How responsible is the UAW regarding Ford's situation?

[thelion2005]

Ahhhhhhhhh .... something I can comment on.

I was an Executive at Ford, right in the WHQ building overlooking Southfield Road.
I was lucky and took very early retirement a few years ago. My work included many areas of the entire purchasing, assembly and sales oerations both in North America and Europe.

Here's what went wrong:
- We produced poor quality vehicles and then fixed and fixed them under warranty.
- Our designs lacked boldness, because this is a conservative company that takes no chances.
- Financial decisions and decision makers ruled ... especially in the purchasing of materials ... cheaper is better.
- In the 1990's, the value of the Company became inflated as reflected in the stock prices. The bubble burst.
- The UAW was always considered the enemy ... the element to eliminate in the process ..the lazy element that would joyfully produce junk to spite management. They lived the image. I found them almost criminal as they held out their hands for a fat pay check after sleeping all day.
- Management was always afraid and fought change of any kind. Yessing the Boss and dragging your feet equaled promotions.
- For years and years anything built was sold at a profit. The Japanese did nothing more that produce like vehicles perfectly. Ford and GM were fatted calves to be gored.
- So called Americans bought foreign vehicles with no idea or concern how this would destroy another American manufacturing industry and undermine the entire economy while bolstering Japan's.

So .. Who is at fault? Everyone.

Must it be "fixed"? You better believe it.
Ford and GM stock is in every pension plan around.
Foreign investors are holding their notes.
The US govenment is holding their notes.

Will it get fixed? yes ... But both Ford and GM will hold smaller market shares. The UAW has woken up ... Gettlefinger is a fine, smart man. The vehicles will be bolder in design - fun - with higher quality (which is already up).

Toyota will take the sales lead. They will then find themselves faced with the same dilemas as they get too large to control. (It is happening now in quality.)

I have 4,000 shares of F ... sold all the rest at $66. I''l make money because I bought at $7.

I'll always drive a F/LM because they are damn good and I get a super deal.

The end.

 

[mrplunkey]

no sir you are wrong, they can not be fired for any reason at any point. there are laws that protect workers rights, the laws that unions helped get established. in fact, union workers are sometimes excluded from govt help for being in a union.

In employment-at-will states, such as the one my business operated in (TN), you can fire any employee at any time for any non-discriminatory reason or simply not state a reason. Most salaried workers get fired by saying "Your services are no longer required". That's it, game over.

 

[spongebob]

In employment-at-will states, such as the one my business operated in (TN), you can fire any employee at any time for any non-discriminatory reason or simply not state a reason. Most salaried workers get fired by saying "Your services are no longer required". That's it, game over.

what i stated was 100% accurate. what you are stating is a word game.

 

[spongebob]

In employment-at-will states, such as the one my business operated in (TN), you can fire any employee at any time for any non-discriminatory reason or simply not state a reason. Most salaried workers get fired by saying "Your services are no longer required". That's it, game over.

oh yea, i live in tx and so i am aware of employment at will laws.

 

[mrplunkey]

what i stated was 100% accurate. what you are stating is a word game.

No, what I am stating is that in an employment-at-will state, the following things are legal:

"Joe, I'm firing you because your services are no longer required."

"Joe, I'm firing you because I hate the color of the shirt you are wearing."

"Joe, I'm firing you because I don't think you are doing a good job."

"Joe, I'm firing you because I want to. You don't get a reason."

"Joe, I'm firing you because the traffic was really bad today."

Now... here are some of the precious few reasons you CAN'T fire someone in an employment-at-will state:

"Joe, I'm firing you because you are black."

"Joe, I'm firing you because you are a woman."

"Joe, I'm firing you because you are over 40."

"Joe, I'm firing you because you are a vietnam veteran."

Sooo... to say that somehow workers "they can not be fired for any reason at any point" is totally inaccurate. Unless the worker is a member of a protected class (i.e. minority, female, vietnam veteran, over 40) or under an employment contract stating otherwise (i.e. an individual agreement or a union contract), they can be "fired for any reason at any point"

 

[spongebob]

No, what I am stating is that in an employment-at-will state, the following things are legal:

"Joe, I'm firing you because your services are no longer required."

"Joe, I'm firing you because I hate the color of the shirt you are wearing."

"Joe, I'm firing you because I don't think you are doing a good job."

"Joe, I'm firing you because I want to. You don't get a reason."

"Joe, I'm firing you because the traffic was really bad today."

Now... here are some of the precious few reasons you CAN'T fire someone in an employment-at-will state:

"Joe, I'm firing you because you are black."

"Joe, I'm firing you because you are a woman."

"Joe, I'm firing you because you are over 40."

"Joe, I'm firing you because you are a vietnam veteran."

Sooo... to say that somehow workers "they can not be fired for any reason at any point" is totally inaccurate. Unless the worker is a member of a protected class (i.e. minority, female, vietnam veteran, over 40) or under an employment contract stating otherwise (i.e. an individual agreement or a union contract), they can be "fired for any reason at any point"

if they can be fired for any reason at any point then why cant we fire joe for being black?

what i stated is 100% accurate. get over it and move to the next point.

p.s. using your logic you are wrong about the i.e. part. under at will states an employer can also fire a union hand for any reason at any time. there a multitude of reasons he could get fired for, i.e. breaking company policy which supercedes a union contract.

and for shits and grins a company can fire union hand joe for any reason at any time. union hand joe does have the right to file a grievance.

 

[mrplunkey]

if they can be fired for any reason at any point then why cant we fire joe for being black?

what i stated is 100% accurate. get over it and move to the next point.

p.s. using your logic you are wrong about the i.e. part. under at will states an employer can also fire a union hand for any reason at any time. there a multitude of reasons he could get fired for, i.e. breaking company policy which supercedes a union contract.

and for shits and grins a company can fire union hand joe for any reason at any time. union hand joe does have the right to file a grievance.

There are things called "laws" that define certain "protected classes" and those laws supercede state employment-at-will laws. Other than that, in an employment at will state, you can be fired for any or no reason. I'm not sure what's not getting through here, it's just how employment in these types of states work. Any or no reason... that's it.

 

[mrplunkey]

and for shits and grins a company can fire union hand joe for any reason at any time. union hand joe does have the right to file a grievance.

And that part of your comment is technically correct. Union Joe can be fired for reasons outside his contract. He files a grievance, the union files an unfair labor practice (a 483 or 583 maybe? It's been about eight years since I dealt with the Teamsters), and the company (if found guilty) is responsible for reinstatement with back pay. So yeah, they can violate the agreement, but it just circles back to them and they have to pay restitution. Trust me on that one, I had to do it for four guys I fired in the mid-1990's. What got me was I didn't inform the union that I was going to fire them, so their union representitive found out from them instead of me.

 

[spongebob]

There are things called "laws" that define certain "protected classes" and those laws supercede state employment-at-will laws. Other than that, in an employment at will state, you can be fired for any or no reason. I'm not sure what's not getting through here, it's just how employment in these types of states work. Any or no reason... that's it.

im not sure why your not understanding your own statements.

your statement, "an amployee can be fired for any reason at any time."

your statement, "you can not fire joe for being black, a women, or a vet."

in conclusion, you can not fire joe for any reason at any time. now where exactly are you confused?

what i stated is 100% accurate.

and i think we all know what laws supercede.

 

[velvett]

I would prefer a group of people making $8/Hr. I'd prefer the automobile to cost about 30% less. Quality sucks on US assembly lines with the $25/hr people, what makes you think that it would be worse otherwise? Paying a person more without giving them incentive to work harder or smarter defeats the purpose of merit promotion.

Quality should be built into a product, not deficiency inspected out. That's a different argument for a different thread.

Just a side thought - as a start what would bring down the price of cars is to make less variations of one car, make all the seats leather with one seat style, make all the dashes the same, keep all the same options in one model the same don't have 4 or more price lines of the same model. You would have to produce less parts, get a better price on the parts you were making and assembly would remain consistently repetitive.