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: tlong (Jan 12, 2009 9:13 pm) Would you say that ABC, NBC, and CBS have lost market share because they aren't competitive??? I would say cable turned their industry upside down. While I agree that the Big 3 have largely ignored their CARS (not trucks), the fact is that people have more choices today. People tripped all over themselves in the mid '80's to get a Hyundai or a Yugo. Why??? They were CHEAP!!!! That is probably STILL the #1 reason they buy Hyundai's and Kia's today.
|
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Jan 14, 2009 2:55 pm) I think that one thing that the D3 as a whole and GM in particular don't get is that the competitions is on a 5 year cycle for cars while they are going for refreshes that are longer than that. That gave us a Cavalier that lasted through 4 different Civic and/or Corollas.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 13, 2009 5:22 am) WOW!!!!! Who'd have thought that CONGRESS would actually pander to the people who PUT THEM THERE as opposed to overpaid suits who lobby for special interests and other countries. Shame on them. |
|
|
Replying to: fezo (Jan 14, 2009 3:56 pm) I forgot about that one. "G" bodies went 9 yrs ('78-'87). Lemko's Park Ave went from '86-'96. |
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Jan 14, 2009 2:55 pm) That is all I was saying that they have to share in the blame. I have implicated management as much or more than the UAW in the demise of the domestic auto industry. Did the UAW decide to build the Ciera, and Century, virtually UNCHANGED, from 1982 to 1996 I don't know. Did the work rules make it too expensive to upgrade the process for newer better designed models? With 2200 pages of what the workers will and will not do, does present a lot of issues to making changes. Now that GM is trying to get enough money to pay for parts already delivered and health care for retirees, the UAW is attempting to block the bailout with their "no more concessions" protests. I believe the tax payers in this country are not very sympathetic to the UAW cause. From where I sit the UAW would rather take down GM than give up any of their wages or benefits. They keep saying they gave up all they are going to. Well it does not look like the rank and file have given up much of anything. Giving up wages benefits for new hires is pathetic and selfish if you ask me. The few and the proud that are left have given up nothing. The 65,000 UAW workers that are left are willing to take down the whole industry to maintain their lifestyle. You know the 3 million workers the UAW claims will lose their jobs. I got to tell you most of those jobs are going away no matter what the UAW does. I imagine as many as a third are already part of the recession statistics. If the UAW keeps GM from getting the money they will go down in flames with the rest of the domestic workforce. And then my insinuation will be true. PS My original post was to DD who continually avoids the UAW issue by throwing in totally irrelevant information.
|
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Jan 14, 2009 3:59 pm) They also bailed out the banks that give them huge donations. They have not bailed out the working class people that have lost their homes. That is because they are not represented by a Union that get special treatment from the Democrats in Congress. If you feel that catering to special interests is the way our government should be run. Then you should be happy about the bailout for the UAW. The little guy that is not rich enough alone or collectively is left out in the cold by our current Congress.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Jan 14, 2009 3:52 pm) I watch primarily cable Fox, TLC, History, CNBC, etc. There is a difficulty involved for the T3 networks to change themselves and still maintain advertisers which parallels the B3's problems in revamping themselves and adjusting to compete in a new world. Similarly the cable-based companies have fewer controls on what they can and can't do as did the foreign brands coming in with no legacy retired labor force. A very interesting parallel you've brought up. Thanks. >They were CHEAP!!!! I believe another factor in the popularity of small, small cars in the 70s and 80s was that they were economical on gas. The term was (is) econoboxes for the little ones. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: fezo (Jan 14, 2009 3:56 pm) I need help on this one: were the changes in the Civic/Corolla primarily sheet metal or were the underpinnings modified in those changes. |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 14, 2009 4:28 pm) But, just like the possibility if the D3 don't live up to congress demands the loans can be called in, there lies the possibility that Congress can call in the banks TARP loans if they don't start loaning the money. AT least GMAC took their $6 bil and started giving it to customers. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 14, 2009 4:19 pm) The Cutlass/Regal/Grand Prix came out in 88 on the new GM10 chassis. The old A cars were kept for rentals and low priced mid cars.
|
|
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
