The argument isn't about *if* the plant needed to be closed...but, rather,
about *why* it wasn't closed sooner. UAW has a history of pressuring GM
from closing many unproductive plants due to threats of a walk-out.



"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
Blame both GM and the unions. The plant closing is due exclusively to
neither
party.

However, with increased automation in an attempt to cut costs, union
labor
workforces
have been cut...perhaps due to the high costs of those union workers.

One also has to wonder about the efficiency of an old plant like that and
whether or
not GM attempted to modernize it to keep it as efficient as possible.

I would have to agree. The way they make cars these days, it doesn't
matter
very much if the guys on the line are getting
$8 an hour or a decent, living wage.

Being competitive today is more about robotics and automation than whether
the
workforce has been hired for the lowest conceivable dollar. There aren't
as
many man hours in a car as just several years ago.

The old plant was probably not suitable for upgrade to the next generation
of
automation. That would be a death knell, even if they had convict labor
working
for
35 cents an hour.