|
|
View Poll Results: Who's gonna go bust first? | |||
GM | 17 | 47.22% | |
Ford | 4 | 11.11% | |
Chrysler | 15 | 41.67% | |
Voters: 36. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
11-15-2008, 07:59 PM | #1 |
Which of These Car Companies Will Go Bust First?
Poll your answers and state why.
__________________
"Manual labour is not for me. In fact i'm not even sure non manual work is either." -Anthony Linton Check out ▬▬► I like I like ◄▬▬ for more fun on Facebook |
|
11-15-2008, 08:09 PM | #2 |
The Martian
|
Ford due to previously posted labor cost
__________________
"The lead car is absolutely unique, except for the one behind it which is identical." – F1 commentator Murray Walker. |
11-15-2008, 08:29 PM | #3 |
Banned
Drives: 2008 Yaris Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,034
|
By "bust" do you mean bankrupt or liquidated and out of business?
Gene |
11-15-2008, 09:30 PM | #4 |
GM...and the "Labor Cost" issue is bullshit! The big three don't make cars that people buy anymore...plus...they pay their execs. huge sums to run the company into the ground. Toyota will survive because they were smart enough to not pin their hopes and livelyhood on a few models that relied in turn on cheap gas.
Why is it that when a company goes under the first people that get blamed are the ones who actually do the work. People now-adays shit on the worker first when things get tough, forgetting that average incomes have actually gone down over the past 5-8 years, while corporate waste and executive compensation has gone through the roof. The average employee deserves good healthcare and a pension that will support them in retirement. People fail to realize that these companies survived (and indeed made big money) for more that 75 years while still taking care of their workers. The people that blame a company's failure on "labor costs" are unknowingly driving down the wages and benefits of everyone in the bottom 90% of the population. I'll get down off of my soapbox now.....thank you. |
|
11-15-2008, 10:22 PM | #5 |
I mean either or both of those options. Including merging with another company.
__________________
"Manual labour is not for me. In fact i'm not even sure non manual work is either." -Anthony Linton Check out ▬▬► I like I like ◄▬▬ for more fun on Facebook |
|
11-15-2008, 10:54 PM | #6 |
それを吸ってください
|
I think you'll see the door hit areas like Pontiac and Buick before they go bust, but GM is my choice
|
11-15-2008, 11:30 PM | #7 |
Drives: 2008 Yaris Sedan Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Delaware/Connecticut
Posts: 609
|
GM over Ford or Chrysler?! REALLY?!?!
If any go it ill be Chrysler, horrible ownership that just wants out and isn't willing to spend the money and make the moves to improve the state of their company. |
11-16-2008, 10:45 AM | #8 | ||||
Banned
Drives: 2008 Yaris Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,034
|
Quote:
If you're not acquainted with the term "work rules" let me break it down. Work rules are part of the Union Contract. The Union specifies what each worker will do as part of their job description. The worker will do no more, nor any less, than what their job description mandates. Unions like work rules because they can assign each job category their own unique work rule, and thus boost the number of employees on the payroll (and hence can increase the Union dues). Work rules are part of the reason that Union operated facilities are inefficient. I work in an non-Union shop. I am tasked with qualifying and testing large electronic devices at work. I also will do assembly work, rig, run the crane, clean up my area, do paperwork, do engineering, do documentation and many other "unusual" tasks. In contrast if we had a Union where I work someone different would run the crane, rig, clean up, do the engineering and so on. When they were not doing "their job" they'd sit on their asses. I have heard about such facilities, such as some of the Organized Westinghouse facilities in the area. They're all gone now, except for the Nuke operations, which are run by Toshiba. At Toyota it's different - I know this because I've undergone the "Lean" training, once each with three different employers. One of whom was a Japanese consumer electronics manufacturer (where I was employed as a temporary "associate technician"). An hourly worker at a Lean facility is rewarded by how many different jobs that they can do in the assembly process. The more that you can do, the more valuable you are to the Company and the more you are paid. This is in contrast to the Union way, which is to reward people by seniority ONLY. Except of course for Union officers, who enjoy "super seniority", or who are laid off last. I have heard, by rumor, that Unions are starting to get with the Lean concept. However I've never heard of such a thing at an Auto manufacturer with UAW membership in North America. In Toyota's overseas operations, including in India, the Lean Concept is pushed very hard. I spoke with a kid who came from India who had friends who worked for Toyota's facilities there. He claimed that they were extremely happy and proud to work for Toyota. He added that in spite of India's heavy orientation towards Unions that they worked "many different roles" during their work day. There is nothing wrong with growing your skill sets and being rewarded for it. Unions could do this, if they would knock off the "You owe me" mindset. What does this have to do with little cars? If you have a Lean concept you can combine work processes in a flexible way. Whenever the car needs two things done to it you do it. If today the Work Cell has some issues you go where you're needed. You cannot do this with work rules that specify one kind of job for you. If you do work where it's "not your job" you can be slapped with a grievance. In a Lean operation you don't need gigantic cost premiums to make a car. You can make simpler cheaper cars, more cheaply with less hassle and strain. You don't have people sitting on their asses marking time since what needs done isn't "their job". The other side of Lean, incidentally, is that it makes the work go easier. When people can jump in where they're needed it takes the strain off of any individual worker. You also can pick out the slackers and bums and give them some motivation, mainly peer pressure. The ones who can undo the messes are respected and valued and deserve the higher pay. When management is jerking around they can catch hell too. It's on them to explain why shit isn't there when it's needed or why someone gets away with slacking. Quote:
Executive compensation is a totally separate issue from hourly wages. If anything it's still pretty trivial in comparison to guaranteed benefit pensions. Be honest, if you have a hundred guys and girls making over $250,000 a year that's $25,000,000 a year. If you have 10,000 people making $75,000 a year that's $750,000,000 a year. Which is the bigger chunk of change? Which counts for more when it's time to compute benefits? Is there a class issue at work here? Certainly! I know that Office Staff sometimes look down on hourly people. I also know who is there at 0300 hours too. Let's not play games about "who does the work". If you think that engineering is not work you're talking out of your bum. Same with organizing work flow, scheduling, purchasing, and making heavy decisions that might get you fired. Especially that last one - I've seen three guys in the last year get demoted or sacked for bad decisions. How often do you see an hourly person being fired for screw ups? It's not common. Quote:
The Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation started back in 1974. It's job was to ensure pensions. Since 1978 such pensions have been fewer and fewer. Any one with half a brain knows that with our elderly growing ever older that guaranteed benefit pensions were a demographic nightmare in the making. The US cannot compete in a global marketplace when you have workers overseas who are hungrier, will work Lean, will work twelve hours a day six days a week and on top of it don't demand pensions and gold plated "health care". Since we can't afford to work for peanuts we have to work smarter. That means not carrying six retirees on the back of every worker. Also means that we have to take a less glamorous health package. Most of all, it means you have to knock off the "us versus them" mindset. That's reality. I don't like some of it either. I have Brazilians and Chinese climbing up my ass every day. It pisses me off that they can work on generic shit while I do the custom work and we get compared to them. It also pisses me off that Day shift jacks off all day long. I'm really getting angry because of rumors of layoffs and night shift catching it first. Life isn't fair. I already have the get away car warmed up in case of lay off. Quote:
Anyone who thinks running a business is easy is invited to do so. I work with four guys who work on the side. Not one of them would dream of quitting work to do it full time. Do you work in manufacturing, today? I do. I am not The Expert but I think I know a thing or two about how it's done today. First thing is you have to flexible, second you have to be grateful, and third you have to care about your workmanship. Gene |
||||
11-16-2008, 10:56 AM | #9 |
Banned
Drives: 2008 Yaris Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,034
|
|
11-16-2008, 12:30 PM | #10 |
Drives: '08 Yaris Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: SoCal (Jamul)
Posts: 97
|
Gene, you're awfully opinionated for someone who seems to have no experience actually working in a union shop.
You have to remember that union contracts (work rules) are a negotiated agreement with the management, so you can't lay blame on just one side. You also must remember the abusive conditions under which unions came to "power" (many years before both you or I were born). I have personally worked in both union & non-union shops and have seen the abuses that can happen when there is no union protection. I'd prefer to work a union shop every time. I do happen to work in a Lean union shop where multi-skilling is promoted. I have also seen the results of the old saying, "Jack of all trades, master of none". We have a lot of people (management included) who are "qualified" to perform many tasks, albeit, not very well. You can't beat a journeyman's years of experience. |
11-16-2008, 12:43 PM | #11 | |
Drives: 07 Yaris S Sedan 5-Speed Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,179
|
Quote:
Because of this, GM will be the first to go under if there is no bailout. This is a simple math. Chrysler would go second, followed by Ford based on the real numbers. It's already common knowledge that GM will no longer be able to run it's company in about 60 days. That's scary. There are no creditors that will lend the money needed during this crisis and the government is looking increaslingly unlikely to bail them out. |
|
11-16-2008, 01:16 PM | #12 |
I can't vote on one of them. All of them will survive.
I just can not see any of the 3 going down for the count.
__________________
some people are little slinkies. . . . .they are really good for nothing. . . .but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs. Come to the DARKSIDE..... We have candy
|
|
11-16-2008, 01:30 PM | #13 | |
Drives: 07 Yaris S Sedan 5-Speed Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,179
|
Quote:
Right now, at least 2/3 of elected officials in Washington are against this bailout. Almost all of republicans are against it and they still have enough power to stop a bailout. It will also take Bush's signature to pass it and he is against it. GM will not even make it to Obama's inauguration in January. We'll see this week what happens but it's going to take an unexpected miracle to get this passed in the current congress. Time is quickly running out for GM and it doesn't look good. So again, why are you sure they'll be fine? |
|
11-16-2008, 01:48 PM | #14 |
Not really here...
Drives: 2008 Blazing Blue S hatchback Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 1,062
|
I hope that if Chrysler goes belly up it makes the Wrangler really cheap for a small period of time. Other than that, I could careless if Ford and GM go up. Although it would suck if GM goes away with the new Camero coming out.
__________________
Liberate Tutemet Ex Infernis. |
11-16-2008, 02:20 PM | #15 | |
Drives: 07 Yaris S Sedan 5-Speed Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,179
|
Quote:
As for GM, it is ironic that they may soon go under right when they're just starting to build some good cars. And to think, this whole situation may kill the Chevy Volt which cost billions to develop. Truly sad. |
|
11-16-2008, 03:49 PM | #16 | |||||
Banned
Drives: 2008 Yaris Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,034
|
Quote:
Meanwhile the CWA turds enjoyed long coffee breaks, did not do anything but "their job" and sniveled and whined about politics. Finally they whined about us "scabs with papers". We were laid off by seniority and not performance. Hence the loafers got to stay and we (twenty of us) left. I never forgot how my "Brothers and Sisters" used me like a Kleenex. I got to pay dues but got nothing else. If Unions stand for working people how come the IBEW didn't stand up for me? Why did they take my money and not give me the protection that my dues should have bought for me? I survived two Organization campaigns, one by the USW, the other by the Teamsters. In the first case I arrived after the vote, and in the second case I voted against the Union. Quote:
That being said, Unions can and do insist upon certain things, especially work rules. I rather doubt that they'd elect to support Lean, and since that time Lean has NOT been implemented at GM nor at Ford. I wish that they'd do it, and I wish that they'd build a car like the Yaris in North America. I won't hold my breath waiting. Quote:
I read about how Carnegie rolled, and why he had to import workers from Europe. The early Mills were awful places to work, as were the old mines. I heard stories about the "Company Store" too. I also know how the Teamsters got in bed with the Chicago mobs. I know how Teamsters and UAW thugs batter "scabs", even to today. We have a lawsuit out in Philly against some thugs who beat a guy who was protesting Clinton. They beat him senseless and they were members of the Teamsters. I know how it went at one job where the USW came in, won the election and then played some pretty rough games before the shop folded up. I remember being told that "they" were gonna shoot us. I remember learning to back against the wall so that the forklifts didn't smash me. I made less than those bozos but I was a "suit" because I wore a tie to work. Unions are in it for themselves, not for the Rank 'n File. Which is why they're losing membership in the US. How will they fix this situation? Will they stand up for working people? Will they offer us the skills and flexibility to stand up to foreign labor? Will they give us non-union people a reason to join in a stand up ballot? Nope. They want "Card Check". In other words they're gonna scam their way into the workplace. Worst thing they could do, instead of helping us they'll help themselves. No secret ballot, just the shaft. Lie to fifty percent plus one person and we're suddenly "organized". Card Check is a dirty trick, an act of desperation and will hurt working people as well as the good that Unions can do. Quote:
Every one of the Union supporters were I work now have a gigantic chip on their shoulders. Not one of them has ever worked in a Union shop. They've got dreams and gigantic chips on their shoulders. Quote:
I worked for a year with an Instrument Builder who had Journeyman Papers and thirty years experience. The guy knew his shit. He despised Unions because he felt that they protected the lazy workers. Nothing personal but "been there, done that". The IBEW ripped me off and I don't forget such things. Gene Last edited by GeneW; 11-16-2008 at 04:11 PM. |
|||||
11-16-2008, 04:30 PM | #17 | |
Quote:
I am NOT fond of the past business practices and the writing has been on the wall for years with all the subvented leases and lies ....... I am actually pleased it has caught up to them. I worked for a GM dealership and they were making on average of $6000 per truck and SUV on the back end while the salesman was earing $50 yes $50 bucks per unit. I also worked at a toyoye dealership which was a totally differant concept. I doubt they will vanish and I like to see the upper management sweat..... it's about time.
__________________
some people are little slinkies. . . . .they are really good for nothing. . . .but they still bring a smile to your face when you push them down a flight of stairs. Come to the DARKSIDE..... We have candy
|
||
11-16-2008, 07:28 PM | #18 |
Drives: 07 Yaris S Sedan 5-Speed Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,179
|
When did Chrysler fail? Aside from the early '80's government loan, Chrysler has never failed. Daimler-Benz merged with Chrysler (Chrysler was actually in better shape before Mercedes came in). Then Cerberus bought 80% from Daimler after Mercedes sucked the life out of Chrysler.
|
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
The Yaris Performance Primer | eTiMaGo | Performance Modifications | 30 | 01-24-2024 04:26 AM |
Car doors are not self-locking when left unlocked | fainty_girl | General Yaris / Vitz Discussion | 27 | 03-14-2011 09:12 AM |
Someone Please Help With SET & Local Dealer Nightmare! | sanityassassinv2 | General Yaris / Vitz Discussion | 32 | 11-26-2008 11:32 AM |
11/02/08 Metro Auto Squad 1st Annual Car Show (my car club) | Jerkratt | NY / NJ/ CT / PA | 14 | 10-26-2008 05:51 PM |
How to Be a Street Racer - General Life Guide | MDF | Off-topic / Other Cars / Everything else Discussions | 7 | 03-19-2007 12:49 PM |