Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Gunthr on January 23, 2006, 10:49:18 AM
-
Ford has lost billions - sales are in the toilet, while the Japanese car sales are booming. Why can't Ford and GM be responsive to customers? It makes you wonder what factors are at work here...
-
Mainly the incompetency of our l33t managers from the Ivy League B-schools. They have no clue what the customer wants or would buy, nor apparently do they care enough to find out. However, they are absolutely first rate on deciding what pay, perks and pensions they themselves deserve.
-
shame... maybe they will heed the wake up call.
-
I think Ford has great products.
The Mustang is an amazing car.
The F Series pickups are the best in the market.
The Freestyle is a great mini-van/suv.
I don't think their problem is product. Go to a Ford dealer and try any of those out and tell me they are not something you would want to own.
-
Shoot.. has anyone really looked at a Ford lately.. Mustang/F-150 aside the rest of there car line up looks as if someone with a labotomy designed them.
At least GM has a few cars in there lineup I like. I know FWD sucks but that V8 stuffed in that 06 Impala SS is one fun ride!
DC also has some nice looking cars..
Some one at Ford needs to wake up and smell the coffee!
-
I see two failures here.
Mismanagement of the company by top brass.
Unions. When you compete in a global market, wages must be competitive globally or you won't have a job. That's reality. Unfortunately, the Unions haven't figured that equation out yet.
-
How much does the average UAW union guy make?
I heard they start at 60 bucks an hour, is that true?
-
The $60 an hour figure includes benefits and health care. It's not take-home pay, it's what the guy is costing the auto companies once all his benefits are added up.
Still, it's far too much for a guy who turns a bolt and won't get fired if he doesn't bother to show up.
-
So whats the take home 40?
40 an hour hell even 30 an hour seems insane.
Back in 93 the Nummi plant in Fremont was starting at 12 an hour. (not a UAW shop) and that was pretty good starting pay at the time.
-
"tell me they are not something you would want to own."
I wouldn't mind owning a new Ford.....
for at most about 2 years.
IMO, based on personal experience and those of relatives and neighbors, Ford products (GM and Chrsyler too) suck in the long run (more than 3 yrs). If you want lasting value for then money then Honda or Toyota are the way to go.
Examples of some pieces of latter day Ford shat I've owned (or been personal witness to the absolute cruditude of) were Escorts (talk about junky, throw away cars!), the newer "500" (did they use left over WWII German HE-162 glue to put it together?), Crown Vic (holy cracking plastic intake manifolds Batman!) and Rattletrapstar minivans for starters.
-
not sure. I'd be pulling numbers out of my bellybutton (here I go!), but it's not that high. Starting definately isn't near 30.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Unions. When you compete in a global market, wages must be competitive globally or you won't have a job. That's reality. Unfortunately, the Unions haven't figured that equation out yet.
Indeed, Rip. The Unions must figure out a way to beat these wages the Big 3 pay in other countries for similar work.
Big 3 Find More Level Playing Field Abroad (http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-autos31dec31,1,5640613.story?coll=la-headlines-business)
...China is the fastest-growing major auto market and has attracted all the big carmakers. GM is the country's second-largest automaker, behind Volkswagen. And like its rivals, about 35% of GM's payroll costs in China go toward pension, healthcare and other benefits.
Wages for autoworkers range from $1,000 a month that some VW workers in Shanghai reportedly get to as low as $75 a month for obscure Chinese auto companies such as Chery Automotive.
GM pays its workers about $350 a month in direct wages and contributes an additional $150 toward each worker's health insurance, pension and other benefits, according to Jia Xinguang, chief analyst at the China National Automotive Industry Consulting and Development Corp.
....
....Talk about pay and benefits isn't frowned upon in Mexico, however, where a dozen automakers build vehicles. GM, DaimlerChrysler, Nissan Motor Co. and Ford are the biggest, accounting for 97% of the 1.5 million vehicles made there in 2004.
Ford assembly worker Jose Toledo Garcia earns about $2.15 an hour to help build F-Series pickup trucks at its plant in Cuautitlan, just outside of Mexico City. Ford also pays about $500 a year to help fund his retirement plan, a 401(k)-type system into which all Mexican workers also pay a portion of their weekly earnings.
The yearly tab for Toledo's healthcare right now is about $1,000. Ford and Toledo each pay half. And there is no co-pay.
Ford's financial responsibility ends when Toledo hits the mandatory retirement age of 65. After that, the government bears his pension and medical costs.
And it's the same for every other automaker in Mexico...
THAT'S the America we all want, isn't it?
US autoworkers competitively building F-150's for $2.15 an hour to stem the exodus of jobs to Mexican plants. $500 bucks a month to compete with Chinese folks bolting a Chevy together.
Yep... THAT'S what will solve the problem here all right.
Now Main Street's white washed windows and vacant stores
seems like there ain't nobody wants to come down here no more
They're closing down the textile mill across the railroad tracks
Foreman says these jobs are going boys and they ain't coming back to
your hometown
Your hometown
Your hometown
Your hometown
-
Originally posted by Gunthr
It makes you wonder what factors are at work here...
U, A, and W.
-
Deleted.
7- Members should remember this board is aimed at a general audience. Posting pornographic or generally offensive text, images, links, etc. will not be tolerated. This includes attempts to bypass the profanity filter.
-
Ford can become competitive again if they outsource manufacturing to chip away at their massive losses. I can get a guy to turn that same bolt for a few pennies an hour, with no benefits, who'll have better attendance, work longer hours, and not be able to go on strike. Profits will go through the roof, even with less overall sales.
Probably not the answer everybody wanted, huh?
-
Originally posted by indy007
Probably not the answer everybody wanted, huh?
Nope.
Now Main Street's white washed windows and vacant stores
seems like there ain't nobody wants to come down here no more
They're closing down the textile mill across the railroad tracks
Foreman says these jobs are going boys and they ain't coming back to
your hometown
-
You cannot build quality into a product, it must be designed into the product.
I just got rid of a 10 year old Infinity I30 with 140,000 miles on it. The interior of that car looked brand new. No exaggeration. It looked like it was just driven off the showroom floor. After 10 years of insane Texas weather!
Now, show me any American designed vehicle after 10 years of the same Texas weather and take a look at it. I promise you, it will look bad. faded color, cracks in the vinyl, seams pulled apart, seat cushions collapsed, and a malady of other problems will plague American designed cars.
If you use cheaper materials to increase profit margins, then you end up with a cheaper quality vehicle. No other reason to use cheap materials. The American car companies can use the same materials used in that Infinity.
I looked hard at the new Mustang. I wanted to like it. I love the exterior styling of it. But the interior just turned me off. It was/is cheap materials. So I took a look at the new Corvette. Beautiful car. Fast, but again, the interior was assembled from cheap materials. Even the leather used in the bucket seats felt cheap.
So why emphasize the interior? Well, most repairs to the interior of a car are very expensive. Also, there is a greater chance the interior will not be assembled back into the condition it was when it came from the factory. So, I want a car whose interior is made from quality materials. I cannot find an American car which fits the bill.
EDIT: Toad, I know you are pro union, but unions, in general, are doing more damage than good to the ability of America to be a manufacturing country with thier current practices.
-
I think Ford has great products.
The Mustang is an amazing car.
The F Series pickups are the best in the market.
The Freestyle is a great mini-van/suv.
I don't think their problem is product. Go to a Ford dealer and try any of those out and tell me they are not something you would want to own.
Maybe Habu, but lets stick with sales. The bottom line is, Ford sales have plummeted while Toys and Nissans have literally skyrocketed...
Certainly high union wages impact profit margin for US car makers, but the Fords aren't selling regardless! It has to be the product! A significant number of people don't want those vehicles. The Taurus will now only be manufactured as a fleet car now, sale of new Taurus's to individuals will be discontinued. The Freestyle is going to be discontinued too. Why? Maybe people don't like the styling, or the reliability/quality, perceived value or functional design. Whatever, Ford is mostly missing the target, no matter what country's workers are making it.
-
That is also the ther side of the coin. The dealerships and sales practices have not kept up with the times.
Walk onto a Lexus, Infiniti, Volvo, Honda, or Toyota lot. The sales methods are very different than that of Ford or GM. I hate going to a Ford and/or GM lot. It is not a pleasant experience.
Conversely, when I bought my Lexus, it was actually quite relaxing and damn near fun to do.
-
Another area ford and GM are way behind on is warranties. Lots of other makes are offering more the 3 years 36k.
Hell Even jeep figured this out.
Last time I looked GM and ford are still sticking with 3/36. The right there coupled with the percieved qaulity diference is enough to turn people away.
_____________________________ _____________________________ __
The writing is on the wall for the UAW, its dead. GM and ford in 5 years will probably produce very little in the US and I bet most is not in union shops.
Why can't the unions see this coming and try and comprimise on salary? Isn’t taking a pay and benifits cut better then being out of work?
-
Toyota's average hourly factory wage in the U.S. $26.50, GM's $27.13 I would think Ford is in there someplace.
Why is Toyota doing so well in North America and the other two so poorly?
shamus
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
EDIT: Toad, I know you are pro union, but unions, in general, are doing more damage than good to the ability of America to be a manufacturing country with thier current practices.
Well , in all cases it's the result of a faulty management ,dealing with union is also part of the bizness.
-
I got an 11 year old ford.
It runs great, never caused me any trouble & except once two years ago when the coolant pump went belly up, from where that happened it was all downhill to the shop. & i dont baby it either. It lives outside five years in AZ & six going on forever in OR. Best $13k i ever spent.
However in the 90s ford was making $ & good cars as well apparently. One can only guess they are crap now looking at the numbers, but i dont know, i dont pay a lot of attention because i dont need a new car & it look like i never will
-
The problem with american autos is that they're built to not last, probably deliberately. That's why their resale value sucks. Yeah fords stay together longer than chevys, but that's not saying much.
-
Originally posted by Shamus
Toyota's average hourly factory wage in the U.S. $26.50, GM's $27.13 I would think Ford is in there someplace.
Why is Toyota doing so well in North America and the other two so poorly?
shamus
Marketing, service (including part recalls, customer relations, etc), warranty coverage, reputation... Ford never really evolved either. A good example of a company that is adapting is Toyota. They rolled out the Scion brand, with a completely different sales strategy. There is no negotiation. I've seen customers get kicked out of the store because they demanded the sales people negotiate on the price. Part of the theory is to get new customers into Toyota brands... the other part is to train customers on the new sales process early on so that as Toyota makes that transition, people are already comfortable with the concept. Pick the car off the menu, that's what you get, that's what you pay for. The average age of a Toyota owner, iirc, is in their 50s. They're terrified of becoming another Oldsmobile, and are putting a process in place to fix that, decades in advance.
...what are the US brands doing?
-
Originally posted by indy007
Marketing, service (including part recalls, customer relations, etc), warranty coverage, reputation... Ford never really evolved either. A good example of a company that is adapting is Toyota. They rolled out the Scion brand, with a completely different sales strategy. There is no negotiation. I've seen customers get kicked out of the store because they demanded the sales people negotiate on the price. Part of the theory is to get new customers into Toyota brands... the other part is to train customers on the new sales process early on so that as Toyota makes that transition, people are already comfortable with the concept. Pick the car off the menu, that's what you get, that's what you pay for. The average age of a Toyota owner, iirc, is in their 50s. They're terrified of becoming another Oldsmobile, and are putting a process in place to fix that, decades in advance.
...what are the US brands doing?
Digging their own grave, and the UAW is making the shoddily built overpriced coffin? :D
-
Originally posted by straffo
Well , in all cases it's the result of a faulty management ,dealing with union is also part of the bizness.
And it is a shame the management has so little control over thier own company.
Do not get me wrong. I think upper management for large corporations has gotten out of control with greed and corruption, for the most part. But I do not beleive the unions are the answer for that situation.
For every right you can associate with a union, there is a wrong which can be matched to it as well.
-
"Savings from job cuts are limited by the auto maker's union contract. Hourly employees who do not take early retirement packages enter a jobs bank retraining program in which they collect full pay and benefits while waiting for a spot to open up on an assembly line."
How many workers from the dozen or so plants that are closing are going to be sitting around still making full pay? How can Ford NOT be heading toward ever-decreasing profits with this type of labor contract?
-
Ok, that is pretty screwy.
-
Its ironic that Toyota, the most successful car maker on the planet, is doing it by moving manufacturing jobs TO the USA! As opposed to outsourcing to places like China or India.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
EDIT: Toad, I know you are pro union, but unions, in general, are doing more damage than good to the ability of America to be a manufacturing country with thier current practices.
I've often said the only thing worse than a Union is..... no Union.
I'm not really "pro-Union". It's just that I realize a Union is part of a "check and balance" system that is NECESSARY. You only need look to the pre-Union era to see why. Anyone who claims that couldn't happen here again just doesn't read the news.
No, it's really very simple and has little to do with Union/Non-Union.
There are no more tariffs, no more "protectionist trade laws" for the auto industry (and most others) anymore. Technology transfer, the communications revolution, improvements in shipping have made it possible for manufacturers to place their factories in just about any country on the globe and produce a quality product.
There isn't any argument about this, period. Jetliner parts, autos, steel...whatever... it can be made to the necessary quality in any place the corporation chooses to invest and build a factory.
So it's real, real simple. Where would YOU build your next Ford factory?
In the US where a worker earns ~$28/hour plus maybe another $42 in pension, health and other benefits
OR
In China where a worker costs you $500 per MONTH wages AND benefits versus the ~$4800 per month you pay a US worker in straight salary alone?
The jobs are going boys and they ain't coming back.
Unless, of course, you think your friends and neighbors here in the good 'ole USA should work for say.... $500 a month, wages AND benefits.
And then how will the rest of us do? How many folks making $500/month, wages AND benefits will play AH, Skuzzy? How many folks making $500/month will buy cars? Buy houses? How many folks making $500 a month will spend $100 for full house cable TV?
Global economy dudes. We got free trade, now we get to compete with guys that think $500 a month is living large.
It's easy to see where it leads. And it really has nothing to do with Unions. It has to do with "who will work for the least?" when that question is asked around the globe by a corporation.
It'll take a while but job flight is inevitable.
-
Oh, I agree the jobs will be fleeting. Greed from upper management will help to ensure that. They have no national pride nor could they give a crap about the working man. But greed from unions is no better.
I also have a strong dislike for unions. As someone who watched unions destroy my father, simply due to the fact he (nor his employees) wanted to go union, you, nor anyone else, will convince me they are a good thing.
I enjoy the freedom of choice. If my employer does not treat me right or I do not like the compensation package, then I will go to another company. In a union, I do not have that choice. I am forced to work where, when, and how they tell me to.
I do my job, simply due to the fact, I enjoy it. Take that away from me, and I will be miserable.
You know what a union would do to HTC? God forbid that to happen.
-
i have to say forst off, i own my 3rd buick. never owned a ford, so i can not comment on them, but on US auto's i have owned a monte carlo, then 3 buicks. i'll break them down:
forgot the monte carlo. first car, 1980 with a 267 V8. beat the $#%^ out of it, and basically killed it myself. it was smashed, broken into, you name it.
1985 buick skyhawk. was my mothers car, got it for HS graduation. it had 39,000 miles on it in 1991. that's 6,000/ year. she only drove it to and from work, until i got my liscense. i'd say i was responsible for at least 9k or those miles. @ 27,000 before i got it, it needed a cam shaft replacement, basically because it never drove more than 3 miles a day. not GM's fault, the engine never got warm enough for the oil to work properly. i drove that car into the ground, 4 accidents, 1 of them "totaling" the car, and finally sold it to a buddy for $400 with 198,000 miles on it. only real problems were an engine mount that stress cracked (by my hard driving probably), a heater core, and damage from my accidents.
1984 buick regal. got this bueaty with 112,000 miles on it, classic GM V6 engine, car was in great shape. never had a major problem with it, never in an accident. one day with about 180,000 miles on it the timing chain went. the car died, and i was set on buying a "new" car. got it fixed for $650 and sold it for $1100.
1995 buick skyhawk. i still own it. 180,000 miles, V6 and i have had almost no problems again. the heater core went once a few years ago, and a coil went bad. i didn't get regular trans. maintenence and had to have it flushed, and the electric window rack froze and broke 2 times (in -10 or lower temps), but thats about it. just a few weeks ago my driver seat just broke something underneath it, but this car has almost 200,000 miles and it 11 years old. with my fat bellybutton on it all that time, i think it has done good.
now to imports. i worked at a honda dealership for quite a while, and though it was a while ago i can tell you, they are WAY more "well built" than any toyota ever has been. honda's are rock solid. they do have a better feel inside than most american cars. it's the little things, like the vent louvers being solid and not breaking, and things like that.
it is too bad buick does not have a car for someone like me anymore (mid 30's, not rich, single guy) because i'd get another buick in a second.
-
Just saw this on Yahoo...
"The main US auto union called Ford Motor Co.'s decision to cut tens of thousands of jobs "devastating" and blamed the company management for the failure to protect market share.
Ford announced that it would cut 25,000-30,000 jobs and close 14 assembly plants as part of a restructuring plan to stem massive losses in its North American vehicle operations.
"The restructuring plan announced this morning by Ford is extremely disappointing and devastating news for the many thousands of hard-working men and women who have devoted their working lives to Ford," United Auto Workers president Ron Gettelfinger said in a statement.
"The impacted hourly and salaried workers find themselves facing uncertain futures because of senior management's failure to halt Ford's sliding market share.
"The announcement has further left a cloud hanging over the entire workforce because of pending future announcements of additional facilities to be closed at some point in the future," said the union boss.
He said the cuts and future announcements are being discussed with the second biggest US auto maker and warned: "Certainly, today's announcement will only make the 2007 negotiations all the more difficult and all the more important."
Gettelfinger said that the latest plan, like one in 2002, concentrated on cutting capacity when "the focus should instead be on striving to gain market share in this competitive market by offering consumers innovative and appealing products."
The union said it would seek to strictly enforce job security agreements that exist with Ford.
Savings from job cuts are limited by the auto maker's union contract. Hourly employees who do not take early retirement packages enter a jobs bank retraining program in which they collect full pay and benefits while waiting for a spot to open up on an assembly line.
Canadian Auto Workers president Buzz Hargrove described the cuts as "a shocking, painful blow." One plant in Canada is on the closure list."
Yeah, its all management fault. Sure. It couldnt be the incredible hourly wage and benefits these morons get, right?
-
Between the greed of unions and upper management, companies have no chance. Being squeezed from the bottom and the top will eventually make the ballon pop.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Oh, I agree the jobs will be fleeting. Greed from upper management will help to ensure that. They have no national pride nor could they give a crap about the working man. But greed from unions is no better.
And there you have it. Greed as a check and balance on....greed. Suprise. That's the "why" of unions in a nutshell.
As I said, the only thing worse than an union is.... no union. I didn't say they were a "good thing". I said they were better than "no-thing". Big difference.
No one forces ANYONE to take a "Union job". Fortunately, in this country, you can choose where to work. Union or no union, the choice is yours. As far as "closed shop"... well, there are other places to work in every case.
I enjoy the freedom of choice. If my employer does not treat me right or I do not like the compensation package, then I will go to another company. In a union, I do not have that choice. I am forced to work where, when, and how they tell me to.
You most certainly DO have a choice to go to another company. No Union can make you work for a particular company. Don't like building cars under a GM/UAW contract? Then go work for Nissan's Smyrna plant; they are non-union. You can go to another company anytime.
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Yeah, its all management fault. Sure. It couldnt be the incredible hourly wage and benefits these morons get, right?
LP, as the world eventually turns, workers in auto plants in the US and Canada will either compete directly and equally with those in China or the jobs will go to ... China. (And don't suspect for a moment that the Chinese workers won't have their turn in the box. A poorer country will eventually try to beat THEIR low bid as well.)
So what you expect is that "those morons" should work for the same as Chinese autoworkers right? Because THAT is the only way you will stop the transfer of jobs to the lowest cost producer. You have to match cost.
So how will this country and Canada do when autoworkers work for $500/month pay AND benefits? Do you think that might have downward wage pressure on other US and Canadian jobs?
Global workforce, dude. Free trade. We wanted it, we got it. Time to pay the piper.
-
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Skuzzy
EDIT: Toad, I know you are pro union, but unions, in general, are doing more damage than good to the ability of America to be a manufacturing country with thier current practices.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I've often said the only thing worse than a Union is..... no Union.
I'm not really "pro-Union". It's just that I realize a Union is part of a "check and balance" system that is NECESSARY. You only need look to the pre-Union era to see why. Anyone who claims that couldn't happen here again just doesn't read the news.
No, it's really very simple and has little to do with Union/Non-Union.
There are no more tariffs, no more "protectionist trade laws" for the auto industry (and most others) anymore. Technology transfer, the communications revolution, improvements in shipping have made it possible for manufacturers to place their factories in just about any country on the globe and produce a quality product.
There isn't any argument about this, period. Jetliner parts, autos, steel...whatever... it can be made to the necessary quality in any place the corporation chooses to invest and build a factory.
So it's real, real simple. Where would YOU build your next Ford factory?
In the US where a worker earns ~$28/hour plus maybe another $42 in pension, health and other benefits
OR
In China where a worker costs you $500 per MONTH wages AND benefits versus the ~$4800 per month you pay a US worker in straight salary alone?
The jobs are going boys and they ain't coming back.
Unless, of course, you think your friends and neighbors here in the good 'ole USA should work for say.... $500 a month, wages AND benefits.
And then how will the rest of us do? How many folks making $500/month, wages AND benefits will play AH, Skuzzy? How many folks making $500/month will buy cars? Buy houses? How many folks making $500 a month will spend $100 for full house cable TV?
Global economy dudes. We got free trade, now we get to compete with guys that think $500 a month is living large.
It's easy to see where it leads. And it really has nothing to do with Unions. It has to do with "who will work for the least?" when that question is asked around the globe by a corporation.
It'll take a while but job flight is inevitable.
__________________
Toad
13th TAS
I'm having a hard time with this concept, Toad. First of all, the conditions that spawned unions long ago were indeed atrocious. There was a need back then, but unions have gone a long way to having outlived their usefulness. Those conditions do not exist today, and Federal and State administrative law would prevent all of those past abuses today.
Secondly, I can't bring myself to believe that American management and the workforce can't competitively build quality cars in the USA and sell them to make a profit, and therefore stay in buisness. Thats why I'm asking the question, why aren't they doing it? Why can't they change when faced with threats to their survival? You know, temporary sacrifices for a future gain and all that? A realistic wage in a healthy long term industry is better than no wage.
I also don't believe its possible to NOT be involved in the global economy.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Between the greed of unions and upper management, companies have no chance. Being squeezed from the bottom and the top will eventually make the ballon pop.
There is no legal requirement to keep jobs in a particular country anymore.
Stockholders expect profit. If you can save 90% on labor costs in China, where would stockholders expect the company to build product?
The balloon isn't "popping". It's being stolen away by folks that will work for $500/month pay AND benefits. The balloon is just moving to a new address.
-
I work for what is referred to as a tier one supplier to the big 3. Thank god most of our business is with DCX, though we do some GM work too.
From what I can see on my side, there are a few major factors that aren't mentioned much.
Multiple inefficient individual legacy factories with alot of inter-company transportation costs. Engine plant here, casting plant there, assembly plant over there. Factories designed to run one, maybe two products per assembly line with limited flexibility and vehicles produced in batches. Factories that are simply aged.
Attitude:
Before I came to the company I work for now, I worked for a company that serviced injection molding machines. This allowed me to visit the Honda Marysville assembly plant in Ohio and then the following week I was in Utica Michigan at a ford plant.
There couldn't be a bigger contrast. The honda facility was bright, well lit, clean and pleasant. The people seemed happy or at least content and attentive to their work.
The Ford plant was dismal. It was dark, extremely dirty, it seemed abandoned, though there were alot of people there. Employees read large rather thick novels at their machines while performing their work rather than inspecting or whatever it was that they were supposed to do.
From a service persons perspective, even the way we were treated was radically different. When we arrived at Honda, within 1 minute of our arrival, we were wisked on an electric cart to the machine that was broken and any and all requests for special large tools, diagrams/prints etc was responded to immediately. At ford, we would wait sometimes for 2 hours for a person to show up to remove a bolt for us (we were forbidden to actually use any tools, we had to have someone do the physical work for us). If we needed a different trades person (electrical for example), we had to keep the mechanical guy busy with something or he would wander off and it would be another hour or two before he could be coerced to come back to the machine and remove another bolt.
I don't know what to say. I want to defend the American way, the people of this country etc, but in some respects, "we" are reaping what we have sown.
I think in todays age of plastic parts and cheap construction, the inability of the consumer to truly percieve quality and their associated distraction with shiny chromed plastic drives the producer of quality goods into a situation that ends either in complying with the lessening of quality or bankruptcy.
Of course this coming from someons who's first 69 Buick LeSabre had an actual frame made of 1/4" steel rather than unibody sheet metal....so I am a bit jaded.
-
Originally posted by Toad
LP, as the world eventually turns, workers in auto plants in the US and Canada will either compete directly and equally with those in China or the jobs will go to ... China. (And don't suspect for a moment that the Chinese workers won't have their turn in the box. A poorer country will eventually try to beat THEIR low bid as well.)
So what you expect is that "those morons" should work for the same as Chinese autoworkers right? Because THAT is the only way you will stop the transfer of jobs to the lowest cost producer. You have to match cost.
So how will this country and Canada do when autoworkers work for $500/month pay AND benefits? Do you think that might have downward wage pressure on other US and Canadian jobs?
Global workforce, dude. Free trade. We wanted it, we got it. Time to pay the piper.
Dude, as you guys have pointed out...management and union thinking have collided to crush a manufacturing giant.
I dont buy Ford, it means nothing to me. I'm just an outside observer noticing the obvious.
They dont have vehicles I want, or at the price tags I'm willing to pay. While they have some good offerings out there, they are a clunk old company whose hands are tied by the UAW and their own bad choices. they cant shut down and streamline without the UAW crying foul. The UAW is simply along for the ride. Wanting more when there are good times, and refusing to give up anything when the times are lean, such as now.
-
I do not see greed from the union, causing less greed from upper management or vice-versa. I am not sure why you consider this a 'checks and balances' scheme/approach.
You cannot get a job in some states without being part of a union (New York for example).
Uhmm,..the people I have dealt with in unions cannot leave a job without an immediate replacement being available. In some cases that immediate replacement is told to leave one employer for another. Something to do with negation of attrition.
What do you mean by 'no-thing'. I am not part of a union. Why is this a bad thing? What would a union do for me, that I cannot do myself?
-
I drove in few months ago in Europe sharing the road with those "lawn mowers", and last week in Dallas in that jungle of godzilas stile pick up trucks,
Try it , is nice experience, and you will understand the bankrupcy of US carmakers
They are having problems since fuel price went up, is not only about higher quality of japan/europe made cars
They are out the market for fuel eficient vehicles, building monster engines like 30 years ago when the fuel price was cents/gal.
-
Originally posted by Gunthr
Those conditions do not exist today, and Federal and State administrative law would prevent all of those past abuses today.
[/b]
Sadly, you are incorrect. I worked for a company that deliberately and routinely scheduled in violation of Federal Aviation Regulations. They covered this by "cooking the books" and altering flight times. There are laws against that you know. When caught at it, they merely claimed "bookkeeping errors" and went on their merry way.
So, from personal experience, I find your assumption incorrect.
Secondly, I can't bring myself to believe that American management and the workforce can't competitively build quality cars in the USA and sell them to make a profit, and therefore stay in buisness.
[/b]
For a while, they can. Take for example, however, the 2006 Hyundai Sonata. This car is selling for thousands less than the Accord or Camry and US car magazines are touting it as the equal of either competitor. The Japanese are beginning to look over their shoulder at their "low-cost" Korean competitors who are in turn looking over THEIR shoulder at their "low-cost" Chinese competitors.
Joint Report and Policy Recommendations on Sectoral Implications of a China-Japan-Korea Free Trade Agreement (http://www.nira.go.jp/newse/paper/joint4/report.html)
Korean business people10 in the automobile industry predict that a CJK FTA will substantially increase automobile imports from Japan, while it will greatly increase both Korea's auto exports and imports vis-a-vis China.
Furthermore, they foresee that a CJK FTA will increase both Japan's auto parts investment to Korea and Korea's auto parts investment to China. In addition, a CJK FTA is expected to decrease Korean automakers' domestic market share, while it will increase Korean automakers' Chinese and world market shares.
Korean business people also expect that a CJK FTA will enhance the competitiveness of the Korean automobile industry.
Now what does that mean in the long term for US automakers? You tell me.
Thats why I'm asking the question, why aren't they doing it? Why can't they change when faced with threats to their survival? You know, temporary sacrifices for a future gain and all that? A realistic wage in a healthy long term industry is better than no wage.
[/b]
Because, at the end of the day, the wage has to be $500/month pay and benefits in order to compete with the lowest cost producer. Again, you tell me what that means for the American and Canadian autoworker?
I think it only means they can "buy a little time". The handwriting is on the wall though.
I also don't believe its possible to NOT be involved in the global economy.
If you really believe that and think that through, you'll see why manufacturing is going to keep leaving the US and Canada and go to countries that vie against each other to be the lowest cost labor pools.
It won't happen tomorrow. Or in 5 years or maybe even in 10. But your children and grandchildren won't be buying many large ticket items built in North America.
-
Ikeprof brought up a good point as well. People not being allowed to do things as it is not 'part of their job'.
When I worked for Tandy, we use to do our annual new product announcements in New York. I was always there. One year, we had a very large show to do. The truck carrying all our display items had problems and got there late.
I started to open the truck, and was stopped by the hotel manager. He told me it was illegal for us to open the truck. We would have to wait until the union workers got there so they could do it.
Well, we waited, and waited. Finally, they show up. Thye open the back of the truck, then took a 30 minute break. After the break, they start unloading the truck one item at a time. Union regulations prevented them from moving more than one at a time. Every 45 minutes, they took a 15 minute break. No matter where they were, no matter what they were doing, they just stopped. Like automatons.
We ended up being up until 4:00am due to the idiotic rules and regulations of a union and being in a state where nothing can happen without the proper union person doing it. This is not condusive to getting things done.
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Dude, as you guys have pointed out...management and union thinking have collided to crush a manufacturing giant.
Not really. I don't think there is ANYTHING that either managment or labor could do to compete directly with the Chinese. At this point in time, no American or Canadian autoworker can afford to work for $500/month pay and benefits.
Ford is shutting down North American plants. Production will pick up in lower cost overseas plants. Unless UAW can match those labor costs, the work is leaving North America.
Would you work for $500/month pay and bennies LP?
Nope. There you are. The whole explanation right there.
-
Of course, companies which move thier workforce offshore for short term gains (and they are only short term), are effectively killing themselves off.
Put enough Americans out of work and who will be able to buy the cars? That is why it is short term gain. Long term, they are killing the consumer who would buy the product.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
I do not see greed from the union, causing less greed from upper management or vice-versa. I am not sure why you consider this a 'checks and balances' scheme/approach.
[/b]
There is one "pie" at any company. Most management will attempt to eat the whole pie if it possibly can. The Union will attempt to eat the whole pie if it can. The gobbling and counter-gobbling is a type of check and balance. You can't eat what the other guy just ate.
You cannot get a job in some states without being part of a union (New York for example).
[/b]
You're saying EVERY worker in NY state is Union? C'mon, Skuzzy... I know better.
Uhmm,..the people I have dealt with in unions cannot leave a job without an immediate replacement being available. In some cases that immediate replacement is told to leave one employer for another. Something to do with negation of attrition.
[/b]
Was this some vital governmental operation? Where else in America are you incapable of saying "I quit" and leaving? Example, please.
What do you mean by 'no-thing'. I am not part of a union. Why is this a bad thing? What would a union do for me, that I cannot do myself?
"No-thing" is "nothing". I didn't say a Union is a "good thing", I said it is better than "no thing" or "nothing". My experiences in aviation clearly showed that without a Union, safety is not always the FIRST priority as it must be. Non-union airlines routinely push pilots, planes and mechanics to do things that would scare a fearless man. I have little doubt other industries are any different except in degree of danger.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
We ended up being up until 4:00am due to the idiotic rules and regulations of a union and being in a state where nothing can happen without the proper union person doing it. This is not condusive to getting things done.
Yep, things like that happen when the pendulum gets pushed too far one way.
Or the other. ;)
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Ikeprof brought up a good point as well. People not being allowed to do things as it is not 'part of their job'.
When I worked for Tandy, we use to do our annual new product announcements in New York. I was always there. One year, we had a very large show to do. The truck carrying all our display items had problems and got there late.
I started to open the truck, and was stopped by the hotel manager. He told me it was illegal for us to open the truck. We would have to wait until the union workers got there so they could do it.
Well, we waited, and waited. Finally, they show up. Thye open the back of the truck, then took a 30 minute break. After the break, they start unloading the truck one item at a time. Union regulations prevented them from moving more than one at a time. Every 45 minutes, they took a 15 minute break. No matter where they were, no matter what they were doing, they just stopped. Like automatons.
We ended up being up until 4:00am due to the idiotic rules and regulations of a union and being in a state where nothing can happen without the proper union person doing it. This is not condusive to getting things done.
I have heard the same stories from our marketing people. They all hated having to deal lazy union people at the shows in NY.
-
Originally posted by Toad
There is one "pie" at any company. Most management will attempt to eat the whole pie if it possibly can. The Union will attempt to eat the whole pie if it can. The gobbling and counter-gobbling is a type of check and balance. You can't eat what the other guy just ate.
I have always viewed a checks and balances system as an effort to contain/control the negative aspect of the endeavor. Seems to me, the union and the upper management are in a race to see who can consume the pie the fastest. There is nothing to prevent it. If unions are suppsed to be the 'check' which prevents greed from running amok in upper management, I pronounce the exercise a dismal failure.
You're saying EVERY worker in NY state is Union? C'mon, Skuzzy... I know better.
I do not live there. I am only going on what I was told and experienced. I am sure there are some native New Yorkers on the board who can respond with more precision.
I do know there are states which have 'right to work' and there are states who do not have 'right to work'. I know 'right to work' only allows (in theory) a person to work in a job inter-mixed with union and vice-versa.
Was this some vital governmental operation? Where else in America are you incapable of saying "I quit" and leaving? Example, please.
It was some contruction sites. Apparently the union had to have X number of people on site daily. People could only quit if they had a replacement or it would cost the union money.
"No-thing" is "nothing". I didn't say a Union is a "good thing", I said it is better than "no thing" or "nothing". My experiences in aviation clearly showed that without a Union, safety is not always the FIRST priority as it must be. Non-union airlines routinely push pilots, planes and mechanics to do things that would scare a fearless man. I have little doubt other industries are any different except in degree of danger.
If I was overhauling an engine for a plane and was told to short-cut the overhual, I wouldn't. I do not need a union for that.
If the company fired me, I would go public and garner a nice settlement. I do not see where a union is needed in this situation at all.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Would you work for $500/month pay and bennies LP?
Nope. There you are. The whole explanation right there.
Are you trying to outshine Airhead in the concept that the Unions can do no wrong?
Whose asking these guys to take such cuts? Hell they dont want ANY cuts. We should give them MORE just for having the gall to show up!
Your so lost in your pro-union-at-all-cost argument that you've lost your perspective on ths situation.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Put enough Americans out of work and who will be able to buy the cars? That is why it is short term gain. Long term, they are killing the consumer who would buy the product.
Ah HA!
Killing the Golden Goose. Or, biblically,
Deuteronomy 25:4
Thou shalt not muzzle the ox when he treadeth out the corn.
They are killing the North American consumer who would buy the product.
As this evolves, huge new populations of consumers will be created as wealth is transferred to the developing countries. North American consumers fade as Chinese consumers step into the spotlight.
It happened when Great Britain industrialized. It happened in the US and Canada when we industrialized. It happened in Japan post-WW2. It will happen in China. It's historically consistent. It doesn't happen overnight but the cycle grows shorter each time.
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Whose asking these guys to take such cuts?
Don't be fatuous.
If you step back and take the long view, you will understand that we, as a nation, cannot compete with another nation where the people are eager to work for 10% of our wages.
It really has nothing to do with Unions or no Unions. It has to do with competition against people who will joyfully work for 10% of your wage.
And again, if you actually read what I said, I'm not pro-Union. I'm just pointing out they do have their place now and then.
-
Ok, Toad, let's just put an end to this union thing between ourselves. Nothing worse than two intelligent people beating their heads against different sides of the same wall.
You have a very different perspective than I do about unions. I guess you see something positive in them, while every contact I have had with union has been negative.
In light of that, I really cannot see us having a meeting of the minds. Further disussion would be rather predictable and pointless, from me, or you.
Let's agree to disagree, shall we?
-
Originally posted by Toad
Don't be fatuous.
If you step back and take the long view, you will understand that we, as a nation, cannot compete with another nation where the people are eager to work for 10% of our wages.
It really has nothing to do with Unions or no Unions. It has to do with competition against people who will joyfully work for 10% of your wage.
I do agree with that.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Ok, Toaad, let's just put an end to this union thing.
You have a very different perspective than I do about unions. I guess you see something positive in them, while every contact I have had with union has been negative.
In light of that, I really cannot see us having a meeting of the minds. Further disussion would be rather predictable and pointless, from me, or you.
Let's agree to disagree, shall we?
Whats the fun in that!!
This is the O'club no argument can end in a nice way here, you need to flame each other with personal insults and then have some random MP close it! :D :aok
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Between the greed of unions and upper management, companies have no chance. Being squeezed from the bottom and the top will eventually make the ballon pop.
Exactly. Ours is a culture of ME ME ME!:(
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Whats the fun in that!!
This is the O'club no argument can end in a nice way here, you need to flame each other with personal insults and then have some random MP close it! :D :aok
I do not have to agree with Toad's position and he does not have to agree with mine, but I like to think we respect each other enough to note how we feel about something, then move on.
Besides, I dunt need an MP to help me out. :D
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
I do not have to agree with Toad's position and he does not have to agree with mine, but I like to think we respect each other enough to note how we feel about something, then move on.
Besides, I dunt need an MP to help me out. :D
yes yes yes... blah blah...
I don't see any flames!?!
On a side note. Toad is a great guy, I can not say anything bad about the guy who sent me all those awsome BBQ rubs!
If two people can be sure to keep it adult on this forum it is you two.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
If unions are suppsed to be the 'check' which prevents greed from running amok in upper management, I pronounce the exercise a dismal failure.
[/b]
At least the pie gets shared though. ;)
I am only going on what I was told and experienced.
[/b]
Does common sense tell you that every single guy delivering pizza is Union? :)
I do know there are states which have 'right to work' and there are states who do not have 'right to work'.
[/b]
EVERY state has the Taft-Hartley Act; it outlawed the closed shop. :)
You can have a "union shop" under Taft but then YOU choose to work in a Union Shop. No one can make you take the job.
Of course, Taft allows "right to work" as a choice for states too.
But no matter HOW you slice it, no one can MAKE you join a union. You simply don't have to take a job in a Union or Agency shop.
Apparently the union had to have X number of people on site daily. People could only quit if they had a replacement or it would cost the union money.
[/b]
Then there had to be some sort of voluntary agreement by the worker to this setup before hand.
]If I was overhauling an engine for a plane and was told to short-cut the overhual, I wouldn't. I do not need a union for that.
[/b]
No, what you would need is a new employer. You see, in the bad places, they will just FIRE you if you don't do what they ask. Having a Union to defend you in that situation makes a huge difference.
Next time I'm in Dallas, remind me to tell you of the time we were "asked" (read: directed) to take an L-1011 from Frankfurt to Atlanta with one hydraulic system out and back-up components inop in each of the other two systems. Glad we had a Union then; we landed in Frankfurt and still got to keep our jobs. And that was at a GOOD airline.
If the company fired me, I would go public and garner a nice settlement.
Probably not. You'd just get fired and waste a butt load of money on a lawyer going up against a huge corporate law department that would run you out of time and money.
No hard feelings, Skuzzy. We do have a different view. I see it both ways. Unions are a pain. Management is equally a pain. The pendulum swings from one pain to the other pain. Unfortunately, I think you need both pains so you can have a bit of time when the pendulum is in the middle.
-
I agree GTO. I like a good discussion. I think I am backing away from it as I cannot honestly commit to being objective about it. Too many bad things have happened in my life directly attributable to unions.
I really wanted to understand Toad's perspective, or anyone who thinks unions are a good thing, but not being able to back away from the personal things in my life is intruding on making this a good exchange of thoughts.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Don't be fatuous.
If you step back and take the long view, you will understand that we, as a nation, cannot compete with another nation where the people are eager to work for 10% of our wages.
It really has nothing to do with Unions or no Unions. It has to do with competition against people who will joyfully work for 10% of your wage.
And again, if you actually read what I said, I'm not pro-Union. I'm just pointing out they do have their place now and then.
Spin spin spin....you know, the other domestic car makers are eeking by...but again, dont let the facts disrupt yur rant.
-
Again, let me say this simply as I can.
I do not think Unions are a "good thing".
OTOH, I see no way to do without them given the rapacity of American management.
-
Just maybe the domestic builders have bitten off more than they can chew?
You know like ford owning mazda,jaguar, land rover.astin martin and volvo.
If those hot shot europeon companys were so strong how come they sold to ford?
And I do agree with skuzzy as far as unions go I just think it silly that someone could be paid as much as a teacher to stand there and scew in a few bolts:rolleyes:
I have a friend who works in the Arlington GM plant and he makes a killing in salary and he instals the rear windows on pick ups LOL thats it and he makes
over $20 bucks an hour:O
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Spin spin spin....you know, the other domestic car makers are eeking by...but again, dont let the facts disrupt yur rant.
LP, try again with the long view. Read what I said.
Yes, some domestic manufacturers are "eeking by". But, in time, they too will be ground under the wheel.
Again, it's real, real simple. Some guy in Changchun, China is willing to bolt together cars for 10% of American wages.
How long do you think it will take for the "eeking by" manufacturers to realize they could make a boatload more money by building in Changchun?
It's only a matter of time.
Sorry if you think that's a rant. I think it's simply common sense.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
I agree GTO. I like a good discussion. I think I am backing away from it as I cannot honestly commit to being objective about it. Too many bad things have happened in my life directly attributable to unions.
I really wanted to understand Toad's perspective, or anyone who thinks unions are a good thing, but not being able to back away from the personal things in my life is intruding on making this a good exchange of thoughts.
GTI??? GTI???????
Do I look like a guy who would name himself after a VW? Thats way to Eurotrash for me!
:D
I understand the disdain for unions. My only contact with one is my dads screwing my mom out of his retirement.
I can also see a bit of what Toad is saying. So maybe the airlines being union isnt that bad, but not everything needs to be union, I would not want a tech union, it would just mean even faster outsourcing.
No union needed in tech companies for the most part. Talented people get paid what they are worth or they go to another company that pays them what they are worth.
-
What you talkin' bout GTO? :D See,..who needs an MP? :lol
As far as the airline industry is concerned. My conscious would not allow me to do something which could potentially harm people. If my boss told me to do something like that, there are a number of ways it could be handled where I would not lose my job, but the job would be done correctly.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
What you talkin' bout GTO? :D See,..who needs an MP? :lol
LOL yeah who needs those MP's anyway!:D
-
Personally, I have always believed that American auto-makers have made a deliberate effort to keep prices of all autos sold in the U.S. artificially high.
What other products have shown the awe-inspiring price increases that cars and trucks have over the last 30 years?
For instance, I bought my first pickup, a Chevy Silverado with 350 V-8, in the fall of 1977. With $1100 in trade-in the amount I had to finance was a mere $4500 dollars. Financed over a three year period, the monthly payment was $133 a month.
That same vehicle, if purchased today, would cost a minimum of $25,000 to $30,000. That is around a 500% increase in price over that time period.
-
Originally posted by Gunthr
Ford has lost billions - sales are in the toilet, while the Japanese car sales are booming. Why can't Ford and GM be responsive to customers? It makes you wonder what factors are at work here...
News flash. GM went through the same layoff in the early 90's. BTW, Ford is in FAR BETTER shape than GM. GM (unless they change their ways) will be bankrupt and/or bought out within 5 years.
Ford is doing the right thing, they should have done this 3-4 years ago.
BTW, in response to the Japanese car sales, the US has one thing and one thing only that the Japanese don't have to worry about: The UAW.
Karaya
-
Those cars being produced in China are primarily for Chinese consumption, and the standard of living/exchange rate there. The wages are competitive for their environment.
Japanese manufacturers localized production long ago, building factories in the US for US consumption. Not all production, but most.
It really comes down to serious consideration about quality by the people on the factory floor, and not just lip service or advertising slogans. Japanese carmakers have tens of thousands of employees who do their jobs seriously every day. It is just built into the culture. It is built into the culture of all companies and all services. The customer is not king in Japan - the customer is God and the employees simply have more pride in their work.
The adversarial relationship between unions and management at US carmakers hasn't benefitted the workers or the companies. The workers are losing jobs and the company performance is out of step with the times and trundling along only on the back of size and momentum. Uh... the only solution is to change. Not much chance of that, so the trend will continue.
There are some fundamental differences in investment and stock that skew the balance away from US domestic makers. Japanese companies reinvest much more than American companies. Toyota stockholders don't demand or expect high dividends; they expect sound management and reasonable profits for long term stability and growth.
Japanese companies have to be serious about international business and not just domestic consumption. The country is too small to support the standard of living it enjoys. US carmakers consider foreign investment and production as a nusance.
US carmakers have never sold much in Japan or Asia. Why? If the Japanese carmakers used the same logic that US carmakers do, no Japanese cars would be sold in America.
Imagine for a minute that Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Mitsubishi and Mazda decided to enter the US market decades ago using the same models as they produced in Japan. You show up at a dealership and see cars with the steering wheel on the right, the speedometer is in km/hr, the radio frequencies don't cover the same band, all buttons, instrumentation and even the manual are written in Japanese, and parts and service are rare. Would you buy it? No, you would not.
However, that is the approach US carmakers have to international sales, except for some crapbox Ford Escorts sold throughout the world. Thirty years ago US companies didn't have to be concerned about global standards of tooling or localization of products or design. Well, the calendar has kept moving in spite of that resistance to change and adapt. If you can't even adapt or change to the metric system, there is little hope of a change in attitude.
-
And now some even more boring stuff... the US has built (huge) secondary industries to service crappy cars. Drove down any street and you'd swear the entire economy is based on cars needing repair and fast food.
Muffler shops, Wendys, body shops, McDonalds, upholstery shops, Burger King, auto paint shops, KFC, oil service, Pizza Hut, radiator shops, Taco Bell, mechanics, mechanics, mechanics, Crystal Burger, auto parts stores, mechanics, brake shops, mechanics, mechanics...
Japanese cars come from a culture where there are none of these shops. It's a huge nusance to have a car fall apart in Japan. Cars are designed to be transportation vehicles that work with little or no input from the user. No one has time to sit around and work on a car and people just buy a new one every 4-5 years. They send the used ones to Russia or Australia.
If a car breaks down in Japan, the buyer (and all the extended family and coworkers and neighbors) will never buy another car from that manufacturer... ever. The dealer will have to send someone to apologize profusely for weeks for causing such an enormous problem and embarrassment to the customer.
Are the Japanese customers coddled? Sure, but you have reaped the benefit of that culture by having cars needing alot less service.
-
Originally posted by Rolex
Those cars being produced in China are primarily for Chinese consumption, and the standard of living/exchange rate there. The wages are competitive for their environment.
[/b]
True enough.
Staggering blow: Delphi's bankruptcy ominous sign for fading auto industry (http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0510/09/A01-341885.htm)
October 9, 2005
UAW showdown looms as company plans to shutter U.S. plants, cut workers, slash benefits
...In its Chapter 11 filing in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in New York, Delphi said a "substantial segment" of its U.S. manufacturing base will be sold off or phased out over the next two years. The company will also move to slash union wages up to 60 percent, cut health care benefits and free itself of pension obligations to tens of thousands of employees inherited when Delphi was spun off from General Motors Corp. in 1999. ....
Auto parts sales enter fast lane (http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2004-01/20/content_300378.htm)
2004-01-20
The world's leading automotive components supplier Delphi said last week that its consolidated sales on the Chinese mainland surged by 50 per cent to US$650 million last year.
The Detroit-based firm said its growth rate in China increased from 35 per cent in 2002....
...Delphi has invested more than US$450 million and runs 10 manufacturing facilities in China, including eight joint ventures with local partners and two wholly-owned subsidiaries. ...
...Last month, the company started to build its first R&D centre in China, the Delphi China Technical Centre Co, with a total investment of US$50 million....
...Delphi will send more Chinese engineers to the United States for training to strengthen its local R&D capability....
...Delphi will also expand its sourcing in China, following many other multinationals, he said.
...China's ability in sourcing plays a significant role in Delphi's global supply strategy, he added....
Now Main Street's white washed windows and vacant stores
seems like there ain't nobody wants to come down here no more
They're closing down the textile mill across the railroad tracks
Foreman says these jobs are going boys and they ain't coming back to
your hometown
Your hometown
Your hometown
Your hometown
-
This is an interesting topic for me to read. I own 2 Mazda's. A 626 and a Tribute. I have been thinking about getting a Nissan Murano. (just an aside).
At any rate...I wonder what will happen to the price's of FORD's in the future? 35K for a Truck? Puhleaseeeeeee.
I have sold GM cars before. And as was stated earlier , Hondas , toyotas are made much better.
Also as was stated earlier , the negotiating terms in car deals with these comapnies are FAST becoming a thing of the past. When we bought my wife's Honda a few years ago before her 626 Grandma car:lol it was basically at the deal , told to us , there's the price , thats it. And they didn't move either. None of the Honda places would.
Sales in the american industry are at BEST shady. Don't think for a minute they aren't making money off a "We'll sell it to you 100.00 or invoice". They are making plenty.
Fast talking and 3 or 4 trips to the sales managers office to let them know how the sale is going is starting to fade.
Hate to see the U.S. losing out like what I am reading. But , as was stated before , we're reaping the beifits of a FREE market.
Shame:(
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Ok, Toad, let's just put an end to this union thing between ourselves. Nothing worse than two intelligent people beating their heads against different sides of the same wall.
You have a very different perspective than I do about unions. I guess you see something positive in them, while every contact I have had with union has been negative.
In light of that, I really cannot see us having a meeting of the minds. Further disussion would be rather predictable and pointless, from me, or you.
Let's agree to disagree, shall we?
Skuzzy, I'm like you pretty anti-union. However I have my reservations, and its all based around some interesting doco's I watched on industry in the US during the 19th and early 20th centuries, particularly stuff like company towns - it was pretty nasty.
-
After a little reflection, I want to make sure I'm not misunderstood about something: There are plenty of excellent American companies with dedicated employees who take pride in their work and craftsmenship.
Now, that doesn't mean the US is best in the world at manufacturing the highest quality products in all sectors. You have to maturely address your weaknesses before you can come up with solutions and strategies. If you sit around thinking that you are the best, you probably aren't.
Peter Drucker - author of "In Search of Excellence" - admitted that he fabricated the whole thing. He didn't interview the people; he made it all up. The people quoted and companies heralded were not about to deny they were great, and Drucker knew that. It was all a romantic myth that sold well and fit into the need for people to feel good about themselves.
I know that is disappointing. We hate it when are myths of greatness are burst.
I think the romantic notion that unions are only fighting for justice and reasonable treatment for their members is just like that also - a romantic notion of days gone by, and sadly lost, like white picket fences, unlocked doors and Sheriff Andy Griffith. Even the most reasonable executive cannot negotiate with some of the radical national unions of today. You would have about as much luck negotiating with a terroist as you would have with some of the union 'negotiators' I've had the agony of dealing with.
Of course, all circumstances, companies and employees are different. The employees are mostly great, it's a shame to see many of them manipulated by some unions who thrive by creating as much ill-will and antagonism as they can.
China will continue to expand in parts manufacturing. Romantic notions will not stop that; only rational acceptance that other industries have to be created and operated well by management and employees, together.
One day, China may likely be producing and assembling most of your cars. Hoping that doesn't happen is not a very good strategy. Thinking it could never happen is economic suicide. It won't matter who is to "blame."
-
rolex... one minor point about jap repair shops or lack thereof... How many 20 year old cars do you see in japan? How many cars with 250,000 miles on the drivetrain? How many cars there get 20-50k a year put on em? You don't need so many repair shops for new cars or cars that aren't ever driven.
As for unions... They are pretty much evil and corrupt... traditionaly there has been no alternative in the whole checks and balances routine with union vs management...
Some alternatives have started to come about... interest based barganing watched over by a mediator... Paid negotiators... etc. You get rid of all the union corruption and bloat and still get to have a say at the barganing table... A say that is based on logic not elections or dues.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
every contact I have had with union has been negative.
Skuzzy if you worked on an assembly line where management only cares about keeping the line moving and heaping as much work as possible on the worker(and firing anyone who develops an injury) you might see representation in a different light.
btw..i work at Ford Freestar plant Oakville.
-
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Gunthr
Those conditions do not exist today, and Federal and State administrative law would prevent all of those past abuses today.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sadly, you are incorrect. I worked for a company that deliberately and routinely scheduled in violation of Federal Aviation Regulations. They covered this by "cooking the books" and altering flight times. There are laws against that you know. When caught at it, they merely claimed "bookkeeping errors" and went on their merry way.
So, from personal experience, I find your assumption incorrect. Toad
I disagree. The administrative laws, and particularly the spectacular payouts awarded by jurys to victims of workplace abuse by management, have most definately had a major impact on how companies do buisness, in effect suppressing much of the misconduct that you suggest unions are an absolute necessity to protect us from.
In the case that you use as an example, the law functioned as it should, and the company stopped "cooking the books." You say that the company then went on it's merry way, claiming book keeping errors. To me, that suggests that there was not enough evidence or proof against them to prosecute. However, their behavior was corrected. Unions, besides being far less needed then they were in the past, have hurt not only industries, but their own members, and they have become political tools in partisan politics - sometimes against the wishes of union members. I'm glad that they are on the decline.
-
Oh I see. World trade is good ...if and only if we gain from it all around. If they produce a better vehicle and us silly consumers opt for it, that's bad?
If marketshare slips to overseas makers, perhaps its time to take a lesson in what they are offering consumers versus what the domestics are.
Its a global market. Someday the union thought will realize that.
-
Frankly I don't see the situation as discussed (or cussed) as a simple 2 sided coin. I see it as a combination of things.
It can't be soley the unions fault that the company is going under as wages are not the only driving factor.
It can't be the admin. soley as the problem as they don't get the work all done.
It can't be the stock holders as they do not run the day to day operations.
It can't be the competition only as there has to BE competition on an open economy and the govt. interference in things like taxes and tarriffs play in there as well.
It can't be the consumer..... well in a way it can if they simply do not buy the product. Can we say Yugo??? But that is not the case here.
In my opinion it is a combination of things. Back in the 70's the Japanese manufacturers found themselves with a dramatically larger slice of the market due to the price of oil. The American manufacturers all had the idea bigger is the only way. More cubic inches, more barrels in the carb more sheet metal twisted into fanciful shapes. Fins and titties on bumpers for example. The Japanese were about the only ones that had a REAL fuel economy driven line up and they were compared to US cars, CHEAP. Remember the older Datsun 280 Z's and Mazda RX4's at $3k and $4k loaded? They had even cheaper cars that got fuel mileage in the mid to high 20's while American cars sucked gas in single digits.
American manufacturers were not building what people wanted to buy. They tried stop gap measure slapped together but Japan had already caught on. They started to raise prices almost instantly on the same cars that they had to almost give away the year before. I saw the price on a Mazda RX7 go from $6500.00 to 11,000 in one month. Of course Car and Driver making it the car of the year hads a bit to do with that too. I went and bought a 280Z when that happened.
Other costs besides wages and management packages are driving the cost of vehicles. Think legal. The trend in the US to sue for any and everything as well as the legal systems inability to stick to a narrow focus on real cause of events led to the increas in costs as well. Tort almost single handedly killed the small aircraft industry in the US. Now about half to 2/3's of the cost of a new light aircraft is the result of legal action. It bankrupted Piper and cause Cessna to drop production entirely in small private aircraft. A major part of the cost in a ground vehicle can be attributed to the same cause. An entire "industry" of lawyers lives in that trough.
I do NOT excuse management OR unions for their part either. Over specialization in job tasks, excessive wage and benefit demands as well as a lack of forsight in market trends will play a part in any business collapse. I saw the copper indistry in AZ. die in one year because of the union not looking past their paychecks and the potential increase in union dues. Once they pushed the cost beyond profitabilty the mines were simply closed. The miners that were rioting, not demonstratinf but rioting, for a wage of $21.00 to $28.00 an hour for a basic miner lost it all. That was when the base wage in AZ. was about $7.00 an hour for labor in the late 60's and 1970. Don't laugh, at that time you could buy a concrete block or brick construction house at about 2,200 Sq Ft for $20,000. Kaliphornia stucko hadn't been introduced there yet. The mines are still closed today other than a "token" operation to just keep the EPA off of their back.
The idea of a union also helped a couple times. One attempting to get organized in the Police Department spurred the FOP (bargaining agent) and the City to get serious about wages for Cops. The monthly salary in 1973 was about $500.00 to $700.00 for a 10 year veteran. Those who had families were frequently on food stamps to feed their kids. When I came in the wages had increased so that an accademy student was making an in class wage of $900.00 a month. The base wage went to $1500.00 a month on graduation. I thought I was in big money then. Compare that to the miners rioting to get over $20.00 an hour.
As I said earlier it is a combination iof things that is causing the auto manufacturers to be cutting back. Not one side is all at fault, and neither side is blameless. They have to build what people want to buy, they have to build it at a price people are willing to pay and they have to build it in a quality manner that makes people want to buy another later on. A one hit line up won't make it for a companies survival.
-
Yup, you're right, lazs. You rarely see cars more than 10 years old in Japan. Twenty year old cars just look old and out of style, like 20 year old clothes. Actually, you see more 40 year old American cars here than 20 year old ones built anywhere. 1960 cars are much cooler than 1980 cars. ;)
-
Originally posted by Gunthr
In the case that you use as an example, the law functioned as it should, and the company stopped "cooking the books."
No, the "law" did not function at all. No FAA people check to see if the airline is abiding by the FAR's except in a few announced visits.
The pilots themselves, through the Union, enforced the FARs.
Please forgive me but you simply don't have a clue about how they manage to avoid complying with the regs.
It's ongoing; it never ceases. It's why the Union has a bunch of volunteers that continually verify that scheduling is in accordance with the FARs.
And it is always corrected AFTER the fact. You have "fly first, grieve later". The usual result is some "oops, your right. we won't do that anymore." Until the next time they feel they need to do so, of course.
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Oh I see. World trade is good ...if and only if we gain from it all around. If they produce a better vehicle and us silly consumers opt for it, that's bad?
If marketshare slips to overseas makers, perhaps its time to take a lesson in what they are offering consumers versus what the domestics are.
Its a global market. Someday the union thought will realize that.
Still not seeing the long term implications are you? When nothing is manufactured here because better goods can be manufactured elsewhere at a labor cost 90% below US rates..... what jobs will be available in the US economy that will allow you to purchase major items like cars and homes?
Simply put, when everyone is in the service industry mowing grass and flipping burgers what sort of standard of living will this country have?
You have a choice though. You can come close to matching labor cost with China and keep those jobs or you can lose them and flip burgers in the service industry.
Welcome to the global economy.
It won't happen overnight but unless the US finds a way to make or produce something the world is willing to pay a large amount of money to have our standard of living will inevitably decline in a major fashion.
Try to think a few decades ahead and see if you can envision a US economy where no "big ticket" items are built and no unique intellectual properties are exclusively produced and marketed from here.
How do you think that will be?
-
No, the "law" did not function at all. No FAA people check to see if the airline is abiding by the FAR's except in a few announced visits.
The pilots themselves, through the Union, enforced the FARs.
Please forgive me but you simply don't have a clue about how they manage to avoid complying with the regs.
It's ongoing; it never ceases. It's why the Union has a bunch of volunteers that continually verify that scheduling is in accordance with the FARs.
And it is always corrected AFTER the fact. You have "fly first, grieve later". The usual result is some "oops, your right. we won't do that anymore." Until the next time they feel they need to do so, of course. - Toad
Quite right, Toad, I'm not familiar with the details of how the FAA does it's job regulating airlines... I was wondering if there was any reason the pilots couldn't report the violations to the regulatory agency, the FAA in this case, instead of having a union steward tell them they have to pay dues to the union if they want action taken for violations?
Anyway, I'm aware that there are instances all over the country where Unions have important functions... but I still don't believe we need Unions in every single enterprize in this country, that it often hurts the enterprize and the workers themselves. Everyone's percption of this issue seems to be directly related to their own personal experiences with unions. (I remember a heroin addict getting caught red handed by a foreman shooting up in the bathroom at the Ford Truck plant in Wayne, Michigan. and not getting fired - the union force management to send the individual for rehabilitation.) Regardless of our individual views, I don't think that there is any denying the general trend is that union membership is down overall. I find that trend more understandable than the trend for American car makers to continue thumbing their noses at their customers.
I'm not so sure it is due to cheap labor out of the country, necessarily. Aren't the high quality asian made cars every bit as expensive here as domestic made cars? I find it hard to fathom why US auto workers and management don't accept the challange to stop making crappy, ill concieved cars that don't give the customer what they want.
The way you tell it, Toad, you make it sound like the US auto industry is simply living out an inevitable economic cycle. I'm having trouble with that idea. I'm also having trouble with your implication that if we sealed off our borders and stopped the FTA, everything will be alright again....
-
Health care.
GM spends over 5 billion a year on it. (Nevermind pensions)...
It's unaffordable if you want to remain competative.
Hooray for the great privatized health care system when you have to lay off 30,000 people to "afford" it.
-
Originally posted by Gunthr
I was wondering if there was any reason the pilots couldn't report the violations to the regulatory agency, the FAA in this case, instead of having a union steward tell them they have to pay dues to the union if they want action taken for violations?
[/b]
The records are there for the FAA to see if they ever decide to look. Primarily you run into a problem of 1) the ability of the airline to cover it's tracks by several means 2) the problem of self-incrimination as you have to, by contract, "fly then grieve" a problem. If one were to simply refuse to fly except in the most clear cut of cases one could be fired. 3) the risk of creating a totally adversarial relationship. I was lucky that at my airline the Union and the Company got along reasonably well and neither really wanted to invite the FAA in to shut down the operation.
As I said, for an outsider it's probably hard to fathom. But without the Union, the company didn't really consider FAA rules too hard and fast in many areas, crew scheduling being one of those areas.
but I still don't believe we need Unions in every single enterprize in this country, that it often hurts the enterprize and the workers themselves.
[/b]
And of course I haven't said that at all. What I said is Unions are necessary, not that every single enterprise must have one. Unions, like it or not, are a counterbalance in society. Without them, no 40 hour workweek, no two week vacation, no 8 hour workday, health care, etc., etc. And yes, I do believe that if all Unions were eliminated, the pendulum would slowly swing back that way to the "good old days" for management.
I'm not so sure it is due to cheap labor out of the country, necessarily. Aren't the high quality asian made cars every bit as expensive here as domestic made cars?
[/b]
Yes; eventually, however, they too will have to deal with the competition from overseas. Toyota plants here still will have labor costs 80+ % higher than plants in developing countries. Toyota will eventually move too.
My view of this is pretty much like a huge sea change on the order of the Industrial Revolution. It won't happen all at once in an instant but there's a confluence of events/technologies that make it easy to manufacture complex machines/products in undeveloped countries where labor is plentiful and cheap. You no longer need a highly technical workforce to do so either. Chinese farmboys can do the job with just a little training.
Communication is instant nowadays; complex change orders/programs for robots can be interneted right to the machine in seconds.
Transportation of heavy goods is faster and cheaper now due to the huge container ships.
Free trade is the order of the day.
All these things and others are changing the world. I personally think that one big change is that high paying manufacturing jobs are going to places where labor is cheap. Steel industry? Autos? Aircraft production? (Look at how many places build big pieces of a Boeing now... they're sure not all in the US, are they?)
Yeah, I may be wrong but I don't think so.
You don't have to look very far to see the US doesn't make much in the way of big ticket items anymore.
The way you tell it, Toad, you make it sound like the US auto industry is simply living out an inevitable economic cycle. I'm having trouble with that idea.
[/b]
Yes, I think it's inevitable. Follow the money. Where are US corporations building most of their new plants? Delphi for instance; bankrupt and closing in the US, building and expanding in China.
I'm also having trouble with your implication that if we sealed off our borders and stopped the FTA, everything will be alright again....
You have made that part up. I didn't say that at all.
I said Free Trade is one of the causal factors in this sea change. I don't think you can put the Genie back in the bottle.
I do think this cycle is inevitable. Manufacturing is going where labor is cheap and will continue to do so because now, more than ever before, you can make anything anywhere.
I think China's day will eventually come as well. There will be some other starving population willing to work for less. It'll be many years into the future though.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Hooray for the great privatized health care system when you have to lay off 30,000 people to "afford" it.
It may well be this sort of thing that drives us to the "wait six months for a CAT scan" socialized systems that suxxor in the other countries that have them.
-
Quite right.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Health care.
GM spends over 5 billion a year on it. (Nevermind pensions)...
It's unaffordable if you want to remain competative.
Hooray for the great privatized health care system when you have to lay off 30,000 people to "afford" it.
What does laying off 30k workers have to do with the cost of health care in the US?
-
hold it right there, Nash... drop the worm can and keep the can opener where I can see it...
not to confuse the issue, wouldn't we consider US automaker's health care cost for workers as part of their wages, subject to the bargaining agreement?
I wonder, is health care cost any cheaper in Canada - regardless of who pays, private or government subsidized. Would you say actual health care costs are similar in Canada?
-
Rolex... when you see an old muscle car or specialty car here (Hot Rod or custom)sell for about 5 times what it is worth you can bet it is going to the japan with a new jap owner.
lazs
-
Originally posted by nuchpatrick
Shoot.. has anyone really looked at a Ford lately.. Mustang/F-150 aside the rest of there car line up looks as if someone with a labotomy designed them.
At least GM has a few cars in there lineup I like. I know FWD sucks but that V8 stuffed in that 06 Impala SS is one fun ride!
DC also has some nice looking cars..
Some one at Ford needs to wake up and smell the coffee!
"but that v8 stuffed into the 06 Impala is one fun ride ??? :rofl You gota be kidding right ? That front wheel drive POS dosen't even run on 8 cycls... all the tme and fun to drive ? you ever try wringing-oit a front wheel drive car, out on a road with curves ... besides the fact that chevy claim 300 HP > BS .... Cads had that same dumb engine in the 80' and it was also a POS .....
New Corvette is only car GM builds worth spit ! ( and one of the best in it;s class , the rest ?...... junk!
-
Shutting down in the US, expanding in China. Cars already come to the us from Korea and Japan. How much harder can it be to ship your new Focus in from Ford's Chongqing plant?
I think it's just the way things are; no big conspiracy, just the result of technology, transportation and other changes to the way we do business coupled with a global free-trading market.
This is datelined:
Shanghai, January 16, 2006
FORD ACHIEVES RECORD SALES, FAST EXPANSION IN CHINA (http://media.ford.com/newsroom/release_display.cfm?release=22424)
Calendar year 2005 also witnessed several milestone steps forward in Ford Motor Company's efforts to expand its business operations in China. By working closely with its partners in China, Ford Motor Company delivered the $1 billion plus investment plan of business expansion announced by Chairman and CEO Bill Ford during his visit to China in October 2003.
In October 2005, Changan Ford's Chongqing plant completed the expansion of its annual capacity to 150,000 units, up from 50,000 units . The new production lines installed there, on which the all-new Ford Focus is being produced, fully meet the high standards of Ford Motor Company's Global Quality Operating System and are flexible enough to build more new and diversified products in the future.
In April 2005, Ford Motor Company, Changan Group and Mazda, jointly commenced the construction of a new vehicle assembly plant in Nanjing as the second manufacturing base of Changan Ford. With an initial annual capacity of 160,000 units, the advanced and highly flexible manufacturing facility will produce both Ford and Mazda brand cars.
By first half of 2007, with further planned expansions in Chongqing and the operation of the new assembly plant in Nanjing, Changan Ford's combined total production capacity will be approximately 360,000 units—an 18-fold increase from just four years ago.
Adjacent to the Nanjing assembly plant, the three-party joint venture Changan Ford Mazda Engine Co., Ltd. broke ground in September 2005. As one of the largest and most sophisticated engine manufacturing facilities being built in China , the engine plant is planned with an initial annual capacity of 350,000 units and can produce both Ford and Mazda brand engines. To be operational in 2007, the engine plant is expected to supply world-class engine products to the three partners' vehicle assembly business in China.
-
Build cheap, you get cheap.
PS Mercedes is next.
-
Not too difficult, Toad.
China has now passed France to become the 4th largest economy. Here's the ranking:
US
Japan
Germany
China
China is the No. 1 producer of LCD TV's and makes 90% of the world's toys, 70% of it's photocopiers, 50% of it's cameras, 40% of it's microwave ovens and 30% of it's handbags and luggage.
At this rate, China's economy will overtake Germany in 6 years, Japan in 9 years and America in 32 years.
-
Originally posted by Toad
Still not seeing the long term implications are you? When nothing is manufactured here because better goods can be manufactured elsewhere at a labor cost 90% below US rates..... what jobs will be available in the US economy that will allow you to purchase major items like cars and homes?
Simply put, when everyone is in the service industry mowing grass and flipping burgers what sort of standard of living will this country have?
You have a choice though. You can come close to matching labor cost with China and keep those jobs or you can lose them and flip burgers in the service industry.
Welcome to the global economy.
toyota has 8 factorys in the USA, honda has 5, new balance shoes are 100% made in USA, i could name more but i made my point.
-
Jacob Javitz? gotta luv that place
-
Originally posted by Toad
You have a choice though. You can come close to matching labor cost with China and keep those jobs or you can lose them and flip burgers in the service industry.
Welcome to the global economy.
Hmm.. Out of thirty thousand lost jobs, only a thousand of those are in Canadian plants. One shift.
Last time I checked, we don't look anything like China, and we aint flipping burgers thank you very much.
At the same time, Toyota just nixed the idea of opening another US plant and is instead opening another one here. Why? A skilled workforce. They don't wanna have to train their employees by having to use pictograms.
Flipping burgers isn't us. China isn't us. It is you, and rapidly so. That's what the refusal to invest in your own citizens gets you. Plain and simple.
Go ahead and defend the tax cuts for the rich at the dire expense of what in fact made you great, using any tired old rhetoric you can muster. Go ahead and lampoon other country's health care systems, while yours comes apart at the seams costing not only grief, but now jobs. Go ahead and attribute it to having to compete with Chinese labor earning 2 bucks a day, while the rest of the world can not only figure out how to build a decent car, but has also figured out how to have a decent standard of living while doing it.
"[You can save your manufacturing base by] matching labor costs with China and keep those jobs or you can lose them and flip burgers in the service industry." - Toad
What a flawed argument.
I can see it now.... "Blame China" will be the excuse heard over and over and over. Instead, hows about you look inward for a second and quit defending every single idiotic policy with this stoic sense of inevitability that sinks you in incremental and bite-sized stages of failure.
I'll say it again. You don't have to be China to manufacture, and manufacture well. You don't have to live in America to have a decent standard of living while doing it. There are plenty of countries that have it figured out.
Why is that?
It has nothing to do with China. But go ahead and find something other than yourselves to blame for it.
-
Originally posted by Nash
Hmm.. Out of thirty thousand lost jobs, only a thousand of those are in Canadian plants. One shift.
Last time I checked, we don't look anything like China, and we aint flipping burgers thank you very much.
At the same time, Toyota just nixed the idea of opening another US plant and is instead opening another one here. Why? A skilled workforce. They don't wanna have to train their employees by having to use pictograms.
Flipping burgers isn't us. China isn't us. It is you, and rapidly so. That's what the refusal to invest in your own citizens gets you. Plain and simple.
Go ahead and defend the tax cuts for the rich at the dire expense of what in fact made you great, using any tired old rhetoric you can muster. Go ahead and lampoon other country's health care systems, while yours comes apart at the seams costing not only grief, but now jobs. Go ahead and attribute it to having to compete with Chinese labor earning 2 bucks a day, while the rest of the world can not only figure out how to build a decent car, but has also figured out how to have a decent standard of living while doing it.
"[You can save your manufacturing base by] matching labor costs with China and keep those jobs or you can lose them and flip burgers in the service industry." - Toad
What a flawed argument.
I can see it now.... "Blame China" will be the excuse heard over and over and over. Instead, hows about you look inward for a second and quit defending every single idiotic policy with this stoic sense of inevitability that sinks you in incremental and bite-sized stages of failure.
I'll say it again. You don't have to be China to manufacture, and manufacture well. You don't have to live in America to have a decent standard of living while doing it. There are plenty of countries that have it figured out.
Why is that?
It has nothing to do with China. But go ahead and find something other than yourselves to blame for it.
:aok :aok
-
Originally posted by Rolex
Japanese cars come from a culture where there are none of these shops. It's a huge nusance to have a car fall apart in Japan. Cars are designed to be transportation vehicles that work with little or no input from the user. No one has time to sit around and work on a car and people just buy a new one every 4-5 years. They send the used ones to Russia or Australia.
If a car breaks down in Japan, the buyer (and all the extended family and coworkers and neighbors) will never buy another car from that manufacturer... ever. The dealer will have to send someone to apologize profusely for weeks for causing such an enormous problem and embarrassment to the customer.
Are the Japanese customers coddled? Sure, but you have reaped the benefit of that culture by having cars needing alot less service.
You are extremely misinformed. Perhaps you should do some reading on vehicle tax laws in japan. After 5 years it becomes uneconomic to own a car in japan. Thats why they dump stock offshore and NOT to Australia. NZ has fairly open import laws on Jap cars, we take em by the boatload. Australia does not.
-
It isn't about "Blame China" anymore than it was "Blame England" for the industrial revolution.
There really isn't any need to argue the point though; it will evolve over the next few decades and at the end of that time it'll be obvious what happened to the economies with high labor cost. Canada included, I'm afraid.
It's only a matter of time, assuming the free trade situation continues to become more "free" globally.
Lessee... I could try the Euro approach I guess. It's the height of arrogance to assume a Chinese plant can't build complex items as well as any Canadian plant. How arrogantly arrogant of you.
:lol
-
I said:
"Instead, hows about you look inward for a second and quit defending every single idiotic policy with this stoic sense of inevitability that sinks you in incremental and bite-sized stages of failure."
You come back with:
"It's only a matter of time".
Weak. You're already talking in the past tense.
I have an idea....
How's about guys like you, who have already predicted their nation's demise, shut up and give wide birth to the ideas coming forth that might actually save it?
How gawdamned novel is that?
"We're screwed" says you.
But DAMN if you get an argument..... and what we get in return from you is the wall of text and resignation.
It's obvious that you aren't willing to fight for what's left of your country.
Be a decent man, then, and bow out.
-
You're right, Vulcan, my mistake about Australia. I should have said New Zealand.
It is 10 years, not 5 years, when the expensive shakken inspection triggers sales. It has nothing to do with taxes.
P.S. Thanks for your advice, but after 15 years of living, paying taxes and owning cars in Japan, I've read enough about Japanese tax laws to last me a lifetime. ;)
-
LOL.
Why Nash... look at you, eh? All het up an' all. :rofl
It's my opinion; it might turn out that I'm wrong but I don't think it will. It's just history; there's nothing new under the sun.
Did you ever study the lifespan of empires/hegemony? Ever notice that each new one doesn't last near as long as the one before it?
Deny there's a massive shift in the world economy if you like. Pretend Canadian auto plants won't have to compete in the future with brand-spanking-new modern plants in countries with vast amounts of eager....and very cheap... labor. All the while Canada's birth rate is below replacement level, so you'll be allowing even more immigrants in to maintain your workforce. Maybe you can get some more Chinese to come over. :)
Don't matter to me.
It's just a prediction based on what I see, not some struggle to create a new Amreeka.
I may be right, I may be wrong. I'm pretty sure I'm going to be right in the long view.
But having a big foofahraw about it with you won't influence either one of those outcomes.
Nighty-night.
-
Yeah, like "having a big foofahraw about it" was ever gonna change anything (and you and I have been foofahrawing it for years).
Maybe it's age. Maybe it's shame. Maybe it's the stark realization that you've been world-class-wrong all these years that causes you to suddenly prescribe nothing to your fans.
"Welcome to the global economy" says you.
In otherwords.... "It not us, it's the world.... so take a step back, breath, and wait for our impending death."
Rise up and do nothing.
To take it in the arse as it were.... because, for some twisted reason, America is suddenly a parapalegic with turrets. Ffft. You aint selling that to me, that's fer dang sure.
All it says is that you are tired... and can no longer figure out how to defend this nightmare in any reasonable way.
So what do you do? You throw your hands up in the air and claim that all of America is doomed.
How gawdamned lovely!
No. America is not doomed, and it will be in spite of guys like you trumpeting imbacilic talking points, fleshing them out to seem real, and then voting complete jack-arses into office based on them.
Toad - it's folks like you who are killing America. It's not just you solely - because certainly there are tons of others.... but the common denominator is the baby boom generation. I don't know what is up with that, but it's hard to ignore.
-
Looks like we got the Canucks up in arms over something. :aok
-
So tell me Nash.
10-15 years down the road, you're CEO of a company making a complex manufactured product. Sales are good, you're going to open another plant. You have to decide where to put the plant, Canada or China.
Simply put, if you build the plant in China, you can land the product on Canadian shores at a cost to you about 15% less than you can build the product in Canada. Quality is exactly the same.
Where will you build the factory?
'Splain it to me, Lucy.
As a sidenote, there are a few misconceptions spewed in your post.
1) I most certainly don't feel like I've been "world-class-wrong all these years". I think I've been pretty accurate for the most part. Would you care to elucidate with examples?
2) What exactly are you referring to when you say "figure out how to defend this nightmare"? I see no "nightmare" nor do I have them.
3) "You throw your hands up in the air and claim that all of America is doomed" is quite the exaggeration on your part. What I said, repeatedly, is that jobs that pay high wages are going to flow towards places where wages are low because now more than ever anything can be made anywhere. Would you care to state where you disagree with that? Countries survived the Industrial Revolution despite major changes in their societies. This really isn't any different. Society is just going to change, not disappear.
Lastly, it's good to see you up on the white horse in your shining armor again, even if the strident tone sounds a little forced and hollow.
-
Toad is right.
The problem is nobody cares about those jobs that are leaving. Not until it's their jobs, anyway.
Of course, I don't live in sunny Texas or California. I live right in the dead center of the rust belt, and I get to see the results of free trade every day in the form of vacant factories and decaying infastructure. My old man was a steelworker (US Steel) who was forced into early retirement.. Don't worry though, it'll catch up to you sun belt boys in due time, too. The entire USA is going to become a giant rust belt at the rate we're going.
And, typically, John Q. Public couldn't care less until it's his own job at stake. Add in the fact that both the Democrats and Republicans are bought by the corporations who profit (in the short term, which is all they think about) from this, and we have problems. Sooner or later, we either have to protect what we still have or settle for Wal-Mart wages.
However, I don't think this is the reason Ford/GM are failing so badly. If it was, they'd have shut down all of their NA plants years ago. They're simply building stupid ugly cars and their dealerships make the buying experience as annoying as possible. Instead of comming up with their own ideas, the US companies are often trying to copy their rivals. Why buy a crappy copy of a Toyota when you can just buy the real deal, often for less money and with a much more pleasant purchasing experience?
Not like Hondas are all that great. Ever single one I've ever driven was a flimsy, small, cheap-feeling sardine can. They simply last forever with no maintenence and are easier for women and city dwellers to drive. If the US companies got their collective heads out of their posteriors, they could easily regain their dominance.
American management is notoriously short-sighted. Many managers would happily take risks that would potentially bankrupt the company in 5 years' time if it meant bigger profits this week. In fact when I was in college, the business school was training the up-and-comming generation of management to do exactly that. No wonder that rivals who take a more long-term view are gradually pulling ahead.
J_A_B
EDIT:
"Quality is exactly the same."
This part, though, I disagree with. The quality of the junk being built in third-world countries is NOT the same. Korean steel sucked so badly compared to what we were making it's not even funny. The problem is nobody cares about quality anymore (except in advertising slogans), it's all about the bottom line.