The real reason Japanese auto makers aren't as bad as the Big 3

[Strk]

Originally posted by: ICRS

Originally posted by: rchiu

Originally posted by: ICRS

Originally posted by: RY62

Originally posted by: ICRS
The Japanese pay their American workers slave wages. They have factories outside of japan where they treat the workers like slaves. With these slave wages they are able to make $$$.

These statements beg for a few questions.

Are you stating that ALL Japanese companies pay their American workers "slave wages" or do you have some specific Japanese companies you are referring to?

How do you define "slave wages"? Would that be below the minimum wage, below the average regional wage, or below the average national wage?

Could you elaborate on the statement "where they treat the workers like slaves".


Lately, the focus regarding Japanese companies has been on the automotive industry. In the Japanese automotive companies I don't see anything close to "slave wages".

Acouple of recent, supporting stories:

from an Aug 4, 2008 article

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2008/aug/04/chattanooga-vw-plant-could-push-local-wages/

* $13.53: Median hourly wage for production workers in the United States in May 2007, or a yearly pay of $31,310

* $14: Starting hourly wage for many new GM, Ford and Chrysler workers hired under 2007 UAW contract agreement

* $17: Starting hourly wage by Honda in Indiana

* $24.92: Top hourly wage for production workers at the Nissan plants in Smyrna and Decherd, Tenn.

* $26: Top hourly wage for UAW workers

Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Wall Street Journal
---------------

http://mjperry.blogspot.com/20...ilout-story-honda.html

Wednesday, November 19, 2008
On Monday, Honda celebrated the opening of its $550-million, nonunion plant in Greensburg, Indiana, capable of producing 200,000 vehicles annually, highlighting the contrast between the healthy Asian automaker and its ailing domestic rivals.

And even though the starting hourly wage at the plant is $18.41, or roughly $10 less than an average Detroit Three worker, demand for these jobs was off the charts. When Honda announced it was hiring 900 employees, 33,000 people applied. Honda eventually plans to employ about 2,000 at the plant, which started production in October.

Honda's Greensburg plant will give the company a competitive advantage compared with many of the Detroit Three's aging plants and higher labor rates, said Gary Chaison, a professor of industrial relations at Clark University in Massachusetts.

"The Honda plant is the other side of the bailout story," Chaison said. "These are companies which are still expanding and which have lower cost structures. They are also facing the world financial crisis, but they are in much better shape."

"Slave wages"??

They don't get life time pension that UAW workers get. With out that even UAW workers would be making slave wages.

You gotta to be nuts to think starting out at 38k + benefits/insurance in places like Indiana is slave wages. That's 3k a month with minimal tax and minimal housing expenses. You won't get rich on that but you will definitely not starve and that's definitely not slave wages.

Without a life time pension and life them health benifits it is. They get hardly any benifits. Total compensation for these places is on average half that of UAW who are barely getting by.

I swear you're just jerking him around. $38k a year is more than the average college graduate makes (I hate to break it to people, but most people aren't graduating as engineers). And $50k (max rate for Nissan) is higher than the average household income in the US. There are very few people with pensions now (yeah, it sucks) -- with many of those people making less than these workers. There are even less people who have a company that provides benefits after retirement. That is something the big 3 did for all employees -- not just union. It just means a few more people are going to be on medicare.

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: Genx87
Eh this is one guy who decided to set a good example.
I say good for him. I am sure you can find a CEO or two in the US who does the same.

Would you feel confident in saying that it is not the norm in the US but an anomoly? I would certainly feel confident saying the opposite.

Looking that page 3 of this pdf document shows that in 2000, the average CEO pay in the US was 531x that of the average employee. On the same chart, you will see that in Japan it is only 10x the average and in Switzerland, S. Korea and Germany it is only 11x.

Which of those economies are suffering the least in these tough times?

Are you really trying to correlate CEO pay with an economy? That is one of the weakest and unfounded loads of horsehit I have heard yet.

I have no idea how Japans economy is doing. I suspect it is suffering like ours.

Secondly you want to guess why CEO pay was 531x in 2000? What another load of misleading crap. The stock market peaked in 2000. The CEO's pay was in stock. It has since dropped due to a stagnating stock market.

 

[Darwin333]

Originally posted by: ICRS


Without a life time pension and life them health benifits it is. They get hardly any benifits. Total compensation for these places is on average half that of UAW who are barely getting by.

Are you serious? I think I would much rather be working for Toyota right now. The UAW guys could very likely be unemployed in a few months... So much for those lifetime pensions and health benefits (although I am sure the tax payer will pick up a lot of that). I don't understand this idea that employers should cover the cost of retirement and health care for people who are no longer employees. In a global economy I fail to see how a company can compete with those kinds of costs added in. If GM could have saved 2/3rds of their per car legacy costs last year it would have saved the company $9B.

 

[I Saw OJ]

I love his reaction when they tell him what top CEOs in America are making.