Retooling GM

Wally wrote:

4cylndrfury wrote: create a merit based organization, and the rest will fall into place. I will do whatever I can to be a better employee if I think it will get me more pay, which will increase production, quality and eventually share prices etc...

I'm curious how you would do that with an assembly line. "Sure, you put all the bolts in the right holes, nut brian here makes sure al the little "T"s on the heads face the same direction." I can't imagine that someone would roam the plants looking for someone deserving of a raise, and if there was most people would say that was a nothing job that should be cut.

Merit based on factors outside of routine: Here on time every time, low percentage of quality errors etc etc etc. No one will have to roam. Merit presents itself unless your culture prevents you from looking at all.

DILYSI Dave wrote: Discontinue sales through private dealer network. Problem solved. 5000 Dealers are replaced with 2000 corporate test drive centers. These are staffed with knowledgeable folks who aren't trying to seal the deal, and thus aren't alienating people. They are salaried, and are there to inform the potential customer. Cars are ordered online, and delivered to the new owner's residence. Red carpet treatment optional. The first automaker who pulls the trigger on selling direct is going to have a HUGE jump on the competition.

Wasn't that how Daewoo tried selling cars here in the US?

oldopelguy wrote:

DILYSI Dave wrote: Discontinue sales through private dealer network. Problem solved. 5000 Dealers are replaced with 2000 corporate test drive centers. These are staffed with knowledgeable folks who aren't trying to seal the deal, and thus aren't alienating people. They are salaried, and are there to inform the potential customer. Cars are ordered online, and delivered to the new owner's residence. Red carpet treatment optional. The first automaker who pulls the trigger on selling direct is going to have a HUGE jump on the competition.

Wasn't that how Daewoo tried selling cars here in the US?

Only regionally and even that was only a sales suggestion service offered by the OE.

Direct selling only works if there is a VERY good service program in place.

IIRC Ford tried something similar in a couple of test markets, there was a central 'dealership' with smaller service outlets scattered around. The idea was the customers all bought their cars at the 'dealership' but the service points were much closer to home for convenience. Never did hear how all that turned out.

The merit based organization would work; see Toyota, Nissan, BMW, Honda etc here in the US. But in order to put it in place at GM you'd have to get rid of the 'old guard' who prefer it the old way. Honda et al didn't have to face that problem, they simply started from scratch.

Remember when Saturn first got off the ground? They made a big deal out of how anybody could stop the assembly line if they saw something wrong, they even made a TV ad showing exactly that happening. From what I hear, that's pretty much gone and Saturn is now very much like the rest of GM, some of their products aren't even produced in the Saturn plant. AFAIK, the Corvette plant is the only one which is anything close to merit based.

Actually I believe that all the GM lines still have ability for individual stoppage, IIRC there is one person that is designated per area. You report the issue to him/her they stop the line.

The "Great Idea" bonusses have ended.

DILYSI Dave wrote: Discontinue sales through private dealer network. Problem solved. 5000 Dealers are replaced with 2000 corporate test drive centers. These are staffed with knowledgeable folks who aren't trying to seal the deal, and thus aren't alienating people. They are salaried, and are there to inform the potential customer. Cars are ordered online, and delivered to the new owner's residence. Red carpet treatment optional. The first automaker who pulls the trigger on selling direct is going to have a HUGE jump on the competition.

Most states have laws against manufacturer owned dealerships. So we get the "sell what's on the lot" type of dealer, with very few exceptions.

BAMF wrote:

DILYSI Dave wrote: Discontinue sales through private dealer network. Problem solved. 5000 Dealers are replaced with 2000 corporate test drive centers. These are staffed with knowledgeable folks who aren't trying to seal the deal, and thus aren't alienating people. They are salaried, and are there to inform the potential customer. Cars are ordered online, and delivered to the new owner's residence. Red carpet treatment optional. The first automaker who pulls the trigger on selling direct is going to have a HUGE jump on the competition.

Most states have laws against manufacturer owned dealerships. So we get the "sell what's on the lot" type of dealer, with very few exceptions.

These wouldn't be dealerships. Nothing would be sold there.

Retooling GM = Take a D9 Cat to GM head office, start at the front door and push.

Shawn

Trans_Maro wrote: Retooling GM = Take a D9 Cat to GM head office, start at the front door and push. Shawn

You'd only take a D9?

I'd go all the way and get a D11, lol.

...and away goes Saturn (and most of Pontiac)

http://jalopnik.com/5155377/gm-to-officially-kill-saturn-brand-most-of-pontiac

gamby wrote: ...and away goes Saturn (and most of Pontiac) http://jalopnik.com/5155377/gm-to-officially-kill-saturn-brand-most-of-pontiac

counterpoint

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/02/18/gm-reveals-production-cadillac-cts-coupe-in-viability-plan/

http://preprodha.ecomm.gm.com:8221/us/gm/en/news/govt/docs/plan.pdf <-- entire GM plan there...

Before I wanted them to die.. Now I kinda want them to pull this off and give the finger to the world. To get the kind of culture shift I think is needed, you'd basically have to fire anyone with more than 3 years experience though... ugh..

NPR had a commentator on today talking about his. I'll try to summarize his point.

The Big 3 are on the job to make cars and, at this time, employ American's. Why are we giving money to these companies who's only claim to being more American than BMW or Honda is that they're headquartered here? Gm/Chrysler are laying off so many workers that the foreign manufacturers will soon employ as many workers as they do. His point was that if they are going to take our money to layoff more Americans, why give them the money in the first place?

I have to say I agree with the guy. If the Big 3 are taking our money to employ Mexicans or Chinese why bother?

Another question, could we loan them the cash with the stipulation that they can't lay off anymore American workers? I think for that to be successful we would have to take on the UAW as well. Course, all that would be taken care of in bankruptcy too. Maybe the only solution is Chapter 11.

I cannot disagree with the above.. If you cannot manage your business properly in a downturn.. good bye.

as my electrical motors professor said in college. " Time to shape up or.... McDonalds is hiring"

John Brown wrote: Actually I believe that all the GM lines still have ability for individual stoppage, IIRC there is one person that is designated per area. You report the issue to him/her they stop the line.

So they added another layer of bureacracy back into the production system. Look at it like this: worker sees a widget that's not properly installed, has to leave his/her post to report it to get that widget properly installed, now there's several cars which have gone by without our worker installing their widget. Now we have what's called a MCF or Mongolian Cluster Fuc* and someone up the chain of command is gonna want an explanation of why this happened. Like the line from whatever movie that was, 'I'd kill you but the paperwork's a bitch.'

If you are the line jockey stuffing widgets in place, what are you gonna do? [rant] Why, leave it for the techs at the dealership level to fix for next to nothing. [/rant]

Jensenman wrote:

John Brown wrote: Actually I believe that all the GM lines still have ability for individual stoppage, IIRC there is one person that is designated per area. You report the issue to him/her they stop the line.

So they added another layer of bureacracy back into the production system. Look at it like this: worker sees a widget that's not properly installed, has to leave his/her post to report it to get that widget properly installed, now there's several cars which have gone by without our worker installing their widget. Now we have what's called a MCF or Mongolian Cluster Fuc* and someone up the chain of command is gonna want an explanation of why this happened. Like the line from whatever movie that was, 'I'd kill you but the paperwork's a bitch.' If you are the line jockey stuffing widgets in place, what are you gonna do? [rant] Why, leave it for the techs at the dealership level to fix for next to nothing. [/rant]

just as a side note.. I know from friends who were line engineers at Toyota that assembly workers are highly trained but... have 2 chances to screw something up..

1st time this happens it is a slap on the wrist and public shaming. 2nd time.. you're fired.

Same thing for tardiness. 1st time you are late without pre arranging it or calling in sick in the appropriate manner, you are written up... 2nd time and you are not allowed in the gate. The guards hold you there while they clear out your locker.

According to "Chris" who works on the CTS line, the button is still there, it pauses the line and pages the area supervisor who has the authority to completely stop production.

Seems plausible.

"Chris" is a 24 year old that hired on in 2008 and will likely be one of the first not working if there is any paring down at the plant and is my contact "In" if they open hiring back up. He worked four years as a temp (Manpower type) in the same job he is doing now... He made $9.50 then and makes $19.50 now... He almost wishes he was a temp still, at least he would be certain he would be employed if the job ends.

mad_machine wrote: that is one problem with Unions.. I admit that. as I have stated before, I work both in and out of the union houses here in atlantic City as both a stage electrician and an A/V tech (depending on the house) and I can tell you in both respects.. they are the same. I get paid the same wether I am hanging 40 feet up in the air atop some cable hung truss focusing lights (my favourit job and one of the most dangerous) or plugging cables into laptops for people to do powerpoint presentations. Fair? no.. but honestly, I work hard and so does everyone around me. There are a few slackers, but eventually get caught and punished. Just the way it is. Being younger and new to the union scene, I do not get the calls that the older guys get, but my skills do get me jobs they cannot do. I think before people criticise unions, they should try working under one. It never hurts to have both sides of the argument in your realm of experience

No offense, but I've worked around Unions in a couple of different places and not experienced what you're talking about. Through my job, I have visited a number of Union shops. In each instance, I have been confronted with the stereotype that I think many attribute to Unions, generally lazy workers with an entitlement attitude.

Once was in San Francisco where we visited an airline maintenance shop. I don't think I saw anyone do anything that could remotely be described as work the entire 2 days that we were there, but I did see a lot of newspaper reading, card playing and other non work activities.

Another happened at a smaller shop and wasn't quite as egregious, but disturbing none-the-less. I was in their facility to do some testing with highly specialized equipment that was borrowed from a sister company and virtually priceless. I couldn't physically carry everything myself, so I asked the resident engineer I was working with to carry some of my stuff. He was hesitant and I asked why. He said that if he carried anything more than a notepad across the shop floor, a "material handler" would file a grievance with the Union because he was taking work away from them. Being somewhat naive about Union shops, I told him to tell whomever that I insisted that he carry my specialized equipment because I honestly didn't want just anyone's hands on it, since 6 months of my work were culminating in this test and I didn't want it compromised by some "material handler". Just as he suspected, a grievance was filed, he was written up and the "material handler" got 4 hours of compensation out of it.

After what I've seen, I truly wonder sometimes how any Union shop in a manufacturing environment can be profitable.

Con Edison in NY has a position in which a person has a dedicated job opening manhole covers before the electricians can enter to make repairs or improvements. Electricians must wait (but are being paid) until the opener arrives.

In my company, we sometimes move to other areas of the trading floor. In the past, we simply cleared out our desks and moved to the new location. The unions complained. Now I must box my contents so union movers can move them 30 feet. Ridiculous!

Now both GM and Chrysler are asking for more taxpayer money so they can layoff more employees with the promise that in the future they will need even more tax money so they can lay off even more workers.

I don't get it. I thought the government was spending money to create jobs.

....and Cerberus just said that their investors didn't want to put any more money into Chrysler.....but that it was OK for the American Taxpayers to invest.

WTF??

So we should use TARP money to maintain jobs which are not really needed based on current and future business prospects?

How about paying them according to the jobs they create. Or better yet, not paying them at all if they don't create any jobs. Why do they need money to lay people off?

JoshC wrote: No offense, but I've worked around Unions in a couple of different places and not experienced what you're talking about. Through my job, I have visited a number of Union shops. In each instance, I have been confronted with the stereotype that I think many attribute to Unions, generally lazy workers with an entitlement attitude. Once was in San Francisco where we visited an airline maintenance shop. I don't think I saw anyone do anything that could remotely be described as work the entire 2 days that we were there, but I did see a lot of newspaper reading, card playing and other non work activities. Another happened at a smaller shop and wasn't quite as egregious, but disturbing none-the-less. I was in their facility to do some testing with highly specialized equipment that was borrowed from a sister company and virtually priceless. I couldn't physically carry everything myself, so I asked the resident engineer I was working with to carry some of my stuff. He was hesitant and I asked why. He said that if he carried anything more than a notepad across the shop floor, a "material handler" would file a grievance with the Union because he was taking work away from them. Being somewhat naive about Union shops, I told him to tell whomever that I insisted that he carry my specialized equipment because I honestly didn't want just anyone's hands on it, since 6 months of my work were culminating in this test and I didn't want it compromised by some "material handler". Just as he suspected, a grievance was filed, he was written up and the "material handler" got 4 hours of compensation out of it. After what I've seen, I truly wonder sometimes how any Union shop in a manufacturing environment can be profitable.

I want my union dues back, as clearly they are worthless. I've belonged to three unions and never had a job where this goes on. There are some things that I can't do at my job because they belong to another person in another union, but I rarely see someone sitting around waiting for someone else so they can do their job except in the shops where they occasionally need to wait for a helper for heavy lifting and such. I need to find out how to get my union replaced. Hopefully by either the UAW of the Major League Players Association. If I show up one or more minutes late for work I can turn around and go home, and we don't even get coffee breaks. I'm clearly being taken advantage of.

Snowdoggie wrote: How about paying them according to the jobs they create. Or better yet, not paying them at all if they don't create any jobs. Why do they need money to lay people off?

Exactly, if they are laying people off the gov't may as well keep that money to put towards unemployment payments.

Snowdoggie wrote: How about paying them according to the jobs they create. Or better yet, not paying them at all if they don't create any jobs. Why do they need money to lay people off?

Because they need to both reduce workforces AND need more capital.

Moparman wrote:

Snowdoggie wrote: How about paying them according to the jobs they create. Or better yet, not paying them at all if they don't create any jobs. Why do they need money to lay people off?

Because they need to both reduce workforces AND need more capital.

Somehow I don't think that is the taxpayer's problem. If we had a true capitalist system, these guys should go broke and the plants should be sold to somebody who is a little bit better at managing their 'capital'.