General Motors

[XpunkRocker]

it isn't a bad thing to lose your "workforce" to your competitior if the people at the top screw up. IF some loses you 10 billion $$, that person should be fired. instead, GM would give that person a bonus. keep and reward your good workers. rid of the bad ones.

it is time to clean up.

 

[Kelly]

It is my belief that in addition to restructuring worker contracts to be consistent with what Toyota, etc. workers make here in the U.S., the bailout money should include a provision that anyone with the title of Vice-President or President in the companies that take money should be fired immediately and not allowed to have any position in a company that even supplies the auto industry. They should be blacklisted.

Totally agree, and you could actually just lower the wages just a fraction and they would be saving millions.....or even simply freeze the wages.

Right now this is what the government says has to happen

• Kill the Jobs Bank (stupid idea anyway)
• Competitive wages (with non-union Japanese workers, which as far as Ford is concerned is pretty much already there. EXCEPT IN THE pensions. US union workers get 5x the amount in pensions than the non-union Japanese workers).
• Competitive work rules (with non-union Japanese workers)
• 1/2 VEBA in stock (Under contracts negotiated last year, the automakers agreed to contribute about $56.5 billion to the voluntary employees' beneficiary association, which UAW will manage. The VEBA, which will take effect in 2010 and remain operational for 80 years, will reduce retiree health benefit liabilities for the automakers by about $100 billion. Now this has been changed to put 1/2 of this money into stocks.)

Now, when I see what the government plans on doing about the CEO's then I may give a more positive opinion about all of this.

 

[BlackLantern]

Maybe part of the issue is that the auto industry isn't attracting younger workers, they just keep pulling out of the same pool of people who have left one company and go to work for another....

 

[Addendum]

If I saw that I could work in warmer weather for similar benefits I would leave my company and go work there. There has to be some incentive to stay. I don't think it is in a company's best interest to lower a person's wages to be more competitive. That is actually a good way to lose your workforce to your competitor.

But cutting pay is a way to save money. I hate to sound repetitive, but Fedex has cut the pay of their salaried employees, beginning with Fred Smith, the head honcho, taking a 20% pay cut. The rest of the board are taking a 10% cut, and the rest of the salaried employees are taking 7%. They're going to save $800 million.

The reason they had to do that is because while people are still sending stuff overnight, the amount has significantly decreased, especially since this is their peak season (Thanksgiving to New Years).

 

[Kelly]

I have a feeling that if given the choice of a 5 to 7% pay cut or no job at all.........I think they will take the pay cut for now.

 

[dnno1]

it isn't a bad thing to lose your "workforce" to your competitior if the people at the top screw up. IF some loses you 10 billion $$, that person should be fired. instead, GM would give that person a bonus. keep and reward your good workers. rid of the bad ones.

it is time to clean up.

What are you saying? It is a bad thing if you lose your work force to your competitor. Do you think it is wise to invest money on training your labor-force only to lose it to your competitor because you didn't pay him enough? That is not wise. As far as GM goes, they gave Rick Wagoner a bonus because he cut annual losses from $10.5 billion in 2005 to $2 billion (this is according to Bloomberg and is verified by the SEC filings). He had previously cut his salary in half last year because they were showing a loss. Even though they are still showing a loss, the net change is positive. I think you need to get your facts straight before you start mouthing off mis-information.

 

[rdh007]

Totally agree, and you could actually just lower the wages just a fraction and they would be saving millions.....or even simply freeze the wages.

Right now this is what the government says has to happen

• Kill the Jobs Bank (stupid idea anyway)
• Competitive wages (with non-union Japanese workers, which as far as Ford is concerned is pretty much already there. EXCEPT IN THE pensions. US union workers get 5x the amount in pensions than the non-union Japanese workers).
• Competitive work rules (with non-union Japanese workers)
• 1/2 VEBA in stock (Under contracts negotiated last year, the automakers agreed to contribute about $56.5 billion to the voluntary employees' beneficiary association, which UAW will manage. The VEBA, which will take effect in 2010 and remain operational for 80 years, will reduce retiree health benefit liabilities for the automakers by about $100 billion. Now this has been changed to put 1/2 of this money into stocks.)

Now, when I see what the government plans on doing about the CEO's then I may give a more positive opinion about all of this.

Why would changing work rules save money?
Why would a union become competitive with non-union positions? It's my (limited) understanding that there are unions in the non-US manufacturers here in the US. That's who I'm thinking they should be competitive with.

My overriding concern in this is the widening gap between the haves and have nots in this country. The loss of the middle class will end this country. (If it happens)

 

[rdh007]

But cutting pay is a way to save money. I hate to sound repetitive, but Fedex has cut the pay of their salaried employees, beginning with Fred Smith, the head honcho, taking a 20% pay cut. The rest of the board are taking a 10% cut, and the rest of the salaried employees are taking 7%. They're going to save $800 million.

The reason they had to do that is because while people are still sending stuff overnight, the amount has significantly decreased, especially since this is their peak season (Thanksgiving to New Years).

I haven't seen this in this or the other bailout plans, but I haven't looked that closely, so they may be there. But this is the only restructucring I've heard of thus far that has made complete sense to me. Having said that, the auto worker will have to take a hit. I just want to see it be as small as possible.

 

[XpunkRocker]

What are you saying? It is a bad thing if you lose your work force to your competitor. Do you think it is wise to invest money on training your labor-force only to lose it to your competitor because you didn't pay him enough? That is not wise. As far as GM goes, they gave Rick Wagoner a bonus be cause he cut annual losses from $10.5 billion in 2005 to $2 billion (this is according to Bloomberg and is verified by the SEC filings). He had previously cut his salary in half last year because they were showing a loss. Even though they are still showing a loss, the net change is positive. I think you need to get your facts straight before you start mouthing off mis-information.

what i am saying is that if a person loses 10 billion dollars, that person should be fired.

you think a person should be rewarded for losing 10 billion dollars?

and the reason they cut annual losses was because they fired all the little people who had nothing to do with the losses. the company fires/lays off the wrong people.

 

[XpunkRocker]

But cutting pay is a way to save money. I hate to sound repetitive, but Fedex has cut the pay of their salaried employees, beginning with Fred Smith, the head honcho, taking a 20% pay cut. The rest of the board are taking a 10% cut, and the rest of the salaried employees are taking 7%. They're going to save $800 million.

The reason they had to do that is because while people are still sending stuff overnight, the amount has significantly decreased, especially since this is their peak season (Thanksgiving to New Years).

this is a really good model to follow. to survive, people have to make sacrifices. it is life.

 

[Addendum]

I haven't seen this in this or the other bailout plans, but I haven't looked that closely, so they may be there. But this is the only restructucring I've heard of thus far that has made complete sense to me. Having said that, the auto worker will have to take a hit. I just want to see it be as small as possible.

They have tried to avoid cutting the pay for the hourly people (hub workers, drivers, and so on), but they're on a hiring freeze for their main hub in Memphis, and have been for the past couple months.

I forgot that they also suspended their contributions to retirement plans for a minimum 1 year

 

[dnno1]

Totally agree, and you could actually just lower the wages just a fraction and they would be saving millions.....or even simply freeze the wages.

But you are in the hole by billions. Millions is not going to cut it. It would serve you better if you were to eliminate jobs, close down plants, and sell off assets (which is what they have been doing).

Kill the Jobs Bank (stupid idea anyway)

Yeah, why do that when the taxpayers can foot the bill with unemployment payments?

Competitive wages (with non-union Japanese workers, which as far as Ford is concerned is pretty much already there. EXCEPT IN THE pensions. US union workers get 5x the amount in pensions than the non-union Japanese workers).

Not going to save you much, unless you are implying that they cut out the pensions for retirees completely (which is a figure that is erroneously figured into the average wage of the workers). Then that would mean that the taxpayers (once again) would have to pick up the tab for the pensions. Brilliant!

Competitive work rules (with non-union Japanese workers)

That will be a long and painstaking process, since there are distinct job categories in the American auto plants done so that you won't place an electrician in a door fitter's job. It would also mean overturning a lot of the labor disputes that have been settled and have set precedences in the industry. Good luck with that.

 

[Kelly]

Well ya know dnno....ya gotta start somewhere.....damn dude, people are going to lose their jobs, and there will end up being a paycut for others......deal.

 

[Marx]

Considering how much money all of these people in the auto industry make, a paycut is not that unreasonable of a request.

 

[dnno1]

what i am saying is that if a person loses 10 billion dollars, that person should be fired.

It wasn't necessarily his fault. This New York Times article says that the credit crisis, high gas prices, and a shaky economy was the cause of automakers problems, and this can be seen by automakers around the world.

you think a person should be rewarded for losing 10 billion dollars?

Having your salary cut nearly in half until you can turn things around should be punishment enough.

and the reason they cut annual losses was because they fired all the little people who had nothing to do with the losses. the company fires/lays off the wrong people.

Not quite. According to the Bloomberg article, Wagoner and co. closed 12 plants, sold off $17 billion in assets, and layed off or retired $35,000 workers to do that.

 

[Kelly]

Considering how much money all of these people in the auto industry make, a paycut is not that unreasonable of a request.

But we shouldn't do that Marx, because it will only save a portion of what needs to be saved....................

 

[Marx]

But we shouldn't do that Marx, because it will only save a portion of what needs to be saved....................

There are going to have to be massive changes within the American auto industry if it is to survive.

 

[dnno1]

Well ya know dnno....ya gotta start somewhere.....damn dude, people are going to lose their jobs, and there will end up being a paycut for others......deal.

I didn't say that wasn't going to happen. What I didn't want to see is the companies shutting their doors. That would have meant punishing millions of folks who (although related) had nothing to do with the failure (not too fair).

 

[dnno1]

Considering how much money all of these people in the auto industry make, a paycut is not that unreasonable of a request.

You consider an average salary of about $44 K a lot of money?

 

[Kelly]

There are going to have to be massive changes within the American auto industry if it is to survive.

I agree.........and its not going to be pretty..........and ALL/EVERYONE involved is going to have to take a loss for awhile......


I'm willing to have to pay more down for a car/have better credit/etc, UAW/CEOs need to be ready to bare the brunt of this.....not my tax dollars.

But, I'll be damned if I will back anything that looks like nationalizing the auto industry.....and I'll fight to have every Texas legislator thrown out of office who votes for it. I already have a list going....

 

[XpunkRocker]

It wasn't necessarily his fault. This New York Times article says that the credit crisis, high gas prices, and a shaky economy was the cause of automakers problems, and this can be seen by automakers around the world.

Having your salary cut nearly in half until you can turn things around should be punishment enough.

Not quite. According to the Bloomberg article, Wagoner and co. closed 12 plants, sold off $17 billion in assets, and layed off or retired $35,000 workers to do that.

yesm the new york times is always right....

you are missing the point... the people at the top are making mistakes. that is their main problem 10 years of mistakes has brought them to this. they rewarded people for mistakes. when you do that for 10 years, your company is going to have problems. Those people will continue to make mistakes.

this is bigger than saving money on salaries. If a person loses 5 billion $ a year, you have to fire him and bring in someone else. Firing people who make mistakes saves you billions. people cost money, but mistakes cost billions of $$$. by ridding the people who make mistakes, you save billions.

it will take years to fix their issues. they have 10 years of mistakes to clean up. and i don't see how they are even going to go about it. their companies are a mess.

 

[Marx]

You consider an average salary of about $44 K a lot of money?

Alot of people could only be so lucky...

 

[rdh007]

Alot of people could only be so lucky...

My problem is with the amount that others within the industry make. $44k is also a drop in the bucket for some folks.

 

[XpunkRocker]

You consider an average salary of about $44 K a lot of money?

do you know how many people live in poverty in this country?

 

[Kelly]

My problem is with the amount that others within the industry make. $44k is also a drop in the bucket for some folks.

the US per capita GDP is $45,800............I think many people in our country would be extremely happy making average pay.....I think some would be happy with a job at the moment.