Senator Corker's Corker - Automaker bailout

Yes, that's substantially true, though I'd add that future retirement obligations to senior employees who still have the sweetheart deal is still a problem just as it is for those already retired. Newer hires (as if there were many) are on a pay and benefits scale closer to what Toyota is paying.
You realize that this is happened to millions of Americans over the last 10-20 years (including me, and I never expected someone to would fight it for me), and most of them never had the wages of a D3 worker either.

I don't get this 'we have to keep autoworkers and their retirees whole' assumption when no one else in private industry ever had that kind of support. My whole retirement planning world got turned upside down, and I had to fight my way back over the past 14 years. And you know what, it actually turned out they were doing me a favor, since now I am FI without relying on some MegaCorp...
 
So, just throw the pensions into PBGC, remove the job banks, and tell the retirees they have to buy their own healthcare? Senator Corker makes sense, but not the type of sense we are used to in Washington.........;)
I've always wondered what kind of morale there is in these shops where there are "tiered" pay and benefits depending on hire date and whether one is grandfathered into the sweetheart retirement deal.

I can imagine that a newer employee earning $15-20 per hour, with no retiree health insurance and only a crummy 401K, sees someone next to them getting $30-40 per hour with a gold plated pension and retiree health care package, and the only difference was their hire date, it's hard to imagine how that could *not* foster resentment.
 
I don't get this 'we have to keep autoworkers and their retirees whole' assumption when no one else in private industry ever had that kind of support.

Exactly.

My hope is that the voting power of people who feel that way will outweigh the voting power of the recipients of that sort of support.

-ERD50
 
My question, basd on this video- does Henry Blodgett have Parkinson's?
 
If the White House lets Paulson use TARP funds to bail out the big three I guess the senate vote is a non issue ?

White House Bails Out Automakers: Everybody Wins, Save Taxpayers: Tech Ticker, Yahoo! Finance


I gotta laugh about the comment the Senate failed to act. I thought they did and voted down the bail-out. Sounds like they acted to me.

Yeah, they acted NOT to give money, but Bush is going to overrule them. Since most Republicans don't like Bush anyway, might as well piss them off one last time. Maybe Obama will give Bush some nice X-mas gifts as thanks.........:D
 
Morningstar has good article which discusses the implication in greater detail, in summary I think it is safe to say that all options stink.

Excellent article clifp. Thanks for posting.

From the article and in reference to Option 1: No bailout followed by bankruptcy.....

This outcome is the least likely outcome, however, as we do not think the Obama administration will want to put more factory workers in key electoral states out of work, and Speaker Pelosi stated on Dec. 2 that bankruptcy was not an option.

I think this statement from the article shines light on the future administration's thinking. Given a choice, I believe Obama would provide a bailout to the D3 companies sufficient to keep them in business until legislation making it easy for the UAW to organize the Toyota/Honda, etc., plants and thereby level the playing field is in place. Not only would this level the playing field by increasing the cost structure of the currently non-UAW car makers, it would provide a Dem-loyal union foothold in several Red states.
 
Given a choice, I believe Obama would provide a bailout to the D3 companies sufficient to keep them in business until legislation making it easy for the UAW to organize the Toyota/Honda, etc., plants and thereby level the playing field is in place.

Not only would this level the playing field by increasing the cost structure of the currently non-UAW car makers...


Oh boy, don't get better, make the other guy as bad as you. I feel better now. :p

But why would the Toyota/Honda plants want to go UAW? The Union head just told us that they make as much as UAW workers :rolleyes:

-ERD50
 
Oh boy, don't get better, make the other guy as bad as you. I feel better now. :p
Hmmmmm... I was trying to NOT make good - bad value judgements in regard to pay and benefits, so let's not go there other than to say that having the UAW successfully organize the foreign owned car manufacturers operating here would go a long way towards making the D3 long term viable.... especially if the foreign companies were required to share in the legacy expenses.
But why would the Toyota/Honda plants want to go UAW? The Union head just told us that they make as much as UAW workers :rolleyes:

-ERD50

One of Obama's positions during the campaign was that he would support legislation making it easier for union organizing activity. I believe this impacts his thinking on D3 bailouts and forcing UAW give-backs.

Let's not get this thread moved to the soapbox...... ;)
 
Hmmmmm... I was trying to NOT make good - bad value judgements in regard to pay and benefits, so let's not go there other than to say that having the UAW successfully organize the foreign owned car manufacturers operating here would go a long way towards making the D3 long term viable.... especially if the foreign companies were required to share in the legacy expenses.

Now THAT would be a stroke on American genius........:eek:

One of Obama's positions during the campaign was that he would support legislation making it easier for union organizing activity. I believe this impacts his thinking on D3 bailouts and forcing UAW give-backs.

Let's not get this thread moved to the soapbox...... ;)

Nah, no Soapbox. Maybe now WalMart, Target, all the import carmakers, etc, will be FORCED to unionize. Think how much that will "help".......:eek::eek:

It's a form of protectionism without putting any tariffs on the Chinese.........BRILLIANT!!!
 
Nah, no Soapbox. Maybe now WalMart, Target, all the import carmakers, etc, will be FORCED to unionize. Think how much that will "help".......:eek::eek:

It's a form of protectionism without putting any tariffs on the Chinese.........BRILLIANT!!!

Exactly, they will buy cheap products from the Chinese, put the union 'tariff' on it and pass it on to the American consumer. Problem solved. :D WalMart greeter wanted: 50K plus benefits.
 
Exactly, they will buy cheap products from the Chinese, put the union 'tariff' on it and pass it on to the American consumer. Problem solved. :D WalMart greeter wanted: 50K plus benefits.

I can already sense my grocery bill going up.......;) Wonder what Congress will do when WalMart and Home Depot want bailout money? Maybe Gettelfinger can be the Union Czar under Obama? :eek:
 
Very well written article. My own thoughts along these lines. I am a GM "salaried" retiree with 34 years service and have been impacted by the changes in the econ-omy and the auto industry. I just lost all my health care coverage effective 1-1-09. I out shopping now for coverage after 20 years of retirement. Yes, I've had it good. Retired 5-1-88 with full benefits and promises of full health. The fine print in our benefits package says they can change anything want and time they want.
Some years back the salaried retirees filed a class action lawsuit against GM for going back on their promises of free health health care for life. Gm stopped that long ago. Lost it at the highest level in court. I'm not scared for me because I'm pretty well set. My pension is a defined benefit guarantee trust which is backed by the Fed's. I'm concerned about the people still working inside the industry and the supporting industries. I'm listening as I write to Neil Cuvitto on Fox News. I don't think people have a clue as to the impact of the loss of the auto industry as we know it. It's been said there are six people working in the U.S. for every one in the auto industry; steel, rubber, glass, electrical and wire, carpet, fabric, nuts, bolts and screws, etc. Just read an article in the Tampa Tribune where they are against the bailout. They don't realize that the auto business could drive them out of business. No jobs, no money, no travel, no tourism, no ads in their paper for motels, hotels, lodging and meals. No ads for airfares or cruises. The general public just has no idea.

I feel sorry for everyone out there. In my 34 years with General Motors and in my 21st year of retireement, I've never been this concerned. I'm not talking about myself and my wife as we are in decent financial shape. I'm worried about my kids and grandchildren. Don't know how they will manage in the long term. Good luck!
 
Very well written article. My own thoughts along these lines. I am a GM "salaried" retiree with 34 years service and have been impacted by the changes in the econ-omy and the auto industry. I just lost all my health care coverage effective 1-1-09. I out shopping now for coverage after 20 years of retirement. Yes, I've had it good. Retired 5-1-88 with full benefits and promises of full health. The fine print in our benefits package says they can change anything want and time they want.

How old are you? if you started at GM at 18, worked for 34 years, and are retired for 20 years, should you not be on Medicare anyway??

Some years back the salaried retirees filed a class action lawsuit against GM for going back on their promises of free health health care for life. Gm stopped that long ago. Lost it at the highest level in court. I'm not scared for me because I'm pretty well set. My pension is a defined benefit guarantee trust which is backed by the Fed's. I'm concerned about the people still working inside the industry and the supporting industries. I'm listening as I write to Neil Cuvitto on Fox News. I don't think people have a clue as to the impact of the loss of the auto industry as we know it. It's been said there are six people working in the U.S. for every one in the auto industry; steel, rubber, glass, electrical and wire, carpet, fabric, nuts, bolts and screws, etc. Just read an article in the Tampa Tribune where they are against the bailout. They don't realize that the auto business could drive them out of business. No jobs, no money, no travel, no tourism, no ads in their paper for motels, hotels, lodging and meals. No ads for airfares or cruises. The general public just has no idea.

I feel sorry for everyone out there. In my 34 years with General Motors and in my 21st year of retireement, I've never been this concerned. I'm not talking about myself and my wife as we are in decent financial shape. I'm worried about my kids and grandchildren. Don't know how they will manage in the long term. Good luck!


Did you guys ever think that any of this would happen? the big difference is that the so-called "sweet deals" at GM were to be funded by the private sector, unlike the "sweet deals" that are funded by goverment. Maybe govt is the only folks who can offer such promises.........
 
the big difference is that the so-called "sweet deals" at GM were to be funded by the private sector, unlike the "sweet deals" that are funded by goverment. Maybe govt is the only folks who can offer such promises.........
Especially since GM can't raise taxes or force people to buy their products.
 
Originally Posted by ERD50
Oh boy, don't get better, make the other guy as bad as you. I feel better now.
tongue.gif
Hmmmmm... I was trying to NOT make good - bad value judgements in regard to pay and benefits, so let's not go there other than to say that having the UAW successfully organize the foreign owned car manufacturers operating here would go a long way towards making the D3 long term viable.... especially if the foreign companies were required to share in the legacy expenses.


Let's not get this thread moved to the soapbox...... ;)

Thank you. :)

Well, it wasn't intended as a 'soapy' comment, but as a money comment. Sorry if it came across that way. A fuller explanation:

What I am realizing more and more is that unsustainable practices are, well... unsustainable. They lead to problems down the road. Without painting the UAW as good/bad (trying to avoid the soap tainting), I will stand by my comment from a money viewpoint. Clearly, the UAW has used its power to bring compensation above what the free market offers. And these are the types of things that I see as unsustainable. The current situation is evidence of that, no?

So yes, we could level the playing field by artificially (unsustainable, IMO) bringing the other plants UP to the UAW level, rather than the other way around. But that means higher costs for US made cars for all US buyers. What unintended consequence will that bring? Fewer cars sold., and more imports seems obvious. That means fewer US jobs. Which could then be retaliated with tariffs on imports, which has further consequences in a global market. Those are all money issues.

IMO, if we are going to be evaluating and trying to understand the options here, we ought to understand the long term impact of those options. From what I see, any plan that includes bringing other free-market wages up to UAW levels will just have us back here discussing what went wrong down the road. Allowing the D3 to restructure under bankruptcy just might result in a leaner, meaner industry and *increase* value-added manufacturing jobs in the US. Yes, those jobs may be at a somewhat lower wage, but there may be more of them, in the long run.

-ERD50
 
Allowing the D3 to restructure under bankruptcy just might result in a leaner, meaner industry and *increase* value-added manufacturing jobs in the US. Yes, those jobs may be at a somewhat lower wage, but there may be more of them, in the long run.
-ERD50

The crux of the matter, as I see it, is that restructuring under Chapter 11 cannot occur because of the product itself and the spending habits of the American public. This isn't an airline, where there are specific routes/services that can easily survive and thrive in a restructuring, or a large scale retailer, which can easily shed brand and product lines, or even a large scale manufacturing operation, which cas easily re-tool and retrofit itself. GM, Chrysler, or Ford are giant behemoths and they are more akin to Daewoo or Bethelhem Steel, entities that could not reorganize itself out of bankruptcy. They have bloated legacy costs, and are in a catch-22 situation: the most expedient way to get rid of retiree legacy costs, bloated wages, and generous pension plans is to have these items disaffirmed and pared down in bankruptcy, but bankruptcy itself might kill the company's products. It's like performing a surgical technique to get rid of an ailment when the technique will also stop the patient's heart beating!

I think the GM retiree who posted in this thread is right that the public is clueless as to the exact ramifications of a bankruptcy filing and the ensuing liquidation of a major player like GM. But once they get the clue, I bet there will be phobia and a further erosion of consumer confidence which will prolong the recession.
 
The govt is going to bailout the big 3. The big 3 is going to use these $ to keep their workers making cars. The gov'ts purpose after all was to save the big 3 workers jobs.

But the American (or world) public is not buying their cars, and the bailout will not help car sales. As soon (or before) the current bailout money runs out, the big 3 will be back for more money, because they are not making enough from sales to cover expenses.

Then what? Cant the gov't see that this won't work?
 
.... They have bloated legacy costs, and are in a catch-22 situation: the most expedient way to get rid of retiree legacy costs, bloated wages, and generous pension plans is to have these items disaffirmed and pared down in bankruptcy, but bankruptcy itself might kill the company's products. It's like performing a surgical technique to get rid of an ailment when the technique will also stop the patient's heart beating!

Sure, it not easy or pretty, but what is the alternative?

I agree with Ronstar's post just above. If we pump money in and they fail anyhow, we're back in the same boat.

People are afraid to buy from the D3 TODAY, because of uncertainty surrounding warranty support. There could be steps taken in a bankruptcy restructure that would help to assure product support - maybe that is something that the govt needs to back with dollars.

I think the GM retiree who posted in this thread is right that the public is clueless as to the exact ramifications of a bankruptcy filing and the ensuing liquidation of a major player like GM. But once they get the clue, I bet there will be phobia and a further erosion of consumer confidence which will prolong the recession.

I have two problems with that analysis:

One, it assumes a 'static model'. The real world is more dynamic - many of those jobs will be backfilled by demand for cars in general. The American car buying public will still be buying cars. So it is not so black and white that every job associated with the D3 just goes 'poof'. A bankruptcy restructure might be the best way to preserve the most jobs.

Two, as Ronstar's post says - if the bailout money just prolongs things rather than fix them, we will just be facing all these same issues down the road, probably in a very short while.

So while bankruptcy sure looks ugly, I fail to see how the alternatives are better.

-ERD50
 
Sen. Corker: Loan conditions must fix automakers' problems | The Detroit News | detnews.com

Senator Bob Corker is holding up the auto bailout because he has his own plan. Here is a quote from his article today, describing one aspect of his plan.

"Our role should be swift and simple and centered around two areas where we can force immediate and transformative change: addressing the unworkable capital and labor structures that cripple these companies. I cannot support the proposed loan package as written by Democrat lawmakers and the White House because it doesn't tackle these critical issues.

To that end, I have put forth several measures that need to occur for any government-backed loan to be successful:

• One, give existing bondholders 30 cents on the dollar to help reduce their overall debt load.
Etc."

My question- how can this be legal? Doesn't it turn the founding priciple of bankruptcy law on its head? Senior ogligations are to be paid in full before junior obligations get anything. I know that this is often negotiated down, but Corker is proposing that equity remain in the stock, while the bondholders be forced to accept 1/3 face. True, 1/3 of face would be a step up from the present, but a midstream rule change that in my opinion would permanently ruin the faith in formal rules that any financial system has to have.

In addition, I own some auto bonds and this would piss me off personally , as I took considerable risk and would barely break even under his proposal.

I really don't like the trend US has taken over the past 9 months. I'd rather it all crashed under the rules if that indeed would happen, and we sort out what we could.

I may move to Nevada and go with sports betting. So far at least they don't move the goal-line because the losing team feels bad. To hell with Washington.Ha


It's a little late to be calling for "legal" now, haha.
We tin-foil hat wearers could have used your help a while ago.
 
The govt is going to bailout the big 3. The big 3 is going to use these $ to keep their workers making cars. The gov'ts purpose after all was to save the big 3 workers jobs.

But the American (or world) public is not buying their cars, and the bailout will not help car sales. As soon (or before) the current bailout money runs out, the big 3 will be back for more money, because they are not making enough from sales to cover expenses.

Then what?

Then the government will give them more of our money.
 
I don't think people have a clue as to the impact of the loss of the auto industry as we know it. It's been said there are six people working in the U.S. for every one in the auto industry; steel, rubber, glass, electrical and wire, carpet, fabric, nuts, bolts and screws, etc. Just read an article in the Tampa Tribune where they are against the bailout. They don't realize that the auto business could drive them out of business. No jobs, no money, no travel, no tourism, no ads in their paper for motels, hotels, lodging and meals. No ads for airfares or cruises. The general public just has no idea.
ChrisC said:
I think the GM retiree who posted in this thread is right that the public is clueless as to the exact ramifications of a bankruptcy filing and the ensuing liquidation of a major player like GM. But once they get the clue, I bet there will be phobia and a further erosion of consumer confidence which will prolong the recession.
With all due respect, before you say 'we don't have a clue' and "the general public just has no idea," are you sure?

I have heard the 'as goes GM, so goes the country' but I think that was coined about 40-50 years ago when GM had 50% market share, the D3 (actually more than 3) had almost 100% of the domestic market, and the US was overwhelmingly a manufacturing economy - none of those are remotely true anymore. Just Google the phrase for updated views.

I have heard the '1 in 6/7/10 jobs in the US is tied to the D3' most of my life. Might have been true 40-50 years ago, who knows, but still? No question suppliers, dealers and the towns with large factories will be impacted, but I'd challenge you to show the ratio is still that high if it ever was. Far as I can tell there are about 150 million jobs in the US. You are saying 25 million people are employed directly or indirectly by the automakers, I find that hard to believe. GM and Ford employ 252K and 246K worldwide (verifiable), I don't know how many in the US. I'm told dealers employ the most between manufacturers, suppliers and deales. There are supposedly 6,500 GM dealers (verifiable), say 50 employees (estimate I heard) at each, that's 325K - double it to (generously) account for Ford & Chrysler and you have 750K. It's very hard to find exact numbers, the above is simply my best estimate. Say there are as many supplier employees as D3 workers - altogether that's 1.7 million employees. Where are the other 23 million? Maybe we should verify what the UAW and Michigan politicians want you to believe instead of assuming it's a fact before deciding your views on a bailout.

When Lehman failed they were larger than GM is today, but they were allowed to fail. The $130B market cap of Toyota today is far, far larger than than $2B GM, $7B Ford & $0.5B Chrysler (estimated since they are private) put together. BMW's $14B market cap is bigger than the D3 today at least!

And finally, I still don't get why the liquidation bankruptcy of one, say GM, leads inevitably to the failure of all three - that's unprecedented in industry as far as I know (give me an example if you have even one - not including industries that have failed because their product became obsolete). Prospective GM buyers would then buy something else, some a Chrysler or a Ford in some cases, so their revenues and financial health would improve. GM plants would close, GM dealers would close and some suppliers with a heavy reliance on GM would close, but Ford & Chrysler and their dealers, suppliers and towns would benefit to some extent (yes, some of the business would go to foreign carmakers, but not all). Some displaced GM employees might even find work at Ford or Chrysler. Who knows, if GM's volume was split between Chrysler and Ford, they might even get into the black without massive restructuring - short term as least.

It's not that the rest of us don't care about the auto industry or auto workers. But you can't ask the rest of us to subsidize them for wages and benefits that the rest of us lost long ago or never had, especially after decades of poor quality (yes, I know they're better now but it may be too late) and inferior products. And I never realized it until this year, but I'll say it directly, the Jobs Bank is an outrage - that has not helped the automakers cause. Everyone could see this problem coming, it's been written about forever, just Google and read. The economic downturn didn't cause it, it highlighted what everyone has known, but failed to act on for decades. You can blame management, the UAW, politicians and short sighted consumers - all will have to take the medicine to avoid collapse.

End of rant.
 
Back
Top Bottom