GM on strike

[southsider2k5]

Actually they are - and Americans are being employed to make them.

 

And they aren't paid NEARLY was the Big Three counterparts are being paid. The factories have been intentionally located in lower wage areas of the country, usually the deep south. They also don't pay anywhere near the health coverage, and no pension plan. Wal-Mart does it, and it is the target of MSNBC investigation specials. Toyota does it, and it is good business. Keep in mind, only one of those two companies is making record profits quarter after quarter...

[southsider2k5]

Let's be clear - people might "buy American" if American car companies made cars that were at least as good as their Japanese counterparts. Unfortunately, they do not.

 

And no matter what the excuse is, American workers are going to lose jobs. If Japanese car companies paid what their American counterparts did in wages, benefits, and pensions, they wouldn't be able to provide the quality that they do. What are jobs in Detroit worth to you? (meaning people in general)

[kapkomet]

And no matter what the excuse is, American workers are going to lose jobs. If Japanese car companies paid what their American counterparts did in wages, benefits, and pensions, they wouldn't be able to provide the quality that they do. What are jobs in Detroit worth to you? (meaning people in general)

Abbbbbbbbbbbbbbsolutely nothing - nor do any other buying decisions (made in China, Thailand, Mexico, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.) HOW CHEAP CAN I GET THIS?!?!?! is all that matters.

[Texsox]

The decision becomes is it better to employ Mexicans in Mexico or Detroit?

[StrangeSox]

Let's be clear - people might "buy American" if American car companies made cars that were at least as good as their Japanese counterparts. Unfortunately, they do not.

 

I'd have to argue that, as of late, they're on par or better in some areas. They just have decades of reputation from building POS cars to overcome.

[Balta1701]

I'd have to argue that, as of late, they're on par or better in some areas. They just have decades of reputation from building POS cars to overcome.

Probably the single biggest reason I bought a Honda was that I owned an American made car in High school. And I've driven American made cars as field vehicles. My experience with both has been less than positive...particularly with GM.

[EvilMonkey]

Probably the single biggest reason I bought a Honda was that I owned an American made car in High school. And I've driven American made cars as field vehicles. My experience with both has been less than positive...particularly with GM.

So you owned an American car when you were in high school, when you probably don't care for it as well as you do your current foreign car, and you drive field cars that are American, driven by people who couldn't give two s***s because the car isn't theirs. Comparing those to the car you currently have and probably baby with loving care is not quite apples to apples.

 

 

I had a Japanese made SUV for a delivery vehicle in my business that lasted all of 60,000 miles before HUGE repair bills set in. I have had 2 American vehicles that lasted longer, the first one over 100,000 miles, the current one on 65,000 (a GM product, btw). All were driven by the same people, the same way, in the same territory. For my personal car, i currently have a Galant, which has turned out to be pretty bad. the car it replaced was a 95 Thunderbird with 115,000 miles on it, that had an alternator replacement as its only major repair, not caused by an accident.

Edited September 25, 2007 by Alpha Dog

[Balta1701]

So you owned an American car when you were in high school, when you probably don't care for it as well as you do your current foreign car, and you drive field cars that are American, driven by people who couldn't give two s***s because the car isn't theirs. Comparing those to the car you currently have and probably baby with loving care is not quite apples to apples.

Oh now that is absolute B.S. I took as good of care as I could possibly do with that car in H.S. Basically the exact same treatment I give to the current one, if not better. My biggest favorite story with that car was when the chronic problem with the starter that it had cropped up, we took it to the dealer while under warranty roughly 6 times to get it fixed. The last time, they kept the thing for well over a month, and when we got it back it had been sitting out on their lot for 2 weeks or more (you could tell from the new water spots and the lack of rain for roughly those 2 weeks). I'm still bitter at GM for the way that dealer treated us. My father literally had to call the owner of that dealership to get them to give us the bloody vehicle back.

 

And those field vehicles are cared for probably even more, because a.) we have a person who's job it is to maintain them and b.) you're putting your life in the hands of those vehicles a lot more than the other ones. We do put those through a lot in terms of off-road requirements...but if a vehicle doesn't perform well under the conditions its built for, then how else should you judge it.

[Jenksismyhero]

I just went to lunch with an auditor I am friends with who used to work at GM. While auditing the books of one of their plants she noticed that over 100 employees were being paid time and a half for 40 hour work weeks, but because of certain restraints on billable time (a demand of the union), those workers only worked 4-5 hours a day. It's a wonder they can't turn a profit.

 

small unions = good

big unions = bad

[kapkomet]

I just went to lunch with an auditor I am friends with who used to work at GM. While auditing the books of one of their plants she noticed that over 100 employees were being paid time and a half for 40 hour work weeks, but because of certain restraints on billable time (a demand of the union), those workers only worked 4-5 hours a day. It's a wonder they can't turn a profit.

 

small unions = good

big unions = bad

I know personally of MANY stories like that, from both GM towns I used to live in. I'll just leave it at that.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

I just went to lunch with an auditor I am friends with who used to work at GM. While auditing the books of one of their plants she noticed that over 100 employees were being paid time and a half for 40 hour work weeks, but because of certain restraints on billable time (a demand of the union), those workers only worked 4-5 hours a day. It's a wonder they can't turn a profit.

 

small unions = good

big unions = bad

The worst, to me, is their reserve policy for staff. I don't know if they still do it, but at one time, they were paying a whole bunch of line staff full salary and benefits to basically ride the bench in case they were needed.

 

[southsider2k5]

The worst, to me, is their reserve policy for staff. I don't know if they still do it, but at one time, they were paying a whole bunch of line staff full salary and benefits to basically ride the bench in case they were needed.

 

They are also guarenteed 8 hours of pay if they show up for work. It doesn't matter if an assembly line breaks, or something else happens, they can't even send them home.

[kapkomet]

Like I said, I have lived in two HUGE GM towns in my life. The stories are insane.

 

Union "protections", my ass.

[NorthSideSox72]

This isn't just on the shoulders of the unions - you can also point to GM, Ford and AMC for getting themselves into this mess. They got fat and arrogant, thinking no one would ever challenge them. They were wrong.

 

[kapkomet]

This isn't just on the shoulders of the unions - you can also point to GM, Ford and AMC for getting themselves into this mess. They got fat and arrogant, thinking no one would ever challenge them. They were wrong.

Oh, that's very true.

 

[Chisoxfn]

The thing with GM is that unlike the other manufacuters, they are a very good company aside from the legacy issues. I realize you can't just ignore your legacy costs, but those costs are expected to be reduced greatly in the coming decade and when you factor that in with GM having really improved there vehicles (they build exceptoinal SUV's and Trucks and are on the verge, even if its a little late, of becoming big players in the hybrid market) I see them being a company that 10 years from now will be a success story (showing how they fought off a lot of various things and serious doubts to once again become a profitable company).

[NorthSideSox72]

The thing with GM is that unlike the other manufacuters, they are a very good company aside from the legacy issues. I realize you can't just ignore your legacy costs, but those costs are expected to be reduced greatly in the coming decade and when you factor that in with GM having really improved there vehicles (they build exceptoinal SUV's and Trucks and are on the verge, even if its a little late, of becoming big players in the hybrid market) I see them being a company that 10 years from now will be a success story (showing how they fought off a lot of various things and serious doubts to once again become a profitable company).

I actually think that Ford, despite having far worse financial problems, is looking to be a bigger recovery than GM. Ford has an edge on hybrids already, selling the most popular American hybrid out there (Escape/Mariner), which they are releasing a second generation of for 2008. They already re-negotiated labor contracts before they had too (though now it looks like they may still get hit). And they are the one American company who made huge leaps in the JD Power quality ratings in 2007.

 

[EvilMonkey]

The worst, to me, is their reserve policy for staff. I don't know if they still do it, but at one time, they were paying a whole bunch of line staff full salary and benefits to basically ride the bench in case they were needed.

I think that was called the 'jobs bank', created because the union wouldn't let them eliminate the jobs. So they got paid to show up and sit in a classroom, like a study hall, and do nothing. The companies probably hoped people would quit just out of shear boredom, but from what I remember, not many did.

[jasonxctf]

This isn't just on the shoulders of the unions - you can also point to GM, Ford and AMC for getting themselves into this mess. They got fat and arrogant, thinking no one would ever challenge them. They were wrong.

 

 

as im sure its been said here throughout... the biggest downfall of American Automakers has been themselves not the unions. They design, build and sell dogsh*t automobiles.

 

I read recently that one design flaw of US automakers vs Japanese, is that US automakers sit in rooms, brainstorming on what their consumers want in an automobile, build it and then try and sell it. Almost a "we know what you want" type of mentality.

 

The Foreign automakers go out to the consumers, ask them what they want first and then build it.

[EvilMonkey]

Oh now that is absolute B.S. I took as good of care as I could possibly do with that car in H.S. Basically the exact same treatment I give to the current one, if not better. My biggest favorite story with that car was when the chronic problem with the starter that it had cropped up, we took it to the dealer while under warranty roughly 6 times to get it fixed. The last time, they kept the thing for well over a month, and when we got it back it had been sitting out on their lot for 2 weeks or more (you could tell from the new water spots and the lack of rain for roughly those 2 weeks). I'm still bitter at GM for the way that dealer treated us. My father literally had to call the owner of that dealership to get them to give us the bloody vehicle back.

 

And those field vehicles are cared for probably even more, because a.) we have a person who's job it is to maintain them and b.) you're putting your life in the hands of those vehicles a lot more than the other ones. We do put those through a lot in terms of off-road requirements...but if a vehicle doesn't perform well under the conditions its built for, then how else should you judge it.

'as good as I possibly do with that car'. Does that mean it was already s*** when you got it, or you had no time/money/knowledge to do upkeep? Was it new or used when you got it. As for your GM experience, I don't dispute it happened. I have heard many of them, unfortunately in the 80's, most from American dealers. But look back to I think 2005, Toyota recalled more cars than it sold in America. All I am trying to say is your experience 20 years ago isn't necessarily indicitive of todays world. I am extremely happy with my Chevy dealer, having only had to go there for preventative maintenance. My wife has a PT Cruiser that is also fortunately running great, and other than our free oil changes, haven't been back to the dealer. My Galant is not so lucky. Water pump, alternator, power window motor, turn signal short, broken passenger seat and headlights that seem to keep moving out of alignment no matter what I do. WOuld I never buy another foreign car again? Well, never another Galant. But your one experience seems more like a dealer problem, which isn't limited to brand.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

as im sure its been said here throughout... the biggest downfall of American Automakers has been themselves not the unions. They design, build and sell dogsh*t automobiles.

 

I read recently that one design flaw of US automakers vs Japanese, is that US automakers sit in rooms, brainstorming on what their consumers want in an automobile, build it and then try and sell it. Almost a "we know what you want" type of mentality.

 

The Foreign automakers go out to the consumers, ask them what they want first and then build it.

1. I know for a fact that American companies try to get feedback direct from consumers, because I get calls a few times a year to participate in forums (I own a GM product).

 

2. Every company on earth sits in a room and brainstorms ideas.

 

3. Its partially the fault of companies, but also partially the fault of unions. To say unions have no blame here is to ignore history. Just look at the examples cited in this thread.

 

4. They built dogs*** autos before because they could, and they'd get away with it. They are a little better now, but can't improve much more, because their cost structure is far too high.

 

[jasonxctf]

i've had 7 cars in my lifetime.

 

Triumph TR7 (antique car, still have, tons of issues)

Chrysler LeBaron (engine issues, power lock/window issues)

Hyundai Scoupe (beautiful car, i beat the crap out of it)

Pontiac GrandAm (power and lighting issues, exterior rust issues)

Toyota Corolla (unbelievable car. never 1 issue. sold the car for $3500 with 130k miles)

Acura RSX (runs great. no issues)

Mercedes SLK230 (bought used, wife's car. no issues so far)

 

My track record is a bit light, but so far its been...

 

US cars= bad

Foreign cars= good

 

[jasonxctf]

1. I know for a fact that American companies try to get feedback direct from consumers, because I get calls a few times a year to participate in forums (I own a GM product).

 

2. Every company on earth sits in a room and brainstorms ideas.

 

3. Its partially the fault of companies, but also partially the fault of unions. To say unions have no blame here is to ignore history. Just look at the examples cited in this thread.

 

4. They built dogs*** autos before because they could, and they'd get away with it. They are a little better now, but can't improve much more, because their cost structure is far too high.

 

 

im sure the unions dont help the situation, but neither does the $100 million pay package for the CEO.

 

At the same time, how many times have you heard the joke, "What does F.O.R.D. stand for?" Ever heard that about Honda or Toyota?

 

The only savior left for the US automakers now is the truck market where they still hold a loyal base and somewhat of a competitive edge.

[kapkomet]

im sure the unions dont help the situation, but neither does the $100 million pay package for the CEO.

 

At the same time, how many times have you heard the joke, "What does F.O.R.D. stand for?" Ever heard that about Honda or Toyota?

 

The only savior left for the US automakers now is the truck market where they still hold a loyal base and somewhat of a competitive edge.

$100M salary is a pimple on an elephant's ass when it comes to GM's cost structure. And, it's not $100M SALARY, either. It's just a little over $1M.

[NorthSideSox72]

im sure the unions dont help the situation, but neither does the $100 million pay package for the CEO.

 

At the same time, how many times have you heard the joke, "What does F.O.R.D. stand for?" Ever heard that about Honda or Toyota?

 

The only savior left for the US automakers now is the truck market where they still hold a loyal base and somewhat of a competitive edge.

Huh? Did you actually read the thread before posting in it? GM's CEO has a TEN million dollar package, not A HUNDRED million dollar package. And only $1.3M of that is salary, the rest is stock OPTIONS, not even grants. That pales in comparison to CEO compensation for other similarly sized companies.