GM investing $500M in Mexico plant

[yosef1969]

It is ironic that the Big 3 have to go outside the US to earn a profit while the foreign auto makers who continue to out perform them come to the US.

The difference is the foreign auto makers have the good sense to build in right to work states, primarily in the south. Detroit is beholden to the unions and the unions are the primary source of their troubles. Ridiculous retirement packages and higher out of whack wages are directly tied to the unions. The big 3 are so hogtied by big labor that rather than build plants in the USA without unions and risk ticking off frigging labor they provide jobs elsewhere in search of profits.

The states that get these manufacturing facilities also offer huge tax breaks which allows the foreign automakers to better handle federal taxes and compete. That's the big bad corporate fatcats getting a tax break and turning it into thousands of jobs (about 40K last I read). Who would've thunk it?

[houndawg]

It is ironic that the Big 3 have to go outside the US to earn a profit while the foreign auto makers who continue to out perform them come to the US.

The difference is the foreign auto makers have the good sense to build in right to work states, primarily in the south. Detroit is beholden to the unions and the unions are the primary source of their troubles. Ridiculous retirement packages and higher out of whack wages are directly tied to the unions. The big 3 are so hogtied by big labor that rather than build plants in the USA without unions and risk ticking off frigging labor they provide jobs elsewhere in search of profits.

The states that get these manufacturing facilities also offer huge tax breaks which allows the foreign automakers to better handle federal taxes and compete. That's the big bad corporate fatcats getting a tax break and turning it into thousands of jobs (about 40K last I read). Who would've thunk it?

Management signed every contract and now, as usual, they want to blame somebody else for their own poor performance in negotiating.

First thing to do is eliminate management bonuses and fire 50% of managers; they are overhead and they produce nothing. That's why the foreign-managed car companies in America are more successful - fewer American managers.

[CID1990]

It is ironic that the Big 3 have to go outside the US to earn a profit while the foreign auto makers who continue to out perform them come to the US.

The difference is the foreign auto makers have the good sense to build in right to work states, primarily in the south. Detroit is beholden to the unions and the unions are the primary source of their troubles. Ridiculous retirement packages and higher out of whack wages are directly tied to the unions. The big 3 are so hogtied by big labor that rather than build plants in the USA without unions and risk ticking off frigging labor they provide jobs elsewhere in search of profits.

The states that get these manufacturing facilities also offer huge tax breaks which allows the foreign automakers to better handle federal taxes and compete. That's the big bad corporate fatcats getting a tax break and turning it into thousands of jobs (about 40K last I read). Who would've thunk it?

Management signed every contract and now, as usual, they want to blame somebody else for their own poor performance in negotiating.

First thing to do is eliminate management bonuses and fire 50% of managers; they are overhead and they produce nothing. That's why the foreign-managed car companies in America are more successful - fewer American managers.

The unions won't like that, and unions run that little circus, Bubba.

[OL FU]

Management signed every contract and now, as usual, they want to blame somebody else for their own poor performance in negotiating.

First thing to do is eliminate management bonuses and fire 50% of managers; they are overhead and they produce nothing. That's why the foreign-managed car companies in America are more successful - fewer American managers.

The unions won't like that, and unions run that little circus, Bubba.

I thought he was saying to fire Obama

[OL FU]

Interesting thing about unions.

On a macro level they are all about increasing their memberships. That is one of the reasons that the only growth in union membership has been government employees. It is the only place where "management" is effectively on the side of unions since unions contribute and vote to keep management in place.

On the micro side unions are about protecting current members and don't give a hoot about whether there are more jobs or less jobs. If they did, they would be more interested in trying to do whatever was reasonable to get GM to build another factory in Detroit where union membership would be guaranteed.

[CID1990]

Interesting thing about unions.

On a macro level they are all about increasing their memberships. That is one of the reasons that the only growth in union membership has been government employees. It is the only place where "management" is effectively on the side of unions since unions contribute and vote to keep management in place.

On the micro side unions are about protecting current members and don't give a hoot about whether there are more jobs or less jobs. If they did, they would be more interested in trying to do whatever was reasonable to get GM to build another factory in Detroit where union membership would be guaranteed.

That makes so much sense it is blinding.

[GannonFan]

Interesting thing about unions.

On a macro level they are all about increasing their memberships. That is one of the reasons that the only growth in union membership has been government employees. It is the only place where "management" is effectively on the side of unions since unions contribute and vote to keep management in place.

On the micro side unions are about protecting current members and don't give a hoot about whether there are more jobs or less jobs. If they did, they would be more interested in trying to do whatever was reasonable to get GM to build another factory in Detroit where union membership would be guaranteed.

Yup, absolutely right. We're long past the days where some unions were critical in ensuring safe working conditions, reasonable work weeks, and reasonable pay. It's not the turn of the last century any longer, and some unions are well past their worth. The auto unions now are, unfortunately, all about protecting current membership, and if that's contrary to the well-being of the company so be it. It's a "get your's now" mentality. GM will be okay for a little while since the government graciously removed the albatross of years of bad decisions off their backs (thanks taxpayers, of course) but there's been nothing done to ensure it doesn't build up again and they are still woefully positioned against foreign car makers. It'll look good for 5, 10 years maybe. But then we'll be back where we were before.

[houndawg]

Interesting thing about unions.

On a macro level they are all about increasing their memberships. That is one of the reasons that the only growth in union membership has been government employees. It is the only place where "management" is effectively on the side of unions since unions contribute and vote to keep management in place.

On the micro side unions are about protecting current members and don't give a hoot about whether there are more jobs or less jobs. If they did, they would be more interested in trying to do whatever was reasonable to get GM to build another factory in Detroit where union membership would be guaranteed.

True, I've seen it first hand. Also seen how a little bonus for the signing committee can make them forget all about the welfare of their union brethren and sign on the line.

Of course, bloated overhead will continue to get their bonuses and their "membership" won't shrink.

[houndawg]

Interesting thing about unions.

On a macro level they are all about increasing their memberships. That is one of the reasons that the only growth in union membership has been government employees. It is the only place where "management" is effectively on the side of unions since unions contribute and vote to keep management in place.

On the micro side unions are about protecting current members and don't give a hoot about whether there are more jobs or less jobs. If they did, they would be more interested in trying to do whatever was reasonable to get GM to build another factory in Detroit where union membership would be guaranteed.

Yup, absolutely right. We're long past the days where some unions were critical in ensuring safe working conditions, reasonable work weeks, and reasonable pay. It's not the turn of the last century any longer, and some unions are well past their worth. The auto unions now are, unfortunately, all about protecting current membership, and if that's contrary to the well-being of the company so be it. It's a "get your's now" mentality. GM will be okay for a little while since the government graciously removed the albatross of years of bad decisions off their backs (thanks taxpayers, of course) but there's been nothing done to ensure it doesn't build up again and they are still woefully positioned against foreign car makers. It'll look good for 5, 10 years maybe. But then we'll be back where we were before.

You mean those safe conditions like on a certain oil rig where eleven people recently burned up? Or a certain coal mine where twenty-nine more recently suffered the same fate?


Management has to lead by example instead of insisting that only the unions lose. Worked for Lee Iacocca.

[ASUG8]

Hyundai, Honda, BMW, Mercedes, Kia, Toyota, and Nissan have all demonstrated that a quality vehicle can be manufactured and assembled in the US, and it can be done without labor unions.

[OL FU]

Yup, absolutely right. We're long past the days where some unions were critical in ensuring safe working conditions, reasonable work weeks, and reasonable pay. It's not the turn of the last century any longer, and some unions are well past their worth. The auto unions now are, unfortunately, all about protecting current membership, and if that's contrary to the well-being of the company so be it. It's a "get your's now" mentality. GM will be okay for a little while since the government graciously removed the albatross of years of bad decisions off their backs (thanks taxpayers, of course) but there's been nothing done to ensure it doesn't build up again and they are still woefully positioned against foreign car makers. It'll look good for 5, 10 years maybe. But then we'll be back where we were before.

You mean those safe conditions like on a certain oil rig where eleven people recently burned up? Or a certain coal mine where twenty-nine more recently suffered the same fate?


Management has to lead by example instead of insisting that only the unions lose. Worked for Lee Iacocca.

You know hound I realize it is great for gotcha message board but one offs in discussion like this only work for that purpose. Everyone knows every work place isn't safe and sometimes that includes union shops. Wasn't the recent coal mine disaster a union mine. Regardless, the point is the same compared with the time unions started things are not the same.

[OL FU]

Interesting thing about unions.

On a macro level they are all about increasing their memberships. That is one of the reasons that the only growth in union membership has been government employees. It is the only place where "management" is effectively on the side of unions since unions contribute and vote to keep management in place.

On the micro side unions are about protecting current members and don't give a hoot about whether there are more jobs or less jobs. If they did, they would be more interested in trying to do whatever was reasonable to get GM to build another factory in Detroit where union membership would be guaranteed.

True, I've seen it first hand. Also seen how a little bonus for the signing committee can make them forget all about the welfare of their union brethren and sign on the line.

Of course, bloated overhead will continue to get their bonuses and their "membership" won't shrink.

I might be wrong but I think GM and Ford both whacked away at middle management but it is really beside the point.

I wasn't taking sides in that post simply pointing out reality. I don't really have a problem with private sector unions. Management typically gets what it deserve. Of course the car business, like the airline business, got into this situation because they were virtual monopolies so negotiating union contracats weren't life or death issues. Both management and labor rode that horse as long as they could. Of course it has been shot out from under them now.

My main point with private sectors unions is that since their main focus is current employees compensation packages that, like anything that operates under the laws of supply and demand, they actually reduce private sector participation in unions and to some degree where their influence is significant the overall number of jobs. Once again, not saying it is good or bad it is just an economic fact.

[yosef1969]

It is ironic that the Big 3 have to go outside the US to earn a profit while the foreign auto makers who continue to out perform them come to the US.

The difference is the foreign auto makers have the good sense to build in right to work states, primarily in the south. Detroit is beholden to the unions and the unions are the primary source of their troubles. Ridiculous retirement packages and higher out of whack wages are directly tied to the unions. The big 3 are so hogtied by big labor that rather than build plants in the USA without unions and risk ticking off frigging labor they provide jobs elsewhere in search of profits.

The states that get these manufacturing facilities also offer huge tax breaks which allows the foreign automakers to better handle federal taxes and compete. That's the big bad corporate fatcats getting a tax break and turning it into thousands of jobs (about 40K last I read). Who would've thunk it?

Management signed every contract and now, as usual, they want to blame somebody else for their own poor performance in negotiating.

First thing to do is eliminate management bonuses and fire 50% of managers; they are overhead and they produce nothing. That's why the foreign-managed car companies in America are more successful - fewer American managers.

Didn't say anything about management not having a part in it. Those contracts and other poor decisions by management are precisely why they should have been allowed to fail. Another company would have bought the remaining pieces and the contracts could've been voided giving the new company a realistic chance at being competitive long term without government interference.

[AZGrizFan]

Management signed every contract and now, as usual, they want to blame somebody else for their own poor performance in negotiating.

First thing to do is eliminate management bonuses and fire 50% of managers; they are overhead and they produce nothing. That's why the foreign-managed car companies in America are more successful - fewer American managers.

Even for a union apologist you're pretty pathetic. Union employees hold all the power in negotiating sessions. You know it. I know it. Anyone with a brainstem knows it. It's amazing what you'll sign when a gun is being held to your head (figuratively speaking....I think). Foreign managed car companies are more successful because for the most part they're non-union. Period. You can keep trying to justify the need for unions all you want...but they're similar to the typewriter. Once had a purpose, but now they're just a relic of the way we USED to do business.

[houndawg]

Even for a union apologist you're pretty pathetic. Union employees hold all the power in negotiating sessions. You know it. I know it. Anyone with a brainstem knows it. It's amazing what you'll sign when a gun is being held to your head (figuratively speaking....I think). Foreign managed car companies are more successful because for the most part they're non-union. Period. You can keep trying to justify the need for unions all you want...but they're similar to the typewriter. Once had a purpose, but now they're just a relic of the way we USED to do business.

That's feeble, Z. Management holds all the cards and not one single contract takes effect without their approval. And I'm not trying to justify the need for unions I think by and large their day is past, given that only about 12% of workers are unionized. What I'm trying to point out is that the vast majority of union bashing is the usual attempt by management to take the spotlight off of their poor performance, everything is somebody else's fault and all they can talk about is what they can't do.. I don't buy that unions are the problem when 88% of our workforce in not union. American workers are the most productive in the world. Period. And foreign managers are better negotiators and leaders than US managers are obviously.

[Skjellyfetti]

Foreign managed car companies are more successful because for the most part they're non-union. Period.

For the most part? Really? You sure about that?

Japan
http://www.jaw.or.jp/e/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Germany
http://www.igmetall.de/cps/rde/xchg/internet" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

France
http://www.cgt.fr/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Korea
http://metalunion.kr/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Spain
http://www.ugt.es/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Those are the top 5 car producing countries outside the US. All have unionized workers.





Foreign managed car companies are more successful because they produce a better product. Period.

[yosef1969]

Foreign managed car companies are more successful because for the most part they're non-union. Period.

For the most part? Really? You sure about that?

Japan
http://www.jaw.or.jp/e/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Germany
http://www.igmetall.de/cps/rde/xchg/internet" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

France
http://www.cgt.fr/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Korea
http://metalunion.kr/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Spain
http://www.ugt.es/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Those are the top 5 car producing countries outside the US. All have unionized workers.





Foreign managed car companies are more successful because they produce a better product. Period.

Not so fast with that period. Their US manufacturing facilities are not unionized. They are more successful producing automobiles in the US than Detroit due to lack of union overhead.

[OL FU]

Foreign managed car companies are more successful because for the most part they're non-union. Period.

Foreign managed car companies are more successful because they produce a better product. Period.

Agreed. As I said management and the unions had a somewhat adversarial but very cozy relationship for way too long when there were only three car companies. Management could pay the unions more than most and make crappy cars and sell them. Times have changed. Driven a couple of Fords lately. Thought they have done fairly well. Hope GM comes through the same way.

[AZGrizFan]

Those are the top 5 car producing countries outside the US. All have unionized workers.
Foreign managed car companies are more successful because they produce a better product. Period.

Unionized at their American plants?

[houndawg]

For the most part? Really? You sure about that?

Japan
http://www.jaw.or.jp/e/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Germany
http://www.igmetall.de/cps/rde/xchg/internet" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

France
http://www.cgt.fr/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Korea
http://metalunion.kr/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Spain
http://www.ugt.es/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Those are the top 5 car producing countries outside the US. All have unionized workers.





Foreign managed car companies are more successful because they produce a better product. Period.

Not so fast with that period. Their US manufacturing facilities are not unionized. They are more successful producing automobiles in the US than Detroit due to lack of union overhead.

Not so fast with that implied period.

Foreign manufacturers are better managed and understand about modernizing equipment and facilities and training workers and thinking long-term. American management sees nothing beyond the quarterly P&L statement and thinks that deferring maintenance is a great way to cut costs.

[AZGrizFan]

Even for a union apologist you're pretty pathetic. Union employees hold all the power in negotiating sessions. You know it. I know it. Anyone with a brainstem knows it. It's amazing what you'll sign when a gun is being held to your head (figuratively speaking....I think). Foreign managed car companies are more successful because for the most part they're non-union. Period. You can keep trying to justify the need for unions all you want...but they're similar to the typewriter. Once had a purpose, but now they're just a relic of the way we USED to do business.

That's feeble, Z. Management holds all the cards and not one single contract takes effect without their approval. And I'm not trying to justify the need for unions I think by and large their day is past, given that only about 12% of workers are unionized. What I'm trying to point out is that the vast majority of union bashing is the usual attempt by management to take the spotlight off of their poor performance, everything is somebody else's fault and all they can talk about is what they can't do.. I don't buy that unions are the problem when 88% of our workforce in not union. American workers are the most productive in the world. Period. And foreign managers are better negotiators and leaders than US managers are obviously.

A rising tide (benefits and salary-wise) lifts all boats, dawg. Non-union wages and benefits benefitted from the contracts UNION workers signed too, causing labor costs ACROSS THE BOARD to rise to an unsustainable point...Sure, not one contract takes effect with out management approval, but when you (as a manager) weigh the opportunity cost of a strike/shutdown/idle machinery with the future costs inherent in a bad union contract, at some point the manager is going to sign the fucking contract to get the machines rolling again.

Exhibit A for why companies should be allowed to fail. The employees and their ridiculous demands, coupled with weak-kneed management who cow-towed to those demands....they ALL need to be on the street and see how the other half lives.

[yosef1969]

Not so fast with that period. Their US manufacturing facilities are not unionized. They are more successful producing automobiles in the US than Detroit due to lack of union overhead.

Not so fast with that implied period.

Foreign manufacturers are better managed and understand about modernizing equipment and facilities and training workers and thinking long-term. American management sees nothing beyond the quarterly P&L statement and thinks that deferring maintenance is a great way to cut costs.

You seriously have a reading comprehension issue don't you? The fact that they have high union overhead is a result of poor management but it still doesn't change the fact that labor cost (inflated by the unions) is major factor in why the big 3 are at a competitive disadvantage and rather than manufacture cars in the US they go to Mexico for cheaper labor.

[yosef1969]

That's feeble, Z. Management holds all the cards and not one single contract takes effect without their approval. And I'm not trying to justify the need for unions I think by and large their day is past, given that only about 12% of workers are unionized. What I'm trying to point out is that the vast majority of union bashing is the usual attempt by management to take the spotlight off of their poor performance, everything is somebody else's fault and all they can talk about is what they can't do.. I don't buy that unions are the problem when 88% of our workforce in not union. American workers are the most productive in the world. Period. And foreign managers are better negotiators and leaders than US managers are obviously.

A rising tide (benefits and salary-wise) lifts all boats, dawg. Non-union wages and benefits benefitted from the contracts UNION workers signed too, causing labor costs ACROSS THE BOARD to rise to an unsustainable point...Sure, not one contract takes effect with out management approval, but when you (as a manager) weigh the opportunity cost of a strike/shutdown/idle machinery with the future costs inherent in a bad union contract, at some point the manager is going to sign the **** contract to get the machines rolling again.

Exhibit A for why companies should be allowed to fail. The employees and their ridiculous demands, coupled with weak-kneed management who cow-towed to those demands....they ALL need to be on the street and see how the other half lives.

+1

[Grizalltheway]

Not so fast with that implied period.

Foreign manufacturers are better managed and understand about modernizing equipment and facilities and training workers and thinking long-term. American management sees nothing beyond the quarterly P&L statement and thinks that deferring maintenance is a great way to cut costs.

You seriously have a reading comprehension issue don't you? The fact that they have high union overhead is a result of poor management but it still doesn't change the fact that labor cost (inflated by the unions) is major factor in why the big 3 are at a competitive disadvantage and rather than manufacture cars in the US they go to Mexico for cheaper labor.

Why don't they just build plants in right-to-work states like the foreign car makers are doing?

[houndawg]

Not so fast with that implied period.

Foreign manufacturers are better managed and understand about modernizing equipment and facilities and training workers and thinking long-term. American management sees nothing beyond the quarterly P&L statement and thinks that deferring maintenance is a great way to cut costs.

You seriously have a reading comprehension issue don't you? The fact that they have high union overhead is a result of poor management but it still doesn't change the fact that labor cost (inflated by the unions) is major factor in why the big 3 are at a competitive disadvantage and rather than manufacture cars in the US they go to Mexico for cheaper labor.

Well which is it, yo?

Unions caused wages and benefits to be raised ACROSS THE BOARD to an unsustainable point including non-union workers? So why are the foreign companies profitable with all that "unsustainable" non-union labor cost?
Methinks you have a little comprehension problem of your own.