Harley-Davidson cuts more jobs

[Graunke]

The things I posted came directly from Wandell's mouth, in a release to the dealers. There will be more details given at the dealershow, but come hell or highwater, Supply and Demand will be balanced this year. Some dealers will get more bikes, some dealers will get less bikes, and some dealers may dissapear all together.

I am going to disagree with the take on the working man getting it on the chin. Yes, it sucks they are losing jobs. But if you thought the past few years were bad business decisions on H-D's part, how bad of a decision would it be to continue production at the clip it's going? Or even just to leave the employees on payroll when there is nothing for them to do. That's even dumber IMO. Had the Auto industry made moves like this years ago, instead of letting the unions dictate their practices, alot of these problems we're having now economy wide might not be as bad. I know I"m grasping at straws with my reasoning, but it makes sense to me.

[Ryethil]

The things I posted came directly from Wandell's mouth, in a release to the dealers. There will be more details given at the dealershow, but come hell or highwater, Supply and Demand will be balanced this year. Some dealers will get more bikes, some dealers will get less bikes, and some dealers may dissapear all together.

If it came from Wandell then it must be true. I haven't seen it though I haven't sceen a lot in the last few days. This is a good first start.

I am going to disagree with the take on the working man getting it on the chin. Yes, it sucks they are losing jobs. But if you thought the past few years were bad business decisions on H-D's part, how bad of a decision would it be to continue production at the clip it's going? Or even just to leave the employees on payroll when there is nothing for them to do. That's even dumber IMO. Had the Auto industry made moves like this years ago, instead of letting the unions dictate their practices, alot of these problems we're having now economy wide might not be as bad. I know I"m grasping at straws with my reasoning, but it makes sense to me.

Okay, I see the point you're making though I don't agree with it. At least in the main. If the working man is being punished for bad management decisions then management should be laid off too. They should be the ones to suffer for their bad decisions if not more so than labor.

The car compnaies have said for the last 2-3 years that labor is only 10% of the cost of making a car. So it is only 10% of the problem. Becareful, I have serious facts on this. So the other 90% have management written all over it. So why isn't management not suffering 90% for it was their for decisions that got them there in the first place. You're reasoning is common knowledge which makes it neither.

Just my point...

[Graunke]

The car compnaies have said for the last 2-3 years that labor is only 10% of the cost of making a car. So it is only 10% of the problem. Becareful, I have serious facts on this. So the other 90% have management written all over it. So why isn't management not suffering 90% for it was their for decisions that got them there in the first place. You're reasoning is common knowledge which makes it neither.

Just my point...

This isn't about the car business, but since you have serious facts on this subject, how much of that 90% is from the ridiculous retirement packages the unions suggested and the managers agreed to?

Anyway back on task.......

Of the 1000 Jobs, 600 are to be hourly production, 300 salaried management, and 100 from the Financial Services division. These are estimates of course.

Dealers that have SRO's ( I think that's the term ) or are in areas with a large number of dealer concentrations, will be contacted in the future to discuss "Voluntary Consolidations" in territories. If there are no volunteers, then I can only imagine that they will become forced. Once again, this sucks for all involved, but it is a neccesary step to survival of the brand.

[koji52]

White collar, blue collar, it all works the same. dodo rolls downhill one way or another. It's better that a restructuring of the workforce happens now, if it means keeping the company afloat. If the MOCO goes Chapter 11, there will likely be a restructuring anyway.

Unless youre for a U.S. where the government has 100% control over the economy, management will ALWAYS be the last in consideration to go. Management makes the decisions and, of course, will look to their own interests before those of others. That's capitalism for you.

[Ryethil]

The car compnaies have said for the last 2-3 years that labor is only 10% of the cost of making a car. So it is only 10% of the problem. Becareful, I have serious facts on this. So the other 90% have management written all over it. So why isn't management not suffering 90% for it was their for decisions that got them there in the first place. You're reasoning is common knowledge which makes it neither.

Just my point...

This isn't about the car business, but since you have serious facts on this subject, how much of that 90% is from the ridiculous retirement packages the unions suggested and the managers agreed to?

Okay, a truce then...

I reread all my information because I was sure you would come back at me and I'm impressed.

There are 2 things that are mistakes that management made that should have been decided how to correct them 20-30 years ago and managements's biggest mistake ws doing the Status Quo.

The first is the extremely expensive distribution system that has interm distributers buying and selling the cars that go through them that causes a tremendous cost inflation. The Japanese and European car companies have company owned distribution centers and there is no cost increase as cars pass through them. The archaic American system came about when cars were few in number and transportation costs were expensive. The distributers paid for the cost of transportation of the cars that past through their transportation networks.

The second is an expensive misdirection on the part of the car companies to try and muddy the waters of their bookkeeping to outsiders. The actual biggest cost to making a car is the middle level managers or white collor workers. The cost of blue collar labor is only 10% but the overall cost of labor is closer to 22-30% of the vehicle. This last figure includes total figures of manpower costs. The middle managers retirement and bonus figures were higher per capita than similiar blue collar benefits.

However, the highest level of "labor" costs was the top management to the tune of 5-8% of total costs. making some of them the highest paid workers in the world. Again I ask is why aren't these the people that should be punished by layoffs for it was their mistakes that took everything down.

Blue collar labor once again is being blamed for something they are actually be short changed over. The talk of ridiculous anything was smoke that was blown to confuse things. It never had any basis in fact.

Anyway back on task.......

Of the 1000 Jobs, 600 are to be hourly production, 300 salaried management, and 100 from the Financial Services division. These are estimates of course.

Dealers that have SRO's ( I think that's the term ) or are in areas with a large number of dealer concentrations, will be contacted in the future to discuss "Voluntary Consolidations" in territories. If there are no volunteers, then I can only imagine that they will become forced. Once again, this sucks for all involved, but it is a neccesary step to survival of the brand.

I was wrong.. and yes they did seperate out the layoffs, though they did it by number of employees and not actual labor costs. Do white callor workers build the motorcycles but they take as much 1.5x the cost of labor. Shouldn't it be fairer.

As for dealers that was stupidity of a previous management group that is no longer represented in the company. It should have been corrected but again the status quo.

There are further point in which we can go. Do you wna to go there? this isn't a threat or anything. Just asking if it would be worth going there?

[HYPERR]

Had the Auto industry made moves like this years ago, instead of letting the unions dictate their practices, alot of these problems we're having now economy wide might not be as bad. I know I"m grasping at straws with my reasoning, but it makes sense to me.

The toxicity of the UAW goes back to the 50s. The situation the Big Three faced with the UAW back then was completely different from what Harley is facing today. Back in the 50s, 60s, and most of the 70s, the Big Three were making so much money that the they met every ridiculous demand that the UAW came up with. If they did not, the UAW would have striked, and that would have cost the Big Three hundreds of millions in profit. In the words of Lee Iacocca, and I'm paraphrasing here, "we met every ridiculous demands that the UAW came up with as we were making money hands over fist and if they went on strike, it would have meant a loss to us personally of hundreds of thousands(in 1960s money) in bonus".
This continued like clockwork until the UAW became a monster liability that the Big Three could no longer shoulder. Hence the major reason why the "Big" Three are where they are today.
This actually was my thesis in one of my classes in college. I likened the UAW to a blood sucking leech, which will eventually suck it's victim(US automakers) dry and ultimately causing both their demise. Looking back, I actually predicted the future.

[Ryethil]

Had the Auto industry made moves like this years ago, instead of letting the unions dictate their practices, alot of these problems we're having now economy wide might not be as bad. I know I"m grasping at straws with my reasoning, but it makes sense to me.

The toxicity of the UAW goes back to the 50s. The situation the Big Three faced with the UAW back then was completely different from what Harley is facing today. Back in the 50s, 60s, and most of the 70s, the Big Three were making so much money that the they met every ridiculous demand that the UAW came up with. If they did not, the UAW would have striked, and that would have cost the Big Three hundreds of millions in profit. In the words of Lee Iacocca, and I'm paraphrasing here, "we met every ridiculous demands that the UAW came up with as we were making money hands over fist and if they went on strike, it would have meant a loss to us personally of hundreds of thousands(in 1960s money) in bonus".
This continued like clockwork until the UAW became a monster liability that the Big Three could no longer shoulder. Hence the major reason why the "Big" Three are where they are today.
This actually was my thesis in one of my classes in college. I likened the UAW to a blood sucking leech, which will eventually suck it's victim(US automakers) dry and ultimately causing both their demise. Looking back, I actually predicted the future.

First of all the Japanese though Lee Iacocca a baffoon and thought the fact he went to Japan to talk about improving the Japanese corporate
behavior the highest of arrogance. The Japanese were at this time becoming the biggest industrial concern in the world. You remember this trip for George Hiram Bush threw up on the Prime Minsiter of Japan. Lee Iacocca was a great self promoter but actually showed little real management skills except that he produced a book that the elite promoted for it showed nothing but that the Elite should lord everybody els.

I don't care if you wrote tons of papers on this problem, it doesn't change the facts. You also prove common knowledge to be niether.

As for the reality of those that have the gold makes the rules, which is more important, a large group of labor/factory workers or one elitist who never proved anywhere that he was worth a 1% of the money he was paid. Class papers don't impress me for they are given little review and I also could baffle them with bulsh*t when I didn't have the facts to back it up.

As for the UAW, they were the receivers of a smear campaign that was greater than even the special interests/republicans attempts on affordable healthcare. Again I work here and have the facts so I'm unafraid of my soursces.

As for the UAW, it was considered the greatest threat since Communism by the Elite for the UAW supported the working man. I have these facts too though they have more to do with more modern times than the 50s and 60s. But I can get them by tomorrow night, I guess.

So your turn... Though I'm getting tired of proproganda as proof and really are tired of this thread.

Lets go back to Motorcycles. There I said it.

BTW, don't flame, you can't do half of what has been done to me over the last 2 days. And I'm still in this bed. And ya'll are still mostly strangers.

[koji52]

Had the Auto industry made moves like this years ago, instead of letting the unions dictate their practices, alot of these problems we're having now economy wide might not be as bad. I know I"m grasping at straws with my reasoning, but it makes sense to me.

The toxicity of the UAW goes back to the 50s. The situation the Big Three faced with the UAW back then was completely different from what Harley is facing today. Back in the 50s, 60s, and most of the 70s, the Big Three were making so much money that the they met every ridiculous demand that the UAW came up with. If they did not, the UAW would have striked, and that would have cost the Big Three hundreds of millions in profit. In the words of Lee Iacocca, and I'm paraphrasing here, "we met every ridiculous demands that the UAW came up with as we were making money hands over fist and if they went on strike, it would have meant a loss to us personally of hundreds of thousands(in 1960s money) in bonus".
This continued like clockwork until the UAW became a monster liability that the Big Three could no longer shoulder. Hence the major reason why the "Big" Three are where they are today.
This actually was my thesis in one of my classes in college. I likened the UAW to a blood sucking leech, which will eventually suck it's victim(US automakers) dry and ultimately causing both their demise. Looking back, I actually predicted the future.

First of all the Japanese though Lee Iacocca a baffoon and thought the fact he went to Japan to talk about improving the Japanese corporate
behavior the highest of arrogance. The Japanese were at this time becoming the biggest industrial concern in the world. You remember this trip for George Hiram Bush threw up on the Prime Minsiter of Japan. Lee Iacocca was a great self promoter but actually showed little real management skills except that he produced a book that the elite promoted for it showed nothing but that the Elite should lord everybody els.

I don't care if you wrote tons of papers on this problem, it doesn't change the facts. You also prove common knowledge to be niether.

As for the reality of those that have the gold makes the rules, which is more important, a large group of labor/factory workers or one elitist who never proved anywhere that he was worth a 1% of the money he was paid. Class papers don't impress me for they are given little review and I also could baffle them with bulsh*t when I didn't have the facts to back it up.

As for the UAW, they were the receivers of a smear campaign that was greater than even the special interests/republicans attempts on affordable healthcare. Again I work here and have the facts so I'm unafraid of my soursces.

As for the UAW, it was considered the greatest threat since Communism by the Elite for the UAW supported the working man. I have these facts too though they have more to do with more modern times than the 50s and 60s. But I can get them by tomorrow night, I guess.

So your turn... Though I'm getting tired of proproganda as proof and really are tired of this thread.

Lets go back to Motorcycles. There I said it.

BTW, don't flame, you can't do half of what has been done to me over the last 2 days. And I'm still in this bed. And ya'll are still mostly strangers.

I think the general UAW argument is based on which side of the line you stand on. Blue collars will support the union. White collars will think that unions are demanding too much. Generally speaking, in some cases, unions are great (the UAW does not fall into this category IMHO). Union demands can be reasonable and some reasonable agreement can be arrived at. I, for one, think a large portion of blame should be put on the UAW for the auto mess. At the same time a large portion of the blame should be placed on management for meeting the ridiculous demands.

By way of background, I work professionally with management of many different types of companies, including those in the manufacturing industries, for issues that go to the IRS, to the SEC, various accounting procedures, etc. I come from a blue collar family and I used to think, "corporations are bad and take advantage of the little guy." The experiences I have gotten through my job have expanded my perception of the general issue at hand here. I can honestly say that I find the whole "fairness" and "anti-management" argument you make to be incredibly naive, biased and short-sighted. I think you have very little concept of what it is like to run a gigantic company like GM, Ford, Chrysler and HD. There are so many complicated, interlocking issues that have to be addressed on a day to day basis in the corporate world that probably over 95% of the population just wouldn't understand. That's why a lot of people work in the corporate part of manufacturing companies and that's why they're being paid well.

Concluding and possibly the most important point: You can say all you want about upper management not being worth 1% of their pay and that factory workers should get more for what they are doing yadda yadda yadda. I mean no disrespect, but fact of the matter is, management of these companies put the extra time into their education to place themselves in places of opportunities where they wouldn't get stuck at the bottom end of the totem pole. Labor in the factories can be trained a hell of alot faster (and thus are easier to physically replace) than upper management.

I'm all fired up now and officially hate this thread.

[Ryethil]

I'm not going to bed and I hate this thread too... But I've got too much repect for the posters to give less than my complete thoughts...

By way of background, I work professionally with management of many different types of companies, including those in the manufacturing industries, for issues that go to the IRS, to the SEC, various accounting procedures, etc. I come from a blue collar family and I used to think, "corporations are bad and take advantage of the little guy." The experiences I have gotten through my job have expanded my perception of the general issue at hand here. I can honestly say that I find the whole "fairness" and "anti-management" argument you make to be incredibly naive, biased and short-sighted. I think you have very little concept of what it is like to run a gigantic company like GM, Ford, Chrysler and HD. There are so many complicated, interlocking issues that have to be addressed on a day to day basis in the corporate world that probably over 95% of the population just wouldn't understand. That's why a lot of people work in the corporate part of manufacturing companies and that's why they're being paid well.

Concluding and possibly the most important point: You can say all you want about upper management not being worth 1% of their pay and that factory workers should get more for what they are doing yadda yadda yadda. I mean no disrespect, but fact of the matter is, management of these companies put the extra time into their education to place themselves in places of opportunities where they wouldn't get stuck at the bottom end of the totem pole. Labor in the factories can be trained a hell of alot faster (and thus are easier to physically replace) than upper management.

I'm all fired up now and officially hate this thread.

I don't come from a blue collar family and I have an associates degree in business.

I am neither naive or short sighted. What you say about the white collar work force being made up of people that did what it took to get the extra training but it smacks of privilege. The elite is cutting of more and more funds to education. (Obama may change this) so there is getting to be a class of privilege that is self perpetuating. I've rejected that thinking as much as possible in my life.

But to go on. If a person is in a position of power and makes stupid decisions then they should be treated approprietly as fits thier mistake. And higher management that is very well trained and supposedly very highly intelligent making the same mistakes over and over again until the company fails should be punished not given bonuses. Their mistakes are not the workers fault.

I don't care that they have to make high level and very critical decisions, They are getting paid for it. It is their job and yet when the stuff hits the fank, it's not the bad decision makers but the common man of the streets that takes the brunt of happens. Management has to be made responsible for its actions. Not the little person who had no say in the management or the decisions.

And in the end it will be those people who invest in thse companies that have the final say but all the fincial sector seems to be interested in is sort turn gains. I'm not cutting investors down naively but it is up to them to make decisions that will direct the corperation in which way it should procceed.

As for the UAW, I think it was a two sided coin. This whole mess was caused by a struggle and disrepect across the bargining table. It just never got any better and the auto companies lost control because they became weak and failed to really negotiate. There could of been a middle gound here but that is not a point brough up by either side since their has ben so much animosity between the two parties.

I'm actually sorry for this reply. The pain meds are kicking in and this isn't some of my best work.

However, I don't want to actually go on with this, so I'll just say your right. For in the Greco_Roman scheme of things, I can't build a convincing argument. You reasoning is superb.

As for the future you won't always get off so easy...

[MZ33]

Okay, I know that this is not really relevant, but let me just throw this out there:

George Hiram Bush

He's George Herbert Walker Bush, and his son is George Walker Bush. No Hirams. (A wishful pun on "hire 'em", perhaps?)