By on October 12, 2017

cami assembly factory

Talks between General Motors and Canadian union Unifor seem to have broken down after the automaker mentioned it might wind down production of the Chevrolet Equinox at the striking CAMI Assembly plant in Ingersoll, Ontario. Negotiators explained to the union that the cost of continuing the month-long strike would mean losing more business to Mexico, which has already been filling Canadian production gaps since before the strike began.

GM currently builds the popular Equinox at three North American facilities: the CAMI plant, and two Mexican plants. With a shrinking 41-day supply of rolling stock at the end of last month, the facilities located south of the border can’t produce an equivalent volume to the Canadian worksite. However, GM suggests that could change if Unifor doesn’t throw in the towel soon.

According to Reuters, the automaker is already planning how it could modify supplier logistics and heighten production capacity in Mexico. Unifor president Jerry Dias spilled the beans via a phone call.

“GM just told us today that they are going to ramp up production in Mexico,” he told Reuters on Wednesday. “They have declared war on Canada.”

Unifor is unlikely to bend. General Motors’ decision to shift assembly of the GMC Terrain from the CAMI plant to San Luis Potosí is one of the chief reasons the factory went on strike. Losing the Terrain to Mexico resulted in about 600 lost jobs and union employees immediately demanded the manufacturer promise Canada would be the primary assembly site for the Equinox. However, GM chose to spread that vehicle’s production between CAMI, Ramos Arizpe Assembly, and San Luis Potosí.

The CAMI plant was initially projected to build about 210,000 vehicles in 2018, while the two Mexican factories were estimated to build 150,000, according to AutoForecast Solutions. While that’s likely enough to cover demand of the SUV in North America, every month of production lost in Canada runs the risk of creating shortages. At best, GM probably has another month before entering dangerous territory with its Equinox supply.

Dias indicated he will not call off the strike. “This is the big issue,” he said. “Once we solve this, everything else will fall into place.”

The Unifor president claims GM only cares about profit and has no vested interest in protecting Canadian or American jobs. “This is about autoworkers in Mexico making $2 an hour [and] the movement of good paying middle-class jobs to Mexico,” he said.

Currently attending the NAFTA talks in Washington, Dias faulted the agreement for some of Canada’s industrial losses to Mexico. However, GM also has to cope with NAFTA’s uncertain future. While the company clearly has its bottom line in mind, it did invest $800 million to retool the CAMI plant for the Equinox’s third generation. There is little reason to assume it will abandon Canadian production in the near future. But with so much SUV production now shifting to Mexico, Unifor’s fears aren’t unfounded.

Nobody has any idea if NAFTA will even exist in the next few years. As a result, unions want reassurance and automakers want to remain flexible.

[Image: General Motors]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

60 Comments on “GM to Union: End Strike or Automaker Will ‘Wind Down’ Equinox Production...”


  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    As I’ve said before, GM can close the plant, and the union can declare victory.

    “They have declared war on Canada.” No, they didn’t. Unifor declared war on GM, and will destroy themselves in the process.

  • avatar
    Pig_Iron

    Unifor should dig in its heels, and not back down, just like it stuck to its guns to the bitter end at EMD, because that worked out so well.
    :-(

  • avatar
    sensiblebuyer

    Typical Canadians, throwing tantrums when they don’t get their way. Should be thankful GM is even providing them with good paying jobs. This is self-inflicted, don’t wanna lose jobs to Mexico? Stop complaining and get your butt back to work. These workers seem to think they’re the only ones capable of doing the job, Mexico is also capable.. so is every other place. The ungratefulness is absolutely unbelievable.

    • 0 avatar
      mikey

      “Typical Canadians, throwing tantrums when they don’t get their way” I guess Im not a typical Canadian ?

      I watch the news and see an “anti Trump” rally ,and see people waving placards, and stomping their feet, and being generally belligerent . Am I supposed to think “typical American ? ”

      I don’t think that at all..I’m certainly not going to judge a whole country and culture on the actions of a few.

      • 0 avatar
        sensiblebuyer

        Just speaking from experience, I’ve found it to always be the same story with them; very arrogant. Didn’t mean to offend, but what’s GM supposed to do when demand for the Equinox is reaching record levels, especially in Canada. It’s not a story of a personal attack on Ingersoll.. GM simply needs to keep up with demand and their only viable option right now is Mexico. I’m considering a third-gen Equinox myself

        • 0 avatar
          redapple

          AUTO Start Stop Is the deal killer for me. Drove one last week

          #2- Real Narrow between my shoulder and the B pillar. Passenger side is worse (can that be true???).

          EQuinox is off my list. Previous gen was better.

          CRV or Forester are my top 2 I m looking at.

          • 0 avatar
            sensiblebuyer

            I currently drive a ’14 Malibu with the stop/start technology and I don’t mind it at all. I’ve heard endless complaints that it never activates or makes too much noise or even jolts the car forward when the engine powers back on. Never experienced any of these problems, as mine is smooth and barely noticeable. I’m hoping this is the case on the Equinox too…or I’ll have to go with my second choice which I’m hesitant about; the Edge, not sure if I’m ready for the futuristic spaceship look just yet

      • 0 avatar
        sgtjmack

        Well, since a lot of those “protesters” are illegal immigrants, it is hard to say who you are generalizing about…

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        Now that General Motors has been bailed out of complete bankruptcy/insolvency (by American AND Canadian taxpayers) MULTIPLE TIMES due to a culture (still ongoing) of massive, deep, executive and management gross incompetence and recklessness, General Motors is free to move American AND Canadian assembly and other jobs down Mexico way, or worse yet, to China (hello Cadillac CT6, Buick Envrision, etc, with many more to come), Thailand, Vietnam, Mongolia, Uzbekistan, Myanmar, India, Kabul, etc.

        Maybe Toyota or VW or Mercedes or Hyundai will buy that plant and hire Canadians to build vehicles there assembled from Canadian-fabricated parts and components.

  • avatar
    kcflyer

    It seems to me the union loses a little leverage with each passing day. Eventually GM will have sufficient infrastructure in place in Mexico to render the Canadian plant unnecessary. It’s a shame and I feel bad for the employees and the community. The smart play for the rank and file would be to look for ways to innovate and make their plant and product more efficient. I wish them good luck.

    • 0 avatar
      sgtjmack

      G.M. Can simply open a new plant in a State that doesn’t have a heavy pro-union attitude, like Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Florida, both Carolinas etc. Just ask Boeing how it is working out for them. They did exactly that and still received an excellent product at a little lower cost when it comes to time to production.

      • 0 avatar
        volvo

        That was part of an earlier question I asked. Can GM do that or do existing agreements preclude opening a non union shop in Canada or the US?

        Boeing would have different agreements with a different union

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          @volvo – I doubt that GM could open a non-union plant in Canada. I do believe that Toyota Motor Manufacturing Canada (TMMC) is non-union. That is surprising since Canada has a strong social/political left.

          There has been a marked decline in the size of union membership in manufacturing in Canada. That has more to do with a shrinking workforce than any anti-union sentiments.

      • 0 avatar
        George B

        I can’t imagine the UAW would allow GM to have non-UAW plants in the US, but not all UAW locals are equally confrontational. GM kept the Arlington, TX plant and closed down the Willow Run plant because the workers at the Arlington plant were much more flexible on job classification and work hours. https://www.deseretnews.com/article/212006/FLEXIBILITY-SAVES-1-GM-PLANT-FROM-AX.html

  • avatar
    pmirp1

    It is amazing to me that Toyota, Honda, Subaru, have plants in USA, and employees are happy, and don’t strike.

    GM and Ford and Chrysler-Fiat are always under threat of strikes by unions that don’t understand their legacy costs already made GM declare bankruptcy previously.

    As long as unions exist up north(In Canada and America), American car companies continue to move operations to Mexico. Meanwhile, Japanese and Germans move more to southern states in America, where weather is more temperate, cost of living is lower, and labor doesn’t have the unrealistic expectations built upon a legacy where GM and Ford had the market mostly to themselves. Time for GM and Ford to try moving south.

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      They had southern plants. They were unionized from way back. Then states like Georgia rolled out the red carpet for Kia and other foreign automakers, while basically telling Ford and GM to pound sand. That’s why the Fusion is built in Mexico, and not Atlanta.

      • 0 avatar
        gmichaelj

        yes, it is amazing to think that GM had 2 ATL plants and Ford had 1 as recently as 90’s (I dont recall when GM closed theirs).

        Anyway, I think part of the closures was distance – what advantage would F/GM have in producing cars several hundred miles away in the same country? Sure is a lot easier for Management to control/look-in on functions nearby same day.

        Although I am sure State and local politicians took F/GM them for granted, I can tell you from living in ATL that the politicians paid no political price for losing the plants. The “failure” was seen as “natural”: the Americans were un-competitive and had to leave. I dont recall any serious discussion of concessions/tax breaks to keep them in GA. Come on, a trip to Detroit isn’t as cool as a trip to Seoul or Tokyo.
        —-
        Southerners getting jobs at Foreign-owned plants don’t know the pros/cons of working in a UAW plant, and would only hear about how inefficient UAW plants were from the past.

        Plus, the jobs at Foreign-owned plants are certainly better than a local construction / day care center job. So of course they’d be happy with that.

        • 0 avatar
          redapple

          GM Doraville closed in 2008. I worked there in 1997 tooling the plant for the M VAN. General Assy.

          YOu are correct. Distance to main suppliers killed it.

          PS- I ve been to Mexico 80 times. They have new plants, hungry workers (skills can be meh), and their young engineers are very good (if they stay focused on the correct task and can shift gears when needed.).

          This is why the giant sucking sound is REAL (ref. H Ross Perot)

          Unifor is applying 1965 tactics to a 2018 marketplace. I predict unemployment in your future. Good riddance to bad rubbish.

  • avatar
    ScarecrowRepair

    “The Unifor president claims GM only cares about profit and has no vested interest in protecting Canadian or American jobs.”

    No shit, Sherlock. People invest their money in something to get more money back.

    Did you take your union job for free? Did your union workers take their jobs because they care about management’s jobs?

    The purpose of a job is to make money to buy things. People take all sorts of jobs they don’t like because they get more money, just as investors invest in companies they don’t particularly like because the return is higher. I have no doubt there are plenty of investors who would love to invest in cuddly kittens for hurricane victims, and plenty of people who would love a job cuddling kittens with hurricane victims. But the pay sucks.

  • avatar
    Car Guy

    Unions are a relic of a bygone era. 80-100 years ago factories were very dangerous and unions were justified to protect people. Today, there are countless workplace regulations and laws to protect workers and unions are all about entitlement and promoting left wing political parties. Plenty of automotive factories work just fine without unions and time and time again have voted to keep them out. Time for GM to pull the plug……….

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      I agree with your sentiment on unions. I live within reasonable driving distance of several automotive plants down here in the Dirty South. I don’t regularly hear or read about workers getting their leg chopped off or being crushed by a robotic arm any more often than you guys up north do about Union plants. The workers down here are happy with their pay, their safety, and their benefits. If they weren’t, they would have voted the union in, despite the alleged tactics by the automakers to discourage such. When I read about the union accusing Nissan and others of such, I laugh, its like a kid trying to blame their own self-imposed misfortune on a “mean teacher” or other outlandish conspiracy that supposedly “explains” why they failed a test after not studying.

    • 0 avatar
      Whatnext

      GM is a relic of a bygone era, when North Americans had little choice and had to put up with their dismal engineering and pathetic quality of the Big 3. The sooner the end comes for these corporate welfare bums the better.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      @Car Guy – If one looks at the balance of power between employer and worker, the balance is always in favour of the employer even with various workplace safety rules and rules covering employment rights. Unions tend to balance out the equation. We see problems arise when ever one side has more power. One could argue that there was a time auto unions became too powerful but that would be an appropriate question for someone like Mikey to answer.

      “Left wing” anything in the USA is truly an oxymoron. Post WWII communist/socialist paranoia as well as anti-left sentiments fueled by those who actually run the country have ensured that what is seen as “left” is by definition centrist.
      Both political parties in the USA are bought and paid for by the ruling class. The whole “drain the swamp, put the moron in power” populist movement is an attack upon the ruling class but from the right wing side since “feel the Burn” is seen as “commie” and was a threat to the ruling class’s preferred puppet aka Hillary Clinton.

  • avatar
    mikey

    Three weeks ago, had a bad feeling on this one..I predicted “it could get ugly”. Now its ugly.

    Make no mistake GM was not caught by surprise..Those days are long gone for GM. The decision to “let them walk” was made at the highest levels of management, and was made months ago. While Mary B. hails from from the fairer sex, she figuratively owns a pair of big brass ones…She won’t cave…Unlike past experience, GM now holds the gun.

    Matt mentioned the unknown place that NAFTA is going..I believe that GM is taking a calculated risk with that one ?

    What I do know is that we are now in week four..This isn’t the 70’s or the 90’s. Today folks are carrying huge mortgages , credit card debt, car payments etc etc..Canada is not a cheap place to live. If the rank and file, have a few bucks in savings (experience has taught me.. many don’t) how long will that money last ?

    With this latest news from UNIFOR, will solidarity begin to crack? Can Jerry Dias rally the troops have a few “rah rah” meetings ? Rah rah and rhetoric won’t cover the grocery bill.

    I guess we’re going to see what sort of stuff Jerry Dias and UNIFOR are made of..Throw the towel in, and face an uncertain future ? Or stick it out and face a certain future ?

    Were I in Jerrys position, I wouldn’t sign a tentative agreement,not with the present GM offer..I would call a meeting and take it to the rank and file..No B.S, no sell job, facts only. Just present GM’s position to the rank and file, let them decide.

    • 0 avatar
      alff

      A logical approach that would likely spell the end for Jerry.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      Good summary, mikey. Always appreciate your input.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      CAW has been struggling for a long time. The CAW merged with the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers unions for a reason. . UNIFOR is the largest private sector union in Canada but members are mortgaged to the eyeballs and will not support a general strike.

      The death of NAFTA will put more pressure on the auto companies but most experts feel that the auto companies would rather pay tariffs and import from more “friendly” countries than deal with MAGA or big unions.

  • avatar
    MrGrieves

    What’s to keep GM from shipping all the brand-new tooling they just invested in at CAMI down to Mexico? And expanding the production down there? A lack of floor space in the factory?

    • 0 avatar
      JohnTaurus

      That’s the question Unifor should be asking themselves. A lack of floor space can be solved, and the company will profit more in the long term.

      As I said before, they act as though GM needs them more than they need GM. They can keep thinking that way, all the way to the breaking point where GM has enough of their $hit and permanently moves the jobs to Mexico.

      If I was Unifor, I’d go sit down with GM and figure out how to save face while putting the workers back on the assembly line before lunch tomorrow.

    • 0 avatar
      ClutchCarGo

      From what I’ve been reading about the (floundering) NAFTA negotiations, Trump may soon have what he needs to declare NAFTA dead and to pursue new trade deals with Mexico and Canada independently. In that scenario I would expect Canada to come out as a much better place to build cars, and Mexico manufacturing in general would suffer. GM expanding production in Mexico is a gamble that Trump can’t/won’t make that happen.

  • avatar
    Arthur Dailey

    Unifor has overplayed their hand here. Possibly believed that the POTUS would initiate programs to prevent auto manufacturing jobs being moved to Mexico?

    If I were Jerry Dias, I would accept GM’s offer for a 1 or 2 year term. Then wait and see how the NAFTA and other negotiations play out.

    Perhaps Mexico will be ‘negotiated’ out of the deal?

    After all regardless of what state they are located in or whether or not they are unionized American and Canadian auto workers can never compete against Mexican labour rates. Who would be willing to accept a job in North America (not including Mexico) at $2.00 per hour?

    As for unions being outdated or no longer needed, that is a canard. Each and every day, large profitable corporations are found to be in non-compliance or contravention of employment laws. Each and every day, workers are injured. Workplace related fatalities, from injury and illness average one per day in Canada.

    Without the counterbalance of unions, management would have no need to improve working conditions and would have an even greater freehand in rescinding regulations that protect workers.

    The smartest organizations, defuse the need for their workers to unionize by offering compensation, and working conditions that are competitive with those in union workplaces.

    • 0 avatar
      mason

      I’ve spent the last 20 years all over the country working as a mechanical contractor in industrial manufacturing (primarily chemical plants). Unions have squat to do with work place safety. It’s called OSHA. Many facilities have voluntary programs in place that align their safety standards with OSHA. Many go above and beyond. The only thing unions are good for is finding the loopholes to get out of doing a job. All in the name of “safety” (insert sarcasm).

      • 0 avatar
        Arthur Dailey

        @Mason, you may be right in regards to what you have seen in the USA. However all objective studies state the opposite. In Ontario unions actually help to fund a world renowned centre for occupational health and safety training and research.

        And with over 4 decades of ‘consulting’ and ‘enforcement’ experience, I would also state that the presence of a collective agreement makes a considerable difference, as it provides workers with more protection if they point out problems, refuse unsafe work (which is their legal right), provides more time and money for training and generally strengthens the Joint Health & Safety Committee.

      • 0 avatar
        redapple

        This man is CORRECT!!

    • 0 avatar
      ToddAtlasF1

      “Unifor has overplayed their hand here. Possibly believed that the POTUS would initiate programs to prevent auto manufacturing jobs being moved to Mexico?”

      Unlike loyal members of our one political party with two faces, President Trump doesn’t discriminate between countries with organized labor and countries without organized labor. He can distinguish between US manufacturing and ‘North American’ manufacturing just fine. What’s good for Canada is only important when it is good for the US as well. Hoping that NAFTA talks are going to benefit people who chose Castro’s illegitimate son to represent them is folly.

      • 0 avatar
        Arthur Dailey

        @ToddAtlas: think that you have things reversed. Since Canada is the #1 supplier to the USA of petroleum and other precious natural resources, then perhaps you should reconsider the economic relationship between the two nations.

        Canada has resources and raw materials that the USA requires. However the USA does not manufacture/produce anything that Canadians cannot source from other nations.

        And Canada protects the USA’s northern border. Without a free and democratic Canada, even contemplate closing two borders when it cannot even close one?

    • 0 avatar
      I_like_stuff

      “Without the counterbalance of unions, management would have no need to improve working conditions and would have an even greater freehand in rescinding regulations that protect workers.”

      Nonsense. Management has an incentive because good employees will go to where working conditions are good, pay is good, benefits are good, etc. It’s this thing called the free market. You might have heard of it. If Company A offers crap pay/conditions and Company B offers good pay/conditions, where do you think the best employees will go? Hmmm….. And what do you think will happen long term to Company A when it can’t attract any good employees? Hmmm….you don’t need a PhD in economics to figure it out,

      Less than 10% of the workforce in the US is unionized. Yet somehow, the other 90% manages to survive.

      Unions are the embodiment of socialism/communism. Everyone is equal regardless of ability. It destroys any incentive to work harder/better. Why put in the extra effort when I know as a union member, I get the same stuff as the guy next to me who phones it in?

      Yes 100 years ago there was a need for unions. Things change. It’s time to get rid of these business killing entities.

      • 0 avatar
        Arthur Dailey

        @ILike: Thanks for my laugh of the day!

        You talk about a ‘free market’ in labour, but then espouse tariffs on foreign goods. That is called talking out of both sides of the same mouth. Either you believe in free markets or you believe in protectionism.

        As the majority of new jobs are precarious, when income disparity is at an alltime high, when the USA has been surpassed on most ‘livability’ scales, then obviously things are not working.

        Then when you review economic surveys and find that American standards of living and disposable income peaked the same year that union participation peaked, it gives those who view things objectively pause to reflect on just what might have gone wrong.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        “Unions are the embodiment of socialism/communism.”

        There it is.

        I was wondering when that card would get played.

  • avatar
    volvo

    I think that no matter the outcome of these negotiations it is over for unionized GM production in Canada. After this experience GM will look at a 5-10 year window of moving production to Non-unionized plants.

    I provided a link a while ago to the most recent 2100+ page Ford/UAW contract. Who needs that trouble?

    I am not sure the hold the UAW has on the “big 3” in Canada and the USA but there must be something that precludes their opening a non union plant in the US or Canada so for logistical reasons they are left with Mexico.

    Would it be possible for the workers at the CAMI plant to vote the union out and then become non union employees of GM? I imagine that not being held hostage to strikes is at least as important to GM as the hourly wage they are paying.

    • 0 avatar
      Arthur Dailey

      Strikes only occur if the majority of votes cast by members of the bargaining unit, endorse a strike. If they vote against it, then no strike.

      • 0 avatar
        volvo

        Actually that is good information. I feel better knowing the workers are masters of their fate and choosing this path.

        • 0 avatar
          Arthur Dailey

          Also they can only strike after the collective agreement has expired and conciliation attempted using a government appointed conciliator.

          @TCCRagg is correct in that the number of bargaining unit members who vote is too often far too small.

          Members of the bargaining unit do not have to join the union, however they still have to pay union dues, as their working conditions are set by the collective agreement.

      • 0 avatar
        TCragg

        The sad reality (at least in my experience over 25 years working with various private and public sector unions in Ontario and Alberta, including three strikes), is that a small (call it radical or looney) minority of union members actually attend meetings, yet their votes ultimately determine events like strikes, arbitrations, etc. Ontario is a closed-shop jurisdiction, so the average person who simply wants to go to work and earn a living is forced to be a member of the bargaining unit as a condition of employment. It’s easy to say that if more of them just showed up for a vote, the result would be different, but the reality is that the average union member is not all that engaged in the union process. Most of them don’t want to be walking the picket line, but the consequences of not doing so are serious for them.

  • avatar
    Gardiner Westbound

    The writing on the wall is saying goodbye.

  • avatar
    tomLU86

    It’s interesting that the “pro-business” Southern states gave hundreds of millions in breaks and infrastructure to lure transplants.

    Some estimate that the giveaways amount to $200-300k per job.

    Yet Ford and GM had 3 plants in greater Atlanta, and probably got next to nothing.

    Also, the unionized workers of the Detroit carmakers set the floor for non-union workers. So these non-union workers benefit from the existence of a union, without paying for it. If the transplants get too stingy, the workers can unionize.

    GM and Unifor/UAW’s leaders certainly deserve each other.

  • avatar
    I_like_stuff

    The sooner unions die out the better.

  • avatar

    “However, GM also has to cope with NAFTA’s uncertain future.”
    I guess I missed the announcement that Mexico was no longer part of NAFTA.

  • avatar
    danio3834

    Ontario in particular is becoming a less and less attractive place to manufacture, GM would probably love to shut down CAMI. It’s up to Mr. Dias to decide how easy that decision will be for them.

  • avatar
    Joss

    GM & UNIFOR deserve each other to hell with them both.

  • avatar
    Jerome10

    Ultimately, the Americans and Canadians should be arm in arm over NAFTA, ignoring the entire union argument.

    At the end of the day, if you can go to Mexico, and pay garbage wages, with minimal safety standards, and dump stuff into the air and water for minimal cost, and ship the finished goods to the USA and Canada with no tariff, the USA and Canada are ALWAYS going to lose this deal. When it is time to build a new plant, or raze or modernize any facility in the USA or Canada, Mexico is going to look extremely attractive. Sure there are things like crime and gangs in Mexico or other political issues, but economically, the USA and Canada will never ever ever compete with Mexico on wages or safety or pollution regulations.

    To me, this is the disgusting part of all this. It has nothing to do with the unions. I understand the arguments for open/free trade, efficiencies, cost of goods etc. But without tariffs that compensate for the lack of decent wages, social safety nets, workplace safety, and pollution, goods made in Mexico, China, Vietnam, (insert other 3rd world country here) will always be cheaper. There is no level playing field, there is no competition based on efficiency, hard work, work ethic or any of that garbage.

    Level the playing field in Mexico by bringing them up to 1st world (USA/Canada) standards, or there MUST be tariffs on Mexican goods to level the playing field.

    Without this, Americans and Canadians will continue to lose manufacturing jobs.

    Really, I think I’d be fine with a CAFTA agreement. Americans and Canadians really are awfully close on living standards, safety, emissions. This would truly be about as free-trade as one could get, and a big benefit to both sides I’d think. But Mexico has to either come up to those standards, or they gotta go and be subject to import duties.

    I feel for the workers at the plant. At the same time I completely understand GM’s perspective. And if you’ve got the Mexican cheap carrot dangling in front of you, you’ve gotta do what is best for the company from a financial perspective. I really cannot blame GM or anyone else for going to Mexico in the current environment.

  • avatar
    abitolder

    This is not a union only thing. I think we must all take a stand against GM here, the local Buick GMC dealer in Oshawa has about 200 trucks on the lot, all but 3 are made in Mexico. A full line of about 20 new Terrain’s all built in Mexico. Several Envisions from China. The absurd thing is they are all being sold to current and former GM employees. Canada must take a stand here against GM, let us start by not purchasing any vehicles whose VIN number starts with a ‘3’ for Made in Mexico or ‘L’ for made in China. There are lots of vehicles sold here that are made in Canada and the USA, and I have no problem supporting those manufacturers, but by purchasing from mexico or China you are cutting your own throats.

    • 0 avatar
      redapple

      I AGREE. I would avoid extremely a HENCHO EM MEXICO VEHICLE. I blew Jack B some S*** on his recent Silverado purchase.

      But buying a China made car? It is like intentionally giving your child an illness. Your future destruction is assured. Some way or another.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • YeOldeMobile: But a Mercedes can do the ‘Ring AND be luxurious! Or at least, that’s the counter-argument.
  • slavuta: Elantra Sport brakes feel super good. Even better than 2011 Mazda3 and on par with 2017 Mazda6. I had 1990...
  • sirwired: I’m surprised by this. The CR-V is a well-received and fresh design, while the RAV4 is pretty far...
  • YeOldeMobile: 1. I actually saw a new Lincoln Continental being driven by a little old lady the other day at the...
  • IBx1: Nail. Head. Hit.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States