GM's Janesville plant likely to be shut down

[Thom Little]

General Motors Corp, Chief Executive Rick Wagoner will announce plans this week to close four U.S. assembly plants, the Automotive News industry paper reported on Monday, citing a "company insider."

It said the move was part of an effort by the world's biggest carmaker to quiet Wall Street speculation about a possible bankruptcy.

.......

Wagoner has said he plans to cut manufacturing capacity to match demand by 2008. Some experts believe The Lansing Craft Center, where GM builds the Chevrolet SSR, will likely be shut down because the convertible sport pickup has not sold very well and GM has idled the plant for several months in 2005.

Two other plants likely to be shut down are the Doraville, Georgia, plant, which builds GM's minivans, and an SUV plant in Janesville, Wisconsin, analysts said.

The new plant closures will add to three assembly plants that GM has already closed or stopped production at this year -- a car plant in Lansing, Michigan, an SUV plant in Linden, New Jersey, and a van plant in Baltimore.



http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051121/bs_nm/autos_gm_plants_dc&printer=1;_ylt=AiMz8KKS9g_xgSsyTY7.s76b.HQA;_ylu=X3oDMTA3MXN1bHE0BHNlYwN0bWE-

[sybylla]

1. Once again, the CEO's cash in and the workers take it from behind

I'm beginning to think we need a law in this country that says when CEO's screw over a company to cash in personally, every stinking penny of their assets should be confiscated and used to support the employees who end up paying far more in blood and sweat and stress for these enronesque shenanigans.

[Jimbo S]

13. Plenty of blame to go around

Top-heavy management, patting each other on the back and not doing much else.

Overcompensated union workers driving up the cost of new cars.

Suppliers are left to come up with price concessions to keep the Big Three (or Two) afloat. Would be nice to give *our* workers a nice raise for once.

[sybylla]

19. Had the company been more honest with their financial status

months ago rather than pulling an Enronesque coverup so they could pocket as much as possible in bonuses and keep their stock value artifically high, GM might have been able to clean this up much earlier without jeopardizing so many jobs and without risking a bankruptcy we taxpayers will no doubt bailout with our hard earned dollars in the end.

And I disagree about overcompensated union workers. The fact that Reagan managed to break the unions 25 years ago has left our standard of living in the dust. Employers used to pay decent wages merely because of the threat of unions coming into their business. The presence of strong unions across the country meant more people earning a living wage. Now, minimum wage is between 1/2 and 1/3 of living wage in most climes and over 45 MILLION people don't have health insurance. GM workers aren't overcompensated. We're all undercompensated.

And I'm quite disappointed though not surprised that I have call to say this on a DEMOCRATIC forum. The Democratic party used to be the party of the worker and worker's rights. I guess those days are over too.

[bugslsu9]

20. Those Days are NOT Over

Those days are not yet over, Sybylla. There are still Democrats, like myself, who are willing to stand up and fight for living wages, workers' rights, and universal health care. I will be doing so the entire time I am fighting Paul Ryan, and will keep doing so when I am in Congress.

[Jimbo S]

21. I stand by my comments.

GM's financial problems go back years, long before this current incident.

The last I heard a typical UAW worker receives $30+ an hour in wages and compensation. Heck, that's way more than what I get or most other professionals I know. A worker can call in sick Monday through Friday and still get time-and-half for working Saturday. Two weeks ago I was at an UAW plant to re-inspect some parts we had shipped them. A co-worker and I were setup at one table, three UAW guys at another. The two of us went through 600 pieces in the five hours we were there. The other group weren't even close to us despite the extra guy. Why? Work thirty minutes and take a smoke break. They get a thity-minute lunch at 11:00, and 10:45 they're nowhere to be seen. Just ask any of this in the inside, all kinds of stories like this. And all this goes into the price of a new car.

The wage scale was reasonable at one time, but now with a global economy that is no longer the case - little to do with union busting. Most companies could never compete given a workforce such as GM's. The only reason the automakers have been getting by is because they pretty much a monopoly on the market.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm all for unions. It's just people need to use common sense. I don't think people in the UAW are really aware of how they are killing themselves, and I hate to see it happening.

[sybylla]

22. And so do I

Unions aren't perfect - don't get me wrong. But if I remember correctly, we were talking about "overcompensated union employees", not incompetent union employees.

The global economy meant nothing until NAFTA, CAFTA and GATT came along to insure higher corporate profits at the expense of US employees, long after Ronnie Raygun and his union busting. What point is a 40 hour work week if people have to hold down three jobs to make ends meet? A "global economy" is just another way for corporations to get out of having to treat workers in this world like human beings. A wage scale that provides a living wage is always, ALWAYS, reasonable, whether in the US or China or India regardless of a global economy. If the aforementioned treaties protected the rights of workers to make a living wage worldwide, if they required the protection of the environment and workers health and safety globally, a wage scale that provided a living wage would never be a problem in this country and guess what? There would be no need for unions.

But unfortunately for us, corporations are currently clasping Uncle Sam's scrotum in their greedy fingers and were stuck with shit jobs paying fuckall so the rich can get richer. Study your history, Jimbo. We're repeating it only it's global now. Just take a look at the 1880's and 1890's.

BTW, $30+ in wages and compensation (compensation generally referring to benefits like health insurance, life insurance, pension, disability, vacation, sick time, etc) would suggest the average UAW worker makes about $15-$20 an hour in wages alone. That's fine money for a skilled labor force but not exceptional - far less than I pay my plumber or my mechanic. And it's still not much above a starting wage for most "professionals," including school teachers.

[Jimbo S]

23. I'll try to sum this up

I wasn’t calling employees incompetent, just inefficient. Please keep in mind I also hold management accountable for their mess – top-heavy management, making out-dated SUVs vs. hybrids, unable to penetrate foreign markets because they don’t make right-side driven cars, women prefer the smaller Camrys and Corrollas to American cars, etc.

I’m aware of the 19th century sweatshops and the need for organized labor. But the America’s golden era of the 50’s and 60’s are long gone. It’s a global economy now and we’re all slowly regressing to the mean. This has nothing to do with Reagan, NAFTA, GATT or greedy owners.

You say the situation is such that we are under compensated. The question I have to ask is where is the money suppose to come from? If my employer offered us the same things GM does, we’d be out of business in a year.

It doesn’t matter what UAW takes home in pay. All the benies goes into the price of a car (if I remember about $32/hr. in the mid-90’s). You mention life insurance, pension, sick time...that’s exactly the point. A company can’t be competitive when required to offer these things; it’s the pensions that will eventually doom these companies. Plus, I don’t think it’s correct to compare their wages (unskilled labor) to professionals such as plumbers and teachers.

[sybylla]

24. Thank you, I was certainly too dumb to catch your bs without a summation

I fail to understand how you miss the the fact that sweatshops, whether or not they are in America or Thailand, matter in a global economy and demand a need for organized labor and regulations. Our global situation today is certainly very much like our national situation in the late 19th century. You cry "global" but fail to account for the fact that corporations are using the global economy and sweatshops in other countries to bring us all down to that level, exactly the way they did in the unregulated late 19th century.

You fail to recognize that workers deserve to be treated as humans and have rights that you seem to think are has-beens or mere fads from the 50's and 60's. And this has everything to do with international trade agreements as they did nothing to protect workers here or abroad. A trade agreement doesn't foster a level playing field if it doesn't work towards the same working conditions in both countries. If by loosening international trade regulations we don't take the opportuntity to force other countries to treat their environment with care and their workers with respect and dignity, we have fucked up a very big opportunity to eliminate the sweat shops and inhumane working and living conditions world wide. Gosh, who might have been behind that plan? :think:

To answer your question on undercompensation, I merely point to the great decade of the 90's before the international trade agreements started devasting our workforce. Wages rose thanks to a hike in the minimum wage, people had more money to spend, profits rose across the board, unemployment fell as businesses needed more workers to meet demand and, gee, I might expect businesses could then afford to offer decent benefits and better pay and, darn it, I think that would be a mighty fine economic cycle to get back into. How about you?

Lastly, it doesn't take a degree in economics to see that the cost of running a business, including employee expenses, go into the product. As a small business owner, I assumed that was a given and I didn't need to expound quite so eruditely upon it. Thank you for enlightening me. We'll just have to agree to differ that a company can't be competitive when required to offer "these things" like benefits. I've worked for several and know very many people who do. And pensions will only doom companies who fail to plan, run by CEO's who prefer to keep a company as close to the margins as possible so they can pocket as much profit as their financial institutions can hold.

And though this hasn't even come up in our exchange yet, I would argue that employee relations and expenses have less to do with GM's problems than the fact that their R&D people have failed them miserably when it comes to developing models that have appeal to both the eye and pocketbook.

Ironically, it was Henry Ford who realized that his employees needed to make enough money to afford his cars. If you haven't been to a car dealer's lately, I suggest you take a moment out of your busy schedule to see that the cost of even the cheapest models is fast outstripping our average income as a nation and many of them are out of the reach of those overpaid workers at GM supporting their families on a whopping 30,000 a year. In this global economy it won't be long before only the wealthy can afford a new car if we aren't there already.

[Jimbo S]

25. We agree on a few things

I fail to understand how you miss the the fact that sweatshops...demand a need for organized labor and regulations.
Please see Post 23, paragraph 2. I agree with you.

You fail to recognize that workers deserve to be treated as humans and have rights that you seem to think are has-beens or mere fads from the 50's and 60's.
I never implied workers are has-beens. I was stating the fact that the standard of living is different now than what it used to be. And also that companies don't have the ability to compensate workers at the level of year's past.
My gandfather was a union man. The union was able to provide his family with a middle class living and a comfortable retirement.

To answer your question on undercompensation, I merely point to the great decade of the 90's before the international trade agreements started devasting our workforce.
GM took a huge hit back about '91 or '92. About that same time Chrysler was teetering on the brink of death. Their financial problems were before Clinton, NAFTA and all that.

And though this hasn't even come up in our exchange yet, I would argue that employee relations and expenses have less to do with GM's problems than the fact that their R&D people have failed them miserably when it comes to developing models that have appeal to both the eye and pocketbook.
I agree with you, also. Refer to post 22.

it was Henry Ford who realized that his employees needed to make enough money to afford his cars.
Correct. But nowadays, the money just isn't there. Many liberals assume companies are flowing with money, but the truth is too many are just getting by.

those overpaid workers at GM supporting their families on a whopping 30,000 a year.
I'd be willing to bet my house the typical autoworker makes much more than $30K.

In this global economy it won't be long before only the wealthy can afford a new car if we aren't there already.
Once again sybylla we agree, just not on the cause for it.

We'll just have to agree to disagree on the role of NAFTA and GATT.

[sybylla]

26. Let's back up the horsecart for a minute

But nowadays, the money just isn't there. Many liberals assume companies are flowing with money, but the truth is too many are just getting by. Got a link to justify any of the generalizations you make in that statement?

GM took a huge hit back about '91 or '92. About that same time Chrysler was teetering on the brink of death. Their financial problems were before Clinton, NAFTA and all that. Talking about a global economy in general and GM specifically are two different things since, by and large, automobile manufacturers in this country are protected from the global economy and competition with manufacturers in other countries by considerable tariffs. GM doesn't have to compete globally, only nationally. True or not I've even heard it said that Toyotas are more "American Made" than GM's these days.

...companies don't have the ability to compensate workers at the level of year's past. Again, another unsupported generalization.

I'd be willing to bet my house the typical autoworker makes much more than $30K. I was using your numbers, honeybunny and being optimistic at that. See your post 426.

Strawmen and logical fallicies fail to persuade me. So far, I have no problem agreeing to disagree with you.

edit: typos

[Jimbo S]

27. Let's back up the horsecart for a minute

1. But nowadays, the money just isn't there.
2. Many liberals assume companies are flowing with money, but the truth is too many are just getting by.
Got a link to justify any of the generalizations you make in that statement?
3. companies don't have the ability to compensate workers at the level of year's past.
Again, another unsupported generalization.
Strawmen and logical fallicies fail to persuade me.

1,3. Sorry, no links. Just common knowlowdge to those of us in the inside.
2. All I have to do is read some of the threads in LBN and GD. Sometimes leaves me shaking my head.


I'd be willing to bet my house the typical autoworker makes much more than $30K.
I was using your numbers, honeybunny and being optimistic at that. See your post 426.
All I stated was average UAW compensation was in the low 30 per hour range (this was a few years ago). I have no idea what the actual paycheck is. I do know in our shop (USWA) we have people making $15-$18, which including OT leaves many making $40K-$50K easy.

GM doesn't have to compete globally, only nationally. True or not I've even heard it said that Toyotas are more "American Made" than GM's these days.
This note is directed to all reading this: Toyotas are not "made" in America, they are "assembled" in America. They import the (cheaper) internal components from Japan to the U.S. to avoid the treaties, then assemble them here. A car made by Chrysler/Ford/GM employ four times as many (unionized) Americans than a Toyota. That's why their cars aren't as expensive.
Sorry sybylla, no link for this either. Just more insider information.

Thanks for reading and have a great day everyone. :hi:

[sybylla]

28. um, okay...

I was taught at a very early age not to pick up the blinds when the highest trump in my hand was an eight.

It was a pleasure, Jimbo. I'm sure your hard hitting facts have persuaded "many liberals" that their assumptions about business in a global economy are just plain wrong.

[ewagner]

2. I'm furious

GM is one of the worst corporations in terms of "strategic vision". Followed closely by FORD. That SUV plant in Janesville should have been converted over to hybrids or new technologically advanced cars YEAR ago...

Lack of any kind of vision on the part of management will now force workers to pay for their greed and stupidity. :grr:

[RevCheesehead]

4. That's why I have a Saturn.

Plus, it's a damn fine little car - and they have a woman as CEO.

[Viking12]

5. psssst, Rev, Saturn is a GM subsidiary

Just sayin'

[RevCheesehead]

6. In name only.

They're run independently - and have a huge following. Any Saturn owner will tell you their next car will be another Saturn.

[Viking12]

7. GM's problems are Saturn's problems

General Motors Corp. will close nine auto manufacturing plants and service parts facilities between now and the end of 2008, including its Ion sedan assembly line at its Saturn plant in Spring Hill.

The move will affect about 1,500 employees. The plant, which opened in 1990 in Spring Hill employs about 5,700 people. The assembly line will cease production at the end of next year. The Spring Hill facility also makes the Saturn Vue, an SUV. GM also produces Saturn vehicles in Wilmington, Del.

http://nashville.bizjournals.com/nashville/stories/2005/11/21/daily1.html

The Doraville, GA GM plant which produces the Saturn Relay is also slated to close.

[RevCheesehead]

8. The Ion is highly popular.... this won't sit well.

I seriously hope they'll reconsider.

The Relay - BIG mistake. And ugly, too.

There's some rumor of a hybrid vehicle to be released soon. But unfortunately, they're focusing on the VUE. Someone needs to remind them that single people buy cars, too.

Thanks for the information - I had no idea this was going on.

[Viking12]

9. I'm not sure this means the Ion will be discontinued...

only that the TN employees that make them are gonna lose their jobs. They may very well continue to produce that model elsewhere.

[Jimbo S]

12. I'm also an owner

On my second Saturn.

Saturn used to run independantly of GM, but then GM started blurring the line about ten years ago.

I was previously employed in the automotive supplier sector, so I have some inside knowledge.

[RevCheesehead]

14. I wish they'd go completely independent.

Ah, inside knowledge....

What are you driving now? And what do you recommend for 2006? The Ion looks nice, but I'm afraid it might be too confining.
I'm driving an SL-1, and love it... although at times I wish it had just a tad more zip to it (passing).

[Jimbo S]

16. Was driving

a dark green '95 SL1. Last February traded it in for a dark green '02 SL1. Freaked out my friends, getting the exact same model. LOL

Didn't test drive an ION, so I can't say anything.

I'm extremely happy with the service. There's a dealer two miles from where I live.

I can relate with you on the power. Doesn't accelerate the way I would like on the Milwaukee freeways.

38 mpg freeway driving, that's important to me. I'm not a big environmentalist, but I try to help out where I can doing common sense things.

A practical car for a practical guy like me. :)

[RevCheesehead]

17. Practical, and you know what you're going to pay for it, too...

I don't haggle. Tell me what you think it's worth - and if it seems like a good product, I'll probably buy it.

The dealer told me last time I was in that they're no longer making SL1's. I was very, very sad to learn that. He said the Ion was designed as an upgrade (of sorts). The only thing is, I'm not sure if I like that control panel smack dab in the middle of the dashboard.

Does Mrs. J drive one, too?

[Jimbo S]

18. They no longer make SLs, SCs, or SWs

They have the ION 100s, 200s and so on.

That's a good point about the no haggle policy. I don't negotiate over the price of a candy bar or video rental, so why over a car? I don't have the time nor energy to go around playing games with sales people.

Mrs. S leases a Corrolla, much to my dismay.

[Viking12]

3. Wisconsin plant escapes GM cuts

General Motors' oldest plant - in Janesville, Wis. - was spared in a plan to eliminate 30,000 jobs and close nine assembly, stamping and powertrain plants by 2008.

But the GM plant in Janesville, Wis., which employs more than 3,800 workers — 5,100 including GM suppliers — will remain open. The plant's $225 million payroll accounts for more than 6 percent of local wages.

The 86-year-old Janesville assembly plant has survived the Depression, a world war, and GM's major layoffs in the 1980s.

http://www.startribune.com/stories/535/5738988.html

[ewagner]

10. Wouldn't it be sweet vindication

if the Tennessee plants closed and the Wisconsin Plant stayed open because of the quality of the educated workforce?

Remember.

Toyota pulled out of Alabama and went to MONTREAL CA because the Alabama workforce was dummber than a box of rocks...if I remember the story correctly, they had to make training manuals in the form of comic books for the workforce...they got tired of it and went to CA.

That would be sweet if Wisconsin jobs survived because we're a state that invests in our workforce.

e

[RevCheesehead]

11. Hell, I'm still pissed about the raping of AMC by Chrysler.

I will never, ever, ever, ever, ever consider a Chrysler.
My first car was an AMC Spirit hatchback, with a V-8 engine. Damn!

[Jimbo S]

15. Reminds me of when I was in college

1988 when Chrysler laid off workers in Kenosha. I was taking a class in the Business school. The new plant closing law was just passed to give people the heads up about this stuff. The TA was discussing this, saying sometimes CEOs know weeks, even months in advance when layoffs accours. The business major sitting next to me says "Tough!".
:puke:

People ask me why I'm not a conservative?