Discuss Detroit » Archives - Beginning January 2007 » Unions and the future of Michigan, pro and con. « Previous Next »
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 428
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 4:53 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I have established this thread because another thread about the office shooting got hijacked (partly my fault) and turned into a debate about labor unions and their role in the future of our economic health.
Top of pageBottom of page

Mayor_sekou
Member
Username: Mayor_sekou

Post Number: 670
Registered: 09-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 4:59 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Not only are you anti-muslim, you're anti- union too huh?
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 429
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 5:00 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

To summarize my view, I contend the following:

1. Unions have not proven to be the key to job security or job growth.

2. Unions have contributed to the problems of the US auto industry becoming non-competitive. This is not to excuse management either.

3. The state government employees that are unionized have contributed to inefficiencies and waste of taxpayer dollars as well as poor performance.

4. The presence of unions has discouraged new businesses and non-domestic automakers from opening facilities here.

There's a start...

(Message edited by perfectgentleman on April 09, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 430
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 5:05 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Mayor_sekou -

No, I am not anti-Muslim, I am pro-American and only have a problem with those Muslims who are in this country while supporting regimes and groups who seek to exterminate the Jews and bring down this country. If you would like to start a thread about that, I can provide you with examples and facts when I have the time.

(Message edited by perfectgentleman on April 09, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Johnlodge
Member
Username: Johnlodge

Post Number: 386
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 5:07 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I know this is a touchy subject, and I probably don't know as much about it as I should, but here is an observation I've had:

It seems like unions prevent people from doing all they are able for their company. At my job, I sometimes wear several different hats in a day. I pitch in wherever I can to help. I don't sit in my one slot and do my one specific job all day long, and then refuse to do anything that is not that job. Other people here do the same. We do everything it takes to get the job done every day. It seems like unions get in the way of this sort of mentality.

(Message edited by johnlodge on April 09, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Buzzman0077
Member
Username: Buzzman0077

Post Number: 38
Registered: 11-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 5:17 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I have always been torn about my feelings for unions. My mother is in the teacher's union and I have seen how the union can protect good teachers in bad situations. On the other hand, at times it also protects bad teachers how should not be in the field.

I think that in the business sense there was a time in our history when unions were desperately needed but that time has passed for now. I'm not saying there may never be a need for them again but right now they hinder the progress and growth of many companies and people in the area.
Top of pageBottom of page

Lilpup
Member
Username: Lilpup

Post Number: 2002
Registered: 06-2004
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 5:22 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I'm sure Circuit City's employees wished they had a union after they all got canned for "being paid too much".
Top of pageBottom of page

Cambrian
Member
Username: Cambrian

Post Number: 938
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 5:29 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

And that's it, you can't trust your boss to pay you a fair wage with benefits. It's the proverbial kid watching the cookie jar. Given the chance, the 45 yo will be tossed out every time in favor of the 24 yo with a Masters. A union seeks to protect workers from these injustices.
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 431
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 5:38 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Circuit City is having trouble competing with Best Buy, from April 7th, 2007:

"The companies' financial results are telling. Best Buy, the nation's No. 1 electronics retailer, this week posted an 18 percent rise in fourth-quarter profits despite a bruising environment of flat-panel TV price drops. No. 2 Circuit City, on the other hand, swung to a loss in the quarter and is shaving its total work force by 8 percent, laying off 3,400 of its most experienced (and expensive) clerks."

http://www.cio-today.com/story .xhtml?story_id=021000D7R0H6

So lets say the employees were in a union and the company was forced to keep them on, for now. How would this allow them to be more competitive against their competition? It wouldn't and they would only fall further behind, which in the end would make matters worse.

I am not saying it was necessarily a great idea to do this to their employees because it will harm morale and that could adversely affect customer service by not having as many experienced people. The presence of a union would not improve their standing in the market however, which is what the root cause of the problem is.

(Message edited by perfectgentleman on April 09, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Firstandten
Member
Username: Firstandten

Post Number: 85
Registered: 05-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 5:38 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I think we need to get beyond the pro-union, anti-union stances people are taking and look at what's happening. In a monopoly or a oligopoly (the big 3) situation as long as the wages are the same among companies unions have created a economic middle class that may have never developed otherwise. As you get closer to pure competition ( example : non-union auto transplants or charter schools ) the union work rules and wages simply makes them uncompetitive. One either has to hope that the union can organize the transplants and the charter schools. Or there is some artificial barrier put in place to halt the competition. Failing either of those events happening, folks in Michigan are going to need to change their mindsets and economic expectations.
Top of pageBottom of page

Queensfinest
Member
Username: Queensfinest

Post Number: 82
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 5:43 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I like to think unions can be good and bad.

Municipal workers consisting of transit and sanitation employees usually justify the need for their unions. Usually. These people are ultimately serving the public and not involved with the whole concept of the bottom line being of utmost importance.

I think in a corporate setting though, such as the auto industry, we've seen a great example of what can and does go wrong with unions and how they can help to bring down certain companies. Ultimately the idea of a union of workers employed by a corporation geared towards profit maximization is a recipe for disaster. The two ideas are incompatible for the most part in a competitive global economy.
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 432
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 5:45 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Firstandten - Good points. From what I can see right now, being one of the only states in this country who is betting that unions make a big comeback doesn't seem to be working.

I am all for doing a better job keeping our trading partners honest and if they play games with currency manipulation or put large tariffs on our exports we should crack down hard on them. I also see value in economic patriotism among the citizens in this country. We should all "Buy American" whenever possible.
Top of pageBottom of page

Buyamerican
Member
Username: Buyamerican

Post Number: 59
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 5:51 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Anyone here who isn't pro union needs to remember that the following quote is what employers follow in the State of Michigan...

"any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all," and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work"

No job is protected like a union job, like it or not. Unions do more good for employees than bad.
Top of pageBottom of page

Plymouthres
Member
Username: Plymouthres

Post Number: 73
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 5:52 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Okay, Perfect, here we go. This will take a long time, so sit back, read and THEN reply. This should be fun!!

1.)Starting with your first post from the other thread(#418), where are the links supporting the facts you quoted? This should be easy.
I'm presuming that Mackinaw wa being somewhat facetious when saying this? To say "your idiocy exposed is a bit rough, isn't it? Obviously never picked for the debate team?

2.) Post #420-any links to support your assertions-er,opinions? Unemployment skyrocketing? Some facts would be nice here.

3.)Post #421-again, where's the "substance", in the form of some believable links? Way to slam the Asians (all of them). Sheesh! You are correct that we all need to keep our skills fresh. Also, there never was any job security in the Unions! For forty years this was true, but after 9-11 the whole world changed and even the unions couldn't keep up. Aside from that, they need to share in the responsibility-they "helped" to make it that way!

4.)Post #423-links to the "data you have viewed"?

5.)Post #424-Apparently, you did not read my post fully, or chose to ignore the whole content. I did reference all 3 big car companies, and if you would like, I can reference many, many people who long ago got out of "the business" and are now doing something else. Perhaps because they will be flesh and blood people replying to your assertions, you won't believe them either? Also, as the people dismissed were part of these companies internal figures and will certainly make these companies look really bad (mis-managed), I seriously doubt that you'll find the figures published anywhere. I thought that I said that, too.

6.) Posts #425, 426- No, I am not, although my facts come from people in the auto industry only. My guess would be there are many more examples. Again, no links=no facts. State your sources, please. Real people you know, affected as you claim, chiming in here, will do. Proof that I am a thinking, rational person? I'm TALKING to you while your screaming, aren't I? I am also trying to get educated, not pissed on. Your last sentence in post #426 is true though (only my opinion!)

7.)Post #427- No you don't. Opinions/assertions are not fact. Again, no links to substantiate your view.

Let's see, that's 10 posts from you in that thread and not one link. Not a very good average.

I'm waiting for your proof. Please educate me.
Top of pageBottom of page

Queensfinest
Member
Username: Queensfinest

Post Number: 84
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 6:27 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Everything is great as long as youre in a uaw member and can show up to work maybe three days a week and take advantage in any conceivable way of your employer while they head towards financial ruin?

I know people still working for the auto companies and I'm sure youre all familiar with the type of severely outdated backwoods behavior that the unions encourage.

All the while plenty of young students that I know, who actually have ambition to better their place in the world have to deal with the fact that their medicaid insurance (what they had to resort to) runs out after a year. Thanks in large part to your precious unions the health care system is this country might never be fixed or redesigned.

Don't get me wrong, my immigrant grandfather fought for a union at Chrysler Co and the reasons behind that fight were justified in that day and age. The types of work conditions that justified union formation were remedied a long long time ago as well in this country.

Auto workers have made far too much income for what they do for too long now and as you see, the joyride is close to over for them. Your modern-day unions have taken a once brilliant concept of solidarity and workers rights and basically shit all over it while also ruining a once thriving economic region.

Anywhere else outside of Michigan it was accepted a long time ago that education is of utmost importance for securing employment. People work
hard for their degrees because the rest of the country works as a cutthroat competitive system.

What has developed in Michigan is a culture full of workers who are so complacent that they drop out of high-school and then plan on having a career as a third generation auto worker. If your family has been here more than two generations and your still in a factory then something needs to change.

Why should this behavior be rewarded in one area of the country when the rest of us have to work hard for a better way of life in each successive generation?
Top of pageBottom of page

Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus

Post Number: 879
Registered: 06-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 6:41 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

My feeling is that unions are a good idea in concept but not such a good idea in practice...

I worked for a union shop right out of high school in 1998 for about 8 months, and, having nothing to compare it to, I thought it was ok at the time...but I soon learned otherwise

I left that job and started working for a privately owned non-union business which turned out to be WAY, WAY better...I've been at my current job for 8 years now and I can say that the pay, benefits, and treatment of us as employees is FAR superior to what I experienced at the the union shop

jmtc
Top of pageBottom of page

Lilpup
Member
Username: Lilpup

Post Number: 2004
Registered: 06-2004
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 6:55 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Anyone have the actual data on the education level of line workers? The ones I personally know have attended college.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jtw
Member
Username: Jtw

Post Number: 124
Registered: 06-2005
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 7:28 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

attending "college" means nothing. hell, GRADUATING "college" means nothing.

is that philosophy degree from community college going to help you program a computer or design an engine? simply put, some skills are more valuable than others, and having a degree is not (and should not) be a guarantor of work.

anyone who's been to college will tell you that not everyone who's in college ought to be in college.
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 433
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 7:52 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Plymouthres

My response:

1. http://www.city-data.com for stats on murder.

2. As we are talking about a hypothetical situation, meaning all jobs would be guaranteed to be permanent, it is hard to know what the actual unemployment rate would be. It would defy every principle of economics however to deny that many would never be hired if the prospective employer knew that every person they hired would be permanent. This issue has been at play in Europe where it is much harder to let go of your employees, they have had a higher unemployment rate than the US for years as the following chart shows:


un


3. I know this because I have worked in that particular industry for years. I have experienced it first hand and know many others who have as well. For example, the launch of Windows Vista was delayed due to much of the codebase that was done in India not being of sufficient quality. I know this from people I know within Microsoft. Here is a link on the subject for your reference: http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/4695286.html

4. http://www.milmi.org/admin/uploadedPublications/940_micaetmm.htm for Michigan Unemployment data.

5. You are making the same point I did, an assumption was made that could not be backed up because the data is probably not available.

6, It was you who provided no data for your assertion, you based it on your personal experience and you mentioned Ford. I merely stated that there are no hard numbers on this that I have seen so how would I provide a link to something I am stating doesn't exist? The fact that being in a union does not save your job is clear. Here is a nice chart for you:


ua


7. You have not read all of my threads so you have no idea what I do. I base most of my statements on facts and usually provide a link or if not it is taken directly from the source material as I have demonstrated here. There are left-wingers who NEVER post any factual data to support their positions, their posts seem to be based on their personal feelings which I guess works for them.

Now that I have responded to you, maybe you can provide me with all of the facts and figures you promised that support YOUR position and would challenge the assertions I have made at the beginning of this thread.

(Message edited by perfectgentleman on April 09, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Thejesus
Member
Username: Thejesus

Post Number: 882
Registered: 06-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 7:54 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

jtw, I hear you...

many people in college are also under the false impression that simply BEING in college so you can put it on your resume is the purpose of college, instead of understanding that the purpose is actually learning useful skills so you can contribute something valuable to an organization...THAT is what leads to a secure, well-paying job...not a meaningless line on a resume

I can venture a guess who these "college educated" line workers are...anyone who makes a living bolting something onto something does not have a college education in the true sense of the term, and would likely fail miserably in any other line of work...
Top of pageBottom of page

Plymouthres
Member
Username: Plymouthres

Post Number: 75
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 7:59 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Good point, Jtw. I have found that experience is where it is at. A degree only means you are good at theory to me. Application is the key, and that is gained through experience. The degree does mean that you can be taught, however, They just need the "experience" to get there!!

Perfect-

Don't bust your ba$$s tonight providing links. Tomorrow or the next day will be fine as I have been at this stupid computer since early this morning and I'm getting off to go to spend some time with the little lady, so take your time and give me good proof so I can post my stuff back! I gave a lot out and expect equal back!

All of the others have good points and I agree that unions have had their heyday. They are still necessary as management does not know all, but thinks they do. The union, therefore, is still a necessity to keep them in line!!
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 434
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 8:05 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Plymouthres -

The ball is in your court brother, I have provided my response above. You haven't given anything out yet except for nitpicking my posts. Have fun with your lady though. In the meantime here is a chart that might help clarify matters in terms of educational achievement, unemployment and salaries. I am no academic snob, I don't have college degree myself...


o
Top of pageBottom of page

Plymouthres
Member
Username: Plymouthres

Post Number: 78
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 8:15 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Awesome response! I can work with that, and yes, you provided links. Looks like I have some work to do...thanks for the reprieve! By the way, I wasn't nitpicking, merely engaging you in a discussion!

Look for something more "credible" from me tomorrow or early Wednesday! By the way, I just went back for my degree at the age of 45 (two years ago) so I don't have a degree yet either, but in an effort to stay ahead of the curve, I've gone back for the paper. Should finish in June!

I have, however, worked in the design business for 27 years and know seven different design software's, all the windows stuff plus I can still accomplish the drawing things when and if we have a power outage manually! I can also make change for a dollar with a cash register or calculator!
Top of pageBottom of page

Fnemecek
Member
Username: Fnemecek

Post Number: 2437
Registered: 12-2004
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 8:51 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

To summarize my view, I contend the following:

1. Unions have not proven to be the key to job security or job growth.


No one ever claimed that they were either of those things. Labor unions exist to ensure that workers are treated fairly in the workplace and have a safe work environment.
quote:

2. Unions have contributed to the problems of the US auto industry becoming non-competitive. This is not to excuse management either.


Yes, because the UAW is responsible for all of the designs that Ford, GM and Chrysler have produced in the past 3 decades.
quote:

3. The state government employees that are unionized have contributed to inefficiencies and waste of taxpayer dollars as well as poor performance.


You're kidding right? Government bureaucracies, be they unionize or not, are inherently inefficient. If government is efficient, it isn't working.
quote:

4. The presence of unions has discouraged new businesses and non-domestic automakers from opening facilities here.


Some of the states with the highest levels of unionization also have the lowest levels of unemployment. Michigan's economic problems lie in some incredibly stupid decisions made in Lansing, not in labor unions.
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 442
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 9:10 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Fnemecek -

1. Of course unions promised their members increased job security! I heard it myself when I worked in the auto industry many times. It was a major part of many negotiations. As far as safe, I guess no work environment because you have been laid off is pretty safe.

2. It is not just a "design" problem, it is a quality problem, a cost and efficiency problem and the ability to respond to the market quickly. If a foreign auto maker like Honda can put over $1000 more into the actual vehicle that the big 3 cannot because of legacy costs, that is a tremendous advantage.

3. Government is incompetent but having unions makes matters worse. Can we say that schools are better because of the teachers unions? No.

4. The automotive business, which has grown in the USA despite our troubles, has moved to non-union, right-to-work states. As this business has been the foundation of our states economy and we have all of these trained workers, why aren't we getting Honda, Toyota and Nissan plants? Any guesses?
Top of pageBottom of page

Oldredfordette
Member
Username: Oldredfordette

Post Number: 1465
Registered: 02-2004
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 9:33 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Because companies want to avoid the inevitable costs of doing business in order to maximize profits to enrich CEO's and uninvolved shareholders, that's why. Unionized companies aren't the only ones being outsourced.
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 446
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 9:36 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Oldredfordette -
The UAW has lost 1 million workers, the folks down south have good paying jobs working in non-union plants, which would you prefer?
Top of pageBottom of page

Cambrian
Member
Username: Cambrian

Post Number: 941
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 10:49 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

People down south are paid a premium to keep unions out. However it's just a matter of time before corporate greed and the boss thumb machine drive workers in southern states to vote unions in:


Discuss Detroit » DISCUSS DETROIT! » Toyota Workers in Kentucky.

Sorry if the link above is not active. It's from our recent discussions, last on 4/3/07
Top of pageBottom of page

Cambrian
Member
Username: Cambrian

Post Number: 942
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 10:51 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

https://www.atdetroit.net/forum/mes sages/5/98660.html?1175639039
Top of pageBottom of page

Cambrian
Member
Username: Cambrian

Post Number: 943
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 10:54 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

https://www.atdetroit.net/forum/mes sages/91697/96904.html
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2992
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 10:55 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

However it's just a matter of time before corporate greed and the boss thumb machine drive workers in southern states to vote unions in:


Usually only one in three hourly workers down south vote for unionization. What leads you to believe that 50% (still 50% against, BTW) will vote in a union?

Probably, even then if a union becomes certified about 50% may still decide not to join the newly certified union. Just because fifty percent want something doesn't mean the the other fifty percent must go along.
Top of pageBottom of page

River_rat
Member
Username: River_rat

Post Number: 262
Registered: 02-2006
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 10:58 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

A lot of conflicting data and angry rhetoric, magical thought and wishful thinking presented in this thread.

Unions are irrelevant at this time so save all the hot air and specious statistics.

Whatever becomes of Chrysler will be doomed by a union heritage. Ford will suffer until a foreign auto maker partner can be found to transfer the employment base to right to work state.

Like all things, corporations, organizations, animals and ideas have a finite life span; the life span of the unions has reached the end. The job market has, and will continue to, leave union based jurisdictions (read Detroit and Michigan) for non-union locales. The UAW may remain strong here with a few thousand retirees hanging on, but the day has come and gone.

If Detroit & Michigan have any hope for the future it will require a massive sea change in the behavior of labor (workers); failing this, we will watch the continuing decline of our area.

Sorry to be so blunt.
Top of pageBottom of page

Gmich99
Member
Username: Gmich99

Post Number: 176
Registered: 11-2005
Posted on Monday, April 09, 2007 - 11:33 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Surprise, Perfectgentleman is a supporter of FOX News and decries unions! Would Perfectgentleman believe a news headline reading "Do Unions Support the Terrorist" was fair and balanced?

It is a gigantic leap of faith to associate the decline of domestic auto sales in the US to the organized labor on the line. We wouldn’t be discussing the auto industry if it wasn’t for the decline of the domestic auto share. So what went wrong with Ford Motor Company and General Motors? Was it that they paid their workers a developed world middle class salary and benefits, or was it that their share of the market has decreased remarkably, while foreign shares increased?

It is amazing that to realize that health costs are causing the higher paid engineers to engineer blah autos, and the disproportionately high paid executives to all but abandon the car market for the nearly exclusive domestic sales of SUVs and large trucks, whose sales are so tied to the cost of cheap gasoline at the pump. Surely the unions must be to blame for these poor engineering and management issues. If only the auto companies in the US had the advantages of the European and Japanese auto companies where organized labor have positions mandated by law on some of the company boards, pay much higher taxes, are subject to more stringent and enforced environmental laws, and are burdened by high labor costs.

The answer is obvious, lower labor costs! Slave labor is cheaper than paid labor; would that work for the auto industry? It might be argued that there would be no incentive for uncompensated labor to work harder. But the present compensated workers, apparently, do not work hard enough, probably the fault of unions. Compensated non-unionized workers probably work harder. From experiences at fast food restaurants and Walmart, I doubt the validity of this claim.

Is the best solution to lower the standard of living in Michigan to that of the South, or worse yet, to the standards of our neighbor to the South, or even worse still, to the standard of living in China in order to be competitive in the global market? Is it wise for a developed country to develop a working class on-par with the labor costs of under developed countries that cannot, or can barely afford the products they manufacture? The trend of a shrinking middle class, a growing lower class, and an exploding combined wealth of the upper class is a result, in part, of shifting our well-paying manufacturing jobs without restrictions to under developed countries, with a minority relocating to the cheaper Southern US.

It appears that the blame game of pointing fingers at the unions, which is being played over the mainstream media sources and largely ignoring the moves at the top, both within the corporations making the strategic decisions and within a government that enables consequence-free outsourcing of US manufacturing jobs, works in favor of those whose interests seem increasingly opposed to the interests of the companies. While our middle class continues to shrink the upper class continues to grow in wealth and influence. In a world where compensation packages for exiting a company are many times greater than the actual salary, and compensation increases even as the company posts record losses, it is ironic that the public points at the unions with their dwindling membership and influence as the principle reason for sales declines and posted profit losses.

(Message edited by gmich99 on April 10, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 451
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 12:11 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Gmich99 -
If you think paying a hi-lo driver $70-80 grand per year, a lavish benefits package, a retirement plan most of the rest of us wouldn't get and health care for life for himself and his spouse has nothing to do with why a company is not competitive in the market, than you know nothing about economics. All this for a job anyone can learn in a week. No offense to hi-lo drivers, I was one myself when I was a young lad, making $8.00 per hour in a non-union shop.

Nobody denies that poor decisions within management hasn't played a role too, they agreed with these ridiculous demands, albeit much of it under the threat of a strike. Some of the products were executed poorly as well.

The big 3 has tried numerous times to go head-to-head with the Japanese in the compact and sub-compact segments but they lose because the low margins at that level force them to cut corners. Their costs due to high compensation and the inefficiency of the work rules imposed by unions prevent them from sinking more into the vehicle. Their competitors do not have those problems to that degree.

When a company has to literally compensate workers for doing nothing or pay out tens of millions in buyouts for people who will no longer be producing how can they realistically compete?

Here is food for thought:

GM's bitter pill

Automaker spends billions on drugs for aging workers, retirees

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20060927/L IFESTYLE03/609270383/1148

Quote:

"General Motors will pay about $16,000 for drugs this year for Mae and her husband, GM retiree Ralph Gumbinger, the equivalent of giving the couple a new Chevrolet Malibu."

And:

"The average worker, retiree and family member whose medical bills are paid by GM gets 15 prescriptions per year -- 50 percent more than the national average. The automaker pays a whopping $1.9 billion for prescription medicine alone."

And:

"She knows that 60 percent of the antibiotics GM pays for are a waste of money because they're prescribed for ailments that don't respond to antibiotics. She knows GM spends $17 million a year on sexual dysfunction pills when a national study showed that two-thirds of men ages 18-45 using the drugs don't need them."

(Message edited by perfectgentleman on April 10, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Lilpup
Member
Username: Lilpup

Post Number: 2005
Registered: 06-2004
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 12:15 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

sounds like a great argument for universal health care

Btw, what happens to the insurance and medical industries if the Big 3 dump all their healthcare obligations and put employees and retirees on their own? Those industries would buckle, too.
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 452
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 12:25 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Lilpup -

Yeah, the government does such a great job and is so efficient with everything else, why not put them in charge of our health care too? What would make you believe that introducing another incompetent layer of bureaucracy into the equation would help?

The retired union folks will need to participate financially in their health care at a greater rate. Maybe they will think twice about buying the Viagra when they know they have to kick in their own money.

Quote from union retiree:
"We walked the streets to get these benefits," said Turek, 74. "We earned it."

That about sums it up I guess.

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pb cs.dll/article?AID=/20060927/L IFESTYLE03/609270387/1148
Top of pageBottom of page

Lilpup
Member
Username: Lilpup

Post Number: 2006
Registered: 06-2004
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 1:02 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

to be honest, at this point, I'd rather have incompetence than greed

the former is correctable, the latter is not



(Message edited by lilpup on April 10, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 455
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 1:07 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Lilpup -
The government agencies that would be involved in administering universal health care have been incompetent for decades, can't see how giving them even more to do is going to cure that but whatever.
Top of pageBottom of page

56packman
Member
Username: 56packman

Post Number: 1214
Registered: 12-2005
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 1:10 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I've been a working adult for 30 years, never once worked in a situation where I would be required to join a union. If I felt I was being unfairly treated or paid I had the option of quitting and going to work someplace where the boss, owners, conditions and pay were better. No one was keeping me from quitting, I wasn't shackled to my bench or desk. Some people have mental shackles on, can't envision working anyplace else. Shit happens, companies grow with certain trends and have to shrink with others. My first job out of school ended after 14-1/2 years, the company downsized by getting rid of all the long-time employees who were getting the best benefits. Was it the worse thing that could have happened?--NO, it was the best thing in my case. I'm sure there were some in my "graduating class" who were devastated, but life goes on. If an individual is so easy a target for serial-dismissal without the backing of a collective bargaining unit, how could they survive in the world more of us have worked in then not?
We're going to have to wait about 30 more ears until the "cradle to grave" set dies off and that mentality goes with them.
I work for a company now where routine matters of building maintenance and upkeep are represented by a large, well known (locally) union. Everything is a fucking game, they make changing light bulbs into brain surgery, will start a job then inexplicably leave. You can't ask why and get a straight answer, it's as though your building is being serviced by the Mafia. I'm at will, and may get the big go-home one day. And I'll work somewhere else, and won't be destitute.

be your own man, be self reliant.

I've said it here before, I’ll say it again--the Unions did themselves in when they started buying non-union (and imported)goods for themselves (household goods, etc.) just like the rest of America that has to have a steady stream of new shit coming into their homes (ohhhh-look hon, this one’s CHEAPER), and last years _________out on the curb every Tuesday night. Gone are the days when they would collectively boycott a local (or national) business because they didn't hire their own. In those days you spoke to the business community in the only language they understand--MONEY. You had your (hundreds of thousands) members boycott and picket a business that wouldn't let you in, and guess what? their money faucet was shut off and you had their undivided attention. The non-union community wouldn't cross your lines in sympathy. About the time your elected officials all became corrupt they decided it was just easier to bite the hand that feeds them and strike the plants they represent, causing horrifically expensive stoppages for management.

The only thing that is constant is change.
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 456
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 1:27 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

56packman -
Thanks for that post, I laughed my ass off. I worked at Ford through a sound reinforcement contractor part time and saw much the same. The union guys who were in the charge of the phones were supposed to man the public address system at large meetings, but they didn't know how to do it so they would hire us.

Anyway, they still had the union guy show up and do nothing while we did the work, just so they could obey the work rules. He would normally hang around for a half hour or so and then wander off somewhere.

I also remember going down to Cobo for a trade show and having to wait around for the union boys to load our booth in and set it up. Eventually they would get tired of us telling them how to do everything and we would end up doing it ourselves after wasting a couple of hours.

I also remember as a young lad while working at a UAW Tier 1 supplier I made the huge mistake of retrieving a Fed Ex package from the receiving dock myself, which was 50 feet from my office, as I needed to handle something for a customer first thing in the morning.

The union filed a grievance against me and told me I had to wait for the shipping boys to deliver it to my office, which was usually around 2:00 in the afternoon which of course defeats the purpose of Fed Ex!

I know GM guys to this day that punch in and take off for hours on end, getting paid for fucking off. Meanwhile the company is tanking and they all get self-righteous when they are criticized. Enough for now...
Top of pageBottom of page

Gmich99
Member
Username: Gmich99

Post Number: 177
Registered: 11-2005
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 3:34 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Perpetuating the myth that most UAW workers are pulling away close to six-figures makes a good sound byte that hurts American workers. “General Motors Corp., which lost $10.6 billion in 2005 and didn't issue profit-sharing checks last year, paid its production workers an average of $27 an hour . . . . That would be a base of about $54,000 a year, based on a 2,000-hour work year.” (The Detroit Free Press). According to the Detroit Free Press, the average UAW worker also makes $27 an hour. But this ignores the cost of additional compensation. Domestic automakers must pay directly out-of-pocket healthcare benefits; a point made regularly. This point suggests that foreign autos do not pay for worker healthcare or additional compensation. Foreign autos pay the healthcare of worker’s at home through similar schemes as in the US, or through high taxes supporting universal healthcare programs. Foreign autos also provide generous pensions to their labor forces at home.
The gap between rich and poor continues to increase. The middle class becomes smaller as the lower class becomes larger, and the upper class increase in wealth. “From 2003 to 2004, the average incomes of the bottom 99 percent of households grew by less than 3 percent, after adjusting for inflation. In contrast, the average incomes of the top one percent of households experienced a jump of almost 17 percent, after adjusting for inflation. (Census data show that real median income fell between 2003 and 2004 . . . [T]he 3 percent rise among the bottom 99 percent seems to largely reflect gains by households in the top quintile of the income spectrum . . . . The top one percent of households garnered 36 percent of the income gains in 2004.” (Economist’s View). This trend reflects a problem greater than the outsourcing within the auto industry. Workers in the US are being compensated at an increasingly lower rate than executives. If India, China, and Latin America can provide cheaper manufacturing labor, than certainly populations over 1 billion can provide cheaper executives.
Japanese automakers incur similar labor costs as domestic automakers. “Japanese carmakers in the U.S. match the UAW's pay -- and its benefits, too.” (BussinessWeek). “[T]he Japanese Big Three now employ about 100,000 Americans, paying roughly the same salaries and healthcare costs as the Big Three pay.” (US News & World Report).
The Japanese have found it cheaper to build cars in America than they can in Japan. It is a disturbing trend to watch other developed countries expand and shift labor to the US as our domestic manufacturing is doing in under developed counties.

Governmental policies have an effect on the manufacturing industry. Countries like Japan and China keep their currencies artificially low to make importing their manufactured goods cheaper. “Japan keeps the yen artificially low, making Japanese imports cheaper in the United States.” (US World & News Report). Further, “Protectionist tariffs on imported steel make it costlier to build cars here.” (US World & News Report). The plight of the US auto industry is not merely the result of poor business decisions, but also a failure of the US government to adjust policy protecting and benefiting the US worker.

Foreign rivals cost more than domestic autos. A quick scroll through the prices many comparable foreign autos when compared to those of domestics reveal higher costs for purchasing foreign autos. According to the Economist’s View, “GM and Ford can't design vehicles that Americans want to pay "Toyota money" for. And this is not a matter of bad bets on product concepts or dumb engineers. It's a matter of Toyota's better engineering system, using simple concepts like chief engineers with real responsibility for products, concurrent and simultaneous engineering practices, and sophisticated knowledge capture methods.” (Economist’s View). Yet despite the myth that domestic autos are unable to compete at home because of lower priced foreign autos, the reality is that consumers are paying a premium to drive foreign autos.

Big 3 executive compensation increases as companies post loses and UAW take pay cuts. “Dieter Zetsche, the head of DaimlerChrysler . . . last year received salary, benefits and bonuses worth about $6.7 million in U.S. dollars at today's exchange rates and $3.6 million in so-called phantom shares . . . Chrysler CEO Tom LaSorda received nearly $5.2 million in total compensation, including a $1.1-million annual bonus, plus $2 million worth of phantom shares -- even though Chrysler lost $1.5 billion last year . . . . General Motors Corp. Chairman Rick Wagoner's total compensation in 2005 was $5.5 million, including a base salary of $2.2 million . . . . Ford Motor Co. has announced it will pay its new president and CEO Alan Mulally a $2-million annual salary, a $7.5-million hiring bonus and $11 million to offset forfeited awards that he would have received at Boeing Co.” (The Detroit Free Press).

Many in the public blame labor for management shortfalls. GM and Ford have been unable to squeeze lower costs and higher quality out of domestic auto parts manufactures. “Toyota, by contrast, is getting brilliant results and lower prices from American suppliers like Delphi while also giving suppliers adequate profit margins. How? By relentlessly analyzing every step in their shared design and production process to take out the waste and put in the quality.” (Economist’s View). GM and Ford continue to maintain an unprofitable range of product brands. GM maintains Chevy, Pontiac, Buick, Cadillac, Saab, GMC, and Hummer; Ford maintains Mercury, Lincoln, Mazda, Jaguar, Volvo, Range Rover, and a stake in Aston Martin, while companies like Toyota, Honda, Volkswagen, and BMW manage only a few brands each.
Domestic manufactures produce quality autos. According to J.D. Power the Ford Fusion and Mercury Milan made the top 5 midsize for initial quality and 4 of the top 5 midsize for reliability were domestics, including the number 1 Buick Century. (J.D. Power). “Brands with the fewest defects and malfunctions include BMW, Chrysler, Hyundai, Lexus, Porsche and Toyota. Brands with the fewest design problems include GMC, Hyundai, Jaguar, Lexus, Nissan and Porsche.” (J.D. Power). Absent from this list is Mercedes, Volkswagen, and Honda. All the while these domestic cars were designed and manufactured under union labor.

Union manufactured domestic autos that are stylish, and or well-built are profitable and sell. The Cadillac CTS, Pontiac Solstice/Saturn Sky, the Chrysler 300, Ford Fusion, and Saturn Aura have all proven to be profitable domestic autos. GM recently revamped nearly the entire Cadillac lineup and reversed years of declining sales. Apparently UAW labor costs were not enough to prevent the redesigning of an entire luxury brand and make those vehicles, which are cheaper than their foreign rivals, profitable.

But if we are to ease the healthcare burden of our US companies, what are we to do? It has been suggested that the workers are to pay for their healthcare. But if the UAW is also expected to take lower wages, is that a realistic expectation. It has been suggested that the government provide universal healthcare and provide a minimum level of care for our citizens like most of the developed world, but that too has been struck down. “Yeah, the government does such a great job and is so efficient with everything else; why not put them in charge of our health care too? What would make you believe that introducing another incompetent layer of bureaucracy into the equation would help?” (Perfectgentleman). It would seem that no one wants to pay for the healthcare and that we should all go wanting in the name of global competitiveness. The position that we should all get by on the bare minimum seems to smack in the face of James Madison’s idea of government’s ultimate end being the happiness of its citizens. European countries and their companies have been able to get by fine paying higher taxes for an increased standard of living and pleasures such as universal healthcare and education. Scandinavia has been able to accomplish that with no national debt. It is curious the world’s greatest economic power cannot offer similar, especially to benefit the economic burden on our largest companies like General Motors.

Perhaps union laborers in the US must give up some of the benefits they previously enjoyed. In fact they have already given up many of those benefits, including lowered salaries, healthcare premiums, pension payouts, and most importantly, many of their jobs. Organized labor is also at its lowest levels since the early 20th century, and most of the labor in the US is not unionized, which makes our economic woes difficult to lie in the lap of unions. But aren’t unions a necessary check? We prize our political system of checks and balances. It certainly isn’t a popular idea to dissolve the Supreme Court, Congress, or the Office of the President in the name of economic efficiency. The US could save a lot of money not paying the salaries of Congress, or increase legislative efficiency by removing the President’s veto so that bills could pass more quickly. But we value our three branches of government as necessary checks on competing powers. Corporations and unions also are competing interests. Corporations have a duty to their profit and unions have a duty to their worker’s compensation. If one of our three branches were removed it would increase the power of the others. To remove unions would lead to unbridled power of the owner of the laborer. To give unions absolute power would cripple our industry. This balancing act between corporations and unions sways with economic demands of the time, and the balance is swinging as those economic demands change.

The present problem arises when that balance is disrupted. The balance is being disrupted by the outsourcing of that labor in the name of free trade. The court of public opinion has been turned against our own laborers and enabled the consequence-free outsourcing of American jobs overseas and the redistribution of those jobs to desperate regions within the US. What value are these corporations when the majority of the jobs with their pay and benefits reside in other countries? The US is outsourcing its standard of living, which our government should be protecting. Must the citizens of the US be reduced to accepting the motto “any job is better than no job” before accepting government assistance in the form of universal healthcare and protectionalist tariffs as an absolute necessary? When the cost of labor in currently poor countries like China, India, and Mexico become too expensive and the labor is shifted to the poorest continent, Africa, what will be left of the US workforce, will be still be passing tax cuts to the richest minority of the population with the expectation that we too will be rich tomorrow and don’t want to be taxed once we strike it rich, or will even those executive positions, which give hope of tomorrow’s riches, be stationed in the high rises of Beijing, or Dubai? But then again, things like that don’t happen in America. “MANAMA/HOUSTON (Reuters) - U.S. oil services firm Halliburton Co. is moving its headquarters and chief executive to Dubai . . .” (Reuters, 12 March 2007).

(Message edited by gmich99 on April 10, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Mthouston
Member
Username: Mthouston

Post Number: 818
Registered: 01-2006
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 6:08 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

What is interesting is while UAW membership is rapidly declining, several other union's membership have increased. Many of these increases have taken place in "right to work States"

Check out the LIUNA or SEIU.
Top of pageBottom of page

Fnemecek
Member
Username: Fnemecek

Post Number: 2438
Registered: 12-2004
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 9:47 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

2. It is not just a "design" problem, it is a quality problem, a cost and efficiency problem and the ability to respond to the market quickly. If a foreign auto maker like Honda can put over $1000 more into the actual vehicle that the big 3 cannot because of legacy costs, that is a tremendous advantage.


No, the legacy costs simply make the company more profitable on a per vehicle sold basis. If a company is making products that consumers aren't interested in, legacy costs could be at zero and the company would still lose money.
quote:

4. The automotive business, which has grown in the USA despite our troubles, has moved to non-union, right-to-work states. As this business has been the foundation of our states economy and we have all of these trained workers, why aren't we getting Honda, Toyota and Nissan plants? Any guesses?


Toyota operates factories in Indiana, Kentucky and West Virginia. Honda operates in Ohio, California and Indiana.

None of those states are Right to Work states.

SOURCES:
http://www.nrtw.org/rtws.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H onda#United_States
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T oyota#Manufacturing_facilities
Top of pageBottom of page

Mrjoshua
Member
Username: Mrjoshua

Post Number: 1291
Registered: 03-2005
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 10:09 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Public Schools Lack a Competitive Spirit
April 9, 2007; Page A11
The Wall Street Journal, letter to the editor

Brendan Miniter's description of "how school choice was defeated in South Carolina" ("Cross Country: A Day Late," op-ed, March 31) perfectly describes the power created by a combination of teacher unions and politicians they help elect to office. What gets lost is what's best for the kids. In this case, it seems, the paranoid worries about the impact of losing students to schools of choice has outweighed possible benefits that might, just might, happen for 200,000 kids in South Carolina.





There is no apparent competitive spirit among the public school establishment types that is leading them to say what I would have: "Go ahead with school choice and I'll prove you wrong. Just tell me what I need to do and watch what happens. I'll change, if needed, and soon you will wish you had had left your kids in my school."

I would not worry about some lean times while my public school made adjustments. I'd tighten my belt, suck up my pride, take two deep breaths and get to work. I, while teaching for 35 years, fully recognized that the union, the Michigan Education Association, could not have cared less about whether I was a good teacher or not. Its only concern was that I not have more than one prep period per day, did not exceed more than the contracted student numbers per class, that I did not do anything the contract prohibited, that I was paid the same as the teacher down the hall regardless of merit, that teaching and other positions were guaranteed regardless, that as many grievances be filed as possible, and, oh boy, that dues were such that the upper level union employees could be paid better than any contracted teacher in a local school.

Instead, we have this perpetual paranoid promotion of the idea that public schools will decline because of competition. And unionists and unions really do have something to fear, I guess, because if that paranoia dissipates, the teachers union loses its reason for existence: the endless promotion of teacher jobs at union pay rates that support the South Carolina Education Association and the National Education Association infrastructure through union dues. They can't get along without them.

Notice that student education concerns through my subject matter delivery skills was not mentioned once. Unions don't care. Obviously, neither do South Carolina politicians.

Ken Feneley
Clare, Mich.
Top of pageBottom of page

_sj_
Member
Username: _sj_

Post Number: 1784
Registered: 12-2003
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 10:37 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Circuit City wishes they had a union. Go ask all those Farmer Jack employees how much the union helped them.

LilPup, those stats from GM do not make an argument for national health care they prove why we will never have one.

The reason unions are have a con status is because those same unionites that demand these protections and wages do not want to pay those prices themselves. We still want that $0.99 cup of coffee while expecting a raise.

We bitch about prices, but prices in this state are inflated due to those high wages. You can not have it both ways.

There was a time when hiring a union member for work meant you were getting the cream of the crop. Now you get the bottom of the barrel.
Top of pageBottom of page

Vas
Member
Username: Vas

Post Number: 689
Registered: 01-2004
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 11:13 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Asking if union is pro or con is like asking if corporations are pro or con.

There are bad ones, good ones, but they are something here to stay because workers need more power then they are granted.
Top of pageBottom of page

Irish_mafia
Member
Username: Irish_mafia

Post Number: 863
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 1:29 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Union bad.

Right to Work State good
Top of pageBottom of page

Warrenite84
Member
Username: Warrenite84

Post Number: 74
Registered: 01-2007
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 3:41 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I feel companies would do best if they spread their allegiance equally between stock holders, customers, and employees. Each of these should benefit equally.

If the unions disappeared, do you think the Japanese/German transplants would retain their pay and benefits? Absolutely not.
Why would there be rumblings in Toyota's Georgetown facility if leaked memos didn't say so?

Poor product design and style hurt sales as much as legacy costs, yet you don't see head honchos get the boot when products don't sell. Watch Chrysler products drop in sales when the slab-sided look-alikes hit the market. I hope I'm wrong.
Top of pageBottom of page

Oldredfordette
Member
Username: Oldredfordette

Post Number: 1488
Registered: 02-2004
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 3:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Long sentences bad.

Simplistic ones good.
Top of pageBottom of page

_sj_
Member
Username: _sj_

Post Number: 1786
Registered: 12-2003
Posted on Tuesday, April 10, 2007 - 4:10 pm:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Poor product design and style hurt sales as much as legacy costs, yet you don't see head honchos get the boot when products don't sell. Watch Chrysler products drop in sales when the slab-sided look-alikes hit the market. I hope I'm wrong.



It is a lot more complicated than that. And by the way pay closer attention, turn-over in those ranks are pretty common place.
Top of pageBottom of page

Warrenite84
Member
Username: Warrenite84

Post Number: 75
Registered: 01-2007
Posted on Wednesday, April 11, 2007 - 1:14 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Bean counters rarely have a sense of style.
Top of pageBottom of page

Plymouthres
Member
Username: Plymouthres

Post Number: 80
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Wednesday, April 11, 2007 - 9:31 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Perfect-

I apologize for not responding yet, but, in the midst of doing my "homework", I found out that my sister's mother-in-law passed and we ended-up in Georgia yesterday! I ask only for a temporary reprieve, however, and I will answer back this weekend. I apologize for the delay, but I'm trying to gather the necessary facts to continue our discussion, as I don't want to provide anything but credible responses and I just haven't had the time! I just didn't want you to think that I bailed on you! I'll be back......

By the way, from the responses posted here, it looks as though it was a good idea to have started this thread. Many, many good opinions/facts that I really never considered!
Top of pageBottom of page

Perfectgentleman
Member
Username: Perfectgentleman

Post Number: 468
Registered: 03-2006
Posted on Wednesday, April 11, 2007 - 9:46 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Plymouthres -
Don't bother if you don't have the time, family matters should take precedence.
Top of pageBottom of page

Plymouthres
Member
Username: Plymouthres

Post Number: 82
Registered: 02-2007
Posted on Wednesday, April 11, 2007 - 10:08 am:   Edit PostDelete Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Perfect-

Thanks, but I didn't want to be a weenie! This just totally took me by surprise, and coupled with the job search, set me back a bit! As I said, I'll get to it as soon as possible! I enjoy the discourse, and I've learned a lot already. Thanks for understanding! By the way, do you ever get down to the FSC gatherings? I went last week, and I'm going to try to go this week (Lord knows I could use it this week! Thursday night 8:0pm at the Buzz Bar). You are certain to enjoy yourself, put some faces to the madness, and I'll even buy the first round for ya!!

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.