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?