Posted on 08/07/2007 1:43:37 AM PDT by bruinbirdman
As of 2003, GM had 339,000 retirees and Toyota had 65.
Those numbers will change as retirees die, the auto companies downsize retiree benefits and Toyota’s workforce ages and retires. ~But first the damage will get more severe.
The difference is simply that GM is an American company with a long presence and Toyota is a newcomer with fewer liabilities.
Sorry, attributed to:
http://www.industryweek.com/ReadArticle.aspx?ArticleID=1331
Chrysler is in about the same shape.
First, kill all the unions......
I guess CEOs are like NBA head coaches. No matter haw bad you are, and how many times you get fired, there will always be another job down the road.
Perhaps you can add NFL and MLB to that list! Dennis Green comes to mind...wonder who he'll coach next.
“Chrysler cannot wish away either of these, regardless of its owners, or CEO’s.”
They can. They can cut pensions if a certain financial loss threshold is reached. That is in the contract from the past.
All they have to do is build better cars at a better price.
Join the club. I bought my last Chrysler 10 years ago.
At Lebanon Rd. and Andrew Jackson Highway here in the Nashville area there is a Lowes on one side and a Home Depot on the other.
Five years ago I bought a water heater at Lowes and went across the street to get two pipe nipples that Home Depot carried and Lowes couldn’t sell me.
But, I'm not hoping very much.
What a stupid move. Eager to hear what Jim Cramer says....
Seven thousand off of list price.
I think that has been Lowe’s strategy: look for orange buildings and build within sight of them. Makes store location easy!
Which brings up an important point. The auto industry (US) has operated much like the US government - make promises that they cannot possibly afford/tie up future funds and obligations. Why has the US auto industry made such promises - the union. The unions have outlived their useful and constructive roll by about 60 years. When unions were about actual worker safety/working conditions - they were quite instrumental in bringing up standards in US manufacturing. But we taxpayers now fund an agency of the federal government to take care of that (OSHA). Now, the unions are about getting all the pay and benefits they can squeeze out of the employers - even if that means cutting their own throat. Here is what it boils down to - Toyota, Nissan, and other overseas companies building plants in the US choose "right to work" states for a reason. And while the Japanese plants have operated under a "no layoffs" plan their entire time in the US (they do also hire temporary workers - as does other companies like Remington Arms), they have kept the promises and continue to make huge profits. While the big 2 have had many layoffs. The benefits and pay, though maybe not quite as plumb/golden as the big 3, are quite good at the Japanese factories. As I posted at a previous time on the same subject - IF the big 3 were to decide to work together to bust the Union, they could. If all three decide that they are going to set the conditions of work, the pay scale, the benefits packages - all based upon what they can actually afford - maybe (God forbid) tie in benefits and bonuses with actual profits and quality.... IF the Union says no, then shut them down. At this point, it is difficult to imagine that it would hurt the already bleeding ledger. IF GM/Ford/Chrysler are to stay in business, they must be run like a business. That means operating in a manner that makes a profit. They cannot continue in the red forever. if the union decides to play hardball, then they should be willing to face layoffs or even complete loss of jobs. And it may come to this - how much does it cost to build and open an auto manufacturing plant in a right-to-work state? A billion dollars? How much is GM or the other makers bleeding due to inane benefits and union demands? I realize that training a whole new workforce would also be extremely expensive- but the current model is NOT WORKING. Without change, and SOON, the only US made cars will be by foreign companies (like Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Hyundai, etc.)
At one time long ago when I worked there, Chrysler was known best for their engineering. Quality has always been in question even when I was with Dodge. A Nephew who is a garage mechanic advises me now that their quality is not desireable. Regarding union muscle. Years ago when at another auto company I asked the Director of Labor Relations if he thought the union would strike if we didn’t give them more fans for an alleged health and safety issue. His response answered the problem at hand. “Do you think we’d let them strike.? They then got lots of extra fans. By the way that settlement only cost money. It was the principle issues that hurt us the most, and those involved work practices. Glad to help in anyway I can.
How is it that I can get to where you are just when you’re there????
Tell me more. I could listen to this for the rest of my life.
yeah, i could.
I agree. Unfortunately, its illegal, and the perps would go to jail. The union can get together to pit one company against the other, and that's entirely legal. But if the companies try it, they violate the law. Such is the legacy of FDR. This is not to exonerate decades of mismanagement by company bosses (I'm one of them, retired), but it does complicate the current strategy.
But the loophole would be if the the companies just choose to not bow down to the unions. It would not require an actual “conspiracy”, just that the management decides to do what is best financially for the companies...
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.