Are UAW Union Bosses Abusing Their Positions for Pay?

[mgb_phys]

Ummm, they're not.

http://www.reuters.com/article/americasDealsNews/idUSTRE4AG7DU20081117

 

[montoyas7940]

That is good news.

How much did it say the pay was? $18.00 an hour.

I will stand by my race to the bottom statement. I understand that there are more factors at work than the workers rate of pay. However with nafta and the recent expansion of nafta, things will not improve for U.S manufacturing workers.

 

[CaptainQuasar]

If that plant just opened then it seems like it probably would have been started before the economic downturn began. And Honda may well have received economic incentives from Greenburg or the state of Indiana, just like the quarter of a billion dollars spent to bring the Mercedez-Benz plant to Tuscaloosa, Alabama that I mentioned earlier with references. (I saw the same thing cited on the news just today.)

⚛​

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Yes, until foreign producers are required to meet the same environmental, safety, and working standards that we have, the playing field is heavily slanted against us. This is one issue that Obama has promised to address.

This is another example of the complete failure of the free-market as it applies to today's world. You can't protect the environment and compete with people who don't.

 

[montoyas7940]

If that plant just opened then it seems like it probably would have been started before the economic downturn began

It was.

Toyota recently put U.S plant construction on hold. And Nissan is moving some models to Mexico and Japan.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

If that plant just opened then it seems like it probably would have been started before the economic downturn began. And Honda may well have received economic incentives from Greenburg or the state of Indiana, just like the quarter of a billion dollars spent to bring the Mercedez-Benz plant to Tuscaloosa, Alabama that I mentioned earlier with references. (I saw the same thing cited on the news just today.)

⚛​

That has nothing to do with the rate of pay, which was the issue. If anything, the pay differential between US and foreign workers has improved in recent years; in some cases, dramatically so.

 

[turbo]

GM is returning two of the private jets it leases. Farther down in the story, we find out that GM still has 3 more. According to the story, GM and Ford require their CEOs to use private transportation for security purposes, but there is no explanation for why GM needs to have three jets on hand.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081121/bs_nm/us_gm;_ylt=Apu7a_NS97I2wllfvYY5twCs0NUE

 

[jal]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122722835387246299.html
OPINION NOVEMBER 21, 2008
The Auto Makers Are Already Bankrupt
Admitting the obvious is their best chance to restructure.
By PAUL INGRASSIA

The biggest beneficiaries of a GM-Chrysler merger would be Cerberus, the private-equity firm that owns Chrysler, and the big banks that hold billions of Chrysler bonds that they haven't been able to sell. The bonds were used in Cerberus's purchase of Chrysler from Daimler. The banks expected to sell the bonds to investors, but have been left holding billions in Chrysler debt that they'd dearly love to unload.

Cerberus has offered to forego any profits on a sale of Chrysler, but that's phony. There won't be any profits. Just relieving Cerberus of the need to keep funding Chrysler would provide the private-equity moguls with a bonanza. As for the banks holding Chrysler bonds, didn't we already bail them out? Why should we have to do it again?

 

[jreelawg]

I bet they don't want to go bankrupt for the same reason the financial institutions don't want to. Bankruptcy court will expose their fraud and accounting errors.

 

[turbo]

I bet they don't want to go bankrupt for the same reason the financial institutions don't want to. Bankruptcy court will expose their fraud and accounting errors.

Bankruptcy court audits might also show that other stuff that goes on in corporate America. Stuff like depressing stock values before board meetings, so the board will offer top execs stock options at that very low price. The execs can then manipulate the short-term value of the stocks in order to make personal fortunes exercising those options. The quarter-by-quarter fixation in American corporations is a recipe for long-term disaster, and now here we are.

 

[jal]

Can the big 3 make a comparable model to the Nano for $2,500?
Just what we need to do the groceries.
http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2008/01/10/nano-tata.html
Tata Motors rolls out Nano, the world's cheapest car

 

[mgb_phys]

The last thing a car company wants is a car that cheap. The defence against it for the last 20years has been to demand increased safety features, which leads to bigger cars, which leads to more damaging crashes which leads to a demand for more safety features.
would the roads be safer if eeryone drove one of those or if everyone drove a hummer?

 

[Office_Shredder]

If everyone drove one of those, and one person drove a hummer, he'd be the safest person on the road by a lot

 

[Vanadium 50]

would the roads be safer if eeryone drove one of those or if everyone drove a hummer?

Yes. Studies show that the safest conditions are when the majority of vehicles are within a factor of 2 in mass of each other. If everyone drove Hummers, things would be good. If everybody drove Yugos (why do Yugos have rear window defrosters? To keep your hands warm when you push!) things would be good...well, safe. It's mixing where things get dangerous.

 

[WarPhalange]

It would be safer with smaller cars, period. Crashes involve less total momentum involved (lol 0 if they're going the same speed at each other), and hitting a pedestrian or cyclist is a lot less damaging when it's done by a go-kart than a tank.

 

[Vanadium 50]

Momentum isn't the key issue, it's energy. And while you have more energy in a heavier vehicle you also have more ways to absorb it.

 

[WarPhalange]

Right, like through the cushioned seats, the dvd player, extra cup holders, etc.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

A very good discussion, as always.
http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=6315870

George Will makes a point about GM that has had me concerned as well. They intend to market the plug-in hybrid, Chevy Volt, as a part of their recovery plan, but they can't yet make a profit with that car. The government is providing a $7500 tax credit to motivate the buying public, and even then, GM makes no money. I forget the exact number, but the break-even price for for the Volt was something like $35,000. Who wants, in effect, a $40,000 Corolla? I am all for plug-in hybrids, but there appears to be profoundly unrealistic expectations, esp in a collapsed economy.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

We don't need three car companies in the states. I don't mind helping Ford or GM, but Chrysler is pure garbage and needs to die. No way can we give Chrysler, a private company, tax payer money.

 

[drankin]

It would be safer with smaller cars, period. Crashes involve less total momentum involved (lol 0 if they're going the same speed at each other), and hitting a pedestrian or cyclist is a lot less damaging when it's done by a go-kart than a tank.

The more steel you have around you the safer you will be. Common sense, really. I'd rather run off the road, run into an immobile object, or crash into a semi with my Silverado than my Neon. Of course, if we slowed everyone down and put them in go-carts we'd be safer. But you still need trucks and semi's on the road to transport goods. No way around that.

 

[Office_Shredder]

No way can we give Ford, a private company, taxpayer money.

How is that statement any different Greg?

 

[nuby]

We don't need three car companies in the states. I don't mind helping Ford or GM, but Chrysler is pure garbage and needs to die. No way can we give Chrysler, a private company, tax payer money.

Amen to that. Dodge is pure garbage, but newer Mercedes and Chrysler cars are OK. I think.

 

[Proton Soup]

chrysler is crap, and gm is overpriced. let them both sink.

the thing i don't get though is they're only asking for a few billion each. don't these companies have some collateral to put up? if this is life or death, then you put it all on the line. if GM had a yard sale today, just how much would its assets be worth?

 

[mgb_phys]

No way can we give Ford, a private company, taxpayer money.
How is that statement any different Greg?

Chrylser is owned by a VC firm, Cerberus Capital Management, they bought it when Merc realized what a pile of ... they had bought and dumped it.
Cerberus Capital Management haven't put any investment into it as a car company - they bought it at a bargain price as an investment/gamble. If you bail them out then you should also pay off any day trader whose shares went down.

 

[turbo]

Michael Moore pointed out recently that the government could buy GM's common stock for $3 billion and take ownership instead of giving them huge unsecured loans.

 

[jreelawg]

I think that one major problem is that bankruptcy is the system designed to save companies and allows the government to get involved and work the problems out. In this case, they say it is different because people won't buy a car from a company in that position. So, in my opinion, if that is really the case, then the law is flawed, and there is no system for car companies in this position. If the government decides that car companies cannot go bankrupt, then a new system unique to the car industry needs to be established that allows the same kind of process as bankruptcy under another name, and that going through that system is required in order to get bailout money.

Someone from "Moody's Economy" (the last speaker at the most recent big 3 bailout hearing stated that he estimated that the amount needed to keep them afloat would be more like 75-130 billion, or something like that. That is more than twice the amount proposed. The funny thing is that congress seamed to be unaware of this, until then, and the big 3 seam to be reluctant in stating exactly how much they will need in the long run.

In bankruptcy court, the big 3 would be forced to be entirely honest and audits etc, would make the government fully aware of the situation and the information required to make a sound investment, would be handed over. As is, the big 3 are just trying to get the money, and not kicking down key information.

The big three offered to pay a 1 dollar salary a year to their CEO's. But, that just seams like an extremely over obvious useless gesture, only reinforcing the fact that limiting CEO salary means nothing because bonuses can be given providing them with as much as they want. It is this kind of dishonesty that makes me uneasy. When Chris Dodd claims he is not just going to hand over a blank check, he said the same thing about the 700 billion bail out, yet there seams to be exactly that.

 

[mgb_phys]

Michael Moore pointed out recently that the government could buy GM's common stock for $3 billion and take ownership instead of giving them huge unsecured loans.

Wasn't giving people loans for 10x the value of their assets how we got into this mess in the first place?

 

[turbo]

Wasn't giving people loans for 10x the value of their assets how we got into this mess in the first place?

Sounds familiar, as well as giving loans to entities with no ability to repay them. The Big 3 are bleeding money through their own ignorance and short-sightedness, and they want the taxpayers to give them more. They need to get their house in order first. I would rather see them bought out by the Japanese, who actually seem to be able to make cars Americans want and trust.

 

[turbo]

As an object lesson, apart from a Volkswagon diesel that my 82 year old father bought when he and 3 other guys had to carpool quite a long distance to work everyday after the mill they worked at closed (economy first!) he has only owned US-branded vehicles. He recently bought a used Buick Park Avenue Ultra, and it nickeled and dimed him to death in the first few weeks. I nagged him until he agreed to cash in a CD that he had been saving to give to us kids, and I took him to the Subaru dealership. My wife's Legacy is as steady as a rock, with full time AWD, traction control, ABS, etc, and it is WAY better than my Nissan 4x4 in snow and ice. I suggested a Forester with auto transmission, since he has arthritic knees like me, and he took one for a test drive. They passed him from a salesman to the sales manager, etc, playing games, but I got them back. I couldn't visit the showroom/sales area because of my bad reactions to colognes, etc, so every time they came to him with a new proposal, I had him drag them out to the parking lot so I could hammer on them. I got them to come down over $2000 (about 10% and somewhat under $20K total) before we agreed to a deal. Every time Dad calls me, he raves about that vehicle, and I am considering buying one. My old pickup has great suspension for load-carrying, but it rides like a buckboard unloaded and the rear-end is very loose in icy conditions.

The auto trannie has a flexible shift-point system so that if you flick the shifter toward you when it's in Drive, the trannie stays in lower gears longer, and shifts at higher RPMS, so that rig really scoots. Get on a highway, and flick the shifter away from you to drive it to higher gears and lower RPM shift points for better gas mileage. What a sweet ride.

Can't the US car companies figure out how to build powerful fuel-efficient AWD cars nicely-equipped at the $20K and under price point?

 

[russ_watters]

Michael Moore pointed out recently that the government could buy GM's common stock for $3 billion and take ownership instead of giving them huge unsecured loans.

I'm not sure what he thinks that would do to help - GM needs operating capital and just buying the stock doesn't change that.