ChasingBlueSky 0 #101 November 18, 2008 Quote Again - if you think unions had no part, you are not facing reality. Funny, as soon as I saw this thread I said outloud the following: The conservatives will be talking about class envy or union issues. Why? That's all Hannity, Rush and O'Reilly have been talking about the last week or so. In fact, most of Rush's show yesterday was about the evils of unions and how they are the reason of failure for the auto industry. It's funny seeing people spout off the talking points. Hey, here are some facts about the Detroit Union: As of 2006 there is no more pension for new hires. As of 2006 they earn significantly less. There is no more $40/hour entry level pay and it's more around $15/hour and they will be lucky to be up to $25/hour by retirement if they keep their jobs that long. But, I love how 30 years of mismanagement and refusing to retool and put out better cars in the 70s, 80s, and 90s is the union's fault. I love how the mismanagement not to go to better fuel mileage cars is the union's fault. I love how spending billions in sendoffs to failed C-levels is the union's fault. Interesting that Toyota and Honda both use Unions workers in the USA and don't have the same problems. Here is an idea: Have OPEC and the other oil companies bailout Detroit. They have been in bed with them and made business choices due to their influences, so why shouldn't they? But you know what? If Obama doesn't push for money to go to Detroit and the entire US auto industry fails and nearly 5% of the current workforce is unemployed and another 3-5% of retired workers lose their pensions.....do you think they will blame Obama for this or the Unions or maybe where the blame should go (hint:Detroit management). BTW, I love how GM claims they were trying to change and show the Cobalt as their example. Bravo! I can see how they expect a four year rotation of cars to mend 30 years of mismanagement. Idiots. All of them. And now we get to bail them out and we will never see our money returned to us._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #102 November 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteHow many people out here can say at least 75% of what they own(other than their house) was purchased or made by an American company? There have been a lot of websites that promoted that. Their problem was finding those products. Who builds stereos? Electronics ? Clothing? Nobody in the US. Your bank? Bank of America? Information processing is done overseas. Most major multinationals do that. Even the US govt sends software contracts overseas. Rather like a variant on the Prisoners' Dilemma, isn't it?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #103 November 18, 2008 QuoteQuoteHow many people out here can say at least 75% of what they own(other than their house) was purchased or made by an American company? There have been a lot of websites that promoted that. Their problem was finding those products. Who builds stereos? Electronics ? Clothing? Nobody in the US. Your bank? Bank of America? Information processing is done overseas. Most major multinationals do that. Even the US govt sends software contracts overseas. but that doesn't mean we can't try to at least buy from american conpanies when possible, even if the product is made elsewere the profits stay here in the US Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #104 November 18, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Not that alone. It's the unions pushing labor costs so goddamned high as well. UAW didn't wisen up to the fact that corporations exist to make a profit and not to give people jobs until just a few years ago. Far too late. MAJOR contributor to the current problems at auto makers in the US. MANAGEMENT is responsible for managing its workforce along with all other aspects of the corporation. Is it difficult - sure, that's why CEOs are paid $(tens of) millions in salaries, perks and bonuses. Blaming the unions is a standard cop-out. Hogwash. The unions knew they had the automakers by the short hairs because the short-term costs of relocating would have killed them. blah blah blah BS! If management painted itself into a corner, that is management's fault. The mission of the union is NOT to manage the company.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #105 November 19, 2008 QuoteThere is no more $40/hour entry level pay Just "wow". My nephew didn't start as an attorney at $40. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #106 November 19, 2008 QuoteQuoteThere is no more $40/hour entry level pay Just "wow". My nephew didn't start as an attorney at $40. Times change. In 1999 if you could spell SQL DBA you could charge nearly $55/hour. After 9 months of training at the same time I found a job with IBM just shy of six figures. That same job now pays $28.50. Salaries are all over the board and I can tell you this due to the amount of resumes and people I go through on any given workday. None of this has a wow factor to it at all. I have people with 5 years of experience from one company coming to me on a daily basis thinking they deserve $100k jobs. Meanwhile, consultants with 20 years experience with more depth and more current technology come in at real prices. Salaries, like job titles, are arbitrary things._________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #107 November 19, 2008 Detroit is pretty smart on this whole problem. Let's look at their analysis from a report the provided to congress: Quote Current crisis not related to fuel prices: Current problem is not that consumers are demanding different, more fuel-efficient vehicles than those that are being produced by the companies. The problem is that consumers are not buying vehicles at all. And, with the recent drop in gas prices, analysts are questioning whether there will be a shift backward in the product mix demanded by consumers. So, ya. Despite everyone claiming oil prices will go up again by next summer, they feel we will keep buying SUV's as every day cars. I guess this means we will see the H4 soon??_________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChasingBlueSky 0 #108 November 19, 2008 Clearly this must be Obama's fault or the union's: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/WallStreet/story?id=6285739&page=1 QuoteAll three CEOs - Rick Wagoner of GM, Alan Mulally of Ford, and Robert Nardelli of Chrysler - exercised their perks Tuesday by flying in corporate jets to DC. Wagoner flew in GM's $36 million luxury aircraft to tell members of Congress that the company is burning through cash, asking for $10-12 billion for GM alone. QuoteWhile Wagoner testified, his G4 private jet was parked at Dulles airport. It is just one of a fleet of luxury jets owned by GM that continues to ferry executives around the world despite the company's dire financial straits QuoteMulally made his case Tuesday before the committee saying he's cut expenses, laid-off workers and closed 17 plants. "We have also reduced our work force by 51,000 employees in the past three years," Mulally said. Yet Ford continues to operate a fleet of eight private jets for its executives. Just Tuesday, one jet was taking Ford brass to Los Angeles, another on a trip to Nebraska, and of course Mulally needed to fly to Washington to testify. He did not address questions following the hearing. QuoteGM and Ford say that it is a corporate decision to have their CEOs fly on private jets and that is non-negotiable, even as the companies say they are running out of cash. QuoteAIG, despite the $150 billion bailout, still operates a fleet of corporate jets. The company says it has put two out of its seven jets up for sale and is reviewing the use of others. Though there are no such plans by GM or Ford. _________________________________________ you can burn the land and boil the sea, but you can't take the sky from me.... I WILL fly again..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #109 November 19, 2008 QuoteClearly this must be Obama's fault or the union's: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/WallStreet/story?id=6285739&page=1 QuoteAll three CEOs - Rick Wagoner of GM, Alan Mulally of Ford, and Robert Nardelli of Chrysler - exercised their perks Tuesday by flying in corporate jets to DC. Wagoner flew in GM's $36 million luxury aircraft to tell members of Congress that the company is burning through cash, asking for $10-12 billion for GM alone. Don't be hard on them. Wagoner only makes a bit over $7,000 an HOUR, unlike those overpaid UAW folks who, according to Vinny, are managing the corporation.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #110 November 20, 2008 QuoteUAW says "No more concessions" Quote"We're here not because of what the auto industry has done," he said. "We're here because of what has happened to the economy." "It's not our fault". Sounds like their pretty committed to change... jim The UAW has made concessions in the past year to cut wages and takeover responsibility for providing healthcare. This will bring GM's cost per worker down from $75/hr to $45/hr.(about the same as Toyota) It will take to 2010 to make the changes and implement the new system. GM needs the bailout to make it to this point in time....hopefully the economy will be rebounding by then. Now...if the main argument against GM is that it's labor costs are too high to survive even with the bailout, doesn't this satisfy that argument?Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tonyhays 86 #111 November 20, 2008 QuoteNow...if the main argument against GM is that it's labor costs are too high to survive even with the bailout, doesn't this satisfy that argument? I think there are two arguments here...labors costs (whether it be management or UAW fault, doesn't matter) and their product, which at the time can't compete in MPG with Toyota & Honda when gas prices have been so high this year. I can't remember which Big 3 company's commercial it was (I think Chrysler) that bragged about it's minivan MPG at 23. 23??? HAHAHAHA, that's fucking pathetic. If the Big 3 wants to pay their workers wages that don't reflect their skill level, good for them. Make as much money as you can. My argument against a bailout is they can't compete with the more efficient "foreign" cars. Perhaps mgmt should have pulled their collective heads out of their asses and seen this coming.“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #112 November 20, 2008 Or perhaps they could use the $$ to buy a ticket to KallendWorld where cost of manpower doesn't factor into the cash flow statement! Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #113 November 20, 2008 Quote Or perhaps they could use the $$ to buy a ticket to KallendWorld where cost of manpower doesn't factor into the cash flow statement! Management's responsibility includes negotiating with employees over compensation rates. It is NOT the job of the rank-and-file employees (or their representatives) to manage the corporation. The CEO (making $7,000+ per hour) and his staff have that job.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #114 November 20, 2008 Quote Quote UAW says "No more concessions" Quote "We're here not because of what the auto industry has done," he said. "We're here because of what has happened to the economy." "It's not our fault". Sounds like their pretty committed to change... jim The UAW has made concessions in the past year to cut wages and takeover responsibility for providing healthcare. This will bring GM's cost per worker down from $75/hr to $45/hr.(about the same as Toyota) It will take to 2010 to make the changes and implement the new system. GM needs the bailout to make it to this point in time....hopefully the economy will be rebounding by then. Now...if the main argument against GM is that it's labor costs are too high to survive even with the bailout, doesn't this satisfy that argument? GM has approximately 12,000 workers that are in the "job bank". These guys punch-in and do.....N O T H I N G. At an average compensation of say, $30/hr before benefits, that equates to $750M per year...again without paying for the lights, materials, parts, or employees that actually build cars. GM and the UAW can need and want and testify to their heart's content, the plain fact is both sides must real measures N O W to save the company. GM itself is burning through $1.5-2B per month. If they get a portion of the $25B, what will it do? Right now, nothing more than perpetuate the misery. The unpopular message is this: the stigma of Chapter 11 bankruptcy is more stable and predictable than relying on the government. It would hurt the brand image in the near term, but it would fade (look at the airlines, each of whom have filed, recovered, etc). If the government hands over the check-book, we may as well mark a spot for the line to start......because every other @ssh*le that can't run a business in good times and bad is going to have their hand out.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 806 #115 November 20, 2008 The Honda Odessy at 25 mpg is SOOOOO much better? Perhaps the Toyota Sienna at 23??? This ain't about mpg, the Nips are no better for a lot of their vehicles. Mainly the ones made for American tastes. As long as we Americans want BIG cars, we'll get low mpg. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 34 #116 November 20, 2008 Not responding to anybody here but I just read in the paper how the big three's CEOs all flew to Washington DC in their private company jets, and the congressmen interviewing them had a bit of fun over that excess at the worst possible time. Said something was funny about these millionaires stepping out of company jets with tin cans in their hands. Even asked them if they were willing to work for $1 a year. They all responded demurredly "I'm okay where I am". They could have shared one company jet, or flew first class in commercial. Come on, there are 24 daily flights from Detroit to DC. They want a $50 billion bailout? Fuck off. "Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
n23x 0 #117 November 20, 2008 Quote Come on, there are 24 daily flights from Detroit to DC. Have you BEEN in the detroit airport?!!?! They set trashcans on fire to heat that dump! Quote They want a $50 billion bailout? Fuck off. Agreed. .jim"Don't touch my fucking Easter eggs, I'll be back monday." ~JTFC Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tonyhays 86 #118 November 20, 2008 Nips??? Quote As long as we Americans want BIG cars, we'll get low mpg. And apparently we don't anymore, since SUV/Hummer/etc plants are being shut down. People are not buying their product anymore. Why the fuck should taxpayer money be shelled out to a company with a business plan that is failing?“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LOSTandCRAZY 0 #119 November 20, 2008 I don't want a BIG car. I want a BIG airplane, one that can hold 50 jumpers, and still get them to altitude and back to the tarmac for 1 gallon per head. That's what I want. Is there still a Santa Clause???"Get these balls!" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 806 #120 November 21, 2008 I've never supported the bailout, never even suggested it for that matter. I didn't support the first one either. I see no difference between the banks and the car makers. The both had bad business plans that caused them their own financial ruin. I'm just saying the Jap cars typically do not have better gas mileage. When we compare similar products. In fact many of their similar products get worse gas mileage than the American model. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tonyhays 86 #121 November 21, 2008 I don't support any kind of a bailout either. Let them fail and let capitalism run its course.“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Coreece 190 #122 November 21, 2008 QuoteI don't support any kind of a bailout either. Let them fail and let capitalism run its course. I think someone is playing a trick on us...and it ain't GM.Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #123 November 24, 2008 The Big Three....oops, can't call them that anymore....the Domestic Three failed because of the American mindset. The mi8ndset often seen on these boards as well. The: We are American and we are the best in the world and we know everything better mindset. I mean,they took Hummers and Escalades to the Paris auto show. They are so far out of touch with what is happening in the real world, that any form of bail out could not help them. I don't support giving them money, but if money is given it should come with the condition that all senior management gets fired. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #124 November 24, 2008 QuoteNot at all, sir John. You really should read a bit more carefully. I blame management for their decisions. I blame unions for driving up labor costs and putting management into a hole with regards to managing its workforce. Management at all times had the option of not agreeing to the demands from the union and force a strike. They could have kept the workforce locked out until they agreed to lower wages and benefits. The appetite for that was never present with management, since they wanted to protect market share and never had the foresight to see what would happen in the long run. Plus in the short run it would have seriously impacted their performance bonusses.... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #125 November 25, 2008 Thank you for making my point. Management's only option was to harm the corporation and incur the wrath of the shareholders (their true bosses)...other than acquiesce to absurd union demands for salary, benefits, and job banks. You see, sir John et al - Unions forced management's hand...and directly contributed to the demise of these companies. Chapter 11 awaits! Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
