I'd love to stick to the topic. The problem comes in when completely erroneous info is floated to make a point about the current state of the U.S., its economy, and the status of its citizens. It's dificult to discuss these issues rationally if the foundation is rotten.
It may not be what UAW workers expected. But, having $3,000/month plus benefits and being free to take another job probably beats what a Ch.11 judge will award the UAW.
As to Mexico, the peso is the weakest now it has been in many, many years. Mexicans are finding their money buys very little in the US now.
Looks like it's $3 K per month before taxes, they pay $700 approx of health care costs from news stories recently. Free to get another real job where they get to work and pay taxes and experience what most others experience.
So it's $3,000 before taxes - $700 of which will be needed to pay for health care - so we're really down to $2,300 before taxes. Well, if it's cheap where you live, I guess you will do alright despite your new Wal-Mart job. Maybe that $700 can be saved if one gets those lucrative Wal-Mart health bennies!
I say drop the healthcare. If you get real sick rob a 7/11 with a gun. Get a couple years in the pen where you can get that kidney or heart transplant for FREE!!! Save the $700 a month in a jar buried in the back yard for when you get out.
The $700 is payment for the year so it would reduce one month's check to $2300; the others would be 3000$
At $36000 per year taxes would be cheap. But there's no or minor out-of-pocket costs associated wtih the healthcare, remember. Most people have copays or percents to pay on healthcare. Some people even pay a monthly premium or portion and then have a deductible like $500 or $1000 of costs before healthcare starts paying part of the costs.
The proposal is $36,000 (less $700 for insurance) a year. Those who take it won't have to work one hour a year to collect the money. They also have complete freedom to work a new job at whatever interests them.
UAW workers should grab this deal pronto, now, today! This may be the last, best offer.
If/when a bankruptcy judge reads the UAW contract he will probably just teriminate the whole thing. That will mean no severance, no benefits and no income.
It is a lot better than the deal I am getting from our Union after 36 years. We do not get any medical paid after retirement. Our buy outs are less than half of the lowest GM is offering. It will be good to get rid of a lot of dead weight in the ranks. Hire some young blood without the protectionism that breeds laziness. Add production incentives for exceptional employees. Get back on track where they should be.
Guys if you have 27 years before July 15th you are elgible for the $35K and $2800 a month before taxes. When you reach your 30th year you will move up to $3000 a month=$36K a year. Yes health insurance will be $700 a year. If you don't have enough years to qualify, you can take your pension accurals + $100,000 to get out. Not really a go deal if I was in that situation. I'd flow back to GM and stay. Dad is going to flow back and retire as far as he knows last time I talked to him. Hopefully he will know further details when I talk to him Saturday. I will keep ya'll posted. :shades:
Rocky
P.S. Maybe enough of em' will leave so I can finally get a job at GM :surprise: They need a next generation Hell I will even take a 401K, since it probably will be a fair/decent company match.
is there still gonna be a GM a year from now? :surprise:
You'd think there would be, but...that nasty UAW!
Just kiddin', man!
Divvy up the spoils and get to making cars like the '62 Chevy Nova SS again! I'll be back in their court if they give those to us again. How about some small car ingenuity?
iluvmysephia1, I might not like Kia's or Hyundai's like you pal, but I understand why some Americans buy them over Japanese cars. BTW- Here's another source showing Lou Dobbs was correct on "Real Wages" dropping 4% Lou went on to explain that average americans are making what they did in year 2000, but we have many folks that haven't been affected saying the economy is strong and robust. I guess if your getting more than 3 or 4 % wage increases each year (which don't fight of inflation) and haven't had your healthcare coverage raised, or your retirement either frozen or slashed then it might appear everything is fine. Rorr, your obviously one of the lucky ones. Well here's the other link.
My opinion is Free Trade does create jobs, but those that are created are not good paying jobs, when compared to the ones being lost. You no longer can go work in a factory and support a family by yourself without your spouse working. It takes about $40,000+ a year and that's owning a older home and driving (2) 5-10 year old cars. If energy and healthcare prices keep going up it will take even more. If the rumor is true that gas will be going up to $3.00-$3.50 this summer (during Hurricane season) then us that make $60K or better will see are walletts lightened quite a bit. :sick:
I'm not trying to be a doom and gloomer, but it takes organizations like the UAW to lobby politcians that will fight for average folks that might otherwise be living in poverty. The $33,600 my pops will get in pension is hardly enough to survive on. Luckily he was told that Delphi or GM will want to hire him back as a consultant. Many retirees will be consultants for the company since many of their jobs are skills that ordinary folks that just hire in can't do. I think Dad is going to take his $35K severance and pay off his house. I'm trying to convince him that he doesn't need to leave us the lake property and he should sell it and travel. Come see his grandkids, etc. Keep the $35K and profit from the sale of his and my stepmoms house and invest it in a money market fund to supplement his pension. I told him to keep listening to Dave Ramsey.
I did tell him he should be a consultant for Delphi atleast a little while if he wants to keep working.
It will be interesting if these "buyouts" are really benefitual for GM/Delphi. One good thing is it will give more Americans jobs once they hire again. I do think the 401K is good enough if the company gives a good match.
Even if your making let's say $18.50 or $19 bucks an hour when you reach the top, it will be enough to get through life I suppose if your spouse works. They won't be well off, but it's better than flippin' burgers eh ?
I'm just glad most of my relatives jobs will be saved and my newely hired Delphi aunt is relieved that her $14 dollar an hour job is safe. She will be my only relative left working for GM or Delphi. What a relief for me.
Now I can just worry about my job and my benefits. Our contract is up in March of 2007.
Re: Drop in 'real wages' - according to the link you posted:
"...although wages have fallen behind inflation for over a generation now, other nonwage components of worker compensation, particularly health care benefits, have grown more quickly than inflation. The graph below shows that in fact total compensation shows a steady long-term upward trend relative to inflation that has if anything accelerated in recent years."
Get it? Total compensation has grown relative to inflation. That's wages PLUS benefits.
What is skewing the 'real wages' graph to show a downward trend is skyrocking health costs born by folks who either don't have health insurance or who pay health insurance out of pocket. The problem ISN'T a 'struggling' economy. The problem (IMO) is rising health costs.
And no amount of SUPPORT THE UAW or American protectionism will address the problem of rising health costs.
So it's $3,000 before taxes - $700 of which will be needed to pay for health care - so we're really down to $2,300 before taxes.
$3K/month gross is pretty good money. Those taking it presumably can find some type of work (part or full), probably at substantially less than their current hourly rate, but still enough to supplement the $3K. But, another factor that could cut into that $3K is spousal survival option. Don't know if this is being offered. If it is, and is chosen, it will cost some amount of hundreds per month. Finally, those taking package will have to make adjustments in life and spending habits just like millions of retiring Americans have already done over the decades.
GM has been cutting engineers for at least 3 years now. It has been voluntary with a years salary. Now that those who want to leave have, it is time to force some out. But as was announced earlier this year there will be significant financial packages and assistance.
Have not seen anything about GM lump sums and tax treatment. If sums are 30k-140k, those getting the larger amounts will get hit by Fed and their state for big tax bills if lump sums are considered "ordinary income". If ordinary income, people taking buyout will have 4-5 months of 2006 GM regular income, plus possibly spouse 2006 income plus "next job" income they may have in 2006. Those getting close to 140k will have very high Adjusted Gross Income in 2006. An elderly married couple both working at GM and taking buyout could get "murdered" with taxes if lump sums are ordinary income.
Anybody know if there is special tax treatment for GM situation? Hope that there is. Would seem kind of unfair for IRS to get money out of GM and/or employees losing jobs.
Check out 2005 IRS tax tables. 2006 tax rates probably will be similar.
I think we BOTH know that that was a very selective "special window"last year that had to be approved by your management.And that was a relatively small group. If you wanted to JUST retire now the whole formula is SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERNT.(Read a hell of a lot LESS at retirement). Your age,credited service,and ability to be replaced come into question. If you take a voluntary retirement you CANNOT be replaced. Period ! As for this next reduction in the engineering staff, the details are yet to be announced.
"Anybody know if there is special tax treatment for GM situation? Hope that there is. Would seem kind of unfair for IRS to get money out of GM and/or employees losing jobs."
Of course the money should be taxed. If your employer gives you money, it is taxable income.
Thanks to George W, however, the taxes will be much less than if we had been Gored in 2000.
Yes, but what is going to be announced is NOT what the media is making it out to be.
In Engineering it was a small group the last two years but it was a large group at the Vehicle Sales, Service, and Marketing group. If you wanted to go they did not stop you. They may have stopped a couple but not many. Many, many left in the field and at the RenCen. I can name a whole bunch who were very well thought of but were allowed to leave. My marketing partner (at work!) just landed a job with a supplier making at least 50% more (was 8th level)
What do you mean by less at retirement? No changes have been made, except for health care, which effect those retiring now. The pension plan for those ready to retire will be no different than it was. Only if you stay past January next year will see their pension frozen at that date and then from then on your additional pension will be a match in the 401.
I am just waiting to see if this is only a voluntary leave or if they will tap shoulders and ask people to leave. The last two years they did not push to get rid of Engineers since so much development was going on with all the new programs. Now that the huge big truck program is basically over and Engineering is spread out at the GM worldwide engineering groups there will be many that will need to go.
An awful lot of American's can't get behind the UAW because of the UAW's pay and benefits. Here in SC, an assmbly type job pays around $9.50 an hour, maybe a 401K (no matching), no retirement pension, and employees pay at least 180 a month of healthcare.
Compared to that, the UAW benefits are unbelievable!
Does anybody here work in the BMW plant in Greeneville? I here their wages and benfits are pretty good. Much better than the typical assembly jobs down here.
Perhaps the marketing group YOU work with had some different rules than our group. We had a clear cut mandate. There were those who wanted to retire,fit the age and credited service and were told that management had to approve. They could insist on a voluntary retirement. That could be done but without that approval no "special package" conditions would apply. Maybe the marketing group is different "animal".
Little confused. How many Marketing groups are there? I am talking about VSSM which had a high percentage to be cut. The last two years Engiineering was just not asked to cut like VSSM. For instance, Buick Marketing used to have about 45 folks directly assigned as Buick. Now it is probably less than 25. Lots of consolidation of jobs.
Also I was not just talking about retirements. Early outs also.
No it's the people(critics) that need to work on publicity. If your dumb enough to work for that and not do anything about it, then don't complain. BTW- GM is the 2nd biggest company in the world and shouldn't employees make a middle class income ? I find it crazy, when a group of workers doing a manufactoring job like running a machine, etc. (same jobs done at GM/Delphi) get's so jealous that they want his fellow american to have it tough just because they are less fortunate. That attitude won't get you anywhere. If I was in that situation, I'd either find another job or attempt to form a union.
I wasn't happy until I was able to find a good job, like my current one. I only have one chance at life, and I'm going to make the best of it. I however will let my voice be heard when it comes to issues like standard of livings, workers rights, and the right for american buisness to compete on a level playing field, without having to compete with 3rd world laborers.
I wasn't directly saying that, but you know as well as I that Rick has one. I was just trying to show some of the Platinum chutes many CEO's have. :surprise: Some of them were bigger than even I could imagine. :surprise:
You are correct that directly supporting the UAW isn't going to change things like rising healthcare costs. I suppose a better approach would be electing a different party or impeaching the corrupt we have in offices.
This is grounds for impeachment: :mad:
Hong Kong firm hired to help check U.S.-bound cargo
Rocky, what is Rick's golden parachute? As was said before a golden parachute is a pay off when let go? What does he get if he was let go tomorrow. (not his stock options which are worthless)
Wagoner's salary last year was over $4.6 million, so I would hope that he could buy his own parachute.
I wonder how much of that was bonus pay for blowing the FIAT deal? I would want to be amply rewarded, too, if I managed to lose $4.4 billion on a single deal.
Ok. I will put in layman's terms. Wagoners leg was put into the trap (deal) before he took on the role. Given the cooked Fiat books (read not correct) he made a difficult decision. Either,take on the largest Italian Mfg. Co.,collapse Fiat and have the smug satisfaction of victory. (This would probably devistate Italian relations and cause economic panic in that country.) Or make even a more difficult one........
So he took the "coyote ugly" option rather than compound the loss he was committed too by previous Management. Remember we did gain knowledge in the diesel engineering as part of the deal.
Would you like to be responsible for the actions of someone before you even knew them ?......I think not. So give it a rest.
Are you a bit obsessed with the Fiat deal? Maybe GM was trying to help out Italy financially like they did Sweden back in 1989 when they bought half of Saab. Sweden was a sinking ship and GM felt sorry for them. It is all about helping our EU neighbors. $4.4 billion pales next to the $12 billion it is going to cost GM to get out of old Delphi union separation agreements.
Golden Parachutes
Gillette’s CEO, James M. Kilts, will pocket an astounding $188 million in cash and stock options. The payout was too much even for insiders. The retiring Gillette vice-chairman, Joseph E. Mullaney described the package as “obscene.” Kilts, speaking up after shareholders had approved the acquisition, was indignant, complaining that we had become “a piñata” and had earned his pay by creating billions in shareholder value. He was not alone. The CEO of Georgia-Pacific, A.D. Correll, will receive a $92 million severance package when the company is sold to Koch Industries. MBNA CEO Bruce L. Hammonds will similarly receive $102 million, Toys are Us Inc. CEO John H. Eyler will receive $63 million; David Dorman of AT&T will take home $55 million; and Michael D. Capellas of MCI will pocket $39 million. These are astounding numbers and are the tip of the iceberg. The average parachute payment for CEOs of our largest one hundred corporations is a whopping $28 million.
Responding to new estimates that Disney's golden parachute for Mike Ovitz will peak out at $140 million including stock options, employees of the Mouse are organizing demonstrations protesting the buyout. These are not what you call the Happiest Employees on Earth here.
So if Rick were to get less than $28 million he would be, below average.
Sorry, but he was president of GM when the deal was cut. He was an integral part of the negotiations that included the put option, so he deserves full credit (or in this case, blame) for the end result, i.e. another $2 billion lost for his employer.
So there's no reason to "give it a rest". Why would you negotiate a forced-buyout clause in an agreement with a company in decline? Pretty bad dealmaking, most people get fired for actions like that.
Maybe GM was trying to help out Italy financially like they did Sweden back in 1989 when they bought half of Saab. Sweden was a sinking ship and GM felt sorry for them. It is all about helping our EU neighbors.
I assume that's a joke. If not, it has no basis in reality whatsover.
Hardly, read a little Swedish history. Here is a snippet from a Swedish website.
After particularly good years from World-War II to the early 1970s, Sweden has then seen branch after branch of the industry to lose competitive capacity. Textile industry, skinn industry and shipyards have almost disappeared. During the 1990s the mining industry has went through a period of radical reorganization.
Honestly, some of you folks on this forum have some very odd views about what other countries are like.
Every economy has its ups and downs, including this one, but on the whole, Sweden has had a high level of prosperity and generous benefits for its people. You don't have to like it, but to act as if it is some third world country desperate for American handouts is simply ridiculous.
GM bought Saab because it thought it could capture the benefit of the cachet value of a European brand, ala BMW or Mercedes. (As it turns out, Saabs may be European, but they have never had much cachet value in the US market, so that wasn't such a bright idea. Again, M&A doesn't generally work when the acquired company has weak brands or products.)
Toyota took the smarter approach -- instead of buying a losing company with a mediocre brand, it invented its own brand (Lexus), and invested a good deal of effort to build it from the ground up. It found a weak spot in the Euro-armor, namely a mixed track record in the area of reliability, and then exploited that with a price competitive but still costly product. Now it is extremely successful after all of that commitment.
Why Ford and GM couldn't have taken this same approach, I don't know. It seems that years of drinking the Let's Blame Everyone Except For Ourselves flavor of Kool Aid was a lot more appealing than was making some good decisions. That's the kind of poor management that leads to the path of bad decisions re: FIAT, Saab, Isuzu, etc., etc. etc.
That's the kind of poor management that leads to the path of bad decisions re: FIAT, Saab, Isuzu, etc., etc. etc.
Here is the way I see GM. They excelled at building trucks and big cars since the beginning. Then when the energy crisis hit they needed small cars to compete with the imports. So they tried to buy existing technology from the EU which had built small cars for a long time. Why did they do that. Go back even further. In 1959 GM built the Corvair as a vehicle to get better mileage. From the outset they are poo pooed by the press. The car had many new innovations that are still in use today. Yet because of ignorant writers and some unfortunate accidents, they finally gave up and went back to what sells good. Big cars and trucks. GM has tried to build small efficient cars. The American public has not been kind or receptive to their efforts. They cut the Japanese slack with the crap cars they brought in from the 1960s through the 1970s. Toyota & Honda finally got their act together in the late 1980s. I guess they are lucky there were no bloggers to shoot at them in the early days.
And for Sweden. If they have such a good economic climate. Why did both Saab and Volvo need bailing out?
In 1959 GM built the Corvair as a vehicle to get better mileage. From the outset they are poo pooed by the press. The car had many new innovations that are still in use today. Yet because of ignorant writers and some unfortunate accidents, they finally gave up and went back to what sells good.
These copouts sure are popular on this forum. As usual, the media and the consumer are blamed for a failed product. Meanwhile, the managers charged with managing the company and making the product decisions get let off the hook. (Why you'd want to pay a guy $4.6 million when he supposedly can't do anything about anything, I don't know. If that's the case, I'd cut him loose and save the money.)
How's this -- the Corvair might have been a better car had its design not been inherently prone to severe oversteer. It's one thing to build a tail-happy 911, it's quite another to try to make a mass-market car that is highly dependent upon the driving styles of its customer base to ensure that it doesn't result in a violent, spinning death. But at least we can see from this example that GM management has been making mistakes for a very long time.
The real issue is simple -- when the oil crisis of the early seventies made fuel consumption a priority with more Americans, it was the Japanese makers who stepped up to the plate. And their quality efforts were so vastly superior to what came out of Michigan that more and more consumers began to see what they had been missing, so more of them defected to the better built Japanese cars that not only got them lower fuel bills, but also less time spent in the repair shop.
So I'd give credit to the smart guys at the helm of Toyota, Honda, etc. who figured out how to meet customer needs and beat their competition. Blame the guys in Detroit who didn't take them seriously, learn from Demming or realize that it had been much easier to compete in the good old days when they had no competition, but times had changed.
And for Sweden. If they have such a good economic climate. Why did both Saab and Volvo need bailing out?
You must not think much of the American economy then, given that Ford and GM are both in need of serious help.
Saab needed bailing it out for the same reason that GM needs it now -- it had a mediocre brand and products that created a lukewarm response from the buying public. The state of the Swedish economy really has nothing to do with whether western consumers are going to want to buy or not buy a Saab.
The Saab 9000 was one nice car. Probably what GM was trying to incorporate in their small cars. The Corvair was a fun car to drive if you were not an idiot. They did sell 1.8 million Corvairs before being shot down. I bought Japanese cars from 1964 through 1978. They were in the shop more than any GM vehicle I have owned. And I prefer living in a Republic vs a Monarchy.
I guess Japan needs to import some of these cutting edge CEOs - Toyota last year paid only 17 Mn USD total to its 33 directors (that works out to an average of 500K USD per Director) (http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1094517/000119312505130486/d20f.htm#rom4- 2116_21) So shareholders here are missing out on something which their American counterparts have discovered.
I think it is difficult to come to any conclusion on this thread, since there are two philosophies being discussed, the US one (shareholder and top management has precedence over average employee), and the Japanese one (average employee has precedence over shareholders). Only time will tell which one is more succesful, certainly in the short term (last ten years) the US model has been more succesful, causing a lot of Japanese companies to shift the balance somewhat in the favor of shareholders.
So we have also shipped a large number of manufacturing jobs to China. But it seems so far it is working out well, 2005 was the most profitable year ever for Japanese companese, and jobs to job seeker ratio back to 1.0 (after 15 years....) - despite the hollowing out of low cost manufacturing.
Why Ford and GM couldn't have taken this same approach,[creating a luxury brand like Lexus] I don't know.
Maybe because GM and Ford don't know how to build a high reliability luxury car?
Perhaps because they've not yet shown the level of refinement in engines remotely near Lexus?
Probably because they've not figured out to develop cars that handle like BMWs and Audis?
You know what's interesting? You can measure Goodwill in the value of cars by the established model identifications. Models that stick around are usually well thought of. Models that do poorly are retired, and new names are created (or reused).
How many years have we known: Corolla Civic Camry Suburban Impala Accord LSxxx?
How long did these names last? Fairmont Vega Pinto Taurus Cavalier Contour Topaz Neon Firenza Windstar Aztec Silouette?
GM has tried to build small efficient cars. The American public has not been kind or receptive to their efforts. They cut the Japanese slack with the crap cars they brought in from the 1960s through the 1970s. Toyota & Honda finally got their act together in the late 1980s.
Sorry, I have to disagree. One word. Vega. That was GM's answer to smaller cars in the 1970's. The Japanese cars of the 1970's were FAR superior to the American small cars of the time. Corolla. Civic (with CVCC, didn't need a catalytic converter. Contrast that with the disposable Vega engine). And let's not forget the Pinto, a better car than the Vega, but had a bad tendency to incinerate the occupants in rear-end collisions.
I guess Japan needs to import some of these cutting edge CEOs - Toyota last year paid only 17 Mn USD total to its 33 directors (that works out to an average of 500K USD per Director)
I don't think that's a fair comparison. Simply put, talent is more expensive in the US, and nobody is going to take the helm of a major US corporation without getting paid handsomely for the responsibility. Japanese work culture is different, and can get away with paying senior executives less, but that will not fly here.
And that's fine. Honestly, I have absolutely no problem with the CEO of General Motors being paid $4.6 million per year. But what I do have a problem with is paying $4.6 million per year to a guy who lost the company over $4.4 billion on just one deal alone, based upon a horrendous deal point that should have never been negotiated in the first place (the put option). So to see that some would speak of this person as if he's some sort of savior is simply amazing, when the failure of this decision should have been evident before the deal ever got signed. (Again, a provision that forces you to buy a loser is obviously not good for the party that would have been forced to pay it.)
To be blunt, when I read the comments from the former white-collar GM employees on this forum, the problem becomes even more obvious. The people in management are such cheerleaders that they see absolutely no problem with how the company has been managed, or the product and channel choices that it has made. So it's no surprise that nothing ever gets fixed, when they refuse to acknowledge that anything that is broken is their fault.
Falling market share? Their solution: Blame the competition, the economy, the union or the customer.
Build products that people don't want? Their solution: Blame the competition, the economy, the union or the customer.
Poor or spotty reliability? Their solution: Blame the competition, the economy, the union or the customer.
Lack of a highly reliable and desirable small car? Their solution: Blame the competition, the economy, the union or the customer.
It's like alcoholism -- you can't fix the problem if you can't first admit that you've got a problem. Thirty years of erosion, and still they don't accept their hand in the problem. What is the point of having a management team if it refuses to manage anything?
Anybody know how much the Nissan/Toyota/Honda American execs make here? Are they really being paid Japanese rates of $500k? (I would actually expect it to be less since they are not really CEO's of the main company) Or are they making more than their bosses?
Comments
As to Mexico, the peso is the weakest now it has been in many, many years. Mexicans are finding their money buys very little in the US now.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
At $36000 per year taxes would be cheap. But there's no or minor out-of-pocket costs associated wtih the healthcare, remember. Most people have copays or percents to pay on healthcare. Some people even pay a monthly premium or portion and then have a deductible like $500 or $1000 of costs before healthcare starts paying part of the costs.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
http://today.reuters.com/investing/FinanceArticle.aspx?type=businessNews&storyID- - - =2006-03-23T171122Z_01_L23513723_RTRUKOC_0_US-AUTOS-GM-ENGINEERING.xml
UAW workers should grab this deal pronto, now, today! This may be the last, best offer.
If/when a bankruptcy judge reads the UAW contract he will probably just teriminate the whole thing. That will mean no severance, no benefits and no income.
Rocky
P.S. Maybe enough of em' will leave so I can finally get a job at GM :surprise: They need a next generation
You'd think there would be, but...that nasty UAW!
Just kiddin', man!
Divvy up the spoils and get to making cars like the '62 Chevy Nova SS again! I'll be back in their court if they give those to us again. How about some small car ingenuity?
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Here's a link for CEO Golden parachutes Ya'll need to read this. http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P145685.asp
And you thought the UAW workers got a deal. :surprise:
Here's video's on buyout package if you missed it on your local Alpha Soup news channel.
http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm?g=c02b7f8a-2c82-4a3a-baf7-0ccab1dff480,45fa1639-- - c201-4efd-854c-a5cc01015d6c,e4b2053e-1bbd-43b4-bf09-8d2846fa4a85&t=c29&f=06/64&p- -
iluvmysephia1, I might not like Kia's or Hyundai's like you pal, but I understand why some Americans buy them over Japanese cars. BTW- Here's another source showing Lou Dobbs was correct on "Real Wages" dropping 4%
http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2005/12/declining_real.html
My opinion is Free Trade does create jobs, but those that are created are not good paying jobs, when compared to the ones being lost. You no longer can go work in a factory and support a family by yourself without your spouse working. It takes about $40,000+ a year and that's owning a older home and driving (2) 5-10 year old cars. If energy and healthcare prices keep going up it will take even more. If the rumor is true that gas will be going up to $3.00-$3.50 this summer (during Hurricane season) then us that make $60K or better will see are walletts lightened quite a bit. :sick:
I'm not trying to be a doom and gloomer, but it takes organizations like the UAW to lobby politcians that will fight for average folks that might otherwise be living in poverty. The $33,600 my pops will get in pension is hardly enough to survive on. Luckily he was told that Delphi or GM will want to hire him back as a consultant. Many retirees will be consultants for the company since many of their jobs are skills that ordinary folks that just hire in can't do.
I did tell him he should be a consultant for Delphi atleast a little while if he wants to keep working.
It will be interesting if these "buyouts" are really benefitual for GM/Delphi. One good thing is it will give more Americans jobs once they hire again. I do think the 401K is good enough if the company gives a good match.
Even if your making let's say $18.50 or $19 bucks an hour when you reach the top, it will be enough to get through life I suppose if your spouse works. They won't be well off, but it's better than flippin' burgers eh ?
I'm just glad most of my relatives jobs will be saved and my newely hired Delphi aunt is relieved that her $14 dollar an hour job is safe. She will be my only relative left working for GM or Delphi. What a relief for me.
Now I can just worry about my job and my benefits. Our contract is up in March of 2007.
Rocky
Isn't that kinda like the pot calling the kettle black.? .... considering Kia has had 2 bankruptcies in 10 years with just a flick of a switch ...
Of course .. all they had to do was push their employee's out the front door and lock em', and maybe hope they made it home - or not ......
Kia is just like the Fed Ex commercial .......... ".. Not my problem ....."
Terry.
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060324/AUTO01/603240380/1148- - -
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060324/AUTO01/603240380/1148- -
"...although wages have fallen behind inflation for over a generation now, other nonwage components of worker compensation, particularly health care benefits, have grown more quickly than inflation. The graph below shows that in fact total compensation shows a steady long-term upward trend relative to inflation that has if anything accelerated in recent years."
Get it? Total compensation has grown relative to inflation. That's wages PLUS benefits.
What is skewing the 'real wages' graph to show a downward trend is skyrocking health costs born by folks who either don't have health insurance or who pay health insurance out of pocket. The problem ISN'T a 'struggling' economy. The problem (IMO) is rising health costs.
And no amount of SUPPORT THE UAW or American protectionism will address the problem of rising health costs.
$3K/month gross is pretty good money. Those taking it presumably can find some type of work (part or full), probably at substantially less than their current hourly rate, but still enough to supplement the $3K. But, another factor that could cut into that $3K is spousal survival option. Don't know if this is being offered. If it is, and is chosen, it will cost some amount of hundreds per month. Finally, those taking package will have to make adjustments in life and spending habits just like millions of retiring Americans have already done over the decades.
Anybody know if there is special tax treatment for GM situation? Hope that there is. Would seem kind of unfair for IRS to get money out of GM and/or employees losing jobs.
Check out 2005 IRS tax tables. 2006 tax rates probably will be similar.
Of course the money should be taxed. If your employer gives you money, it is taxable income.
Thanks to George W, however, the taxes will be much less than if we had been Gored in 2000.
In Engineering it was a small group the last two years but it was a large group at the Vehicle Sales, Service, and Marketing group. If you wanted to go they did not stop you. They may have stopped a couple but not many. Many, many left in the field and at the RenCen. I can name a whole bunch who were very well thought of but were allowed to leave. My marketing partner (at work!) just landed a job with a supplier making at least 50% more (was 8th level)
What do you mean by less at retirement? No changes have been made, except for health care, which effect those retiring now. The pension plan for those ready to retire will be no different than it was. Only if you stay past January next year will see their pension frozen at that date and then from then on your additional pension will be a match in the 401.
I am just waiting to see if this is only a voluntary leave or if they will tap shoulders and ask people to leave. The last two years they did not push to get rid of Engineers since so much development was going on with all the new programs. Now that the huge big truck program is basically over and Engineering is spread out at the GM worldwide engineering groups there will be many that will need to go.
An awful lot of American's can't get behind the UAW because of the UAW's pay and benefits. Here in SC, an assmbly type job pays around $9.50 an hour, maybe a 401K (no matching), no retirement pension, and employees pay at least 180 a month of healthcare.
Compared to that, the UAW benefits are unbelievable!
Does anybody here work in the BMW plant in Greeneville? I here their wages and benfits are pretty good. Much better than the typical assembly jobs down here.
Also I was not just talking about retirements. Early outs also.
I wasn't happy until I was able to find a good job, like my current one. I only have one chance at life, and I'm going to make the best of it. I however will let my voice be heard when it comes to issues like standard of livings, workers rights, and the right for american buisness to compete on a level playing field, without having to compete with 3rd world laborers.
Rocky
Rocky
You are correct that directly supporting the UAW isn't going to change things like rising healthcare costs. I suppose a better approach would be electing a different party or impeaching the corrupt we have in offices.
This is grounds for impeachment: :mad:
Hong Kong firm hired to help check U.S.-bound cargo
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/24/Bahamas.security.ap/index.html
What do you think ? :mad:
Rocky
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060325/BUSINESS01/603250308
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060325/BUSINESS01/603250320
http://today.reuters.com/investing/financeArticle.aspx?type=bondsNews&storyID=20- 06-03-25T060015Z_01_N24214774_RTRIDST_0_AUTOS-DELPHI-LABOR.XML
Great links.
Rocky
Wagoner's salary last year was over $4.6 million, so I would hope that he could buy his own parachute.
I wonder how much of that was bonus pay for blowing the FIAT deal? I would want to be amply rewarded, too, if I managed to lose $4.4 billion on a single deal.
So he took the "coyote ugly" option rather than compound the loss he was committed too by previous Management. Remember we did gain knowledge in the diesel engineering as part of the deal.
Would you like to be responsible for the actions of someone before you even knew them ?......I think not. So give it a rest.
Are you a bit obsessed with the Fiat deal? Maybe GM was trying to help out Italy financially like they did Sweden back in 1989 when they bought half of Saab. Sweden was a sinking ship and GM felt sorry for them. It is all about helping our EU neighbors. $4.4 billion pales next to the $12 billion it is going to cost GM to get out of old Delphi union separation agreements.
Golden Parachutes
Gillette’s CEO, James M. Kilts, will pocket an astounding $188 million in cash and stock options. The payout was too much even for insiders. The retiring Gillette vice-chairman, Joseph E. Mullaney described the package as “obscene.” Kilts, speaking up after shareholders had approved the acquisition, was indignant, complaining that we had become “a piñata” and had earned his pay by creating billions in shareholder value.
He was not alone. The CEO of Georgia-Pacific, A.D. Correll, will receive a $92 million severance package when the company is sold to Koch Industries. MBNA CEO Bruce L. Hammonds will similarly receive $102 million, Toys are Us Inc. CEO John H. Eyler will receive $63 million; David Dorman of AT&T will take home $55 million; and Michael D. Capellas of MCI will pocket $39 million. These are astounding numbers and are the tip of the iceberg. The average parachute payment for CEOs of our largest one hundred corporations is a whopping $28 million.
Golden Parachutes
My personal favorite!!!
Responding to new estimates that Disney's golden parachute for Mike Ovitz will peak out at $140 million including stock options, employees of the Mouse are organizing demonstrations protesting the buyout. These are not what you call the Happiest Employees on Earth here.
So if Rick were to get less than $28 million he would be, below average.
So there's no reason to "give it a rest". Why would you negotiate a forced-buyout clause in an agreement with a company in decline? Pretty bad dealmaking, most people get fired for actions like that.
I assume that's a joke. If not, it has no basis in reality whatsover.
Hardly, read a little Swedish history. Here is a snippet from a Swedish website.
After particularly good years from World-War II to the early 1970s, Sweden has then seen branch after branch of the industry to lose competitive capacity. Textile industry, skinn industry and shipyards have almost disappeared. During the 1990s the mining industry has went through a period of radical reorganization.
Sweden
Every economy has its ups and downs, including this one, but on the whole, Sweden has had a high level of prosperity and generous benefits for its people. You don't have to like it, but to act as if it is some third world country desperate for American handouts is simply ridiculous.
GM bought Saab because it thought it could capture the benefit of the cachet value of a European brand, ala BMW or Mercedes. (As it turns out, Saabs may be European, but they have never had much cachet value in the US market, so that wasn't such a bright idea. Again, M&A doesn't generally work when the acquired company has weak brands or products.)
Toyota took the smarter approach -- instead of buying a losing company with a mediocre brand, it invented its own brand (Lexus), and invested a good deal of effort to build it from the ground up. It found a weak spot in the Euro-armor, namely a mixed track record in the area of reliability, and then exploited that with a price competitive but still costly product. Now it is extremely successful after all of that commitment.
Why Ford and GM couldn't have taken this same approach, I don't know. It seems that years of drinking the Let's Blame Everyone Except For Ourselves flavor of Kool Aid was a lot more appealing than was making some good decisions. That's the kind of poor management that leads to the path of bad decisions re: FIAT, Saab, Isuzu, etc., etc. etc.
Here is the way I see GM. They excelled at building trucks and big cars since the beginning. Then when the energy crisis hit they needed small cars to compete with the imports. So they tried to buy existing technology from the EU which had built small cars for a long time. Why did they do that. Go back even further. In 1959 GM built the Corvair as a vehicle to get better mileage. From the outset they are poo pooed by the press. The car had many new innovations that are still in use today. Yet because of ignorant writers and some unfortunate accidents, they finally gave up and went back to what sells good. Big cars and trucks. GM has tried to build small efficient cars. The American public has not been kind or receptive to their efforts. They cut the Japanese slack with the crap cars they brought in from the 1960s through the 1970s. Toyota & Honda finally got their act together in the late 1980s. I guess they are lucky there were no bloggers to shoot at them in the early days.
And for Sweden. If they have such a good economic climate. Why did both Saab and Volvo need bailing out?
These copouts sure are popular on this forum. As usual, the media and the consumer are blamed for a failed product. Meanwhile, the managers charged with managing the company and making the product decisions get let off the hook. (Why you'd want to pay a guy $4.6 million when he supposedly can't do anything about anything, I don't know. If that's the case, I'd cut him loose and save the money.)
How's this -- the Corvair might have been a better car had its design not been inherently prone to severe oversteer. It's one thing to build a tail-happy 911, it's quite another to try to make a mass-market car that is highly dependent upon the driving styles of its customer base to ensure that it doesn't result in a violent, spinning death. But at least we can see from this example that GM management has been making mistakes for a very long time.
The real issue is simple -- when the oil crisis of the early seventies made fuel consumption a priority with more Americans, it was the Japanese makers who stepped up to the plate. And their quality efforts were so vastly superior to what came out of Michigan that more and more consumers began to see what they had been missing, so more of them defected to the better built Japanese cars that not only got them lower fuel bills, but also less time spent in the repair shop.
So I'd give credit to the smart guys at the helm of Toyota, Honda, etc. who figured out how to meet customer needs and beat their competition. Blame the guys in Detroit who didn't take them seriously, learn from Demming or realize that it had been much easier to compete in the good old days when they had no competition, but times had changed.
And for Sweden. If they have such a good economic climate. Why did both Saab and Volvo need bailing out?
You must not think much of the American economy then, given that Ford and GM are both in need of serious help.
Saab needed bailing it out for the same reason that GM needs it now -- it had a mediocre brand and products that created a lukewarm response from the buying public. The state of the Swedish economy really has nothing to do with whether western consumers are going to want to buy or not buy a Saab.
The Saab 9000 was one nice car. Probably what GM was trying to incorporate in their small cars. The Corvair was a fun car to drive if you were not an idiot. They did sell 1.8 million Corvairs before being shot down. I bought Japanese cars from 1964 through 1978. They were in the shop more than any GM vehicle I have owned. And I prefer living in a Republic vs a Monarchy.
So shareholders here are missing out on something which their American counterparts have discovered.
I think it is difficult to come to any conclusion on this thread, since there are two philosophies being discussed, the US one (shareholder and top management has precedence over average employee), and the Japanese one (average employee has precedence over shareholders). Only time will tell which one is more succesful, certainly in the short term (last ten years) the US model has been more succesful, causing a lot of Japanese companies to shift the balance somewhat in the favor of shareholders.
So we have also shipped a large number of manufacturing jobs to China. But it seems so far it is working out well, 2005 was the most profitable year ever for Japanese companese, and jobs to job seeker ratio back to 1.0 (after 15 years....) - despite the hollowing out of low cost manufacturing.
Maybe because GM and Ford don't know how to build a high reliability luxury car?
Perhaps because they've not yet shown the level of refinement in engines remotely near Lexus?
Probably because they've not figured out to develop cars that handle like BMWs and Audis?
You know what's interesting? You can measure Goodwill in the value of cars by the established model identifications. Models that stick around are usually well thought of. Models that do poorly are retired, and new names are created (or reused).
How many years have we known:
Corolla
Civic
Camry
Suburban
Impala
Accord
LSxxx?
How long did these names last?
Fairmont
Vega
Pinto
Taurus
Cavalier
Contour
Topaz
Neon
Firenza
Windstar
Aztec
Silouette?
Sorry, I have to disagree. One word. Vega. That was GM's answer to smaller cars in the 1970's. The Japanese cars of the 1970's were FAR superior to the American small cars of the time. Corolla. Civic (with CVCC, didn't need a catalytic converter. Contrast that with the disposable Vega engine). And let's not forget the Pinto, a better car than the Vega, but had a bad tendency to incinerate the occupants in rear-end collisions.
I don't think that's a fair comparison. Simply put, talent is more expensive in the US, and nobody is going to take the helm of a major US corporation without getting paid handsomely for the responsibility. Japanese work culture is different, and can get away with paying senior executives less, but that will not fly here.
And that's fine. Honestly, I have absolutely no problem with the CEO of General Motors being paid $4.6 million per year. But what I do have a problem with is paying $4.6 million per year to a guy who lost the company over $4.4 billion on just one deal alone, based upon a horrendous deal point that should have never been negotiated in the first place (the put option). So to see that some would speak of this person as if he's some sort of savior is simply amazing, when the failure of this decision should have been evident before the deal ever got signed. (Again, a provision that forces you to buy a loser is obviously not good for the party that would have been forced to pay it.)
To be blunt, when I read the comments from the former white-collar GM employees on this forum, the problem becomes even more obvious. The people in management are such cheerleaders that they see absolutely no problem with how the company has been managed, or the product and channel choices that it has made. So it's no surprise that nothing ever gets fixed, when they refuse to acknowledge that anything that is broken is their fault.
Falling market share? Their solution: Blame the competition, the economy, the union or the customer.
Build products that people don't want? Their solution: Blame the competition, the economy, the union or the customer.
Poor or spotty reliability? Their solution: Blame the competition, the economy, the union or the customer.
Lack of a highly reliable and desirable small car? Their solution: Blame the competition, the economy, the union or the customer.
It's like alcoholism -- you can't fix the problem if you can't first admit that you've got a problem. Thirty years of erosion, and still they don't accept their hand in the problem. What is the point of having a management team if it refuses to manage anything?