Text 29358, 239 rader
Skriven 2012-06-01 09:38:46 av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
  Kommentar till text 29326 av Roy Witt (1:387/22)
Ärende: The real free world..
=============================
Roy Witt wrote to Robert Bashe on Thursday May 31 2012 at 04:13:

RW>>> LOL! Tell that to the union goons in Germany who TRIED to tell GM
RW>>> that they couldn't close an Opel plant and move it to Poland...Many
RW>>> Poles will be enjoying new found employment thanks to stupid union
RW>>> goons, come 2014.

RB>> If I may say something here, being in the area and knowing something
RB>> about the subject...

RW> You're saying that you know more about it than Deutsch-Welle has
RW> reported on their website and newsletter?

Of course. Bochum is right next door to where I live. All you do is read the
national news.

RB>> The plant in question is in Bochum, a bit down the road from me, and
RB>> has had many financial problems over the years, not least because of
RB>> the fact that company policy is decided in the USA and not in
RB>> Germany. Opel used to be quite popular here, but has gone downhill
RB>> because the models simply didn't keep up with modern developments
RB>> such as those we see from companies like Toyota and Hyundai (or even
RB>> VW, BMW and Mercedes).

RW> In your opinion.

No, in the opinions of quite a number of people in the industry here in
Germany.

RB>> There were and are several reasons for this, one being the relatively
RB>> high wages and strict labor laws in Germany (not "union goons"),

RW> Unions are run by goons...labor laws are enforced by the state. That's
RW> how it works worldwide.

In the States. You have no idea what the situation is in Germany. The news
reports don't tell everything.

RB>> another the fact that GM siphons off the cash that would be needed
RB>> for model development instead of leaving it with Opel,

RW> Because Opels are designed in GM studios, located in the states. Even
RW> Japanese vehicles are designed in studios located in the states.

No, in this case you're dead wrong. Opels are designed in Germany. GM benefits
from the engineering done here. As for Japanese vehicles, it would depend what
you're talking about. Those made for sale in the USA may well be specially
designed for that market.

RB>> and a third the fact that Opel is artificially restricted in it's
RB>> markets by GM USA.

RW> I don't think so. GM owns Holden - Australia and those vehicles are
RW> sold worldwide.

The subject was Opel, not Holden, and...

RW> Opels are also sold here.

Maybe, but no longer by GM. Opel is restricted to western and central Europe.
Even eastern Europe, where their chances might be better, is off limits. Times
have changed since GM imported the Opel Kadett to the States to compete with
the VW Beetle.

RW> I suspect that they'll be made in China soon and sold worldwide, with
RW> a price that everyone can afford.

If GM sells Opel (I mean Adam Opel AG), that would be a possibility.

RB>> The places Opel could sell more cars are off limits to it, not
RB>> because of local policies, but because GM says "no".

RW> GM, like any other company in the world, should have a say so in where
RW> their products can be manufactured and sold. Just like VW manufactures
RW> in Mexico and Brazil and sells them to any market that they'll move
RW> in.

That's naturally another matter entirely.

RB>> So here you have a company that is being hamstrung by policies set
RB>> overseas, far from the local company, and quite a lot of employees -

RW> I guess you're not aware that 'overseas' companies do marketing
RW> research before they begin to export vehicles there. They use
RW> potentially (export market) local companies to do that research. The
RW> Japanese are famous for their market research practices.

GM is doing what GM thinks is best for GM, whatever effect that has on Opel
Germany. No question about that. But it doesn't make GM very popular in this
part of the world.

RB>> I think still around 20,000 at Bochum alone - who have already given
RB>> up benefits and accepted wage cuts several times to keep the plant
RB>> open and running, and now despite such sacrifices are seeing that
RB>> everything they have done is still not enough for GM USA.

RW> When a union and its workers affect the bottom line, GM, like any
RW> other company will find places with 'right to work' laws...

Roy, now you're talking about the States, not about Europe. There are no "union
shops" here and no "right to work laws" either. You get a job according to your
training and capabilities, and although there _are_ unions, only a minority of
employees actually belong to them. The situation here is totally different from
that in the States.

RB>> This is a pity, as Opel used to be one of the main German automakers,
RB>> along with VW, BMW and Mercedes - but those three are German
RB>> companies, with the policies set here.

RW> Each of which have assembly plants in the states as well as South
RW> America. They're tired of the labor unions and laws that favor unions.

And mainly, they're tired of paying German workers relatively high salaries in
expensive Euro, and then having to pay for shipping cars from Germany to the
States to be sold for cheap Dollars. So they manufacture where the cars are
bought and take advantage of the relatively cheap labor and the advantage of
the "hire and fire" mentality in the States. It's not easy to fire someone here
in Germany without some very good reason.

RW> I don't blame them, as union labor has taken a toll on GMs bottom line
RW> and the vehicles produced by labor unions is sub-par.

You're still speaking from an American point of view.

RW> Bottom line is a driving force that makes companies do what is needed
RW> for the company to survive...if it isn't profitable to make and sell
RW> in one place (Germany), the company will be looking for some place
RW> that is (Poland or China).

True, but there is such a thing as image, and GM's image in Germany is not the
best. Which is not really a negligible factor, as the Germans have more money
to buy cars than a lot of the other EU countries.

RB>> I can still remember the Nokia plant - also in Bochum, also a large
RB>> plant - being closed and the production transferred to Rumania,
RB>> similarly because of labor costs. That was only a few years back, and
RB>> cost Nokia dearly in the German market, one of the technology
RB>> highpoints of the continent.

RW> Fortunately for Nokia, their market has expanded from Rumania and soon
RW> from China into the American (north and south) and Asian markets,
RW> where they're very profitable. My newest cellphone is a Nokia.

They didn't "expand" into Romania, Roy. They built a plant there to take
advantage of the lower labopr costs, and have now shut it down after only a
couple of years.

And calling Nokia "very profitable" nowadays is ignoring the facts. As for your
cellphone, it depends on what you want to do. If you just want to phone, any
brand is OK. But there are apparently a lot of people around who like the bells
and whistles of the iPod & Co and are willing to pay big money for the fun.

RB>> And now... the Nokia plant in Rumania, almost brand new, is being
RB>> closed as well and all production trensferred to the far east. The
RB>> Rumanians are as unhappy about this as the Germans were, and are
RB>> demanding that government subsidies paid to Nokia be returned.

RW> Hopefully, Nokia will ignore all of that and make their move quickly,
RW> before German unions and labor laws send them down the drain.

Did you even read the above paragraph? The ROMANIAN government is demanding
return of the subsidies, and Nokia has long since left Germany. You're still
judging everything as if it were in the States.

RB>> Something like that could happen to GM, too, and if it does Opel cars
RB>> may eventually be made in Shanghai. But since their only markets, by
RB>> order of GM USA, are in central and western Europe,

RW> GM is looking for a market that can sell their products; China is a
RW> much faster growing economy than the EU, which is about to go belly up
RW> on its own.

;-) We were talking about Opel. And as for China, they have their problems,
too. You should look beyond Europe and see what's going on elsewhere.

RB>> the whole brand may eventually die. Or be sold off to die like Saab
RB>> and Volvo.

RW> Doubtful. There is plenty of market in Asia for small, fuel efficient
RW> cars that don't have to meet emission laws of the EU or the USA.

Again: ;-)))) The emission laws in the EU are comparable with those in
California, i.e. very strict indeed. And if GM would let Opel compete outside
of western and central Europe, the brand might really have a chance. But that's
just not the case.

RW> Opel can fit into that criteria very well.

Roy, you've never seen an Opel in your life if you believe that crap.

RB>> All that is quite an argument for local ownership and local policy
RB>> setting, since at least then any failure is clearly one of the local
RB>> management.

RW> GM has a much better grasp on it than you, I'm sure.

Maybe, but not better than local management, which is being ignored.

RB>> But just to finish up, this is not one of your typical union
RB>> disagreements that have developed in the States from time to time.
RB>> The matter isn't that simple.

RW> No one has said that it is...GM's bottom line drives the company to be
RW> profitable, not unions or German labor laws.

Get off the hype, will you? Germany is not the USA, and unions are not like
those in the States, nor are the laws comparable. Stop trying to equate the
States with Germany. The two just aren't comparable.

Just for your education, here's how things work in Germany.

Wage contracts are not set company by company, but industry-wide.
Representatived of the union or unions, the worker's councils (we have worker
participation laws in Germany) and employer associations meet and work out a
plan. Usually that goes something like: worker demands 6% increase across the
board, employers offer 2%. What finally emerges is something like: workers get
5% over a period of two years, and low-paid workers get a fixed-sum (not a
percentage) increase or one-time bonus.

Strikes can be called by the unions, but require a poll of union members. At
least 75% of the members muust vote for strike, and even if this happens, not
all plants in an industry are stuck, only selected ones to demonstrate the
determination of the workers. Then, if another offer is made by the employers,
there must, by law, be another poll of the union members. If 50% agree to the
new offer, the strike is ended. Note the difference between the percentage
required to call a strike and that required to end it.

I'm not sure whether non-union workers participate in such strikes, but assume
they usually do. In that case, they naturally receive no strike benefits, in
contrast to the union members. But strikes here are generally not particularly
lengthy, maybe a couple of weeks of threatening and a few strikes at key
plants, and then the parties agree to a compromise.

Generally, however, strikes are rare.

Cheers, Bob

--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-0613
 * Origin: Jabberwocky System - 02363-56073 ISDN/V34 (2:2448/44)