Is General Motors going bankrupt?

Everyone is guilty at every level. In fact, much of what we complain about in the behavior of our leaders, more financially successful persons, etc. is exactly the same behavior we exhibit in our own daily lives. In our system of government we can not claim the King is solely evil because we are the King. In our economic system we can not claim the supplier is solely evil because we create the demand.

 

I didn't say it was exclusively the fault of the unions... but unions and the union culture/mentality have very, very often been a critical factor.

Unions do three things that hurt a company's competitiveness. Hopefully this will boil the proof down to something we can manage and grasp. They drive wages up, they inhibit flexibility/modernization, and they discourage high performers from "breaking the curve" (ie. people who work too fast are told to slow down so standards don't go up).

That's in part because he has the flexibility to go to his employees and say "I need higher production and better quality but I can't give you a raise..." without facing a strike or protest or demand that higher production and better quality will only be agreed to for higher pay.

And one has to wonder about your grip on reality if you think unions don't have a major impact on how a company is run... from design to shipment.

Tim, Just look at the reality of things. Union dominated, heavy manufacturing businesses are failing to compete with foreign companies.

If you want to keep running a public company, you can't avoid paying your investors. Do you think it would have been a good thing for union workers to see a sell off of your company's stock out of line with the overall market?

Yes. But because a non-union company has more flexibility and less cost burden, they are in a much better position to answer the competition and survive.

The pension plans were too generous to be sustained in a cost effective manner.

Nope. Paying someone for not doing work and not holding an investment is never, ever a good thing for the economy. In some cases it is a necessary evil... but never beneficial to the economy.

If you have been paying a union to look out for you... and your company's pension plan is the reason you can't compete... your union has been asleep at the wheel. They haven't insured that the fund was properly invested, protected, and grown.

Retirement plans like pensions and social security are a drag on the economy. Retirement plans founded on capital investment and savings like IRA's and 401k's are very good for the economy. They provide a stable source of capital.

So is that an acknowledgement that when the economy doesn't allow it you shouldn't get paid great?

I am not angry. Sad, but not angry. The UAW and poor management appear to be sinking GM.

You say that "greed" is the problem... but why haven't you applied that to yourself and your union? Why should you be paid more than if your salary was determined by the market? Why should you get full paid benefits funded by our having to pay for your over priced product? (And no, it is not determined by market forces, Japanese vehicles could sell for less if it weren't for import tariffs- Big Gov't, Big Labor, and Big Business conspiring to rip off the avg Joe) Why should you get early retirement options? Why should you get special protection from being fired if you don't do your job or violate the rules? Why should you be able to demand that companies double pay to manage you?

The insistence of unions that their workers receive artificially high compensation while opposing mfg efficiency improvements have been a big part of the problem along with poor workmanship. Now, those of us who have had our pockets picked by an increase in car prices that has far exceeded the inflation rate... will be expected to bail you out.

 

People in some other countries are willing to work for less - far less pay and with virtually no benefits - and they, through their governments, are also not imposing the same restrictions on their industrial facilities that we do here.

Until their average level of wealth rises followed by the demand for more pay, more benefits, better working conditions, etc. and the imposition of similar restrictions on industrial facilities we'll have very stiff competition.

We could eliminate corporate taxes so that American companies head quartered here could enjoy the same rates as those located abroad and get rid of the burden of making decisions based upon taxation verses goods and services. Some people just don't understand that in the end the consumers pays all corporate taxes plus handling by an army of accountants and lawyers. Companies set up shop where they can get the most favorable treatment.

We could limit liability to reasonable levels so American businesses - large and small - could take reasonable risks in the marketplace and stop wasting so much money on insurance and lawyers to "protect" against ridiculous claims. We need accountability for true negligence but we must be willing to accept risk individually and collectively. Working and playing are both risky.

We could bring greater common sense to our huge mass of federal and state environmental regulations that prevent us for wisely maximizing the use of our own natural resources focusing on renewing, developing, etc. rather than limiting. We do want a clean country and a lot was wrong with what was being done but a lot now shifts to the other extreme. Environmental impact studies often make projects impossible to fund. Nuclear power regulations make investments in that form of energy next to impossible. We're choking ourselves to save ourselves.

We could focus on education that generates persons capable of functioning in our society. We could get it out of the hands of government and into the hands of private citizens who view education not as a right but as an opportunity to generate skills useful for work that in turn generate income. We could accept the fact that many persons are too lazy to work much less be educated. Even the early church recognize if you don't work you can't eat. We pamper our children all the way through the process falsely believing we're going to make little Einstein's out of all of them through our government schools. The government school curricula and implementation is bankrupt because it's controlled by bureaucrats far away from the consumer of the services the schools should generate.

 

What is the process for terminating an employee that makes a careless mistake that damages a critical piece of machinery at GM.

You know what it is where I work? They call the employee in, read them the policy, give them their paperwork, and take their ID. Case closed.

You know what the procedure is for working OT... a note goes up by the timeclock or the supervisor informs the employee. Our policy is to give a day's notice. My last company reserved the right to compel OT up until 1 hour before shift end... based on customer demands... and yes, customers do change their demands that quickly or you have to react to something like them agreeing to expedited shipment.

You are telling me that mgt can do whatever they want based on market pressure and the union does nothing to restrict it? They can send employees out without pay for a lack of work the day before it happens? They can increase productivity standards without having the union agree?

That sounds just terribly unfair... you should quit them right away since they compensate you so poorly and don't share the dividends from investments that you didn't contribute to with you.

I am being facetious but on the one hand you rail against greed and on the other complain that the company doesn't share things with you that you have no right to expect that it will.

It isn't your company (except for the stock you own). They have extended the privilege of employment to you... it is not a right but a privilege to work for GM.

Only the one's I have read about, seen reported, and worked around.

But does it cost them?

Yes. I had heard this. I haven't denied that GM has been poorly managed... only that unions aren't a good thing generally.

No I'm not. I don't think GM is a "victim" nor do I think the $25/hr floor sweep is a "victim"... except of their own greed, short-sightedness, and poor decision making.

With all due respect Tim, you haven't proven that my assessments are wrong in the least. Your stating something isn't correct does not constitute proof.

I have worked in the south, midwest, and west. I have worked with and known people from various industries including automotive and aircraft.

A good part of the reason I very seldom listen to him any more... plus I just got tired of the blowhard style.

Non sequitur. You proved my point for me. Union demands and costs contributed to the relocation of plants from Pontiac and Flint... that led to the closure of many small businesses.

If it were simply management and engineering problems then they wouldn't have relocated production.

 

Nope. The fundamental idea of employees abusing the privilege of employment by making demands of a company operating within its "rights" or else shutting that company down is simply wrong.

You don't like GM. Go work for Ford or Honda or Chrysler or Toyota. Take you skills and hard work to them. That's the market at work... that's the market that unions disrupt.

Again, and this is very important, I could agree with the legitimacy of unions if they were not monopolies... if they had to compete to get the business of companies they wanted to serve and employees they wanted to represent.

You haven't refuted anything. You have simply "said so". Well, I am sorry. But the UAW has forced GM to pay wages and benefits that are out of line with what the market would bear if true competition were introduced.

Yes. I understand that as a manager responsible for a $30 million budget... I was paid less than those clerks and ground crew workers who are being asked to take a 40% pay cut so their company can survive.

I understand that I worked however many hours were necessary to see that my company was successful and my workers were taken care of and properly directed.... so no, I don't think the rude lady checking me in or guy who abuses my baggage deserves to have their unearned high wages protected.

ARE YOU READING YET? I haven't excused the company, union, or gov't in this deal. Your the one who wants to blame it all on management.

BTW, I have worked with Mexicans earning $6 per hour... they work longer, harder, and better than most American workers I have seen- union or not.

All three won't shut down... but market indications are that at least one of them is supply above demand.

I very sincerely doubt it. The car industry has experienced massive layoffs and relocation of jobs to those $6 per hour countries... and the non-union companies I have worked for and known have continued to increase employee compensation.

Absolutely... maybe try this in that spirit. Suggest that individual employees do more for their pay. I don't know the particulars of your environment but do you have a bunch of janitors? Why can't workers empty their own cans? Can production rates be increased by employee effort? Can employees do more work by inspecting in their dead time?

Are you saying that every UAW employee at GM does his dead level best each and every moment to drive company costs down and improve quality?

If that is the case, the UAW should buy GM and form the world's first employee owned car company.

I don't. I can take pleasure in the fact that I have worked for my opportunities... and not held an axe over the head of my employers. They pay me what they think the market will bear knowing that if I disagree... I can go prove it.

That's good advice... now if you would just tone done on the unChristlike insults.

BTW, I am a libertarian at heart. I don't believe in the workers of the world unite non-sense. At the same time, I am not particularly wild about "free trade". I think we should have reciprocal trade.

I am sorry... but it almost sounds as if GM is completely corrupted and almost needs to take a complete fall before being able to re-build.

Just basing it on the reports from a few years ago from the east coast concerning union reps that emptied the pension plan. Not a particular charge of your union or company since apparently GM manages the plan and not the UAW.

I said most... not all.

This was actually based on a survey from a few years back.

Wow... relying on the market sure goes by the way quick when inconvenient to you.

 

Oh and Tim... before you over react on something else like you did on the comment about raiding pensions... maybe you should ask me what I am talking about rather than assuming that I don't know.

You know like you said- If you don't know, ask.

 

FTR, this isn't the one I was talking about... but a good example none the less:

http://time-proxy.yaga.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,904832,00.html

 

Scott:

Unions do three things that hurt a company's competitiveness. Hopefully this will boil the proof down to something we can manage and grasp. They drive wages up, they inhibit flexibility/modernization, and they discourage high performers from "breaking the curve" (ie. people who work too fast are told to slow down so standards don't go up).

That is free market Scott. Employers give their employees raises as the cost of living goes up. See if food, heat or gas go up there is not a whole lot you can do about it. Just pay it. Now if GM makes cars that cost too much and have poor quality then the customer has the ability to shop elsewhere. Thus competition. Now if the companies doing well then they pay their employees more. Now with GM there is no Mr. GM it is a board backed by shareholders. So our government has made provision for and allowed unions to negotiate contracts. We have done quit well over the years because GM has done very well. They owned 64% or more of the world market! Now GM is not producing cars that the public wants. I really suggest you look around at the price of cars. They are not cheap from Honda or Toyota either. Its just they are building cars that people want. Now I have asked you to explain how union workers affect the design and quality of a car. Now I can see the quality somewhat but I work in the shop Scott and when you are making 62 trucks an hour then there is not much thought in your work. Just put your part on. Most people do that. It is not a problem. Quality usually goes out the window when you get a bad batch of parts and GM says put them on anyways. Or run them without. Most workers do their job and do it consciously. Yes we all have heard stories about people sitting around reading etc but as competition became greater we were made to be more productive. We are five times more productive then we were 8 years ago. Less people more production. Now we have people in Mexico that will build them for 6 dollars a day or something like that. They can live on that in Mexico but can we live on it here? SEE, can you SEE it Scott. We are expected to compete with them? The Japanese make less but live in crowed apartments. Many times with several of their family members. Should we have to live like that because they do? Let me sum it up for you one more time. It is not mostly the unions that are causing the fall of auto companies in America, it is greed (cars and trucks made in Mexico still 40,000) and poor designs (people not attracted to the product) or the product is very poor quality. Which I will and can argue that GM has some great quality cars like the G6 but not appealing to the public. Finally and lastly it is the market and not meeting the market demands. Now cars are selling just not GM’s does that tell you something?

Scott:
That's in part because he has the flexibility to go to his employees and say "I need higher production and better quality but I can't give you a raise..." without facing a strike or protest or demand that higher production and better quality will only be agreed to for higher pay.

If you listen we won’t have to argue this pt again. We have given up cost of living,. We have collected less then 6000 dollars in profit sharing compared to 48000 plus for Ford and Chrysler employees. We have given up vacation time, personal holidays that we had and just last month a dollar an hour. GM has come to us more then just this once for help and we have done it. We like our jobs too and are not in the business of putting GM out of business. Is that not logical too you!!!! We are higher in production as they cut jobs every year and up production. When is the last time you seen UAW go on strike? Been 20 years. GM HAS THIS flexibility and just practiced it. They tell us our dollar that we gave up will secure our pension fund for the next 20 years. Of course that remains to be seen.

Scott:
And one has to wonder about your grip on reality if you think unions don't have a major impact on how a company is run... from design to shipment.

And Scott I have to say I wonder about your honesty in this debate with that statement. I have told you over and over how we do not determine the design or engineer. They don’t ask us if we like them or what we even think of the cars they design WHAT PART DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND. The price of our cars and trucks right now are very completive with Honda and Toyota. Have you priced comparable size cars? GM, Ford Chrysler, Toyota and Honda. Not much price difference there. We simply are not making products that the public wants. Now if you are selling coke and Pepsi but every9one else is selling root beer and orange pop and not doing any business. While the root beer / orange pop are selling then you not only will go bankrupt but all of your employees will also loose their jobs. And is it their fault. No, unless you brought them into the decision making process to keep selling coke/Pepsi. Now that is simply reality, comprehend.

Scott:
If you want to keep running a public company, you can't avoid paying your investors. Do you think it would have been a good thing for union workers to see a sell off of your company's stock out of line with the overall market?

NO but the problem comes from overselling and cooking the books. This had been going on for the last 10 years. It catches up too you. It’s called dishonesty. Also out of the hands of union workers.

Scott:
Yes. But because a non-union company has more flexibility and less cost burden, they are in a much better position to answer the competition and survive.

And I literally can take you and show you hundreds of businesses that are gone because GM or ford are gone. Where is their flexibility? YOU NEED THE REALITY check! Come to an area that has been affected by moves of big business let them tell you where their flexibility went!!!!


Scott:
The pension plans were too generous to be sustained in a cost effective manner.

Says who Scott. CEO’s are getting millions for retirement and we get 2800 a month. This is envy again rearing its ugly head. GM made billions for shareholders off the backs of these people and you want to tell them they don’t deserve it! Our Pension plan is covered and supposedly for the nest 20 years at least. Most companies have pension plans for management so why not share the wealth with the worker?

Scott:

Nope. Paying someone for not doing work and not holding an investment is never, ever a good thing for the economy. In some cases it is a necessary evil... but never beneficial to the economy.

If you have been paying a union to look out for you... and your company's pension plan is the reason you can't compete... your union has been asleep at the wheel. They haven't insured that the fund was properly invested, protected, and grown.

Retirement plans like pensions and social security are a drag on the economy. Retirement plans founded on capital investment and savings like IRA's and 401k are very good for the economy. They provide a stable source of capital.


Bring out the stupid sign and wear it so proudly! Where are they paying people not too work? Here is another question I would like answered. I am calling you on it. And I really don’t expect you answer this one either, just like you ignored my earlier question on how UAW execs were raping the pension and benefit funds. Don’t make such inane statements if you don’t have proof or AT LEAST some reasonable argument for it.

You have no idea what we pay a union for so let’s not even get into that discussion! Retirement funds are not a drag on the economy. It is money that the public does not have pay too. These people will not be living off of the government but their pensions……..sheeesssshhh you will say anything, true or not to make you pt!

Do you realize that when the market went down that a lot of people who had their pensions in the stock market lost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Do you have any idea how crooked the stock market is becoming. Inside information where only the wealthy have the inside information while the average guy gets stuck with worthless stock. Ever heard of Environ or Kmart. Let me clue you in, it’s not going to get better. That’s reality!


Scott:
So is that an acknowledgement that when the economy doesn't allow it you shouldn't get paid great?

Yep, absolutely and if you have read my post I have made that pt that we will give back again too save jobs. And I have no doubt we will, however the union at least has the ability to make the company open the books and prove their case.GM has lied to its workers over and over again. That’s another pt. if you treat your employee’s fair you won’t need or get a union. The union has been voted against in most Toyota and Honda plants. People are happy with the treatment of the company.


Scott:

I am not angry. Sad, but not angry. The UAW and poor management appear to be sinking GM.

You say that "greed" is the problem... but why haven't you applied that to yourself and your union? Why should you be paid more than if your salary was determined by the market? Why should you get full paid benefits funded by our having to pay for your over priced product? (And no, it is not determined by market forces, Japanese vehicles could sell for less if it weren't for import tariffs- Big Gov't, Big Labor, and Big Business conspiring to rip off the avg Joe) Why should you get early retirement options? Why should you get special protection from being fired if you don't do your job or violate the rules? Why should you be able to demand that companies double pay to manage you?

The insistence of unions that their workers receive artificially high compensation while opposing mfg efficiency improvements have been a big part of the problem along with poor workmanship. Now, those of us who have had our pockets picked by an increase in car prices that has far exceeded the inflation rate... will be expected to bail you out.


Well here again you are simply wrong. You have not proved greed. Auto workers are not considered millionaires or the rich. We make 65000 a year unless working overtime. That is a fair wage I think. However it is not what I think but what the market has allowed. You see no one held a gun to your head telling you to buy GM products. So while you may not have been buying them most of the world was. We prospered by it. We spent money on boats, pools, snowmobiles and eating out. Yes we make a big difference in the economy. Maybe you prefer that we all made 5.00 an hour. I mean the rich could buy those things but then a lot of the boat makers and snowmobile makers would be out of a job because the rich are only going to buy so many. Small business would and will be crushed. I can prove that without a doubt, when big businesses close or move out.

 

cott:
What is the process for terminating an employee that makes a careless mistake that damages a critical piece of machinery at GM.
If the foreman can prove his case it is a firing. Had two people fired no questions asked for throwing an air gun and other for hammering a gas tank out of anger. Both gone.

They can tell us 9 hours anytime right up till going home time. If they want to schedule more the can make us work 10 hours or 12 but must give a days notice. This is just respect for workers. The car market does not change by minutes or days so it really does not hinder GM in any way. GM can call an emergency and work us 10 hrs and sat and sun if need be. So where are the restrictions?!!!!! You can do better then that.


Scott:

You are telling me that mgt can do whatever they want based on market pressure and the union does nothing to restrict it? They can send employees out without pay for a lack of work the day before it happens? They can increase productivity standards without having the union agree?
This statement has nothing to do with the statement you quoted me above it. You ignored my statement completely about the management being 2 and 3 times more in American companies then Japanese thus making it hard to get changes done quickly. Too many chiefs and not enough Indians.
However I will answer it. They have the right to line speed that has never been an issue. As far as being sent without pay if the market deems it nessarccy then yes they can lay off but in the car market there is usually a warning. Like GM telling us they have a 120 supply of cars and the market is slow. Yes they can increase without the union agreeing however they are to let us know in advance. Not what you want to hear but none the less true.

Scott:
That sounds just terribly unfair... you should quit them right away since they compensate you so poorly and don't share the dividends from investments that you didn't contribute to with you.
Maybe my fault. Will give you the benefit of the doubt. I have stated in earlier post that we are paid well and happy about it. The pt was that GM has not dealt honestly with its employees so it makes it harder when they come and say we need help. It becomes a battle because you have lied to us in the past. There are very few people who would complain about the pay, however you will hear complaints about being respected and not treated as a dummy.


Scott:
Only the one's I have read about, seen reported, and worked around.
Any of them UAW and if so which plant have you worked in or worked with?

Scott:
But does it cost them?
Sometimes but it usually cost us much more!

Scott:
Yes. I had heard this. I haven't denied that GM has been poorly managed... only that unions aren't a good thing generally.
In a way I can agree except if your company has a good relationship (which by the way is the first and most important factor in quality of produce goods, taught to me by GM’s own.) then you will not have to deal with unions. There are many companies including the Honda and Toyota plants in America that voted not to have a union. Here is a group of people that are paid less but happy with the way the company treats them. I would prefer not to have a union but be able to expect fair and equal treatment from my employer. Case in pt when I first started at GM I had one weeks vacation. Asked my foreman for two days off to go to a bible conference. Told me I don’t need to attend crap like that. Called my committee/person. They checked to see if anyone else wanted off, nope. Foreman just being a jerk. Got to go. Now that isn’t the norm but it does happen enough times to be glad you have a union. Now if I didn’t have a union what was I to do? Just quit my job because some foreman doesn’t like what I do with my vacation time?!!! There is no GM owner I can go too and explain what happened I would just have to live with it. And this foreman is no better. He was, as all were, instructed to let employees take their vacation time if it did not impede product or work. And let me be clear it did not.

Scott:
With all due respect Tim, you haven't proven that my assessments are wrong in the least. Your stating something isn't correct does not constitute proof.
Maybe you have but I would like names and places. It appears more that you may have heard or read but actually not experience what goes on in a union shop. So I am not going to call you a liar but from what I am hearing it is a bit one sided and the life of being in the union and of the union that I know. And I can say with much certainty that all the griping and complaining comes mostly from the flesh. A better living is a better living and if a brother has a good job then be happy for him don’t wish for his pain or demise.


Scott:
Non sequitur. You proved my point for me. Union demands and costs contributed to the relocation of plants from Pontiac and Flint... that led to the closure of many small businesses.
Scott I am not going to use the S word but for crying out loud do you really have a clue or know anything of which you talk about. I mean you don’t actually have to be here or part of GM decision making to even realize how ----- that is. They moved it because of union demands. LOL well guess where they moved them too. Other cities with the same union! Duh, yeah…..REALLY! No one cept GM knows why they moved. When they did they left a jobs bank of people who made the product. Now they moved one plant to Wisconsin. We had over a dozen plants in Pontiac that were vacant. Union says why uproot people and move them away from friends and family.GM agrees to have a jobs bank of the same amount of people that are working in the plant in Wisconsin. Now how crazy is that, willingly paying two crews to do one job?! However you assumption was way off base. Even common sense can let you see that. And of course the small businesses suffered greatly.

Scott:
Nope. The fundamental idea of employees abusing the privilege of employment by making demands of a company operating within its "rights" or else shutting that company down is simply wrong.
Well there are abuses on both sides of the fence Scott. You have yet to prove that unions are the major cause of their downfall and not themselves. If you read our national contract it says it is not the intention of the union to impede or cost GM money. We are also not there to tell them how to run the company. When I was a committee person if the foreman could show how following the contract cost or hurt GM or the quality then no grievance would be written. That very very seldom was the case. It was a foreman who had a bad day, wanted to show who was boss or just because he could.

Second statement shows that you have not been reading my post or listening to me. I love my job at GM that has nothing to do with you trying to prove that the union is the main cause of the downfall of GM. Please don’t waste my time with crap like this.

And have you stop to think what you are saying about unions competing. One union says I will demand a pay cut so that their union would get the contract. It defeats the whole purpose of workers sticking together to negotiate a fair and good living. I am not sure you understand too much at all about unions. The real competition is rather you need a union or not! Treat your workers right and they will not seek a union.

Scott:
You haven't refuted anything. You have simply "said so". Well, I am sorry. But the UAW has forced GM to pay wages and benefits that are out of line with what the market would bear if true competition were introduced.
Statement born out of total ignorance of how capitalism works. The marked did support it and it is not now thus the give back. The union did NOT have to open the contract that GM signed. They did on their own with a vote from the members! You need to know all other countries rules for imports in you want to claim fair trade. Been awhile since I have been in negotiations but Japan use to tax the crap out of our cars to over double the sticker price. Fair trade would be anyone can ship anything anywhere free with no taxes and see how many jobs are left. That is the very reason countries put import taxes on products coming into their countries./ If true competition where here you would be living in the streets.
By the way what work do you do? I would be very interested in what you do.

Scott:
Yes. I understand that as a manager responsible for a $30 million budget... I was paid less than those clerks and ground crew workers who are being asked to take a 40% pay cut so their company can survive.
BINGO we have the real reason for this whole argument. Poor Scott is not being paid what he is worth while others are getting paid more.
First off what manager is paid less then their workers? Second if you don’t like it find another job. Third do you know how unchristian like that attitude is? And lastly do you remember how much Bush gave to the airlines to keep them afloat. I believe it was in the neighborhood of 20 or maybe even 40 billion dollars. Know what is and will happen to that money. It will end up in the pockets of ceo’s. MILLIONS if not billions of dollars while employees will lose their pensions and lively hoods because of management’s greed. It would have been cheaper for Bush to just give all the workers a million to retire on. That way man y would be taken care of and not just the wealthy few. Don’t get wrong I have no problem with wealthy people just think it is immoral to earn that money off the backs of others.

So you work for the airlines or did?

Scott:
BTW, I have worked with Mexicans earning $6 per hour... they work longer, harder, and better than most American workers I have seen- union or n.t.
No doubt, it’s because they have too. They work harder then you and most Asian and Japanese work harder then you. Which lifestyle do you want to copy?

Scott:
All three won't shut down... but market indications are that at least one of them is supply above demand.
Yep can you tell me which ones? Ford and Chrysler? Yep, both union companies and making it while GM is not. Same union same contract, go figure. Another hole in your theory.

Scott:
I very sincerely doubt it. The car industry has experienced massive layoffs and relocation of jobs to those $6 per hour countries... and the non-union companies I have worked for and known have continued to increase employee compensation.
You can pull that nonsense on others but I am not buying. Most, not all companies are on standby right now. My brother is a General foreman for a rubber plant in Cleveland. Although they are very busy the overseas competition is hurting them. They cannot increase profits while 3 rd world countries enslave their people to do it for less. Although China is not a 3rd world they are one of the biggest competitors. Many companies are regrouping and trying to turn out a profit.

Scott:
Absolutely... maybe try this in that spirit. Suggest that individual employees do more for their pay. I don't know the particulars of your environment but do you have a bunch of janitors? Why can't workers empty their own cans? Can production rates be increased by employee effort? Can employees do more work by inspecting in their dead time?
Here is the problem with that. Company tells you their hurting. They lay off no salary workers, they increase the already ungodly bonus for the work they are doing as the company is going under and you want the union to tell them to go and replace workers (janitors) Work harder and longer hours so the overpaid management can get more money? Is that it?

No they are not doing their dead level best, neither is management. They would if the company would treat them with respect and honesty. Most take pride in their work however the same cannot be said for management. Too many with your attitude of worrying about how much people get paid instead of doing their job. Granted they should any ways I agree but it’s much easier to lead then push and management seems unable or willing to do that.

Scott: I don't. I can take pleasure in the fact that I have worked for my opportunities... and not held an axe over the head of my employers. They pay me what they think the market will bear knowing that if I disagree... I can go prove it.

Scott it really boils down to the fact its all about you. You think you work harder then those in the shop. You think those in the shop get paid more then you. Here, have a hanky! I think we have pretty much summed everything up now. WE also got paid what they thought the market could bare and it has. Scott life is not fair. I feel for you.


Scott:
That's good advice... now if you would just tone done on the unChristlike insults.
I can do that if you can tone down the “my opion is fact” bit. And what is reciprocal trade. I don’t know what I am any more. I voted for Bush because he was a republican but he is not any different then Clinton or Al Gore in my opinion. So I am more inclined to not vote next time. But I have always voted republican except once and he was really had republican values.

Scott:
I am sorry... but it almost sounds as if GM is completely corrupted and almost needs to take a complete fall before being able to re-build.
Might agree with this if they get new management. I tell you honestly that it does take an effort on the foreman’s part to fire a worker from GM. But he can do it but it takes time , work and effort. Most management does not have the character to follow through. A lot of the foremen are overloaded with work to the pt they can’t run the line. Mostly paperwork that is never read. You don’t know the half of it!

Scott:
Just basing it on the reports from a few years ago from the east coast concerning union reps that emptied the pension plan. Not a particular charge of your union or company since apparently GM manages the plan and not the UAW.
Whelp I would have to see those reports. How would anyone get control of pension plans or benefit funds? Aren’t pension’s funds protected by government?

Scott:
Wow... relying on the market sure goes by the way quick when inconvenient to you.
Not really. Don’t understand how you are drawing this conclusion from the fact I said the market supported it. I mean everyone had to get leaner and meaner when imports started coming/ there was a lot of fat in a lot of companies. Now we are at the pt to which you think is too much fat. If the Japanese work 12 hour days do you think we should. What if the Mexicans up it to 13? We can all work harder is that what you want.

Scott:
Oh and Tim... before you over react on something else like you did on the comment about raiding pensions... maybe you should ask me what I am talking about rather than assuming that I don't know.

Scott I would still have to see the report. How would they get hold of pension funds? I understand pretty much how our union works and can’t figure out how they could get their hands on ANY of the funds.

[ January 23, 2006, 09:20 PM: Message edited by: Timtoolman ]

 

Link is not working. Is this the report on the funds being raped?

 

I had been a member of the International Union of Operating Engineers for 14 years. If it wasn't for unions, management would runover the employees with threats and intimidation. I was the Shop Steward and was able to mediate problems with results that were fair to both sides.

I got along with management and employees.

I had worked at a hospital which the CEO of same had a salary of more than $130,000. per year, in addition the hospital purchased a brand new BMW 733I for him and it was his to keep the car was worth more than $30,000.00

My wife worked for the school district in the files and records dept. When the contract for the teachers came up and after much wrangling and crying poor mouth from the district, teachers ended up with a three percent wage increase. not long after negotiations were over the administrator of the school district got a pay raise which bumped his salary to $85,000. per year.

 

Unions and Union workers can demand an unreasonably high wage and unreal benifits from there company. Unions can demand that even poor employees not be fired. Companies like GM and Ford have been extorted and have passed on that extortion price in the price of their product.

The one thing that Unions have not been sucessfull at is making the customer buy their outragesly priced poor quality product. Why would I buy a GM product at three times the price that will last one third the miles when I can buy a Honda.

When making a major purchase like a car should I concider the best interests of auto workers over the best interest of my own family? American auto workers must become competitive or go out of buisness, their choice, I hope they become competitive. Until they do, well, I am looking at a Honda for my family this month.

 

So instead of unions demanding reasonable things to stop employees from geting run over, Unions are now runing over buisnesses with threats and intemidation.

What good will a union be when it puts the company out of buisness.

 

Everyone is entittled to their opinion DeeJay. We have not demanded prices that the market could not support. Do you say the same about Doctors, medical companies, sports figures? The market adjust itself. If we can't compete with imports then we will take cuts.
Number two, no one extorted anyone and no one forced you to buy american made cars. My friend and I have owned Bonnevilles which we put over 200,000 miles on with nothing but an oil change. We drove and then our kids drove them. One of them over 250,000. Japan and other countries havea a cost advantage. We cannot compete wage wise as all americans can't with other countries. So if we don't make quality vehicles or products that the public want then you will fail.
As a union rep at one time I can assure you that we don't demand they keep poor workers.

Don't hate people for wanting a fair wage and fair treatment on a job that has no boss.

 

It amazes me Buren that those who are so gun ho on the free market get upset that some people are doing well. where is the outrage for CEO's who m ake millions a year on top of millions more in bonus and stock options. THat all in dispite of the fact the company has done poorly under thier leadership. There is a loyality among salaried just as well. You don't fire them or lay them off just move them. GM has 3 or 4 times the management Toyota (per employee) and other Japanese companys do.
Roger smith ran the company into the ground. Lost 112 or 15% of the world market share and yet was rewarded with a retirement and bonus that dwarf all earlier retirements.
It really boils down to you got I don't.

 

Good post, I think it is being ignored. I read it though. Some good incite.

 

This is a common refrain I hear...about how much cheaper Hondas, Toyotas, etc are than GMs, Fords, etc...but as some one who has bought 4 new cars in the last three years, I've just not found that to be the case. I've bought two Fords and Two GM products in 3 yrs, and none have even had to go back for warranty work. I have a '95 Oldsmobile that I bought new that has over 260,000 miles and has never had a motor or transmission replaced. In the past I've had Toyotas and Hondas (and a Nissan)and they held up well too, but replacement parts were 2-3 times for the American made ones.

I think GMs problems are more that they are not marketing cars the general public wants, with gas prices spiking up over the last year. I think that is why you see so many SUVs in the dealership lots now.

 

Most companies do not have pension plans for management. Again, the US is bigger than Michigan. Maybe its the lack of perspective that keeps you from seeing the many fallacies you propose here.

Part of my job is industrial engineering... you know, the guys who look at jobs, break them into their fundamental elements, and evaluate the effectiveness of the job design and costs.

Wear your own stupid sign if you think that there are no inefficiencies and lack of effort at GM from UAW workers.

Each and every time a worker does not engage in value added or cost reducing work.

You live apparently in a closed little world. You act as if you have neither seen nor studied the larger picture or broader industries. I have... so when I disagree with you, you insult my intelligence... and person.

FTR, I am well educated, have 20 years of professional management experience in three different mfg industries. I have visited and studied places as diverse as USPS bulk mail distributors and German heavy parts foundaries. My IQ is about 140 and my abstract reasoning is in the top 10 percentile.

IOW's, you can now dispense with the "stupid" comments. At worst, I may be ignorant of your isolated case in some respects.

That is a very true statement... I have no idea what anyone would pay a union for... especially one that quite obviously isn't representing your interests very well at GM.

Now THAT is a stupid comment. Just because gov't doesn't collect money doesn't mean it isn't collect from the public.

Retirement plans that are capital based help the economy. Retirement funds that deplete a companies capital base hurt the economy. That is a pretty simple concept. Liberals for years argued that wealth distribution helps the economy... but when money is distributed to and spent by someone who didn't make a contribution to the economy... the net effect is negative.

Oh... so now if I disagree with you I am not only stupid but a liar as well. You need to get a grip on your ego.

Yes. I lost money... that has now been made up. It is the nature of the market... and the responsibility of free individuals to bear their own risks rather than expecting others to insulate them from risk.

Do you mean "Enron"? If so, yes. Poorly managed companies were not properly monitored by the federal agencies responsible for doing so... pretty much a snap shot of the Clinton years.

You are making an excellent case against bailing GM out.

And, coming from the south, many people trust the unions less than the companies... and still have a spirit of independence and personal responsibility about them.

Unions aren't popular where I come from since people are wisely suspicious of people who want us to surrender our personal rights.

This is higher than the average manager's salary in the print industry. It is simply too much for the work that is being done. The responsibility and skill level of a line worker in your plant is simply not greater than someone who is responsible for managing quality, machinery, 50-200 people, HR, environmental law, business law, etc, etc, etc. Sorry. It just ain't.

The market hasn't allowed it and now isn't allowing it. Those kinds of inflated wages are a direct cause of moving work to Mexico. Further, the union monopoly has foisted that rate on the car companies... the market did not determine it. Extortion did.

No. Frankly, I think you wage should line up better (as the market would determine) with comparable jobs in other industries where unions haven't driven labor costs through the roof. As a result, I would like to see those making $40K per year to do a comparable job have more disposable income and less debt so they can buy boats, snowmobiles, and take their family out to dinner.

If you think that makes me "envious" then so be it. I simply think it is a fair, market driven value for reasonably comparable jobs to be paid within range of each other.

 

It is NOT, repeat NOT the free market if a consumer of a product (in this case the employer as consumer of labor) is restricted to only one choice. There is nothing free or market driven about that... it is in fact the extortion of someone who is attempting to legitimately exercise their property rights.

Now that's interesting... what do you think are the factors that cause prices to go up? Very often, they include labor costs... costs that you say unions legitimately drive up beyond their market determined level.

And I have made that choice... not because I wanted to. I would love to buy American cars but I can't afford to pay as much or more on a major expense when i am likely to get more value from another company.

The problem there is that those prices are artificially inflated through taxes and regulations to favor American car manufacturers.

The bad news is that the auto market is still governed by brand loyalty to a significant extent. To win my business back, GM would have to start building cars that were favorably reviewed, superior on gas mileage, and quite frankly less expensive than other options.

For starters, what I have seen from you on this front has neither impressed me with UAW nor GM nor made me feel comfortable that the two are working together to produce a car I want to spend more than half a years salary on.

I have seen you specifically blame everyone and everything but the efforts and workmanship of UAW employees.

Maybe that's where you need to threaten to strike? Maybe that's when union bosses need to find their buddies in the media and lambaste mgt for forcing poor workmanship.

Back in the Japanese scare of the 80's, one of the more notable differences was the emphasis on quality... not just systems but attitudes. Workers were empowered and expected to refuse to produce a poor product. It is disappointing that neither UAW nor GM has pushed empowerment to that point.

If that is true then a) you need to continue to support automation and b) the future may be brighter than any of us think.

The cold heartless answer is "yes" people can live here for $6/hr... but not at the standard of living they've grown accustomed to.

But that isn't necessary. If you make $24/hr... then you need to make up that $18/hr in value. You have to offer something that makes you superior. That is the free market... and it could probably start with going the extra mile in every possible case... seeing it as a mission and not a job.