Corporate begging in style
posted at 9:30 am on November 19, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
If industry leaders need to convince Congress that their plight is so desperate that they need $25 billion in taxpayer cash to rescue them, what mode of transportation would best underscore that crisis? Flying coach? Traveling by train? Horse and buggy? ABC News reports that the Big Three automakers sent their CEOs to Washington DC by private jet instead:
The CEOs of the big three automakers flew to the nation’s capital yesterday in private luxurious jets to make their case to Washington that the auto industry is running out of cash and needs $25 billion in taxpayer money to avoid bankruptcy.
The CEOs of GM, Ford and Chrysler may have told Congress that they will likely go out of business without a bailout yet that has not stopped them from traveling in style, not even First Class is good enough.
All three CEOs – Rick Wagoner of GM, Alan Mulally of Ford, and Robert Nardelli of Chrysler – exercised their perks Tuesday by flying in corporate jets to DC. Wagoner flew in GM’s $36 million luxury aircraft to tell members of Congress that the company is burning through cash, asking for $10-12 billion for GM alone.
The price of a coach ticket between Detroit and DC goes for $288 on a non-stop Northwest flight. Granted, one has to fly Northwest, but Wagoner could have improved the experience by spending an extra $600 on a first-class ticket. Instead of spending $900, Wagoner instead burned through $20,000 — the cost of the single flight on the private jet.
Alan Mulally hasn’t flown commercial since beginning his stint at Ford. He refused to relocate to Michigan from Seattle, so his contract with Ford includes the unlimited use of a private jet. He commutes every weekend from Seattle to Detroit for his job. Yesterday, Ford had three private jets in flight with various executives flying to Los Angeles and Nebraska as well as Mulally’s flight to DC.
None of the automakers have plans to shelve their fleets. In fact, they’ve already called their private jets “non-negotiable” at the same time they’re demanding that taxpayers pay the bills for their extravagance. They’re running out of cash and can’t sell their cars, but Ford and GM refuse to fly coach or even first class.
When the management of these automakers start acting like they’re in crisis, then perhaps we’ll believe them. They’ve come to Congress not to rescue their companies but to salvage their lifestyles. This is an industry that desperately needs bankruptcy and collapse to put an end to unrealistic labor deals and obnoxious executive behavior. The American taxpayer doesn’t have any business subsidizing this failure.
Update: Seattle, not Detroit.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
“He refused to relocate to Michigan from Detroit”
Something is amiss…
Daft Punk on November 19, 2008 at 9:35 AM
LET THEM BURN
lodge on November 19, 2008 at 9:36 AM
Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered. I think we know which category these guys fall into.
Squid Vicious on November 19, 2008 at 9:37 AM
They all should have drove one of their crappy, over-priced, poorly made cars to Washington.
robblefarian on November 19, 2008 at 9:39 AM
Nice job, guys, way to really make your case that we need to bail you out.
Your private jets are non-negotiable? Ok, we will consider a bailout, but the first thing on our list is that you losing your jobs without a golden parachute be non-negotiable.
Bishop on November 19, 2008 at 9:40 AM
Maybe Ed thinks Detroit is a state unto itself. Happened with Obama.
I’d bet Michigan would like to see Detroit secede.
Amendment X on November 19, 2008 at 9:41 AM
I think he meant to say “from Seattle to Detroit.” Ed’s probably as pissed off at the rest of us.
I’d say they’re more like old race horses. Take them out behind the barn and put them out of OUR misery.
manwithblackhat on November 19, 2008 at 9:42 AM
They all should have drove one of their crappy, over-priced, poorly made cars to Washington.
robblefarian on November 19, 2008 at 9:39 AM
Ahem: Ford’s CEO Mulally drives a Lexus. Go figure.
http://www.leftlanenews.com/new-ford-ceo-drives-a-lexus.html
Bishop on November 19, 2008 at 9:43 AM
Most of us here in Michigan have the hope that Detroit kind of floats across the river into Canada one day.
Daft Punk on November 19, 2008 at 9:44 AM
Ed, you might want to fix that.
BigD on November 19, 2008 at 9:44 AM
You are hitting the nail on the head, as usual, Ed. In the larger picture, these bailouts are just the kind of thing that provide talking points for socialist/communist movements. In a period of economic recession and political turmoil, the country is trying to find itself again. Looking at history, these are the times in which people are more willing to latch onto dangerous ideas, using the powerful handle of fear to manipulate people into accepting solutions that do not mesh with the values that have made America a magnet for freedom-seeking people across the globe.
bryanmyrick on November 19, 2008 at 9:44 AM
Ouch! Was that an elbow?
whitetop on November 19, 2008 at 9:45 AM
I heard somewhere they can sell private jets on Ebay. Would be nice if Congress could spank them with that stipulation.
sherry on November 19, 2008 at 9:45 AM
How did Gettelfinger get there?
BigD on November 19, 2008 at 9:45 AM
This alone is reason for me to dump my plans to buy and F-150, Toyota Tundra – here I come.
Screw em.
jake-the-goose on November 19, 2008 at 9:46 AM
Granted, one has to fly Northwest
Which means if you’re lucky you MIGHT get a flight attendant who actually smiles at least once during the flight.
Bishop on November 19, 2008 at 9:47 AM
Nice post, Ed. Couldn’t agree more.
But this is at odds with what we’ve been force fed lately. It’s those evil yoooonyuns and their overpaid lazy workers that forced the Big Three to build those big honkin’, gas gulping, high profit margin SUVs that we all purchased and drove with glee.
Certainly the jet-set, over-compensated, shortsighted and blameless managers of those companies aren’t complicit in their own demise?
Et tu Brute on November 19, 2008 at 9:48 AM
Doesn’t matter. The Dem Congress will bail them out. Then they’ll do it again in a couple of years, which they’ll need to do because the Big 3’s business models are unsustainable. The unions and the Big 3 are mugging us, and they’re having the federal government hold the gun.
aero on November 19, 2008 at 9:48 AM
Bah, NWA isn’t any worse than the rest of ‘em. Besides, they will be Delta branded soon. So, hey, new uniforms.
Daft Punk on November 19, 2008 at 9:50 AM
let them eat cake
custer on November 19, 2008 at 9:51 AM
Look, this was bad, but it is bullsh*t. I work at Ford. Ford is actually in pretty good shape, but will not be if one of our competitors goes under. Alan is there arguing not so much for Ford to get money, but for the security of the whole industry. There is quite a lot of collaboration between us, as well as between our suppliers. The effects of GM going under would be devastating to Ford, my job, my families health and saftey, my children. I am an engineer, I have survived 6 cuts, and there is yet another one on the way. Ford has seriously changed thier business model for the better. The big problem here is the UAW. However, Ford secured a better contract with them last year with cutbacks. But there needs to be more on the UAW. They need to realize that they are a parasite that is close to killing off their host. The LOAN (not a bailout – the banks got a bailout) needs to happen, but with strings attached.
Keep in mind that if ford were to go under whole metro areas and all of the jobs would be wiped out. All of the support industries, and not just people making parts, but people working in resturaunts and bars, people who work at shopping centers, marketing companies, accounting firms, temp agencies, project management companies, a whole lot of people would seriously be hurt if one company or all were to go under. You may not live where there is an auto company, but you need to fully understand how far this reaches.
Ford is in good shape with quality that is now second to none. That is tied with Toyota and honda and in some cases better. Ford’s has more fuel efficient sedans on par with the japaneese. Have you driven a Ford lately? Take a new Focus for a spin, try out a Fusion. These are great vehicles.
Snapiron on November 19, 2008 at 9:51 AM
Amen
brianjt0308 on November 19, 2008 at 9:51 AM
The agony of flying in your private jet!
Next the luxury jet business will want a bailout.
izoneguy on November 19, 2008 at 9:52 AM
“He refused to relocate to Michigan from Detroit.”
Detroit is an absolute joke. I live ninety minutes west of that city and–if it weren’t for Tigers and Red Wings games (let’s not even talk about the Lions)–I would never go there. Coleman Young and Kwame Kilpatrick did their best to destroy what was once one of the great cities of the Midwest. It’s just sad. The difficulties the Big Three are experiencing are just one more sock to the gut of the people of Michigan. It’s enough to make someone want to move, but I grew up here and want to see Michigan rebound somehow.
WV736 on November 19, 2008 at 9:55 AM
Bailing out the Big Three would really only be bailing out the UAW. Chapter 11 would solve their problems by redoing their union contracts, and managemet oughta be shown the door on general principles.
Akzed on November 19, 2008 at 9:56 AM
Come on you are not that gullible to believe that the dimocrats are going to not approve the bailout and loose their access to the big 3’s corporate jets.
Come on you know better!
amex on November 19, 2008 at 9:57 AM
What other Western nation forces its corporations to pick up the tab for healthcare? What other Western nation forces its auto corporations to subsidize their own technology developments? The problem is not unions, that’s the biggest right wing hack thing to say ever. The problem is that our competitors do business in nations with national healthcare and pension programs that allow the corporations to spend money on innovation. People rarely talk about this when they discuss single payer systems in Germany and Japan, but healthcare is a HUGE reason why our auto corporations are bankrupt.
Ironically, this IS the market working, but not in the way that “free market” people want to think about it. For some reason “free market” people refuse to take into account that workers are humans and therefore, their health/standard of living has a huge impact on the effeciency and profitability of the company.
DeathToMediaHacks on November 19, 2008 at 9:58 AM
You have to remember the prime rule of government lending — the amount which you are entitled to borrow is equal to the dollar value of your assets plus the dollar value of your indebtedness.
Plus, these people have President Government in their corner; it doesn’t get any better than that.
In other words, they have a double plus going for them, and it allows them to travel any way they please.
unclesmrgol on November 19, 2008 at 9:59 AM
Snapiron — I sympathize with you, really I do. I grew up in Michigan (although I left 20 years ago), and have four siblings and their families there. My grandfather owned a landmark Lincoln Mercury dealership in the 50s.
But the entire rest of the country cannot bail one state and prop up its failures into perpetuity. Bankruptcy would force the restructuring of union contracts that you say is needed. And I am tired of this talking point that bankruptcy would result in the loss of every single job. Some jobs, to be sure, but that needs to happen anyway.
Michigan has to change. The automakers have to change.
BigD on November 19, 2008 at 9:59 AM
Corporate America is clearly broken. AIG’s lavish parties after begging for gov’t handouts and the Big 3s going AlGore style to beg for their own buyout are merely symptoms of the disease.
The disease is fixation on short term results that prop up stock prices with no view to the long term health of the companies. There is no easy fix for this. But it starts with throwing all the bums out, not kowtowing to their self inflicted tales of woe and their fearmongering.
EconomicNeocon on November 19, 2008 at 10:00 AM
I said we shouldn’t talk about the Lions, but here goes: Need I mention that they are also a Ford family enterprise? 0-10 everyone.
WV736 on November 19, 2008 at 10:00 AM
Private jets? This shows how clueless these execs are and should reinforce how pointless it would be to “lend” these companies and the UAW any money. It’s a handout and it will be wasted.
forest on November 19, 2008 at 10:01 AM
So what they take private jets to work/DC/etc? That’s part of their compensation for their position at their respective company. Cry & moan as much as you please…class warfare isn’t going to solve the problem.
Ahh…the problem. The major problem facing the big 2.5 is competitiveness. They make good products at good prices, however due to massive fleet sales and huge incentives on new cars – residual values on US cars suck. Tack in all the juicy contracts the UAW have strong-armed Detroit into signing, and the Big 2.5 are even less competitive.
GM has long been a financing company that produces and sells cars as a hobby. Now that the finance world is on a roller-coaster ride from hell, it’s no wonder the management of the Detroit Automakers are going long in ‘Oops, I crapped my pants’.
The business model of the automakers is a problem. The stranglehold of the UAW is even a bigger problem…not fuel efficiency, emission standards, or a couple execs using private jets.
Stay focused people. Private jets are a non-issue and re-negotiating the compensation of these execs is a non-issue. Detroit increasing global competitiveness, including employee/legacy costs, is what needs to be addressed.
If you people really want Harry, Nancy, and Barney dictating salaries/bonuses of employees of private enterprises – well go ahead. That’s a very slippery slope I’m not willing to take. What will be after that? People making $250,000 can’t invest the way they want, receive severance packages, or bonuses? There’s a lot of wealth out there that the Marxists want to spread around. Stay focused and stop them at every turn. If that means defending an investment banker so that they get a $1mil bonus that they are entitled too…so be it.
Ital79 on November 19, 2008 at 10:02 AM
they flew in……..let them take the bus back home!
grapeknutz on November 19, 2008 at 10:07 AM
What other Western nation forces its corporations to pick up the tab for healthcare?
Germany:
France:
And although it isn’t Western, Japan (in part).
MayBee on November 19, 2008 at 10:07 AM
Ital79 on November 19, 2008 at 10:02 AM
It’s an issue as long as they are asking for tax dollars to bail them out. Just to be clear, I don’t want to give them the money and then have the government dictate to executives what mode of transportation they use. I’m simply against giving them the money to begin with. They can fly whatever they want to as long as they are doing it on their own money and not expecting for any of mine to be spread their way.
forest on November 19, 2008 at 10:08 AM
thomasaur on November 19, 2008 at 10:08 AM
I disagree. I have worked in the auto industry for a decade, both on the OEM and supplier side. From the supplier side, Ford is by far the worst of the companies to work with, and the model they have currently cannot sustain itself any longer than the other two. Suppliers work with Ford to keep their own plants full, and work with others to make money, because they know it is impossible to make money working with Ford. To say that there is collaberation between Ford and its suppliers is false. It is what management would like Ford employees to believe, but looking from the other side it is just plain patently false.
I am in the midst of my second layoff in three years, and I know the Big Three going down will hurt, but it is necessary. Michigan will rebuild itself, without the anchor of the UAW.
ConservativeLawStudent on November 19, 2008 at 10:09 AM
Wait, have the CEOs actually fly with hoi polloi, the people who actually buy their products? But then they might actually have to listen to consumers’ complaints and suggestions.
All three of them need to be fired. Let the companies go bankrupt. Not only are those companies saddled with bad UAW contracts, they are also saddled with bad management.
rbj on November 19, 2008 at 10:09 AM
Why isn’t there an “ignore” feature on this board?
Daft Punk on November 19, 2008 at 10:10 AM
They wouldn’t go to ch. 11, by the way. They wouldnt have the money or be able to get a loan to sustain them during restructing. They’d go to ch.7 and the whole company would be liquidated.
I’m still adamantly opposed to any bailout, obviously. Just correcting the record
lodge on November 19, 2008 at 10:11 AM
How much of the taxpayer money that they get will end up being funneled back into Washington as lobbying money?
aero on November 19, 2008 at 10:12 AM
It isnt just one state. Take for instance Belividere and Rockford Illinois. Chrysler’s Belvidere Assembly is there. If that plant were to close, so would all of the local OEM suppliers. It would crush Belvidere and Rockford. There are plants, and suppliers located all around the country. Not everything is in Michigan or Detroit.
Snapiron on November 19, 2008 at 10:13 AM
Did Detroit secede? And did Michigan rejoice?
irishspy on November 19, 2008 at 10:15 AM
When a company is spending far more each year on the pensions of people who no longer work for them than they are on the salaries of the people currently working the line, the business model is unsustainable. It’s communism in microcosm, and it’s simply unsustainable. Loans/bailouts notwithstanding, the Big 3 will not be able to survive under the agreements they have with the UAW.
aero on November 19, 2008 at 10:16 AM
I disagree. I have a real problem with the fact that Mulally flies home to Seattle from Detroit every weekend on a private jet. If he wants to live in Seattle, he can fly coach or first class on his own dime. That demonstrates tone-deafness on the part of Ford to allow this perk to continue. People are worried about losing their jobs while he is out using a private jet for a four-hour flight home every weekend; that is a serious waste of company funds.
WV736 on November 19, 2008 at 10:17 AM
You, just like the MSM and author of this article failed to do ALL the numbers to see what the cost are.
In that article the mention his Salary is $28 million a year. For a 40 hour work week, this means he gets paid $14,583 an hour. Lets go with a low of 1 hour spend each way in the airport if he takes a public plane over his private jets, that means it would cost $29,166, not counting the airfare, for 2 hours of his time waiting in the airport verses the $20k it cost to take the flight on the private jet. Now if there is a flight delay, which happens a lot, then this number jumps even higher but bottom line is it saved $9k to take a private jet.
Now we can debate his pay as a different topic, but based on his salary alone it is cheaper to take these private planes. That does not make a good news story though, so lets go with the greedy executive with perks story instead by selective reporting of the facts and figures. This type of reporting is how Sen. Obama got elected.
JeffinSac on November 19, 2008 at 10:19 AM
Why is your assumption that they are entitled to it rather than, IF they are entitled to it. Somewhere along the line the right’s defense of the “free market” lost the most important principle that should undergird the system, MERITOCRACY. It seems to me that over the last 8 years investment bankers have demonstrated that they are NOT entitled to 1$ million dollar (and more) bonuses, in part because they have been engaging in shady practices to inflate their value.
I know it’s really popular to blame Frannie and Freddie for the financial services meltdown, but there’s a reason that line of attack didn’t work in the campaign, it’s not true. Frannie and Freddie might have opened the floodgates, but investment bankers here and around the country saw a gleaming pile of gold in the expansion in the housing market and they went for it lock, stock and barrel with no reservations. No one, anywhere, wanted people to make “responsible” decisions about loaning because no one, anywhere thought beyond the next quarter or fiscal year. Was a profit turned? Yes! Did we get our bonus? Yes! Did anyone make sure that this kind of thing was sustainable in the long term and decide to make less profitable but safer investments instead? No, no and NO again.
This logic of “profit now” “long term never” thinking is also at the root of what’s wrong with the auto industry and corporate America in general right now. Rather than start to diversify to renewable funds twenty years ago when these issues were first being raised oil companies donated to political campaigns, that’s cheaper than overhauling the industry and now there’s an energy crisis. Rather than digitizing medical records independently, which would cost in the short term, but save money in the long term, the healthcare industry drug its feet and now the government is mandating a seriously important cost saving matter. Rather than think about the forecasts for reduced oil supply in the long term, American auto corporations drug their feet on fuel effecient vehicles and listened to their marketing teams who told them Americans would “never” buy small fuel effecient cars.
At a certain point the right is going to have to stop blaming workers. Workers didn’t make executives in a variety of corporations make ridiculous decisions. Unions are not perfect, but their job is NOT to secure the corporation has long term sustainable growth. That’s the job of CEOs and we can say that there has been a horrible failure for corporate America to think about the long term and we’re seeing the results of it. Defending bonusus. HA!
DeathToMediaHacks on November 19, 2008 at 10:20 AM
Yeah, I know. Where I live, we have on Chrysler and one GM plant and they are both closing.
What I referred to was the fact that all three companies are in one state, with a twice-elected absolute loser of a governor dependent on them.
BigD on November 19, 2008 at 10:20 AM
Are you blogging from France?
sherry on November 19, 2008 at 10:20 AM
sherry on November 19, 2008 at 10:20 AM
Just in his mind.
kingsjester on November 19, 2008 at 10:24 AM
DeathToMediaHacks on November 19, 2008 at 10:20 AM
You are so full of $hit.
There is plenty of evidence which proves that sales figures for the big three would not have put them in this position (they are competitive with the better run/better staffed Japanese/Euro manufacturers). The problem is overhead, and the biggest component of their bloated overhead are the contracts for the UAW thugs.
Next.
PimFortuynsGhost on November 19, 2008 at 10:25 AM
Ed. This is wrong. First of all, you cannot relocate to michigan from detroit (though most people have ;) ) . Second of all, Mulally lives here. It was Mark Fields that was commuting from Florida, and after that debacle, I believe that perk was taken from him and he has to pay for that himself now.
Snapiron on November 19, 2008 at 10:27 AM
West Michigan can hear the sucking sound coming from Detroit. Not even the shrill call of the Ann Arbor loon can mask the reality that Detroit is New Orleans with Snow or Baghdad without the green zone.
More seriously, this is like AIG’s parties- a PR problem
highhopes on November 19, 2008 at 10:27 AM
Germany and Japan don’t have huge union overhead because workers in those countries get healthcare and retirement pensions from the government, not from corporations. Yes corporations pay a tax on profit, but clearly, Japan and Germany auto corporations have found a way to integrated those costs into their business model and voila, profit. German and Japanese governments ALSO supply funds for new technological development for innovation to their corporations so that cost is not part of their overhead.
You see it’s not just that German and Japanese auto corps don’t have to pay for workers healthcare. They don’t have to waste time and energy on being in an adversarial relationship with their workers. They aren’t paying lawyers to negotiate, lobbysts to fight for anti-union law, and they aren’t having to create a huge ugly beauracracy to administer UAW benefit packages.
DeathToMediaHacks on November 19, 2008 at 10:29 AM
We’ve seen this happen already with the steel industry. In Western PA in the 70s-early 80s, 90% of the steel production and jobs disappeared in a span of about 10 years. 48 blast furnaces operating went down to a total of 1. There was no bailout, they just shut em down due to high costs (USW mostly). (Yes, the union opted for destruction over meaningful and timely concessions)
It was rough for a while, my uncle moved for Aliquippa to El Paso, and many friends also moved. But Western PA is in pretty decent shape now, and has been since the late 80’s.
Anyway, I’d take the disaster scenarios/scare tactics surrounding the auto industry with grain of salt. Chapter 11 does not mean all production will cease. Even chapter 7 wouldn’t necessarily mean that. And the ancillary businesses will not disappear either. I’m just not buying the scare tactics, I guess because I’ve already lived through a similar industrial collapse.
forest on November 19, 2008 at 10:29 AM
Oh, please. The dude has a Blackberry and laptop to be productive (in a way that only a CEO can) while waiting.
Daft Punk on November 19, 2008 at 10:30 AM
Dreaming of sugarplums and socialism.
sherry on November 19, 2008 at 10:30 AM
Are you aware that health insurance was first provided to employees after WWII when the Democrats instituted wage controls. Businesses offered it as a perk, along with vacation pay, bonuses and other things because the government limited what they could pay.
How much more pay could workers receive if revenue wasn’t eaten up with all the taxes and other services the government mandates? Why not eliminate all of the crap that employers pay to employ someone and instead pay the people doing the work. Then people would be free to spend their money as they see fit. But, wait, that means some people wont’ spend it the way the government wants. Oh, that would never do, people are too stupid to care for themselves.
This country is founded on the principles of LIBERTY. That is what has made it great. Freedom to succeed, freedom to fail.
Jvette on November 19, 2008 at 10:31 AM
And at a certain point the left, particularly the labor unions will have to stop demanding disproportionate salaries for semi-skilled and unskilled labor. And, while on the subject, have you seen the lifestyles of Union leaders or the palaces they have built for themselves in DC? It really tees me off when idiots blame all the problems on the auto manufacturer while giving the UAW and its members a complete pass for decades of being greedy bastards concerned with increasing benefits than the financial well-being of the cash cow.
highhopes on November 19, 2008 at 10:31 AM
There are a few hundred overpaid execs. There are millions of overpaid hourly UAW workers.
Care to take a guess which group has more of an impact on GM’s demise?
angryed on November 19, 2008 at 10:32 AM
I’m not harping on Ed’s typo, here. Just wanted to point out how funny my Michigan relatives would find this statement, because it is exactly correct!
You do relocate from Detroit to Michigan, although almost everyone with a functioning brain did this 40 years ago…
Jaibones on November 19, 2008 at 10:34 AM
It’s not 1980 anymore. The tax rate isn’t 70% and it hasn’t been for a long time. You can only reduce taxes so much before, as an economic strategy you get diminishing returns. We’ve seen the evidence of that over the past 8 years. At a certain point tax reductions are factored into the business model and, at least recently, wages go up AT THE TOP, but they have yet to go up for everyday American workers. Is the argument that this time tax reductions would lead to an increase in wages for Americans when it didn’t during the Bush years? Profit went up. Wall Street went up. But wages in comparison to increases in cost of living? Not so much. Know when wages DID go up? Under the tax system proposed by Obama that is basically an exact mirror of Clinton era tax system. Was that “socialism”?
DeathToMediaHacks on November 19, 2008 at 10:35 AM
Germany and Japan don’t have huge union overhead because workers in those countries get healthcare and retirement pensions from the government, not from corporations.
I just posted information showing you are wrong about that. In both Germany and Japan, corporations and employees split the cost of their health care.
MayBee on November 19, 2008 at 10:36 AM
I don’t know about that. If Dearborn gets any more Islamic it could declare itself a caliphate.
I wonder if we could just give Detroit back to the French or British with a sincere apology note.
highhopes on November 19, 2008 at 10:38 AM
I agree, but that’s really an industry by industry discussion. Can we agree that the people who build cars are not “unskilled” labor. So that issue isn’t why the auto industry failed.
You mean their individual houses or you mean their office buildings. Union leadership is entrenched and corrupt, I agree. But what are their salaries. Are we talking 8 figures like we are with the top teir of many of these corporations and investment banks? As I said, unions are not perfect, but their ONLY job is to advocate for workers in the purest sense of a meritocracy they are doing well. CEOs are supposed to think about the longterm health of a corporation. And I know that’s tough when you’re negotiating with a union, but being a CEO SHOULD be hard, you’re paid a TON of money, again MERITOCRACY. The corporate class has failed in its responsibility to the economy as a whole.
DeathToMediaHacks on November 19, 2008 at 10:39 AM
UAW workers are getting paid more than their labor is worth.
Execs are getting paid more than their services are worth.
They companies are losing money as a result, and both labor and management want us to subsidize their failure so they don’t have to make necessary chnages.
The answer is no.
forest on November 19, 2008 at 10:40 AM
DeathToMediaHacks on November 19, 2008 at 10:29 AM
How much are the UAW goons paying you? Or are you whoring for free?
This country needs someone with the balls to crush the UAW like Thatcher crushed Scargill and the NUM in the 80’s in Britain and bring the British into the 20th century. Too bad Obama and the Dhimmis are bought and paid for by these thugs.
PimFortuynsGhost on November 19, 2008 at 10:40 AM
But it’s a national system no? The overhead and administration of which is not handled by the corporations but by the state.
DeathToMediaHacks on November 19, 2008 at 10:40 AM
Ed just needed another cup of coffee. He’ll fix it.
Laura in Maryland on November 19, 2008 at 10:41 AM
Classy. How much are corporate execs paying you? Or are you whoring for free? See how easy that was. *eyeroll*
Sweet. Polemical rhetoric with no engagement of the issues and the use of a lame “Dhimmis” slur. So you’re done then? Cool.
DeathToMediaHacks on November 19, 2008 at 10:42 AM
Time for some bankruptcy therapy for the Big Three.
A reorganization judge would break both parasitic UAW contracts and silly exec perks.
Bad form, boys, for showing up for handouts while traveling like princes…
Wanderlust on November 19, 2008 at 10:42 AM
Let them eat airline peanuts.
Star20 on November 19, 2008 at 10:42 AM
No Bail Out! Plain and simple. They can sell their Private Jet! Let the Unions start to crumble. No Bail Out!
sheebe on November 19, 2008 at 10:42 AM
You, just like the MSM and author of this article failed to do ALL the numbers to see what the cost are.
In that article the mention his Salary is $28 million a year. For a 40 hour work week, this means he gets paid $14,583 an hour. Lets go with a low of 1 hour spend each way in the airport if he takes a public plane over his private jets, that means it would cost $29,166, not counting the airfare, for 2 hours of his time waiting in the airport verses the $20k it cost to take the flight on the private jet. Now if there is a flight delay, which happens a lot, then this number jumps even higher but bottom line is it saved $9k to take a private jet.
Now we can debate his pay as a different topic, but based on his salary alone it is cheaper to take these private planes. That does not make a good news story though, so lets go with the greedy executive with perks story instead by selective reporting of the facts and figures. This type of reporting is how Sen. Obama got elected.
JeffinSac on November 19, 2008 at 10:19 AM
sorry jiffysac, but CEO’s don’t get an hourly wage….
max1 on November 19, 2008 at 10:43 AM
No one “gets” anything from the government. For the government to have it to give, it must first take it from someone. I do not want the government to “give” me health care, eventually the one doing the “giving” also will the one deciding whether or not I deserve the care I need. We are seeing this in other countries where the government “gives” its citizens health care.
Jvette on November 19, 2008 at 10:46 AM
So my home mortgage, something that is not a gift, something I have to pay back – by this same logic – is also a ‘bailout?’
I thought it was a loan.
They are not asking for a bailout. They are asking for a loan.
wise_man on November 19, 2008 at 10:49 AM
I’m not buying into all this “beat up the CEO” crap.
What a CEO earns, in relation to the total payroll of large corporations is chump change… And, he earns every g’damn penny of it.
The real villains in all this are the Communist Extortionist Unions, bleeding out all the profitability of corporate America.
Even if a CEO comes up with the PERFECT business model, all it takes is a union sucking the lifeblood out, plus the unending safety and ecological regulations, to bring a corporation to it’s knees, when the economy recesses.
franksalterego on November 19, 2008 at 10:49 AM
Hey, guess what I just figured out? We, the taxpayers, will be stuck paying all those UAW pensions if/when the Big 3 fall:
We’re screwed either way. So this is what it feels like to be mugged.
aero on November 19, 2008 at 10:49 AM
DeathToMediaHacks on November 19, 2008 at 10:35 AM
A lower tax burden is the same as increased wages. Unemployment went down under Pres. Bush which means that the tax cuts at the top created more jobs. More people working means more money in the economy. I have no problem with the people at the top getting greater compensation. The more they have, the more they spend, the more they spend, the more services and goods are needed. More jobs, more money in the economy.
Jvette on November 19, 2008 at 10:50 AM
The best thing for the US automakers to do would be to declare bankruptcy. That would free them from their contracts with their suppliers and the unions, and allow them to reorganize.
A bailout would be nothing more than life support, and sould only delay the inevitable. They don’t need our tax dollars, they need to change the way they do business.
UltimateBob on November 19, 2008 at 10:55 AM
They have to fly private so they don’t have to face the public scrutiny and personal interaction with the huddled masses.
What is wrong with you heartless conservatives?
/sarc
csdeven on November 19, 2008 at 10:59 AM
Unions began honorably fighting for workers that were abused with over work, under pay, unsafe working environment and unfair hiring and firing practices. They succeeded in not just correcting these injustices, but in getting government regulations to mandate them. Over the last few decades, in order to justify themselves, they have come the bargaining table with the sole purpose of getting more and more. They are no longer watchdogs and guardians, but mob like enforcers. The dues paid to the unions are used to influence elections, promote the activist agendas of the leaders and assure them high paying positions. Pension plans, health insurance and other supposed “benefits” of unionization have been raided over the years by the leaders.
The unions in my lifetime have become a huge part of the problem. They need to be restructured.
Jvette on November 19, 2008 at 11:00 AM
Nope, not done.
My motto is “look for the union label, and buy elsewhere.”
PimFortuynsGhost on November 19, 2008 at 11:00 AM
The difference between the German/French/Japanese system and ours is that over there every business has to pay the contribution, not just the “legacy” businesses. If Ford pays for the health care of its employees and Toyota (at its US plants) does not, then the playing field isn’t exactly level, is it.
factoid on November 19, 2008 at 11:01 AM
Let’s pool our money and offer to buy the Volt from GM.
huckleberryfriend on November 19, 2008 at 11:02 AM
Ital79 on November 19, 2008 at 10:02 AM
Priceless. Private jets are just compensation…eat it everybody! But those juicy contracts for the workers, robbing the place!
Really lame double standard. Its a problem top to bottom. Both ends of the spectrum need to be addressed. Obviously the big shots are just as overcompensated as the UAW, or they wouldn’t have let their company get in this mess.
thecountofincognito on November 19, 2008 at 11:02 AM
Come on, you know he’d be at the Cinnabon, charging it and the Post-Intelligencer on the company card. Using the Blackberry to do, you know, actual work, well, that just wouldn’t happen.
Snowed In on November 19, 2008 at 11:03 AM
Jvette on November 19, 2008 at 11:00 AM
Well said.
thecountofincognito on November 19, 2008 at 11:04 AM
Sorry, Max — they may not be hourly wage slaves, but all you need to do is divide working hours by compensation to do a simple time valuation.
Prufrock on November 19, 2008 at 11:05 AM
It centers around “Energy” what is Obama going to do about our Energy needs in America? There is more then the Auto Industry that is vunerable in Obama’s America. Remember he doesn’t like COAL.
http://sarah-palin-2008.blogspot.com/2008/11/obama-vows-to-move-full-steam-ahead-but.html
Dr Evil on November 19, 2008 at 11:07 AM
Death To Media:But it’s a national system no? The overhead and administration of which is not handled by the corporations but by the state.
No.
The government tightly manages health care costs, but employers like auto companies have the responsibility for insurance.
MayBee on November 19, 2008 at 11:10 AM
The irony of all this?
For years we’ve heard college know-it-all hippies lament the idea that the “corporations run everything”.
Yet now, we’re on the verge of proving them right, by giving our hard-earned money to those who do anything but work hard for theirs, and spend it like water.
MadisonConservative on November 19, 2008 at 11:12 AM
factoid- If Ford pays for the health care of its employees and Toyota (at its US plants) does not, then the playing field isn’t exactly level, is it.
Toyota in its US plants does pay for health insurance.
MayBee on November 19, 2008 at 11:12 AM
They need to fail. They need to be restructured.
Not sure if that means they can cancel the union contracts, but that would be a big plus.
Sir Andrew on November 19, 2008 at 11:12 AM
whatever they get from Obamahandouts, I will never buy a big 3 car on principle alone….Die you Union whores….
SDarchitect on November 19, 2008 at 11:17 AM
And as you know health insurance isn’t what’s expensive, it’s healthcare COSTS i.e. the treatments, the drugs, the surgeries etc. Toyota doesn’t have to pay that outside of its U.S. plants. There’s no way around that. You also continue to ignore that other nations subsidize tech innovations.
DeathToMediaHacks on November 19, 2008 at 11:17 AM
That may very well be true, I don’t know. But to travel that way when you are asking for taxpayer money is simply ridiculous, and does not show any respect to the average Joe who is paying for their bailout. CEO of a large operation or not, you would think they would have the public relation sense to see how the public would react to their extravagance.
kam582 on November 19, 2008 at 11:18 AM
Hmmm, corporate largess and unions that pay more for health care than steel…. seems to me, a pox on both houses would cull the herd.
MNDavenotPC on November 19, 2008 at 11:25 AM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »