Well, we're going to soon find out with
the plans put forward for GM and Chrysler.The United Auto Workers (UAW) would own 39% of GM. The federal government would own 50%. The creditors will be shafted with just 10%. (In the Chrysler plan being discussed, labor would own 55%, making it effectively a subsidiary of the UAW.)
Since everyone recognizes the role that the unions have played in the decline of the two companies, how are they going to improve and come out of this debacle as stronger, more profitable companies? What is going to happen when it comes time for the UAW to negotiate their next labor contract with a company that they own 39%? Do you think that an Obama-run administration would stand up to their demands? As
Holman Jenkins points out, it has been the combination of government and union action in the past thirty years that has led these companies to the situation that they're now in.
Chrysler was bailed out directly with government loan guarantees; the Big Three all benefited from Reagan era "voluntary" quotas on Japanese imports to prop up domestic car prices. But these were temporary fixes. For more than 40 years, a 25% tariff has kept out foreign-built pickup trucks even as a studied loophole was created in fuel-economy regulations to let the Big Three develop a lucrative, protected niche in the "passenger truck" business.
This became the long-running unwritten deal. This was Washington's real auto policy.
For three decades, the Big Three were able to survive precisely because they skimped on quality and features in the money-losing sedans they were required under Congress's fuel economy rules to build in high-cost UAW factories. In return, Washington compensated them with the hothouse, politically protected opportunity to profit from pickups and SUVs.
Doesn't sound much like what you hear incessantly from your Congressman, about how Detroit's problems are all due to management "incompetence" in deciding to build "gas guzzling" SUVs, does it?
But then uncertain at this point is whether any legislator (other than John Dingell) remembers or grasps anymore Congress's own role. Yet the muddled, covert bailout continues: Washington's latest fuel-economy rules actually reward manufacturers for increasing the size and weight of some vehicles. The truck tariff remains in place. The fuel-mileage rules continue to protect the UAW monopoly by discouraging the Big Three from shipping small-car production offshore.
Lately some have doted, with wonderment and admiration, on the Obama administration's apparent willingness to drive a hard bargain with the UAW as it tries to impose a stage-managed replica of bankruptcy on GM and Chrysler. Please.
In a real bankruptcy, which is the natural fate of companies unable to meet their obligations, Chrysler and GM would be run (or liquidated) for the benefit of their creditors, not their workers. But, here, "pattern bargaining" will remain the law of the Detroit jungle. The UAW will continue to use its unnaturally augmented clout to extract uncompetitive pay and benefits (it can do no other given its internal incentives). As it has for 40 years, Washington will pitch in with one improvisation after another, disguised as energy policy, trade policy, health-care policy or environmental policy, to stop the rivets from popping off. Politics, especially Democratic electoral politics, will play a more dominant role than ever.
Look closely and the hidden subsidies to keep the dismal beast alive have already started flowing -- tax credits for UAW retirees to make up for reduced health-care benefits, loans to help Detroit "invest in green cars." And plenty more will be needed to sustain Obama Motors on life support, at least through the 2012 election.
Why would anyone invest money in these companies today? The ordinary bondholders are getting the shaft. As
Larry Kudlow pointed out Monday,
The government is about to take over GM in a plan that completely screws private bondholders and favors the unions. Get this: The GM bondholders own $27 billion and they’re getting 10 percent of the common stock in an expected exchange. And the UAW owns $10 billion of the bonds and they’re getting 40 percent of the stock. Huh? Did I miss something here? And Uncle Sam will have a controlling share of the stock with something close to 50 percent ownership. And no bankruptcy judge. So this is a political restructuring run by the White House, not a rule-of-law bankruptcy-court reorganization.
Yes, up is down and down is up. But it's been that way for a long time in Detroit. Don't expect anything to change.
12 comments:
Old Russian saying...You can tell same lie 1000 times but not change truth!
Difference between USSR Communist media and USA "mainstream media"
In Russia government make media say what they want - even if lie.
In USA "mainstream media" try make government what they want - even if lie..
.....eventually they become same thing?!
I Igor produce Obama Birth Certificate at www.igormarxo.org
Look for Democrat governors to cooperate and make huge fleet buys from GM.
The order has already gone out in WV. The State Police are no longer to buy Fords. Chevys only.
Boy do I feel stupid. I've been defending the Constitution for over 20 years, and I've spent a fair number of them overseas, away from my family. Who would've guessed that the real threat to my country was in Washington DC?
Is there some kind of bailout program for 20 wasted years?
When no one buys the cars the Fed forces the union-run companies to build, the next logical step is for the Fed to strangle Ford and foreign-owned companies with more regulations, thereby limiting choices for American buyers and providing a guaranteed market for the unwanted product. That's the progressive way. Morph individualism into collectivism by force.
I will never buy a GM vehicle for as long as the federal government holds an ownership interest in the company.
should the autos be nationalized, there could very well be a backlash against even buying a nationalized product by consumers. I've been a GM lifer myself (my dad has almost 30 years in with GM), but should the company become government-run, I may well look elsewhere for my transportation needs.
Looks like I'm not the only one either...
The creditors have every right to force GM and Chrysler into involuntary bankruptcy. They only need to get together to do it. So, why haven't they?
If you are a publicly traded creditor, the shareholders will have a field day suing you for not protecting their interest.
Oh, but wait, that's yet another gift to a BO constituancy, trial lawyers.
The GM bondholders own $27 billion and they’re getting 10 percent of the common stock in an expected exchange. And the UAW owns $10 billion of the bonds and they’re getting 40 percent of the stock.Without this deal, the GM bondholders would get nothing at all. The bonds would be in default.
The workforce (what have you got against American workers, anyway?) gets stock which will only be worth anything if they can build products people want. If they can't do that, the stockholders lose a few dollars. The workers lose their livelihood.
Some of the people here sound like Rush Limbaugh, who hates so much he *wants* America to fail.
Oh, and for people worrying about swine flu? If you don't understand evolution is a fact, don't worry about swine flu, as it is created by virus evolution, and thus cannot exist in your world.
Bill B is not entirely true. The Wall Street Journal estimated that the bondholders would receive between $0.30 to $0.50 on the dollar in a liquidation bankruptcy. That is due mostly to the fact that both
companies have extensive property holdings around the world. In a reorganization, anything is
possible, but presumably that number would be the floor as to what the bondholders would agree
to in the Bankruptcy Court.
Concerning the amount due to the unions, my understanding is that the number is entirely
unfunded contributions to the pension plan (something that the Federal government has stupidly
allowed corporations, and not just the auto makers, to due for years). In a bankruptcy, any
money due to the employees for salary and current benefits could be claimed and would be a
priority claim. That is not true for claims that the pension is underfunded.
The UAW pension plan is guaranteed by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corporation (PBGC),
which is a government run corporation similar the FNMA and Freddie Mac. By allowing their
pension to be guaranteed by the PBGC, the union and the workers have subordinated their claims
to the PBGC for any money they must pay out.
The Federal government will be on the hook for this money if it must be paid out. In that regard,
the share being given to the government may make eminent good sense.
I have heard no claims that the union members will not be taking their pension payments due
under the union contract. I have also not heard that the UAW will be distributing these shares to
its members in exchange for their pensions, or that they are waiving any claims under the union
contract. That raises the question, what is the money to the UAW for other than payback to the
union by the Obama Administration?
As to actual bonds owned by the UAW. Federal bankruptcy law would require all creditors in the same priority, such as secured creditors, unsecured creditors priority creditors and in this case bondholders to receive the same treatment. There does not appear to be any reason why Union bondholders and other bondholders are being treated differently. Reason enough for the non-union bondholders to force a bankruptcy.
If you oppose the administration's massive tax and spend budget, please visit http://capwiz.com/friendsoftheuschamber/issues/alert/?alertid=12956826 and take action!
Sure, why not? We can always look to British Leyland and the Austin Marina for examples! Or the Trabant.
Post a Comment