Should We Really Bail Out the Big Three Automakers with $73.20 Per Hour Labor? 439 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
The chart above shows average hourly compensation for the Big Three ($73.20) and Toyota (TM) ($48.00), compared to average hourly compensation for Management and Professional Workers ($47.57), Manufacturing/Goods Producing ($31.59) and all workers ($28.48), data available here.
Should U.S. taxpayers really be providing billions of dollars to bailout companies (GM (GM), Ford (F) and Chrysler) that compensate their workers 52.5% more than the market (assuming Toyota wages and benefits are market), 54% more than management and professional workers, 132% more than the average manufacturing wage, and 157% more than the average compensation of all American workers?
Maybe the country would be better off in the long run if we let the Big Three fail, and in the process break the UAW labor monopoly, and then let Toyota, Honda (HMC) and Volkswagen (VLKAY.PK) take over the U.S. auto industry, and restore realistic, competitive, market wages to the industry. It might be the best long-run solution.
Related Articles
|
This article has 439 comments:
Considering the CEO makes the equivalent of 100-1000 workers, that is the salary I would cut first. Then the upper management that makes 50 times or more what the average worker makes.
I am glad that the guys that get their hands dirty, end up with physical problems from their jobs and sweat each day are making good pay - it is those guys that have the soft hands at the top that should be getting a pay cut.
I find it amazing when people blame the workers and unions for the downfall of the auto industry. When if the CEO's and upper management merely made double or triple the average workers salary over the last 20 years, they would have saved billions.
The problem is the greedy CEO's and upper management, not the workers and unions..
On Nov 10 09:32 AM User 294926 wrote:
> Do a little research before you make a comment like that. The $73
> and hour includes legacy costs. Union member don't make anywhere
> near that much money in reality. That number is at least $15-$20
> high and includes benefits like health care. It's a shame- this guy
> is a Phd yet he makes off the cuff statements like he has an IQ below
> room temperature.
Those guys making 60-70 thousand plus benefits deserve every cent. The CEO's making 10's of millions do not.
On Nov 10 09:42 AM saajjata wrote:
> Legacy costs are not calculated into the hourly rate, they are stated
> in a per vehicle cost. The hourly rate is wages and benefits.
On Nov 10 09:48 AM working at ford wrote:
> The hourly rate is less than 30 per and benny cost about 10 grand
> a year. If these companies go away there is no reason for any employer
> to pay above min wage. How many new cars and tv's can you buy an
> min wage. Mc d's pays almost twice min wage to be able to keep there
> unskilled workforce loyal. Get off your high horse and realize that
> all the benny's you now have are as a result of the unions. Not to
> mention workplace safety rule and labor laws that prevent abuses
> that are in the sweat shops of asia. I don't think many of the complainers
> would last long in a true free market.
There is no happy solution. Shoot em all.
On Nov 10 09:39 AM Midas1 wrote:
> Fox News reported this weekend that GM is seeking multibillions to
> fund their retirees' HEALTHCARE costs. BS!!!! No one is giving
> me a free ride on healthcare. I DO NOT WANT MY TAX DOLLARS PAYING
> FOR ANYTHING OTHER THAN PRODUCT INGENUITY!! Taxpayers fund Medicare--now
> we're supposed to give GM retirees the "cadillac" of healthcare?
> No way. Let them fail. This money should not go to padding pockets
> of overpaid employees whom the union would only allow a simple job
> task and no cross training. GM is never going to match the quality
> of Toyota or Honda as long as the focus is on what more they can
> do to pacify the stupid UAW. It's time to dump the UAW and infuse
> a dose of common sense into the domestics!!
You are wrong- that figure includes legacy costs- trust me.
We all know (or should know) that unions have done immeasurable good for the country. But does that mean that everything they do is good? Does that mean there can be no imbalance on the other side?
Further, do you think Toyota is exploiting its workers? If yes, where are the calls for boycott? If no, how can Detroit be expected to compete in a market with such divergent labor costs?
These are the questions, not whether CEOs are overpaid a-holes. (The answer to this has been well-established already.)
On Nov 10 09:45 AM gkahn wrote:
> Let the first one fail, and the UAW will not see fit to make the
> necessary concesions for survival. This is utter graft. A backwards
> segment of the auto industry held together by taking money from the
> government with political threats. This is exactly the kind of problem
> that plagues our nation and our politics.
Well...THERE'S YOUR PROBLEM>>>
$65,000 a year per worker to build cars? That's insane!
If the auto makers were rolling in dough due to the productivity of those $6k workers I wouldn't have a problem; but they're NOT!
Pay should be cut in half for all employees as a first step and then >>>MAYBE>&... a government handout MIGHT be considered.
Do you want your pay cut in half? When CEO's of most companies make $10's of millions, you have a problem with someone making $65k a year?
On Nov 10 10:07 AM Foster J Fezziwig III wrote:
> Why is this being cast as a choice between union busting and exorbitant
> manufacturing salaries.
>
> We all know (or should know) that unions have done immeasurable good
> for the country. But does that mean that everything they do is good?
> Does that mean there can be no imbalance on the other side?
>
> Further, do you think Toyota is exploiting its workers? If yes, where
> are the calls for boycott? If no, how can Detroit be expected to
> compete in a market with such divergent labor costs?
>
> These are the questions, not whether CEOs are overpaid a-holes. (The
> answer to this has been well-established already.)
On Nov 10 09:14 AM Herbert Hoover wrote:
> Just out of curiosity - How much per hour do the guys at AIG make?
> Oh, I forgot, AIG is a friend of Paulson's, so that's OK.
What I find amazing is people like my parents (who make 30,000 a year combined) complain about unions and the GM guys that make 60-70 a year because that is what they hear on Fox and Talk Radio. When the CEO's at the top make more than a thousand employees combined - their exorbitant salaries are the real problem, but lets blame the guy that is going to have back problems for the rest of their lives for making a decent wage....
I have studied the history of corporations and find it amazing that just 200 years ago newspapers were filled with opinion pages complaining that their bosses made 3-10 times their wages - saying it is outrageous and something needs to be done.
200 years later we seem resigned with the fact that CEO's make 100 to sometimes 10,000 times the wages of the average worker, and yet it is rarely a topic to be found - instead, let's blame that guy making 60,000 that is able to put his kids through college and retire at a good age...
On Nov 10 10:07 AM Foster J Fezziwig III wrote:
> Why is this being cast as a choice between union busting and exorbitant
> manufacturing salaries.
>
> We all know (or should know) that unions have done immeasurable good
> for the country. But does that mean that everything they do is good?
> Does that mean there can be no imbalance on the other side?
>
> Further, do you think Toyota is exploiting its workers? If yes, where
> are the calls for boycott? If no, how can Detroit be expected to
> compete in a market with such divergent labor costs?
>
> These are the questions, not whether CEOs are overpaid a-holes. (The
> answer to this has been well-established already.)
On Nov 10 10:19 AM jarco wrote:
> You must be a union auto worker or organizer. You obviously don't
> know what happens at the executive level especially during difficult
> times. Very few have the talents, education, experience to make it
> all come together and preserve the jobs of everyone involved.
>
>
>
> On Nov 10 09:14 AM Herbert Hoover wrote:
On Nov 10 10:15 AM Tomas04 wrote:
> John
>
> Do you want your pay cut in half? When CEO's of most companies make
> $10's of millions, you have a problem with someone making $65k a
> year?
Think about it: one 10 million dollar CEO = at least 153 employees paid a decent rate.
The, the management staff is probably another 10 million
Why can't we pay the CEO 500,000 a year, the management at 100,000 a year and keep those employees rates fair (so they can live a comfortable life). If we did this, the auto corporations would be able to survive...
On Nov 10 10:11 AM John Pseudonym wrote:
> "The article makes it sound like these people are making 150 grand
> a year, when it is closer to 60 or 70. To me that is a wage they
> deserve"
>
> Well...THERE'S YOUR PROBLEM>>>
>
> $65,000 a year per worker to build cars? That's insane!
>
> If the auto makers were rolling in dough due to the productivity
> of those $6k workers I wouldn't have a problem; but they're NOT!
>
>
> Pay should be cut in half for all employees as a first step and then
> >>>MAYBE>&... a government handout MIGHT be considered.
It does matter that those numbers are wrong. You can't start a debate with bogus facts. The reason the non-union auto makers are gaining market share has nothing to do with unions.
I'm all ears as to the reason then. Big steel left this country in large part due to unions. I don't disagree that it is pathetic companies are paying CEO's the salaries and bonuses they are but wages for manual labor jobs are simply out of touch with reality.
On Nov 10 10:30 AM Tomas04 wrote:
> Shadrach
>
> It does matter that those numbers are wrong. You can't start a debate
> with bogus facts. The reason the non-union auto makers are gaining
> market share has nothing to do with unions.
If this guy has a PhD, then I am Einstein.
The $73 is NOT the employee's income, it is the cost to the Company for each hourly employee. This cost includes wages, employment taxes, benefits, AND legacy costs--health care and pensions for up to 1 million people.
Now, if all the posters here wish to kill the pensions for the retirees, fine. The PBGP is already underfunded by about $50 billion, so another taxpayer funded bail out for the PBGP will be required.
Medicare is in crisis due to chronic underfunding. If these 1 million people migrate to Medicare, another taxpayer funded bail out will be required.
It's OK, though. Niot to worry. The Messiah will fix it by taxing the rich.
.
On Nov 10 09:42 AM saajjata wrote:
> Legacy costs are not calculated into the hourly rate, they are stated
> in a per vehicle cost. The hourly rate is wages and benefits.
Amen, well said.
To all those hyper critical people are going to be out of work too, no Big 3, we can't buy their services/products, like their houses, boats, insurance policies, products, etc. Wake up! Minimum wage gets you no where. Get ready because you're going down with us.
On Nov 10 09:48 AM working at ford wrote:
> The hourly rate is less than 30 per and benny cost about 10 grand
> a year. If these companies go away there is no reason for any employer
> to pay above min wage. How many new cars and tv's can you buy an
> min wage. Mc d's pays almost twice min wage to be able to keep there
> unskilled workforce loyal. Get off your high horse and realize that
> all the benny's you now have are as a result of the unions. Not to
> mention workplace safety rule and labor laws that prevent abuses
> that are in the sweat shops of asia. I don't think many of the complainers
> would last long in a true free market.
Recent "new" product offerings are 4-5 years too late. The Ford 500 was a prime example. Now they're advertising a Lincoln MX getting 24 mph highway. Duh. Check out the competition! A similar BMW, for example gets 30, and at even $3/gallon will more than make up for the slightly additional purchase cost. The big three are far behind the curve
On Nov 10 10:37 AM IXLR8 wrote:
>
>
> If this guy has a PhD, then I am Einstein.
>
> The $73 is NOT the employee's income, it is the cost to the Company
> for each hourly employee. This cost includes wages, employment taxes,
> benefits, AND legacy costs--health care and pensions for up to 1
> million people.
>
> Now, if all the posters here wish to kill the pensions for the retirees,
> fine. The PBGP is already underfunded by about $50 billion, so another
> taxpayer funded bail out for the PBGP will be required.
>
> Medicare is in crisis due to chronic underfunding. If these 1 million
> people migrate to Medicare, another taxpayer funded bail out will
> be required.
>
> It's OK, though. Niot to worry. The Messiah will fix it by taxing
> the rich.
>
> .
The root of the problem is that the big 3 are not making vehicles that the consumer is willing to pay for. Some of this is price, but a lot of it is quality. I had a disucssion with a salseman at best buy and it went like this:
"So, what kind of car do you have?" I asked.
He said, "I own a Honda civic."
"You don't own a domestic?"
"I have a 2001 mercury cougar. I loan it to my brother. I couldn't keep it on the road, it kept breaking down."
"Is your Honda good?"
"Oh yeah, the Honda is perfect."
"So you wouldn't consider a domestic?"
"No, their just nightmares. My Honda is solid, so when it is time to buy another car I'll just get a Honda."
"I'm told that the domestics are better, now"
He shrugged his shoulder, "Maybe, but why take the chance? The Honda's are good."
and, by the way, this kid is about 30. He basically will never even consider a domestic. Basically, the big 3 have soured their customer base. They aren't coming back. That is the real problem.
On Nov 10 10:35 AM shadrach wrote:
>
> I'm all ears as to the reason then. Big steel left this country
> in large part due to unions. I don't disagree that it is pathetic
> companies are paying CEO's the salaries and bonuses they are but
> wages for manual labor jobs are simply out of touch with reality.
>
>
>
> On Nov 10 10:30 AM Tomas04 wrote:
jimrogers-investments....
2. I am not anti-union. I believe unions can be a good thing. Workers should organize to get their fair share of the profits. But that payment should not be written in stone.
If the company becomes unprofitable, then the unions should step up and do what's necessary to save the golden goose; NOT COOK IT!
CEO pay is broken and this is another thing the unions should tackle. Insist CEO pay is no more than 10x the average worker pay and falls at the same percentage as the workers pay in tough times.
What I've described above is not the UAW and that's the problem!
On Nov 10 11:01 AM epeon wrote:
> As far as the big 3 paying $70/hr who cares? They simply put it
> into the price of the car and the consumer has to pay for it. Except,
> oooppps, the consumer isn't paying for it are they?
>
> The root of the problem is that the big 3 are not making vehicles
> that the consumer is willing to pay for. Some of this is price,
> but a lot of it is quality. I had a disucssion with a salseman at
> best buy and it went like this:
>
> "So, what kind of car do you have?" I asked.
>
> He said, "I own a Honda civic."
>
> "You don't own a domestic?"
>
> "I have a 2001 mercury cougar. I loan it to my brother. I couldn't
> keep it on the road, it kept breaking down."
>
> "Is your Honda good?"
>
> "Oh yeah, the Honda is perfect."
>
> "So you wouldn't consider a domestic?"
>
> "No, their just nightmares. My Honda is solid, so when it is time
> to buy another car I'll just get a Honda."
>
> "I'm told that the domestics are better, now"
>
> He shrugged his shoulder, "Maybe, but why take the chance? The Honda's
> are good."
>
> and, by the way, this kid is about 30. He basically will never even
> consider a domestic. Basically, the big 3 have soured their customer
> base. They aren't coming back. That is the real problem.
What perks go along with the job? Any corruption there?
The 'union' way is a way to mediocre product. Talent OR production wise.
On Nov 10 11:05 AM John Pseudonym wrote:
> 1. All wages in bankrupt companies should be cut; hence the term
> bankrupt and no money, as in on the way to zero pay...
>
> 2. I am not anti-union. I believe unions can be a good thing. Workers
> should organize to get their fair share of the profits. But that
> payment should not be written in stone.
>
> If the company becomes unprofitable, then the unions should step
> up and do what's necessary to save the golden goose; NOT COOK IT!
>
>
> CEO pay is broken and this is another thing the unions should tackle.
> Insist CEO pay is no more than 10x the average worker pay and falls
> at the same percentage as the workers pay in tough times.
>
> What I've described above is not the UAW and that's the problem!
Let's start working together, rather than driving ourselves closer to civil war.
www.automotive.com/aut...
On Nov 10 11:09 AM eternitus wrote:
> My thoughts exactly. Unlike with the financials, where one large
> company's failure, if left unchecked, can bring down the whole system,
> completely destroy all our access to credit, and ruin our lives for
> a generation, GM's failure will simply eliminate a poorly-run, noncompetitive
> company that overpays its employees. Even healthy companies with
> good management are destroyed in a financial panic as confidence
> evaporates... not true with the auto industry.
On Nov 10 11:06 AM working at ford wrote:
> Thirty and working at best buy. My guess is he had made more than
> one mistake in his life
It makes you wonder if these companies would be in this mess now if they had done something like that years ago.
I AM a Ford factory worker and I can tell you FOR SURE that that $73 an hour rate absolutely includes legacy costs. Do you know what the Japanese brands legacy costs are as of today? --$0000. Thats right, they are paying out no pensions whatsoever.
The average cost to an American auto company per person working is about $83,000. That amount is wages/bennies. This is a FACT. Now I'm no genius, just a factory worker, but by my math based on 2200 hours a year worked that works out to $37 an hour. Our actual hourly wage ranges from $27-$32, give or take.
I will admit we are 'FAT'. There are definately too many people sitting around doing nothing and getting paid for it. It is much better today than in the past but this is the sole reason that the Big 3 are where they are. I personally blame Ford/Union for this. Decades of no real competition let them get away with this. In no way is it the factory workers faults. This would be the same for any worker in any industry. 99% of the time it is never the workers' fault, it is managements. It's just that now, in this time, all the current factory workers are paying the price for managements/unions carelessness.
Interesting tidbit..When the Japanese start to 'cut' people to make their business flourish, they start at the TOP. In fact, most of the world operates in this manner except for our country. It only makes sense. If a business isn't managed well you don't keep the manager and get new workers. You fire the manager and get one who knows what hes doing.
rant off...
Your point is dramatic and highly disengenuous! The numbers you reference include, "wages, pension and health care benefits". Let's look at the pensions. I have included a section from the article referenced below. Let's do some math: the pension benefits from 540,344 retirees and surviving spouses divide into the number of hours worked per year over 180,681 U.S. hourly workers approximately as follows:
($1500.00/month*12 months*540,344 people)
----------------------... = $25.88/hour
(2080 hours/worker/year * 180681 workers)
The pension plans at GM, Ford and Chrysler are either fully funded or close to fully funded and remove about $25.88/hour from your quoted number of $73.20 for a more realistic figure of $47.32/hour for wages and health care. The trick here is to add in the cost of pension benefits to retirees that are funded by the Big 3's pension funds into the hourly labor cost of active workers. Not a fair comparison when GM has been around for 100 years and Toyota has been making vehicles in any significant number in the USA for only about 20 years. GM's pension plan has about $100 billion in assets and should throw off about $5-8 billion/year to pay the cost of the pensions to the retirees. Ford and Chryslers's plans are in similar shape.
The health care costs for retirees add about another $6-7 billion spread over the 540,344 retirees for another $15.97/hour using the $6 Billion figure which brings the average hourly compensation per active worker to $31.32/hour (my estimate). Given that the UAW negoatiated a health care VEBA to remove the 540,344 UAW retirees from the Big 3's books after 2010, I would say it is not fair to include health care costs when comparing UAW to Toyota workers.
I have made some educated guesses about what numbers to use but I am sure they hit in the ball park. Taking the costs added by the retirees and adding those costs on to the hourly wage cost of the current workers is not honest. Letting the Big 3 die would be a tragic mistake that would end up costing consumers in the USA dearly over time.
Chuck1962
"Who: Contracts between the UAW and General Motors, Ford and Chrysler cover 180,681 U.S. hourly workers and 540,344 retirees and surviving spouses.
What: The union has named GM its lead company, which means it will negotiate a contract with GM and then ask Ford and Chrysler to accept the same terms. If there is a strike, GM plants will be targeted.
When: Contracts were set to expire Sept. 14 at miidnight. Ford and Chrysler have extended their contracts indefinitely. GM workers could strike any time if talks hit a wall.
The issues:
Labor Costs: The three automakers lost $15 billion last year. Chrysler pays an average $75.86 an hour in wages, pension and health care benefits, GM pays $73.26 and Ford pays $70.51. Toyota pays U.S. workers about $48, U.S. automakers say."
While you're angry with working stiffs making "outrageous" salaries you should go after the cops making 140k a year and firemen making 120k a year. You'll really hit the roof when you find that they can retire after 20 at 90%! Many city cops retire after 20 with 90% and go to work at the sheriff's department or state police while collecting their pensions and retire from there with another 90% pension!
Boggles your Phd mind doesn't it! How DARE they! How dare a mere worker unit make more than a PhD guy! HOW DARE THEY!
PhD guys are so much better, so much smarter and therefore so much more entitled!
HOW DARE YOU SIR!
1) We can't get rid of poor teachers. After your first couple years, you are generally "locked in", and it would take serious underperformance or commission of a crime to get you yanked!! What lesson does that teach? It says to students, "put in a couple good years, then coast." That seems to have become the paradigm for American life.
2) It drives costs out of control. We don't pay based on performance and results. We pay based on what degree you have and how long you've been there. How does that incentivize hard work and extra effort to foster student achievement? I know plenty of teachers who truly care about the students' success and are driven to promote that...I also know a good share who have put in a few years and then simply coast -- the old reuse the lesson plans and rotate the recyclable tests, etc.
On the bailouts in general:
1) AIG has now gotten over 150B?! How do we justify the continual increase? When do we say "you are on your own???"
2) Regarding the "Big Banks" -- the whole injection of capital there was wrong to begin with. The banks who did not properly manage risk should have been allowed to reap the consequences! The government has effectively picked the winners. It doesn't bug me so much that some of the Bigs were prevented from failing, as much as the fact that others which did not mess up had opportunities snagged away from them by this action!!! Why does the Fed think it had the right to intervene in markets this way and thwart competition?? A couple of regionals with good balance sheets could have maybe thought about merging and taking some market share shed by the Big Bank losers...except that the Fed disallowed this natural market opportunity!!
The whole thing is a crock.
Come o think of it I'll bet you'll be really really angry when you discover that the guy flying your over paid PhD butt around works 1200 hours a year max for his $175,000! Thats $145 an hour! How DARE he!!!
Mr PhD guy, you need to get your priorities straight. In a free market, like you freepers love so much, a worker gets paid what someone is willing to pay for their labor. Come on now, you're a freeper aren't you?
Perhaps you're just angry you spent so many years sucking up to department heads you hated to get you PhD and no one will pay you what you think you deserve. Well, PhD guy, Perhaps you should "improve your skill set"!
HOW DARE YOU SIR!
> A true free market would be a scary place - police stations run by
> the highest bidder, schools only for the wealthy, and the disabled
> left on the side of the road. Nothing is scarier than a completely
> free market.
How about schools that wallow in ineffectiveness, police departments that peddle drugs and play to crime, and a health industry so swamped that no one gets served? Familiar, but still scary.
Ultimately, you are not qualified to decide what is just compensation for workers OR chief executives. We have markets for this. The market says that both Big 3 auto workers and muckety-mucks should be making the same wage - $0. These companies are old, uncompetitive, and saddled with debt, even after chronic government bailouts and sizable tariffs; they should have been allowed to die long ago. Their survival now depends upon congressional favors - meaning that the only productive US auto employees at this point are lobbyists.
If you wish to defend the pension bailouts and the tariffs and the huge amount of loan capital that has been extended to this industry, then you have to make the case - who are auto workers to deserve such welfare at the public's - and the car-buyer's - expense?
On Nov 10 10:23 AM User 294975 wrote:
> And how much does a Ph.D. get paid to write articles without any
> thought or reality? The key is total compensation. Where does that
> money go? Back into our economy in the form of cash spending, health
> care, retirement and more. Is this important? I guess if the government
> can support them when they retire and our health care system is willing
> to cut their costs way down to take care of us and if people earning
> money to spend in our great country isn't important, then let them
> go out of business. I'm sure Toyota and Honda will send some of their
> profits back to the US from Japan to support us........NOT.
Our management compensation is way out of whack because our corporate governance is way out of whack. If you have the people skills to get to the CEO slot, are you going to put members on the board that won't give you exactly the pay you want? Yeah, sure you are.
Check out congress. They give themselves a non taxable income with a pay raise every year, 100% pay in retirement, 100% gold plated health coverage for life. Members of congress may disagree with each other on lots of things, but they agree on one thing: looking after members of congress. So we have a congressional governance issue as well as a corporate governance issue.
Unions did good in their time, but they are anachronisms in the workplace now. All of the good they forced has been taken over by the government. We're all union members now, the government is our union. Are there problems with union governance? There sure are. I've worked in union shops and what 'work at ford' says above is true. Too many workers, work to rule, no drive. I've spoken to people who worked at autoworkers during their hayday. People clocking in and then going to sleep in the warehouse for the rest of the day, etc.
What is happening is that we are competing, at all levels, with workers who are more desperate than we are. Both the illegals here who will live and work under conditions we would never tolerate, and with workers in places where people have too many babies they can't afford and are even more desperate than the illegals here.
And just like the union workers have taken it on the chin from that competition, the time is coming when the management workers will take it on the chin. Why pay someone who is so incompetent they cost their company billions of dollars exorbitant rates of pay when you can hire offshore workers that can't do any worse for 10% of the amount?
And as long as people in those third world countries don't limit their population growth so the desperation eases, there is nowhere to hide. It is going to happen. It is as assured as watching a tsunami wave sweep in towards shore.
The American way of life and standard of living was predicated on a lack of competition both in production and access to raw materials. That is now ending. And so our way of life has to end.
That doesn't mean we can't have a decent way of life, and a decent country. We still have a lot of innovation, of educated workers, of industry, and research. But it means there is no going back to the glory days where we lorded it over the world, and were able to indulge in excess.
Now, eventually the people in those places where they breed without restraint will get some clue and realize they don't like watching their children suffer, that they want to do right by their children, and will limit their population growth. At that point, among other good things that happen, the supply of labor becomes constrained again, and workers wages go up. Then there will be a boom that will make anything in history look like it was playacting. And all sorts of positive effects will occur; the end of war, and poverty, and hunger.
But that is a ways off yet. And we might not get there.
There is a tremendous difference in responsibilities between a ship master, an airline pilot and a guy bolting bumpers on an assembly line. No doubt the job is important, but it does not rise to the level of expertise required of the ship master and the pilot.
On Nov 10 12:56 PM bosun.j wrote:
> Hey PhD guy! You're a smart guy, what percentage of a Cadillac's
> price is labor? AND what percentage of a Lexus' price is labor? Now,
> What percentage of each vehicle's price is executive salaries and
> bonuses? You're a smart guy, huh?
As a retired ship Master I can speak with some authority here. An auto worker works allot harder every day than I ever did. Sure some days I worked around the clock when going in and out of port. Some days I spent all day doing payroll. Over all, I made decisions that occupied a few hours of a day. I was paid what my union negotiated for me. No more, no less. Period.
This is supposedly a free market. In a free market what something costs is based mostly on what someone is willing to pay. That goes for labor too.
My, aren't you the compassionate conservative! "so that they die a quicker and more efficient death. They are most deserving of everything they get."
Palin make you feel like a real man for the first time did she?
Not specifically on point but I worked a couple of years ago in a manufacturing plant and my job consisted of running a test machine on component parts. When I started, a "good" shift with two workers would process around 400 parts combined. Like you I did not work hard; I just worked steady. My shift (two workers) processed 550-575 per shift of which I ran 350-375. I was despised by my coworkers who worried they would be replaced because management now knew they could process more. Fortunately it was only a temporary job for me.
On Nov 10 01:35 PM bosun.j wrote:
> shadach:
>
> As a retired ship Master I can speak with some authority here. An
> auto worker works allot harder every day than I ever did. Sure some
> days I worked around the clock when going in and out of port. Some
> days I spent all day doing payroll. Over all, I made decisions that
> occupied a few hours of a day. I was paid what my union negotiated
> for me. No more, no less. Period.
>
> This is supposedly a free market. In a free market what something
> costs is based mostly on what someone is willing to pay. That goes
> for labor too.
The union has no place in America today!
On Nov 10 09:41 AM Jeff from PA wrote:
> Given the fact that the CEO's and higher management makes millions
> to tens of millions per year, I am more concerned about their pay
> then those making even 70 dollars an hour (which by the way is not
> even near what the regular worker makes).
>
> Considering the CEO makes the equivalent of 100-1000 workers, that
> is the salary I would cut first. Then the upper management that makes
> 50 times or more what the average worker makes.
>
> I am glad that the guys that get their hands dirty, end up with physical
> problems from their jobs and sweat each day are making good pay -
> it is those guys that have the soft hands at the top that should
> be getting a pay cut.
>
> I find it amazing when people blame the workers and unions for the
> downfall of the auto industry. When if the CEO's and upper management
> merely made double or triple the average workers salary over the
> last 20 years, they would have saved billions.
>
> The problem is the greedy CEO's and upper management, not the workers
> and unions..
On Nov 10 09:14 AM Herbert Hoover wrote:
> Just out of curiosity - How much per hour do the guys at AIG make?
> Oh, I forgot, AIG is a friend of Paulson's, so that's OK.
It’s interesting that Mr. Obama stressed that he would bring back manufacturing jobs to Ohio earlier this year. With rates per hour like the big three it WILL NEVER HAPPEN.
His plan to redistribute wealth will only encourage even higher salaries, which in turn will increase the price of cars, which in turn will result in lower sales. You don’t need to have a PHD to figure this out.
The UAW and company management have it all wrong, when competition is involved you can’t keep asking for more, you have to adapt to what’s really going on. Both the union and management are too stupid to keep alive and should not be allowed to continue in a welfare (Uncle Sam will bail you out) mode
I'm all for unions when there are labor abuses and underpaying going on...but we are seeing the opposite: a distortion of the market wages for unskilled labor.
On Nov 10 09:48 AM working at ford wrote:
> The hourly rate is less than 30 per and benny cost about 10 grand
> a year. If these companies go away there is no reason for any employer
> to pay above min wage. How many new cars and tv's can you buy an
> min wage. Mc d's pays almost twice min wage to be able to keep there
> unskilled workforce loyal. Get off your high horse and realize that
> all the benny's you now have are as a result of the unions. Not to
> mention workplace safety rule and labor laws that prevent abuses
> that are in the sweat shops of asia. I don't think many of the complainers
> would last long in a true free market.
"Thirty and working at best buy. My guess is he had made more than one mistake in his life"
Wow.
Tell me, Mr. assembly-line-worker, what is it that you do that makes your job so much more valuable or prestigious than someone working at Best Buy? Not everyone is lucky enough to get a union job that pays $30/hour to do absolutely nothing. YOU are what is wrong with the system.
I guess we'll find out how well your bolt screwing abilities translate to the outside if Ford goes under, and neither I nor the employees of Best Buy will feel any sympathy.
The answer is yes. Why?
The foreign makers have the benefit of green-field plants sited in low-cost areas, probably with long-term tax breaks from state and local governments, and an initial workforce likely cherry-picked to be younger rather than older.
Now that the earliest foreign plants are getting close to 30 years old, the true legacy costs for the foreign makers is just starting to emerge. I'm guessing wages and pensions are not that different between domestic and foreign US plants after adjusting for location cost-of-living. Perhaps the retiree medical for domestics is more generous, I'm not sure.
Given a level playing field, the difference is probably not much.
The Big 3 were prepared for a garden variety recession, but unfortunately we're looking at a near-depression, especially if the Big 3 goes under (if one goes, the others will likely have to quickly follow to maintain parity -- however, nobody wants to buy a car if they think the manufacturer is not going to be around to back a warranty -- so sales may drop to near zero while companies are in Chapter 11.)
Should we destroy the lives of as many people as possible because the government (aka the public) mismanaged housing, energy, credit and the economy generally? Or should we give as many people as possible a chance to get through this?
The writing has been on the the wall for twenty years now that employment-based health-care is a big handicap for US industries versus foreign competitors. Basically, nothing was done about the health care system.
We better start revisioning what work is about or there won't be any manufacturing in N.Am at all....
How? By printing money? There is no wealth being created to pay for the bailouts. It's simply a transfer from public to private hands. And it's those same private hands that have proven they are incapable of building a sustainable business.
Do you also advocate the public paying the mortgages of people who signed up for the cheap ARMs or bought a house way beyond their means? When you make stupid decisions you should have to deal with the consequences, whether it involves your house or a multi-billion dollar industry.
If it IS a free economy, then the big 3 will go out of business as a result of caving in to too many union demands. That's not the subject. The subject is that they are trying to claim our tax dollars, which is the opposite of free market.
Perhaps if the government takes a passive equity stake, there is a chance of recouping the investment when there is a recovery.
Regarding mortgage workouts, that is another tough situation.
The consequences of both situations go way beyond just those directly involved.
On Nov 10 08:31 PM fergus wrote:
> "Should we destroy the lives of as many people as possible because
> the government (aka the public) mismanaged housing, energy, credit
> and the economy generally? Or should we give as many people as possible
> a chance to get through this? "
>
> How? By printing money? There is no wealth being created to pay for
> the bailouts. It's simply a transfer from public to private hands.
> And it's those same private hands that have proven they are incapable
> of building a sustainable business.
>
> Do you also advocate the public paying the mortgages of people who
> signed up for the cheap ARMs or bought a house way beyond their means?
> When you make stupid decisions you should have to deal with the consequences,
> whether it involves your house or a multi-billion dollar industry.
>
>
>
On Nov 10 11:28 AM A Ford Worker wrote:
> I just scanned thru alot of these and by no means read all the comments.
> Let me make a few myself though.
>
> I AM a Ford factory worker and I can tell you FOR SURE that that
> $73 an hour rate absolutely includes legacy costs. Do you know what
> the Japanese brands legacy costs are as of today? --$0000. Thats
> right, they are paying out no pensions whatsoever.
>
> The average cost to an American auto company per person working is
> about $83,000. That amount is wages/bennies. This is a FACT. Now
> I'm no genius, just a factory worker, but by my math based on 2200
> hours a year worked that works out to $37 an hour. Our actual hourly
> wage ranges from $27-$32, give or take.
>
> I will admit we are 'FAT'. There are definately too many people sitting
> around doing nothing and getting paid for it. It is much better today
> than in the past but this is the sole reason that the Big 3 are where
> they are. I personally blame Ford/Union for this. Decades of no real
> competition let them get away with this. In no way is it the factory
> workers faults. This would be the same for any worker in any industry.
> 99% of the time it is never the workers' fault, it is managements.
> It's just that now, in this time, all the current factory workers
> are paying the price for managements/unions carelessness.
>
> Interesting tidbit..When the Japanese start to 'cut' people to make
> their business flourish, they start at the TOP. In fact, most of
> the world operates in this manner except for our country. It only
> makes sense. If a business isn't managed well you don't keep the
> manager and get new workers. You fire the manager and get one who
> knows what hes doing.
>
> rant off...
>
>
To all you union workers, I don’t give a rat’s ass if you break a sweat and go home with a sore back each day. There are tens of millions of manual laborers in this country (albeit creating higher quality products or services than you auto losers). Why don’t we just pay them all $70/hour as well? Unemployment would skyrocket and that is a fact. This is America, not communist Russia, Cuba, or China.
If you didn’t want to break your backs doing manual labor your entire life, guess what, you should have made better decisions when you were younger (saved money, joined army, gone to college and studied your butts off to get one of those soft, white collar jobs that you all so obviously covet). I’m betting you autoworkers were to damned lazy for all that though (which by the way is probably why the products you create are inferior to those made by the Japanese). Now you want to blame others for you personal failures and bad decisions and demand a ridiculously high wage for the low-skilled labor you perform.
Your life is a product of your decisions, take some responsibility and stop blaming the evil, greedy CEO’s. Those CEO’s and the shareholders that pay their salaries make your employment possible.
The UAW and other unions have done more harm to this country than any other group. The selfish union workers that vote for a paycheck every election rather than vote for what is best for our country every four years deserve exactly what is coming. This is karma, plain and simple. You reap what you sew you character lacking, no honor, selfish pieces of excrement. The damage you’ve done to this country by voting for your jobs is coming back to bite you all in your collective arses. The chickens have come home to roost. Screw you all.
Sadly, the only way GM and the unions (both at fault for many reasons given above) will restructure is through some drastic act like reorganizing through bankruptcy. Bankruptcy isn't necessarily the end of a company, but gives it a chance to get out of the mess it's in and have somewhat of a fresh start.
Giving taxpayer money (or just printing it) to the current dysfunctional companies would only prolong their painful demise. They need to be motivated to change.
Their main business plan seems to be to ask the government for money (Oh yes, they did kill the electric car a while ago and plan a new one in a small production run in a couple of years).
Q: Why aren't stockholders insisting on throwing out upper management? Is so much of the stock owned by "insiders" who are benefiting from the status quo?
To all you union workers, I don’t give a rat’s ass if you break a sweat and go home with a sore back each day. There are tens of millions of manual laborers in this country (albeit creating higher quality products or services than you auto losers). Why don’t we just pay them all $70/hour as well? Unemployment would skyrocket and that is a fact. This is America, not communist Russia, Cuba, or China.
If you didn’t want to break your backs doing manual labor your entire life, guess what, you should have made better decisions when you were younger (saved money, joined army, gone to college and studied your butts off to get one of those soft, white collar jobs that you all so obviously covet). I’m betting you autoworkers were to damned lazy for all that though (which by the way is probably why the products you create are inferior to those made by the Japanese). Now you want to blame others for you personal failures and bad decisions and demand a ridiculously high wage for the low-skilled labor you perform.
Your life is a product of your decisions, take some responsibility and stop blaming the evil, greedy CEO’s. Those CEO’s and the shareholders that pay their salaries make your employment possible.
The UAW and other unions have done more harm to this country than any other group. The selfish union workers that vote for a paycheck every election rather than vote for what is best for our country every four years deserve exactly what is coming. This is karma, plain and simple. You reap what you sew you character lacking, no honor, selfish pieces of excrement. The damage you’ve done to this country by voting for your jobs is coming back to bite you all in your collective arses. The chickens have come home to roost. Screw you all.
French automaker Renault has dependably delivered shareholders $2 billion - $3 billion a year profits for the past couple of years.
Renault produces the hugely successful Logan in Romania, a large and affordable car for emerging markets which is extremely reliable and cheap to maintain.
Cost of auto-labour in Romania: $324 / month.
Why should shareholders and taxpayers tolerate anything else?
Nothing against people with an education. I have an advanced degree myself. I do have a particular dislike for those who apparently believe their advanced degrees make them better than people with little education. Some of the brightest people sailed with had no degree and could run circles around most PhDs I've met.
My objection with Mr. PhD is a class issue.
On Nov 10 08:34 PM Chris B wrote:
> Damn, bosun.j, what do you have against people who get an education?
> Your rants border on hateful... did you do bad in school or something?
>
>
> If it IS a free economy, then the big 3 will go out of business as
> a result of caving in to too many union demands. That's not the
> subject. The subject is that they are trying to claim our tax dollars,
> which is the opposite of free market.
I wouldn't mind if the UAW worker did a good job washing the windows, but oftentimes they don't even get washed. Maybe that's why I've heard so often UAW stands for U ain't workin'.
I said to one UAW worker "if this ends you'll be lucky to make half what you do." The response was: "well, you know, I had to pay $800 for my daughter's dance lessons." Ok, that makes real sense. I think UAW and America is not in Kansas anymore. Can you say "entitlement" neighbor? THe piper's piped--and the bill is there to be paid so is the government going to rape the average American so that one person can pay the $800 quarterly dance bill?
On Nov 10 09:14 AM Herbert Hoover wrote:
> Just out of curiosity - How much per hour do the guys at AIG make?
> Oh, I forgot, AIG is a friend of Paulson's, so that's OK.
Finally the government cannot afford to let these car manufacturers fail because many millions of ancillary jobs depend on them. A partial list might be: car sales, part manufacturers and sales, car repair (mechanics), etc. It is foolish of you to be cavalier about such a serious issue.
" I just viewed some segments regarding the US automakers and whether or not they should receive government assistance or should go into bankruptcy. I appreciated the discussion held among Scott Cohn, Melissa Lee, Charlie Gasparino, Phil Lebeau and Herrick Feinstein attorney Stephen Selbst. I also caught a short segment in which a Rep. Paul Ryan stated that the litmus test for whether or not a company should receive government assistance should rest upon the answer to the question, 'Does the failure of this company respresent systemic risk?'
In these segments and any others I have viewed regarding the fate of the automakers, the main risk that is usually mentioned is the potential for the loss of 2.5 to 3 million jobs. This is bad enough on its own. However, there are a few additional systemic risk issues I wish CNBC would cover as well. First of all, according to Cramer, there are $68B worth of GM bonds in the financial system. The potential for these bonds to fail should be enough of a reason to consider that a GM failure does represent systemic risk to the financial system.
I am writing to request that Charlie Gasparino and/or someone else on CNBC research and report the facts on the following issues:
1) Are there, in fact, $68B worth of GM bonds in the market and what would happen to the bonds should GM declare bankruptcy?
2) How many bonds are outstanding on Chrysler and Ford?
3) Does the $68B bond figure for GM include the financial paper held by GM's Financial division, GMAC/Homecomings Financial, or would the failure of GMAC represent an additional risk to the fragile financial system?
4) What, if any, connections does AIG have to bonds, CDOs or CDSs written on bonds or CDOs issued by the 'big' 3 automakers? If any of the big three go into bankruptcy, will that then represent another risk to AIG's financial position?
5) Aside from AIG, what other companies might be severly adversly affected by the failure of the financial products connected with the big 3 automakers?
These are the main questions I can think of at the moment that I would like to see added to the coverage regarding the bankruptcy/bailout debate.
Please broaden your coverage of the issue so viewers can get a wider viewpoint on the issue to help us and our lawmakers make up our minds."
On Nov 10 09:41 AM Jeff from PA wrote:
> Given the fact that the CEO's and higher management makes millions
> to tens of millions per year, I am more concerned about their pay
> then those making even 70 dollars an hour (which by the way is not
> even near what the regular worker makes).
>
> Considering the CEO makes the equivalent of 100-1000 workers, that
> is the salary I would cut first. Then the upper management that makes
> 50 times or more what the average worker makes.
>
> I am glad that the guys that get their hands dirty, end up with physical
> problems from their jobs and sweat each day are making good pay -
> it is those guys that have the soft hands at the top that should
> be getting a pay cut.
>
> I find it amazing when people blame the workers and unions for the
> downfall of the auto industry. When if the CEO's and upper management
> merely made double or triple the average workers salary over the
> last 20 years, they would have saved billions.
>
> The problem is the greedy CEO's and upper management, not the workers
> and unions..
On Nov 10 09:32 AM Tomas04 wrote:
> Do a little research before you make a comment like that. The $73
> and hour includes legacy costs. Union member don't make anywhere
> near that much money in reality. That number is at least $15-$20
> high and includes benefits like health care. It's a shame- this guy
> is a Phd yet he makes off the cuff statements like he has an IQ below
> room temperature.
Let's see; $11/4 =$2.75 per pick up. x 60 min/hr = $165/hr. x 60/45 = $220 per hour. This guy is non-union and more likely than not an illegal alien, so the trash hauler is making a mint. $73/hr doesn't look so bad viewed in this context.
Common sense says you can't pay workers low wages and expect them to pay high health care insurance costs and high gas costs for their cars and homes, not to mention the high costs of housing and food and other numerous expenses.
Our teachers are doing as good a job as they can, considering they are teaching to the NCLB testing.
Capitalism works when we all buy from each other. When many of the groups have no money to spend that creates problems.
Universal Health care would work. We already have Medicare, Medicaid, VA health care, Schip and other children's insurance. We even pay for the cadilac insurance of the elected government. Health workers and Physicians could still make excellent money, but there is no need of paying the insurance companies their 20% profit.
The CEOs need to be cut back to 10 times what the average worker earns.
The stock market takes their cut of the profits by dividends. A few years ago, our broker said he was putting all his retirement money in Ford because they paid high dividends. I hope he isn't retiring any time soon.
In other countries the workers can take less pay because they have free health care and other benefits that we have to pay for.
It may be that price roll backs, cut CEO pay, universal health care. Our necessities should be heavily regulated, especially gas, electricity and health insurance and health care.
American workers would be happy to work for lower wages, if they paid for reduced costs of health insurance, health care, housing, gas and electricity, ect.
Keep in mind the buying power of the dollar has fallen to at least half of what it was when Bush took office. So $65,000 is really more like $32,000 in buying power.
On Nov 11 09:14 AM Tao wrote:
> Workers have to earn enough to pay their standard expenses and they
> should also earn enough so they can afford to do something they enjoy,
> like going to the movies or dining out or a once a year cruise. They
> also need to take care of their retirement.
>
> Common sense says you can't pay workers low wages and expect them
> to pay high health care insurance costs and high gas costs for their
> cars and homes, not to mention the high costs of housing and food
> and other numerous expenses.
>
> Our teachers are doing as good a job as they can, considering they
> are teaching to the NCLB testing.
>
> Capitalism works when we all buy from each other. When many of the
> groups have no money to spend that creates problems.
>
> Universal Health care would work. We already have Medicare, Medicaid,
> VA health care, Schip and other children's insurance. We even pay
> for the cadilac insurance of the elected government. Health workers
> and Physicians could still make excellent money, but there is no
> need of paying the insurance companies their 20% profit.
>
> The CEOs need to be cut back to 10 times what the average worker
> earns.
>
> The stock market takes their cut of the profits by dividends. A few
> years ago, our broker said he was putting all his retirement money
> in Ford because they paid high dividends. I hope he isn't retiring
> any time soon.
>
> In other countries the workers can take less pay because they have
> free health care and other benefits that we have to pay for.
>
> It may be that price roll backs in housing, gas, electricity, cut CEO pay, universal health care, etc. would make it possible to work for less.
> Our necessities should be heavily regulated, especially gas, electricity
> and health insurance and health care.
perhaps an explicit definition of this will leave gm out in the cold.... It is too bad the management they of at least ford and gm seems good today,,,,, but look at what inherited.......are you listening george meany, wherever you are????
On Nov 10 09:48 AM working at ford wrote:
> The hourly rate is less than 30 per and benny cost about 10 grand
> a year. If these companies go away there is no reason for any employer
> to pay above min wage. How many new cars and tv's can you buy an
> min wage. Mc d's pays almost twice min wage to be able to keep there
> unskilled workforce loyal. Get off your high horse and realize that
> all the benny's you now have are as a result of the unions. Not to
> mention workplace safety rule and labor laws that prevent abuses
> that are in the sweat shops of asia. I don't think many of the complainers
> would last long in a true free market.
Most likely that guy doesn't get the $11 all to himself. It probably goes to the company, and he probably gets $10/hr or less.
But in the unlikely event that the guy did own his own garbage company and drove the truck himself and was the only worker, that $11 has to cover the cost of maintenance on the truck, gas, a place to process the trash, and then unless he has his own landfill he'll have to pay for someplace to put it, not to mention he'd have to pay the full SS tax on his income.
So your illustration really isn't comparable.
On Nov 11 08:49 AM pockyclips 2020 wrote:
> Sounds expensive, but let's crunch some numbers. I pay some guy
> $11.00/month to pick up my trash 4 times. It takes him about 45
> secs to pick up my trash.
>
> Let's see; $11/4 =$2.75 per pick up. x 60 min/hr = $165/hr. x
> 60/45 = $220 per hour. This guy is non-union and more likely than
> not an illegal alien, so the trash hauler is making a mint. $73/hr
> doesn't look so bad viewed in this context.
Rather than post your failures on this site:
"I've been teaching high school for 20 years, have a doctorate degree, and I don't make 60k!"
Perhaps you should develop a new skill set! This is a free market, in a free market an item costs what someone is willing to pay for it! Apparently no one is willing to pay you more than you are getting? Why is that? Perhaps, at the end of the day, you are working for the wages you deserve.
Now, are your teaching skills up to snuff? Are you more concerned with your students or yourself? Is there another school you can teach in that will pay you more? Are you a member of the teachers union?
Your presumption that because you have a PhD therefore you are better doesn't hold water. Whats more you provided the evidence against yourself in your own post.
I hear that wind farm engineers can write their own ticket.May be more suitable to your people skills.
> Workers have to earn enough to pay their standard expenses and they
> should also earn enough so they can afford to do something they enjoy,
> like going to the movies or dining out or a once a year cruise.
> They also need to take care of their retirement.
Standard expenses? Ok. Do something you enjoy, movies, dining, cruises -- those are not necessities -- they are extras you must work for, and which are not rights. Taking care of your retirement? YOUR responsibility, not the government's -- contrary to belief of the Greatest (Sponge) Generation!!
> Common sense says you can't pay workers low wages and expect them
> to pay high health care insurance costs and high gas costs for their
> cars and homes, not to mention the high costs of housing and food
> and other numerous expenses.
Things get expensive when the government gets its hands on them. Where's the incentive to provide cheap healthcare if the government pays for it all? The real answer is NOT socialism, but INCREASED competition! Along with that...we need to dramatically shrink government so the people can keep their own money!! We know better how to allocate our income than does the government!! Abolish the income tax and fund government solely with sales taxes, with zero sales tax on certain necessities such as food and electricity.
> Our teachers are doing as good a job as they can, considering they
> are teaching to the NCLB testing.
Heh. Teachers unions are ruining the education system by making it darn near impossible to implement "pay for performance"...much less get rid of under-performers!
> Capitalism works when we all buy from each other. When many of the
> groups have no money to spend that creates problems.
Many of the groups? What groups? Groups of citizens? When do "many of the groups" have no money to spend? We typically have 4 to 5% unemployment in the U.S. Socialist European countries have 10 to 12% as a rule, during NON-RECESSION times!! Talk about groups with no money to spend!! Keep heading down the socialist path and we can have that too.
> Universal Health care would work. We already have Medicare, Medicaid,
> VA health care, Schip and other children's insurance.
Oh yeah -- Medicare is so well-funded that we should expand it to everyone! Have you been paying attention at all? Medicare is the biggest pyramid scheme ever, along with Social Security!! Talk about underfunded budget breakers!!
> In other countries the workers can take less pay because they have
> free health care and other benefits that we have to pay for.
Yeah, as mentioned above -- those European countries have much lower economic growth -- they have high unemployment, and immobile, unproductive workforces, because many people just cling to a job, happy to have one, whether they really like their work or not!! You can keep your 10% unemployment. Socialism DOES NOT WORK -- government has NEVER been able to do anything cheaper than a competitive, free-market economy can.
Why? If autoworkers are making $40+/hour, wage is obviously not dependent on your skill set.
Nobody begrudges a working man a living wage, but we don't live in a world of wishes. The market eventually asserts itself. Most of the readers of Seeking Alpha understand this, and for this reason they are against inflating the money supply to prop up the salaries of the American auto industry.
Perhaps unions began to expect too much, but I would much rather these people make more money than the executives make millions more. They can lay people off to help the bottom line but who's going to buy your products if nobody has a well-paying job to be able to afford them? Will that help business in the long term?
As for people who say the Domestic Three make cars nobody wants, you should go drive some and check out the latest quality surveys and then talk. It's really sad that we're not at all patriotic when it comes to one of the last manufactured products developed and/or made in our country. I think we should reward companies that treat their employees well by buying their products. Instead we reward ones that overwork their employees to the point of them committing suicide. To wish for the Domestic Three's downfall is sheer stupidity as the related job losses in other industries would be devastating. Healthcare, advertising, legal services, construction, banking all will be affected. Your job may be affected even if you don't live in Michigan!
Not to dismiss some of the management mistakes these companies have made, but the playing field hasn't been level for a long time and the Bush/Republican administration did nothing about healthcare, currency manipulation, unfair trade practices. A domestic auto industry owned by American corporations is important to our national security too. Toyota and VW plants in the US won't be volunteering to make tanks and defense parts if we ever enter into a real global war.
You wrote:<i>Most of the readers of Seeking Alpha understand this, and for this reason they are against inflating the money supply to prop up the salaries of the American auto industry.</i>
Most especially when it interferes with those readers intent on stealing those workers futures with their 2.6 TRILLION bailouts!
Class warfare is alive and thriving in America! The owning class is looting the country while they still can.
Unions are not there for the workers benefit, the workers are there for the benefit of the Union! The Unions are archaic, that is why you have the RUST BELT in the North. The Unions killed competition and Capitalism.
If wages go up and production is static, then eventually the company will collapse from the weight of wages.
If you're not competitve, you will not survive. This country is on the verge of collapse and the Unions want to raise scale wages; that is absurd!!
I am cashing out and leaving before the US collapses under the weight of Fascism; no country can survive this onslaught!
Adios America!!!
On Nov 10 10:09 AM working at ford wrote:
> Let your company fail and see how you will pay the bills. Failing
> is not good for anyone. If kids fail at school they lose. If your
> favorite team fails the fans lose. If the biggest companies in the
> world fails the whole world loses
You wrote: I am cashing out and leaving before the US collapses under the weight of Fascism; no country can survive this onslaught!"
I understand your sentiments. Most especially in the light of fascism being the melding of the interests of the state with those of the corporation.
I left America for good 10 years ago and have never missed it. Due to the nature of my career I had the opportunity to visit more than 60 countries many times and live in a half dozen more before settling where I now am. Curiosity demands I ask where yo intend to go?
It will be interesting to see your reaction to many business customs you will encounter.
GM has too many problems to name, not the least of which is grossly overpaid factory workers. The real avg is around $100k plus bennys. That is a rediculous amount for a person working in a factory production line. The truth is that the unions have caused the Big Three to be uncompetitive in the global marketplace. We need to let the these companies fail!!! They can restructure and start over paying a MARKET wage of approx $40k plus benefits.
Why don't the pundits mention that we have a whole court system -- bought and paid for by the taxpayers -- to take care of these things. And we have a huge body of law on these very situations.
Let them declare Chapter 11 and reorganize. Wipe out the equity-holders. They were the ones getting rich off of SUVs and easy money for car buyers. They took the risk, and I will not guarantee their investment.
A Bankruptcy court could also force the unions to make concessions. This is better than any government bailout or at least would keep management disciplined and avoid taxpayers enriching the investors that made a bad investment.
Do you remember Terry Schiavo?
Because of government intervention (in this case the courts), she dies - they stop feeding her. If left in her parents care - she lives.
On Nov 10 09:51 AM Jeff from PA wrote:
> A true free market would be a scary place - police stations run by
> the highest bidder, schools only for the wealthy, and the disabled
> left on the side of the road. Nothing is scarier than a completely
> free market.
The simple fact is if the domestics are not supported some 780,000 retirees will fall into the PBGF which the american public will absorb wether they like it or not.
Lets do some math. The average retiree in that group makes about 2500 a month. If it defaults to the PBGF its about half. so 1250 * 780,000 = 97,500,000 per month the government will have to subsidize and thats a low ball figure.
If the government wants to fix the issue they'll level the playing field as the domestics have been asking for years.
That means addressing yen manipulation and reigning in the cost of medical in this country.
Its impossible for a company to be competitive when its the largest supplier of medical benefits in the entire USA to the tune of 5 billion a year. By the way if you fold that up the medical industry better bend over and you to because the medical industry and the pharma's will pass the cost right on to you. Plan on it like taxes.
Its gonna be awesome watching the military grind to a halt when all that high tech electronic stuff thats made by GM spin off companies like Hughes, Delphi, Raytheon etc all the sudden can't produce replacement parts for F16's F18's M1's Apaches etc because the same suppliers that are going down in a ball of flames are the same ones that make and supply those components.
But never fear we can source that stuff to china to.
Chapter 11 is no chapter as even in the event of a prepackaged C11 there are and will not be any investors to bring any of them out of C11. Won't happen just look at Delphi. They've been ready to go for a year now and no investors, zero nada zip zilch.
Get ready america, you asked for it your gonna get it.
You can choose to believe management or labor or both are at fault for the demise of GM -- but not one commenter has even suggested it was the fault of taxpayers.
We all went out and looked at the cars produced -- and the majority of us concluded that Honda and Toyota were a better value. Democrats, Republicans, union folk, managers, small business owners, minimum wage earners -- we all came to the same conclusion: Detroit's offerings are inferior.
Back in the 1970s, when GM/Chrysler/Ford failed (the first time) -- health care was almost a non issue. Iaccoca / Chrysler designed some cars (actually minivans) that didn't suck and focused on improving quality -- and for a short while Chrysler looked like it might make it. But no one carried through on those improvements, and only a few years later Chrysler was back to behaving like GM.
European car manufacturers are beating Detroit on US soil also. Europe has union labor -- but unions in Europe do not have an anti-team attitude. They focus on making their companies more competitive in addition to making sure that workers get their share of the growth. The UAW is stuck in the past with moronic "us versus them" thinking.
In the interest of fairness, I should mention that Detroit management has done nothing to help either. Lee Iacocca showed that better designed models and a renewed focus on quality could attract American buyers. Better management would have helped Detroit if only they had bothered.
Detroit has been a disaster for much longer than Obama has been an adult (Doubya too). This is not a question of whether management or unions are more to blame -- neither management or the UAW have done anything to help themselves; they have both contributed to Detroit's demise.
The relevant question is whether taxpayers should try to prop up a dead business model, or would taxpayer money be better spent encouraging jobs in a new industry?
Propping up politically connected companies -- in banking or auto manufacture-- is a terrible deal for country as a whole. In the short term, the government collects lower tax revenue on net (because it has to spend so much on subsidies). In the long term, new businesses and new industries never form because they cannot compete with politically protected.
Lets all hope that Obama doesn't replace right-wing stupidity with left-wing stupidity. Its not just Detroit that needs better leadership -- the whole country needs it
They also pay their employees and suppliers etc.---all US based for the most part---so yet more money supplied into the US economy.
Regardless of your emotions on the topic, the math is unsupportable---especi... after the 700B "bailout".
Foreign companies are building more-desired vehicles, are managing their costs better and have built a lead in R&D/the greener future. Having 1 or all of the big 3 go dark would be sad, but the pieces would be sold off, some workers would restart with the new owners, some would train for other jobs etc. Again sad, but old news for many industries already---and the US will still have the largest, most transparent economy and will still be #1 in the world after the dust settles.
On Nov 10 10:23 AM User 294975 wrote:
> And how much does a Ph.D. get paid to write articles without any
> thought or reality? The key is total compensation. Where does that
> money go? Back into our economy in the form of cash spending, health
> care, retirement and more. Is this important? I guess if the government
> can support them when they retire and our health care system is willing
> to cut their costs way down to take care of us and if people earning
> money to spend in our great country isn't important, then let them
> go out of business. I'm sure Toyota and Honda will send some of
> their profits back to the US from Japan to support us........NOT.
1-PBGC takes all pension legacy costs and Govt picks up all legacy health costs - one full sweep. Autos will have 1 year to restructure and rightsize to sweep in legacy costs.
2-executive mgmt is capped -- 10xavg worker salary
3-executive options are based on a 5 year rolling performance
4-zero out existing equity holders and issue preferred/warrants
5-you need to break the control of the Ford super voting rights
6-offer UAW a percentage of the warrants, Force UAW to accept market wage and benefit rates
7- you need to eliminate 50% of all auto dealers -- the dealer business model takes lots of profits
There are many other items but I am getting tired now
Let GM and the UAW figure out their own pensions and their own benefits -- the same as the rest of us. If the socialists even bring the subject up again -- dump the pension money into IRAs and make the greedy auto workers fend for themselves -- again, like the rest of us.
Your empty promises and your business mistakes are not our problem.
On Nov 10 11:06 AM working at ford wrote:
> Thirty and working at best buy. My guess is he had made more than
> one mistake in his life
Let the bankers and the auto companies compete on their own -- the same as the rest of us.
If they can't make it -- it is because their products stink. It is not the fault of the taxpayers. We can get our bank loans and our cars from better run companies
The PBGC + FDIC are broke , stonebroke ! More taxpayer money to bail Them out ? Gramps 2 ,I agree with you ! Let the greedy auto unions rot . Why should uneducated , unskilled UAW workers have cush medical care in retirement in old age . Like gramps 2 says " like the rest of us!
US cars aren't selling, costs are too high--what next? My guess is that you will be taking a job that pays well soon too---welcome to the real world brother. Go polish your resume.
On Nov 10 11:22 AM working at ford wrote:
> Please stop thinking. It has gotten you nowhere. my guess is that
> if you could get a job that pays well you would take it. Your though
> process has left out that it was the union who set the pay scales
> and benny's that you now enjoy. Yes even the government benny's such
> as medicare and social security are as a result of the union setting
> the standard. How about work place safety and work rules that keep
> us out of the sweat shops.
It is wrong for Bush to ask taxpayers to bail out poorly run banks, and it is equally wrong for Obama/Pelosi to ask taxpayers to bail out poorly run auto companies.
I am fed up with stupid politicians (both parties) punishing people who act prudently in order to reward inept, but politically connected, failures
However, the UAW and the Big 3 have to be forced to rightsize the industry, get non-working UAW members off the payroll, et cetera. GM as an example has profitable non-automotive divisions, and actually does pretty well in Europe. They sell cars over there that I would buy if they would ship them here.
The reality is that we, the taxpayer, will pay for this no matter what the outcome. I advocate that Government Sachs, or its successor, loans the money, but puts the draconian terms necessary in it for both the companies and the UAW (which could use a little right-sizing itself). GM should also be forced to spin off unrelated, profitable business units like GM Locomotive, and look for buyers for the unrelated unprofitable ones.
Too big to fail is likely also too big to perform...
is it too late to add a third party? The country can the appropriate clergy to issue an annulment................
FYI, I dont support McCain either on this. the fact that McCain was planning to back up people's mortgages is just as horrible. I am fearful that our country is quickly making a habit of rewarding bad decisions.
Ironically, the some have complained about the distribution of wealth and they are trying to make sure it doesnt shift???? Those that borrowed or lent too aggresively made a lot of money in teh process and should be shown the downside consequences of their actions. its that simple. the coutnry will survive.
PS: most people dont have pensions. if the govt is giving them, please let me know where I can also get one................
> like I’m entitled to make $70/hour? Hell no and I don’t make anywhere
> near that. I don’t have a safe pension and my healthcare costs are
> through the roof.
>
> To all you union workers, I don’t give a rat’s ass if you break a
> sweat and go home with a sore back each day. There are tens of millions
> of manual laborers in this country (albeit creating higher quality
> products or services than you auto losers). Why don’t we just pay
> them all $70/hour as well? Unemployment would skyrocket and that
> is a fact. This is America, not communist Russia, Cuba, or China.
>
>
> If you didn’t want to break your backs doing manual labor your entire
> life, guess what, you should have made better decisions when you
> were younger (saved money, joined army, gone to college and studied
> your butts off to get one of those soft, white collar jobs that you
> all so obviously covet). I’m betting you autoworkers were to damned
> lazy for all that though (which by the way is probably why the products
> you create are inferior to those made by the Japanese). Now you want
> to blame others for you personal failures and bad decisions and demand
> a ridiculously high wage for the low-skilled labor you perform.
>
>
> Your life is a product of your decisions, take some responsibility
> and stop blaming the evil, greedy CEO’s. Those CEO’s and the shareholders
> that pay their salaries make your employment possible.
> The UAW and other unions have done more harm to this country than
> any other group. The selfish union workers that vote for a paycheck
> every election rather than vote for what is best for our country
> every four years deserve exactly what is coming. This is karma, plain
> and simple. You reap what you sew you character lacking, no honor,
> selfish pieces of excrement. The damage you’ve done to this country
> by voting for your jobs is coming back to bite you all in your collective
> arses. The chickens have come home to roost. Screw you all.
you nationalize health care and you fix multiple labor markets
but this guy just wants to bust unions
2. Airlines.
3. Auto-industry.
Three worst perfmorming US industries in last 20 years. What is common? Unions!
Let's stop pretending that unions played any positive role at any point of history. It is the productivity growth that improved the worker wages and work conditions. Most white-collar workers have no unions and have been doing just fine.
If a GM worker gets paid 50% more than a Toyota worker, he has to be 50% more productive. I seriously doubt it is the case.
I also find it hard to comprehend and outright offensive how someone thinks that a low-skilled assembly worker with at best high school education should get paid 60-70K. Isn't is what a minimum wage for?
I bust my butt everyday delivering drywall the average house take about 7 tons of drywall. Myself and 1 helper stock 5-6 houses a day.
I have a CDL license and make $11 an hour.
I am more than happy to have a job in this economy right now.
Get rid of the unions drop everyones pay by half and they can lower the cost of the cars they produce and be more competitive
Why should I have to pay more taxes so some idiot with pneumatic driver can run a few bolts into a bumper every day. Sissy work for $27 to $37 an hour.
Try moving 30 tons of drywall everyday, then tell me you how "hard" you work
Is there a part of the 'bill of rights' that ensures health care to every individual? When did it become a 'right' to health care? Those of us who eat right, don't smoke, drink in moderation, etc., pay for those who do, in the form of higher health care costs. The reason the costs are so high is because there IS free health care in the USA. If you have no assets for the hospital to go after...it's a freebie! Of course, any fool knows there is no free lunch, especially for the middle class. If GM goes BK, not to worry. If our free market economy is allowed to function, there are already manufacturing firms ready to take on whatever GM leaves behind. Cars will still get made, the manufacturing plants will get bought....and those without a job will get hired.
sometime in the late 80's or early 90's GM had working electric car that averaged around 170 mile per charge. Now they have the VOLT that gets 40 miles to a charge
they couldn't make any money on service. so they trashed the the prototypes (sent them to the crusher)
If they would have continued that project they would probably have the #1 selling car in the world right now.
BUT GREED GOT IN THE WAY
DOWN WITH UNIONS
should comment on the hourly rate (the burdened rate) for government
employees. This would be the N.I.F. rate. (Naval Industrial Funded activities) I believe the last I heard, it was well over $100/hr, and they are not even unionized to any extent. (or the unions that are present are powerless relating to wages and benefits) In my experience as a government employee, the main function of a union in a government organization is to provide representation for the few who had problems in the performance of their job. Government employees cannot go on strike. Congress has the say of what the cost of living raises and health benefit cost/benefits will be, and what share of the benefit costs will be attributed to the worker. That averages the $20,000/yr, secretaries to the $100,000/yr. managers. The average government worker probably earns $17.00/hr. net, Talk about bloated overhead, fraud,waste and abuse. We all pay the cost of mismanagement and bloated overhead in the government as the American taxpayer!! It sure isn't confined to the auto industries.
On Nov 11 09:48 PM hard working american wrote:
> One more thing i forgot to add
>
> sometime in the late 80's or early 90's GM had working electric car
> that averaged around 170 mile per charge. Now they have the VOLT
> that gets 40 miles to a charge
> they couldn't make any money on service. so they trashed the the
> prototypes (sent them to the crusher)
> If they would have continued that project they would probably have
> the #1 selling car in the world right now.
>
> BUT GREED GOT IN THE WAY
>
> DOWN WITH UNIONS
Do I depend on the Big 3? Yes. Do I drive American? No. I did, when they had small cars, but now I'm going for BMW, where I know they focus on quality. The unions have screwed things up for the rest of us. If everyone was unionized, the wages wouldn't be this high because the companies couldn't afford it. The UAW doesn't go for the small fry... there's no money in it!
And to anyone who thinks choosing a foreign car is wrong, let's all remember this country was built on the idea of choice.
Toyota is working on a plug in Prius. You know what its batteries are projected to proivide under full electric power? 6 Miles Then the engine takes over.
40 miles,6 miles. GM has the upper hand.
NO BONUS until a 3 consecutive year ROI and EPS rise 15% above the best recorded years for GM, FORD , Chrysler.
.
THE SLIME FOR ALL THIS PAULSON =NEW YORK BAIL OUT IS SO ODOROUS( BS SMELL), IT ALMOST OVER COMES,THE AIG PIG SMELL FROM GREENBERG'S CREATION,BUT THE BIG 3 MESS CAN BE FIXED QUICKLY.
THE MANAGEMENT OF ALL THE INVOLVED COMPANIES HAVE TO BE TERMINATED NOW. THE NEW CEO'S SHOULD BE FROM HONDA AND TOYOTA.
I LIKE JEEP, HUMMER (WITH DIESEL HYBRID OF COURSE) , SUBURBANS( IF YOU HAVE A HORSE OR A FARM AND HORSE- LARGE BOAT ETC ONLY) LARGE PICK UPS IF YOU HAVE A BUSINESS . Ford is now the ROUSCH PROPANE F-150, THE HYBRID SUV, MUSTANG AND VOLVO. CAN THE REST.GM NEEDS SUBURBANS IF YOU HAVE A FARM AND HORSES OR LARGE BOAT. BUICKS ARE GREAT, LARGE PICKUP FOR CONSTRUCTION, PLUMBING ETC MECHANICAL AND MINING. TAHOE IS SO-SO. DITCH MALIBU AND PONTIAC. KEEP AVEO AND BRING IN EUROPEAN MODELS.
REMEMBER WHEN BUSINESS had some loyality to consumers? And Boards of Directors had integrity?? Neither do I.Thank God on Veteran's Day our TROOPS , GIs, SAILORS AND MARINES (AND COAST GUARD) HAVE SERVED AMERICA WITH HONESTY AND DECENCY...NOT LIKE THE SCUM BAG FECES ON WALL STREET AND DETROIT.
AND A SPECIAL THANKS TO FANNIE AND FREDDIE SLIME AND INVESTMENT BANKS THAT SOLD SWAPS, CDOs , DERIVATIVES AND THOSE WHO FACILITATED THIS DESTRUCTION OF OUR ECONOMY.
AS A MEDIC I ALWAYS TRIED TO FIX THE INJURED OR WOUNDED THERE ARE SITUATIONS HERE THAT NEED TO JUST TERMINATE.
DIEGO
On Nov 11 09:48 PM hard working american wrote:
> One more thing i forgot to add
>
> sometime in the late 80's or early 90's GM had working electric car
> that averaged around 170 mile per charge. Now they have the VOLT
> that gets 40 miles to a charge
> they couldn't make any money on service. so they trashed the the
> prototypes (sent them to the crusher)
> If they would have continued that project they would probably have
> the #1 selling car in the world right now.
>
> BUT GREED GOT IN THE WAY
>
> DOWN WITH UNIONS
Bosun,
All those jobs you listed have a much higher skill set than you have so stop pretending that you are in the same league as them. This is the USA, not the USSR.
I fully believe that the unions were necessary to management abuses of the 20's, but once that was corrected, they took things too far in regards to income, benefits and pensions. I don't care what the cops make, you're not a cop so stop the comparison or else become a cop. Let the retirees start contributing more to their health benefits. No one pays for mine or even part of mine. Cut back the pension % to future retirees. The number of folks getting a pension is continually shrinking so consider yourself lucky. Very few people in percentage terms can make 60K and get a pension to boot. I am completely on my own and live a lifestyle that allows me to save.
I lived near Lorain, OH where there is a large Ford plant. Every year end when the bonus checks came, the "member" were out buying a snow mobile or ATV or something they real didn't need. And, every year when the OT was cut back there was a large repo of those items because many lived beyond there means.
I agree with keeping management salaries in line and making it a requirement of any loan. But, I also want to see large concessions from the union as well.
And just to remind you every day I have to go out and make a living. There is no shift waiting for me or cheap benefits or pension, so while I feel for you, I think you need to stop and smell the roses.
On Nov 10 11:59 AM bosun.j wrote:
> Mr PhD guy! I'll bet you'll really be angry about Merchant Marine
> ship Masters making 202,000 a year! How dare they! Work six months
> a year And six months vacation! Just isn't right is it? How dare
> they! After all, that's 3240 hours a year at $62 an hour!
>
> Come o think of it I'll bet you'll be really really angry when you
> discover that the guy flying your over paid PhD butt around works
> 1200 hours a year max for his $175,000! Thats $145 an hour! How DARE
> he!!!
>
> Mr PhD guy, you need to get your priorities straight. In a free market,
> like you freepers love so much, a worker gets paid what someone is
> willing to pay for their labor. Come on now, you're a freeper aren't
> you?
>
> Perhaps you're just angry you spent so many years sucking up to department
> heads you hated to get you PhD and no one will pay you what you think
> you deserve. Well, PhD guy, Perhaps you should "improve your skill
> set"!
>
> HOW DARE YOU SIR!
This was in 1999.
He told me he made $27 per hour!!!
Somehow these workers were receiving unrealistic paychecks and continued to want more...
I understand them wanting, what they THINK is a fair hourly rate, when compared to the PROFITS the Big 3 were making.
Delphi workers (who manufactured components of vehicles) rejected taking a pay cut a few years ago, preferring that they put Delphi into bankruptcy.
Sorry, but I don't have much Sympathy for Greedy people.
I'm sure it started at the top, with the Managers drawing nice Fat Paychecks.
This Corporate Greed has destroyed the Corporations ability to compete with our friends in China (which work for roughly $15 per WEEK for 60 hours of work).
Remember R-E-S-P-O-N-S-I-B-I-L-...
We as a Nation, have become derailed with the "Live Now, Pay Later" mentality.
Guess What, "LATER" is here, it's time to pay the piper.
That is A problem... but not THE problem even if a CEO makes 100+ times what an average worker makes, we're talking about tens of thousands of workers here..
throwing the CEO on the street won't solve the problem...
Toyota must be doing something right if their costs are so much lower... maybe it's just greater efficiency... I wouldn't support using tax dollars to support an inefficient, non-competitive industry...
Quite frankly, there's not much that's going to stop people from mass producing cars in China and India in the future... it will take some time, but believe me it's in the works...
good wages for auto workers are a thing of the past... at least Detroit cost of housing is reasonable... some $1 houses there... and going lower...
Executives can leave
Now maybe (OK, probably) the current crop of executives *should* leave. But where exactly do you think you are going to get replacements for them at $150k a year? I've got news for you, *no* decent executive of a large enterprise makes that little in any other industry. And make no mistake, you *need* good executive leadership to run a large company (a lesson the current automaker debacle should clearly demonstrate).
The truth is, the kind of talent that will allow one to manage a complex enterprise or contribute to the design of a good car is rare. Do you really expect some kid who is capable of being a good mechanical engineer to go into the auto industry? Where he can make less than a factory worker, get worse benefits, and face industry insecurity... no thanks... that smart kid is going into software or electrical engineering where they don't get compensated less than the factory labor.
On the flip side, ask yourself, how rare are the skills and abilities necessary to work on a factory floor? If the auto unions suddenly disappeared, do you think the big 3 could staff their factories at half the wage/benefits? I bet they could, overnight.
That's the real lesson of how the unions have killed off the domestic auto industry... because they starved the rare talent to pay for the relatively plentiful labor.
Currently, I won't.
There are some things GM is doing that sound good to me. The Volt sounds intriguing, and the OnStar system is frankly brilliant.
But I rent a lot of cars as a travel for business. And I've never driven an American make of car without at least one serious highly annoying design flaw. It's gotten so bad I simply refuse to rent domestic cars anymore. So even if the big three turned around and started producing amazing, much better than Toyota and Honda cars it would take years for me to work through the process of giving them enough of a chance to buy them.
First, it would probably take 2-3 years of having people simply *rave* about domestic cars before I'd consider renting them again. Then I'd have to rent a bunch of different makes and models for another 2-3 years to decide it wasn't just a fluke, then I *might* consider buying a domestic car for my once a decade car purchase... but perhaps not... better to play it safe with the reliable foreign makes.
Basically, the domestic car makers have burned me, my friends, and my family so many times that it will take an incredible, sustained turnaround to convince me to give them another chance. I expect there are a lot of other car buyers like me out there.
(Oh, and this is even in light of the fact that it's been plain to me that buying a Toyota or Honda implies a strong price premium... even at a lower price I'm not tempted by domestics)
(It should also be noted that my parents recently, against their better judgement bought a Town and Country because it had great reviews and supposedly good quality... it's been no end of service problems for them... perhaps it's a fluke... but it make me distrust the reports of the improved quality of the big 3).
Wake up and smell the coffee
On Nov 11 10:59 AM dealfinder500 wrote:
> That's a pretty naive statement.
>
> Most likely that guy doesn't get the $11 all to himself. It probably
> goes to the company, and he probably gets $10/hr or less.
>
> But in the unlikely event that the guy did own his own garbage company
> and drove the truck himself and was the only worker, that $11 has
> to cover the cost of maintenance on the truck, gas, a place to process
> the trash, and then unless he has his own landfill he'll have to
> pay for someplace to put it, not to mention he'd have to pay the
> full SS tax on his income.
>
> So your illustration really isn't comparable.
Of all the hourly people in the country, Nuclear Reactor Operators should be the highest paid. This is because they can go to prison or be heavily fined if they screw up. Unfortunately UAW workers make the same wage. I've worked at the Fairfax GM plant, so I know what assembly line workers do. It's the same thing over and over again.
In every union there are people who want to kill the golden goose. You know the type...me, me, for me. If they become business managers or chief stewards the results can get ugly. It is up to the rank and file to elect responsible officials.
I realize there are quite a few people that do not understand what a union is supposed to do. The intent of a union is not money, money, money. The intent is to give the working man a voice. If a worker is being bullied, hit, or harassed it is the unions responsibility to help the employee file a grievance. Grievance resolutions always include at least one steward, one mid level manager, and the employee. The union is also responsible for ensuring the employee is paid a fair days wage for a fair days work. Our grandfathers and great-grandfathers shed their blood for that one. The union is responsible to ensure the companies overtime policies are fair. If an employee is being forced to work overtime, the employee should be paid fairly. It is the unions duty to ensure that companies provide adequate vacation time and sick leave. There is more but this is getting a little long.
Lastly...Union contracts set the wages for the rest of the country.
These companies need to left to die and new non-union companies can replace them. New nimble, effecient and competitive companiest that can take on the imports.
On Nov 11 03:05 AM KIT wrote:
> All wages after taxes end up in the hands of other businessmen and
> shareholders. Economies are based on money in motion. All wages are
> only held temporary in workers hands. Burn through of $100 is 4 days.
> Cutting wages damages other business.
Anyone with even a passing familiarity with the National Labor Relations Act realizes that it creates a system under unionization that has no resemblance whatsoever to a free market. As a preliminary matter, in a true free market employers are free to replace striking laborers with others who are willing to work.
The NLRA effectively prohibits that in all but extreme cases. Likewise, collusion among laborers is no different than price-fixing or anything else among manufacturers/retalier... - collusion is anticompetitive by definition and injures the ability of a free market to function. Furthermore, in many fields unions are free to constrain the supply of labor as unions traditionally run the apprenticeship programs through which new workers gain entrance into a profession.
Union supporters will say that aside from wage increases, unions help to improve working conditions, including health and safety considerations, for unionized workers. This is true, but it would be far better if there were simply more direct regulation of these issues by the government. After all, only a small percentage of workers are unionized anyway, so for workers to win true protections the government must simply step in and set standards - this means meaningful enforcement of OSHA, new standards, the end of at will employment as a concept in American law, etc...
You might have read down further before posting your anti-union anti-worker screed.
I do have one of the skill sets I mentioned. Even as a retired ship Master my skill set is harder to attain than a cops. Judging by the way cops act these days they're not at all skilled. BTW, the firefighters deserve twice their current pay. I've stood in a burning compartment surrounded by flame. It's not fun.
As for unions. At sea unions are absolutely necessary. Today around the world there are thousands of seamen who haven't been paid in weeks. Some who haven't been paid in months! There are seamen who can't go home after their time is up because the shipowner won't repatriate them (fly them home per their contract) !!!!! They have no union.
There are seamen who haven't eaten a proper meal for weeks because the ship owners won't buy enough food for them. There are seamen all over the world working with serious injuries from defective equipment that suffer because the ship owner is too cheap to get them medical care in the next port.
Captains locking the fresh water valves because water costs too much and they won't get a big enough bonus for that voyage if they treat their sailors as anything more than dogs!
I know these facts because I have inspected these ships.
I have witnessed the crimes against humanity committed by ship owners.
I have had ships like this arrested, sailors paid, sailors given medical care, ship owners forced to pay wages and it feels great!
Greedy ship owners treat people worse than dirt so they can live like princes! Screw 'em!
In the instances where seamen are paid in full many of them are paid less $5 a day.
I had a Russian national, a ship Master come on my ship in Hong Kong years ago as a guest. He works 11 months straight without a break, gets one month unpaid vacation, and earns only $12,000 a year! This man has as good or better education as I do. He's a first class seaman at the top of his game! $12,000 a year. $1000 a month. $33 a day. A crime!
So, continue with your anti- worker anti-union extremist-capitalist neo-CON trickle down economics, IGMFU screed. Continue to pat yourself on the back for working your fingers to the bone and ending up with nothing more than bony fingers. Go right ahead! While you're at it, quit complaining about how sad an existence you lead!
Rising tides lift all boats.
When workers do better they have more money to buy the useless consumerist nonsense your Madison Avenue tells them they can't live without. When they do so your company makes more money, hires more workers, and those workers can be bamboozled into contributing more to those 401(k)'s.
The only class war being waged is by the owning class against everyone else.
On Nov 11 11:41 PM Self-employed wrote:
>
> Bosun,
>
> All those jobs you listed have a much higher skill set than you have
> so stop pretending that you are in the same league as them. This
> is the USA, not the USSR.
>
> I fully believe that the unions were necessary to management abuses
> of the 20's, but once that was corrected, they took things too far
> in regards to income, benefits and pensions. I don't care what the
> cops make, you're not a cop so stop the comparison or else become
> a cop. Let the retirees start contributing more to their health
> benefits. No one pays for mine or even part of mine. Cut back the
> pension % to future retirees. The number of folks getting a pension
> is continually shrinking so consider yourself lucky. Very few people
> in percentage terms can make 60K and get a pension to boot. I am
> completely on my own and live a lifestyle that allows me to save.
>
>
> I lived near Lorain, OH where there is a large Ford plant. Every
> year end when the bonus checks came, the "member" were out buying
> a snow mobile or ATV or something they real didn't need. And, every
> year when the OT was cut back there was a large repo of those items
> because many lived beyond there means.
>
> I agree with keeping management salaries in line and making it a
> requirement of any loan. But, I also want to see large concessions
> from the union as well.
>
> And just to remind you every day I have to go out and make a living.
> There is no shift waiting for me or cheap benefits or pension, so
> while I feel for you, I think you need to stop and smell the roses.
>
>
> On Nov 10 11:59 AM bosun.j wrote:
"In Japan, Toyota has plants clustered together, with a capability of building more than a half-dozen different vehicles on each line, and their most efficient plants around the world are capable of operating more than one assembly line each. But here in the U.S., Toyota plants build just one or two models and are spread out all over the place. Why are they running so inefficiently stateside?" "The WSJ quoted an unnamed Toyota senior executive and management board member who says, "It's much, much more profitable to produce cars in Japan and ship them all to the U.S. right now,"
Isnt it amazing Big oil can gouge us for $140 a barrel, thats ok, Now its $59 hmmm . $5.00 gas to $2.00 gas isnt it amazing. Gas goes to $5.00 and now its the domestics fault?? Ford Gm and Chrysler had to work overtime to meet the DEMAND for large truck/suv sales while their cars rusted on the lots. Gm made a electric car, did anyone want it then NOPE. The big three have made CNG cars where are the stations? Ford has the Escape Hybrid but cant make enough. Gm Ford and Chrysler made what people wanted. Do you really think they would be working overtime to produce things people didnt want? AIG can cry and Bushes buddys run to the rescue, they are the supposed College educated no-it-alls, they got what they got due to pure GREED, and now they are getting more and I have to pay for that. See all you people that say no to the Loans the Domestics want obviously do not no anybody in the automotive sector. Or live in Michigan or Ohio.
U.S. automakers (Ford, GM and Chrysler) employ two and a half times more U.S. workers (per car) than foreign automakers (including all the cars they make here). Even with recent buyouts, GM employs more Americans than all foreign-owned automakers combined. Ford's U.S. job "footprint" is about 20 times bigger than that of Hyundai. And Ford employs more U.S. workers at a single manufacturing facilitiy than Hyundai and VW employ nationwide. Honda is one of the largest, longest operating "transplant" manufacturers operating in the U.S., but it employs only 27,000 Americans, about a third of Chrysler's current total.
And autoworker DO NOT make $73 per hour.
Also Autoworkers WAGES acount for 5%- 7% of the price of a car.
For the guy crying that he has a CDL and unloads drywall for $11hr,, LOL and you are complaing about the auto workers wages. You relize to get hired you need a Diploma to work at the Big Three. Try getting one and maybe you could make more money.
Just a thought, Gm has 31 plants/ operations in Michigan alone. What about the new VOLT plant? Gm employs more Americans than all 16 foreign automaker combined. Ford operates as many assembly lines as Toyota, Honda, Nissan and Hyundai combined.
In Michigan alone more then 200 R&D facilities employ 65,000 R&D workers about a $10 billion per year investment into the economy.
Also I was reading a article that stated last year the domestic automakers spent approximately $222 billion on U.S. parts, steel, rubber and semiconductors. These suppliers employed about 780,000 U.S. workers.
For the guy crying that he has a CDL and unloads drywall for $11hr,, LOL and you are complaing about the auto workers wages. You relize to get hired you need a Diploma to work at the Big Three. Try getting one and maybe you could make more money.
Just a thought, Gm has 31 plants/ operations in Michigan alone. What about the new VOLT plant? Gm employs more Americans than all 16 foreign automaker combined. Ford operates as many assembly lines as Toyota, Honda, Nissan and Hyundai combined.
In Michigan alone more then 200 R&D facilities employ 65,000 R&D workers about a $10 billion per year investment into the economy.
Also I was reading a article that stated last year the domestic automakers spent approximately $222 billion on U.S. parts, steel, rubber and semiconductors. These suppliers employed about 780,000 U.S. workers.
Well this is bull. Metal stampingt is out sourced by the auto industry to mostly non union factorys in the south. Those working poor with no helath insurance you hear about !
On Nov 10 09:26 AM coastalpirate wrote:
> It is not just the hourly rate, the union has also lobbied to reduce
> output so that more workers are required. You would think quality
> would go up. They push safety as the reason, but I heard at one point
> a metal stamping machine operator was only punching 12 sheets a day.
> The management wastes money true, and they have way too many brand
> families duplicate models with duplicate expenses lines. But paying
> factory workers more professional workers is not sensible. Maybe
> better business leaders wound up on the assembly line because of
> the higher pay and benefits....
Well this is bull. Metal stampingt is out sourced by the auto industry to mostly non union factorys in the south. Those working poor with no helath insurance you hear about !
On Nov 10 09:26 AM coastalpirate wrote:
> It is not just the hourly rate, the union has also lobbied to reduce
> output so that more workers are required. You would think quality
> would go up. They push safety as the reason, but I heard at one point
> a metal stamping machine operator was only punching 12 sheets a day.
> The management wastes money true, and they have way too many brand
> families duplicate models with duplicate expenses lines. But paying
> factory workers more professional workers is not sensible. Maybe
> better business leaders wound up on the assembly line because of
> the higher pay and benefits....
Should we bail them out? No, not with the current expense base and not without demands placed upon them to streamline their product mix. Manufacturing should move to more economical places and labor expenses should be brought into line with the actual skill associated with the jobs. In short, they need to run this like a business and not an entitlement zone for the unions.
On Nov 11 09:19 AM Tao wrote:
> The biggest problem is trying to keep the status quo. Let the companies
> fail and give the money to those who are hurt by the failure, like
> those who have insurance with AIG.
>
> American workers would be happy to work for lower wages, if they
> paid for reduced costs of health insurance, health care, housing,
> gas and electricity, ect.
>
> Keep in mind the buying power of the dollar has fallen to at least
> half of what it was when Bush took office. So $65,000 is really
> more like $32,000 in buying power.
Why autoworkers did not treasure their jobs and squzzed the
employer to death ? Crazy or something ?
Subsidize the automakers with billions every year
Place protectionist tariffs on imports
Drive gas guzzlers
Triple the amount of a monthly paycheck allocated to transportation
Pollute the atmosphere and remove all troublesome regulations
Increase the price of domestic automobiles by a third
Increase by law the interest paid for auto loans to 29%, the credit card rate
Support ever higher wages and benefits for workers and executives, reduce hours worked.
Problem solved for GM and GMAC
> like I’m entitled to make $70/hour? Hell no and I don’t make anywhere
> near that. I don’t have a safe pension and my healthcare costs are
> through the roof.
>
> To all you union workers, I don’t give a rat’s ass if you break a
> sweat and go home with a sore back each day. There are tens of millions
> of manual laborers in this country (albeit creating higher quality
> products or services than you auto losers). Why don’t we just pay
> them all $70/hour as well? Unemployment would skyrocket and that
> is a fact. This is America, not communist Russia, Cuba, or China.
>
>
> If you didn’t want to break your backs doing manual labor your entire
> life, guess what, you should have made better decisions when you
> were younger (saved money, joined army, gone to college and studied
> your butts off to get one of those soft, white collar jobs that you
> all so obviously covet). I’m betting you autoworkers were to damned
> lazy for all that though (which by the way is probably why the products
> you create are inferior to those made by the Japanese). Now you want
> to blame others for you personal failures and bad decisions and demand
> a ridiculously high wage for the low-skilled labor you perform.
>
>
> Your life is a product of your decisions, take some responsibility
> and stop blaming the evil, greedy CEO’s. Those CEO’s and the shareholders
> that pay their salaries make your employment possible.
> The UAW and other unions have done more harm to this country than
> any other group. The selfish union workers that vote for a paycheck
> every election rather than vote for what is best for our country
> every four years deserve exactly what is coming. This is karma, plain
> and simple. You reap what you sew you character lacking, no honor,
> selfish pieces of excrement. The damage you’ve done to this country
> by voting for your jobs is coming back to bite you all in your collective
> arses. The chickens have come home to roost. Screw you all.
that is the biggest crock I have ever heard. Haven't you people heard of EMPLOYMENT AT WILL. You are not forced to work in the auto industry. YOU CHOSE TO WORK IN THE AUTO INDUSTRY.
If you feel you are treated unfairly you have the option to leave. You can leave and get a different job anytime. Employment is not a zero sum game. You would not be working at your job if you didn't feel the benefits of working there outweighed the costs of leaving you would leave and somebody else would come right in and take your place.
You ignorant union workers are causing your own downfall, your own unemployment and you are going to get exactly what you deserve.
I have no sympathy for unpatriotic, selfish pieces of excrement who vote for a paycheck every election rather than what is best for this great country.
Union workers have done enough damage to this country. It is high time that they pay for their selfishness.
I am all for reducing the pay and employment levels of the white collar staff as well. Pay cuts should be unilateral or perhaps even staggered by income level, but everyone at the BIG 3 should participate. Kill all bonuses. Companies that lose money should not be paying any bonuses.
I am not for throwing the retirees overboard, but increasing their contributions to medical by $50 - $75 a month is not asking alot.
On Nov 12 02:07 AM bosun.j wrote:
> Self-employed:
>
> You might have read down further before posting your anti-union anti-worker
> screed.
>
> I do have one of the skill sets I mentioned. Even as a retired ship
> Master my skill set is harder to attain than a cops. Judging by the
> way cops act these days they're not at all skilled. BTW, the firefighters
> deserve twice their current pay. I've stood in a burning compartment
> surrounded by flame. It's not fun.
>
> As for unions. At sea unions are absolutely necessary. Today around
> the world there are thousands of seamen who haven't been paid in
> weeks. Some who haven't been paid in months! There are seamen who
> can't go home after their time is up because the shipowner won't
> repatriate them (fly them home per their contract) !!!!! They have
> no union.
>
> There are seamen who haven't eaten a proper meal for weeks because
> the ship owners won't buy enough food for them. There are seamen
> all over the world working with serious injuries from defective equipment
> that suffer because the ship owner is too cheap to get them medical
> care in the next port.
>
> Captains locking the fresh water valves because water costs too much
> and they won't get a big enough bonus for that voyage if they treat
> their sailors as anything more than dogs!
>
> I know these facts because I have inspected these ships.
>
> I have witnessed the crimes against humanity committed by ship owners.
>
>
> I have had ships like this arrested, sailors paid, sailors given
> medical care, ship owners forced to pay wages and it feels great!
>
>
> Greedy ship owners treat people worse than dirt so they can live
> like princes! Screw 'em!
>
> In the instances where seamen are paid in full many of them are paid
> less $5 a day.
>
> I had a Russian national, a ship Master come on my ship in Hong Kong
> years ago as a guest. He works 11 months straight without a break,
> gets one month unpaid vacation, and earns only $12,000 a year! This
> man has as good or better education as I do. He's a first class seaman
> at the top of his game! $12,000 a year. $1000 a month. $33 a day.
> A crime!
>
> So, continue with your anti- worker anti-union extremist-capitalist
> neo-CON trickle down economics, IGMFU screed. Continue to pat yourself
> on the back for working your fingers to the bone and ending up with
> nothing more than bony fingers. Go right ahead! While you're at it,
> quit complaining about how sad an existence you lead!
>
> Rising tides lift all boats.
>
> When workers do better they have more money to buy the useless consumerist
> nonsense your Madison Avenue tells them they can't live without.
> When they do so your company makes more money, hires more workers,
> and those workers can be bamboozled into contributing more to those
> 401(k)'s.
>
> The only class war being waged is by the owning class against everyone
> else.
>
>
On Nov 12 10:48 AM joe the pllumber wrote:
> To these union workers that keep saying unions exist to protect workers
> from being forced to work overtime, forced to accept unfair wages,
> forced to do this and that...
>
> that is the biggest crock I have ever heard. Haven't you people heard
> of EMPLOYMENT AT WILL. You are not forced to work in the auto industry.
> YOU CHOSE TO WORK IN THE AUTO INDUSTRY.
>
> If you feel you are treated unfairly you have the option to leave.
> You can leave and get a different job anytime. Employment is not
> a zero sum game. You would not be working at your job if you didn't
> feel the benefits of working there outweighed the costs of leaving
> you would leave and somebody else would come right in and take your
> place.
>
> You ignorant union workers are causing your own downfall, your own
> unemployment and you are going to get exactly what you deserve.
>
>
> I have no sympathy for unpatriotic, selfish pieces of excrement who
> vote for a paycheck every election rather than what is best for this
> great country.
>
> Union workers have done enough damage to this country. It is high
> time that they pay for their selfishness.
Settle Down!
The numbers in this article are alarming and inteded to be alarmist, but they show a skewed view of reality. That figure was including all labor wages, salaries, healthcare and other benefits, AND legacy costs averaged out to the number of workers employed.
The auto companies do have great legacy costs, but they have renegotiated a lot of those costs and average wages and benefit caosts are going way down as a result, including cutting retirees healthcare benefits for those of age to qualify for medicare.
Future costs will be nowhere near that, though undoubtedly still a bit more than Toyota.
On Nov 10 09:39 AM Midas1 wrote:
> Fox News reported this weekend that GM is seeking multibillions to
> fund their retirees' HEALTHCARE costs. BS!!!! No one is giving me
> a free ride on healthcare. I DO NOT WANT MY TAX DOLLARS PAYING FOR
> ANYTHING OTHER THAN PRODUCT INGENUITY!! Taxpayers fund Medicare--now
> we're supposed to give GM retirees the "cadillac" of healthcare?
> No way. Let them fail. This money should not go to padding pockets
> of overpaid employees whom the union would only allow a simple job
> task and no cross training. GM is never going to match the quality
> of Toyota or Honda as long as the focus is on what more they can
> do to pacify the stupid UAW. It's time to dump the UAW and infuse
> a dose of common sense into the domestics!!
I do think they should be helped out, not bailed out, but only under very strict circumstances where everyone in those companies participates in the cost reductions.
On Nov 12 08:54 AM AndrewEye wrote:
> Ha. I have to laugh at this article. Where are they getting the numbers
> from? The average worker at the big three does not make nearly this
> much money, that would add up to 150k a year. I live in Detroit and
> know many people who work in the auto industry and I don't know a
> single person making 150k. I work for a supplier in the auto industry
> as a mechanical engineer and I have a master's degree and don't even
> make half of that.
>
At the same time, by negotiating ridiculously lucrative wage and benefit packages for their members, the unions have placed the big three in a very unfavorable position. When the cost of your labor (and all their benefits) is nearly double that of your competition, you cannot compete. You will fail.
The sad reality is, that if these workers want to make $65,000 per year and have great benefits (that collectively add up to $73/hour), then they should go to college or trade school so they have skills that are worth that much to someone. But demanding those excessive wages and benefits simply because you belong to some sort of collective bargaining group is setting things up to fail. In this global economy, that job simply isn't worth the cost being demanded by the unions. That is also greed.
Someone has repeatedly argued above that the problem is because of the excessive compensation for CEOs and has nothing to do with excessive wages for labor. The problem is that there is only one CEO and if he makes $10 or $20 million per year you could take away his entire salary and you would only save $10 or $20 million per year. But with 1,000,000 workers making $65,000 per year in wages (plus another $80,000 or so in benefits and pension) that adds up to more than $150 BILLION dollars per year. That is nearly 1,000 times the CEOs salary. As I said before, the problem lies on BOTH sides of the equation.
I know that this is not what anyone wants to hear but, in order to be competitive in the global economy, our automobile production costs need to be in line with those paid by other car companies. It is that simple. The solution lies in cutting all costs - Management and Labor.
It will be interesting if the union leadership and the board of directors can come to some sort of mutually beneficial agreement. As a tax payer I do not favor subsidizing a business model that is so clearly flawed.
On Nov 10 10:19 AM jarco wrote:
> You must be a union auto worker or organizer. You obviously don't
> know what happens at the executive level especially during difficult
> times. Very few have the talents, education, experience to make it
> all come together and preserve the jobs of everyone involved.
>
>
>
> On Nov 10 09:14 AM Herbert Hoover wrote:
On Nov 12 11:28 AM lolYouSaidEducation wrote:
> Are you implying that CEO's are extremely intelligent? lol, I think
> not. The only value a CEO brings is perceived value.. that his,
> the board (including himself) feel they should be paid an outrageous
> amount because they bring *great* value to the company. I could
> be a CEO.. you could be a CEO.. anyone could be a CEO, it does not
> require any sort of natural gift, unless you condsider greed and
> stupidity a gift.
Socialist Corporate States of the Formerly United here we come!
The big three have been placed in a position where they need to sell the big SUVs and luxury cars, because the profit margin on those vehicles is much greater than it is on small economy cars - and they need the extra profit margin to be able to pay the high union wages and benefits and CEO salaries.
TJIrish: wrote
"I work in a union. Not Auto workers. Soo hey full disclosure. But I want to ask anyone reading these posts a question. Is it the union's fault that the Big 3 did not develop energy conserving automobiles like the Prius? Is it the union's fault for the lack of imagination at the Big 3 in developing automobile's people want to buy? Oil is under $60 a barrel. We are in a terrible mess. People aren't just buying cars. Look what Best Buy said today. Toyota stock has taken a huge hit along with the Big 3. It's not just about wage cost per car. It's management imagination and creativity that is also part of the issue. I read along time ago in an auto magazine a critic who said none of Big 3 have any original ideas and just copy others. Witness the bailout proposal. Where did they get that idea from?they saw the banks get bailed out. Now they want to be bailed out. What happened to GM's plan to ride out the storm til 2010 when it would save billion's from union managing it's own healthcare? Which is also around time of the VOLT being mass marketed? So don't just blame the unions. Blame should be placed everywhere with the Big 3! "
Who do you think is going to buy the crap at Wal-Mart, Circuit City, Mervyns, Best Buy, etc., if they are not paid? If the GOP masters of the universe had not begun the downward spiral in wages in the Reagan years, (and continued them for the past 28 years), our nation would not be in the abyss it is now.
Which is where the line gets drawn in two ways, the automobiles being produced by the big 3 aren't competitive yet the wages they are paying are way beyond competitive. At other industries if your product is not competing well than labor gets laid off, they don't get retained in rubber rooms like the big 3's labor force.
Than you got the fact that these people are asking for a bailout when they're already making 2.5 times the earnings of your typical worker, and this number is 4 times higher than someone living at the poverty line. A bailout shouldn't be used to help fund their living situation if these people who earned $70/hr wage and benefits, couldn't figure out how to live a life well within their own means.
And that is exactly what we're trying to bailout, whether it is the worker, or the entire company, we are bailing out people who aren't competitive and don't live within their means, or as a company doesn't use that money to remain competitive.
I agree that the CEO's salary is way too high for an uncompetitive company. If a company is dying the CEO's salary and those of his upper management should be the first to suffer in a forward thinking society, yet it is the opposite way around, the CEO stays til the ship sinks while all the workers are being forced to lighten the load.
But seriously, do we really need the big 3 if they don't remain competitive? Which is hard to see them being so after their recent failures.
Go to anybody's house, and I been to quite a few seeing as how I use to work door to door for a research company, and you'll see regardless of what kind of income their pulling in whether they are retired, working at Mcdonalds and Target, or they're a small business owner and all the furnishings look the same.
By looking at a person's home and not asking them what they do in their lives you would not be able to tell someone who is earning middle income from someone who lives below poverty. They have the same digital camera, two computers, and a flat screen.
So you're saying that these people should continue to be paid $70 an hour to do bad work, and by bad work I don't mean they aren't qualified to do their job well, but I mean bad work as in the final product isn't competitive?
On Nov 12 11:39 AM missing link wrote:
> Actually, (TJIrish) indirectly, the unions share the blame for the
> big three not developing fuel efficient cars. The costs associated
> with the wages and benefit packages demanded by the unions is so
> great that the big three have had to divert most (if not all) of
> their research and development dollars into paying these excessive
> costs., so there is little money left to pay for research and development.
> In addition, the Japanese government paid for the research to develop
> the hybrid electric technology, then they gave it top their car companies.
>
>
> The big three have been placed in a position where they need to sell
> the big SUVs and luxury cars, because the profit margin on those
> vehicles is much greater than it is on small economy cars - and they
> need the extra profit margin to be able to pay the high union wages
> and benefits and CEO salaries.
>
> TJIrish: wrote
>
> "I work in a union. Not Auto workers. Soo hey full disclosure. But
> I want to ask anyone reading these posts a question. Is it the union's
> fault that the Big 3 did not develop energy conserving automobiles
> like the Prius? Is it the union's fault for the lack of imagination
> at the Big 3 in developing automobile's people want to buy? Oil is
> under $60 a barrel. We are in a terrible mess. People aren't just
> buying cars. Look what Best Buy said today. Toyota stock has taken
> a huge hit along with the Big 3. It's not just about wage cost per
> car. It's management imagination and creativity that is also part
> of the issue. I read along time ago in an auto magazine a critic
> who said none of Big 3 have any original ideas and just copy others.
> Witness the bailout proposal. Where did they get that idea from?they
> saw the banks get bailed out. Now they want to be bailed out. What
> happened to GM's plan to ride out the storm til 2010 when it would
> save billion's from union managing it's own healthcare? Which is
> also around time of the VOLT being mass marketed? So don't just blame
> the unions. Blame should be placed everywhere with the Big 3! "
As to buying the big SUV's, few had one or demanded one until Ford built the Explorer and created a market for it via advertising. That's the goal of advertising. The International Scout and the Jeep(what ever there 1980's SUV was called) were niche vehicles with low sales numbers. If gas had been the equivalent of $4.00 a gallon in 1992, the Explorer would have died in it's tracks.
Right now the press is pushing diesel and guess what, folks are clamoring for diesel vehicles. Don't be so naive to think that the "people" spoke and the Big 3 listened. They simply saw a way to promote high profiit vehicles and exploited that. It's the 1970's all over again.
I don't want the see the BIG 3 go out, but management and labor need to make big concessions before I will be for any money being given to them.
On Nov 12 02:22 AM Steve442 wrote:
> God you people are STUPID,, Toyota and Hondas main operations are
> in JAPAN, Not the USA. They have what are called transplants here.
> Look what there goverments do for them, look what Chinas is doing.
> If Toyoda is doing so good then why do they have plants idled here?
> "Japan's Toyota Motor Corp. said Friday it would reopen three US
> factories after a three-month suspension due to falling US demand,
> using them to produce exports for the Middle East and Latin America."
>
> "In Japan, Toyota has plants clustered together, with a capability
> of building more than a half-dozen different vehicles on each line,
> and their most efficient plants around the world are capable of operating
> more than one assembly line each. But here in the U.S., Toyota plants
> build just one or two models and are spread out all over the place.
> Why are they running so inefficiently stateside?" "The WSJ quoted
> an unnamed Toyota senior executive and management board member who
> says, "It's much, much more profitable to produce cars in Japan and
> ship them all to the U.S. right now,"
>
> Isnt it amazing Big oil can gouge us for $140 a barrel, thats ok,
> Now its $59 hmmm . $5.00 gas to $2.00 gas isnt it amazing. Gas goes
> to $5.00 and now its the domestics fault?? Ford Gm and Chrysler had
> to work overtime to meet the DEMAND for large truck/suv sales while
> their cars rusted on the lots. Gm made a electric car, did anyone
> want it then NOPE. The big three have made CNG cars where are the
> stations? Ford has the Escape Hybrid but cant make enough. Gm Ford
> and Chrysler made what people wanted. Do you really think they would
> be working overtime to produce things people didnt want? AIG can
> cry and Bushes buddys run to the rescue, they are the supposed College
> educated no-it-alls, they got what they got due to pure GREED, and
> now they are getting more and I have to pay for that. See all you
> people that say no to the Loans the Domestics want obviously do not
> no anybody in the automotive sector. Or live in Michigan or Ohio.
>
> U.S. automakers (Ford, GM and Chrysler) employ two and a half times
> more U.S. workers (per car) than foreign automakers (including all
> the cars they make here). Even with recent buyouts, GM employs more
> Americans than all foreign-owned automakers combined. Ford's U.S.
> job "footprint" is about 20 times bigger than that of Hyundai. And
> Ford employs more U.S. workers at a single manufacturing facilitiy
> than Hyundai and VW employ nationwide. Honda is one of the largest,
> longest operating "transplant" manufacturers operating in the U.S.,
> but it employs only 27,000 Americans, about a third of Chrysler's
> current total.
>
>
> And autoworker DO NOT make $73 per hour.
> Also Autoworkers WAGES acount for 5%- 7% of the price of a car.
>
>
My comments have to do with the fact that unions do good for their members.
You seem to have a pathological hatred for unions and I tried to illustrate, in a frame of reference I have experience in, that unions can, and in fact do, do very good things.
What the UAW does or does not do in negotiations, within their organization or for or against their members is not for me to comment on. I am not a member of the UAW.
Are there are members that take advantage of any union and their fellow members? Of course. Are there members that recognize how good they have it and do their jobs well day in and day out? Of course. I can assure you that there are more of the latter than of the former.
Are there supervisors and managers that do a good job and work within the frame work established by the contract? Certainly. Are there supervisors and managers that are vehemently anti-union, anti-worker, and who do all they can to harass the members and subvert the contract? Certainly. I can assure you that there are more of the latter than of the former.
As for "inefficiencies" you mistakenly blame the membership for, how about those of building engine plants 1200 miles from assembly plants, how about having independent truckers waiting for hours to load and hours more to unload when delivering to auto factories, how about 250+ mirrors for one model rather than 3 or 4, or over 600 different kinds of seats, or 60 different engines, 20 different transmissions, 100+ different radios and on and on? Aren't those inefficiencies?
How about changing the models trim, engines, transmissions, tires wheels and a host of other changes every year? Aren't those inefficiencies?
One would think that where labor being 7% of the cost of a new car that inefficiencies in the way the company is structured and managed are more of an influence on the viability of the company.
You seem to have bought that biggest of lies that unions are evil. It simply is not so.
The American Extremist-Capitalist tinkle down economic theory is inherently evil. The evidence is in and its irrefutable.
Good luck to you on your way to your goal!
On Nov 12 10:49 AM Self-employed wrote:
> What do your comments have to do the UAW? My remarks are pointedbr/>> at removing inefficiencies from US auto manufacterers. Your attempts
> to divert attention away from the pay of UAW workers, the apparently
> excess number of UAW workers at auto plants and the stifling legacy
> benefits owed to former workers is a testament to the lack of an
> argument you posses for cutting all the above.
>
> I am all for reducing the pay and employment levels of the white
> collar staff as well. Pay cuts should be unilateral or perhaps even
> staggered by income level, but everyone at the BIG 3 should participate.
> Kill all bonuses. Companies that lose money should not be paying
> any bonuses.
>
> I am not for throwing the retirees overboard, but increasing their
> contributions to medical by $50 - $75 a month is not asking alot.
>
>
>
> On Nov 12 02:07 AM bosun.j wrote:
On Nov 10 11:59 AM bosun.j wrote:
> Mr PhD guy! I'll bet you'll really be angry about Merchant Marine
> ship Masters making 202,000 a year! How dare they! Work six months
> a year And six months vacation! Just isn't right is it? How dare
> they! After all, that's 3240 hours a year at $62 an hour!
>
> Come o think of it I'll bet you'll be really really angry when you
> discover that the guy flying your over paid PhD butt around works
> 1200 hours a year max for his $175,000! Thats $145 an hour! How DARE
> he!!!
>
> Mr PhD guy, you need to get your priorities straight. In a free market,
> like you freepers love so much, a worker gets paid what someone is
> willing to pay for their labor. Come on now, you're a freeper aren't
> you?
>
> Perhaps you're just angry you spent so many years sucking up to department
> heads you hated to get you PhD and no one will pay you what you think
> you deserve. Well, PhD guy, Perhaps you should "improve your skill
> set"!
>
> HOW DARE YOU SIR!
Now I know you aint a real plumber because if you were you would have been part of AFL-CIO. That is the union that regulates a plumbers wage. If you were a licensed, union plumber you wouldn't be so mad about working 70 hrs a week for little or nothing, because you too would be protected. Now did the auto workers elect the wrong union leaders and almost kill the golden goose? Of course they did. Does Toyota, Nissan, VW, et. a. recognize it? yep. The way they handle their workforce used to be by ensuring the oriental paternal management concept was enforced, vs the western model.
How do companies such as Wal-mart and Tyson's keep unions out? They scare the hell out of their employees.
However, Joe you are absolutely right. Without banding together to ensure our protection, we leave ourselves open to having to work long hours for little pay, too high healthcare payments, and no pension (other than SS). I would attempt to organize my fellow manual laborers to at least get healthcare costs down and ensure we have a pension in our old age. Believe me, management will do their best to keep you from organizing, because the union will cut into their pay. They may go as far as to fire bomb your house so be aware and protect your family. Once you organize though you find the benefits of being union greatly outweigh the risks. If my company had not organized I wouldn't be on medical retirement now, or have the opportunity to pay my house off. I would have been out the door with a "see ya, wouldn't want to be ya".
I've seen college educated engineers up through PHDs join the union for their own protection. The same goes for Chemists and Physicists. They became the backbone of our unit and a select few have moved on from union to management positions. With them moving into management, our company management is now much more sensitive to the needs of their employees.
Self employed I read where you were dissing auto workers for spending their pay increases. Since you are self employed I also know that you held any employees pay to little or nothing, while you increased the costs for your products, relative to their pay increase. I'm betting you were salivating each time you heard they might get paid more. You also know that you directly benefited from it. So cut the BS.
If it is a freemarket like you said, why asked government for a bailout??? Duhh!!!
On Nov 10 11:59 AM bosun.j wrote:
> Mr PhD guy! I'll bet you'll really be angry about Merchant Marine
> ship Masters making 202,000 a year! How dare they! Work six months
> a year And six months vacation! Just isn't right is it? How dare
> they! After all, that's 3240 hours a year at $62 an hour!
>
> Come o think of it I'll bet you'll be really really angry when you
> discover that the guy flying your over paid PhD butt around works
> 1200 hours a year max for his $175,000! Thats $145 an hour! How DARE
> he!!!
>
> Mr PhD guy, you need to get your priorities straight. In a free market,
> like you freepers love so much, a worker gets paid what someone is
> willing to pay for their labor. Come on now, you're a freeper aren't
> you?
>
> Perhaps you're just angry you spent so many years sucking up to department
> heads you hated to get you PhD and no one will pay you what you think
> you deserve. Well, PhD guy, Perhaps you should "improve your skill
> set"!
>
> HOW DARE YOU SIR!
They wrote their own story.
They are in bed with unions. Why don't they approach the unions for all the promises they offered originally - have the UAW bail them out.
And - poor mgt with poor design!
Absolutely not.
Auto workers - - - welcome to the real world of NO PENSIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...
On Nov 10 09:32 AM Tomas04 wrote:
> Do a little research before you make a comment like that. The $73
> and hour includes legacy costs. Union member don't make anywhere
> near that much money in reality. That number is at least $15-$20
> high and includes benefits like health care. It's a shame- this guy
> is a Phd yet he makes off the cuff statements like he has an IQ below
> room temperature.
Perhaps I did. However its not the UAW asking for bailouts either....... Also GM asked the German gov't to bail out their manufacturing interests in Germany too. They were told to pound sand.
On Nov 12 12:41 PM WatchingMarcitz wrote:
> So lets do some quick math.
>
> In the 1970s when General Motors had 50% US market share they had
> 5 consumer divisions (we'll leave GMC as a "business" division).
>
>
> That meant that each division, could, on average, have 10% market
> share. That's an OK-sized business.
>
> Now GM has 7 divisions (again leaving GMC aside) and has 25% market
> share.
>
> That means that each division could, on average, have less than 4%
> market share (3.57% to be precise). That is not a very healthy nor
> sustainable business model (given the marketing and infrastructure
> costs to keep these divsions alive - as it were)
>
> This division is the heart of GM's division problem. Before they
> can ever even hope to get better they need to benefit from a concept
> that made them successful in the past, namely "economies of scale".
> Right now there is no chance to take advantage of that because they
> have NO SCALE.
>
> This is why there should not be a bail-out of GM and at most a "bail-down".
> They should pare down to 3 divisions at most (Cadillac, Chevy, Saab)
>
>
> Until they scale-down they can never hope to scale-up.
>
Perhaps I did. However its not the UAW asking for bailouts either....... Also GM asked the German gov't to bail out their manufacturing interests in Germany too. They were told to pound sand.
WatchingMarcitz: sorry, I pressed the wrong reply link....
On Nov 12 12:56 PM taison wrote:
> You obviously missed the point! Did the Merchant marine ship Masters
> asked government for a bail out? Duhh!!!
>
>
> On Nov 10 11:59 AM bosun.j wrote:
> Do you want your pay cut in half? When CEO's of most companies make
> $10's of millions, you have a problem with someone making $65k a
> year?
We have always admired your economy's ability to fight back, and I'm sure that in time it will recover, I just hope that it doesn't repeat the mistakes of the past. When you sneeze, the rest of the world catches a cold!
New workers at the domestic three make half wages, don't have a traditional pension and don't have employer based healthcare in retirement.
Your argument is outdated...
The unions already took a hit to try and save the companies but it may have been too late...
If there is a LOAN... then there will be stipulaions involved and everyone will be expected to pony up to help them survive.
The loans wil be repaid and we will have saved MILLIONS of jobs..a small price to pay .. a loan guarantee.. kin exchange for saving several million jobs..
If we don't help them, we could be facing economic depression.. I don't think we can afford to take the risk that losing the big three could spark a horrible decline in our economy.. that would be worsened by the psychological effects of watching severla million of our neighbors lose their jobs...
Bad idea to let them die right now.. let's get a bridge loan to them and support this important strategic asset....
I'm all for helping the big three succeed.. It likely won't cost us anything.. and the industry will have leverage to fix any remaining labor woes...
On Nov 12 01:42 PM Socialism cannot compete! wrote:
> No, I have no problem with *someone* making $65K a year...just not
> unskilled lineworkers. That's not a market wage -- that's a union-driven
> wage. Lotsa engineers don't make much more than that, and have *much*
> more education and hard-to-replace knowledge! Time to get real in
> the auto industry on labor costs.
In a perfect world for D.C., the gov't would like Detriot to fail in little dribs and drabs on its own and go under quietly and with honor, and not all at once, so the rioting will be less severe. But, due to abject incompetance in Detroit and D.C., it has come to a painful head in quite an inconvenient spot of bother for D.C. that must now be addressed differently than the more "honorable failure" way it would vastly prefer.
So, here we are in another bailout "plan" that will not work. Guess who will pay the bill for this, yet another, failure? You guessed it.
Nothing in my comments say I have a pathological hatred for the unions. Your rage is clouding your judgement. I am just pointing out some obvious issues. I stated in a previous post that unions were necessary and good. My point is that the pendulum has swung too far the other way and is in part responsible for the mess of the automakers. I think most would agree that the Big 3 have been poorly run for years, but you can't lay all the blame just on them.
I never said all autoworkers were bad people. I am just saying that most are overpaid. Now I agree that the work may be monotonous, but that does not change the fact that the unions had(past tense) gained so much power that they have skewed auto wages way outside what the market would pay.
While I think at will employment is a joke, management should still be able to fire someone who is a bad employee. The hurdles that are set to get rid of a deadbeat are ridiculous. I know this for a fact as I have to friends who work at Navistar.
On another union note, did you know that NYC is paying 40 teachers not to teach. That's right, they can't fire them because of the union. Two of these "teachers" were sending lewd emails to students. Now before you get all crazed, no where am I insinuating that all teachers are bad. i am saying that they have 40 bad teachers that need to be fired. That's probably somewhere in the neighborhood of $3 million dollars in salary and benefits being pissed away because of union tactics. That's not a good, but a wrong anyway you slice it.
Sure, we can thank the union for today's labor laws, but does that mean we have to tolerate their strong arm tactics in this day an age?
P.S. don't be so angry, it will only shorten your life span.
On Nov 12 12:14 PM bosun.j wrote:
> Self-employed:
>
> My comments have to do with the fact that unions do good for their
> members.
>
> You seem to have a pathological hatred for unions and I tried to
> illustrate, in a frame of reference I have experience in, that unions
> can, and in fact do, do very good things.
>
> What the UAW does or does not do in negotiations, within their organization
> or for or against their members is not for me to comment on. I am
> not a member of the UAW.
>
> Are there are members that take advantage of any union and their
> fellow members? Of course. Are there members that recognize how good
> they have it and do their jobs well day in and day out? Of course.
> I can assure you that there are more of the latter than of the former.
>
>
> Are there supervisors and managers that do a good job and work within
> the frame work established by the contract? Certainly. Are there
> supervisors and managers that are vehemently anti-union, anti-worker,
> and who do all they can to harass the members and subvert the contract?
> Certainly. I can assure you that there are more of the latter than
> of the former.
>
> As for "inefficiencies&am... you mistakenly blame the membership
> for, how about those of building engine plants 1200 miles from assembly
> plants, how about having independent truckers waiting for hours to
> load and hours more to unload when delivering to auto factories,
> how about 250+ mirrors for one model rather than 3 or 4, or over
> 600 different kinds of seats, or 60 different engines, 20 different
> transmissions, 100+ different radios and on and on? Aren't those
> inefficiencies?
>
> How about changing the models trim, engines, transmissions, tires
> wheels and a host of other changes every year? Aren't those inefficiencies?
>
>
> One would think that where labor being 7% of the cost of a new car
> that inefficiencies in the way the company is structured and managed
> are more of an influence on the viability of the company.
>
> You seem to have bought that biggest of lies that unions are evil.
> It simply is not so.
>
> The American Extremist-Capitalist tinkle down economic theory is
> inherently evil. The evidence is in and its irrefutable.
>
> Good luck to you on your way to your goal!
>
>
>
>
Hourly worker wage: around 28$ per hour
Benefits: around 20 per hour.
The rest is legacy costs that the japanese do not have due to having new plants with few retirees.
As for those complaining that these people make a decent wage.. try doing the work yourself... Personally, I would rather use my education to avoid installing 500 gas tanks a day. The benefits of an education go far beyond pay.... Nothing like having some non productive knucklehead sitting in a cubicle complaining about the compensation of a worker who is doing an incredible amount of productive work each and every day.
You won't find a job making 73 an hour building vehicles on an assembly line because that job is a myth.. personally, I think the unions should consider a lawsuit for slander. Oh well.. the companies can't afford to pay on that lawsuit but it would be nice if they were smart enough to realize that reporting inflated wages of their workforce does not increase sales!!!
If you report that your workers are overpaid slobs, do you think you will sell more cars?
D U H
Drive an entry-level VW Golf or Audi and you understand just how far behind Detroit is.
We are in a recession now, and the talking heads on CNBC are all trying to predict when we'll come out of it. If we let the auto industry and their associated suppliers die, look out for a depression, and probably with a capital 'd.'
On Nov 10 09:49 AM Jeff from PA wrote:
> But most of the benefits are outrageously overpriced because of the
> deregulation of the health and pharmaceutical companies. The article
> makes it sound like these people are making 150 grand a year, when
> it is closer to 60 or 70. To me that is a wage they deserve. The
> cuts should come from the top from the outrageous CEO and management
> pay. The gap between the average worker and CEO is the greatest it
> has ever been in world history. Considering you could pay 100-1000
> workers on one CEO's pay, if they would have cut their salaries of
> the last 2 decades, they would have saved billions.
>
> Those guys making 60-70 thousand plus benefits deserve every cent.
> The CEO's making 10's of millions do not.
PERMANENT WORKERS HAVE LITTLE HEALCARE AND NO PENSION...THE REASON WHY THEY ARE NOT UNION? LOOK AT THEIR WAGES AND WHERE THE'RE LOCATED.
LETS GO BACK TO THE BIG THREE...700,000 RETIRED WORKERS...IS IT A CRIME TO HAVE RETIREMNT BENEFITS? HEALTHCARE BENEFITS,....NOT AS GOOD AS THOSE THAT WANT TO SEE UAW DESTROED ....THE REPUBLICANS.
THE REASON WE'RE IN THIS MESS IS BECAUSE THE BUSHES WITH THE HELP OF PRESIDENT CLINTON (NAFTA) MANEGED TO SHIP OUR GOOD PAYNG JOBS TO CHINA AND MEXICO, TAKING AWAY PEOPLE'S BUYNG POWER AND REPLESING IT WITH BORROWIN POWER. WITH OUR JOBS GONE WE CAN'T PAY OUR LOANS..AND NOW WITHOUT A GOOD PAYNG JOB WE CANT GET A LOAN...WAKE-UP AMERICA....