Good Bye Detroit: The Final Nail in Big 3's Coffin

[Disley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony_j15

correct. and that special type of people is called Chinese.
*really bad joke, but I went for it anyways *

In all seriousness, anyone can do it. Hell, that's all we used to have. Repetition jobs like farming or manufacturing. STFU with your "you can't do this" "you have no idea" crap.

Sorry, I didn't realise you had the mentality of a trained monkey.
I wouldn't last a day in any repetitive job, as I get bored with any job without mental stimulation. So I have lots of respect for people that can do that type of work, they're a necessary part of the workforce and deserve decent pay and conditions.
As do all workers.

[tony_j15]

I guess you should be glad you live in a time and place where someone can sit on their ass all day and be stimulated.
I've done some farm work, wood lot work, and currently the dreaded retail environment. Repetition work isn't exactly fun, but if you have strong mental fortitude then it's no biggie. Oh, and it helps if you have some physical stamina as well.

[RicheemxX]

God damn I can't believe I just read through most of thae crap in this thread

This about sums my POV on the whole shebang, with stress on the high points.

Quote:

Originally Posted by M_Six

What I find amusing about this thread is that those who are claiming the unions get paid too much are the same folks who were claiming that we could end illegal immigration if we paid decent wages to tomato pickers so Americans would be willing to do those jobs. So what exactly is a "decent wage?"

I work with labor experts. My boss and another colleague were instrumental in brokering the deal between Ford and the UAW which has left Ford in better financial shape than GM and Chrysler. I've had the union/non-union discussion with them several times. I've taken the position that you cannot pay everyone a minimum of $30/hr without the price of everything going through the roof, and they basically agreed. But autoworkers and other manufacturing jobs are not necessarily "unskilled" labor as some folks here have claimed. It takes time to learn to get part A to attach to part B accurately and quickly so as not to hold up the assembly line. It is also mind-numbingly dull. If you want to avoid a high turnover rate and hence a useless assembly line, you need to retain those workers and maintain a steady, skilled workforce. I could never do assembly line work because it would drive me insane. But someone has to do it.

And going back to what I said earlier, the workers are not to blame for the current state of US automakers. You could fill the assembly lines with minimum wage workers and the cars still would not sell. GM and Chrysler make quality cars that get lousy gas mileage and crappy pieces of shit that get great gas mileage. Toyota, on the other hand, makes quality cars that get great mileage. That's the equation that the Big 3 have missed these past few years. Ford is coming around somewhat. Their pickups actually get some fair mileage while still maintaining their power and the Focus has been a decent car with good mileage. But what does GM have? The Aveo? The Cobalt? Rolling crap. Instead, GM builds the Cadillac XLR Roadster or the CTS V-Series which all hover around 6 figures and have horsepower in the NASCAR range. Good plan as long as gas is at $1.50 gallon. Not so much when it's up around $4.

If the Big 3 had been building quality cars that get decent mileage for the last decade as Toyota has been doing, they wouldn't be begging for money from the US taxpayers. The Big 3 don't need to emulate Toyota's labor practices, they need to emulate Toyota's prodcuts.

The one area there I disagree with is saying this is "skilled" labor, yeah it takes skill to assemble the parts like it takes skill to flip my burger. It takes skill for just about every job out there but not everyone is making $30/hr with full benefits. There are tons of "skilled" positions out there that don't even touch that pay rate, why you may ask, because no one ever unionized them.

I'm not none union because I know they have a place and they do a great job fighting for rights of their workers. But, in this case and many more, they over step the boundary of "fair pay" and reasonable compensation.

The main fact here is these companies could barely stay afloat before the economic down turn, the economy going to shit was just the last drop in the bucket. Throwing money at them is not going to solve a damn thing. They aren't suddenly going to sell all the cars sitting in lots (which are closing by the way) and on the docks. They aren't going to suddenly come out with a hit product that is going to save their business. They aren't going to do squat but suck up billions up billions of dollars.

[MadMan2k]

I think they should shut down, then all the workers that currently work in the factories can go to work making aftermarket replacement parts for all the cars that have been built up until now, so we can keep our cars on the road longer.

Down the road, when business for aftermarket parts is booming and the cars that are so computer-locked now and difficult for owners to do any major repairs will be 'ghetto-ized' and user serviceable.

Then we can have mainstream kit cars. People can buy the parts and put together a whole car if they want. All the car companies are proprietary in their designs so you have to go to them to get replacement parts, or go to a junkyard and hunt around for used ones.

I think they whatever company did this, should make a few different chasis configurations (compact car, standard car, small truck, large truck), with a few different body styles per chasis (3 door hatchback, 4 door, 2 door coupe, 2 door long bed, 4 door short bed), and a few different drivetrains available (engine with appropriate transmission), then sell ALL of the parts cheaply enough that you could custom make the car yourself.

Have everything be standard and designed to be easy to put together, so you could get a standard issue tool set and not have to get special proprietary tools to do anything. Of course the cars wouldn't be luxurious, they'd be like the equipment used by the military. Modular, function before form, just enough to get the job done and be cost effective.


Bicycles are like that, why can't cars be? You can get a bike frame and find out what size the bottom bracket hole is, what the rear hub spacing is to choose a wheel, how long of a fork you need to get to maintain the right geometry, etc. Then you can buy all the parts and put it together, without too many specialized tools (most of the time). A lot of things are standardized so you know if you buy Shimano cranks and Crank brothers pedals, the threading is the same so they'll fit.


edit to elaborate - I think as many of the parts as possible would be interchangable between the different chasis and body styles - all the doors would be the same, front or back, sedan or truck or coupe (might be harder to get in the back, but hell). All the windshields would be the same, and the side and rear windows. The part of the dashboard with the instrument panel and all the controls would be the same piece for all the cars, with the other half being available in different sizes for the small and large cars. All the seats would mount the same way, and be easy to put in and take out. The lights, grill, hood, trunk, as many exterior pieces as possible would be the same in all the models.

[SoloCamo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M_Six

GM and Chrysler make quality cars that get lousy gas mileage and crappy pieces of shit that get great gas mileage. Toyota, on the other hand, makes quality cars that get great mileage. That's the equation that the Big 3 have missed these past few years. Ford is coming around somewhat. Their pickups actually get some fair mileage while still maintaining their power and the Focus has been a decent car with good mileage. But what does GM have? The Aveo? The Cobalt? Rolling crap. Instead, GM builds the Cadillac XLR Roadster or the CTS V-Series which all hover around 6 figures and have horsepower in the NASCAR range. Good plan as long as gas is at $1.50 gallon. Not so much when it's up around $4.

So much anger and yet oh so wrong. Bottom line is you either have power or you don't. You sacrifice power for mileage. Don't give me the spiel that Toyota is the hand of god in the auto industry that has perfected the automobile in the sense of power, economy and quality because it certainly has not. That's 80's talk all over again. News flash, it's 2008 so get with the times and update your opinions to cope. I don't see any vehicles from Toyota that really stand above any of the Big Three, not a single one.

For example:

The current 4x2, 4.0L V6, 5-speed auto Toyota Tacoma pickup is rated at 17city/21 highway.

Now tell me what's wrong here;

My 1988 Jeep Comanche pickup; 4.0L I6, 4-speed auto, 4x2 is rated at 15city/21 highway.

Do you not see something wrong there?

[Disley]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tony_j15

I guess you should be glad you live in a time and place where someone can sit on their ass all day and be stimulated.
I've done some farm work, wood lot work, and currently the dreaded retail environment. Repetition work isn't exactly fun, but if you have strong mental fortitude then it's no biggie. Oh, and it helps if you have some physical stamina as well.

Why do you think I should be glad there are stimulating office jobs.
I certainly don't want one.
I've been in the workforce for forty years, I left school when there were plenty jobs and did a five year apprenticeship in aircraft engineering, as we still had industries then to take on apprentices, and we were paid to study at technical college to gain extra qualifications and increase our usefulness to the company. The union negotiated some of these conditions on our behalf and also to increase the benefits that passed on to the community.
I've had many jobs, but worked in the engineering and maintenance dept of an international airline, for most of the time.
So having to do a boring job has never been an option I've had to take. But working to a deadline, and departure time can be stressful occasionally.
I've been a union member for most of my working life, and as with universal health care, I don't want to be without it, and the positive benefits universal health care and a union presence can bring to a community and country.

[MTAtech]

The bottom line is that nobody wants to use government money to bail out any company. It's only done when it is a necessity to the country.

Sure, one can have a Herbert Hoover moment and stand firm on their free-market ideology and run the country into depression. Or, we can give GM about 10% of the money given to AIG without any debate. The result may avoid further stabbing a poor economy.

True to form, the Republicans want to blame the unions for Detroit's problems (see, Republican "Action-Alert")

[aldtech]

Quote:

Originally Posted by M_Six

Talking about an "average" college professor's salary is useless. The range is huge. We have professors at our school making $250k per year. At the same university there are professors making less than $50k per year. Professorial pay is largely dependent on areas of expertise. English, history, social studies, etc get paid far less than economics or business or engineering or HR profs.

The Forbes data is also misleading. Much of that cost is health care and retirement for which the unions members contributed a portion of their pay. And Ford renegotiated in concert with the UAW to offload retirement health benefits on the UAW (which Ford funded with a trust fund). Ford is in much better shape now than Chrysler and GM in that respect. The Forbes data is being misinterpreted and misused by the GOP to bust up the unions. This is the GOP's best chance of doing so in many years and they're pulling out all the stops to place blame for the mismanagement of the auto companies on the unions.

Here's a news flash; the unions don't decide which cars to make. The 90 day profitability cycle is what's killing GM and Chrysler. They never thought long-term and they got burned with a production strategy which focused on SUVs and high-horsepower, low-mileage vehicles. Stop blaming unions and start looking at the short-sighted idiots running the companies.

Now this is something I can whole heartedly agree with but with one caveat and that is everyone at the table has to make concessions including the unions. No one gets a free pass here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chuckiechan

It looks like rather than concede to lowering wages, the unions chose to not accept the deal and now they are out. I'd look for a bankruptcy filing Sunday unless the UAW is willing to agree to match the wages of Toyota and other auto manufacturers. In addition, unacceptable "green" mandates are a unreasonable burden for a bankrupt company according to the Republicans.

[Ed_S]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTAtech

The bottom line is that nobody wants to use government money to bail out any company. It's only done when it is a necessity to the country.

Sure, one can have a Herbert Hoover moment and stand firm on their free-market ideology and run the country into depression. Or, we can give GM about 10% of the money given to AIG without any debate. The result may avoid further stabbing a poor economy.

True to form, the Republicans want to blame the unions for Detroit's problems (see, Republican "Action-Alert")

The other bailouts are what bother me. We "loan" billions to the ins industry, hundreds of billions to the banking/housing industry, but we halt & have a ton of debate over a relatively paltry figure for a major manufacturing industry?? One of the few remaining?? $15B is nothing in comparison to $700B - this should have been a rubber-stamp thing, a no-brainer decision.
Whole thing is ridiculous bordering on a$$inine.

Guess it's OK since the others are "white collar" industries, heaven forbid we do anything to maintain or show loyalty to a major domestic manufacturer...

[RicheemxX]

Comparing the bank bailout to bailing out a company that's only job is producing cars it can't sale is, sorry to say, ass backwards. Sure the government should have put more stipulations on how the bank and insurance money could be used but they screwed up.

They were hoping the bank would easy up on the purse strings and the money would flow a little easier, infusing the economy a tad. That is a big difference from handing over an initial installment, and don't kid yourself into think this is anything but that, to a company that doesn't have a magic cure. Sure the 1million or so, probably a lot less now, employees are going to get paid, sure they'll spend day to day money. But anyone of a sane mind isn't going to go out and start buying new homes or new cars, or anything big ticket.

How do any of you that actually support this think that by giving money to these 3 companies you'll be benefiting the economy, or for that matter benefit the companies other than keeping the bills paid for another month or two? They obviously can't sell enough cars now, so what do you think is going to change? Do you honestly think they are going to be able to turn things around before that money runs out?