Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Are Toyota's recent quality problems just a glitch?

2456716

Comments

  • dtownfbdtownfb Member Posts: 2,918
    I thought the Yaris was to fill this nitch? Would not be smart to have two vehicles in your own lineup competing against one another.
  • dtownfbdtownfb Member Posts: 2,918
    I think you will see a big change over the current model. I don't think it will be as edgy as the Civic but I do think Toyota will inject some style.

    I just hope they change the seating so someone with long legs can comfortably drive the vehicle.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,146
    Jin, we can't help you in this discussion, but I'd like to help you get to other owners who can help you. Again...Please let us know what model you have. This topic is for sharing news about Toyota in general, and members here don't necessarily have expertise with your particular vehicle.

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • maple2maple2 Member Posts: 177
    If you buy a new vehicle these days expect it to be recalled at some point. Make sense?

    No it doesnt make sense to me, why would it make sense for the last 20yrs for gm and ford to get raked over the coals for all the recalls they had, now that the shoe is on the other foot your going to sit there and try to tell me that recalls should be expected? nobody shells out good money on a car and expects it to be recalled. Now that toyota cant sneak around and secretly fix their flaws anymore they will undoubtedly issue more recalls than has been their average over the years,but that still dosent mean anyone expects their car to be recalled
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Well let me refer back to the Durango's cupholders and the Highlander's carpeting. The NHTSA is requiring that these safety issues be corrected.

    Regardless of the manufacturer this is the environment of the auto market at this time. My question was more rhetorical not directed anywhere in particular. All automakers are going to have massive numbers of recalls now, IMHO, for the reasons I mentioned above.

    Most recalls like the one on my Prius and the one on my Highlander will be .... nothing. No inconvenience, no time lost, no cost, no effect at all. This will be the case for all vehicle makers.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    1-2
    Reuters reported that car maker DaimlerChrysler's premium Mercedes arm said on Tuesday it would recall almost 130,000 vehicles in Germany due to possible problems with windscreen wipers.

    12-22
    The AP reported that DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler Group said Friday it was recalling more than 60,000 vehicles to reprogram a brake system computer to avoid the loss of antilock brakes and traction control.
    The recall involves 62,369 model year 2007 Chrysler Sebring, Chrysler 300, Jeep Commander, Jeep Compass, Jeep Grand Cherokee, Jeep Liberty, Jeep Wrangler, Dodge Nitro, Dodge Magnum, Dodge Charger and Dodge Caliber vehicles


    12-8
    Volkswagen of America, Inc. announced safety recalls to address two issues in some 2006 and 2007 model year Passat sedans, and in some 2007 model year Passat wagons.
    Some of the affected 2006 model year Passat vehicles have a wiper motor that may fail during heavy rain due to excessive moisture entering the wiper motor. If this happens, reduced visibility could result.

    Approximately 62,000 vehicles in the United States and Canada could be potentially affected.


    12-6
    Toyota Motor Sales (TMS), U.S.A., Inc., will launch a voluntary Special Service Campaign involving approximately 60,700 four-cylinder Highlander sport utility vehicles from the 2001 through 2003 model year and 159,100 RAV4 sport utility vehicles from the 2001 and 2002 model year. The Malfunction Indicator Light, also known as the "check engine" light, on certain RAV4 and Highlander may inadvertently illuminate due to an issue with the program logic in the Engine Control Module (ECM). This light does not affect the operation of the vehicle. The affected RAV4 and Highlander were produced from July 24, 2000 to August 22, 2003.

    11-25
    Japan Today reported that Honda Motor Co said on Friday that it is recalling a total of 209,898 of its Mobilio and the Mobilio Spike small passenger cars for repairs of defective parts.

    11-24
    Reuters reported that Volvo, a unit of Ford Motor Co., is recalling about 360,000 cars because of a problem with vehicle speed controls that can cause engines to lose power without warning, Volvo said on Friday

    These are all from Recall News

    This is the legal/political environment we live in now. Most as you can see are fixable during a normal service visit at little or no extra time/cost.
  • nwngnwng Member Posts: 663
    But yaris is in the same class as the Fit, not the rolla. By delaying the launch almost 18 mos compare with the rest of the world, toyota can:

    1)just keep on printing money (as another poster mentioned above)
    2) avoid head to head competition with the new civic
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    drjames,

    First of all you are a relative new member to edmunds and I wanted to say a (late) welcome. :)

    Rockylee, you are aware that Chinese Laws require an automotive company who wants to sell cars in China to also BUILD them there too, no?

    I've heard that in the past but others never could confirm it to me. How bout this ? Why is it fair for them to be just a exporter of goods while they make it next to impossible for our domestic company's to sell goods made in our country to them ????? See something wrong with this picture ????

    That's why every automotive company who's selling in China is building plants in China.

    I understand why company's want to tap that 2 billion consumer market because it makes dollars and sense. I guess you have to do what you have to do but I do feel we could do more to open up their market to reduce our trade deficit. ;)

    That said, The big three are closing plants in the US and Canada, and cutting jobs for financial reasons; whereas Toyota, Hyundai, etc. have been building new plants by choice, providing tens of thousands of good paying jobs. GM may have just built a plant, but how many plants have they closed, how many jobs have been cut, or "early" retirement packages offered in the past 10 years? Unfortunately, Ford has followed suit and it appears DaimlerChrysler is about to do the same.

    I'm fully aware of the article and yes feel the more jobs gained the better for the U.S.
    I however want you to recognize that 8 out of 10 auto-jobs in this country are still provided by the big 3 and domestic suppliers. I also want you to realize that company's like kia have around 3-5% domestic content. Just asembling a car here without buying parts from here is no longer good enough IMHO. Toyota and Honda do have high domestic content percentages and I welcome them more than some brand like hyundai. That is hard for me to admit because GM's parts supplier company Delphi, does supply Hykia with fuel injectors which is included in that 5% domestic content. ;)

    Here's the facts, "The assembly plants being closed are in Oklahoma City, Lansing, Mich., and Doraville, Ga., with the first two closing next year and Doraville slated to shut in 2008.

    Some shifts will be eliminated at three other assembly plants, including Line 1 at Spring Hill, Tenn., and Oshawa, Ontario, Car Plant No. 2, which will both be shut, although assembly plants on the same property will continue to operate.

    Other facilities to be closed include stamping plants in Lansing, Mich., next year and in Pittsburgh in 2007, along with two powertrain plants, in St. Catharines, Ontario, and Flint, Mich., in 2008.

    And the company will shut three parts facilities in Portland, Ore., Ypsilanti, Mich., and St. Louis by 2007. One other parts facility yet to be identified will also be closed. "

    As for job cuts, GM's at about 35,000 lost american jobs, a NET deficit, regardless of the "new" plant they opened last year.

    http://money.cnn.com/2005/11/21/news/fortune500/gm_cuts/


    That is a relatively "OLD" article and things have changed quite a bit since 2005' ;)

    My father and many of my relatives were recent victims of the 2006 downsize. Luckily they had enough or plenty of years in to take the early outs and/or buy outs.
    My father was a 27 year GM/Delphi veteran and I couldn't be more proud of somebody who took such honor and pride in his job. I did tear up the day he retired and unfortunately dad living in Michigan and I living in Texas, I wished I could of been their to give him a hug. My family has a very good reputation at General Motors and unfortunately I will not be able to continue the family tradition of being a 3rd generation auto worker. I suppose I should be thankful for the good job I have in these depressed times we live in. :cry:

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    TORRANCE, Calif. — Toyota confirmed on Wednesday that its highly anticipated FT-HS hybrid sports concept will make its debut at the 2007 North American International Auto Show in Detroit.

    http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=119067

    Rocky
  • drjamesdrjames Member Posts: 274
    "First of all you are a relative new member to edmunds and I wanted to say a (late) welcome."

    Rockylee, thank you. As someone who loves cars, I wish I knew about this place long ago.

    "I've heard that in the past but others never could confirm it to me. How bout this ? Why is it fair for them to be just a exporter of goods while they make it next to impossible for our domestic company's to sell goods made in our country to them ????? See something wrong with this picture ????"

    Yeah, unfortunately it's true, and agreed, it's not necessarily fair. But, it's China's market, so they can pretty much do anything they want. But, there is a push from the 'right' to create a free-trade agreement with North America and China; however, there is an obvious revolt and fear from the 'left'. See any peaceful anti-WTO rallys and marches lately? ;)

    "... I do feel we could do more to open up their market to reduce our trade deficit."

    It's always a 'catch 22' with the trade deficit. Look at China Inc... oops, I mean Wal-Mart. A true American success story that buys most of their products from China.

    "I however want you to recognize that 8 out of 10 auto-jobs in this country are still provided by the big 3 and domestic suppliers."

    I will recongnise that, IF you recongnise that DailmerChysler isn't really a domestic anymore. ;)

    "I also want you to realize that company's like kia have around 3-5% domestic content. Just asembling a car here without buying parts from here is no longer good enough IMHO. Toyota and Honda do have high domestic content percentages and I welcome them more than some brand like hyundai. That is hard for me to admit because GM's parts supplier company Delphi, does supply Hykia with fuel injectors which is included in that 5% domestic content."

    I am aware of domestic parts content. Did you know that the New Tundra being built in Texas has more domestic content than GM or Ford's respective trucks? As for companies like Hyundai, didn't have to build a new plant in the US, but chose to. It would have been cheaper for them to continue to build and ship their cars from S. Korea.

    "That is a relatively "OLD" article and things have changed quite a bit since 2005'"

    You're right, things have changed abit, but not necessarily for the better either. ; Many would argue things have only gotten worse.... as in continued shrinking market share. It'll take a few years to see if GM's master plan for 're-structuring' or as I see it 'cutting jobs and plants and sending them elsewhere to save money' are effective. Now Ford is following a similar path, and DC's position is no better.

    "My father and many of my relatives were recent victims of the 2006 downsize. Luckily they had enough or plenty of years in to take the early outs and/or buy outs."

    I'm glad to hear that your family will be fine.

    So, after all this, do you still bear ill towards a comment such as, "Toyota cares about the US"? I'll admit that I've been a fan of Toyota for quite some time. Predominately for their corporate philosophy, if not for their products.
  • drjamesdrjames Member Posts: 274
    Hey Rockylee, you probably are still unhappy with Toyota's advance in the US market, but.... get ready, here comes another American plant, probably worth 1 - 2 billion dollars and a 2000 direct jobs. Plus the huge number of spin off jobs this new plant will create.

    http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=22472&vf=7
  • bottgersbottgers Member Posts: 2,030
    ....with Toyota's recent quality control issues lie less with the inconvenience of recalls, but more with long term reliability. The main reason I currently own Toyotas is because they're so well built, it's reasonable to expect them to last at least 200K miles with few problems, assuming they are maintained properly. Since Toyota is having more quality problems recently than they had in the past, is this any indication their vehicles won't have the long term reliability their previous vehicles had? This shred of doubt is what would keep me from buying a new Toyota, if I decided not to.
  • drjamesdrjames Member Posts: 274
    Certainly valid concerns bottgers, and long term reliability is something that just can't be known at this time, or even a few years. However, as I was telling Rockylee, it's Toyota's all-encompassing corporate philosophy that I most admire, and why I'll have to have faith in Toyota's products until there is a good reason why not to.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Did you know that the New Tundra being built in Texas has more domestic content than GM or Ford's respective trucks?

    I'd like to see some proof on that. ;)

    GM's full-size trucks have an average of 87-90% domestic content. I'm not absolutely sure on what domestic content of Ford's F-150 is but I'm pretty certain it's still in the high 70 to 80 percentile ;)

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Yeah I won't be happy until they are union jobs to level the playing field. ;)

    Rocky
  • rorrrorr Member Posts: 3,630
    "Yeah I won't be happy until they are union jobs to level the playing field."

    Look out rocky.....rorr's back.

    So you acknowledge that using non-Union labor gives Toyota an unfair advantage?

    Why?

    The only reason I can think of is that Union labor costs certain manufacturers more in terms of pay/benefits WITHOUT providing those manufacturers with a quality of labor commensurate with the higher pay/benefits.

    In other words, if the higher pay/benefits given to Union labor ensured higher quality labor, then the higher pay/benefits would be 'worth it' to the manufacturer.....and there'd be no need to 'level the playing field'.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    OMG Rorr, is back !!!!! :D Hows it going ? We've missed ya. :)

    So you acknowledge that using non-Union labor gives Toyota an unfair advantage?

    Yes because Toyota, doesn't have to pay retirement healthcare and benefits on its employees. The biggest advantage toyota has on the big 3 is they also have modern plants here in the U.S. which we all know reduce costs because they require less employees per plant and with modern machinery the jobs require less human intervention.

    The next UAW contract I have no doubt will have very flexible work rules that allow employees to work in teams which some experts say will speed up productivity.

    The only reason I can think of is that Union labor costs certain manufacturers more in terms of pay/benefits WITHOUT providing those manufacturers with a quality of labor commensurate with the higher pay/benefits.

    That is somewhat true but not in all cases or jobs since union workers do have a lot of self pride and don't have a "overseer" standing over them with a whip to make sure the job is done right.

    In other words, if the higher pay/benefits given to Union labor ensured higher quality labor, then the higher pay/benefits would be 'worth it' to the manufacturer.....and there'd be no need to 'level the playing field'.

    Well perhaps.....I guess we will see how level it gets when GM's contract comes up in March. ;)

    I like I said before still think the currency manipulation issue is a important one and the Japanese auto manufactors still build a fair amount of it's products in Japan, where the profit margins on those vehicals are very significant. ;)

    Rocky
  • drjamesdrjames Member Posts: 274
    "
    I'd like to see some proof on that.

    GM's full-size trucks have an average of 87-90% domestic content. I'm not absolutely sure on what domestic content of Ford's F-150 is but I'm pretty certain it's still in the high 70 to 80 percentile"


    Yeah, I kid you not. I'm sure if you look around, you'll find it too. I think I read about it in Truck Trend Magazine (the one with the GMC nose to nose against the new Tundra. If I see it, I'll let you know.

    So, how do you feel about this? ;)
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Yeah, I kid you not. I'm sure if you look around, you'll find it too. I think I read about it in Truck Trend Magazine (the one with the GMC nose to nose against the new Tundra. If I see it, I'll let you know.

    I don't get Truck Trend, so no I haven't seen it. Yeah if you can post a link from the internet I'd love to read it even though I already know it's B.S.

    I have a couple though...... ;)

    http://levelfieldinstitute.org/domestic.htm

    http://www.levelfieldinstitute.org/docs/Auto_Parts_Scorecard_090606_FINAL.pdf

    http://levelfieldinstitute.org/docs/ad-lfi-total-jobs-barchart02.pdf

    So, how do you feel about this? ;)

    No offense drjames, but it shows right here that the Toyota Tundra only has 60% "domestic content" making your Tundra is more american :surprise: arguement that you claim Truck Trends has printed ummmmm pretty much to put in a nice way--> "HAWG WASH" ;)

    I knew it was hawg wash from the get go but I being the nice guy I am had to at least give you the benefit of the doubt and look it up for myself to confirm :P

    http://levelfieldinstitute.org/docs/lfi-domestic-content.pdf

    Thanx,

    Rocky
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Member Posts: 4,277
    60% Content is better than 0% content... And being built on American soil in the heart of Texas isn't doing a bit or disservice to the economy or job growth.

    Good luck trying to convice otherwise...
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    I just wished my tax dollars didn't have to go torwards the creation of that plant...... :sick:

    Rocky
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    From the Detroit News

    Recalls for 2006

    Snippet:
    Ford, which led the industry with 6 million recalls in 2005, saw recalls drop to 1.7 million in 2006. GM saw similar results, recalling 1.6 million cars and trucks, down from 5 million the year before.

    Toyota, which has faced nagging questions about its quality after 2.2 million recalls in 2005, saw improvement in 2006, with 766,000 vehicles recalled.
  • drjamesdrjames Member Posts: 274
    "I knew it was hawg wash from the get go but I being the nice guy I am had to at least give you the benefit of the doubt and look it up for myself to confirm"

    hey rockylee, sneaky of you to try and use 2004 data to prove a point. And 2005 data to gernalize each company. ;) As you have previously said... "things have changed quite a bit since [2004 and] 2005". Like a new Toyota plant, 21 separate parts and components suppliers built, incorporated, and integrated on site, and about $1.3 Billion in direct and indirect investments.

    But, I said... "Did you know that the New Tundra being built in Texas has more domestic content than GM or Ford's respective trucks?"

    I guess I'll continue to be "nice" and let that one slide. ;) The source wasn't Truck Trend, since I just saw it at today, but I'll keep looking for you. ;)

    As for being "disappointed" about the use of your "tax dollars", that's too bad. Since the $133 million in incentives given to Toyota resulted in over $1 billion in toyota's money being injected into Texas and the US.

    Just an aside, did you know, "Toyota, however, passed on a considerable chunk of potential incentives still sitting on the negotiating table. Local officials had offered the automaker school- and hospital-district tax abatements that could have been worth as much as $34 million. Toyota declined, saying it wanted to be a contributor to the local community.
    "In Texas we recognize the value and contributions of good corporate citizens," [Texas Gov. Rick] Perry said. "Toyota has long been known as a good corporate citizen as well as an industry leader."
    The incentives will provide a rich return, Perry maintained.
    "We will have a complete payoff of our investment before the first truck even rolls off the assembly line," he said. "This decision will impact San Antonio and its economy by billions of dollars, and the San Antonio job base with thousands of jobs. The ripple effect will lead to an additional 5,300 spin-off jobs, which will contribute another $4 billion to this economy," the governor added.
    Toyota's plant will generate $300 million in state sales and franchise tax revenues over the next 25 years, according to state estimates, Perry noted. The incentives will yield an 18.3-percent return over 10 years, he said.
    And the payoff could get better. Toyota's San Antonio employment could jump to 4,300 if the company decides to extend plant production into SUVs, officials with the automaker said."
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    hey rockylee, sneaky of you to try and use 2004 data to prove a point. And 2005 data to gernalize each company. As you have previously said... "things have changed quite a bit since [2004 and] 2005". Like a new Toyota plant, 21 separate parts and components suppliers built, incorporated, and integrated on site, and about $1.3 Billion in direct and indirect investments.

    Regardless, assembling the Tundra in Texas instead of Japan, doesn't change the domestic content one bit. If it did gain more it's a marginal gain. ;)

    But, I said... "Did you know that the New Tundra being built in Texas has more domestic content than GM or Ford's respective trucks?"

    I guess I'll continue to be "nice" and let that one slide. The source wasn't Truck Trend, since I just saw it at today, but I'll keep looking for you.


    You please keep looking because I'm calling Hawg Wash, until you get me facts. If you are right I'll bow to you. I will be able to confirm in the not so distant future since it's law they have to put domestic content on the stickers and all I'd have to do is go down to the Toyota lot and check it out. ;)

    As for being "disappointed" about the use of your "tax dollars", that's too bad. Since the $133 million in incentives given to Toyota resulted in over $1 billion in toyota's money being injected into Texas and the US.

    I could give a rat !!!! :mad: A billion dollars of investment isn't going to affect me. I don't live in San Antonio, thus I won't see a return. They might pay some local taxes and that's about it. Why doesn't GM's Arlington, Texas plant get this much love. They have been in Texas for what 30+ years building SUV's.

    Just an aside, did you know, "Toyota, however, passed on a considerable chunk of potential incentives still sitting on the negotiating table. Local officials had offered the automaker school- and hospital-district tax abatements that could have been worth as much as $34 million. Toyota declined, saying it wanted to be a contributor to the local community.

    $34 million is pocket change for them. They can make that up in no time by importing a few Lexus's with the currency manipulation advantage they enjoy. :mad:

    "In Texas we recognize the value and contributions of good corporate citizens," [Texas Gov. Rick] Perry said. "Toyota has long been known as a good corporate citizen as well as an industry leader."
    The incentives will provide a rich return, Perry maintained.
    "We will have a complete payoff of our investment before the first truck even rolls off the assembly line," he said. "This decision will impact San Antonio and its economy by billions of dollars, and the San Antonio job base with thousands of jobs. The ripple effect will lead to an additional 5,300 spin-off jobs, which will contribute another $4 billion to this economy," the governor added.


    You actually listen to that idiot. That man has ruined Texass more than Dubya. I don't liky phony politicians telling me whats good for me. Perry, is a business man and will most likely make it easier for Toyota, to hire illegal aliens for that San Antonio, plant. It's like him to boast about something as minor as that when we have public schools in this state where kids have to share text books and have roofs falling down. No wonder texas ranks torwards the bottom in education and has a high drop-out rate. Instead of doing his job, he's out playing big shot with Toyota executives. :mad:

    Toyota's plant will generate $300 million in state sales and franchise tax revenues over the next 25 years, according to state estimates, Perry noted. The incentives will yield an 18.3-percent return over 10 years, he said.
    And the payoff could get better. Toyota's San Antonio employment could jump to 4,300 if the company decides to extend plant production into SUVs, officials with the automaker said."


    blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, shut-up editor !!! :mad:
    The main reason why they built it in San Antonio, was they knew they wouldn't have to worry about any unions, and they knew they could at some point pay whatever they wanted and get away with it using the cost of living excuse. My prediction is within 10-20 years you will have to prove you are a illegal alien to work there or work like a slave in a sweat shop to stay employed. I wished someone could do a study on the turn-over ratio of these plants by age. The UAW, already has but y'all don't think of them as a credible source so why bother. :sick: As far as I'm concerned they can take the San Antonio Plant and send it back to Toyota City, and give those poor folks their jobs back. Good Grief !!!! :mad:

    Rocky
  • lemonhaterlemonhater Member Posts: 110
    “I could give a rat !!!! A billion dollars of investment isn't going to affect me. I don't live in San Antonio, thus I won't see a return. They might pay some local taxes and that's about it. Why doesn't GM's Arlington, Texas plant get this much love. They have been in Texas for what 30+ years building SUV's.”

    Because they are not a new plant. If GM would build a new plant in an area that has no plant the local government will bend over backwards trying to get those new jobs into the economy. The local governments wants you to build here. Granted at the moment there is some concern with GM going bankrupt but all things being equal they would get equal treatment.

    However an old plant does not bring in new jobs. The local government might be helpful to keep as many jobs as possible. This by the way is not good for GM since they want to hire as few people as possible. Any government help would be viewed as corporate welfare rather than bringing in new jobs. In addition this 30 year old plant probably employs fewer people than it did 30 years ago and has ticked off some locals. The local environment has changed the plant could loss public support because it’s generating traffic, polluting the environment, or is now sitting on hot real estate that could be redeveloped. The fewer people you employ and the fewer new jobs you bring the less and less politicians want to deal with you. In 15-20 years the plants built by Toyota will get the same treatment.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Because they are not a new plant. If GM would build a new plant in an area that has no plant the local government will bend over backwards trying to get those new jobs into the economy. The local governments wants you to build here. Granted at the moment there is some concern with GM going bankrupt but all things being equal they would get equal treatment.

    GM, didn't get the amount of tax breaks and investments from the local governments when it pumps hundreds of millions into refurbishing older plants. GM, has done this a few times over the last 5 years and one most recently was the Lansing Cadillac Plant which I believe was $300 or $400 million.

    However an old plant does not bring in new jobs.

    It does when GM, offered buy-outs or early retirement packages for 40,000 UAW employees. Have you not read or watched the news about all the hirring of replacements ? :confuse:

    The local government might be helpful to keep as many jobs as possible. This by the way is not good for GM since they want to hire as few people as possible. Any government help would be viewed as corporate welfare rather than bringing in new jobs. In addition this 30 year old plant probably employs fewer people than it did 30 years ago and has ticked off some locals. The local environment has changed the plant could loss public support because it’s generating traffic, polluting the environment, or is now sitting on hot real estate that could be redeveloped. The fewer people you employ and the fewer new jobs you bring the less and less politicians want to deal with you. In 15-20 years the plants built by Toyota will get the same treatment.

    I do respect your opinion but don't think that last large paragraph is a good example or analogy lemonhater IMHO.

    Rocky
  • lemonhaterlemonhater Member Posts: 110
    "blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, shut-up editor !!!
    The main reason why they built it in San Antonio, was they knew they wouldn't have to worry about any unions, and they knew they could at some point pay whatever they wanted and get away with it using the cost of living excuse. My prediction is within 10-20 years you will have to prove you are a illegal alien to work there or work like a slave in a sweat shop to stay employed. I wished someone could do a study on the turn-over ratio of these plants by age. The UAW, already has but y'all don't think of them as a credible source so why bother. As far as I'm concerned they can take the San Antonio Plant and send it back to Toyota City, and give those poor folks their jobs back. Good Grief !!!! "


    Well last time I checked the Toyota plant workers can unionize if things should go sour. Instead of blaming a company which does not want to deal with unions (and trust me if GM could, it would dump the UAW). Maybe it is time to blame the UAW for not being able to appeal to the workers in those plants or the change the laws.

    I once worked for a union and I frankly thought that some of their rules were stupid. For instance you could not schedule overtime and all overtime had to be given in order of seniority. The result was stupid. Management could not post a simple sheet of paper and have worker sign up ahead of time. Instead management had to run around everyday and ask people to work overtime. And they had to do this in order of seniority, a real waste of time.

    In addition the lack of overtime made younger workers more prone to look elsewhere for more money and lets not talk about their constant lay offs(since they could not use part time workers to handle their seasonality).

    Since the employer paid into the pension you had to work at least 5 years to have any pension. Stupid give me a 401k anyday, at least if I get laid off at any point I get something. And with their constant lay offs you probably would have to work darn near 6 years to get vested.

    They had a rule that work on Sunday would generate double time and a half. Now that was a good rule back in the day when the plant was capable of running 7 days a week and you wanted to force em to give at least one day off. However the plant was idling two days a week not counting weekends. Since the product had a short shelf life and the plant takes a few hours to get up management needed more flexibility.

    I don’t see sweat shops returning to the US. People just will not tolerate that. The UAW had better get unionizing those plants or move out the way for a union that does a better job being relevant for the workers without killing the employer.
  • lemonhaterlemonhater Member Posts: 110
    “It does when GM, offered buy-outs or early retirement packages for 40,000 UAW employees. Have you not read or watched the news about all the hirring of replacements ?”

    Still they had 40,000 people employed making more money than they would retired. In addition there has been a net loss of jobs and the replacement will make less money and GM will hire fewer of them. There are now 40,000 people who could potentially renter the job market, since they are not drawing social security creating more people and fewer jobs. Not counting the plants that are being closed.

    When Toyota built a plant there were no auto jobs there. There was a net gain. From zero to however many were employed. That is the difference.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    I once worked for a union and I frankly thought that some of their rules were stupid. For instance you could not schedule overtime and all overtime had to be given in order of seniority.

    Well our overtime does go by seniority but also goes by how many hours of OT you've worked. The highest seniority person with the least amount of hours get's preference where I work.

    The result was stupid. Management could not post a simple sheet of paper and have worker sign up ahead of time. Instead management had to run around everyday and ask people to work overtime. And they had to do this in order of seniority, a real waste of time.

    I agree it was a waste of time and the union and management perhaps got set in their ways and didn't change it. We have a sign up sheet and if you want to work all you have to do is sign up. However if you don't sign up and don't take a job and you are low on seniority you can be "drafted".

    In addition the lack of overtime made younger workers more prone to look elsewhere for more money and lets not talk about their constant lay offs(since they could not use part time workers to handle their seasonality).

    Well I'm not sure where you worked butat GM, along with many other union shops the college kids could get summer jobs working at the plant during the busy season (summer/seasonal) as long as they were signed up for college. ;)

    Since the employer paid into the pension you had to work at least 5 years to have any pension. Stupid give me a 401k anyday, at least if I get laid off at any point I get something. And with their constant lay offs you probably would have to work darn near 6 years to get vested.

    You have to have 6 years in at my place to get 100% "vested" in the 401K. The "vested" part means you will retain the company's contributions. The difference between a pension and a 401K is quite different. A pension is a "define benefit" a 401K is a "define contribution". I'd take a UAW "30 and out" pension plan from GM over my 401K anyday because it's more guaranteed than playing the Vegas stock market with small change. ;)

    They had a rule that work on Sunday would generate double time and a half. Now that was a good rule back in the day when the plant was capable of running 7 days a week and you wanted to force em to give at least one day off. However the plant was idling two days a week not counting weekends. Since the product had a short shelf life and the plant takes a few hours to get up management needed more flexibility.

    I've never heard of "double time and a half" before except on holidays :surprise: However it seems y'all had plenty of ups and downs, eh ? I do agree y'alls union based on what little I know could of helped management out a bit more.

    I don’t see sweat shops returning to the US. People just will not tolerate that.

    We already have them. Some like Toyota, just pay well for being non-union but doesn't mean they aren't "sweat shops". Hell my plant (different union) for instance has some employees being forced to work 70-80 hours a week and those are union employees because the union allowed management the flexibility to force them out when needed instead of expanding/hirring more for that department.

    The UAW had better get unionizing those plants or move out the way for a union that does a better job being relevant for the workers without killing the employer.

    My father and family admit the UAW, was a little harsh and made some mistakes in the past. However they were trying to keep jobs for its members and CEO's like Roger Smith weren't the easiest people to work with. Remember the UAW workers at the Saturn plant in Tennesee received handsome bonuses from GM/Saturn in the early 90's while the others didn't get squat. Ford paid it's UAW members huge performance $10K bonuses's also which angered GM UAW employees in the 90's. Chrysler, paid it's UAW members the biggest bonuses $10-13K and that really upset UAW-GM employees. The funny thing was the UAW-GM employees were making GM more money than the other two. Roger Smith's greed and management style was what ultimately ruined UAW-GM relationships because he paid him and his top executives very well and wouldn't throw any crumbs to the UAW-GM employees while they watched Ford and Chrysler UAW workers buy new homes or cars with their bonuses. :mad:

    Dad, says: "I save GM $3 million (suggestion) and I get a made in china flashlight. Back in the 1980's I would of received at least $40K" :mad:

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Still they had 40,000 people employed making more money than they would retired.

    These people were all within 3 years of retiring anyways so either way they were going to leave in the near future.

    In addition there has been a net loss of jobs and the replacement will make less money and GM will hire fewer of them. There are now 40,000 people who could potentially renter the job market, since they are not drawing social security creating more people and fewer jobs. Not counting the plants that are being closed.

    That is somewhat true but most of them will be spending time in florida and traveling spending that hard earned money all across the U.S. helping economy's outside of the midwest ;) The new employees are on average making more money than they were so I do think it's a net gain over all. :blush: My step dad went from making $13 an hour to $33 an hr. as a mill wright and my aunt went from being a homemaker making zero to making $14.50 ;) both are high skilled and worked in industry before. My aunt worked at General Electric and can fix cars and is quite the handy women. My Step-dad is the ultimate carpenter and machine repair man and has 24 years experience at Rowe International where they made Juke Boxes and dollar bill changers, along with vending machines, etc ;) He is happy to work for GM where is father, brother, sister, retired from. ;)

    When Toyota built a plant there were no auto jobs there. There was a net gain. From zero to however many were employed. That is the difference.

    That is true. You can spin it any way you want. I'm just saying you should account for the net gain of new workers at the big 3 as they offered early buy-outs to it's membership ;)

    Rocky
  • 1972ck1972ck Member Posts: 56
    Your tax dollars didn't go towards the creation of the new Tundra plant in TX. Toyota has footed the $2 billion bill for it. Toyota is one of the richest cash corporations in the world. Toyota currently has $54 billion in liquid assests. (cash) And currently owes noone any debt. Can that be said for any domestic manufacture? As for the union debate. Here's a tid bit for you. Toyota manufacture employees in Japan heard of Chinese labor being less and decided not to except any pay raise for that year to help offset cost for Toyota, this small gesture ensured continued jobs and work for these employees in a competitive world. Would you or anyone else in your union do such a thing to ensure future employment? Every manufacture is continuing to try to find ways of cutting costs while still keeping quality and reliability up.
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    You please keep looking because I'm calling Hawg Wash, until you get me facts. If you are right I'll bow to you. I will be able to confirm in the not so distant future since it's law they have to put domestic content on the stickers and all I'd have to do is go down to the Toyota lot and check it out.

    Here are the facts.. right off the window stickers of a Chevy and Toyota lot.

    Silverado built in Oshawa Ont
    90% US & Canadian parts
    100% Canadian labor
    100% Canadian taxes & local benefits

    Avalanche built in Silao, GJ
    70% US & Canadian parts
    100% Mexican labor
    100% Mexican taxes & local benefits

    Tundra built in Indiana & TX
    80% US & Canadian parts
    100% US labor
    100% US taxes & local benefits

    Again your arguments fail in the face of the facts.

    $34 million is pocket change for them. They can make that up in no time by importing a few Lexus's with the currency manipulation advantage they enjoy.

    You keep bringing this subject up as if by saying it over and over and over it suddenly will be true. Hint: Just becasue the UAW publishes something doesn't mean that it's actually true. Don't you and your UAW friends always talk about 'media bias' slanting the information presented. Don't you think there is a similar 'Union bias' in the UAW's publications? I showed you the graphs that showed that the currency manipulation was done by the Fed Res in the opposite direction to help US industry....but you ignored that fact - again. My feeling is that you have a very limited understanding of how currency variations affect global economies. You are parrotting a UAW publication of a specious concept because it soothes your hurt feeling, nothing more.

    My prediction is within 10-20 years you will have to prove you are a illegal alien to work there or work like a slave in a sweat shop to stay employed. I wished someone could do a study on the turn-over ratio of these plants by age

    Well the Honda Ohio plant and the Toyota KY plants are both about 20 years old and nothing like what you predict has come to pass. In fact both these formerly empty farming regions are booming and people are making a lot of wealth where there was nothing before. Again these are the facts and you ignore them too.

    Do you see a pattern here? You and the UAW are angry ( understandable ) because the detroiters are contracting while transplants are booming. The facts say one thing and you refuse to believe it.
    'The world is flat'
    'The sun rises in the North every day'
    'We are being taken advantage of by the foreigners'
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    GM, didn't get the amount of tax breaks and investments from the local governments when it pumps hundreds of millions into refurbishing older plants. GM, has done this a few times over the last 5 years and one most recently was the Lansing Cadillac Plant which I believe was $300 or $400 million.

    Just recently GM announced that it was no longer going to produce any Saturns in Tenn. All the Saturns were going to Mexico at the plant that makes the HHR ( see a trend ). But they were going to move the new lambda CUV's into the Tenn plant.

    Now why didn't they just move the CUV's to Arlington and keep the Saturn cars in Tenn? Because with their $2000 per unit legacy costs auto's simply cannot support this much cost. SUV/CUV's can support this extra cost.

    Because of their legal responsibility to honor their poorly negotiated prior contract all 3 detroiters must move all small vehicles out of the US as fast as possible. Trucks, SUV's and CUV's ( that aren't already in Mexico ) can stay in the US but they have to hope that fuel prices don't kill this segment for every manufacturer.

    Cars go...Trucks stay. That's just fact and no amount of whining is going to stop this trend. The decisions have already been made.
  • w9cww9cw Member Posts: 888
    kdhspyder . . . I agree with you. Why does every thread and forum that rockylee contributes to gravitate to becoming a drum beating advertisement for the UAW?
  • maple2maple2 Member Posts: 177
    Here are the facts.. right off the window stickers of a Chevy and Toyota lot.

    Silverado built in Oshawa Ont
    90% US & Canadian parts
    100% Canadian labor
    100% Canadian taxes & local benefits


    funny how you forgot to mention that gm also has truck plants in the us that build this truck too. with 100% us labour and taxes.

    Im also curious where you found a toyota lot with a tundra built in texas?

    Here are the facts.. right off the window stickers of a Chevy and Toyota lot.
    Tundra built in Indiana & TX
    80% US & Canadian parts
    100% US labor
    100% US taxes & local benefits
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Fair. To be accurate, the sticker is off the Tundras from Indiana... from reports the US content from Texas is higher.

    I didn't find any Chevy's from US plants in our Chevy store.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    It's amazing how you didn't include the U.S. plants that make the Silverado/Sierra ;)

    I'd also have to see that 80% american content for Toyota, because the wensite which I've posted several times only shows 60% so I'm calling B.S. ;)

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    kd, lets see those report damn it !!! Quit preaching propaganda and bring some meat along with your potato's !!!! :mad:

    Rocky
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Go to any Toyota lot and see for yourself. You always seem to rely on what the UAW says. Do you ever think for yourself? Do your own research. I'm certain that there are several Toyota stores in your town.

    You'll find it's 80% NA Content.

    Official Texas specs will be out when the truck arrives in 4 weeks. Patience son.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    1972ck,

    You obviously don't know how the state tax system works. Toyota, recieved hundreds of millions in state support to build that plants. :confuse:

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    kd,

    The last tundra, I looked at was 60% and that was a few years ago.

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    Kd,

    GM management in the past are the ones to blame for not fully funding GM, pension funds and blowing billions on fiat, Saab, Fuji, Isuzu, Suzuki, Subaru, all which have been major blunders and money that could of fully funded pensions and health insurance to make them non-issues.

    Rocky
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    from wikipedia..

    1st Gen tundra

    Snippet:
    Built in a new Toyota plant in Princeton, Indiana, with 80 percent domestic content, the Tundra showed that Toyota was serious about closing the gap on the Big Three.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    http://www.levelfieldinstitute.org/docs/lfi-domestic-content.pdf

    It shows here the toyota Tundra is 60% so Wikipedia or this site is wrong. I with my own eyes back around 2003-2004 remember seeing a Tundra with 60% ???? I don't know why we are getting different numbers.....

    However some of these facts below might help you look at the bigger picture. ;)

    http://levelfieldinstitute.org/domestic.htm

    http://www.levelfieldinstitute.org/fact-sheet-yen.htm

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    kdhspyder . . . I agree with you. Why does every thread and forum that rockylee contributes to gravitate to becoming a drum beating advertisement for the UAW?

    W9cw,

    If you actually pay attention and follow the posts you would notice I wasn't the one who brought up the UAW. ;)

    Rocky
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    No in this case the 'levelfieldinstitue' is
    a) wrong because they did no research of their own;
    b) intentionally misleading the readers;
    c) presently old evidence..

    It is what it is at 80%. Your refusal to accept any other word than the possibly slanted viewpoint UAW just confirms your 'ears of stone' nickname.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    You are yet to show me a domestic content label off of a Toyota Tundra. Wikipedia, can be wrong and who knows where they got their information from. They perhaps like you got the domestic content percentage from Consumer Reports ? I'm not blind and know just a few years ago the Tundra, I saw said 60% domestic content. Geeez why would I lie. I honestly could really care less because the big 3 trucks are the only "american" trucks and the Tundra is a Japanese owned truck.

    Rocky
  • british_roverbritish_rover Member Posts: 8,502
    OMG I am going down to the Toyota dealer across the way from and looking at the sticker myself.

    You said yourself it was a few years ago so they could have increased the domestic content now.
  • rockyleerockylee Member Posts: 14,014
    You said yourself it was a few years ago so they could have increased the domestic content now.

    That is true british, they could have but Wikipedia said the content was 80% from 2000-2006 and I think their could be a mistake on their part ?

    Oh well it's not that big of a deal and is kinda childish to really argue over. ;)

    Rocky
  • kdhspyderkdhspyder Member Posts: 7,160
    Unless you are calling me a liar...

    I gave you three domestic content stickers
    2 Chevy's and a Tundra.

    You only contest the Tundra one because you don't want to take the time to verify my info and it doesn't suit your purpose.

    Most importantly though you just like to argue without listening especially where facts don't suit your biased viewpoint... ergo 'ears or stone'
This discussion has been closed.