What Would GM be Without the UAW?

  • Thread starter Thread starter YSSMAN
  • 14 comments
  • 575 views

YSSMAN

Super-Cool Since 2013
Premium
Messages
21,286
United States
GR-MI-USA
Messages
YSSMAN
Messages
YSSMAN
I'm not going to post the whole thing, but you can find it HERE

I thought this piece was interesting:

In sum, without the UAW, General Motors would not be faced with extinction. Instead, it would almost certainly be a vastly larger, far more prosperous company, producing more and better motor vehicles than ever before, at far lower costs of production and prices than it does today, and providing employment to hundreds of thousands more workers than it does today.

Few things are more obvious than that the role of the UAW in relation to General Motors has been that of a swarm of bloodsucking leeches, a swarm that will not stop until its prey exists no more.

It is difficult to believe that people who have been neither lobotomized nor castrated would not rise up and demand that these leeches finally be pulled off!

Perhaps the American people do not rise up because they have never seen General Motors, or any other major American business, rise up and dare to assert the philosophical principle of private property rights and individual freedom and proceed to pull the leeches off in the name of that principle. It is easy to say, and also largely true, that General Motors and American business in general have not behaved in this way for several generations because they no longer have any principles. Indeed, they would project contempt at the very thought of acting on any kind of moral or political principle.

Hmmm, I guess me an BX arent the only ones who hate the UAW.
 
Today, GM would be much better without the UAW. But GM would never have risen to the heights of sucess they attained in the 50s, 60s, and early 70s without the UAW. Which is to say, would GM even be around today were it not for the many dedicated workers proudly assembling American cars during the height of the US auto industry?

So you really need to consider the last 50 years of history, not just the last 20, when asking where GM would be without the UAW.
 
If this... If that.... One couldnt really say what GM would be without the UAW, its all speculation. If I grew up in america would I still have been an audi fan? We will never know.
 
30,40,50+ years ago the union was needed, now adays it's not. The UAW is pretty much the sole reason GM cars don't last as long as say Japanese cars. It has nothing to with design, more like workmenship. The UAW workers (for the most part) don't care and they are there just to get paid a lot of money for something a robot could do cheaper and better.

There was a time for the UAW, now is not that time. They are a heavy burden to GM and GM would be better without that load.
 
I hate unions. They are ONLY here now for political purposes--and NOT the employees which for which they were created for. Down with the UAW and everyother union! GM and other US auto plants wouldn't be in a chokehold if it weren't for the UAW.
 
neanderthal
i pose this question: where would GM be today without its prior management?

Good/not good, Bob Lutz is good, Rick Wagner is an idiot and so is Jim Queen. If it hadn't been for Bob GM would still make really boring things, I'd say he's the only good manager there.
 
In my opinion, Unions do nothing but look out for the "union" and suck companies dry. When they see a profit (a time when most companies gain new technologies, products, methods) they strike till they get more pay, but when the company takes a loss, they strike if they have pay taken away. With most of my girlfriends family working for Ford, i've seen the CAW (Canadian Auto Workers Union) upset many peoples family lives by calling for strikes due to stupid reasons, leaving the employee's with no paychecks.

The fact that the head of the Union drives around in a Limo from place to place makes you wonder who he's really looking out for, the worker or himself?
 
neanderthal
i pose this question: where would GM be today without its prior management?

Its a good question, and it is something of a problem at GM. Back in GM's glory years (1947-1973), actual car guys ran the company. Earl, DeLorean, Duntov, etc. all knew what they were doing and had a great passion for automobiles. Today, I really only recognize Mr. Lutz as the car guy at GM, which is really unfortunate for the company as a whole. Being that they are so focused on profits and having a model to compete with another company is just plain stupid, and I think Lutz has made it his mission to turn that notion around at GM.
 
SRV2LOW4ME
In my opinion, Unions do nothing but look out for the "union" and suck companies dry. When they see a profit (a time when most companies gain new technologies, products, methods) they strike till they get more pay, but when the company takes a loss, they strike if they have pay taken away.

This is exactly 100% correct. You hit the nail on the head here. Unions are useless now...but they aren't going to be kicked out so easily. Infact, unions are here forever which is a shame.
 
Without the UAW, GM might be a little bit understaffed, don't you think?


But, for a straight answer to the question: A cancer survivor.
 
Not really, they would just have more robots to build the cars. Therefore GM's would be cheaper and better built.
 
Well, part of the reason why Toyota and Honda are both so successful is because they don't have unions to deal with. I can recall reading stories about the European automakers that are now dealing with union troubles who are putting a lot of pressure on them to increase wages, pensions, etc. when the company just does not have the profits to do so.
 
yes but i think to put all of GMs problems on the UAW without acknowledging the mistakes that caused them to have so much power (thanks previous GM management) is to only look at half the problem.

management (past and present) is just as to blame as the UAW on this. thats not debateable.

its like the iraq thing: im against our presence there, but saddam shouldnt have made threats, and shouldnt have hindered the inspectors which only gave credence to his baloney. do the threats justify our presence? no. but if he hadnt made those threats we wouldnt be there would we?

GMs problems with the union stem from the contracts signed by (rick?) smith and other past CEOs. they didnt have to shoulder the retirees health plan completely. they didnt have to keep giving concessions and so on.

ibet what heppened was they were making stupid money, and instead of focusing on what was good for the business they focused on making money, always a short term solution. of course, they made thier moeny, got thier year end, performance, target bonuses, and moved on. i dont see anyone b!tching about that.

one problem, two parts.

this is why i think someone who already is invested in the company (financially, emotionally, timewise, doesnt matter. must be invested!) should be CEO. if you hire a quick draw shooter, you are left to clean up the mess.
 
Back