Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:
On Sun, 07 Dec 2008 18:06:36 -0500, Boater
wrote:

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
The quality issues have nothing to do with the workers who build the car,
and everything to do with corporate management.
That's right. I forgot. The union workers are paid to stay home while Rick
Wagoner personally bolts the cars together.
Unless things have changed drastically since I last visited an
autoplant, virtually every decision on who does what with what and for
how long is determined by management. Design is determined by
management. Tools are decided by management. Training is decided by
management. Materials are decided by management. Assembly line speed is
decided by management.

Then what does the Union do?

And by the way, you never answered my question. Why did you buy a
foreign car built by non-Union labor in the US?

Smacks of hyprocrisy don't you think?

--


Traditionally, manufacturing unions negotiate to improve the wages,
hours, working conditions and benefits of their members. In progressive
countries abroad and at some plants here, they do more.

The construction unions are significantly different in scope, as are the
professional unions, such as teachers' unions.

My understanding is that the Toyota we have was not built by non-union
workers in the USA.

Why did I choose it? Because at the time I purchased it, the
corresponding Ford and GM vehicles were too large.

"Boater" wrote in message
...

My understanding is that the Toyota we have was not built by non-union
workers in the USA.

Why did I choose it? Because at the time I purchased it, the corresponding
Ford and GM vehicles were too large.


I assume you bought a used Tundra.

Eisboch

On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 04:32:22 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Boater" wrote in message
...

My understanding is that the Toyota we have was not built by non-union
workers in the USA.

Why did I choose it? Because at the time I purchased it, the corresponding
Ford and GM vehicles were too large.


I assume you bought a used Tundra.

Eisboch


I believe he said he had a 4Runner.
--
John H.

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 04:32:22 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Boater" wrote in message
...

My understanding is that the Toyota we have was not built by non-union
workers in the USA.

Why did I choose it? Because at the time I purchased it, the
corresponding
Ford and GM vehicles were too large.


I assume you bought a used Tundra.

Eisboch


I believe he said he had a 4Runner.
--
John H.


Oh. I was wrong. I thought he mentioned a Tundra.
I assume it is an older, used model.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 04:32:22 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

"Boater" wrote in message
...
My understanding is that the Toyota we have was not built by non-union
workers in the USA.

Why did I choose it? Because at the time I purchased it, the
corresponding
Ford and GM vehicles were too large.

I assume you bought a used Tundra.

Eisboch

I believe he said he had a 4Runner.
--
John H.


Oh. I was wrong. I thought he mentioned a Tundra.
I assume it is an older, used model.

Eisboch



4Runner with 100,000 miles. Still in good shape, but only used as a boat
ramp tow vehicle these days. When we got it, Ford and GM didn't make a
mid-sized SUV with similar tow capacity, as I recall, and, of course, I
wouldn't take a Chrysler product on a bet, not with those old-tech
pushrod engines.

That was almost six years ago, though. I haven't stayed "current" with
what is being offered by Ford or GM these days. In fact, I'm not really
that interested in cars these days.

I do think Ford and GM would be better off, as would their workers, if
good foreign management took over there, management from Japan or Korea.
with buyouts for the current organized employees, and a new unionized
deal for new hires, with a quality "national" health care plan so the
employers aren't burdened with that.

I have no faith in U.S. corporate management and its B-school mentality.

On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 08:07:17 -0500, Boater
wrote:


4Runner with 100,000 miles. Still in good shape, but only used as a boat
ramp tow vehicle these days. When we got it, Ford and GM didn't make a
mid-sized SUV with similar tow capacity, as I recall, and, of course, I
wouldn't take a Chrysler product on a bet, not with those old-tech
pushrod engines.

Nothing wrong with a good pushrod engine, especially for a truck.
BTW, wheels and levers are old-tech.

--Vic

"Vic Smith" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 08:07:17 -0500, Boater
wrote:


4Runner with 100,000 miles. Still in good shape, but only used as a boat
ramp tow vehicle these days. When we got it, Ford and GM didn't make a
mid-sized SUV with similar tow capacity, as I recall, and, of course, I
wouldn't take a Chrysler product on a bet, not with those old-tech
pushrod engines.

Nothing wrong with a good pushrod engine, especially for a truck.
BTW, wheels and levers are old-tech.

--Vic

At least with a pushrod you typically just lost a cylinder if one broke. If
the timing belt goes on some of the overhead cams because you forgot to
replace it at 70k miles, the engine can completely self destruct.

Eisboch

"Boater" wrote in message
...

I do think Ford and GM would be better off, as would their workers, if
good foreign management took over there, management from Japan or Korea.
with buyouts for the current organized employees, and a new unionized deal
for new hires, with a quality "national" health care plan so the employers
aren't burdened with that.

I have no faith in U.S. corporate management and its B-school mentality.



Overall, I agree. I am not sure that fresh, innovative management cannot be
found here in the US, but I won't argue the need to get away from
traditional business and MBA concepts.

I also believe in and respect the concept of a contract. The current
organized employees need to be considered and fairly treated. However,
contracts, by design, can be renegotiated, particularly in troubled times
when absolute adherence to them puts the whole operation at risk.

I couldn't agree more that businesses should not be the administrators of
health plans.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...
I do think Ford and GM would be better off, as would their workers, if
good foreign management took over there, management from Japan or Korea.
with buyouts for the current organized employees, and a new unionized deal
for new hires, with a quality "national" health care plan so the employers
aren't burdened with that.

I have no faith in U.S. corporate management and its B-school mentality.



Overall, I agree. I am not sure that fresh, innovative management cannot be
found here in the US, but I won't argue the need to get away from
traditional business and MBA concepts.

I also believe in and respect the concept of a contract. The current
organized employees need to be considered and fairly treated. However,
contracts, by design, can be renegotiated, particularly in troubled times
when absolute adherence to them puts the whole operation at risk.

I couldn't agree more that businesses should not be the administrators of
health plans.

Eisboch




I haven't seen the numbers, but I wonder what American corporations
would have to do if they were required to fund their pension liabilities.

My union's pension fund has *no* unfunded liabilities, and we intend to
keep it that way, for moral and legal reasons. The hourly contributions
go where they are supposed to go, and, even though we do not invest in
stocks, we are still several percentage points ahead in earnings so that
we can handle distributions.

Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 8 Dec 2008 04:32:22 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

"Boater" wrote in message
...
My understanding is that the Toyota we have was not built by non-union
workers in the USA.

Why did I choose it? Because at the time I purchased it, the
corresponding
Ford and GM vehicles were too large.

I assume you bought a used Tundra.

Eisboch

I believe he said he had a 4Runner.
--
John H.


Oh. I was wrong. I thought he mentioned a Tundra.
I assume it is an older, used model.

Eisboch


4Runner with 100,000 miles. Still in good shape, but only used as a boat
ramp tow vehicle these days. When we got it, Ford and GM didn't make a
mid-sized SUV with similar tow capacity, as I recall, and, of course, I
wouldn't take a Chrysler product on a bet, not with those old-tech
pushrod engines.

That was almost six years ago, though. I haven't stayed "current" with
what is being offered by Ford or GM these days. In fact, I'm not really
that interested in cars these days.

I do think Ford and GM would be better off, as would their workers, if
good foreign management took over there, management from Japan or Korea.
with buyouts for the current organized employees, and a new unionized
deal for new hires, with a quality "national" health care plan so the
employers aren't burdened with that.

I have no faith in U.S. corporate management and its B-school mentality.

Your lack of faith is apparent. GM is Better off in chapter 11 with no
bailout money. Pay the union members off with 10 cents per benefit
dollar and lock out the unions permanently. Executive bonus should be
tied to profit. Worker bonus and pay should be tied to individual
productivity. Simply put. "Earn your pay"