Further Layoffs Announced from Detroit Big Three Automaker Due to Poor Earnings

Further Layoffs Announced from Detroit Big Three Automaker Due to Poor Earnings​

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...S&cvid=5b0b982c6d324a438d77bec6580076da&ei=12

​

 

[zrock]

For the most part unions are just legalized mafia and nothing more, they take money from employee's and then when its time to give some back its no where to be found. They negotiate pay rates that a lot of business cannot afford forcing them to close down, so how does this help the employee? In a few comments above about still paying a layer off employee when they was no work for them, how does this work as i have never heard of that before things must be drastically different between canada and the US since we have EI for situations like this..

 

[Docwagon1776]

1) NAFTA was bad. I agree. 2) Illegals have been picking produce since the 70's...Becaue no one else would do it. 3) Blacksmiths learned to change tires when the horse went away...Coal usage was going away, being replaced with natural gas...So, yes, a new job skill was suggested. 3) Company pensions were being raided and stolen by corporate raiders. Protections were put into place and those protections were literally bankrupting companies, so pensions went away. 401Ks are very effective...If people participate. They don't...They'd rather spend thier extra money on beer and cigs. 4) Illegals flooded entry level trade jobs because the entitled kids no longer wanted them. Need proof? Look at the labor-starved, low-paying industries and tell me how many young people are working those jobs...restaurants, lawn care, tire shops, etc....They can't hire people. Can't. People aren't applying and the $15hr wage didn't chnge any of that. To your point, I'm not blind to the polarization of wealth, but I'm also not blind to the lazy, entitled, spoiled brats of this younger generation. Maybe....just maybe....They should cut out the excuses and find a way to make a way, instead of standing back and waiting for the government to do it for them.

Every generation thinks the young generation is lazy, entitled, spoiled, etc. I will again refer you to the rise in homeless veterans. Those lazy entitled spoiled vets had outcomes significantly different based on year of birth.

Telling me that pensions went away because the company owners were too greedy to run pensions effectively doesn't really help your side of the argument. Replacing it with a way to force workers to invest in the stock market turned it from an expense to a mild form of extortion. Want enough money to retire? Invest in our companies. I'm one of the few that still has a defined pension, and while I also invest significantly I know the difference.

New skills are needed, no doubt, however the transition from agricultural to industrial was one that skills transferred to. The farm worker and the factory worker were interchangeable and the training and mental acuity required were on par. Additionally, the industrial revolution created more jobs than it destroyed. The information revolution and automation revolution destroy more jobs than they create and the requirements are beyond the reach of many. Half the work force is below average intelligence and they still need jobs that are within their reach and will provide a living wage. Learning to code is a pipe dream for replacing blue collar manufacturing, semiskilled trades, etc.

The lie that we need illegals is just that, and a disgusting one. If we actually *need* foreign workers, then authorize more legal immigration, but that would cause the workers to have more rights and get higher wages. Saying we "need" illegals lets the powers that be allow and encourage a flood of disposable workers, human trafficking, etc. Labor trafficking is still a very real thing in the US, a fairly recent famous example: https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndoh/p...ection-labor-trafficking-minors-ohio-egg-farm

 

[Docwagon1776]

God forbid the blue collar worker invest capital in a business so that maybe they can understand the need for a return. They can earn dividends, too...But they choose not too. Oh yea...the profit share payments to their 401K doesn't count, nor do the dividends they earn in the mutual funds in those accounts....But those evil dividends....

Who said dividends are evil? I brought up dividend payments and CEO pay to counter the notion Stellantis would go bankrupt if they paid their workers more. It's just a question of where the money goes, not the company going under.

I fully understand the value of dividends and passive income. I also fully understand that the number of shares owned by individual workers vs C-suite and large investors means dividends raises are disproportionately raises for those already making the most money and supplement, but do not replace, salaries.

 

[nlambert182]

It's pretty simple math, really.

A corporation needs to make a certain profit margin to stay afloat. That margin is on top of the money needed for overhead, development, manufacturing, employee wages & benefits, marketing, etc... Just right there is an exorbitant operating cost. Inflation doesn't just hit consumers... it hits the companies too. Costs in the supply chain have doubled since 2019. Literally.

We can break that down further:

1) Overhead - gotta keep the bldgs in good shape, keep the lights on, pay the leases, pay the taxes and fees that folks like the EPA levy.

2) Development - A lot of money has to go into R&D to stay ahead of the competition, but also is the R&D to continuously refine the products to fix previous design flaws.

3) Manufacturing - Equipment maintenance and repairs, replacement, etc...

4) Marketing - Advertising is a lot of company's biggest cost sink. Trade shows, commercials, ads, etc...

5) Employees - By the time you pay for employee wages and benefits, annual salary increases, bonuses, etc.. it gets expensive. Then you insert a union and all of that is exponentially more expensive for the same (or less) output.


I'm still not arguing that CEOs and some higher ups on boards haven't found ways to skim more off the top. We all know it's happening and some of it is downright criminal. BUT... I would argue that this isn't THE main reason that blue collar workers can't seem to make it.


Many want more money for less effort. Wages increase and to offset that, companies raise prices and the same people who now make more money have to spend more money. It ends up in a wash.

I'm blue collar and have done extremely well over the years despite the difficulty. It's perspective and smart financial management... not holding my hand out.

 

[nlambert182]

To add.... the average hourly wage for a Stellantis worker in Wyoming ranges from $48-$51.68/hr. That's $100-$107k per year. The annual COL is $37k per year. Median household income there is $84k/yr. They're doing well above average right out of the gate.

So on an assembly line, a worker that is bolting on a bumper, or an inventory clerk that is picking an order to push to the floor falls into that range. Both examples require almost no skill to do and can all be learned on the job.

What is your argument for why they're worth that amount of money? I'm not arguing that they aren't, but Doc, I'd like to hear your take on it.

My argument is that many of these jobs are lower skilled jobs, but necessary jobs. However, when an individual CHOOSES to work these jobs they also need to be able to CHOOSE to live an affordable lifestyle. They must be fiscally responsible to themselves and smart with their money and they can still live a happy, fulfilling, and fruitful life.


If you want the bling, glitz, and glamour, this job should be a stepping stone while they work on a degree or whatever to take them into something that pays better. You can't make the shoe fit when it doesn't and that's what a lot of us consumers are trying to do, but screaming that it's everyone else's fault.

 

[jr27236]

I think the problem is 2 fold and not a single person has touched on this..... I don't put all the blame on the manufacturers for selling what the market is asking for. We, the consumer, are much more to blame with our lack of financial responsibility.

It's not just that companies have decreased their entry level options to move towards more expensive ones... but also that they do this because financial institutions will loan just about anything to anyone regardless if they can pay it back or not. The car companies are leaning into what buyers are buying.

Thus.... when 21 year old Jimmy can get an auto loan for $80k when he brings home $40k/yr, he isn't looking for a Corolla when he can step into a brand new Limited truck. Nevermind that it's an 8 yr loan at 9% interest. So Jimmy buys the truck, the mfg gets paid, and then within a year he gets the truck repo'd. Not the car mfg problem at that point.

Jimmy buys a $200k house at 7% interest with 0 down, then gets a couple lines of credit, and buys the truck on an 8 year note with 0 down and 9% interest. Financial institutions have sold people on payments and have made things look affordable on paper when they're really not.

Every business in existence is selling what the people are buying.

Read post #14 prior to yours

 

[nlambert182]

I don't see the comparison?

 

[jr27236]

I don't see the comparison?

Well I may have jumped the gun replying to you earlier as I was reading this on the go. Now that I've had time to sit down and reread it. There is really no comparison to what we each said but I think we both reach the same conclusion. Me blaming the manufacturers and you blaming the consumer. But in the end the common denominator is the GREED of the manufacturers. But the consumers are buying them no matter what which is just insane. I wanted to buy a new truck cash. They wanted me to finance I said NO (because of the interest rates) they then wanted to charge me $5k over sticker. I laughed and walked out and still drive my beautiful 2016 limited and I'm so glad I do.

 

[Docwagon1776]

To add.... the average hourly wage for a Stellantis worker in Wyoming ranges from $48-$51.68/hr. That's $100-$107k per year. The annual COL is $37k per year. Median household income there is $84k/yr. They're doing well above average right out of the gate.

So on an assembly line, a worker that is bolting on a bumper, or an inventory clerk that is picking an order to push to the floor falls into that range. Both examples require almost no skill to do and can all be learned on the job.

What is your argument for why they're worth that amount of money? I'm not arguing that they aren't, but Doc, I'd like to hear your take on it.

What Stellantis manufacturing facility is in Wyoming? Where are you getting your numbers?

https://actionnetwork.org/user_files/user_files/000/099/091/original/Stellantis_HourlyHighlighter.pdf

Production workers start at $18/hr and *top out* at roughly $37/hr

 

[nlambert182]

What Stellantis manufacturing facility is in Wyoming? Where are you getting your numbers?

https://actionnetwork.org/user_files/user_files/000/099/091/original/Stellantis_HourlyHighlighter.pdf

Production workers start at $18/hr and *top out* at roughly $37/hr

https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salaries/Stellantis-Salary

 

[nlambert182]

Well I may have jumped the gun replying to you earlier as I was reading this on the go. Now that I've had time to sit down and reread it. There is really no comparison to what we each said but I think we both reach the same conclusion. Me blaming the manufacturers and you blaming the consumer. But in the end the common denominator is the GREED of the manufacturers. But the consumers are buying them no matter what which is just insane. I wanted to buy a new truck cash. They wanted me to finance I said NO (because of the interest rates) they then wanted to charge me $5k over sticker. I laughed and walked out and still drive my beautiful 2016 limited and I'm so glad I do.

Actually,

That isn't what I said. What I implied is that BOTH play an equal part in the problem.

Your last purchase experience isn't relevant to Stellantis. That is a dealership level issue. The MFGs don't tell the dealer what to charge. It's no different than buying a widget at Wal-Mart and complaining to the widget mfg that Wal-Mart gouged you on the price.

Consumers are willingly becoming more and more financial irresponsible and buying expensive vehicles they can't afford and then complaining about it later. Companies are producing more higher end vehicles to meet the demand. At the same time, some corporate CEOs and the likes are having a field day.

If you think the problem is only with the companies, then you are one of those consumers. Having ran multiple manufacturing facilities, I can see both sides. This is nothing more than supply and demand.

If the consumer wants prices to go back down, you'll have to convince the masses to stop buying $100k trucks and spending above their means. First, across the board, everyone will have to buy the base model trucks for probably 2-3 years so that the demand for a high end vehicle decreases. Then the price of a lower model will increase for a while, and people will have to stop buying those. Eventually companies that want to keep their margins up will figure out ways to sell the trucks at a more reasonable price.

That said, we as consumers want things right now at whatever cost, so this will never happen.

 

[Docwagon1776]

https://www.ziprecruiter.com/Salaries/Stellantis-Salary

View attachment 550244

Literally none of those places have manufacturing facilities. Green River, WY doesn't even appear to have a dealership. Any dealership of any brand. Maybe some high paid remote worker lives there or maybe ZIP recruiter if full of it, but Google let you down on this one.

 

[nlambert182]

You're right, it did.

However, it doesn't change the premise behind what I said across the auto industry. Industries are changing and if we're still talking "below average intelligence" employees it shouldn't be a requirement of any company to find a place for them if those areas don't fit the business model.

These are business transactions where the employee needs to negotiate for themselves instead of expecting corporations to define all of the terms of the agreements. If your arrangement doesn't work for you, make another deal somewhere else. If a particular corp is getting too "greedy", vote with your feet. When enough do this, they change or bail water. In other words, don't complain that the companies need to improve when we can improve ourselves and increase our value.

Times change and as a society we are getting smarter (intellectually, not common sense) and learning how to do things faster and smarter. If people make the choice not to improve themselves to a point where they can keep up with the industries I don't see it as a problem that the industry must solve for them.

If you want to get paid for your skillset, develop a skillset worth paying for. In my industry, I can find wrench turners and people who can do general assembly from work instructions at a rate of 20:1 over a specific type of software developer or an electrical engineer. Guess which we pay a whole lot more for? They too can do general assembly, but the assemblers can't do anything that these folks can do.

 

[Docwagon1776]

You're right, it did.

However, it doesn't change the premise behind what I said across the auto industry. Industries are changing and if we're still talking "below average intelligence" employees it shouldn't be a requirement of any company to find a place for them if those areas don't fit the business model.

...

I'm not even sure what we're discussing at this point. Unions exist exactly because employees need to have some seat at the table instead of having terms dictated by the employer. Literally nobody has suggested an assembly line worker should make as much or more than an electrical engineer.

The simple fact remains without those wrench turners, nobody makes the billions of dollars and seeing they make a living wage, have economic mobility, and feel like they have a stake in society *matters*. People who can buy a home, raise a family, etc. vs people who feel they are going nowhere lead to radically different societies. Compare 1910-1920 America to 1950-1960 America. Post WW-2 boom in the middle class literally created our widespread modern middle class, largely due to a hand full of things. Increased homeownership with the GI Bill and a rapidly expanded manufacturing economic engine being main players.

Even as far back as the mid 1700s, Adam Smith (father of modern economics) noted that the most base line worker's wages were set by survival and replacement cost. What did it take for a common laborer to survive and raise the next generation of worker to replace him. At the time, obviously, that meant one man working to raise a family of at two children. One worker and one wife for the next generation. Then skilled work like attorneys and dangerous work like coal miners were paid more either due to the fact most people couldn't do it (so attorneys got the share of wages for the percentage of people who failed) or had a shorter lifespan or other risks (miners) due to those deaths/injuries.

Now, companies don't have to pay survival wages because gov't subsidizes them. Walmart can pay literal starvation wages because their employees can get food stamps and Medicaid. But the family owning nearly 50% of the stock continues to make billions while taxpayers subsidize that.

So, yes, we live in a society and the existence of a strong and mobile middle class matters to all of us for the same reasons an educated population matters to all of us. A modern western democracy is literally impossible without it. Again, see how close the US came to adopting socialism in the aftermath of WW1 through the beginning of WW2. We're on the path to returning to those sorts of disparities of wealth. Arguably, GWoT helped stave it off and COVID accelerated it.

If you're interested, take the time to do a bit deeper dive into economics and social implications. Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations" is free online from multiple sources. Much of the book is not particularly relevant today unless you care about the price of wheat in the mid 1700s, but the overall themes illustrated apply universally regardless.

 

[Scottly]

A modern western democracy is literally impossible without it.

I respect your opinion, Doc, but on this phrase I will push back on you. We are NOT a Democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic. The Socialists would love to have everyone think we are a Democracy, because it makes it easier for them to convert it to such, and seize power. Enlarging the Supreme Court, eliminating the Electoral College for a popular vote...all moves to eliminate our Constitution and the government of the people.

 

[rule18]

Ok Gents, I appreciate that this discussion has remained civil and for the most part, remained apolitical but it's definitely gone too far afield.

 

[Docwagon1776]

I respect your opinion, Doc, but on this phrase I will push back on you. We are NOT a Democracy, we are a Constitutional Republic.

I said western democracy, which is not limited to the US. This is not strictly a modern USA issue.

That said:

We are both a Representative Democracy and a Constitutional Republic. We are also a Federation.

These are not mutually exclusive terms and describe overlapping, but distinct, aspects of government.