|
Ford's success...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "thunder" wrote in message t... On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:03:13 -0800, Bill McKee wrote: They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even less, if the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies and taxpayers. Funny, instead of focusing on bottom up, perhaps more focus should be placed on top down. Toyota's top 37 executives earned a combined $21.6 million. That bum Wagoner's compensation, alone, was $14.4 million. At Honda, the top 21 executives earned $11.1 million combined. Ford's CEO Mulally's compensation was $17.7 million in 2008. If the boss thinks there's that kind of money floating around, why wonder if the working man wants a piece. Or, is this just another example of voodoo economics, you know, Reagan's "tinkle down" economics? Yes, the **** poor managment of the Big 3 auto companies is famous. And they are overpaid. But why should the guy on the assembly line with maybe a GED putting on lugnuts also be overpaid. As I said bad management also. As to the lower pay of the Japanese. Is true, but is not a true picture of the pay. They basically have unlimited expense accounts, which mitigates a lot of personal taxes. How do you determine if s/he is overpaid? What the criteria? Seems to me either union or non-union it's a negotiation that ends up at the market rate. -- Nom=de=Plume Compare her wage to what you would have to pay anywhere else including shipping and time value and you have a valid market wage. Anywhere else? How about Mexico, since it's pretty close. Something manufactured in TJ, delivered to San D. That's the valid market rate in TJ, but the living expenses are pretty different. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Ford's success...
|
Ford's success..., GM and math.
nom=de=plume wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message ... ...will last until the union or the government figures out a way to stop it. " Ford is also running into resistance from its unionized work force as it tries to cut costs further. Its improving fortunes were the main reason cited by the United Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting another round of labor concessions that would have roughly matched concessions that workers at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the spring." The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and its vice president in charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a statement that the carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence of the contributions that Ford workers have made."" http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay Why should they cave to demands from management? How about producing decent products that people want to buy? My Honda, which was built in the US by American labor, was hit by a young gal, while on her cell phone, was too busy to look behind her. It's in the shop for two weeks. I asked for an American car at Enterprise rent a car. I got a 2010 Chevy Impala. It's a nice car, even though there's a sticky spot on the dash (poorly mixed epoxy) which never should have made it out of the factory. I liked it enough to research some highlights. It was actually built in Canada. It sells for $28,000 new, but a one year old one with 20,000 miles can be had at Carmax.com for just about half. $14,000 My Honda cost $18,200 new, a one year old one can be gotten for $17,000. A three year old one, with 60,000 is $14,000. Who, in their right mind would take a hit like 50% in a new car? Now I understand why GM is in such trouble, who would be dumb enough to buy a new one? |
Ford's success...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "thunder" wrote in message t... On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:03:13 -0800, Bill McKee wrote: They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even less, if the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies and taxpayers. Funny, instead of focusing on bottom up, perhaps more focus should be placed on top down. Toyota's top 37 executives earned a combined $21.6 million. That bum Wagoner's compensation, alone, was $14.4 million. At Honda, the top 21 executives earned $11.1 million combined. Ford's CEO Mulally's compensation was $17.7 million in 2008. If the boss thinks there's that kind of money floating around, why wonder if the working man wants a piece. Or, is this just another example of voodoo economics, you know, Reagan's "tinkle down" economics? Yes, the **** poor managment of the Big 3 auto companies is famous. And they are overpaid. But why should the guy on the assembly line with maybe a GED putting on lugnuts also be overpaid. As I said bad management also. As to the lower pay of the Japanese. Is true, but is not a true picture of the pay. They basically have unlimited expense accounts, which mitigates a lot of personal taxes. How do you determine if s/he is overpaid? What the criteria? Seems to me either union or non-union it's a negotiation that ends up at the market rate. -- Nom=de=Plume Compare her wage to what you would have to pay anywhere else including shipping and time value and you have a valid market wage. Anywhere else? How about Mexico, since it's pretty close. Something manufactured in TJ, delivered to San D. That's the valid market rate in TJ, but the living expenses are pretty different. -- Nom=de=Plume Yup, used to not be that huge differential in pay between the 2 countries. We did not pay our people 10x, but maybe 3x even mexico. |
Ford's success...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "JohnH" wrote in message ... ...will last until the union or the government figures out a way to stop it. " Ford is also running into resistance from its unionized work force as it tries to cut costs further. Its improving fortunes were the main reason cited by the United Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting another round of labor concessions that would have roughly matched concessions that workers at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the spring." The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and its vice president in charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a statement that the carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence of the contributions that Ford workers have made."" http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay Why should they cave to demands from management? How about producing decent products that people want to buy? -- Nom=de=Plume They are decent products. But if you are paying some low skilled laborer excess money, then the decent product is priced out of the market. Then, when the contract expires the company should seek to renegotiate. It takes two parties to make a contract. If there's good management in place, then the union members will feel better about consessions. -- Nom=de=Plume Yup, they should pay the workers what they are worth. A lot less than they are making. $65 bundled labor cost to install a lug nut? Yes. I agree. What, pray tell, are they worth? Who determines this? You? -- Nom=de=Plume The market place. Not the union strong arming the company. Between the union and **** poor management over the at least 40 years before the crash, there is no way the car companies can succeed. Hate to tell you, but a negotiated contract _is_ the market rate. Looks like Ford is going to do ok and even GM is doing better. Chrysler I think is on the way out completely. -- Nom=de=Plume The artificial market rate. **** Poor management is the reason for those egregious contracts. American car companies at the time had 80 or 90% of the world market. Why worry about fiscal responsibility when you could pass on the cost and produce crappy cars. Now the real market rate is maybe 25% of the negotiated rate. My daughter bought a used Hyundai station wagon a couple years ago. 100k warrantee, good car, 70% the price of a comparable American car. Buy American? Not when it comes with a 42% premium. For a car with less warrantee. Please show us the data for the "real" market rate. Yes. ****-poor management. I agree. Thus, unions came into being. -- Nom=de=Plume Look at what the non union successful car companies are paying and a valid market rate is less than that. Huh? Non union car companies not paying a valid market rate? How do you figure that one? -- Nom=de=Plume They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even less, if the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies and taxpayers. So, the non-union car companies pay a valid market rate, which is fine if you can convince the workers to get rid of the union. It doesn't happen that often, but I have no problem with it per se. -- Nom=de=Plume Basically the non union shops pay the workers enough and will build a plant somewhere else if they need more capacity if the shop goes union. Thus they pay the valid market rate. Not sure what you mean by "enough." Union shops pay a valid market rate also, but with different facts involved. They will also build a plant somewhere else if they need more capacity union or no union. -- Nom=de=Plume Valid market rate? If the job could financially be outsourced then it will be. In the 1980's the fully bundled labor costs in a tech factory in Malaysia was about $3.50 an hour. Why disk drives were assembled overseas, as the bundled labor cost here was above $35 an hour. Due to government overspending and excess union contracts we have priced America out of most manufacturing jobs. Government has added to this. Most government contracts require "prevailing wages". They mean union wages and not what the prevailing market rate is. You're the one who keeps mentioning the valid rate, but you don't want to name it. We can't compete on labor costs with Malaysia. We can compete on quality and innovation. I don't think we want to be the McDees of disk drives. -- Nom=de=Plume We used to compete with Malasia and all the 3rd world countries. But due to overspending by our government and lots of excess regulations we priced ourselves out of most markets. I thought it was the unions' fault. -- Nom=de=Plume Right and Harry and you and the unions added to the excess cost. Glad you realized that, and pointed it out. |
Ford's success...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "JohnH" wrote in message ... ...will last until the union or the government figures out a way to stop it. " Ford is also running into resistance from its unionized work force as it tries to cut costs further. Its improving fortunes were the main reason cited by the United Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting another round of labor concessions that would have roughly matched concessions that workers at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the spring." The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and its vice president in charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a statement that the carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence of the contributions that Ford workers have made."" http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay Why should they cave to demands from management? How about producing decent products that people want to buy? -- Nom=de=Plume They are decent products. But if you are paying some low skilled laborer excess money, then the decent product is priced out of the market. Then, when the contract expires the company should seek to renegotiate. It takes two parties to make a contract. If there's good management in place, then the union members will feel better about consessions. -- Nom=de=Plume Yup, they should pay the workers what they are worth. A lot less than they are making. $65 bundled labor cost to install a lug nut? Yes. I agree. What, pray tell, are they worth? Who determines this? You? -- Nom=de=Plume The market place. Not the union strong arming the company. Between the union and **** poor management over the at least 40 years before the crash, there is no way the car companies can succeed. Hate to tell you, but a negotiated contract _is_ the market rate. Looks like Ford is going to do ok and even GM is doing better. Chrysler I think is on the way out completely. -- Nom=de=Plume The artificial market rate. **** Poor management is the reason for those egregious contracts. American car companies at the time had 80 or 90% of the world market. Why worry about fiscal responsibility when you could pass on the cost and produce crappy cars. Now the real market rate is maybe 25% of the negotiated rate. My daughter bought a used Hyundai station wagon a couple years ago. 100k warrantee, good car, 70% the price of a comparable American car. Buy American? Not when it comes with a 42% premium. For a car with less warrantee. Please show us the data for the "real" market rate. Yes. ****-poor management. I agree. Thus, unions came into being. -- Nom=de=Plume Look at what the non union successful car companies are paying and a valid market rate is less than that. Huh? Non union car companies not paying a valid market rate? How do you figure that one? -- Nom=de=Plume They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even less, if the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies and taxpayers. So, the non-union car companies pay a valid market rate, which is fine if you can convince the workers to get rid of the union. It doesn't happen that often, but I have no problem with it per se. -- Nom=de=Plume Basically the non union shops pay the workers enough and will build a plant somewhere else if they need more capacity if the shop goes union. Thus they pay the valid market rate. Not sure what you mean by "enough." Union shops pay a valid market rate also, but with different facts involved. They will also build a plant somewhere else if they need more capacity union or no union. -- Nom=de=Plume Valid market rate? If the job could financially be outsourced then it will be. In the 1980's the fully bundled labor costs in a tech factory in Malaysia was about $3.50 an hour. Why disk drives were assembled overseas, as the bundled labor cost here was above $35 an hour. Due to government overspending and excess union contracts we have priced America out of most manufacturing jobs. Government has added to this. Most government contracts require "prevailing wages". They mean union wages and not what the prevailing market rate is. You're the one who keeps mentioning the valid rate, but you don't want to name it. We can't compete on labor costs with Malaysia. We can compete on quality and innovation. I don't think we want to be the McDees of disk drives. -- Nom=de=Plume We used to compete with Malasia and all the 3rd world countries. But due to overspending by our government and lots of excess regulations we priced ourselves out of most markets. I thought it was the unions' fault. -- Nom=de=Plume Right and Harry and you and the unions added to the excess cost. Glad you realized that, and pointed it out. Bill, everything "adds" to costs. That's the nature of the world. I *am* glad I pointed it out, since you didn't understand previously. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Ford's success...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "thunder" wrote in message t... On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:03:13 -0800, Bill McKee wrote: They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even less, if the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies and taxpayers. Funny, instead of focusing on bottom up, perhaps more focus should be placed on top down. Toyota's top 37 executives earned a combined $21.6 million. That bum Wagoner's compensation, alone, was $14.4 million. At Honda, the top 21 executives earned $11.1 million combined. Ford's CEO Mulally's compensation was $17.7 million in 2008. If the boss thinks there's that kind of money floating around, why wonder if the working man wants a piece. Or, is this just another example of voodoo economics, you know, Reagan's "tinkle down" economics? Yes, the **** poor managment of the Big 3 auto companies is famous. And they are overpaid. But why should the guy on the assembly line with maybe a GED putting on lugnuts also be overpaid. As I said bad management also. As to the lower pay of the Japanese. Is true, but is not a true picture of the pay. They basically have unlimited expense accounts, which mitigates a lot of personal taxes. How do you determine if s/he is overpaid? What the criteria? Seems to me either union or non-union it's a negotiation that ends up at the market rate. -- Nom=de=Plume Compare her wage to what you would have to pay anywhere else including shipping and time value and you have a valid market wage. Anywhere else? How about Mexico, since it's pretty close. Something manufactured in TJ, delivered to San D. That's the valid market rate in TJ, but the living expenses are pretty different. -- Nom=de=Plume Yup, used to not be that huge differential in pay between the 2 countries. We did not pay our people 10x, but maybe 3x even mexico. Right on. And, who's standard of living is better? What do we get for the taxes we pay vs. what those in Mexico pays? -- Nom=de=Plume |
Ford's success...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "thunder" wrote in message t... On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:03:13 -0800, Bill McKee wrote: They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even less, if the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies and taxpayers. Funny, instead of focusing on bottom up, perhaps more focus should be placed on top down. Toyota's top 37 executives earned a combined $21.6 million. That bum Wagoner's compensation, alone, was $14.4 million. At Honda, the top 21 executives earned $11.1 million combined. Ford's CEO Mulally's compensation was $17.7 million in 2008. If the boss thinks there's that kind of money floating around, why wonder if the working man wants a piece. Or, is this just another example of voodoo economics, you know, Reagan's "tinkle down" economics? Yes, the **** poor managment of the Big 3 auto companies is famous. And they are overpaid. But why should the guy on the assembly line with maybe a GED putting on lugnuts also be overpaid. As I said bad management also. As to the lower pay of the Japanese. Is true, but is not a true picture of the pay. They basically have unlimited expense accounts, which mitigates a lot of personal taxes. How do you determine if s/he is overpaid? What the criteria? Seems to me either union or non-union it's a negotiation that ends up at the market rate. -- Nom=de=Plume Compare her wage to what you would have to pay anywhere else including shipping and time value and you have a valid market wage. Anywhere else? How about Mexico, since it's pretty close. Something manufactured in TJ, delivered to San D. That's the valid market rate in TJ, but the living expenses are pretty different. -- Nom=de=Plume Yup, used to not be that huge differential in pay between the 2 countries. We did not pay our people 10x, but maybe 3x even mexico. Right on. And, who's standard of living is better? What do we get for the taxes we pay vs. what those in Mexico pays? -- Nom=de=Plume What do we get from our excess taxation? |
Ford's success...
On Sat, 7 Nov 2009 15:16:32 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote: "Bill McKee" wrote in message om... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "JohnH" wrote in message ... ...will last until the union or the government figures out a way to stop it. " Ford is also running into resistance from its unionized work force as it tries to cut costs further. Its improving fortunes were the main reason cited by the United Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting another round of labor concessions that would have roughly matched concessions that workers at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the spring." The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and its vice president in charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a statement that the carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence of the contributions that Ford workers have made."" http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay Why should they cave to demands from management? How about producing decent products that people want to buy? -- Nom=de=Plume They are decent products. But if you are paying some low skilled laborer excess money, then the decent product is priced out of the market. Then, when the contract expires the company should seek to renegotiate. It takes two parties to make a contract. If there's good management in place, then the union members will feel better about consessions. -- Nom=de=Plume Yup, they should pay the workers what they are worth. A lot less than they are making. $65 bundled labor cost to install a lug nut? Yes. I agree. What, pray tell, are they worth? Who determines this? You? -- Nom=de=Plume The market place. Not the union strong arming the company. Between the union and **** poor management over the at least 40 years before the crash, there is no way the car companies can succeed. Hate to tell you, but a negotiated contract _is_ the market rate. Looks like Ford is going to do ok and even GM is doing better. Chrysler I think is on the way out completely. -- Nom=de=Plume The artificial market rate. **** Poor management is the reason for those egregious contracts. American car companies at the time had 80 or 90% of the world market. Why worry about fiscal responsibility when you could pass on the cost and produce crappy cars. Now the real market rate is maybe 25% of the negotiated rate. My daughter bought a used Hyundai station wagon a couple years ago. 100k warrantee, good car, 70% the price of a comparable American car. Buy American? Not when it comes with a 42% premium. For a car with less warrantee. Please show us the data for the "real" market rate. Yes. ****-poor management. I agree. Thus, unions came into being. -- Nom=de=Plume Look at what the non union successful car companies are paying and a valid market rate is less than that. Huh? Non union car companies not paying a valid market rate? How do you figure that one? -- Nom=de=Plume They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even less, if the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies and taxpayers. So, the non-union car companies pay a valid market rate, which is fine if you can convince the workers to get rid of the union. It doesn't happen that often, but I have no problem with it per se. -- Nom=de=Plume Basically the non union shops pay the workers enough and will build a plant somewhere else if they need more capacity if the shop goes union. Thus they pay the valid market rate. Not sure what you mean by "enough." Union shops pay a valid market rate also, but with different facts involved. They will also build a plant somewhere else if they need more capacity union or no union. -- Nom=de=Plume Valid market rate? If the job could financially be outsourced then it will be. In the 1980's the fully bundled labor costs in a tech factory in Malaysia was about $3.50 an hour. Why disk drives were assembled overseas, as the bundled labor cost here was above $35 an hour. Due to government overspending and excess union contracts we have priced America out of most manufacturing jobs. Government has added to this. Most government contracts require "prevailing wages". They mean union wages and not what the prevailing market rate is. You're the one who keeps mentioning the valid rate, but you don't want to name it. We can't compete on labor costs with Malaysia. We can compete on quality and innovation. I don't think we want to be the McDees of disk drives. -- Nom=de=Plume We used to compete with Malasia and all the 3rd world countries. But due to overspending by our government and lots of excess regulations we priced ourselves out of most markets. I thought it was the unions' fault. -- Nom=de=Plume Right and Harry and you and the unions added to the excess cost. Glad you realized that, and pointed it out. Bill, everything "adds" to costs. That's the nature of the world. I *am* glad I pointed it out, since you didn't understand previously. By Bill's definition, you are lying. Everyone who doesn't agree with Bill is lying. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:03 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com