ellives

Actually I commented to my wife about their lack of drill down on the point of the martyr stuff. I would have liked to have him probe further to get the basis for the comments. It makes no sense to me.

Yes. It was just before the segment you're referring to.

Get your mind out of the past and stop whining. The company HAS to be cost competitive to survive. What part of this issue don't you understand?

Ron Gettlinger's comments make my stomach turn.

Go Rick go! ----------------------- Wagoner, 52, has kept a low profile as the criticism has mounted. But now he’s decid­ed to come out swinging. In an interview with NEWSWEEK, he offers a passionate defense of the job he’s doing and rejects the notion of replacing him with an outsider. ----------------------- This is what he needs to do. Silence can be deadly. He needs to work harder than ever to get the message across as he is doing now. Remember a vacuum will be filled with SOMEthing. His just is to make sure it's filled with what people want to hear rather than what his enemies and pundits (media) what you to hear.

Face it. The media is only deemed as good as their last "big" story so they're out scrounging whatever they can and amplifying it for their own benefit. They're all whores.

I don't see any risk by putting my true location. I think it gives people some insight into your perspective when they know where you're from - exactly what we've been talking about i guess. Me too. No one is completely right in their opinions. It's the effective conglomeration of all of them that will yield the right answer. I agree the world *is* changing and I fear not for the better. I worry I'm becoming like my grandmother - she worried about this stuff all her life. What's wrong with a world that is competitive? It already *is* competitive. It's just changing. Try getting your kid into college. It's competitive worldwide and they're all competiting for those willing and able to pay $40-50K/year in costs. I'm not sure what you mean by "worthwhile" and I'm not convinced the US is heading for a two-class society. I *do* know a two-party system is necessary to make the decision easy that are too ignorant to effective use any other system. Most people don't research candidates at ll before they vote and the vote on what they've heard or sound bites the media privileges us to hear. Howard Dean is a classic example of this. Whatever you think of the man's policies and ideas, the truth is his campaign was destroyed by one 20 second clip from Iowa. Nobody remembers anything else about him. It's really tough to make sweeping statements and be right. I have always had disdain for the way unions protect EVERYONE in the union when they know damn well there are very specific people who shouldn't be members. They just don't want to rock the boat so they let things continue. My kid had one of these people as a teacher a while back. Everybody in town knew the teacher was worthless but she was in the union so nothing was done and year after year children are subjected to this worthless sack of $h! teacher. That's a sad legacy of unions to me. I'm sure we all know white collar people who are useless. The last 2 or 3 people in my current job fit this category. Eventually people figured them out and dealt with them. I see these people benefiting from apathy or incompetence of those above them. Nobody likes confrontation so things have to get REALLY bad before these people are canned. Me too. And same to Josh. I finally had to through in the towel at 1:30 AM. I think we've gotten off the track too far when the real discussing is GM and my brand Cadillac.

Maybe I was tainted by observing my old man back when he was in the union. He was all about "what can can I get out of the union" and "what can I get out of my company." It was never about what he could and did do for the company. I know he put his time in but that was it. The union gave him shelter at times when he probably wasn't the best person for the job. Good for him but bad for the company. Of course as I wrote that, the Social Security system comes to mind. People are bitching more because it's heading towards bankrupcy but over the last 30 years when people paid into the system for 10-20 years but lived on the system for 25 or 30 after retiring, none of them bitched. Why would they, as they were getting way more of the system than they put in. Aren't some of the compensation GM's UAW workers getting the same? Maybe I do have a "nonchalant attitude, "get another job."" but that's because I *can* get another job. I'm good at what I do - I got an education and I will probably never lack for a job, and I'm not sorry about it.

"Blame" is such a terrible word. I'm not blaming the UAW for GM's current situation. I *am* questioning the relevency of the UAW. If you accept this statement then there is no value being brought by the higher wages their members require and therefore they are putting GM at a disadvantage when they can ill afford to have one. I agree though Josh. The ending will not be peaceful nor desirable from what I can see.

I REALLY wanted to put a nasty response on here to this question but I won't. I know some will say it's against my core personality not to but: <---see where I'm from (it's on every one of my posts) I also work at a non-union company and am what you'd consider to be "white collar." I couldn't care less what other's in my company make. I have not control over it. My boss makes 20 to 30 times the money I make. Should I try to unionize so I can get some of his money? There are of course plenty that make less than me but nobody is starving. OK - so if I'm using your logic, shouldn't we just incinerate all the Iraqi's so we can take their oil? I mean after all, we're going to run out of oil soon and need it to sustain our standard of living, right? Why waste time and our men and women's lives over there trying to avoid civilians while we're hunting down the insurgents? Just slaughter them all and make it easy on ourselves. (I know this is an extreme. I'm only using for illustration and am not in any way advocating this approach. I hope this conflict is over as expediently as possible so our armed services can come home.) I don't think it's a Utopia I'm after but it does seem like we ought to be able to get to a place where people worldwide can make an actual living where 40% are not below the poverty line. Every poster on this forum has asked this question before. The answer is complicated but certainly the main 2 components are labor costs and they are just better at building cars. Get yourself a copy of the book "The Machine that Changed the World" and you'll understand. I did. Currency manipulation? I'd buy that if you were talking China. The argument just does not apply to Toyota. Much of their stuff is built in the US. Nope. Never worked an assembly line. I've worked plenty of &#036;h&#33; jobs though. I'm not sure how the question is relevent though. I earned everything I have. I paid for my own education and I manage to live quite comfortably all without the benefit of a union. Go figure. Get yourself the book and read it. At least you'll understand why GM has a huge struggle again and doesn't need labor issues.

[whine] [/whine] Are you serious? "the consumer will know through first hand experince..." You're kidding I hope. I'd venture to guess 80% of buyers wouldn't know the difference in any product they see in the marketplace. Most are lemmings that do what their friends do. This is why marketing is so important. It gets the message out so people AREN'T just depending on what their friend, mother, brother, babysitter or whomever tells them what they'd do. GM also needs to make better product and I don't really believe anyone thinks they can't make a great product. The trick is to make great stuff that looks good, stays together and can be sold for the right price and to be able to tell everybody that you can do all these things - then the sales will come. Arguing about which is more important, better product or better marketing is a fool's argument. They need both and all of it to succeed.

These comments by ANY union are typical posturing strategies. The real problem is the lack of any long term planning and strategic thinking here. Any contract should have considered thinks like GM's current financial situation. This is what contracts are... anticipations of what will happen in specific situations. GM and their negotiators and lawyers own this ineptitude

Quite eloquently written. We're agreed on this point. Nobody is going to disregard any contracts. Let's not confuse GM's financial situation with the union's problems and contract law. They are three different things. This issue is the one that's complicated. As I have stated here before, as the economy becomes more global, the natural competitive landscape will cause some areas of the US economy to be dragged down while the standard of living in other countries is dragged up. This is painful of course for those impacted in the US but of course those in other countries have had and continue to have much lower standards of living than in the US. Our deficits are so high because we spend too much. Blame the deficit problem on Bush. It lays at his feet. It has nothing to do with GM, the unions or contract law. Hang on to what? You'll have to should me some factual evidence to demonstrate the relationship between UAW wages and my salary. Why is it you pro-union people want to tie GM to the success or failure of the UAW? The problem with the UAW is not GM. It's the UAW. They need to be successful getting themselves into Toyota, Honda, et al. Until this happens, there is no future for the UAW. Start thinking about these auto manufacturers and the importance of them to the union in terms of the profit they're generating. If you use this as your measurement, you're wasting your time on GM. That ship sailed long ago and particularly in the last year with $10B in losses. Go get Toyota and their fat profits. What's that? The UAW can't get in there? Why not? Because their assembly workers are happy with that market labor rates without supporting the overhead of a union. If your friend doesn't like it, he should find another employer. You can try the "blame the government" argument. It won't help your case. "The lack of protectionism?" Are you serious? When we raise trade barriers here, other countries will raise their barriers too. What is served by this approach? The goal should be to eventually raise the standard of living everywhere in the world so people everywhere AREN'T as poor as they are currently. What makes the US so special? I tell you to stop connecting the UAW's future with GM because it's not there. GM needs to level the playing field just to survive in a marketplace with the likes of Toyota and Honda. Getting equivalent labor rates is just one piece of the puzzle. GM has has huge other issues they have to deal with including getting their manufacturing processes to be as efficient as Japan, Inc. This is another huge piece of the puzzle and in some ways is tougher and even more daunting than the labor issue. [/color]

I can't disagree either. It's *all* about the details. You're right to a certain degree however it *is* about how many they sell to an extent. Their business is all about overhead. This means they MUST sell volume otherwise their overhead costs will eat them alive. This is what's happening now.

Brain drain is going to happen without incentives when a company loses money, and for the same reason I cited already - those people can find jobs elsewhere with profitable companies. We all like to minimize the risk we'll find ourselves unemployed. I do not agree with your implication that only white collar employees have "dead wood" and assembly workers as a group do not. Both groups certainly have their share. They both have damaging effects to the company as well. I'm more concerned about the undesirable loss of the "non-dead wood" white collar staff. These are the people that define the future of any company. Everyone else helps but particularly the key decision makers in the company define strategy, and GM needs good 5- and 10-year strategic plans in place. It's troubles did not appear overnight and they won't be resolved quickly either.

Agreed it's more complex than I describe HOWEVER.... we're talking about the Company's survival here. They have to be ruthless or they won't survive. The problem with these "buyout offers" is the people who are worth anything will take them and go find other jobs because they have marketable skills and therefore value. The dead wood, the people skating by, those that know they can't get anything comparable, will not take the offer. The end result will be a brain and skill drain that will kill the Company for sure. Thank Ross Perot for the expression "giant sucking sound" because it is very appropriate in this situation. Oh and as for the $1000 debt comment, the typical "early termination fee" is $150 and not $1k that you refer to. I've never broken a cell contract but I also never sign any business contracts without a "business downturn" clause. You'd think GM would be smart enough not to do it either. It's going to be an ugly ~18 months to get through the UAW contract next year.

To me that sounds like someone put words into her mouth. No kid at 19 (especially a girl - sorry libbers) has had enough experience owning and driving cars to have come to a conclusion like that on their own.

And we allow those people to actually vote. Sigh.

She's a lemming... just like everybody else. No offense intended. And by the way, age has nothing to do with it. You'll feel the same as you do now when you're 63.

I love that quote: "Labor costs so out of whack that it's worth it to the automaker to pay employees $140,000 just to go away." *My* question is: "Who the hell is running this company?" Paying people $140K to get rid of them is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. GM needs to grow a pair and start getting rid of these employees without paying them off. Make the list... call them into a room and tell them they're done. The days of the UAW are over. The UAW isn't running the company. Tell them to get the hell out. Plunking down the billions it will cost them to pay these people to go away is just ridiculous. They need that money to combat Toyota and there's just no way around it. If they consummate this deal, there'll be another need to get rid of people in a year and they'll have to pay more precious cash they need to keep up the fight. This will be a death of a thousand cuts so why not just draw the line now and get it over with.

http://money.cnn.com/2006/03/31/news/compa...dex.htm?cnn=yes GM problems: Deeper than Delphi The brewing battle between Delphi and its unions don't help, but General Motors has a lot of other headaches to worry about. By Chris Isidore, CNNMoney senior writer March 31, 2006: 3:09 PM EST NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - One of these days General Motors will have some good news. But it's tough to remember the last time it had one of those days. Friday certainly wasn't one as bankrupt auto-parts supplier Delphi asked a bankruptcy court to throw out its union contracts and the United Auto Workers union vowed a long and crippling strike in that event. Such a strike would quickly halt production at GM as well, but its union contract would require it to keep paying workers, hemorrhaging up to an estimated $1 billion a week in additional losses at a company that posted a $10.6 billion net loss in 2005. Many worry an economy-rattling GM bankruptcy filing would follow. This tough turn comes on the heels of a long list of problems that have been front and center in recent weeks: The recent restatement of results that raise already staggering net losses. A criminal probe looking at its relationship with suppliers. Labor costs so out of whack that it's worth it to the automaker to pay employees $140,000 just to go away. Negotiations to sell a majority stake of it one major profit engine, GMAC. Shares of GM (up $0.23 to $21.29, Research), which have lost almost a third of their value over the past 12 months, were down Friday morning but had recovered by Friday afternoon. "The bad news certainly isn't going to end for a while," said David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research. The good news is that most experts contacted Friday -- including Cole -- said they think that a strike is not inevitable at Delphi. "At this point I still feel they'll get something done that avoids a strike," said Kevin Tynan. "But that said, it's still a long way to go." GM has maintained that it can avoid bankruptcy and said Friday it is confident that an agreement at Delphi can be reached without disrupting its own operations. But Tynan said that GM will likely have to pay more than $1 billion in one-time payments to the hourly workers at Delphi to get the them to accept significant pay cuts, as well as significantly subsidizing the ongoing pay to union members at Delphi if they are to avoid a strike. But with the company's own financial problems, there's only so much it can do to solve the problem at Delphi, according to Tynan and other experts. GM's own contract with the UAW expires in September 2007. "They might want to (pay more) in the short term to avoid a strike," said Bob Schnorbus, chief economist at JD Power & Associates. "But if they're spending money now to gloss over the hard decisions that Delphi needs to make, they're only going to compound their problems when their turn comes up." Even some of those who don't think there will be a strike at Delphi think that GM will eventually find itself in bankruptcy court as it tries to trim its own costs. "They still have their own cost issues to deal with," said Tynan. "My feeling is that it (a GM bankruptcy) is inevitable anyway. I don't know if that's two years, five years or 10 years, but this cost structure is not sustainable. What a strike at Delphi probably would mean is that it would move up the bankruptcy before the 2007 negotiations." Holding out hope Still there are others who believe that GM should be able to weather these gathering clouds. David Healy of Burnham Securities said that he thinks GM would have the resources to weather even a two-month strike at Delphi, and that the company's battered stock is probably at or near a low point. "My guess would be that a two-month (Delphi) strike would raise net losses by $4 billion to $5 billion," said Healy. "That's a kick in the nuts, but they can afford it. They could have an extra $11 billion come Monday (from a sale of GMAC)." Monday could also bring some half-way decent March sales numbers for the company that has continually been losing market share. The Power Information Network (PIN), a unit of JD Power, showed that GM's U.S. sales to consumers during the first 12 days of March were off 1.7 percent from a year earlier, but the industry as a whole saw sales to consumers fall 13 percent. Perhaps more importantly, PIN's data shows sales of its new large SUV models, on which GM is basing much of its hopes of a turnaround, have been very strong. The new versions of the Cadillac Escalade, Chevrolet Tahoe and GMC Yukon have seen the transaction price up 15 to 20 percent from the price GM was getting for those models in the past two years. "We often see increases for new models, but that's more than one generally sees," said Tom Libby, senior director of industry analyst for PIN. "It's early to say they have hits on their hands, but the signs are very positive." So maybe Monday will be a better day for GM. After the past two weeks, it could use it.

Actually, the expression is "moot point" and not "mute point" as so many people say and write.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/01/business...fUvdvtEuVokkYBQ April 1, 2006 Car Parts Maker Moves to Break Its Union Deals By MICHELINE MAYNARD DETROIT, March 31 — Delphi, the nation's biggest auto parts maker, on Friday asked a federal judge for permission to throw out some of its labor agreements, a move that could cost 20,000 union workers their jobs and leave thousands of others with less than half their current wages. Delphi, which is operating in bankruptcy, wants the judge's permission to impose sharply lower wages and benefits on six unions, setting up a confrontation that its largest union, the United Automobile Workers, said could lead to a lengthy strike. A strike could also cripple General Motors, which spun off Delphi in 1999 and remains its biggest customer. And any harm to G.M. could eviscerate the U.A.W.'s own influence as one of the nation's most socially progressive and powerful unions, while accelerating the slide of the American auto industry. Delphi said it would close or sell all but 8 of its 29 plants in the United States and cut 28,500 positions around the world. Beyond the 20,000 of its 33,100 hourly jobs in the United States that Delphi plans to cut, another 8,500 salaried jobs worldwide are to be eliminated. "I took this job thinking this was my future," said Tracey Huffman, 37, staring blankly down at a table at Jamins, a pool hall next to the U.A.W. Local 651 hall on the east side of Flint, Mich. "Now I don't know. It's like starting all over again." Ms. Huffman, who is scheduled to be laid off temporarily at the end of April, now fears that her layoff could become permanent. Any decision by the judge, however, is expected to be weeks or even months away. The confrontation promises to become even more fierce in coming months, as G.M. tries to extricate itself from its worst financial crisis in over a decade, and the U.A.W. fights Delphi over the deep wage cuts that it wants to impose. All sides could be losers. A strike by the U.A.W. could send G.M. into bankruptcy alongside its former parts unit, a fate that would be an even bigger debacle for the union and the industry than Delphi's bankruptcy has proved to be. And unless a judge rejects Delphi's effort to abrogate its contract, the U.A.W. faces the prospect that it can no longer give its workers the security it has fought for years to provide, leaving the union's president, Ron Gettelfinger, distressed. Already, some workers at the Delphi East plant in Flint left their plant in tears Friday, after learning that it was among 21 that would close. In 1998, a seven-week strike at that plant and another in Flint, nearly crippled G.M. "I have to put my faith in the union," said Judy Steyer, 36, who dabbed her eyes as she walked on her lunch break. Wearing a black sweatshirt embroidered with the U.A.W. crest, Mrs. Steyer continued: "I've been through one strike. It was tough then, and it'll be tough if we go on strike now." David L. Gregory, professor of labor law at St. John's University in New York, said, "This is really for all practical purposes a frontal challenge to the reason for existence of the U.A.W." The tangle comes as the American industry already faces stiff competition from Asian and European companies, which have wrested market share in automobiles and auto parts from their American rivals. G.M., which lost $10.8 billion last year, is struggling to reverse a slide that has deepened under its chief executive, Rick Wagoner, while Delphi is one of half a dozen major American parts suppliers that have been forced to seek Chapter 11 protection. G.M. has already stepped up several times to help Delphi, most recently last week, when it agreed to pay for bailouts covering 13,000 Delphi workers, in addition to 113,000 of its own, and to take 5,000 Delphi workers back to G.M. On Friday, Delphi said it hoped that many of the workers who will lose their jobs will have a "soft landing" because of the G.M. program. This is going on, Professor Gregory said, while companies like Toyota, which is expected to earn $16 billion for the year ended Friday, are prospering and even building plants across the Midwest and South that are employing tens of thousands of Americans. "The 20th century was the century of General Motors and America," Professor Gregory said. "The 21st century is going to be the century of Toyota and Asia." While similar actions have occurred in the steel and airline industries, Delphi's move was the first time that a major player in the automobile industry had sought to void its labor contracts, setting the stage for a precedent-setting court ruling later this year. Delphi plans to eliminate 21 factories in Michigan, New Jersey, Mississippi, Texas, Alabama and elsewhere. "Emergence from the Chapter 11 process in the U.S. requires that we make difficult, yet necessary, decisions," Delphi's chief executive, Robert S. Miller, said in a statement Friday. "These actions will result in a stronger company with future global growth opportunities." Once Delphi is finished with its restructuring, it will have a much more streamlined product line than the current wide array of components — from air-conditioning systems to steering gear to cruise controls — that it inherited from G.M. Under Delphi's contract, which is essentially the same as the one covering workers at G.M., members of the U.A.W. are paid nearly $28 an hour in wages. Their total compensation, including pensions, health care and other benefits, is an average $78.63 an hour, Delphi said in court documents, a figure it said was three and a half times that at competing parts suppliers. That number, however, struck analysts and union officials as too high; they generally estimate total costs to be about $67. In its court filing, Delphi said it wanted to impose its last offer, which it made a week ago. That was for a $5-an-hour wage cut this year, to $22, followed by another cut next year to $16.50 an hour. To ease the pain, workers would be given $50,000 each, presumably provided by G.M. If workers do not accept that deal — or if G.M. does not come up with the money — Delphi said it would impose a unilateral cut in wages to $12.50 an hour. Though less than half what they make now, that is still more than Delphi's original offer to the U.A.W., made shortly after its bankruptcy filing, for wages as low as $9.50, a proposal that ignited outrage among union members. The U.A.W. earlier this week rejected essentially the same proposal Delphi now wants a judge to approve, saying its members would surely vote it down. If those terms are imposed on the union, "it appears that it will be impossible to avoid a long strike," U.A.W. officials said. Robert Betts, president of U.A.W. Local 2151 in Coopersville, Mich., home to one of the plants that Delphi intends to close, said the issue went beyond the parts maker. "This is turning from a restructuring of a business into a basic struggle for workers' rights," he said. "Essentially what they want you to be is a very poorly paid indentured servant." He added: "If we accept too low of a wage, it will affect workers everywhere." Knowing the ramifications, bankruptcy court judges encourage labor unions and companies to reach agreements, rather than have lower rates imposed upon them. A hearing in the Delphi case is set for May 9, and the situation may not be resolved for weeks after that, allowing plenty of time to reach a deal — if the parties talk. A number of unions in the airline industry have reached agreements with bankrupt companies in the last few years. The U.A.W., however, has never been in this position with such a large company. And labor experts said it would be politically impossible for Mr. Gettelfinger to agree to all of Delphi's demands, because that would set a precedent for even more critical talks next year with G.M. and Ford. Delphi has been included in the union's practice of "pattern bargaining," which essentially calls for the same terms at each company. Cuts granted at Delphi would open the door for the automakers to demand lower wages and benefits as well. Although it has agreed to some modifications, particularly changes in health care coverage negotiated at G.M. and Ford last year, the U.A.W. has not granted pay cuts at a major auto company since it agreed to concessions with Chrysler in 1979 as part of its bid for a Congressional bailout. Those cuts were later restored. Given that a strike is its only — and most lethal — weapon, Mr. Gettelfinger has to appear as if he is ready to wield it, experts said. "There's always a lot of posturing," Ms. Steyer, the Flint auto worker, said. "It's like two big dogs. You growl, and I'll growl back." But people in the union and in the auto industry who are acquainted with his thinking said Mr. Gettelfinger was loath to call a broad strike at Delphi, knowing it could lead to a bankruptcy at G.M. and an even bigger morass for the union. That would not prevent him from strategic strikes, at a plant or two, if he felt it was necessary to send a message to Delphi, these people said. Mr. Gettelfinger's reluctance to inflame the situation is a reason the U.A.W. has not conducted strike votes at any local unions, a formality that occurs before any walkout. Quentin Garland, a 32-year veteran at the Flint plant who assembles cruise control mechanisms, said he understood the union's quandary. "A strike at this point doesn't help anyone," Mr. Garland, 51, said. But Sue Gosner, 50, said she did not plan to wait around to see if that happened. She recently reached the 30-year mark that will allow her to retire with a $35,000 check from G.M. "It's just been such an emotional roller coaster for so long now," Ms. Gosner said. "People just go in there and do the best they can do. That's all we can do." Jeremy W. Peters contributed reporting from Flint, Mich.,for this article.

Holy mouthful batman!

I agree. In some sense it's not clear why GM is even relevent any more. There are SO many car companies out there that the void would immediately be made up by others. The losers in all this would be the employees/retirees and current owners like me. I don't see a clear parallel to the Chrysler backrupcy. Iacocca pulled them back from the abyss. I think that's one of the things GM needs - a pitchman. Every car dealer advertising on TV here has one. Ford has Bill Ford out there front and center. Car buyers relate to a face giving them confidence there's a real person behind the product. GM needs this to convince the buying public it has a soul.