OT--Ouch! Right in Harry's backyard...
 

"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

OT--Ouch! Right in Harry's backyard...
 

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.

OT--Ouch! Right in Harry's backyard...
 

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.

OT--Ouch! Right in Harry's backyard...
 

"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.



What auto worker do you know that is making $8/hour? Try $26-$30/hour plus another
$35/hour in benefits.
http://www.uaw.org/barg/03/barg02.cfm

OT--Ouch! Right in Harry's backyard...
 

Jim - wrote:

"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.



What auto worker do you know that is making $8/hour? Try $26-$30/hour plus another
$35/hour in benefits.
http://www.uaw.org/barg/03/barg02.cfm



Poor Jim/Dennis...can't even compete with a blue collar auto worker.



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

OT--Ouch! Right in Harry's backyard...
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
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?

What would *you* know about it? You peck away at a keyboard, and before
that a type-writer, writing "we hate management" slogans meant to incite
anger in people out there doing real work. You represent a group that first
sparks the outrage, and then reaps the benefits in the form of union dues.
That makes you a low-life, exploitive, flim flam man...who's ****ed you
couldn't pass "p-chem" so that you could have pursued a "real" profession.
Your failed miserable life, combined with extreme Narcissistic Personality
Disorder, make you a time bomb ready to go off when it becomes apparent that
your entire life's "work" has gone for naught. Pretty sad...

OT--Ouch! Right in Harry's backyard...
 

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.

OT--Ouch! Right in Harry's backyard...
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Jim - wrote:

"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.



What auto worker do you know that is making $8/hour? Try $26-$30/hour plus another
$35/hour in benefits.
http://www.uaw.org/barg/03/barg02.cfm



Poor Jim/Dennis...can't even compete with a blue collar auto worker.

Based on the intention of that remark, you obviously think little of the blue collar
auto worker you claim to defend. You are a total farce.

OT--Ouch! Right in Harry's backyard...
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

Your failed miserable life, combined with extreme Narcissistic Personality
Disorder, make you a time bomb ready to go off when it becomes apparent
that
your entire life's "work" has gone for naught. Pretty sad...

Even if true, still better than drilling rotten teeth.

OT--Ouch! Right in Harry's backyard...
 

"jps" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
link.net...

Your failed miserable life, combined with extreme Narcissistic
Personality
Disorder, make you a time bomb ready to go off when it becomes apparent
that
your entire life's "work" has gone for naught. Pretty sad...

Even if true, still better than drilling rotten teeth.

Not really. With the advent of cosmetic dentistry, there's a certain
satisfaction in my work when the patient leaves my office sporting a big,
white Hollywood smile. With the the "only-go-to-the-dentist-when-it-hurts"
kind, there's a satisfaction in knowing that they aren't in pain any longer
when they leave. Either way, it's very fulFILLING (pun intended).

It must suck to be an "advocate for union membership"...and then see the
number of members reduced by more than 60% in the last 50 years.