to worry about fighting for anything else in the future as all of those Minivans, Engines and Transmissions built in Windsor will just be built in Asia or Mexico...



The choice is yours, brother!

[Newbieinvestor]

You know what, I was gonna write out a big reply, but I know how "union guys" handle this type of stuff, so I'm just gonna save my breath... !
Good idea. A combination of brainwashing and economic selfishness is hard to overcome with the "brothers and sisters."

If you think your total compensation is fair, then fine.. Whatever... You won't find a lot of support outside the union hall or plant turnstiles FYI.
Or even inside. A lot of union people know it's a sham filled with thuggism and waste.

Just remember, you guys cashed in big when times were good...
We're supposed to forget about this.

Now times are tough and if you're not willing to make real concessions then you won't have to worry about fighting for anything else in the future as all of those Minivans, Engines and Transmissions built in Windsor will just be built in Asia or Mexico...
Which is why I suggested the CAF.

The choice is yours, brother
Nah, they'll whine and squirm and wiggle and accept whatever, despite all the "we deserve" rhetoric. McGuinty will offer them jobs somewhere in the bureaucracy, make-work projects.

[Prankster]

+1 for Goober!! Until all of these nay sayers walk a mile in a factory and get a working mans degree, become involved in the process of big three and feeder plants, they will never understand anything but what they call logic from the pen and paper. They will never understand Goob about the concessions we have made in the last several years to keep the companies afloat, a price we pay dearly keep our wages at the level they are. They dont even know what in our contracts or the language that surrounds each plant and their environment and why it is there.

That $70+ plus an hour everyone is throwing out is retiree cost, benefits ect. and every person that has worked the line for the company is currently tied into the current person on the line. Where as the real cost of the guy on the line is about $40 all in an hour, same as the foreign automakers, they enjoy the same benefits as us unionized workers, they just havent been around as long to have the legacy cost, wait until toyota and honda have retirees.


It was mentioned that the caw/uaw wont allow for migration of workers on the floor, gm has many joint ventures, with foreign automakers, hell they even have one with Toyota in California, were workers are migrated on the assembly line.

[Goober56]

You know what, I was gonna write out a big reply, but I know how "union guys" handle this type of stuff, so I'm just gonna save my breath... If you think your total compensation is fair, then fine.. Whatever... You won't find a lot of support outside the union hall or plant turnstiles FYI.

Just remember, you guys cashed in big when times were good... Now times are tough and if you're not willing to make real concessions then you won't have to worry about fighting for anything else in the future as all of those Minivans, Engines and Transmissions built in Windsor will just be built in Asia or Mexico...


How do us "union guys" handle this type of stuff, please fill me in. I haven't insulted anyone, I haven't threatened anyone. I thought we were having a nice intellectual debate about the issue, apparently I guessed wrong.

Also just remember the company handed that stuff over.. If you've never bargained a contract, let me give a very basic primer:

Union: We're looking for this.
Company: We're looking for this.
Union: OK if you give us this, we'll give you that.
Company: Alright then, if you want this though, we want this.

Any step in the process the company could have said "Whoa, hold on here fellas, this is beyond what we can afford. As being the responsible business managers that we are, we aren't able to offer that."

So again, I'm not really sure what you mean by "real" concessions. Giving up 3 weeks vacation, giving up hundreds of janitorial and stock jobs, taking a COLA freeze for 2 years and some other stuff I don't recall off the top of my head. This is what the company ASKED US FOR, to help them out in May. We agreed to it. Again I say if something more needs to be done, then bring it to us with a sound business case and it will be considered.
Just because Lewenza is the President of the CAW doesn't mean he speaks for all of us, remember that.

[Goober56]

Did you ever think of joining the CAF?

You lost me here my friend.


Good idea. A combination of brainwashing and economic selfishness is hard to overcome with the "brothers and sisters."


I point you to my last reply, I thought we were having an intelligent debate. I am open to any information you might want to share with me as I like to read and try and understand both sides, but your constant unions are the downfall of man is getting old.


We're supposed to forget about this.


Again see my last reply in regards to the company.


Nah, they'll whine and squirm and wiggle and accept whatever, despite all the "we deserve" rhetoric. McGuinty will offer them jobs somewhere in the bureaucracy, make-work projects.

I guess fighting for your job and right to support your family has become a bad thing lately? Please fill me in on why your hatred of unions is boiling over, I'm just trying to figure out where your coming from man.

[pitz]

I guess fighting for your job and right to support your family has become a bad thing lately? Please fill me in on why your hatred of unions is boiling over, I'm just trying to figure out where your coming from man.

He's probably upset because for every union job that is overpaid, there are various jobs that are underpaid, or worse, not even created, because labour markets aren't being allowed to be efficient.

For instance, in the auto sector, fresh out of high school line workers make higher wages than freshly hired university engineering grads. Is that right, is that an efficient allocation of resources? To be giving more money to some fresh out of high school worker, versus compensating an engineer properly? Hell no.

The problem with unions in the public service and in the auto sector essentially comes down to -- are the brightest and most well-trained workers in our economy receiving the best pay? The answer is clearly no. Ultimately, this leads to a decline in living standards in the long run, as the brightest simply migrate offshore, or don't even bother to apply their talents to the litany of problems facing us.

The economy and the issues that we're facing are so important that now is not the time to be complacent about ensuring that our brightest scientists and engineers finally receive the part of the economic pie that they deserve, so they can come up with the solutions needed to pull us out of this mess. Archaic union rules that force a disproportionate amount of the compensation in the economy to flow to semi-skilled labour deprives top-notch skilled labour of their fair share, and diminishes their contributions in the economy when their contributions are so desperately required.

Back to the topic of the thread, if GM/Ford/Chrysler can't hire, nuture, and let top engineering talent do their thing -- then all those union workers don't have a chance of keeping their jobs, bailout or not. We're facing a science and engineering crisis, even moreso than a financial crisis right now, and the sooner our leaders wake up and put policies in place to unleash the talent that's out there, the better.

[Newbieinvestor]

The problem with unions in the public service and in the auto sector essentially comes down to -- are the brightest and most well-trained workers in our economy receiving the best pay? The answer is clearly no. Ultimately, this leads to a decline in living standards in the long run, as the brightest simply migrate offshore, or don't even bother to apply their talents to the litany of problems facing us..
Very impressive, pitz. You're right on.

Actually, I don't mind the auto workers unions.

They aren't nearly the pathetic scam that the public sectors unions are.

Auto workers at least, um...work! I only hope they understand the current climate and help get the auto sector back to profits and stability.

In fact, I suspect that with gas/oil dropping, GM/FORD/Chrysler will be okay with some short term help. Although, I'd never buy any of these brands, some short term loans are reasonable.

Public sector unions? :mad:

[Goober56]

He's probably upset because for every union job that is overpaid, there are various jobs that are underpaid, or worse, not even created, because labour markets aren't being allowed to be efficient.

For instance, in the auto sector, fresh out of high school line workers make higher wages than freshly hired university engineering grads. Is that right, is that an efficient allocation of resources? To be giving more money to some fresh out of high school worker, versus compensating an engineer properly? Hell no.

But this isn't the crux of the argument. We aren't talking about other jobs and whether or not he is underpaid. The point was the union wasn't making concessions to help out, I stated that they were. Now if you want to go down this road thats fine, again this has nothing to do with the union thats managements fault for not letting their Engineers do their thing.

But I'll bite on the wage equality point you bring up. Ford is not a publicly owned company, if it was run by the government then you bet the wages would be rock bottom. See nurses and the wage gaps from here (and since I live so close to Detroit) and the ones who work in Detroit. I definitely know about this, my mother is an OR nurse here, my sister works in Detroit.


The problem with unions in the public service and in the auto sector essentially comes down to -- are the brightest and most well-trained workers in our economy receiving the best pay? The answer is clearly no. Ultimately, this leads to a decline in living standards in the long run, as the brightest simply migrate offshore, or don't even bother to apply their talents to the litany of problems facing us.


But I thought we were going to let the market dictate the wage. You can't have your cake and eat it too. Starting off in the Big3 right now you would be making less than $20/hr with almost no benefits, this was another concession that was made. In fact a lot of those people in which you speak are putting spark plugs in engines right this very second, since they couldn't find a job that paid enough in their field.


The economy and the issues that we're facing are so important that now is not the time to be complacent about ensuring that our brightest scientists and engineers finally receive the part of the economic pie that they deserve, so they can come up with the solutions needed to pull us out of this mess. Archaic union rules that force a disproportionate amount of the compensation in the economy to flow to semi-skilled labour deprives top-notch skilled labour of their fair share, and diminishes their contributions in the economy when their contributions are so desperately required.

I don't buy this argument at all. The company will offer you a salary based on a budget of how they see your experience and the salary range for your level on the job you are applying for. No union rules affect who a company hire. A recent article in a monthly magazine that Ford puts out one of the Design engineers stated this, "We were at a point where we were designing cars that we wanted, not what the general public wanted." This is was roughly 5 months ago, can you believe that? How do you make vehicles people want that way?

In my estimation if we were to pay people for what they were worth, I would have teachers at the top of my list, somewhere not too far would Nurses then Doctors.


Back to the topic of the thread, if GM/Ford/Chrysler can't hire, nuture, and let top engineering talent do their thing -- then all those union workers don't have a chance of keeping their jobs, bailout or not. We're facing a science and engineering crisis, even moreso than a financial crisis right now, and the sooner our leaders wake up and put policies in place to unleash the talent that's out there, the better.

I fully agree with you, but I don't see what's stopping them from doing that? Ford has been notorious over the years as being too conservative in their designs.. Clearly in the past they left a lot to be desired in some of the bombs they came up with. They could have been the first company to have dual sliding doors on minivans, but they dropped that ball.. In fact they dropped the minivan altogether for this abomination called the Flex, their so-called next family vehicle. First thing my wife said to me, it doesn't have sliding doors, because the people who generally drive those family type vans, are the moms. And generally they have kids and hands full of groceries or whatever and they don't feel like slamming doors in the adjacent parked vehicles. Its choices like this that has lead Ford to this point. Luckily for the people at Ford I think they have turned the corner and learned.

[Newbieinvestor]

, if it was run by the government then you bet the wages would be rock bottom. .
Rock bottom? Ha!

Seek new employment in the McGuinty/Miller "I'll hire you/you vote for me" scam that plagues the province!

Lots of trips. Little supervision.

And if you want $$

Ever think of joining the TTC?:twisted:

[Goober56]

Rock bottom? Ha!

Seek new employment in the McGuinty/Miller "I'll hire you/you vote for me" scam that plagues the province!

Lots of trips. Little supervision.

And if you want $$

Ever think of joining the TTC?:twisted:

Nah I quit my nice cushy job with Ford for less pay at UnionGas.

[pitz]

The company will offer you a salary based on a budget of how they see your experience and the salary range for your level on the job you are applying for.


But salary budgets for non-union workers are constrained by having to fund union salaries, union severance packages, etc. The Big-3 desperately need to hire more, and better engineers right now -- but they simply cannot afford to because the salaries that they're paying other workers are too high. If the Big-3 had labour flexibility, they could reduce salaries of the line workers, using the money to recruit and retain to engineering talent. Instead, they have no choice but to maintain their committments to the union line workers.


No union rules affect who a company hire. A recent article in a monthly magazine that Ford puts out one of the Design engineers stated this, "We were at a point where we were designing cars that we wanted, not what the general public wanted." This is was roughly 5 months ago, can you believe that?


Much of the jist of that quote pertains to a comment that I made previously, Ford/GM/Chrysler are so starved for capital that they cannot execute major reconfigurations of plant processes to produce the latest features that consumers want. The engineers are forced to resort to half-measures because of inflexible manufacturing, a lack of engineering capability, and an inflexible supply chain.

Engineers, in this instance, don't want to enter into projects that are doomed to engineering failure for lack of resources, ie: delivering a 60mpg fleet, because the engineering costs and engineering risk is simply too high for such weakly capitalized firms.

The Big-3 desperately need assistance, but the assistance should be, IMHO, to take the engineering design risks that would result in the company being able to deliver upon the 60mpg goal. Not simply providing production assistance on technically obsolete models.


How do you make vehicles people want that way?


They simply can't, because of the lack of resources and the lack of cash. The industry is caught in a classic 'chicken and egg' problem.


In my estimation if we were to pay people for what they were worth, I would have teachers at the top of my list, somewhere not too far would Nurses then Doctors.


But none of the activities of those professions are possible without primary industry. Mining, manufacturing, and innovation. At some point, we have to get back to basics. The basics have been neglected far too long. Teachers, nurses, bankers, and doctors leverage wealth created in the primary economy, into the service economy.


I fully agree with you, but I don't see what's stopping them from doing that? Ford has been notorious over the years as being too conservative in their designs..


Ford, GM, Chrysler have been extremely slow to adopt technology in their powerplants. A good half, if not more cars in Europe now ship with direct injection, which provides significant fuel savings and higher power density from the same block. North American auto makers are years behind. My 1971 Jaguar has an electronic spark system, factory-installed. GM and Ford were still shipping that mechanical spark junk in cars well into the early 90s. My 1956 Chevy Bel-Air gets mileage similar to a modern Chevy half-ton, even though they weigh about the same, and the Bel-Air is 50 years older. Amazing, really, how little things have progressed.


Luckily for the people at Ford I think they have turned the corner and learned.

Hopefully, although I'm skeptical.

[dash riprock]

He's probably upset because for every union job that is overpaid, there are various jobs that are underpaid, or worse, not even created, because labour markets aren't being allowed to be efficient.

For instance, in the auto sector, fresh out of high school line workers make higher wages than freshly hired university engineering grads. Is that right, is that an efficient allocation of resources? To be giving more money to some fresh out of high school worker, versus compensating an engineer properly? Hell no.

The problem with unions in the public service and in the auto sector essentially comes down to -- are the brightest and most well-trained workers in our economy receiving the best pay? The answer is clearly no. Ultimately, this leads to a decline in living standards in the long run, as the brightest simply migrate offshore, or don't even bother to apply their talents to the litany of problems facing us.

The economy and the issues that we're facing are so important that now is not the time to be complacent about ensuring that our brightest scientists and engineers finally receive the part of the economic pie that they deserve, so they can come up with the solutions needed to pull us out of this mess. Archaic union rules that force a disproportionate amount of the compensation in the economy to flow to semi-skilled labour deprives top-notch skilled labour of their fair share, and diminishes their contributions in the economy when their contributions are so desperately required.

Back to the topic of the thread, if GM/Ford/Chrysler can't hire, nuture, and let top engineering talent do their thing -- then all those union workers don't have a chance of keeping their jobs, bailout or not. We're facing a science and engineering crisis, even moreso than a financial crisis right now, and the sooner our leaders wake up and put policies in place to unleash the talent that's out there, the better.

I think you have to seperate public and private sector unions.

with private sector unions, if the union makes demands that exceed the companies ability to compete in the market, they lose sales, eventually they can disappear.

public sector unions are another beast completely. They don't worry about competitors since they are usually a state controlled monopoly. They also don't have to worry about employer going broke or running out of money as the tax payer can always be tapped for more.

the CAW is really one of the last of the truely strong private sector unions providing great wages and benefits,along with(they hope) strong pension benefits. As more of these strong private sector unions weaken, it will be interesting to see the reaction to the fact that the only workers with great guaranteed pensions, with high job security, great wages and benefits will be the public sector workers. So, public sector employees will be enjoying wages and benefits that their employers(the taxpayer) can only dream of. Do you think taxpayers may get a case of the redass in the future?

[Newbieinvestor]

Nah I quit my nice cushy job with Ford for less pay at UnionGas.
You seem like a good guy. So now you are UnionGas? Are they union?

[Newbieinvestor]

public sector unions are another beast completely. They don't worry about competitors since they are usually a state controlled monopoly. They also don't have to worry about employer going broke or running out of money as the tax payer can always be tapped for more.

Besides Quebec and the Seperatist money grabbers, public sector unions are THE issue holding Canada back from becoming the wealthy nation it should be.

[Goober56]

You seem like a good guy. So now you are UnionGas? Are they union?

Some of the people are, some aren't. It's an odd mix, but you definitely know which side you are on.

As far as the good guy comment goes, I'm just trying to make sure people know that there is more to the story than these "outrageous" $75/hr union jobs that are killing the company. I just can't believe there isn't more outrage aimed at the banks who seemingly walk up to the trough and guzzle down as much as they want, with the need for zero accountability.

[CeoOfKFC]

I agree with the notion to let the free market occur and NOT bail them out. Regardless of what happens their will be short term pain but in order to prevent long term pain the government should stop interfering in businesses.

If the Federal reserve bails them out then the companies will only attempt to restructure and lay off workers which they have been doing for years. There is no proof that they have a plan to reinvent themselves. Pumping the 30 or so billion into them is like investing in assets that aren't worth anything. Who wants to do that? In other words, this is just a short fix that will DELAY a bigger problem later on and the money will be wasted.

Obviously, they will have to print more money which in the long run will increase inflation and drive down the US dollar. How can the US do that when they already broke with trillions of dollars in debt. This will reduce the purchasing power and PRICES of consumer goods will not reduce with it. If anything they will increase. This will make EVERYONE suffer because their money will be worthless.

Hopefully we see some change and the US dollars do not become like the fake cash we see monopoly type games in the next 5 years.

[Sepiraph]

Bottom line is they are in the business to make money, nothing else really matters. They need to take whatever measure to make themselves profitable again, failing that bankruptcy is their only answer.

[Goober56]

But salary budgets for non-union workers are constrained by having to fund union salaries, union severance packages, etc. The Big-3 desperately need to hire more, and better engineers right now -- but they simply cannot afford to because the salaries that they're paying other workers are too high. If the Big-3 had labour flexibility, they could reduce salaries of the line workers, using the money to recruit and retain to engineering talent. Instead, they have no choice but to maintain their committments to the union line workers.

I still don't buy that. Ford is asking the US government for a $9billion line of credit in the chance that GM or Chrysler tanks, since they share suppliers, who would undoubtedly get nailed harder. They aren't even asking for any money, simply a stash that they can grab if the others go belly up.
Any company that would handcuff themselves like that, should fail.

Much of the jist of that quote pertains to a comment that I made previously, Ford/GM/Chrysler are so starved for capital that they cannot execute major reconfigurations of plant processes to produce the latest features that consumers want. The engineers are forced to resort to half-measures because of inflexible manufacturing, a lack of engineering capability, and an inflexible supply chain.

Ford mortgaged the farm last year to do this. They are closing a ton of truck plants and converting them into car plants. Ford has something ridiculous like $20bill in cash liquidity at their fingertips. But let me tell you something about how management has dropped the ball here. 3 years ago when Ford was in their "Way Forward Plan" v3 or v4 at that point, they were holding meetings for all employees at each plant to talk about the situation. I asked a question in regards to bringing Ford's vehicles in Europe, to NA. Nice looking cars, simple solution, right? Apparently not. It was shot down by the Windsor site manager because of a myriad of excuses.
Fast forward to last year, suddenly someone in the ivory tower has figured out that gas is on the rise. OMG! Panic sets in, whats the plan now? Mortgage the farm and bring all the EuroFords over to NA. Now if *I* could think of this, why didn't they bother with it?

The Big-3 desperately need assistance, but the assistance should be, IMHO, to take the engineering design risks that would result in the company being able to deliver upon the 60mpg goal. Not simply providing production assistance on technically obsolete models.

I fully agree with you. Again nothing the union can control.

They simply can't, because of the lack of resources and the lack of cash. The industry is caught in a classic 'chicken and egg' problem.


Again Ford has a lot of cash, just not the brain power to figure it out.


But none of the activities of those professions are possible without primary industry. Mining, manufacturing, and innovation. At some point, we have to get back to basics. The basics have been neglected far too long. Teachers, nurses, bankers, and doctors leverage wealth created in the primary economy, into the service economy.

Ahh yes you hit the nail on the head my friend. Manufacturing thats now in China because CEOs can make a bigger buck. You think toys and other things got cheaper once they companies figure out they could make the stuff for less in China?

Ford, GM, Chrysler have been extremely slow to adopt technology in their powerplants. A good half, if not more cars in Europe now ship with direct injection, which provides significant fuel savings and higher power density from the same block. North American auto makers are years behind. My 1971 Jaguar has an electronic spark system, factory-installed. GM and Ford were still shipping that mechanical spark junk in cars well into the early 90s. My 1956 Chevy Bel-Air gets mileage similar to a modern Chevy half-ton, even though they weigh about the same, and the Bel-Air is 50 years older. Amazing, really, how little things have progressed.

Average fuel economy in 1975, 25mpg. Average fuel economy 2006, 25mpg. You would have thought that the energy crunch in the 70s would have brought down a world of change. Lobbyists are a powerful contingent, and should be outlawed.

Here is a little Did You Know Factoid:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Company

This ruling made it pretty much illegal to run a company that was socially responsible, having to hand out money to the shareholders instead of reinvesting in the company.

This it for me tonight fellas. Good debating all around. Love to share opinions. I'll check in again tomorrow to see if anything hot has popped up...

[Goober56]

I agree with the notion to let the free market occur and NOT bail them out. Regardless of what happens their will be short term pain but in order to prevent long term pain the government should stop interfering in businesses.

Unfortunately you are caught between and rock and hard place here. The initial wave of unemployment from say GM failing would be big. Tack on suppliers, tack on communities that rely on all those jobs. I think someone estimated something in the neighborhood of 3million jobs gone, just like that.
The pain will be far from short.

[dgs]

This story has been played out before in the UK in the 70s. A massive government bailout then failed to save a dying auto industry and it will fail here in North America. The only solution to this issue is to combine funding with an agreement from the company to accept new management and an agreement from the workers to accept the structural changes that will be required to bring the company back to a competitive position.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/business/economy/18car.html?em

Money alone does not fix a business that is flawed not so much by its labour relations and unionisation but by its failure to innovate and respond to the market.

Poor reliability has been a common problem with the big 3's vehicles for a significant amount of time but the issue is not the track record itself but their inability or desire to correct it.

Consider Toyota's recent problems with the initial launch of the Camry V6 - terrible press and a big negative with Consumer Reports but within 12 months they have corrected the issue, handled the customers who suffered with humility and continue to make big inroads in that space. The big 3 approach to such a problem would typically be to minimise the financial impact by denying as many warranty claims as possible (big 3 dealers are discouraged from doing warranty work - anything of any size has to be approved from above - Toyota actually incentivises warranty work since they see it as a chance to prove their worth - when did you last have a Toyota dealer ask head office for authorisation to do warranty work - never!)..

A company that seeks to learn from its mistakes and correct them will always prosper - one that actually tries to deny them has one destiny and no amount of Government money alone be it a loan or otherwise will fix that.

[mart242]

I agree with the post about the public service union: a big joke that protects the incompetents and make sure that even if you don't do ****, your job is protected.

As for the cost about "wait until toyota has retirees", I wonder why unions think that the employer should pay for their retirements.. What do they think that the rest of the private sector does? RRSPs my friends.. sometimes the employer matches part of it.

[Newbieinvestor]

I just can't believe there isn't more outrage aimed at the banks who seemingly walk up to the trough and guzzle down as much as they want, with the need for zero accountability.
You all need to be privatized.

[Newbieinvestor]

I agree with the post about the public service union: a big joke that protects the incompetents and make sure that even if you don't do ****, your job is protected.
.
How can we defeat this????:?:

[mart242]

How can we defeat this????:?:

I doubt much will happen.. at least they can't strike for the next two years (was that approved?). if they economy goes in the shitter even more, who knows, maybe they'll have to do some major changes at the govt.

[dash riprock]

I doubt much will happen.. at least they can't strike for the next two years (was that approved?). if they economy goes in the shitter even more, who knows, maybe they'll have to do some major changes at the govt.

No, the coalition made them back down. You'll love the "spontaneous" rallies for the coalition that are planned in the coming days

[CeoOfKFC]

Unfortunately you are caught between and rock and hard place here. The initial wave of unemployment from say GM failing would be big. Tack on suppliers, tack on communities that rely on all those jobs. I think someone estimated something in the neighborhood of 3million jobs gone, just like that.
The pain will be far from short.

Yes I understand. But I still believe, failing companies should fail. Look what happened when Enron/Worldcome went bankrupt and the dot-com bust. We weren't printing money and bailing out companies like they are doing now and after some short-term suffering things were able to pick up.

Even a bailout does not guarantee that these jobs will be kept. These companies are just too big and complex to just reinvent and start selling cars at affordable prices to become profitable. If they get this money it will just extend their payroll for the short term until the money is used up and they are asking for more.

The free market should be allowed to run without Government interfering. Remember we learned throughout our education that 90% of small businesses fail? Well why doesn't government bail out all of those businesses too since you bet many of them would have better success then GM is right now.

As mentioned before, short term without a doubt will be painful and their will be job losses and a lot in this case. But if it doesn't happen then in the long term will be worse. Is it really worth investing "created" money and putting the burden on the general population?

If the US dollar plummets, inflation increases, prices of goods increases, then their money will be worthless. People will not spend. People will not invest money. People will not buy cars and the car companies and pretty much any retail company will fail anyway and PRICES will not go down. If this was to occur that will be a bigger problem then just a few companies going bankrupt. In a consumer driven economy that will be a bigger crisis then the one happening here in the US now.

[mart242]

No, the coalition made them back down. You'll love the "spontaneous" rallies for the coalition that are planned in the coming days

Yeah, I'm quite pissed at that coalition crap. Let's leave at that. This will only hurt the economy and we really really don't need that now. I'm fed up of people believing that there is a magic money tree... unions, govt workers, mayors, ..

[Newbieinvestor]

I'm fed up of people believing that there is a magic money tree... unions, govt workers, mayors, ..
This is the entire argument of the TROIKA of stooges.

You work = you pay.

You don't work = you get.

You want an easy job = we pay.

[dgs]

The argument that we have to "buy" jobs just astounds me. If all we are concerned about is keeping people in jobs so they can continue to buy products and fuel the economy, we might as well just take several billion dollars and pay 50% of folks to dig holes and the other 50% to fill them in - while we are at it we should perhaps all go out and get blue uniforms and a little red book each.

[Octavius]

I doubt much will happen.. at least they can't strike for the next two years (was that approved?). if they economy goes in the shitter even more, who knows, maybe they'll have to do some major changes at the govt.

It was not. It was part of the package that got Harper in hot water.

Harper removed this stipulation, in addition to cutting funding for political parties in order to "ease" the threat of a coalition happening. Seems it still isn't / wasn't enough.

ANYWAY, I don't want to get this thread locked, so that's enough of that.

I've been a member of the union for a little while now. Having never been part of a union before, I realized a number of benefits that I felt were very nice to have. That being said, I felt myself getting "too comfortable" and I see many other people who have felt this way and gotten themselves into a rut because of it.

Many of these people end up slacking off at work profusely, that's assuming they bother to even show up.

There are many good things a union can do, and many not good things it can do (such as protect the incompetent and lazy people from rightfully getting canned).

Outlawing the right to strike means there's absolutely no leverage for public service employees to lean on in the event that negotiations go south. More often than not, I agree that striking is mostly about greed - but in some cases, such as Harper's comment of "we offer everyone this, take it or leave it, this is final" is pretty outrageous. Each union represents different classes of individuals. The rate of pay increase should NOT be the same for everyone (higher manager who make substantially less than their private counterparts should not receive the same % rate increase as a low-level grunt for example as the value of their work is quite different). Economic crisis or not, higher management makes substantially LESS than their private sector counterparts, why further punish them because they chose to serve the public rather than their wallet?

Also, nothing will stop the government from saying "we're freezing wages, and there's nothing you can do about it". Sure, the union can take them to court, but how long is the process...months...years?

If you're going to outlaw strikes, may as well have it in effect for everyone in the country. I agree that there are good workers and bad workers in the public service, but this occurs everywhere - public and private realms. If you're going to slap workers in the face all "for the sake of the economy", don't just focus on public servants, focus on those in the private sector as well. The CAW (GM) is a prime example - I would consider them to be much MUCH worse than any of the unions in the public service right, and this is likely to stay this way.

If you're going to piss off unions by telling them they can't strike, make it affect all unions in Canada, at least this way people like myself don't feel like we're the main cause/drain on society (which we aren't). If it truly is "for the good of the economy" then outlawing striking for all unions in Canada will certainly be more effective than just the public servants.

Just wanted to get that out of my system.

[dash riprock]

It was not. It was part of the package that got Harper in hot water.

Harper removed this stipulation, in addition to cutting funding for political parties in order to "ease" the threat of a coalition happening. Seems it still isn't / wasn't enough.

ANYWAY, I don't want to get this thread locked, so that's enough of that.

I've been a member of the union for a little while now. Having never been part of a union before, I realized a number of benefits that I felt were very nice to have. That being said, I felt myself getting "too comfortable" and I see many other people who have felt this way and gotten themselves into a rut because of it.

Many of these people end up slacking off at work profusely, that's assuming they bother to even show up.

There are many good things a union can do, and many not good things it can do (such as protect the incompetent and lazy people from rightfully getting canned).

Outlawing the right to strike means there's absolutely no leverage for public service employees to lean on in the event that negotiations go south. More often than not, I agree that striking is mostly about greed - but in some cases, such as Harper's comment of "we offer everyone this, take it or leave it, this is final" is pretty outrageous. Each union represents different classes of individuals. The rate of pay increase should NOT be the same for everyone (higher manager who make substantially less than their private counterparts should not receive the same % rate increase as a low-level grunt for example as the value of their work is quite different). Economic crisis or not, higher management makes substantially LESS than their private sector counterparts, why further punish them because they chose to serve the public rather than their wallet?

Also, nothing will stop the government from saying "we're freezing wages, and there's nothing you can do about it". Sure, the union can take them to court, but how long is the process...months...years?

If you're going to outlaw strikes, may as well have it in effect for everyone in the country. I agree that there are good workers and bad workers in the public service, but this occurs everywhere - public and private realms. If you're going to slap workers in the face all "for the sake of the economy", don't just focus on public servants, focus on those in the private sector as well. The CAW (GM) is a prime example - I would consider them to be much MUCH worse than any of the unions in the public service right, and this is likely to stay this way.

If you're going to piss off unions by telling them they can't strike, make it affect all unions in Canada, at least this way people like myself don't feel like we're the main cause/drain on society (which we aren't). If it truly is "for the good of the economy" then outlawing striking for all unions in Canada will certainly be more effective than just the public servants.

Just wanted to get that out of my system.

why are you boycotting RBC?

[Octavius]

why are you boycotting RBC?

O_o

My big comment in a thread about unions and bailouts and you ask me about RBC :confused:

Whatever.

RBC has crappy service, shady customer service packages, outrageous fees, etc. I know every bank has their bad side, but I don't think RBC ever had a good side to complement it.

[Newbieinvestor]

Getting rid of the auto unions and the public service unions would be a great benefit to Canada.

Sadly, in Ontario, the governments rely on unions.

This is why international money is fleeing.

[batman321123]

Goober, you keep mentioning the fallout from GM going bankrupt, and cite the collateral damage (suppliers, etc) as a reason why they should be bailed out. You need to consider the fact that GM still commands a large chunk of the automobile market share. If they go down, someone will need to fill up their portion of the market share. There may be pandemonium for a short while, but someone's going to pick up the slack shortly, and those suppliers et al will be back in business.

Octavius: The coalition can't back down now, because then it will look like they only threatened to overthrow Harper when their subsidies were in trouble. To be fair, Harper was being a prick when he should have been more concerned with working together for the good of the nation. We elect politicians hoping they'll do what's best for the country; but the moves they make are simply what's best for their re-election. I would hate to give the BQ the power they'll have in this new government, which is why I hope the GG tells these kids in Ottawa to grow up and work together.

I think Pitz is dead on here - we need to stop underpaying our engineers and scientists, and give them the funding they need to make a difference.

[v_tofu]

Several auto analyst sites have concluded that Ford's quality is on par with Toyota's,

LOLZ

ahem.. i'm sorry.. I'm sure there is a nice discussion goign on in this thread, but I read this and couldn't stop laughing..


anyways.. back to your regularly scheduled program

[batman321123]

LOLZ

ahem.. i'm sorry.. I'm sure there is a nice discussion goign on in this thread, but I read this and couldn't stop laughing..


anyways.. back to your regularly scheduled program

07 article, but still: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19073071/

08 - http://www.strategicvision.com/press_release.php?pr=31

[Goober56]

Goober, you keep mentioning the fallout from GM going bankrupt, and cite the collateral damage (suppliers, etc) as a reason why they should be bailed out. You need to consider the fact that GM still commands a large chunk of the automobile market share. If they go down, someone will need to fill up their portion of the market share. There may be pandemonium for a short while, but someone's going to pick up the slack shortly, and those suppliers et al will be back in business.

So what do you do about all the people who are on pension who are no longer getting their money? What do you do about a parts supplier who goes under that supplied GM but also Ford and Chrysler? While at one time GMs market share was 50% (Yes HALF) its now under 25%. Quickly divided between the remaining auto makers its easy to eat up. The other fact of the matter is market share is down, but so is gross vehicle sales. From 17mill units at its peak to I think under 11mill this year, and worse next year. At 25% you are looking at 4.25mill down to 2.75mill units, just at GM.
No company can survive that much of a drop like that, especially an industry where their products are your second biggest life decision.

So as you see letting GM fail, especially, would be tantamount to shooting the others in the head. Because as the suppliers go belly up because credit is still frozen, thanks to a bad policy to prop up the banks, then you'll see why it was better to help them out for a fraction of what the banks and insurance companies are getting. Hell, even Toyota is not immune to this crisis and I consider them to be the pinnacle of proper management.

Now I am not defending anyone here. You are all convinced that union workers are lazy and don't do anything, that is if they bother to show up. I invite any of you to come to work with me and see just how lazy we are. At Ford, I can't speak for the others, if you have 5 Lates or Absences (combined) in a 1 year time frame you are disciplined. Be it a write up, time off going on a scale per infraction and subsequently fired.

Letting GM go is not just as easy you say or think it is. If it was that easy I would be all for it, but the collateral damage going forward would send the US into a worse condition than it is now, and it would not be a short term thing.

I read an article once, I wish I would have bookmarked it, it was a comparison of middle management in the US vs Japanese auto makers. The basic gist of it was that the US middle management receive compensation based on a 27 to 1 ratio over their Japanese counterparts. And thats just middle management. So lets start in management where clearly there is a failure there, then lets work down the line and review where we are at then.

Again at Ford the situation is brighter. I think they actually foresaw this crisis and circumvented most of their liquidity issues early before the credit crunch took hold. Ford is only looking for a Line Of Credit in the event that GM or Chrysler end up falling.

I can't change your opinions, thats up to you. But all I ask you guys to do is read on both sides of the story here. The union is not responsible for this mess, but we can be part of the solution if a strong business case is presented to us instead of kneejerk quick fix solutions. We all know crap like that doesn't work and its what got the Big3 where they are today. Luckily I got myself a trade out of Ford and now I am moving on to better things, to an industry that is fairly recession proof.

[slavka012]

So what do you do about all the people who are on pension who are no longer getting their money?

I have a solution - union should start paying those pensions. :)

[mart242]

SSo as you see letting GM fail, especially, would be tantamount to shooting the others in the head.

Sure, but in the last few years, GM, Ford & co have lost money so they haven't paid taxes to the govt.. I'd be curious to see a cost comparison between letting it fail and spending more money (which might simply delay failure).

It's like the light rail train they wanted in ottawa. After subsidies from the govt, each trip was to be something like 15$, yet they'd charge only 2-3$ per passenger. Thank god they killed that project. Sometimes it doesn't make sense to pour public money to help / finance / subsidize something.

[Goober56]

I have a solution - union should start paying those pensions. :)

The UAW is already taking over their health care in the US. What happens then? What happens when the company is still failing? I have no problem with this idea, but if thats the best and only thing you can come up with I would have to say to you, try harder.

[Goober56]

Sure, but in the last few years, GM, Ford & co have lost money so they haven't paid taxes to the govt.. I'd be curious to see a cost comparison between letting it fail and spending more money (which might simply delay failure).


Good luck trying to figure out the cost, because while the companies themselves might not have paid any taxes, which I doubt considering that their losses were due to restructuring and wiped out their profits on the vehicles, the ultimate cost of a loss in millions of jobs is worth it right there. The cost in income tax alone is worth it. Again simply saying that its just GM is wrong. There is a whole chain of companies that rely on GM that would also fail.

[mart242]

There is a whole chain of companies that rely on GM that would also fail.

This, I agree. It can pretty much kill a city. Housing price plummets, companies close, ..

But then again take a look at the high tech in Ottawa: JDS uniphase shed thousands of jobs, so did Nortel, Alcatel, that also killed (or seriously downsized) lots of start-ups that had them as main (or sole!) customer. The job market here still sucks but people survived.

[Ducky]

+1

well said.

Demanding contract improvement? Do you live in a bubble, or can you not read? The loss of 3 weeks vacation is not an improvement. The loss of COLA for the first part of this agreement is not an improvement. The loss of Dock & Janitorial jobs is not an improvement. The merging of trades is not an improvement. If you can show me what improved in the last contract then I will shake your hand and buy you a beer, because clearly these things are not improvements.

The CAW has been in concessionary mode since the 2005 contract and for people to say the workers need to give more aren't really informed as to what is happening. The current state of the Big3 is quite simply piss poor management at its best. Holding on to truck platforms while gas was sky rocketing was insane, and when the bottom fell out, so too did their profits.
Don't blame the workers for this mess, they signed on the bottom line for a decent job with decent pay and benefits, things I would wish that any of you people here would have. Unskilled labour is a misused term. People are basically surrendering their bodies to do some of these jobs. I bet you would all be stunned to know that these people don't sleep and do crossword puzzles all day. Nope, these people are doing their part, every day, 1000+ times a day. Whether its working in the dust in a foundry or in the oilmists of an engine plant, or the obtuse angles of installing parts on a B&A line.

Here is a couple other links you might be interested in:

http://www.autoblog.com/2008/11/23/opinion-the-real-cost-of-unionized-auto-workers-70-hour-try/

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/countdown-worst-person-taking-70-hour-auto

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=1026e955-541c-4aa6-bcf2-56dfc3323682

And for those who say "Let them go under, they get unemployment anyways", that is such an ignorant statement on so many levels. If the Big3 go under you have the immediate impact of these people out of work, then as the ripple rolls outward you lose part suppliers and equipment manufacturers. Not to mention all the businesses in these communities. The simple fact of the matter is when a GM goes down a lot more comes with it.

I suggest you actually read both sides of the story before you start targeting people who have no control over whats happening right now. And please don't buy into the media outlets who's sole purpose in life seems to be causing panic and to polarize the publics view one way or the other.

[fdhw]

like it or not, government has to bail them out. Lucky the Big 3's state right now coincide with the recession. Had it been good times, Government would let them fail. We can't possibly have chains of massive layoffs starting from production lines to part suppliers in this time.

Question: In the proposal that the 3 CEOs made to the congress, was there anything that said they will cut back on benefits of their unionized workers? Or will the unionized workers continue to leech away on the automakers' negative income

[Prankster]

Nice to see you got your 2 cents in though fdhw!

http://www.freep.com/article/20081204/BUSINESS01/812040413

[florch]

My brother and I have um, discussions from time to time. If we had a center we'd make a good line. I don't usually like Michael Moore for much besides light entertainment/argument fuel, but I read what my bro sends to keep an open mind. This actually has some interesting points - sometimes vision and opportunity starts from the most chaotic of times; I especially noted Point #2, my emphasis. Discuss!
__________________________________________________ _______

Saving the Big 3 for You and Me ...a message from Michael Moore

Wednesday, December 3rd, 2008

Friends,

I drive an American car. It's a Chrysler. That's not an endorsement. It's more like a cry for pity. And now for a decades-old story, retold ad infinitum by tens of millions of Americans, a third of whom have had to desert their country to simply find a damn way to get to work in something that won't break down:

My Chrysler is four years old. I bought it because of its smooth and comfortable ride. Daimler-Benz owned the company then and had the good grace to place the Chrysler chassis on a Mercedes axle and, man, was that a sweet ride!

When it would start.

More than a dozen times in these years, the car has simply died. Batteries have been replaced, but that wasn't the problem. My dad drives the same model. His car has died many times, too. Just won't start, for no reason at all.

A few weeks ago, I took my Chrysler in to the Chrysler dealer here in northern Michigan -- and the latest fixes cost me $1,400. The next day, the vehicle wouldn't start. When I got it going, the brake warning light came on. And on and on.

You might assume from this that I couldn't give a rat's ass about these miserably inept crapmobile makers down the road in Detroit city. But I do care. I care about the millions whose lives and livelihoods depend on these car companies. I care about the security and defense of this country because the world is running out of oil -- and when it runs out, the calamity and collapse that will take place will make the current recession/depression look like a Tommy Tune musical.

And I care about what happens with the Big 3 because they are more responsible than almost anyone for the destruction of our fragile atmosphere and the daily melting of our polar ice caps.

Congress must save the industrial infrastructure that these companies control and the jobs they create. And it must save the world from the internal combustion engine. This great, vast manufacturing network can redeem itself by building mass transit and electric/hybrid cars, and the kind of transportation we need for the 21st century.

And Congress must do all this by NOT giving GM, Ford and Chrysler the $34 billion they are asking for in "loans" (a few days ago they only wanted $25 billion; that's how stupid they are -- they don't even know how much they really need to make this month's payroll. If you or I tried to get a loan from the bank this way, not only would we be thrown out on our ear, the bank would place us on some sort of credit rating blacklist).

Two weeks ago, the CEOs of the Big 3 were tarred and feathered before a Congressional committee who sneered at them in a way far different than when the heads of the financial industry showed up two months earlier. At that time, the politicians tripped over each other in their swoon for Wall Street and its Ponzi schemers who had concocted Byzantine ways to bet other people's money on unregulated credit default swaps, known in the common vernacular as unicorns and fairies.

But the Detroit boys were from the Midwest, the Rust (yuk!) Belt, where they made real things that consumers needed and could touch and buy, and that continually recycled money into the economy (shocking!), produced unions that created the middle class, and fixed my teeth for free when I was ten.

For all of that, the auto heads had to sit there in November and be ridiculed about how they traveled to D.C. Yes, they flew on their corporate jets, just like the bankers and Wall Street thieves did in October. But, hey, THAT was OK! They're the Masters of the Universe! Nothing but the best chariots for Big Finance as they set about to loot our nation's treasury.

Of course, the auto magnates used be the Masters who ruled the world. They were the pulsating hub that all other industries -- steel, oil, cement contractors -- served. Fifty-five years ago, the president of GM sat on that same Capitol Hill and bluntly told Congress, what's good for General Motors is good for the country. Because, you see, in their minds, GM WAS the country.

What a long, sad fall from grace we witnessed on November 19th when the three blind mice had their knuckles slapped and then were sent back home to write an essay called, "Why You Should Give Me Billions of Dollars of Free Cash." They were also asked if they would work for a dollar a year. Take that! What a big, brave Congress they are! Requesting indentured servitude from (still) three of the most powerful men in the world. This from a spineless body that won't dare stand up to a disgraced president nor turn down a single funding request for a war that neither they nor the American public support. Amazing.

Let me just state the obvious: Every single dollar Congress gives these three companies will be flushed right down the toilet. There is nothing the management teams of the Big 3 are going to do to convince people to go out during a recession and buy their big, gas-guzzling, inferior products. Just forget it. And, as sure as I am that the Ford family-owned Detroit Lions are not going to the Super Bowl -- ever -- I can guarantee you, after they burn through this $34 billion, they'll be back for another $34 billion next summer.

So what to do? Members of Congress, here's what I propose:

1. Transporting Americans is and should be one of the most important functions our government must address. And because we are facing a massive economic, energy and environmental crisis, the new president and Congress must do what Franklin Roosevelt did when he was faced with a crisis (and ordered the auto industry to stop building cars and instead build tanks and planes): The Big 3 are, from this point forward, to build only cars that are not primarily dependent on oil and, more importantly to build trains, buses, subways and light rail (a corresponding public works project across the country will build the rail lines and tracks). This will not only save jobs, but create millions of new ones.

2. You could buy ALL the common shares of stock in General Motors for less than $3 billion. Why should we give GM $18 billion or $25 billion or anything? Take the money and buy the company! (You're going to demand collateral anyway if you give them the "loan," and because we know they will default on that loan, you're going to own the company in the end as it is. So why wait? Just buy them out now.)

3. None of us want government officials running a car company, but there are some very smart transportation geniuses who could be hired to do this. We need a Marshall Plan to switch us off oil-dependent vehicles and get us into the 21st century.

This proposal is not radical or rocket science. It just takes one of the smartest people ever to run for the presidency to pull it off. What I'm proposing has worked before. The national rail system was in shambles in the '70s. The government took it over. A decade later it was turning a profit, so the government returned it to private/public hands, and got a couple billion dollars put back in the treasury.

This proposal will save our industrial infrastructure -- and millions of jobs. More importantly, it will create millions more. It literally could pull us out of this recession.

In contrast, yesterday General Motors presented its restructuring proposal to Congress. They promised, if Congress gave them $18 billion now, they would, in turn, eliminate around 20,000 jobs. You read that right. We give them billions so they can throw more Americans out of work. That's been their Big Idea for the last 30 years -- layoff thousands in order to protect profits. But no one ever stopped to ask this question: If you throw everyone out of work, who's going to have the money to go out and buy a car?

These idiots don't deserve a dime. Fire all of them, and take over the industry for the good of the workers, the country and the planet.

What's good for General Motors IS good for the country. Once the country is calling the shots.

Yours,
Michael Moore
MMFlint@aol.com
MichaelMoore.com

P.S. I will be on Keith Olbermann tonight (8pm/10pm/midnight ET) to discuss this further on MSNBC.

[Newbieinvestor]

Big celebration at the upgraded new Toyota facility.

A few Toyota employees were asked why Toyota was expanding compared to GM, Ford, Chrysler.

Replies were all about the same: no UAW!

[Prankster]

You have any links for the newbie? I can tell ya the plant I work in supplies the big 5 (torsion and stabilizer bars) and Toyota might have expanded their building and such, but none of them are producing very much.

The new CDN Toyota Plant in Woodstock cancelled their 2nd shift beofre they even hired the people for the day shift. So it migh be a little hard to beleive what your saying!

[Prankster]

v tofu: Did you know when toyoyta started up they orginally purchased a ford taurus and modelled their cars from it!

the statement about the quality of ford cars is correct recent testing found ford with 16 models that won safety test, way ahead of toyota and the others.

[Prankster]

http://www.freep.com/article/20081205/COL14/812050400



The debate over aid to the Detroit-based automakers is awash with half-truths and misrepresentations that are endlessly repeated by everyone from members of Congress to journalists. Here are seven myths about the companies and their vehicles, and the reality in each case.

Reality: General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler LLC sold 8.5 million vehicles in the United States last year and millions more around the world. GM outsold Toyota by about 1.2 million vehicles in the United States last year and holds a U.S. lead over Toyota of nearly 700,000 so far this year. Globally, GM in 2007 remained the world's largest automaker, selling 9,369,524 vehicles worldwide -- about 3,000 more than Toyota.
Ford outsold Honda by about 850,000 and Nissan by more than 1.3 million vehicles in the United States last year.

Chrysler sold more vehicles here than Nissan and Hyundai combined in 2007 and so far this year.

Reality: The creaky, leaky vehicles of the 1980s and '90s are long gone. Consumer Reports recently found that "Ford's reliability is now on par with good Japanese automakers."
The independent J.D. Power Initial Quality Study scored Buick, Cadillac, Chevrolet, Ford, GMC, Mercury, Pontiac and Lincoln brands' overall quality as high as or higher than that of Acura, Audi, BMW, Honda, Nissan, Scion, Volkswagen and Volvo.

J.D. Power rated the Chevrolet Malibu the highest-quality midsize sedan. Both the Malibu and Ford Fusion scored better than the Honda Accord and Toyota Camry.

Reality: All of the Detroit Three build midsize sedans that the Environmental Protection Agency rates at 29-33 miles per gallon on the highway.

The most fuel-efficient Chevrolet Malibu gets 33 m.p.g. on the highway, 2 m.p.g. better than the best Honda Accord. The most fuel-efficient Ford Focus has the same highway fuel economy ratings as the most efficient Toyota Corolla. The most fuel-efficient Chevrolet Cobalt has the same city fuel economy and better highway fuel economy than the most efficient non-hybrid Honda Civic.

A recent study by Edmunds.com found that the Chevrolet Aveo subcompact is the least expensive car to buy and operate.

Reality: None of that money has been lent out and may not be for more than a year. In addition, it can, by law, be used only to invest in future vehicles and technology, so it has no effect on the shortage of operating cash the companies face because of the economic slowdown that's killing them now.

Reality: The domestics' lineup has been truck-heavy, but Toyota, Nissan, Mercedes-Benz and BMW have spent billions of dollars on pickups and SUVs because trucks are a large and historically profitable part of the auto industry.

The most fuel-efficient full-size pickups from GM, Ford and Chrysler all have higher EPA fuel-economy ratings than Toyota and Nissan's full-size pickups.

Reality: The Detroit Three got into the hybrid business late, but Ford and GM each now offers more hybrid models than Honda or Nissan, with several more due to hit the road in early 2009.

Reality: Chrysler tied Toyota as the most productive automaker in North America this year, according to the Harbour Report on manufacturing, which measures the amount of work done per employee. Eight of the 10 most productive vehicle assembly plants in North America belong to Chrysler, Ford or GM.

The oft-cited $70-an-hour wage and benefit figure for UAW workers inaccurately adds benefits that millions of retirees get to the pay of current workers, but divides the total only by current employees. That's like assuming you get your parents' retirement and Social Security benefits in addition to your own income.

Hourly pay for assembly line workers tops out around $28; benefits add about $14. New hires at the Detroit Three get $14 an hour. There's no pension or health care when they retire, but benefits raise their total hourly compensation to $29 while they're working. UAW wages are now comparable with Toyota workers, according to a Free Press analysis.

[Newbieinvestor]

Propaganda.

The market decides, and you can see on the roads which cars people are buying.

Regarding GM globally, they basically are giving their technology away and giving their cars away in an attempt to keep some form of market share. The GM factory in Pudong is an example of this.

[pitz]

Propaganda.


Not only that, but those fuel burn figures aren't impressive.

Off-the-shelf technology exists (direct injection, turbochargers, direct gear transmissions, etc.) to bring car fleets easily into the mid 40s in terms of MPG on petrol (60mpg on diesel).

Its not good enough that the North American manufacturers merely be 'average'. They have to be ahead of the curve in order to win market share. They have to be leaders, not followers.

[Newbieinvestor]

"Surviving in a modern economy requires fast decision-making, but negotiations with unions take time (and energy). Like pulling teeth takes time (and energy). You sometimes wonder whether supporters of unionism are familiar with the concept of "too little too late."

[CeoOfKFC]

It's official. US acknolwedges they are in a recession.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081205/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_economy

Exert:

WASHINGTON – President George W. Bush publicly acknowledged for the first time Friday that the U.S. economy is in a recession and worried aloud that Detroit's Big Three automakers may not all survive their mounting troubles.

Four days after the long-suspected existence of a recession was made official, Bush used the word himself.

"Our economy is in a recession," Bush said flatly, speaking to reporters on the South Lawn only hours after the release of a government report showing the biggest month of job losses in 34 years. "This is in large part because of severe problems in our housing, credit and financial markets, which have resulted in significant job losses."

[Prankster]

Current news:
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081205/AUTO01/812050420

WASHINGTON -- President Bush urged Congress Friday to act to help automakers, while a top House Democrat said letting Detroit's Big Three automakers fail "would be a disaster."


Old News:

It's official. US acknolwedges they are in a recession.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081205/...h/bush_economy

Exert:

WASHINGTON – President George W. Bush publicly acknowledged for the first time Friday that the U.S. economy is in a recession and worried aloud that Detroit's Big Three automakers may not all survive their mounting troubles.

Four days after the long-suspected existence of a recession was made official, Bush used the word himself.

"Our economy is in a recession," Bush said flatly, speaking to reporters on the South Lawn only hours after the release of a government report showing the biggest month of job losses in 34 years. "This is in large part because of severe problems in our housing, credit and financial markets, which have resulted in significant job losses."

[Prankster]

hey newb:

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081205/AUTO01/812050420

United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger said Friday the unionis willing to consider additional concessions to save the companies.

"There has to be a restructuring in this industry. This is about survival," Gettelfinger said. "We can't sugarcoat it. We can't stick our heads in the sand."

[Prankster]

newb: I am unionized and yes we do realize the importance of the situtation in hand, just last year we signed a new contract March 15/07 and then on Dec. 22/07 we gave back $4 million dollars worth of concessions. So we are not ignorant to what is happening around us, plus look at what Goober says they gave back. All of theses concession are just in one year, we have gave back 4 times in the last 7 years.

[Newbieinvestor]

hey newb:

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081205/AUTO01/812050420

United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger said Friday the unionis willing to consider additional concessions to save the companies.

"There has to be a restructuring in this industry. This is about survival," Gettelfinger said. "We can't sugarcoat it. We can't stick our heads in the sand."
Wow.