Woody~
Everything in corporate dealings is agenda driven. For example, Dutcher didn't choose to run for Local 95 president with the city of Janesville foremost in his mind. Corporate America has it's own agenda and the union is just a branch of corporate america. They'll never admit it, but, the union is a business. If it wasn't, they wouldn't be collecting union dues. They're there for one reason, to make money. They've had the working man roped into their program for a long time and it's coming back to bite them in the rear. There was a day when the union was there for the working American. Not anymore. It's been long gone. Put it this way, how many insurance companies would pay for a claim if you weren't making your monthly premium payments? If people stopped paying their union dues, would the union be there for the people? No, they want their money. The dues and premiums are nothing more than an "anti" for the pot for a sense of security in case you need them down the road. If that weren't the case, nobody would pay the fees.

There's a big difference of an hour here and there and fridays and saturdays. Alot of what the overtime here is to make up for downtime throughout the shift.

Wheelie, they've actually mandated overtime for the last couple weeks. Not Fridays, just over on their shifts.

Get a clue etown, Janesville hasn't worked overtime for quite awhile.

Copenhagen, Janesville is working overtime right now.

I was driving through Lansing ,MI yesterday. They are forcing overtime

Thanks Sarah B. and other well-wishers. The stress is great, this is true, but we (I speak only for my family) will be ok. My parents are turning 50 this year and my parents have no post-secondary education. It seems bad when you look at something like that, but I am inspired by my parent's reaction to my Dad's job loss. They are going to stay in the area and my Dad is going to take the opportunity to go back to school and earn a post-secondary degree. My family has it worse than some, and better than others..it all really depends on how you look at the situation and how you choose to deal with it. Our family will survive without GM even if it means tougher times are ahead. I hope many families affected by the closing of the plant are able to find the same silver lining as my family has. Best of luck to you all.

While everyone is concerned with the local situation, perhaps stepping back and looking at the bigger picture is in order.

GM stock languishes in the $12-13 range. The stock was in the mid 40's last November and in 2000-2001 some thought it would approach $100 a share. The current stock price leaves a market capitalization of around 8 billion dollars. For a company with 285 billion in debt/obligations, 8 billion is peanuts. If the stock should slip below 10 and GM has a few more months like May, profit wise, bankruptcy would seem a real possibility. GM, now with junk bond ratings from S&P, would need to raise money. They do have a fairly good cash position now but, at near a billion a month burn rate, that won't last long. The only way to raise cash may be through DIP (Debtor in possession) loans. To get these loans, however, they would have to seek chapter 11 protection from debtors. Some might say this could never happen....don't be so sure..........

See

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/general...

Is Dutcher trying to follow Sheridan into politics? Is janesville going to keep electing GM people?

Wow, Joe! While interesting and very informative, I have kept abreast as many have of global events. I hope no one gets on you for the term paper, as it was topical. It is just hard to make complex points without writing so much, so trying to make a post simpler does not mean everyone is not informed. It's just normally I try, and others have too, to keep opinions condensed. By the way, on the "do you knows" it was 5 yes, 2 no.

A serious question: would you rather have paid $2 / gallon for gas since 1985 right through today and have that "surplus" go to car, road, and energy improvements? Or would you rather have the price of gas swing wildly and unpredicatably, sometimes insanely cheap (70 cents a gallon in 1998 in parts of the US) and sometimes "outrageously" expensive (well over $4 / gallon nation-wide now)? This is a national conversation we seriously need to have but I think most people get stuck at "would you look at the price of gas???"

P.S. as for why the prognosticators are not running the country..... there is a rather old truism that those best suited to govern are least likely to run. Why any sane person would subject themselves to the constant scrutiny, gossip, innuendo, and flat-out lies (look at the crap both McCain and Obama must deflect each and every day) -- let alone having to kiss-ass to brain-dead teevee "news" reporters... well, as I say, I think some people just have too much common sense to subject themselves to that much abuse.

So, some will ask, why not drill known or supposed *deep* offshore oil fields? Why not open up ANWR? Why not get the oil out of "oil shale" in South Dakota and parts of the Canadian Rockies? Because, as I alluded to, it has not been economically viable. Up until about 15 years ago, any yahoo (Jed Clampett) could poke a hole in the ground and just let the oil come to you (hydrostatic pressure). Now, even in well-established oil fields, the oil must be forced to the surface somehow (a la the Saudia Arabia example of pumping seawater into the ground). Deep water oil exploration is extremely expensive and has not until now had an attractive enough return-on-investment. ANWR has its own set of problems aside from environmentalism; namely it is an unproven field and there is almost no infrastructure to get the oil from the field to a refinery to you the consumer. Oil shales require what many would call strip mining (bad enough)... but then still require nearly as much energy to be put into the process as will be obtained by the gasoline that is ultimately created... in other words, hardly worth it (certainly, when compared to existing alternatives, e.g. the Jed Clampett method).

So, why was oil so cheap a decade ago? There was a currency crisis in South America and a bigger one across most of SE Asia that caused a reduced demand for energy (factories, ...) and consumer goods (cards, ...), coupled with a then-strong dollar. Oil was a mere $18 per barrel at one point, just a short decade ago but almost entirely due to external factors. Bill Clinton, Democrats, Republicans, GM, ... -- none of them can control the price of oil. But believe me, Congress (through the Congressional Budget Office) and the major auto manufacturers sure as hell spend a great deal of time and money to try to forecast the price of oil because as most Americans are suddenly rediscovering it certainly impacts day-to-day life and by extension our entire economy. Some more fun facts: Did you know that Unocal tried in vain in the 1990s to build a pipeline across Afghanistan and that it was one of the top priorities after we invaded? Did you know that a pipeline in Nigeria has been repeatedly bombed over the past decade? Did you know that Mexico is predicting that they are now past their peak (production fell some 30% in the past two years... not for lack of trying). Did you know that cars (automobile manufacture and sale), roads, and oil production and oil itself are some of the most heavily subsidized items in the US budget? Did you know that an interesting way to analyze WWII is to consider it the first oil war -- the Germans invaded SE Europe, SW Russia, and tried to expand their sphere of influence over then-British-controlled Iran so as to have an ample, cheap supply of oil. Frankly, I believe that the dollar will continue a gradual slide and coupled with many other factors we will see $200 / barrel oil within a few years. I'd love to be wrong but that seems to be the most reasonable "educated guess" based on all the available facts.

Actually, there have been a great many signs that taken together indicated that oil would rise in price rapidly. In fact, this sharp increase in price has been predicted to occur, right about now in the latter part of this decade, since the mid 1970s; many have labeled this "peak oil", a term that dates to 1956 when M. King Hubbert accurately predicted when the United States would reach its peak of (cheap, just-stick-a-drill-in-the-ground-and-let-it-gush) production around 1970. Did you know that in Saudi Arabia they have to pump seawater into the ground to get the oil to come out now? Water does not come cheap in the desert. Did you know that there are oil field production forecasts, based on geology and science, that reach back to the late 1940s that predicted (rather accurately) how much oil was located? Geologists are very well paid at oil companies, let me assure you. In the here and now, these are some of the underlying factors for why oil is so much more expensive: 1) a very much weakened US dollar; 2a) a surge in energy demand in China (they didn't built the Three Gorges hydroelectric dam because they're bored) and India since 1998; 2b) a surge in middle class wealth in those two countries has meant a huge increase in the number of automobiles worldwide; 3) a steady supply or peaking supply of oil since about that same time (more demand ===> higher price!); 4) very little energy infrastructure improvements within the US since the 1960s (refinery capacity, distribution of refined products, e.g. regular ol' gasoline, and lack of R&D into solar, hydro, nuclear, etc.); 5) an uncertain future in the Middle East (who will ultimately control the supply of oil from the Persian Gulf?); 6) unrest in Africa, particularly Nigeria which is a sizeable exporter. 7) We refuse, rightly, to buy oil from Iran (btw, there are very valid reasons they continue to pursue nuclear power; whether or not they want nuclear weapons is a whole other matter that I shan't address).

I just passed GM and seen a couple of workers going in to work, I yelled at them good luck to be nice. But wait a minute what about toyota or honda comming in would the UAW be willing to build them, I'm not being a pain this time. Just trying to be possitive for the workers. They should tell the group that is going to talk to GM to try to talk to the other builders to get a product in

Joeflint - My statement wasn't that no one could see the rise of oil prices. It's just that it happened at a much more accelerated pace than many had anticipated. Sure there will be some who "predicted" this rise, so how come these prognosticators are not running the country. Not to demean anything people predict, but educated guesses sometimes work out, sometimes not, but are rarely 100% correct.

Wow - Clinton was the CEO of GM in the 80s and 90s??? Ummm... Now, for those of you who continue to speak in a blindly ideological manner: how can I put this, it has historically been the Republicans (y'know, "it's a free market" and all) pushing for free trade which of course somehow makes it Clinton's fault. (Don't get me wrong: Clinton did quite a few stupid things, as we all know.) As for "who could've forseen oil doubling?" -- give me a break. That's as bad as Condi Rice's "who could've forseen...?" Many analysts and regular people knew that without Bush (41)'s "Coalition of the Willing" that another excursion into the Middle East would almost certainly bring about a rise in oil prices... the doubters (true believers, if you will) were claiming that Iraqi oil production would not only keep gas prices down but would PAY FOR THE WAR! How'd that work out? If you are inclined to even further educate yourself, might I suggest a rather long-running series entitled "Countdown to $100 oil" -- the first article / diary was posted on June 21st, 2005 -- that's three years ago! [ http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/2/1... ]. The author is now running a series entitled "Countdown to $200 oil".

Stacy, you can blame it all on whomever you want, but some things you missed. Can you tell me who it was that sent the vehicles to Mexico in the first place, if you need help one of his best lines was " I did not have sex with that woman"...

Just my opinion, but... GM was very slow to react, but who saw oil prices doubling in 1 year? There is some corruption going on there somewhere, but with all the finger pointing by those same crooks it is being used as a smoke screen to confuse the public while they rake in all the big bucks. As far as re-tooling, GM is low on cash for any such project. So unless there is an infusion of money from somewhere I don't hold out much hope.

**************************************************************************
GM's problem has always been that of slow acting and even slower reacting. Just a poorly run business.

While Toyota is celebrating the 10 yr anniversary of the Prius Hybrid, GM is "excited" about finally introducing their 1st, the Chevy Volt. A little behind wouldn't you say. Sorta like the new Camaro creating huge interest at the Detroit and Chicago Auto Shows, winning Car of the Year, then telling the public it should be available in 3 to 4 YEARS. Bye Bye interest.

As far as a comment about retooling the plant and producing a new product, that sure sounds like a good idea. But from a logistics standpoint, GM is trying to localize its plants so there is less money involved with transporting parts and goods. Gas prices are much higher to deliver parts to Janesville and Canada, in the middle of nowhere to them, rather than in the Michigan or Texas area where everything is localized. Especially when so many parts are from Mexico anyways.

Time will tell, but it sure doesn't look good. Then again, GM always does what is least logical.
**************************************************************************

TazJr800, I completely disagree with you. I worked for Chrysler in the Production Control/Material department before finding a new job, and I can tell you that logistics don't come into play as much as you think. There were facilities within a few short hours of us that created ALL the parts for the car. Whatever wasn't created locally was warehoused and stocked to a level that would give us enough time to acquire more material.

Interior body panels, glass, plastic components, hoses, headlights, etc. are all within a good range of the plant (in the midwest). The midwest is a good hub for all of these suppliers to be. They are in range of all the plants in Michigan, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Ohio. If that was your logic, I'm truly surprised that GM isn't closing the Arlington and Silao plants. Those are the plants that are in an inefficient logistics standpoint. The Canada plants are in the same boat but not quite as bad as Texas.

You shouldn't try to blame gas so much. Yes, it is making the cost of everything go up, but don't think that GM, Ford, Chrysler, Toyota, or Honda (or any other manufacturer for that matter) won't pass that bill on to you (the consumer). They will and won't hesitate to do so. FYI- GM is raising prices by over 3% on all 2009 models.

I have to disagree with the corporate greed. Yes, it is running rampant, but so is the rest of society. Unfortunately, we live in a VERY greedy society and we cannot seem to come to grips with that.

I do have the families and our community in my thoughts and prayers as we fall victim to man-made and Mother Nature's disasaters (is it really totally Mother Nature's fault if we build dams to keep lots of water; and buildings and neighborhoods in flood plains?)

Sounds like a case of:

woulda shoulda kudda

GM's problem has always been that of slow acting and even slower reacting. Just a poorly run business.

While Toyota is celebrating the 10 yr anniversary of the Prius Hybrid, GM is "excited" about finally introducing their 1st, the Chevy Volt. A little behind wouldn't you say. Sorta like the new Camaro creating huge interest at the Detroit and Chicago Auto Shows, winning Car of the Year, then telling the public it should be available in 3 to 4 YEARS. Bye Bye interest.

As far as a comment about retooling the plant and producing a new product, that sure sounds like a good idea. But from a logistics standpoint, GM is trying to localize its plants so there is less money involved with transporting parts and goods. Gas prices are much higher to deliver parts to Janesville and Canada, in the middle of nowhere to them, rather than in the Michigan or Texas area where everything is localized. Especially when so many parts are from Mexico anyways.

Time will tell, but it sure doesn't look good. Then again, GM always does what is least logical.

Its not just GM. Its an industry of corporate greed and offshoring production. I went to buy a water pump for my ford ranger and found it to be made in china!! We have lost a lot of manufacturing to the likes of India, China and a whole host of foreign competition. And, to add insult to injury, someone from belguim might buy Budweiser. We might as well move NASCAR to japan and the NFL to Europe. Better yet , lets pull all our troops from overseas and let the world police themselves. That worked out real good from 1900 - 1945 dont you think. Until we start to take care of our own people, we will fall to a third world nation in a hurry. No one comes to the aid of the American people. They (most of them) think we deserve what we got.I hope, I am dead wrong!!

This is very bad news. I just want to tell all of the families affected (whether GM workers or those tied to other facilities) that each and everyone of you are in my prayers. I imagine the stress is great.

Oh, swell. Cullen, FORMER state senator, FORMER etc., is going to get us out of this??? The operative word is FORMER. He certainly is not operating up to his former standards and has pretty much single-handedly destroyed what once was a great school board while trying to re-establish his FORMER glory. Talk about living in the past! We might as well just say good-bye to the FORMER GM.

I agree fully, when my dad, uncles and other family and friends started to work there, they one TRUCK line and ONE car line, why not go back to the car line, Bring the jobs back to America, and close the plants that are not in the United states, Our "So called" President says he wants to save jobs for the American worker but he does not want to bring back the jobs out of the "States"..
Sure you can blame the plant closing on sale trends, but I believe the "Village Idiot" that is in the White house is the major blame for this..
So Why don't they (GM) shut down and "ReTool" the plant for the smaller (more economical) vehicle, that can keep a plant this size going...

The fat lady is warming up backstage....

I agree with rockstars. I don't understand why GM didn’t look into the future. Once they knew that SUV's weren't going to sell very well (about 2 years ago), they should have started thinking about replacing them with high mileage cars electric cars. Toyota is killing GM and they won't stop until they do. Wake up GM.

This is really a simple solution for GM. Build the cars that people WANT to buy. Obviously SUVs aren't selling. Take a look at dealership lots. They have no small/smaller cars to sell! Why isn't production changing for that? Sure, they can still close a couple of the plants (and I'm not giving Janesville a pass at all) but they should go by what plants are the least cost efficient and workforce. I say retool what you can and THEN close what you don't need.