View Full Version : GM layoffs
Sean O'Gorman
04-07-07, 05:04 PM
http://www.cleveland.com/plaindealer/stories/index.ssf?/base/other/1175935696238400.xml&coll=2
Workers say they're skeptical of the motives of Kerkorian, or any bidder. The priority of these buyers will be making money, not helping workers, they say.
"He's no different than anybody else," Pacheco said. "He's out to make a buck. He couldn't care less about any of us. He's just another one of a host of guys who's going to stick it to us and turn the screws."
Is one of the requirements to joining a union mean you have to become anti-profits?
oddlycalm
04-07-07, 09:39 PM
But it's all so fake. JIT/Just In Time, Six Sigma, Kaizen, Total Quality Management and all the other gee-whiz biz programs are just for show in most of the American mfg. facilities I've been in. If you bring in someone like me to address process failures, the first place I go is the front office. Bad workers can be "fixed" or fired - often they can be reformed. Very seldom can an incompetent manager be "fixed". But unless it's done by an outsider like me, most incompetent managers won't be fired. They are kept out of convenience. So what happens? You begin to accumulate Stupid. I think my buddy should write a book about this. Great summary that I can confirm from my own experience over the decades. I could provide some very amusing specific if your buddy every decides to put pen to paper...:gomer:
While the talent drain is now a mass exodus I witnessed the beginnings of it back in the late 60's and early 70's. This industry created a malignant corporate culture that has driven away most of the innovators and strong leaders and stifled the rest. :shakehead
oc
Andrew Longman
04-08-07, 09:04 AM
JIT/Just In Time, Six Sigma, Kaizen, Total Quality Management and all the other gee-whiz biz programs are just for show in most of the American mfg. facilities I've been in. If you bring in someone like me to address process failures, the first place I go is the front office. Bad workers can be "fixed" or fired - often they can be reformed. Very seldom can an incompetent manager be "fixed". But unless it's done by an outsider like me, most incompetent managers won't be fired. They are kept out of convenience. So what happens? You begin to accumulate Stupid. I think my buddy should write a book about this.
When I first got into this, automotive was fun. My former company was in CART and Trans Am. We developed some pieces for the race cars. We made parts for Jag and Ferrari. It was difficult and stressful much of the time, but it was generally satisfying and fun. Now, when the Big 3 have problems, they lean on suppliers to steal some of their money back. And... they drive them out of business or into bankruptcy.
I too have stories if your buddy wants to write a book. Actually a good one is The Critical Chain by Brock Yates about the development of the 96 Caravan. Stark harsh inside look at DCX.
Drucker (and my work with process improvement) echos your experience about "fixing" managers. Processes are perfectly designed to give you exactly the performance you are getting. If you don't like the performance there is only one person ultimately responsible for the process.
As for leaning on suppliers, I worked with one years ago that made interior door panels. A big three was unhappy that they were warping and falling off and wanted millions in reimbersment. I was able to prove and the OEM agreed that the cause was with their fasteners and installation method, not the panel. Didn't matter. OEM wanted the money or they would yank the business.
From cnnmoney.com
"Dig a little deeper and you realize that $5 billion represents Cerberus' capital infusion into the auto business and another $1 billion an infusion into the finance business. When all the bookkeeping is completed, Daimler will actually record a net cash outflow of $650 million to be rid of Chrysler."
Funny how the problem is dumb managment and there isn't one intelligent manager anywhere in the world who will take a unionized automaker for nothing. The smart guys at Toyota don't even want it for free.
You realize the irony in citing this action (as evidence of unions being completely at fault) by a Deutsche make, considering their own labor situation, right?
oddlycalm
05-14-07, 09:43 PM
Funny how the problem is dumb managment and there isn't one intelligent manager anywhere in the world who will take a unionized automaker for nothing. The smart guys at Toyota don't even want it for free. Who exactly was offered Chrysler for free? Perhaps it's best to stick with reality based discussion. In addition to the $7.4 billion sale price for their 80% stake Cerberus is also assuming $22.6 billion in legacy pension obligations.
Why would Toyota want any company that has capacity they don't need and duplicates products they already have regadless of price?
oc
Great thread, I am glad I revisited.
The comments about stupid multiplying are spot on. There has been an exodus of talent. Ten years ago I thought it was bad, but those are now refered to as "them good ole days."
I am afraid we have lost the ablitity to make anything of quality, quickly and which will earn a profit FOR ALL INVOLVED.
Any child with a decent upbringing, being exposed to mechanical process while growing into a young adult, could do a better job of planning work/projects. When you turn these decisions over to a group of educated numbskulls you are sure to reach failure time and time again.
Since when did a college education supliment common sense???????
Thanks for sharing your stories and insights, it's better than reading four newspapers!
yfs
Ziggy
Kiwifan
05-14-07, 11:23 PM
Didn't old Henry hire guys like Iaocca because they didn't go to College?
I know nothing about the auto industry but some of the smartypants uni types who have worked for me over the years have been flabbergasted how we do things at times. Common sense should always prevail, not some marketing ploy thought up by someone a million miles away from my shop who has never worked in a retail.
Sometimes I wonder if the people how design things actually use/drive them? :shakehead
Rusty.
Napoleon
05-15-07, 05:10 AM
You realize the irony in citing this action (as evidence of unions being completely at fault) by a Deutsche make, considering their own labor situation, right?
Ank, it is so much easier to blame the unions then the management which is actually at fault and ignore the fact that other heavily unionized manufacturers and heavily unionized countries do just fine.
eiregosod
05-16-07, 01:00 PM
Ank, it is so much easier to blame the unions then the management which is actually at fault and ignore the fact that other heavily unionized manufacturers and heavily unionized countries do just fine.
I watched the report on CBS Schnooze. the reasons given for the sale of Chrysler, "healthcare, unions, other populist reasons", they said nothing about the products, nothing about the reasons behind the drop in market share. Maybe of Chrsyler designed and built vehicles the people wanted to buy :gomer:
the only businesses rockin' these days are "gas" companies & healthcare providers. even though people like their automobiles, the automakers total revenue equals the profits of the 'gas' companies. whose ya daddy :tony:
"While auto revenue fell 8 percent in North America, it gained in the company's other three regions, climbing 5 percent in Europe, 13 percent in South America, Africa and the Middle East, and 35 percent in the Asia-Pacific region. It gained market share in each of the regions outside the United States."
Funny how stupid management is actually gaining share against Toyota, Honda and everyone else in every region where they don't have a union.
Why would Toyota want any company that has capacity they don't need
Toyota to expand Woodstock, Ontario plant
February 7, 2006 – Woodstock, Ontario – Toyota said today that annual production capacity will increase to 150,000 RAV4 sport utility vehicles at a plant under construction here. Total employment will reach about 2,000 and the total investment will grow to about C$1.1 billion/US$950 million.
The facility, managed by Toyota Motor Manufacturing Canada (TMMC) in Cambridge, was announced last June and construction began in October. Production begins in 2008.
Toyota would rather spent $1.1 billion to have a non union plant, than be paid 650 million to take over Chrysler and its unions. Why are they doing that if they're smarter than the idiots at Chrysler and GM?
Who exactly was offered Chrysler for free?
oc
You're right. My bad. Daimler paid $650 million to get rid of Chrylser, according to cnnmoney.com. No was willing willing to take it over for nothing.
Funny how stupid management is actually gaining share against Toyota, Honda and everyone else in every region where they don't have a union. yet daimler's still based in germany and makes a buck despite german labor law.
Toyota would rather spent $1.1 billion to have a non union plant, than be paid 650 million to take over Chrysler and its unions. Why are they doing that if they're smarter than the idiots at Chrysler and GM?
Why would Toyota want any company that has capacity they don't need and duplicates products they already have regadless of price?
"The UAW has so far refused to grant Chrysler the savings it's granted GM and Ford, putting Chrysler at a disadvantage that amounts to about $600 a vehicle."
Right, only an idiot couldn't sell a car that costs $600 more than a GM vehicle. Since you guys aren't idiots, maybe you could tell me how to do it.
Sell this:
http://www.automobilemag.com/multimedia/photo_gallery/0608_z+2007_audi_tt+06.jpg
manufactured by blood sucking good for nothing unions :gomer:
yet daimler's still based in germany and makes a buck despite german labor law.
Selling $40,000 cars. Porsche does OK too. Daimler paid $650 million to get out the business business of building cheap cars in America. That means they're "dumb."
I think GM will be fine if they import all their cheap cars from China and make nothing but Caddies in America, but according to you, that would be "dumb." How is Chrysler supposed to sell a compact that costs $600 more than a Civic?
manufactured by blood sucking good for nothing union that can't even work 40 hours a week and takes a months of vacation every year
http://cache.jalopnik.com/cars/images/vw_polo_gti_front.jpg
Japan, 10+ year recession, employment for life, they seemed to do alright in the interim.
and ignore the fact that other heavily unionized manufacturers do just fine.
Union Membership in the United States:
The Divergence between the Public and Private Sectors
Henry S. Farber
Princeton University
September 19, 2005
Abstract
I document the dramatic divergence between the fortunes of unions in the
public and private sectors in the United States since the 1970s. While the union
membership rate in the private sector fell from 25 percent in 1975 to 8.2 percent
in 2004, the
I guess if you think dropping from 25% to 8.2% is "just fine," I can understand why you believe there's nothing wrong at GM and Chrysler.
http://cache.jalopnik.com/cars/images/vw_polo_gti_front.jpg
"Towards the end of 2005....losses also reported for Renault, Fiat and Volkswagen.
One area of continuing expansion is China: Volkswagen has added capacity."
So the best example you can come up with is a money losing company that is expanding its non union work force.
Japanese automakers, with few exceptions, have avoided organized labor at the nearly dozen U.S. assembly plants they operate. Toyota and Honda representatives say they’ve done little to keep unions at bay and insist their employees simply choose not to form unions. But both the timing of their arrival and even the locations they choose have been key factors.
Historically, Japanese automakers have tended to avoid union-friendly areas such as Detroit. Moreover, many build factories that already have a low average wage for the labor market, Saltzman told AP. “That means factory pay looks great regardless of whether it approached union standards.” According to recent analysis from The Detroit Free Press, workers at the Toyota Motor Corp. plant in Georgetown, Ky., last year received more in pay and bonuses than UAW members averaged at domestic automaker factories for the first time.
More layoffs. Less pay. Sucks to work for stupid bosses. Funny though, how the smart ones "tend to avoid union friendly areas"
Japan, 10+ year recession, employment for life, they seemed to do alright in the interim.
In Japan, the unionisation rate has been falling steadily since the mid-1970s, when it stood at around 35%. In recent years, it has declined from 22.2% in 1999 to 21.5% in 2000 and 20.7% in 2001, standing at 20.2% in 2002.
heavily unionized countries do just fine.
Union density has declined in Japan, the USA and almost all European countries in recent years.
Do you want to provide some examples?
More things smart managers are doing
August 18, 1987 the New York Times
Hyundai has long taken a tough anti-union stance.
From a "call for solidarity"
"A unionized Honda worker is one of the most endangered species in America. Honda’s manufacturing in the U.S. is almost entirely non-union and Honda as a company is anti-union. "
japanese manufacturing stateside is a modern thing, japanese makes were successful even before they they began establishing manuf stateside.
way to twist reality though, you're consistent, so you've got that going for you, which is nice...
http://cache.jalopnik.com/cars/images/vw_polo_gti_front.jpg
yet daimler's still based in germany and makes a buck despite german labor law.
From the BBC 2005
DaimlerChrysler said its German-based Mercedes division reported an operating loss of 954m euros, from profits at the same time last year of 639m euros, linked to restructuring costs at its Smart car business totalling 800m euros.
The distinctive minicar has consistently lost money since its debut in 1998.
japanese manufacturing stateside is a modern thing,
Yep. The unions worked fine when everyone had to pay $600 more no matter what. When someone starting building cars without unions, lots of people decided they'd rather pay $600 less.
You still haven't told me why you'd rather spend $600 more for a union made Chrysler, or why smart managers "tend to avoid union freindly areas."
From the BBC 2005
DaimlerChrysler said its German-based Mercedes division reported an operating loss of 954m euros, from profits at the same time last year of 639m euros, linked to restructuring costs at its Smart car business totalling 800m euros.
The distinctive minicar has consistently lost money since its debut in 1998.
so a failed product model is now proof of a failed business model, all from a quarterly report or some such from 2005.
excellent analysis.
Yep. The unions worked fine when everyone had to pay $600 more no matter what. When someone starting building cars without unions, lots of people decided they'd rather pay $600 less.
You still haven't told me why you'd rather spend $600 more for a union made Chrysler, or why smart managers "tend to avoid union freindly areas."
http://cache.jalopnik.com/cars/images/vw_polo_gti_front.jpg
and japanese cars were available and selling well prior to the preponderance of stateside production.
but like I said, you're consistent.
Jag_Warrior
05-16-07, 11:19 PM
At one of the recent DCX town hall meetings, a brash plant engineering supervisor asked if he was really up to the task of running the company. :eek: I hear that people started moving away from her, as if she'd cut a massive popcorn fart. There is a pool where over & under bets are being taken on when she'll "disappear". I picked three months or less... I refer to her as "DGW" whenever I see her (Dead Girl Walking). It was the exact right question, asked in the exact wrong place.
The town hall meeting was in March. And I was just told that she "showed up on a milk carton" early last week. I guess I'll find out tomorrow what my portion of the DGW Sweepstakes amounts to.
One thing about stupid people in power... if you plan on letting them know that they're stupid, you have to keep your resume fresh.
But with Cerberus taking over, she's better off in the fast food industry, selling Mary Kay, working part time at the carwash or where ever she winds up.
IMO, this is going to be ugly...
manufactured by blood sucking good for nothing union that can't even work 40 hours a week and takes a months of vacation every year
What the heck is your point with these German poster children? German auto reliability is largely the same or worse than American brands.
This whole managment-union finger pointing exercise is sad and laughable. It's a combination of short-sightedness and greed by both sides that have gotten the U.S. auto industry where it is today.
chop456
05-17-07, 03:51 AM
A hell of a lot of German cars aren't made in Germany.
Andrew Longman
05-17-07, 08:37 AM
A hell of a lot of German cars aren't made in Germany.
Some are made in South Carolina. Others in Alabama.;)
A couple of points...
Chrysler has been a mess for decades. They needed a government bail out in the late 70s. If not for selfless persistance by a few mid level engineers they never would have launched the minivan in the late 80s (over "savior" Iacocca's objections) and they would have gone bust again. And if another small group of engineers hadn't pushed it, they would have not launched the redesign minivan in 96 that saved them again.
They only agreed to the Daimler merger because they were tanking again and as events have proven, it was a huge mistake for Daimler.
Union or no union, Chrysler needs to solve their healthcare and pension whoas, and I'm not sure that can be done. It also needs to get smaller and it need to start building higher quality cars that people actually want to drive. That will only happen when they transform their culture to one that rewards innovation and accountability and doesn't measure everyone almost entirely on how little they spend.
Finally, T and H are not unionized for a reason. They give workers little reason to unionize. They pay them fairly and involve them in running the business and improving the product. Consequently the more people buy the product and the plant makes more cars so their is more pay and jobs for everyone. Everyone I've met at Honda, while not necessarily drinking the koolaid, are darn proud of the cars they make. Far from the truth with the people I've met at the big 3.
chop456
05-17-07, 08:59 AM
Some are made in South Carolina. Others in Alabama.;)
I was thinking more about places like Slovakia, but point taken. :D
A hell of a lot of German cars aren't made in Germany.Right, but the question remains: What's the point of the VW pics? Is there any data on whether German cars manufactured in Germany fair better or worse in reliability?
German manufacturers are moving work out of Germany because of high labor costs. German companies are looking to cut pay, benefits, work rules, and workers - just like American companies dealing with high labor costs. German brands are rated poorly on reliability.
As far as I can tell Ank's pics illustrate exactly the opposite of the point he seems to be trying to make.
What the heck is your point with these German poster children? German auto reliability is largely the same or worse than American brands.
This whole managment-union finger pointing exercise is sad and laughable. It's a combination of short-sightedness and greed by both sides that have gotten the U.S. auto industry where it is today.
the point is that despite german labor troubles, VWAG still manufs out of germany, and the unions haven't sucked them dry. not that the cars are marvels of engineering quality.
yes, they do have manuf operations out of the country as well, such as slovakia as chop mentioned, but they're still german based, still have manuf operations there, and have a much worse labor situation than anything the big 3 faces. yet FTG keeps portraying detroit's trouble as a binary issue, and as 100% UAW's doing. Which as you posted, it's not binary at all and has everything to do with ****tards all around.
yes, they do have manuf operations out of the country as well, such as slovakia as chop mentioned, but they're still german based, still have manuf operations there, and have a much worse labor situation than anything the big 3 faces. yet FTG keeps portraying detroit's trouble as a binary issue, and as 100% UAW's doing. Which as you posted, it's not binary at all and has everything to do with ****tards all around.
It's not a good counter-example. The German industry is in an ongoing crisis. They can't make money without a favorable exchange rate with the U.S. and a heavy bias towards premium models. Every time they introduce a new model they put the union over a barrel with threats to build it elsewhere and extract concessions.
not the best, no, but it works in this context, imo, since the argument laid forth was that of all or nothing.
Methanolandbrats
05-17-07, 11:32 AM
The biggest difference between The German and the USA auto industries is the Germans build quality cars people want to buy and drive. The USA auto industry product planners and designers develops cars nobody wants, then downgrade the materials to save a few bucks and they wonder why nobody buys the horrid ****boxes. It's not the workers fault. Someone said that UAW workers are not proud of their product. While that may be true, they are proud of their work and it's not their fault they are told to screw together Aztecs, Colbalts and all the other crap that has been spawned by the fine minds at the big three over the last few decades. The workers are not proud of the cars because they know each time the factory spits one out they are digging their own graves.
Sean O'Gorman
05-17-07, 12:57 PM
The biggest difference between The German and the USA auto industries is the Germans build quality cars people want to buy and drive. The USA auto industry product planners and designers develops cars nobody wants, then downgrade the materials to save a few bucks and they wonder why nobody buys the horrid ****boxes. It's not the workers fault. Someone said that UAW workers are not proud of their product. While that may be true, they are proud of their work and it's not their fault they are told to screw together Aztecs, Colbalts and all the other crap that has been spawned by the fine minds at the big three over the last few decades. The workers are not proud of the cars because they know each time the factory spits one out they are digging their own graves.
Yes, but consider that those same workers buy those same crapboxes, and encourage all their friends and family to do the same. Like I've said, the biggest reason I have for being anti-union is because of the xenophobia that they spread by encouraging people to buy second rate cars because they are made by Americans, instead of first rate cars made by foreigners, "because the profits go back to Japan." Last I checked, aren't we all human?
Methanolandbrats
05-17-07, 01:41 PM
Yes, but consider that those same workers buy those same crapboxes, and encourage all their friends and family to do the same. Like I've said, the biggest reason I have for being anti-union is because of the xenophobia that they spread by encouraging people to buy second rate cars because they are made by Americans, instead of first rate cars made by foreigners, "because the profits go back to Japan." Last I checked, aren't we all human?
True, but shrinking market share is what is killing the big three. The market share is shrinking because of the product they offer. As far as the workers buying the product, even if they were'nt unionized there would still be peer pressure to buy what they produce.
devilmaster
05-17-07, 02:50 PM
Yes, but consider that those same workers buy those same crapboxes, and encourage all their friends and family to do the same. Like I've said, the biggest reason I have for being anti-union is because of the xenophobia that they spread by encouraging people to buy second rate cars because they are made by Americans, instead of first rate cars made by foreigners, "because the profits go back to Japan." Last I checked, aren't we all human?
Yes, we're all human, I think. But as M&B said, there will always be peer pressure to buy a locally made product, regardless of the union. There are probably more chrysler minivans per capita in Windsor than anywhere else because the product has been built here since its inception.
I don't know how that's xenophobia, as no one is forced at gunpoint to buy one. People choose to buy and if they choose to buy because a relative or a friend works there and they feel that it might help them keep their job, so be it.
It sounds more and more like that you refuse to buy a union made product because of the union itself. Xenophobic of the union, are you?
Sean O'Gorman
05-17-07, 04:24 PM
Maybe its different in Windsor, but in good ol' Parma, a complaint about a foreign car is usually followed by some sort of racial slur.
devilmaster
05-17-07, 04:52 PM
Maybe its different in Windsor, but in good ol' Parma, a complaint about a foreign car is usually followed by some sort of racial slur.
And so, to counter that rediculous slant of a racial slur, you have developed your own rediculous slant.
As I've said before, I am not a union apologist. There were things that I really hated when I was a member. Union elections that made Soviet elections look really democratic. Our union got DaimlerChrysler to agree in the contract to rebuild Pillette Van and get a new product for the plant. Well, its an empty field now and the union never said boo when they found out the company wasn't going to build. And then becoming a trustee, I dealt with teacher unions also - that had no problem damaging a child's education if they didn't want to do something. But i've also seen unions do some good things for the communities they're in. The CAW has always been a strong supporter of charities in this area, and it starts with the can drives, passing the hat, and other collections as the workers walked into the plants.
This whole debate isn't black and white. There's alot of grey. And the truth lies in the middle somewhere. It ain't all the company's fault. It ain't all the union's fault. Everyone involved had a hand in this disaster.
I drive a VW because it is a superior product, period. It was made near Hamburg, I believe. I once spent an evening in Hamburg with some Germans, drinking beer, and one of the guys was a union worker in the VW plant. This guy was the proudest worker I have ever encountered. He was genuinely upset that I did not drive a VW (at the time), and he offered me a tour of his factory the next day, and I thought I was going to have to fight him to get out of it. I have never been more impressed by company loyalty and pride in product. This same guy probably also votes for better pay, fewer hours, etc., but what is more important, in the long run?
I have also worked in American auto plants, and I encountered no one like my German friend. But, I was also pretty negative in attitude myself, and that did not come from the unions, but from the lousy corporate culture that turned optimistic young workers into jaded cynics in no time.
You can blame the unions all you want, and they are certainly a negative force much of the time, but, ultimately, it is management's responsibility to create a culture of pride. Producing ugly, unreliable, uninspiring products, and doing so in an organizational structure that encourages selfishness, backbiting, and laziness is 100% the fault of management. In the end, they, and the owners of the companies, shoulder all of the blame.
I drive a VW because it is a superior product, period.
You realize that saying "period" doesn't change the fact that it's a subjective judgement based on your own personal needs and preferences.
Just saw a thing on the news the other night on the Chrysler buyout.
Legacy costs added to the average American made car that rolls off the assembly line
$1350
these are health and pension costs to retirees and some payment to those no longer working for the company.
In comparison
Toyotas legacy costs
$100 per car.
If you're redirecting that much revenue for goods sold to pay people who don't work for the company anymore you're doomed.
The big 3 negotiated with the union and traded off lower salaries for assembly line workers for retirement incentives. Of course, when they made those deals who'd have known healthcare costs would've shot through the roof and beyond. This'll be real simple, either the union and it's retirees lose the health benefits or at least start paying the lions share for them, or they lose them for good when the company goes out of business.
The unions were just as responsible for the downfall of big 3 as the corporate suits running those companies.
You realize that saying "period" doesn't change the fact that it's a subjective judgement based on your own personal needs and preferences.
You are right, period.
You realize that saying "period" doesn't change the fact that it's a subjective judgement based on your own personal needs and preferences.
and you realize that your pwning him on this point doesn't change the fact that you've always had a subjective prejudice against v dubs. :p
and I was never a vdub fan growing up, and it was one of hte last cars i ever considered, so you don't get to paint me as a fanboy, sorry ;)
and you realize that your pwning him on this point doesn't change the fact that you've always had a subjective prejudice against v dubs. :p
Not always! I used to love the '70s Scirocco and early '80s GTI. Lately.. eh.
It's certainly no bias against German cars. Heck, almost half the cars we've owned have been German, or partly German.
Showing your age boss!!
I had a 76 Scirocco, what a blast to drive. A bit concerting with the single wiper blade but it work great. The car was even fun in the snow.
Tifosi24
05-18-07, 09:24 AM
The big 3 negotiated with the union and traded off lower salaries for assembly line workers for retirement incentives. Of course, when they made those deals who'd have known healthcare costs would've shot through the roof and beyond. This'll be real simple, either the union and it's retirees lose the health benefits or at least start paying the lions share for them, or they lose them for good when the company goes out of business.
The unions were just as responsible for the downfall of big 3 as the corporate suits running those companies.
Both paragraphs have very valid points. Taking the second one first, and like I say over and over again, there are two sets of signatures on all contracts, the union is just at fault for asking for pie and the sky, and the management is just as at fault for giving them the sky. The health care costs is the biggie in my eyes and it is going to take some kind of great compromise. In my opinion, this stems from the fact that company actuaries in the middle part of the century based health care and pension payments on their workers dropping dead from heart attacks (or insert other sudden, preventable cause of death) well before age 70, but they failed to take into account that advances in medicine might actually occur.
cameraman
05-18-07, 02:23 PM
Not always! I used to love the '70s Scirocco
This car was a whole lot of fun...
http://www.adclassix.com/images/78vwscirocco.jpg
oddlycalm
05-18-07, 03:49 PM
company actuaries in the middle part of the century based health care and pension payments on their workers dropping dead from heart attacks (or insert other sudden, preventable cause of death) well before age 70, but they failed to take into account that advances in medicine might actually occur. Exactly right.
Another major issue is that we don't subsidize or protect our auto makers. Meanwhile Japan has significant trade barriers to imports, support from MITI, favorable tax policies as well as access to money at rates under 1%. In addition Japans socialized health care and retirment systems free their companies from the kind of health care and pension burden shouldered by US companies.
oc
Andrew Longman
05-18-07, 04:04 PM
oc, your points are correct, especially on the competitive aspects of socialized medicine, but the US auto industry is subsidized in the form comparetively low tax on gas which encourages use of the product and screwy CAFE standards that encourage production of high margin SUVs over more low margin, economical, fuel efficient models.
The foreign nameplates have access to that same cheap gas and fuel standards but the market itself is enhanced through policy. If those things were not in place you can bet we would see much different land use pattern (no ex-urbs), much more mass transit and development around it. More high speed rail and fewer cars.
Sadly now that the Germans, Japanese and Koreans are building products, even big SUV product in NA (where they don't have all the benefits you describe at home) they are still kicking the big three's butt.
Guess we were all wrong. It turns out that not working is a good thing.
http://i.l.cnn.net/money/2007/09/24/news/companies/gm_uaw_strikedeadline/uaw_strike.03.jpg
spinner26
09-24-07, 01:48 PM
these pawns are walking for a measly 200$ / week strike pay while the leaders who control them pocket a healthy paycheck, continue to play golf and eat at country clubs with the bosses at GM. UNFRIGGINBELIVEABLE.
Honestly, why would you want to belong to a union? 20-30 years ago, okay, MAYBE. Today? No way in hell.
eiregosod
09-24-07, 01:56 PM
today is a very good time to join a union. Most of these companies dishonour your pension account (see United aIRLINES mAY 2005) , or let speculators drain your savings.
The need to be a union member soon will reflect the same reasons it did early in the twentieth century.
What is corrupted and sided with the bribs will be passed by.
It won't be pretty, just as it wasn't back then.
Andrew Longman
09-24-07, 02:52 PM
today is a very good time to join a union. Most of these companies dishonour your pension account (see United aIRLINES mAY 2005) , or let speculators drain your savings.
Wharton Steel union retirees lost almost everything, including health benefits back in the early 80s.
Now GM employees apparently don't believe they can manage their health plan better than GM, even if GM gives them a couple billion fund to start out with. Either that, or they still think they are entitled to benefits on a scale most of us can only dream of.
Sadly, despite all the talk among presidental candidates, our healthcare crisis is almost certainly to get far worse, not better as boomers age and get sicker and the population is replaced by young, undocumented workers without insurance.
Sean Malone
09-24-07, 02:57 PM
Wharton Steel union retirees lost almost everything, including health benefits back in the early 80s.
Now GM employees apparently don't believe they can manage their health plan better than GM, even if GM gives them a couple billion fund to start out with. Either that, or they still think they are entitled to benefits on a scale most of us can only dream of.
Sadly, despite all the talk among presidental candidates, our healthcare crisis is almost certainly to get far worse, not better as boomers age and get sicker and the population is replaced by young, undocumented workers without insurance.
What's the 'crisis'?
spinner26
09-24-07, 03:11 PM
What's the 'crisis'?
It's not free.:cry:
the ins administrative costs compared to the level of care received is ridiculous, is what. doctors having to maintain staff who spend all day combing through paperwork of 15 different providers only to have the provider weasel out of it through some loophole. patients expecting free check-ups, but not realising that more serious issues can and will put them in a world of debt.
From CNN:
The strike by 73,000 union members halted operations at 80 facilities in 30 states, and could also hit GM plants in Canada and Mexico as well as companies supplying GM.
The industry is already on the ropes in this country. :shakehead
From CNN:
The industry is already on the ropes in this country. :shakehead
It's better to squeeze out a few more free doctor's appointments from a dying company than to try and save the industry.
What's the 'crisis'?
There isn't one, and won't be one, until you get sick.
oddlycalm
09-24-07, 05:22 PM
The industry is already on the ropes in this country. :shakehead Yeah, this could tip over some of the suppliers that are in rough shape as it will effect the entire supply chain. I can hear the people being laid off, budgets being cut and wallets snapping shut from 2000 miles away...:shakehead
Ironically, they chose GM because it was the healthiest of the three, health being a relative term in this case. Honestly, it's hard to imagine worse timing for contract renewal. Good luck trying to squeeze blood from a turnip.
oc
Interesting article (http://www.slate.com/id/2174601/)
What if the biggest industrial union struck the biggest American automaker—and nobody noticed? That's what happened this morning, as the United Auto Workers launched a national strike against General Motors. They are talking about it—a little—on CNBC, but the strike is vying for airtime with a dozen other stories. And General Motors' stock barely budged on the day.
(In fact, there's a degree to which GM might actually have wanted a strike: If they stop making cars for a few months, it'll allow dealers to get rid of their inventory.)
spinner26
09-24-07, 06:27 PM
Interesting article (http://www.slate.com/id/2174601/)
What if the biggest industrial union struck the biggest American automaker—and nobody noticed? That's what happened this morning, as the United Auto Workers launched a national strike against General Motors. They are talking about it—a little—on CNBC, but the strike is vying for airtime with a dozen other stories. And General Motors' stock barely budged on the day.
(In fact, there's a degree to which GM might actually have wanted a strike: If they stop making cars for a few months, it'll allow dealers to get rid of their inventory.)
FOX, CNN, CNBC, and many others were showing the Iranian dictator live from New York.
eiregosod
09-24-07, 10:13 PM
Wharton Steel union retirees lost almost everything, including health benefits back in the early 80s.
Now GM employees apparently don't believe they can manage their health plan better than GM, even if GM gives them a couple billion fund to start out with. Either that, or they still think they are entitled to benefits on a scale most of us can only dream of.
Sadly, despite all the talk among presidental candidates, our healthcare crisis is almost certainly to get far worse, not better as boomers age and get sicker and the population is replaced by young, undocumented workers without insurance.
The problem is the actual cost of the health coverage/insurance.
The health care providers/insurers can name their price, and they're bleeding the economy dry. if they lowered their price, then real companies could be more productive and earn more instead of theose comapnies preying/praying that a whole batch of people gets ill or gets diagnosed with a new strain of ADD/ADHD/ADDHD or whatever psycotic symptom is newly diagnosed tomorrow.
Andrew Longman
09-25-07, 10:01 AM
What's the 'crisis'?
Healthcare is an issue deserving of its own thread and could go on for pages, but the short of it is that it cost too much, insurance for it cost too much and companies that provide coverage are at a global disadvantage. People who don't have insurance, and because of caps even if you do have it, are easily bankrupt if they have a serious illness. If you lose your insurance because you lost your job, and have a previous condition, you're screwed to try and get it on your own even if you can afford the $1600+ cost. Moreover, if you do get sick and wind up in a hospital, there are good odds the hospital will make you sicker, and then charge you/your insurance to fix that too. There are not enough doctors and nurses in most areas and demographic shifts aren't likely to fix that.
And all of that will get worse as boomers age, leave the workforce and get sicker while the generation behind them grows smaller and is less able to pay into the system to support the sick and elderly.
Andrew Longman
09-25-07, 10:02 AM
(In fact, there's a degree to which GM might actually have wanted a strike: If they stop making cars for a few months, it'll allow dealers to get rid of their inventory.)
And they are highly motivated to lower their healthcare costs. If a strke accomplishes that it is highly worth it.
Sean Malone
09-25-07, 10:18 AM
Healthcare is an issue deserving of its own thread and could go on for pages,...
True, the reason being that there are many schools of thought on the problems at hand and their possible solutions.
...but the short of it is that it cost too much, insurance for it cost too much and companies that provide coverage are at a global disadvantage. People who don't have insurance, and because of caps even if you do have it, are easily bankrupt if they have a serious illness. If you lose your insurance because you lost your job, and have a previous condition, you're screwed to try and get it on your own even if you can afford the $1600+ cost. Moreover, if you do get sick and wind up in a hospital, there are good odds the hospital will make you sicker, and then charge you/your insurance to fix that too. There are not enough doctors and nurses in most areas and demographic shifts aren't likely to fix that.
And all of that will get worse as boomers age, leave the workforce and get sicker while the generation behind them grows smaller and is less able to pay into the system to support the sick and elderly.
I work for a national health plan and my question wasn't a bait but rather me simply being curious what constitutes the usage of the word "crisis" regarding health care. The word carries a lot of weight. A google search of "health care crisis" returns many results, the majority being leftwing bloggers longing for a socialistic solution. Which to me is the crux of the matter...politics...and with that, it's not for this forum. But you bring up valid points to which I don’t believe there are any easy answers. ;)
Andrew Longman
09-25-07, 10:30 AM
Sean, you might consider this. The author is a New America Foundation Sr. Fellow and hardly a left wing blogger. (That's my other brother) ;)
http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/51nwGgROxkL._AA240_.jpg
http://www.amazon.com/Best-Care-Anywhere-Health-Better/dp/0977825302/ref=pd_bbs_1/105-2342407-5070003?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1190730365&sr=8-1
A google search of "health care crisis" returns many results, the majority being leftwing bloggers longing for a socialistic solution. Which to me is the crux of the matter...politics...and with that, it's not for this forum.Then don't take it that direction.
Sean Malone
09-25-07, 10:46 AM
Then don't take it that direction.
Wasn't intending to boss. It's really two sides of the same coin or they both walk hand in hand or strange bedfellows...I'm done. :)
Thanks for the recommendation Andrew. It looks very interesting.
oddlycalm
09-25-07, 02:35 PM
what constitutes the usage of the word "crisis" regarding health care If it's not a crisis to you it's because you aren't on the outside looking in. Health care costs have been increasing at several times the rate of inflation for decades. Tens of millions have no access to the system and it's the #1 cause of personal bankruptcy. Companies can no longer afford to provide health care to their employees so that those that do find themselves the subject of threads like this one.
Ask the CEO of every one of the Fortune 500 companies and how many do you think would rate this one of their top 3 challenges?
I agreee that discussing potential solutions would be political and I further suggest that we will all be hearing more than we care to about it over the next 18 months...:yuck:
oc
Sean Malone
09-25-07, 02:58 PM
Yes, if I didn't have health care for my family it would definitely be a crisis. Coupled with added expenses that could lead to ones financial ruin, a crisis without a doubt.
chop456
02-12-08, 09:46 AM
GM Offers Buyouts To All 74,000 Hourly Workers (http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/12/news/companies/gm/index.htm?cnn=yes)
Methanolandbrats
02-12-08, 10:16 AM
GM Offers Buyouts To All 74,000 Hourly Workers (http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/12/news/companies/gm/index.htm?cnn=yes) But how much does it cost to ship a boatload of Cobalts from India to the USA?
JLMannin
02-12-08, 12:19 PM
GM Offers Buyouts To All 74,000 Hourly Workers (http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/12/news/companies/gm/index.htm?cnn=yes)
So, can they take the buy-outs and the benefits, then come back to work for GM?
So, can they take the buy-outs and the benefits, then come back to work for GM?
From my experience with layoffs (and I've seen many around here), there wil be verbage in the agreement they sign preventing future employment with GM, or at a minimum for a period of time.
-Kevin
something that I have not seen on this very good thread
How many executives does GM have and what is their salary? ;)
Joe Blow line worker, making 80K versus Mr Big Shot at 3M + :eek:
From my experience with layoffs (and I've seen many around here), there wil be verbage in the agreement they sign preventing future employment with GM, or at a minimum for a period of time.
-Kevin
Well, it has been quite a while, but when I was at GM that was not the case. They would buy people out, then hire them back on contract. So, they paid the net present value of their benefit liabilities up front (a financial disadvantage), then they paid more per hour to have them on contract (a financial disadvantage), so that they could gain the flexibility to fire them at will (an operating advantage) and a better balance sheet (a fool the idiots who buy the stock advantage).
Fundamentally, they were not "saving money," but sprucing up the books for Wall Street. And of course we can see today how well that has worked out for them. Nice so-called management.
Of course, on the flip side of the coin, one must wonder why the UAW is amenable to the company eliminating union positions. But the union has always been about protecting the current union voter and screwing the future and retired union guys, despite all the bogus rhetoric about the nobility of the working man.
Profoundly dysfunctional. Expect to see universal health care this presidency, not because the people demand it, but because it is absolutely necessary for our economic survival, and thus national security. There is a misconception that the business world is against it, while for companies like GM, billions in on and off balance sheet liabilities would disappear overnight.
something that I have not seen on this very good thread
How many executives does GM have and what is their salary? ;)
Joe Blow line worker, making 80K versus Mr Big Shot at 3M + :eek:
The Joe Blow line maker's decisions at work may alter the outcome of a few cars.
The executives' decisions at work impact the entire fleet, the workforce, ancillary services and companies, local/state/federal governments, etc.
I think that comparison sounds fair.
cameraman
02-13-08, 02:12 PM
something that I have not seen on this very good thread
How many executives does GM have and what is their salary? ;)
Joe Blow line worker, making 80K versus Mr Big Shot at 3M + :eek:
The insurance costs for both people are the same. That is what they care about.
Profoundly dysfunctional. Expect to see universal health care this presidency, not because the people demand it, but because it is absolutely necessary for our economic survival, and thus national security. There is a misconception that the business world is against it, while for companies like GM, billions in on and off balance sheet liabilities would disappear overnight.
The money will still have to come from somewhere. Rather than paying the benefits, we will have higher taxes, leaving corporations with less profit and individuals with less money to spend on cars.
Sean O'Gorman
02-13-08, 03:57 PM
Also, I hate subsidizing the lazy.
cameraman
02-13-08, 04:02 PM
The money will still have to come from somewhere. Rather than paying the benefits, we will have higher taxes, leaving corporations with less profit and individuals with less money to spend on cars.
No, that is not anyone's plan. The current free market system is a disaster, we are paying far more than anyone else on the planet for care that is no longer better than the rest. The amount of money wasted in filing and re-filing claims to hundreds of infinitely variable insurance plans is truly staggering. The current system is going to bankrupt us, the amount of money I have to budget for coverage goes up every year, the coverage we get goes down, and the employee share of the costs continues to rise.
Racing Truth
02-13-08, 04:04 PM
Also, I hate subsidizing the lazy.
There is that, but there's also genuine people who cannot afford it. I'll add that, while there are some great things, the health care system doesn't work very efficiently.
It's great if you're really healthy or really sick. Otherwise...
No, that is not anyone's plan. The current free market system is a disaster, we are paying far more than anyone else on the planet for care that is no longer better than the rest. The amount of money wasted in filing and re-filing claims to hundreds of infinitely variable insurance plans is truly staggering. The current system is going to bankrupt us, the amount of money I have to budget for coverage goes up every year, the coverage we get goes down, and the employee share of the costs continues to rise.
no candidate is proposing to eliminate the multi payer system in the US health care industry. so we will still have all those added expenses that you are talking about.
if you want true universal coverage from the feds, it will come at the cost of a 20-30% (depending on which study you read) income tax in addition to all of our other taxes.
and by certain statistics, you are right that the US is not #1 in health care. however the US does rank #1 in the world in Patient Satisfaction, which I would say is the most important factor. the other factors can be skewed by other causes, such as our dietary habits.
using the ER as universal coverage is not working
cameraman
02-13-08, 04:27 PM
the US does rank #1 in the world in Patient Satisfaction Says who :saywhat:
Says who :saywhat:
The World Health Organization.
Racing Truth
02-13-08, 04:41 PM
Says who :saywhat:
That's what I wonder.
Look, if you have cancer, you'll probably get top-notch treatment and drugs. If you have pneumonia, OTOH.
And what f00boy said.
The money will still have to come from somewhere. Rather than paying the benefits, we will have higher taxes, leaving corporations with less profit and individuals with less money to spend on cars.
I am a Libertarian. I hate it. Nevertheless, it is a boulder rolling down a mountain. You are not going to stop it.
I am a Libertarian. I hate it. Nevertheless, it is a boulder rolling down a mountain. You are not going to stop it.
This is treading close enough to politics without having people weighing in with their affiliation.
Sorry, boss. I didn't think about that. :gomer:
6 years no interest, sounds like one healthy business, the product line that's dependent on margins from gas guzzling trucks biting them in the arse.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=akzUY90SVnL4&refer=home
June 23 (Bloomberg) -- General Motors Corp., trying to spur U.S. sales after a 16 percent slide through May, tomorrow will begin offering no-interest financing for as long as six years on many 2008 cars and trucks.
GM also will raise prices on several 2009 models by about $1,000 each, or an average of 3.5 percent, because of materials costs, currency exchange rates and new technology, spokesman John McDonald said today. The loan incentives run through the end of June and include such models as the Chevrolet Silverado pickup and the GMC Envoy sport-utility vehicle, he said in an e-mail.
``This is always a great promotion and really does drive traffic,'' Steve Lowry, sales manager of Plaza Pontiac-Buick-GMC in Omaha, Nebraska, said of the loan offers in an interview today. ``We expect to see a good-size bump in sales.''
Detroit-based GM, the largest U.S. automaker, is trying to attract people to showrooms as consumers purchase fewer vehicles because of rising gasoline costs and declines in housing prices and used-vehicle trade-in values. The industry's annualized sales rate in June may fall to its lowest in 15 years, according to Citigroup analyst Itay Michaeli.
GM fell 59 cents, or 4.3 percent, to $13.20 at 2:36 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. The shares declined 45 percent this year before today.
also GM's last 10Q lists $49,000,000,000.00 of "shareholder deficit" where many companies have this funny thing called "shareholder equity"
Andrew Longman
06-25-08, 10:54 AM
6 years no interest, sounds like one healthy business, the product line that's dependent on margins from gas guzzling trucks biting them in the arse.
Its worse than that. Their business model is to essentially give away cars to make money on loans and leases. A bank that gives a away cars instead of toasters, if you will. Zero interest loans are not exactly good banking practices.
All this will do for them is to convince lenders that they can actually move their SUV inventories so they can borrow more against it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.