imidazol97: Of course the jobs they "created" were taken away from the domestic automakers, but they don't have a word for that in their language, I guess.
I have yet to find anything in any federal or state law - let alone the United States Constitution - that gives GM, Ford, Chrysler and the UAW the "right" to assemble all vehicles built in the United States.
In the 1950s, GM and Ford "took away" lots of jobs from workers at Studebaker, Packard, Kaiser-Frazer and Hudson. They did this because their vehicles better met the needs, wants and desires of the buying public. Now, 50 years later, the same thing is happening to GM and Ford. Vehicles built here in the United States, with high domestic content, are stealing sales from the Big Two.
The transplants are providing jobs with good pay and decent benefits. The gross pay almost matches the UAW rate (adjusted takehome pay probably DOES match it, accounting for the lower cost of living in southern states and no need to pay union dues). Benefits are not as rich as those negotiated by the UAW, but the benefits paid by the transplants more closely approximate what most white-collar people are getting in the real world, and are still superior to most other blue-collar jobs.
The auto industry is dynamic and ever-changing. Trying to freeze time at 1965 is pointless and counterproductive. The great majority of new vehicle buyers are quite happy with the expanded choice and improved vehicle quality brought about by increased competition. When GM had 50 percent of the market (and Ford and Chrysler pretty much controlled another 40 percent), we were treated to vehicles with increasingly worse build quality, performance and reliability.
If you like your Buick, you should be thanking Toyota and Honda, because it wouldn't be half as good as it is if GM and the UAW hadn't felt those companies breathing down their necks.
The way I see it is this......(Analogy) Your buisness sells a good/service and makes a profit, you get paid. It costs money to make money. You get the Credit Card Bills every month but pay the mininum balance on them. Over time that bill keeps getting bigger and bigger and becomes more than you can afford, because you blew your net income on yourself, and spent it in other area's of interest instead of paying it (credit card) off. (You now have a legacy cost) Now that the credit card bill has ballooned, you start to panic. You owe more than you can afford due to your irresponsibility. The only option left is to start charging more for your product/service. However your compeitor can undercut you because he does "pay as he goes".
This is exactly what GM did with their legacy costs. They didn't "pay as you go" and perhaps learned that from our current government administration. :surprise: I hope they aren't still teaching economics 101 at Yale.
As far as healthcare goes at GM/Delphi. They are either "A" getting ripped off or "B" paying that much and somebody's getting a kick back. My insurance a month cost's my employer approx. $1400 a month and I pay $121 of it. GM due to their sheer size should beable to get it cheaper than my employer, especially being the biggest buyer of it. These $130,000 a yr. costs per employee I don't buy for a second. Work the figures. I also find it funny that different reporters get twisted figures. Some say $100,000 per yr. per employee, others say up to $130,000. No different than $65 dollars an hour from one article, $75 an hour in another, and a whopping figure of $95 dollars an hour I once read :surprise:
I do laugh about the figures, because many of you actually believe em'. Whatever is the highest figure that comes out of the media get's everyone in an uproar. :confuse:
Just today their was an article about the "buy out" package that was supposably being offered to GM workers. Read it and you will notice their was no truth about it and Ron Getterfinger said it was made up by the media after Ford annouced a "buy out" for it's hourly workers.
What I'm saying not to just you 62vetteefp, but everyone else....becareful of what you believe from the media. The figures get juggled around more than a clown at a circus. The higher the figure the media and GM makes it, the more sympathy and "cry fowl" they will get from the public. Ridiculous figures like these have destroyed unions over the years because people believe them. For instance back 15 years ago a good friend of mines parents believed my dad made $45 dollars and hour. 5 or so years later the number reported in the Grand Rapids was $60 dollars an hour. I asked him both times do we look that rich ???? he said no. I said well my dad makes around $19 an hour. He said oh, I figured that report was far from the truth. I said you make more than him being Presidnt of the School board Randy at $60,000 a yr. Dad made a little over $40,000. He said oh.
>I have yet to find anything in any federal or state law
>In the 1950s, GM and Ford "took away" lots of jobs from workers at Studebaker, Packard, Kaiser-Frazer and Hudson
>Trying to freeze time at 1965 is pointless and counterproductive.
>If you like your Buick, should be thanking Toyota and Honda, because it wouldn't be half as good as it is if GM and the UAW
I'm not sure why you're pontificating on each of these as they weren't in the original post. I commented about the tone of the advertisement which was very self-righteous on the part of Toyo. However they didn't even tailor each advertisement to the targeted area; they had an addon at the end to thank the kind folks of (Greater) Cincinnati area for buying their vehicles. They have some kind of office in Northern Cincy and some kind of major management office in Erlanger (KY) -- they seemed to want their management in urban areas but their manufacturing is 80 miles south in Georgetown, KY.
Maybe they haven't run the advertisement in Philly area.
BTW my Buicks have been very good to me with a minimum of maintenance costs. Check with Lemko about his 88 Buick.
grbeck, tsk tsk tsk. :P Union dues per month aren't that much 2 1/2 times your wage is all they pay. BTW- The UAW also picks up 90% of the pay during voluntary layoffs, called subpay @ 90%
BTW- I do agree the transplants do have it just as good because of the cost of living in the south.
If you like your Buick, you should be thanking Toyota and Honda, because it wouldn't be half as good as it is if GM and the UAW hadn't felt those companies breathing down their necks.
The labor laws in the south don't seem to be nearly as protective of workers as in the more developed states. A friend just had a "real world" experience with TN's laws on Hire for Pay and workmans compensation. He lives two miles from the wonderful Smyrna Nissan plant.
But, if you read the Detroit papers (and others I am sure) almost all traditional suppliers are getting hammered. With their high wages and lower sales to the domestics they are all lining up to go bankrupt.
True. We were getting hammered by GM and Ford for a long time to decrease prices and take on a higher burden of warranty costs (especially from Ford). Luckily we were able to expand into other areas and gain more non-GM & -Ford business. We're now at the point where there product share is a smaller part of the business, like in the 10 - 15% range. If we would have stayed in the "GM & Ford's our bread & butter" mode we surely would've filed for or been close to filing BK.
Do you think your BIL's plant may supply the "domestics" as well or just the transplants?
With the employee buyout frenzy going on have any of your relatives been offered packages? And, without getting into specifics like $$, are they really as good as the companies saw they are?
...I met a guy at work who has an '88 LeSabre and he can't say enough good things about it as well. Funny, I hated those downsized FWD B and C bodies when they were new. Girlfriend is having great luck with her LaCrosse.
Pal, the buy-outs are all false at this momment and the $25K-$50K offers were B.S. made up in the media.
Dad says it's all B.S. but he heard that the UAW is trying to work a deal to get workers out of the Job Banks, and get the elgible ones to retire. Their is a scare of shortages in the skill trades if to many take a package.
...but eventually the burden of all these early retirees is going to fall on the taxpayer. Geeze, I wonder if I'll ever get to retire. I know a man whose a retired Philadelphia policeman and he's still working at close to 80 if he isn't already past it.
Thank you. He actually is older and a very hard worker with knowledge of his trade which requires passing state testing before being able to do his job for public safety reasons. He had a shoulder injury on workman's comp. His company had been testy at times wanting him to do menial work rather than skilled work. He finally told boss goodbye. He'd been job shopping already.
New employer employed him, tested him for few days for certifications, and trained him for the job. Then workmen's comp doctor said he couldn't work. They continued to pay him, insurance, etc. Person who employed him was moved to another zone, and then seems to have been separated from company. From November to Feb he's employed. Company wrote doctor demanding he be allowed to work. Then the company decided he had to be part time only with two menial workers. Then company decided he was terminated but started trying to say he was terminated in November (with no written notice) rather than early February. He didn't accept being forced to resign. He lives next door to a newly trained attorney (a second career so he's not a neophyte).
The State has been totally unsupportive of any rights to either notice or how workman's comp is handled. Doctor's said they were doing shoulder surgery then backed off with more tests. That was about when company decided he had been moved to temp only and should resign.
The only thing company hasn't asked for is return of pay from November before doctors put him off on workman's comp. This is a national company.
Her car is an '05. I didn't think they had a '04 but still had the Century and Regal. I'm not sure, but I think they briefly had an '05 Century for the old heads. I saw two of them on the dealers lot when my girlfriend bought her LaCrosse. They were practically giving them away for Cavalier prices. One would be a chump to get a Cavalier when they could've had a Century for the same price. I was tempted, but I just got done paying for my Seville STS and didn't feel like making car payments again.
I don't have a spin on it. I do believe the government would step in and save GM if it went down the tubes. The democrats are going to play politics with GM and use them to their advantage to not miss the White House in 08' Sen. John Edwards is already out their winning Support from working folks of all stripes, and he will slam the trade laws back 50 years ago. He can run on domestic issues and will win the white House if Hillary decides to take a pass. Eitherway John will be in Hillary's cabinet if not her V.P. and Bill better get used to the pretty lawyer being at Hillary's side as she turns back the trade treaties.
Well, if I get a Lucerne, I'm going all the way to a CXS. However, even the "cheap" Lucerne seems to be a decent car I wouldn't be ashamed of. I'm pretty sure she would consider another LaCrosse in the future.
Well I'm not sure how much your girlfriend likes cars, but maybe next time get her a CTS when they redesign it. I could picture you for one being in a CTS-V with a grin ear to ear.
imidazol97: I'm not sure why you're pontificating on each of these as they weren't in the original post.
Because by saying that the transplants "took away" jobs from the Big Three - as opposed to earning them by providing products that Americans want - you are implying that the workers had some sort of right to these jobs, which, of course, is not true. You are also implying that things should stay as they were during the Big Three's heyday - which was about 1965.
As for the Toyota ads being "self righteous" - a company promoting itself. How shocking. Imagine that...
imidazol97: BTW my Buicks have been very good to me with a minimum of maintenance costs. Check with Lemko about his 88 Buick.
That's nice, but for many years your experiences were the exception, not the norm. Fortunately, GM and the UAW shaped up and now Buicks - and the rest of GM vechicles - are much better. But they didn't make these improvements out of the goodness of their hearts.
I did bring home a black CTS last summer as a loaner car. She really liked the car. I could see her in a CTS. She isn't the car buff I am, but she is coming around. When I met her, she was driving a 1991 Mercury Tracer with the paint coming off it and badly repainted in spots with a can of Krylon. The finish looked like a redder version of an orange tabby cat's coat. I don't know why she was driving such a bomb as she makes a decent income.
That's nice, but for many years your experiences were the exception, not the norm. Fortunately, GM and the UAW shaped up and now Buicks - and the rest of GM vechicles - are much better. But they didn't make these improvements out of the goodness of their hearts.
Good point....The UAW wanted to make the best, but mangement didn't allow it. I will say this....Rick Wagoner is 10x the CEO that Jack Smith was....I sometimes put it all on Rick, but really it's not all him. I however don't agree with him offshoring buisness, but he's better than Bill Ford or Dieter Zietsche :mad:
I love the exterior of the CTS, but am holding out for a better more luxurious/sporty interior. If they could throw a Lexus or Acura TL type interior in it I'd buy one without hesitation. Maybe my wish is coming as the 07' looks promising.
Thank you! I guess you saw the pictures on Carspace. I have seen the concept pics of the new CTS. I love the grille! Reminds me of the gorgeous 1969 Cadillac grille. If gas prices start going the way they were last summer, a CTS will look mighty good. Things got so crazy, I left the car at home and walked or took the bus. One great thing was that I dropped from a 38 waist to a 36 in one month!
GRBeck, your points are on the money. Amazing how some can't hear the obvious.
If the only way that the Big 2.5 can compete is to have no competition except for themselves, then they deserve to die.
The only reason that Big 2.5 quality has improved has been because there has been a quality gap to fill, a gap created by superior imports. If there had been no imports with which to compete, we would have not had better quality products available to us that would have forced the American companies to change their practices. We'd simply be driving Buicks that would be much worse than they are today, with little to no clue about how bad we had it.
Now these "imported" cars increase American employment, while the "American" companies work to offshore production. I would think that it would be obvious that a car produced in Kentucky with American parts and labor would be better for the US economy as a whole than one produced in Mexico with Mexican labor, but I guess not everyone has picked up on this.
Yup saw the pics on Car Space. I wished I could walk to work, cuz it would save me over $300 a month. Yes, the new CTS will be very cool if it resembles the concept pics. I do like the way it looks now in the grill. I would prefer they smooth the angels a lil' bit too.
The only reason that Big 2.5 quality has improved has been because there has been a quality gap to fill, a gap created by superior imports. If there had been no imports with which to compete, we would have not had better quality products available to us that would have forced the American companies to change their practices. We'd simply be driving Buicks that would be much worse than they are today, with little to no clue about how bad we had it.
I agree
Now these "imported" cars increase American employment, while the "American" companies work to offshore production. I would think that it would be obvious that a car produced in Kentucky with American parts and labor would be better for the US economy as a whole than one produced in Mexico with Mexican labor, but I guess not everyone has picked up on this.
I agree with that. However the net result of the transplants being good, unfortunatly have resulted in the Big 3 off-shoring to compete. Well that's what they say. :sick:
The actual buy outs of hourly has been offered at Ford. No official buyout at GM for hourly but they have bought out many salary in the past years.
But there are buy outs coming for GM hourly. Most likely buyouts for Delphi and GM. Then IF there are openings at GM Delphi employees with GM time will be able to move over to GM as GM employees.
However the net result of the transplants being good, unfortunatly have resulted in the Big 3 off-shoring to compete. Well that's what they say.
Rocky, one of my fundamental points here is that the Big 2.5 would offshoring no matter what. Blaming the unions, the Japanese, the exchange rate, the consumer, the weather, the Red Sox -- it's all a cop-out meant to hide their true motivations.
It wouldn't matter if there wasn't a single car being imported or if there was no union -- they would still be building plants in Mexico and elsewhere. These companies are run by beancounters, who want to lower costs whereever they can, whenever they can. They beat up their suppliers (unlike the transplants, who create cooperative relationships with them), they beat up their workers (which is why there is a UAW in the first place) and on and on.
Let's face it: Mexican wages are lower across the board, which is why it is appealing to industrial companies of all types. Last I checked, autoworkers in Mexico were getting paid about US$12 per day -- not per hour, but per day. If you have an accountant's mentality, then you are going to do cartwheels when you figure out how you can lower your wage costs by 90% simply by building a factory somewhere else.
The unions might create another justification, but you can bet that they would still be offshoring those jobs. Even if they could pay Americans $20 per hour with minimal fringes and no Jobs Bank, they would still prefer to pay some other worker a fraction of that if they could. And at the rate that they are going, they are hoping to do just that.
Now these "imported" cars increase American employment, while the "American" companies work to offshore production. I would think that it would be obvious that a car produced in Kentucky with American parts and labor would be better for the US economy as a whole than one produced in Mexico with Mexican labor, but I guess not everyone has picked up on this.
Absolutely right, who is disagreeing with that? However few GM cars are made in Mexico. And many more are imported by the transplants from overseas. But I guess not everyone has picked up on this.
Well I agree with you 100%. Great Post. I will buy a Japanese American Made car for sure if this trend keeps happening. The bean counters in all area's of our economy are out of control. I'm not sure if the bleeding will ever stop ? Do you think it will ?
one of my fundamental points here is that the Big 2.5 would offshoring no matter what.
I will disagree on that. IF the domestics were profitable and did not have the competition they would still be producing here in the US. The competition is forcing them to find ways of saving money. Offshore is one way they can do that.
I'd like to agree with you on that....I however am very skeptical if they would pal. I'm glad you have more of a vote of confidence in them (management) than me.
Why would they bother to import if they were making lots of money? That is the way it was until the imports started rolling in. I do not know one purchasing agent who wants to buy from overseas (well unless it was in hawaii or Paris!). It is way too much of a hassle. You got all the government rules and taxes and shipping and language barriers. GM would never have gone there if they did not feel they had to.
In the 80's GM started to import aluminum wheels but only because the capacity here in the states was too low for the sudden demand for fancy wheels(environmental rules here did not help).
Why would they bother to import if they were making lots of money?
Because the management wants to improve profitability all the time (now you could blame this on the stock option game, but it is a fact).
I work in the software industry, and US dominates this industry, with hugely profitable companies (at least compared to their counterparts abroad). Yet US leads the trend in outsourcing (which is the equivalent of "importing" in our industry - You are importing productivity), and the reason is that it is in the interests of the managers.
So I am afraid it has nothing to do with profitability.....
Why would they bother to import if they were making lots of money?
Because they would be earning even more money. That's how business works, particularly for a public company whose stock value is generally based upon a multiplier of earnings. Yes, if they have very high profits, they can afford to be somewhat inefficient, but on the whole, they are going to still attempt to maximize profits if they know what they are doing.
The fact is that the world is fundamentally changing because offshoring is much easier than it once was:
--Developing countries have completely shifted gears -- once upon a time, they erected significant trade barriers and discouraged foreign investment, but now, they are eliminating barriers and begging companies to build facilities, cutting taxes and creating incentive packages for foreign companies to create jobs in their markets. (For example, there is a tax amnesty in India on call centers until 2008 or so, in order to encourage call centers to be built there.) These countries are hungry for domestic employment from whoever can provide it.
--Technology has also fundamentally changed the game. Even 10-15 years ago, running a foreign operation was very difficult, because phone lines were poor and sharing data was slow and cumbersome. Now, with integrated IT, new reliable phone networks, webconferencing that actually works, etc., communications are much easier and allow people to run distant facilities with greater controls.
--The workforces abroad are increasingly educated. For example, India now has some of the best science and technology education in the world, and are creating a class of well-educated managers (some with US MBA's) to bring professional practices that can be used to operate these facilities.
--Capital is easier to move than it once was. Not long ago, converting large amounts of rupees, yuan, etc. to dollars would have been difficult, but with modern technology, large quantities of funds can be moved from place to place very efficiently.
So the game is totally different than it once was, and the automakers are going to take advantage of this, just as do many other large American employers. I seriously doubt that Dell's US call centers were unionized before it moved the majority of that work to India, or that its manufacturing plants were unionized before it shipped those jobs to China. I do know for certain that it was already highly profitable, it just wanted to create even more profits when the opportunity became available.
True, but a car is different than a mother board. While the mother board is complicated it is pretty much a set piece that fits into a slot and has a couple cables coming out of it and a few more boards plugged into it.
A car is very complicated. It is not easy to make sure the imported control arm fits into the imported welded up frame. No one want to have all the hassles I mentioned before. No doubt in this world market GM would be importing parts but they would not be "forcing" the supplier base to move overseas as fast as they can unless they had to. In fact they did not start this latest push to go overseas until their bottom line fell out.
Well I will tell you why in my opinion. Today we have college buisness McGrads that get there degree and want to make a name. They also want to make a million dollars, and in order to do that they got to levy up enough cuts in cost to justify there worth. This is where the terminology of American Greed by CEO's started. I agree the trend of off-shoring became a popular way to cut costs in the 80's. Neutron Jack of GE was one of the biggest off-shorers ever. I guess he needed a way to justify his 500 million dollar pension he gets still to this day from GE. He turned out the lights on many employees in this country which costed many of my family members jobs. My Mother, My Aunt, My Uncle, My Grandmother, in Holland, Mi. Then it continued on and when NAFTA became law we really started to see the exportation of America. Bose for instance who demands a premium for their electronics started off-shoring a yr or so ago. Bose really doesn't have many big competitors, but there greed finally got the best of them and they off-shored. When I worked at Perrigo, we virtually had no competitors either. Guess what ? We opened Perrigo deMexico and a good portion went south of the border. Greed has driven many to make decisions that our fore fathers would be ashamed of. Sam Walton I'm sure has spinned more than once in his grave at the buisness decisions his greedy kids have made. :sick:
It's ashame we live in such times. I've lost pretty much all hope that we can turn this around. American Car Manufactors have lost many customers. Many won't even look at an American Made Car, because of service or product failures.
A car is very complicated. It is not easy to make sure the imported control arm fits into the imported welded up frame. No one want to have all the hassles I mentioned before.
They apparently don't mind the hassles, because they are already doing it.
It's not just the automakers who are building plants in Mexico, the larger suppliers are also building facilities in Mexico in order to be close to their customers and to take advantage of the same low labor costs. That's why Ford can build a car in Mexico with only 30% US-Canadian content -- the suppliers have already relocated there to sell their parts to FoMoCo. At this point, the trend is unstoppable.
Comments
I have yet to find anything in any federal or state law - let alone the United States Constitution - that gives GM, Ford, Chrysler and the UAW the "right" to assemble all vehicles built in the United States.
In the 1950s, GM and Ford "took away" lots of jobs from workers at Studebaker, Packard, Kaiser-Frazer and Hudson. They did this because their vehicles better met the needs, wants and desires of the buying public. Now, 50 years later, the same thing is happening to GM and Ford. Vehicles built here in the United States, with high domestic content, are stealing sales from the Big Two.
The transplants are providing jobs with good pay and decent benefits. The gross pay almost matches the UAW rate (adjusted takehome pay probably DOES match it, accounting for the lower cost of living in southern states and no need to pay union dues). Benefits are not as rich as those negotiated by the UAW, but the benefits paid by the transplants more closely approximate what most white-collar people are getting in the real world, and are still superior to most other blue-collar jobs.
The auto industry is dynamic and ever-changing. Trying to freeze time at 1965 is pointless and counterproductive. The great majority of new vehicle buyers are quite happy with the expanded choice and improved vehicle quality brought about by increased competition. When GM had 50 percent of the market (and Ford and Chrysler pretty much controlled another 40 percent), we were treated to vehicles with increasingly worse build quality, performance and reliability.
If you like your Buick, you should be thanking Toyota and Honda, because it wouldn't be half as good as it is if GM and the UAW hadn't felt those companies breathing down their necks.
(You now have a legacy cost) Now that the credit card bill has ballooned, you start to panic. You owe more than you can afford due to your irresponsibility. The only option left is to start charging more for your product/service. However your compeitor can undercut you because he does "pay as he goes".
This is exactly what GM did with their legacy costs. They didn't "pay as you go" and perhaps learned that from our current government administration. :surprise: I hope they aren't still teaching economics 101 at Yale.
As far as healthcare goes at GM/Delphi. They are either "A" getting ripped off or "B" paying that much and somebody's getting a kick back. My insurance a month cost's my employer approx. $1400 a month and I pay $121 of it. GM due to their sheer size should beable to get it cheaper than my employer, especially being the biggest buyer of it. These $130,000 a yr. costs per employee I don't buy for a second. Work the figures.
I do laugh about the figures, because many of you actually believe em'. Whatever is the highest figure that comes out of the media get's everyone in an uproar. :confuse:
Just today their was an article about the "buy out" package that was supposably being offered to GM workers. Read it and you will notice their was no truth about it and Ron Getterfinger said it was made up by the media after Ford annouced a "buy out" for it's hourly workers.
What I'm saying not to just you 62vetteefp, but everyone else....becareful of what you believe from the media. The figures get juggled around more than a clown at a circus. The higher the figure the media and GM makes it, the more sympathy and "cry fowl" they will get from the public. Ridiculous figures like these have destroyed unions over the years because people believe them. For instance back 15 years ago a good friend of mines parents believed my dad made $45 dollars and hour. 5 or so years later the number reported in the Grand Rapids was $60 dollars an hour. I asked him both times do we look that rich ???? he said no. I said well my dad makes around $19 an hour. He said oh, I figured that report was far from the truth. I said you make more than him being Presidnt of the School board Randy at $60,000 a yr. Dad made a little over $40,000. He said oh.
Rocky
>In the 1950s, GM and Ford "took away" lots of jobs from workers at Studebaker, Packard, Kaiser-Frazer and Hudson
>Trying to freeze time at 1965 is pointless and counterproductive.
>If you like your Buick, should be thanking Toyota and Honda, because it wouldn't be half as good as it is if GM and the UAW
I'm not sure why you're pontificating on each of these as they weren't in the original post. I commented about the tone of the advertisement which was very self-righteous on the part of Toyo. However they didn't even tailor each advertisement to the targeted area; they had an addon at the end to thank the kind folks of (Greater) Cincinnati area for buying their vehicles. They have some kind of office in Northern Cincy and some kind of major management office in Erlanger (KY) -- they seemed to want their management in urban areas but their manufacturing is 80 miles south in Georgetown, KY.
Maybe they haven't run the advertisement in Philly area.
BTW my Buicks have been very good to me with a minimum of maintenance costs. Check with Lemko about his 88 Buick.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
BTW- I do agree the transplants do have it just as good because of the cost of living in the south.
If you like your Buick, you should be thanking Toyota and Honda, because it wouldn't be half as good as it is if GM and the UAW hadn't felt those companies breathing down their necks.
I can agree with that too.
Rocky
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Rocky
True. We were getting hammered by GM and Ford for a long time to decrease prices and take on a higher burden of warranty costs (especially from Ford). Luckily we were able to expand into other areas and gain more non-GM & -Ford business. We're now at the point where there product share is a smaller part of the business, like in the 10 - 15% range. If we would have stayed in the "GM & Ford's our bread & butter" mode we surely would've filed for or been close to filing BK.
Do you think your BIL's plant may supply the "domestics" as well or just the transplants?
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060310/AUTO02/603100377/1148- /AUTO01
Rocky
Rocky
With the employee buyout frenzy going on have any of your relatives been offered packages? And, without getting into specifics like $$, are they really as good as the companies saw they are?
Pal, the buy-outs are all false at this momment and the $25K-$50K offers were B.S. made up in the media.
Dad says it's all B.S. but he heard that the UAW is trying to work a deal to get workers out of the Job Banks, and get the elgible ones to retire. Their is a scare of shortages in the skill trades if to many take a package.
But no FINAL figures yet pal have been offered.
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
P.S. So it's a 04' or 05 ?
New employer employed him, tested him for few days for certifications, and trained him for the job. Then workmen's comp doctor said he couldn't work. They continued to pay him, insurance, etc. Person who employed him was moved to another zone, and then seems to have been separated from company. From November to Feb he's employed. Company wrote doctor demanding he be allowed to work. Then the company decided he had to be part time only with two menial workers. Then company decided he was terminated but started trying to say he was terminated in November (with no written notice) rather than early February. He didn't accept being forced to resign. He lives next door to a newly trained attorney (a second career so he's not a neophyte).
The State has been totally unsupportive of any rights to either notice or how workman's comp is handled. Doctor's said they were doing shoulder surgery then backed off with more tests. That was about when company decided he had been moved to temp only and should resign.
The only thing company hasn't asked for is return of pay from November before doctors put him off on workman's comp. This is a national company.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Rocky
Rocky
Sen. John Edwards is already out their winning Support from working folks of all stripes, and he will slam the trade laws back 50 years ago.
Rocky
Rocky
Rocky
Because by saying that the transplants "took away" jobs from the Big Three - as opposed to earning them by providing products that Americans want - you are implying that the workers had some sort of right to these jobs, which, of course, is not true. You are also implying that things should stay as they were during the Big Three's heyday - which was about 1965.
As for the Toyota ads being "self righteous" - a company promoting itself. How shocking. Imagine that...
imidazol97: BTW my Buicks have been very good to me with a minimum of maintenance costs. Check with Lemko about his 88 Buick.
That's nice, but for many years your experiences were the exception, not the norm. Fortunately, GM and the UAW shaped up and now Buicks - and the rest of GM vechicles - are much better. But they didn't make these improvements out of the goodness of their hearts.
Good point....The UAW wanted to make the best, but mangement didn't allow it. I will say this....Rick Wagoner is 10x the CEO that Jack Smith was....I sometimes put it all on Rick, but really it's not all him. I however don't agree with him offshoring buisness, but he's better than Bill Ford or Dieter Zietsche :mad:
Rocky
Rocky
BTW- You got a pretty G/F
If the only way that the Big 2.5 can compete is to have no competition except for themselves, then they deserve to die.
The only reason that Big 2.5 quality has improved has been because there has been a quality gap to fill, a gap created by superior imports. If there had been no imports with which to compete, we would have not had better quality products available to us that would have forced the American companies to change their practices. We'd simply be driving Buicks that would be much worse than they are today, with little to no clue about how bad we had it.
Now these "imported" cars increase American employment, while the "American" companies work to offshore production. I would think that it would be obvious that a car produced in Kentucky with American parts and labor would be better for the US economy as a whole than one produced in Mexico with Mexican labor, but I guess not everyone has picked up on this.
Rocky
I agree
Now these "imported" cars increase American employment, while the "American" companies work to offshore production. I would think that it would be obvious that a car produced in Kentucky with American parts and labor would be better for the US economy as a whole than one produced in Mexico with Mexican labor, but I guess not everyone has picked up on this.
I agree with that. However the net result of the transplants being good, unfortunatly have resulted in the Big 3 off-shoring to compete. Well that's what they say. :sick:
Either way employee Joe Six-Pack loses.
Rocky
But there are buy outs coming for GM hourly. Most likely buyouts for Delphi and GM. Then IF there are openings at GM Delphi employees with GM time will be able to move over to GM as GM employees.
Rocky
Rocky, one of my fundamental points here is that the Big 2.5 would offshoring no matter what. Blaming the unions, the Japanese, the exchange rate, the consumer, the weather, the Red Sox -- it's all a cop-out meant to hide their true motivations.
It wouldn't matter if there wasn't a single car being imported or if there was no union -- they would still be building plants in Mexico and elsewhere. These companies are run by beancounters, who want to lower costs whereever they can, whenever they can. They beat up their suppliers (unlike the transplants, who create cooperative relationships with them), they beat up their workers (which is why there is a UAW in the first place) and on and on.
Let's face it: Mexican wages are lower across the board, which is why it is appealing to industrial companies of all types. Last I checked, autoworkers in Mexico were getting paid about US$12 per day -- not per hour, but per day. If you have an accountant's mentality, then you are going to do cartwheels when you figure out how you can lower your wage costs by 90% simply by building a factory somewhere else.
The unions might create another justification, but you can bet that they would still be offshoring those jobs. Even if they could pay Americans $20 per hour with minimal fringes and no Jobs Bank, they would still prefer to pay some other worker a fraction of that if they could. And at the rate that they are going, they are hoping to do just that.
Absolutely right, who is disagreeing with that? However few GM cars are made in Mexico. And many more are imported by the transplants from overseas. But I guess not everyone has picked up on this.
Rocky
I will disagree on that. IF the domestics were profitable and did not have the competition they would still be producing here in the US. The competition is forcing them to find ways of saving money. Offshore is one way they can do that.
Rocky
In the 80's GM started to import aluminum wheels but only because the capacity here in the states was too low for the sudden demand for fancy wheels(environmental rules here did not help).
Because the management wants to improve profitability all the time (now you could blame this on the stock option game, but it is a fact).
I work in the software industry, and US dominates this industry, with hugely profitable companies (at least compared to their counterparts abroad). Yet US leads the trend in outsourcing (which is the equivalent of "importing" in our industry - You are importing productivity), and the reason is that it is in the interests of the managers.
So I am afraid it has nothing to do with profitability.....
Because they would be earning even more money. That's how business works, particularly for a public company whose stock value is generally based upon a multiplier of earnings. Yes, if they have very high profits, they can afford to be somewhat inefficient, but on the whole, they are going to still attempt to maximize profits if they know what they are doing.
The fact is that the world is fundamentally changing because offshoring is much easier than it once was:
--Developing countries have completely shifted gears -- once upon a time, they erected significant trade barriers and discouraged foreign investment, but now, they are eliminating barriers and begging companies to build facilities, cutting taxes and creating incentive packages for foreign companies to create jobs in their markets. (For example, there is a tax amnesty in India on call centers until 2008 or so, in order to encourage call centers to be built there.) These countries are hungry for domestic employment from whoever can provide it.
--Technology has also fundamentally changed the game. Even 10-15 years ago, running a foreign operation was very difficult, because phone lines were poor and sharing data was slow and cumbersome. Now, with integrated IT, new reliable phone networks, webconferencing that actually works, etc., communications are much easier and allow people to run distant facilities with greater controls.
--The workforces abroad are increasingly educated. For example, India now has some of the best science and technology education in the world, and are creating a class of well-educated managers (some with US MBA's) to bring professional practices that can be used to operate these facilities.
--Capital is easier to move than it once was. Not long ago, converting large amounts of rupees, yuan, etc. to dollars would have been difficult, but with modern technology, large quantities of funds can be moved from place to place very efficiently.
So the game is totally different than it once was, and the automakers are going to take advantage of this, just as do many other large American employers. I seriously doubt that Dell's US call centers were unionized before it moved the majority of that work to India, or that its manufacturing plants were unionized before it shipped those jobs to China. I do know for certain that it was already highly profitable, it just wanted to create even more profits when the opportunity became available.
A car is very complicated. It is not easy to make sure the imported control arm fits into the imported welded up frame. No one want to have all the hassles I mentioned before. No doubt in this world market GM would be importing parts but they would not be "forcing" the supplier base to move overseas as fast as they can unless they had to. In fact they did not start this latest push to go overseas until their bottom line fell out.
It's ashame we live in such times. I've lost pretty much all hope that we can turn this around. American Car Manufactors have lost many customers. Many won't even look at an American Made Car, because of service or product failures.
Rocky
They apparently don't mind the hassles, because they are already doing it.
It's not just the automakers who are building plants in Mexico, the larger suppliers are also building facilities in Mexico in order to be close to their customers and to take advantage of the same low labor costs. That's why Ford can build a car in Mexico with only 30% US-Canadian content -- the suppliers have already relocated there to sell their parts to FoMoCo. At this point, the trend is unstoppable.