 | |
Piss on the UAW
General Motors Discussions About General Motors vehicles (alt.autos.gm)
 |
| | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#11
 
| |||
| |||
|
Re: Piss on the UAW -
05-07-2007
, 11:25 PM
|
In article <pyM%h.114269$VU4.87083 (AT) bgtnsc05-news (DOT) ops.worldnet.att.net>, "Sudy Nim" <pseudonym (AT) noplace (DOT) com> wrote: Where were you or (your parents) back around 1972 when everyone [started] to buy those Great (Cheaper) Japanese TV's and other consumer electronic products? Can you remember any of the names like RCA, Philco, Motorola, Zenith, Emerson or Admiral etc? Plus all the brand names like Sears, Wards and Pacific Mercury? All put out of business costing millions of Americans too eventually lose their jobs, including me! Some belonged to a union some not. All Japanese auto plants in this country should eventually be unionized but that will dive up the price so we'll need a new invasion to reduce costs. But, do we really need employment in America anymore? We are a nation of consumers not workers, just ask the Chinese. I will not live to see it but make way for the Cherry Blossom coming your way soon at a Wal-Mart near you. Looks like they finally got to the auto industry and you. I say tough Shit! I was in the TV business back in the early 60s working for Westinghouse as a TV gun production engineer. We built RCA CRT designs. I could see that Westinghouse and other USA companies were falling behind with TV designs and left for the computer business in '63. In the late 60s I bought my first color TV, a lovely Sony. I've bought several Sony TVs since and have never looked back, nor have I had to look for TV service. It was not a union problem, USA management let the USA companies and consumers down. The Japanese companies simply filled a big gap created by stale USA companies. |
always be number one. Someone is always looking to drop number two on you.
Once GM cars were good, better than Ford, even. But they assumed they would
always be on top at some point, and real innovation slowly died.
Charles of Schaumburg
#12
| |||
| |||
|
|
That's just the thing. Once you're number one, you can't just assume you'll always be number one. Someone is always looking to drop number two on you. Once GM cars were good, better than Ford, even. But they assumed they would always be on top at some point, and real innovation slowly died. |
any of the US automakers for that matter) have been left behind by the
innovative designs of the competition. In fact, I see where GM has either
kept up with, or lead in innovations - not all of them the most necessary
IMHO, but right up front all the same. Now, quality control and durability
designs might be another topic. Where most GM owners have felt the most
abandoned by GM is in the lack of quality in components and design, and the
manner in which GM pushed off the expense for this on the consumer.
--
-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE (AT) alltel (DOT) net
#13
| |||
| |||
|
|
"n5hsr" <n5hsr (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote in message news:a4CdnacwVZzlZqLbnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com... That's just the thing. Once you're number one, you can't just assume you'll always be number one. Someone is always looking to drop number two on you. Once GM cars were good, better than Ford, even. But they assumed they would always be on top at some point, and real innovation slowly died. I have to disagree with this statement Charles. I don't see where GM (or any of the US automakers for that matter) have been left behind by the innovative designs of the competition. In fact, I see where GM has either kept up with, or lead in innovations - not all of them the most necessary IMHO, but right up front all the same. Now, quality control and durability designs might be another topic. Where most GM owners have felt the most abandoned by GM is in the lack of quality in components and design, and the manner in which GM pushed off the expense for this on the consumer. -- -Mike- mmarlowREMOVE (AT) alltel (DOT) net |
wanted a small car. What sort of small cars did GM produce? The Shitvette.
(Ford produced the Pinto.) They kept hoping people would buy the big cars.
They were behind the Japanese even then. In 1974 we bought our first Toyota
and the technology was light-years ahead of the US cars of that era. The
paint was better, the fit and finish was better, parts were easier to work
with. GM had settled for Good Enough. They had believed their own PR that
there was a heirarchy to car ownership, that only the poor people owned
little cars, that Chevy owners were the bottom of the scale. That once
people made better money, they moved up to a Phewic, or a Pantyrack, or an
Oldsmobauble and as things went on, they bought bigger ones and the really
prestegious people bought slick black Cadillacs. Well, maybe in their mind.
Quality Control and Durability are part of the innovations Toyota brought to
the market.
My dad, for instance, owned his 77 Corolla almost to the day he died, 22
years. It's been abused by idiot mechanics, charged by a deer, drag raced
against Z-28's and one 1980's Chevy lead-sled, and with one broken valve,
still managed to make over 60 mph on the way to the boneyard.
The accountants took over GM a long time ago and worked on ways to make the
car cheaper and still charge the same price. That corporate attitude still
has the Big Three in its thrall. The result is a car that may actually cost
less than a Toyota, but is also worth less, and the customers are getting
wise to it.
Charles of Schaumburg
#14
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Mon, 07 May 2007 16:54:16 -0500, dbu., wrote: In article <f6f162466bdbe0dfd0ef1d86383d9c2b (AT) mixmaster (DOT) it>, George Orwell <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote: Windsor Star http://snipurl.com/1jofs After working 23 years for General Motors, Paul Harrison sought a job Saturday with the domestic automaker's chief rival -- Toyota. "I saw a lot of my colleagues here; even my boss was in line," said Harrison, who will lose his job at the GM transmission plant July 1. "I was surprised by that. The future of the auto industry is terrible here. I'm looking for a job that pays well regardless of whether it's in this community. Toyota is a good company and they make good cars." Harrison, a 47-year-old licensed industrial mechanic, was one of hundreds of job seekers Saturday who converged on the Toyota job fair at the Holiday Inn... ..None of the job applicants were bothered by Toyota being a non-union environment. "If I can't hold onto my job without a union backing me, then I have no business working," Harrison said. I've heard of more union workers complaining about the union dues and not getting anything for their money. They used to serve a viable need, but in recent years it seems they are only a drag on the workers pocketbook. Don't even get me started on unions...there isn't enough bandwidth in this group... Only thing I'll say...we were coming down to contract talks. The rumours of strike were rampant. I was making $16.75 and hour, and this was 1992. Good bennies, good pensions, everything you could want. A guy who's place I took in the dept I was in (he moved 'up') came over and asked what I think about striking. I said, I'm happy, I have all I need. Then I posed this question: If it came down to you getting $0.25 an hour more, and watching people walk out the door, which would you rather? His response? I'll take the quarter. We got the quarter...he walked out the door about 6 months before my turn came... I couple of points. First of all I did not notice at the start of this |
did not wish to berate the unions. And I must point out I never was a union
member as I was employed buy a good corporation, in their day. My point was
that in my opinion the autoworkers are faced with the inevitable loss of
jobs, as so many of us before them. They were fat dumb and happy with a
great job, great benefits (as was I) and failed to look behind, to see what
was catching up to them. There are still a few small companies in America
that are trying to do right with their employees but they are facing an
uphill battle. As to unions they had there place prior to WWII, and did
better the living conditions for the "poor class" workers as my father who
was a coal miner in the 20's and 30's. Unions can still stand up to the
corporations but workers will lose! The world is taking away all our jobs
and we are helpless to prevent it. The autoworkers are just now finding that
out. I look at my grandchildren; oh they can find a job, at Wal-Mart but
what about their future and the future of your grandchildren? Will Honda or
Toyota be there for them?
#15
| |||
| |||
|
|
In message news:f6f162466bdbe0dfd0ef1d86383d9c2b (AT) mixmaster (DOT) it, George Orwell sprach forth the following: None of the job applicants were bothered by Toyota being a non-union environment. Because being a non-union environment is the reason Toyota has jobs to offer while GM and Ford die die die. |
treated their workers so bad in the 1930's that the workers BEGGED for a
union to have some protection.
Toyota is a little smarter. Happy employees don't strike. Happy employees
work better. Happy employees don't need a union. . . .
Charles of Schaumburg
#16
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Mike Marlow" <mmarlow (AT) alltel (DOT) net> wrote in message news:2eed6$46405e9b$471fb881$24169 (AT) ALLTEL (DOT) NET... "n5hsr" <n5hsr (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote in message news:a4CdnacwVZzlZqLbnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com... That's just the thing. Once you're number one, you can't just assume you'll always be number one. Someone is always looking to drop number two on you. Once GM cars were good, better than Ford, even. But they assumed they would always be on top at some point, and real innovation slowly died. I have to disagree with this statement Charles. I don't see where GM (or any of the US automakers for that matter) have been left behind by the innovative designs of the competition. In fact, I see where GM has either kept up with, or lead in innovations - not all of them the most necessary IMHO, but right up front all the same. Now, quality control and durability designs might be another topic. Where most GM owners have felt the most abandoned by GM is in the lack of quality in components and design, and the manner in which GM pushed off the expense for this on the consumer. -- -Mike- mmarlowREMOVE (AT) alltel (DOT) net Ok, think back to the 1970's and the first Arab Oil Embargo. Everybody wanted a small car. What sort of small cars did GM produce? The Shitvette. (Ford produced the Pinto.) They kept hoping people would buy the big cars. They were behind the Japanese even then. In 1974 we bought our first Toyota and the technology was light-years ahead of the US cars of that era. The paint was better, the fit and finish was better, parts were easier to work with. GM had settled for Good Enough. They had believed their own PR that there was a heirarchy to car ownership, that only the poor people owned little cars, that Chevy owners were the bottom of the scale. That once people made better money, they moved up to a Phewic, or a Pantyrack, or an Oldsmobauble and as things went on, they bought bigger ones and the really prestegious people bought slick black Cadillacs. Well, maybe in their mind. Quality Control and Durability are part of the innovations Toyota brought to the market. |
Quote:
|
My dad, for instance, owned his 77 Corolla almost to the day he died, 22 years. It's been abused by idiot mechanics, charged by a deer, drag raced against Z-28's and one 1980's Chevy lead-sled, and with one broken valve, still managed to make over 60 mph on the way to the boneyard. |
having done the same thing.
Quote:
|
The accountants took over GM a long time ago and worked on ways to make the car cheaper and still charge the same price. That corporate attitude still has the Big Three in its thrall. The result is a car that may actually cost less than a Toyota, but is also worth less, and the customers are getting wise to it. |
--
-Mike-
mmarlowREMOVE (AT) alltel (DOT) net
#17
| |||
| |||
|
|
"n5hsr" <n5hsr (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote in message news:n8ydnbXt0L9M_N3bnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com... "Mike Marlow" <mmarlow (AT) alltel (DOT) net> wrote in message news:2eed6$46405e9b$471fb881$24169 (AT) ALLTEL (DOT) NET... "n5hsr" <n5hsr (AT) comcast (DOT) net> wrote in message news:a4CdnacwVZzlZqLbnZ2dnUVZ_g-dnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com... That's just the thing. Once you're number one, you can't just assume you'll always be number one. Someone is always looking to drop number two on you. Once GM cars were good, better than Ford, even. But they assumed they would always be on top at some point, and real innovation slowly died. I have to disagree with this statement Charles. I don't see where GM (or any of the US automakers for that matter) have been left behind by the innovative designs of the competition. In fact, I see where GM has either kept up with, or lead in innovations - not all of them the most necessary IMHO, but right up front all the same. Now, quality control and durability designs might be another topic. Where most GM owners have felt the most abandoned by GM is in the lack of quality in components and design, and the manner in which GM pushed off the expense for this on the consumer. -- -Mike- mmarlowREMOVE (AT) alltel (DOT) net Ok, think back to the 1970's and the first Arab Oil Embargo. Everybody wanted a small car. What sort of small cars did GM produce? The Shitvette. (Ford produced the Pinto.) They kept hoping people would buy the big cars. They were behind the Japanese even then. In 1974 we bought our first Toyota and the technology was light-years ahead of the US cars of that era. The paint was better, the fit and finish was better, parts were easier to work with. GM had settled for Good Enough. They had believed their own PR that there was a heirarchy to car ownership, that only the poor people owned little cars, that Chevy owners were the bottom of the scale. That once people made better money, they moved up to a Phewic, or a Pantyrack, or an Oldsmobauble and as things went on, they bought bigger ones and the really prestegious people bought slick black Cadillacs. Well, maybe in their mind. Quality Control and Durability are part of the innovations Toyota brought to the market. True - but you're referencing the 70's. That's 30 years ago. My dad, for instance, owned his 77 Corolla almost to the day he died, 22 years. It's been abused by idiot mechanics, charged by a deer, drag raced against Z-28's and one 1980's Chevy lead-sled, and with one broken valve, still managed to make over 60 mph on the way to the boneyard. Again, true, but there as many like stories of Ford's, GM's, Chryslers, etc. having done the same thing. The accountants took over GM a long time ago and worked on ways to make the car cheaper and still charge the same price. That corporate attitude still has the Big Three in its thrall. The result is a car that may actually cost less than a Toyota, but is also worth less, and the customers are getting wise to it. True - but the issue was one of innovation. -- -Mike- mmarlowREMOVE (AT) alltel (DOT) net |
Stop and think about it.
I bought a 1995 Chevy S-10. Quality was better than the 1960's, but still
inferior to Toyota. It needed to be in the shop a lot more than the Toyotas
I've owned. I dumped it before 50,000 miles.
Charles of Schaumburg
#18
| |||
| |||
|
|
Toyota is a little smarter. Happy employees don't strike. Happy employees work better. Happy employees don't need a union. . . . Charles of Schaumburg |
were union. One of them thought to ask what Toyota's standard benefits
were, and if they would get the same benefits as the other employees in the
office. They voted to de-unionize, and got full healthcare benefits for
themselves and their families, including vision and dental without another
deduction from their pay check, were eligible for greatly discounted
employee lease cars (including all scheduled maintenance, insurance, and
unlimited mileage) after 5 years, got a pay raise on a par with the other
non-union employees, got employment anniversary gifts, more vacation and
sick time, a 401K, and all without having to pay union dues.
--
Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)
#19
| |||
| |||
|
|
How can any Union help him hold a job if he does not do it properly? The day will come when the imports plants will be unionized in any event.. The Honda Ohio plant will be the first, the way it looks  mike "George Orwell" <Use-Author-Supplied-Address-Header@[127.1]> wrote in message news:f6f162466bdbe0dfd0ef1d86383d9c2b (AT) mixmaster (DOT) it... Windsor Star http://snipurl.com/1jofs ..None of the job applicants were bothered by Toyota being a non-union environment. "If I can't hold onto my job without a union backing me, then I have no business working," Harrison said. If it wasn't for Unions there would be low wages, no pension funds no |
love this. Unions give an average Joe a chance to buy a house and a
car. That is slowly disappearing as union membership depletes. That
would put another couple million dollars in the rich peoples wallets,
and make an already inflated ego match the thickness of their money
belts.
#20
| |||
| |||
|
|
In article <q1N%h.114354$VU4.73797 (AT) bgtnsc05-news (DOT) ops.worldnet.att.net>, "Sudy Nim" <pseudonym (AT) noplace (DOT) com> wrote: "JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote in message news:ZDM%h.8133$ya1.2082 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny... "Sudy Nim" <pseudonym (AT) noplace (DOT) com> wrote in message news  yM%h.114269$VU4.87083 (AT) bgtnsc05-news (DOT) ops.worldnet.att.net...Where were you or (your parents) back around 1972 when everyone [started] to buy those Great (Cheaper) Japanese TV's and other consumer electronic products? Can you remember any of the names like RCA, Philco, Motorola, Zenith, Emerson or Admiral etc? Plus all the brand names like Sears, Wards and Pacific Mercury? All put out of business costing millions of Americans too eventually lose their jobs, including me! Some belonged to a union some not. All Japanese auto plants in this country should eventually be unionized but that will dive up the price so we'll need a new invasion to reduce costs. Why do you think the Japanese plants should be unionized eventually? I really do not as it is a loosing battle. The American worker wants a good paying job (middle income bracket) with security, health insurance and pension benefits. Money enough to buy a home and send the kids off to a good education. That is a reasonable quest but getting hard to find today. No industry (except for government jobs) will provide that. He wrongfully expects that a union will! Those jobs started to disappear about 1972 and nothing in the future will change that. I read a report that home ownership is as high as it's ever been. Thanks to GWB. He is a promoter of home ownership. The economy is doing very well. Stock market is at record highs, which means IRA's are doing very well as are 401K's. Citizens should be pleased with the way things are going domestically. Home ownership is high because of kids that have rich parents from the |
parents belonged to a Union. You're an Idiot.
|
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
Linear Mode
| |
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.