GM closing nine plants

[Anonymous]

Sierrarr. Sounds like sour grapes when you say us rails make too much money. It is not your position to determine my wages. What is it prey tell that you do for a living? How much do you make? You seem to know so much about my craft, hows about sharing something about yourself........Have you done my job? Do you know anymore about my job than what you have read? Please, dazzle me! You should put a sock in it. I get sick of some of this non-union drivel floating about here.

[richardy]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz

QUOTE: Originally posted by APG45
In the US Ford makes the worst vehicles in terms of quality. Some GM vehicles are as good as Toyota and Honda, many are slightly behind.

Is this your "professional" opinion, or do you have any facts to support your claim?

I have had 'car quality' discussions with many people about cars over the years, and I know that each person has their own opinion on vehicles, which seems to be based on actual experience with a particular brand.

I know people that swear by Jeeps, whereas the Jeeps I've owned needed so many repairs by 120K miles, that after two such vehicles, I swore to never buy another one.

I've seen GM vehicles with well over 300K miles, and they were still functioning.

Some folks say that though their Chrysler products were nice when they bought them, they seemed to fall apart near about 100K miles.

Lots of people do not like Fords, but the two Explorers I've owned I sold at about 180K miles, and I sold them just because I wanted something newer, not because they were having problems. The 03 Ranger I own now has 75K miles on it, and I have had ZERO problems so far. None! (knock on wood)

Bottom line is, I feel, that each company can make a good vehicle, and can also make a crappy vehicle. Luck of the draw, I guess.

I agree with you Zardoz, it probably is luck of the draw. I have owned all Fords except for one Chevy. All of the Fords were great, I would still have my Explorer, that was in mint condition at 99,500 miles, had it not been for an out of control duct cleaning truck; the Explorer gave it's life to save mine. The Chevy was mechanically good but had a serious paint problem that they could not solve and GM would not stand behind the car.

[Modelcar]

...GM is not that far behind other "American" manufactures in producing Hybrids.....It probably contributes to the problem of market share but they do need to be more competitive in "new" and active designs of main stream autos. Producing "new" designs that bring in more showroom traffic to increase market share. Cost cutting is imperative but it will require regaining more market share to help them out of this crisis.

[daveklepper]

I am 73 years old, and the danger of falling asleep at the wheel is one reason I have not driven for 11 years. But I did own three cars, the first a Ford Mainline and the second and third Cehvrolet Corvairs (the last bought just before the Corvair was discontinued). I enjoyed driving all of them and had no complaints about USA quality. But it is clear that GM did not react in the right direction to the events of 11.09.01 or a much higher percentage of the car production would be hybrids.

[Tulyar15]

QUOTE: Originally posted by APG45

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15

Arent they? Given the increasingly globally nature of trade, no one is an island any more.

How many workers do Toyota/Honda/GM have in the UK vs. the USA? I don't know the figures but am willing to bet their UK operations are a drop in the bucket compared to the US. GM is one of the largest (the largest?) private employer in the US.

From what I've read on the subject, for a car plant to be viable it must produce at least 200,000 cars a year. At the moment the Nissan and Toyota plants are the only ones in Britain which make this number or more though the Honda plant is rapidly approaching that level.

Just as an aside, when Britain and the EU tried to get the Japs to voluntary limit imports, these limits did not apply to Honda cars made in the US. Since these latter had a sufficiently high proportion of US made components to count as US made, Honda were able to import as many of these as they wished into the EU.

[eastside]

Governments don't pay for programs, despite the representations of politicians, taxpayers -- you and I -- do. In the case of a national health care scheme in effect the government redistributes health costs among the taxpayers. In addition, there are considerable administrative costs because the government is involved. The big three automakers lobbied for a national health scheme because they could unload much of their enormous health care costs onto the taxpayer.

The role of a politician is to take credit for spending our money. Most Americans have access to health insurance and have become used to a gold-plated health care system, which would make it that much more difficult to implement a satisfactory national system. Countries with nationalized health care have big problems too, but this is way beyond the scope of this forum.

Legacy costs refer to benefits and health care associated with retirees, not health costs associated with current staff. GM's are currently about $1600/car whereas in Toyota's US plants it's about $200.

[andrewjonathon]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edbenton

The real probelm is our companys are playing against a stacked deck in every other industrialized nation health care is paid for by the goverment!! Clinton tried to get passed in 1993 and everybody crucified him for it. In Japan the goverment pays for healthcare and that alone saves the Japaneese companies 1000 bucks in legacey costs per car. In our country it is the have and have nots when it comes to health care. Remove GM's health care costs and the last 3 quarters NA operations was profitable.

Manufacturing companies in other industrialized countries may not be saddled with the same healthcare burdens that US companies face but I think they have their own challenges.

Healthcare may be free for the individual people in other countries but at the end of the day someone still has to pay the bills. Remember, a government doesn't have anymore money than it collects from its citizens and businesses. In many countries, companies foot a large part of the healthcare bill either by paying direct healthcare taxes or through paying high corporate taxes or a combination of both.

[MJ4562]

Okay you're right about the "Too much..." but I think he meant they were over the market rate and just didn't word it well, IMO.

GM management was definately asleep at the switch. Or more likely took the path of least resistance figuring they would take their bonuses and cash out before the trouble hit. ********.

There are two sides to the blue collar worker thing. On the individual company level it's bad because it's hard for them to compete because their costs are higher than the competition. On the national USA level it's good because as you say it gives those workers purchasing power to pump money back into the economy.

There's no easy answer to any of this and economists have been and will continue to argue about this for decades to come. Eventually events will just unfold and we will have to survive the best we can.

JD Power.....that measures initial quality (1st year of ownership) in the opinion of the buyer. How about 5 years out? Do all people use the same scale when judging what a defect is and how serious? I always wonder when filling those surveys out....if you're someone that buys a new car every two years wouldn't it be to your advantage to report no defects as this will increase the resale value of your vehicle?

[edblysard]

I don’t know, sounds like he is stating that union workers make too much money for a blue collar worker...
Point is, I agree with you APG45, there is no limit, it is whatever the market will bear.

And don’t kid yourself; this didn't just jump up in GM's face out of the blue, they knew
exactly what the cost would be when they signed the deal, I mean, they have to project their production cost years and years in advance just for tooling up the plants, and the cost of labor is figured into it...they just got caught with nothing sellable to compete with, and made a few other bad business decisions.

Last, even if you can show me how a blue collar worker is overpaid, you still have to consider this...they don’t take the money they are paid out of circulation...they turn right around and add it back into the economy by spending it...they shop at Wal-Mart, Sears, Dillard’s, McDonalds and GM too...
Oh, and as for railroaders being union and overpaid...my UPS driver makes as much as I do, with a better benefit package...

Ed

QUOTE: Originally posted by sierrarr

I agree that the union people make TOO much money per hour for a blue collar job and have to pay NO health benefits.

[Modelcar]

....J D Power people is a concern generally accepted as a reliable source of quality reference.

[MJ4562]

QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz
Is this your "professional" opinion, or do you have any facts to support your claim?

Just speaking from my experience and those around me. I doubt anyone has ever really sifted through all the data and done unbiased field research. I know there are a lot of companies that rate cars but they tend to rely on only a few measures and mainly their judgements. Not exactly an objective approach.

It's really a matter of perception and not actual reliability. Every automaker has their share of lemons and amazing vehicles. No exceptions.

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard
Ok, Sierrarr, exactly how much money is it OK for a blue collar worker to make?
I mean, from you post, there appeares to be a limit, so what is it?

I didn't get that from his post. It should be whatever the market rate is. Now that non-union plants have opened up shop it's easy to see what that is. You mentioned the new Toyota plant in San Antonio. They were originally going to pay $15/hr. with benefits comparable to Wal-mart (now that they've added health insurance) but they got so many qualified applicants they have lowered that rate to $10/hr.

One of the results of globalization will be that wages in the US will decline and wages in the Third world will increase until they meet in the middle somewhere.
Workers will be paid not by their nationality but what their skills are. It will be a rough ride.

[edblysard]

Ok, Sierrarr, exactly how much money is it OK for a blue collar worker to make?
I mean, from you post, there appeares to be a limit, so what is it?

As for quality of cars, I, like the Big Z, have owned everything from Jeeps to an old MGB...some were junk, some were fantastic... I know folks who have 200 to 300 thousand on all makes...but I also know folks who bought lemons right of the lot from all the major players...
Quality is possible from them all, but so is junk.

Ed

QUOTE: Originally posted by sierrarr

A lot of it is a money hungry union. Our new car is a Toyota because of the better gas milage for a comparable car from GM. The difference was about 20% better for the Toyota and with price of gas it makes a big difference. I agree that the union people make TOO much money per hour for a blue collar job and have to pay NO health benefits. That is not going to work in todays world. Now on GM's part. They have to start making cars which beat the foreign cars in milage, and DON'T tell me the technology is not out there because if you do there are a couple of bridges I will sell you REAL CHEAP. We also have a Saturn and love it. If the Saturn had comparble gas milage we would have bought one. The Saturns' gas milage was 28/24 compared to the Toyots' 40/35. I rest my case.

[Big_Boy_4005]

Hey Zardos, Rangers are made here in the Northland.

Last week in the wake of GM's plant closing announcement, the subject of closing Ford's St Paul plant came up in the local news. This isn't the first time there has been talk, but people are really worried that it might actually happen this time. I think they said the plant has been in operation for 86 years.

If this happens, CP and UP stand to lose a lot of business in the area. CP's tracks go right into the plant. UP started that Triple Crown service with NS, with Ford as a cornerstone customer.

I plan to represent the Ford plant on my model railroad. Better get the camera fired up.

Sure is pleasantly quiet around here all of a sudden. Wonder why. [swg]

[zardoz]

QUOTE: Originally posted by APG45
In the US Ford makes the worst vehicles in terms of quality. Some GM vehicles are as good as Toyota and Honda, many are slightly behind.

Is this your "professional" opinion, or do you have any facts to support your claim?

I have had 'car quality' discussions with many people about cars over the years, and I know that each person has their own opinion on vehicles, which seems to be based on actual experience with a particular brand.

I know people that swear by Jeeps, whereas the Jeeps I've owned needed so many repairs by 120K miles, that after two such vehicles, I swore to never buy another one.

I've seen GM vehicles with well over 300K miles, and they were still functioning.

Some folks say that though their Chrysler products were nice when they bought them, they seemed to fall apart near about 100K miles.

Lots of people do not like Fords, but the two Explorers I've owned I sold at about 180K miles, and I sold them just because I wanted something newer, not because they were having problems. The 03 Ranger I own now has 75K miles on it, and I have had ZERO problems so far. None! (knock on wood)

Bottom line is, I feel, that each company can make a good vehicle, and can also make a crappy vehicle. Luck of the draw, I guess.

[Anonymous]

A lot of it is a money hungry union. Our new car is a Toyota because of the better gas milage for a comparable car from GM. The difference was about 20% better for the Toyota and with price of gas it makes a big difference. I agree that the union people make TOO much money per hour for a blue collar job and have to pay NO health benefits. That is not going to work in todays world. Now on GM's part. They have to start making cars which beat the foreign cars in milage, and DON'T tell me the technology is not out there because if you do there are a couple of bridges I will sell you REAL CHEAP. We also have a Saturn and love it. If the Saturn had comparble gas milage we would have bought one. The Saturns' gas milage was 28/24 compared to the Toyots' 40/35. I rest my case.

[Modelcar]

...The "cure" will of course require drastic cost cutting but on this one....they will have to do more than cut costs to turn it around...They must revive product to the point that buyers will want to get into the showrooms to see what is the latest and newest from GM and have enough that those buyers will want to pruchase one....

[edbenton]

How about limiting malpractice awards and also disbarring any atty that says I can get you money if you took xyz medication.

[Modelcar]

....But removing the health care costs is not a simple and easy problem to cure.....
I hope a solution can be found and soon...as it is now a more than serious problem.

[edbenton]

The real probelm is our companys are playing against a stacked deck in every other industrialized nation health care is paid for by the goverment!! Clinton tried to get passed in 1993 and everybody crucified him for it. In Japan the goverment pays for healthcare and that alone saves the Japaneese companies 1000 bucks in legacey costs per car. In our country it is the have and have nots when it comes to health care. Remove GM's health care costs and the last 3 quarters NA operations was profitable.

[Modelcar]

..GM simply has too much cost per manufactured vehicle compared to it's competition.
It simply must take out some of the cost to become competitive again.
Lotus....Regarding sports cars: Better bone up on the "facts" re: 2006 Chevrolet Corvette C6...It can compete with just about anyone in the world market for performance....
Another "fact" is quality and reliability....Look to the Japanese...especially Lexus.
US car makers have made great strides in quality in the past decade but still cars like Lexus have an edge......
GM had roughly in the high 50's US market percentage about 1960 and now have about 25 % of the US market.
GM MUST shed costs and revamp some of their product to bring in the buying public in order to survive.....It must be done soon or it may be too late.
I surely hope it will be successfully done and get on the road to recovery....A GM failure will bode not well for the car industry in this country....Ford is not very far behind GM in similar trouble.....and they have had some quality problems lately too....
Health car costs are a massive problem to all US manufactures.
I will root for GM as I've said in an earlier post I am a GM vehicle owner so I want them to survive and do well.....

[eastside]

QUOTE: Originally posted by icmr

See what happend to GM after they sold EMD.

IMO it's just as well for both that GM sold EMD. GM realized that it was becoming more and more difficult to provide the ongoing investment that EMD required, a distraction from its core operations. After all EMD is competing with GE, one of the great money machines that has ever existed. Starved of sufficient investment funds, EMD would have been a declining asset.

[MJ4562]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15
In the last few years Vauxhall (GM's UK susbisduary) have been rated very poorly in reliability surveys done by the car magazine "Top Gear". By contrast Ford have improved and are now on a par with the Japanese car makers. This seems to tally with what people have been saying about Ford in the US. So there seems to be a pattern emerging.

The only thing Ford or GM about those vehicles is the name of the holding company. Those subsidiaries operate autonomously and have little or nothing in common with the US subsidiaries.

In the US Ford makes the worst vehicles in terms of quality. Some GM vehicles are as good as Toyota and Honda, many are slightly behind. GM has a lot of different models and needs to drop many of them and concentrate on their best ones.

I agree with the sentiments expressed by the other posters on page 6 in terms of quality and the need to move forward. It's time to stop pointing fingers and work out a solution.

[MJ4562]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15

Arent they? Given the increasingly globally nature of trade, no one is an island any more.

How many workers do Toyota/Honda/GM have in the UK vs. the USA? I don't know the figures but am willing to bet their UK operations are a drop in the bucket compared to the US. GM is one of the largest (the largest?) private employer in the US.

You're missing the real issue here which is healthcare. In the US health insurance is paid for by individuals not the government. Employers may pay part of that while you are working. If you want to cover your spouse or your children you pay even more. When you retire you pay all of your health insurance/medical costs. The unionized auto workers get all of their (plus their spouses and minor children) insurance paid for by their employer for the rest of their lives. No other group in the US receives such a generous package. (Certainly not Toyota employees!). UAW members also receive free legal representation and numerous other benefits. This is an enormous expense [modest health insurance here costs about $10,000-$20,000 per person per year currently and has been going up about 20% every year]. Making things worse is that they are paying wages 2-3 times what Toyota and Honda are paying in the US.

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15
As for the issue of unions, I think that is a red herring. Have you ever met anyone who's said "I wont be a car made by X cos their unions are a load of commies"?.

???? Again you are missing the issue. No one ever said that. GM workers are the best in the world. The problem is there are too many of them and they are overpaid. GM could afford to overpay its workers when it dominated the world market. This is a luxury it can no longer afford now that it's facing stiff competition.

GM has excessive production capacity in the form of too many employees and too many factories. GM used to control over 75% of the US market *(and most of the world market) and it now has about 20% of the US market. The obvious response is that if GM built better vehicles it wouldn't have lost market share.
Well the world has changed since the 1950s. The rest of the world has caught up. In today's marketplace no automaker will ever again have that much dominance (20-25% is about the most any automaker can hope for). GM needs to cut its workforce, reduce wages & benefits and close plants to reflect reality.

Unfortunately the unions have fought GM at every turn trying to prevent them from rationalizing their production capacity. They use their enormous political clout to pressure GM from doing what it needs to do to compete effectively.

Consumers don't care about any of this. They want a quality product at a reasonable price. Although there are some variations, automobiles are commodities. There is a set price range for each class of vehicle regardless of perceived quality. That means manufacturers have to manage their costs. If you pay too much for materials or labor, you can't spend as much on product improvement. This is the problem GM is having. It spends too much on labor and so it can't afford to spend as much as Toyota on product improvement.



*GM by itself used to account for about 2% of US GNP. An incredible figure for any private company.

[traintownofcowee]

That sure stinks! I just hope that locomotive development won't be held back either.
There's only one thing left to do...just wait and see...

C U ALL L8TER!!!
[:)][:D][8D][:(][?][:O][8)][|)][:)][:P][;)][X-)][%-)][(-D][swg]

[icmr]

See what happend to GM after they sold EMD.



ICMR

Happy Railroading.[swg][swg]

[Tulyar15]

QUOTE: Originally posted by APG45

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15

QUOTE: Originally posted by 440cuin

Are the Honda and Toyota plants even unionizedd? I don't realy know but I have heard they are not.

Their plants in Britain most definitely are unionised, and they're also the most efficient in Europe. They also pay the best wages in the car industry here and seem to be doing well.

As Napoleon once said: "No such thing as a bad soldier, only bad officers".

The discussion is referring to plants located in the United States. I'm referring to their US operations. Plants outside the US are not relevant.

Arent they? Given the increasingly globally nature of trade, no one is an island any more.

Just as GM seem to have lost the plot in the US,, judging by what other people have said on this thred, so too in Britain and Europe. In the last few years Vauxhall (GM's UK susbisduary) have been rated very poorly in reliability surveys done by the car magazine "Top Gear". By contrast Ford have improved and are now on a par with the Japanese car makers. This seems to tally with what people have been saying about Ford in the US. So there seems to be a pattern emerging.

As for the issue of unions, I think that is a red herring. Have you ever met anyone who's said "I wont be a car made by X cos their unions are a load of commies"?. I haven't but I've met loads of people who wont buy a car if they think it will be unreliable. That's what counts at the end of the day.

[Anonymous]

My dad could actually buy a dual turbo-charged. Adui A-6; which he did. Beats the socks off the Ford escort we are currently have. I agree with 440cuin thoughts that Asian automakers are more of the problem; and as also stated, they are not do not have unionized factories. When it comes to most reliable, or best value for you money. Americans cars win out. But almost any Lotus will make dog meat out of any American sports car. I have been presenting most of the facts here.

[TH&B]

I think it realy is the Asian and Japanese makers that threaten the GM, I don't think Europeans are the threat. VW is the only real large vlume European car in the US, we don't get much Fiat or Renault etc, alot of large European companys don't even bother the US exept for "hi end" types the ones you mentioned.

I'm sorry to hear this bad news, if only as a rail fan watching the hi cube parts trains, as far as I know they are mostly GM and Ford.

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

QUOTE: Originally posted by jsanchez

Then why are the unionized Japanese plants not being shut down, also American Auto workers earn less than their Japanese and German counterparts. I used to be anti-union until I got a job on class one railroad, believe me unions are needed more than ever.
What kind of pay cuts are the executives taking at GM for making cars the public has little interest in, GM's biggest problem is going to be with consumers under 30 who much prefer Hondas, Suburus and Toyotas and for the most part do not even consider a GM product as an option. It helps to build a product people want and by the way Chrysler is doing well because of doing just that!

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

Paul,

Businesses have to think of wages as a cost, like steel. A company is not going to over pay for supplies; neither are they going to pay for high wages. Now because of it (and other factors) none of these people have jobs, a lot of good those unions did, and are earning nothing instead. The money to pay people more has to come from somewhere, in this case the price of the car. If you are in such favor of Unions I suggest you always pay the highest price for everything, since odds are that has the most Union people to pay. Raising wages, be it minimum wage, or by unions, is like inflation, it really doesn't get anyone any more money, since the people earn more, but also pay more for goods. Unions had their place historically, but have outlived most of their usefulness, becoming collections places for a certain political party, in fact did you know that the ACLU was founded by communist?

I believe in Japan their citizens were\are, forced to buy new cars every year. That explains that. I think when it comes to these companies especially European ones; people are willing to pay for quality, no American company has anything close to an Audi, either quality or price wise. Also, Japanese cars, like Honda, were good quality high mileage cars; so they had a part of the market with little competition, from American companies. This, as noted, was a big problem for GM.

I am always looking to see how people think on issues like this. Why, in your opinion do we need the unions now more than ever? What do you view as flawed in what I said about economics?

James-

European cars are LESS reliable than American ones. Audis and their VW cousins are not particularly good. Neither are Mercedes. BMWs are only so-so. You could look it up, but I doubt you will. You don't like fact-based discussions.

[Modelcar]

Toyota will soon be building cars in the Subaru plant here in Lafayette, Indiana. About 120,000 per year. As for GM's troubles I believe it is at a very critical stage and for sure, it would not be good for our economy in this country as it may cause some domino effects throughout the auto industry along with effecting so many lives. I also believe there is enough blame on all sides to go around that contributed to the situation GM finds itself in now....I think we all know pretty much what many of them are....I hope somehow people can come together with sensible minds and make the changes necessary to create a GM that can survive and make money...and better vehicles to compete with the world market. I'm not putting down GM as I have owned many of their vehicles...and at present have a Chevy Xtreme as one of my vehicles...and enjoy using it....

[greyhounds]

Just as an aside to the union issue, I flew home for the Thanksgiving weekend on Northwest from Minneapolis.

We all know that the Northwest mechanics are on strike and they had a four person picket line up at the airport. I don't think anyone cared. Everybody else just worked and got me home in fine shape. The airport was very uncrowded, to my suprise, the plane was on time and not full.

Unions have their place, but in the past they have been very unrealistic, especially with the railroads. They can, and should, protect workers from abuse, but they can't turn a $20/hour job into a $30/hour job with a piece of paper.

[MJ4562]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Tulyar15

QUOTE: Originally posted by 440cuin

Are the Honda and Toyota plants even unionizedd? I don't realy know but I have heard they are not.

Their plants in Britain most definitely are unionised, and they're also the most efficient in Europe. They also pay the best wages in the car industry here and seem to be doing well.

As Napoleon once said: "No such thing as a bad soldier, only bad officers".

The discussion is referring to plants located in the United States. I'm referring to their US operations. Plants outside the US are not relevant.

[Tulyar15]

QUOTE: Originally posted by 440cuin

Are the Honda and Toyota plants even unionizedd? I don't realy know but I have heard they are not.

Their plants in Britain most definitely are unionised, and they're also the most efficient in Europe. They also pay the best wages in the car industry here and seem to be doing well.

As Napoleon once said: "No such thing as a bad soldier, only bad officers".

[MJ4562]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard
As for foreign autos...most of your Toyotas and Hondas are made right here, in Tennessee and Kentucky, and Toyota is building a plant here in Texas.
All built by American auto workers, all paying those extreme union wages.

No! No! No! Toyota and Honda plants are 100% non-union. There is a reason why Honda and Toyota locate their plants in right to work states. They do not pay anywhere close to what GM pays.

I blame GM management for not taking a tougher stance on the unions and allowing them to negotiate sweetheart labor contracts.

The unions need to realize that if they don't give, they will end up with nothing. Without drastic cuts in benefits GM's only viable option is bankruptcy. That will mean those retirees will lose their pensions and their health care (plus numerous other benefits they receive for free). One of the problems with the unions is that the union bosses really don't care about this--they are already set for life. They have more in common with GM management than with their members.

This is an issue for all Americans. Not only will the US economy take a major hit if GM goes under, but we will all have to pay when those former GM pensioners become wards of the state.

[Anonymous]

I didn't say I liked the idea. I know they did something like that, I'll just have to go do some reasearch


P.S You've got the right attitude about those taxes.

[rrnut282]

James
Japanese cititzens are not forced to buy a new car every year. The opposite is closer to the truth. A Japanese citizen cannot buy a new vehicle without proof of off-street parking for it. If I got all my taxes back every year, I might be able to swing another car payment. To be forced by my government would be grounds for a revolt.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jsanchez

Then why are the unionized Japanese plants not being shut down, also American Auto workers earn less than their Japanese and German counterparts. I used to be anti-union until I got a job on class one railroad, believe me unions are needed more than ever.
What kind of pay cuts are the executives taking at GM for making cars the public has little interest in, GM's biggest problem is going to be with consumers under 30 who much prefer Hondas, Suburus and Toyotas and for the most part do not even consider a GM product as an option. It helps to build a product people want and by the way Chrysler is doing well because of doing just that!

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

Paul,

Businesses have to think of wages as a cost, like steel. A company is not going to over pay for supplies; neither are they going to pay for high wages. Now because of it (and other factors) none of these people have jobs, a lot of good those unions did, and are earning nothing instead. The money to pay people more has to come from somewhere, in this case the price of the car. If you are in such favor of Unions I suggest you always pay the highest price for everything, since odds are that has the most Union people to pay. Raising wages, be it minimum wage, or by unions, is like inflation, it really doesn't get anyone any more money, since the people earn more, but also pay more for goods. Unions had their place historically, but have outlived most of their usefulness, becoming collections places for a certain political party, in fact did you know that the ACLU was founded by communist?

I believe in Japan their citizens were\are, forced to buy new cars every year. That explains that. I think when it comes to these companies especially European ones; people are willing to pay for quality, no American company has anything close to an Audi, either quality or price wise. Also, Japanese cars, like Honda, were good quality high mileage cars; so they had a part of the market with little competition, from American companies. This, as noted, was a big problem for GM.

I am always looking to see how people think on issues like this. Why, in your opinion do we need the unions now more than ever? What do you view as flawed in what I said about economics?

[Modelcar]

...As most know GM's costs per vehicle are too high as compared to competition...and everyone that is around the bargaining table must take some blame. Now the problem has mushroomed to a breaking point and action must be taken or we will not have a GM much longer. Seems both sides will now have to dig pretty deep to "save" the operations....The end result down the road in a year or so will be very different than it has been in the past and as it is now....

[TH&B]

Are the Honda and Toyota plants even unionizedd? I don't realy know but I have heard they are not.

[jsanchez]

Then why are the unionized Japanese plants not being shut down, also American Auto workers earn less than their Japanese and German counterparts. I used to be anti-union until I got a job on class one railroad, believe me unions are needed more than ever.
What kind of pay cuts are the executives taking at GM for making cars the public has little interest in, GM's biggest problem is going to be with consumers under 30 who much prefer Hondas, Suburus and Toyotas and for the most part do not even consider a GM product as an option. It helps to build a product people want and by the way Chrysler is doing well because of doing just that!

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

Paul,

Businesses have to think of wages as a cost, like steel. A company is not going to over pay for supplies; neither are they going to pay for high wages. Now because of it (and other factors) none of these people have jobs, a lot of good those unions did, and are earning nothing instead. The money to pay people more has to come from somewhere, in this case the price of the car. If you are in such favor of Unions I suggest you always pay the highest price for everything, since odds are that has the most Union people to pay. Raising wages, be it minimum wage, or by unions, is like inflation, it really doesn't get anyone any more money, since the people earn more, but also pay more for goods. Unions had their place historically, but have outlived most of their usefulness, becoming collections places for a certain political party, in fact did you know that the ACLU was founded by communist?

[jeaton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by eastside

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton
Of course, these day, one might question how much time is ever given to thinking.

Have people there also remarked that that this week's cuts may have only been round one? I haven't seen anything specific to Janesville, but most analyst articles that I've read insist that GM must go much further.

Many prople around here are of the opinion that Janesville is at the edge, but not OUT of the woods.

Jay

[eastside]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jeaton
Of course, these day, one might question how much time is ever given to thinking.

Have people there also remarked that that this week's cuts may have only been round one? I haven't seen anything specific to Janesville, but most analyst articles that I've read insist that GM must go much further.

[jeaton]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Chris30

Kick 'em when they're down...

As mentioned previously, I'm also surprised that the GM plant in Janesville, WI survived. It's an old plant that has been in the cross-hairs for some time. Without the GM plant in Janesville, I'm guessing that the UP would give up and sell the Harvard & Cottage Grove subs to the Wisconsin Southern.

I didn't see it posted anywhere else... I wonder how much politics had to do with a plant closing or staying open?

CC

While the Janesville operation has been around for a long time, a few years back GM put a ton of money into the facility. I have an iron worker as a tax customer and he usually comes with at least a half dozen W-2's a year from the different contractors he has worked for during the year. Back just a few years he had two years of only one W-2 from the contractor doing work on the Janesville plant.

My reading of the business press isn't as great as it used to be, but I haven't seen anything that suggests that politics had anything to do with the selections for closing.

One would think that they not only looked at a ranking of "performance" for the different plants, but also looked at what would be left in terms of the efficiency of the configuration of the remaining plants.

Of course, these day, one might question how much time is ever given to thinking.

Jay

[chad thomas]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CrazyDiamond

QUOTE: Originally posted by chad thomas

Not me, I have a 69' Plymouth Sport Fury that I plan on keeping till the day I die.[8D]

I own a '68 Plymouth Satellite Sport Convertiable.....440....WOW what a car. I'll never sell that baby if I can help it. [:D]

Sweet !!!!![8D]

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CrazyDiamond

QUOTE: Originally posted by chad thomas

Not me, I have a 69' Plymouth Sport Fury that I plan on keeping till the day I die.[8D]

I own a '68 Plymouth Satellite Sport Convertiable.....440....WOW what a car. I'll never sell that baby if I can help it. [:D]

I'm guessing you don't use that as a commuter car, especially with today's gas prices.

[CrazyDiamond]

QUOTE: Originally posted by chad thomas

Not me, I have a 69' Plymouth Sport Fury that I plan on keeping till the day I die.[8D]

I own a '68 Plymouth Satellite Sport Convertiable.....440....WOW what a car. I'll never sell that baby if I can help it. [:D]

[Chris30]

Kick 'em when they're down...

As mentioned previously, I'm also surprised that the GM plant in Janesville, WI survived. It's an old plant that has been in the cross-hairs for some time. Without the GM plant in Janesville, I'm guessing that the UP would give up and sell the Harvard & Cottage Grove subs to the Wisconsin Southern.

I didn't see it posted anywhere else... I wonder how much politics had to do with a plant closing or staying open?

CC

[greyhounds]

As for locomotives, GE seems to be doing all right these days. For a long time they've had an emphasis on developing good management. (It doesn't just grow on trees.) It seems to have paid off for years.

Other bright spots (although not as bright in US manufacturing include Boeing, which seems to have righted its ship and my hometown favorite, Caterpillar.

[Anonymous]

What new name do you suppose is going to be the future crown name for locomotives on the American railroads?

Honda
MIC - "Made In China" - to replace EMD
Sushimoto
Suzuki
Toyota
Yamaha

I despise the future for anything anymore!!! We were sold out as a nation, by our politicians, to tird world nations. NAFTA anyone?? CAFTA's next.

I'm just going to watch my train videos and sink back into the days of old - the 50's the 60's ..... when the chrome was still thick and the women were women ... when a team of ALCOs would go racing by with black diesel smoke filling the air and the fuel spilling out all over the gutter ... and there was no such thing as an environmentalist who is an "environmentalist " only because he could never make an honest living nor could he fill a baker's shoes.

Does some minute part of our politicians' concept of a futuristic brave new world involve us coming to a stop in our Hondas/Toyotas at a railroad crossing (signal parts & accessories made in China, Japan, & Taiwan) while waiting for two Sushimotos and a Honda locomotive pulling 100 corrugated aluminum frame fiberglass body railcars made in Taiwan, to come slithering by??? Is this "progress"?

[eastside]

As I recall it, the central issue of the blowup between GM and its unions in the ‘90s was outsourcing. In those days, outsourcing had nothing to do with foreign countries. It meant being able to use non-GM sources for parts. GM settled by caving in to the unions by offering generous compensation for lost jobs. This was extended in the crazy way in which GM structured the Delphi spin-off by ceding operational control yet remaining liable to pick up the pieces if it failed, canceling out almost all the benefits! GM’s every attempt to implement fundamental changes to its production processes seemed to have been either stymied or diluted at every turn. The ‘90s were a lost decade for reforming GM. A whole book could (and should) be written about this episode.

[eastside]

QUOTE: Originally posted by erikthered

Give some credit to GM's execs for selling EMD when they did. If they tried to sell it now, it would be going for a fire sale price.

Which makes one ask the question, was EMD doing that badly? I thought EMD was one of the few divisions of GM doing fair to middlin well. I figured EMD got sold to private owners simply to allow GM to focus closer on automobile and truck production.

1. If EMD were being sold now, a potential buyer would perceive GM as being in a weak position, desperate to raise cash, and would likely be more aggressive
2. We're further into the economic cycle and sales will probably start tailing off
3. Senior executives doubtlessly have more pressing matters than negotiating the sale of a minor division. Better that they got the sale of EMD out of the way

[andrewjonathon]

Maybe, just maybe the GM executives planned the Avian flu and it is on the way to rescue GM. If predictions are right, it could kill millions of people. Assuming it comes to the US and takes out enough of those "pesky" GM retirees that will take care of the pension problem.[:)] Of course it is a risky business for the executives as it could also take them out at the same time.

[eastside]

QUOTE: Originally posted by GP40-2

A few thoughts:

1) EMD was not a "crown jewel" of GM. Even when it ruled the railroad environment, EMD's revenues and profits were insignificant to GM. For the past 10-15 years, it was a money loser for GM.

[:D] C'mon, you think I was being serious?

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by cmeastern

Some how, some way foreign carmakers figured that prices were only going to run up. Perhaps they actually believe what most experts in science say — that we are nearing the point when oil production actually starts to dip - permanently. Oh, that's right again. The Bush administration doesn't like to hear the truth and kills the messagers.

The gasoline prices in the US were always WAY below the rest of the world. This is probably the only country that didn't worry about gas mileage in their cars. Foreign car manufacturers were designing for their market.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by JOdom
[TomDiehl - In the '50's there were more than 4 domestic automakers. Hudson and Nash combined to form AMC in 1954. Studebaker bought the remnants of Packards sometime in the mid-50's, then Studebaker died in 1966.

When I was 2 years old, I really wasn't into cars. Also, notice I said '50's AND '60's

[GP40-2]

A few thoughts:

1) EMD was not a "crown jewel" of GM. Even when it ruled the railroad environment, EMD's revenues and profits were insignificant to GM. For the past 10-15 years, it was a money loser for GM.

2) GMAC: There are a lot of rumors flying aroud Wall Street that GMAC will be the next divsion GM will sell off to remain afloat. Seems those pesky retirees just aren't dying off fast enough. Of course, GMAC is about the only thing GM gas left that actually makes a profit, so the future dosen't look to bright for the General.

3) Ford went down the same road as GM with the large SUV's, however, the last figures I saw for Ford legacy/health care costs was only around $800 per vehicle (half of GM's $1500 per vehicle). Ford will also stop supplying rental car companies with cut-rate vehicles. That destroyed the resale value of used Ford's. For example, the new 500 and Fusion sedans will not be sold in large numbers to rental/fleet buyers. This alone has increased the projected used value of those products close to Toyota/Honda used values. Most of Ford's new cars have been highly received by auto reviewers-the new Fusion has been reported to have Honda quality and European driving manners. That is something that GM has never figured out how to do in a mass production car.

[Anonymous]

Did you know back in the 20's Republic trucks were in hot competition with Ford. In fact one year (1924?) they out sold Fords, and now you can't find Republic trucks. They got sold to a fire engine manufacturer.

History aside, don't panic about hybrids, good old American Ingenuity will come through and, we will have a better hybrid. In fact I will bet on it.

[samfp1943]

Oldsmobile, gone in 2004 and Spring Hill scheduled to close, Saturn will be gone in 2006. Maybe thay can sell that plant to Nissan who needs the space to build vehicles. You might say that Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection is at work in the auto industry.. Adapt or die.
GM on it's way to being another Fallen Flag.

[mnwestern]

Just goes to show you that high-priced management is usually the biggest bunch of dumb----- known to man. Here was GM, and other U.S. automakers, cranking out big, ole gas-hog SUVs and pickups (actually rolling battleships) because they are short-term cash cows, when foreign makers were putting research into the cars of tomorrow — hybrids, flex-fuel vehicles, light composites, etc. and raking in the increased sales as people finally switch to efficient vehicles when prices went through the roof.

Apparently, GM, Ford and Daimler-Chrysler execs were not invited to VP Cheney's little pow wow with energy execs back in 2001 when they mapped out the strategy to ratchet up gas prices to increase oil company profits to record levels (if that wasn't the plan, how did oil company's turn in record third quarter profits when they were said to have suffered so much physical damage from hurricanes.) If the carmakers had known that, they would have moved quickly to quit building battleships that will rust in the dealers lots (Oh, Heck, even I don't believe GM officials could move quickly on anything except running for their bonus checks.)

Some how, some way foreign carmakers figured that prices were only going to run up. Perhaps they actually believe what most experts in science say — that we are nearing the point when oil production actually starts to dip - permanently. Oh, that's right again. The Bush administration doesn't like to hear the truth and kills the messagers.

So, GM will not be the last American automaker to face bankruptcy. Why do we think that in the future we'll still build cars here. We build very little else. Everything is sent off to Asia, or Asians come back here to show us how it is done cheaply, without the old, crushing union contracts that are milking the auto industry just like the heritage air carriers.

[PigFarmer1]

QUOTE: Originally posted by bobwilcox

It is amazing that GM is going to take over three year to make these cuts. They are not facing bankruptcy in three years but this year.

I apologize if you have already gotten a response, but I'm not going to read through four pages of pro and anti union comments.[:0] Anywho...GM is contractually obligated to not make these cuts until such a time as was specified in the agreements with the UAW. Even though it sounds crazy, that's the way it goes.

[SALfan]

UP829 - Actually sometime in the '60's or early '70's GM flirted with having 60% of the US market, and they may have made it. In those days, GM products were just built better than Fords or Chryslers.

TomDiehl - In the '50's there were more than 4 domestic automakers. Hudson and Nash combined to form AMC in 1954. Studebaker bought the remnants of Packards sometime in the mid-50's, then Studebaker died in 1966.

My complaint about GM is that all the brands are built on the same assembly lines using the same parts, except for grilles and taillights. What's the difference? Used to, if you paid the extra money for a Buick or an Oldsmobile, you got a different engine at least and different ride and handling characteristics. Nowadays you have to look to tell the difference, because all GM cars are built from the same parts bin.

[edblysard]

I am surprised that anyone would take that statement, and some how turn it into "they got it together", which is not what I said at all.
Re-read it...I said they were not in the toilet...which is altogether different from "having it together"...

American auto makers have to adapt, and get something going on some serious research on the next generation/ hybrid/alternate fuel if they are going to survive beyond the next decade.


Ed

QUOTE: Originally posted by andrewjonathon

QUOTE: Originally posted by edblysard

Same unions work at Ford and Chrysler, and those two are not in the toilet...
As for foreign autos...most of your Toyotas and Hondas are made right here, in Tennessee and Kentucky, and Toyota is building a plant here in Texas.
All built by American auto workers, all paying those extreme union wages.

Ford and Chrysler both took a look at what they would be paying out in retirement, benefits and such well over a decade ago, and decided to buy out who they could right then, and replace them with robotics and automated manufactures, then streamlined how they build cars, introduced new designs, and instituted quality controls that makes GM’s look so shabby by comparison.

So, two of the big three paid attention when they should have, one of them decided that business as usual was the way to go...
Daimler Chrysler is blowing GM away, Ford Trucks out sell GM...Go figure whose management teams were on the ball and looked ahead, and whose were more worried about their green fees than their business...

I am surprised anyone would point to Ford and Chyrsler as examples of automobile manufactuers who have "got it together".

While Ford's problems may not be as deep as GMs, they certainly still have a lot of their own house cleaning to do. Ford's North American operations lost $1 billion dollars in just the third quarter this year alone. You don't have to search too on the internet to find expert predictions of Ford's own bankrupcty.

As for Chysler, recently their new products may be reflecting the benefits of their merger with Mercedes. However, it is safe to say the marriage with Chrysler has not had the same positive effect on Mercedes. Ever since the marriage, with the company's focus on improving Chrysler, the reputation of the Mercedes cars division has taken a hit, especially in their reputation for reliability. Recently, the combined value of Mercedes and Chrylser slipped below the value of just Mercedes before the merger. I doubt that wasn't a by-product of the merger the shareholders were looking for.

[Anonymous]

There probaly closing the plants because they are puting tomuch in their vehicles for the same price, the GM employee sale which brought in alot of money in the short run but long term investments are fried, people are going to foreign cars more better fuel economy with same power and/or speed,etc...
I saw something in the newspaper this morning but can't recall anything tho.
They need to straighten up and get to making what people want in order to survive.
I dont mean any disrespect but this is what i think.
[8D][:D][:)][8]

[Junctionfan]

There is a "mr.fix-it" type guy who is trying to repair the sorry state of Nortel. I can't remember his name-I believe he is from Scandanavian or Swiss. At any rate, maybe GM should get him and chuck the useless executives that caused the company to head for the crappers to begin with.

[richardy]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005



Now Chad has me wondering about Oldsmobile, anyone know that story?

2004 was the last model year for Oldsmobile.

[chad thomas]

I just checked GMs website and there is no listings for Olds so I guess it is gone. To bad, I have owned a couple of Oldsmobiles and both were great cars. As I mentioned my last one almost hit 400k, but a rod started knocking and I had an engine fire (my own dumb a$$ fault) and is now history. Now I've got my eyes out for replacement, but a 70s mdl in good condition not a newer one.

[chad thomas]

BTW My moms Olds is a 04' I think.

[Big_Boy_4005]

Actually Tom, I was aware about who bought who in the Chrysler deal, but I was too lazy to type it that way. [oops][sigh][;)]

Now Chad has me wondering about Oldsmobile, anyone know that story?

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by Big_Boy_4005

QUOTE: Originally posted by Lotus098

Just for the record who does GM own? Chevy, ...

I'm not sure if they have bought out any foreign manufacturers like Ford and Chrysler have.

Chrysler didn't buy out any foreign manufacturers, they were bought out themselves by Daimler-Benz. They made their new name Daimler-Chrysler as a PR point.

[TomDiehl]

QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd

It's interesting that Olds and Plymouth have gone away. Their brand names had such little value that their owners ditched them completely. While this was going on, Toyota lauched an entirely new brand, Scion, Honda started selling full size pickups and SUVs, and Kia and Hyundai sell a full line of cars.

It's called market shift. Going back to the '50's and '60's there were four auto manufacturers in the US, GM, Ford, Chrysler, and American Motors. Foreign auto competition was so small it was just considered a novelty at that time. Starting in the '70's, with the gas prices suddenly jumping to three times what it was, people quickly shifted to wanting more economical running cars. Unfortunately, this coincided with a trend in the US manufacturers toward a better "bottom line" and they did it at the expense of quality, cars literally fell apart off the showroom floor. Imported cars, primarily from Japan, with noticibly better quality and much better gas mileage experienced big sales jumps. Although the quality has equalized, the reputation from this period has been hard to shake. Plus now, there's a LOT more than four companies making and selling cars in the US. So of course, each US company will have a smaller "piece of the pie" than they had when there were only four. And the foreign companies will work harder to get a bigger piece. That's the capitalist system.

[chad thomas]

QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd

It's interesting that Olds and Plymouth have gone away. Their brand names had such little value that their owners ditched them completely. While this was going on, Toyota lauched an entirely new brand, Scion, Honda started selling full size pickups and SUVs, and Kia and Hyundai sell a full line of cars.

Not me, I have a 69' Plymouth Sport Fury that I plan on keeping till the day I die.[8D]

[chad thomas]

Vic, are you sure Olds got phased out? My mom just bought a new Olds Bravada.

I must say the best cars I ever owned were GM products. But they were all 60s and 70s models. I racked up almost 400,000 on my last Olds and the only work I had to do was exhaust work (installed headers, a must on all my rides) and I had to re-build my tranny at around 300k. I have delt with a lot of fleet vehicles in the last 20 years and I must say quality took a real dive in the 80s. I saw a lot of late 70s trucks outlast 80s trucks (GM and Ford). They seem to have produced a better quality vehicle (trucks anyway) in the later 90s but in my opinion the 70s produced higher quality then anything sience.

Right now I have 6 chevys and 3 fords in my fleet. For the amount of abuse they take they are holding up very well, the chevys that is. The fords are falling apart. It's always the little things with the fords but it's one thing after another. Not to say the chevys are perfect, when they fail it's usualy something major like fuel injection failures, head gaskets and such. But I would rather have one major failure then constant minor failures like the fords seem to have.

Not that I'm an expert or anything but my experience with work trucks makes me favor Chevys and when I go shopping for replacements in my fleet it will be at a GM dealer.

[oltmannd]

It's interesting that Olds and Plymouth have gone away. Their brand names had such little value that their owners ditched them completely. While this was going on, Toyota lauched an entirely new brand, Scion, Honda started selling full size pickups and SUVs, and Kia and Hyundai sell a full line of cars.

[oltmannd]

QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed

The point is the plants are being closed cause they are not making enuf sales to keep it open so there will be no shifting of biz from the closed plants to some other open plant since GM admitted they do not have the biz. [:(].

Originally posted by oltmannd
[

No argument, there. It's the "production" mentality that got them there. Wall Sts reaction has been "what took you so long to figure this out"!

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) 

• Reply