kpc655

nope http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2125243620091221 ford's recent buyout offer (the third if i'm not mistaken) was to 41,000 employees. that means they want some portion of that 41000 to leave and not be replaced, and some portion to be replaced by cheaper entry level workers. with 10+% unemployment, there are a lot of very eager workers around the country (esp. michigan) who would gladly compete for factory jobs.

you obviously don't work in the industry. sufficiently flexible? by who's standards, yours? i don't think your qualified to make that judgment. you've still not told me..when's the last time you stepped foot in an automotive plant? do you even work in the industry? every year ford cycles through layoffs at the beginning of the year. work rules require 2 weeks of layoff before unemployment can be paid. but this only has to be done once per year. so they do this at the beginning of the year, that way throughout the year, anytime someone goes on layoff (for a day here, a week here, doesn't matter), they go on unemployment. and collect sub pay. and still get benefits. ford is still unable to trim down the work force as needed. ford figures that they need to downsize/reposition somewhere around 41,000 additional hrly workers. I'd say that's a big problem. you sure do make a lot of assumptions though. which I'm sure partially explains some of your incorrect views. i said nothing of "throwing workers on their ears" or "randomly reassigning them". ford's work rules are not on par. which should be plainly obvious, if nothing else, by the simple fact that the recent contract modifications to bring them in line with their domestic counterparts was rejected. and as far as the transplants..they have largely avoided unionization. so I'm not sure what work rules you're using for comparison. you've quickly turned this into a "bash toyota" thread. so congrats on that.

read the rest of the post i.e. they're not. both in terms of actual costs and flexibility. i'm guessing you've not spent much time working in automotive plants. do you have any first hand experience at a GM (or ford) plant?

do you no understand that labor costs factor in to the cost structure of a company? the union cost structure is not competitive (particularly when benefits and pension costs are included). it should be rather obvious that one of the main benefits that a union offers its members is above average wages. additionally companies cannot right size the labor force near as quickly as is necessary in a downturn. I'm guessing you never spend any time in a plant, because this is self evident to all of us who do. additionally, the union rules prevent the level of flexibility required to compete. two tier wage system? how about 10, or 20 tiers. sub pay? inability to hire/fire at will. come on, this is pretty basic stuff here. the entire point of a union in today's job market is to protect jobs and increase compensation to a level which could not be achieved individually. that presents a very basic problem for a company that needs to down size to stay in business. and needs to compete with foreign company's not hindered by unions.

of course it's valid. and in fact, did i say the union was the sole reason? no, you did if you deny the unions play a role, your ignoring reality. and ford's success is far from certain.

Bumper sticher, "Toyota's: Please Brake Early!"

"By eliminating UAW workers, GM will have all its problems solved." what was the "valid point"? looks like a sarcastic post that brought nothing to the thread. my point, which was valid, was that i hope the de-unionization of Detroit continues.

ah, so it was just a troll post. i expect more from "moderators"

you must live in a very black and white world.

for the sake of detroit, i hope this trend continues

good points. i just see a very basic problem where, if one looks at ford's total capacity, it's still far above what they need. whether vehicle assembly, engine assembly, stamping etc. machines and equipment can be idled short term..but the cost burden largely remains. whereas, theoretically, employment levels can always be adjusted. i would expect to see ford further consolidating total capacity in the future which includes employment levels. if sales are not expected to significantly improve in the near term they must address the idled capacity issue.

are you saying ford doesn't have too much capacity?

makes sense and i'm sure that's part of it. there's people willing to do these jobs for less pay. let's hope it happens. it's good for ford and ford customers

crooks giving themselves raises? big surprise here's a crazy idea..stop bailing the crooks out.

yes, the #'s are too high even if you don't believe that, why should ford pay higher wages when another American would happily do the same job for less? (if you're reason is to be believed)

but the white collar ranks were right sized and thus are not burdened with too many employees. that is still not the case with hourly. remind me again how many people took the recent buyouts?

ok. i didn't say dumping and what release are you referring to? the op was merely asking about opinions on future earnings (or rather..insider info, as that is what he technically asked for). if you're referring to the 8k's, those are merely notification of sale.

that was a very odd response

why? i earn my place everyday?

a lot of insiders are selling stock. http://online.barrons.com/article/SB126342476442628369.html careful on any speculative plays based on earnings. ford is still not profitable

tax the people that don't have healthcare. they're the ones helping to drive costs.. no, instead, you tax people for earning good benefits/salary. the race to the bottom continues.

Keynesian manipulation of the macro economy has done far more to create the bubbles than to solve them. the government cannot create demand. as the past year has so (un)elegantly proven. Keynesian policies are dead and should be written into the history books as such.

we have over 10% unemployment. There's millions of people in this country that would gladly take a factory job for a more competitive wage and do just as good of, if not a better, job. and that's all that matters. not what a german makes in germany, or a japanese person in japan. the UAW hasn't competed for their own jobs for decades. it's all about protectionism. and that's bad for america.

all this...while ignoring the simple fact that unions have priced themselves right out of the market. ignorance is bliss, eh? that is the primary reason the US auto industry is moving it's manufacturing jobs overseas. the UAW cannot (well can, but refuses) compete with foreign labor. and now the boy president and his merry band of dems want to tax your health benefits. whoops.

It's a lost cause with this one cap. The obamadrones like die will defend anything and everything he does, regardless of the merits. Just let it alone. some people need to crash before they can see beyond their own narrow universe...some never will.