I think it was addressed. The problem is on one anticipated one, or maybe two of the big three would go bankrupt and leave a 25 million dollar tab unpaid. Based on all the money the government is throwing around and the fact they forced this bankruptcy it seems to me they should cover the tab.
The WC fund is against the sale to Fiat because it may wreck their fund? What’s the alternative? What happens if Chrysler liquidates (which I think they should)? Talk about self-preservation. The reality is Chrysler has no compelling products outside of the Jeep brand. If they do emerge from bankrupty, who is going to contribute capital to support their future losses? Not me.
I’ve never gotten the impression that the government forced the bankruptcy – When Daimler parted ways the company was on a non-stop express to bankruptcy, the government funds merely kept it artificially running for a few more months. Also I heard the truck and mini-van divisions were viable they just have to figure out how to part out the company without allowing the long tail liabilities, built up over many years of incompetent management, to derail the process.
I’ve seen 1/2 of my 401K go away as I’m nearing retirement so I can feel for the retired and disabled autoworkers who are looking at reduced or disappearing benefits. Tough choices to make.
So why is the fund set up in such a way that a $25M gap in premiums would cause the fund to collapse? That just does not seem correct at all. Talk about a mismanaged fund…If $25M is going to make or break the state fund maybe it should go by the wayside.
Only one issue that I have with the comment… “incompetent management”
I am not saying that there wasn’t a degree of incompetent management, but paying someone $25 an hour to screw on lugnuts and then guarantee them that they will make that when they retire after 20 years… somewhere the unions have to understand that they are as much to blame as management
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
This question needed to be answered at the time the state fund was set up – well before any participating company went bankrupt.
I think it was addressed. The problem is on one anticipated one, or maybe two of the big three would go bankrupt and leave a 25 million dollar tab unpaid. Based on all the money the government is throwing around and the fact they forced this bankruptcy it seems to me they should cover the tab.
$25MM is chump change to Obama. Time to dine and ditch!
The WC fund is against the sale to Fiat because it may wreck their fund? What’s the alternative? What happens if Chrysler liquidates (which I think they should)? Talk about self-preservation. The reality is Chrysler has no compelling products outside of the Jeep brand. If they do emerge from bankrupty, who is going to contribute capital to support their future losses? Not me.
I’ve never gotten the impression that the government forced the bankruptcy – When Daimler parted ways the company was on a non-stop express to bankruptcy, the government funds merely kept it artificially running for a few more months. Also I heard the truck and mini-van divisions were viable they just have to figure out how to part out the company without allowing the long tail liabilities, built up over many years of incompetent management, to derail the process.
I’ve seen 1/2 of my 401K go away as I’m nearing retirement so I can feel for the retired and disabled autoworkers who are looking at reduced or disappearing benefits. Tough choices to make.
So why is the fund set up in such a way that a $25M gap in premiums would cause the fund to collapse? That just does not seem correct at all. Talk about a mismanaged fund…If $25M is going to make or break the state fund maybe it should go by the wayside.
Only one issue that I have with the comment… “incompetent management”
I am not saying that there wasn’t a degree of incompetent management, but paying someone $25 an hour to screw on lugnuts and then guarantee them that they will make that when they retire after 20 years… somewhere the unions have to understand that they are as much to blame as management