GM, Ford, Chrysler

[craiger]

Interesting. I watched and participated with a Union in a Plant Takeover to prevent the "bankrupt" company from relocating. They contined to fight and locate a buyer who was interested in operating the company in Ontario. They were successful, and that company is operating without a nickle of taxpayer monies and is profitable because it never really was bankrupt. Morally bankrupt owner perhaps. The Provincial and Federal government were no help, and actually supported the companies decision to relocate.

You must do alright for yourselves. Autoworkers also make very good money. Soon they will not, when they are displaced.

thankfully I am not a Auto worker. As a Job steward though for the union, it is my resposibility to take interest outside my jury.

What I have come to understand is the unions have created a scene where your ability in sucess is not determined by your skills or work ethic. I hear it all the time my members tell me " you can't do nothing, you can't lay me off!" even though I see them sit and do nothing all day long. And sad thing is they are right I am forced to file greivence on their behalf and waste the members money's with lawyers , and dispute resolutions when we already have a system in place Called labour relations or human rights. these costs are then carried on to the Contractors and clients and in return it is the consumer who pay's the piper for some lazzy do nothing.

This hurts everyone, even higher wages, as eventually it all gets passed on and those most effected are the onse that can't afford it . I would never buy a car that is union made.

[AngusThermopyle]

and name one Canadian teacher or auto-worker that is not in a union

Thats an easy one Oleg, I did just that a couple of posts above yours.

Actually its not one, its all six thousand plus who work in the Alliston Honda plant who are non unionized.

Unfortunatelly I don't know all their names so I can't name them for you.

[madmax]

Thats an easy one Oleg, I did just that a couple of posts above yours.

Actually its not one, its all six thousand plus who work in the Alliston Honda plant who are non unionized.

Unfortunatelly I don't know all their names so I can't name them for you.

Here is a few names. Salt and Pepper them as needed.

Tim, Timmy, Jim, Dhillon, Sabu, Mike, Micheal, John, James, Frank, Frederick, Ricky, Rick, Bob, Bobby, Robert, Hank, Frank, Cam, Angus (not you), Victor, Sam, Artek, Art, Ari,

I think that should help.

Oops, those are some of the names at the Toyota Cambridge, Woodstock and Toyota Boshuku, ToyoTetsu plants who are non unionized

[Brunopolis]

The problem with unions is that they are exempt from monopoly laws. A union that controls all car manufacturing workers? No problem! One big company that is the only one that builds vehicles? Then it seems we have a problem.

Unions should be treated like any other company and shouldn't be allowed to group together. This keeps their power in line with the company's power and helps prevent abuse.

[madmax]

As a Job steward though for the union, it is my resposibility to take interest outside my jury.

What I have come to understand is the unions have created a scene where your ability in sucess is not determined by your skills or work ethic. I hear it all the time my members tell me " you can't do nothing, you can't lay me off!" even though I see them sit and do nothing all day long.

In a past life, I was Chief Steward. Do you not have management and foreman/supervisors? I have never heard such nonsense. I am not aware of people who get paid to do nothing all day long (OK HYDRO ONE CEOS EXCEPTED). Just what job title and description does that fall under? Do you have a LAZY ASSES position that pays? While I am certain that many people learn how to produce puppies, and I have seen it in non union shops and in the military, the responsibility and discipline lie with the management.

And sad thing is they are right I am forced to file greivence on their behalf and waste the members money's with lawyers

I never once had to use lawyers for greivances. It can happen, and that is when neither side has come to a resolution. But if you are wasting members money, then you are proceeding with a bad greivance. If a greivance was not valid, I would never proceed. If it was valid, of course you proceed, its valid. But if you have shaken the tree, and gotten a fair shake, you have to have the ability to tell your member that's it. A greivance doesn't go to the lawyers, without first speaking with the company many many times. Filing a piece of paper acknowledging the greivance is simply enforcing the collective agreement. If there isn't a violation of the collective agreement, why are you filing a greivance in the first place?

, and dispute resolutions when we already have a system in place Called labour relations or human rights. these costs are then carried on to the Contractors and clients and in return it is the consumer who pay's the piper for some lazzy do nothing.

We have a system of Industrial Relations. At no place in this system or the labour relations act or the Human rights code, do I see any paragraph dedicated to lazzy do nothings.

That said, I do know what you mean. It is the few who keep you busy on nonsense and scamming. But that exists in all companies. Union or not. You just get to see it as a worker and steward. It is a thankless job. And everyone jumps down your throat. It isn't one that is easy for a person to accept. I don't know why you would want that kind of aggravation. You shouldn't be feeling the burdens that I have read above. It doesn't sound healthy for the company or you. And it sounds like the company has too much money to care, because they don't appear to concerned about people doin.....nuthun.

This hurts everyone, even higher wages, as eventually it all gets passed on and those most effected are the onse that can't afford it . I would never buy a car that is union made.

I have had cars of all stripes. They all break, they all have similar track records, good ones, and I currently drive a Union Made Suzuki. Not bad. My other vehicles that lasted 17 and 26 years were two Dodge/plymouth TC3,omni, and an 1982 GMC pickup and the body just went last year. I also had a few Toyotas and the bodies didn't last 5 years. My wife has a Honda Civic. Its 7 years old, very good car. Its getting ready to rust..I hope it makes it through the winter

As for passing on the costs.

This Hyundai isn't one I can afford.

2008 Hyundai Azera Prices

Base MSRP

Brand new

$ 35,995 - 39,195 cdn

New cars are not always affordable regardless of labour costs and origin.

Edited November 9, 2008 by madmax

[Oleg Bach]

So that's the offical word. No one is to blame. That is a positive start. All machines ware out. As do all people eventually - we are not here forever - So how do you fix the problem and how do you reset and restart a new and improved cutting edge auto industry - the old days are gone - may as well forget about them....maybe rocket powered bikes....and pointed silver helmets? AND CAPES.... joke aside - the industry must look at the present situation as being a new begining - and kick Japan and Germany's ass...this may be an opportunity - so what if you go broke and have to start again - Henry Ford did.

[Kitch]

I apologize for telling you hat you should and shouldn't be, but when all 4 surveys that I can think of (Consumer Reports, JD Power, TrueDelta, and the RDA Group, as well as internal numbers, there are more that I can't think of) agree on the quality improvements, especially in the case of Ford, I have no reason to doubt it.

Thing is, many people think like you on this issue. Thankfully, many don't. Ford and maybe GM can make comebacks, as long as they survive. I think that, it would have to great of a negative impact to let the companies fail.

Why don't we just nationalize them then?

[Kitch]

The problem with unions is that they are exempt from monopoly laws. A union that controls all car manufacturing workers? No problem! One big company that is the only one that builds vehicles? Then it seems we have a problem.

Unions should be treated like any other company and shouldn't be allowed to group together. This keeps their power in line with the company's power and helps prevent abuse.

Interesting idea. I like it. I think. But is it the size of the unions that leads to the inability to release employees that don't do the job they're paid for?

I'm pro-union... based on very little knowledge of the way that they work. I just know that without them, some companies would exploit their employees. So what do people who oppose them have against them? (Other than Brunopolis' distaste for their size).

[msj]

Isn't all consumer spending down by about 25% in the US? It's not just automakers, it's everything.

If it was then we would be eating out of cans while holding on to shotguns.

Total consumer spending is down something like 3.1% (annualized) based on Q3 2007 versus Q3 2008.

Edited November 9, 2008 by msj

[Topaz]

Today, I heard GW does doesn't want to help out the Big 3 but Obama does. The auto makers says they need 250 bil of the 700 Bil. and neither the US or Canada are in a position to say no because it will take their economies down further. I think Harper is waiting until he speaks with Obama to make up his mind but I don't think he has a choice. IF Harper doesn't, I think there will be only more problems for him. For those who are against using taxes dollars , lets remember Harper has helped out the grain farmer's, the fishermen, even the pig farmer's got 50 million. All these groups who needed help from the gov't should because they DO pay taxes and so doesn't the auto workers and they probably pay more than the other groups. Since income tax is the largest revenue for the Feds, they have to keep the taxes coming in. I'm sure they can be strings attached to the loans so the Feds aren't taken but if the Auto Pact had be in place then alot of these cars makers would be forced to stay in Canada to sell their goods.

[craiger]

Today, I heard GW does doesn't want to help out the Big 3 but Obama does. The auto makers says they need 250 bil of the 700 Bil. and neither the US or Canada are in a position to say no because it will take their economies down further. I think Harper is waiting until he speaks with Obama to make up his mind but I don't think he has a choice. IF Harper doesn't, I think there will be only more problems for him. For those who are against using taxes dollars , lets remember Harper has helped out the grain farmer's, the fishermen, even the pig farmer's got 50 million. All these groups who needed help from the gov't should because they DO pay taxes and so doesn't the auto workers and they probably pay more than the other groups. Since income tax is the largest revenue for the Feds, they have to keep the taxes coming in. I'm sure they can be strings attached to the loans so the Feds aren't taken but if the Auto Pact had be in place then alot of these cars makers would be forced to stay in Canada to sell their goods.

Difference is all those other industry's they bailed out produce food a necessity for us to live, Auto's on the other hand are not.

What I rather see is money put towards educating these workers , like it or not things are going to change and soon we will have a bunch of unskilled workers capable of what monkeys can do.

Edited November 9, 2008 by craiger

[Topaz]

Difference is all those other industry's they bailed out produce food a necessity for us to live, Auto's on the other hand are not.

What I rather see is money put towards educating these workers , like it or not things are going to change and soon we will have a bunch of unskilled workers capable of what monkeys can do.

IF the Feds don't loan the auto sector money then we won't have autos being built in Canada and then we will have to import them from Mexico, China and Korea and you'll be paying more for junk! In the US it was reported that the US could lose 30 millions jobs from this sector and removing 60 Billion dollars in taxes. How much would the Feds lose, in taxes and jobs here in Canada? The new created jobs would have to be very close to what they make now or the banks would get alot of mortgages back! Harper would have to raise tax to make up for the loss and I bet alot of them pay about 12000.00 in income tax at the very least. Beside that , the CAW gives alot of money to their communities and that would also be a loss. IF you think monkeys can do these jobs why not start with the PMO. Those guys make what 250,000 yearly and how many weeks do they actual work??

[Renegade]

IF the Feds don't loan the auto sector money then we won't have autos being built in Canada and then we will have to import them from Mexico, China and Korea and you'll be paying more for junk!

Topaz, if Canada and the US were to completely stop producing cars, would the only cars available be cars that were "junk"?

[Vancouver King]

Topaz, if Canada and the US were to completely stop producing cars, would the only cars available be cars that were "junk"?

I seem to recall an ad campaign in the late '70's from Ford promoting their vehicles "road hugging weight". Now, two generations later, the company is on it's knees unable to sell more over sized gas eaters.

Should taxpayers be asked to subsidize this performance without management input, strict limits on management compensation or an equity stake?

[Renegade]

I seem to recall an ad campaign in the late '70's from Ford promoting their vehicles "road hugging weight". Now, two generations later, the company is on it's knees unable to sell more over sized gas eaters.

Should taxpayers be asked to subsidize this performance without management input, strict limits on management compensation or an equity stake?

I don't really see that the government, as taxpayer's representaive are much better manager than those at the US auto makers. The government itself would have gone bankrupt if not for its power to forcibly take in tax revenues. In any case why buy equity in a company which has been proven a failure?

[GostHacked]

Having decided to build toasters, the American "Big 3" are now competing on the basis of how well they can make toast. And the consensus seems to now be that the Japanese and Koreans make better toasters.

-k

Now the toasters they are building are being called toaster ovens. The term SUV has seemed to all but dissapear from marketing. Now they call them Cross Over vehicles. But looky looky, it's still a freakin SUV. But some will be fooled. Also this cross-over category is new and might not be subject to regulation for fuel efficiency. SUVs have to fall into certain guidelines now to be meet fuel consumption requirements.

The Ford Flex is a perfect example of an SUV . er Crossover.

http://www.autonet.ca/autos/search/testdri...28/6286916.html

Allow me to clear up a couple of misconceptions about the Flex while I’m at it here. A number of people took the name to mean that it was a flex-fuel (E85) vehicle, or perhaps a hybrid. It’s neither. The Flex runs on gasoline (there’s even a warning printed inside the filler door), and the name refers to the “flexibility” of the ute.

Maybe the government should be harassing the big 3 to make vehicles that will allow the US to umm ween itself off the dependance on foreign oil. It can be done. I also do not like the argument, 'well if we change things drasticly the industry won't be able to keep up or fulfill it's obligations to make more fuel efficient vehicles. ' ... Seems like whatever they have been doing, is not working, and has not been working for quite some time. Let them die. I know it will be bad for the economy and the loss of jobs will be high. But if the automakers get the bail out, what have we learned? And how long before another bailout is needed?

Topaz

IF the Feds don't loan the auto sector money then we won't have autos being built in Canada and then we will have to import them from Mexico, China and Korea and you'll be paying more for junk!

Compared to the junk you can buy that are built domesticly?? Don't forget Honda. Toyota, and (I think) Hyundai have plants in North America. So automakers are producing cars in North America that are not the Big 3. And they are definately not junk.

We can use Hyundai as a good example of a company that is addressing the needs and wants at the same time. The Pony was a disaster of a vehicle, but they learned from their mistakes and now is a very respectable car maker. Inexpensive and long lasting.

Also, I think car makers have approached car making like other sectors have approached manufacturing. Making them cheap and disposable. Every one wants a new car, and from what I see here in Canada (Ottawa-Sudbury-Toronto) you are pressed to find a car more than 10 years old on the road. And yet back in the 80s, I can recall seeing a good road presence of cars that were 10-15 years plus on the road.

I owned a Dodge Shadow in the early 90s. I barely see them on the road anymore. Althought I'd like to get my hands on one again. Tunnel it, throw the kit to smack a 318 V8 with the rear wheel drive kit. Okay, ain't gas friendly, but man that car would go like stink if I can get that done.

[Bryan]

The auto industry is not in trouble. These three particular American manufacturers are in trouble. If they go under, the other companies will have to make more cars and increase production to make up for it. They'll need more workers. Honda and Toyota already have production in Canada. A loss of GM/Chrysler/Ford will lead to increased production for Honda and Toyota, as well as other manufacturers coming into the country.

[kengs333]

Personally I hope the who automotive industry goes belly up.

[Bryan]

Personally I hope the who automotive industry goes belly up.

The whole industry? Worldwide? Have you really thought that through?

[Smallc]

The auto industry is not in trouble. These three particular American manufacturers are in trouble. If they go under, the other companies will have to make more cars and increase production to make up for it. They'll need more workers. Honda and Toyota already have production in Canada. A loss of GM/Chrysler/Ford will lead to increased production for Honda and Toyota, as well as other manufacturers coming into the country.

At the current time, all of the companies are suffering. 7M sales have been taken out of the US market this year.

[Bryan]

At the current time, all of the companies are suffering. 7M sales have been taken out of the US market this year.

But Canadian car sales are still increasing. Honda and Toyota are setting all-time sales records worldwide.

Canadians are still buying cars, and will still need them if the US companies close down.

[Smallc]

But Canadian car sales are still increasing. Honda and Toyota are setting all-time sales records worldwide.

Canadians are still buying cars, and will still need them if the US companies close down.

Yes, but we're just a drop in the bucket. Toyota's profit was less than 1/3 of what it was last year at this time. Everyone is suffering from this.

[Wilber]

Now the toasters they are building are being called toaster ovens. The term SUV has seemed to all but dissapear from marketing. Now they call them Cross Over vehicles. But looky looky, it's still a freakin SUV. But some will be fooled. Also this cross-over category is new and might not be subject to regulation for fuel efficiency. SUVs have to fall into certain guidelines now to be meet fuel consumption requirements.

Cross Overs are the modern day station wagon. Utility vehicles based on car platforms. An alternative to a mini van that makes a lot of sense. The best examples combine most of the comfort, handling and economy of a car with the utility of an SUV. SUV's were mostly based on truck platforms, heavy awkward and inefficient. About the only thing a cross over can't do as well as an SUV is towing or real off roading.

[blueblood]

Whoo! Buy a new Super Duty and get a free Ranger.

New loaded GM silverados are only 28 large.

Time to go shopping!!

[Vancouver King]

I don't really see that the government, as taxpayer's Representative are much better manager than those at the US auto makers. The government itself would have gone bankrupt if not for its power to forcibly take in tax revenues. In any case why buy equity in a company which has been proven a failure?

So taxpayer's money should simply be handed over without accountability or veto power over how funds should be used? How could any govt input into on going operations be worse than the Big 3's own record?

You could be right on the equity stake. Deutsch Bank says GM shares are worthless even with treasury relief. This bailout can only be justified on the cost to govt, including social costs, versus the 'free market' judgment of allowing them to fail.

Apparently the math dictates state intervention.