|
GM: 25,000 jobs will be cut
|
View this Thread in Original format
| ogvh5150 |
| quote: | | General Motors Corp plans to eliminate 25,000 jobs in the United States by 2008 and to close plants as part of a strategy to revive its struggling North American operations. |
GM chairman says 25,000 jobs will be cut
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
From their 2003 annual report it listed (in the millions)
$448,507 in total assets and
$448,507 in total liabilities.
That is up from 2002 which stated
$369,053 in total assets and
$369,053 in total liabilities. (page 60) This is an increase of a little over 21% in one year alone. The difference is US$79,454,000,000
General Motors has been on the Dow Jones Industrial Average list since 1915. |
GM to cut 12,000 jobs in Europe (old thread)
From the 2004 annual report in the millions:
$479,603 in total assets and
$479,603 in total liabilities |
|
|
| Shakka |
| This is old news. What is your point? GM is on the brink of bankruptcy and has to take severe cost cutting measures to stay afloat. |
|
|
| Dupz |
I'll be honest, this is the first I've heard of the problem.. What's happening down in GM anyway?? How does such a HUGE corporation get in such a state, when they've produced every second car on the planet..?
I mean, the world is in the midst of economic recovery and should stimulate spending in luxury items like cars... where's the problem? |
|
|
| metalgearsolid |
| come on GM cars suck they should be out of business or at least have a new CEO like me |
|
|
| BadBadNeil |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dupz
I'll be honest, this is the first I've heard of the problem.. What's happening down in GM anyway?? How does such a HUGE corporation get in such a state, when they've produced every second car on the planet..?
I mean, the world is in the midst of economic recovery and should stimulate spending in luxury items like cars... where's the problem? |
They put out horrible products that garner little respect in the automotive community, have average and below average reliability ratings, have no prestige, and to be quite blunt they put out some of the most boring cars on this planet.
To blame the workers and lay them off won't solve the problem as it is much deeper, the problem is in the management who don't approve, seek, or applaud concept designs coming from their design studios.
Here is a good example. See the new SS car from GM *BELOW* that they plan to release. Does that say SS to you, does it invoke a sense of speed or excitement or rather does it appear to be deemed worthy of the rental car lots across America? What would make a person spending $30K pick this car over an Audi, BMW, Lexus, Toyota, Nissan, Infiniti, Subaru? I can't think of a single one other than being patriotic and trying to support a your country. The toughest part is that many of those foreign brands have plants in this country as well that employ thousands of American workers so that argument doesn't even work any more.
What GM needs is not to lay off people, there needs to be a mix of issues looked at including the absurd pensions of retired workers (which equates to a large chunk of each car sold), the unions who have a lot of power and decrease the profit margins, and they need to take a serious look at this competition, use focus groups, etc to bring their car companies in the right direction design wise. They also need to recognize the "buying up" term. For example many foreign companies have many levels of cars within their structure to get younger buyers to buy into their higher end lines (eg. Toyota < Lexus, Nissan < Infiniti, Volkswagon < Audi) and GM fails to capitalize on this so you get people who have owned a cheaper American car finding no where to go but to the competition.
I can't believe their execs can't see these things or are willing to act on them.
 |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by Dupz
I'll be honest, this is the first I've heard of the problem.. What's happening down in GM anyway?? How does such a HUGE corporation get in such a state, when they've produced every second car on the planet..?
I mean, the world is in the midst of economic recovery and should stimulate spending in luxury items like cars... where's the problem? |
Massive legacy costs, underfunded pension plan, healthcare costs for retirees, union demands, you name it. They've practically been giving cars away for the last 4 years, slowly but surely trying to dig their own grave. |
|
|
| ogvh5150 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
This is old news. What is your point? GM is on the brink of bankruptcy and has to take severe cost cutting measures to stay afloat. |
I am sure that if the fat at the top of the pile were trimmed out in upper management it would save a lot of money.
| quote: | Originally posted by BadBadNeil
They put out horrible products that garner little respect in the automotive community...
Here is a good example. See the new SS car from GM *BELOW* that they plan to release. Does that say SS to you, does it invoke a sense of speed or excitement or rather does it appear to be deemed worthy of the rental car lots across America? |
I drove a '04 Monte Carlo rental from NYC to Hartford round trip and it didn't impress me. I'd rather drive an '84 Monte that misfires and spews smoke than that again. The car was hard to get in and out of. It made the radio raise volume when driving at high speeds like to pass or get on the ramp. It did have pickup but not enough for the Monte Carlo tag IMHO.
I had an '85 Olds Delta 88 with a 350 in it until I came across wet payment at 40mph into a solid wall. I walked away without a scratch. A bit dizzy to call a tow but enough to make a call.
You can't do that in a '05 I bet. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
I am sure that if the fat at the top of the pile were trimmed out in upper management it would save a lot of money.
|
That is defintely not the problem. It really does not matter for a huge ass company if its paying its top manager $1 million a year or $10 million a year inconsequential in the volumes of money such a corporation sees nor would trimming it achieve any result.
The problem is when such a high sum is payed when it is not based on result. I could care less if the guy makes $10 million if he brought $1 billion more due to his efforts in runing the company - hell I'd say he's getting ripped off even. But if the guy losses a billion there really isn't any justificaiton for him making more than $70k. |
|
|
| ogvh5150 |
So by that logic there has been lack of fiduciary responsibility on upper managements behalf and thereby negating their services but yet it's ok to keep them on to let money just fly out at the seams?
The company should have seen anything coming and shore up everything. And since they have seen it coming they chose to let the workforce go. They knew it was coming here in the US when they cut jobs in Europe. I said to myself it was only a matter of time before the layoffs came here.
Who would have known eight months later but them.
Couple that with the new bankruptcy law changes on Chapter 11 filings. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
So by that logic there has been lack of fiduciary responsibility on upper managements behalf and thereby negating their services but yet it's ok to keep them on to let money just fly out at the seams?
The company should have seen anything coming and shore up everything. And since they have seen it coming they chose to let the workforce go. They knew it was coming here in the US when they cut jobs in Europe. I said to myself it was only a matter of time before the layoffs came here.
Who would have known eight months later but them.
Couple that with the new bankruptcy law changes on Chapter 11 filings. |
Right - obviously management was bad.
But my point was paying managers large sums is not a problem - its under what circumstances such large sums are paid that is. |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by ogvh5150
So by that logic there has been lack of fiduciary responsibility on upper managements behalf and thereby negating their services but yet it's ok to keep them on to let money just fly out at the seams?
The company should have seen anything coming and shore up everything. And since they have seen it coming they chose to let the workforce go. They knew it was coming here in the US when they cut jobs in Europe. I said to myself it was only a matter of time before the layoffs came here.
Who would have known eight months later but them.
Couple that with the new bankruptcy law changes on Chapter 11 filings. |
It's not helping that the companies are riddled with union costs which make them much less competitive than their Japanese/Korean counterparts. There's much more to the story than just someone at the top making a bad decision. Look at Ford and Daimler-Chrysler as well. The macro environemnt is extremely poor for auto manufaturers and auto parts suppliers right now. There are plenty of things that are simply out of management's control. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
It's not helping that the companies are riddled with union costs which make them much less competitive than their Japanese/Korean counterparts. There's much more to the story than just someone at the top making a bad decision. Look at Ford and Daimler-Chrysler as well. The macro environemnt is extremely poor for auto manufaturers and auto parts suppliers right now. There are plenty of things that are simply out of management's control. |
Ssshhhh! stop making valid arguments:whip:
:p |
|
|
|
|
