Ford's new automated plant

  • Thread starter Dennis Sorensen
  • Start date
Well taken Joe S

My fishing buddy has been retired now for almost 14 years. Times have changed, and living in Ca. he is out of touch. It really is sad that so many people are as gullible as they are and base their comments on the negative and uninformed rumors and anti union comments made.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I find the "Union" issue to be moot and nothing more than a scapegoat for bad business fundamentals. "Labor", whether organized or not is a cost factor no different than materials or rent. Someone or some group of people should have been paying more attention to cash flows, research and market trends; BTW all management functions.

The big three operated under a monopolistic culture and despite decades of extraordinary growth, forgot how to be businesspeople...From the groundskeeper to the executive to the shareholder, all stakeholders forgot.

Back to fundamentals, buy this and it cost that. Know thy market.
 
Last edited:
RStiefel said:
by the hour. You don't work, you don't get paid. They aren't paid a salary. I fish with a retired UAW autoworker from Detroit. Senior or 5 year employees make no difference. They are paid the same. Now, you might be talking about the salaried employees who are not UAW members. The answers to your questions:

GM- $26.00 per hr + benefits, Toyota- $30.00 per hr + benefits
GM- 0, Toyota- I don't know
GM- production 365 days per year, Toyota- ?
GM- hundreds of thousands with contractors, Toyota- ?
GM- 0, Toyota, 0

Big 3 ship all over the globe. Toyota, Nissan, MB, BMW manufacture in the US only the top sellers in our country. We are the largest buyer of these particular vehicles. They don't have the shipping and export costs to deal with. They are also given incentives to manufacture here in the US. Land and tax breaks. One good thing about it is that it gives American workers jobs here in our country.
Click to expand...

Go back and watch the congressional hearings from a couple weeks ago where the big three along with the UAW president gave their testimonies.
 
tim said:
You make a good point. You forgot, however, two fairly important other points. The first is that for every guy there less than 5 years you got 5 there more than five years. The second is that you got ten other guys retired that you're paying for. The basic reality some of these kitchen table economists that have posted here don't realize is that if the ship goes down, all hands lost.
Click to expand...

And there is where so much cost comes from... If the companies file for bankruptcy the American taxpayer will be paying for the retirement of the ten mentioned above. Another company will buy them if they fold.

The demand for automobiles is changing as they are lasting much longer. The American auto makers can become successful if they model after the successful auto companies here in America.

At the present I have two Fords and two Chryslers. Americans can make great products, there is no doubt about that. The key is that business practices and models need to change to keep up.
 
The last 10 or so years new hires have started at ~$15/hr and taken 5 years to reach full pay
Click to expand...

Thats not exactly true. The only time an employee will reach full pay is if he/she is working in a "core job". A joint leadership team came through our plant and determined which jobs are considered "core jobs". Less than 50% of the production jobs in the plant are considered "core jobs".

The Ford plant was built back in 2001 and isn't considered "State of the Art" any more. We have over 600 robots at the plant where I work doing tasks that traditionally were manual labor.

Laid off GM employees earn unemployment and sub pay which amounts to 85% (before taxes) of their take home pay. Toyota doesn't pay employees not to work, they don't layoff. In times of slow production they have their employees paint floors or do house-keeping tasks along with work related training.
 
AVanGorder said:
Go back and watch the congressional hearings from a couple weeks ago where the big three along with the UAW president gave their testimonies.
Click to expand...
I know a UAW member (retired). It appears a couple here have spoken. I'm glad to see some UAW employees finally stepping in and setting things straight. Their paychecks aren't near as much as most are led to believe, they are the what got the GREEDY 3 started, profitable and a huge success. Now they are being thrown to the wolves by the owners and people who blame them for the demise of the GREEDY 3.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RStiefel said:
I know a UAW member (retired). It appears a couple here have spoken. You're lost, can't decide who or what to blame, and obviously anti union. You are out of touch with the real world and your credibility is shot. I'm glad to see some UAW employees finally stepping in and setting things straight. Their paychecks aren't near as much as most are led to believe, they are the what got the GREEDY 3 started, profitable and a huge success. Now they are being thrown to the wolves by the owners and people who blame them for the demise of the GREEDY 3.
Click to expand...

Keep it civil - No keyboard Rambo necessary here.

I wasn't referring to what an hourly individual receives in their paycheck, they aren't getting rich. However, as was said, during the congressional hearings two weeks ago, by the President of the UAW, the big three must pay the UAW 90% even when the plant is not building anything. In today's market, has the manufacturing by the three slowed down?

Toyota workers receive more money at the end of the year because of bonuses. When was the last time the big three gave money to their hourly workers.

Try to take a look at the bigger picture and not at an individual. Many economics have looked at the big three and all say that can't be successful today as they are. Changes must be made. How do you recommend the companies start making money?

Nancy Pelosi said yesterday that the big three will get the 25 billion. Who would like to place a bet with me that they will ask for even more down the road?

Adrian
 
How about this Adrian

You start with the CEO and his subordinates. Cut their pay to a realistic amount. Start scraping these ridiculous endorsement contracts. $40 Million dollars to Tiger Woods alone. Fly on a major airline when you travel from state to state. A $36 Million dollar private jet to get around? Retool and bring the plants into the 21st century. Stop producing the big gas guzzlers that no one wants. Need money to stay afloat? Sell off the remaining new 2008 and 2007 vehicles that are covering the dealers lots. Sell them at cost if need be. You are then at least breaking even on them. Sell off the vanity name brand auto companies that don't show a profit. Build the engines and other major components here instead of Mexico. Put those US dollars to good use right here in the US.
No Rambo tactics intended. I modified my last post.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Adrian what the media doesn't tell you is how much the UAW has already sacrificed. When I arrived at the plant where I work we had 3200 employees, were down to just under 900. Production jobs have been outsourced to companies paying aprox $7.00 an hour, some jobs have been replaced with robotics. We've outsourced janitorial services along with grounds-keeping jobs to companies paying slightly above minumum wages. Truck repair (forktruct and mobile equipment) has been outsourced, we keep a minimum of staff to cover emergencies (2 people a shift). Plant demo work is done by outside contractors, new equipment installation will be done by contractors. Both jobs were normally accomplished by our Millwrights. Work rules have been changed to where we have only one job classification for production workers, they can be required to perform any job in the plant. My trade (toolmaker) has been gutted, we had over 35 toolmakers on site when I arrived 10 years ago, were down to 2 a shift. Heck this is only part of what's been done over the past 10 years by the UAW to become competitive, pretty much reflects GM wide.
 
WOW! I didn't even look at thenext two yet. Here's some quotes from the Ford Link! Hehehe

Ford provided initial details of an accelerated vehicle electrification plan for a family of hybrids, plug-in hybrids and battery electric vehicles. The plan includes a Ford full battery electric vehicle (BEV) in a van-type vehicle for commercial fleet use in 2010 and a BEV sedan in 2011
Ford’s plan calls for an investment of approximately $14 billion in the U.S. on advanced technologies and products to improve fuel efficiency during the next seven years
Click to expand...

Wait a minute, I thought we just discussed in another thread here that full battery electrics were not possible? Here's Ford reps saying this is a major point of thier restructuring plans. I find this laughable. I was under the impression that these cars were not in demand and that they were a bad business decision. Of course, a Hydrogen car at a million dollars a pop is a good thing to look into... :confused:
Ford said it will sell its corporate aircraft as part of its overall cash improvement plan
Click to expand...
This sounds more to me like saying what folks want to hear to get your check. This crap makes me puke. Let the companies go under I say.

Does anyone here remember the name Lee Iacocca from the 80's? Here's a link. I know anyone who ever watched the news back in those days or read a newspaper would be hard pressed not to remember this name. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Iacocca One of his first edicts as CEO of Chrysler when he took over was to trim dead wood. Chrysler went from 33 VP's to 2 in 3 months If I remember correctly. The trouble with todays situation is that top execs now get as much in adjusted dollars as all 33 of them did then.

I wonder if there will be new CEO's brought in to take over the big 3. Any one want to guess?

Also, on the Union issues, those here who think that the unions are exempt from the current situation are very wrong. Unions are a complex animal, and even within the UAW, there's latitude for people to do what's right, or to do what we hear about as anti union marketing. Unfortunately, we get more of the latter than the previous. It's a rare union steward who knows right from wrong.

Technology isn't everything that's needed, as pointed out above many times. The VW Phaeton is a great example. Go google VW Phaeton Plant Tour and look at that place, then ask why it went under.
 
To clear up another misconception, bankrupcy doesn't automatically void any contracts! If that were true a parts supplier could either deny shipment of parts or hold parts hostage till payment. Neither stunt will go over well with a bankrupcy judge.;) GM would have to petition the court to seek relief from the UAW contract, the UAW would be given a chance to contest the fact and show how they intend on easing the burden. The UAW would still represent the GM hourly workers. It's up to the judge to decide to vacate the contract, historically they do though it's not carved in stone.
 
When did

they go under???
They weren't a big seller in the US due to price and our thirst for big SUVs.
There was a documentary about that plant on TV just last week. They seem to be doing just fine.
 
RSteifel,
Do they make Phaetons?

Did they close that plant?

Was the plant built for show?

Yes/No to all 3?

I said "It" as in the Phaeton project. Not VW who's doing just fine despite that mess.

------------------------------
Edit
Here's a link to the Phaeton Photo Tour on another forum. It's amazing.
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=1837641
PS. that plant is now closed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes

They do make the Phaetons. They are extremely popular in Europe and in Asia for those who can afford them. If the plant was closed, it was done so in the past week. It would be hard for anyone to believe one would sink Billions of dollars into a structure for show. Take a look at Porsche. Pretty high tech, and built by hand. The most amazing thing I find is that MB in Germany employes union labor and builds the SUVs in the US using non union labor. More and more companies are moving here because they find it to be "easy pickins".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RStiefel said:
They do make the Phaetons. They are extremely popular in Europe and in Asia for those who can afford them. If the plant was closed, it was done so in the past week. It would be hard for anyone to believe one would sink Billions of dollars into a structure for show. Take a look at Porsche. Pretty high tech, and built by hand. The most amazing thing I find is that MB in Germany employes union labor and builds the SUVs in the US using non union labor. More and more companies are moving here because they find it to be "easy pickins".
Click to expand...
I stand corrected.

A quick google on Phaeton sales shows they are still as of 2008 producing them in Dresden. (plant I linked to the photos of).

A little over a year ago, I saw where they were going to kill the project and were closing the plant due to "lack of sales". More googles will show that was the plan at the time (late 06). What changed their mind... I don't know. looking at the sales numbers, it looks like they better be building more cars to pay for that place. Lots more. 25K cars since 2002 isn't going to pay the rent.

I agree that Porshe's SUV offering is hard to see the profitabiltiy in also. I remember commercials of 450hp in a SUV about the size of a Jimmy. Go figure.

Ford was smart enough to sell off Jag and Astin Martin and I would figure that VW will sell off the Phaeton plant as well. It's just too expensive. I don't doubt the cars are awesome, but you do have to sell them too. I've never driven an Astin DBS, but I have driven a Jag XKR. Let me tell ya that Jag is an ANIMAL. But, mainstream? Don't think so. Profitable? I doubt it. Obviously, Ford didn't think so either.
edit...
That Jag get's a legitimate 30+ mpg highway, and 20 in town. That's from a twin supercharged V8, and I'm here to tell ya it makes every one of the 420 HP they say it does.

Why then could someone not make a 210hp car that get's 60/40mpg?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
aj300mag said:
adrian what the media doesn't tell you is how much the uaw has already sacrificed. When i arrived at the plant where i work we had 3200 employees, were down to just under 900. Production jobs have been outsourced to companies paying aprox $7.00 an hour, some jobs have been replaced with robotics. We've outsourced janitorial services along with grounds-keeping jobs to companies paying slightly above minumum wages. Truck repair (forktruct and mobile equipment) has been outsourced, we keep a minimum of staff to cover emergencies (2 people a shift). Plant demo work is done by outside contractors, new equipment installation will be done by contractors. Both jobs were normally accomplished by our millwrights. Work rules have been changed to where we have only one job classification for production workers, they can be required to perform any job in the plant. My trade (toolmaker) has been gutted, we had over 35 toolmakers on site when i arrived 10 years ago, were down to 2 a shift. Heck this is only part of what's been done over the past 10 years by the uaw to become competitive, pretty much reflects gm wide.
Click to expand...

594?
 
AJ300MAG said:
To clear up another misconception, bankrupcy doesn't automatically void any contracts! If that were true a parts supplier could either deny shipment of parts or hold parts hostage till payment. Neither stunt will go over well with a bankrupcy judge.;) GM would have to petition the court to seek relief from the UAW contract, the UAW would be given a chance to contest the fact and show how they intend on easing the burden. The UAW would still represent the GM hourly workers. It's up to the judge to decide to vacate the contract, historically they do though it's not carved in stone.
Click to expand...

Really, talk to somebody who retired from UAL, US Air, or Delphi. Then do a little homework on how many suppliers go under if their cashflow gets delayed 30-60 days.
 
Joe................... 668

Tim, point I'm trying to make is that the courts wouldn't automatically vacate the GM/UAW contract.

I've followed both the Delphi and Northwest Airlines bankruptcies closely ;)
 
4Mesh said:
Why then could someone not make a 210hp car that get's 60/40mpg?
Click to expand...

C'mon 4mesh,

Take the SAME CAR, the aforementioned Jaguar, and put 210 horses under the hood. It won't make 60/40mpg.

In any mechanical system there are constants. Gravity, for instance, is for all intents and purposes a constant.

A useful cockpit size can be considered to be a constant.

The specific gravity of the components used for mfgr are "constants", in other words even if you halve the size of a steel or fiberglass car you don't actually halve the weight.

Air drag and road friction drag are not constants but their effect isn't "halved" just by reducing size/weight.

Now if you were to actually custom build the Jag from unobtanium such that it's "halved" in every way you STILL haven't achieved your goal. You can't Halve the combustion ratios.

A story:

When I was little our family read tons of stories about monsters and fairies and elves and various phantasmagorical creatures including little people. We all read 'Stuart Little' and 'The Borrowers' about little critters and people functioning as humanlike. One of the things that bothered me as a youngster was the concept of cooking their meals and heating their wee homes using small fires built of wood the size of matchsticks and toothpicks. They'd set for hours around these teeny fires. Well, I'm a Biggle but I can still build a teeny fire!

Only it won't last for hours.

Burn rate. Combustion is a "constant"......... consequently even motorcycles of only 75-100HP with only two wheels and small engines don't gain mileage in a linear fashion as weight/drag/HP drops. A motorcycle with only 1/4 the wt, power and drag of your Jag doesn't get 4 times the mileage.

By the same token some truly HUGE loads like large trucks that're getting only 4-6mpg are actually MORE EFFICIENT than both the Jag AND the motorcycle because they're tuned to operate in a specific range and roads/laws allow that to happen.




This probably doesn't clearly illustrate my point but I still believe it to be essentially true.

al
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top