| Author |
Message |
Spam Hater
Guest
|
 Posted:
Tue Nov 22, 2005 9:16 am Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
In article <7vg4o15vrhgue3tbn8bg38kmp5oembtr2p@4ax.com>,
murray641@email.com wrote:
| Quote: | Right now, from a
pure cost perspective, the only way GM will be saving money is through
not having to pay non-related labor costs associated with operating
the affected plants.
|
Plus avoiding the storage costs on unsold production.
I'm in the market for a replacement for my '95 Chrysler. After looking
at a few GM models- no way. Not even those Korean build models.
Current Chrysler and Ford cars don't meet my requirements either.
I saw a cars that do suit me at Toyota and Honda. How come they produce
the cars I could be happy with? I'm talking function here; not quality.
I expect many of the laid off GM workers could get employment down the
road at Toyota or Honda.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
80 Knight
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 22, 2005 3:27 pm Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
"Spam Hater" <iHate@spam.net> wrote in message
news:iHate-DD03A3.00400822112005@news.telus.net...
| Quote: | In article <7vg4o15vrhgue3tbn8bg38kmp5oembtr2p@4ax.com>,
murray641@email.com wrote:
Right now, from a
pure cost perspective, the only way GM will be saving money is through
not having to pay non-related labor costs associated with operating
the affected plants.
Plus avoiding the storage costs on unsold production.
I'm in the market for a replacement for my '95 Chrysler. After looking
at a few GM models- no way. Not even those Korean build models.
Current Chrysler and Ford cars don't meet my requirements either.
I saw a cars that do suit me at Toyota and Honda. How come they produce
the cars I could be happy with? I'm talking function here; not quality.
|
I honestly can not see how people can find a Honda or Toyota an attractive
vehicle. I have never seen one I would purchase. Same for Kia. Sure, GM has
some ugly-as-sin looking hulks, but they also produce what I think are the
most beautiful cars on the planet. Well, the ones normal people can afford
anyhow ;-) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Timmy Lexicon
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 22, 2005 6:43 pm Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
"80 Knight" <80_knightREMOVEME@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:QK6dnYpfZLkceR_eRVn-sg@rogers.com...
| Quote: | I honestly can not see how people can find a Honda or Toyota an
attractive
vehicle. I have never seen one I would purchase. Same for Kia. Sure, GM
has
some ugly-as-sin looking hulks, but they also produce what I think are
the
most beautiful cars on the planet. Well, the ones normal people can
afford
anyhow ;-)
|
I used to think the way you do at one time 80 K.
Then I bit the bullet and purchased a pre-owned
3 year old Honda Civic sedan with 35K on the clock
for my daughter to use at college. That was 11 Years
ago. That Honda is still going strong and apart from
a brake job, a new muffler and routine oil changes and
a coolant flushing, the car has NEVER been in the shop
even once for a major repair. It's now got 160K on the
clock and still starts and runs like a Singer sewing machine.
The body has aged and it "ain't pretty" like it used to
be but it still runs 4 my daughter and she loves it.
I wish that I could say the same for my wife's Ford Tarus
sedan (..scrapped and replaced with a Honda Accord last year)
and my GM truck which has had 2 major engine service
procedures before it reached 80K miles.
I would like to "buy American" via a Ford or a GM product, but the
likelyhood is very low at this time as I have found that Honda
builds a far more reliable car that Detroit. The only exception to
the rule is Subaru, my neighbor has an Outback Wagon that has
been plagued by oil leaks and cooling system problems from day
one. My mechanic echoed the same, saying that Subaru's engines
all have known problems with blown gaskets and oil leaks and not to touch
a Subaru product of any kind with a 10' pole. My next truck just
may be that Honda pickup their now making. It may be more plastic
than metal but if it's anything like my daughter's ultra-reliable Civic
it looks like it will be a keeper.
It's a damm shame Ford and GM can't design and build cars and trucks
which are just as reliable in the long term as Honda. Subaru is another
story however and their crap might as well have a GM logo affixed to it.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
gfulton
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 22, 2005 8:48 pm Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
"Timmy Lexicon" <tvord40071@gmail.nospm.com> wrote in message
news:3f505$43831267$d1cc7a72$20200@snip.allthenewsgroups.com...
| Quote: |
"80 Knight" <80_knightREMOVEME@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:QK6dnYpfZLkceR_eRVn-sg@rogers.com...
I honestly can not see how people can find a Honda or Toyota an
attractive
vehicle. I have never seen one I would purchase. Same for Kia. Sure, GM
has
some ugly-as-sin looking hulks, but they also produce what I think are
the
most beautiful cars on the planet. Well, the ones normal people can
afford
anyhow ;-)
I used to think the way you do at one time 80 K.
Then I bit the bullet and purchased a pre-owned
3 year old Honda Civic sedan with 35K on the clock
for my daughter to use at college. That was 11 Years
ago. That Honda is still going strong and apart from
a brake job, a new muffler and routine oil changes and
a coolant flushing, the car has NEVER been in the shop
even once for a major repair. It's now got 160K on the
clock and still starts and runs like a Singer sewing machine.
The body has aged and it "ain't pretty" like it used to
be but it still runs 4 my daughter and she loves it.
I wish that I could say the same for my wife's Ford Tarus
sedan (..scrapped and replaced with a Honda Accord last year)
and my GM truck which has had 2 major engine service
procedures before it reached 80K miles.
I would like to "buy American" via a Ford or a GM product, but the
likelyhood is very low at this time as I have found that Honda
builds a far more reliable car that Detroit. The only exception to
the rule is Subaru, my neighbor has an Outback Wagon that has
been plagued by oil leaks and cooling system problems from day
one. My mechanic echoed the same, saying that Subaru's engines
all have known problems with blown gaskets and oil leaks and not to touch
a Subaru product of any kind with a 10' pole. My next truck just
may be that Honda pickup their now making. It may be more plastic
than metal but if it's anything like my daughter's ultra-reliable Civic
it looks like it will be a keeper.
It's a damm shame Ford and GM can't design and build cars and trucks
which are just as reliable in the long term as Honda. Subaru is another
story however and their crap might as well have a GM logo affixed to it.
|
I guess these things are all subjective and just one guy's experience. I
have a hard time not commenting here, though, with respect to this due to my
experience with GM vehicles. I've got a '93 Chev. diesel pickup with
208,000 m. on it that has been without any major problems. Particularly the
turbodiesel engine. Absolutely rock solid reliability and this truck has
not been coddled at all. Had a '79 and an '83 of the same vehicle with the
exact same experience. Even the paint jobs never faded out on me and they
still looked good until the last day I had them. The only Jap car I ever
owned was back when I was working in Saudi Arabia. A Datsun that spum out a
rod bearing and left me beside the road. A friend I worked with bought one
of those new Nissan small pickups. He'd had it about a year when he started
in our work parking lot and the crank pully broke off at the crankshaft.
You read that right. The crankshaft snapped off flush with the front of the
engine. I'm not saying this has never happened to a GM vehicle, just that
I've never heard of it and I've been around for 56 yrs. I just do not agree
at all with this business of GM not building reliable vehicles, but, again,
it's just my personal experience.
Garrett Fulton |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Timmy Lexicon
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 22, 2005 9:20 pm Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
"PHILIPHD" <pdevolejr@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1132614054.621222.93850@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | Oh well keep buying overseas products and you will be wondering were
your job went to.
|
My wife's Honda Accord was built in Marysville Ohio with
major engine components supplied by USA based suppliers.
Looks to me like Honda is NOT "outsourcing" it's parts to suppliers
and sweatshops in Mexico and China, which both GM and Chrysler
have been doing for several years now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve W.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 22, 2005 10:44 pm Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
<murray641@email.com> wrote in message
news:8245o1piqf9feigu538hkkodqkmdus7dih@4ax.com...
| Quote: | On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 17:19:21 -0500, "doug"
dougejNOSPAM@SPAMFREEhotmail.com> wrote:
Good job? Usually not. UAW jobs are often physically taxing (even
with
automation) and often boring. On-the-job accidents are frequent. Many
workers must retire early due to physical problems caused by their
jobs.
But where is it written that people who don't have skillsets that make
them broadly employable can expect exciting jobs? And accidents, for
better or worse, are part of any manual labor scene.
Good benefits? Damn right. Don't blame the union for a contract that
GM
agreed to. Even more important, don't forget the many auto workers
who were
killed in the '30s while trying to win union representation. The
fringe
benefits that workers of all stripes now have available are a direct
result
of union workers' sacrifices. Things like pensions, medical coverage
and
vacations. Realize too that as union membership has decreased, so
have these
benefits. Is there a direct correlation? Maybe - maybe not. Certainly
foreign competition has affected the situation. But WalMart has no
foreign
competitors - and their benefits suck. Be sure of this - no executive
at GM,
Ford, or Chrysler has had his benefits slashed.
While this is true to a degree, your argument assumes that workers
would never gain ground due to a free-market economy. And because of
that, your argument is flawed. When a worker and/or a skill is in
demand, its price goes up, so wages and benefits have to rise if they
want to keep them. One only has to see the wage power that
white-collar individuals outside unit environments have to see the
benefit of this.
Wal-Mart's benefits suck because most of its employees are classified
as part-time. And no executive ever feels the pain that the worker
feels, no matter what.
|
Wal~Mart benefits do not SUCK. Hell my wife works for Wal~Mart . 16.75
Hr. Health / dental / visual, Incentive checks, two weeks vacation, one
week personal time. Holiday pay, company sponsors events for the
employees. If your a member of a volunteer organization you can fill out
a paper and get money ,time and items donated to the organization. 4 day
work week. Safety bonuses.
As for the stores. They employ a LOT of folks who others would not. They
also like to provide entry level jobs that even ex union folks can
handle.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
80 Knight
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:03 pm Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
"Timmy Lexicon" <tvord40071@gmail.nospm.com> wrote in message
news:3f505$43831267$d1cc7a72$20200@snip.allthenewsgroups.com...
| Quote: |
"80 Knight" <80_knightREMOVEME@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:QK6dnYpfZLkceR_eRVn-sg@rogers.com...
I honestly can not see how people can find a Honda or Toyota an
attractive
vehicle. I have never seen one I would purchase. Same for Kia. Sure, GM
has
some ugly-as-sin looking hulks, but they also produce what I think are
the
most beautiful cars on the planet. Well, the ones normal people can
afford
anyhow ;-)
I used to think the way you do at one time 80 K.
Then I bit the bullet and purchased a pre-owned
3 year old Honda Civic sedan with 35K on the clock
for my daughter to use at college. That was 11 Years
ago. That Honda is still going strong and apart from
a brake job, a new muffler and routine oil changes and
a coolant flushing, the car has NEVER been in the shop
even once for a major repair. It's now got 160K on the
clock and still starts and runs like a Singer sewing machine.
The body has aged and it "ain't pretty" like it used to
be but it still runs 4 my daughter and she loves it.
I wish that I could say the same for my wife's Ford Tarus
sedan (..scrapped and replaced with a Honda Accord last year)
and my GM truck which has had 2 major engine service
procedures before it reached 80K miles.
I would like to "buy American" via a Ford or a GM product, but the
likelyhood is very low at this time as I have found that Honda
builds a far more reliable car that Detroit. The only exception to
the rule is Subaru, my neighbor has an Outback Wagon that has
been plagued by oil leaks and cooling system problems from day
one. My mechanic echoed the same, saying that Subaru's engines
all have known problems with blown gaskets and oil leaks and not to touch
a Subaru product of any kind with a 10' pole. My next truck just
may be that Honda pickup their now making. It may be more plastic
than metal but if it's anything like my daughter's ultra-reliable Civic
it looks like it will be a keeper.
It's a damm shame Ford and GM can't design and build cars and trucks
which are just as reliable in the long term as Honda. Subaru is another
story however and their crap might as well have a GM logo affixed to it.
|
I can accept that. But, I can also say that I have had relatives (just as
yourself) who have had Chevy trucks last well past 400,000 with nothing
major done to it, and the other day a friend stopped by with a Cavalier
which had already rolled the odometer once, and they were quite pleased with
the car as well. As for Honda's, I cant really comment on them as I have
never owned one, and I have a strictly GM family (I live in Oshawa Ontario,
so a lot of them work at the plant there, and a couple more work for GM
dealerships), however my mother's boyfriend does have a Civic. Though, I
once again can't comment on it as I have never driven it, and he does not
know much about them as he trades it in every 2 or so years. I guess
basically, every car company makes the occasional 'pearl' and every company
makes the occasional 'lemon'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:15 pm Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
doug wrote:
| Quote: | Not in any union I've ever been a member of. Those guys will be on
furlough, with recall rights as per their seniority. Drawing
unemployment until they find another job or get recalled to GM. But
certainly not drawing a paycheck from GM. I've never been a UAW member
but I can't imagine what you're saying here is true.
Good job? Usually not. UAW jobs are often physically taxing (even with
automation) and often boring. On-the-job accidents are frequent. Many
workers must retire early due to physical problems caused by their jobs.
|
If they don't like it, they're free to leave.
| Quote: |
Good benefits? Damn right. Don't blame the union for a contract that GM
agreed to. Even more important, don't forget the many auto workers who were
killed in the '30s while trying to win union representation.
|
Yes, you normally do have to go back that far to remember when unions
contributed positively, rather than vampirically sucking on the tit of
capitalism in order to justify their socialist existence.
The fringe
| Quote: | benefits that workers of all stripes now have available are a direct result
of union workers' sacrifices. Things like pensions, medical coverage and
vacations. Realize too that as union membership has decreased, so have these
benefits. Is there a direct correlation? Maybe - maybe not.
|
Regardless, if an employee is valuable to a company, that company will
do whatever it needs to do to keep that employee. Sound familiar? It's
called "merit," something that frightens the entitlement nuts in the
unions.
Certainly
| Quote: | foreign competition has affected the situation. But WalMart has no foreign
competitors - and their benefits suck. Be sure of this - no executive at GM,
Ford, or Chrysler has had his benefits slashed.
|
Of course unqualified statements like this are hilarious. But even if
it was true, they probably kept their benefits by earning them,
something else the unions have no concept of. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jerry
Guest
|
| Posted:
Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:28 pm Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
The unions are sponsoring a lot of negative press against them because they
failed to organize them. I also know an individual that worked for them a
number of years and was very pleased with the experience.
--
Jerry
"Steve W." <Dugdug56@what.com> wrote in message
news:1132678038_21997@spool6-east.superfeed.net...
| Quote: |
murray641@email.com> wrote in message
news:8245o1piqf9feigu538hkkodqkmdus7dih@4ax.com...
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 17:19:21 -0500, "doug"
dougejNOSPAM@SPAMFREEhotmail.com> wrote:
Good job? Usually not. UAW jobs are often physically taxing (even
with
automation) and often boring. On-the-job accidents are frequent. Many
workers must retire early due to physical problems caused by their
jobs.
But where is it written that people who don't have skillsets that make
them broadly employable can expect exciting jobs? And accidents, for
better or worse, are part of any manual labor scene.
Good benefits? Damn right. Don't blame the union for a contract that
GM
agreed to. Even more important, don't forget the many auto workers
who were
killed in the '30s while trying to win union representation. The
fringe
benefits that workers of all stripes now have available are a direct
result
of union workers' sacrifices. Things like pensions, medical coverage
and
vacations. Realize too that as union membership has decreased, so
have these
benefits. Is there a direct correlation? Maybe - maybe not. Certainly
foreign competition has affected the situation. But WalMart has no
foreign
competitors - and their benefits suck. Be sure of this - no executive
at GM,
Ford, or Chrysler has had his benefits slashed.
While this is true to a degree, your argument assumes that workers
would never gain ground due to a free-market economy. And because of
that, your argument is flawed. When a worker and/or a skill is in
demand, its price goes up, so wages and benefits have to rise if they
want to keep them. One only has to see the wage power that
white-collar individuals outside unit environments have to see the
benefit of this.
Wal-Mart's benefits suck because most of its employees are classified
as part-time. And no executive ever feels the pain that the worker
feels, no matter what.
Wal~Mart benefits do not SUCK. Hell my wife works for Wal~Mart . 16.75
Hr. Health / dental / visual, Incentive checks, two weeks vacation, one
week personal time. Holiday pay, company sponsors events for the
employees. If your a member of a volunteer organization you can fill out
a paper and get money ,time and items donated to the organization. 4 day
work week. Safety bonuses.
As for the stores. They employ a LOT of folks who others would not. They
also like to provide entry level jobs that even ex union folks can
handle.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=---- |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
billccm
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 23, 2005 1:58 am Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
I have never owned a foreign make automobile, and have driven mostly
Chrysler products my entire life, but I can comment on what I observe
with this newgroup when it comes to GM cars.
It seems that there are many repeatable design flaws that show up on
the usenet like crazy with GM cars. To be specific, Impalas seem to
have consistent ISS issues, water leaks, funky BCMs, engine cradle
squeeks and pops, and plastic intake manifold failures/leaks. This is
not caused by assembly line workmanship (ie unions), but rather poor
design engineering management. YES, all cars have design flaws,
including the Japanese, but the GM of yesteryear would not have allowed
this kind of car in the public domain. This is why they must learn to
live with shrinking market share.
My first GM car is a 2001 Impala LS. For the money, it has been very
satisfactory, but I still am disappointed that many design flaws are
reminding me that there are better cars available.
With my Chrysler car experience, I accepted the fact that they were
much cheaper cars then the competitation, therefore, I understood a
lower reliability rating. With the year old poor resale of a Chrysler
product, you can get a very nice car for the price of a KIA, and even
with the reduced relibily, they are good cars for the money.
IF GM wanted to improve, they could, but they won't. American
management style will not allow the changes required to compete in a
global market. Therefore, GM is shrinking, and learning to be
profitable with less market share, which keeps management and Wall
Street happy, and that is all that matters.
Have a nice Thanksgiving. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 23, 2005 2:44 am Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
| Quote: | I honestly can not see how people can find a Honda or Toyota an
attractive
vehicle. I have never seen one I would purchase. Same for Kia. Sure, GM
has
some ugly-as-sin looking hulks, but they also produce what I think are
the
most beautiful cars on the planet. Well, the ones normal people can
afford
anyhow ;-)
|
When the price of a car approaches $20grand ( or more )
people want more than styling and slogans.
You can't say that Japanese cars are priced any cheaper
than comparable American sedans.
You can't even allude to overseas assembly.
Several Japanese brands are assembled in the US
And yet when all is said and done,
consumers vote with their dollars,
and they're rejecting the Detroit product.
<rj> |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steve W.
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 23, 2005 4:13 am Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
I figure the main reason is because the unions are losing members and
workplaces and many of the new places are non union. The big shots in
the unions are losing money because of it so they are trying to attach
themselves to a new tit. I don't figure it will be that long before
unions are gone completely and people who are used to having jobs due to
"seniority" will have to prove they can actually do a job.
It's a lot like the teachers unions that fight merit based pay tooth and
nail because it means MANY of thier members will be very low paid. Want
to know the real reason that many other countries have much better
education, they do not allow unions.
--
Steve Williams
"Jerry" <NoSpam@???.??.com> wrote in message
news:_yIgf.225207$lI5.167709@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
| Quote: | The unions are sponsoring a lot of negative press against them because
they
failed to organize them. I also know an individual that worked for
them a
number of years and was very pleased with the experience.
--
Jerry
"Steve W." <Dugdug56@what.com> wrote in message
news:1132678038_21997@spool6-east.superfeed.net...
murray641@email.com> wrote in message
news:8245o1piqf9feigu538hkkodqkmdus7dih@4ax.com...
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 17:19:21 -0500, "doug"
dougejNOSPAM@SPAMFREEhotmail.com> wrote:
Good job? Usually not. UAW jobs are often physically taxing (even
with
automation) and often boring. On-the-job accidents are frequent.
Many
workers must retire early due to physical problems caused by their
jobs.
But where is it written that people who don't have skillsets that
make
them broadly employable can expect exciting jobs? And accidents,
for
better or worse, are part of any manual labor scene.
Good benefits? Damn right. Don't blame the union for a contract
that
GM
agreed to. Even more important, don't forget the many auto workers
who were
killed in the '30s while trying to win union representation. The
fringe
benefits that workers of all stripes now have available are a
direct
result
of union workers' sacrifices. Things like pensions, medical
coverage
and
vacations. Realize too that as union membership has decreased, so
have these
benefits. Is there a direct correlation? Maybe - maybe not.
Certainly
foreign competition has affected the situation. But WalMart has no
foreign
competitors - and their benefits suck. Be sure of this - no
executive
at GM,
Ford, or Chrysler has had his benefits slashed.
While this is true to a degree, your argument assumes that workers
would never gain ground due to a free-market economy. And because
of
that, your argument is flawed. When a worker and/or a skill is in
demand, its price goes up, so wages and benefits have to rise if
they
want to keep them. One only has to see the wage power that
white-collar individuals outside unit environments have to see the
benefit of this.
Wal-Mart's benefits suck because most of its employees are
classified
as part-time. And no executive ever feels the pain that the worker
feels, no matter what.
Wal~Mart benefits do not SUCK. Hell my wife works for Wal~Mart .
16.75
Hr. Health / dental / visual, Incentive checks, two weeks vacation,
one
week personal time. Holiday pay, company sponsors events for the
employees. If your a member of a volunteer organization you can fill
out
a paper and get money ,time and items donated to the organization. 4
day
work week. Safety bonuses.
As for the stores. They employ a LOT of folks who others would not.
They
also like to provide entry level jobs that even ex union folks can
handle.
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure
Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via
Encryption
=----
|
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David Starr
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 23, 2005 4:45 am Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 23:10:30 GMT, "Jerry" <NoSpam@???.??.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Ave. pay is 65 per hour for unskilled labor - overtime is much greater.
Where does this $65 per hour figure come from? When I retired in Feb, I was |
getting $31.00 per hour. If the 65 figure is to be believed, my benefits cost
GM $34.00 per hour, or $68,000 per year based on a 2000 hour work year!
| Quote: | All health care and drugs paid for at pretty much 100% (includes retirees).
I pay 50% of all office visits. One of the three prescriptions I take is not |
covered by my GM health insurance. I pay $130.00 per month for that out of my
pocket.
| Quote: | Guaranteed full pay and benefits for 2 years in the case of layoffs. I know
some PHD's who would like contracts like this.
Whose fault is it that the PhD's chose a low paying field? |
| Quote: | IMO GM will not survive, because the unions are spoiled and will not give in that much.
How much should we give? For 40 years, GM told me I would receive these |
benefits. For 40 years I was promised a pension when I retired. That pension
is $1800.00 per month, BTW.
One of the plants closing is the Flint, MI, Powertrain North plant where the
3800 V6 is built. They have 633 hourly employees and 102 salary, per today's
Detroit papers. That's 6.2 hourly for every salary employee. In the plant I
worked in, in the same complex, one department has 1 supervisor for every 4
employees. The plant I used to work in recently eliminated the 2nd shift. All
the 2nd shife supervisors were moved to the day shift. There were NO salary
cuts. I know that topheavy management is not part of the problem, though. It's
always the greedy workers on the plant floor.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant.
Now I can do what I enjoy: Large Format Photography
Web Site: www.destarr.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
David Starr
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 23, 2005 5:02 am Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
On Mon, 21 Nov 2005 19:25:13 -0500, "doug" <dougejNOSPAM@SPAMFREEhotmail.com>
wrote:
| Quote: |
Boring yes, that's because anyone could do the jobs at much less than the
65/hour that they're getting, not counting overtime.
Don't kid yourself - or try to BS anyone else. Your arrogant attitude
indicates that you have no idea what's involved with the job. And 65 an
hour? ROTFLMAO
|
I doubt the OP has ever been in an auto plant, let alone worked in one.
| Quote: | Accidents - mostly faked to get paid time off.
Really? Nothing like severing your finger to get a day off. Or a herniated
disc. Or being electrocuted. Just check with OSHA if you doubt it.
|
I retired in Feb as an electrician. In the year previous to my retirement, 4
other electricians in my plant were told that GM no longer had jobs for them.
All 4 had suffered in-plant injuries.
1. Torn bicep moving a platform to get to the job. A torn bicep can be
reattached up to 5 weeks after the injury. GM waited 3 months to send him
to a specialist.
2. Arm caught in machine and almosr severed at the elbow about 10 years ago.
Rheumatoid arthritis developed over the years.
3. Torn knee ligaments and cartilage after slipping and falling on an oily plant
floor. Knee now requires replacement.
4. Herniated discs after falling on a junk-strewn overhead catwalk. Surgery
brought very little relief.
All 4 of these had work restrictions dur to their injuries. One at a time over
the past year they were called to plant medical and told there were no longer
any jobs they could do with their restrictions. They were involutarily retired
on the spot. pensions were based on their years of service, 26 in most cases.
if they want to get disability, they have to hire a lawyer at their expense to
negotiate, or possibly sue, for a settlement.
Don't even mention the "legal services" plan. It's worthless. All the "lawyers
tell you is to go hire a lawyer.
| Quote: |
These guys will someday realize that there is no free lunch. Areas around
GM plants nickename them as "Generous Motors" - that is certainlly true,
but will end in a few yeare due to global competition.
I doubt that you'll find many UAW workers who aren't aware of it. But like I
said - GM accepted the deal. Don't blame the workers. Your typical
anti-union attitude is common among those who are trapped in a lousy job
with crappy non-union pay and benefits, jealous of those are EARNING more
than you.
Amen. |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Retired Shop Rat: 14,647 days in a GM plant.
Now I can do what I enjoy: Large Format Photography
Web Site: www.destarr.com
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hairy
Guest
|
| Posted:
Wed Nov 23, 2005 7:58 am Post subject:
Re: GM to cut 30,000 Jobs & Close several NA Plants |
|
|
"Spam Hater" <iHate@spam.net> wrote >
| Quote: | I'm in the market for a replacement for my '95 Chrysler. After looking
at a few GM models- no way. Not even those Korean build models.
Current Chrysler and Ford cars don't meet my requirements either.
I saw a cars that do suit me at Toyota and Honda. How come they produce
the cars I could be happy with? I'm talking function here; not quality.
|
Just out of curiosity, what "function" does a Honda or Toyota have that
can't be found on a GM vehicle?
Dave |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in