Manufacturing jobs lost to productivity

washingtontimes.com ^ | Nov. 29, 2003 | UPI

[Destro]

WASHINGTON, Nov. 29 (UPI) -- Since early 2001, through the recession and slow recovery, 2.8 million more factory jobs were cut, most of which will never be recovered.

Some jobs disappeared because of rising imports or the movement of jobs overseas. But by far most manufacturing jobs were eliminated because companies used new technologies and management techniques to achieve productivity gains -- the amount of goods and services produced per hour worked, the Washington Post reported.

[Destro]

Manufacturing continues to lose jobs even as Jobless Rate Declined Again in November, to 5.9%

[RiflemanSharpe]

This is all true. And is just another reason we need to set up our trade policy, regulations, and tax system up to be optimum for keeping as many of these good paying jobs in the US as possible.

[Naspino]

I love it too. I used to install robotic machinery into plants and knock off five people at a time with a machine. I had no problem with it either after observing what they did for a living. One girl's job was to cup her gloved hand over a Rice Krispie line to line them up for the wrapper -- replaced by a 50 cent piece of plastic.

[truthandjustice1]

The guy up the road from me, the inventor of the PLC, has some credit (or blame), for the productivity improvements in mfg. He invented and installed the first PLC in GM some 25 years ago.

[Mad Dawgg]

Oh Christ, we are all gonna die!

[lelio]

Today, GM makes about the same number of vehicles, but employs just 118,000 workers because of increased mechanization and technology.

While that might be true, how many of the 300k difference are employed in GM spinoffs or a company that sells products to GM that they used to manufacture in house?

That's the problem when talking about a gross productivity number -- if you layoff 1/2 your workforce as now you buy the product from an outside manufacture your "productivity" number goes up. Now traditionally the companies that you outsource too are here in the US, but now the car companies are building their car parts in India and China.

I'm not saying this is good or bad, but just pointing out that numbers such as this should be looked at with a huge grain of salt.

[truthandjustice1]

I hear you. I saw union workers at Delphi automotive fight the introduction of automation equipment that improve the fit/finish of cars.

[Destro]

replaced by a 50 cent peoce of plastic or a Mexican....

[Naspino]

Some people just need a kick in the rear to do something productive with their life. I just looked at some of them like "..when you were a little girl did you dream of cupping a rice krispie line with your hand.."? It really boggled my mind.

[ClearCase_guy]

The Left has opposed automation since the beginning. The Luddites and "Captain Swing" in the early 1800's wanted to keep as many folks working as subsistence-level farmers as possible.The Marxists in the early and mid 20th Century wanted to keep people working in unsafe Mills, factories and coal mines -- machinery threatened their livlihoods, you know.

Now people worry that automation/productivity reduces jobs. Figure it out people: automation helped us move from subsistence-level farming to computer programming. It's a good thing.

[Naspino]

For every machine there has to be people to maintain it, program it, design it, market it, build it, and install it. The problem these people have is that they never cared about education and relied on these stand here and hold you hand like that kind of job to be available.

[Destro]

We can export those muscle jobs to Mexico--we don't really need to employ the unskilled beyond McJobs.

America - the future Brazil....

[BenLurkin]

Ping

[Starwind]

This is all true. And is just another reason we need to set up our trade policy, regulations, and tax system up to be optimum for keeping as many of these good paying jobs in the US as possible.

Yes we need to correct our trade, tax, monetary and fiscal policies, and protect our borders and enforce our laws.

No, manufacturing jobs were not lost to productivity, they were were lost to overseas labor arbitrage and competition.

The article has numerous errors, chiefly productivity did not increase since 2001 by new technology and techniques. CapEx spending on new equipment has languished until about 2 months ago - so no new automation has been involved nor any new manufacturing techniques.

Productivity is up statistically mainly (not entirely) because low productivity jobs have moved overseas or been shutdown, leaving the more productive jobs here. The result is an increase in "productivity" but it is not more efficient use of labor and equipment. Service sector productivity is also poorly measured and seemingly adds to productivity assumed to have taken place in manufacturing - but again it is not reality.

And adjusting actual cash prices for "assumed quality changes" (known has hedonic pricing) is being removed by the BEA in the latest GDP benchmark revision because they agree (finally) it causes more distortion than help in understanding price changes and the real state of the economy.

We do get more function and features for our dollars, but that is actual and measurable by those who pay the cash for those features, and real dollars changes hands for it. Hedonic price adjustments (implemented in 1996) are just another statistical attempt to explain away rising real prices to keep the CPI (and hence government COLAs) down.

[sixmil]

For example, nearly 25 years ago, General Motors employed 454,000 workers, more than any other company in America, to produce 5 million cars and trucks a year, according to the Harbour Report which tracks the auto industry.

Today, GM makes about the same number of vehicles, but employs just 118,000 workers because of increased mechanization and technology.

Sad that GM has not grown in 25 years. They might have actually grown if we had not given the auto industry away to Japan. I am all for increased productivity through technology, but free traders want increased productivity through exporting jobs.

[harpseal]

Ping

On or off let me know

[oceanview]

we did not "give" the auto industry to Japan, they developed better products and took market share. they make cars in Japan without the use of $1 per day labor, and they make alot of cars employing americans. the situation with Japan is totally different then we face today with India and China.

[sixmil]

we did not "give" the auto industry to Japan, they developed better products and took market share. they make cars in Japan without the use of $1 per day labor, and they make alot of cars employing americans. the situation with Japan is totally different then we face today with India and China.

Japan dumped cheap cars on the market to gain market share and then reinvested the money into their auto industry while closing their market to US autos. We, along with their gov't, supplied the cash for them to modernize the production of autos. There was no incentive for us to do the same until our gov't actually did something about this predation of our economy. Japan now produces cars in America because of action our government took to protect the auto industry. Harley Davidson was saved by tariffs. We have gone down the same path with Korea, and China and India are following suit. Of course they will not make it as far as Japan because they aren't half as smart, and it has already been done.

[Willie Green]

But by far most manufacturing jobs were eliminated because companies used new technologies and management techniques to achieve productivity gains --

Bogus!

The only new "management techiques" they're using is outsourcing components while still taking full credit for the finished product.

Globalization is actually a regressive force in manufacturing technology. Justification for investment in labor saving automation is driven by HIGH wages and benefits. Outsourcing to low wage nations undercuts this capital expenditure with cheaper and more labor-intensive manufacturing technology.