Funny you mention the bit about janitors making $100/hour. While that may be a bit of a stretch, at a former company I used to work for (which will remain nameless), the union janitors DID make over $100k per year with overtime, and they did not do CRAP. There were literally cockroaches crawling in the offices and in the manufacturing areas. The janitors thought it was hilarious that they did not do any work but they made more than the "suckers who got degrees".

I do think that unions did serve their purpose at one time, but they have overstepped their bounds and are killing US companies. It is supposed to be about fair wages- janitors that make $100k is not fair.

 

Don't worry, I am sure the union leeches took about $40k of that each year lol.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Chrysler "IN THE BLACK" before the Mercedes "merger" of equals.
I thought they had "Union" workers before the merger, didn't they? I wonder how they were able to do so well for themselves with all the dead weight.
Didn't I read right here on this forum that Mercedes pillaged Chrysler, before they sold out to Cerebus?

 

Could these be an effort to avoid competition of their electric car entries? The Chyrsler platform is essentially the same as the Chevy Volt. If electric is the way the industry is heading, its probably a smart move of their part.

 

I do agree that the unions have sucked the companies dry, and the CEO's have also sucked the companies dry, but in the end, we all are going to pay for our wanting more. The unions said "we cant do this without this", and the company said "we cant do this without this". I dont know who was right. What I dont like is the outcome of all the merger/bankruptcy talk going on. IF many people lose their jobs and the government takes over the pension plans, it's only going to add more taxes to my kids and grandkids for years to come. They didn't cause it and should not have to pay for it. But the 100K janitor will be laughing all the way to the bank. Unions were good AT A TIME, but the world has changed and they haven't. They still get part of the paycheck each week, but when the *hit hits the fan, they are not around.

 

Wow,
Not really sure about the whole chevy chrysler merger. Never been much of a chevy fan, owned a few, drove a few at work and I was generally not all that impressed with them. Hopefully they won't butcher chrysler to bad.

On a side note I really don't know how this thread went to unions but since it has I have to say my piece. The history of unions, I agree, has not always been a good one. On the flip side the history of business managers and CEO's in America haven't either. I'm not bashing either side and yes I am a proud card carrying AFL-CIO member, AFGE Local 2324 as well as the FOP. Our unions have backed our departments officers allowing for better gear and training. The have helped prevent abuses of the FLRA as well as the collective bargaining agreement which was agreed to by both sides. Along with my membership I receive over 1 million in liability insurance and attorneys at no cost to me for any work related court cases. All of this for 13 bucks a month, a far cry from some of the other amounts it this thread. I'm not trying to stir any trouble as I respect everyone here and their right of opinion, simply my 2 cents.

 

i find it funny that people are actually chrysler fans. i'm not talking the old hemi/ hp war days, but today. i think chrysler does lead the big three in inovative design and putting concepts on the showrooms, but fail at exicution. i don't want to start a this is better than that war, but just putting my opinion on the table. i too hope gm doesn't chop up chryslers cars, but chrysler could use some better built and quality on the table. i'm not saying gm doesn't have its short comings, because they have plenty. its just that the only nice vehicals in my experience chrysler has had was made from somebody else in a merge. thats why i have a crossfire.

i also think gm has really stepped up its offerings here in the us bringing the austrailian platforms over. a true improvement in their quality that ties well with their dominant engines.(mostly in regards to their LS platform v8's)

 

General Motors and Cerberus reportedly want to act as quickly as possible if they are going to make a move on Chrysler. It seems that the two bargainers would like to come to a decision before the upcoming Presidential elections, as they believe they may get more promises from either candidate before the actual vote takes place. A potential problem exists though, as General Motors is finding it tough to come up with the cash needed to make a deal happen and banks aren't about the lend it to them. An alternative option that's being considered is getting government backing for the deal.

Though it sounded hard to believe when we first heard the GM/Chrysler merger rumors, it truly appears that these talks are taking place at a very high level and the deal could indeed be on its way to. We'll just need to pay close attention in the next few weeks to the reactions from the Feds, the UAW and the thousands of workers that would inevitably be affected by the deal. Stay tuned.

 

As of this morning it looks like Nissian is making a move. This would be a much better tie up. Less over lapping of product, no real dealer issues and hopefully less jobs lost.

 

The problem with a nissan merge is that renault comes in the package. Don't know, with the problems gm and chrysler have they might be better together. btw. I wouldn't mind if chrysler get's it's own gtr

 

You are correct. Chysler was $9 billion in the black at the time of the merger. MB raped them and basically left them for dead.

BTW, Although it is referred to as the Chrysler "Bailout" it was actually not a bailout but a series of loan guarrantees. The money came from banks with the US government basically acting as a "co-signer"

When Lee Iaccoca wanted to pay the loan off early it reportedtly took 4,000 attorneys almost 18 months to get thru the red tape to get it done.

Prepared to pay the loans off almost 3 years early, they managed to do it only one year early. Aren't bankers great. They are the kind of folks who offer you an umbrella on a sunny day only to ask for it back when it starts raining.

roadster with a stick

 

I thought it was consensual? j/k

In my opinion Chrysler knew what it was getting into with Mercedes. The Chrysler execs knew where the US auto industry was headed. Ford lost $13 Billion in one year, GM lost $40 Billion. That's just one year. Think about how much has been lost over the last decade by Ford and GM and the Chrysler story doesn't sound that exceptional.

Mercedes definitely left Chrysler out in a lurch by giving them the shabbiest car platforms to build cars off of (except for the Crossfire, which was built on the best roadster chassis ever built by Mercedes Without any money, they've been pumping out "new cars" for the Dodge brand which are all basically built on all the same platforms with different front and rear bumpers.

All the while low-budget Korean companies are building profitably with American labor in Alabama coupled with considerable amounts of automation. Are the Americans cranking out Hyundais in Alabama not unionized? I doubt it, and even if they weren't, they're certainly not complaining.

In my opinion, the US car companies are dying under their own weight because they are mammoth organizations operating under tired assumptions in a highly competitive marketplace.

I have a silly prediction: The next profitable American car company won't be Ford, GM or Chrysler.

 

If your not first or second in your market respectfully, then you better buy or be bought. Chrysler is being bought, again.

 

The part that I don't understand is why GM - who is floundering badly - would think that buying Chrysler - also floundering - would be a good idea. I suppose on one hand, they could eliminate the competition, but I would think they'd be smart enough to realize that it is a very costly venture and not a lot of the market share would follow Chrysler with the sale. To me that's a lose-lose proposition.

If Chrysler has to be bought by someone, I would prefer it be Nissan. At least they've got something going for them besides SUV's.

 

Who else is there other than some dinky little backyard company?

 

Little reading material…

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll...TO01/810200360

 

here's more talk of the merge.

http://quote.com/news/story.action?i...531000348&pg=2

it just might happen, and they mention talks of a third brand coming out of the deal. maybe something just for the electric/alternitive fuel vehicals?

 

Gm is now asking for government money to the tune of $10 billion for the purchase of chrysler.

http://www.thetorquereport.com/2008/...bill.html#more

 

tom2112 - I was wondering the same thing and my thought is they own it, then they kill it, doing away with some of their competition. I too would rather see Chrysler merge with Nissan. At least it would have a prayer. I just don't see GM doing anything with it except killing off the brand.
Pat

 

Even if GM was to buy Chrysler, it would take years to kill off all the brands.

The big 3 are too dependent on suppliers. If GM was to just kill off Chrysler, there would be a ripple effect throughout the suppliers, causing many to go out of business. This is not surprising due to the fact that most suppliers to the automotive industry have contracts with each of the big 3. I don't know of any supplier that can continue to stay profitable with the loss of 1/3 their business.This would in turn cause big problems for GM, leaving them scrambling for parts.

Remember the problems American Axle caused GM last spring when they went on strike? Now imagine that company closing their doors.