Give me a break...

[DAVID GAGNARD]

I own a 2500 HD Diesel (that I have towed 16,000 pounds with, try that with a Jap POS), a Jeep wrangler (6 years old and nothing has broken), a 1983 Dodge D150 work truck (still going strong), a 1949 Cady (also still going strong), and a 1997 Harley Davidson (not an American car, but still an American product). All of the above vehicles have been great. I think a lot of people think of a mid 70's quality vehicle when they think of American, but most of the new vehicles are very good.

Since 1978, my wife and I have had 8 Ford cars and trucks....

my 05 2500HD Diesel Supy Duty lost it's turbo at 4,000 miles, my wifes 02 Taurus was in the shop 4 times before it had 30,000 miles on it....needed injectors,catalytic converter and rotors, and a few other little odds/ends, wind noise, rain leaking in the car etc.,etc., her T-bird caught fire and nearly burned to the ground while going to work one morning, it had about 20,000 miles at the time.....

By contrast, I'm on my second Toyota company car, first did 250,000 miles with only routine mantince,traded it in on the present one, as of today it's got a tad over 406,000 miles!!!!!!! had to replace the fan belt at 225,000 miles and the valve cover gasket at about 300,000 miles, still going strong.....only routine mantinence.....

In my line of work I see wrecked cars all day, every day....High mileage Hondas,Toyotas,Nissans,etc. are the rule, high mileage American cars/trucks are the EXCEPTION.........

I still own and drive Ford products, but the foreign brands are better,hands down..........

David

[sparks]

Some of you have said how these(line worker people) make $65k -100k, and you are rite to a point. The auto plants have MANDATORY over-time. The skilled trade guys are the ones who usually make around 100k and thats w/ mega O.T. If these workers worked a regular year w/ no O.T. they would avg. between 40-50k a year. Thats really not chit...These people work LOTSSSS of O.T. Getting payed when layed off is (80% of there take home pay). Not a bad deal still but I think one reason for that is to keep the ceo's from big layoffs just to get bigger bonus's? I really feel that if ALL were to take a 15% cut across the board w/no bonus's for a while ,cut back on OT,tax foreign products as they do are's, and get med. costs under control the B3 would have No trouble competeing w/ the enemy........

[Anthony]

I don't know what the big deal is about how much or how little UAW employees are paid, how and when their paid. It's a capitalistic free society, where both the big three and UAW agreed upon those terms however unfair they may be from anyones point of view.

I was talking to a Chevy dealer employee the other day. He told me GM owed his dealership $805,000 in paybacks, incentives, etc, and that if GM goes bankrupt, they may only get a fraction of it, if any at all, and they are near the bottom of the "owed" list. I come to realize that the real losers are the dealers and suppliers who are owed monies, and whose businesses are so dependant upon the Big Three. The Big Three and UAW employess did it to each other, and unfortunately have affected other ? more responsible businesses.

Finally, the real irony to the entire situation are the senators and congressmen grilling the CEO's of their mismanagement, leading to this situation, when they themselves caused the entire financial crisis itself with the mismanagement of fannie mae / f mac along with some other key influencing factors. WTF are the politicians (lawyers) doing running this country when they have no idea how to run any type of business. They're good at writing laws, allowing loop holes, etc, allowing people to get away with not being responsible for their actions/screw-ups. When I saw fudge packer Frank on 60 minutes the other night, I got ill and had to turn the channel before I threw up. These people should not be running this country, but they are. Their decisions and laws are what that has gotten us in this mess, like it has in the past as well, costing billions of dollars, from all of us, our families, many retiree's pensions, etc. Honest to god, the more I experience the business world, the more F'd Up i see it. Again, all based on the laws that protect people who screw other people, the lack of accountability.

[nevermind65]

Hey...good for you! Let's see...my girlfriends 2007 Impala (10k miles)has been back to the dealer twice for warped rotors. A fellow worker has had new rotors put on his 2007 Chrysler 300 at 13k miles, and another co-worker has had brakes replaced on his 2008 Ford Edge at 17k.

Hmmm...my Toyota RAV 4 just had front brakes replaced at 90k for the first time. BTW...I'm trading it in on a Ford Fusion AWD because they are practically giving it to me.

Originally Posted by SP01715

I own a 2500 HD Diesel (that I have towed 16,000 pounds with, try that with a Jap POS), a Jeep wrangler (6 years old and nothing has broken), a 1983 Dodge D150 work truck (still going strong), a 1949 Cady (also still going strong), and a 1997 Harley Davidson (not an American car, but still an American product). All of the above vehicles have been great. I think a lot of people think of a mid 70's quality vehicle when they think of American, but most of the new vehicles are very good.

[392cobra]

I have had my '04 Subaru WRX STi for 64 months.

It has only had/needed/required oil & filter change every 3,000 miles.
You just start it on the first crank and go anywhere.

[Dan40]

Anthony,
I agree with everything you said.
And I agree with those that say the unions suck.
And I agree with those that say the unions are great.
And I agree with those who say the B-3 management sucks.
And I agree with those who say management is great.
And I agree with those who say Congress sucks.
And I agree with those who say Congress is gre........... Hmmm, I'd be all alone there, scratch that!
The B-3 has been beautiful throughout the entire begging process. Both mgmt. and Mr. Getfingered.
First they arrive in INDIVIDUAL private jets, crying 'poor mouth.' and they bring a financial 'expert' to back their beg.
They want 'ONLY' $25B, altho their numbers total $27B (a $2,000,000,000.00 ERROR is nuttin', right?)
The 'expert says, "Yes, they must have the $25B." Then adds, "They REALLY need $125B to $150B!"
Guess he lost his seat on the jet! He's gone missing.
B-3 comes back in a week, "Doesn't matter if it was $25B or $27B, cause we MUST have $34B, TODAY, OR ELSE!
Back again, "OK, we'll take $14B or $15B, but we really need $40B or $50B for a "BRIDGE" loan.
How can anybody now doubt that these ARE the guys to fix the auto industry?

Maybe they can tell us where to get the money to bail them out?
Because we were way beyond broke when we authorized the $700B.
And it is 'Financial Magic' that we have spent half of the 700 without having any of it.
Altho "FM" usually stands for a different kind of 'F------ Magic!'

Dan

[Wes Tausend]

...

Originally Posted by Dan40

I agree with everything you said.
And I agree with those that say the unions suck.
And I agree with those that say the unions are great.
And I agree with those who say the B-3 management sucks.
And I agree with those who say management is great.
And I agree with those who say Congress sucks.
And I agree with those who say Congress is gre........... Hmmm, I'd be all alone there, scratch that!

Good one. As usual, the truth probably lies in the middle. Still, it seems the working class takes it between the cheeks again. Something isn't right.

I have a hard time accepting that $76/hour is not spun far beyond reality.
Granted, the $76 seems to be accepted as common knowledge but I think it has been repeated so often, it has "morphed into common knowledge".
As evidence, I offer this Dilbert cartoon, http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2008-11-09/ .
Note the "morph into common knowledge" panel.
Note the timing (date) on this cartoon altogether.

At one time I had a small construction company. My business ran with wages plus 15%. If an example of base UAW wages were $28/hr, what the hell kind of math list, produces wages plus 170% ($28+$48=$76/hr)?

To my employees earnings per hour, I had to add about 7.5% for Social Security and another 7.5% for Workmans Compensation. Starting wages were $6/hr, I paid overtime after 8 hours, there were no other benefits and I had 12 employees. I had pride in paying better than average wage in my area. I looked into an open shop (mixed union/non-union) as a ticket into powerplant projects. I was even looking at about $400/mo/man healthcare until the 1979 Carter/interest rate debacle hit. Deja vu.

Where is an insightful breakdown in the UAW/OEM case? If an additional $10/hour over $28/hr went to health care (a biggy), a 40 hour week would generate $400/wk or $1600/mo. That might cut it. What about the other $38/hr after base wage and health care? ($76-$28-$10=$38)

The most alarming amount is: if $76/hr equals 10% cost of an auto(per UAW propoganda), then $760 is the total cost per hour per auto. I'd really like to see a piechart of where that $760 goes.

I will submit one of the reasons labor may not be a large chunk is: consider a factory run with one employee and two acres of robots. Obviously wages would be the least cost. So if that is the case, I'd like to see the books ...why the robots seem to cost so much per hour.

In one huge way, the present wage dilema is the UAW's fault.
If management should have known that gas guzzlers were at a precipice, so should UAW have known, "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush."
Money up front is all that really counts.

Everybody wants the biggest piece of pie.
The working class invariably picks all the berries for the absolute entire pie, including the "free pie" (an average 10% longterm normal annual growth in the market).

- All the berries, including all the berries that become all the taxes.

- All the berries, including a very large piece
...for those that get a bigger berry filled piece than any one lone man could possibly pick
...and then whine about their taxes as though they paid them themselves.

- All the berries, including a very small piece for those that get it just because they exist inside our borders.

And that's why I wonder where the $760 an hour goes more than anything. There's simply not much pie left after that.

Wes


...

[VRM]

Wes,
Unfortunately the numbers are realistic.

GM and Toyota pay their current people about the same. GM tends to be a dollar or two per hour higher, but that margin does not account for the huge difference.

GM has 500,000 or so past employees that they cover some or all of their healthcare for. This adds a lot to the cost of making a vehicle, and is an expense that Toyota is not dealing with.
Toyota also has a LOT less plants and runs them over capacity (overtime for workers) as opposed to GM that runs at less than 100%. GM also has more than twice the manager level employees as Toyota.

GMs business model works great when you have no competition and have 40% market share like they did in the '40s.

Steve

[Jamo]

Wes ol buddy...eh...dare I repeat myself for the zillionth time...read the contract. You're simply refusing to deal with the facts. In times past, folks kept to the line that the world was flat.

Steve...the costs for retirees are NOT part of the wage/benefits being cited. You always ask for sources, so read the contract. And BTW, GM and the other two pay an excessive amount of overtime. There have been work stoppages by the UAW when the companies sought to control overtime.

I know...facts just screw up the flow of your preconceived notions.

[SP01715]

Originally Posted by DAVID GAGNARD

Since 1978, my wife and I have had 8 Ford cars and trucks....

my 05 2500HD Diesel Supy Duty David

A 2500 HD is a GM product. A Super Duty is a Ford. Do you actually own an American truck truck?

I owned many Toyota trucks back in the late 80's, and I have friends that still buy Toyotas and they are not free from problems. On top of that try pulling a 16,000 pound boat 1400 miles with a Toyota. Go to a launch ramp where big boats are being launched and all you will see is American trucks. Same goes for big 5th wheel rigs. The Jap trucks will not do the job. I have a friend that towed boats for a living and he put over 400K hard miles on his 99 Ford Super Duty Diesel, and the truck ran strong until the day he sold it.

I think the B3 have serious problems, with the biggest one being the UAW. They do build some quality stuff though.

[SP01715]

Originally Posted by nevermind65

Hey...good for you! Let's see...my girlfriends 2007 Impala (10k miles)has been back to the dealer twice for warped rotors. A fellow worker has had new rotors put on his 2007 Chrysler 300 at 13k miles, and another co-worker has had brakes replaced on his 2008 Ford Edge at 17k.

Hmmm...my Toyota RAV 4 just had front brakes replaced at 90k for the first time. BTW...I'm trading it in on a Ford Fusion AWD because they are practically giving it to me.

I think you will be happier seeing how the Rav4 is a chick car. J/K

BTW, My wrangler has 90k on it and nothing more than routine maintenance. I beat the crap out of it off road and it has been rock solid even pulling 33's with a 4 1/2" lift. Best car I have ever owned...

[nevermind65]

Chick car? Matters not to me. My company pays for it, the insurance, maintenance, and gas. It's an 05 with now over 90k.

When somebody else is paying, I could care less. Gives me a LOT more money to mess with the Cobra.

[DAVID GAGNARD]

Originally Posted by SP01715

A 2500 HD is a GM product. A Super Duty is a Ford. Do you actually own an American truck truck?

I owned many Toyota trucks back in the late 80's, and I have friends that still buy Toyotas and they are not free from problems. On top of that try pulling a 16,000 pound boat 1400 miles with a Toyota. Go to a launch ramp where big boats are being launched and all you will see is American trucks. Same goes for big 5th wheel rigs. The Jap trucks will not do the job. I have a friend that towed boats for a living and he put over 400K hard miles on his 99 Ford Super Duty Diesel, and the truck ran strong until the day he sold it.

I think the B3 have serious problems, with the biggest one being the UAW. They do build some quality stuff though.

My mistake in typing, IT IS an 05 Crew Cab Super Duty Diesel, should have left off the HD, you want me to post a picutre for proof????
Since buying my first Ford truck in 1976, I HAVE OWNED NOTHING BUT FORD TRUCKS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I do love the truck, I tow a race car and a bass boat as well as a bay boat and it does the job effortlessly......but, at 4,000 miles the turbo went out and I purposely waited for the 05's so I could get the intergrated electric brake controller which, BTW is a piece of crap in the 05's, 2 different dealers have worked on it a total of 4 times and it still doesn't work half as good as an under dash aftermarket unit.......just check with any ford truck diesel forum and you'll see what I'm talking about.........

As stated, bewteen my wife and I, we have had numerous Ford cars and trucks. I've had one truck (1989 model F-150) go beyound 100,000 miles without any major problems, ONLY ONE......We have not had a Ford car even make 100,000. One almost burned to the ground at around 20,000 while driving 30 mph down the road.Others need major work once they passed 60,000 miles....

At the present time, I have the 05 F-250, wifey drives a Taurus and I have a 65 Mustang and a 66 Mustang, we are a Ford family... I just re-counted and since we've been married, we've had 12 Ford cars and trucks...(would you like for me to list them for proof???)....Just saying Ford doesn't neccasarily make the best cars and trucks out there...............

For every high mileage Ford/Chev./Dodge truck/car you can find, I'll show you 10 Toyota/Hondas with the same or more mileage.....I do this for a living, I see on the average "only" 1,200 cars and trucks a year, for the last 14 years, so I do know a "little" of what I'm talkng about.......

David

[Wes Tausend]

Originally Posted by Jamo

Wes ol buddy...eh...dare I repeat myself for the zillionth time...read the contract. You're simply refusing to deal with the facts. In times past, folks kept to the line that the world was flat.

Steve...the costs for retirees are NOT part of the wage/benefits being cited. You always ask for sources, so read the contract. And BTW, GM and the other two pay an excessive amount of overtime. There have been work stoppages by the UAW when the companies sought to control overtime.

I know...facts just screw up the flow of your preconceived notions.

Jamo,

Read the contract? That's a lot of work. Could you be more specific?
Are you asking me to passively accept $76/hr, because UAW obviously gets so many benefits besides wages, as outlined in said 2007 contract, that it must be true?

I'm basically questioning the relation of three figures in my posts.
One: is $76/hr(thereabouts) real ...or exaggerated spin?
Two: is labor cost really only 10% of a vehicle ...or exaggerated spin?
Three: if 10% labor is accurate, and $76/hr is accurate ...then one may logically derive that each auto brings in $760/hr as it moves down the line. Where does all this very significant amount of money go?
Why are we all focused on the minor $76/hr amount? Is labor the only significant fat in the plant, if at all? Or is it all we hear?
Hard for me to believe, and I think it should be hard for all of us to believe ...once we have all thought about it. How could a variation of 10% reduced to, at best half, for a total 5% cost reduction, make or break corporate OEM? Give me a break.

I'm not sure what clarity you expect me to gain by reading the contract. I'm sure it's full of minor penalties on both sides.
I'm kind of assuming that an exact total hourly figure for an average employee is not directly quoted in the contract anywhere. In many cases of benefits, not even a specific amount is mentioned. All are contingent on sets of unique circumstances. As an example, my own cash rail compensation is almost never the same from trip to trip. It's always the same per mile ...plus or minus all the minor variable BS that goes with it. Benefits such as health are based on the calendar, independent of trips. None are added nor subtracted to total, until they hit a pay stub or white sheet.

It is my assumption that the $76/hour UAW figure is a vague, yet tearful, press release from corporate OEM. There is a good chance that no explanatory pie chart ever accompanied the figure, and yet it is accepted as a cruel "self-evident truth" by just about everyone. Except me.

Part of what I'm trying to say is that I would like to see how OEM arrived at the seemingly astounding $76/hr(thereabouts) figure. It's quite possible that if we do similar creative math, within any of our employers, that forum members will find that the claimed cost of their own labor also commonly approaches 2 1/2 times actual wage, day to day. Or in the case of UAW possibly being excessively imbursed by 1/2, perhaps we only manage 2X etc.

I don't automatically think the claims of over-cost of labor has diddly to do with the imminent failure of US manufacturing. Faithful Labor is just taking the heat ...yet again.

Opportunity knocks and the exorbitantly priced, yet talented, "welfare recipients", at the top, don't miss a beat. And the majority of us buy it ...as we sign away our personal sovereignty to the fruit of our own efforts.

Well, I could be wrong, but that's my scientific theory how the top 1 percenters got on top. Unless there actually resides an undisputed fact to the contrary in the contract. Enlighten me.

The great tragedy of science - the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact ...Thomas Huxley

Wes


...

[Stentor]

Originally Posted by Wes Tausend

Jamo,

Three: if 10% labor is accurate, and $76/hr is accurate ...then one may logically derive that each auto brings in $760/hr as it moves down the line. Where does all this very significant amount of money go?

...

I am guessing you were not a math major!? I think your "logic" and calculations are flawed.

[Wes Tausend]

Originally Posted by Wes

Three: if 10% labor is accurate, and $76/hr is accurate ...then one may logically derive that each auto brings in $760/hr as it moves down the line.

Originally Posted by Stentor

I am guessing you were not a math major!? I think your "logic" and calculations are flawed.

You are quite correct Stentor. Good catch. My bad.
I've been trying to avoid the apparent clumsy mixing of apples and oranges ever since the discord of the two opposing propogandas struck me.

It should read, "Three: if 10% labor cost of total cost is accurate per auto (by UAW), and $76/hr cost is accurate per employee (by OEM) ...then one may logically derive that each auto costs $760/hr to produce as it moves down the line."

Better? What do you calculate? No, really.

Wes


...

[Jamo]

Originally Posted by Wes Tausend

Jamo,

Read the contract? That's a lot of work. Could you be more specific?
Are you asking me to passively accept $76/hr, because UAW obviously gets so many benefits besides wages, as outlined in said 2007 contract, that it must be true?


I'm not sure what clarity you expect me to gain by reading the contract.

**********
I'm kind of assuming that an exact total hourly figure for an average employee is not directly quoted in the contract anywhere.

**********
It is my assumption that the $76/hour UAW figure is a vague, yet tearful, press release from corporate OEM.

**********
Part of what I'm trying to say is that I would like to see how OEM arrived at the seemingly astounding $76/hr(thereabouts) figure.

**********
The great tragedy of science - the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact ...Thomas Huxley

Wes


...

Wes...no flame or disrespect intended, but you have essentially made yourself totally irrelevant to this discussion.

[VRM]

Originally Posted by Jamo

Wes ol buddy...eh...dare I repeat myself for the zillionth time...read the contract. You're simply refusing to deal with the facts. In times past, folks kept to the line that the world was flat.

Steve...the costs for retirees are NOT part of the wage/benefits being cited. You always ask for sources, so read the contract. And BTW, GM and the other two pay an excessive amount of overtime. There have been work stoppages by the UAW when the companies sought to control overtime.

I know...facts just screw up the flow of your preconceived notions.

I'd be happy to read it. I've looked for it before and have not been able to find it online. Can you post a link or send a copy? I work with the facts I have - if you can prove them wrong (a contract could certainly do that) I will be happy to say so. Try proving your case instead of trying to convince me that you know everything there is to know about everything. Show me the data that you are working from and I may come to the same conclusion that you have.

Steve

[Jamo]

Originally Posted by VRM

I'd be happy to read it. I've looked for it before and have not been able to find it online. Can you post a link or send a copy? I work with the facts I have - if you can prove them wrong (a contract could certainly do that) I will be happy to say so. Try proving your case instead of trying to convince me that you know everything there is to know about everything. Show me the data that you are working from and I may come to the same conclusion that you have.

Steve

As much as I detest the ignorance of facts, I really can't stand pure-assed laziness coupled with a willingness to put forth utterances of intense BS.

It's a freeking national labor contract...if you think you're smart enough to spout opinions about it, you certainly should be able to find it.

In other words...go fish.

[jhv48]

I think we can ALL agree that there needs to be a complete overhaul of these behemouths in order for order for them to survive and competitiveness to be retained.

And that means EVERYONE and EVERYTHING is up for evaluation and review. The pork needs to be cut from the top on down. It's going to hurt and everyone is going to have to compromise somewhat.

If not, it's BK time! (Not Burger King)