I'm amazed GM doesn't ask employees for an opinion. Are you sure that's so across the board?
Well for one thing, when employees think it's OK to key foreign makes driven into their parking lot, that means every employee compares GM to GM. It doesn't give them ANY perspective on what the real world is used to in a automobile.
Sort of like saying I can only work for the Charmin company if I wipe my butt with their TP.
Well for one thing, when employees think it's OK to key foreign makes driven into their parking lot, that means every employee compares GM to GM. It doesn't give them ANY perspective on what the real world is used to in a automobile.
Well, I hope the keying thing is mostly tough union hall talk. Might be some class friction there.
Besides, you're not asking the guy on the assembly line to design the thing from scratch to world class standards. But when they make me chmn of an American car manufacturer (this is rhetorical, of course), I'll be open to employee comments about work processes, location of instruments, cupholders, kid passenger safety ...
I like the new CTS development on the Nurburgring and benchmarking with BMW and MB. But I wouldn't send my own employees the message, "Ah, you're all just expense." That's not smart car bidness.
If you act like a bozo, and treat your employees like bozos, they'll soon act like you. The pay's the same.
GM has acted like they could shuffle around badges and consumers would think they were new models. I think this sly, mendacious attitude filtered to the assembly floor. GM employees will do better when they're building vehicles that truly compete with BMW and MB, even if the benefit package isn't quite as generous. JMHO.
I'm amazed GM doesn't ask employees for an opinion. Are you sure that's so across the board?
Most manufacturers use focus groups. Of course it's been shown that focus groups are usually constructed and steered in such a way that their results will confirm exec's agendas, or if they don't their results are completely ignored, cause exec's "gut" says opposite. So if they don't want to listen to real customers, why would they listen to their employees. Especially if the employees are their customers not by choice, but by obligation. There is no reason (in exec's minds anyway) to ask somebody who would buy your product regardless of its quality or who would not buy it at all. First is a sucker, second might say the products sucks, and nobody wants to hear that. So the circle is closed - focus groups rule :sick:
Just curious where you saw that a Union shop was more productive, on a basis of 3-2 than a non-union shop?
My experiences have been, as a former GM dealer, that General Motors, like all domestic manufacturers, has a huge problem with labor costs.
GM has 73,000 UAW Employees in America. They cost $25/hr, on average, more than Employees who work for Toyota, Nissan, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, etc.
Say each employee works 40 hrs/wk. That's $1,000 x 73,000 or $73,000,000 PER WEEK over what they would make if they worked for the foreign competition.
So let's say that Toyota, with about 38,000 US Employees has, say, 15,000 that are assembly line workers.
Of course, these are not exact #s, but they are close.
That means that the same labor pool (15k workers) costs GM $780 Million annually more than Toyota.
This does not take retiree benefits into account.
So say GM had 15k workers... at that level that wouyld be 1.5 their current size, so let's say that means they sell 600,000 cars per year.
That's a $1,300 per car disadvantage assuming that they have the EXACT SAME amount of man hours of labor per vehicle.
What do people say their reasons are for buying a Honda or Toyota or Nissan or whatever over a Domestic car?
It's because, frequently, the "imports" are nicer cars. How long did GM sell cars with pushrod motors and inferior quality parts when the competiton simply offered a nicer product?
Well, at the component level, $1,300 per car buys you an awful lot of content. It's been said that a DOHC V6 would cost $300-400 per car more than the ancient pushrod 3800. Sure the 3800 is a durable and proven engine, but it's not as efficient, smooth, quiet, etc as a Toyota VVT V6.
There's a list that we could make that's huge to identify said issues, but the one thing that sticks in my mind was when the new Altima was announced in 2002... our Nissan rep said, and I quote, "We don't worry too much about Detroit, you're going against the Camry and Accord. We've got Detroit by over $2k per car in cost advantages, we can throw another $1,000 at our cars, kill em on content and still beat em on price if we want to"
What happens is that the Japanese manufacturers, not saddled by UAW contracts, can build a nicer product, for less money than Detroit can and make more money doing it.
That angers me to no end. You might think I dislike domestic cars, I don't. I want nothing more than to see Detroit regain domestic market share and kick the foreign manufacturers out of the country. Say what you want about American jobs, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, etc.. the profits that they make in America go right back to Japan.
Heck, how many times have we heard that Ford/GM is either in trouble or staying afloat because of profits or losses in Europe/Asia/Africa/etc? If you buy a Chevrolet Caprice in Riyadh, A Ford Falcon in Perth, a Vauxhall Astra in London or a Jeep 2500 in Shanghai, ultimately those profits end up back in Detroit.
The Imports have two very distinct advantages here.
1) They can and do use only as much labor as is absolutely required to operate. Forget about workers and the middle class for a second, it's how they operate and it's the technical obligation of any company to operate as efficiently as possible.
2) They also have a distinct cost advantage per worker over Detroit. Period.
Is this all the UAW's fault? Hell no. GM in particular is terribly guilty of producing some real garbage over the years, people like Roger Smith should be thrown in the stocks but that was then, this is now.
50 years ago GM could bow to the UAW because their competition was Ford and GM.. there was no foreign competition.. what, a few sports car freaks in New England and Southern California buying a few thousand MGs? A wealthy guy on Long Island buying a Jaguar XK120? Imports in the 1950s were an insignifigant piece of the pie and a small niche market.
It's not 1958 anymore, people don't choose between a Ford Galaxie, Chevy Bel Air or Plymouth Belvedere.
Quite simply, if Detroit can't adapt to their competition, they will lose... and so will an awful lot of people who depend on GM's survival for their own survival.
I would not steal a wallet, as I would expect you to not steal my job, while I was fighting against corporate corruption.
You might be able to connect the two, each meaning the same. I however can't link the two because it's ridiculous to compare someone defending his job, and someone stealing someone's wallet with a baseball bat. However I guess you could look at it this way anotherguy, as a scab not only will steal your job, he might as well grab your wallet on his way across the picket line.
Yes, assaulting someone trying to steal union members job, while on strike deserves "the sultan of swat" IMHO
Well most die-hard union members I know support the "buy-american" slogan to keep good paying jobs in this country for this and future generations. If you work for GM, and drive a foreign car dieselone, it should be keyed. It's not about throwing a fit, kicking, screaming, tantrums, it's about respect. If you have no self respect, then at least show your co-workers and GM, a little respect. If you can't then live with the consequences or better yet quit.
Most employees believe in and are loyal to the company they work for. Too bad though that GM, Ford and Chrysler workers had not started buying and driving Hondas, Toyotas and Nissans back in the early 80's along with their domestic brands. They would have discovered what many Americans did about Japanese brand quality. They would have then been a very strong voice to their management asking for improvements in design, engineering, materials and asssembly processes.
I did some thinking before I decided to respond xrunner2. We all know and can throw stones at GM, for the 80's cars. However after doing some thinking about this subject I don't remember seeing any japanese car's from the 80's in a very long time. You would think such superior automobiles would still be around today. I do recall seeing some 80's domestic products on the road the last couple of days like a couple of old Chevy, Ford Pick-up's. I saw a mid-late 80's Camaro, Fox Body Mustang Convertible, a long with a 80's Corvette. Aren't they C3's ?
As I said I, for one wonder what happen to all these superior products everyone but the UAW, workers and their family's were driving ??? :confuse:
As one of the Fords said not too long ago, "We've figured out what unskilled labor is worth and it's not $65 an hour." He didn't say anything about the relative worth of Ford management.
LOL, well if that so-called unskilled labor isn't worth $65 an hour, then I beg to ask the question to him what does that make his unskilled management team worth ????? :surprise:
As I said why bother ? :confuse: You just figured it all out and have all the answer's calculated correctly.
I'm not trying to be a jerk, but honestly your numbers and the propoganda (you believe?) well is printed in the newspaper, tv, etc, by a reporter getting a interview from a company spokesmouth. I've seen story's telling about how UAW, workers make $95 an hour while others say $60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 87, 90, 95. Well I'm sure at some point it will cross the $100 mark. :surprise:
The company's are playing the people as fools for their gain. Well if it didn't work so well they would give it up.
The bottom line is yes their is a cost difference between GM and Toyota. It's not as large as the company, makes it out. I guess perhaps you didn't read one of my past posts where I pointed out how expensive Japanese, labor is in Japan ?????? Their labor unions demands make the UAW's, look like [non-permissible content removed] cats.
Just curious where you saw that a Union shop was more productive, on a basis of 3-2 than a non-union shop?
If my memory is serving me correctly I saw it in a IUE news letter my grandmother had. The study was done by a independant agency from the mid-late 90's.
Unions Boost Productivity
Unions bring higher wages and better benefits to the workers they represent, but they also bring increased productivity to employers and the overall economy.
Anti-union critics say unionization lowers productivity. But according to recent data from the International Labor Organization and some anecdotal analysis of highly unionized employers like United Parcel Service, that argument is bogus.
The media pumped out stories on U.S productivity over the Labor Day weekend with headlines proclaiming the "U.S. Leads in Productivity". But the fine print in the ILO data on which they were based tells another story. The reality is that U.S. workers produce more than workers in other advanced nations because they work 300 to 400 hours longer per year than workers in Europe and Japan.
The media grabbed the raw output numbers in the ILO report, but looking at the real measures of productivity in the ILO data - output per hour worked and productivity growth over time - the U.S. falls to the bottom of the heap among the industrialized nations. And one of the reasons for the drop in U.S. relative productivity that is never talked about is the impact of declining real wages.
Basic economics says that as labor costs rise the incentive for capital investment increases - hence rising productivity. The opposite holds as well - when wages fall there is a relative disincentive to make new capital investments.
As real wages in the U.S. have fallen, so too has the incentive for companies to make productivity enhancing capital investments. In fact, in the U.S., where real wages are lower than they were in the 1970s, there is a perverse incentive to substitute labor for capital.
Recent data (ILO, Bureau of Labor Statistics) shows that where union density and real wages are high, for example in the manufacturing sector, productivity growth is more rapid.
The European countries with strong productivity growth have much higher unionization rates than the United States. In Ireland, for example, where 40 percent of the manufacturing workforce is unionized, productivity per hour worked rose at an average annual rate of 8.5 percent from 1980 to 2005, more than double the U.S. rate.
Higher productivity growth rates and higher wages go hand-in-hand in Europe, where unions remain strong and the wage-setting power of unions reaches a much larger portion of the labor force through pattern bargaining and nationwide agreements. In virtually every European nation with strong productivity growth, total compensation has increased at a higher annual rate than in the U.S.
We can also see that phenomenon in highly unionized firms in the U.S., including in the service sector. The New York Times did a story in July that showed that productivity at United Parcel Service - the most highly-unionized and highly-paid service sector company in America - is skyrocketing as a result of extensive technological research and innovation. UPS has spent more than $600 million in research on package flow technology in recent years.
The research at UPS is paying off. Last year, it cut 28 million miles from truck routes in good part by mapping routes that minimize left turns.
While not the only reason for UPS' heavy investment in technological research, the fact that UPS's workers receive high wages and benefits as a result of their Teamster union contract is certainly an added incentive for the company to operate more efficiently. If UPS drivers and sorters were making the same wage and benefit package as their lesser-paid counterparts at FedEx, the drive to be more efficient and keep delivery rates down would not be as great.
In the end, higher wages and better conditions - the result of unions - are good for workers and good for America.
Don't have a problem with them either. You just shouldn't be working for GM, and drive other makes/models especially foreign ones.
Is GM and/or UAW willing to pay for the GM cars its workers "should" be driving? If not, they should stay out of other people's business. Are UAW workers "allowed" to buy Aveos? How about a Mazda6?
These numbers are like the homeless reports back in the 92-99 era. They kept being exaggerated by the media and propagandists everytime they could because the more extreme they became the "bigger" the problem for the then administration to fix. Remember the guy who laid down in front of a locomotive and let it cut off his legs?
The point here is that GM et al inherited a selfmade high cost of production. Others throw in their face continually, like a nagging wife, that their cost of production is higher than the wonderboys on the block who built new factories with efficient ways of assembling. Those boys also give you model A, B, or C; they learned from Henry to offer a choice of colors, in this case options. So just pick which combo you want. Don't expect a 4-cyl with stability control because you have to buy a 280 hp 6-cyl to get that; but remember you can have anything you want.
I just saw pictures from the assembly line in 1957 and noted how many people were needed and how cumberson the system was then.
I can't link to the individual group of pictures because they are in Flash. So go to the page below. Assembly line, 1958, Plymouth
GM is streamlining their assembly. The number of people is greatly reduced by efficiency in how it's done.
As for the great hate for union folks..., how do the people here feel about the management in the companies setting themselves and friends up financially no matter what happens to the sale of the product? I'm talking about companies beyond auto companies. Is it okay for management to "sabatage" the cash flow to insure their hundreds of millions will continue or even get higher if the company flounders?
Some have bitten on the disabling by union workers with a great self-righteousness; how do you feel about management who sets up a situation to force a strike just so they can bring in scabs, sorry, replacement workers for the PC folk, and ditch their union. I offer AK Steel in Middletown, Ohio. You can research the Dayton Daily News, who got rid of their delivery folk who were making too much; can't have Cox Newspapers paying the worker mice money. Save the money for the big wigs.
Let's hear some disdain for management sabatage. And remember, the line worker didn't design the Aztek.
I see Toyotas & Hondas from the 80s every day in the commuter parking lot at the railroad station in my town. They ain't pretty but they're still running.
"The company, which lost $2 billion last year and is in the midst of a restructuring, went into the negotiations seeking to cut or erase what it said is about a $25-per-hour labor cost disparity with the U.S. employees of Japanese competitors. GM has said it pays workers $73.26 an hour in wages and benefits."
This is from an Associated Press article 9/26/07. You can read it here:
Most of the Anti-Union rhetoric is brought on by jealousy. I am sure that a large percentage of NisHonToy workers would love to make as much as a UAW employee. In fact the reason non-union workers make as much as they do is a reflection on the UAW just being there. If there were no Union jobs the foreign plants would be paying near minimum wage to their line workers. The UAW has been a bellwether for line workers in all manufacturing. Anyone working in a US factory should be thanking the UAW for keeping corporate greed somewhat in check.
Blaming UAW wages for jobs going overseas has little merit. Look at all the non-union factories that have bailed out of the USA. Most of the reason is high taxes and crazy environmental regulations. If the environmentalists were not in corporate pockets they would block any product coming into the USA, that could not be manufactured in this country. If it pollutes in Ohio, it pollutes in China.
It's not just the union employees, but also the executives at GM that see the company as an endless gravy train.
Last year, GM chief Wagoner famously cut his salary in half and received no year-end bonus to show that he, too, was willing to sacrifice. However, his original compensation package (2005) totaled $8.5 million. ( http://www.forbes.com/static/pvp2005/LIRSOX2.html )
So, to be fair, the UAW isn't the only group to blame for GM's downfall. But spreading the blame certainly doesn't excuse it. Nor does it change consumers' attitudes toward the company or its products.
Most of the reason is high taxes and crazy environmental regulations.
No Kidding....Just wait and see what happens when the Dems get elected. Raise taxes and tax green house gas emissions. I don't see how that will help US manufactures compete, unless they find a way to apply the same tax as a tarrif on imports. But that will never happen.
Then everyone will be up in arms over higher prices.
I am sure that GM uses the same accounting methods that all companies use. Our company was a small Cooperative phone company. The loaded rate for us was $138 per hour. That does not mean we had a package that added up to that much. It was the cost of all the dead weight managers, the clerks, health care for the whole cooperative, Company vehicles etc. It is hardly fair to say the cost of maintaining 400k plus retirees is part of a wage package for a current employee. Yet that is the way they do it. I would be surprised if the wages and benefits for the average UAW GM employee were over $50 per hour. Add it up based on $30 for actual wages. You know what a health care plan and a 401K costs. Throw in SSI and you got the actual cost per hour.
Check the mileage on the odometers and put up some pictures. That should be interesting. There aren't many, if any, running around here in the Midwest.
But it's made a lot of money for ADM and other companies jumping in after getting favorable legislation and aid in building plants from the political agencies. Hehehe.
Yes sick leave and vacation is part of that package. The aging work force is a factor also. I do not understand the mentality that thinks it best to lay off an older employee in favor of a young one. That does not happen in other countries of the World. Why would it be acceptable in the USA. Could it be greed? I think experience is as much a benefit to a company as a strong back. It also builds loyalty which many companies have tossed out in favor of a better bottom line. GREEDY pencil pushers.
But it's made a lot of money for ADM and other companies jumping in after getting favorable legislation and aid in building plants from the political agencies. Hehehe.
I'm sure it's provided some good jobs for average joe's too.
>thinks it best to lay off an older employee in favor of a young one.
What's even more amusing about the conflict here is that for decades we heard about the Japanese ethic of jobs for life and employment certainty and caring for their workers. (Guess that doesn't wash here in the USA for Georgetown and Smyrna at least.) B ut some criticize the UAW for working to protect the older, skilled workers.
I've been following this discussion and several others from a distance and decided to get a bit involved in this one today. First, I must qualify I'm neither anti union nor pro management, and I'm trying to look at the current NA auto industry issue in an objective way. There are, in fact, many causal factors which evolved over many decades and have led us to the present situation. Unions are part of the equation, whether some of you agree or not. As well, disfunctional management practices, failed government policies, foreign policies, and above all our hedonistic consumerist culture, are also part of the problem. The result is that from an economic and cultural standpoint, our country is moving toward decline. It's unreasonable to point blame at any one of these factors as a sole cause, just as it's unreasonable to suggest any one of them is blameless, nor does it make any sense to hold any one of them as the only answer to the problem. They all share some of the blame in the issue, whether you agree or not, whether you are a devout trade unionist or not, whether you are a supporter of management, or the government, or the military, or whatever cause or organization you subscribe to. By definition then, if the situation is to be changed for the better, then every one of these influences must somehow find a way to work collectively toward that end. The big question in my mind, after reading some of the comments herein, would be: " Is that ever going to happen?" My sense is that as long as there are opinions and feelings such as those I see being expressed herein, is "Not in my lifetime!" Personally, I see our country as on an inevitable slippery slope of decline. As Winston Churchill once said: "This isn't the beginning of the end; it's the end of the beginning!" Sadly, I don't see any great willingness for any of the contributing influences to change. It will be interesting to see what things will look like in this country in two or three more generations. I don't hold a whole lot of optimism. In the meantime, the petty to and fro arguments such as happening herein will undoubtedly continue, while the process of inevitable change continues. More Churchillian prose: "Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it"
Well IF that is the case, I would avoid working with such people. Sounds like a hostile environment, with a criminal element. I would rather make much less money, and not be associated with people as in the case of the picture being painted here. I say if, as I am an outsider, so perhaps all I hear is but all so much hearsay. If true, any work place with people afraid of their fellow worker, willing to sabotage company equipment, thinking only of the next paycheck and not the future, paints a rather dark picture. I would have hoped for more in the 21st century. Education and morals are essential to man. As for respect, people often use this word incorrectly. When they mean to say fear, they substitute respect. One can truly respect a person which always does the honorable thing, and to best of their ability. A professional group of workers is not a street gang operating to gain territory by means of terror. Respect would be earned by being the sharpest at what you do, and having it show in the products produced, and by standing by the company in times of need, and thus producing what is best for the customer. Please, paint a picture like this for a successful 21st century auto workforce. I am sure this is what most people would want to see as the future of a modern work force in America. The image of good, hard working, law abiding, intelligent and caring individuals as members of the UAW would go a long-long way towards public relations, as in winning over hearts and minds. Who knows, perhaps more people would say I buy Union, as I am really impressed with those people that work there. Both GM and Unions, I am sure run ads about, and sponsor events for charities, which do good for others. Fine - that's the stuff, and right on track. Building not only a better image, but a better reality, as in total follow through would be positive for all concerned. Let's start off the UAW and all workers in America in the positive light for this century - go forward and do good. L
I think your comments are appropriate, and show that you have a positive sensitivity to the economic, industrial, and cultural situations we find ourselves in these days. Perhaps a bit on the idealistic side though, in the sense that a whole lot has to change before we get to what you advocate. Question is, are we as a society willing to make the sacrifices that kind of change needs to be successful? I would hope so, but as I said earlier, I'm not optomistic we've got what it takes to make those kinds of sacrifices. last time our country got anywhere near that willingness was during and shortly after WW2. Since then, we've been going down that slippery slope of decline. Comments?
Yes sick leave and vacation is part of that package. The aging work force is a factor also. I do not understand the mentality that thinks it best to lay off an older employee in favor of a young one. That does not happen in other countries of the World. Why would it be acceptable in the USA. Could it be greed? I think experience is as much a benefit to a company as a strong back. It also builds loyalty which many companies have tossed out in favor of a better bottom line. GREEDY pencil pushers.
The dumb thing about the way Boeing does business is they'll turn around and hire like gangbusters a year after plowing their fields. I don't respect Boeing and I do think they're a bunch of hapless dorks.
"I would not steal a wallet, as I would expect you to not steal my job"
The job is not your property. The company is employing you, not the other way around. Don't forget that.
I can understand why you would be upset, which is why I wouldn't cross a picket line like that unless I were truly desperate, but you don't have the right to commit assault someone doing a thing that is perfectly legal.
If you don't like that it is legal for the company to hire permanent replacement workers the correct solution is to get the law changed, not to become a self-righteous thug.
I think you know I am all for clean air and water. My problem is allowing products into our country that are made in factories that would not be allowed to operate here. Like the NiMH batteries in Hybrids or laptops. If a product cannot be made in Ohio without polluting it cannot be made in China without polluting. If a product pollutes in being manufactured anywhere. It should not be welcome in our country. Eliminating a job here because the factory is polluting a river is not a good excuse to move the operation to China. Same goes for our states. Products made in AZ because they cause too much pollution being made in California.
PS A lot of the pollution in this country was cleaned up during Nixon's tenure. He also paved the way for us to be trading partners with China. Maybe that was not a coincidence.
Well, that was their food & drug guy and he was on the take, but pollution over there reached deadly proportions years ago. The fallout is affecting American companies too, since people don't want to buy, say toys, that ruin the environment where they are made.
Not much to do with the UAW, but the little eco-[non-permissible content removed] bon mots don't hold much water with me.
Thankfully the strike was short and no instances of assault, sabotage or vandalism were reported. It is good the workers are back building cars and trucks. Maybe the Big 3 can get about the business of building vehicles that people want to buy. If the engineers come up with models that workers are proud to put the Union label will be a big plus. Made in the USA is a good thing for all of US.
I'm sure it's provided some good jobs for average joe's too.
Food for fuel is probably single biggest contemporary corporate and political scam right now. If you subtract the jobs it killed (thru taxation that was needed to support that brilliant program) and account for rising prices on most foods (corn is everywhere, from syroup to milk, to meat), I would say, its effect was definitely way more harmful than beneficial.
most UAW workers probably drive at least one vehicle of their own make, simply because of the discounts they get...I know Ford folks get the A plan, and I also know that Chrysler folks have something, I assume that GM does the same thing...
But I would not be surprised if now the other family car may be a Honda or Toyota, simply because they make a number of good cars that meet the needs of folks, including UAW members...and, let's face it, does anyone think the Aztec looked like a nice car???...would YOU buy one if you worked for Pontiac???
Last year, GM chief Wagoner famously cut his salary in half and received no year-end bonus to show that he, too, was willing to sacrifice. However, his original compensation package (2005) totaled $8.5 million. ( http://www.forbes.com/static/pvp2005/LIRSOX2.html )
Yeah, that's probably fairly accurate, but the costs of the retirees have to be added in somewhere and that is/was a huge expense.
Well like a 401K plan with a company match, the company needs to contribute. GM, didn't contribute enough to the pension fund, and got way behind. So now they are tacking on past underfunding from GM, management and making this generation of workers be held liable for it. What I'm getting at is you can't blame the UAW, for GM's past CEO's and what they did and didn't do while they had the power. The pension bill has been sent to collections and instead of goinging after the jerks who handled the situation wrong the media and corporate spokesmouths are going after the benefituary. :confuse:
So the bottom line is these past expenses that should of been paid as they go instead got added on now to the cost of labor per car and it's a bunch of crap. :mad:
Comments
Well for one thing, when employees think it's OK to key foreign makes driven into their parking lot, that means every employee compares GM to GM. It doesn't give them ANY perspective on what the real world is used to in a automobile.
Sort of like saying I can only work for the Charmin company if I wipe my butt with their TP.
Well, I hope the keying thing is mostly tough union hall talk. Might be some class friction there.
Besides, you're not asking the guy on the assembly line to design the thing from scratch to world class standards. But when they make me chmn of an American car manufacturer (this is rhetorical, of course), I'll be open to employee comments about work processes, location of instruments, cupholders, kid passenger safety ...
I like the new CTS development on the Nurburgring and benchmarking with BMW and MB. But I wouldn't send my own employees the message, "Ah, you're all just expense." That's not smart car bidness.
If you act like a bozo, and treat your employees like bozos, they'll soon act like you. The pay's the same.
GM has acted like they could shuffle around badges and consumers would think they were new models. I think this sly, mendacious attitude filtered to the assembly floor. GM employees will do better when they're building vehicles that truly compete with BMW and MB, even if the benefit package isn't quite as generous. JMHO.
Most manufacturers use focus groups. Of course it's been shown that focus groups are usually constructed and steered in such a way that their results will confirm exec's agendas, or if they don't their results are completely ignored, cause exec's "gut" says opposite. So if they don't want to listen to real customers, why would they listen to their employees. Especially if the employees are their customers not by choice, but by obligation. There is no reason (in exec's minds anyway) to ask somebody who would buy your product regardless of its quality or who would not buy it at all. First is a sucker, second might say the products sucks, and nobody wants to hear that. So the circle is closed - focus groups rule :sick:
2018 430i Gran Coupe
2018 430i Gran Coupe
Just curious where you saw that a Union shop was more productive, on a basis of 3-2 than a non-union shop?
My experiences have been, as a former GM dealer, that General Motors, like all domestic manufacturers, has a huge problem with labor costs.
GM has 73,000 UAW Employees in America. They cost $25/hr, on average, more than Employees who work for Toyota, Nissan, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, etc.
Say each employee works 40 hrs/wk. That's $1,000 x 73,000 or $73,000,000 PER WEEK over what they would make if they worked for the foreign competition.
So let's say that Toyota, with about 38,000 US Employees has, say, 15,000 that are assembly line workers.
Of course, these are not exact #s, but they are close.
That means that the same labor pool (15k workers) costs GM $780 Million annually more than Toyota.
This does not take retiree benefits into account.
So say GM had 15k workers... at that level that wouyld be 1.5 their current size, so let's say that means they sell 600,000 cars per year.
That's a $1,300 per car disadvantage assuming that they have the EXACT SAME amount of man hours of labor per vehicle.
What do people say their reasons are for buying a Honda or Toyota or Nissan or whatever over a Domestic car?
It's because, frequently, the "imports" are nicer cars. How long did GM sell cars with pushrod motors and inferior quality parts when the competiton simply offered a nicer product?
Well, at the component level, $1,300 per car buys you an awful lot of content. It's been said that a DOHC V6 would cost $300-400 per car more than the ancient pushrod 3800. Sure the 3800 is a durable and proven engine, but it's not as efficient, smooth, quiet, etc as a Toyota VVT V6.
There's a list that we could make that's huge to identify said issues, but the one thing that sticks in my mind was when the new Altima was announced in 2002... our Nissan rep said, and I quote, "We don't worry too much about Detroit, you're going against the Camry and Accord. We've got Detroit by over $2k per car in cost advantages, we can throw another $1,000 at our cars, kill em on content and still beat em on price if we want to"
What happens is that the Japanese manufacturers, not saddled by UAW contracts, can build a nicer product, for less money than Detroit can and make more money doing it.
That angers me to no end. You might think I dislike domestic cars, I don't. I want nothing more than to see Detroit regain domestic market share and kick the foreign manufacturers out of the country. Say what you want about American jobs, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, etc.. the profits that they make in America go right back to Japan.
Heck, how many times have we heard that Ford/GM is either in trouble or staying afloat because of profits or losses in Europe/Asia/Africa/etc? If you buy a Chevrolet Caprice in Riyadh, A Ford Falcon in Perth, a Vauxhall Astra in London or a Jeep 2500 in Shanghai, ultimately those profits end up back in Detroit.
The Imports have two very distinct advantages here.
1) They can and do use only as much labor as is absolutely required to operate. Forget about workers and the middle class for a second, it's how they operate and it's the technical obligation of any company to operate as efficiently as possible.
2) They also have a distinct cost advantage per worker over Detroit. Period.
Is this all the UAW's fault? Hell no. GM in particular is terribly guilty of producing some real garbage over the years, people like Roger Smith should be thrown in the stocks but that was then, this is now.
50 years ago GM could bow to the UAW because their competition was Ford and GM.. there was no foreign competition.. what, a few sports car freaks in New England and Southern California buying a few thousand MGs? A wealthy guy on Long Island buying a Jaguar XK120? Imports in the 1950s were an insignifigant piece of the pie and a small niche market.
It's not 1958 anymore, people don't choose between a Ford Galaxie, Chevy Bel Air or Plymouth Belvedere.
Quite simply, if Detroit can't adapt to their competition, they will lose... and so will an awful lot of people who depend on GM's survival for their own survival.
You might be able to connect the two, each meaning the same. I however can't link the two because it's ridiculous to compare someone defending his job, and someone stealing someone's wallet with a baseball bat. However I guess you could look at it this way anotherguy, as a scab not only will steal your job, he might as well grab your wallet on his way across the picket line.
Yes, assaulting someone trying to steal union members job, while on strike deserves "the sultan of swat" IMHO
-Rocky
"buy-american" slogan to keep good paying jobs in this country for this and future generations. If you work for GM, and drive a foreign car dieselone, it should be keyed. It's not about throwing a fit, kicking, screaming, tantrums, it's about respect. If you have no self respect, then at least show your co-workers and GM, a little respect. If you can't then live with the consequences or better yet quit.
-Rocky
Please show me credible documentation of this $80/hour propoganda......
-Rocky
I did some thinking before I decided to respond xrunner2. We all know and can throw stones at GM, for the 80's cars. However after doing some thinking about this subject I don't remember seeing any japanese car's from the 80's in a very long time. You would think such superior automobiles would still be around today.
As I said I, for one wonder what happen to all these superior products everyone but the UAW, workers and their family's were driving ??? :confuse:
-Rocky
LOL, well if that so-called unskilled labor isn't worth $65 an hour, then I beg to ask the question to him what does that make his unskilled management team worth ????? :surprise:
-rockylee
-Rocky
I have no prblem with good non-union workers, it's the people that cross the picket-line that I have a problem with.
vandalizing cars made by non-union workers.
Don't have a problem with them either. You just shouldn't be working for GM, and drive other makes/models especially foreign ones.
He also can't even see why anyone else would have a problem with it, or at least not anyone whose opinion actually matters
I only "value" opinions from individuals I respect.
Then he can't understand why the average person isn't pro-union anymore.
I can understand it quite clearly. Some would call it the
"It's all about me" slogan. :surprise:
-Rocky
I'm not trying to be a jerk, but honestly your numbers and the propoganda (you believe?) well is printed in the newspaper, tv, etc, by a reporter getting a interview from a company spokesmouth. I've seen story's telling about how UAW, workers make $95 an hour while others say $60, 65, 70, 75, 80, 85, 87, 90, 95. Well I'm sure at some point it will cross the $100 mark. :surprise:
The company's are playing the people as fools for their gain. Well if it didn't work so well they would give it up.
The bottom line is yes their is a cost difference between GM and Toyota. It's not as large as the company, makes it out. I guess perhaps you didn't read one of my past posts where I pointed out how expensive Japanese, labor is in Japan ?????? Their labor unions demands make the UAW's, look like [non-permissible content removed] cats.
Just curious where you saw that a Union shop was more productive, on a basis of 3-2 than a non-union shop?
If my memory is serving me correctly I saw it in a IUE news letter my grandmother had. The study was done by a independant agency from the mid-late 90's.
Unions Boost Productivity
Unions bring higher wages and better benefits to the workers they represent, but they also bring increased productivity to employers and the overall economy.
Anti-union critics say unionization lowers productivity. But according to recent data from the International Labor Organization and some anecdotal analysis of highly unionized employers like United Parcel Service, that argument is bogus.
The media pumped out stories on U.S productivity over the Labor Day weekend with headlines proclaiming the "U.S. Leads in Productivity". But the fine print in the ILO data on which they were based tells another story. The reality is that U.S. workers produce more than workers in other advanced nations because they work 300 to 400 hours longer per year than workers in Europe and Japan.
The media grabbed the raw output numbers in the ILO report, but looking at the real measures of productivity in the ILO data - output per hour worked and productivity growth over time - the U.S. falls to the bottom of the heap among the industrialized nations. And one of the reasons for the drop in U.S. relative productivity that is never talked about is the impact of declining real wages.
Basic economics says that as labor costs rise the incentive for capital investment increases - hence rising productivity. The opposite holds as well - when wages fall there is a relative disincentive to make new capital investments.
As real wages in the U.S. have fallen, so too has the incentive for companies to make productivity enhancing capital investments. In fact, in the U.S., where real wages are lower than they were in the 1970s, there is a perverse incentive to substitute labor for capital.
Recent data (ILO, Bureau of Labor Statistics) shows that where union density and real wages are high, for example in the manufacturing sector, productivity growth is more rapid.
The European countries with strong productivity growth have much higher unionization rates than the United States. In Ireland, for example, where 40 percent of the manufacturing workforce is unionized, productivity per hour worked rose at an average annual rate of 8.5 percent from 1980 to 2005, more than double the U.S. rate.
Higher productivity growth rates and higher wages go hand-in-hand in Europe, where unions remain strong and the wage-setting power of unions reaches a much larger portion of the labor force through pattern bargaining and nationwide agreements. In virtually every European nation with strong productivity growth, total compensation has increased at a higher annual rate than in the U.S.
We can also see that phenomenon in highly unionized firms in the U.S., including in the service sector. The New York Times did a story in July that showed that productivity at United Parcel Service - the most highly-unionized and highly-paid service sector company in America - is skyrocketing as a result of extensive technological research and innovation. UPS has spent more than $600 million in research on package flow technology in recent years.
The research at UPS is paying off. Last year, it cut 28 million miles from truck routes in good part by mapping routes that minimize left turns.
While not the only reason for UPS' heavy investment in technological research, the fact that UPS's workers receive high wages and benefits as a result of their Teamster union contract is certainly an added incentive for the company to operate more efficiently. If UPS drivers and sorters were making the same wage and benefit package as their lesser-paid counterparts at FedEx, the drive to be more efficient and keep delivery rates down would not be as great.
In the end, higher wages and better conditions - the result of unions - are good for workers and good for America.
http://www.changetowin.org/connect/2007/09/unions_boost_productivity.html
Here's a couple more I'll share with ya !!!!
http://www.epi.org/content.cfm/webfeatures_snapshots_20070620
Unions Are Good for Business, Productivity and the Economy
http://www.aflcio.org/joinaunion/why/uniondifference/uniondiff8.cfm
-Rocky
Is GM and/or UAW willing to pay for the GM cars its workers "should" be driving? If not, they should stay out of other people's business. Are UAW workers "allowed" to buy Aveos? How about a Mazda6?
The point here is that GM et al inherited a selfmade high cost of production. Others throw in their face continually, like a nagging wife, that their cost of production is higher than the wonderboys on the block who built new factories with efficient ways of assembling. Those boys also give you model A, B, or C; they learned from Henry to offer a choice of colors, in this case options. So just pick which combo you want. Don't expect a 4-cyl with stability control because you have to buy a 280 hp 6-cyl to get that; but remember you can have anything you want.
I just saw pictures from the assembly line in 1957 and noted how many people were needed and how cumberson the system was then.
I can't link to the individual group of pictures because they are in Flash. So go to the page below.
Assembly line, 1958, Plymouth
GM is streamlining their assembly. The number of people is greatly reduced by efficiency in how it's done.
As for the great hate for union folks..., how do the people here feel about the management in the companies setting themselves and friends up financially no matter what happens to the sale of the product? I'm talking about companies beyond auto companies. Is it okay for management to "sabatage" the cash flow to insure their hundreds of millions will continue or even get higher if the company flounders?
Some have bitten on the disabling by union workers with a great self-righteousness; how do you feel about management who sets up a situation to force a strike just so they can bring in scabs, sorry, replacement workers for the PC folk, and ditch their union. I offer AK Steel in Middletown, Ohio. You can research the Dayton Daily News, who got rid of their delivery folk who were making too much; can't have Cox Newspapers paying the worker mice money. Save the money for the big wigs.
Let's hear some disdain for management sabatage. And remember, the line worker didn't design the Aztek.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
This is from an Associated Press article 9/26/07. You can read it here:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070926/ap_on_bi_ge/auto_talks
Blaming UAW wages for jobs going overseas has little merit. Look at all the non-union factories that have bailed out of the USA. Most of the reason is high taxes and crazy environmental regulations. If the environmentalists were not in corporate pockets they would block any product coming into the USA, that could not be manufactured in this country. If it pollutes in Ohio, it pollutes in China.
Bottomline is I wouldn't work for a company that has terrible management.
Last year, GM chief Wagoner famously cut his salary in half and received no year-end bonus to show that he, too, was willing to sacrifice. However, his original compensation package (2005) totaled $8.5 million. ( http://www.forbes.com/static/pvp2005/LIRSOX2.html )
In that same year, the combined compensation of Toyota's 26 top executives totaled $8.3 million. ( http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/business/articles/0609toyotapay0609.htm- l )
So, to be fair, the UAW isn't the only group to blame for GM's downfall. But spreading the blame certainly doesn't excuse it. Nor does it change consumers' attitudes toward the company or its products.
No Kidding....Just wait and see what happens when the Dems get elected. Raise taxes and tax green house gas emissions. I don't see how that will help US manufactures compete, unless they find a way to apply the same tax as a tarrif on imports. But that will never happen.
Then everyone will be up in arms over higher prices.
Yeah, that's probably fairly accurate, but the costs of the retirees have to be added in somewhere and that is/was a huge expense.
Since GMs work force is older then everyone else's, the costs of the extra paid time off effects the hourly costs as well.
Check the mileage on the odometers and put up some pictures. That should be interesting. There aren't many, if any, running around here in the Midwest.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
But it's made a lot of money for ADM and other companies jumping in after getting favorable legislation and aid in building plants from the political agencies. Hehehe.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
I'm sure it's provided some good jobs for average joe's too.
What's even more amusing about the conflict here is that for decades we heard about the Japanese ethic of jobs for life and employment certainty and caring for their workers. (Guess that doesn't wash here in the USA for Georgetown and Smyrna at least.) B ut some criticize the UAW for working to protect the older, skilled workers.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
First, I must qualify I'm neither anti union nor pro management, and I'm trying to look at the current NA auto industry issue in an objective way.
There are, in fact, many causal factors which evolved over many decades and have led us to the present situation.
Unions are part of the equation, whether some of you agree or not. As well, disfunctional management practices, failed government policies, foreign policies, and above all our hedonistic consumerist culture, are also part of the problem.
The result is that from an economic and cultural standpoint, our country is moving toward decline.
It's unreasonable to point blame at any one of these factors as a sole cause, just as it's unreasonable to suggest any one of them is blameless, nor does it make any sense to hold any one of them as the only answer to the problem.
They all share some of the blame in the issue, whether you agree or not, whether you are a devout trade unionist or not, whether you are a supporter of management, or the government, or the military, or whatever cause or organization you subscribe to.
By definition then, if the situation is to be changed for the better, then every one of these influences must somehow find a way to work collectively toward that end.
The big question in my mind, after reading some of the comments herein, would be: " Is that ever going to happen?"
My sense is that as long as there are opinions and feelings such as those I see being expressed herein, is "Not in my lifetime!"
Personally, I see our country as on an inevitable slippery slope of decline.
As Winston Churchill once said: "This isn't the beginning of the end; it's the end of the beginning!"
Sadly, I don't see any great willingness for any of the contributing influences to change.
It will be interesting to see what things will look like in this country in two or three more generations.
I don't hold a whole lot of optimism.
In the meantime, the petty to and fro arguments such as happening herein will undoubtedly continue, while the process of inevitable change continues.
More Churchillian prose: "Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it"
Gary, UAW Local 1250 in Cleveland called. They need someone to come to the Cuyahoga and put their river fire out.
Perhaps a bit on the idealistic side though, in the sense that a whole lot has to change before we get to what you advocate.
Question is, are we as a society willing to make the sacrifices that kind of change needs to be successful?
I would hope so, but as I said earlier, I'm not optomistic we've got what it takes to make those kinds of sacrifices.
last time our country got anywhere near that willingness was during and shortly after WW2.
Since then, we've been going down that slippery slope of decline.
Comments?
Yes sick leave and vacation is part of that package. The aging work force is a factor also. I do not understand the mentality that thinks it best to lay off an older employee in favor of a young one. That does not happen in other countries of the World. Why would it be acceptable in the USA. Could it be greed? I think experience is as much a benefit to a company as a strong back. It also builds loyalty which many companies have tossed out in favor of a better bottom line. GREEDY pencil pushers.
The dumb thing about the way Boeing does business is they'll turn around and hire like gangbusters a year after plowing their fields. I don't respect Boeing and I do think they're a bunch of hapless dorks.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
The job is not your property. The company is employing you, not the other way around. Don't forget that.
I can understand why you would be upset, which is why I wouldn't cross a picket line like that unless I were truly desperate, but you don't have the right to commit assault someone doing a thing that is perfectly legal.
If you don't like that it is legal for the company to hire permanent replacement workers the correct solution is to get the law changed, not to become a self-righteous thug.
PS
A lot of the pollution in this country was cleaned up during Nixon's tenure. He also paved the way for us to be trading partners with China. Maybe that was not a coincidence.
Well, that was their food & drug guy and he was on the take, but pollution over there reached deadly proportions years ago. The fallout is affecting American companies too, since people don't want to buy, say toys, that ruin the environment where they are made.
Not much to do with the UAW, but the little eco-[non-permissible content removed] bon mots don't hold much water with me.
Food for fuel is probably single biggest contemporary corporate and political scam right now. If you subtract the jobs it killed (thru taxation that was needed to support that brilliant program) and account for rising prices on most foods (corn is everywhere, from syroup to milk, to meat), I would say, its effect was definitely way more harmful than beneficial.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
But I would not be surprised if now the other family car may be a Honda or Toyota, simply because they make a number of good cars that meet the needs of folks, including UAW members...and, let's face it, does anyone think the Aztec looked like a nice car???...would YOU buy one if you worked for Pontiac???
Well yeah, they are paying you as they are providing you with a really good paying job.
Are UAW workers "allowed" to buy Aveos?
Let's just say your not looked upon very well by your colleagues.
How about a Mazda6?
Yes, the Mazda6 is in fact in the UAW union-made car list.
-Rocky
As I said Credible !!!!!!
Not what some company spokesmouth or reporter says please !!!
-Rocky
-Rocky
In that same year, the combined compensation of Toyota's 26 top executives totaled $8.3 million. ( http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/business/articles/0609toyotapay0609.htm- - l )
Well perhaps GM, needs to import Japanese, management since it's a job that american management won't do. :P
-Rocky
Well like a 401K plan with a company match, the company needs to contribute. GM, didn't contribute enough to the pension fund, and got way behind. So now they are tacking on past underfunding from GM, management and making this generation of workers be held liable for it. What I'm getting at is you can't blame the UAW, for GM's past CEO's and what they did and didn't do while they had the power. The pension bill has been sent to collections and instead of goinging after the jerks who handled the situation wrong the media and corporate spokesmouths are going after the benefituary. :confuse:
So the bottom line is these past expenses that should of been paid as they go instead got added on now to the cost of labor per car and it's a bunch of crap. :mad:
-Rocky
I thought that was part of the reason for the NUMMI Joint Venture. (TheAutoChannel)
We visit NUMMI to see what it takes to build the 2005 Toyota Tacoma