Показаны сообщения с ярлыком car politics. Показать все сообщения
Показаны сообщения с ярлыком car politics. Показать все сообщения

Another Take on NUMMI and the UAW

A Pontiac Vibe Comes Off the Line at NUMMI

A Pontiac Vibe comes off the line at NUMMI

The significance of NUMMI’s closing is not what it will do to the California economy, the Detroit Free Press to the contrary notwithstanding. Come on, guys, 4,600 workers losing their jobs is an old story in the auto industry. California, even with its deteriorating economy, can absorb them a lot better than Michigan could.

What the Freep got right yet didn’t stress enough was the importance of NUMMI as a grand experiment that indeed worked well for a time:

On the manufacturing side, GM did sustain much of what it learned from Toyota in its Global Manufacturing System, a standardized set of practices that literally choreograph workers’ jobs to maximize efficiency, minimize physical movement and focus on using inventory only as needed.

NUMMI enhanced GM’s understanding of quality and provided small cars that people wanted. For NUMMI’s first six years, GM took more than half the factory’s output. Since 1996, however, GM has drawn no more than 21% of the plant’s vehicles and that number dipped as low as 12% as recently as 2007.

NUMMI’s decline was a function of GM’s decline and a long history of management failure that we all know too well.

Now my compadre tgriffith is positively gleeful at the plant’s closing and sees it as an opportunity to bash the UAW. In that, he’s like a lot of people who think the UAW brought on the recent auto industry debacle, or that without the union’s insatiable greed the industry would be healthy. Well, gang, if you believe that, I’ve got a tooth fairy just waiting to give you more Novocain.

UAW-worker

UAW worker in happier times

The sad story of the trade-union movement in this country is well represented by the UAW, forced to sell out years ago to the auto industry and now, of all things, the major stockholder in Chrysler and second-largest owner of GM. The union, as one writer puts it, has been “corporatized.” Clearly, unions can’t protect workers’ jobs any more, or there wouldn’t have been a NUMMI closing.

I love union-bashers. They know next to nothing about labor history and are always eager to see unions as holding a gun to the head of the oppressed industrialists. In this case, let us remember that the UAW, for all the noise it makes, has not only collaborated with the industry at least since 1979, but has made continued and sizable concessions regarding wages, working conditions, union power and influence—you name it. They have given away the store to preserve their jobs. Now the jobs are leaving them.

To think the UAW “desperately wants to spread its empire and organize labor at other Asian automakers,” as tgriffith has it, is to indulge in fantasy. To think it has a “stranglehold on the domestics” is, well, hogwash. The UAW, for all intents and purposes, is a shell that now functions primarily to serve government and corporate interests.

What a far cry from the glorious (and terrifying) history of the 1930s, when the union fought the good fight to defend its people from persecution, physical abuse, and domination at the hands of the auto barons. This is not fiction: Sitdown strikes happened at Chrysler, Ford, and GM in 1937, and people got injured and killed. Then the union was indeed something to be reckoned with.

I don’t think unions have much chance of surviving. I worked at a large international trade union in the ‘90s, and what I saw didn’t inspire confidence. The UAW’s wage concessions in the last few years have put its people on a par with nonunion workers, and now, irony of ironies, they have at last become management.

If the unions go, will you be glad to see them go? Why or why not?

—jgoods

Share this post:



Related posts:



Related posts:



Battle of the Hybrids Begins

honda-insight1We suspected it would happen, and it has: Toyota dropped its price on the 2010 Prius for the Japanese market after Honda’s Insight (left) became the country’s best-selling car. The Big H sold 10,481 of these 1.3-liter, CVT cars in April. Toyota claims 80,000 preorders for the Prius while marking it down $3,100 to bring it in line with the Honda. So it looks like we’ve got a price war brewing.

The Prius will go on sale in the U.S. in about two weeks at $21,750 MSRP, $1,000 cheaper than the 2009 model. Honda grabbed the edge in Japan because it basically copied the Prius, used a cheaper (some would say inferior) hybrid system, and jumped into a market hungry for cheap, fuel-efficient cars.

However, not everybody loves the Insight. Jeremy Clarkson crucified it, calling the car

terrible. Biblically terrible. Possibly the worst new car money can buy. It’s the first car I’ve ever considered crashing into a tree, on purpose, so I didn’t have to drive it any more.

The biggest problem, and it’s taken me a while to work this out, because all the other problems are so vast and so cancerous, is the gearbox. For reasons known only to itself, Honda has fitted the Insight with something called constantly variable transmission (CVT).

It doesn’t work. Put your foot down in a normal car and the revs climb in tandem with the speed. In a CVT car, the revs spool up quickly and then the speed rises to match them. It feels like the clutch is slipping. It feels horrid. And the sound is worse.

He goes on: That sound is like sitting “a dog on a ham slicer.” The car feels like it’s been “made from steel so thin, you could read through it.” And so on. The rant continues, with Jeremy properly questioning, I think, the whole hybrid mentality. In the quest for every last mile per gallon, have we overlooked the considerable costs of production? The battery problems? The fact that we can get comparable mileage from a Golf diesel that’s built better and performs better should give the tree-huggers pause.

And look at this dippy commercial from Toyota:

Sure, there are trade-offs in all this controversy, and some of this hybrid pie in the sky is being baked by the government. Ford today announced a partnership with Xcel Energy to bring 66 electrics and hybrids to the Twin Cities. The project would require federal stimulus money to set up charging stations.

Similarly, hybrid sales are being fueled by government incentives in Germany, France, China, and Japan—some in the form of clunker trade-in bonuses, which have happened in the U.K. and maybe will here. So some of this interest is coming from artificial demand and industry supports.

A buoyant view of our green, plug-in future was also part of Fritz Henderson’s pitch in his last press conference. “I promise you,” he said, “that we have new vehicles that will blow you away,” and he mentioned some. Well and good. Let’s hope GM doesn’t get blown away before they can produce them.

Would you consider buying a new Prius or Insight? Are you hot on the hybrid concept, or do you share some of our skepticism?

—jgoods



Related posts:



Related posts:



Lincoln Limos for the Chief

the-beast1As we celebrate the birthday of our 16th president, Mr. Lincoln would be appalled to learn that Barack Obama rides in an overweight Cadillac called “the Beast.” The long tradition of Lincoln presidential limousines was broken in 1989 with Reagan and Bush the Elder. Cadillac has reigned since—probably because of Secret Service requirements, like rear-wheel or all-wheel drive, that Lincoln cars couldn’t fulfill.
1939-lincoln-sunshine-special
The company was the first to provide specially built cars for presidents, beginning in 1939 with the “Sunshine Special” (above) used by FDR. Truman and Roosevelt used both this car and a 1942 limo (below), the first with protective armor, and Truman’s later transport was a 1950 Lincoln which looked pretty ridiculous with the bubble top in place. Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson used it too.

1942-lincoln-001-1 50-lincoln2kennedy-limo

The 1961 Lincoln Continental convertible (later given a top) was the car in which President Kennedy was shot. This is the most affecting ( I shudder to say “popular”) of all the presidential limos because of that event and the car’s beauty and style. We associate it to an era, and its classic lines convey power and confidence.

69-lincoln-nixon1

Lincoln created a totally new car in 1969 (above) which was used by Presidents Nixon, Ford and Carter, and did so again in 1972 (below). That limo remained in service for more than 10 years.

72-lincoln1

1989-exterior

89-bush-regan-interior

Then the 1989 car, last of the Lincolns, was used in the Reagan and Bush years. Note the two presidential seals inside, as if the occupants had to be reminded whose car this was.

The Lincoln presidential limousine history is well told here, and you can buy some nice die-cast models here.

Which of these would you like to have for your ride?

—jgoods



Related posts:



Exports, Imports, and Bringing It All Back Home

It might be a great time for U.S. car companies to think about the export business. That is, if any importing countries have money to buy. It’s an even better time for them—Ford and GM in particular—to start thinking about importing the good, fuel-efficient cars they already produce in Europe. Why not Mondeos and Opels for us in the U.S.?

Mondeo

Mondeo

Why, you may ask, can’t the successful European cars simply be imported and rebadged here for our consumption? The main obstacle seems to be our regulatory, safety, and emission standards which vary, sometimes in minor details, from the European rules and from state to state. Certification here is expensive, and the red tape extensive. In a time of crisis, one might think, the government should be able to set aside some of these barriers.

The other alternative is to make them here. Ford has been working hard to get its next-gen small cars here and retooling its truck plants here and in Canada. Cars like the Mondeo, which won the European Car of the Year award, are better built than our counterparts and better suited to the burgeoning U.S. market for smaller, more efficient Euro-styled cars. In fact, we hear the Mondeo will provide the platform for the new Fusion, plus other Ford, Mercury and Lincoln products.

Ford also has a successful recent history of exporting its cars to China, namely the Escape and the Lincoln Navigator, as well as the Mondeo, S-Max and the Transit. Ford Motor China sold over 90,000 vehicles there last year, 47% more than in 2007. Chrysler? Forget it.

Regal Nee Opel

Buick Regal Née Opel Insignia

So Ford has gotten the message and recently decided, as we reported, to import the new Fiesta, a good car that Chrysler and GM can’t match with their product lines.

What is GM doing? Well, with the convoluted genius that only this company can muster, they are rebadging their award-winning Opel Insignia and sending it to China as a Buick Regal. We know the Chinese love Buicks, so it’s another excuse for GM to indulge its addiction to rebranding and rebadging. They now have a product line of maybe 9 cars with 180 names. The Insignia may also be coming here as the Saturn Aura (if Saturn is still in existence).

If this administration really believes in the global marketplace, now would be the time to ease the overly fussy restrictions on imports and provide incentives for exporting our cars to China, India, and wherever the market will take them. Yes, we can.

Which of the Big Three’s cars currently available overseas would you consider purchasing if it went on sale in the U.S.?

—jgoods



Related posts:



Related posts: