Posted on 03/01/2007 8:09:17 AM PST by lowbuck
Airbus announced its long-awaited restructuring proposals yesterday, and French and German workers responded swiftly by staging a walkout.
The company plans to cut 10,000 jobs, outsource three factories and sell or close a further three. Despite a record order book worth €200 billion (£135 billion), the European aircraft manufacturer has been struggling with the weak dollar and the high costs of its inefficient structure.
Louis Gallois, the chief executive of Airbus, set out yesterday how he intended to simplify the company’s pan-European operations to free money and engineering talent to build the company’s next aircraft, the €10 billion A350. The restructuring proposals, called Power 8, are highly controversial and politicians across the Continent are wading into the debate.
Mr Gallois attacked the political interference and the bickering between governments over the company’s future, calling the situation a “poison”.
Trade unions were unhappy with the restructuring and have threatened industrial action. German and French workers walked off the job yesterday in protest at the redundancies.
Power 8 calls for Airbus to outsource more work to suppliers. The company takes only about 25 per cent of its components from third parties, compared with 80 per cent for Boeing and 75 per cent for Embraer. The A350 will source about half from third parties, and Airbus has started the process of outsourcing by putting three of its component factories up for sale: Saint-Nazaire, in France, and Varel and Laupheim, in Germany. If no buyer is found, these factories are likely to close. Airbus will seek joint-venture partners for three other factories: Filton, near Bristol, Meaulte, in France, and Nordenham, in Germany.
Mr Gallois said that these factories could become wholly owned by the joint-venture partner. By outsourcing these facilities, he said, Airbus would be able to spread its investment costs and risk.
Airbus was also trimming its 55,000strong workforce, with 3,700 jobs to go in Germany, 3,200 in France, 1,600 in the UK, 400 in Spain and 1,100 in Toulouse, the corporate headquarters. About half of these jobs entail contractors; the other half will be offered early retirement.
Airbus was also attempting to streamline its Europe-wide operations. In future it will assemble one aircraft at one site, rather than the present system of carrying out construction in Hamburg and Toulouse. For example, the A350 will be built in France, but Germany will get the A320 when it is revamped in about eight years.
Airbus will also streamline where the key parts of its aircraft are built, halving the number of core factories – or centres of excellence – to four. Germany will be responsible for the fuselages, Spain the tails, Britain the wings and France the interiors and electrical systems.
Joint-venture partners sought
Airbus is seeking joint-venture partners to invest in its Filton factory. Filton, near Bristol, is one of three plants that the aircraft manufacturer is outsourcing as part of cost-cutting measures.
As The Times reported last week, four potential partners are understood to have been approached: GKN, Finmeccanica, Saab and Spirit AeroSystems. There had been concerns that Filton would be one of three factories Airbus has decided to sell or close.
Instead, the company will outsource about 50 per cent of operations at Filton, which is where Concorde was built in the 1970s. The joint-venture partner could then be allowed to buy out the facility in the future.
Airbus will retain wing design work at Filton, while its partner will make wing components. The wings themselves will be built at Broughton, North Wales.
Wow..we were the first world economic power huh? That's impressive.
"China lacks the vision, the freedom of ingenuity, and the cultural stamina to keep up when push comes to shove. 5000 years of history and they have expanded to nowhere. They have over a dozen angry geographical neighbors, including India. I would not want to be a Chinese strategist or a banker as we've seen with the markets the last few days. The odds on them in reality are long to do anything of substance in the near future. They are the west's servants -always have been and always will be."
Reminds me of something someone wrote a long time ago:
'France and Russia are the great powers. In between are the Germans. The Germans can beat up on other Germans, but no-one else. The French and the Russians rarely fight each other, but both beat up upon the Germans. Germany is the battleground upon which the great powers fight each other.' - a paraphrase of Leo Tolstoy
Times change. Divided, subject, weak, conquered vassal people...the Germans...can, with industrialization, turn into something else altogether...the Germans.
Yes. The United States became the world's number one economic power in 1880.
I suspect it's a by product of China's loss of face, i.e. the treaties Western Powers imposed on them following the Boxer Rebellion.
The 'West' is fortunate that right now it's focused on Japan due to the misconduct of the Japanese Army during WWII.
But in time their grievance's will work there way around to the rest of the civilized world.
Then it's 'Cady bar the door' time.
It's not Vicomte13 'paranoia' that's causing China to upgrade their armed forces. China looks on the rest of the world as savages and now it's their time to take control. And they have chosen Fascism as the most efficient model to carry out their goals.
I'm certain the leadership of China has looked at Hitler's rise to power for a model. When a certain third rate Austrian house painter came into power, Germany was treaty limited to a 100,000 man Army and no Air Force, and a Navy smaller than our Coast Guard. Within eight years ...?
Work to the rule, work slowdown, or strike.
Yeah, the US is so short sighted they'll never see it coming. We are so weak and they are so strong because they've got a billion people blah, blah, blah. They believe they are so superior blah, blah. Same drivel and drek for several years now.
The typical Asian seeks one thing above all - Wealth.
The typical American seeks one thing above all - Wealth.
I don't think we have anything to worry about. Yes they are building up their military. Once again so is India. Same status as China, same population. They are threats to each other. Doom and Gloomers such as yourself are the same regardless of the subject, whether it be no gold standard, real estate, or rivets on DC3's, it's always the end of the world.
Naw, we'll whip'em like a rented mule.
I'm just acknowledging there will come a time when China seeks their 'place in the sun'.
They've seen other empires come and go, now it's their turn.
And why not?
They're a a hard working industrious - intelligent people. More than willing to take a couple of hundred million casualties. They look at us and Western Europe and see nearly hundred million people living on the dole who won't - can't work. While in China there are 800+ million who would love to have that life style and would even be willing to work for it.
Just predicting the tide of history
(And yes, it should still be a requirement that an A&P lic'd mechanic should be able to re-skin a Stearmen Yellow Peril ;^)
Oh yes their so industrious and smart, but those are the ones that come to the US in shipping containers, whereas the Choges stay behind.
Yes
Good.
I agree with you completely.
We should erect an equalization tarriff.
It's socialist, but so what.
Unrestricted free market capitalism, without nationalistic concerns, means precisely what I said: transfer of all manufacturing to the cheapest labor market.
That's great for business.
It sucks for America. And France.
I am American and French, both.
And I prefer seeing America and France wins.
That means not being an unrestricted free market capitalist.
>I will answer your questions if you will answer mine:<
Questions
1. Should a war occur between China and the US who do you propose that we hire to build our military aircraft?
2.Should we also have China build our nuclear submarines, warships and military aircraft?
3.Seriously, what country are you a citizen of?
1. United States aircraft manufacturers should be building our military and civilian aircraft. We should be erecting equalization tarriffs to overcome the advantage of the "China Price" and thereby protect American manufacturing capacity from being shipped off to China.
2. No. The United States should build all of that. We should also build our own cars, and make our own textiles and clothing. Our unemployment rate is higher than the official statistics indicate, is artificially deflated by the number of people in prison (who should, by the way, be put to labor), and is exacerbated by both the export of the manufacturing and tech sector to India, and the import of illegal, cheap Mexican labor. We should slap on tarriffs to stop the former practices, close the border and impose punitive fines on companies that use illegal labor to recoup the entirety of the profit gained by those companies from the price differential between illegal labor and the standard fair market rate for American labor to do the job.
Both 1 and 2 will be inefficient, nationalist and socialist intrusions into the capitalist free market economy, and that's fine. Capitalism, efficiency, and the rapidity of technological advance are not of the highest importance. We can accept less profits, reduced inefficiency, and longer wait times for new technologies. National integrity, national security and full employment are of much greater concern.
3. I say the above because I am an American citizen and a nationalist.
However, speaking from the reference of a pure economic capitalist, shipping all jobs to India and China is the way to maximize corporate profits. It is my view that, although maximizing corporate profits and return to stockholders is indeed the business of corporations, it is not the business of the country, and indeed it is the duty of the country to use law to impose those very socialistic inefficiencies on companies: labor laws, health and welfare standards, equalization tarriffs, and non-deductibility for US tax purposes of foreign invested capital (in certain non-allied countries) in order to protect the American manufacturing base.
What I wrote, that you were reacting to, was pure unbridled free market, Ayn Randian capitalism.
And pure unbridled free market Ayn Randian capitalism SUCKS.
What we need is nationalistic, socialistic, regulated capitalism. The realization that profit is a good thing, but that profit cannot be MAXIMIZED, because maximizing profit requires us to abandon national security and social welfare protections, and social welfare and national security are more important than profit maximization.
I agree that "National integrity, national security and full employment are of much greater concern."
The problem I see with "shipping all jobs to India and China is the way to maximize corporate profits." is that you would have a nation of men and women sitting on their butts. People need a continious challenge to be able to feel self worth, self respect.
I am not much in favor of welfare for anyone who is capable of working. If you are too sick or phyiscally unable that is a different story.
I much prefer a life with minimal government interference not the socialistic system you refer to.
Another Look at Outsourcing (Vanity)
Whither the Economy?(Vanity)
(Vanity) A Falling Tide Grounds All Boats
(Vanity) The New Colonialism, or, Out of One, Many
(Vanity) Immigration Policies, or, Half-A-Glass
(Vanity) As the World Turns, or The Wild, Wild, East
(Vanity) As the World Turns, Part II, or Back to the Future
(Vanity) As the World Turns, Part III, or, The Year of Lipstick on a Pig
(Vanity) As the World Turns, Part IV, or The New Dealhi
Cheers!
Imposing tarriffs in order to protect jobs IS socialism.
It's using law to directly control outcomes in the labor market, in order to protect income flows to invididuals.
The other forms of "socialism" (I am speaking in an FR context here) are OSHA standards and maximum work weeks before overtime. Once again, that's law interfering with business, and it ain't minimalist, but OSHA is the REASON we don't have thousands dying in the mines every year anymore. Safety and health protections are EXPENSIVE and BURDENSOME. They cut into bottom lines, and companies won't do them properly unless government coerces them by law. Companies never have, and never well. It's a self-imposed burden. They won't do it. Safety rules HAVE to come from the government and be backed by enforcement. It's just the nature of people that they won't really DO certain things that we need them to do for everybody's safety, if the government doesn't bear down on them.
Imposing tarriffs in order to protect jobs IS socialism.
I had never looked at it that way but I think you are correct.
Nope. Socialism cannot be reorganized, it must be completely renounced. They are still infected with the disease.
Fuzzy thinking. American exceptionalism doesn't boil down to protectionism.
Did America have high protective tarriffs in the 19th Century, during the great American economic explosion? Yes or no.
Did America ignore patent theft by American manufacturers of European inventions during the great American economic explosion in the 19th Century? Yes or no.
That's not American "exceptionalism" at all.
It's plain old government protectionism and piracy, just like India and China are using today to become the dominant economic powers of this century. Demography is destiny.
There is nothing particularly exceptional about these aspects of the American economic experience.
1. Protectionists have no idea how competition really works.
2. Protectionists have no real esteem for the capitalist system or the American worker and his culture.
Other than that it's just great.
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.