Comments on: A Ten-Point Plan to Fix General Motors

By: Will

Will — Sun, 14 Jun 2009 16:27:24 +0000

Then please, enlighten me. What do you think GM should do to recover?

And thanks for commenting everyone.

By: cousintim

cousintim — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 02:00:52 +0000

It's amazing that one person can have so many bad ideas.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 19:24:33 +0000

I agree that most of the blame lies on GM execs here. However, I do think the unions had something to do with it. Douglas, your description of the union is correct in that that's why it was created, and that's how it should be, but it's no longer that way. Greed simply got the best of them, and the unions are no longer there "to protect the workers," but to make as much profit as they can.

My Father is in the union, and he just lost a huge job because his local got too greedy and "negotiated" themselves out of a big contract. Now he and his fellow workers are collecting unemployment until another job comes along, which I'm sure is really helping the state budget.

Here is why GM is bankrupt. Here is why we are in this economic meltdown:

GREED

By: Douglas King Sr

Douglas King Sr — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:32:33 +0000

The union is not at fault for GM's woes. Poor management foresight and trade inequeties are the major faults. The unions were formed because the company had to be FORCED to treat workers fairly. Without a union they would revert back to the same heavy handed "rule by fear of losing your job" tactics of the past. Breaking the union will plunge workers back into the browbeat days of near slavery with no job security or hope of getting ahead. There is very little job security in the non-union "transplants". It was only a few short years ago that the big three were making record profits and they had the unions and legacy costs then. You have to look somewhere else to hang the blame.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 14:02:15 +0000

Absolutely correct, Seattleforge.

By: seattleforge

seattleforge — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 13:42:55 +0000

You missed the most important item. Certainly more important than your comment about the union. They need to break the executives. Executives who make ludicrous amounts of money for long term failure needs to end. We can't forget that this company got to this point by not thinking long term – which included caving to unions to make short term profits to stuff their pockets with.

By: HHRKID

HHRKID — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 03:59:07 +0000

They should keep GMC. If they do have to drop a major brand, it should be Buick. And the point made shot droping different cars rather than whole brands is not a bad idea but the cars mentioned above in the article are making money for GM more than othersbnot mentioned. For example, the HHR brings in more money than the Aveo or the Aveo5 (which GM should only make one Or the other). And as far as hybrids go, I think GM should (for now) only make one hybrid truck and one hybrid SUV ( keep the Tahoe Hybrid and for the time being, stop making the Yukon and Escalade Hybrids. They should Also should work on making the Equinox in hybrid and fuel cell ( like they planned) and help get hydrergon alternatives as a source of energy!

HHRKID

By: Stewart

Stewart — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 00:11:59 +0000

Very true – however the alternative is much scarier for GM. If they were to separate from GM and become their own group. The only thing they really borrow from the GM “true” brands the big engines…..but I’m sure a company like Rotax etc would happily step forward and fill that void. Actually a 6L V8 rotax doesn’t sound to bad.
I personally think that their could be a partial separation (like 80% sell off) where technologies could still be shared and developed. Very similar to the Ford/Mazda/Suzuki and the Toyota/Subaru/Yamaha teamups.

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 23:51:21 +0000

Stewart: Buick is huge in China, and that’s the primary reason they’re ditching Pontiac instead; it’s a NA brand only. Will did address that, though: “Also keep in mind that this is a plan only for GM North America (for I propose cutting Buick, which would alarm the reader living in, say, China).”

Pontiac breaking into its own brand sounds like a good idea, but the problem is that they don’t really have any of their own vehicles; they’re all taken from other GMs around the world. Opel, Vauxhall, Holden, or rebadged GMNA vehicles.

By: Stewart

Stewart — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 18:54:49 +0000

fyi buick is one of the biggest sections of GM, and accounts for around 20-30% of all GM sales…..just not in USA. Buick is GM's arm in china. Anything GM in china is pretty much badged Buick. However i think that Pontiac would do fantastically as their own company. As would Holden and Opel. So i suggest that GM cut them free.

By: Tom

Tom — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 17:09:45 +0000

Break the unions = YES.. Auto worker jobs should be for college kids, not for adults… Work in a plant till you get your education… that would keep the salarys down. Union drones are milking this country dry. Ditch the Volt? No way. More engineering into this type of car will gain customers.. Just do it right like Toyota and Honda are doing with their Hybrids… Agressive Advertising? What you're really saying is "False advertising." I'll take my 2004 M3 over anything GM can offer, including a Z06.. why? because it's a better product. Higher quality, better engineered.. Hey GM… start building better cars and maybe we'll buy them. Camaro is on the showroom floors for 2 weeks and already a massive recall. Nice job, GM.