"NOYB" wrote in message thlink.net...
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"NOYB" wrote in message news:8lsbb.21089
No wonder GM finds it hard to compete. I'm sure it has been modernized
that plant over the years, but the age of the facility speaks volumes
about what is wrong with the management of America's car
manufacturers.


No kidding. Management should have shut it down years ago in favor of
opening a more profitable non-union plant. I guess it took 68 years of
"negotiations" with UAW to finally win concessions for closing the
place.

Please provide...

No. *You* prove I'm wrong.
Umm, I wasn't the one who MADE such an ignorant statement. Now, do you
have ANY facts to back up YOUR statements?

"NOYB" wrote in message news:qQBbb.58380
No kidding. Management should have shut it down years ago in favor of
opening a more profitable non-union plant. I guess it took 68 years of
"negotiations" with UAW to finally win concessions for closing the
place.

Please provide...

No. *You* prove I'm wrong.

Okay:
From the Washington Post:

The 68-year-old plant produces the Chevrolet Astro and GMC Safari
full-sized vans. Sales of both vehicles have declined so sharply in
recent years that the plant had cut back from two shifts to one, the
official said.

Separately, Ford Motor Co. agreed in its tentative contract to keep
open a St. Louis assembly plant that it had proposed closing and to
shut down a plant in Loraine, Ohio, and move those workers to a
factory nearby. The news about the GM and Ford plants was reported by
Reuters.

The GM shutdown will further erode a key source of jobs for the
Baltimore area, economists said. "It's an awful blow to Maryland's
industrial base," said Richard Clinch, director of economic research
at the University of Baltimore. "For places like Baltimore, with a
large base of middle- to low-skilled workers, this is a huge blow."

The big, boxy Astro and Safari, the same basic vehicle built for
separate GM brands, lost their competitiveness as the market swung
heavily to minivans. The GM models ran up against popular foreign
rivals such as the Toyota Sienna, Nissan Qwest and Honda Odyssey.

The article further states:

In recent years, GM has been shifting toward flexible production at
newer plants instead of manufacturing one type of vehicle at its aging
factories. The strategy, aimed at boosting productivity, allows the
company to adjust swiftly to changing demand and make smaller numbers
of different types of vehicles.

"When they come up with a new vehicle, they don't make an investment
in a used factory, because of the embedded work practices, the
environment. It's very difficult bringing an old factory up to speed,"
said Rob Lachenauer, a vice president at the Boston Consulting Group

NOYB wrote:

"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"NOYB" wrote in message news:8lsbb.21089
No wonder GM finds it hard to compete. I'm sure it has been modernized
that plant over the years, but the age of the facility speaks volumes
about what is wrong with the management of America's car
manufacturers.


No kidding. Management should have shut it down years ago in favor of
opening a more profitable non-union plant. I guess it took 68 years of
"negotiations" with UAW to finally win concessions for closing the
place.

Please provide...

No. *You* prove I'm wrong.




No one has to. You're 30 years old and have led a sheltered life. What
the hell would you know about working at an auto plant, or, for that
matter, any other factory job?

--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.

"NOYB" wrote in message thlink.net...
"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
"NOYB" wrote in message news:8lsbb.21089
No wonder GM finds it hard to compete. I'm sure it has been modernized
that plant over the years, but the age of the facility speaks volumes
about what is wrong with the management of America's car
manufacturers.


No kidding. Management should have shut it down years ago in favor of
opening a more profitable non-union plant. I guess it took 68 years of
"negotiations" with UAW to finally win concessions for closing the
place.

Please provide...

No. *You* prove I'm wrong.


I did, by the way. No rebuttal?

No kidding. Management should have shut it down years ago in favor of
opening a more profitable non-union plant. I guess it took 68 years of
"negotiations" with UAW to finally win concessions for closing the place.

Please provide ANY evidence that the plat was kept open for 68 years
because of "negotiations with the UAW to finally win concession for
closing the place."

Yeah, that's it. The place was a big loser from day one, and GM would have
closed it right away except for the Union.
Nitrous leak in the office?

"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...
No kidding. Management should have shut it down years ago in favor of
opening a more profitable non-union plant. I guess it took 68 years of
"negotiations" with UAW to finally win concessions for closing the
place.

Please provide ANY evidence that the plat was kept open for 68 years
because of "negotiations with the UAW to finally win concession for
closing the place."

Yeah, that's it. The place was a big loser from day one, and GM would have
closed it right away except for the Union.

You don't think that hasn't happened? Why do you think GM won't close
plants that are less efficient and costly to run in favor of plants
somewhere else that are more efficient and less costly to run? Because the
Unions would strike if GM announced massive layoffs in a town that employs
thousands.

Remember our discussion about Boeing moving? And Boeing doesn't have the
union problems that GM does.

That's how I see it.
The top management are so busy giving themselves outrageous bonuses that
there was little left to modernize plants.
Live for today...tomorrow will take care of it's self??

Harry Krause wrote in message
...
A 68-year-old auto assembly plant? A plant built in the 1930s? A
pre-World War II factory?

No wonder GM finds it hard to compete. I'm sure it has been modernized
that plant over the years, but the age of the facility speaks volumes
about what is wrong with the management of America's car manufacturers.


--
* * *
email sent to will *never* get to me.