Comments on: Full Details of the “Auto Industry Emergency Bridge Loan Act”

By: wwskinn3

wwskinn3 — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 01:14:35 +0000

GM needs to trim the number of models it sells if it is ever going to move forward again. Look at the other companies like Toyota, Nissan, and others. They basically make 2 small cars – two mid size cars, and two SUV’s and trucks (1 small and 1 larger). They have been successful with this concept.

GM makes too many models of small cars, too many models of the other cars – I don’t know how many models of trucks it makes and too many models of SUV’s. Ford is getting more like GM with too many models of SUV’s.

Both companies need to trim the number of models they make and concentrate more on quality.

By: J Man

J Man — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 06:34:44 +0000

The 95% that we gat paid does not come from the company, the state and the union pay that.

When a plant closes buyouts are offered, or at least have been the last few years. This gets the people with enough time to retire to do so and gets others to walk away from the company. Many are given the chance to transfer to another plant. This allows the employee to stay with the company if they so desire. The one issue if you continue to transfer is that there has to be an opening at a plant for you to go to. Just so you know, salary employees have the same ability to transfer.

Just curious has anyone taken the time to see what the package for a salary employee is? I am sure it is pretty comparable if not more.

On another note, Back when Bill Clinton was in office and the economy was good and people were buying cars, GM was making money and they had around 4x the number of employees than they do now (union and non union). If the economy was not ruined by the moron that took his place (Bush), people would still be buying cars and GM would not have to be looking for loans from the government. Back in the ’80′s when Chrysler needed help we were in a recession, so I am told, I was still in elementary school. Check and see how much GM wasted on Fiat. The union had nothing to do with that. It would have given the company two more months to survive. I am sure you can find other ways GM has wasted billions without any help from the unions.

By: Drew

Drew — Sun, 23 Nov 2008 03:59:15 +0000

J Man
You just help make my point. GM shuts down a plant because it is not profitable and you keep 95% of your salary for 48 weeks!!! Then you must be rehired. Maybe you have been in the union too long, but normal people in normal jobs don’t have anything close to that type of protection. That is just one of the reasons that the total union package averages more than $70 per hour, and why the big three can’t be competative with non union companies. And yes, like you said the big three “had” to agree to this package that is putting them out of business. Utherwise there would have been a strike and they would have been put out of business by the resulting walkout. The unions will never back off of these benifit plans enough to save the car companies. The only way to get out of these contracts is to file chapter 11 and start from scratch. I think that the big three can make very good cars but they will never be competative with the nonunion companies. As long as their is competition, they will be undersold in price or out marketed with more and better features for the same price.

By: law

law — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 22:14:39 +0000

They need to put up a tariff to foreign oil or else as Obama reduces our oil demand the price of oil will drop and cause domestic production to drop faster than the reduction of demand and thus make us more dependent on foreign oil.

By: J Man

J Man — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 17:53:27 +0000

#120 Drew

Please get your info right before posting. If GM shut own all of their plants and laid off all the union employees it would not cost the company anything for the next 48 weeks. The state would pay the unemployment and the union pays out the sub pay to get it up to 95% of the employees take home pay.

Under your senerio people would not be off that long as there is not the stock built up to maintain that kind of lay off. Also they would still keep the salary workers in the plant, at least that is what they are doing these 2 weeks at my plant. Depending on what the plant does or car they build there would be places working to keep up with the cars that are selling (Cobalt, Malibu)
_____________________________________________________

On another note, I know a lot of people complain about the job bank. When that is enacted at a plant, it is mutually agreed to by the plant management and the local union. The company does have the option to bring back the laid off employee after the 48 weeks agree to in the national contract and lay off other workers. At another plant I worked at they asked for volunteers for the lay off. It was given based on seniority from the top down. They had to be called back before their time was up due to other employees taking the first buyout that was offered.

Also I want to remind everyone that GM, Ford and Chrysler all have to agree to what is in the contract with any union before it is sent to the membership for a vote. They may not like it but they have to agree to it.