Posted on 11/05/2009 8:49:30 AM PST by GOP_Lady
The news from Dearborn is sunny, except for the auto maker's labor relations.
A year ago, Ford Motor Co. steered clear of the auto industry's version of the "public option." You know, a government-funded bankruptcy. Maybe the decision wasn't entirely altruistic. Plan B, as in bankruptcy, would have ended more than a century of Ford family control.
Whatever the motives, Ford chose a private solution for regaining its corporate health, and today the patient is walking without a government crutch. Last week Consumer Reports gave the company quality ratings comparable to those of Honda and Toyota. On Monday, Ford reported its second consecutive quarterly profit—and more impressively, a swing from a $7.7 billion cash burn a year earlier to positive cash flow of $1.3 billion in the just-ended third quarter, helped by but not due to Washington's cash for clunkers program. The company gained a percentage of market share in the first 10 months of this year, no easy feat in an ultra-competitive market.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Getting rid of Matt Millen was still the best move the family has made in recent years.
Much depends on the Auto Workers Union. If they see that their fellow members at Government Motors are doing OK, even though they aren’t selling any cars, thanks to Obama’s largesse, then they may keep pushing back at Ford instead of cutting a rational deal.
And a plant in Dearborn? Home of Somali Muslim terrorists and dysfunctional gangs? That can’t be too easy, either. Because they need good workers who take pride in their job, if they’re going to continue competing with the American/Japanese companies.
Ford still makes good pickups, and the guys around here in Vermont seem to drive them more or less equally with Toyotas. I suspect that few people are going to be buying their cars and trucks from GM.
All I have to say to the UAW is “Loraine Assembly”........a monument to the union’s stupidity...
The money line in the article:
“All this begs a fundamental, and uncomfortable, question. Can a UAW-represented car company compete effectively, long term, with its nonunion competitors?”
The answer to that is in the article itself, and the answer is clearly “NO.”
Ford did the right thing by staying away from the government money and UAW control last year. But that was only a half measure and so long as the UAW builds Fords, the UAW will do everything they can to force Ford to accept UAW control, just like Government Motors and Obama Motors.
For Ford to make this turnaround permanent, they have to close all UAW plants and move south to right-to-work states. Otherwise, this is just Ford’s “Indian Summer” before their winter sets in.
BUT in the end they will lose.
GM and Chrysler wiped out all their debts and liabilities. They are backed up with endless government money. They are backed up with endless government bailouts and endless government support by interfering with all competition (including Ford).
They all have the same union costs. They all have the same pension costs.
The math does not lie.
I think the UAW’s purpose is to drive Ford into bankruptcy and government ownership, ensuring the WH a “level playing field” and UAW stock ownership....
hh
The news from Dearborn is sunny, except for the auto maker’s labor relations....................... Labor = UAW, so what else is new? Holding up production because of a job qualification? Keep it up Unions, then wonder why all the production jobs go outside the country and why other working folks have to buy cheaper imports.
That’s why I’ve been telling everyone to watch their backs here...the gov’t will NOT let this success go unpunished.
We absolutely will not buy a GM or Chrysler---and I really like the new Camaro. But I would consider a Ford.
Perhaps.
But for now, if I buy American, it’ll be a Ford: no government motors for us.
There was a turbocharged Thunderbird in 1974? I am skeptical.
However, I had a friend with a restored early 70s T-Bird and it was an awesome machine. I think the hood was about 18 feet long.
My turbo T-bird had Pirelli tires and handled like a dream, and had kick-butt power, even though it was a FOUR-cylinder.
Absolutely.
Very well said.
Maybe they don't have that debt and those liabilties anymore, but if they can't sell enough cars, they won't have the income to pay their workers, they won't be able to make many more cars, then the companies will eventually go out of business.
You might be having problems because it was built in the 80s. 1983 I believe.
I corrected this. It was a mis-type. It’s 1984, and no, you can’t find them anywhere. Not Edmonds, not auto auctions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.