…and not gained them one half of a percent of market share over their competition.

When it comes to bosses, I vote with my feet. I have been my own boss, but figured out I was really working for the government. I plan to go back to work for someone else and let them play with Uncle Sugar and the 50 dwarves. I will make more money without having to spend so much on lawyers and accountants who don’t know their jobs worth a flip. If you think your boss is a pain in the butt, try dealing with KPMG. They treat you like crap, and you get to pay them!

MPLS,

I call Bullshit.

“The NLPC is admittedly anti-union – therefore not disguised. Furthermore, fighting union power and influence is only one of their many activities. ”

The NLPC “other activities” that you allude to all all right wing politics. They have a partisan agenda but there websites tries to create the impression they just care about “ethics” and “public good”. An organization is not a good source for information about what they clearly view as “evil”. It appers slanted to me you use them as a reference and attempt create the impression that that represents fair and balanced journalism.

“Hugo Chavez was elected democratically (at least once). If your comment is meant to shine a positive light on union leadership, it won’t pass the sniff test.”

My point was not to “shine a positve light on union leadership.” Union leadership within the UAW and outside it often seems incompetent to me. Bosses are not elected. Did you elect your boss at work( presuming you are not yourself the boss). This descprition of union leadership is, in my opinion, unfairly perjorative and misleading.

“If you want to defend the unions or discredit their foes, you will have to do better.”

You are correct Landcrusher and two points. I am a proud and active union member myself who does attemtp to defend the labor movment. Also, I will certainly “have to do better” if I want to change any minds on this blog.

I call Bullshit.

The NLPC is admittedly anti-union – therefore not disguised. Furthermore, fighting union power and influence is only one of their many activities.

Hugo Chavez was elected democratically (at least once). If your comment is meant to shine a positive light on union leadership, it won’t pass the sniff test.

If you want to defend the unions or discredit their foes, you will have to do better.

Bingo, we have a winner!

Anyone who has spent time in Europe actually talking to Europeans will note that virtually all Europeans who can afford to do so supplement their government coverage with private insurance.

People also forget that one reason unions were less than enthusiastic about then-First Lady Hillary Clinton’s national healthcare proposal was because it didn’t offer benefits as generous as their current plans.

They (retirees) don’t want it they want their current excellent gold plated private health plan which is breaking GM’s back. Its not the current workers its the retirees healthcare that is breaking GM. Toyota also pays for private health insurance for their US workforce but not for their retirees.

People somehow have this notion that a national health care plan will have the same coverage and benefits etc that the best private medical care can offer. However, whenever they are offered a national government health plan like the VA or Medicare, people go running and complaining.

Its as if my company provides a Mercedes Benz for a company car and then assuming that if the government buys everyone a car that I will still get a car like a Mercedes. I won’t.

I am not arguing for or against a national health plan but if it comes to pass it will resemble the VA or Medicare more than the excellent coverage that the UAW retirees currently enjoy.

That is what I find ironic in the clamoring for a national health plan by the UAW and or their retirees.

Actually S. Lin it probably is the answer. The national systems in many other countries take the health care burden off the expenses of the manufactures and businesses in their countries. We quickly look at the taxes paid in countries with national health care systems and think we don’t want to pay those kind of tax rates but we in the U.S. fail to add our low taxes and the high medical costs our whole system does pay. I bet we pay more overall.

I believe that 1 out of every 3 dollars we pay in medical costs goes to the insurance companies.

Finally before you think government is inefficient stop to think of how many civil servants earn the amounts of money paid to insurance executives and I don’t know of any CSs with golden parachutes.

If not, how is that fair to the other investors? Furthermore, what does that mean to their compensation packages? Are they using this as an excuse to get more cash rather than useless stocks and options?

Something is ooohhhh so smelly in Michigan.

Is this right? About 6 retired UAW for every employed UAW members. No wonder the wages are going lower…That is a lot of, um, overhead to carry…Almost slave-like.

The GM/UAW contract.

The “excessive” wages and benefits that the UAW receives is I guess at an end. Finally, one the concerns that Mr. Farago has been addressed. I am surprised though that he was only concerned that GM does not have the money to fund the VEBA. He missed one importaant point. The UAW new hires that may begin to be hired in a year or 2 will not be able to afford teh cars they help make. Being competetive won’t help much if your own employees can’t afford your product.

One of the recurrent themes on TTAC seems to be how worthless some of these “COTY” awards turn out to be.

And COTY awards are given without consideration to reliability… which is something consumers have come to prize very highly indeed. The Malibu might be a great car but the consumer won’t consider it “reliable” without considerable history.

As for the general attitude of uninformed buyers…

IF (big IF, there) the new GM products are the equal of Honda and Toyota for reliability, durability and customer satisfaction, as Bob Lutz claims, it’s still going to take years for this improvement to be demonstrable to people who take it seriously.

Even with improved reliability, dealer and manufacturer stonewalling on common problems – those stories get around, too.

I’m one who’s going to wait and it’s not because I’m uninformed; I’m justifiably skeptical. And I don’t know how long I’ll wait, either, as I’m not sure I’ll trust the standards of the current GM buyer to reflect the standard I expect the car to satisfy.

As an example, if you read reviews on Edmunds (I find them highly entertaining and informative), you’ll often read about domestic brake rotors wearing out well within the warranty period but “that’s a wear item,” so it’s never covered.

Well, OK, I guess I would accept that… once upon a time. We used to do pads every 25K miles and rotors at every 50K and I thought it was OK. This was on Volvos, which I dearly loved and thought were satisfying in every way.

Then we started buying Toyotas (Volvo didn’t make a minivan – big mistake). My Toyotas run on their first pads well beyond 60K miles, possibly routinely to 100K and the rotors don’t go until you hit get well beyond 100K, either. It’s not just the considerable savings, there are plenty of things I enjoy more than hanging around the brake shop waiting for my car.

So, I look at the Edmunds reviews and I have to wonder if GM owners cheerfully tolerate levels of reliability and service that Toyonda owners would find unacceptable.

TTAC also published warranty expense charts a while back. Toyota and Honda lead the pack, with levels half those of GM and Ford. Somehow, I just don’t believe the domestics magically and dramatically improve when the warranty period runs out.

Yes. It’s only their dealers who struggle mightily due to point saturation. Deals start at invoice and go down from there. Doesn’t help either that their pick up and large SUV are the most gas guzzling in their respective class.

Many people say that GM is a big ship which needs more time to turn around. GM has been in turnaround for 5 years, exactly how much time is needed? Nissan turned a profit in under a year and was fully turned around in 3 years and all of this was done with upper managers’ job on the line, too (Nissan fails, we ALL fail). Like GM, Nissan had loads of sub-divisions, branches around the world and a bloated bureaucracy. So, I’m sorry, that isn’t a valid excuse.

I think, ultimately, it’s the sense of entitlement which has caused GM’s downfall:

UAW’s entitlement to benefits with zero flexiblity.
Management’s entitlement to golden parachutes, regardless of performance.
GM’s belief that their market share was what they were entitled to.
GM’s sense of entitlement to be regarded as a maker of reliable vehicles without feeling the need to prove it.

Now with regards to this VEBA, I agree that this is a disaster waiting to happen. And the sad thing is, I feel sorry for the rank and file who are entrusting their future to people with a track record in corruption. How would you feel if you reached retirement age and the following conversation happened?

Retiree: Great! My working life over! Now, if you’ll pay me my pension and benefits, I’ll be on my way.
UAW President: Sorry, there’s no money for your pension and benefits.
Reitree: What do you mean?!
UAW President: Well, due to a mixture of mis-management, embezzling and neptotism, we lost the lost! Sorry! We tried out best!
Retiree: Oh no! What am I going to do?! I’ve got to carry on working! And you’ve lost your pension and benefits, too!
UAW President: Oh no. I said there was no money for YOUR pension!
(UAW President jumps in his car and drives off)
Retiree: Is he driving a Lexus……?!

If you think it’s bad here, check out the article comments on the new Pontiac G8 at Edmunds.com. I’ve never seen so much negativity; it’s as if these people actively want someone to hate. Edmunds just wrote two gushing reviews of the car, but you could swear that they’d called it the next Sunfire from the temperament of their readership.

It really is wearing to see a manufacturer try so hard to get it right, only to be panned for their efforts. When I first discovered sites like Autoextremist, I was convinced I’ve discovered truth amidst the drivel spooned out by the buff rags. After two years of that, I’m now convinced that there isn’t any truth. Everyone has their own slant. The question is, what do you want to read?

To their credit, TTAC is closer to the middle than most. Given GM’s financial state, I’m not quite ready to claim that “Deathwatch” is an inappropriate moniker.

A handful of great products isn’t enough to push back against the tsunami of mediocre ones ($3k back on the Pontiac G6, this weekend’s paper), along with a mountain of debt, an ever-increasing cost of raw materials, too many employees, a [Detroit 3] reliance on hit products which may not ever materialize, and finally the large number of dealerships which were just right for a company which had 50% of the US market long ago.

GM is not your corner latte shop. It’s a huge undertaking, spanning continents. I’d say that the GMDW series has earned its right to exist for a variety of reasons:

1. It’s proven to be quite prescient, in view of others who have taken corporate spin at face value.

2. If all automakers were underperforming, we could claim the series is excessive, but we have automakers both small and soon to be larger than GM who have performed brilliantly during this same period. GM’s response has been that these other automakers are clueless, out of touch, lack insight into the American autobuyer’s psyche and don’t care about the climate, global warming, rising gasolilne prices or environmental awareness. Take your pick.

3. It’s a supertanker, it’s really hard to turn, and if RF is right, they have been steaming ahead at full speed straight into uncharted waters, their backs turned against the direction of travel.

The series is what convinced me that this site really was dedicated to The Truth about Cars, as RF is in this to make money, I’m pretty certain he could have attracted ad dollars by being a little less outspoken on the topic, he’s chosen not to, trusting that in the end, the truth will win.

I think there’s room for another couple of hundred GMDW editorials, there’s definitely more than enough material – you couldn’t make it up, and (un)fortunately we don’t have to.

From my observations I see people making the common mistake of judging GM or any carmakers health by their product portfolio. What I like about TTAC is that Robert Farago and other have delved into and broken down the business side financial numbers.

Its my opinion that GM simply has a mountain of debt and the lack of profitability to climb out of the hole. They have cut left and right and sold off everything left and right and they still have failed to stem the red ink as illustrated by the Death Watch series.

As for judging GM by their cars, IMO it makes no difference. I actually like their cars but I won’t buy one for the simple reason that I am happy with the brands I have been buying (Honda Toyota). IMO its not that their cars suck its simply the false belief that if GM only made better cars everyone would flock back. This is hubris and the height of arrogance on the part of GM, Ford Chrysler, their management and employees etc.

How in the hell could anybody assume that? That is certainly not true for anybody in the past so why would it be true now. Did former Ford owners flock back to Ford from GM after Henry finally updated their car line, instituted constant model year changes and added Mercury and Lincoln for upscale models. No they didn’t because people were happy with GM. So how can people assume people are going to ditch Toyota and Honda simply because GM and ford have a decent line up finally?