Skip to comments.GM: Its rise, fall and future (Founder was strongly anti-union)
Posted on 06/01/2009 3:22:27 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
When United Auto Workers (UAW) union chief Ron Gettelfinger announced the end of GM's two-day strike in the early hours of September 26, 2007, it was the beginning of the end for the world's largest car manufacturer.
The agreement to end the first US nationwide automotive strike in 31 years, which saw General Motors' then 73,000-strong US workforce walk out, was the final death knell in the company's 101-year history.
The strike had occurred not over the future of those employees however, but rather of the fate of GM's 460,000 retired workers whose continuing eligibility for healthcare benefits had placed a $50bn (£30bn) noose around GM's neck.
The deal to end the strike saw GM management swap those liabilities in favour of the creation of an off-balance sheet healthcare trust, worth $20bn.
Although the agreement ended the short-lived strike, it placed an additional one-off burden on GM's already ailing balance sheet, forcing the company into a situation from which it could never recover.
The events of the 20 months that have followed culminating in today's Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing have all stemmed from that decision, a decision which was necessary because of years of died-in-the-wool union practices in a domestic industry being fast usurped by overseas competitors.
If GM's founder, Billy Durant, had lived to see this day, he would not have been a happy man. Durant, who originally made his fortune making horse-drawn vehicles in the late 1800s, formed General Motors in 1908 having been appointed as general manager of Buick in 1904.
In quick succession he merged the now defunct Oldsmobile, Pontiac and Cadillac marques into the GM family, and started the company with a fervent belief no unions.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
It really is government motors.
Obama apparently is going to make the announcement about GM’s bankruptcy today. Not the CEO, not the chairman of the board but Obama himself.
GM was dead long ago. The thing now is whether they can focus on building cars people want to buy and my bet is that they won’t and Obama Motors will fail like Obama will fail as president.
Since we now own an auto company will it be considered “patriotic” to boycott all the other non-government owned companies?
I think it would be patriotic not to boycott the non-government companies. GM will be a drain on the taxpayers for years to come. The only way GM survives is if the Obama administration passes laws that require us to buy its cars.
That is a possibility.
Watch for new attempts by the UAW to unionize the Japanese plants in the US.
Well he is a dictator now for sure ,Congress just sits by with their head up their asses,I can imagine if George Bush was saying today he is going to be in Charge of GM ,the first question would not be How Long the Government would be running the show there ,the question would be where the Hell does King George think he has the Authority in the Constitution to do such a thing with Tax Payer Money?
Watch those Japanese plants close and move back to Japan.
Wow, I hadn't heard about this. The article also contains the best description I've seen of the 2007 looting of GM by the UAW. It's a sad day in American not only because of Obama and the UAW's syndicalism, but also because of our utterly failed press.
No. The federal tyrants will simply put a punitive tax on any auto that is not owned by them.
Look for pop culture to start talking about the only true car “born in America” and condemning the greed of all those other private companies.
Maybe Tina Fey, the idiot actress with no talent, can do some spot ads for the new GM.
The leftist MSM should be celebrating the victory in their war against American wealth. Sadly, envy is the only one of the 7 deadly sins that is no fun at all.
GM Management points to the Engineers, and says they will not design cars people want to buy....
The Engineers point to the Union, and say they refuse to work hard enough to build the cars they design....
The Union points to Management, and says they get paid too much, while the Union gets paid too little....
Management points to the Engineers.........
Paid for outstanding balances? According to bankruptcy laws, they can go back 90 days and seize payments made to suppliers.....
GM's management decided to continue selling cars which consumed a lot of fuel even as gas prices continued to climb. While I don't think they should dump large vehicles because clearly people do use them, they should not have made those the foundation for profit for the entire economy. When gas goes back to $4 a gallon or more, any company that makes most of its money selling vehicles like these will take a hit once again. They could have also tried to find a way to make larger vehicles use less gas.
Then there's the quality issues. The UAW simply refuses to build quality vehicles. They've been doing this for decades. Many customers simply said "screw you" and bought foreign makes instead.
If what happened in my family is any example, the GM just needs someone to nail the coffin shut. My entire family was all GM until I got tired of being on a first name basis with my mechanic and bought my first Honda. When my mom tells me that she is happy she found a mechanic close by who can fix her GM vehicle, I tell her... you see the problem with that?
You are absolutely correct!
Sounds good but with what they are doing to the bond holders, what is stopping them from screwing the suppliers? Maybe they will pay them 10 cents on the dollar.
I wonder if the thug-in-chief will figure out a way to intimidate consumers into buying a Government Motors product instead of a Ford?
Do ya think all the Liberal types will suddenly stop buying their Japanese cars just to be “patriotic”? Fat chance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.