What Toyota knows that GM doesn’t

[Rooster_Ties]

I really don't see it being any different functionally than a station wagon.

Perhaps -- EXCEPT that the gas mileage for a station wagon is probably at least 30% to maybe even 40% or 50% better than for most SUV's.

I used to LOVE my '92 Honda Accord wagon (a fairly moderate size vehicle), and it got pretty decent gas mileage too (nothing like our Prius does now, but not that much less than our '93 Honda Accord 2-door sedan).

Trouble is that practically all SUV's -- because they're technically 'trucks' in the eyes of the government regs -- don't have to adhere to the government standards for gas mileage.

Detroit killed the station wagon (and I'll never forgive them for it), because they could make 2 or 3 times the profit on them, over what they could make on wagons or more utilitarian minivans.

But I really blame us. We always want the biggest -- or at least quite a lot bigger than what we really need.

Edited November 21, 2008 by Rooster_Ties

[Aggie87]

I really don't see it being any different functionally than a station wagon.

Perhaps -- EXCEPT that the gas mileage for a station wagon is probably at least 30% to maybe even 40% or 50% better than for most SUV's.

I don't find this to be true in my case. My last car when I was married was a '99 Volvo V70 station wagon. It got about 23 mpg highway.

My current SUV (Toyota 4Runner) gets 22 on the highway. The difference is negligible, and they're comparable vehicles in terms of quality and size, IMO.

And functionally they are the same to me, still. Both serve the same purpose - adequate seating room and ample covered storage area.

Your argument may make sense if you're comparing a small car's mileage to something like the ginormous Ford Expeditions. But the target market for these vehicles are markedly different from one another.

Edited November 21, 2008 by Aggie87

[Larry Kart]

My favorite SUV is the Ford Global Destroyer. Actually, I once was at a stoplight when a Lincoln Navigator pulled up behind while I wasn't looking, and when I checked my rearview mirror I thought the sky had been blotted out.

[Rooster_Ties]

Saw this quote buried in an article about Honda...

Honda has never had an unprofitable year. It has never had to lay off employees.

Full article (on two pages, the 2nd one you have to click to get to).

[catesta]

"At American auto companies, finance guys and marketers rise to the top. Not at Honda"

This is a problem with a lot of companies being poorly managed. Years ago I was a manager for TruGreen ChemLawn

and was arguing with the division VP at a metting about the sales program being too agressive and cramming shit donw people's throat that they did not need. The guy looked at me and said, "we're not a service company, we're a maketing company". Needless to say I knew I was never going to advance any further than I had, jumped ship and went on my own. You hear people say shit like that all the time. Of course sales are the highest priority, but quality products and service should be what drives the sales.

Of course, Honda also does not have to deal with the UAW.

There was a time and need for the union, but in my opinion that time is over. People are beginning to figure that out. It's obvious when you look at how the amount of dues paying members keeps shrinking. The UAW keeps making runs at Subaru, Honda and Toyota and the door keeps slamming in their faces.

Edited November 25, 2008 by catesta

[Jim Alfredson]

My brother in law's father was an engineer for GM until he retired a few years back. One time he and other top engineers went to a Honda plant in Ohio and he was so impressed with how things are run and how they design their cars that after that experience he only buys Hondas.

[RDK]

I'm gonna get the specifics wrong since I was only half-listening, but there was a report this morning on the Today Show about how cars have gotten much safer over the last few years due to gov't regulations. Something like a record 72 cars have now gotten the "top safety rating" from some organization (I think the one funded by the insurance companies). Only Chrysler didn't have a single vehicle this year that made the top cut.

[catesta]

I'm gonna get the specifics wrong since I was only half-listening, but there was a report this morning on the Today Show about how cars have gotten much safer over the last few years due to gov't regulations. Something like a record 72 cars have now gotten the "top safety rating" from some organization (I think the one funded by the insurance companies). Only Chrysler didn't have a single vehicle this year that made the top cut.

Here is the story....

Vehicle Safety

Ford/Volvo had the highest number.

My midsize SUV is on the list...

Large cars

Acura RL

Audi A6

Cadillac CTS

Ford Taurus

Lincoln MKS

Mercury Sable

Toyota Avalon

Volvo S80

Midsize cars

Acura TL, TSX

Audi A3, A4

BMW 3 series 4-door models

Ford Fusion with optional electronic stability control

Honda Accord 4-door models

Mercedes C class

Mercury Milan with optional electronic stability control

Saab 9-3

Subaru Legacy

Volkswagen Jetta, Passat

Midsize convertibles

Saab 9-3

Volkswagen Eos

Volvo C70

Small cars

Honda Civic 4-door models (except Si) with optional electronic stability control

Mitsubishi Lancer with optional electronic stability control

Scion xB

Subaru Impreza with optional electronic stability control

Toyota Corolla with optional electronic stability control

Volkswagen Rabbit

Minicar

Honda Fit with optional electronic stability control

Minivans

Honda Odyssey

Hyundai Entourage

Kia Sedona

Large SUVs

Audi Q7

Buick Enclave

Chevrolet Traverse

GMC Acadia

Saturn Outlook

Midsize SUVs

Acura MDX, RDX

BMW X3, X5

Ford Edge, Flex, Taurus X

Honda Pilot

Hyundai Santa Fe, Veracruz

Infiniti EX35

Lincoln MKX

Mercedes M class

Nissan Murano

Saturn VUE

Subaru Tribeca

Toyota FJ Cruiser, Highlander

Volvo XC90

Small SUVs

Ford Escape

Honda CR-V, Element

Mazda Tribute

Mercury Mariner

Mitsubishi Outlander

Nissan Rogue

Subaru Forester

Toyota RAV4

Volkswagen Tiguan

Large pickups

Ford F-150

Honda Ridgeline

Toyota Tundra

Small pickup

Toyota Tacoma

ALSO-RANS

These 26 vehicles earn good ratings in front and side crash tests. They have ESC, standard or optional. They would be 2009 Top Safety Pick winners if their seat/head restraints also earn good ratings:

Chevrolet Malibu

Chrysler Sebring, Sebring convertible, Town & Country

Dodge Avenger, Grand Caravan

Infiniti G35, M35

Kia Amanti

Lexus ES, GS,IS

Mazda CX-7, CX-9

Mitsubishi Eclipse Spyder, Endeavor

Nissan Altima, Pathfinder, Quest, Xterra

Saturn AURA

Smart Fortwo

Toyota 4Runner, Camry, Prius, Sienna

[JSngry]

Years ago I was a manager for TruGreen ChemLawn and was arguing with the division VP at a metting about the sales program being too agressive and cramming shit donw people's throat that they did not need. The guy looked at me and said, "we're not a service company, we're a maketing company". Needless to say I knew I was never going to advance any further than I had, jumped ship and went on my own. You hear people say shit like that all the time. Of course sales are the highest priority, but quality products and service should be what drives the sales.

Of course, Honda also does not have to deal with the UAW.

There was a time and need for the union, but in my opinion that time is over. People are beginning to figure that out. It's obvious when you look at how the amount of dues paying members keeps shrinking. The UAW keeps making runs at Subaru, Honda and Toyota and the door keeps slamming in their faces.

Chris, how can you say that the time for unions is "over" when you know that most American companies are still being ran like TruGreen ChemLawn?

Maybe the UAW needs to start thinking in terms of "dealing with" Subaru, Honda and Toyota, instead of them Subaru, Honda and Toyota with the UAW. Because clearly these are companies that are doing what a union should (even/especially now) be focused on - delivering job security in an environment of mutual profitability and overall benefit.

Maybe it's more to the point to argue that there was a time and a need for the aggressive, "sales first" management strategy of TruGreen ChemLawn, but that time is over. Until then, there ain't even the possibility for a level playing field w/o organized employee representation.

Viability & sustainability are never unilaterally created in a free society.

Edited November 25, 2008 by JSngry

[catesta]

Years ago I was a manager for TruGreen ChemLawn and was arguing with the division VP at a metting about the sales program being too agressive and cramming shit donw people's throat that they did not need. The guy looked at me and said, "we're not a service company, we're a maketing company". Needless to say I knew I was never going to advance any further than I had, jumped ship and went on my own. You hear people say shit like that all the time. Of course sales are the highest priority, but quality products and service should be what drives the sales.

Of course, Honda also does not have to deal with the UAW.

There was a time and need for the union, but in my opinion that time is over. People are beginning to figure that out. It's obvious when you look at how the amount of dues paying members keeps shrinking. The UAW keeps making runs at Subaru, Honda and Toyota and the door keeps slamming in their faces.

Chris, how can you say that the time for unions is "over" when you know that most American companies are still being ran like TruGreen ChemLawn?

Maybe the UAW needs to start thinking in terms of "dealing with" Subaru, Honda and Toyota, instead of them Subaru, Honda and Toyota with the UAW. Because clearly these are companies that are doing what a union should (even/especially now) be focused on - delivering job security in an environment of mutual profitability and overall benefit.

Maybe it's more to the point to argue that there was a time and a need for the aggressive, "sales first" management strategy of TruGreen ChemLawn, but that time is over. Until then, there ain't even the possibility for a level playing field w/o organized employee representation.

Viability & sustainability are never unilaterally created in a free society.

Look, the UAW was and still may very well be a major part of the problem. Remember back when all those shitty cars were being made? It wasn't all because of bad engineering, a good majority of the time is was also some jerkoff not tightening the bolt down.

Now, that said, I agree completely with those that say these companies have made some poor/bad management decisions as well. It's not all the fault of the union.

But let me ask you this. Why should Honda or any other foreign manufacturer even consider dealing with the UAW in any form? They obviously do not need to. The employees don't seem to want it, so where is the need?

If Toyota and Honda are used as examples of how an auto manufacturer should run, then union is out of the equation.

That's all I'm saying.

Now I could be wrong, if the UAW gets it all together and follows through with some of the shit they say needs to be done for the good of both business and the employee, then sure, there is a place for them. Still, I don't believe we will ever see the UAW in a Honda plant anytime in the future.

[JSngry]

Still, I don't believe we will ever see the UAW in a Honda plant anytime in the future.

As long as there is not a need for what the union provides (or should provide...), no there won't be (not unless we go back to the pre-union days of hired goons beating up and/or murdering people...). But labor does not determine that.

I really want to know though - do Honda, Toyota, etc. allow any sort of "employees association" or some such? Or are they such awesomely Sensitive New Age folks that they maintain harmony intuitively?

[JSngry]

Look, the UAW was and still may very well be a major part of the problem. Remember back when all those shitty cars were being made? It wasn't all because of bad engineering, a good majority of the time is was also some jerkoff not tightening the bolt down.

Hey, the last pizza I got was short on sausage. That wasn't bad engineering either, but I'm not going to blame the actions of the jerkoff who made it on the Italians...

[catesta]

Jim, I think in principal we agree.

For me it breaks down like this...

The UAW got fat when times were good for Ford and GM. Now times have changed. When you look at what it costs a domestic manufacturer to build a car versus one of the imports, it is a significant difference. The imports have never had the union around their neck (for the right or wrong reasons) in fat or lean times. GM, Ford and Chrysler cannot say the same.

So this is do or die? Does the UAW want to survive? Because if these three fail, they're finished.

If they want to survive like the auto makers want to survive, then it can no longer be business as usual for them either.

[catesta]

Look, the UAW was and still may very well be a major part of the problem. Remember back when all those shitty cars were being made? It wasn't all because of bad engineering, a good majority of the time is was also some jerkoff not tightening the bolt down.

Hey, the last pizza I got was short on sausage. That wasn't bad engineering either, but I'm not going to blame the actions of the jerkoff who made it on the Italians...

Well let me ask you this...

Was it delievery, or DiGiorno?

[JSngry]

It was DiPressing.

[catesta]

Still, I don't believe we will ever see the UAW in a Honda plant anytime in the future.

As long as there is not a need for what the union provides (or should provide...), no there won't be (not unless we go back to the pre-union days of hired goons beating up and/or murdering people...). But labor does not determine that.

I really want to know though - do Honda, Toyota, etc. allow any sort of "employees association" or some such? Or are they such awesomely Sensitive New Age folks that they maintain harmony intuitively?

I really don't know, but I doubt there is any type of organized employee association. Maybe just a more representative lower and middle management structure.

For what it's worth. While we keep reading articles and hear praise about how great the foreign companies are to their employees in this country, it ain't so rosey back home....

Nov. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Toyota Motor Corp., Japan's biggest carmaker, will cut its domestic temporary workforce by 50 percent as vehicle demand slumps globally.

Toyota will cut the number of temporary workers to 3,000 from 6,000 by the end of March, spokesman Paul Nolasco said today in a phone interview.

The automaker follows Mazda Motor Corp. and Isuzu Motors Ltd., which yesterday said they would slash a combined 2,700 temporary jobs in Japan in response to slowing sales. Earlier this month, Toyota forecast a 68 percent drop in full-year net income, the biggest decline in at least 18 years, as a global recession cripples auto demand.

Honda Motor Co., Japan's second-largest carmaker, also said today it is cutting 270 temporary workers at its Saitama plant, where the carmaker is reducing output of Accord sedans by 40,000 units. Honda is also cutting production in the U.K. of Civic compacts and CR-V sport-utility vehicles by 21,000 units.

Nissan Motor Co. said last week it will reduce its domestic production by an additional 72,000 units. Japan's third-largest automaker had its credit rating cut one notch today by Fitch Ratings, which cited the company's dependence on the weak U.S. auto market and an appreciation of the yen.

Toyota gained 4.6 percent to 3,080 yen at the close of trading today in Tokyo. The shares have dropped 49 percent this year, set for the worst annual performance since at least 1975.

Full story here...

Toyota cuts 3000 jobs

[catesta]

It was DiPressing.

Tell you what, make it my way sometime and I'll not only make sure your pie has the right amount of fresh salsiccia, I'll make damn sure it is made by a non-union Italian.

[JSngry]

Jim, I think in principal we agree...

If they want to survive like the auto makers want to survive, then it can no longer be business as usual for them either.

Exactly. The UAW needs to radically (and I do mean radically) reform. But that deos not = cease to exist, which is what immediately comes to my mind when I hear talk of "well, weonce needed unions, but now we don't" and such.

To me, that's like saying that hey, your neighborhood is really nice these days, has been for quite a while, probably will be for a good while longer, so why the hell does your house need a door?

Now, sure, I probably don't need my triple-titanium plated steel-core door with the atomic-powered security system built into it, but dammit, I still need a door, just because. And a decent door too, not some cardboard facsimile of one. As long as everything stays cool, I can even leave it unlocked, or even open (when/where I grew up, that's just what you did, leave your door open, assuming that you had a screen door to keep the flies out). But damn if I ever want to find myself in the position of not being able to lock my door if I need to, much less of going to close the door only to find that it ain't there, and OOOPS, Home Depot stopped carrying doors about 8 years ago.

It shows a lack of self-respect to not care for one's self-protection, just as it shows an inflated/distorted sense of self to put one's self-interest above the collective good at all times. And it also shows a lack of respect for others to expect them not to want self-protection of some sort. And no, sorry, "If you don't like it, you can always work someplace else" (as I've heard more than a few times at The Mortgage Company That Cannot Be Named over the last 10 years) is not a form of protection, nor is it in any way a show of respect. It's a pseudo-Neanderthal approach to personnel relations that was a big part of what led to the formation of the labor movement in the first place, so when I hear the same people (not you) spouting, "Unions had their place, but now they're obsolete" turn around and say "If you don't like it, you can always work someplace else" when it comes to simple matters like tying production standards to quarterly pay increases and then transparently raising production standards to impossibly high standards in order to avoid the payouts (and then always having to repeat this charade because the motherfuckers are too stupid to realize that job functions with output that cannot be precisely measured & quantified should not be placed on such a program, and for damn sure you don't let employees "estimate" and report their own production!), then I know what time they think it's getting to be, and quite frankly, they can kiss my farting ass if they think that's gonna go down without a fight. It's bad for me, but it's bad for them too. I want them to do well, hell, they pay me for crissakes. I owe them an honest day's work and my best effort. I don't owe them my soul, and I don't allow them unlimited access to my ass, if you know what I mean.

Now, we definitely need to reform, fundamentally reform, organized labor. But please, American Business, do not insult me by telling me, or even implying that, there is no need for any sort of employee representation in the face of clueless, ignorant management. That's my dignity you're talking about, and also my job. I want them both, I need them both, and I am a reasonable man when approached and treated in a reasonable manner.

[JSngry]

It was DiPressing.

Tell you what, make it my way sometime and I'll not only make sure your pie has the right amount of fresh salsiccia, I'll make damn sure it is made by a non-union Italian.

Cool! Can we make sure that they also work 80 hour weeks at less than minimum wage and sleep in the kitchen too?

I bet that would be some DAMN good pizza!

(just KIDDING!)

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

The imports have never had the union around their neck (for the right or wrong reasons) in fat or lean times. GM, Ford and Chrysler cannot say the same.

I don't think that's true, Chris. British manufacturers had all the same sorts of problems with their unions as the big three have with theirs. (OK, few British cars were in the same market as the big three - some luxury cars and sports cars did well in the US, but the bread and butter British cars weren't suitable for the US market.) And the biggest British firm is now out and has been for the best part of a decade. I am pretty certain that the same union problems applied to continental manufacturers.

As I've said before - even in this thread, I think - there comes a time when it is realised that the balance between unions and management is wrong and adjustments have to be made. They were in Britain. And yes, it bloody well hurt. Mrs Thatcher used to say, "if it isn't hurting, it isn't working," but she was gloating because she just hated the unions anyway. But we got over it after twenty or so years

I don't know if you can get this link

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/statbase/TSDdownload2.asp

edit - no, you can't I just tried it.

It's a series of stats about the number of days (in thousands) lost in Britain through industrial disputes - annually from 1891 to 2007 and monthly from 1931 to September 2008. You'll see a big reduction after the early eighties. Which is not to say that there are no strikes; as Jim says, not all firms act reasonably; not all unions act reasonably. So there is still conflict, but at a very much lower level now, and more legal incentives for negotiation and better ways of handling negotiation now. You need all these things - not just a bash at the unions. But if government can put in place an all-round new deal that encompasses negotiation as well as reducing the unions' power, it seems it can work.

MG

[JSngry]

Still, I don't believe we will ever see the UAW in a Honda plant anytime in the future.

As long as there is not a need for what the union provides (or should provide...), no there won't be (not unless we go back to the pre-union days of hired goons beating up and/or murdering people...). But labor does not determine that.

I really want to know though - do Honda, Toyota, etc. allow any sort of "employees association" or some such? Or are they such awesomely Sensitive New Age folks that they maintain harmony intuitively?

I really don't know, but I doubt there is any type of organized employee association. Maybe just a more representative lower and middle management structure.

Hey, a rose by any other name...

If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

[The Magnificent Goldberg]

I've downloaded those statistics to my disc and here they are (I hope)

Days_lost_through_industrial_disputes_1891_2007.doc

MG

[JSngry]

And the thing about Japanese management, at least the stereotype of same, is that there is a sense of honor. These cats (or at least their stereotypes) know that with their power comes responsibility for nurturing and maintaining "health" of all types across all levels of the enterprise.

American management by and overwhelmingly large, just does not "get" this. We have not yet learned that "rugged individualism" & "guaranteeing the common good" are not mutually exclusive in any put their purest forms. The whole yin-yang thing eludes us, and that will prove to be our downfall, should we not beging to get a grip on this most basic concept, that you can not have a front without also having a back, and that as one goes, so, ultimately, does the other.

Then again, America is a nation in love with the illusion of its own "purity" (national, ideological, regional, whatever, even the "melting pot" is, according to some, result in some kind of ultimate "purity"), even though its greatest triumphs have been the result of anything but...

I have repeatedly seen the most boneheaded management decisions, decisions that are bad for the company & destructive to its employees, not only not admitted to, but covered up, at times even rewarded to further the cover up. If the stereotypes are to be believed, a Japanese manager/executive/whatever would at the very least admit their error, probably even apologize for it to those it adversely affected, including the rank-and-file. It's the simple (yet apparently esoteric) notion of "hey, y'all entrust me with this responsibility and I fucked up. I do not take it lightly that I did, nor do I take lightly the disruptions my error has caused." simple as that.

Hey, ok, Honda ain't got to deal with the UAW. You want that to be an across the board model, then make it an across the board model. When a pus-head like Angelo Mozilo resigns in deep shame rather than making out like a bandit (and disrupting, truly disrupting literally tens of thousands of people's lives, and that's just employees, never mind the lives of their families and communities, in the process), then I'll know we're getting somewhere better than where we are now.

[BruceH]

It was DiPressing.

Tell you what, make it my way sometime and I'll not only make sure your pie has the right amount of fresh salsiccia, I'll make damn sure it is made by a non-union Italian.

Cool! Can we make sure that they also work 80 hour weeks at less than minimum wage and sleep in the kitchen too?

I bet that would be some DAMN good pizza!

Mmm---mmmm!

Spiced with human misery! Now THAT's-a-good pizza!

[JSngry]

SOUL food!