Comments on: Toyota UK to cut staff pay & hours by 10%

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:09:26 +0000

Wheelnut said – “When and wherre did I say GM or any other business is a Charity”

You implied it with this comment:

Wheelnut – “I just love the fact that despite the financial problems that ALL car companies are experiencing at the moment they still expect the workers to take pay cuts.. yet it wasn’t the workers decisions that got them in the sh!t.. Onvce again ignorant/arrogant managers.”

Sure. They shouldn’t take any paycuts at all. ANd they shouldn’t be sacked either. Let the business run at a loss. Yeah right… don’t try to backpedal on what you’ve essentially said there Wheelnut :)

By: Wheelnut

Wheelnut — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 10:08:17 +0000

When and wherre did I say GM or any other business is a Charity [except for of course Vinnies]

I was merley informing you that althoguh GM haven’t yet been able to come to an similar agreement with their stupod ignorant American Workers as Ford and other car companies have recently.. thy have been trying to do so for some time. Hopefully now that Ford [US] have made a deal with the UAW GM will be able to reach a similar deal in time before they go under and/or leave the USA

Even the UAW must realise that a job is better than no job

I agree its sad to think that some long term employees might have to lose their jobs but Managers have to make decisions that they believe will ensure the survival of the company.

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 03:42:45 +0000

Yep, exactly Andrew. Many people try to paint business, profit, and ‘making money’ in a bad light. What’s wrong with making money? Where would this world be if no money was made? When you make losses, the owner of the business effectively has to cover those with their own reserves. Would you be employing staff, knowing that you are paying them not out of your income, but out of your own personal savings? Of course you wouldn’t. You’re not a charity.

No doubt, there is an element of emotion involved as at the end of the day you are dealing with real people and their livelihoods, and want to avoid it as much as possible. However end of the day, when it comes to the crunch, that’s just business.

By: Andrew M

Andrew M — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 03:20:25 +0000

Im starting to agree with you on a few things Dan.

Many people seem to think profit is a dirty word.

I know im not in business to do anyone favours at my expense, but in saying that i have respect for those that work for me and would try my hardest to ensure their job security as well if a bad time was to arrive.

Wages are pretty much the biggest cost to a business. its also pretty much considered a fixed cost. It is the quickest, cheapest, and easiest way to bring up your bottom line by culling dollars from it.

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:24:49 +0000

Exactly Andrew. I could have just as well used Ford as an example. I just love it how Wheelnut and others get all emotional when you throw a little word ‘toyota’ somewhere in there haha. Typical reaction, I know I am guaranteed to get. Hook, line and sinker :) But yes. On a serious note this is something GM should have done a long time ago. It is basically staff benefits that are bankrupting GM. Personally, I wouldn’t want to see any company go bust due to the mass of problems it creates, and people it affects, not even Hyundai/Kia (although it would be great to rub in the face of you know who haha, maybe one day!)

Wheelnut, one thing is that business is not charity. It’s there to make money. It will not keep on employees if it’s losing money. Would you employ someone if they don’t make you money for you? Even as a result of YOUR bad decisions? Of course not. Employees, are just a human resource. As cruel as it sounds, the operative word is ‘resource’. Reality is harsh… but then again, this is capitalism, not communism.

By: Frenchie

Frenchie — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 11:49:19 +0000

Doest slow down their production though. Still producing 90% of max production where the market is down 20-50%.
So Toyota’s and Honda’s stock pile there cars amounting to huge losses.

By: Andrew M

Andrew M — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 10:17:57 +0000

Im gonna have to say I didnt think Dan was showing his usual bias this time around.

sure what he said could have been interpereted the way bret and frontman did considering Dans past, but i feel the general mood coming from Dan isnt that biased…………this time.

I am gonna stir it myself though and say that if Toyota has to announce a similar policy so close to Ford, then perhaps Toyota isnt as far ahead of Ford as Dan thinks?????

By: Wheelnut

Wheelnut — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 09:07:01 +0000

Dan says: Had this article been about ford doing it, I would have mentioned that GM should have learnt from ford instead of toyota.

That maybe so Dan yet the fact is that GM have tried to get the UAW to agree to a similar package on several occassions – it’s been an ongoing thing with the UAW for Years.. I mean they get paid approx $40p/h plus health care etc and look at the “quality” of cars they make.

Remember – Ford managed to get the UAW to agree to a pay cut just a couple of weeks ago.. So I don’t think it will be too long before the UAW agrees to GMs [original] proposal..
Unfortunately though there’s just no hope for Chrysler

By: Wheelnut

Wheelnut — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 08:57:31 +0000

It mightn’t seem like something to be proud of Dan but in the end when the ecomnomic downturn is eventually over and tyour company si still operational it will be seen as a smart move.. and that;s what the management ofall companies should do is to ensure their companies survival for the future.

I just love the fact that despite the financial problems that ALL car companies are experiencing at the moment they still expect the workers to take pay cuts.. yet it wasn’t the workers decisions that got them in the sh!t.. Onvce again ignorant/arrogant managers.

Because Toyota made the decision after Ford doesn’t necessarily mean that they are in a better position than Ford.
It could also mean that they took longer to realise that “the sh!t has hit the fan” in Japan as well as in Detroit

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 08:30:00 +0000

And wheelnut, for a company it is nothing to be proud of to be the firt who resolved to have to cut staff pay and / or fire people in a crisis. Means that they’re not as solid as others. The fact that Toyota lasted so long before they had to, after Ford, means they are (obviously) better off than Ford. In any case, it makes logical business sense to do this. Such practice has been done in the business world for as long as business has existed. Ford did not invent this. Neither has toyota. Had this article been about ford doing it, I would have mentioned that GM should have learnt from ford instead of toyota. But becasue I always adhere to code of conduct, and don’t want to go off topic, I used toyota instead. It is an article about toyota after all isn’t it?

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 08:25:07 +0000

So… where have I said GM is following? As far as I know, GM still hasn’t resolved the issue. I’ll make it clear for you then. GM / Chrysler should follow. But they’re not. Hence they’re going broke. Hence it’s too late for them to learn from Toyota unfortunately :) Maybe GM management don’t have the people’s skills to negotiate with the unions? Who knows. But it’s certainly not impossible. Toyota is doing it. Ford is doing it. Feel free to read that between the lines again :P

By: Wheelnut

Wheelnut — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 08:21:01 +0000

Dan your initial comment on this topic was

Better to have lower paying job and staff benefits are better than no job at all. Get through the tough times and back in full swing afterwards. Something GM and Chrysler should have done. Too late for them to learn from Toyota unfortunately…

By saying to late to learn from Toyota you implied that Toyota were the first to come up with the idea of offering their assembly line workers a package where they take a pay cut to help the company through the togh times…
When infact Honda and Ford workers agreed to a similar package before Toyota [UK] did.

As for it being something GM should have done… They did months ago but the stupid small minded UAW refused to accept it.. as a result Bob Lutz said that [GM] pulling out of the US and moving overseas is a possibility.

I wouldn’t be surprised that if the situation gets worse for GM the Obama administration Forces the UAW to accept the paycut deal inorder to save jobs etc – which is ironic given that teh Bush Snr adminsitration forced the Big 3 to accept the unions deal inorder to end a long running strike

As I’ve said a Job is a better than No Job particularly now

As for Toyota not being in as bad a situation as the Others – there was an article on Autoblog which said Toytas “reserves” was down to [approx] $40bn which their F1 team could easily wipeout this season

By: Bret

Bret — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 08:12:25 +0000

Dan Says:
March 12th, 2009 at 11:46 am
“Too late for them to learn from Toyota unfortunately… ”

Difrectly meant to imply: Toyota leading, GM/chrysler following.

Even though GM, for instance, have been trying for a similar arrangement for many months.

You suggested that GM should follow Toyota’s lead, when infact GM have been trying since long before Toyota saw someone else do it.
Personally I couldn’t give a rats about GM per se, but rather the global fallout throught the industry.

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 07:55:31 +0000

Please quote me where I said they are leading the pack Bret?? Reason I mentioned GM is that GM should have done the same. What’s the problem??

By: Bret

Bret — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 07:46:35 +0000

Dan, I didn’t mention GM, you did. Your claim was that Toyota was leading the pack – they aren’t.
They’re copying as usual?

By: Frontman

Frontman — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 04:21:50 +0000

Smile Dan that was a quiet dig :-p
But the big thing with the D3 has been the arrogance and un-willingness of the UAW to shift on it’s stance. Couple that with the exact same response from the baord room of the companies and there was only one way for it to end. Thankfully (yes again I’ll quote my Bias ;-)) for Ford Mullaly & Co have been able to broker a deal to suit both sides.
It has been far easier for the Companies in England due to the fact that they have seen this all before with BMC / Leyland and more recently Rover. If no one bends everyone breaks. This time round both parties are bending together.

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 03:44:01 +0000

Bret, last time I checked GM is almost bankrupt due to all the provisions for employee benefits amounting to astronomical amounts, and staff unwilling to let some of it go, sendng their employer to ruin. Whereas Toyota’s staff are co-operating with company wishes that are essential to long term survival. What is Toyota copying in that regard, you tell me?

Perhaps Toyota took this step after Ford because they are in a better position than Ford, so they could have held it off for longer. And what am I stirring Frontman? It’s plain obvious, and those are the facts! Everyone knows GM is in trouble becasue of this very same thing.

By: Frontman

Frontman — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 03:23:10 +0000

Ha Ha Ha Stirring again are we Dan;-)
Funny how Ford yesterday announced it had done exactly the same thing with the toughest of the Unions, the UAW.

But yes working less hours for less money is far better than working no hours for no money. It’s strange how some unions have trouble with that concept. “No We Will not Take a wage drop!!!!!! Oh hang on, your broke and don’t have any money left for our entitlements………… :-(

By: Bret

Bret — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 02:42:12 +0000

Dan, to claim that Toyota are leading the field on this idea is rediculous. I’m actually surprised it’s taken Toyota so long pick up in this and copy it from everyone else.

By: Dan

Dan — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 00:46:28 +0000