Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
With the ways things are going in Detroit. Some sacrifice from people of all levels, including the people who sit all day, is needed for long term survival and success. Either bite the bullet now and have a plan to address the touchy issues now or avoid addressing the tough issues and risk collapsing.
Bankruptcy for a business in not a good thing, but sometimes is needed. There have been a number of companies that have successfully emerged from bankrupcy. The auto companies may need to slim down their operations and costs, and maybe that is what is needed. Bankruptcy is not a death sentence for a company and not all companies liquidate, due to there being several kinds of bankruptcy.
Well something is going to have to give. I personally think that the whole union thing is not cost-effective, and instead of pink-slipping workers, which according to the CEO's testimony, is something they've already done, they should instead revamp so that they could avoid hacking people's jobs. Part of that is getting the union drug deals off the table. And maybe the CEO's should take a little pay cut too, as should upper management. YOu can't expect to make the same sort of money when you're not showing a profit. But....it won't happen because Obama is in bed with the union and it's payoff time. Change, right?
BTW, the Boeing labor workers were on strike in WA for about 2 months. They struck a deal and returned to work several weeks ago. Now Boeing has announced that it will have to lay off some of those labor workers to save costs......costs they probably lost because of the strike in the first place.
The higher level employees need to make some sacrifices along with the employees on the factory floor. It often digusts me that the executives in many big companies get a compensation package if they are forced to resigned or get fired and the administrative workers and those involved in the frontlines, grunt work, factory floor, and nuts and bolts of a company are often let go and have to fend for themselves. If the regular workers get unemployment, it is peanuts more or less. Why should executives get very generous severance packages, even for poor performance when the ordinary workers are left to fend for themselves?
Yes, the higher level employees and management need to share in with the sacrifice with the regular workers. It is only fair.
I agree Chris, They reward poor performance of the CEO's with a big severance package and if a Grunt employee does bad, they get fired and loose everything. Makes alot of sense don't it. Sometimes I don't understand that mentality at all.
I found this on CNN.....It was actually published yesterday which is surprising with the numbers that they use. It proves that not all areas of the country are bad.
Thanks for the links. I have seen two of the three links and they have interesting insights. The Big Three needs to make some fundamental changes if they need to go forward. The culture lacks personal accountability and discourages progressive thinking, very bureaucratic (reminds me of government). The bureaucratic culture needs to be fixed along with having the employees take a greater responsbility for their retirement plans. Quality control and improvement will help in addition to reducing labor costs (as noted in prior posts) and a change in the organizational bureaucratic cultures at GM, Ford, and Chrysler.
Why is it that i keep hearing that the UAW workers are expected to make concessions in pay and benefits and eliminate legacy costs, which are pensions people have earned! BUT I have yet to hear anything about the employees of AIG or CITI taking anykind of pay cut or lose benefits or possibly lose a good portion of their pension.....why is that? I would be willing to bet that most of the AIG or CITI workers earn as much if not way more than your average assembly line worker, and yet they recieved HUNDREDS of billions. Why are so many people concerned with UAW wage concessions and no mention of these other companies recieving taxpayer monies giving up anything? I have seen numerous polititions on every news network complaining about UAW but not one of them mention the other companies. Please somebody explain this!
I'd like to see a Citibank or AIG AVERAGE worker make the $73/hour with benefits that the 'Big 3' assembly line workers make.....I'm anti-union mainly for the reason that if you get a job at a workplace that has a union you are required to be a part of it and they take you're money without getting a choice.....As far as I'm concerned, unions are basically just people who get to throw fits if they don't get the money they want.....'I want a $1/hr raise each year or we'll strike!".......Why would most employers want to have unions in their businesses if this is what will happen.....
Where does everyone come up with the $73 per/hr come from? In Lansing, Mi at the cadillac plant I work in, we average about $28 per/hr. I doubt like hell that my benefits are $45 hr. If I make $28 hr, someone tell me what do the non-union workers at honda, toyota, hyundai, mercedes, etc. make per/hr? I seriously doubt they are that far behind $28!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
curious!
