GM of Canada Job Cuts

[Keith Tedford]

If the numbers are true, that GM of Canada, not just Oshawa, had 20,000 employees in 2005 and plan on reducing to 7,000, then something big is in the works. There are probably more than 7,000 workers in Oshawa alone right now. Getting rid of two thirds of your work force is one big cut.

http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/hom...Chrysler_090220

[BJCHEV396]

Where do the bailouts stop Keith?7-8 billion to GM!3-4 billion to Mopar!You and are paying for it as tax payers.I'm tired of hearing about it and I'm real tired of paying around 42% income tax!Maybe it's time to pull the plug!They will probably be back next year with more sob stories looking for more handouts.

[Keith Tedford]

If they don't get the banking system sorted out around the world, The Big Three will be the least of our problems. Add to that all the Madoffs coming out of the woodwork who have scammed billions of dollars out of unsuspecting and greedy people and the mess just keeps getting worse. It's going to be interesting to say the least over the next 3-5 years.

[Hylton]

8 billion to save 7,000 jobs? That's 850,000+ tax payer dollars per job! Forget it.

[BJCHEV396]

Right on Hylton!

[Salvatore]

Well then what should we do? I guess if we don't help with the bailouts we will be paying billions for unemployment compensation anyway with nothing ever in return! Most countries have funded these systems for years. We, in North America are just not used to it. I guess we have become more of a Socialist economy to just exist.

[Keith Tedford]

I didn't start this thread to create an argument but most of these threads seem to end up that way. I was just pointing out that GM seems to be planning on cutting two thirds of their manpower out of the Canadian work force. That is huge. If they can do it now, why didn't they do it a few years ago? They might have actually been able to weather this economic storm had they taken action then. Most companies seem to be geared to full production to make money. Anything less and they are in the red. Let the big three go down and all of a sudden the supplier chain becomes distressed and they start going down. Then the successful companies like Toyota start getting a supply problem. It becomes a vicious circle that spirals outward. I certainly don't know what the answer is, but things aren't going to be pretty over the next 3-5 years for any of us.

[Hylton]

[ QUOTE ]
I didn't start this thread to create an argument but most of these threads seem to end up that way. I was just pointing out that GM seems to be planning on cutting two thirds of their manpower out of the Canadian work force. That is huge. If they can do it now, why didn't they do it a few years ago? They might have actually been able to weather this economic storm had they taken action then. Most companies seem to be geared to full production to make money. Anything less and they are in the red. Let the big three go down and all of a sudden the supplier chain becomes distressed and they start going down. Then the successful companies like Toyota start getting a supply problem. It becomes a vicious circle that spirals outward. I certainly don't know what the answer is, but things aren't going to be pretty over the next 3-5 years for any of us.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't mind using taxpayer money to create long term sustainable jobs but not 850K per job. Suppliers are affected by how many units are produced, not by how many people have jobs. If GM went under tomorrow, they would still be making cars - just under a new organization and ownership structure.

Nobody can expect to have the same job or career for their entire life anymore so if we are going to spend tax payers money, let's use it on retraining people to work in industries that need people. Ever get a drywaller to come in and give you an estimate for taping and mud these days? Geezus!

[BJCHEV396]

Around $35-40 an hour!