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)
16705 messages, Last post on Nov 25, 2009 at 6:56 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: lumoy (Jan 04, 2009 8:21 pm) So the UAW is running a golf course that loses money while Goldfinger testifies to Congress to get taxpayer money? every other foreign auto mfgrg has national health insurance which gives them a cost advantage of about $2000 a car Wrong. The transplant companies in the US make 50% of our automobiles and they don't have nationalized health care, yet they are profitable. Honda Civics made here, no nationalized health care. Toyota Camrys made here, no nationalized health care. BMW SUVs made here, no nationalized health care. Hyundai's made here, no nationalized health care. Half of US auto manufacturing is profitable, here, without nationalized health care - just not the UAW companies. when oh when will the union bashers get it thru their skull the key fact that none of the federal bridge loan money is going to the uaw. Well if the reason the D3 are not cost-competitive is because of the union, then indirectly the bailout IS going to the union. The bailout supports D3 operations so that the D3 can continue to fund Union benefits. the uaw is not asking anyone for a loan or a bailout Last I remember Goldfinger is the head of the UAW. He was sitting with the three CEOs asking Congress for the bailout loan. He was asking for the GOLD with his own FINGERS. what the hell business is it of yours!!!!...why is that something that bothers you? i really really would like to know . When it's out tax money funding the D3 due to high costs (much of which is union) then it is very much our business. It bothers me because I want this country to be successful and competitive on a world stage and bailing out failing businesses with my tax dollars is a miserable use of our funds. It weakens the USA.
|
|
|
Replying to: okal (Jan 04, 2009 3:13 pm) There is no regulation preventing US Automakers from setting up new manufacturing facilities in Japan. But you have to first consider that 1) Japan already has overcapacity (and thus exports cars from Japan); 2) Input costs are much higher in Japan (e.g. land / power etc) as compared to other locations. So it would make sense (for US companies) to export to Japan from lower cost centers, rather than building plants in Japan. US companies did take equity stakes in Mazda (Ford) and Suzuki / Subaru / Isuzu (GM), which definitely is a better option than setting up new manufacturing plants. The investments worked out well for them, a pity that they had to sell out due to their own internal cash problems (since that forced them to sell at adverse terms) - Renault's investment in Nissan has generated much larger returns. You may also ask why lower cost imports are not successful in penetrating the Japanese market. Firstly, the safety / emission requirements raise the cost of importing; Secondly Japan already has a very competitive small car market (very few countries have a 600cc capacity segment....). The high end luxury car market is dominated by the Europeans (even beating the Japanese domestic offerings - e.g. Lexus), as I have posted elsewhere before. |
|
|
Replying to: lumoy (Jan 04, 2009 9:14 pm) Don't you think you are stretching the word "hero" to the breaking point? Your UAW friends may have been hard working and dedicated, but lets not throw the term hero around so loosely. I know U.S. Marines with bronze stars and purple hearts, they are heroes. Words mean things and I hate to see that word get diluted. Sorry to digress, but that is a pet peeve of mine.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: usfmarine (Jan 05, 2009 12:03 am) I am also a former Army sgt. and that word hero should go to the men and woman of are ARMED FORCES for the sacerfice that they are induring. So if you do see one of are men & woman put out you're hand and say thank you!! |
|
|
Replying to: usfmarine (Jan 05, 2009 12:03 am) Good Post! |
|
|
Replying to: lumoy (Jan 04, 2009 8:21 pm) There is a difference between Union bashing and pointing out mistakes made by a Union. In this case the UAW. You are very biased in your narrow views on how the World should be. The reality is that the import auto makers are kicking the Big 3's butt on quality and doing it with USA workers. You can bemoan the fact that people will work for less in other states. I was a Union member for 46 years before I retired. I was never as blinded to the faults of the Union as many on this thread are. You expect money to just grow on trees. The UAW has bullied the B3 and especially GM for years. They have had such wimpy management that they did not know how to stand up for the company. To my way of thinking implementing a contract that screws future employees to maintain the status quo for the existing employees is not any kind of concession. Getting rid of the Jobs bank was just common sense. Now it is your turn to explain something. You seem to be a UAW insider. Why on earth would the UAW strike GM this year when they were bleeding red ink? GM had lost $38 billion dollars and had little hope of making any money this year and the UAW calls for strikes on two of the only plants that were making vehicles that GM was able to sell. If that is not sticking a knife in the back of the company that is paying the bills, I sure do not know what you would call it. Your overall postings further point out the entitlement mentality so prevalent in the UAW workers. Nothing in our Constitution guarantees you a middle class income. Let alone an upper class income that most UAW workers have had for the last 50 years. The UAW worker is NOT MIDDLE CLASS. They are UPPER CLASS. When you make $100k per year you are in the top 5% of wage earners in the USA. |
|
|
Replying to: tlong (Jan 04, 2009 10:22 pm) That is exactly correct. If it was not for the large donations that the UAW and other Unions give to the Democrats, they would not even be considering loans to the nearly departed GM & Chrysler. The loans are for the UAW workers and NO OTHER REASON. |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Jan 04, 2009 9:45 am) Most of the time the extreme highs and extreme lows are thrown out because they may involve specialized segment. Therefore not really considered in the mix. Any time a business, employing a lot of people, starts up, the surrounding area bennefits. A number of other businesses may move in. Their' pay scale is in competition with each other, not with the new business/factory. While true that businesses catering to the UAW employees might suffer or close for lack of businesses, when a plant closes, that would happen whether the UAW worker had been making $28 or $15. Just because the worker at a D3 plant was making a certain pay and got a raise didn't necessarily mean the guy changing tires at the local tire store got an equal raise or bennefits. His compensation would be only be affected by the pay at other tire stores or comparable industries. Businesses will pay what is necessary to get and retain skilled people for their particular type of work. That is where the "Averages" really fall into play. I don't buy most argument that the UAW single handedly raised the middle class standard of living for all Americans. It simply raised the standard of living for the UAW workers. When the D3 closes plants, what do those UAW workers find to do to continue their lifestyle? Few companies in the area pay anywhere near the same. Many companies don't really want them because of the union/entitlement attitude. And yes there are always exceptions. Kip |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Jan 04, 2009 9:45 am) That sounds nice, but all that extra money floating around in the local economy drives up the cost of housing, utilities, taxes, etc., so the non-union folks are no better off than before, and may even be worse off if the numerical inflation of their wages and property pushes them into more punitive tax brackets. |
|
|
whether Big 3 can build cars in Japan, but I did recently read in one of my "car books", critical of the American auto industry, that years ago, I think it was Gm had the opportunity to sell cars in japan, but they "arrogantly" refused to design their cars with right hand drive...if true, they wonder why Japanese consumers won't buy them???... I am reading a book now, "The End of Detroit", written about 5-6 years ago...amazing how prescient the book is/was, as tho someone was writing it today... It seems that anyone and everyone outside of GM/Ford/Chrysler saw this coming 10-20 years ago, and only the BIg 3 stuck their heads in the sand in denial... Interesting comments about the short tenure of Bob Stempel as Chairman of GM, and what a disaster he was, also sticking his head in the sand...seems that GM was a master at manipulating numbers to make it seem like they were profitable, but they were losing money on every car they made, and failed to learn ANYTHING from the Japanese method of manufacturing and from NUMMI in Fremont, Calif... What is amazing is that they survived this long losing billions every year, and building cars well in excess of their market share, only to pretend to be Number 1...stupid...
|
|
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
