the parts paradox

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81

What's more American than the Ford (nyse: F - news - people ) Mustang? The Toyota (nyse: TM - news - people ) Sienna, for one. The Mustang is assembled in Michigan. But 65% (by value) of the parts that compose it come from the U.S. and Canada. The Sienna, built in Princeton, Ind., contains 90% North American content.

This contrast says plenty about the state of automaking in the U.S. these days. Struggling American parts suppliers, such as Delphi (nyse: DPH - news - people ), Visteon (nyse: VC - news - people ) and Dana, are in the midst of a sweeping migration to greener pastures overseas. While shutting plants in the U.S., they are adding to plants overseas. With those, they either supply foreign automakers in their home countries or make low-cost parts to ship stateside.

Meanwhile, foreign suppliers like Bosch of Germany and Denso of Japan have followed European and Asian automakers to the U.S. as the those firms build more vehicles here. In 1994, 109 of the 150 biggest suppliers to North American factories were in the U.S., according to James Rubenstein, a geography professor at Miami University in Ohio. By 2004 only 68 were. "It's just a big role reversal," says James Gillette (nyse: G - news - people ), an auto- supplier analyst with CSM Worldwide.

...

Labor costs in the Czech Republic are 77% lower than in the U.S. In the early 1990s a sun visor for a small GM pickup cost $11. Now the cost is $6 for one made in China, making it nearly impossible for U.S. companies to make them profitably in the U.S. General Motors has for the past few years encouraged its suppliers to source parts in low-cost countries.

The foreign-owned supplier giants are joining their main European and Asian customers in the U.S. Last year these companies built 4 million cars in the U.S., up from 3.2 million in 2002. The foreign suppliers choose to move here to dodge tariffs, currency swings and transportation costs. But they also mitigate the higher labor costs, often by setting up in the South, where unions aren't always welcome.

Smaller overseas suppliers gain cheap entrée by buying struggling U.S. factories. Spain's Corporación Gestamp bought an Alabama factory in 2004 that the now-failed Oxford Automotive built to supply a nearby Mercedes-Benz plant. Last year India's Bharat Forge bought Federal Forge of Lansing, Mich. China's Asimco bought a Livonia, Mich. maker of engine mounts. By and large, the phoenixes rising from these ashes are nonunion.

[/quote]

It appears that unions continue to drive work out of the US Unions have stopped protection and now only protect union headcount, which is now causing it dwindle away to the competition. Unions need to embrace more productive enviroments and rules, or they will become less and less important.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
I wonder how much of the supplier content that is "made in the USA" actually is? My company (and I know it's not the only one), makes "sub assembies" in Mexico and then does final assembly (or sometimes, just inspection) from US plants (what's left of them). It's classified as a US product. This is done partially to keep from being paid in PESOs, as the big 3 will do that if it's made in Mexico.

Oh, and my company is 97% non union with the only union plants not shipping directly to the customers, only interplant transfers.
 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,559
4
0
Originally posted by: charrison

What's more American than the Ford (nyse: F - news - people ) Mustang? The Toyota (nyse: TM - news - people ) Sienna, for one. The Mustang is assembled in Michigan. But 65% (by value) of the parts that compose it come from the U.S. and Canada. The Sienna, built in Princeton, Ind., contains 90% North American content.

This contrast says plenty about the state of automaking in the U.S. these days. Struggling American parts suppliers, such as Delphi (nyse: DPH - news - people ), Visteon (nyse: VC - news - people ) and Dana, are in the midst of a sweeping migration to greener pastures overseas. While shutting plants in the U.S., they are adding to plants overseas. With those, they either supply foreign automakers in their home countries or make low-cost parts to ship stateside.

Meanwhile, foreign suppliers like Bosch of Germany and Denso of Japan have followed European and Asian automakers to the U.S. as the those firms build more vehicles here. In 1994, 109 of the 150 biggest suppliers to North American factories were in the U.S., according to James Rubenstein, a geography professor at Miami University in Ohio. By 2004 only 68 were. "It's just a big role reversal," says James Gillette (nyse: G - news - people ), an auto- supplier analyst with CSM Worldwide.

...

Labor costs in the Czech Republic are 77% lower than in the U.S. In the early 1990s a sun visor for a small GM pickup cost $11. Now the cost is $6 for one made in China, making it nearly impossible for U.S. companies to make them profitably in the U.S. General Motors has for the past few years encouraged its suppliers to source parts in low-cost countries.

The foreign-owned supplier giants are joining their main European and Asian customers in the U.S. Last year these companies built 4 million cars in the U.S., up from 3.2 million in 2002. The foreign suppliers choose to move here to dodge tariffs, currency swings and transportation costs. But they also mitigate the higher labor costs, often by setting up in the South, where unions aren't always welcome.

Smaller overseas suppliers gain cheap entrée by buying struggling U.S. factories. Spain's Corporación Gestamp bought an Alabama factory in 2004 that the now-failed Oxford Automotive built to supply a nearby Mercedes-Benz plant. Last year India's Bharat Forge bought Federal Forge of Lansing, Mich. China's Asimco bought a Livonia, Mich. maker of engine mounts. By and large, the phoenixes rising from these ashes are nonunion.

It appears that unions continue to drive work out of the US Unions have stopped protection and now only protect union headcount, which is now causing it dwindle away to the competition. Unions need to embrace more productive enviroments and rules, or they will become less and less important.[/quote]
So what you are saying is American workers should make what they make in Yugoslavia.
How is that good for Americans?

 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: charrison

What's more American than the Ford (nyse: F - news - people ) Mustang? The Toyota (nyse: TM - news - people ) Sienna, for one. The Mustang is assembled in Michigan. But 65% (by value) of the parts that compose it come from the U.S. and Canada. The Sienna, built in Princeton, Ind., contains 90% North American content.

This contrast says plenty about the state of automaking in the U.S. these days. Struggling American parts suppliers, such as Delphi (nyse: DPH - news - people ), Visteon (nyse: VC - news - people ) and Dana, are in the midst of a sweeping migration to greener pastures overseas. While shutting plants in the U.S., they are adding to plants overseas. With those, they either supply foreign automakers in their home countries or make low-cost parts to ship stateside.

Meanwhile, foreign suppliers like Bosch of Germany and Denso of Japan have followed European and Asian automakers to the U.S. as the those firms build more vehicles here. In 1994, 109 of the 150 biggest suppliers to North American factories were in the U.S., according to James Rubenstein, a geography professor at Miami University in Ohio. By 2004 only 68 were. "It's just a big role reversal," says James Gillette (nyse: G - news - people ), an auto- supplier analyst with CSM Worldwide.

...

Labor costs in the Czech Republic are 77% lower than in the U.S. In the early 1990s a sun visor for a small GM pickup cost $11. Now the cost is $6 for one made in China, making it nearly impossible for U.S. companies to make them profitably in the U.S. General Motors has for the past few years encouraged its suppliers to source parts in low-cost countries.

The foreign-owned supplier giants are joining their main European and Asian customers in the U.S. Last year these companies built 4 million cars in the U.S., up from 3.2 million in 2002. The foreign suppliers choose to move here to dodge tariffs, currency swings and transportation costs. But they also mitigate the higher labor costs, often by setting up in the South, where unions aren't always welcome.

Smaller overseas suppliers gain cheap entrée by buying struggling U.S. factories. Spain's Corporación Gestamp bought an Alabama factory in 2004 that the now-failed Oxford Automotive built to supply a nearby Mercedes-Benz plant. Last year India's Bharat Forge bought Federal Forge of Lansing, Mich. China's Asimco bought a Livonia, Mich. maker of engine mounts. By and large, the phoenixes rising from these ashes are nonunion.

It appears that unions continue to drive work out of the US Unions have stopped protection and now only protect union headcount, which is now causing it dwindle away to the competition. Unions need to embrace more productive enviroments and rules, or they will become less and less important.
So what you are saying is American workers should make what they make in Yugoslavia.
How is that good for Americans?

[/quote]



Not at all. I am saying unions should embrace technology and productivity. Non unions shops have good wages and they also appear to be producing competitive products. Nonthing wrong with high wages if you have the productivity to back it up, but many union shops do not.
 

Engineer

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
39,230
701
126
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: charrison

What's more American than the Ford (nyse: F - news - people ) Mustang? The Toyota (nyse: TM - news - people ) Sienna, for one. The Mustang is assembled in Michigan. But 65% (by value) of the parts that compose it come from the U.S. and Canada. The Sienna, built in Princeton, Ind., contains 90% North American content.

This contrast says plenty about the state of automaking in the U.S. these days. Struggling American parts suppliers, such as Delphi (nyse: DPH - news - people ), Visteon (nyse: VC - news - people ) and Dana, are in the midst of a sweeping migration to greener pastures overseas. While shutting plants in the U.S., they are adding to plants overseas. With those, they either supply foreign automakers in their home countries or make low-cost parts to ship stateside.

Meanwhile, foreign suppliers like Bosch of Germany and Denso of Japan have followed European and Asian automakers to the U.S. as the those firms build more vehicles here. In 1994, 109 of the 150 biggest suppliers to North American factories were in the U.S., according to James Rubenstein, a geography professor at Miami University in Ohio. By 2004 only 68 were. "It's just a big role reversal," says James Gillette (nyse: G - news - people ), an auto- supplier analyst with CSM Worldwide.

...

Labor costs in the Czech Republic are 77% lower than in the U.S. In the early 1990s a sun visor for a small GM pickup cost $11. Now the cost is $6 for one made in China, making it nearly impossible for U.S. companies to make them profitably in the U.S. General Motors has for the past few years encouraged its suppliers to source parts in low-cost countries.

The foreign-owned supplier giants are joining their main European and Asian customers in the U.S. Last year these companies built 4 million cars in the U.S., up from 3.2 million in 2002. The foreign suppliers choose to move here to dodge tariffs, currency swings and transportation costs. But they also mitigate the higher labor costs, often by setting up in the South, where unions aren't always welcome.

Smaller overseas suppliers gain cheap entrée by buying struggling U.S. factories. Spain's Corporación Gestamp bought an Alabama factory in 2004 that the now-failed Oxford Automotive built to supply a nearby Mercedes-Benz plant. Last year India's Bharat Forge bought Federal Forge of Lansing, Mich. China's Asimco bought a Livonia, Mich. maker of engine mounts. By and large, the phoenixes rising from these ashes are nonunion.

It appears that unions continue to drive work out of the US Unions have stopped protection and now only protect union headcount, which is now causing it dwindle away to the competition. Unions need to embrace more productive enviroments and rules, or they will become less and less important.
So what you are saying is American workers should make what they make in Yugoslavia.
How is that good for Americans?



Not at all. I am saying unions should embrace technology and productivity. Non unions shops have good wages and they also appear to be producing competitive products. Nonthing wrong with high wages if you have the productivity to back it up, but many union shops do not.[/quote]


Couple of other comments on unions (in my experience):

The heads of the unions seem almost political. It isn't about the people they are supposed to represent, but more about a position of power and how long they can keep it and how much they can use it.

2nd, unions drag those who are unproductive along getting the same pay raises as everyone else, while keeping the great workers at that same rate. Rewarding the crappy workers, while, in effect punishing good workers. How do you reward a great worker? Give them MORE work, of course.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: charrison

What's more American than the Ford (nyse: F - news - people ) Mustang? The Toyota (nyse: TM - news - people ) Sienna, for one. The Mustang is assembled in Michigan. But 65% (by value) of the parts that compose it come from the U.S. and Canada. The Sienna, built in Princeton, Ind., contains 90% North American content.

This contrast says plenty about the state of automaking in the U.S. these days. Struggling American parts suppliers, such as Delphi (nyse: DPH - news - people ), Visteon (nyse: VC - news - people ) and Dana, are in the midst of a sweeping migration to greener pastures overseas. While shutting plants in the U.S., they are adding to plants overseas. With those, they either supply foreign automakers in their home countries or make low-cost parts to ship stateside.

Meanwhile, foreign suppliers like Bosch of Germany and Denso of Japan have followed European and Asian automakers to the U.S. as the those firms build more vehicles here. In 1994, 109 of the 150 biggest suppliers to North American factories were in the U.S., according to James Rubenstein, a geography professor at Miami University in Ohio. By 2004 only 68 were. "It's just a big role reversal," says James Gillette (nyse: G - news - people ), an auto- supplier analyst with CSM Worldwide.

...

Labor costs in the Czech Republic are 77% lower than in the U.S. In the early 1990s a sun visor for a small GM pickup cost $11. Now the cost is $6 for one made in China, making it nearly impossible for U.S. companies to make them profitably in the U.S. General Motors has for the past few years encouraged its suppliers to source parts in low-cost countries.

The foreign-owned supplier giants are joining their main European and Asian customers in the U.S. Last year these companies built 4 million cars in the U.S., up from 3.2 million in 2002. The foreign suppliers choose to move here to dodge tariffs, currency swings and transportation costs. But they also mitigate the higher labor costs, often by setting up in the South, where unions aren't always welcome.

Smaller overseas suppliers gain cheap entrée by buying struggling U.S. factories. Spain's Corporación Gestamp bought an Alabama factory in 2004 that the now-failed Oxford Automotive built to supply a nearby Mercedes-Benz plant. Last year India's Bharat Forge bought Federal Forge of Lansing, Mich. China's Asimco bought a Livonia, Mich. maker of engine mounts. By and large, the phoenixes rising from these ashes are nonunion.

It appears that unions continue to drive work out of the US Unions have stopped protection and now only protect union headcount, which is now causing it dwindle away to the competition. Unions need to embrace more productive enviroments and rules, or they will become less and less important.
So what you are saying is American workers should make what they make in Yugoslavia.
How is that good for Americans?



Not at all. I am saying unions should embrace technology and productivity. Non unions shops have good wages and they also appear to be producing competitive products. Nonthing wrong with high wages if you have the productivity to back it up, but many union shops do not.


Couple of other comments on unions (in my experience):

The heads of the unions seem almost political. It isn't about the people they are supposed to represent, but more about a position of power and how long they can keep it and how much they can use it.

2nd, unions drag those who are unproductive along getting the same pay raises as everyone else, while keeping the great workers at that same rate. Rewarding the crappy workers, while, in effect punishing good workers. How do you reward a great worker? Give them MORE work, of course.
[/quote]

That most likely explains why the southern non union plants do everything with about 25% less man hours.
 

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
15,613
11,254
136
Originally posted by: Engineer
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: charrison

What's more American than the Ford (nyse: F - news - people ) Mustang? The Toyota (nyse: TM - news - people ) Sienna, for one. The Mustang is assembled in Michigan. But 65% (by value) of the parts that compose it come from the U.S. and Canada. The Sienna, built in Princeton, Ind., contains 90% North American content.

This contrast says plenty about the state of automaking in the U.S. these days. Struggling American parts suppliers, such as Delphi (nyse: DPH - news - people ), Visteon (nyse: VC - news - people ) and Dana, are in the midst of a sweeping migration to greener pastures overseas. While shutting plants in the U.S., they are adding to plants overseas. With those, they either supply foreign automakers in their home countries or make low-cost parts to ship stateside.

Meanwhile, foreign suppliers like Bosch of Germany and Denso of Japan have followed European and Asian automakers to the U.S. as the those firms build more vehicles here. In 1994, 109 of the 150 biggest suppliers to North American factories were in the U.S., according to James Rubenstein, a geography professor at Miami University in Ohio. By 2004 only 68 were. "It's just a big role reversal," says James Gillette (nyse: G - news - people ), an auto- supplier analyst with CSM Worldwide.

...

Labor costs in the Czech Republic are 77% lower than in the U.S. In the early 1990s a sun visor for a small GM pickup cost $11. Now the cost is $6 for one made in China, making it nearly impossible for U.S. companies to make them profitably in the U.S. General Motors has for the past few years encouraged its suppliers to source parts in low-cost countries.

The foreign-owned supplier giants are joining their main European and Asian customers in the U.S. Last year these companies built 4 million cars in the U.S., up from 3.2 million in 2002. The foreign suppliers choose to move here to dodge tariffs, currency swings and transportation costs. But they also mitigate the higher labor costs, often by setting up in the South, where unions aren't always welcome.

Smaller overseas suppliers gain cheap entrée by buying struggling U.S. factories. Spain's Corporación Gestamp bought an Alabama factory in 2004 that the now-failed Oxford Automotive built to supply a nearby Mercedes-Benz plant. Last year India's Bharat Forge bought Federal Forge of Lansing, Mich. China's Asimco bought a Livonia, Mich. maker of engine mounts. By and large, the phoenixes rising from these ashes are nonunion.

It appears that unions continue to drive work out of the US Unions have stopped protection and now only protect union headcount, which is now causing it dwindle away to the competition. Unions need to embrace more productive enviroments and rules, or they will become less and less important.
So what you are saying is American workers should make what they make in Yugoslavia.
How is that good for Americans?



Not at all. I am saying unions should embrace technology and productivity. Non unions shops have good wages and they also appear to be producing competitive products. Nonthing wrong with high wages if you have the productivity to back it up, but many union shops do not.


Couple of other comments on unions (in my experience):

The heads of the unions seem almost political. It isn't about the people they are supposed to represent, but more about a position of power and how long they can keep it and how much they can use it.

2nd, unions drag those who are unproductive along getting the same pay raises as everyone else, while keeping the great workers at that same rate. Rewarding the crappy workers, while, in effect punishing good workers. How do you reward a great worker? Give them MORE work, of course.
[/quote]

I really think that most Union heads are there just to stir up unrest in the Union. The company I had an internship with this summer was going through talks with the Unions. Made them a decent deal, and the talk around the plant was the it was pretty good. Until the had their Union meeting, then everyone hated it and couldn't stop bashing the company, etc. The voted to authorize a strike, but never went on it because of other events in the industry.
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
Here's an idea . . . maybe if US automakers built something people actually wanted . . . they wouldn't have to bribe customers to buy them.

More profit = more money for everyone . . . company, investors, and workers (unionized or not) . . .

While unions may play a role in "import" plant location, it's hard to say that matters more than incentives provided by states and localities. SC gave away the farm to get BMW, while AL gave away the farm and then some (state agreed to buy 2500 MLs).

In 1997, AL . . . to prove just how stupid is as stupid does . . . gave Daimler:
1) $300m in tax breaks
2) $253m direct incentives
3) $60m to send dumb arse Bama boys (and gals I hope) to Germany to learn how to make vehicles
4) agreement to buy 2500 MLs at 30k each . . . granted that's below retail

In 1987, Toyota won the KY lottery:
1) 1500 acres free of charge
2) plant was built by a Japanese steel company . . . naturally they used Japanese steel
3) Feds granted "special trade zone" status so material/parts could be imported duty free
4) Japanese bank got the financing
Total subsidy exceeded $100m

In 1980, Nissan's Smyrna plant cost TN taxpayers $11k PER job.

This website claims Bayerische Motoren Werke fleeced SC for a whopping $79k per job.

Who knows . . . maybe the long term benefits justify such public largesse being showered on corporate titans. Regardless, it makes the "evil union" argument ring hollow.

Oh yeah, SC Bimmers and AL MLs were some of the crappiest vehicles to ever roll off a line. Granted, many if not all of them were new models. Union labor clearly can make crap. But anyone claiming nonunion doesn't . . . needs to recruit a 2nd neuron.
 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: charrison

What's more American than the Ford (nyse: F - news - people ) Mustang? The Toyota (nyse: TM - news - people ) Sienna, for one. The Mustang is assembled in Michigan. But 65% (by value) of the parts that compose it come from the U.S. and Canada. The Sienna, built in Princeton, Ind., contains 90% North American content.

This contrast says plenty about the state of automaking in the U.S. these days. Struggling American parts suppliers, such as Delphi (nyse: DPH - news - people ), Visteon (nyse: VC - news - people ) and Dana, are in the midst of a sweeping migration to greener pastures overseas. While shutting plants in the U.S., they are adding to plants overseas. With those, they either supply foreign automakers in their home countries or make low-cost parts to ship stateside.

Meanwhile, foreign suppliers like Bosch of Germany and Denso of Japan have followed European and Asian automakers to the U.S. as the those firms build more vehicles here. In 1994, 109 of the 150 biggest suppliers to North American factories were in the U.S., according to James Rubenstein, a geography professor at Miami University in Ohio. By 2004 only 68 were. "It's just a big role reversal," says James Gillette (nyse: G - news - people ), an auto- supplier analyst with CSM Worldwide.

...

Labor costs in the Czech Republic are 77% lower than in the U.S. In the early 1990s a sun visor for a small GM pickup cost $11. Now the cost is $6 for one made in China, making it nearly impossible for U.S. companies to make them profitably in the U.S. General Motors has for the past few years encouraged its suppliers to source parts in low-cost countries.

The foreign-owned supplier giants are joining their main European and Asian customers in the U.S. Last year these companies built 4 million cars in the U.S., up from 3.2 million in 2002. The foreign suppliers choose to move here to dodge tariffs, currency swings and transportation costs. But they also mitigate the higher labor costs, often by setting up in the South, where unions aren't always welcome.

Smaller overseas suppliers gain cheap entrée by buying struggling U.S. factories. Spain's Corporación Gestamp bought an Alabama factory in 2004 that the now-failed Oxford Automotive built to supply a nearby Mercedes-Benz plant. Last year India's Bharat Forge bought Federal Forge of Lansing, Mich. China's Asimco bought a Livonia, Mich. maker of engine mounts. By and large, the phoenixes rising from these ashes are nonunion.
It appears that unions continue to drive work out of the US Unions have stopped protection and now only protect union headcount, which is now causing it dwindle away to the competition. Unions need to embrace more productive enviroments and rules, or they will become less and less important.

So what you are saying is American workers should make what they make in Yugoslavia.

How is that good for Americans?[/quote]

That's the new Republican idea of the American Dream for all of those except themselves and the rich. Enjoy
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
0
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: charrison

What's more American than the Ford (nyse: F - news - people ) Mustang? The Toyota (nyse: TM - news - people ) Sienna, for one. The Mustang is assembled in Michigan. But 65% (by value) of the parts that compose it come from the U.S. and Canada. The Sienna, built in Princeton, Ind., contains 90% North American content.

This contrast says plenty about the state of automaking in the U.S. these days. Struggling American parts suppliers, such as Delphi (nyse: DPH - news - people ), Visteon (nyse: VC - news - people ) and Dana, are in the midst of a sweeping migration to greener pastures overseas. While shutting plants in the U.S., they are adding to plants overseas. With those, they either supply foreign automakers in their home countries or make low-cost parts to ship stateside.

Meanwhile, foreign suppliers like Bosch of Germany and Denso of Japan have followed European and Asian automakers to the U.S. as the those firms build more vehicles here. In 1994, 109 of the 150 biggest suppliers to North American factories were in the U.S., according to James Rubenstein, a geography professor at Miami University in Ohio. By 2004 only 68 were. "It's just a big role reversal," says James Gillette (nyse: G - news - people ), an auto- supplier analyst with CSM Worldwide.

...

Labor costs in the Czech Republic are 77% lower than in the U.S. In the early 1990s a sun visor for a small GM pickup cost $11. Now the cost is $6 for one made in China, making it nearly impossible for U.S. companies to make them profitably in the U.S. General Motors has for the past few years encouraged its suppliers to source parts in low-cost countries.

The foreign-owned supplier giants are joining their main European and Asian customers in the U.S. Last year these companies built 4 million cars in the U.S., up from 3.2 million in 2002. The foreign suppliers choose to move here to dodge tariffs, currency swings and transportation costs. But they also mitigate the higher labor costs, often by setting up in the South, where unions aren't always welcome.

Smaller overseas suppliers gain cheap entrée by buying struggling U.S. factories. Spain's Corporación Gestamp bought an Alabama factory in 2004 that the now-failed Oxford Automotive built to supply a nearby Mercedes-Benz plant. Last year India's Bharat Forge bought Federal Forge of Lansing, Mich. China's Asimco bought a Livonia, Mich. maker of engine mounts. By and large, the phoenixes rising from these ashes are nonunion.
It appears that unions continue to drive work out of the US Unions have stopped protection and now only protect union headcount, which is now causing it dwindle away to the competition. Unions need to embrace more productive enviroments and rules, or they will become less and less important.

So what you are saying is American workers should make what they make in Yugoslavia.

How is that good for Americans?

That's the new Republican idea of the American Dream for all of those except themselves and the rich. Enjoy[/quote]


Dude shut the fvck up already about your new republican bulsh!t.

Same mindless drivel in every god damn thread. If you don't have anythign worh while to say and just feel like trolling, keep your fvcking mouth shut. :|
 

Fingolfin269

Lifer
Feb 28, 2003
17,948
31
91
Originally posted by: halik
Originally posted by: dmcowen674
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: charrison

What's more American than the Ford (nyse: F - news - people ) Mustang? The Toyota (nyse: TM - news - people ) Sienna, for one. The Mustang is assembled in Michigan. But 65% (by value) of the parts that compose it come from the U.S. and Canada. The Sienna, built in Princeton, Ind., contains 90% North American content.

This contrast says plenty about the state of automaking in the U.S. these days. Struggling American parts suppliers, such as Delphi (nyse: DPH - news - people ), Visteon (nyse: VC - news - people ) and Dana, are in the midst of a sweeping migration to greener pastures overseas. While shutting plants in the U.S., they are adding to plants overseas. With those, they either supply foreign automakers in their home countries or make low-cost parts to ship stateside.

Meanwhile, foreign suppliers like Bosch of Germany and Denso of Japan have followed European and Asian automakers to the U.S. as the those firms build more vehicles here. In 1994, 109 of the 150 biggest suppliers to North American factories were in the U.S., according to James Rubenstein, a geography professor at Miami University in Ohio. By 2004 only 68 were. "It's just a big role reversal," says James Gillette (nyse: G - news - people ), an auto- supplier analyst with CSM Worldwide.

...

Labor costs in the Czech Republic are 77% lower than in the U.S. In the early 1990s a sun visor for a small GM pickup cost $11. Now the cost is $6 for one made in China, making it nearly impossible for U.S. companies to make them profitably in the U.S. General Motors has for the past few years encouraged its suppliers to source parts in low-cost countries.

The foreign-owned supplier giants are joining their main European and Asian customers in the U.S. Last year these companies built 4 million cars in the U.S., up from 3.2 million in 2002. The foreign suppliers choose to move here to dodge tariffs, currency swings and transportation costs. But they also mitigate the higher labor costs, often by setting up in the South, where unions aren't always welcome.

Smaller overseas suppliers gain cheap entrée by buying struggling U.S. factories. Spain's Corporación Gestamp bought an Alabama factory in 2004 that the now-failed Oxford Automotive built to supply a nearby Mercedes-Benz plant. Last year India's Bharat Forge bought Federal Forge of Lansing, Mich. China's Asimco bought a Livonia, Mich. maker of engine mounts. By and large, the phoenixes rising from these ashes are nonunion.
It appears that unions continue to drive work out of the US Unions have stopped protection and now only protect union headcount, which is now causing it dwindle away to the competition. Unions need to embrace more productive enviroments and rules, or they will become less and less important.

So what you are saying is American workers should make what they make in Yugoslavia.

How is that good for Americans?

That's the new Republican idea of the American Dream for all of those except themselves and the rich. Enjoy


Dude shut the fvck up already about your new republican bulsh!t.

Same mindless drivel in every god damn thread. If you don't have anythign worh while to say and just feel like trolling, keep your fvcking mouth shut. :|[/quote]

I concur. Idiotic statements like that are what steer me away from this place. Debate with thoughtful insight and factual evidence. Stop spouting off garbage. That goes for all sides because frankly it does nothing but cause all fair discussions to spiral into stupid mud slinging events.

Heck, that's pretty much all P&N is now once you get past the first page of any thread. Mud slinging. My party is better than yours. Etc.

 

MonkeyK

Golden Member
May 27, 2001
1,396
8
81
Whenever I see these anti-union posts, I am always surprised to see this incredible anti-union sentiment. Management at the company is at least as culpable in any faults of the company.

They negotiated the contracts that defined the scope of union responsibilities, perogotives, and pay.

If you really feel that unions are behaving so badly, you should also be calling the corporate execs a bunch of fools for letting it be so. As well as for allowing the production of cars that do not keep up with changes in what consumers want.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
Whenever I see these anti-union posts, I am always surprised to see this incredible anti-union sentiment. Management at the company is at least as culpable in any faults of the company.
Quite true, as both corporate management and union leadership are responsible for creating the non-productive dialogue between the two entities.

Unions came to power in this country, and rightfully so, because of the labor abuses across industrial America. The climate that unions sought to change was a noble cause.

The problem is that unions now mirror the corruption and abuses that they were envisioned to protect workers from. While American manufacturers persist this adversarial relationships between management and the work force, foreign companies are finding better and more productive ways to do business.

If you look at the Toyota Production System for example, there is no dividing line between managers and the work force. It is an integrated environment where workers can have their voices heard without the need of union representation, and management actually values such inputs.

The problem in America is not solely management, nor is it entirely the fault of unions...it is a cultural attitude that simply needs to shift.

They negotiated the contracts that defined the scope of union responsibilities, perogotives, and pay.
True, but contract negotiations are more about strong armed tactics and displays of power then doing what is best for the company or the workforce.

If you really feel that unions are behaving so badly, you should also be calling the corporate execs a bunch of fools for letting it be so. As well as for allowing the production of cars that do not keep up with changes in what consumers want.
Corporate strategy plays a part...misdirected consumer targeting strategy and poor quality tend to hurt the bottom line. Crippling union demands have similarly cut into profitability. Corporate executives enjoying disproportional benefits and payouts does not help to change perceptions either.