  Hardhat Member Username: Hardhat Post Number: 175 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 69.218.78.190 |
...union employees. That's on the MSNBC site, citing the Wall Steet Journal. No other details. Holy crap. Unbelievable. Any other details? Anyone have access to the Journal's site? | ||
Machoken Member Username: Machoken Post Number: 1498 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 207.145.38.104 |
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14 831365/ | ||
Rustic Member Username: Rustic Post Number: 2802 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 128.36.14.220 |
seems like a strong move ... too bad they didn't do it 6-10 years ago when they had the $$ to spare (it might have cost them a bit more in terms of buyout $ but they'd be in a stronger position today) ... | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 100 Registered: 08-2006 Posted From: 75.10.91.78 |
So, who builds the cars once they leave? How much will they be getting paid? | ||
Supersport Member Username: Supersport Post Number: 10597 Registered: 10-2003 Posted From: 64.118.137.226 |
Q: So, who builds the cars once they leave? A: Mexico Q: How much will they be getting paid? A: 50 cents an hour | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 101 Registered: 08-2006 Posted From: 75.10.91.78 |
Foolish move! It will do nothing but boost their share price for a short period. Thier market share will surely dwindle to nothing, there will be no more Ford in five years. | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1501 Registered: 12-2003 Posted From: 69.220.230.150 |
The other 35k and the same wages. There will be just less of them standing around. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 102 Registered: 08-2006 |
I can't believe how dumb the people that run these companies are; they obviously never took an Economics class in college. There's this basic principle called the “circular theory of economics” where the company puts money into the economy by employing a large number of people in that economy, including LOCAL suppliers. Those people, plus those in the community that support those people, reward the company by purchasing the products the companies produce. By eliminating, most of the work force, they now have to compete with the likes of Toyota and Honda (whom by the way make a better car too, save the Mustang); where all they (Toyota / Honda) have to say is; "we assemble the cars you buy right here in the US" Where as all Ford can say is, "hey… we added a couple of shifts in Mexico and China". This does not even consider the fact; how the hell do they expect to compete with Toyota, now that their dumb asses just shrunk them selves into welter weight status? | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2165 Registered: 10-2003 |
I can't believe how dumb you are Cambrian. Hopefully in one of those economic classes you took they told you that if you earn less money than you spend you will go bankrupt. This is the environment Ford is working in. If they don't reduce their expenditures they will go out of business. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 103 Registered: 08-2006 |
NDAVIEs! Funny! if they are that poor as you say, how could they afford to pay the new CEO 20 million up front!? Don't be so dang gullable! | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2166 Registered: 10-2003 |
I'm gullable. They just announced they are going to lose $9 billion this year. Don't be such a fucking idiot. If you hire a new CEO you have to pay him. If you have too many line workers, building far too few cars, you have to sack them. They aren't selling enough cars to keep those line workers employed. The line workers and their bosses need to go. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 104 Registered: 08-2006 |
Well, that's the problem! Ford is too willing to spread the wealth among other rich people at the top of the structure and pay for it by cutting the work force. How many Fords’ do you think those over paid Fat Cats and their country club swine friends are going to buy? If they were smart, which like you NDAVIES, they ain’t, they would invest that money into making interesting products that people want built right here with parts made here. | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2167 Registered: 10-2003 |
The US auto industry is dieing. The union contracts that were mutually aggreed to in better times, forced the Big three to keep workers as market share shrank. It dragged them into the situation they are currently in. If they could have reduced labor costs as their markets shrank they may have had the money to put into new product development. They were unfortunately hamstrung by a bad deal they made with the unions. | ||
K_solomon Member Username: K_solomon Post Number: 35 Registered: 07-2006 |
So Cambrian, you have a better plan? You sound ridiculous when you assert that Ford shouldn't shouldn't cut down it bloated workforce simply because they will buy a Ford product every 4-5 years. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 261 Registered: 05-2005 |
*shaking my head* Cut the laborer, the men responsible for all the profits, whilst the CEO's and such give themselves raise after raise. Why dont they start cutting back on that? Who and how do they expect anyone to be able to but their product? lol You guys are folling yourselves if you think they need to cut labor, they need to cut the million dollar signing bonus's and vacations and perks to the heads of the departments, THATS where the money is wasted. DUH! | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1426 Registered: 10-2004 |
His salary is primarily tied to bonuses. If he doesn't deliver in a material way, neither does Ford. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 262 Registered: 05-2005 |
he is already over paid from the start, why doesnt anyone see this? | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 105 Registered: 08-2006 |
Apples to Apples, the wages paid to Japanese and German auto car US auto workers is not that far off from what a US Car company auto worker gets paid. Yet, the Foreign owned plants can't pump out enough cars. It's not the workers, it's the Ho hum products or Gas guzzling behemoths no one wants, that the money loving management gives them to build. They love money so much, they make sure they get paid their millions and go on to kill viable programs that would generate a feeding frenzy for the car buying public, saying the viable programs are not feasible, or too expensive. Instead of owning up to the error of their ways, they hide behind the "oppressive union agreement from the 80s" smoke screens. It really disgusts me that an upper level executive can collect his $25K / wk paycheck while their ship sinks. Only in America is this allowed. | ||
Wash_man Member Username: Wash_man Post Number: 108 Registered: 05-2006 |
I agree with Ndavies. I know several people that work in Big Three plants. They brag about how much money they make for doing nothing or very little. They laugh that they are protected by the union. Well...times are changing. The union mentality is out dated. I recall an article a couple weeks ago when Ford announced that they would ax 25,000 more workers. UAW President Ron Gettlefinger said in reply that the UAW would only agree to that if Ford hired an additional 25,000 workers. What the hell kind of response is that? If I were in the UAW (I'd rather be dead), my first goal would be to get rid of leadership like that. I think our local economy is finally correcting itself as far as earnings. Why should someone with little to no post-high school education be making $25-30hr? to assemble the same part all day long? I work in the automotive supplier business. The owner of our company once told me something that I will never forget. He said "If you can't get another job doing what you are doing now for the same pay, you are over paid." I'm sure he didn't coin the phrase, but it sure applies to a lot of people in our area. | ||
Ndavies Member Username: Ndavies Post Number: 2168 Registered: 10-2003 |
Sorry Miss cleo, you are ignoring the economic realities that this country was founded on. All industries in this country get more efficient. This means constantly needing fewer workers to do the same tasks. If this wasn't the case we would all still be farmers. We get more people earning higher wages by making them more productive. Every year it takes fewer workers to produce the same number of cars. So either we all start having more babies so we have more people to use more cars, or we cut the number of people making those cars. | ||
Thnk2mch Member Username: Thnk2mch Post Number: 363 Registered: 02-2006 |
Too many cooks in the kitchen. The world is changing folks, get used to it. | ||
56packman Member Username: 56packman Post Number: 591 Registered: 12-2005 |
"Too bad the people who really know how to run things are all cutting hair and driving cabs" George Burns | ||
Wash_man Member Username: Wash_man Post Number: 109 Registered: 05-2006 |
The auto makers insist on icreased efficiencies from their supply base. They lower the price of parts they purchase each model year from the suppliers. They maintain that the longer you manufacture the same part, you become more efficient at it and it requires less labor, hence the reduce price each year. If they built cars using this logic, they would naturally need less people each year. But thanks to the UAW, they can't get rid of the excess...until now when it is sink or swim. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 106 Registered: 08-2006 |
It's easy to say when it's not your industry that is effected. We are sending all our wealth over to China. Only after we are all speaking Chinese in the next 100 years will you fools understand! | ||
K_solomon Member Username: K_solomon Post Number: 36 Registered: 07-2006 |
What I dont understand is why people feel that only the union workers are being affected by this. Ford also annocted that 14,000 white collar jobs were going to be cut as well. The CEO is not overpaid. As stated a portion of his salary is tied to bonus. How can you compare screwing a nut onto a bolt to being responsible for the turnaround for a company in as dire straits as Ford. | ||
Thejesus Member Username: Thejesus Post Number: 292 Registered: 06-2006 |
How many employees does Ford even have left??? They lay off 75,000 here, 30,000 there... | ||
River_rat Member Username: River_rat Post Number: 227 Registered: 02-2006 |
UAW - R.I.P | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1502 Registered: 12-2003 |
Ford, GM and Chrysler are all over staffed with overpriced workers. Jettisoning them allows them to stay competitive. The other car companies do this except they aren't sacked with endless money pits such as laid off workers @ 90% of their pay and a job banks. They are spending way to much on Health Care and Pensions to stay competitive. That is the bottom line. Cambrian, you theory is right on. Except those workers and their salaries, health care and pensions have driven up the costs of Automobiles so high that only employees with discounts will buy them. When they start making dependable cars with options for a good price, people will buy them. they will not pay $400 a month for a car that an employee pays $89 a month for. (Message edited by _sj_ on September 15, 2006) | ||
Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2375 Registered: 10-2003 |
Miss cleo and Cambrian haven't a clue. Even if top management all worked for free it wouldn't really change Ford's dire financial position. You can legitimately argue that executive management is overpaid but you can't reasonably argue that executive compensation is the reason why Ford is losing money. They sure don't pay their executive team $9 billion per year. Their cost structure is sized "XL" and their revenue created is "M". This newly announced plan to shrink the cost side of the business will get them to "L" but not "M". They'd better have product online to grow the revenue to fit a size "L" or we'll see them going through this cut-back exercise again in a year or so. For the long term good of the industry they ought to shrink to a size "M" or even "S", if that "S" is a profitable company across virtually all product lines. Then they'll have the cost structure and product development resources to grow again. BTW, the oft-made argument that a company should pay their employees a lot and keep headcount up so that there is a base of well-paid employees to buy the company's products is so stupid, I can't believe people keep bringing it up. Whether Ford has 120,000, or 80,000 employees doesn't matter much when each 1% slide in market share equals 170,000 vehicles. Yet some think Ford's solution is to pay unneeded employees $100K a year so that those employees will buy a Ford vehicle that'll net Ford an incremental $5K in gross profit? Great logic... | ||
River_rat Member Username: River_rat Post Number: 228 Registered: 02-2006 |
The new CEO at Ford may be paid (be eligible for a bonus) $25 million and a lot of you do not think he is worth it. What about A-rod, T.O., most NBA players who are in the multimillion a year payroll range? The new CEO is responsible for making a corporation survive so that it can employ 50,000 people in the country. The real loser is the UAW. Their membership is declining faster than imaginable and that will impact their finances enormously. No more Las Vegas conventions boys. The jobs that will be preserved will be in right to work states and we all know what that means. The auto business in Detroit continues the downward spiral --- sadly. | ||
Wash_man Member Username: Wash_man Post Number: 110 Registered: 05-2006 |
Let's not forget something...I know several people that have taken buy outs/early retirement. They leave the company on Friday and return to their same desk on Monday as a "contract" employee. They now work for a staffing service. It's a way to reduce the number of employees on paper, but still be able to manage the company with the required staff. A lot of these people make more money than when they were actual employees. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 263 Registered: 05-2005 |
LOL, I have a big clue, I am from a 3rd generation auto worker family LOL....I see and hear things first hand, not press releases and such that you blindly believe to be true | ||
Livedog2 Member Username: Livedog2 Post Number: 1143 Registered: 03-2006 |
The rattle snakes (American Auto Industry) are definitely committing suicide! And, I say good ribbons!! Nationalism is nothing more than a way for the people at the top to get the people below them to do what they want them to do!!! We'll go on and make it just like people have throughout the ages!!!! Livedog2 | ||
Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2376 Registered: 10-2003 |
Well then that settles it. If Ford just cuts exec compensation and keeps lots of extra workers around they'll make tons of money and all will be fine. Wow, brilliant solution. Miss_cleo, that strategy will ensure that your 3rd-generation auto worker family never gets the opportunity to be a 4th-generation auto worker family. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 107 Registered: 08-2006 |
Right, if money is going to be wasted, let's waste it on people who need it, rather then those that don't! You're smarter then I gave you credit for originally Track75! | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 264 Registered: 05-2005 |
my dad just retired from GM. I know a thing or 2 about the industry as we are 3rd generation auto workers. If they would stop sending job over seas they would be fine. If the fat cats stop sucking money for their extravagant life style they would be fine. If they would stop the trips like they sent my dad on, they would be fine. A work trip consisted of golf at a resort, luxery hotel rooms and gourmet food, my dad even admits it, THAT is why your truck/car cost 40,000+ because of THAT waste, not because of the workers who I might add actually make the profits that the fat cats at the top suck up. How about Curt Clawson, former CEO where my husband used to work, filed bankrupsy for the comapny and then gave himself a raise, oh yeah, thats always a good move, the company is LOSING money, think I will give myself a raise. You guys are pinning the troubles on the wrong people here | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1504 Registered: 12-2003 |
Becuase theories all have believers.
Funny, but all workers feel the same way about their companies but have no clue how to run one. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 265 Registered: 05-2005 |
Miss_cleo, that strategy will ensure that your 3rd-generation auto worker family never gets the opportunity to be a 4th-generation auto worker family. dam straight cause we got OUT of the Auto Industry, thank goodness. They dont take care of their own anymore, just the fat cats at the top | ||
Wash_man Member Username: Wash_man Post Number: 111 Registered: 05-2006 |
Speaking of sending jobs overseas...one of GM's best selling cars now is the Chevy Aveo, thanks to gas prices. It is a Suzuki with a Chevy logo slapped on it. Why do the big three always want us to "but American" but it's okay for them to import cars and put their name on it? I remember in the '80 during a similar slump when Lee Iaocca was selling Mitsubishis as Chrysler products and hailed them as "Imports with a purpose". | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 779 Registered: 11-2003 |
^^^ True... a la Dodge Stealth, Colt Vista, Summit, Plymouth Laser.... the list goes on. | ||
Tndetroiter Member Username: Tndetroiter Post Number: 295 Registered: 12-2005 |
Mulally (spelling?) gets paid what he does because he has a specific set of skills that few others have. It's called supply and demand, there is a very big demand for the kinds of skills he has, yet there isn't a very big supply of those skills out there. Put it this way, there's not a UAW peon on the line that could effectively do his job. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 108 Registered: 08-2006 |
Nor could his flabby ass do thier job without croaking over with a coronary! | ||
K_solomon Member Username: K_solomon Post Number: 37 Registered: 07-2006 |
He may not be able to , but thousands of other would line to do what they do for half of what they are paid. | ||
Wazootyman Member Username: Wazootyman Post Number: 128 Registered: 02-2006 |
It doesn't matter, because there is a huge supply of other people that could do their job. Again, the CEO is compensated because such (proven) skills come at a high cost. If Ford is able to continue to produce a product in line with market volume demands, but that is more desirable and at lower cost, it's a win for them. Unfortunately, the laborers lose out, but the alternative is that the entire company disappears. | ||
Tndetroiter Member Username: Tndetroiter Post Number: 297 Registered: 12-2005 |
What's their job? Standing around and doing nothing? BTW, I've seen some UAW parasites that are fat as hell and they ain't croaked yet. The company would probably be in a better condition if they would, however. | ||
Wash_man Member Username: Wash_man Post Number: 112 Registered: 05-2006 |
Yeah Cambrian, it's hard to tighten a couple of screws, then sit and read the paper until the next car comes down the line. I have been in many, many assembly plants. Some people work very hard physically, but most don't. BTW your comparison is idiotic. Mulally's job will be 24/7 of stress. Line workers punch out, go home and forget about it. Besides, there is no comparison between the two jobs and I'm not sure why I even justified your comment with a response. | ||
Wash_man Member Username: Wash_man Post Number: 113 Registered: 05-2006 |
Remember that the main purpose of a company is to make money for its owners/shareholders. The main purpose is not to provide jobs. That's a by-product of the real goal, which is to make money. If Ford (or GM or DCX) could produce cars without any line workers they would do it in a minute. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 109 Registered: 08-2006 |
You people amaze me! Rich white guy making $20 million / year=good, middle class persons with families to support who are the ones that really keep our economy going, making $60K / year = bad. Talk about cronic head in the ass syndrome! | ||
Wash_man Member Username: Wash_man Post Number: 114 Registered: 05-2006 |
Rich white guy responsible for entire company vs middle class person responsible for putting a screw on right. Go figure. It's called pay equity. And the hourly guy can't even make it in on time if at all. Please, give it up. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 110 Registered: 08-2006 |
You obviously have no experience in the plant or working as a Union Person. I've been on both sides as an Engineer and as an Hourly person. I think you are the one that needs to be schooled here! | ||
Tndetroiter Member Username: Tndetroiter Post Number: 299 Registered: 12-2005 |
Like I said, it's supply and demand. The demand for the skill sets that most line workers have isn't terribly high and there is an over abundence of said skill sets. That equals lower wages. Cambrian, take your head out of your ass, this isn't Communist Russia or China, we have a regulated free market system. This is the way it is. Our system rewards those w/ strong work ethics and valuable skills. If you work hard enough in America, you can make a living. | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 781 Registered: 11-2003 |
I come from a GM family and i have seen the cut backs and plant closures first hand and how they affect the workers. The thing that bothers me is, we have seen a tradition of plant closings and job cuts for the past 20+ years, and I don't see why people don't think it will happen to them. For the lifers who make a good living, why don't they bump up that 401k and savings as retirements and buyouts come about these days. The less seasoned vets- learn another trade or hustle just in case your in the next round of cuts. Young folk... work the plant job and GO TO SCHOOL... these arent the old days when you started and knew you had another 35 years to go at the plant. Fail to prepare, prefare to fail. I understand it sucks to loose a job as I have been cut before due to downsizing etc... but like it was said above... it is not the company's responsibilty to provide jobs but it's a by product. The company does not owe you anything, you came to them for the job and they hired you. It is their responsibilty to take care of you while you are an employee, but thats pretty much it. More people need to think business-minded and not emotionally or our of their own pockets. Think as if you owned your own business and you could do the work cheaper and more efficiently. | ||
K_solomon Member Username: K_solomon Post Number: 38 Registered: 07-2006 |
Cambrian, give me a break. An autoworker making 60k a year is ridiculous. I have peers with MBA's who don't make that much. AGAIN, companies are not in the business of providing jobs. The ultimate goal is to make a profit. I personally think that the buyout offers are extremely generous. Especially the one that give the $15k per year tution allowance, all while the employee collects 50% of thier pay and full medical benefits. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 111 Registered: 08-2006 |
If that were true, then hardworking blue collar people would not be looking for work why those that spend their afternoons on the Golf Course stay employed. | ||
Tndetroiter Member Username: Tndetroiter Post Number: 300 Registered: 12-2005 |
Huh? In English please. | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 782 Registered: 11-2003 |
^^^^ There are jobs.. People are just to picky to take them until something better comes along. I got cut and started my own business... like he said, if people work hard they can make it. | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 783 Registered: 11-2003 |
^^^^ There are jobs.. People are just to picky to take them until something better comes along. I got cut and started my own business... like he said, if people work hard they can make it. | ||
Susanarosa Member Username: Susanarosa Post Number: 1154 Registered: 11-2003 |
Ding, ding, ding... we have a winner. This is the exact same reason the city is suffering so badly, too. I agree that some of these salaries are absurd. I also think it's absurd to pay $200 for a pair of shoes or $500 for a purse or $600 for a winter coat. It's all relative. Which probably also why I found it absurd to spend $3,000 more on an American car than I did on my Honda. (Message edited by susanarosa on September 15, 2006) | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 112 Registered: 08-2006 |
Like continuously re-educating on ones own dime? Or working more hours to please the boss only to get critiscized for expecting OT? | ||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 478 Registered: 02-2004 |
Give it up, Cambrian. This group are doggies for the corporate class. You think this area is bad now? Wait till another couple thousand people are out of work with no medical insurance. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 113 Registered: 08-2006 |
Yes Oldrefordette, the majority here does seem to be made up of corporate stooges. The reality is, that's my background too, My Uncle recently retired as an Exective at GM, he's literaly a millionaire with a 7000 Square Foot new house. Why are my sympathies not where my roots are? Because I have a conscience! I run into these stooges all the time where I am taking night classes, they turn my gut. I'm lucky to not be working with them now, but soon I will be again. It's ok I have a great poker face! | ||
Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2377 Registered: 10-2003 |
Who do you want to pay for your education? Me??? The company? People are responsible for their own education, or lack thereof. If someone or something else helps pay for it, great, but it's still their responsibility. Quit whining. If the work world changes and they're without valued skills, who's fault is that? Even if you don't think it's your fault, it's your problem. There's been a whole lot of writing on the wall for autoworkers. They've had ample notice, they earn enough money to pay for their education, and I understand their employer/union will assist in paying for it. What valid excuse is there if one didn't prepare for an uncertain future? | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 114 Registered: 08-2006 |
Yes, reall smart! Let's all get started in the hole becasue we owe lots of money for student loans. Half what I had to pay for in College was BS I all ready knew. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1150 Registered: 11-2003 |
People in the automotive industry need to take this opportunity to use the money being given to them to invest in a new education to be retrained for the jobs that exist. Viziondetroit is correct, it is out of times like this where people look to start their own business, and find other opportunities. Yes, corporate culture is what it is, but that is not just in Michigan. How about Enron, Adelphia? Just think, we could have one of these corporate stooges as our governor come November. | ||
Planner_727 Member Username: Planner_727 Post Number: 48 Registered: 07-2006 |
I wish I could have posted to this thread earlier. The rather self-centered thinking of Cleo and Cambrian is exactly the reason why the Detroit car companies are in the dire straits they are today. This is not about the livelihood of those 75,000 individuals who are being offered buy outs (NOT fired I might add); it is about the sustainability of a company that employs directly and indirectly many times that many hourly and salaried workers. The CEO gets $20 million up front. That seemed to be a sticking point. Put it in perspective - Ford says it needs to cut $5 billion a year to be sustainable. $20/$5000 = 0.4%. That is a drop in the bucket for someone tasked with turning around a company like Ford. Without that pay, noone close to qualified or able would be willing to risk reputation, health, etc to take on such a daunting task. There is no comparison. The unions foolishly (or smartly, in the short term) demanded benefits that were way out of wack compared to what the companies could afford in times that were not as booming as the late 90's. Everything is catching up now... the buyouts are necessary not necessarily to cut the workforce by 75,000, but instead to 're-set' many of those workers' compensations to be reasonable and competitive with other car companies. | ||
Track75 Member Username: Track75 Post Number: 2378 Registered: 10-2003 |
Yep, much wiser to only get the High School diploma and try to get a job on the line at Fords. It worked for Grandpa, I'm sure that'll never change. Who's fault is it that you enrolled in a college program that involved learning things you already knew? Maybe you made a bad choice of colleges or majors. It happens. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 267 Registered: 05-2005 |
ROTFLMAO! ITs your lie, tell it how you want, only you have to believe it. Nobody NEEDS 20mil to do a job, NOBODY! | ||
Planner_727 Member Username: Planner_727 Post Number: 49 Registered: 07-2006 |
I'm not saying it's reasonable. Same as with sports figures, etc. But if they didn't pay that much, no one who could do it would take the job. Bottom line. | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1505 Registered: 12-2003 |
they get paid that much becuase the money is there. There is not Billions to continue to pay 75k unskilled workers. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 115 Registered: 08-2006 |
Track75, The problem with that Theory is, we peons are the only ones expected to change and open our wallets these days why the rich guys like Mullaly get overpaid for non value added work. Nothing wrong with getting a college degree, just the balance needs to be fixed. My parent's generation had way more oppurtunities then does mine. Let's say everyone gets a Bachelor's? Does that mean more people will be employed? Wrong! The jobs will start requiring Masters, when we get a Masters, "Sorry we're only looking for Doctorate Degrees now" get a Dr's Degree, "Sorry, we're looking for someone younger" | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 465 Registered: 02-2006 |
The entitlement mentality in this thread is disgusting. Nobody owes you anything. I forget when, but there was a nice article about this in (I think) the news awhile back, where there is a mentality in this region that if you work in a factory, you think you are owed a big suburban house, 3 cars, a boat, and a cottage up north. Union salaries are so disgustingly out of whack with the job performed. The attitude described earlier, the thought of invincibility, "the union will protect me" is absolutely true. Sick. And I'm even a lefty. But I'm a realist. | ||
Spitty Member Username: Spitty Post Number: 481 Registered: 07-2004 |
The company's losing 20 million dollars a day. Put it in perspective. Pretend it's a leap year and this guy's salary pays for itself. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 466 Registered: 02-2006 |
So your solution is what? To be petulant, stamp your foot, and say "I don't wanna"? You can't look at the realities of the world and expect that you can go against them just because you don't agree. Sink or swim. But if you choose to sink, don't blame anyone else when you're drowning. | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1507 Registered: 12-2003 |
Not everyone can graduate at the head of the class, someone has to finish last. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 117 Registered: 08-2006 |
Ohhhh, but we owe those that run a company millions and thy don't owe us a thing in return! Gotta love the ignorance. | ||
Bob Member Username: Bob Post Number: 1152 Registered: 11-2003 |
How about we just start with graduating. | ||
Focusonthed Member Username: Focusonthed Post Number: 467 Registered: 02-2006 |
No, nobody owes CEOs millions either. But that is what the market stipulates. The market does NOT call for $60k for a line worker. Hence, the problem we have here. For someone who claims to study economics, you continue to gloss over a very simple point, a Day 1 of ECON 101 point. (Message edited by focusonthed on September 15, 2006) | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1508 Registered: 12-2003 |
How about Billions of dollars spent each year for those workers. Sure seems like they are getting something. | ||
Thnk2mch Member Username: Thnk2mch Post Number: 364 Registered: 02-2006 |
Didn't "WE" get paychecks? | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 118 Registered: 08-2006 |
Yes, for now, until the $35,000 buyout Ford offers that's supposed to account for so many years of work plus any retirement expenses. | ||
Wash_man Member Username: Wash_man Post Number: 115 Registered: 05-2006 |
Don't complain about the "buyout" offer. When my company downsized, people were handed their last check on Friday and escorted to their cars. That's how it is every where but the Big 3. Those people should be happy with anything they get. I still don't understand why they just don't kick 'em to the curb and save the buy out costs. An hourly employee is just that..an hours pay for an hours work. Ford owes them nothing more. | ||
Ray1936 Member Username: Ray1936 Post Number: 806 Registered: 01-2005 |
I wonder what state Ford would be in today if Lee Iacocca had become CEO about ten years ago? Seems to me like Ford's biggest problem has been its leadership in that time span. | ||
Thnk2mch Member Username: Thnk2mch Post Number: 366 Registered: 02-2006 |
He would have merged it Daimler. | ||
Jjaba Member Username: Jjaba Post Number: 4337 Registered: 11-2003 |
Supersport, you are not exactly right. Mexican workers get $1.00 an hour, a clean uniform, a lunch, and a vanride to work. They work an 8 hr. day. What you are right about is the NIKE model. They sell shoes, jock straps, clothing, and sports gear, without any plants in USA. The stock price is sky high and coolie offshore wages are even less than Mexico. That's the future for Detroit. jjaba. | ||
Dillpicklesoup Member Username: Dillpicklesoup Post Number: 175 Registered: 05-2006 |
hope all y'all ford folks- got your bills paid- dam- good luck- going to be tough finding comparable paying work- maybe you should all go to mexico- | ||
Planner_727 Member Username: Planner_727 Post Number: 51 Registered: 07-2006 |
This whole thread is one big loop. I don't know how else to say it. I'm a lefty as well, but there are limits to how much you can expect handed out. As I mentioned earlier, the fact that these are voluntary buy outs instead of lay offs is a gift on its own. Many, many people get thier last check and a 'thanks' on their way home! Quote: "Yes, for now, until the $35,000 buyout Ford offers that's supposed to account for so many years of work plus any retirement expenses." Again, so many (most) professional and hourly jobs these days don't have pensions. Or retiree health care. Or any of that. You have been rewarded for your years of service by being employed and awarded raises, etc. Everyone else is forced to put money into a 401 k account and save for themselves. How you can still be complaining about a company on the brink of bankruptcy ONLY giving you the OPTION to leave and tens of thousands of dollars if you CHOOSE is absurd. All the rest of the workforce has to be prepared to find another job any given day. Get two cars instead of three and all of a sudden you can afford a low-interest student loan! | ||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 479 Registered: 02-2004 |
Incredible. Incredible. The $35,000 is only for the Ford guys who meet a certain criteria (30 years plus, a certain age, I don't have the stuff in front of me, but there are tiers to this buyout). My husband, who retired from Ford with 31 years, got no buyout. But they didn't have to kick him out the door. Focusonthed, you're a Democrat, not a lefty, right? Big big big big difference. Ford put themselves in this position by designing and selling cars that were out of date, out of touch. There is no reason that Ford doesn't make cars that aren't oil dependent and fuel efficient and good looking and cheap, except for it hurt their BOTTOM LINE. To blame the hourly workers for this state of affairs is just plain stupid. Stupid. Stupid. In this big old world there are lazy union workers and incompetent bosses. Educated, motivated union workers and innovative humane bosses. I'm sure somewhere there's a CEO worth his $5billion dollars, give me a year and I'll find it. My husband the former Ford employee only had one year of college, but was constantly in schools, all over the midwest and east coast, making him better trained to keep up with the current technology in the plants. He was far from the only one. When I went back to school in the early 90's, my classes was full of GM workers, taking advantage of their jobs bank and benefits to get degrees and better themselves. The Jobs Bank was a great idea that will be sorely missed by many small municipalities who couldn't afford all sorts of workers but were able to get city jobs done due to the bank (ask my pal in Rahway New Jersey whose parks are groomed and kid ready due to jobs bank). Try and leave your anti-worker, class based prejudice behind when you talk about this subject. Southeastern Michigan will look like paradise compared to how it's going to be in a year or so, when the benefits run out and the jobs are vapor. Handed out. humph. Ford couldn't sign those union contracts fast enough when times were good. Bill fucking Ford isn't going to miss a meal, or put off a doctors appointment, I can promise you that. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1434 Registered: 10-2004 |
Nothing was forcing the workers from ever quitting the gravy train at Ford. So quit the nonsense about their being abused. They are riding as long as Ford will keep them. Strange how socialists believe that they are owed a living and perpetual job security. Welcome back down to planet earth. | ||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 480 Registered: 02-2004 |
Who is a socialist? | ||
Hugo8100 Member Username: Hugo8100 Post Number: 8 Registered: 06-2006 |
Anyone who thinks they are owed a living and perpetual job security. | ||
Karl Member Username: Karl Post Number: 4035 Registered: 09-2005 |
Along with free lifetime healthcare. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 271 Registered: 05-2005 |
Those who dont work in the Auto Industry really have no idea, and it shows. They jusr throw out their ideas and opinions without any of it affecting them, anything you say looks good on paper. What you dont get at all is the real human element behind it all. I really dont understand all of you feeling it right to keep giving the top cats raises and outragously high saleries and bonuses but you begrudge the laborer a living wage.........but I guess that comes from actually BEING in the industry vrs looking through the window and thinking your ideas and thoughts are the real reality. Hayes-Lemmerz, my husbands former employer in Ferndale, an Auto supplier,closed it doors yesterday. Thank God we got out in time. We now know MANY more people who are out of a job, people 40 and up....where do you think they are going to go to get a job that will support them and their families? Back to school you shout....great, but where is money comming from in the mean time? Meanwhile the top cats whos decisions brought the company down (not the worker) continue on with the life style, oh my no, they dont have to choose between food and the doctor.....you guys really havent a clue. | ||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 481 Registered: 02-2004 |
Free lifetime healthcare might have saved Ford - if costs were the real reason for the problems. | ||
Karl Member Username: Karl Post Number: 4036 Registered: 09-2005 |
Miss cleo, the auto industry is similar to many others, and the human element trancends since everyone needs a paycheck. Did you think that layoffs outside the auto industry cause workers to rejoice? The auto industry provides many lessons since they are so visible, large, and hold a common interest with everyone (cars) For example, the idea that any industry (including govt) should provide lifetime healthcare is fairly easy to analyze by looking at auto workers starting in the 1960's, when thousands of workers began receiving free healthcare at no cost. Look at the physical condition of those workers today. Better than the mainstream? Then look at the financial condition of the employer (imagine the US auto industry is the govt, and as a taxpayer, you're being asked to bail them out/pay more) Some might think this a poor or unreasonable example - yet many of those same people would opt to turn healthcare and its costs over to govt bureaucrats, thinking bureaucrats can do a better and more economical job with taxpayer funds than management in auto companies can do with stockholders' funds. In return for a limited (20-30 years) period of service, companies are asked to pay top wages, pay for healthcare during and for an unlimited period of time after retirement (someimes longer than the career itself) manage and provide retirement income, again for a period described above for healthcare - and provide a competitive return on investment for stockholders. Sorry Miss cleo, but it appears you are the one with no clue - or perhaps only part of one. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 272 Registered: 05-2005 |
LOL, keep telling yourself that, you speculate, I live it. | ||
Karl Member Username: Karl Post Number: 4037 Registered: 09-2005 |
Sorry Miss cleo, but I'm trying to look at things in a realistic manner - as a car buyer, and as a stockholder - both factors are the key to the future as well as the continuity of Ford's pension payments. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 274 Registered: 05-2005 |
Why is it no one address the issue of the top cats continuing to get bonus and raises and high saleries while taking more and more from the larborer? Why you all feel this is right is way beyond me, if they all took a major cut, they could STILL mantain their lifestyle and there would be your money for pensions and such. Why are you all for a few hogging all the money that many make? I guess my manner of realistic and yours are very different, that doesnt make either one of them right | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1815 Registered: 07-2004 |
Ford and GM keep trying to force trucks and SUVs down our throats instead of designing and producing more fuel efficient cars. This mentality from management is what's killing the American car industry. Don't put all the blame on the UAW. Ford continues to produce uninspiring products with poor gas mileage and they want to solve the problem by reducing its workforce. How about building cars that are fun, exciting, reliable, and fuel efficient? Is that such a tall task for Ford? The Ford Mustang is the only car in the Ford line that people get excited about. However, it's very impractical. It's really a two-seater and with rear wheel-drive it's not the kind of car you want to drive in winter. Also, it doesn't get the best of gas mileage. Despite these negatives I would still get one if I could afford a new car at this time. Chrysler is about to put into production the exciting Challenger concept car. This car will sell well given the positive response from the public at the auto show. Did Ford show off anything exciting? Well, maybe that big ass mammoth truck. Can you believe that they actually want to produce this thing? This is why Ford is faltering. Again, the UAW is not to blame. | ||
Karl Member Username: Karl Post Number: 4039 Registered: 09-2005 |
Royce said: "Despite these negatives I would still get one if I could afford a new car at this time." This is part of the reason the auto industry works - sometimes. When the money gushes in, not much else matters, does it? Miss cleo - why didn't your hubby go into management if everything is so rosy (and apparently easy) on that side of the fence? If he didn't agree with "hogging all the money" perhaps he could have been a breakthrough leader and led the charge for greater efficiencies? If he retired after 20-30-more years, surely he had the time to figure it all out. Bombthrowing at an industry that apparently fed you well over many years and has now allowed you to retire to N Michigan (a luxury attained by less than 1% of the world's population) seems unfairly critical of the industry that allowed this. Maybe you should compare your "manner of realistic" with those below you on the economic ladder, rather than those you perceive as above you. | ||
Jams Member Username: Jams Post Number: 3716 Registered: 10-2003 |
The elitism on this site frightens me. I grew up in a blue-collar family, went to college, my callouses on my hands from my factory years are gone. Where the hell is much of the next generation going to find the money to attend university and attain the education necessary that many of you on this forum deem to be acceptable to live in this society? I was lucky, I paid my way through College working for the railroads and steelmills fulltime while attending classes fulltime. I made a good living. I lament our society (from what I have read from the postings on this forum) which feels that manual labour should be happy with any pittance given to them by the benevolence of the corporation. I read my history, 2000 dead on a battlefield is just a footnote, you or your father losing a job changes your world forever. I had a conversation with someone last night regarding just wages. c Can the Henry Fords, Bill Gates, etc. ever exist without the nameless employees actually producing the products they make their money from? How many cars could Henry Ford have produced from a garage on Bagley by himself? I'm guessing most of us work for a paycheck to expected on a certain day. Why the disdain for the guy who sweeps the floors and emptying the trash cans. Doesn't he and his family deserve a shot at abetter life? | ||
Karl Member Username: Karl Post Number: 4040 Registered: 09-2005 |
Jams, your comment that folks today "feels that manual labour should be happy with any pittance given to them by the benevolence of the corporation" is pretty silly. Labor has been saying that throughout history. Now take a look around - retired hourly workers in MI are hardly living under bridges. Hourly workers today are providing for their families, in far better health and conditions than workers did in earlier generations. Of course "the guy who sweeps the floors and emptying the trash cans....he and his family deserve(s) a shot at abetter life.." and they had it in Michigan - you start somewhere, and work your way up, either by experience, education, or both. Times are changing, and smart workers will change with the times. If you don't think that method worked in the past as well as the present, all I can say is get real. | ||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 269 Registered: 12-2005 |
To all those who think that Mulally's salary is "obscene", keep in mind that his guaranteed base pay is about $10 million per year. The rest is not guaranteed, it is performance-based and he will only collect if the company gets turned around and their stock price climbs high enough. If you want to "call out" those who get the largest share of the guaranteed compensation pie at Ford's North American operations,it is their 75,000 blue collar employees, who contractually take home about $6 billion each year, REGARDLESS of how many vehicles Ford sells or whether the company makes a profit or a loss. Their $6 billion represents about 60% of Ford's annual NA compensation costs. Next are their 34,000 white collar employees, whose non-variable compensation totals about $3.5 billion each year - about 34% of the NA compensation "pie". Finally, there are those greedy, fat-cat executives. While I cannot readily find a source for the exact number of these managers at Ford, let's assume that there are 1,000 bonus-eligible Ford executives and their average annual salary is $500,000 (based on comparable data from GM). Totalled, they pull down $0.5 billion a year, which represents just 5% of the "pie". Adding Mulally's $10 million represents just a 0.1% increase to Ford's total NA payroll. All of Steve Wilson's hype about Mullaly geting a $35 million package is just speculation based on a very optimistic guess about Ford's future performance and stock price appreciation. BTW, Ford has not paid any bonuses to their executives recently, despite Miss_cleo's assertions. Including potential bonus and stock option income for executives in any comparison with blue-collar wages is like comparing apples with oranges. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 1333 Registered: 06-2004 |
GM is the abuser when it comes to willfully screwing employees, not Ford. Ford has historically always tried to take care of it's employees and Ford's profit sharing always made it down the line. GM's never has. | ||
Karl Member Username: Karl Post Number: 4041 Registered: 09-2005 |
Uh, Lilpup, throughout the years the workers at each of the Big 3 had similar pay/benefits, negotiated by the UAW. Perhaps you want to talk to your union? BTW, as was stated eloquently above by Mikeg, the hourly workers would have been paid even if the company lost money. The UAW negotiated, arrived at a deal, and the rest is history. Whining about what workers coulda/shoulda got when no one knew how much, if any, profit would be is silly and naive. The workers got a very fair pay for a day's work - exactly what they negotiated thru the UAW. Unlike the stockholders, the workers wagered nothing. | ||
Lilpup Member Username: Lilpup Post Number: 1334 Registered: 06-2004 |
The way profit sharing is distributed has more to do with corporate accounting than any labor contract. | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1816 Registered: 07-2004 |
Karl, you use the word "whining" too much. When you disagree with someone in the future, do you think you can come up with another word? BTW, Karl, it appears that you must be retired because of the amount of time that you spend on this forum. It indicates that you have a lot of free time on your hands. I say this because your non-abortion arguments are always telling people to essentially pull themselves up from their boot straps. Don't ask the government or anyone for help seems to be your mantra. I just want to know, Karl, are you a self-made millionnaire with nothing but free time on your hands? You just act like someone who has never had to rely on anyone or needed anyone's help to get to where you are today. I'm just curious, Karl. | ||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 270 Registered: 12-2005 |
Lilpup, GM and Ford used the exact same formula for determining profit sharing which was the result of negotiations with the UAW. The reason that Ford paid out larger amounts was that GM traditionally performed more of their work in-house, while Ford relied more heavily on outside suppliers. Therefore, GM had proportionally more employees among which it divided the profit sharing fund. I fail to see how keeping more of their subassembly jobs in-house is an example of GM "willfully screwing employees". If anyone can be blamed for the injustice you cite, it would be the UAW, since they wanted a one-size-fits-all profit sharing approach. | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 785 Registered: 11-2003 |
Question...So the question is where does one get money for college when they are a lil older 40+ Answer... The same place a 18-21 year old gets it... LOANS. It suck, I know. The truth is by working in the auto industry for the past 10-20 years, workers have avoided what everyone else has not had luck avoiding, SCHOOL. They are/were afforded a nice job, benefits, discounts etc for a nice wage. What other industry can one make such a nic living WITHOUT a formal education? I can't relly think of one WITHOUT going into sales. Now reality has caught up and auto workers are back at ground zero with the rest of us broke people with student loans. Now what does suck is the fact that these people are older for the most part and have kids in college, mortgages etc... but the ride is back in the station. The playing field is in a manner becoming "level" so to speak. I hope serves as ANOTHER example of why you should get some college education, live like make 60k instead of the full 100k ur making with all the overtime, save some money, and learn a trade. Im not being inhumane, but you can't say there weren't enough examples of the auto gravy train shutting down al a Flint, Fisher 21, Dodge Main, the list goes on... | ||
K_solomon Member Username: K_solomon Post Number: 39 Registered: 07-2006 |
While I don't sympathize with the UAW, I do empathize. Hopefully. The workers will make the most of the buyout offers. Getting a free education, taking the money and opening a business, all sound like great opportunities. I also hope that for the regions sake, that those worker pursue those opportunities HERE. | ||
Karl Member Username: Karl Post Number: 4042 Registered: 09-2005 |
Royce, I'm not retired nor am I a self-made millionaire. Like everyone else on the planet, I've had to rely on others, and have needed others help to succeed, starting at conception. I consider myself blessed and am surrounded by folks who care. I appear to be on here alot simply because I type fast. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 119 Registered: 08-2006 |
You neo cons keep telling yourself no one owes anybody anything. Wait until your 75 and need medical treatment, or medications that cost more than your SS checks amount too. I hope some is there to remind you it's your fault you don't have better health insurance and that no one owes you a damn thing! | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 276 Registered: 05-2005 |
again I say, you guys are nuts and arent really vested in any of this. If you arent in the Auto Industry, I cant put any stock in what you say or observe because you are not hurting or out of a job or taking a pay cut or worrying about keeping your house or feeding your family. You just keep spouting about how its the hourly workers fault and thats just not so. Its the changes in the upper management that has brought the comapnies to their knees. There is no loyality anymore, no respect or reward for the worker who actually makes the product, hence actually making the money the uppers put in their pockets. I laugh at all you *figures and stats* cause that all they are, paper. You forget there are familys and lives behind those numbers, and lets not forget who throws those numbers out to you....not the worker, oh no, the come from the uppers again. They dont skew anything do they, they are forth right and honest about how much they are losing arent they, about how much they have squirreled away in a Swiss bank account. They have to let workers go and put their livelyhood at risk, they couldnt take a pay cut of their own could they? Those that believe any man is woth 20 mil or 10 mil are fooling yourselves. These are the guys who decisions run the comapny into the ground in the first place, but we dont take from them, oh no. We take more and more from the little guy to make up for upper managments mistakes. Then they turn around and give themselves raises for *being so clever* Get real people, you are blaming the wrong people and the wrong people are losing jobs here, every day, while the fat cats sit back and get richer and richer. Thank goodness we are OUT of the Auto Industry and OUT of the region, never to return. Last one out, turn off the lights! | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 786 Registered: 11-2003 |
^^^ take it out on the region. You owe us property taxes and sales taxes for the next 30 years. How dare you tease us and get us used to you paying into our economy. We thought you would never leave... what are we to do? You should have pre-paid your taxes for the next year and then moved. | ||
Karl Member Username: Karl Post Number: 4043 Registered: 09-2005 |
Miss cleo, how kind of you! I take it you might still have a pension check being generated IN the region?? Hopefully none of your pension funds are invested in auto stocks either, otherwise that check might burp once in awhile. | ||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 273 Registered: 12-2005 |
Too many auto industry retirees and near-retirees with defined-benefit pensions think that their future well-being is independent of the fortunes of their employer, because they feel secure in their belief that their pension is guaranteed by the Federal Government. Actually, the Federal Govt., through Congress and the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation (PBGC), only guarantees their right to continue collecting a pension check in the event their company goes bankrupt - it does not guarantees that they will collect the full amount of the pension they were promised by their employer. If Delphi terminates their pension plans and the UAW strikes and takes GM down, the resulting drain on the PBGC would pose a political hot potato that would make the Savings and Loan Crisis of 20 years ago look like a picnic. (Message edited by Mikeg on September 16, 2006) | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 279 Registered: 05-2005 |
funny though, those damn ceos will never worry about retirement or penision, thanks to who? the laborers! | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1436 Registered: 10-2004 |
"I also hope that for the regions sake, that those worker pursue those opportunities HERE." UAW retirees from here and Ohio have been fleeing Michigan and Ohio for decades. Why does anybody believe that they will stay in high-tax states with lousy weather four or five months out of the year? They take their money out of state and afterwards bitch about how bad a time they had when they were "working." (Message edited by LivernoisYard on September 16, 2006) | ||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 274 Registered: 12-2005 |
Yep, in Miss_cleo's world, everything is a zero-sum game - there is only so much wealth to go around and somehow it unfairly gets into the pockets of those "damn CEOs" who, by winning the lottery of life, are allowed to conduct class warfare and exploit their workers (\sarcasm). With such a negative outlook on life and such a total lack of understanding of how the economy and business world really works, it must really suck to be her. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 280 Registered: 05-2005 |
but it doesnt, life is oh so good away from the city crap. Have fun in your cesspool! | ||
Planner_727 Member Username: Planner_727 Post Number: 52 Registered: 07-2006 |
quote: "If you arent in the Auto Industry, I cant put any stock in what you say or observe because you are not hurting or out of a job or taking a pay cut or worrying about keeping your house or feeding your family. " Do you not read the paper? Do you not know anyone outside the auto industry? Do you not read other threads? Sorry for the onslaught of questions, but how can you deflect our remarks because we don't work for Ford? The economy for this whole State sucks. People in every line of work are being laid off. That's right: the downturn of the big 3 effects more than just the auto industry! Everyone, from municipal workers to teachers to layzboy manufacturers to pilots are being canned, downsized, or forced to choose between downsizing their budget or losing thier jobs! I recall at least one airline union agreeing to 29% pay cut. NWA mechanics gambled and striked, and got replaced! No buy-out, no education. Just a letter that told them to take shit out of the garbage and buy a bike to save money now that they are unemployed! This is a rant, but how much more ignorant can someone be!?! The bottom line is, you are not the only ones suffering! And with the buy-outs, education comps, etc, you are actually getting off much easier than countless others! Don't tell anyone else here that they cannot comment on the buy-outs becuase they aren't in the industry and don't know what personal sacrifice is! I never placed blame for the situation at Ford on anyone, hourly or otherwise. That isn't the point. And the salary of the big wig is irrelevant. The bottom line is Ford sells less cars, and needs less people to make those cars. Whether the head guy made 100k or 100 million, the same number of hourly and salaried employees must be laid off. Cutting his pay to save however many hourly workers would be pointless. It would be like putting a Curad bandage on leg that needs to be amputated. I apologize for sounding callous, and for the number of !'s. (Message edited by Planner_727 on September 16, 2006) | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 788 Registered: 11-2003 |
^^^^HI-5 AMEN SPEEK THE TROOF lol | ||
Planner_727 Member Username: Planner_727 Post Number: 54 Registered: 07-2006 |
Even the newspaper supports that rant! Free Press just today says: Feeling Ford's pinch Cuts expected to affect other businesses as customers tighten the belt http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs .dll/article?AID=2006609160341 (Message edited by Planner_727 on September 16, 2006) | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1817 Registered: 07-2004 |
A report on 20/20 or Primetime did a story on the owner of Costco. He takes only a salary of $500,000 a year. The company is doing very well. | ||
Karl Member Username: Karl Post Number: 4044 Registered: 09-2005 |
Nice try, Royce - check the value of the owner's Costco stock: about $140 bizzillion or so - as you said, "The company is doing very well." | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 789 Registered: 11-2003 |
Yeah there are some people who work for a dollar but their stock option is at like 250 million dollars lol... | ||
Salvadordelmundo Member Username: Salvadordelmundo Post Number: 25 Registered: 04-2006 |
Ford and GM might as well take the crapshoot and abrogate the pension plans right now. It'll end up in litigation, probably with the result that the plans get substantially cut down. The other option, as noted above, is to go into bankruptcy and try to dump it on the feds. Car sales are not the main problem. Ford and GM would have to sell an absolutely insane number of cars to fund what are now their unfunded future pension liabilities. People are living longer and using more health care. That's a structural crisis for any company that made such expansive pension promises back when things didn't look so grim. (Message edited by Salvadordelmundo on September 17, 2006) | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 790 Registered: 11-2003 |
Costco.. from Yahoo Finance... Mr. Jeffrey H. Brotman , 64 Co-Founder and Chairman $ 450.00K salary $ 3.83M stock He also owns 2,095,728 share of stock... direct/indirectly do the math. (Message edited by viziondetroit on September 17, 2006) | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 791 Registered: 11-2003 |
This is Ford... Under Bill Ford Mr. William Clay Ford Jr., 48 Chairman, Chief Exec. Officer, Pres, Chief Operating Officer, Chairman of Exec. Operating Committee, Chairman of Fin. Committee and Chairman of Environmental & Public Policy Committee $ 0 Salary $ 2.11M Stock in theory all the money they "saved" by Billy not electing to take a salary could have been put in a pool for the next head honcho... Who knows. | ||
Karl Member Username: Karl Post Number: 4045 Registered: 09-2005 |
Thank you, Viziondetroit. As for Mr Costco and Mr Ford, performance of the stock is the key (though I think Mr Ford doesn't have to worry either way) Each year many business owners roll the dice and lose. Whiney socialists get yipping when businesses thrive and they think they deserve an equal part of the spoils. No risk, please - just lotsa money. Frankly, it amazes me that the Big 3 have done as well as they've done, for as long, and provided excellent lifestyles for so many - only to have their retired workers cast stones at 'em from the north woods - all the while collecting their pensions and using their free/cheap healthcare. Smart workers love it when their companies thrive - including retirees. | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1819 Registered: 07-2004 |
Karl et al., retirees while working had money taken out of their paychecks to go towards their retirement. Their pension is their money. If Ford decided to match their contributions or do whatever is on Ford. Don't blame retirees for their pension packages. Also, can retirees be blamed for living longer than what was anticipated by Ford 30-40 years ago? Can retirees be blamed for the rise in healthcare costs? Given the fact that retirees only receive about a third of what they made as workers, they still have daily expenses that go beyond just healthcare costs. After paying off those expenses there's not a lot left for healthcare needs. Karl et al., are these retirees supposed to just accept death from complications from ailments or diseases they develop? Who do you suggest should pay their healthcare expenses? Surely not them by themselves? | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1440 Registered: 10-2004 |
"Who do you suggest should pay their healthcare expenses? Surely not them by themselves?" What not themselves? They can use their pensions. They can even get a job if they're living so long. Good workers are hard to find most places outside of Ohio and Michigan. But again, how valuable to well-run businesses are vastly overpaid bolters, janitors, and fasteners? (Message edited by LivernoisYard on September 17, 2006) | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1820 Registered: 07-2004 |
Living longer, Livernoisyard, does not mean that you are living healtier or in great shape to take on a job. My father just turned 77 and retired at 70 from Ford, after 44 years. His pension is $33,000 a year(that averages to $2750 a month). My mother has high blood pressure, arthritis, and takes pills for diabetes. My father was just recently dianosed with having emphyzema. They medical ailments have not forced them into the hospital or to make weekly doctor visits, but their ailments could get worst, requiring them to pay for more healthcare. Also, I've watched my father slow down to the point that he can't cut the grass like he used to or do a number of things around the house like he used to. Yet, if my parents were hurting financially, you, Livernoisyard, would expect them to go out and get a job? Well, I just hope that your parents remain healthy, Livernoisyard. I know I would hate to see them forced to work to make ends meet in their golden years and I don't even know them. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 281 Registered: 05-2005 |
can I get an amen? | ||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 279 Registered: 12-2005 |
Whatever happened to the time-honored practice of the elderly being helped out by their family, close friends and private charity? Why do so many supposedly smart people think that the first and best source of assistance is from the government or a business? Who has your best interests at heart? - those who are closest to you, a group of well-meaning, but impersonal, employees/bureaucrats or some business executives, elected union reps or politicians? | ||
Salvadordelmundo Member Username: Salvadordelmundo Post Number: 26 Registered: 04-2006 |
"are these retirees supposed to just accept death from complications from ailments or diseases they develop? Who do you suggest should pay their healthcare expenses? Surely not them by themselves?" Most workers in the private sector don't have pension packages with health care included. How do they get by? Usually through Medicare, private insurance, or personal savings. That's how the US economy works. Auto workers and retirees have been sheltered from those realities for a while now, but reality is beginning to intrude. | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1821 Registered: 07-2004 |
Mikeg, families can't help because most families are trying to take care of their expenses. They can help with the physical assistance, but very few can help their ailing parents with financial assistance. Others balk and national healthcare but countries in Europe provide it to their citizens but we don't. Why? Because drug companies won't stand for it. After oil companies, drug companies are probably the richest paid companies in this country. Yet they get government assistance for reseach, but folks here don't want the government to help its citizens out with their healthcare expenses. Does that seem fair? | ||
Jiminnm Member Username: Jiminnm Post Number: 1086 Registered: 02-2005 |
Mikeg, your statement "Actually, the Federal Govt., through Congress and the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation (PBGC), only guarantees their right to continue collecting a pension check in the event their company goes bankrupt - it does not guarantees that they will collect the full amount of the pension they were promised by their employer" isn't entirely correct. PBGC stands pretty much alone, similar to Social Security, and is funded with payments made by all pension plans (based on number of participants, future liabilities and plan funding status, with penalties for underfunding). So far, no general tax revenues have been used to fund it. The Company's financial status isn't what prompts PBGC payments, it's the financial status of the pension plan, which is a separate legal entity from the company. The reason it frequently comes up in bankruptcy is because those plans (nearly all of which are defined benefit plans) are usually underfunded. The PBGC does not recognize COLA, so pensions with COLA would be reduced to the original calculated value, and PBGC uses real life actuarial tables (plans frequently subsidize early retirement amounts with direct dollars or favorable actuarial calculations) so those who retired prior to age 65 might see reduced benefits. Health care costs are not covered by PBGC. Theoretically, if PBGC runs out of funds, then all payments by them wil be reduced, but I don't see Congress letting that happen. Legislation passed earlier this year increases payments to PBGC by pension plans and shortens the timetable for underfunded plans to fully fund. It might also have the effect of further reducing the number of defined benefit plans and increasing the use of defined contribution plans, which are generally employee managed and much less subject to being underfunded. | ||
Jiminnm Member Username: Jiminnm Post Number: 1087 Registered: 02-2005 |
Royce, my parents are in their early 80s with similar problems and situations to your parents. However, my dad's emphysema is directly attributable to 55 or so years of smoking Pall Malls and my mother's diabetes and high blood pressure can be attributed to her eating habits and a long time lack of exercise. I'm not sure how personal habits should play into the cost equation. By the way, doesn't Medicare cover the vast majority of medical costs, and some drug costs, for those over age 65? I see folks like myself, retired with a ways to go to age 65, at more risk from company changes to health plans for retirees. | ||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 280 Registered: 12-2005 |
Jiminmn, My point is that that the "Guarantee" in "PBGC" is totally based on Congress taking appropriate action to keep the PBGC sufficiently funded if they are inundated by a raft of underfunded terminations. Each year, Congress sets the maximum guaranteed benefits from the PBGC for the year in which a plan is terminated. Pensioners who were promised a larger amount by their employer are SOL. The max. guaranteed benefit is $2323/mo. for a 60 yr. old person whose company terminated their plan this year and immediately begins reciving joint survivor payments from the PBGC. The legislation you cited will definitely drive more companies to defined contribution plans, further reducing the income stream the PBGC needs to stay afloat with out an infusion of general tax revenues from Congress or reducing the guaranteed amount. I can already hear the cries of "no taxpayer funded pension bail-outs!", so the only other means available will be to reduce the maximum guaranteed benefits. | ||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 281 Registered: 12-2005 |
Royce, Perhaps the reason "very few can help their ailing parents with financial assistance" is because they are spending more than they are earning and they assume that others will take care of them in their old age, just as they are relying on others to take care of their parents now. I think that is a very foolish assumption for anyone to make. | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 792 Registered: 11-2003 |
^^^ that my friend is very true.... | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1822 Registered: 07-2004 |
Mikeg, perhaps they're not spending more than they earn. As you witnessed this past summer, the price of gas and other fossil fuels have increased. This past winter saw many people's heating bills double if not triple. In many places property taxes have increased. Mikeg, I don't think many people are purposely spending more than they earn. They don't have a choice. If a bill doubles then that means the money has to come from somewhere else. Maybe it comes from savings or from money set aside for emergencies. Many on this forum are young and don't have children. Raising children isn't cheap, even if you are frugal. Children get sick more than adults so that means more money goes toward healthcare. If a child needs surgery and needs to spend time at home recovering, one parent usually has to stay with them, meaning that they're not bringing in as much money if they were working. The surgery itself probably cost thousands. If they have little or no healthcare then that's an expense that they didn't plan on. It's easy to be single or married with no children. The situation changes with children or ailing parents. Some of you haven't had to deal with these issues. If you did you would probably think and feel differently. (Message edited by royce on September 17, 2006) | ||
Hysteria Member Username: Hysteria Post Number: 1354 Registered: 02-2006 |
Sadly, that's been the American way for the past 25 years. | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 1963 Registered: 12-2004 |
The two basic problems with Schumpeter's theory are that a) the local economy is not always united behind a single company and b) a company's work force, their vendors and respective families isn't always a large enough block of consumers to support said company. To illustrate these points, start with a worker at a paint company. His employer sells paint to Ford, but they also sell to GM, DiamlerChrysler, Volkswagen and Toyota. Is each worker at that paint factory then expected to buy 5 different cars from each of the 5 companies that buy his paint? No, he will likely buy 1 car from 1 of the 5 companies in question. Next, let's look at the folks who actually work at the auto companies instead of at a vendor. Let's say that a worker on Ford's assembly line is so grateful for his job that he runs out and buys a Ford truck as soon as he gets his first paycheck. Let's even say that his siblings, parents and grandparents all buy Ford truck - even though they don't work at Ford. They're just glad that they're family member does. This still wouldn't necessarily support the auto company because people don't buy cars every other week, but workers have to be paid every other week. A company could keep itself afloat for a short period of time by selling to its own workforce and their respective family members and neighbors - but only for a short period of time. Eventually, in order for a company to maintain its profitablity they have to sell their products who have no connection to the company itself; people who simply like the product for what it is - a really good product. Unfortunately, Ford has built its company by selling trucks and SUVs. As gas prices have risen, the demand for their products amoung those crucial consumers (the ones who don't ask for anything but the product itself) dropped and dropped dramatically. Since Ford wasn't able to adopt to said change in the marketplace, we have the situation that you see today. Although, speaking of things that auto executives should have learned in a college econ class, there is also the Law of Supply & Demand - a nifty point of the price for a given commodity increasing when the demand for it rises. Since we've seen a 54% increase in worldwide demand for oil, and the manufactures are not capable of increasing their supply by a proportionate amount, anyone who paid attention in Econ 101 could've predicted a decade ago that we'd see significant prices in gas. (It wasn't that long ago that people we're looking at gasoline at $1.80 per gallon and complaining about how high it was.) It was painfully obvious years ago that the demand for trucks and SUVs was going to plumment. A better management team would have starting adapting their product mix, but the teams at Ford and GM didn't. | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1823 Registered: 07-2004 |
Who honestly saves money with the thought that some of this money will help out ailing parents? Usually people save money for a down payment on a house. Then they save or invest money for their child's college tuition. Then, if possible, people try to save money for emergencies. Rarely do people say that their going to save money to help out ailing parents. Occasionally you hear people say that they're saving money to give their parents a nice trip somewhere. When parents do become ill and need financial help we usually deduct the money from other areas of spending, but there's no nest egg for our parents. | ||
Royce Member Username: Royce Post Number: 1824 Registered: 07-2004 |
Fnemecek, why didn't Ford and GM's management teams adapt? | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1442 Registered: 10-2004 |
Another major reason for sagging truck and SUV sales for the Detroit Three was the fairly recent entry of the Japanese into this final market. Detroit already lost their sedan market to them. But that's Ford's fault to be so unidirectional. Ford could remain as a medium to major truck firm, though, after it downsizes or sells its losing car operations. It says it'll keep its Mercury division but does Wall Street buy that? (Message edited by LivernoisYard on September 17, 2006) | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 120 Registered: 08-2006 |
Fremecek, you are correct that workers and thier families buying cars in of itself is not enough, but it does go a little deeper than that. I know of a local resteraunt owner who was so pissed that his customer's were getting laid off, he bought his first Japenese car after buying Ford's and Chevy's for many years. There's the negative PR angle, and the exploitation of poor people angle; while if local detroiters cannot support a company, how the hell can the Chineese or Mexican Worker that replaces the Detroiter making $100 / month support GM or Ford when they so obviously cannot afford to buy the products they produce for? | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1511 Registered: 12-2003 |
Don't give me this bullshit about elderly. When Unions need to cut costs on the company who are the first ones they cut? The elderly, why becuase they are more worried about the keeping their small voting contingent together. According to the Metro Detroit Dealerships over 75% of their business are employees. Buying cars at cost are not going to provide any new Monies for raises and other benefits they demand. This happens everytime someone gets loses their job, they spout off about management. And always claim management could not succeed without workers. Well guess what, the vice versa holds true as well. It has nothing to do with going to School. It has to do with realizing a lifestyle is over and it has nothing to do with anything other than greed. Car sales are down due to over inflated prices and more competition. That means less jobs to stay a float not more jobs and more money. GM owning more than 50% of the market is over. At least current union officials are starting to see the light, that there is no new money, this is nothe 1950s anymore. The problem is that the members are still in a timewarp in that they think they and their 8% membership really matters on a global scale. | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 793 Registered: 11-2003 |
Quote.... "while if local detroiters cannot support a company, how the hell can the Chineese or Mexican Worker that replaces the Detroiter making $100 / month support GM or Ford when they so obviously cannot afford to buy the products they produce for?" If you pay someone less to the make the product, you don't need the employees to buy as many to make money. If you pay someone $100 a month in Mexico and $4000 a month in the USA... it's lil easier make money on cars. Simple economics. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 286 Registered: 05-2005 |
lol OMG! that is hilarious! Who will be buying the cars? Do you think they'll lower the price of cars seeing as how they are paying less for labor? I mean, they should by your logic lower the price then, cause no one is going to be making enough money to buy them. nah, I bet the extra money you claim they will save will go right to the top cats pockets. | ||
Viziondetroit Member Username: Viziondetroit Post Number: 795 Registered: 11-2003 |
With all the competition out there.. it would be wise to lower the cost of the cars... only time will tell. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 287 Registered: 05-2005 |
they dont do *wise* very well though.... | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1443 Registered: 10-2004 |
Duh! It's not just selling vehicles that people want to buy. But in order to stay in business, they must make money in order to attract capital so they can invest in R&D in order to design and make more, better vehicles in the future. And all at the same time, they must make money at it before they have to sell off their assets in order to stay in business. Saddled with legacy costs as they do, with the UAW in place, it's guaranteed that they cannot stay in business for much longer when their competitors are building better vehicles at cheaper cost structures in place than they do. Just why are Ford and GM dumping the UAW workers otherwise? Especially if the UAW workers believe themselves as being overly important to anybody. It's a done deal for Ford and GM to buy out their inefficiencies and hope for the best. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 288 Registered: 05-2005 |
just curious, what do the ceo's at Honda, Toyota etc make? Is it on par with the big 3? and dont you think part of the projected 20 mil the ceo stands to make, PART of that could be used for R&D? Dont you think its foolish to give one mere man so much money when clearly using part of it for other things would be more benifical? | ||
Oldredfordette Member Username: Oldredfordette Post Number: 488 Registered: 02-2004 |
How much R&D would it have taken since the first oil crisis to implement energy savings vehicles?! This blaming the workers is making me sick. Ford (and GM and Chrysler) made hay when they should be innovating. Now we're paying the price, the region will pay the price and you high horse elitists sneer about auto workers salaries! | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1444 Registered: 10-2004 |
Paying workers $28/hr for a $9/hr job and then throw in another $11,000 annually for health insurance and still muchos kilobuck$ for pensions is a sure-fire road to financial ruin. It's surprising that their demise isn't occurring faster. If the US economy wasn't still booming, Ford and GM would have already filed for bankruptcy, like the others in their industry with less cash in their banks. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 122 Registered: 08-2006 |
I just heard on WWJ, that FORD spends more on R&D than GM or Toyata do, $8 billion / year, you sure couldn't figure that out by the vehicles they produce. It must be because that R&D money is getting sunk into creating highly automated plants that require less, over payed fat and lazy Union Workers. Some companies are so dumb, they deserve to go out of business! | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1513 Registered: 12-2003 |
When you change jobs do you not get a raise, do all workers at Car plants make the same wages. No, as they progress their pay increases. When you want to lure away talent you have to pay for it. Mulally is reciving a 2 million Salary and 7.5 million dollar signing bonus to draw him away from Boeing. The rest of the money is offset the retirement benefits he forfeited at Boeing. BTW, $2 million is a normal salary for a company that large. That is it normal is just scary however a janitor making 70k at GM is just a benefit of that money.
Where to begin, an energy efficent automobile is not efficient at the moment in performance nor in price or cost. You can babble on all you want about energy but who is buying those HEMIs and Big ass trucks. People talk a good game but when push comes to shove they turtle. You also realize that it is cheaper than ever to own and operate a car and it has become more expensive ot operate cheaper alternatives. There are two big hurdles energy efficent cars have to overcome, Performance and cost. And at this point 20 Billion in R&D is not going to solve that. | ||
Mikeg Member Username: Mikeg Post Number: 287 Registered: 12-2005 |
No one is blaming the workers, the problem is that with global competition, GM and Ford can no longer set the pricing on their vehicles to cover their costs. The lowest-cost producers (ie, those who are the most efficient, not necessarily those with the lowest labor costs) are the ones who now set the pricing. The highest-cost producers will die unless they can become more efficient and reduce their strucutral costs. GM, Ford & Chrysler made a huge mistake when they agreed to the "jobs bank", since that changed their labor costs from a variable to a fixed (structural) cost. They also have huge legacy costs. The low-cost producers have minimal legacy costs and they retain the ability to match their hourly employment to their production levels. As far as only needing to make a product that the public "must have" in order to set things right, even if Ford or GM introduces a highly successful new product, if it competes in a segment where the low-cost producers have competetive products, Ford or GM cannot sell them for any more than their competition does. | ||
_sj_ Member Username: _sj_ Post Number: 1516 Registered: 12-2003 |
Once again here is that entitlement mentatility. It is not workers vs execs, UAW vs Ford, et al. It is company v company for survival and right now the UAW and Detroit are getting their asses handed to them from the foreign counterparts. The US will never supply 100% health care, they can not place tariffs on cars or any of the other schemes that people come up with. | ||
Danny Member Username: Danny Post Number: 4998 Registered: 02-2004 |
This is truly the apocalypse of Henry Ford's dream. Swallowed up by negative symptoms of the Capitalist competitive market. | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 289 Registered: 05-2005 |
Paying workers $28/hr for a $9/hr job who are YOU to say what their job is worth, only a dollar or so more than a McDonalds worker? are you serious? I think the ceos are insanely over paid, and why some of you here think they are not TRUELY makes NO sense to me You also realize that it is cheaper than ever to own and operate a car you belive 40,000 for a truck and 2.00+ a gallon of gas is cheaper than ever? holy moly! | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1446 Registered: 10-2004 |
"Paying workers $28/hr for a $9/hr job" The best way to ascertain this vaildity of this would be to replace them with competent applicants and let the free market determine their real worth in much the same way as an auction determines "value." Perhaps, the pay level might even be lower than $9/hr in such an event. After all, the vast majority of these jobs are not really any different than during the 1920s when untrained and unschoolded immigrants were the norm. I was, perhaps, being generous at $9/hr... | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 291 Registered: 05-2005 |
After all, the vast majority of these jobs are not really any different than during the 1920s when untrained and unschoolded immigrants were the norm. and this clearly shows me you have not been in a factory nor done any of the work if you believe it hasnt changed in 80 years.....thats like saying the cars are the same as they were 80 years ago. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 124 Registered: 08-2006 |
Well, if we are gonna go around slashing peoples wages to reflect what they are actually worth; Why stop at the production worker, how about the Engineer making 80K, let's knock him down to 40K seems fair, or how about people like my uncle who was receiving about $300K / yr before bonuses as a director at GM, knock him down to 100K, Guys like Mulally, ehhh lets give him 500K, and we'll call that good. | ||
Livernoisyard Member Username: Livernoisyard Post Number: 1447 Registered: 10-2004 |
Engineers get fired; their pay scales vary with their numbers and needs in their industry. So their market value is more readily known. However, the UAW with its one-size-fits-all mentality shields their rank and file members from reality a good share of the time. But the playing field is leveling from being in the UAW's favor and, being greedy, they want it returned. (Message edited by LivernoisYard on September 18, 2006) | ||
Miss_cleo Member Username: Miss_cleo Post Number: 293 Registered: 05-2005 |
I dont call expecting a livng wage greedy, I do call ceos with more money they can spend and getting more on top of that greedy | ||
Wash_man Member Username: Wash_man Post Number: 119 Registered: 05-2006 |
I'd like to say something positive about this mess for a change. (Well sort of positive.) One big reason that cars (foreign or domestic) don't sell as well anymore is because they are much better than they used to be. I remember when I was a kid in the '60's and '70's, my parents used to finance their car for three years and hope that it lasted until it was paid for. And my Dad took very good care of his vehicles. Getting 100K miles on a car was almost unheard of and if a car did have that many miles on it, it surely looked like crap. Now, because of consumer demand, competition, whatever, the cars last much longer and there isn't a need to buy one as often. Am I crazy thinking like this? I have a 2000 Jeep that looks almost as good as the day I bought it and it runs/drives fine. It has 105K miles. That was unheard of 20-30 years ago. It's great that the company (from CEO to janitor) are doing a better job of producing better cars, but I think it hurt sales overall. My idea is NOT to return to the previous level of quality, I am just stating that the products are better, last longer, and don't need to be replaced as often, hence less sales. | ||
Fnemecek Member Username: Fnemecek Post Number: 1966 Registered: 12-2004 |
I don't know. The next time I bump into them, I'll be sure to ask.
Laying off your employees definately carries a negative PR angle, especially when those jobs are being outsourced to a foreign country. However, Ford's "Way Forward" does not move American jobs overseas. They are simply closing American automotive plants; not opening a new one in Mexico or China. It's a straight forward reduction in their manufacturing capacity. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 125 Registered: 08-2006 |
True! Cars today are more dependable, and less interesting then they used to be. Meaning a need to go to the dealer every three years is gone. The main reason I have had to chime in on this thread was ever since time immemorial;, The production worker has been scapegoated for the ills of the industry, and more oftern then not, they are not educated as well as the people who are scapegoating them, and therefore cannot adequatley defend them selves from these unfair attacks. I'm sure someone will say that the reason cars were of such poor quality in the old days was the fact that the workers were all drunk or on drugs, or absent. And completely forget to mention that management would frequently impose un realistic targets and would routinely speed up line rates, making it impossible to correctly do ones job. | ||
Karl Member Username: Karl Post Number: 4060 Registered: 09-2005 |
Cambrian - Speeding up the line or drunk workers didn't cause millions of cars to rust prematurely, transmissions to fail, etc. Most premature failures are/were due to poor design, not poor workmanship. Upper management isn't necessarily the best educated of the bunch - there was only one Henry Ford, and millions of Ford workers. There is only one Bill Gates, and thousands under him. Each had meager beginnings, but had ideas and continued to work hard & perfect them. Those few get the credit - and the money. How they choose to spend it (including who they hire for management & workers in a free society) is up to them. | ||
Cambrian Member Username: Cambrian Post Number: 127 Registered: 08-2006 |
The rust out of older cars did not have to do with the designs as much as the items new cars have (galvanized metals and protective polymers) were not being used on older cars because those advancements had not been discovered yet. Also municipalities did not start using road salts until the late 30s. |
