total auto industry employment in KC?

[beautyfromashes]

The quality stunk because the costs were too high.  If your costs are $5000 more per car then you have to cut corners to compete, otherwise you don't sell any cars.  If American car companies are allowed to keep their costs at or just a little above foreign car companies then they will blow the competition out of the water. 

[DaveKCMO]

The quality stunk because the costs were too high.  If your costs are $5000 more per car then you have to cut corners to compete, otherwise you don't sell any cars.  If American car companies are allowed to keep their costs at or just a little above foreign car companies then they will blow the competition out of the water. 

if you removed health care from the equation you'd have a great start.

[LindseyLohan]

Received this today as a forward. Very relavant to this discussion....

Just substitute "union" for "voters" and "big three's piggy bank" for "public treasury"

About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:
'A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government.'  'A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.' 'From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.'  'The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years' 'During those 200 years, those nations progressed through the following sequence:

1. from bondage to spiritual faith; 2. from spiritual faith to great courage; 3. from courage to liberty; 4. from liberty to abundance; 5. from abundance to complacency; 6. from complacency to apathy; 7. from apathy to dependence; 8. from dependence to bondage'

[LindseyLohan]

....and then everyone should go read a few of Ayn Rand's novels.

[ShowME]

So I'm sitting here watching the Chiefs game (I need my daily dose of comedy) and I don't know how many Dodge and Chevy truck commercials I've seen.  These companies (The Big 3) are a joke.  Just go ahead and admit you don't give 2 shits and never have about fuel economy.  This same crap went on in the 70's and they still never learned.  I hope they fail and I hope we don't bail them out.  3 million jobs?  We'll get over it, someone we'll take their place.  Let these spoiled UAW employee's find another profession where everything is not taken for granted.

[warwickland]

chrysler is buying out 3000 employees here.

[LindseyLohan]

Maybe Exxon Mobile should bail them out...

[Highlander]

So I'm sitting here watching the Chiefs game (I need my daily dose of comedy) and I don't know how many Dodge and Chevy truck commercials I've seen.  These companies (The Big 3) are a joke.  Just go ahead and admit you don't give 2 shits and never have about fuel economy.  This same crap went on in the 70's and they still never learned.  I hope they fail and I hope we don't bail them out.  3 million jobs?  We'll get over it, someone we'll take their place.  Let these spoiled UAW employee's find another profession where everything is not taken for granted.

Light trucks and SUV's are protected from foreign competition by a hefty import tax.  Cars are not.  Consequently, the automakers have a much larger profit margin on these vehicles than they do on passenger cars.  When forced to compete with foreign imports or even Japanese (et al) cars made in the US, they struggle because of high labor costs.  SUV's essentially subsidize car manufacturing for the big 3.  I can't blame them for pushing the trucks, that is where they make their profits.  It's a far more complicated issue than just fuel efficiency.  

If the US auto industry collapses, we likely move from a bad recession into a depression.  We may get over, but it will take many years and probably some desperate times for a lot of us.   I don't like bail outs but the consequences of a failed auto manufacturing industry are pretty grim.  What we produce as a nation in terms of manufactured goods has really dwindled over the last 25 years.  

[phxcat]

Plain and simple: UNIONS KILL BUSINESSES.

And prior to unionization, business killed workers.

$73 per/hour is more than a decent wage.

Nobody is making $73 and hour.  That figure comes from adding an average wage of $29 per worker (which probably includes old timers who have been getting raises since the 60's and night shift workers who give up their daytime and health for a bit more money) to the benefits per worker which, as has been previously noted, would decrease significantly if we had single payer healthcare, plus any overtime and holiday pay, training costs, and anything that can be used to show that the workers are paid too much to the pensions and benefits of hundreds of thousands of retirees and then dividing by the number of employees.  That does not provide anywhere close to an accurate number, closer to $41 (which includes benefits).  That could be reduced to $35, again if we had single payer insurance. 

Now, one debate many conservatives like to avoid is about the pay of the CEOs.  While many of them worked hard to get where they are, and many were were just in the right place at the right time, they all make their millions on the backs of the workers.  How much should an hours worth of hard work be worth?  Doctors and lawyers invest a lot of time and money for their professions, but how much is that worth compared to an autoworker who is just working to get by? 

[ShowME]

If the US auto industry collapses, we likely move from a bad recession into a depression.  We may get over, but it will take many years and probably some desperate times for a lot of us.  I don't like bail outs but the consequences of a failed auto manufacturing industry are pretty grim.  What we produce as a nation in terms of manufactured goods has really dwindled over the last 25 years. 

No way we're going into a depression.  I'm sorry but in 1933 the unemployment rate was 25%.  That's not going to happen.  America's job base is too diversified.  Let them fail lose the 3 million jobs and encourage foreign automakers to continue building manufacturing plants in the U.S.  If our government does bail them out I hope they're bailing my employer (Sprint) when the time comes as well.  When will this end....

[Highlander]

No way we're going into a depression.  I'm sorry but in 1933 the unemployment rate was 25%.  That's not going to happen.  America's job base is too diversified.  Let them fail lose the 3 million jobs and encourage foreign automakers to continue building manufacturing plants in the U.S.  If our government does bail them out I hope they're bailing my employer (Sprint) when the time comes as well.  When will this end....

I have read a number of articles suggesting that the collapse of the American auto industry would launch us into a depression.  I am inclined to believe it.  We may have a diversified economy but as many as 1 out of 6 jobs in the US are tied to the auto industry.  The loss would be more than 2.5 million jobs but even at that, the impact would be like a shock wave going through the economy.  Obviously not all jobs would go away as Honda etc would still be intact but the profit would move out of the US.  In any event, we don't need to experience 1930's proportions to be in a depression.  If we are going to have 250 billion job stimulus packages, we might as well use the money ensuring that American industry remains a going concern rather than create a few temporary jobs attached to the governement.  We produce damn little as it is today. 

Now, one debate many conservatives like to avoid is about the pay of the CEOs.  While many of them worked hard to get where they are, and many were were just in the right place at the right time, they all make their millions on the backs of the workers.  How much should an hours worth of hard work be worth?  Doctors and lawyers invest a lot of time and money for their professions, but how much is that worth compared to an autoworker who is just working to get by? 

CEO pay, while probably too high considering their often abysmal performance, is really a red herring.  GM has 266,000 employees.  You could cut CEO of GM's compensation by 66% and only generate enough wealth to increase the annual employee pay about 35$ per worker.

[phxcat]

I have read a number of articles suggesting that the collapse of the American auto industry would launch us into a depression.  I am inclined to believe it.  We may have a diversified economy but as many as 1 out of 6 jobs in the US are tied to the auto industry.  The loss would be more than 2.5 million jobs but even at that, the impact would be like a shock wave going through the economy.  Obviously not all jobs would go away as Honda etc would still be intact but the profit would move out of the US.  In any event, we don't need to experience 1930's proportions to be in a depression.  If we are going to have 250 billion job stimulus packages, we might as well use the money ensuring that American industry remains a going concern rather than create a few temporary jobs attached to the governement.  We produce damn little as it is today. 

And while it may be felt moderately in some parts of the country initially, it would disproportionately devastate those regions of the country that rely on the industry, including the service jobs that are dependent on the factories for paying customers, and the ripple effect would be felt throughout the country. 

CEO pay, while probably too high considering their often abysmal performance, is really a red herring.  GM has 266,000 employees.  You could cut CEO of GM's compensation by 66% and only generate enough wealth to increase the annual employee pay about 35$ per worker.

It is a red herring as far as being a cure for the problem, but as for being symbolic of how much they are willing to make changes to fix the problem and how much the workers are paid, it is not.  Flying their private jets in to discuss the potential bailout isn't going to cost their companies a significant amount of money, but it is symbolic of the idea that they are not serious about cleaning their own houses.

[aknowledgeableperson]

No way we're going into a depression.  I'm sorry but in 1933 the unemployment rate was 25%.  That's not going to happen.  America's job base is too diversified.  Let them fail lose the 3 million jobs and encourage foreign automakers to continue building manufacturing plants in the U.S.  If our government does bail them out I hope they're bailing my employer (Sprint) when the time comes as well.  When will this end....

So you have looked into your crystal ball and have seen that a depression will not be.  Well, I do not have a crystal ball so I have not seen what you have seen.  I am not saying we will enter or we will not, it is just too early to tell and besides you don't know if you are in a recession or a depression until you are well into one (at least in economic terms since you have to have past data to review in order to determine where you are).  And at the same time we can enter into a depression even if there is a Big 3 bailout.  And the diversified job base will not save us.  It is quite simple, people don't have jobs they don't have or have less money to spend.  No matter what less spending means less sales and that translates into business slowdown and businesses closing.

The collapse of the Big 3 does not translate into healthy foreign auto makers.  They too are having their own problems with all auto makers suffering the total loss of about 5M to 6M new car sales in the USA alone.  What the governments have to know is bailing out the Big 3 does not solve the whole problem.  People are not buying cars like they use to and it is very likely that the level of new car sales will not approach the level it was 2 to 3 years ago, at least for many years to come.

The growth of the new car sales, and the housing market, was due to the easy credit standards of the past.  And I do not think that we will return to those lax credit standards for a long time.  

[WoodDraw]

I read somewhere that Chapter 11 wouldn't work because it limits your ability to get credit, and car companies rely on credit to get parts. I don't know much about bankruptcy...could the judge change that to accommodate the car companies?

If they go into Chapt. 11, they'll need something called debtor in possesion financing, which allows you to raise capital senior to your oustanding debt once in bankruptcy.  Since the credit markets are in ruin, the big 3 are claiming that in bankruptcy they wouldn't be able to secure the DIP funding, which would launch them into chapt. 7 instead of restructuring in 11.  That's a fair argument, but the solution would be for the government to come in and back all of the DIP funding. 

The big three have so many problems beyond the recent economic problems.  For all practical purposes, the American auto industry is a failed industry.  Not only has management made awful decisions over the past few years, but they are handicapped with legacy union costs that are exorberant.  New hires are in line with most foreign companies, but they have huge legacy costs that add around $2000 to the ticket price of every car made.  When an industry reaches this point, they SHOULD enter into bankrupty.  The government handing them a blank check, or even a check tied to the idiotic fuel standards that don't work, will only prelong their inevitable bankruptcy.  These companies need to restructure.

BUT, given the current economic problems, we probably can't allow a straight, unstructured bankruptcy.  What the regulators should do is bring them into a planned bankruptcy with a government guarantee of all DIP funding tied towards restructuring.  It will hurt the economy overall, and the management and workers of the companies.  But, when your union and management make poor decisions, that is what you deserve.  I'm sick of bailing out all of these workers and companies that brought along their own desmise.

[WoodDraw]

sometimes, yes.  just like business in general, government, etc.  with any organization that allocates resources, power, etc., corruption is there.  it's not like the big bad unions are tainting the poor, altruistic corporations!

Sure, but the difference is that people don't have a big problem holding executives and share holders responsible, but when unions screw up, it's a different deal.  If we're going to wipe out the equity holders of these companies, which should be done, then why shouldn't the union workers that contributed not face significant losses too?

[KCMax]

The thing is that our legal system should take care of protecting workers.  While in the past there wasn't any protection from sweatshop conditions or sexual harrassment, we now have laws to protect workers.  No need for unions.

Those laws protecting workers were made possible by unions lobbying Congress.

[mean]

You could cut CEO of GM's compensation by 66% and only generate enough wealth to increase the annual employee pay about 35$ per worker.

I assume you mean his base salary, not including bonuses, benefits, and perks? And of course, you can't just look at the CEO, to be fair you'd have to include the entire overpaid executive staff and all the things they get that your average worker doesn't get. So in addition to the executive staff's base salaries, we include the salaries for their huge fleet of assistants and secretaries, pilots, flight attendants, and drivers; the cost of company provided cars plus fuel and maintenance for a year; private jets plus fuel and maintenance for a year; all company-provided phones and computers and lavish imported office furniture for a year, and add all this up with their salaries and the "performance bonuses" that they may get even if the company performs poorly.

I'd like to see how far 66% cut off that would go toward bailing them out. Even just selling the jets. Jets are expensive!

[WoodDraw]

It is a red herring as far as being a cure for the problem, but as for being symbolic of how much they are willing to make changes to fix the problem and how much the workers are paid, it is not.  Flying their private jets in to discuss the potential bailout isn't going to cost their companies a significant amount of money, but it is symbolic of the idea that they are not serious about cleaning their own houses.

Well by all means then, let's fix the symbol and not the actual problem.

Why are we comparing the salaries of well educated, top of the line employees with assembly plant workers?  Yes, they make a lot of money.  But if you look at GM's CEO, very little of the money is guaranteed, he receives no bonus, and the remainder of his salary is earned through stock, options, and incentive plans. 

Yes, he flies a corporate plane.  So does nearly every other CEO in the nation.  You know who else does?  Those same congressmen who ridiculed the big three for using one.  Really, who cares?  We aren't in a recession right now because of private planes, and GM won't become a profitable company by the CEO flying coach. 

The UAW workers are well paid.  In fact, they're paid better than their counterparts in foreign companies.  We can artificially boost the American industry workers above the market price, but that money has to come from somewhere.  Right now, it comes from making shitty cars that no one wants to buy.  We can put restrictions on CEO pay and give the workers that money, but 1) who decides what is fair?  And 2) why would any top executive want to lead the American car industry then?

[LenexatoKCMO]

Yes, he flies a corporate plane.  So does nearly every other CEO in the nation.  You know who else does?  Those same congressmen who ridiculed the big three for using one.  Really, who cares?  We aren't in a recession right now because of private planes, and GM won't become a profitable company by the CEO flying coach. 

Those private planes are assembled by American union workers - if Fortune CEOs quit flying private planes, what are all of the union aircraft builders down in Wichita going to do?

[WoodDraw]

I assume you mean his base salary, not including bonuses, benefits, and perks? And of course, you can't just look at the CEO, to be fair you'd have to include the entire overpaid executive staff and all the things they get that your average worker doesn't get. So in addition to the executive staff's base salaries, we include the salaries for their huge fleet of assistants and secretaries, pilots, flight attendants, and drivers; the cost of company provided cars plus fuel and maintenance for a year; private jets plus fuel and maintenance for a year; all company-provided phones and computers and lavish imported office furniture for a year, and add all this up with their salaries and the "performance bonuses" that they may get even if the company performs poorly.

I'd like to see how far 66% cut off that would go toward bailing them out. Even just selling the jets. Jets are expensive!

Total compensation in 2007 for the executive officers at GM was $65,684,326.  Most of that isn't in hard cash, but regardless.  So 66% of that would be 43,351,655.16.  So, subtract that from the $5,000,000,000 loan that GM would probably directly get in any bailiout and now they'd only need $4,956,648,344.84.  So no, it wouldn't go very far.

All of the executive officers would then resign too, and go make more money at a more attractive job, leaving GM leaderless and unable to attract top management talent.  But at least they wouldn't need the private plan then, eh?