White House tells GM boss to step down

[alfred russel]

Tell me again why the union, who is in large part responsible for driving these companies into the ground, should get anything?

There is zero credible business reason to make these deals for the union. None. They ahve no leverage, no credibility, and they bring nothing to the table that a re-organized GM needs, and plenty that they do not.

This is nothing more than federal welfare for union employees.

Don't they bring to the table their labor and experience as the workforce of GM?

[Savonarola]

There's a ticker thing on CNN this morning that says GM will likely file for bankruptcy this week.

It seems inevitable now:

GM bondholders turn down debt swap
By TIM HIGGINS • FREE PRESS BUSINESS WRITER • May 27, 2009


General Motors failed in its attempts to trade bondholder debt for shares in the automaker, the company announced this morning.


The defeat, while not surprising given bondholders' criticisms of the proposal, makes bankruptcy even more likely.

Getting unsecured debt holders to accept a 10% stake in GM in exchange for the $27 billion they are owed was a key part of GM's plans to restructure its debt outside of court.


President Barack Obama has given GM until Monday to restructure or else it faces bankruptcy reorganization. GM is surviving on $19.4 billion in federal loans.


The deadline for tendering the debt was late Tuesday night.


"The principal amount of notes tendered was substantially less than the amount required by GM to satisfy the debt reduction requirement under its loan agreements with the U.S. Department of the Treasury , to meet the debt reduction objectives under its viability plan, or to meet the minimum tender condition of the exchange offers as required by the U.S. Treasury," the company said in a statement.


GM said its board of directors will meet to discuss GM's next step.

[Caliga]

@ Berkut
*shrug* Doesn't matter.  The company is going to fail anyway.  Another nail in the commie coffin. 

[Barrister]

Tell me again why the union, who is in large part responsible for driving these companies into the ground, should get anything?

There is zero credible business reason to make these deals for the union. None. They ahve no leverage, no credibility, and they bring nothing to the table that a re-organized GM needs, and plenty that they do not.

This is nothing more than federal welfare for union employees.

Because they in fact do have leverage (they are a debtor of GM after all and get a say in bankruptcy) and can bring something to the table that the new GM needs (i.e. labour peace), and they certainly do have credibility with the administration?

[Caliga]

Don't they bring to the table their labor and experience as the workforce of GM?

Not really valuable.  We have a Ford plant in Louisville (the F-250 and Explorer models are made here) and I've met probably a dozen people who have worked there.  The unanimous opinion is that a monkey could be trained to do 90% of the jobs there in like 20 minutes.

[Berkut]

Tell me again why the union, who is in large part responsible for driving these companies into the ground, should get anything?

There is zero credible business reason to make these deals for the union. None. They ahve no leverage, no credibility, and they bring nothing to the table that a re-organized GM needs, and plenty that they do not.

This is nothing more than federal welfare for union employees.

Don't they bring to the table their labor and experience as the workforce of GM?

The employees might, but you don't need a union to hire them.

[alfred russel]

Don't they bring to the table their labor and experience as the workforce of GM?

Not really valuable.  We have a Ford plant in Louisville (the F-250 and Explorer models are made here) and I've met probably a dozen people who have worked there.  The unanimous opinion is that a monkey could be trained to do 90% of the jobs there in like 20 minutes.

Okay. So if we are not going to scrap the plants GM and shut down the company, how do you plan on getting a nonunionized workforce in there?

[Berkut]

Tell me again why the union, who is in large part responsible for driving these companies into the ground, should get anything?

There is zero credible business reason to make these deals for the union. None. They ahve no leverage, no credibility, and they bring nothing to the table that a re-organized GM needs, and plenty that they do not.

This is nothing more than federal welfare for union employees.

Because they in fact do have leverage (they are a debtor of GM after all and get a say in bankruptcy) and can bring something to the table that the new GM needs (i.e. labour peace), and they certainly do have credibility with the administration?

They do not have "credibililty" with the admin, they simply have bought political capital with them. Not the same thing.

And GM does not need their "labor peace" there are tens of thousands of unemployed auto workers who would be happy to get a job, so why deal with all the hassle of the union when you don't need to? Of course you would not - if in fact your business decisions were being driven by business needs, rather than political bullshit.

And sure, they are a debtor - so let them fail along with GM. It is what they deserve. Reorg GM, tell the UAW to take a long walk of a short pier, tear up all those ridiculous union contracts, and start hiring PEOPLE instead of unions.

[Berkut]

Don't they bring to the table their labor and experience as the workforce of GM?

Not really valuable.  We have a Ford plant in Louisville (the F-250 and Explorer models are made here) and I've met probably a dozen people who have worked there.  The unanimous opinion is that a monkey could be trained to do 90% of the jobs there in like 20 minutes.

Okay. So if we are not going to scrap the plants GM and shut down the company, how do you plan on getting a nonunionized workforce in there?

Post an ad in the newspaper. I heard there were some unemployed people in Detroit who would like jobs.

And there is the cool thing about this plan: If they suck, are lazy, and don't show up for work...you can replace them! Holy shit! What an insane idea!

[alfred russel]

Don't they bring to the table their labor and experience as the workforce of GM?

Not really valuable.  We have a Ford plant in Louisville (the F-250 and Explorer models are made here) and I've met probably a dozen people who have worked there.  The unanimous opinion is that a monkey could be trained to do 90% of the jobs there in like 20 minutes.

Okay. So if we are not going to scrap the plants GM and shut down the company, how do you plan on getting a nonunionized workforce in there?

Post an ad in the newspaper. I heard there were some unemployed people in Detroit who would like jobs.

And there is the cool thing about this plan: If they suck, are lazy, and don't show up for work...you can replace them! Holy shit! What an insane idea!

So you want the government, who basically is just now taking over the company, to have as its first major policy breaking one of the largest and most successful unions in the country?

[Barrister]

Tell me again why the union, who is in large part responsible for driving these companies into the ground, should get anything?

There is zero credible business reason to make these deals for the union. None. They ahve no leverage, no credibility, and they bring nothing to the table that a re-organized GM needs, and plenty that they do not.

This is nothing more than federal welfare for union employees.

Because they in fact do have leverage (they are a debtor of GM after all and get a say in bankruptcy) and can bring something to the table that the new GM needs (i.e. labour peace), and they certainly do have credibility with the administration?

They do not have "credibililty" with the admin, they simply have bought political capital with them. Not the same thing.

And GM does not need their "labor peace" there are tens of thousands of unemployed auto workers who would be happy to get a job, so why deal with all the hassle of the union when you don't need to? Of course you would not - if in fact your business decisions were being driven by business needs, rather than political bullshit.

And sure, they are a debtor - so let them fail along with GM. It is what they deserve. Reorg GM, tell the UAW to take a long walk of a short pier, tear up all those ridiculous union contracts, and start hiring PEOPLE instead of unions.

Exactly how do you figure that GM can just disband the UAW merely because it is going through bankruptcy?

Plenty of unionized companies go through bankruptcy, and if/when they emerge thei're always still unionized.

[Berkut]

So you want the government, who basically is just now taking over the company, to have as its first major policy breaking one of the largest and most successful unions in the country?

Considering that "most successful" union is what is driving the company into bankruptcy and its existence is what makes it impossible for GM to succeed, yeah, I think that is a fine idea.

Although it would not be the Administration breaking the union, it would be the bankruptcy of GM that would do so - the Administrations roll is simply one where they do not elect to 'save" the union at the expense of the company, taxpayers, and consumers.

[Berkut]

Exactly how do you figure that GM can just disband the UAW merely because it is going through bankruptcy?

Plenty of unionized companies go through bankruptcy, and if/when they emerge thei're always still unionized.

Always? Really? Every single time?

GM doesn't need to disband the UAW, they just need to quit hiring their shitty workers.

[Berkut]

You guys are like an ER doctor with a patient dying of a giant fucking parasite attached to their brain sucking away their lifeblood trying to figure out how they can save the parasite once the patient dies.

[Barrister]

You guys are like an ER doctor with a patient dying of a giant fucking parasite attached to their brain sucking away their lifeblood trying to figure out how they can save the parasite once the patient dies.

I'd rather think that we're ER doctors who notice that the patient has an INOPERABLE brain tumour, and so we're trying to figure out what else we can do to save the patient.  Going on about how the patient would be better off without a brain tumour isn't helpful if we have no means to remove it.

And yes Berk - I am unaware of even a single incident where an established company, with an established union, managed to break that union as part of bankruptcy.