Author Topic: Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work  (Read 1606 times)

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #15 on: March 03, 2006, 07:04:15 PM »
Presented without further comment as it doesn't need any.


Seattle Post Intelligencer, Friday, February 17, 2006


BLOOMBERG NEWS



Quote
Delta executive deal opposed


Delta Air Lines Inc. pilots, who are being asked to accept a wage cut, objected to a plan in which the bankrupt carrier could pay severance totaling as much as $15 million to 144 executives if their jobs are eliminated.

"At a time when Delta is proposing deep cuts in pilot wages and benefits, deep resentment and anger over a soft landing program for officers and directors can neither be understated," the carrier's Air Line Pilots Association said in a bankruptcy court filing Thursday.

Delta, which sought Chapter 11 protection in September, said in a filing Feb. 8 that the program is intended to retain executives who would be eligible for the payments totaling $3 million to $15 million if their jobs are cut without cause, because of airline changes or new ownership, the Atlanta-based company said.

Delta is seeking $315 million in annual pay and benefit concessions from pilots, who took a 32.5 percent wage cut in 2004.

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Urchin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5517
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #16 on: March 03, 2006, 07:21:31 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
Presented without further comment as it doesn't need any.


Seattle Post Intelligencer, Friday, February 17, 2006


BLOOMBERG NEWS


I cannot BELIEVE the nerve of those dirty greedy communist UNIONS!  

They make me SO angry when they make our companies uncompetitive with underhanded tactics like those!

Offline LePaul

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7988
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #17 on: March 03, 2006, 07:57:35 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
Presented without further comment as it doesn't need any.


Seattle Post Intelligencer, Friday, February 17, 2006


BLOOMBERG NEWS


Now wait a minute, you fault us for grouping all Unions as one giant bad thing.  Yet you turn around and constantly fault management as the source of all bad things constantly.

You want to talk auto industry...and Im going to say it over and over again...the UAW is the biggest problem the big three has to ever compete.

If you want to talk airlines...yes, I'll agree with you.  Over and over, management has squandered, decieved and given up nothing while asking others to take the hit.

But...you need to stay on topic.

I see your tactic...and "if you cant convince, confuse em" aint working  LOL  ;)

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #18 on: March 03, 2006, 09:08:48 PM »
LP, I think you miss the point. Completely.

There is absolutely no difference between management in the auto industry and the airline industry.

There is no significant difference between union leadership in the auto industy and the airline industry.

Those who think the unions are solely responsible for ruining either industry are blind to management's faults.

Those who think management is solely responsible for ruining either industry are blind to the union's faults.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Sixpence

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5265
      • http://www.onpoi.net/ah/index.php
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #19 on: March 04, 2006, 12:33:28 AM »
I blame Bush
"My grandaddy always told me, "There are three things that'll put a good man down: Losin' a good woman, eatin' bad possum, or eatin' good possum."" - Holden McGroin

(and I still say he wasn't trying to spell possum!)

Offline Pooh21

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3145
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #20 on: March 04, 2006, 01:58:16 AM »
Unions need to be eliminated,except UPS's they can keep theirs, anything that makes them less productive and more incompetant is :aok
Bis endlich der Fiend am Boden liegt.
Bis Bishland bis Bishland bis Bishland wird besiegt!

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #21 on: March 04, 2006, 09:18:15 AM »
executives are getting a bigger and bigger piece of the pie, that is true..

but... come on guys... you aren't really saying that those salaries are totaling anything like the salaries of the union?

Rolex... you are correct to a point but..  At the time the japs were going all out to get a foothold here and shipping cars...  Our executives were making about 3% of the profit (still high but..)  

What happened was a combination of things.   The gas crisis, high fuel costs... were allready common in japan... their cars were allready small and thrifty....  

Smog laws... the smog laws were wrong.   They insisted on the impossible.. the only way a V8 of 300+ cubic inches would meet those standards was with electronic fuel injection controlled by a computer... Those things did not exist together at the time soo.... they dropped compression and added converters and recycled exhaust and added air to the mixture and killed the performance of the V8 and... at the same time... increased it's fuel usage..

Unions had a stranglehold on our car companies and probly 80% of the workers were drugged or drunk..  employee and management relations were at a all time low...

japs were willing to dump vehicles and with our low tarriffs (at first anyway) it was easy.    latter we upped tariffs but it was far too late (and a bad idea anyway)

lazs

Offline LePaul

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7988
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #22 on: March 04, 2006, 10:58:39 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad

Those who think the unions are solely responsible for ruining either industry are blind to management's faults.

Those who think management is solely responsible for ruining either industry are blind to the union's faults.


Alas, we agree

But getting paid to sit in a room for over $100k a year?  And this makes them competitive...how?

Offline Gunthr

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3043
      • http://www.dot.squat
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #23 on: March 04, 2006, 12:00:29 PM »
Quote
But getting paid to sit in a room for over $100k a year? And this makes them competitive...how?


The fact that such a stupid, wasteful thing could come to be accepted as "normal" tells you everything you need to know about why the US auto industry is falling on its face...
"When I speak I put on a mask. When I act, I am forced to take it off."  - Helvetius 18th Century

Offline SirLoin

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5708
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #24 on: March 04, 2006, 02:50:24 PM »
The main reason the big 3 are falling on their face is mostly due to mamagement..if u ever worked at a "Big Three" auto plant you'd know the only thing they care about is quantity,"keep the line moving"...quality is usually the result of someone on the line making a stand when they are instructed to cover up uninstalled wiring et... or install wrong(or unsafe parts)

Upper management rules lower management by intimidation & threats to the point where the zone supervisor only cares about covering his prettythang(ie..covering repairs up) and keep the line going at all costs...This is how you get a heck of a lot of recalls(hence Japanese autos have far less recalls..which can cost billions)...& ya,i work the line at Ford.

The big three have to re-think their management structure.Quantity is not job 1.

and as for the unions..they are bending over big time allowing contracts to be opened and giving consessions away for nothing in return.,
« Last Edit: March 04, 2006, 02:57:21 PM by SirLoin »
**JOKER'S JOKERS**

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #25 on: March 04, 2006, 06:20:19 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by LePaul
But getting paid to sit in a room for over $100k a year?  And this makes them competitive...how?


I think you would have to ask MANAGEMENT why they accepted that clause in the contract back when it was negotiated.

As I've said before I've never heard of a contract negotiation that was completely "one sided".

Boths sides come to the table with what they call their "Christmas tree" contract, as in every possible thing on their list for Santa. The negotiation is a continual bargaining of "this for that". I'll give you the pony you want if you give me the bicycle I want.

So, there was a reason that clause was agreed to. Usually, it's coupled to productivity. I'd guess the company gained huge productivity increases that they really, really wanted but which made a lot of jobs obsolete. The tit for tat was some sort of "job security" for the guys that lost their jobs.

At that time management obviously thought the trade was worth, for whatever reason.

As I said, the reason contracts have duration clauses is because everyone expects to have to renegotiate as "times change".
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline LePaul

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7988
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #26 on: March 04, 2006, 06:27:25 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by SirLoin

and as for the unions..they are bending over big time allowing contracts to be opened and giving consessions away for nothing in return.,


In relevance to the UAW, please show me where.

Offline Rolex

  • AH Training Corps
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3285
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #27 on: March 05, 2006, 12:01:07 AM »
In the end, it is always the fault of owners, and the management they select. As long as 'good' executives are defined by how clever they are in protecting and maximizing their own compensation instead of focusing on how the company does business, not much good can come from them. Financial trickery is not business.

Nissan fell into the same fat and lazy stagnant doldrums. They were losing money hand over fist and on the verge of bankrupcy. One man, Carlos Ghosn, turned it around quickly. They made more money last year than all the profit Renault and Nissan combined made in the last 10 years. It was done with common sense and good business practices, not financial trickery or sleight of hand. But, it wasn't easy because everyone (white and blue collar) had to suffer equally, for awhile. Unfortunately, I'm not optimistic about any similar common sense turnaround for GM or Ford. The U.S. union-management culture of negotiation is more confrontational and based on one side winning instead of the company (which employs both sides) winning. Who is going to change that culture? Can't see any candidates.

On to the airlines... Wow, who in their right mind would even want to run an airline? :) The industry is a minefield - always has been and will probably always will be. My inelegant opinion of the industry is twofold; there are too many major US carriers for such a mature industry, and too few options to differentiate 'brands.'

You can't cut price just to garner a few more passengers because we all know (or should) that a 5% cut in price does not yield a 5% reduction in profit - it's far more. There are just too many airlines who can get you where you want to go, so only a few things are available to be altered, mainly the image and service that customers experience to build some loyalty.

I used to be a heavy traveler, but I avoid it all costs now in the U.S. My anecdotal experience in heavy international travel is skewed toward staying away from Delta, Northwest and United. My reason is simple: I can travel on other airlines without having to endure the cabin staff.

[rant]You want to help Delta? Get rid of the fat, surly, rude, obnoxious, lazy, arrogant, "get it yourself" flight attendants on international routes. I avoid Delta like the plague, United like AIDS and Northwest like AIDS with the plague.

I need to get up and walk around sometimes on a 11-hour flight. I'm an ideal passenger and customer - I ask for nothing special, I don't expect a lot, I don't complain or annoy people around me, or behind me. If I walk to the galley and ask for a glass of water politely, I don't expect to be growled at, have an attendant roll their eyes at me, throw down their cards from their card game and sigh, or even be told to "get it yourself..."

Call me old-fashioned, but I'll stay away from that airline after a few times of that. I get better service, with a smile, on Air India, Thai Air, JAL, Singapore Airlines... maybe US airlines should start outsourcing cabin staff. [/rant]

On to Japanese cars. By the way, lazs, I know you get a thrill from trying to spin people up by using words like "jap" and "colored people" and "wetback" etc., but aren't you old enough now to have outgrown it? You're in your 50s now... It would be interesting to hear you say it in front of a sumo wrestler one day. You'd be wimpering like a little girl after he squished you like a bug.

Anyway, let me learn you a little about 'dumping' there, hot rod. ;)

Tariffs are political tools to prevent competition and get votes for the politician. The problem with tariffs, is that they work both ways. So, one country tries to protect an industry from foreign boogey man competition, but another industry gets hurt by tariffs placed as reprisal. The overall result is little effect on either economy, contrary to what the politicians will tell you.

Some companies do sell below cost, but only because they screwed up and made too much or many, or need to cut inventories and raise some cheap cash. There is no shortage of cheap financing money available in Japan though, so they were not dumping.

We have this thing called 'overhead' in business. There are two basic types, so you should be able to keep up with this. One is fixed and the other is variable. Fixed overhead is, well, fixed expenses, meaning they don't change, regardless of how many widgets you make, which is the definition of 'fixed.'

Variable overhead 'varies' with how many widgets you make. Both of these are plugged into the cost column of a widget. Now, this is going to get complicated here, but you can print it out and carry it around in your shirt pocket this week.

Dumb companies add up the costs (which are usually inflated by all departments when asked to tally their costs), add a profit, and use that as their price. Smart companies look at the market price, then try to find a way to maximize profit or market share by continually assessing and modifying their costs, product line, marketing or other really, really technical thingies. Once a company is assured of meeting fixed overhead through orders and sales for the period in question, fixed overhead does not have to be considered anymore. It's already paid, so why are we adding to our price, when it isn't costing us anything anymore?

You can sell more of your widgets by selling them for less, make more profit than you had planned on by reduced costs from larger raw material purchases, increase efficiency of your widget production line, increase market share, and create inventory that will only cost more to make later - and maybe sell that at a market price that includes the fixed overhead, which is now even more profit, since we have already paid our fixed overhead for the period. It's Friggin' Huge profit.

We call this 'incremental sales.' It's business we never would have had that allows us (and our suppliers) to hire more people, create more earnings to reinvest, puts smiles on our faces, and frowns on the faces of dumb companies. It is not losing money, or selling below cost, or dumping.

Sheesh, I can't imagine how Seagoon must feel typing several posts like this every day.
« Last Edit: March 05, 2006, 12:11:25 AM by Rolex »

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #28 on: March 05, 2006, 11:39:06 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Rolex

[rant]You want to help Delta? Get rid of the fat, surly, rude, obnoxious, lazy, arrogant, "get it yourself" flight attendants on international routes. I avoid Delta like the plague, United like AIDS and Northwest like AIDS with the plague.

[/rant]



I was actually there to watch the "International" develop. The "fat F/A's" as well.

Interestingly enough, the Delta Flight Attendants have never, ever been represented by a Union. The Pilot's Union (ALPA) and the Flight Dispatchers are the ONLY unionized workers at DAL.

In the beginning, the company selected F/A's for "the International". They had to have positive letters from customers, good reviews from their supervisors, they gave them tests on various people skills... and they had to be at least well-kept if not outright attractive.

As you might expect in a seniority system (company, not union, implemented) there was soon unrest in the ranks. Seniority couldn't get one on "the International" although it brought one everything else: best domestic trips, best pay, first pick of vacation times, bid holidays off, etc., etc..

It wasn't long before the Senior F/A's were stridently demanding access to "the International" on a seniority rather than test/selection basis.

While there was no union, no contract, the company eventually gave in to straight seniority bid. That's pretty much the story there.

The "fat F/A" was brought to you courtesy of the US Court system. DAL had a "weight check" system where the F/A's had to weigh in every month. Those exceeding the "guidelines" for weight per height were given numerous opportunities to get back within guidelines. Eventually, though, they could and sometimes were terminated for failure to do so. That eventually got to the US court system where the company lost the case.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Automakers Paying $2 Billion Not to Work
« Reply #29 on: March 05, 2006, 11:49:05 AM »
there is less hope than even I see with the unions...  Even if GM goes broke and dumps the union and it's high paid executives and leans out with a lot of R & D...  It won't matter.

The unions have a strnglehold on the ancillary stuff ... tires, starter motors carbs metal plastic... everything... They will just pout and march and stamp their feet and not sell to GM till Gm hires back all the useless union workers again.

lazs