11 ms·

GM Is Now Detroit’s Smallest Auto-Making Employer

84 points by danans 7y ago

phjesusthatguy3 7y ago
Of the "Detroit three", GM is the only one based in Detroit. Ford world headquarters are in Dearborn, Chrysler is in Auburn Hills.
- bumby 7y ago
  The others are still generally considered metro Detroit
  - phjesusthatguy3 7y ago
    But they're not actually in Detroit. It's like how anyone from the general area of southeast Michigan says they're from Detroit. The real point of TFA, though, is that GM employs the least unionized labor of the Detroit three, which really should have been the headline.
    - bumby 7y ago
      I imagine they used "Detroit" for the same reason metro dwellers claim Detroit. It avoids digressions explaining where places like Auburn Hills or Royal Oak actually are when it's not pertinent to the point. Its short-hand, even if lazy
    - skinnymuch 7y ago
      That’s different. That’s because people don’t know the local cities of the area. I’m sure many people also say South Michigan or if not for Michigan that is done in other states. Either saying the local big city or geographic area location in state. Vs talking about stuff like Ford not being Detroit because it’s merely close as hell to Detroit and essentially considered Detroit when talking about Detroit as a car industry hub.
- MaconBacon 7y ago
  They've been building Fords in The Rouge for over a hundred years. It's less than 10 miles away from Detroit city center. I'm not sure your nitpicking distinction really matters here...
  - phjesusthatguy3 7y ago
    The Rouge? The plant in Dearborn? Oh, okay.
    - MaconBacon 7y ago
      This is like saying Brooklyn is not New York City. This is silly shit.
      - phjesusthatguy3 7y ago
        Dearborn isn't Detroit. I don't know why y'all are upset about this. I mean, I do, being from Detroit myself. I just don't know why you got this twisted. (Grand River & Five Mile)
        true_religion 7y ago
        It’s strictly true but not colloquially true. Like how Amazon is in DC, but really it’s new HQ is in Arlington, Virginia.
        jchw 7y ago
        Also from Detroit. Dearborn is in Metro Detroit. I don’t know anyone who would nitpick this.
      - vinay427 7y ago
        That's a poor comparison because Brooklyn actually is a part of New York City, but I agree with your point.
- toomuchequate 7y ago
  Nissan in Farmington Hills, Toyota in Ann Arbor?
- kgwgk 7y ago
  Did you know that among the big 6 Hollywood studios only Paramount is actually in Hollywood?
- ldargin 7y ago
  True, and Chrysler was previous based in Highland Park, which isn't Detroit lol.
tempsy 7y ago
I’m mostly positive about Andrew Yang but it’s frustrating to know he would point to something like this and scream “automation” when GM’s downsizing has more to do with outsourcing and a slowing market than anything remotely related to robots taking over jobs.
- bumby 7y ago
  I don't know much in this arena, but there's at least some evidence that automation may be double the job risk as outsourcing[0] https://talkbusiness.net/2017/07/ball-state-study-automation-offshoring-may-extend-job-losses-beyond-the-factory-floor/ https://talkbusiness.net/2017/07/ball-state-study-automation...
  - AnthonyMouse 7y ago
    The difference between automation and outsourcing is that automation can actually save domestic jobs. Labor costs are lower in other countries and that is likely to continue, so for US workers to stay competitive they need to be more productive and justify the higher compensation. Which is what automation does -- you get more cars for the same number of labor hours, justifying the higher wages. That means you get a choice between losing some jobs to reduced labor requirements from automation but keeping the remaining ones, or losing all of them to foreign labor competition. Which may itself use automation regardless of what you do domestically. You can also get net job gains from automation in markets subject to the Jevons paradox. You make each widget cost 50% as much by reducing jobs by 50%, but that causes people to buy ten times as many widgets, so you really end up with five times as many domestic jobs. Or five times as many foreign jobs, if the other country automates and you don't.
    - bumby 7y ago
      I follow your point, but I'm not sure the research or my personal experience proves that to be true. In some cases, automation leads to net job growth (e.g., there are more bank tellers now than before the invention of ATMs), but I think that is the exception rather than the rule. Especially in manufacturing, automation absolutely guts jobs. A line that was run by dozens can be run by a just a couple. The balance is so far to one side I think it's hard to make a case that automation saves many jobs. It seems to me that the paradox you bring up would only apply to very limited use cases; I don't know many products people would want to increase consumption on scale with the job loss for that to work. But I may be biased by my automation experience in high dollar products. Example: I know of an onion farmer who recently automated. Even if all other onion farmers automated im not going to 5x my consumption of onions, and that's a low cost product
tastygreenapple 7y ago
If GM were grateful for their bailout, how many employees would they have in detroit?
- froindt 7y ago
  We're a decade past the bailout. How long after paying back the government would be acceptable to outsource production?
  - masonic 7y ago
    They'll never pay it all back: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-autos-gm-treasury-idusbrea3t0mr20140430 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-autos-gm-treasury-idusbre... You have to count the losses from the Motors Liquidation Company half of the split.
rmason 7y ago
It is true for Detroit, but GM is still the largest auto employer in Michigan. Lots of jobs at three plants in the state capital of Lansing and a handful in Flint and Grand Rapids.
AmVess 7y ago
They are pushing production and engineering to anywhere not the USA, so this trend of having fewer workers isn't going to stop until all that's left of GM is the headquarters. I'm not Chicken-Littling either. This trend has been many decades in the making, and it only has one logical endpoint. I was looking at their trucks, and left the showroom when I saw one that had 45% domestic content. I bought a truck that had the most USA content...a Honda Ridgeline.
- pkaye 7y ago
  > They are pushing production and engineering to anywhere not the USA... How much is outside of Detroit vs outside of US?
- sharkweek 7y ago
  As someone in the market for a truck, why specifically USA and not somewhere else? I’m looking at the Toyota Tacoma as my number one choice, but this is not a strongly held desire if there is something better.
  - track_me_now 7y ago
    Well first a Tacoma is actually a truck; even Honda states the ridgeline is not intended to compete with traditional trucks, is not built for towing and uses a unibody construction. Tacomas are expensive, the dealers don't deal and they hold their resale value. The new (2019) Tacoma trades heavily on it's reputation IMO, without really adding much new over the past 3-4 years. It's a real off-road vehicle though, if that's important to you. In this format/size I'd suggest you take a look at the new Ranger. It's nothing fancy but much more affordable. It's pretty much the polar opposite of the Ridgeline.
    - lotsofpulp 7y ago
      I like that Toyota hasn’t touched Tacoma/4Runner. It’s already perfect as is, no additional bells and whistles were needed other than CarPlay.
W-Stool 7y ago
I wonder how GM would compare to IBM, another once great USA engineering and employment leader?
pteredactyl 7y ago
Sounds like they need another check from the US government.
vgoh1 7y ago
Wow, Chrysler has made quite the turn-around, I just noticed from that chart. 10 years ago, I expected them to be out of business by now with their low reliability (which I believe is still one of the lowest). Chrysler has a pretty terrible reputation, but their minivans have a good reputation (I know, I own one with 90k miles, and it's an amazing value and has been very reliable). The Jeep brand is killing it, lots of die hard fans of the nameplate. They also made a good move rebranding Dodge Rams to just Ram.
InfiniteRand 7y ago
One thing that makes these employment numbers a little questionable is that car manufacturers are mostly component assemblers, with differing amounts of components made in-house vs bought from other companies which may be US companies or might not be. I know this is true for a lot of things, but my occasional experience with the auto-industry gives me the sense that it is more true for the auto industry than other places.

84 points by danans 7y ago

Of the "Detroit three", GM is the only one based in Detroit. Ford world headquarters are in Dearborn, Chrysler is in Auburn Hills.

bumby 7y ago
The others are still generally considered metro Detroit
- phjesusthatguy3 7y ago
  But they're not actually in Detroit. It's like how anyone from the general area of southeast Michigan says they're from Detroit. The real point of TFA, though, is that GM employs the least unionized labor of the Detroit three, which really should have been the headline.
  - bumby 7y ago
    I imagine they used "Detroit" for the same reason metro dwellers claim Detroit. It avoids digressions explaining where places like Auburn Hills or Royal Oak actually are when it's not pertinent to the point. Its short-hand, even if lazy
  - skinnymuch 7y ago
    That’s different. That’s because people don’t know the local cities of the area. I’m sure many people also say South Michigan or if not for Michigan that is done in other states. Either saying the local big city or geographic area location in state. Vs talking about stuff like Ford not being Detroit because it’s merely close as hell to Detroit and essentially considered Detroit when talking about Detroit as a car industry hub.
MaconBacon 7y ago
They've been building Fords in The Rouge for over a hundred years. It's less than 10 miles away from Detroit city center. I'm not sure your nitpicking distinction really matters here...
- phjesusthatguy3 7y ago
  The Rouge? The plant in Dearborn? Oh, okay.
  - MaconBacon 7y ago
    This is like saying Brooklyn is not New York City. This is silly shit.
    - phjesusthatguy3 7y ago
      Dearborn isn't Detroit. I don't know why y'all are upset about this. I mean, I do, being from Detroit myself. I just don't know why you got this twisted. (Grand River & Five Mile)
      - true_religion 7y ago
        It’s strictly true but not colloquially true. Like how Amazon is in DC, but really it’s new HQ is in Arlington, Virginia.
      - jchw 7y ago
        Also from Detroit. Dearborn is in Metro Detroit. I don’t know anyone who would nitpick this.
    - vinay427 7y ago
      That's a poor comparison because Brooklyn actually is a part of New York City, but I agree with your point.
toomuchequate 7y ago
Nissan in Farmington Hills, Toyota in Ann Arbor?
kgwgk 7y ago
Did you know that among the big 6 Hollywood studios only Paramount is actually in Hollywood?
ldargin 7y ago
True, and Chrysler was previous based in Highland Park, which isn't Detroit lol.

tempsy 7y ago

I’m mostly positive about Andrew Yang but it’s frustrating to know he would point to something like this and scream “automation” when GM’s downsizing has more to do with outsourcing and a slowing market than anything remotely related to robots taking over jobs.

bumby 7y ago
I don't know much in this arena, but there's at least some evidence that automation may be double the job risk as outsourcing[0] https://talkbusiness.net/2017/07/ball-state-study-automation-offshoring-may-extend-job-losses-beyond-the-factory-floor/ https://talkbusiness.net/2017/07/ball-state-study-automation...
- AnthonyMouse 7y ago
  The difference between automation and outsourcing is that automation can actually save domestic jobs. Labor costs are lower in other countries and that is likely to continue, so for US workers to stay competitive they need to be more productive and justify the higher compensation. Which is what automation does -- you get more cars for the same number of labor hours, justifying the higher wages. That means you get a choice between losing some jobs to reduced labor requirements from automation but keeping the remaining ones, or losing all of them to foreign labor competition. Which may itself use automation regardless of what you do domestically. You can also get net job gains from automation in markets subject to the Jevons paradox. You make each widget cost 50% as much by reducing jobs by 50%, but that causes people to buy ten times as many widgets, so you really end up with five times as many domestic jobs. Or five times as many foreign jobs, if the other country automates and you don't.
  - bumby 7y ago
    I follow your point, but I'm not sure the research or my personal experience proves that to be true. In some cases, automation leads to net job growth (e.g., there are more bank tellers now than before the invention of ATMs), but I think that is the exception rather than the rule. Especially in manufacturing, automation absolutely guts jobs. A line that was run by dozens can be run by a just a couple. The balance is so far to one side I think it's hard to make a case that automation saves many jobs. It seems to me that the paradox you bring up would only apply to very limited use cases; I don't know many products people would want to increase consumption on scale with the job loss for that to work. But I may be biased by my automation experience in high dollar products. Example: I know of an onion farmer who recently automated. Even if all other onion farmers automated im not going to 5x my consumption of onions, and that's a low cost product

tastygreenapple 7y ago

If GM were grateful for their bailout, how many employees would they have in detroit?

froindt 7y ago
We're a decade past the bailout. How long after paying back the government would be acceptable to outsource production?
- masonic 7y ago
  They'll never pay it all back: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-autos-gm-treasury-idusbrea3t0mr20140430 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-autos-gm-treasury-idusbre... You have to count the losses from the Motors Liquidation Company half of the split.

rmason 7y ago

It is true for Detroit, but GM is still the largest auto employer in Michigan. Lots of jobs at three plants in the state capital of Lansing and a handful in Flint and Grand Rapids.

AmVess 7y ago

They are pushing production and engineering to anywhere not the USA, so this trend of having fewer workers isn't going to stop until all that's left of GM is the headquarters. I'm not Chicken-Littling either. This trend has been many decades in the making, and it only has one logical endpoint. I was looking at their trucks, and left the showroom when I saw one that had 45% domestic content. I bought a truck that had the most USA content...a Honda Ridgeline.

pkaye 7y ago
> They are pushing production and engineering to anywhere not the USA... How much is outside of Detroit vs outside of US?
sharkweek 7y ago
As someone in the market for a truck, why specifically USA and not somewhere else? I’m looking at the Toyota Tacoma as my number one choice, but this is not a strongly held desire if there is something better.
- track_me_now 7y ago
  Well first a Tacoma is actually a truck; even Honda states the ridgeline is not intended to compete with traditional trucks, is not built for towing and uses a unibody construction. Tacomas are expensive, the dealers don't deal and they hold their resale value. The new (2019) Tacoma trades heavily on it's reputation IMO, without really adding much new over the past 3-4 years. It's a real off-road vehicle though, if that's important to you. In this format/size I'd suggest you take a look at the new Ranger. It's nothing fancy but much more affordable. It's pretty much the polar opposite of the Ridgeline.
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    I like that Toyota hasn’t touched Tacoma/4Runner. It’s already perfect as is, no additional bells and whistles were needed other than CarPlay.

W-Stool 7y ago

I wonder how GM would compare to IBM, another once great USA engineering and employment leader?

pteredactyl 7y ago

Sounds like they need another check from the US government.

vgoh1 7y ago

Wow, Chrysler has made quite the turn-around, I just noticed from that chart. 10 years ago, I expected them to be out of business by now with their low reliability (which I believe is still one of the lowest). Chrysler has a pretty terrible reputation, but their minivans have a good reputation (I know, I own one with 90k miles, and it's an amazing value and has been very reliable). The Jeep brand is killing it, lots of die hard fans of the nameplate. They also made a good move rebranding Dodge Rams to just Ram.

InfiniteRand 7y ago

One thing that makes these employment numbers a little questionable is that car manufacturers are mostly component assemblers, with differing amounts of components made in-house vs bought from other companies which may be US companies or might not be. I know this is true for a lot of things, but my occasional experience with the auto-industry gives me the sense that it is more true for the auto industry than other places.