GM lay-offs.....
Originally Posted by ULTIMATEORANGESS
thing is GM is going in the ******* because of poor leadership and awareness of what customers want.
they can cut everything including killing the union and it wont save them if they cant sell cars.
they need to start concentrating on what made them great.
a quality vehicle that people can depend on and good service after the purchase and not forget them when its time to buy again.
they can cut everything including killing the union and it wont save them if they cant sell cars.
they need to start concentrating on what made them great.
a quality vehicle that people can depend on and good service after the purchase and not forget them when its time to buy again.
Originally Posted by ULTIMATEORANGESS
as long as they pay CEOs overseas wages then i have no problems with moving jobs overseas but that would be fair and corp. arent fair thats why unions will always exist.
Launching!
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
From: Pawcatuck, CT
Originally Posted by ULTIMATEORANGESS
thing is GM is going in the ******* because of poor leadership and awareness of what customers want.
they can cut everything including killing the union and it wont save them if they cant sell cars.
they need to start concentrating on what made them great.
a quality vehicle that people can depend on and good service after the purchase and not forget them when its time to buy again.
they can cut everything including killing the union and it wont save them if they cant sell cars.
they need to start concentrating on what made them great.
a quality vehicle that people can depend on and good service after the purchase and not forget them when its time to buy again.
It adds up. To a lot. And it has a serious effect on the quality and design of the automobiles that come forth afterward. If GM had the exact same labor cost per employee as Honda (as an example,) they could produce a car with the same (or better) quality and features as the Accord on the same scale.
Union worker baggage is a large reason why cars like the base Impala and the old Grand Am weren't all that great.
Mind you, I'm not saying that upper management is innocent, another large chunk of the failure if you ask me was corporate decisions from the entire late 70s to mid 90s which lost a whole ton of consumer interest and backing, but that has recently gotten better and so have the cars. It takes time to win back customers. The fact that the UAW has GM's ***** in a vice grip isn't helping turn anything around, it's only making their situation worse.
(Going back to the second paragraph, if GM were free of the extra labor costs, they could also work to rid themselves of another plague: incentives to move inventory. A huge reason they could still sell inferior cars for years is because of the price slashing. Without the labor, you get a higher quality car, meaning a better value, which will sell easier without having to lure people with incentives.)
Originally Posted by Tailwind
The problem is that because of the unionized workforce (meaning the higher pay + benefits/healthcare/retirement,) you have to cut costs elsewhere in the design of the vehicle to keep it in the same price range as your competition's vehicle that doesn't have the extra labor costs.
It adds up. To a lot. And it has a serious effect on the quality and design of the automobiles that come forth afterward. If GM had the exact same labor cost per employee as Honda (as an example,) they could produce a car with the same (or better) quality and features as the Accord on the same scale.
Union worker baggage is a large reason why cars like the base Impala and the old Grand Am weren't all that great.
Mind you, I'm not saying that upper management is innocent, another large chunk of the failure if you ask me was corporate decisions from the entire late 70s to mid 90s which lost a whole ton of consumer interest and backing, but that has recently gotten better and so have the cars. It takes time to win back customers. The fact that the UAW has GM's ***** in a vice grip isn't helping turn anything around, it's only making their situation worse.
(Going back to the second paragraph, if GM were free of the extra labor costs, they could also work to rid themselves of another plague: incentives to move inventory. A huge reason they could still sell inferior cars for years is because of the price slashing. Without the labor, you get a higher quality car, meaning a better value, which will sell easier without having to lure people with incentives.)
It adds up. To a lot. And it has a serious effect on the quality and design of the automobiles that come forth afterward. If GM had the exact same labor cost per employee as Honda (as an example,) they could produce a car with the same (or better) quality and features as the Accord on the same scale.
Union worker baggage is a large reason why cars like the base Impala and the old Grand Am weren't all that great.
Mind you, I'm not saying that upper management is innocent, another large chunk of the failure if you ask me was corporate decisions from the entire late 70s to mid 90s which lost a whole ton of consumer interest and backing, but that has recently gotten better and so have the cars. It takes time to win back customers. The fact that the UAW has GM's ***** in a vice grip isn't helping turn anything around, it's only making their situation worse.
(Going back to the second paragraph, if GM were free of the extra labor costs, they could also work to rid themselves of another plague: incentives to move inventory. A huge reason they could still sell inferior cars for years is because of the price slashing. Without the labor, you get a higher quality car, meaning a better value, which will sell easier without having to lure people with incentives.)
but the thing is people are willing to spend more money to buy a japanese car.they just dont want a domestic car despite improved quality and reliability.
since GMs quality is now above avg. does the union get credit for that?
saying quality is poor because of unions is nonsense.since when did the UAW tell GM to use cheaper parts and build less reliable cars?
its just an excuse instead of just making good vehicles theyd rather blame and thats the major problem with GM leadership right now.
Originally Posted by Jammer
Who said corps have to be fair? They are there to profit.
but unions have to be fair? it goes both ways.
workers are there to make money too and its the corp. mentality of not caring thats BS and why unions will always be needed.
wagoner will be receiving a huge retirement pkg. from GM even if they go bankrupt but its workers might get stuck with nothing.
talk about rewarding doing a **** job.
but i guess thats ok?
Launching!
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
From: Pawcatuck, CT
Originally Posted by ULTIMATEORANGESS
but the thing is people are willing to spend more money to buy a japanese car.they just dont want a domestic car despite improved quality and reliability.
since GMs quality is now above avg. does the union get credit for that?
saying quality is poor because of unions is nonsense.since when did the UAW tell GM to use cheaper parts and build less reliable cars?
its just an excuse instead of just making good vehicles theyd rather blame and thats the major problem with GM leadership right now.
since GMs quality is now above avg. does the union get credit for that?
saying quality is poor because of unions is nonsense.since when did the UAW tell GM to use cheaper parts and build less reliable cars?
its just an excuse instead of just making good vehicles theyd rather blame and thats the major problem with GM leadership right now.
Why are people more willing to buy Japanese cars? Because for a decent amount of time GM produced crapboxes (again, late 70s to mid 90s,) and lost their backing. They could only move cars by slashing prices.
Recently, quality has improved, but it's still not what it could be, because GM has much higher labor costs per car than the competition does (because of the union.) GM can't use more expensive parts if the extra cost is going into labor...again, costs have to be cut somewhere to stay in the projected price range.
You cannot make an equal vehicle in the same price range if you are paying your unionzed employees a ton more than your competition is paying their non-union workers (and not all of that is just salary, most of it is retirement and healthcare.)
Sure, if nobody cared about prices, GM could make better vehicles than everybody else. They'd just end up being a LOT more expensive than the competitors (meaning people wouldn't buy them for that reason.) You need to be competitive on the price front, and when you're getting bent over by a union on labor, it's not easy to do that.
So what exactly does the union deserve credit for? Financially strapping GM? Thanks a lot.
Don't worry. The government won't let GM fail. The complete White House staff, Secret Service and all, are driving Chevrolet Suburbans and they love them. Plus, "W" is going to use them in his new "get popular again" plan to stiffen up the border patrol. 
WJ
WJ
Originally Posted by Tailwind
You're not getting it. It's all indirectly related.
Why are people more willing to buy Japanese cars? Because for a decent amount of time GM produced crapboxes (again, late 70s to mid 90s,) and lost their backing. They could only move cars by slashing prices.
Recently, quality has improved, but it's still not what it could be, because GM has much higher labor costs per car than the competition does (because of the union.) GM can't use more expensive parts if the extra cost is going into labor...again, costs have to be cut somewhere to stay in the projected price range.
You cannot make an equal vehicle in the same price range if you are paying your unionzed employees a ton more than your competition is paying their non-union workers (and not all of that is just salary, most of it is retirement and healthcare.)
Sure, if nobody cared about prices, GM could make better vehicles than everybody else. They'd just end up being a LOT more expensive than the competitors (meaning people wouldn't buy them for that reason.) You need to be competitive on the price front, and when you're getting bent over by a union on labor, it's not easy to do that.
So what exactly does the union deserve credit for? Financially strapping GM? Thanks a lot.
Why are people more willing to buy Japanese cars? Because for a decent amount of time GM produced crapboxes (again, late 70s to mid 90s,) and lost their backing. They could only move cars by slashing prices.
Recently, quality has improved, but it's still not what it could be, because GM has much higher labor costs per car than the competition does (because of the union.) GM can't use more expensive parts if the extra cost is going into labor...again, costs have to be cut somewhere to stay in the projected price range.
You cannot make an equal vehicle in the same price range if you are paying your unionzed employees a ton more than your competition is paying their non-union workers (and not all of that is just salary, most of it is retirement and healthcare.)
Sure, if nobody cared about prices, GM could make better vehicles than everybody else. They'd just end up being a LOT more expensive than the competitors (meaning people wouldn't buy them for that reason.) You need to be competitive on the price front, and when you're getting bent over by a union on labor, it's not easy to do that.
So what exactly does the union deserve credit for? Financially strapping GM? Thanks a lot.
you dont get it.
GM executives made a decision a long time ago to cut back on making quality,efficent automobiles before the japs were even a factor and it cost them.
instead of adjusting to market needs they chose to make cars that sucked gas and didnt last as long.
all this crap has slowly caught up with them.
they screwed customers over for yrs. and yrs. and didnt take foreign competition seriously.people dont forget or forgive easily.
they also remember when theyre treated right.thats why they keep going back to honda and toyota and are willing to pay more.
this had nothing to do with unions.it was stupidity and greed on GMs part.
now both sides are paying and they have to work together to survive.
GM screwed themselves.not the union.
hopefully theyll learn from this mistake and come back stronger and itll be with help from the UAW.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo Like I said, Don't count on any of the big 3 (GM, Ford, Chrysler-Daimler) going down. (Chrysler now has Benz clout now, anyway...) Government won't let it happen. Unless....the whole country is going down. If things don't change, and I'm not talking trade unions, it is not a impossibility. Keeping the gringos south of the border is not the answer, either. There are sections in La. & Miss. that still don't have their electricity back on from hurricane Katrina damage. Doesn't that tell you that some priorities regarding our own citizens are being overlooked here? 
WJ
WJ 
Originally Posted by Mr. B
I can't tell.. F-250? Silverado?
WJ Last edited by WJ SOM SS; Nov 29, 2005 at 07:54 PM.
Originally Posted by WJ SOM SS
Don't worry. The government won't let GM fail. The complete White House staff, Secret Service and all, are driving Chevrolet Suburbans and they love them. Plus, "W" is going to use them in his new "get popular again" plan to stiffen up the border patrol. WJ
WJSome SS drive Excursions.
WJ 