Wrong! GM's 'Employee Discount for Everyone" isn't really any more
discount than the rebates were before this program. Besides, the GM
employees not only get the standard employee discount they also get to
add on all of the rebates and sometimes extra employee discounts. The
only thing hurting GM is the American public that thinks it's really
cool to support a foriegn company instead of keeping their dollars in
the U.S.! BUY AMERICAN! BUY UNION!
Well I for one think Unions are good. Higher wages and benefits for
members. Better quality and workmanship for customers. Most anti union
folk have never belonged to a union and really don't understand exactly
what unions do for their membership.
So remember, if you want it done correctly the first time "BUY UNION"!
Proud retiree of UAW Local 362
Former member of UAW Local 455
I understand that. But what you or I think matters not. If the general
public mostly sees unions in a unfavorable light (rightly or wrongly matters
not), and one wants to sell cars to that same general public, it's best to
leave the word "union" out of slogans or risk turning them off.
A job in the Marketing Department you will not get! ;-)
"Better quality workmanship for customers?" Unions were a good thing back in
the 1920s and 1930s. Unfortunately they came to dominate industries to the
point where it didn't matter if the product was crap (it often was) or not.
Look at the state of public education today, speaking of crap products
controlled by unions that have workers who get above market wages regardless
of the product they put out. At one time people were sympathetic to unions,
but as product quality petered out people got wise to buying the best
product, not the union product.
Most were never sympathitic to unions, most thought it was communist.
Most think that union members are liberal. Most don't have a clue!
YOU can thank unions and their members for the wage and benefit
structure you enjoy right now. When union members gain, the general
public gains in wages and benefits. You will notice it's the non-union
folk that are suffering loss in wage. Remember too that union members
can only produce their employers allow them to produce.
If you want a job in service(sweeping floors, flipping burgers, etc)
keep buying products from far away lands. You will be proud of your
childs shiny floors and well done burgers.
By the way, every GM plant in the U.S. has the representing UAW Local
listed on their sign in front of the plant.
Buy AMERICAN! BUY UNION!
Quote: "So remember, if you want it done correctly the first time "BUY
Why is it then.. that there are numerous issues with my GM vehicles (I own
3) and after searching on the net, it seems that the same problems keep
coming up? Case in point: The targa top on my Corvette is delaminating on
the right side. Can I just give the union a call and have it replaced? I'm
not the only one with this problem and I *know* they built about 150,000 (at
least maybe closer to 200,000!!) Corvettes between 1997 and 2004. How about
the drivers seat rocking? That's case in point number two. Should I go on?
I can probably come up with at least 5, 6, 7, or 8 more examples of
defective, poor quality workmanship, (or design.. same thing). To be
honest, the only reason I still buy GM is that I happen to have a TON of
experience repairing my cars (because they weren't built right the first
time) and don't want to have to re-learn different systems. (Ford, Honda,
Toyota, etc..) So, in closing, I would just like to say, that in my opinion,
unions are only good for the employees who have to pay somebody to protect
their job. It gives them a sense of security that they can't be fired and
probably gives them a little extra money on Friday. The product that comes
out of the factories would probably be the same quality regardless of
whether or not it was a union factory or not. I do have to wonder how much
extra GM tacks on to the price of the cars to cover UAW related expenses.
Every one of the problems you mention are NOT controled by union
members but by management or engineering departments. UAW members do
not design cars nor do they purchase bulk parts for cars. Union members
can only do what management lets them do.
UAW related expenses? Sure GM tacks on a price per car BUT so do all
the other car makers. Even the NON union ones. in fact, all companies
tack on extra costs for various reasons.
By the way, workmanship and engineering are not the same thing. Give
employees good parts and tools and good engineering and they will
produce a good product.
Yikes, what a discussion! :-)
The bottom line is it would be best to leave the word "union" out of
marketing materials if one wants to sell the the greatest number of cars
they can. The word simply turns too many people off. It does not matter
why this is so (ignorance, perception or whatever). Ego is the downfall of
many. You personally may be proud of the union (and that is fine), but
using the word in marketing the product these days will translate to fewer
sales and less $$$ available for future union employment contracts.
You can also thank the union structure for the death of the steel industry.
I live in Pittsburgh and the unions killed it. So, yeah, guys a generation
ago could come right out of high school and earn $80,000 to $120,000
(equivalent of today's dollars...back then it was much less in actual 1978
dollars). Problem is they killed the golden goose. No NO ONE can do that.
I believe if you did some research on the demise of many
industries in the US between 1970 and 1990 that the fault lies in
the unreasonable evirromental laws. The steel industry and many
other 'dirty' industries were forced to meet environmental laws
by dates certain, rather then giving the companies time to
develop new technology to meet those goals. In the interim
import product, that do not have those requirements, came into
the US un retrained.
Companies were forced to spend billion on non productive
equipment in what proved to be a futile effort to clean up the
air a water, rather than developing cleaner more efficient way to
achieve the same result over time.
A good example is the automobile. Companies were forced to spend
billions to change factories over to FWD vehicle using small
engines, with dubious pollution control devices, so they could
still build five passenger cars the US consumer wanted. All that
did was delay the far superior designs of today. On can buy one
of the newer better handling RWD cars today that still gets
better mileage than did the small unsafe under poser cars of the
eighties. By setting a date certain, rather than goals, we
actually delayed the better more efficient vehicles of today by
ten to fifteen years,
In essence we exported the pollution, and all of the jobs, that
were provided by steel, cement, chemical, paint, plastics and the
oil industries etc.
I did a search and found the stating wage for a steelworker in
1955 was $1.47 a hour. The highest rate for a skilled craftsman
in the steel mills was $2.12
Twenty year later in 1975 it was $4.03 and $5.11
The death rate among steelworkers was the highest of any industry
at the time
"D.D. Palmer" wrote:
Obviously you never have had family members poisoned by
There is no free lunch. Today we are spending billions of taxpayer
dollars cleaning up Superfund sites that were created 50 years ago
during lax environmental laws. And you know what, a lot of those
sites could have been avoided if those companies had just dumped
their toxic wastes into the city sewer, instead of into a pond out
in the back 40 where it went into the ground water. The city sewer
would have probably just dumped it into the river - which would
have been polluted of course - but 20 years later after all those
industries were forced to clean up their toxins instead of dumping
them, the rivers are running fairly clean since they are continually
being refreshed with clean water from their sources, but those
contaminated aquifiers are still with us.
And all to save a miserable few hundred bucks a month in
city sewer rates back then.
In any case even if those companies had done the right thing and
dropped a few grand a month into a treatment plant for their
wastes, it's still cheaper than the 4 billion or so per site we
are paying today to clean them.
This is incorrect. FWD was a design that came out as a cost
saving measure, not as a pollution control. I don't know what you
have been reading, probably marketing bullshit, but it does not
save fuel to put the driving wheels on the front, rather than the
By going to FWD the automakers could assemble the entire
engine and transmission as a single unit then just drop it (or
raise it) into the body of the car. With RWD you have a
driveshaft and a rear differential and axle - two parts, more
FWD also allowed them to make the driveshaft hump in the
center of the car a lot smaller which gives more leg room.
While this has a side effect in making it easier to make the
car smaller, the Datsun 510, 210 and smaller cars of that vintage
in the 70's and 80's did not have a problem with RWD in
a small car.
The dubious pollution control devices were all the baloney
done to the engines to try to reduce emissions before the
catalytic converter came out. And anyway, after the Arab
oil embargo in the 70's everyone wanted high MPG cars
and one easy way to reduce emissions is to make the car burn
less fuel, which means higher mpg.
A very great lot of the US comsumer didn't want 5 passenger
cars they wanted economy cars, which wern't 5 passenger unless
3 of your passengers were 8 year old children. And the same
history is repeating itself today as Detroit still remains fixated
on the SUV when everyone is wanting small economy high MPG
The cars today aren't any more efficient than they were 10 years
For now. But would you rather live in Guiyu town in Guangdong?
One of the most polluted places in China this is the destination for
all the used toner cartridges, printed circuit boards, and everything
else in old computers, where they are scrapped out for the metals.
Do you know how they recycle wires they get from the old computers?
They burn them in the street until all the plastic insulation is burned
off then they melt them down for the copper. How would you like
to live there?
Here's an old story, ( I don't know how true )
When congress passed the auto pollution laws in the 70's;
GM hired 150 lawyers to challenge the law.
Toyota hired 150 engineers to solve the problem.
I guess it's all in how you approach the problem.
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.