Face-Palm of the Day

[Atlanteax]

Bolded below for Significance...

A trust fund run by the United Auto Workers union would also have a 17.5% stake in the new GM, as well as the right to buy an additional 2.5% stake. UAW President Ron Gettelfinger said earlier this month the company hopes to sell its stake in GM as soon as possible.

Article describing GM "reorganization" and the various ownership stakes:
http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/28/news...ders/index.htm

.

I consider it a face-palm that the UAW will be attempting to sell their stake in GM ... when they were a major factor in how GM descended into bankruptcy.

[Tolwynn]

Kind of telling when even the UAW doesn't want stake in a company staffed with UAW workers.

[Jorddyn]

Kind of telling when even the UAW doesn't want stake in a company staffed with UAW workers.

Kind of standard financial advice to not have all your eggs in one basket.

I think GM has bigger problems than the UAW not wanting to be a stakeholder.

[Stanley Burrell]

The only thing I care about is when Chevy is sent to the auction block that it stabilizes extremely quickly. If any dealerships for Chevy get reorganized to more than .5 miles away, then I will be all:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILvkEHQPHHg

[Atlanteax]

Kind of standard financial advice to not have all your eggs in one basket.

I think GM has bigger problems than the UAW not wanting to be a stakeholder.

Like the UAW as... EMPLOYEES?!?

[Parkbandit]

Kind of standard financial advice to not have all your eggs in one basket.

I think GM has bigger problems than the UAW not wanting to be a stakeholder.

I love how the US Government has given unions big chunks of both automakers now without any fiscal investment.

BOTH companies should have done what I said from day 1.. go through bankruptcy and restructure all contracts.. including the stifling union ones.

[Jorddyn]

Like the UAW as... EMPLOYEES?!?

That'd be one of 'em.

Unions were a great thing for improving safety and for getting laws passed regarding wages and time off. The problem is, that's all government mandated, so now they have to get even more to prove their usefulness.

So, they negotiate, they strike, they get more. And two years later everyone is sick of paying dues for a union who isn't getting them more (again), so it starts over. It can't continue forever.

That said, I do feel for the retired members of the UAW who had been promised and were counting on a lifetime of healthcare (which is where this stock is going, if I understand correctly). I don't blame them for realizing the ship is sinking and they want out, even though their extra weight helped bring the ship down.

[Parkbandit]

That'd be one of 'em.

Unions were a great thing for improving safety and for getting laws passed regarding wages and time off. The problem is, that's all government mandated, so now they have to get even more to prove their usefulness.

So, they negotiate, they strike, they get more. And two years later everyone is sick of paying dues for a union who isn't getting them more (again), so it starts over. It can't continue forever.

That said, I do feel for the retired members of the UAW who had been promised and were counting on a lifetime of healthcare (which is where this stock is going, if I understand correctly). I don't blame them for realizing the ship is sinking and they want out, even though their extra weight helped bring the ship down.

I agree with everything you stated here. Holy hell, the world IS coming to an end.

[Atlanteax]

I agree there was a time and place for the Unions, where much of the reforms they got into place are now government-mandated.

Ideally the retired members of the UAW would understand if that they try to dump GM stock *now* while it's *already down*, they're going to see *even less* from it.

(I draw a parallel to the "credit crunch" ~ where a series of loans being called prompted a cascade reaction in declining liquidity available.)

[Tolwynn]

Ideally the retired members of the UAW would understand if that they try to dump GM stock *now* while it's *already down*, they're going to see *even less* from it.

Because now they'll magically do something that isn't wholly self-serving, and a detrimental expense to its members and the company worked for?

Heh, pull the other one.