[ambush]

http://www.lemonde.fr/web/article/0,...-712722,0.html

When will it be the "state that looks like a mitten"'s turn???

[Kevin]

Ambush, when are you going to learn to post politics in the political forum?

Esp a thread no one here will probably read?

[vinster]

Paging Railroder to the lounge, Railroader to the lounge please...

Is this going to affect you?

[Mastrap]

I was wondering the same thing. 30000 workers is a lot of people.

[Sandkat]

Posting French article on English message board.

GG

[Stradlater]

ambush:

Please, point to an example of when/where Communism has worked better than Capitalism.

[Kerrigan]

Ambush I started a thread similar to this a few hours ago in the poli lounge. Anyone interested in talking about the shortcomings of capitalism should go there.

One important thing to note about this massive sacking by GM is that the labour force they use in their factories are heavily unionised and GM is bogged down in paying all sorts of special benefits to its workers. The failure of GM is largely a case of protectionism/socialism gone bad.

It's a bit of a paradox: Capitalism causes terrible things to happen, like the firing of 30,000 people. And yet, if GM's workers' unions would have been more competitive, ie, capitalistic, they would still be employed.

Great. Now I have to fight with 30,000 more people for that one opening at Wall-Mart as a cashier!

It's got nothing to do with unions, and everything to do with people would rather buy better cars than what GM makes.

[Stradlater]

Originally Posted by screamingFit

Great. Now I have to fight with 30,000 more people for that one opening at Wall-Mart as a cashier!

No you don't. Your application saw the shredder when you misspelled the company name.

[Kerrigan]

Originally Posted by hayesk

It's got nothing to do with unions, and everything to do with people would rather buy better cars than what GM makes.

GM can't operate efficiently as a company if labour is too expensive. If labour costs are too high, it takes away from other parts company's budget such as research and development. And it spooks stock holders.

To say it has "nothing" to do with labour and "everything" to do with the product they are selling is a severe over-simplification.

If you think I'm wrong, look back to the the days when European countries started nationalising their car manufacturers. The manufacturing end became so expensive that the quality of the cars declined rapidly (especially in Britain) and so they were quickly privatised to stave off the steep drop in sales.

[BRussell]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

Ambush I started a thread similar to this a few hours ago in the poli lounge. Anyone interested in talking about the shortcomings of capitalism should go there.

One important thing to note about this massive sacking by GM is that the labour force they use in their factories are heavily unionised and GM is bogged down in paying all sorts of special benefits to its workers. The failure of GM is largely a case of protectionism/socialism gone bad.

It's a bit of a paradox: Capitalism causes terrible things to happen, like the firing of 30,000 people. And yet, if GM's workers' unions would have been more competitive, ie, capitalistic, they would still be employed.

A large part of the reason they can't afford workers is because we don't have a "socialist" national health insurance program. I agree that part of the problem is the huge load of worker benefits GM has to pay, but I don't see how you can say that a company paying all sorts of benefits to workers is socialistic - it's pure capitalism. It's a private company paying its workers. What could be more capitalistic than that?

[PacHead]

Shouldn't Ambush be out running away from some cops or something, instead of posting strange language articles on an American forum ?



Anyhow, at the rate that French cars are burning up (by the thousands), GM can maybe hire those employees back and sell new cars to France.

[Mastrap]

I don't think the French would be interested in the kind of cars GM builds.

Got to say, I do feel very sorry for the people losing their jobs. If you live in a small town, like Railroader does, where GM is the major employer, that sucks very badly.

[Kerrigan]

Originally Posted by BRussell

It's a private company paying its workers. What could be more capitalistic than that?

Unions, when they become large and irresponsible, can put a company at a major disadvantage. GM, for instance, has been required by workers unions to pay 100% of its employees healthcare costs up until this year. Most workers in the US do not even get half of that from their employers. These costs add up and make it expensive to employ a person.

I know it is depressing to think about, but labour is basically a product. If a product is too expensive, you pass on it and get something at a more reasonable price. Companies need to be able to adjust their labour force in order to respond to changes in the market. Unions, for reasons that are fair enough, try to make the labour market rigid to protect people's jobs, and this is not competitive at all. In the end it makes for a weaker company, and as we have seen in GM's case, this can be dangerous when competition from Asian companies causes their sales to slip.

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by Mastrap

I don't think the French would be interested in the kind of cars GM builds.

You're probably right, If I were French (which I'm glad I am not), I would purchase a freaking Firetruck (and a shotgun to go along with it).

[OldManMac]

GM's health and benefit costs are about $1500/vehicle. That is not enough of a difference to be totally to blame for GM's problems. It contributes, of course, but a $1500 price difference between a GM product and a Toyota product isn't most of what's causing GM's slide; that's just a bogeyman excuse that GM is using (and others obviously are buying into) for the fact that GM doesn't have many models that people want to buy, and the fact that GM can't convince people to buy their cars on the merit of the product alone. In short, GM's marketing and development divisions really suck.

If anyone has ever paid attention, which doesn't seem to be the case, the Japanse and German car manufacturers who have plants in the States pay their employees comparable wages and benefits, yet they're selling cars and not screaming about their overpaid workers.

[11011001]

Originally Posted by PacHead

Shouldn't Ambush be out running away from some cops or something, instead of posting strange language articles on an American forum ?

I'd like to see the demographics justifying this view. Being American owned doesn't necessarily represent the overall nationality of this forum's community. :/

[Mastrap]

Originally Posted by PacHead

You're probably right, If I were French (which I'm glad I am not)

I'm sure your sentiment is shared by the French. So you both win.

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by 11011001

I'd like to see the demographics justifying this view. Being American owned doesn't necessarily represent the overall nationality of this forum's community. :/

French, which is a ridiculous and insignificant language has little place on an English speaking forum.

[Mastrap]

Originally Posted by PacHead

French, which is a ridiculous and insignificant language has little place on an English speaking forum.

There are roughly 33.5 million French speakers online. Insignificant indeed. After English and Spanish French is in third place.

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by Mastrap

There are roughly 33.5 million French speakers online. Insignificant indeed. After English and Spanish French is in third place.

So what ? Few sites of importance are in French. Everything of importance on the web is in English. There are statistics for that you know, maybe you can check them out sometime and you will find out that I am correct.

[Kevin]

Oh who really give a flying fark.

This thread was retarded from the beginning.

ambush showing yet again, he sucks at the internet.

[11011001]

Originally Posted by PacHead

French, which is a ridiculous and insignificant language has little place on an English speaking forum.

I'm really confused, what does speaking French have to do with anything? I'm assuming you were equating American to English, and meant, "English speaking forum"? In which case one must argue that the evolution of modern English (as spoken from the time of Shakespeare) has little to do with America. Perhaps, America should have been left out entirely. Finally, I didn't see anyone explicitly speaking French in this thread.

French might be a minority language, but it's certainly not any more ridiculous than English is.

Have I taken some sort of bait? Am I asking too many questions? I don't know!!??

Bye!

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by Kevin

ambush showing yet again, he sucks at the internet.

He gets a failing mark.

[Mastrap]

Originally Posted by PacHead

So what ? Few sites of importance are in French. Everything of importance on the web is in English.

What's important to you depends on who you are, surely? And if you're a French speaker, or a Spanish speaker for that matter, I suspect that sites in your language are indeed very important to you.

Just as English sites are important to English speakers.

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by 11011001

Have I taken some sort of bait? Am I asking too many questions? I don't know!!??

Bye!

You must not have clicked on his link which is 100% French, in other words gibberish.

[PacHead]

Originally Posted by Mastrap

What's important to you depends on who you are, surely? And if you're a French speaker, or a Spanish speaker for that matter, I suspect that sites in your language are indeed very important to you.

Just as English sites are important to English speakers.

English sites are important to almost everyone. The same is not true for those other languages. English is pretty much the official language of the internet. The statistics back this up.

[Mastrap]

Originally Posted by PacHead

English sites are important to almost everyone. The same is not true for those other languages. English is pretty much the official language of the internet. The statistics back this up.

Oh I agree. But that argument doesn't make French 'gibberish', nor does it mean that other languages are unimportant. It just means that the majority of content is available in English because the majority of us speak English. Once we all speak Spanish, or Chinese, the situation will most probably change.

[spacefreak]

GM needs a massive restructuring, with numerous brands being consolidated, merged, and/or eliminated.

Currently, each brand offers maybe 1 or 2 worth-a-damn models. Keep the luxury in Cadillac, trucks/SUVs in GMC, and Chevy can aim for the larger segment... maybe more geared to take on Toyota in most classes.

Buick and Pontiac can be killed off. Saturn, too. I'd keep Saab seperate, and maybe toss the Hummer models into GMC's line.

Cadillac, GMC, Chevy, Saab: GM can become stronger and more focused with just these brands in their stable.

[SuvsareRetarded]

I heard that GM offer's full pay retirement to people who worked at their plants for x number of years, and it's why they are currently going bankrupt. Something about how they wrote off their pension funds, like 50 million or so, and ridiculous benefits for employees by copaying for retirement, stuff like that.

"cuz they built hte contracts in the 70s when the market was theirs and just assumed that they would be the top forever
and they gave their employees benefits, even when they retired!!"

Whatever. **** Gm.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by vinster

Paging Railroder to the lounge, Railroader to the lounge please...

Is this going to affect you?

HERE I AM!!!

Whew.... there sure is a lot of FUD in this thread. And I am NOT going to touch the French language thing.

I am not affected by this announcement. It is a smoke screen. An announcement to appease the investors. The 30k they are announcing is the projected retirement numbers really.

I looked at the seniority list here a few weeks ago, and about 85% have 30+ years. And of that 85%, 25% have 40+ years. There's even 4 guys with 50+ years. And one guy with 58 years!

I am very aware of a few of the announced plant's closing situations. The Flint plant being closed in one of the smallest plants and is about the only part of the Buick City Complex that was demolished in '00. They make the 3800 engine there which is being fazed out anyway. The Lansing plant is the factory where they make the Chevy SSR and that plant didn't have any work planned after '06. And the Ypsilanti, Mich "plant" is really a warehouse for parts shipping.

If you look closely, all of the announced closings are for smaller plants usually employing lees than 1,500 employyes. Those who don't retire from these plants will be given jobs throughout the rest of GM in the form of transfers and will be paid moving expenses.

Talking to some of the guys today at work the best news is the future retirement incentives that will be offered. Most of the guys have been waiting for something like this to retire.

Something that did not make news was the construction of a new plant in Lansing.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

Ambush I started a thread similar to this a few hours ago in the poli lounge. Anyone interested in talking about the shortcomings of capitalism should go there.

One important thing to note about this massive sacking by GM is that the labour force they use in their factories are heavily unionised and GM is bogged down in paying all sorts of special benefits to its workers. The failure of GM is largely a case of protectionism/socialism gone bad.

It's a bit of a paradox: Capitalism causes terrible things to happen, like the firing of 30,000 people. And yet, if GM's workers' unions would have been more competitive, ie, capitalistic, they would still be employed.

Wrong. How did GM make the a fortune in recent years with even less of a burden of labor costs?

KarlG is very close to the truth here:

Originally Posted by KarlG

GM's health and benefit costs are about $1500/vehicle. That is not enough of a difference to be totally to blame for GM's problems. It contributes, of course, but a $1500 price difference between a GM product and a Toyota product isn't most of what's causing GM's slide; that's just a bogeyman excuse that GM is using (and others obviously are buying into) for the fact that GM doesn't have many models that people want to buy, and the fact that GM can't convince people to buy their cars on the merit of the product alone. In short, GM's marketing and development divisions really suck.

If anyone has ever paid attention, which doesn't seem to be the case, the Japanse and German car manufacturers who have plants in the States pay their employees comparable wages and benefits, yet they're selling cars and not screaming about their overpaid workers.

And the health liabilty just droppped as the UAW voted to lessen our health care costs.

It's marketing, and the latest spin by GM's CEO in the press is just more of it. Lutz needs to go as the current design cheif as he's the one responsible for designs like the Pontiac Aztek.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by spacefreak

GM needs a massive restructuring, with numerous brands being consolidated, merged, and/or eliminated.

Currently, each brand offers maybe 1 or 2 worth-a-damn models. Keep the luxury in Cadillac, trucks/SUVs in GMC, and Chevy can aim for the larger segment... maybe more geared to take on Toyota in most classes.

Buick and Pontiac can be killed off. Saturn, too. I'd keep Saab seperate, and maybe toss the Hummer models into GMC's line.

Cadillac, GMC, Chevy, Saab: GM can become stronger and more focused with just these brands in their stable.

The numerous brands do not add cost to GM's bottom line. ll of the similar cars are built on the same assembly line by the same workers. As the car goes by, they simply look at the order and grap the appropriate car part and put it on the car. The thing that amazes me, is the people who say that GMC trucks are so much better built and designed than Chevrolet trucks. They are build on the same line and designed by the exact same people.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by SuvsareRetarded

I heard that GM offer's full pay retirement to people who worked at their plants for x number of years, and it's why they are currently going bankrupt. Something about how they wrote off their pension funds, like 50 million or so, and ridiculous benefits for employees by copaying for retirement, stuff like that.

"cuz they built hte contracts in the 70s when the market was theirs and just assumed that they would be the top forever
and they gave their employees benefits, even when they retired!!"

Whatever. **** Gm.

False. You amaze me. Do you even think at all when you post?

Just to play your game:
The reitrement pension is significantly less than their working wage. So is their health package. Why in the world would someone keep working if they could make the exact same amount of money if they retired?!?! Do you have any sense of logic at all?!?!?

Don't worry, my job is secure. In fact, moments ago, they offered me overtime to work this holiday weekend. I could have accepted 12 hours a day for the four day weekend if I had accepted. And two of those days would have been triple time, and one day double time. Can't make 'em fast enough.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Oh who really give a flying fark.

This thread was retarded from the beginning.

ambush showing yet again, he sucks at the internet.

Oh yes.

The amazing part, is the teensy number of people offering any sympathy at all to what they percieve as a bad thing. People think that GM is laying off a huge number of people, even though it isn't even nearly the truth, and they aren't thinking what it could possibly mean to them. IF GM were really letting 30k people go, do you have any idea what that could do to the economy? As I said earlier, it is a smoke screen.

[11011001]

Originally Posted by PacHead

You must not have clicked on his link which is 100% French, in other words gibberish.

I was Owned!!!1!11one01001001 00100000 01110111 01101001 01101110

Here is an google translation for you.

[Spliff]

Railroader,

CBC news in Canada had a panicky take on the GM layoffs. They emphasized how many "satellite" jobs will be lost in Canada due to the layoffs. There math was that for every one Canadian GM employee layoff, there will be SEVEN lost jobs in industries that rely on GM.

What's your take on their "math"?

GM cutting 3,900 Ontario jobs, Oshawa and St. Catharines plants to close

GM (NYSE:GM) chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner said the third shift at GM Canada's Number 1 plant in Oshawa will be cancelled in the second half of 2006, while the Number 2 plant will be closed in 2008.

The Number 1 plant in Oshawa builds the Chevrolet Monte Carlo and Impala models. The Number 2 plant currently builds the Pontiac Grand Prix and the Buick LaCrosse/Allure models, but they are to be phased out in 2008 and GM has not scheduled a new product to be built at the facility.

The closing of the Oshawa Number 2 plant surprised analysts, who noted that recent surveys rank it as the fourth most productive vehicle assembly plant in North America and the best in terms of initial quality.

Speaking in Detroit, Wagoner also said the St. Catharines powertrain plant on Ontario Street will cease production in 2008.

The closures mean about 3,880 jobs will be lost in Canada. The Oshawa Number 2 plant closure will mean 2,750 jobs will go, while 1,000 jobs will be lost with the end of the third shift at Oshawa Number One plant.

Closure of the powertrain plant in St. Catharines will cost about 130 jobs.

General Motors had about 20,000 employees in Canada prior to the latest cuts.

Canadian Auto Workers president Buzz Hargrove called the cuts "devastating", noting that the fallout will extend to Canadian parts suppliers who feed GM plants.

But he said he was hopeful that early retirement packages and attrition could absorb most or all of the job cuts at GM.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by Spliff

Railroader,

CBC news in Canada had a panicky take on the GM layoffs. They emphasized how many "satellite" jobs will be lost in Canada due to the layoffs. There math was that for every one Canadian GM employee layoff, there will be SEVEN lost jobs in industries that rely on GM.

What's your take on their "math"?

GM cutting 3,900 Ontario jobs, Oshawa and St. Catharines plants to close

Ontario should be very worried. That is probably the largest closing GM is announcing. And that only lists the hourly people affected, not the salary. Plus, you have to figure the non-GM jobs. There's shipping, parts suppliers, local companies that serve the employees, like bars and convience stores. Office supply companies and janitorial supply companies. Heck, there's usually a restaurant inside each plant that is independently owned. I am not sure about the 7:1 ratio, but it will afect a lot of people.

Originally Posted by Stradlater

No you don't. Your application saw the shredder when you misspelled the company name.

Nice catch!

I work for a Tier 1 company who supplies all the auto manufacturers. For the past few years we've progressively made less and less profit because of the financial cutbacks that all the manufacturers are going through. It's gotten to the point now where we are actually taking a loss on several programs to keep the business. GM's plant closings and layoffs were to be expected but what is getting lesser attention are the Tier 1 suppliers and the suppliers that supply the Tier 1 having to restructure to stay in business because of it. 30,000 jobs for GM and probably much more out of the suppliers affected.

Thankfully, our company has a strong European and Asian sales team. We have always been a strong supplier to the American brands but started concentrating more towards the markets overseas a few years back. Funny, selling to those markets we actually can make a profit whereas we lose our ass selling to the big three.

This announcement has been spun out of control by the media, though. They are sensationalizing it - taking the 30,000 jobs lost and the plant closings and putting it in 128pt bold font on the front page of all our daily papers. That alone is scaring the bejesus out of everyone.

[OldManMac]

The real question is: is this enough of a move to save GM? I don't think so. Simply eliminating people and plants because of overcapacity isn't going to make people go out and buy your product, and that's still GM's biggest problem. When I was a teen they had somewhere around 60% of the U. S. car market, because there was no real competition. Now they're struggling with a market share in the mid 20% range, and it just keeps sliding. Are they going to go out of business? No. Do they need to get rid of Wagner and some top executives who are overpaid for what they do? Yes.

Before the end of this decade, Toyota will become the largest carmaker in the world. They're already number two.

[SimeyTheLimey]

This seems to be a consistent pattern with GM. They have the same issue of over-expensive, under-producing labor in their German Opel division. Link to thread from a few months ago. In that case GM wanted to cut costs at a lossmaking plant in order to utilize labor in Sweden where (believe it or not) labor costs are less expensive. I understand that their Vauxhall division in the UK isn't doing so great either. How is Holden doing?

As an outsider, I'd say the pattern seems to be that these old factories (both management and labor unions) have simply not updated their labor model in a very long time. Rather than do so gradually and painlessly, they put the situation off to the point where it has become a crisis. Not smart at all.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by KarlG

Do they need to get rid of Wagner and some top executives who are overpaid for what they do? Yes.

What they do, is make bad decisions on product designs and keep Lutz who approves cars with designs like the Aztec.

Originally Posted by KarlG

Before the end of this decade, Toyota will become the largest carmaker in the world. They're already number two.

Sad, but true.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

This seems to be a consistent pattern with GM. They have the same issue of over-expensive, under-producing labor in their German Opel division. Link to thread from a few months ago. In that case GM wanted to cut costs at a lossmaking plant in order to utilize labor in Sweden where (believe it or not) labor costs are less expensive. I understand that their Vauxhall division in the UK isn't doing so great either. How is Holden doing?

Is that why they are closing their most efficient factory? /SARCASM]

Originally Posted by SimeytheLimey

As an outsider, I'd say the pattern seems to be that these old factories (both management and labor unions) have simply not updated their labor model in a very long time. Rather than do so gradually and painlessly, they put the situation off to the point where it has become a crisis. Not smart at all.

hint: it's not labor costs. It is a smoke screen. GM simply has models not many people want right now. It's all a matter of sales. Market share is down, profits are down. They are focusing on larger less fuel efficient vehicles when gas prices rose quickly. Bad timing? No, the problem is, they were focusing on models that offer a higher profit margin and ignoring their sales numbers in the smaller more efficient car divisions.

At least in the USA. I can't really comment on overseas operations.

[RAILhead]

[SuvsareRetarded]

Originally Posted by Railroader

Is that why they are closing their most efficient factory? /SARCASM]
GM simply has models not many people want right now. It's all a matter of sales.

I'd say it's a matter of taste.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

It's a bit of a paradox: Capitalism causes terrible things to happen, like the firing of 30,000 people. And yet, if GM's workers' unions would have been more competitive, ie, capitalistic, they would still be employed.

One: Capitalism doesn't 'cause' terrible things to happen. It is a concept, unable to do anything whatsoever until it is applied by people who choose to do so. Blame the people.

Two: How is this a paradox? If you're not willing to put in the effort to compete, others will surpass you. This is true for business, for labor, and for all else. Far from being a paradox, this is exactly how it's supposed to work.

[scottiB]

Originally Posted by Railroader

What they do, is make bad decisions on product designs and keep Lutz who approves cars with designs like the Aztec.

Lutz didn't join GM until after the Azteks had hit the showroom. The Aztek was introduced mid-2000, and Lutz joined GM in an official capacity in September 2001. While he was consulting GM before that by a 8-12 months, he lacked the authority to kill the line after so much had been invested in it.

[SuvsareRetarded]

Personally I think that the Aztek is one of GM's better vehicles. Instead of letting their styling department uglify the whole thing, they sorta created the aztek on functionality, instead of putrid GM 'form'.

[ambush]

Well sorry for starting a thread that, after 48 posts+ interests many people.

I hereby predict GM will soon fail.

Railroader: don't worry all's going very well for GM. In your opium dream smoke screen anyway No go watch that TV show and try to forget it's soon going to be your turn

Redneck: I'm flattered by the fulcrum pilot comparison