jump to navigation

Cutting Wages Won’t Solve Detroit Three’s Crisis December 9, 2008

Posted by rogerhollander in Economic Crisis, Labor.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

auto-workers1Automakers have blamed workers for the financial collapse of the Detroit auto industry. (Photo: motortrend.com)

by: Mark Brenner and Jane Slaughter, The Detroit News

 In the 1980s, Chevrolet proclaimed itself the “Heartbeat of America,” but today the American auto industry barely registers a pulse. As Washington considers Detroit’s plea for life support, the only place where pundits, politicians and Big Three executives seem to agree is that auto workers must make do with less or watch their jobs disappear.

    Some lawmakers have complained that unions are the source of the problem, but they fail to understand some inconvenient truths. According to the latest figures from the U.S. Commerce Department, every worker in Big Three factories could work for free and only shave 5 percent off the cost of their cars. The auto companies pay as much for hubcaps and fenders as they do in wages.

    Data from the Harbour Report – the industry’s gold standard – reveal that even including their benefits, labor costs in the Big Three’s plants account for less than 10 percent of the sticker price.

    No matter how you cut the numbers, demolishing auto workers’ living standards will not transform the industry. The Big Three have been trying for years. They have slashed at least 200,000 jobs since 2004, and last year they wrung billions of dollars in concessions from the United Auto Workers. The union instituted a second-tier wage of $14.50 an hour for new hires, lower than pay in the nonunion, foreign-owned auto companies in the South.

    The impact is all too apparent in auto communities across the Midwest. Forty thousand Detroit homeowners are in foreclosure, and the unemployment rate has hit double digits in many auto towns. That suffering will multiply if one of the Big Three collapses, or if retired auto workers are punished for decisions they had no hand in.

    Automakers’ decisions have been disastrous. While competitors developed gasoline-electric hybrids, Detroit mined the gas-guzzling truck and SUV market, making $104 billion in profits between 1994 and 2003. Wall Street and Congress weren’t calling for more research and development or curbing the company’s dividend payments and high-flying executive salaries back then.

    Pundits crow for us to “Dump Detroit,” but they don’t advertise that through a bailout or the bankruptcy courts taxpayers will shoulder the burden of the automakers’ colossal missteps.

    Washington shouldn’t back into a bailout – it should jump in feet-first. What’s needed is not a half-measure, a cash infusion in exchange for selling the corporate jets. Now is the time to take a sweeping look at the country’s needs.

    Our first steps should confront global warming and oil dependence through a comprehensive overhaul of the transportation system. Federal policy hasn’t changed since the 1950s, when gas was a nickel a gallon.

    Detroit, the Arsenal of Democracy, retooled in a matter of weeks when we needed tanks, not cars, in 1941. We could produce this century’s answer to the interstate highway system and build mass transit and high-speed trains.

    That same sense of urgency is needed for vehicles that don’t run on petroleum. If American engineers can build satellites that read your license plate from outer space, they can develop an alternative to the gasoline engine.

    Automakers need direction as much as financial support from Washington, just as Japan’s government molded Toyota into a world-class performer.

    In every other industrialized nation, government has stepped in and given their auto companies a significant edge. Most important, they all adopted national health care and pension systems decades ago.

    General Motors alone provides health coverage to a million people – workers, retirees and families. The annual price tag is about $5 billion, which, as CEO Rick Wagoner is fond of pointing out, is more than GM spends on steel.

    That burden could be lifted, to the benefit of 47 million uninsured Americans, by adopting a Medicare-style program for everyone. It would save the nation as much as $350 billion per year now spent for insurance companies to shuffle paper and deny claims.

    The fate of the Motor City captivates us because it speaks to our future. For 30 years, politicians have bowed to Wall Street, sitting by while wages for most workers stagnated. Big Three workers have maintained their living standards better than most, in no small part because they have a union. In a country where investment bankers gave themselves $30 billion in bonuses last Christmas, have we reached a point where $58,000 a year with benefits is too much to ask?

    We once promised the pursuit of happiness to all, including the workers who make our factories run, not just those who trade credit default swaps. Now more than ever, we need to recapture that spirit with a thoroughgoing plan to rescue the environment, care for the sick and transform transportation.

    Mark Brenner and Jane Slaughter work for Labor Notes, an independent monthly labor magazine in Detroit. It receives no support from the United Auto Workers.

Poll: 61% Oppose Auto Bailout December 4, 2008

Posted by rogerhollander in Economic Crisis.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
1 comment so far

Survey shows that Americans think federal aid for the Big Three is unfair and won’t help the economy.

By Ben Rooney, CNNMoney.com staff writer


 

Map
Auto workers by state
More than 2 million workers in every state – including Alaska and Hawaii – draw their pay from the auto industry. »»

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — A majority of Americans oppose a bailout of the troubled U.S. auto industry, according to a poll released Wednesday.

The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll, conducted by telephone on Dec. 1-2 with nearly 1,100 people, showed that 61% of those surveyed oppose government assistance for the major U.S. automakers.

The poll comes at a critical time for the American auto industry. Ford Motor (F, Fortune 500), General Motors (GM, Fortune 500) and Chrysler LLC are requesting up to $34 billion in emergency loans from the government amid the weakest auto sales in 25 years and persistently tight credit.

General Motors and Chrysler, burning through billions of dollars in cash, are the most imperiled. All three companies submitted plans to Congress on Tuesday that made their case for funding, and industry executives are set to testify Thursday and Friday as lawmakers debate whether to take emergency action.

But Wednesday’s poll suggests that Americans believe bailing out the Big Three is a bad idea.

A full 70% of respondents indicated that a bailout is unfair to taxpayers.

In addition to being unfair, the poll showed that a majority of those surveyed think a bailout would not help the economy.

Sandeep Dahiya, a professor of finance at Georgetown University, said the poll results were “quite surprising.” The large percentage of those opposed to the bailout “tells you much about how what is good for GM is not good for America.”

But the disapproval reflected in the poll may not result in the kind of public backlash that occurred in response to the $700 billion bailout package Congress passed in October, Dahiya said.

“The numbers are a lot smaller and there’s more apathy,” in the public following a string of other bailouts in recent months, Dahiya said. Still, public resentment is “festering” and an auto industry bailout is “not going to be an easy sell,” he added.

Despite being opposed to federal support of the industry, the possibility of a bankruptcy among one or more of the Big Three automakers is a concern for a significant number of poll respondents.

While only 15% of those polled think a bankruptcy in the auto industry would have an immediate impact on their families, 43% think a bankruptcy would eventually have an effect on them.

Dahiya pointed out that a bankruptcy does not necessarily mean an automaker will stop making cars. “Ideally, a bankruptcy leads to a fresh start,” he said.

The margin of error for the poll is plus or minus 3%. To top of page

Bailout Ballpark December 4, 2008

Posted by rogerhollander in Economic Crisis.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment
Posted on Dec 4, 2008, www.truthdig.org
Wikimedia Commons / mlb.com

By Stanley Kutler

The New York Mets have announced that their new stadium will still be called Citi Field. According to news reports, Citigroup will pay the Mets a trifling $400 million over 20 years for the naming rights to the new ballpark. Small change. The Mets added that the government bailout of Citigroup will help the bank survive the “economic crisis.”

Citibank, we were told, was “too big to fail.” Thus the federal government, in the person of Wall Street icon Henry Paulson, agreed on Nov. 23 to protect $306 billion of Citigroup’s loans and securities against losses.

The Bush administration and its Wall Street minions continue on their way of injecting more federal money to save banks from themselves and heal their self-inflicted wounds. The purpose, Treasury Secretary Paulson contended, was to free up frozen credit markets. But after running up a tab of more than $4 trillion, the credit markets remain mostly frozen. The Financial Times reported in January that Citigroup had raised $14 billion from foreign nations and public investors to shore up its bad debts. The Chinese bought up $9 billion. And no alarm bells rang in Washington or on Wall Street.

Meanwhile, Paulson seems oblivious—or is it unconcerned?—with the future of American automobile workers, who have seen their jobs shrivel because of more bad management. Maybe Paulson believes the current urban legend that auto workers make $70,000 a year, plus all that luxuriant medical care and those lucrative pensions. No need for a bailout of their companies. Meanwhile, the UAW is trying to help, offering contract changes to prevent the Big Three from collapsing. Those concessions include suspending the jobs bank, which requires employers to pay some laid-off employees, and allowing the carmakers to delay payments to the new retiree health fund.

It is staggering when one thinks of what Paulson and the administration have delivered to the financial community in the past few weeks. The 2008 bank bailout tab so far is more than $4.6 trillion, which is more than the total expenditures (in current dollars) for the Marshall Plan, the Louisiana Purchase, the S&L failures of the 1980s, the New Deal, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Iraq war, the moon landing, and all NASA budgets combined. There you have it: Republican small government redefined.

What blatant hypocrisy Citigroup and the Mets peddle. The government has helped out banks because of the “economic crisis”? Why can’t the government (and the Mets) get it straight? Better yet, why can’t our vaunted “free” media state the fundamental truth? Our so-called economic crisis isn’t a freak event, but the result of the excesses of the financial “industry”—as if it produces anything. We once called bankers “prudent.” Now they are best known for their acquisition and the making of mindless bad debts. 

Why doesn’t the government fault Citigroup and similarly situated fellow bankers for their total irresponsibility in accumulating their bad debts? Why doesn’t Henry Paulson offer a plan to prevent such malpractice again? He might start by recommending restoration of the Glass-Steagall Act, repealed in 1999 with the sage sponsorship of Phil Gramm, Robert Rubin and Alan Greenspan. That’s the kind of “bipartisanship” the business community loves. Glass-Steagall, for nearly 70 years, prevented banks from much of the activity that resulted in our present problem. The proponents of the repeal undoubtedly will defend themselves with the “free market” nonsense they have peddled so successfully for the past generation.

Meantime, the game must go on, and there is money to reap. Let us be happy knowing that the financial meltdown has not threatened the Amazin’ Mets. And perhaps they’ll manage to snag an overpriced free agent during the off-season. The game must go on—and the owners have to make money.

Stanley Kutler is the author of “Privilege and Creative Destruction,” among other writings.