Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW) 
17502 messages, Last post on Mar 07, 2010 at 8:31 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 22, 2008 8:15 pm) Assuming you mean something like a tranny, how are we supposed to know that the reason it failed wasn't the mechanic who disconnected the torque converter clutch, instead of adjusting the kickdown lever that was out of adjustment, causing the fliud to overheat threreby causing premature failure of the tranny, as opposed to the drunk UAW employee on Monday??? |
|
|
Replying to: lemko (Dec 25, 2008 9:12 am) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kipk (Dec 25, 2008 8:41 am) Surely they have a plan such as ours. They are basically self insured and just pay a managed care such as HMO, POS, PPO, or other to administer and get them agreed rates. This is nothing new. So at the end of the year they get the actual cost and pay for the administration and then next years employee contribution/copays are calculated. The agreed rates are well worth it. I've seen a surgeon charge $21,000 and have to settle for $7,000, that is if he/she wants to have access to those patients. So managed care might be looked upon as a system where MD's are forced to take less in order to have access. So if you aren't insured by the managed care plans, is it right to be charged $21,000? Then managed care also forces prescriptions from a formulary list to save of medicine. Then again they use their size to get better prices from drug makers. Is it right for those who have to pay out of pocket mare for the same medicine? These and other tactics work well for the managed care industry in reducing cost to their membership/those whom are covered. Many argue that those who lack membership in managed care are making up the gap and in reality subsidizing the managed care folks. Managed care is also been accused of practicing medicine, by either giving doctor incentives to do less testing and rebating savings. They have the number to blackmail doctors and drug makers. Is their medical free? If you wait a long time, maybe a whole day, the county hospital will see you for even the most simplistic of reasons. Such as the common cold. The cost to the taxpayers is a least ten fold when one enters the emergency room of the county hospital. Its serious when an indigent single parent takes their for an illness, which in reality wasn't as dire to begin with. Certainly/surely there should be clinics to save the taxpayers money in these situations and lost opportunity time/GNP to needy patients. Or is that a fitting punishment to the indigent/needy? |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 25, 2008 8:17 am) I could have sworn you told me that nationalize health was bad. Next thing you know you will be telling folks to cross the border to get drugs.
|
|
|
So! Apparently it is very arguable that the UAW leadership can readily destroy the American automotive industry. I have to think that The Big Three need to enter chapter 11 bankruptcy if they are to survive. That may be the only effective way of preventing the UAW from destroying the industry, if some of the popular news sources' analysts know what they are talking about. What do you think?
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Dec 24, 2008 7:30 pm) it made me rethink my inpression of disney. they are really catering to adults. they just want you to think it is 'about the kids'.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 25, 2008 9:05 am) Interesting question, Fear of malpractice suits boosts care volumes too. Our research indicates that the direct costs of malpractice are limited—about $30 billion in 2006—but the risk of litigation creates an incentive to err on the side of caution. http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Why_Americans_pay_more_for_health_care_2275 So tort reform in California capped the malpractice to $200,000 and an OBGYN made an error. The child who was injured, would have to be taken care of his/her entire life. It was estimated that care would run $2,000,000. The California taxpayers will have to ante up $1,800,000. Sounds like a good deal for the insurance industry and not the taxpaying public. Then there is Nevada By Marshall Allen Thu, Feb 28, 2008 (2 a.m.) Hepatitis C outbreak springs from Endoscopy Center of Nevada; 40,000 at risk (02-27-2008) Southern Nevada Health District Web site regarding the Hepatitis C outbreak The medical director and majority owner of the Endoscopy Center of Southern Nevada, where apparent negligence has triggered the largest hepatitis C scare in Nevada history, is one of the state’s most prominent physicians. He is Dr. Dipak Desai, a former member of the Nevada Board of Medical Examiners who has served as chief of gastroenterology at local hospitals and taught at the University of Nevada School of Medicine. Desai did not respond to the Sun’s request for comment. The question that would have been asked of him: How, in the era of AIDS and extreme concern about contamination of patients through the use of needles and syringes, could his employees have allowed the transgressions that will now require that 40,000 patients be notified that they should be tested for hepatitis C, hepatitis B and HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. “It was one of those policies where the staff members told us this was what they were told to do — they admitted this is what (they) have been doing,” Labus said. “It wasn’t any one particular staff member. It was something that was basically seen across the clinic as a common procedure.” In Desai’s absence, another doctor from his practice, which sees about 60 patients a day, read a statement that said, in part: “We are on a mission to maintain the trust our patients have had in us.” Two doctors stood beside him, silent. Their lawyers would not allow them to answer questions, the statement said. http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2008/feb/28/officials-clinic-procedures-put-thou- sands-risk/ |
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Dec 25, 2008 2:35 pm) If they aren't performing, then fair enough. All things being EQUAL (performance included), seniority SHOULD prevail!!! Agree with your point. Problem is that in many unions the more senior staff don't work as hard and chastise the younger eager ones when they do work hard. Not the way to make a competitive company. The union would show its value by balancing the $$/benes for the union workers with the competitiveness and health of the company. When was the last UAW strike for a model that was not competitive enough against other companies' products?
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Dec 25, 2008 9:30 am) As I watch the coverage of the fate of the U.S. auto industry, one alarming and frustrating fact hits me right between the eyes. The fate of our nation's economic survival is in the hands of some congressmen who are completely out of touch and act without knowledge of an industry that affects almost every person in our nation. The same lack of knowledge is shared with many journalists whom are irresponsible when influencing the opinion of millions of viewers. Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama has doomed the industry, calling it a dinosaur. No Mr. Shelby, you are the dinosaur, with ideas stuck in the '70s, '80s and '90s. You and the uninformed journalist and senators that hold onto myths that are not relevant in today's world. When you say that the Big Three build vehicles nobody wants to buy, you must have overlooked that GM outsold Toyota by about 1.2 million vehicles in the U.S. and Ford outsold Honda by 850,000 and Nissan by 1.2 million in the U.S. GM was the world's No. 1 automaker beating Toyota by 3,000 units. When you claim inferior quality comes from the Big Three, did you realize that Chevy makes the Malibu and Ford makes the Fusion that were both rated over the Camry and Accord by J.D. Power independent survey on initial quality? Did you bother to read the Consumer Report that rated Ford on par with good Japanese automakers. Did you realize Big Three's gas guzzlers include the 33 mpg Malibu that beats the Accord. And for '09 Ford introduces the Hybrid Fusion whose 39 mpg is the best midsize, beating the Camry Hybrid. Ford's Focus beats the Corolla and Chevy's Cobalt beats the Civic. When you ask how many times are we going to bail them out you must be referring to 1980. The only Big Three bailout was Chrysler, who paid back $1 billion, plus interest. GM and Ford have never received government aid. When you criticize the Big Three for building so many pickups, surely you've noticed the attempts Toyota and Nissan have made spending billions to try to get a piece of that pie. Perhaps it bothers you that for 31 straight years Ford's F-Series has been the best selling vehicle. Ford and GM have dominated this market and when you see the new '09 F-150 you'll agree this won't change soon. Did you realize that both GM and Ford offer more hybrid models than Nissan or Honda. Between 2005 and 2007, Ford alone has invested more than $22 billion in research and development of technologies such as Eco Boost, flex fuel, clean diesel, hybrids, plug in hybrids and hydrogen cars. It's 2008 and the quality of the vehicles coming out of Detroit are once again the best in the world. Perhaps Sen. Shelby isn't really that blind. Maybe he realizes the quality shift to American. Maybe it's the fact that his state of Alabama has given so much to land factories from Honda, Hyundai and Mercedes Benz that he is more concerned about their continued growth than he is about the people of our country. Sen. Shelby's disdain for 'government subsidies' is very hypocritical. In the early '90s he was the driving force behind a $253 million incentive package to Mercedes. Plus, Alabama agreed to purchase 2,500 vehicles from Mercedes. While the bridge loan the Big Three is requesting will be paid back, Alabama's $180,000-plus per job was pure incentive. Sen. Shelby, not only are you out of touch, you are a self-serving hypocrite, who is prepared to ruin our nation because of lack of knowledge and lack of due diligence in making your opinions and decisions. After 9/11, the Detroit Three and Harley Davidson gave $40 million-plus emergency vehicles to the recovery efforts. What was given to the 9/11 relief effort by the Asian and European Auto Manufactures? $0 Nada. Zip! We live in a world of free trade, world economy and we have not been able to produce products as cost efficiently. While the governments of other auto producing nations subsidize their automakers, our government may be ready to force its demise. While our automakers have paid union wages, benefits and legacy debt, our Asian competitors employ cheap labor. We are at an extreme disadvantage in production cost. Although many UAW concessions begin in 2010, many lawmakers think it's not enough. Some point the blame to corporate management. I would like to speak of Ford Motor Co. The company has streamlined by reducing our workforce by 51,000 since 2005, closing 17 plants and cutting expenses. Product and future product is excellent and the company is focused on one Ford. This is a company poised for success. Ford product quality and corporate management have improved light years since the nightmare of Jacques Nasser. Thank you Alan Mulally and the best auto company management team in the business. The financial collapse caused by the secondary mortgage fiasco and the greed of Wall Street has led to a $700 billion bailout of the industry that created the problem. AIG spent nearly $1 million on three company excursions to lavish resorts and hunting destinations. Paulson is saying no to $250 billion foreclosure relief and the whole thing is a mess. So when the Big Three ask for 4 percent of that of the $700 billion, $25 billion to save the country's largest industry, there is obviously oppositions. But does it make sense to reward the culprits of the problem with $700 billion unconditionally, and ignore the victims? As a Ford dealer, I feel our portion of the $25 billion will never be touched and is not necessary. Ford currently has $29 billion of liquidity. However, the effect of a bankruptcy by GM will hurt the suppliers we all do business with. A Chapter 11 bankruptcy by any manufacture would cost retirees their health care and retirements. Chances are GM would recover from Chapter 11 with a better business plan with much less expense. So who foots the bill if GM or all three go Chapter 11? All that extra health care, unemployment, loss of tax base and some forgiven debt goes back to the taxpayer, us. With no chance of repayment, this would be much worse than a loan with the intent of repayment. So while it is debatable whether a loan or Chapter 11 is better for the Big Three, a $25 billion loan is definitely better for the taxpayers and the economy of our country. So I'll end where I began on the quality of the products of Detroit. Before you, Mr. or Ms. Journalist continue to misinform the American public and turn them against one of the great industries that helped build this nation, I must ask you one question. Before you, Mr. or Madam Congressman vote to end health care and retirement benefits for 1 million retirees, eliminate 2.5 million of our nation's jobs, lose the technology that will lead us in the future and create an economic disaster including hundreds of billions of tax dollars lost, I ask this question not in the rhetorical sense. Can you tell me, have you driven a Ford lately? Jim Jackson Elkins Ford |
|
|
Replying to: tlong (Dec 25, 2008 5:18 pm) As far as striking over lackluster products, I don't think that there is a contract in the world that would allow that. Biggest problem, define "not competitive" . That to me is a slippery slope. You could have a strike over nothing. Not to mention, it is "their company" and they can run it as they see, within the rules of the contract.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
