I just believe that their pay/benefits should be determined by the MARKET and not through extortion.
In other words, you believe that employers should have all the leverage. Not sure how that will improve the cars or their branding.
There is nothing wrong with or illegal about collective bargaining, it is simply another form of negotiation that just happens to give more power to the employees involved in the negotiation. Unions have been legal for decades, and if workers wish to bond together in order to cut package deals, that's perfectly within their right.
In other words, when operating out of pure self-interest (be it on the business level or on the individual level) IMO folks tend to be more productive.
That is a lovely economic theory that often doesn't translate into business reality. Much of what happens in many workplaces comes down to complacency and brownnosing, rather than productivity and efficiency, whether or not there is a union in the house. GM management has proven itself to be less productive and efficient than many, but it took decades of brand destruction and second-rate product before it actually caught up with them. And judging from what we're seeing as of late, the wake up call has yet to be heard.
"I just believe that their pay/benefits should be determined by the MARKET..."
And you responded with:
"In other words, you believe that employers should have all the leverage."
Since when was THE MARKET equivalent to employers?
Employers must repond to the market. They can't just charge WHATEVER they want for their product. So why shouldn't employees also be responsive to the market?
"Much of what happens in many workplaces comes down to complacency and brownnosing, rather than productivity and efficiency, whether or not there is a union in the house."
Then the question becomes WHICH work environment is more conducive to brownnosing and slacking off: a Union shop or Non-union shop? And which environment is more conducive to productivity?
How does an employee get ahead or earn a raise in a Union shop? Be more productive/valuable to management? Or brownnose their Union leader?
"GM management has proven itself to be less productive and efficient than many..."
On this we can agree. But this has NOTHING to do with whether or not the UAW is an asset or not to the domestic automakers. I think we've established that the UAW is definitely an asset to the employee. What I want to know is, as a consumer WITH NO TIES TO THE UNION, how is the higher cost of labor (and associated higher vehicle cost) an asset to me?
I'm not sure I agree with your comments in post 2423 regarding outsourcing. If you are Bill Gates and have the wealth of a nation, you're comments are very germane. If you are not an "insider", than you better be afraid of outsourcing. A standard of living has historically been linked to a country's import-export ratio. One could say that the US is now in a "bubble" phase due to the horrendous trade deficit. Outsourcing comes with some extreme risks. First, it lowers the US's import - export ratio and will lower the standard of living. Second, there is a very real risk of "nationalization". What is that? That is when a country deems a plant built by a corporation "government" property. It has happened with many "banana" governments and will definitely happen in China within 20 years. Outsourcing is a short term plan (until 99.99 % the world is equivalently living in squalor since it is already overpopulated). To coin a lyric by REM, outsourcing is best defined by the song "It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine." This is coming from a US citizen's perspective. On the other hand, if you live in any other country, outsourcing might be good.
Specifically, what can be done in the US that can't be done overseas? Is this the point where you will argue that we should all be making antimatter machines in our garage that will lead to global corporations? One of the reasons that the US hasn't trashed the rest of the world economically is that OTHER GOVERNMENTS do support industries to create unfair business practices (ie a corporation versus a country). I am not saying that this is the answer, but it is government's job to protect the current standard of living.
Since when was THE MARKET equivalent to employers?
I'm sure that you know that this surprise on your part is a bit naive. Large oligopolistic corporations have more leverage than do individual blue-collar employees in labor negotiations, which is precisely why employees unionized in the first place, the normal supply-demand dynamics don't come into play when one party is far more dominant than the other. Had "the market" (i.e. large corporations and trusts) provided desirable wages, benefits and conditions to employees, then there would be no unions.
The fact that employees formed unions shows you that they had more to gain from joining together than they did by cutting their own individual deals. The fact that employers agreed shows that collective bargaining was preferable to them than were the alternatives, i.e. strikes and work disruptions.
What I want to know is, as a consumer WITH NO TIES TO THE UNION, how is the higher cost of labor (and associated higher vehicle cost) an asset to me?
It isn't an asset, per se, but the presence or lack of presence of the union has no bearing to most consumers. Consumers prefer certain products over others because of the products, service, branding, reputation, etc., not because of the pay structure of the employees.
But again, in any case, we all know that Big 2.5 cars are certainly price competitive with their Japanese and transplant counterparts, and are often far cheaper than are their European rivals. The pricing is not a problem -- rather, it is problems related to the products themselves. It goes back to what I've said throughout this thread: the union may affect the cost structure, but it does not reduce the revenues, and for the US automakers, their primary business problem is one of revenues.
GM's problem with the Malibu, Cobalt, etc. is not with the MSRP, but with the cars themselves. The GM cars, on average, actually cost less to build than does a comparable Toyota, but Toyota can command a much higher price because does a better job of serving customer needs. I would have more sympathy for GM management if labor was its only or primary problem, but on the list of difficulties, the union is well down on the list, and "solving" it will do absolutely no good unless the products, branding, etc. are fixed first.
I'm not sure if you are realizing a few basic facts:
(1) Imported goods and services make standards of living higher than the life without them . . . a simple case of measuring what you can buy with your money: say for example, if there are 10 consumers each with $1 chasing 10 widget in a closed economy; the standard of living would be 1 widget per person; now import 2 more widgets, the price goes down to $0.85 per widget, yet at the same time there are 1.2 widgets per person . . . i.e. 20% higher standard of living on average despite the widget maker's lower command on widget price.
(2) We are getting a lot of present goods and services from overseas, including cars, while we hand them a lot of "IOU" in return; looks to me like a break down in international relationship would just wipe off our debt, no?? It's like sharing a room with a college roommate, you two can take turns to clean the room and you also have the option of letting him clean it by giving him a "I owe you one" note . . . now given this scenerio, how many of us would choose to clean the room instead of writing up IOU's?? ;-) If there is ever a dust-up, all the IOU's go up in smoke. The reason why foreigners are willing to accept American IOU's is because they have even less faith in the IOU's of their own governments . . . which brings up the third reality:
(3) Governments are in the business of staying and enlarging its own power. Governments can't really make obsolete jobs suddenly un-obsolete. . . what it can do is subsidize those job holders with tax money and/or IOU's (public debt and fiat money). The reason why the US has such a large trade deficit is not because of consumer profligacy per se, but rather enormous government spending. All the money that the government hands out to its friends and beneficiaries ultimately reaches into the market place to find goods and services. We simply do not make enough goods and services here . . . all manufacturing outsourcing is saying is that more human resources need to be allocated to the service sector because the non-perishable goods-making sector can be substituted with cheaper source.
It is always profitable to wield monopolistic power; yet it generates inefficiency. That's why we have anti-monopoly (anti-trust) laws. Yes, being the only bank in town has a degree of monopolistic power, but the answer to that is not really encouraging periodic bank robbery . . . the consumers would be even worse off on both sides of the deal. That's pretty much what happened in the mid 20th century. Instead of enforcing anti-trust laws regarding the consolidating automakers, the government decided to make exception to anti-trust laws for the union. It's like making an non-enforcement exception to bank robbery as a cure for monopolistic bank greed. The public lose even more money, while the politicians get contributions from both the bank and the robbers.
Saying domestics are already cheaper than the imports is making the same mistake the productivity study that ranked the obsolete rental-fleet Taurus line at the top and all those Soviet economist ranking Lada factory the most productive in the world. All cars are not the same in the eyes of the market. Domestics are perceived to be poor value; their price is not too low but too high for what they offer. Every time there is a big discount, the domestics sell just fine if not phenomenal . . . that should be the first inkling that the prices are still too high for what they offer. They have to either improve quality/brand-image or reduce price. It's a tough competitive position, especially with all the union liabilities. We have gone through this numerous times already, you simply can not argue that workers have nothing to do with product quality; otherwise, why bother paying workers anything more than minimum wage or any wage at all if their input does not even matter?? Workmanship from the workers do matter (until they are entirely repaced by robots; even then the quality checkers on the production line do matter). You just can't spend hours arguing that their work is valuable, then suddenly turn around to say that they have nothing to do with the quality of output. In fact, the expected quality of their work reaches all the way back to the very beginning of design process.
Domestics are perceived to be poor value; their price is not too low but too high for what they offer.
I have been saying this here for weeks, and this is the end result of poor quality and the badge engineering that eroded brand value. Better products could be sold at the current prices, and even above current prices, but for the fact that they aren't good enough.
It was management that created this circumstance, but unfortunately, it is the workers and the stockholders who have been and will continue to pay for it. Shame on Detroit for blaming the little guy, when all he did was follow instructions.
My German car is union built, yet it still commands a premium because it has fine driving dynamics, is well styled, has an outstanding interior and feels solid as a vault. All built by unionized laborers with some of the most extensive benefits packages on this planet, a point which has not impacted the product's desirability one whit.
brightness, wouldn't you agree that these anti-trust laws haven't prevented some industry's from pooling ? I agree that the Big 3 needs to offer more value for the price. Just like Socala pointed out with his German car that is union made.
In terms of reliability, domestics, especially GM, are far better than most German cars on the market today. Survey after survey confirms that. The only German car company with comparable circumstance to GM is VW, which is in even more dire straights than GM is despite German government taking care of healthcare. MB and BMW are in very different markets . . . Cadillac is doing fine too in that market, in fact better than MB and BMW, both in terms of reliability and sales. Having owned a few BMW and MB's, I gave up on them with the realization that "German engineering" is synonymous with poor engineering details and shoddy workmanship (with the possible exception of Prosche, when it's not rebadging VW's), worse than domestics; and that is backed up by survey after survey.
Desirability is to a very large degree a matter of managing supply and demand. That is very much taken out the hands of management for the domestics due to UAW work rules. VW's are not desirable in Germany either because it would cost the company tremendous amount in unit cost to reduce supply and shore up price. MB and BMW are niche players; Cadillac does just fine in that market segment.
The bad reputation of domestics was built in the 70's and 80's, to a large degree result of union refusal and reluctance to allow automation. Toyotas entered the US market with pretty shoddy products . . . in fact some of their engines were license-built GM designs at the beginning, with worse quality than Chevy's; what turned the tide was Japanese embracing of automation, resulting in rapidly improving quality after the low price of the 70's and early 80's that got people in the door (much like Hyundai is in the past few years).
Like I said, the answer to monopolistic power should be proper enforcement of anti-trust laws and create an environement that fosters competition, not the fostering of new cartels (e.g. labor union). As much as it might be fun to watch robbers hold up the only bank in town with monopolistic greed; some may even cheer the robbers . . . the reality is that you and I are the ones ultimately footing the bills of the dog and pony show. The monopolistic bank/carmaker would just pass the cost of extortion to us consumers! That's what kept the big 3 in business for decades.
German cars are not reliable at all, with the possible exception of Porsche when it's not rebadging VW products. The joke about MB nowadays is that every car from them is indeed different . . . result of lacking manufacturing precision.
Wow, what a bunch of hate postings. The one link said the statement disrespected Kentuckians, I read it, and I didn't see that in it.
I wonder if the guy is paying income taxes on the payments he receives for his website and if the T-shirt business there is paying income taxes??? I wonder how those things get checked on?
The reliability of the German cars is wholly irrelevant to this discussion. BMW, etc. can get away with reliability issues that GM cannot, because the German cars offer cachet value and a driving experience that GM products do not.
The germane point is this: GM's current woes are the result of its management being unable to meet customer needs and wants. As I've noted before, building the Chevy Aveo, Saab 9-2, and Pontiac GTO overseas did not help sales, the cars failed to meet their audiences' needs, no matter where they were built.
Companies are run by management, and it is management that will ultimately determine their success or failure. You cannot blame the worker for poor designs, poor design, poor reliability or poor branding, those are all the fault of management.
And if the workers are dispirited or uninspired, that is also the fault of management, it is management's job to coach and lead the team. At this stage, when games are being lost, leadership is a particularly critical skill, yet all we continue to get are excuses when what these companies need are sales and profits.
A 1983 300TD wagon, which was like a bullet-proof tank, and a 1996 E320, which had engine oil leak from day one.
We are doing fine here without abusing political labels. I'm not sure how you can label my advocacy of anti-trust enforcement as "libertarian propaganda."
If you are looking for someone to blame, try the author of post#2434 for bringing the "wholly irrelevant" German cars in here. BMW is a niche brand; the comparable GM division, Cadillac, does just fine in that market segment.
Pontiac GTO sold more cars in two years than all models of BMW with 400hp or more ever sold in the last 20 years! The standards of "success" in sales terms are entirely different for different companies. I doubt BMW ever made profit on any of its 400+hp models.
You'd think companies should be run by management . . . however, that's certainly not the case with UAW shops. Even when management giants like Ford (Henry, not Bill), Sloan and Chrysler clashed with the unions, it was the unions that won the day, and the industrialists were shown the door out. What were small fries like their sucessors gonna do about it? Wagoner in his youthful inexperience tried to battle it out with the union back in the 90's; it was the biggest mistake he ever made. The laws ultimately decides who runs the company (or any other property); it's like squatters taking over a rental property . . . the owner is no longer in charge of much of anything. You can't make design, engineering and branding decisions without taking into account who will be building your product and their quality of workmanship (or automation).
Management does not lead the team at UAW shops; the union does. Most of the union members are on the team with the union bosses, not the management.
That is a cheap slap to Rick Wagoners face. Rick Wagoner, leads General Motors, not the UAW. The problem is Rick Wagoner, is trying to fix the huge mess that Roger Smith etc. created years ago. brightness, you appear to have a strong hate torwards unions, and give the past management a free pass. The UAW is becoming more flexible in it's work rules and has over the years to help GM compete. Do I think Rick Wagoner, Lutz, Devine have the ability to turn the ship around ???? You betchya. They already are showing signs. The biggest obstacle that GM has to overcome is getting good reviews for it's products from media sources like Motor Trend that seems to always nit pick at minor flaws and make them huge ones. For god sakes they had the Escalade finishing 3rd out of the Mercedes GL which doesn't even come standard with leather and cost $2K more. The Land Rover LR3 finished second and of course the Benz took first place :confuse: This is just one example of biased anti-GM media, and GM will never be good enough to get postive remarks in their eyes outside of a Corvette. Hell they even nit-pick that car. :mad:
If you are looking for someone to blame, try the author of post#2434 for bringing the "wholly irrelevant" German cars in here.
Argh, there you go again. I mentioned German cars in the context that they are built with costly German labor, yet still manage to serve their markets and garner sales. Something that Detroit seems unable to do, even with lower labor costs and deeper distribution.
You'd think companies should be run by management
No, the companies are run by management. Or more to the point, the Detroit automakers are mismanaged, which is exactly the problem.
You can't make design, engineering and branding decisions without taking into account who will be building your product and their quality of workmanship
That's ridiculous, the traditional assembly line process used by the Big 2.5 is rooted in Taylor's philosophy that the worker is not a craftsman, but is effectively a sort of machine that performs repetitive tasks according to a routine. These product and design gaffes have nothing to do with the line workers, nor did the assembly line workers develop this brand destroying exercise of badge engineering.
The real problem with Detroit is that post-war market dominance made their management teams arrogant and overconfident, and unable to compete with rivals. Their failure to win is the fault of managers who poo-pooed the competition and held such disrespect for the consumer that they failed to see that the consumer could and would make different, better choices when given the opportunity. The union didn't instruct the management team to kill their brands or make bad products, those decisions were entirely the fault of those running the companies.
Thank-You Socala. brightness, doesn't obviously realize that the union auto workers in Germany, get company baught breakfast and beer breaks to build those fine automobiles. I can't understand how one can trash the craftsmenship of a Mercedes Benz, BMW, Audi, VW, etc :confuse:
He is leading the charge for change in the auto industry, just as his family has for years.
The Detroit News
Walter Reuther, left, is the founder and former president of the modern-day UAW.
UAW: CAN IT SURVIVE?
WASHINGTON -- At a time when Detroit automakers are cutting tens of thousands of jobs and closing dozens of plants, the United Auto Workers is fighting some of its biggest battles far from the factory floor.
Amid sweeping change in the U.S. auto industry, the UAW is waging a political battle on Capital Hill to push for legislation that will preserve the jobs and benefits the union worked for decades to secure.
Quietly leading the charge, as he has for the past quarter century, is Alan Reuther, the UAW's legislative director in Washington.
Reuther brings to the job a storied heritage. He is the nephew of Walter Reuther, the founder and former president of the modern-day UAW. He is the son of Roy Reuther, who worked at Chevrolet's gear and axle plant, became an assistant organizing director for the UAW in Flint and helped lead a sit-down strike against General Motors Corp.
"Our lobbying has never depended on the number of people we have here," Reuther said in an interview. "We can't compete with corporate America (or) the Japanese companies on numbers or funding. Our strength is on our grassroots ability of our membership to communicate our issues."
In Washington, the UAW has a full plate. The union has called for assistance to stem the decline of manufacturing jobs. It has sought to relieve health care costs that have helped put Detroit automakers at a competitive disadvantage with foreign makers unburdened by similar expenses. And it successfully batted down a pension bill that could have cost Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Corp. billions.
The UAW has also called for reforming bankruptcy laws that make it easier for companies to invalidate union contracts and cracking down on currency "manipulation" they allege by China and Japan that makes imports less expensive here.
U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Detroit, said the UAW's mission on Capitol Hill "is more important than ever when you have an industry that has taken the kind of hits that this one has."
David Bonior, a former Michigan congressman and Wayne State University labor professor, calls Reuther "the dean of lobbyists who advocate on behalf of working people."
"He's very strategic in his thinking," Bonior said. "He approaches you on the issues based on facts and rational arguments as opposed to politics."
Reuther has been active on fuel economy issues, after the Bush administration sought authority to raise the standards for passenger cars.
In testimony before House and Senate committees, he opposed big increases in standards by taking a similar position to the automakers, saying those measures would have "serious, adverse effects on the jobs of our members."
Jim Johnston, GM's chief lobbyist from 1976 until 1994, said that while the UAW doesn't have as much money to lobby as other groups, the size of its membership -- 1.3 million active workers and retirees across the country -- gives it plenty of influence.
"The biggest resource is votes," Johnston said. "You can have all the money in the world but it doesn't matter much if you don't have the votes."
Reuther calls the climate in Washington difficult for organized labor, given what he calls the anti-labor attitudes of the Bush administration and most Republicans.
"Fundamentally, this administration isn't terribly concerned about the Big Three having problems. I don't think they would even be troubled by bankruptcies," Reuther said. "They would see that as a way to quote, 'restructure the industry,' and wind up getting rid of defined pension benefits. It would also shrink the UAW and for them it's both a political win and it advances their agenda on benefits."
By all accounts, the UAW's biggest recent success in Washington was the halting in December of bills to reform the government's insurance fund for pensions, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. The proposed changes might have forced companies like GM and Ford, with junk bond credit ratings, to speed up pension plan payments.
A proposed bill in the House of Representatives could have prevented the automakers from using their pension funds to pay for early retirement or plant-shutdown benefits. It also would have rewritten accounting rules to cut back on credits for early pension fund contributions, forcing companies to freeze benefits.
U.S. Rep. Dale Kildee, D-Flint, said Reuther negotiated directly with key Republicans and was involved in the negotiations that led to a bill being passed that the UAW could support.
"He has that Reuther genetic makeup," said Kildee, who has been in Congress for 30 years. "Alan looks upon his job as a duty he has to be successful for the members. The members appreciate that he isn't another hired hand."
Perhaps he's just trying to make a buck ? Neways I wrote them a nice email asking them why they have such hatred torwards a organization that has gave there employer a benchmark to meet so they didn't have to have a union shop. I also told them Kentucky is a "right to work state" and belonging to a union isn't mandatory.
"The UAW is becoming more flexible in it's work rules and has over the years to help GM compete."
And yet we see from the article you've posted:
"...push for legislation that will preserve the jobs and benefits the union worked for decades to secure."
Which is it? Are they trying to be flexible or not?
"It has sought to relieve health care costs that have helped put Detroit automakers at a competitive disadvantage with foreign makers unburdened by similar expenses."
Oh, boo hoo hoo. So the UAW wants to relieve health care costs on the Detroit automakers? How about BEING FLEXIBLE. No, I guess it's 'better' to simply ask Congress to step up to the plate instead...
"The UAW has also called for reforming bankruptcy laws that make it easier for companies to invalidate union contracts..."
I bet they have. Of course, if the Union was actually being 'flexible' there'd be no reason to go through bankruptcy JUST of invalidate the contracts.
"U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Detroit...David Bonior, a former Michigan congressman and Wayne State University labor professor..."
Why am I laughing so hard? I wonder what the response would be if a bunch of Texas Congressman were on Capital Hill asking for consideration on Oil issues?
""He's (Reuther) very strategic in his thinking," Bonior said. "He approaches you on the issues based on facts and rational arguments as opposed to politics."
Oh c'mon, quit pulling my leg, a 36" inseam is enough. A 3rd generation Union heavy and blood relative of the FOUNDERS of the UAW doesn't uses politics when dealing with politicians? I can't even read that with a straight face.
...he opposed big increases in (fuel) standards by taking a similar position to the automakers, saying those measures would have "serious, adverse effects on the jobs of our members."
Well gee. Maybe if Detroit had an inkling of how to make more fuel efficient vehicles that the public actually LIKED, they wouldn't have this problem. Must be a genetic thing that only the Japanese know how to do this....
I can't go on. The rest of the article is downhill from there....
I agree with you that the domestics are suffering from a bit of Rodney Dangerfield treatment: ain't getting no respect. It's hilarious to see critics of GM praising the German carmakers, when in fact GM has surpassed the Germans in reliability.
I don't hate unions; I just think, as an institution, it is founded on a wrong principle. If the domestics are to be saved, frankly, I think UAW might deserve more credit than any in the GM managment, for its exercise of restraint, perhaps riding into sunset without dragging the domestic carmakers and hundreds of thousands of jobs along with it. I don't think GM management is especially brilliant or especially dumb. They seem to be able to compete in environments where they are not loaded down with UAW work rules (Brazil, China); on the other hand, I have a hard time seeing today's top graduates of B-schools wanting to work for GM. Back when Wagoner coming out B-school perhaps, but not today. BTW, I don't think Devine works for GM anymore.
Most German-branded vehicles are not made by the costly German workers. MB and BMW have triple their production capacity since the early 90's. The overwhelming majority of new capacity is not in the unionized Ruhr and Saarland. The new capacity has been built in former East Germany where wages are much lower, Hungary, Austria, Czchslovakia, Poland, Finland, South Africa, the US South, Brazil and China. VW has bought Skoda in Czech and Seat in Spain, plus some Russian facility on the cheap; VW has always been on the forefront of outsourcing (before the word became vogue); they were making Audi's and VW's in China since the mid 1980's.
Furthermore, it's doubtful German workers actually cost more than UAW workers. The German government takes care of all healthcare cost; whereas GM and Ford have to take care of retirees and their familie in addition to current workers. Free beers are really cheap compared to $700/day hospitalization before the doctor charges $5000 for the operation. A diagnostic scan by CT or MRI can cost several years worth of free beers.
Companies are effectively not run by the managment when the management can not hire, fire or discipline worker without consulting someone else. For crying out loud, GM management has to consult UAW even on which model is to be made in which plant. UAW fought hard against automation back in the 70's and 80's; that's the root cause of domestic bad reputation for (un)reliability. Taylor's Philosophy has been significantly modified in real life ever since the day the union successfully locked Henry Ford's factory out of replacement workers. Workers have political clout; that makes them very different from any sort of machines.
I know quite a few ex-first-time-MB-owners of late MB models, who swear never again. That's what _below-average_ reliability does to the ownership experience.
It's hilarious to see critics of GM praising the German carmakers, when in fact GM has surpassed the Germans in reliability
Once again, you mix apples and oranges. BMW, Mercedes, and Audi are able to compete in their segments without making reliability a priority. Reliability is highly important in selling bread-and-butter cars, not luxury cars.
The Germans make up for it with service, and can appeal to their segments with style, performance, and driving manner. GM and Ford can't compete on that basis, so they shouldn't try. (VW can't, either, so it needs to also focus on improving product quality to recover in the US market.)
Thanks for the condolences . . . the sad part is that I'm not alone, nor is W210 unique in that regard among cars rolling off MB production lines since the 90's. Considering what a towering reputation for reliability they had back in the 70's and 80's, it's a damn shame indeed.
Advocacy for anti-trust enforcement is not very libertarianism at all.
Once again, you are the one mixing apples and oranges. Cadillac does quite well as a luxury brand. It makes no sense comparing BMW, MB and Audi (instead of VW, Skoda and Seat combined) to the entirety of GM. For a company the size of GM, it can not survive selling only luxury cars.
There was a horrible time from about 1996-2001 for newly introduced models. Chances if you had a W210, early 203, 220, ML, and even SLK, you had some issues. I'd like to think they are away from that. Not surprisingly, the AMG cars were not so troublesome. I've heard of very few problems with these cars...and I've had mine for coming on a year now, with nary an issue.
However, these union-built cars still attract admirers and buyers...
You're anti-union. We get it. We know. The propaganda is all related. It gets really tiresome after the millionth time.
I thought the AMG cars, both the C32 SC V6 and the S600 SC V12 were terrible in terms of reliability. . . hmm . . . in any case, the latest IQS numbers seem to indicate the problem is continuing.
There you go again, Fintail, meaningless labels' abuse. The debate would not go very far if we indulge ourselves in pointless name-calling instead of proffering anything resembling content.
I haven't heard any horror stories to indicate a trend. A S600 is not AMG, just hilariously expensive to both buy new and maintain. If someone has never owned a car of this complexity, and gets irked at the maintenance...I can't always blame the car.
And nobody can really explain the IQ scores from a few years back to last year to this year. Strange data, makes me wonder.
How much debate is there? It's so much like the constant restating of dogma. We get the point.
VW can't, either, so it needs to also focus on improving product quality to recover in the US market.
You might check the latest sales figures. Jetta is up about 30% over last year. Beetle is up 25%. Camry is off a couple percent and Accord is up less than 2% both selling brand new models. I think the reliability issues for VW are at least a couple years past.
If you look at sales of GM cars they are not doing too bad this year. The Impala, Cobalt & G6 are all doing quite well.
I take the LS simply because it would be infinitely more reliable. The S-Class may be prettier, but I'll take the plain girl who treats me well over somebody like Sharon Stone's character in "Casino."
Maybe we should have never gotten into manufacturing at all. It seems to be falling down around us, leaving a huge pile of rubble and broken lives. Who will support the mob of workers with no place to work?
Jefferson on manufacturing:
"While we have land to labour then, let us never wish to see our citizens occupied at a work-bench, or twirling a distaff...for the general operations of manufacture, let our workshops remain in Europe. It is better to carry provisions and materials to workmen there, than bring them to the provisions and materials, and with them their manners and principles."
Jefferson on Cities:
"The mobs of great cities add just so much to the support of pure government, as sores do to the strength of the human body."
Union Sundown Well, my shoes, they come from Singapore, My flashlight's from Taiwan, My tablecloth's from Malaysia, My belt buckle's from the Amazon. You know, this shirt I wear comes from the Philippines And the car I drive is a Chevrolet, It was put together down in Argentina By a guy makin' thirty cents a day.
Well, it's sundown on the union And what's made in the U.S.A. Sure was a good idea 'Til greed got in the way.
Well, this silk dress is from Hong Kong And the pearls are from Japan. Well, the dog collar's from India And the flower pot's from Pakistan. All the furniture, it says "Made in Brazil" Where a woman, she slaved for sure Bringin' home thirty cents a day to a family of twelve, You know, that's a lot of money to her.
Well, it's sundown on the union And what's made in the U.S.A. Sure was a good idea 'Til greed got in the way.
Well, you know, lots of people complainin' that there is no work. I say, "Why you say that for When nothin' you got is U.S.-made?" They don't make nothin' here no more, You know, capitalism is above the law. It say, "It don't count 'less it sells." When it costs too much to build it at home You just build it cheaper someplace else.
Well, it's sundown on the union And what's made in the U.S.A. Sure was a good idea 'Til greed got in the way.
Well, the job that you used to have, They gave it to somebody down in El Salvador. The unions are big business, friend, And they're goin' out like a dinosaur. They used to grow food in Kansas Now they want to grow it on the moon and eat it raw. I can see the day coming when even your home garden Is gonna be against the law.
Well, it's sundown on the union And what's made in the U.S.A. Sure was a good idea 'Til greed got in the way.
Democracy don't rule the world, You'd better get that in your head. This world is ruled by violence But I guess that's better left unsaid. From Broadway to the Milky Way, That's a lot of territory indeed And a man's gonna do what he has to do When he's got a hungry mouth to feed.
Well, it's sundown on the union And what's made in the U.S.A. Sure was a good idea 'Til greed got in the way.
It's responses such as that which prompt Fintail to comment as he does.
Rather than turn this into an ideological diatribe about unions and an Ayn Rand variant on predatory capitalism, you could try to focus on the automotive industry, instead.
The funny thing is that I don't even particularly care for unions, I just hate to see an incompetent, uncompetitive management team get a pass and attaboys as it runs one of the country's largest companies into the ground. Blaming unions for management's ills is a copout that can be driven only by ideology, being that it isn't supported by the facts.
Comments
In other words, you believe that employers should have all the leverage. Not sure how that will improve the cars or their branding.
There is nothing wrong with or illegal about collective bargaining, it is simply another form of negotiation that just happens to give more power to the employees involved in the negotiation. Unions have been legal for decades, and if workers wish to bond together in order to cut package deals, that's perfectly within their right.
In other words, when operating out of pure self-interest (be it on the business level or on the individual level) IMO folks tend to be more productive.
That is a lovely economic theory that often doesn't translate into business reality. Much of what happens in many workplaces comes down to complacency and brownnosing, rather than productivity and efficiency, whether or not there is a union in the house. GM management has proven itself to be less productive and efficient than many, but it took decades of brand destruction and second-rate product before it actually caught up with them. And judging from what we're seeing as of late, the wake up call has yet to be heard.
"I just believe that their pay/benefits should be determined by the MARKET..."
And you responded with:
"In other words, you believe that employers should have all the leverage."
Since when was THE MARKET equivalent to employers?
Employers must repond to the market. They can't just charge WHATEVER they want for their product. So why shouldn't employees also be responsive to the market?
"Much of what happens in many workplaces comes down to complacency and brownnosing, rather than productivity and efficiency, whether or not there is a union in the house."
Then the question becomes WHICH work environment is more conducive to brownnosing and slacking off: a Union shop or Non-union shop? And which environment is more conducive to productivity?
How does an employee get ahead or earn a raise in a Union shop? Be more productive/valuable to management? Or brownnose their Union leader?
"GM management has proven itself to be less productive and efficient than many..."
On this we can agree. But this has NOTHING to do with whether or not the UAW is an asset or not to the domestic automakers. I think we've established that the UAW is definitely an asset to the employee. What I want to know is, as a consumer WITH NO TIES TO THE UNION, how is the higher cost of labor (and associated higher vehicle cost) an asset to me?
Specifically, what can be done in the US that can't be done overseas? Is this the point where you will argue that we should all be making antimatter machines in our garage that will lead to global corporations? One of the reasons that the US hasn't trashed the rest of the world economically is that OTHER GOVERNMENTS do support industries to create unfair business practices (ie a corporation versus a country). I am not saying that this is the answer, but it is government's job to protect the current standard of living.
Anything that rquires a site visit in the US, such as designing a building.
Building tactical and strategic weaponry for the DoD, even though some has been outsourced.
Farming.
Your local/state/federal politicos will be glad to see that you think that.
I'm sure that you know that this surprise on your part is a bit naive. Large oligopolistic corporations have more leverage than do individual blue-collar employees in labor negotiations, which is precisely why employees unionized in the first place, the normal supply-demand dynamics don't come into play when one party is far more dominant than the other. Had "the market" (i.e. large corporations and trusts) provided desirable wages, benefits and conditions to employees, then there would be no unions.
The fact that employees formed unions shows you that they had more to gain from joining together than they did by cutting their own individual deals. The fact that employers agreed shows that collective bargaining was preferable to them than were the alternatives, i.e. strikes and work disruptions.
What I want to know is, as a consumer WITH NO TIES TO THE UNION, how is the higher cost of labor (and associated higher vehicle cost) an asset to me?
It isn't an asset, per se, but the presence or lack of presence of the union has no bearing to most consumers. Consumers prefer certain products over others because of the products, service, branding, reputation, etc., not because of the pay structure of the employees.
But again, in any case, we all know that Big 2.5 cars are certainly price competitive with their Japanese and transplant counterparts, and are often far cheaper than are their European rivals. The pricing is not a problem -- rather, it is problems related to the products themselves. It goes back to what I've said throughout this thread: the union may affect the cost structure, but it does not reduce the revenues, and for the US automakers, their primary business problem is one of revenues.
GM's problem with the Malibu, Cobalt, etc. is not with the MSRP, but with the cars themselves. The GM cars, on average, actually cost less to build than does a comparable Toyota, but Toyota can command a much higher price because does a better job of serving customer needs. I would have more sympathy for GM management if labor was its only or primary problem, but on the list of difficulties, the union is well down on the list, and "solving" it will do absolutely no good unless the products, branding, etc. are fixed first.
(1) Imported goods and services make standards of living higher than the life without them . . . a simple case of measuring what you can buy with your money: say for example, if there are 10 consumers each with $1 chasing 10 widget in a closed economy; the standard of living would be 1 widget per person; now import 2 more widgets, the price goes down to $0.85 per widget, yet at the same time there are 1.2 widgets per person . . . i.e. 20% higher standard of living on average despite the widget maker's lower command on widget price.
(2) We are getting a lot of present goods and services from overseas, including cars, while we hand them a lot of "IOU" in return; looks to me like a break down in international relationship would just wipe off our debt, no?? It's like sharing a room with a college roommate, you two can take turns to clean the room and you also have the option of letting him clean it by giving him a "I owe you one" note . . . now given this scenerio, how many of us would choose to clean the room instead of writing up IOU's?? ;-) If there is ever a dust-up, all the IOU's go up in smoke. The reason why foreigners are willing to accept American IOU's is because they have even less faith in the IOU's of their own governments . . . which brings up the third reality:
(3) Governments are in the business of staying and enlarging its own power. Governments can't really make obsolete jobs suddenly un-obsolete. . . what it can do is subsidize those job holders with tax money and/or IOU's (public debt and fiat money). The reason why the US has such a large trade deficit is not because of consumer profligacy per se, but rather enormous government spending. All the money that the government hands out to its friends and beneficiaries ultimately reaches into the market place to find goods and services. We simply do not make enough goods and services here . . . all manufacturing outsourcing is saying is that more human resources need to be allocated to the service sector because the non-perishable goods-making sector can be substituted with cheaper source.
Saying domestics are already cheaper than the imports is making the same mistake the productivity study that ranked the obsolete rental-fleet Taurus line at the top and all those Soviet economist ranking Lada factory the most productive in the world. All cars are not the same in the eyes of the market. Domestics are perceived to be poor value; their price is not too low but too high for what they offer. Every time there is a big discount, the domestics sell just fine if not phenomenal . . . that should be the first inkling that the prices are still too high for what they offer. They have to either improve quality/brand-image or reduce price. It's a tough competitive position, especially with all the union liabilities. We have gone through this numerous times already, you simply can not argue that workers have nothing to do with product quality; otherwise, why bother paying workers anything more than minimum wage or any wage at all if their input does not even matter?? Workmanship from the workers do matter (until they are entirely repaced by robots; even then the quality checkers on the production line do matter). You just can't spend hours arguing that their work is valuable, then suddenly turn around to say that they have nothing to do with the quality of output. In fact, the expected quality of their work reaches all the way back to the very beginning of design process.
I have been saying this here for weeks, and this is the end result of poor quality and the badge engineering that eroded brand value. Better products could be sold at the current prices, and even above current prices, but for the fact that they aren't good enough.
It was management that created this circumstance, but unfortunately, it is the workers and the stockholders who have been and will continue to pay for it. Shame on Detroit for blaming the little guy, when all he did was follow instructions.
My German car is union built, yet it still commands a premium because it has fine driving dynamics, is well styled, has an outstanding interior and feels solid as a vault. All built by unionized laborers with some of the most extensive benefits packages on this planet, a point which has not impacted the product's desirability one whit.
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
Desirability is to a very large degree a matter of managing supply and demand. That is very much taken out the hands of management for the domestics due to UAW work rules. VW's are not desirable in Germany either because it would cost the company tremendous amount in unit cost to reduce supply and shore up price. MB and BMW are niche players; Cadillac does just fine in that market segment.
The bad reputation of domestics was built in the 70's and 80's, to a large degree result of union refusal and reluctance to allow automation. Toyotas entered the US market with pretty shoddy products . . . in fact some of their engines were license-built GM designs at the beginning, with worse quality than Chevy's; what turned the tide was Japanese embracing of automation, resulting in rapidly improving quality after the low price of the 70's and early 80's that got people in the door (much like Hyundai is in the past few years).
German cars are not reliable at all, with the possible exception of Porsche when it's not rebadging VW products. The joke about MB nowadays is that every car from them is indeed different . . . result of lacking manufacturing precision.
I wonder if the guy is paying income taxes on the payments he receives for his website and if the T-shirt business there is paying income taxes??? I wonder how those things get checked on?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Please keep away from the libertarian propaganda.
The germane point is this: GM's current woes are the result of its management being unable to meet customer needs and wants. As I've noted before, building the Chevy Aveo, Saab 9-2, and Pontiac GTO overseas did not help sales, the cars failed to meet their audiences' needs, no matter where they were built.
Companies are run by management, and it is management that will ultimately determine their success or failure. You cannot blame the worker for poor designs, poor design, poor reliability or poor branding, those are all the fault of management.
And if the workers are dispirited or uninspired, that is also the fault of management, it is management's job to coach and lead the team. At this stage, when games are being lost, leadership is a particularly critical skill, yet all we continue to get are excuses when what these companies need are sales and profits.
We are doing fine here without abusing political labels. I'm not sure how you can label my advocacy of anti-trust enforcement as "libertarian propaganda."
Pontiac GTO sold more cars in two years than all models of BMW with 400hp or more ever sold in the last 20 years! The standards of "success" in sales terms are entirely different for different companies. I doubt BMW ever made profit on any of its 400+hp models.
You'd think companies should be run by management . . . however, that's certainly not the case with UAW shops. Even when management giants like Ford (Henry, not Bill), Sloan and Chrysler clashed with the unions, it was the unions that won the day, and the industrialists were shown the door out. What were small fries like their sucessors gonna do about it? Wagoner in his youthful inexperience tried to battle it out with the union back in the 90's; it was the biggest mistake he ever made. The laws ultimately decides who runs the company (or any other property); it's like squatters taking over a rental property . . . the owner is no longer in charge of much of anything. You can't make design, engineering and branding decisions without taking into account who will be building your product and their quality of workmanship (or automation).
Management does not lead the team at UAW shops; the union does. Most of the union members are on the team with the union bosses, not the management.
Rocky
Argh, there you go again. I mentioned German cars in the context that they are built with costly German labor, yet still manage to serve their markets and garner sales. Something that Detroit seems unable to do, even with lower labor costs and deeper distribution.
You'd think companies should be run by management
No, the companies are run by management. Or more to the point, the Detroit automakers are mismanaged, which is exactly the problem.
You can't make design, engineering and branding decisions without taking into account who will be building your product and their quality of workmanship
That's ridiculous, the traditional assembly line process used by the Big 2.5 is rooted in Taylor's philosophy that the worker is not a craftsman, but is effectively a sort of machine that performs repetitive tasks according to a routine. These product and design gaffes have nothing to do with the line workers, nor did the assembly line workers develop this brand destroying exercise of badge engineering.
The real problem with Detroit is that post-war market dominance made their management teams arrogant and overconfident, and unable to compete with rivals. Their failure to win is the fault of managers who poo-pooed the competition and held such disrespect for the consumer that they failed to see that the consumer could and would make different, better choices when given the opportunity. The union didn't instruct the management team to kill their brands or make bad products, those decisions were entirely the fault of those running the companies.
Rocky
He is leading the charge for change in the auto industry, just as his family has for years.
The Detroit News
Walter Reuther, left, is the founder and former president of the modern-day UAW.
UAW: CAN IT SURVIVE?
WASHINGTON -- At a time when Detroit automakers are cutting tens of thousands of jobs and closing dozens of plants, the United Auto Workers is fighting some of its biggest battles far from the factory floor.
Amid sweeping change in the U.S. auto industry, the UAW is waging a political battle on Capital Hill to push for legislation that will preserve the jobs and benefits the union worked for decades to secure.
Quietly leading the charge, as he has for the past quarter century, is Alan Reuther, the UAW's legislative director in Washington.
Reuther brings to the job a storied heritage. He is the nephew of Walter Reuther, the founder and former president of the modern-day UAW. He is the son of Roy Reuther, who worked at Chevrolet's gear and axle plant, became an assistant organizing director for the UAW in Flint and helped lead a sit-down strike against General Motors Corp.
"Our lobbying has never depended on the number of people we have here," Reuther said in an interview. "We can't compete with corporate America (or) the Japanese companies on numbers or funding. Our strength is on our grassroots ability of our membership to communicate our issues."
In Washington, the UAW has a full plate. The union has called for assistance to stem the decline of manufacturing jobs. It has sought to relieve health care costs that have helped put Detroit automakers at a competitive disadvantage with foreign makers unburdened by similar expenses. And it successfully batted down a pension bill that could have cost Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Corp. billions.
The UAW has also called for reforming bankruptcy laws that make it easier for companies to invalidate union contracts and cracking down on currency "manipulation" they allege by China and Japan that makes imports less expensive here.
U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Detroit, said the UAW's mission on Capitol Hill "is more important than ever when you have an industry that has taken the kind of hits that this one has."
David Bonior, a former Michigan congressman and Wayne State University labor professor, calls Reuther "the dean of lobbyists who advocate on behalf of working people."
"He's very strategic in his thinking," Bonior said. "He approaches you on the issues based on facts and rational arguments as opposed to politics."
Reuther has been active on fuel economy issues, after the Bush administration sought authority to raise the standards for passenger cars.
In testimony before House and Senate committees, he opposed big increases in standards by taking a similar position to the automakers, saying those measures would have "serious, adverse effects on the jobs of our members."
Jim Johnston, GM's chief lobbyist from 1976 until 1994, said that while the UAW doesn't have as much money to lobby as other groups, the size of its membership -- 1.3 million active workers and retirees across the country -- gives it plenty of influence.
"The biggest resource is votes," Johnston said. "You can have all the money in the world but it doesn't matter much if you don't have the votes."
Reuther calls the climate in Washington difficult for organized labor, given what he calls the anti-labor attitudes of the Bush administration and most Republicans.
"Fundamentally, this administration isn't terribly concerned about the Big Three having problems. I don't think they would even be troubled by bankruptcies," Reuther said. "They would see that as a way to quote, 'restructure the industry,' and wind up getting rid of defined pension benefits. It would also shrink the UAW and for them it's both a political win and it advances their agenda on benefits."
By all accounts, the UAW's biggest recent success in Washington was the halting in December of bills to reform the government's insurance fund for pensions, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. The proposed changes might have forced companies like GM and Ford, with junk bond credit ratings, to speed up pension plan payments.
A proposed bill in the House of Representatives could have prevented the automakers from using their pension funds to pay for early retirement or plant-shutdown benefits. It also would have rewritten accounting rules to cut back on credits for early pension fund contributions, forcing companies to freeze benefits.
U.S. Rep. Dale Kildee, D-Flint, said Reuther negotiated directly with key Republicans and was involved in the negotiations that led to a bill being passed that the UAW could support.
"He has that Reuther genetic makeup," said Kildee, who has been in Congress for 30 years. "Alan looks upon his job as a duty he has to be successful for the members. The members appreciate that he isn't another hired hand."
http://www.detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060608/AUTO01/606080377/- - 1148
Rocky
Have you seen the lastest JP Power results?
It's all part of the dogma
Sure they aren't as reliable as a Lexus, but they still are pretty nice cars and are still admired by many.
Yes if given the choice between the LS and S-Class, I'd probably want the LS because it has more Gadgetology to keep me busy.
Rocky
Rocky
"The UAW is becoming more flexible in it's work rules and has over the years to help GM compete."
And yet we see from the article you've posted:
"...push for legislation that will preserve the jobs and benefits the union worked for decades to secure."
Which is it? Are they trying to be flexible or not?
"It has sought to relieve health care costs that have helped put Detroit automakers at a competitive disadvantage with foreign makers unburdened by similar expenses."
Oh, boo hoo hoo. So the UAW wants to relieve health care costs on the Detroit automakers? How about BEING FLEXIBLE. No, I guess it's 'better' to simply ask Congress to step up to the plate instead...
"The UAW has also called for reforming bankruptcy laws that make it easier for companies to invalidate union contracts..."
I bet they have. Of course, if the Union was actually being 'flexible' there'd be no reason to go through bankruptcy JUST of invalidate the contracts.
"U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Detroit...David Bonior, a former Michigan congressman and Wayne State University labor professor..."
Why am I laughing so hard? I wonder what the response would be if a bunch of Texas Congressman were on Capital Hill asking for consideration on Oil issues?
""He's (Reuther) very strategic in his thinking," Bonior said. "He approaches you on the issues based on facts and rational arguments as opposed to politics."
Oh c'mon, quit pulling my leg, a 36" inseam is enough. A 3rd generation Union heavy and blood relative of the FOUNDERS of the UAW doesn't uses politics when dealing with politicians? I can't even read that with a straight face.
...he opposed big increases in (fuel) standards by taking a similar position to the automakers, saying those measures would have "serious, adverse effects on the jobs of our members."
Well gee. Maybe if Detroit had an inkling of how to make more fuel efficient vehicles that the public actually LIKED, they wouldn't have this problem. Must be a genetic thing that only the Japanese know how to do this....
I can't go on. The rest of the article is downhill from there....
I don't hate unions; I just think, as an institution, it is founded on a wrong principle. If the domestics are to be saved, frankly, I think UAW might deserve more credit than any in the GM managment, for its exercise of restraint, perhaps riding into sunset without dragging the domestic carmakers and hundreds of thousands of jobs along with it. I don't think GM management is especially brilliant or especially dumb. They seem to be able to compete in environments where they are not loaded down with UAW work rules (Brazil, China); on the other hand, I have a hard time seeing today's top graduates of B-schools wanting to work for GM. Back when Wagoner coming out B-school perhaps, but not today. BTW, I don't think Devine works for GM anymore.
Furthermore, it's doubtful German workers actually cost more than UAW workers. The German government takes care of all healthcare cost; whereas GM and Ford have to take care of retirees and their familie in addition to current workers. Free beers are really cheap compared to $700/day hospitalization before the doctor charges $5000 for the operation. A diagnostic scan by CT or MRI can cost several years worth of free beers.
Companies are effectively not run by the managment when the management can not hire, fire or discipline worker without consulting someone else. For crying out loud, GM management has to consult UAW even on which model is to be made in which plant. UAW fought hard against automation back in the 70's and 80's; that's the root cause of domestic bad reputation for (un)reliability. Taylor's Philosophy has been significantly modified in real life ever since the day the union successfully locked Henry Ford's factory out of replacement workers. Workers have political clout; that makes them very different from any sort of machines.
Once again, you mix apples and oranges. BMW, Mercedes, and Audi are able to compete in their segments without making reliability a priority. Reliability is highly important in selling bread-and-butter cars, not luxury cars.
The Germans make up for it with service, and can appeal to their segments with style, performance, and driving manner. GM and Ford can't compete on that basis, so they shouldn't try. (VW can't, either, so it needs to also focus on improving product quality to recover in the US market.)
Advocacy for anti-trust enforcement is not very libertarianism at all.
However, these union-built cars still attract admirers and buyers...
You're anti-union. We get it. We know. The propaganda is all related. It gets really tiresome after the millionth time.
There you go again, Fintail, meaningless labels' abuse. The debate would not go very far if we indulge ourselves in pointless name-calling instead of proffering anything resembling content.
And nobody can really explain the IQ scores from a few years back to last year to this year. Strange data, makes me wonder.
How much debate is there? It's so much like the constant restating of dogma. We get the point.
You might check the latest sales figures. Jetta is up about 30% over last year. Beetle is up 25%. Camry is off a couple percent and Accord is up less than 2% both selling brand new models. I think the reliability issues for VW are at least a couple years past.
If you look at sales of GM cars they are not doing too bad this year. The Impala, Cobalt & G6 are all doing quite well.
http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/business/14774359.htm
http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/newssentinel/14775557.htm
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2006/3323_auction.html
Jefferson on manufacturing:
"While we have land to labour then, let us never wish to see our citizens occupied at a work-bench, or twirling a distaff...for the general operations of manufacture, let our workshops remain in Europe. It is better to carry provisions and materials to workmen there, than bring them to the provisions and materials, and with them their manners and principles."
Jefferson on Cities:
"The mobs of great cities add just so much to the support of pure government, as sores do to the strength of the human body."
Wake Up America
Union Sundown
Well, my shoes, they come from Singapore,
My flashlight's from Taiwan,
My tablecloth's from Malaysia,
My belt buckle's from the Amazon.
You know, this shirt I wear comes from the Philippines
And the car I drive is a Chevrolet,
It was put together down in Argentina
By a guy makin' thirty cents a day.
Well, it's sundown on the union
And what's made in the U.S.A.
Sure was a good idea
'Til greed got in the way.
Well, this silk dress is from Hong Kong
And the pearls are from Japan.
Well, the dog collar's from India
And the flower pot's from Pakistan.
All the furniture, it says "Made in Brazil"
Where a woman, she slaved for sure
Bringin' home thirty cents a day to a family of twelve,
You know, that's a lot of money to her.
Well, it's sundown on the union
And what's made in the U.S.A.
Sure was a good idea
'Til greed got in the way.
Well, you know, lots of people complainin' that there is no work.
I say, "Why you say that for
When nothin' you got is U.S.-made?"
They don't make nothin' here no more,
You know, capitalism is above the law.
It say, "It don't count 'less it sells."
When it costs too much to build it at home
You just build it cheaper someplace else.
Well, it's sundown on the union
And what's made in the U.S.A.
Sure was a good idea
'Til greed got in the way.
Well, the job that you used to have,
They gave it to somebody down in El Salvador.
The unions are big business, friend,
And they're goin' out like a dinosaur.
They used to grow food in Kansas
Now they want to grow it on the moon and eat it raw.
I can see the day coming when even your home garden
Is gonna be against the law.
Well, it's sundown on the union
And what's made in the U.S.A.
Sure was a good idea
'Til greed got in the way.
Democracy don't rule the world,
You'd better get that in your head.
This world is ruled by violence
But I guess that's better left unsaid.
From Broadway to the Milky Way,
That's a lot of territory indeed
And a man's gonna do what he has to do
When he's got a hungry mouth to feed.
Well, it's sundown on the union
And what's made in the U.S.A.
Sure was a good idea
'Til greed got in the way.
Rocky
Rather than turn this into an ideological diatribe about unions and an Ayn Rand variant on predatory capitalism, you could try to focus on the automotive industry, instead.
The funny thing is that I don't even particularly care for unions, I just hate to see an incompetent, uncompetitive management team get a pass and attaboys as it runs one of the country's largest companies into the ground. Blaming unions for management's ills is a copout that can be driven only by ideology, being that it isn't supported by the facts.