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 What if you were in charge of GM?
874 messages, Last post on Oct 28, 2009 at 10:20 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Maybe hire Suzuki? Suzuki Executives Not Gods, Seem Normal(Straightline) Interesting commentary on how to do business. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: vinnyny (Oct 21, 2009 6:26 pm) Of course, raising their productivity is limited by GM's ability to sell what they make. Besides, real wages adjusted for inflation have not gone up for the UAW, or for most Americans, since the mid 1970s. GM has no excuse. They took the profits from high productivity and squandered them in various schemes that didn't pan out, like a financing operation. They certainly didn't give those profits back to the workers. Had they done so, we would have seen an immense jump in real wages. It's not there on the record books. A conspicuous absence.
|
|
|
Replying to: vinnyny (Oct 21, 2009 6:26 pm) Could it have to do with the fact that the average car costs around $28,000, whereas a washer/dryer set is $1100? And don't think that the transplants don't make those kind of wages either. That $9 or 17% difference includes bennies, which are still more generous than the transplants, which means the actual salaries are much closer. |
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Oct 22, 2009 8:48 am) Not entirely. If GM could lay off employees when sales slump (instead of having to maintain the Jobs Bank), or replace them with machines when they retire (until recently, the UAW contract required GM to replace employees who retired or quit), productivity would also increase. Mr. Shiftright: Besides, real wages adjusted for inflation have not gone up for the UAW, or for most Americans, since the mid 1970s. I would like to see the actual figures for UAW members. I have a hard time believing this. Also note that even if wages didn't increase, the cost of health care benefits and pensions undoubtedly did over that timeframe. So GM's total labor cost per employee increased, which is the figure that really matters.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Oct 23, 2009 9:53 am) |
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Oct 23, 2009 11:54 am)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: cooterbfd (Oct 23, 2009 1:31 pm) One could argue that Hyundai's price point has helped a lot, and that's not a bad argument---but probably not the whole picture. Hyundai certainly has proven that an automaker can live down its bad reputation. Took 15-20 years though. Henry Ford figured out 90 years ago that if you pay your workers enough they'll buy the same car they make. $5 a day and $290 for a new Model T. So can a GM worker buy a simple, basic new GM car with 58 days wages? Comes out to about $13,000 before taxes --- so $10K after taxes? Is that a fair guess? So-----Nope, GM worker comes up a bit short. But he can BORROW, which the Ford worker in the 1920s found very hard to do. What's the cheapest GM car you can buy? Chevy Aveo....but made in Korea. (Daewoo). Ironic.
|
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Oct 23, 2009 2:16 pm) So a GM worker could afford that type of new car. Maybe the problem is that in automakers trying to outdo each other with features, more power, more weight and size, they have created vehicles that few can afford? or that want to lose that much in depreciation? If I were an automaker I'd certainly be trying to make autos that the middle class can afford, which is in the $10K range. |
|
|
Replying to: Mr_Shiftright (Oct 23, 2009 2:16 pm) Hyundai is going to have to achieve better resale/residual value though or a lot of your initial purchase price savings will be lost at trade-in time.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views What if you were in charge of GM?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
