An Insider's View of the US Automotive Companies

Discussion in 'General Chat' started by Corwin, May 15, 2009.

  1. #1
    I worked with the big three automotive companies for seven years, selling them semiconductors.

    Ford Motor Company
    Ford was always a joy to work with. The employees were genuinely interested in building quality cars. They maintained good relationships with their vendors. They were always concerned with the end product model they were working on. The work environment was fun and amazing. It was very enjoyable to work with them.

    Chrysler
    Chrysler used to be a great company to work with, concerned with quality and a trusting sourcing process. But when Daimler-Benz "merged" with them, the deal was structured so that Daimler was the senior partner. Daimler quickly removed almost all of the American managers and replaced them with native Germans.

    The new managers, most of whom had never managed large groups of people before, expected the Americans to behave the same as their European employees - blind, unquestioning obedience. No questioning of authority was tolerated, and the German managers kept themselves separated from their subordinates. They began firing anyone that was not a "team player" - absolutely no displays of individuality were tolerated. (A friend of mine, in a moment of pain, described it as being "like a bug captured in a jar".)

    To the new German managers, being in charge was more important than building quality cars. "The Game" meant everything to them.

    Soon after, employees were quitting Chrysler in herds. Within two years, everyone I knew personally, and most of the best engineers, were all gone (some of the best were hired by Ford). Also, because many Jewish Americans still refuse to buy a German car, surveys were showing that they were treating Chrysler cars the same.


    General Motors
    General Motors promoted an adversarial relationship with their vendors. If you sold anything to GM, you were the enemy. Despite mandated quality standards, they would regularly source cheap, poor quality parts. In many cases, the cost savings of a cheap, substandard part plus the cost of expected warranty repairs, were weighed against the cost of a higher priced acceptable quality part with lower warranty repairs. They almost always went with the substandard part. (Ford and Chrysler never did that.)

    Vendors would put together bids, of a part that met automotive quality standards, and they would source instead a cheap part from an unapproved vendor.

    The reason for this was that the unions had a stranglehold on the company. GM could not automate much of their manufacturing because unions contracts wouldn't allow it. So, the cost of manufacturing was staggeringly high - in some cases three times as much as what it cost Ford.


    So, when I see what's going on in the news today, I'm not surprised.
     
    Corwin, May 15, 2009 IP
  2. bogart

    bogart Notable Member

    Messages:
    10,911
    Likes Received:
    509
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    235
    #2
    The retirement benefits are also breaking the car companies. There is a ratio of one active worker to every two retired workers.
     
    bogart, May 16, 2009 IP
  3. worldman

    worldman Notable Member

    Messages:
    3,337
    Likes Received:
    261
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    225
    #3
    While you mention some good points, there are a few things you forget. It costs GM and Chrysler on average double the price it takes Toyota or Ford to make a car. Mainly because of the freakin Unions.

    Plus I would like to know why Barack Obama and George Bush invested so much of our money in the two automakers when they knew they would eventually have to file chapter 11. Right now everyone in GM is taking a hit except for the damn Unions who are sipping koolaid and relaxing in their vast riches.
     
    worldman, May 16, 2009 IP
  4. Corwin

    Corwin Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,438
    Likes Received:
    107
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    195
    #4
    Because the unions are a very powerful lobby. You can't get elected to dogcatcher without kissing ass of the unions. Also, keep in mind that most television and newspaper journalists, as well as most government workers, are in unions.

    Years ago, I worked as an electrical engineer for a large engineering firm. You had (non-union) engineering managers that were there for over ten years, earning less than the union guy who emptied the trash at the end of the day.

    I can't remember the exact figure, but of the United Auto Workers who built the cars, more than half made more than $80,000 a year. And this is in the Midwest, where you could buy a huge house for that amount of money. On that salary, these guys live a life of real luxury - big houses, swimming pools, kids in private schools. I think about 15% of the auto workers are paper millionaires.

    I will never buy a GM car, ever.
     
    Corwin, May 17, 2009 IP
  5. worldman

    worldman Notable Member

    Messages:
    3,337
    Likes Received:
    261
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    225
    #5
    At least we agree on one thing.....DAMN the UNIONS!!!

    I agree with you 100%. Ford all the way.
     
    worldman, May 18, 2009 IP