PDA

View Full Version : GM, Chrysler tell Romney he's wrong about Chinese jobs claim



zeus3925
10-31-2012, 08:50 AM
Looks like Willard got into a little creative history:

http://www.freep.com/article/20121031/NEWS15/310310091/GM-Chrysler-tell-Romney-he-s-wrong-about-Chinese-jobs-claim

Buzz
10-31-2012, 08:58 AM
Looks like Willard got into a little creative history:

http://www.freep.com/article/20121031/NEWS15/310310091/GM-Chrysler-tell-Romney-he-s-wrong-about-Chinese-jobs-claim


Doesn't mater what GM and Chrysler say, the crew here will defend Willard to the very end, no matter what. Romney is referring to Chrysler as an Italian company, ignoring the fact that they are 45% owned by the UAW. That is the tac that Romney should take, calling them a UAW owned company, that would fire up the base...

M&K's Retrievers
10-31-2012, 09:10 AM
Wonder why they are 45% owned by the UAW?

Buzz
10-31-2012, 09:38 AM
Wonder why they are 45% owned by the UAW?


The story is here:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124087751929461535.html

I can't find the article I was reading, but yesterday I read a statement from Marchionne that Fiat now owns 55% of Chrysler while the UAW owns 45%. I don't know if that is correct because I don't believe that the US has sold it's share, maybe it has. Marchionne stated that the origional intent was for Fiat to buy more of Chrysler, but they are now content to leave the UAW with it's ownership stake because Fiat doesn't have the cash to follow through because of the tanking auto sales in Europe. Below is a NYT article on Chryslers most recent results. It seems that the bail out of Chrysler has worked out in spades...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/30/business/chrysler-profit-rises-80-percent.html




DETROIT — Chrysler (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/chrysler_llc/index.html?inline=nyt-org)
, the third-largest Detroit automaker, said on Monday that its third-quarter profit rose 80 percent on the strength of new models, less debt and steadily growing sales in both American and international markets.The company said it earned $381 million in net income, up from $212 million in the same period a year ago. Revenue for the quarter was $15.5 billion, an 18 percent increase from $13.1 billion in the same period last year.The results could be seen as the latest evidence that Chrysler’s improbable comeback from its government bailout and bankruptcy was not only sustainable, but accelerating.“We’ve changed the conversation at Chrysler Group,” said Sergio Marchionne, the chief executive of both Chrysler and its Italian parent, Fiat. “We continue to work feverishly and are pleased to see that our all-consuming aspiration for excellence is translating into results.”Chrysler’s solid results are propping up the faltering European operations of Fiat, which was scheduled to release its third-quarter earnings on Tuesday.Mr. Marchionne may announce new moves to cut losses at Fiat, which is struggling to cope with the steepest decline in sales in Europe in nearly 20 years.But there’s no need anymore to fix Chrysler, which has repaid its debt to the American taxpayers and totally revamped its product lineup since emerging from bankruptcy in 2009.

And now Romney is busy lying his arse off to Ohio and Michigan...

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121030/AUTO0101/210300400?fb_action_ids=4597638499918&fb_action_types=og.recommends&fb_ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.detroitnews.com%2Farticle% 2F20121030%2FAUTO0101%2F210300400%2FMarchionne-Jeep-production-not-headed-China&fb_source=aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=288381481237582



Chrysler Group and General Motors Co. forcefully attacked comments from Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney that Chinese production could cost Americans jobs.After months of largely trying to stay out of the fray, the two U.S. automakers that were rescued by taxpayers in 2008 and 2009 attacked the Detroit native who opposed the $85 billion auto bailout.Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne rejected an assertion from Romney that Chrysler is planning on moving Jeep production to China."I feel obliged to unambiguously restate our position: Jeep production will not be moved from the United States to China," Marchionne said in an email to employees Tuesday, a copy of which was obtained by The Detroit News.In fact, he said the company will continue to expand Jeep manufacturing in this country, noting the automaker has added thousands of jobs in the United States to build additional Jeep vehicles."Jeep is one of our truly global brands with uniquely American roots. This will never change. So much so that we committed that the iconic Wrangler nameplate, currently produced in our Toledo, Ohio, plant, will never see full production outside the United States," Marchionne said. "Jeep assembly lines will remain in operation in the United States and will constitute the backbone of the brand. It is inaccurate to suggest anything different."GM denounced a new Romney radio ad in Ohio on Tuesday that also attacked GM for building cars in China, ramping up the rhetoric."Under President Obama, GM cut 15,000 American jobs, but they are planning to double the number of cars built in China, which means 15,000 more jobs for China. And now comes word that Chrysler is starting to build cars in, you guessed it, China," the ad says. "Mitt Romney — he'll stand up for the auto industry. In Ohio, not China."GM has long built cars in China for consumers, and Chrysler previously built Jeeps in China. It is true that GM has cut jobs since 2008, but it might not be in business if Obama hadn't agreed to a $50 billion bailout. The U.S. job cuts had nothing to do with China, but with shrinking GM in order to restore profitability."At this stage, we're looking at Hubble telescope-length distances between campaign ads and reality. GM's creating jobs in the U.S. and repatriating profits back to this country should be a source of bipartisan pride," GM spokesman Greg Martin said. "We've clearly entered some parallel universe during these last few days. No amount of campaign politics at its cynical worst will diminish our record of creating jobs in the U.S. and repatriating profits back to this country."

Buzz
10-31-2012, 09:42 AM
And did you know anything about what Romney did to Delphi through the bail out of the industry???

I can't believe you guys want the swine Rmoney to be president...


He's kidding, right? Did I just hear Mitt Romney say, "I would do nothing to hurt the US auto industry."Really? Really?
Here's the facts, ma'am:
As I reported in this week's The Nation magazine cover story "Mitt Romney's Bail-out Bonanza (http://truth-out.org/news/item/12210-greg-palast-mitt-romneys-bailout-bonanza)," the Romneys are in a special partnership with the vulture fund that bought Delphi, the former GM auto parts division.

The Romney vulture fund investment syndicate shipped every single UAW production job - every job - to China.
Just after The Nation broke the story, Washington newsletter The Hill received the Romneys' admission of profiteering:
"Romney's campaign did not deny that he profited from the auto bailout in an email to (http://64.147.104.30/blogs/transportation-report/automobiles/262839-report-romney-profited-153-million-on-auto-bailout-)The Hill (http://64.147.104.30/blogs/transportation-report/automobiles/262839-report-romney-profited-153-million-on-auto-bailout-), but it said the report showed the Detroit intervention was 'misguided.'"
The truth? On June 1, 2009, the Obama administration announced that Detroit Piston's owner Tom Gores, GM and the US Treasury would buy back Delphi.The plan called for saving 15 of 29 Delphi factories in the US.
Then the vulture funds pounced.
The Nation discovered that, in the two weeks immediately following the announcement of the Delphi jobs-saving plan, Paul Singer, Romney's partner, secretly bought up over a billion dollars of old Delphi bonds for pennies on the dollar.
Singer and partners now controlled the company - and killed the return of Delphi to GM.
These facts were revealed in a sworn deposition (http://www.scribd.com/doc/16769960/Delphis-Account-of-Its-Platinum-Transaction)of Delphi's Chief Financial Officer John Sheehan, confidential, but now released on the Web.
Sheehan said, under oath, that these speculators threatened to withhold key parts (steering columns), from GM. This would have brought the auto maker to its knees, immediately forcing GM's permanent closure.
The extortion worked. The government money that was supposed to go to save jobs went to Singer's hedge fund, Elliott Management Corporation and its partners, including the Romneys.
Once Singer's crew took control of Delphi, they rapidly completed the move to China, sticking the US taxpayers with the bill for the pensions of the Delphi workers cut loose.
Dan Loeb, a million-dollar donor to the GOP, who made three-quarters of a billion dollars off the legal scam, proudly announced that, once he and Elliott took control, Delphi kept "virtually no North American unionized labor."
In all, three hedge funds run by Romney's million-dollar donors have pocketed $4.2 billion, a return on their "investment" of over 3,000 percent - all care of the US taxpayer. The Romneys personally earned a minimum of $15.3 million, though more likely $115 million - a range their campaign does not dispute.
Frankly, I'm no fan of the way Obama handled the Delphi bail-out. Allowing these speculators to crank the US taxpayers for $12.9 billion in subsidies - and losing almost all the auto parts jobs in the process.
But when I heard that Son of a ... Detroit, Mr. Romney, tell us, "I would do nothing to hurt the US auto industry," I thought I'd lose my dinner. I suggest Romney repeat this directly to the Naylor family of Kokomo, Indiana.
Bruce Naylor lost his job at Delphi, then his health insurance (terminated by the Romney syndicate) - then his home to foreclosure.
Should Obama have done something about that? You bet. If I were the president, I'd have started with putting the vulture speculators out of business - including Elliott's silent, hidden partner, one Mitt Romney.
And a question to the US media: Hello, anybody home?
This info on Romney's profiteering and the shipping of Delphi jobs to China by his cronies is on the cover of The Nation Magazine and in a New York Times bestseller. Want the full story of Romney's vulture-pack partners? I have several chapters on Paul "The Vulture" Singer and other million-dollar donor magnates backing Romney (and those backing Obama, too) in my new book, "Billionaires & Ballot Bandits," with an introduction by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and illustrations by Ted Rall.
So, where is the New York "Paper of Record?" Or, for that matter, MSNBC?
Bill Press explained it to me when I was on his show this morning: "Sorry, Greg. There's no more investigative reporting in America. No reporters, just repeaters."
That's why I fear Jimmy Carter's statement that, "The American people deserve a president as good as they are." Now I'm afraid that's exactly what we'll get.

Franco
10-31-2012, 09:46 AM
7 out of every 10 GM vehicles are built outside of the USA according to the GM President. True or False?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lvl5Gan69Wo

Tax payers paid $100 per share that is now worth $20. per share, true or false?

Croney Capitalism never works.

zeus3925
10-31-2012, 09:51 AM
Old Willard is caught with his pants on fire on this one. Of course he isn't going to retract it. He is too proud of his fiction.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/10/30/auto-companies-hit-back-against-romney-ads/?hpt=hp_t2


The ad was rated "Pants on Fire" by the independent, fact-checking group PolitiFact.com. ...

The Romney campaign did not highlight their television ad–or Tuesday's radio ad–with a press release to reporters, as they have with nearly every other spot, but CNN's ad tracker Kantar Media CMAG, spotted the ad running on broadcast television stations in Toledo and Youngstown, Ohio – two Ohio manufacturing strongholds.

Martin, the GM representative, said Romney's ads show that the candidate is "bereft of any fundamental understanding of the global automotive industry.

"All global manufacturers, whether General Motors, Ford, Chrysler or VW, build historically in the markets in which we sell," he continued.

Romney's campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

Buzz
10-31-2012, 09:58 AM
7 out of every 10 GM vehicles are built outside of the USA according to the GM President. True or False?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lvl5Gan69Wo

Tax payers paid $100 per share that is now worth $20. per share, true or false?

Croney Capitalism never works.


GM builds vehicles for the Chinese market in China. They have to build cars there in order to sell them there. If you held GM stock and they refused to participate in the Chinese market, you wouldn't be happy...

zeus3925
10-31-2012, 10:15 AM
7 out of every 10 GM vehicles are built outside of the USA according to the GM President. True or False?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lvl5Gan69Wo

Tax payers paid $100 per share that is now worth $20. per share, true or false?

Croney Capitalism never works.

That's may be correct if you count Canada, which put in its portion of the rescue. GM has been a global company building cars for decades in Britain, Germany, Australia, and Japan, for instance. They are new to China but that is largely to meet the demand there much as Honda builds cars here to meet the North American demand.

What's more is the profits raised by those overseas operations accrue to an American company.

huntinman
10-31-2012, 10:34 AM
That's may be correct if you count Canada, which put in its portion of the rescue. GM has been a global company building cars for decades in Britain, Germany, and Japan for instance. They are new to China but that is largely to meet the demand there much as Honda builds cars here to meet the North American demand.

What's more is the profits raised by those overseas operations accrue to an American company.

Too bad you guys don't show the same amount of indignation when Obama lies about leaving Americans behind to die at the hands of terrorists...

M&K's Retrievers
10-31-2012, 10:45 AM
They should have let GM, Chrysler and the UAW crater and reorganize under bankruptcy protection like any other business that gets in trouble.

F250 with 292,000 miles regards,

zeus3925
10-31-2012, 11:04 AM
Too bad you guys don't show the same amount of indignation when Obama lies about leaving Americans behind to die at the hands of terrorists...
If you don't like the thread, highjack it, eh?

Buzz
10-31-2012, 11:21 AM
They should have let GM, Chrysler and the UAW crater and reorganize under bankruptcy protection like any other business that gets in trouble.

F250 with 292,000 miles regards,


If you don't get it that the last nail was driven in these companies coffin due to $4 dollar gas prices plus a financial crisis rivaling the great depression, and that they could not reorganize because credit marked were seized up completely, and that this was the only way to save millions of jobs & keep the companies from being liquidated for pennies on the dollar, then you never will. It is no longer worth arguing the point here on RTF.

Romney and his friends are just pissed because they couldn't swoop in, buy the companies for pennies on the dollar, and then ship all the jobs to China, the way they did with Delphi. I have several old college buddies who are in management now at the "big 3" and they tell me that the US auto business, including the foreigns, would all be GONE now, never to return. I get the feeling that you guys would think that was fine...

huntinman
10-31-2012, 11:31 AM
If you don't like the thread, highjack it, eh?

Struck a nerve, eh?

road kill
10-31-2012, 11:35 AM
Gentlemen, PLEASE!!!
All the name calling in this thread.......

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/mhmwindsor/coexist.jpg

JS
10-31-2012, 11:36 AM
7 out of every 10 GM vehicles are built outside of the USA according to the GM President. True or False?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lvl5Gan69Wo

Tax payers paid $100 per share that is now worth $20. per share, true or false?

Croney Capitalism never works.

For anyone who wants to read the story in full context, here is one link.

http://www.factcheck.org/2012/06/is-gm-becoming-china-motors/

The concept of "build them where you sell them!" is something American workers were screaming since the 1970s when Toyota, Subaru, Datsun, et. al. began flooding our market with their cheap cars. We were lobbying for "content regulations" way back then. We were already seeing jobs in electronics, clothing, shoes ... everything; you name it ... disappearing from US factories due to cheap imports produced by workers being paid starvation wages. We campaigned to consumers the perils of not "buying American" and we were called greedy, radical isolationists trying only to protect our jobs.

GM building products in a foreign market where they will be sold is certainly not as desirable as building them here and exporting them. But that is not going to happen unless you think workers here should work for Chinese wages. The problem is building them over there and sending them here for us to buy with our American dollars. No economy has ever been able to survive that.

Admittedly, our "buy American" choices are severely diminished today and most of the trains have left the station never to return, I fear. But it still doesn't seem to be a concern to the consuming public. Every time you open your wallet or your checkbook, you are HIRING someone to build something or do something for you. YOU are the employer. Don't hire the kid on the other side of the world and then blame our government ... no matter who is in office ... for our unemployment.

You really don't want me to use up the bandwidth with all the "I told you so"s , but suffice it to say, we are reaping exactly what we sowed.

JS

JS
10-31-2012, 11:40 AM
Wonder why they are 45% owned by the UAW?

Workers having ownership in the company??? Now there's a novel idea!
Wonder if there is a good side to that.

JS

JS
10-31-2012, 11:41 AM
Too bad you guys don't show the same amount of indignation when Obama lies about leaving Americans behind to die at the hands of terrorists...

There's another thread on that topic.

Try to stay focused, Bill. :p

JS

JS
10-31-2012, 12:00 PM
If you don't get it that the last nail was driven in these companies coffin due to $4 dollar gas prices plus a financial crisis rivaling the great depression, and that they could not reorganize because credit marked were seized up completely, and that this was the only way to save millions of jobs & keep the companies from being liquidated for pennies on the dollar, then you never will. It is no longer worth arguing the point here on RTF.



AW, c'mon Buzz! That's the beauty of it. We have the freedom to succeed AND the freedom to fail! No exceptions. So if these car companies can't cut it, screw 'em! Let 'em go under!

Oh, wait ... would all those worker bees then move from the "giver" group to the "taker" group??? Would we lose their tax contributions??? Or worse, would they then become a liability! As in "welfare, unemployment, food stamps, free school lunches, houses in foreclosure"? Hmmm. Probably wouldn't be able to spend as much at the mall either. Slackers!

Well, now I'm thinking, "who's gonna make up for that loss? Not you and I, right?"

I gotta rethink this. :shock:

JS

menmon
10-31-2012, 12:07 PM
AW, c'mon Buzz! That's the beauty of it. We have the freedom to succeed AND the freedom to fail! No exceptions. So if these car companies can't cut it, screw 'em! Let 'em go under!

Oh, wait ... would all those worker bees then move from the "giver" group to the "taker" group??? Would we lose their tax contributions??? Or worse, would they then become a liability! As in "welfare, unemployment, food stamps, free school lunches, houses in foreclosure"? Hmmm. Probably wouldn't be able to spend as much at the mall either. Slackers!

Well, now I'm thinking, "who's gonna make up for that loss? Not you and I, right?"

I gotta rethink this. :shock:

JS

I bet you would rather the folks on the east coast not get government assistance too. Bad use of you tax dollars...correct? Damn those northeast folks they don't vote republican.

And those business owners are going to rebuild without help from the government too...correct?

Get a clue.

It was nice being on vacation running my dogs and placing 4th in the AM last weekend and not having to read stupidity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

road kill
10-31-2012, 12:11 PM
I bet you would rather the folks on the east coast not get government assistance too. Bad use of you tax dollars...correct? Damn those northeast folks they don't vote republican.

And those business owners are going to rebuild without help from the government too...correct?

Get a clue.

It was nice being on vacation running my dogs and placing 4th in the AM last weekend and not having to read stupidity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



NICE...........Noone is making you stay here.

http://i372.photobucket.com/albums/oo161/mhmwindsor/coexist.jpg

huntinman
10-31-2012, 12:11 PM
I bet you would rather the folks on the east coast not get government assistance too. Bad use of you tax dollars...correct? Damn those northeast folks they don't vote republican.

And those business owners are going to rebuild without help from the government too...correct?

Get a clue.

It was nice being on vacation running my dogs and placing 4th in the AM last weekend and not having to read stupidity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We didn't have to read stupidity either... you were on vacation;)

menmon
10-31-2012, 12:16 PM
you are right...it just entertaining to listen to all you Archie Bunkers;)

road kill
10-31-2012, 12:27 PM
you are right...it just entertaining to listen to all you Archie Bunkers;)
Thanks, "MEATHEAD!!"
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u46/irving_044/arch.jpg
http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u120/sfmb/Meathad.jpg

smillerdvm
10-31-2012, 01:28 PM
Thanks, "MEATHEAD!!"
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u46/irving_044/arch.jpg
http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u120/sfmb/Meathad.jpg

Now thats funny!!

starjack
10-31-2012, 02:40 PM
I bet you would rather the folks on the east coast not get government assistance too. Bad use of you tax dollars...correct? Damn those northeast folks they don't vote republican.

And those business owners are going to rebuild without help from the government too...correct?

Get a clue.

It was nice being on vacation running my dogs and placing 4th in the AM last weekend and not having to read stupidity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!So just go away

Buzz
10-31-2012, 02:43 PM
I bet you would rather the folks on the east coast not get government assistance too. Bad use of you tax dollars...correct? Damn those northeast folks they don't vote republican.

And those business owners are going to rebuild without help from the government too...correct?

Get a clue.

It was nice being on vacation running my dogs and placing 4th in the AM last weekend and not having to read stupidity!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Mike, it might just be me, but you may have misunderstood JS's post.

menmon
10-31-2012, 02:50 PM
Mike, it might just be me, but you may have misunderstood JS's post.

You are right I did misread his quote...sorry JS

menmon
10-31-2012, 02:51 PM
Stan you are the only person that I know that would be proud to be compared to Archie Bunker:D

huntinman
10-31-2012, 02:57 PM
Mike, it might just be me, but you may have misunderstood JS's post.

When the ship is sinking... the libs start attacking each other? Look out then. It's going down like a rock.

JS
10-31-2012, 03:06 PM
Thanks, "MEATHEAD!!"
http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u46/irving_044/arch.jpg
http://i166.photobucket.com/albums/u120/sfmb/Meathad.jpg

What a great show!!! A hippie and a redneck could sit side by side on the couch drinkin' beer and cheer for their guy and ridicule the other guy and both have fun!! And both thought they were the winner!

When did animosity begin to turn to hate?

"Those were the days" regards,

JS

Terri
10-31-2012, 03:11 PM
When I watched that show as a kid, Archie always reminded me of my grandfather. Hard around the edges, but he always made sense. The son in law was a loser liberal, like a lot of young guys. Luckily most out grow their liberal ways. I'm luckier than most because my 23 year old son is not a liberal.

Terri

zeus3925
10-31-2012, 03:20 PM
Struck a nerve, eh?

Nope! Not what this thread is about.

mngundog
10-31-2012, 11:14 PM
I can't find the article I was reading, but yesterday I read a statement from Marchionne that Fiat now owns 55% of Chrysler while the UAW owns 45%. I don't know if that is correct because I don't believe that the US has sold it's share, maybe it has. Marchionne stated that the origional intent was for Fiat to buy more of Chrysler, but they are now content to leave the UAW with it's ownership stake because Fiat doesn't have the cash to follow through because of the tanking auto sales in Europe. Below is a NYT article on Chryslers most recent results. It seems that the bail out of Chrysler has worked out in spades...

Buzz, last I saw Fiat now owns 58.5% of Chrysler, for the life of me I don't know how you can say the bail out worked out in spades...., sounds like a complete flop to me.

Buzz
11-01-2012, 12:59 AM
Buzz, last I saw Fiat now owns 58.5% of Chrysler, for the life of me I don't know how you can say the bail out worked out in spades...., sounds like a complete flop to me.


The US has been paid in full for Chrysler's bail out. From what I saw, 45% of the company is owned by it's US workers. Fiat says they will not be looking to buy more of the company. If you followed things closely at the time, Fiat was the only suitor that could be found to take a stake in the company. Millions of jobs were saved, millions were kept off of unemployment, welfare, food stamps, and medicaid. Millions of families who could have lost everything did not. An entire industry was saved and a state may have been kept from dire dire consequences. If you don't see the upside there, then there is literally nothing I can ever say that can change your mind.

road kill
11-01-2012, 06:24 AM
The US has been paid in full for Chrysler's bail out. From what I saw, 45% of the company is owned by DA UNION. Fiat says they will not be looking to buy more of the company. If you followed things closely at the time, Fiat was the only suitor that could be found to take a stake in the company. Millions of UNION jobs were saved, millions were kept off of unemployment, welfare, food stamps, and medicaid. Millions of families who could have lost everything did not. An entire industry was saved and a state may have been kept from dire dire consequences. If you don't see the upside there, then there is literally nothing I can ever say that can change your mind.

Fixed it for ya!!!!

If you were not in the UAW, you got screwed!

zeus3925
11-01-2012, 09:23 AM
Fixed it for ya!!!!

If you were not in the UAW, you got screwed!

The stock is not directly owned by the UAW. It is invested in a trust to cover the health and pensions. The trust is controlled by an independent board and none of the proceeds are accessible to the UAW's general fund.

Union jobs are jobs. If those workers had been put out on the street, then the the government would have been swamped by associated cost and loss of tax revenue. There would have been a massive social cost to the families and communities. The economy might have seen some sort of recovery toward the end of the century. Then a manufacturing nation like China and India would be at the top of the heap.

As part of the "bailout" the Union took some big hits on pay and benefits. They recognized the state of the companies and the nation. They did what their mission is: Save as many jobs as possible.

road kill
11-01-2012, 09:41 AM
The stock is not directly owned by the UAW. It is invested in a trust to cover the health and pensions. The trust is controlled by an independent board and none of the proceeds are accessible to the UAW's general fund.

Union jobs are jobs. If those workers had been put out on the street, then the the government would have been swamped by associated cost and loss of tax revenue. There would have been a massive social cost to the families and communities. The economy might have seen some sort of recovery toward the end of the century. Then a manufacturing nation like China and India would be at the top of the heap.

As part of the "bailout" the Union took some big hits on pay and benefits. They recognized the state of the companies and the nation. They did what their mission is: Save as many jobs as possible.
The "non-union" people took an even BIGGER hit!!

Coincidence, eh?:cool:

Buzz
11-01-2012, 09:55 AM
The "non-union" people took an even BIGGER hit!!

Coincidence, eh?:cool:

The vast majority of folks I know at the autos are non-union, engineers and managers. They are quite happy to still be working.

youngblood
11-01-2012, 10:05 AM
The "non-union" people took an even BIGGER hit!!

Coincidence, eh?:cool:
I am curious as to what this big hit was... I do not know enough about the bailout's impact on non-union workers and am curious to see what you can dredge up, it a great point if there is substance to it. I would use it!

road kill
11-01-2012, 10:06 AM
The vast majority of folks I know at the autos are non-union, engineers and managers. They are quite happy to still be working.

Hey Buzz, did/do they work for Delphi?
(UAW labor)
GM's largest part supplier?

Or is anything I say automatically dismissed because I see the other side, so I must be wrong?

I am happy your friends in the auto industry have done so well.

Many of mine have lost everything.
As they did work for Delphi, were in professional positions.
The plant is gone, their jobs are gone, their pensions are all but gone.

But that's OK because DA UNION and your freinds are happy.

youngblood
11-01-2012, 10:07 AM
The "non-union" people took an even BIGGER hit!!

Coincidence, eh?:cool:
I am curious as to what this big hit was... I do not know enough about the bailout's impact on non-union workers and am curious to see what you can dredge up, it a great point if there is substance to it. I would use it!
Also, in my experience (teaching unions) with Union's members and non-members get the majority of similar benefits

Sabireley
11-01-2012, 10:44 AM
The vast majority of folks I know at the autos are non-union, engineers and managers. They are quite happy to still be working.

From what I understand, in the GM bailout deal the UAW negotiated having the pensions restored for Delphi union workers who had theirs liquidated (and picked up by the government Pension Guarantee Fund) during the bancruptcy. Dephi non-union employees (salaried) did not get their pensions restored. I do not know if there was any political motivation for excluding non-union employees, but it seems as though all or none would have been more fair.

JS
11-01-2012, 10:54 AM
I echo Zeus’ comments. He makes valid points.

Roadkill, you make a distinction between “da union” and “da workers”. A commonly held perception is that “da union” describes a bunch of fat, cigar smoking hacks in slick suits that are raking off huge salaries and bennies at the expense of “da workers”. The overwhelming majority of folks holding this perception are totally ignorant of the inner workings of a union, have never belonged to one and have never even worked in a union shop. Their opinions are formed by second hand (and 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc. hand) anecdotal evidence that unions are bad and have ruined the country. It may surprise those folks to know that every union rep from the departmental shop steward to the international president and executive board were workers who were elected by their co-workers to represent them in collective bargaining matters and rose through the ranks by elective approval of the membership. So when you refer to the union, we don’t take that as a derogatory slur ... it’s a term we use to refer to the membership as a whole.

Sorry to digress. Back to the case in point, as Zeus points out, the ownership was not given to the workers. They paid dearly with concessions to their wages and benefits. It was a negotiated deal and the workers assumed the risk of the business’ success/failure as well as the health insurance liabilities including that of a growing retiree group. IOW, they bet a bunch on their ability to pull themselves out.

Regarding those salaried workers without a union contract “getting screwed”, as Buzz points out, their jobs were saved as well and they are quite happy about that.

Just one more point off-topic:

1) if those non-union employees are unhappy with their lot they certainly have the right in this country to organize themselves. It is their choice.

2) they have been enjoying the benefits of the union’s work without the cost of dues or the work and risks involved in securing that contract. Every time the union members get a raise or other gain, the salaried, non-union folks get the same right along with them. (that may be part of the reason they have not chosen suggestion #1 above.)

Again, sorry to go off on a sidetracking rant. If we want to start a different thread on the philosophy and value of organized labor, that’s fine. My background in that field is dated (retired 16 happy years) but extensive and I am more than willing to share my feeling. But we will stick to facts.

JS

road kill
11-01-2012, 10:59 AM
I echo Zeus’ comments. He makes valid points.

Roadkill, you make a distinction between “da union” and “da workers”. A commonly held perception is that “da union” describes a bunch of fat, cigar smoking hacks in slick suits that are raking off huge salaries and bennies at the expense of “da workers”. The overwhelming majority of folks holding this perception are totally ignorant of the inner workings of a union, have never belonged to one and have never even worked in a union shop. Their opinions are formed by second hand (and 3rd, 4th, 5th, etc. hand) anecdotal evidence that unions are bad and have ruined the country. It may surprise those folks to know that every union rep from the departmental shop steward to the international president and executive board were workers who were elected by their co-workers to represent them in collective bargaining matters and rose through the ranks by elective approval of the membership. So when you refer to the union, we don’t take that as a derogatory slur ... it’s a term we use to refer to the membership as a whole.

Sorry to digress. Back to the case in point, as Zeus points out, the ownership was not given to the workers. They paid dearly with concessions to their wages and benefits. It was a negotiated deal and the workers assumed the risk of the business’ success/failure as well as the health insurance liabilities including that of a growing retiree group. IOW, they bet a bunch on their ability to pull themselves out.

Regarding those salaried workers without a union contract “getting screwed”, as Buzz points out, their jobs were saved as well and they are quite happy about that.

Just one more point off-topic:

1) if those non-union employees are unhappy with their lot they certainly have the right in this country to organize themselves. It is their choice.

2) they have been enjoying the benefits of the union’s work without the cost of dues or the work and risks involved in securing that contract. Every time the union members get a raise or other gain, the salaried, non-union folks get the same right along with them. (that may be part of the reason they have not chosen suggestion #1 above.)

Again, sorry to go off on a sidetracking rant. If we want to start a different thread on the philosophy and value of organized labor, that’s fine. My background in that field is dated (retired 16 happy years) but extensive and I am more than willing to share my feeling. But we will stick to facts.

JS
Swing and a miss................:cool:

achiro
11-01-2012, 11:06 AM
Was anything done in the bailout to change the overall situation of GM or Chrysler? In other words in a bankruptcy they would have worked on their debt, made changes to allow for financial stability(and hopefully growth in the long term), and some other stuff that goes along with a bankruptcy. Did they do any of that or are they in the same situation as before? If they did any of that, did they do enough for long term sustainability or is it a short term gain/long term loss sort of thing?

menmon
11-01-2012, 11:06 AM
Hey Buzz, did/do they work for Delphi?
(UAW labor)
GM's largest part supplier?

Or is anything I say automatically dismissed because I see the other side, so I must be wrong?

I am happy your friends in the auto industry have done so well.

Many of mine have lost everything.
As they did work for Delphi, were in professional positions.
The plant is gone, their jobs are gone, their pensions are all but gone.

But that's OK because DA UNION and your freinds are happy.

Who bought them?

JS
11-01-2012, 11:07 AM
From what I understand, in the GM bailout deal the UAW negotiated having the pensions restored for Delphi union workers who had theirs liquidated (and picked up by the government Pension Guarantee Fund) during the bancruptcy. Dephi non-union employees (salaried) did not get their pensions restored. I do not know if there was any political motivation for excluding non-union employees, but it seems as though all or none would have been more fair.

And what would be the basis for this opinion??

A pension benefit under a union contract is a part of the compensation package. It is a cost to the company. Actuaries calculate that cost and it is treated in negotiations as part of the pay package. Employers are happy with providing that pension benefit in lieu of pay because they are able to retain capital providing they can show the government they will be able to meet that obligation in the future. As we know, it doesn't always work out that way.

Nevertheless, this is money the union employees have "put in the bank" for the company to cancel that benefit after the fact is the same as paying you on Friday with a bad check. Employees working without a contract have no such arrangement.

As I said in another post, "it is their choice".

JS

menmon
11-01-2012, 11:12 AM
Should have paid their dues! These non-union guys want all the benefit without the sacrific. My dad a business manager of the IBEW and an International Representative in his later days with the union had a name for those types.

twall
11-01-2012, 11:12 AM
I think there needs to be a distinction between the UAW owning 45% of Chrysler and the employees owning Chrysler. The UAW is much bigger than just Chrysler. Not all Chrysler employees are UAW members.

My father inlaw worked in security at a plant in Columbus that was a Delphi company when it finally closed. He retired as chief of security. I'm not sure at what point he became an exempt employee but, that is when he left the union. He was always a union supporter. For 15+ years his benefits were just as GM had promised they would be. The past few years his benefits been cut much more than union retiree benfits have been cut. Union and non-union employees/retirees are not treated the same.

Afew weeks ago they opened a casino on the ground where 'his' plant stood. He has mixed emotions about that. He remembers how the westside of Columbus was much more vibrant when the plant was open. He hates to see it gone but hopes the casino will revitalize the area.

Tom

menmon
11-01-2012, 11:17 AM
I'm not sure how the IBEW business managers of the local unions where power is off are going to handle this disaster, but I know how my dad would have handled it, and that is those friendly to the union and the political leadership they need would have had power first. It is going to be interesting to see how this plays out.

JS
11-01-2012, 11:21 AM
I am happy your friends in the auto industry have done so well.

Many of mine have lost everything.
As they did work for Delphi, were in professional positions.
The plant is gone, their jobs are gone, their pensions are all but gone.

But that's OK because DA UNION and your freinds are happy.

No it is not OK. It is never OK when someone loses everything through no fault of their own. And we all know folks who have and it is tragic.

This situation started long ago and it really doesn't matter who was in office at that time. The question is not, "did the stimulus approach save everyone?". Of course not! But the question is, "did it save many and would the situation have been disastrous for a lot more had we not taken that approach?".

I think it was absolutely the right move. For those people it saved and for the country.

JS

road kill
11-01-2012, 11:27 AM
No it is not OK. It is never OK when someone loses everything through no fault of their own. And we all know folks who have and it is tragic.

This situation started long ago and it really doesn't matter who was in office at that time. The question is not, "did the stimulus approach save everyone?". Of course not! But the question is, "did it save many and would the situation have been disastrous for a lot more had we not taken that approach?".

I think it was absolutely the right move. For those people it saved and for the country.

JS
Fair enough.
That's your opinion and legit.

I just question what criteria was used to decide who got made financially whole and who didn't.
I beleive it was a political decision based on the voting block.

JS
11-01-2012, 11:32 AM
Should have paid their dues! These non-union guys want all the benefit without the sacrific. My dad a business manager of the IBEW and an International Representative in his later days with the union had a name for those types.

If you are referring to "scab", I gotta disagree. Those engineers, accountants, office workers, etc. who work without a contract are not scabs. They are working without a collective representative or a binding contract by choice. While the union would likely consider representing them if approached, they do not disagree with their right to choose.

A "scab" is one who is working in the bargaining unit, enjoying the union-earned benefits and, by law, day-to-day representation, but refuse to join and pay the dues. They are freeriders.

Most everyone on this board agrees with the notion that a freerider in society is despicable ... it's only when you attach the "union" aspect to the issue that it becomes difficult for some. ;-)

JS

JS
11-01-2012, 11:38 AM
Fair enough.
That's your opinion and legit.

I just question what criteria was used to decide who got mad financially whole and who didn't.
I beleive it was a political decision based on the voting block.

Are you serious? Given the attitude toward organized labor in this country today, I really doubt it was a decision based on the voting block. C'mon man!

11% of the workers in this country are union workers. The rest of you hate us. :razz:

Have a nice day. I gotta go door knockin". :cool:

JS

Marvin S
11-01-2012, 12:16 PM
11% of the workers in this country are union workers. JS

Care to break that out into public & private sector? Of the 11% - xx% are public sector employees - xx% are private sector employees -

menmon
11-01-2012, 12:45 PM
If you are referring to "scab", I gotta disagree. Those engineers, accountants, office workers, etc. who work without a contract are not scabs. They are working without a collective representative or a binding contract by choice. While the union would likely consider representing them if approached, they do not disagree with their right to choose.

A "scab" is one who is working in the bargaining unit, enjoying the union-earned benefits and, by law, day-to-day representation, but refuse to join and pay the dues. They are freeriders.

Most everyone on this board agrees with the notion that a freerider in society is despicable ... it's only when you attach the "union" aspect to the issue that it becomes difficult for some. ;-)

JS

No I was talking about the one that complains about paying his dues and then runs a takes a non-union job to avoid paying dues not because the hall can't put him to work and then we he can't get it on his own he is back at the hall.

JS
11-01-2012, 01:12 PM
Care to break that out into public & private sector? Of the 11% - xx% are public sector employees - xx% are private sector employees -

I would estimate that the private sector number is now somewhere between 5 & 10 ... probably closer to 5%.

Last I read the public sector was around 40%. Higher percentage but smaller number.

JS

JS
11-01-2012, 01:14 PM
No I was talking about the one that complains about paying his dues and then runs a takes a non-union job to avoid paying dues not because the hall can't put him to work and then we he can't get it on his own he is back at the hall.

OK, well you're talking about trade unions which operate in a different manner than industrial unions due to the way the work/employers are distributed.

The topic here is the auto industry (industrial).

JS

road kill
11-01-2012, 01:47 PM
Are you serious? Given the attitude toward organized labor in this country today, I really doubt it was a decision based on the voting block. C'mon man!

11% of the workers in this country are union workers. The rest of you hate us. :razz:

Have a nice day. I gotta go door knockin". :cool:

JS
The perception is that labor unions contribute and vote heavily in favor of the Democrats.
Hence a voting block.

If you have information to the contrary, that would be interesting to see.

zeus3925
11-01-2012, 02:16 PM
The perception is that labor unions contribute and vote heavily in favor of the Democrats.
Hence a voting block.

If you have information to the contrary, that would be interesting to see.

The Teamsters have been Republican supporters in the past. Don't know about now. Perhaps a Teamster can enlighten us.

JS
11-01-2012, 02:50 PM
The perception is that labor unions contribute and vote heavily in favor of the Democrats.
Hence a voting block.

If you have information to the contrary, that would be interesting to see.

You are very observant!! :D The Democratic platform and, with rare exceptions, Democrat candidates better represent the interests of our membership as well as the ability of the leaders to represent. The very right of workers to organize and act collectively if they choose is not to be taken for granted. You do live in Wisconsin, right!

Additionally, in our view, the platform of the Dems on other issues, social and economic, align more closely with the needs of the working class in general. In the end, nobody ever gets everything they want ... democracy is an exercise in compromise and human nature seems to be that we complain more about what we don't get than celebrate what we do get. But we all support those that best represent our views and none of us should have to apologize for that.

As far as contributing and voting heavily in favor of Democrats, that needs to be taken in perspective. If the unions had nearly as much clout in the running of the country that outsiders think, things would be a whole lot different! Remember NAFTA? That sure wasn't a labor friendly item. And even though it was drafted by a previous administration, we had our president in office when it came across the desk and rather than kill it, he signed it under pressure. So much for labor's big stick.

Despite common perception, union members do not vote in a solid block regardless of the endorsements of the leadership. Many of the young members value the benefits but don't have an understanding of how they were won and how easily they can be taken away. They have not made the investment that the old organizers did and don't have the same priorities. They are more concerned about their new boat or snowmobile ... things they would not be able to afford had not the oldtimers plowed the ground ... to be worried about voting. Part of the reason for the decline of the labor movement in the country. (Not that much different from the problems faced by retriever clubs ;-))

Labor's financial contributions are restricted more than people realize, too. Most people don't know that union dues money can NOT be used for political contributions. We can use some in educational efforts toward our own members and that type of activity but financial contributions to parties or candidates must be funded by voluntary, special contributions from the members.

No question the unions heavily support the Dems most of the time, but we are a ways down the list in terms of having a major influence in the party.

JS

zeus3925
11-01-2012, 03:10 PM
Was anything done in the bailout to change the overall situation of GM or Chrysler? In other words in a bankruptcy they would have worked on their debt, made changes to allow for financial stability(and hopefully growth in the long term), and some other stuff that goes along with a bankruptcy. Did they do any of that or are they in the same situation as before? If they did any of that, did they do enough for long term sustainability or is it a short term gain/long term loss sort of thing?

First the old GM continues on as Motors Liquidation Company. Old Chrysler continues on as Old Car Co. Those companies are essentially there to settle legal claims against the old GM and the old Chrysler and to dispose of any assets remaining from the old companies. In effect, the government governments of US and Canada provided start up capital for the new companies, now known as General Motors and Chrysler respectively. The new Chrysler was in turn purchased by Fiat. This allowed the new GM and Chrysler to pick and purchase the most viable assets of the old companies. The new GM, for instance, did not purchase Pontiac, Saturn, Hummer, and Saab. This allowed the companies to obtain the most productive facilities and the most popular brands.

There is no question there had to be changes at the top. The Daimler purchase of Chrysler proved to be a disasterous. There were cultural clashes from the get go. Daimler saw Chrysler as a dumping ground for their hand me down platforms. They failed to come to an understanding of of the American market and the American workforce. Essentially, Daimler ran the company into the ground. The sale to Cerberus Capital Management did little to improve old Chrysler's position. The sale to Fiat was a way to clear the slate. Sergio Marchionne ( who hold both Canadian and Italian citizenships) is a known turn around expert. Chrysler has paid off all its debt to the government and Fiat has purchased all the government owned stock acquired during the bailouts.

The management of GM had become rather petrified in their approach. It still went by Charlie Wilson's maxim, "What's good for GM is good for the country". Management at GM never fostered good relations with its line workers. Indicative of management's outlook was their private term for their hourly employees: "shop rats". If you ever lived in an GM town, then you would know what a civic octopus the old GM could be. They could be outright imperial. The guys at the top needed a thumping and they got it when Obama and his minions sent them packing as a condition of the restructuring.

The proof is in the pudding. Both companies are profitable and sales are increasing. New product lines are in development or are being debuted. The auto workforce is now in expansion. A bankruptcy of either of the two would have spelled disaster up an down the supply chain. Ford, even though avoided a financial crisis, stated it too would be in jeopardy if its competitors bit the dust.

huntinman
11-01-2012, 03:45 PM
First the old GM continues on as Motors Liquidation Company. Old Chrysler continues on as Old Car Co. Those companies are essentially there to settle legal claims against the old GM and the old Chrysler and to dispose of any assets remaining from the old companies. In effect, the government governments of US and Canada provided start up capital for the new companies, now known as General Motors and Chrysler respectively. The new Chrysler was in turn purchased by Fiat. This allowed the new GM and Chrysler to pick and purchase the most viable assets of the old companies. The new GM, for instance, did not purchase Pontiac, Saturn, Hummer, and Saab. This allowed the companies to obtain the most productive facilities and the most popular brands.

There is no question there had to be changes at the top. The Daimler purchase of Chrysler proved to be a disasterous. There were cultural clashes from the get go. Daimler saw Chrysler as a dumping ground for their hand me down platforms. They failed to come to an understanding of of the American market and the American workforce. Essentially, Daimler ran the company into the ground. The sale to Cerberus Capital Management did little to improve old Chrysler's position. The sale to Fiat was a way to clear the slate. Sergio Marchionne ( who hold both Canadian and Italian citizenships) is a known turn around expert. Chrysler has paid off all its debt to the government and Fiat has purchased all the government owned stock acquired during the bailouts.

The management of GM had become rather petrified in their approach. It still went by Charlie Wilson's maxim, "What's good for GM is good for the country". Management at GM never fostered good relations with its line workers. Indicative of management's outlook was their private term for their hourly employees: "shop rats". If you ever lived in an GM town, then you would know what a civic octopus the old GM could be. They could be outright imperial. The guys at the top needed a thumping and they got it when Obama and his minions sent them packing as a condition of the restructuring.

The proof is in the pudding. Both companies are profitable and sales are increasing. New product lines are in development or are being debuted. The auto workforce is now in expansion. A bankruptcy of either of the two would have spelled disaster up an down the supply chain. Ford, even though avoided a financial crisis, stated it too would be in jeopardy if its competitors bit the dust.

If something sounds too good to be true it usually is. No disrespect intended... but your story sounds too good to be true.

Ford buyer for life regards...

Buzz
11-01-2012, 03:59 PM
If something sounds too good to be true it usually is. No disrespect intended... but your story sounds too good to be true.

Ford buyer for life regards...

I loaded up on F stock right after they stated that they didn't need a bail out. So, I'm happy to hear that.

JS
11-01-2012, 04:10 PM
.........




The proof is in the pudding. Both companies are profitable and sales are increasing. New product lines are in development or are being debuted. The auto workforce is now in expansion. A bankruptcy of either of the two would have spelled disaster up an down the supply chain. Ford, even though avoided a financial crisis, stated it too would be in jeopardy if its competitors bit the dust.

AND, labor/management relations are better than they have ever been. Labor at all levels is given input, provided with important heretofore "secret" information, and is a cooperative force in the success of the business.

JS

JS
11-01-2012, 05:08 PM
AND, labor/management relations are better than they have ever been. Labor at all levels is given input, provided with important heretofore "secret" information, and is a cooperative force in the success of the business.

JS

No intent to mislead or suggest this is directly attributable to the stimulus we are discussing. This movement started in the early/mid 80s under the buzzwords 'employee involvement", "Japanese management style", etc. These early joint labor/management efforts to improve relations and better run the business were met with extreme cynicism and mistrust on the part of both sides. Many in middle management levels felt threatened and stonewalled the efforts. Ditto for some of the old school union officials who would never trust management.

As the business climate further deteriorated, management became more willing to "try anything", heads rolled and resistance lessened. I am merely speculating that the recent dire straits of the auto industry contributed to the success in implementing a lot of those changes.

But it came on Obama's watch so he gets credit. :cool:

JS

zeus3925
11-01-2012, 06:03 PM
If something sounds too good to be true it usually is. No disrespect intended... but your story sounds too good to be true.

Ford buyer for life regards...
Well Huntingman, I had no intention of telling a "good" story or embellishing one. I grew up in Michigan. My family and my wife's family have been involved in every phase of the car business from management to production to sales. My immediate family worked for Ford--including my mom. An uncle was in management at Chrysler. My wife's family worked for GM and her brother was a sales manager for for Mike Flannery Chevrolet. (Some of you might know Mike Flannery as the owner of River Oaks Corky.) I worked at Ford and I own a F-150. Cars are in my blood.

But, say you can check out my story. There's something called Google you know.

mngundog
11-01-2012, 10:57 PM
The US has been paid in full for Chrysler's bail out. From what I saw, 45% of the company is owned by it's US workers. Fiat says they will not be looking to buy more of the company. If you followed things closely at the time, Fiat was the only suitor that could be found to take a stake in the company. Millions of jobs were saved, millions were kept off of unemployment, welfare, food stamps, and medicaid. Millions of families who could have lost everything did not. An entire industry was saved and a state may have been kept from dire dire consequences. If you don't see the upside there, then there is literally nothing I can ever say that can change your mind.
Interesting I would like to read the article that support your facts, two month ago Forbes ran an article on it, they claim the Chysler's bailout is not paid in full (nor will it ever be) and that Fiat owns 58.5% of Chrysler and 41.5% is owned by a health care trust for UAW retirees.

roseberry
11-02-2012, 08:06 AM
i don't think a guy who rode around europe on a bicycle with a tie on for two years in order to tell folk about his church would lie to me about where cars are made or our presidents impact on industry.

i don't think a guy who has worked so hard to organize communities and who has served our country(maybe not his) his entire life would lie to me about venture capitalists outsourcing jobs or his opponents role in these ventures.

i could be wrong?

road kill
11-02-2012, 08:39 AM
i don't think a guy who rode around europe on a bicycle with a tie on for two years in order to tell folk about his church would lie to me about where cars are made or our presidents impact on industry.

i don't think a guy who has worked so hard to organize communities and who has served our country(maybe not his) his entire life would lie to me about venture capitalists outsourcing jobs or his opponents role in these ventures.

i could be wrong?

You're not!

Fiskars regards................;-)

zeus3925
11-02-2012, 08:44 AM
John I am not the one calling Willard a liar. I just posted the Detroit Free Press story. GM and Fiat-Chrysler are the ones that are saying "bunk" to the yarn Willard told the good folks in Toledo aka Jeeptown. Further, the fact checkers at the Free Press posted this at the bottom of the story:


Television spot: “Chrysler, owned by Italians, is considering making Jeeps in China.”

The facts: Yes, Chrysler wants to resume making Jeeps in China, but only for sales to Chinese buyers. Jeep production and employment in the U.S. are rising.

Radio spot: “Under President Obama, GM cut 15,000 American jobs, but they are planning to double the number of cars built in China, which means 15,000 more jobs for China.”

The facts: GM had 14,000 fewer U.S. employees at the end of 2011 than at the end of 2008, but most of those layoffs and buyouts occurred in early 2009, before GM entered bankruptcy. It has added thousands of jobs since exiting bankruptcy.

roseberry
11-02-2012, 09:14 AM
someone said crony capitalism doesn't work? dude, it works great if you are a crony!!!!!!!(just finished a job downtown);-)

zeus3925
11-02-2012, 10:19 AM
Marchionne's e-mail:




Chrysler Group’s production plans for the Jeep brand have become the focus of public debate.

I feel obliged to unambiguously restate our position: Jeep production will not be moved from the United States to China.

North American production is critical to achieving our goal of selling 800,000 Jeep vehicles by 2014. In fact, U.S. production of our Jeep models has nearly tripled (it is expected to be up 185%) since 2009 in order to keep up with global demand.

We also are investing to improve and expand our entire U.S. operations, including our Jeep facilities. The numbers tell the story:

• We will invest more than $1.7 billion to develop and produce the next generation Jeep SUV, the successor of the Jeep Liberty -- including $500 million directly to tool and expand our Toledo Assembly Complex and will be adding about 1,100 jobs on a second shift by 2013.

• At our Jefferson North Assembly Plant, where we build the Jeep Grand Cherokee, we have created 2,000 jobs since June 2009 and have invested more than $1.8 billion.

• In Belvidere, where we build two Jeep models, we have added two shifts since 2009 resulting in an additional 2,600 jobs.

With the increase in demand for our vehicles, especially Jeep branded vehicles, we have added more than 11,200 U.S. jobs since 2009. Plants producing Jeep branded vehicles alone have seen the number of people invested in the success of the Jeep brand grow to more than 9,300 hourly jobs from 4,700. This will increase by an additional 1,100 as the Liberty successor, which will be produced in Toledo, is introduced for global distribution in the second quarter of 2013.

Together, we are working to establish a global enterprise and previously announced our intent to return Jeep production to China, the world’s largest auto market, in order to satisfy local market demand, which would not otherwise be accessible. Chrysler Group is interested in expanding the customer base for our award-winning Jeep vehicles, which can only be done by establishing local production. This will ultimately help bolster the Jeep brand, and solidify the resilience of U.S. jobs.

Jeep is one of our truly global brands with uniquely American roots. This will never change. So much so that we committed that the iconic Wrangler nameplate, currently produced in our Toledo, Ohio plant, will never see full production outside the United States.

Jeep assembly lines will remain in operation in the United States and will constitute the backbone of the brand.

It is inaccurate to suggest anything different.

Sergio Marchionne

zeus3925
11-02-2012, 10:29 AM
Sorry to leave a good debate. Going deer hunting. See ya all some time next week.

huntinman
11-02-2012, 10:30 AM
Sorry to leave a good debate. Going deer hunting. See ya all some time next week.

Good luck. Get a big one.

road kill
11-02-2012, 10:43 AM
Sorry to leave a good debate. Going deer hunting. See ya all some time next week.
I wanna echo huntinman, have a GREAT HUNT!!!

stan b & Elvis

zeus3925
11-02-2012, 11:52 AM
Thanks guys! I'm gone.

Blackstone
11-04-2012, 12:59 PM
Fixed it for ya!!!!

If you were not in the UAW, you got screwed!

There wer thousands off non-union, non-UAW jobs (like mine) that were saved as well.

road kill
11-04-2012, 07:16 PM
There wer thousands off non-union, non-UAW jobs (like mine) that were saved as well.

Tell that to the people from Delphi.............

murral stark
11-04-2012, 07:34 PM
Tell that to the people from Delphi.............
I heard rumor that Romney's company had their hands in the cookie jar known as Delphi.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/26/1150732/-Breaking-Delphi-Auto-a-Romney-investment-buys-factories-in-China-after-firing-25K-US-workers

huntinman
11-04-2012, 08:05 PM
I heard rumor that Romney's company had their hands in the cookie jar known as Delphi.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/10/26/1150732/-Breaking-Delphi-Auto-a-Romney-investment-buys-factories-in-China-after-firing-25K-US-workers

He's going to have his hand in the cookie jar known as the White House pretty soon....

murral stark
11-04-2012, 08:24 PM
He's going to have his hand in the cookie jar known as the White House pretty soon....

So you condone his company shutting down Delphi and displacing workers?

huntinman
11-04-2012, 08:31 PM
So you condone his company shutting down Delphi and displacing workers?

Don't know anything about it, but if your source is the daily kos, that's all I need to know that it probably bull.

M&K's Retrievers
11-04-2012, 08:32 PM
Don't know anything about it, but if your source is the daily kos, that's all I need to know that it probably bull.

No kidding!

murral stark
11-04-2012, 08:39 PM
I just used google like others here have suggested members to do.:cool:

Buzz
11-04-2012, 08:54 PM
Tell that to the people from Delphi.............


I would like to hear more about Delphi.

road kill
11-05-2012, 06:15 AM
I would like to hear more about Delphi.
Google it.

Buzz
11-05-2012, 10:19 AM
Google it.


I have. I wanted to hear your version.

gmhr1
11-05-2012, 10:36 AM
http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/23/obama-admin-threatened-with-subpoenas-for-details-on-delphi-pensions/

obama admin threatened with subpoenas for delphi pensions


On another note, I hope no one on this site falls into this catagory

Mining lost 9,000 jobs in October, with most of the decline occurring in support activities for mining,” the Bureau of Labor Statistics announced in Friday’s jobs report “Since May of this year, employment in mining has decreased by 17,000.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/04/9000-mining-jobs-lost-in-october/#ixzz2BN1mWIso

ARay11
11-05-2012, 02:32 PM
Murral,
I think you should read that article with eyes wide open. Try it again... this time.... imagine using this thought process:

Oct26, 2012 Delphi completes acquisition of FCI (FCI related to Bain).... Check the dates. Romney no longer works for Bain and hasn't for quite some time.

Delphi’s stockholders—the Romneys included—had one easy way to rectify the harm to these pensioners, much as GM did for its workers: just pay up. I bought Ford stock at $2.22/share at the bottom of the crash. I made a little cha ching on the deal. Does that make me a bad person???? And at what point would I have any say in what Ford does with their company???? NONE...Just a stockholder. That's it. I don't sit on their BOD, I don't hold an office within their organization.

The public has no idea how much the Romneys profited from shipping these jobs to China, since Willard Mitt Romney won't release his 2009 tax returns.
The Romney's did not ship jobs to China. If Delphi did... that's them, not him..... see point #2 above.


There are plenty of things to complain about without hyped up claims and overblown crap-o-la.