Should Ford, GM combine forces?

[Bossxr8]

I don't agree with random drug tests for employees, I believe it is a breach of privacy. I don't agree with people using drugs while at work but if a person chooses to do recreational drugs in their spare time then that is their choice. There are exceptions such as pilots, police officers etc. But i'm sure drugs are a bigger problem in the US than it is here.

Eg. If someone smokes a bit of weed on the weekend its very unlikely to effect his work come Monday. My opinion only.

[aualright]

Originally Posted by Drive XR7

Look, I have respect for you guys because Aussies can definitely produce some quality products... I respect that.

The management of Ford and GM do have problems... I'm not saying they don't, but do you have any idea how much UAW costs American automotive companies (which trickles down to Holden and Ford Aus)?

I have a friend who works for Ford in Virginia, USA building the F150. Because he is in the union, if they were to randomly drug test him, all he would need to do is throw the bowl down on the ground and say he has a problem. Ford would spare him his job and even pay for services to help him overcome his "problem." I heard it straight from his mouth. It's truely f***ked up over here. Workers can get away with anything because the union has so much power. If it were my company, employees that failed drug tests would be fired on the spot... no exceptions. Maybe that's why American vehicles have sub-par quality compared to their foreign counterparts.

Health care in this country is expensive... but the union has nothing to do with that. Ford employs people and gives them benefits. That's part of the way things work over here. Benefits generally cost a company twice the amount of the take home pay of an employee. $20USD/hr = $40USD/hr to the company.

Maybe if the workers that build these vehicles were to step it up a notch and actually produce quality vehicles (ie, actually have to WORK to keep their jobs), lawsuits and recalls would drop.

No doubt that Ford has lawsuits lined up... but there is legislation currently in the US Senate to prevent frivilous lawsuits from using our country's valuable judicial dollars. Change is happening (would be happening faster if we had better administration.. ie... John Kerry).

It's complicated... but I most definitely blame the unions. They simply aren't needed anymore, yet the exist to push the limit of how far companies will go. A total waste on our economy.

so smoking a spliff the night before deserves being punted from your job..?? You haven't mentioned the ridiculous salaries (with options) that the execs are on (or the fact they probably have more serious (coke..??) drug problems than any factory worker).

[Drive XR7]

Originally Posted by aualright

so smoking a spliff the night before deserves being punted from your job..?? You haven't mentioned the ridiculous salaries (with options) that the execs are on (or the fact they probably have more serious (coke..??) drug problems than any factory worker).

Don't know where you get your information.... but most execs sure aren't cokeheads. They couldn't get to the position their in now if they had a problem.

I'm not knockin smoking a spliff on your own time... but the fact of the matter is, it's illegal here (for reasons that I don't agree with). As an employee, you need to obey the law and if the company requires employees to be drug free, you better do it.

And speaking from personal experience... I used to smoke every day about 5 years ago with my buddies. I'm sure it's probably not quite the kind of stuff that you're used to seeing, but still. I was slow. I didn't care and had a lack of motivation. I've seen how it affects people because it affected me.

[aualright]

Originally Posted by Drive XR7

Don't know where you get your information.... but most execs sure aren't cokeheads. They couldn't get to the position their in now if they had a problem.

I'm not knockin smoking a spliff on your own time... but the fact of the matter is, it's illegal here (for reasons that I don't agree with). As an employee, you need to obey the law and if the company requires employees to be drug free, you better do it.

And speaking from personal experience... I used to smoke every day about 5 years ago with my buddies. I'm sure it's probably not quite the kind of stuff that you're used to seeing, but still. I was slow. I didn't care and had a lack of motivation. I've seen how it affects people because it affected me.

Just as 'most' execs aren't cokeheads, 'most' workers aren't druggies either. And if people such as yourself can't cope or don't know how to do things in moderation, it will be obvious (re slow, not motivated).

Back to your argument, is it the union's fault that Ford has bought into all these under-performing companies such as Jaguar, etc..?? Blaming unions is something I'd expect from a conservative politician and without these unions you'd be right back to the early Ford production lines (ever seen a doco on how workers were treated back then..??).

PS: I hate it when people presume that 'personal' experiences mean that it must be the same for everyone. Not everyone is an alcoholic, even though they might like a drink.

[MX837M-GE]

I can't believe people are posting here in defence of the UAW.

This union is destroying Ford and GM, and seriously hampering Chrysler. Sure both companies have massive management issues, but given the unions they are dealing with, there is SFA they can do about it.

GM and Ford have way too many plants in the USA, and the unions will not let them close them.

GM and Ford have health plans and pension schemes that are far more generous then even what Sweden, the country biggest (non commie) welfare state in the world, gives to its own citizens.

All that would be fine if the UAW covered all the foreign makers in the USA, but they don't. Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, etc all employ non-union labour. What a surprise.

So the UAW gives a competitive advantage to the Japanese/Koreans/non GM/Ford, it cuts down GM/Ford burdening them with MASSIVE costs, it jeapordises the future of its own members future entitlements (cutting the money tree down faster than it can grow) - for what? How is the UAW defensible actually?

$0.02

[Drive XR7]

Originally Posted by aualright

Back to your argument, is it the union's fault that Ford has bought into all these under-performing companies such as Jaguar, etc..?? Blaming unions is something I'd expect from a conservative politician and without these unions you'd be right back to the early Ford production lines (ever seen a doco on how workers were treated back then..??).

Exactly. Early Ford production lines were not subject to the regulations of the US government because there WEREN'T ANY. Now, by federal law, companies need to give breaks, offer benefits and enforce strict safety regulations. It's the unions that are pushing these to the limit. Why is it that foreign automotive manufacturers that are producing here in the states are making more reliable, less expensive cars that are selling 2:1 vs. American vehicles? A small fraction of workers in these plants are involved in the unions whereas a huge majority is involved in Ford/GM.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by MX837M-GE

I can't believe people are posting here in defence of the UAW.

This union is destroying Ford and GM, and seriously hampering Chrysler. Sure both companies have massive management issues, but given the unions they are dealing with, there is SFA they can do about it.

GM and Ford have way too many plants in the USA, and the unions will not let them close them.

GM and Ford have health plans and pension schemes that are far more generous then even what Sweden, the country biggest (non commie) welfare state in the world, gives to its own citizens.

All that would be fine if the UAW covered all the foreign makers in the USA, but they don't. Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, etc all employ non-union labour. What a surprise.

So the UAW gives a competitive advantage to the Japanese/Koreans/non GM/Ford, it cuts down GM/Ford burdening them with MASSIVE costs, it jeapordises the future of its own members future entitlements (cutting the money tree down faster than it can grow) - for what? How is the UAW defensible actually?

$0.02

Its not the Unions fault they have too many plants, just like it isn't their fault that they put so much effort into making and building so many SUV's when the oil prices are driving people away from them. They made the mistakes in future product planning, they need to take responsibility for it.

[4.9 EF Futura]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Its not the Unions fault they have too many plants, just like it isn't their fault that they put so much effort into making and building so many SUV's when the oil prices are driving people away from them. They made the mistakes in future product planning, they need to take responsibility for it.

You both make excellent points, some of the best raised thus far.

But let's consider what needs to be done in order to keep those workers in their jobs and also keep $$$ flowing through to the shareholders. The employer and the employees (via the unions) need to work together.

What's more important - apportioning blame or getting the company back on track?? This is why the deal struck between GM and the UAW seemed very encouraging. Both parties compromised and acknoweldged that its going to be a painful process... let's hope they can minimise the damage caused by the actions of both parties.

[aualright]

Originally Posted by 4.9 EF Futura

You both make excellent points, some of the best raised thus far.

But let's consider what needs to be done in order to keep those workers in their jobs and also keep $$$ flowing through to the shareholders. The employer and the employees (via the unions) need to work together.

What's more important - apportioning blame or getting the company back on track?? This is why the deal struck between GM and the UAW seemed very encouraging. Both parties compromised and acknoweldged that its going to be a painful process... let's hope they can minimise the damage caused by the actions of both parties.

Yep - my defence of the union was based on one forum user apportioning total blame on them. I am not a union member nor have ever had to be, but if I was in a position where my choices of employment were restricted I would certainly be in one. And as far as drug testing at work, isn't it the Police's job to "fight the war on drugs" - in the words of 'ol redneck Reagan. Certainly not some 'manager' at a workplace.

CIVIL LIBERTIES folks - something the Americans have forgotten all about since 9/11.

[MX837M-GE]

I have nothing against unions generally speaking at all. But the UAW IMHO is a militious union intent on securing power and money for itself at the expense of the future viability of its constituents employers (GM and Ford) and entitlements.

I'd certainly agree that GM/Fords's situation not ENTIRELY the UAW's fault though.

WRT to drug tests. If staff have been underperforming or something, i'd say it could be reasonable to conduct a drug test. But if it was just random, then I don't see how that helps the business. I'd have thought (and sounds like this is the case) it would just make staff unhappy.