Topic: GM CEO Shows Up in Private Jet

[50362]

GM CEO shows up in Washington on his private jet looking for a bailout from tax payers. HA HA HA!

I hope that company goes out of business! 

Meanwhile back at HCM we're running OT almost every week.

[Vmango]

Link? Article?

[Marc_]

Link:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/11/19/autos.ceo.jets/index.html

[50362]

He probably would have got some money if he showed up on public transit.

[tenpenny]

Really, you can't fault the unions for their hard line stance.  Top management is showing, by their actions, that there is no crisis.  If there truly was a crisis, they'd be trying to set some sort of example.  If they cared, that is.

But the problem is that the typical CEO of these companies don't care.  They have their gravy train, and the rest doesn't matter. 

It's getting to the point where there is no downside for the CEO:  if the company does well, the CEO gets buckets and buckets of money.  If the company doesn't do well, the taxpayers bail it out, and the CEO gets buckets and buckets of money.

Based on performance, I'd suggest that all top management of the US car companies should be FIRED. And the boards, too.  They are supposed to be the leaders of the companies, and they've done an abysmal job.  But there's NO personal accountability.

If any of those clowns worked here for the Irving family, they'd have been booted out years ago for incompetence.

[Vmango]

Yeah, that's a fairly large PR blunder.

[Mitlov]

It's a PR blunder, but seriously, how far does CNN want them to take this?  Showing up in jeans and tee-shirts instead of nice (read: expensive) suits?  Staying at a Holiday Inn Express?  Eating hamburgers from McDonald's? 

The financial problems with the Detroit 3 have many sources, but CEO lifestyles that are more lavish than their competitors isn't one of them.  Does anyone think that the CEOs of Honda, Toyota, and BMW don't use private jets?

[Juke1]

Does anyone think that the CEOs of Honda, Toyota, and BMW don't use private jets?

Of course they do, but they're far from broke

[tenpenny]

The financial problems with the Detroit 3 have many sources, but CEO lifestyles that are more lavish than their competitors isn't one of them.  Does anyone think that the CEOs of Honda, Toyota, and BMW don't use private jets?

I haven't seen the CEO's of Honda, Toyota, and BMW demanding gazillions of dollars from the government, while whining about American competition.

Leadership is all about leadership, and there aint much of that in corporate North America these days.

[sirAQUAMAN64]

It's a PR blunder, but seriously, how far does CNN want them to take this?  Showing up in jeans and tee-shirts instead of nice (read: expensive) suits?  Staying at a Holiday Inn Express?  Eating hamburgers from McDonald's? 

The financial problems with the Detroit 3 have many sources, but CEO lifestyles that are more lavish than their competitors isn't one of them.  Does anyone think that the CEOs of Honda, Toyota, and BMW don't use private jets?

True that.

VW AG's private jet(s) chartered for unions allegedly had prostitutes aboard. You can bet execs flew that one as often as possible 

The more you scrutinize, the more you'll find. But at the exec level time is money and with a situation as urgent as this no one wants to waste time checking in at the airport to wait for a coach flight.

[toolatecrew]

Really, you can't fault the unions for their hard line stance.  Top management is showing, by their actions, that there is no crisis.  If there truly was a crisis, they'd be trying to set some sort of example.  If they cared, that is.

But the problem is that the typical CEO of these companies don't care.  They have their gravy train, and the rest doesn't matter. 

It's getting to the point where there is no downside for the CEO:  if the company does well, the CEO gets buckets and buckets of money.  If the company doesn't do well, the taxpayers bail it out, and the CEO gets buckets and buckets of money.

Based on performance, I'd suggest that all top management of the US car companies should be FIRED. And the boards, too.  They are supposed to be the leaders of the companies, and they've done an abysmal job.  But there's NO personal accountability.

If any of those clowns worked here for the Irving family, they'd have been booted out years ago for incompetence.

Sure you can fault unions for their hardline stance. Union members cannot aford to lose their jobs. The fact that GM mgt are overpaid idiots won't change becuase the union takes a hardline stance. You think that if GM fires everyone one of them (with the nice severance package they will get) that the Union will say "hey lets cave in on everything?"

The fact that those guys foolishly spend money is independent of the relative cost of Union production vs non union production.

Its just a smokescreen the Unions throw up to hide the fact that they won't present any of their own solutions. Who cares who is to blame for the past. What are you going to do TODAY to save your jobs.

[barrie1]

The Unions have done a lot behind the scenes already that very few people even know about in regards to helping the situation. I see in the LONDON FREE PRESS to-day that the Toyota plant in Canada is cutting back on all the overtime,giving more time off at Christmas at all their factories in North America and even dropping a whole shift of the Tacoma truck built in the US. They cetainly are not hiring at all just like the rest of them. Their profit margins are down near 69% this past quarter alone. 50362 you would not make the wages you do working at your factory if it was NOT for the efforts of the CAW which has fought for people even like you to have better wages. you pay them back by stabbing them in the back with your comments. PS The Presiden of GM uses a Jet to travel as he has dozs of places to visit all the time. The last count I knew of was there were 34 different types of Jets from Cargo to only 1-2 smaller personal type Jets at GM's headquarters which are stationed at the Detroit Airport. If you expect this man to drive thousands of miles each week to meetings all over north America you should really think about seriously. Its obvously Ok for the other Import Presidents to do this but not the Pres's of the Big 3. Sounds really discrimanating to me on your behalf as well.   

[tenpenny]

Sure you can fault unions for their hardline stance. Union members cannot aford to lose their jobs. The fact that GM mgt are overpaid idiots won't change becuase the union takes a hardline stance. You think that if GM fires everyone one of them (with the nice severance package they will get) that the Union will say "hey lets cave in on everything?"

The fact that those guys foolishly spend money is independent of the relative cost of Union production vs non union production.

Its just a smokescreen the Unions throw up to hide the fact that they won't present any of their own solutions. Who cares who is to blame for the past. What are you going to do TODAY to save your jobs.

Not really.  The top management is sending out a message that, despite what they say, things are fine, because they've got tons of money to throw around.  True leaders lead by example.  The leaders of the auto companies are setting the example that things are normal, because their behaviour and perks haven't changed.  They are not 'leading' in any sense of the word.

ASK NOT WHAT YOUR COUNTRY CAN DO FOR YOU, BUT WHAT YOU CAN DO FOR YOUR COUNTRY.  What do you think the car company CEOs would answer to that call? 

The CEOs aren't showing any true concern for anything other than their own pockets.

I'm certainly no union supporter, but come on guys.  The message being sent here is that the gov't needs to cough up tons of money to keep the car companies going, and the workers employed, while the 'leaders' continue to think of themselves first, foremost, and only.

The taxpayers are going to grow weary of this foolishness.  If the CEOs expect the government (ie, the taxpayer) to bail them out, then they should at least be willing to sacrifice as well.  But they're not.  Not in the least.  They expect the taxpayers and the front line workers to do all the sacrificing.  It's all about someone else doing the hard work, while the CEO gets to keep all the perks.

Sorry, but you're the leader who led the company into this disaster.  You should be the first one to give up something.

[Loudpedal]

Execs at this level cannot reasonably travel by commercial airlines, as much as anybody wishes they could. 

However, optically it was a poor decision.  The PR guys should be fired on that one. 

Also, the politician that pointed out the method of travel in the hearing was just playing politics and is likely enjoying his pats on the back today.   Gotta love politics eh?...

[sirAQUAMAN64]

Also, the politician that pointed out the method of travel in the hearing was just playing politics and is likely enjoying his pats on the back today.   Gotta love politics eh?...

I'd like to know what the politician drives, or is he chauffeured?

[Sir Osis of Liver]

I posted this in the GM 2009 thread. They should likely be combined.

Let's assume the flight did cost $20000 and first class seats run $900 on a commercial flight. Let's also say the Gulfstream G4 was configured for 19 passengers. I would assume the CEO's were not just going to fly to Washington and return without other meetings scheduled. That usually means assorted lawyers and senior management also tagged along. The use of a private plane makes the travel time productive; business doesn't take place on commercial flights.

Now if 18 others travelled along with the CEO and they flew commercial, that would come to $17100, using the jet would cost them only $2900 more. The plane itself is largely a tax write-off and is either owned outright or leased. Its presence or absence from the company wouldn't make a lick of difference to the bottom line. The optics aren't good, but from a financial standpoint, it isn't nearly as irresponsible as some people are letting on.

Our company has a corporate Cessna 414. We have tables to determine when it's used. The number of people, their pay scale, and the flight duration and destination determine whether we use it, or fly commercial.

One of the reasons many corporations have jets is to smooze with congressmen and senators.

[ovr50]

The truth is that it may well have been as cheap or even cheaper for the Auto Co bigwigs to fly to DC in a corporate jets, BUT when you are going hat in hand for a handout, it's poor optics and the auto co PR ppl should have recognized that. Just lack of thinking on management's part.

[tpl]

Execs at this level cannot reasonably travel by commercial airlines, as much as anybody wishes they could. 
<snip>

With all the time wasted in security queues in airports these days, at Wagoner's salary rate it may actually be cheaper to use a private aircraft and once you decide to do that it may as well be something that can get you to the far side of the country non-stop and the Europe or Japan on one stop. ( I don't know if GM's G4 can do that but in his position I'd want an aircraft that could so do)

[tenpenny]

I posted this in the GM 2009 thread. They should likely be combined.

Our company has a corporate Cessna 414. We have tables to determine when it's used. The number of people, their pay scale, and the flight duration and destination determine whether we use it, or fly commercial.  One of the reasons many corporations have jets is to smooze with congressmen and senators.

Big - I remember when your company bought that plane.  There were quite a lot of big projects on the go at that time.  Didn't know if under new ownership you still had it.

[marineboy]

Execs at this level cannot reasonably travel by commercial airlines, as much as anybody wishes they could. 
<snip>

With all the time wasted in security queues in airports these days, at Wagoner's salary rate it may actually be cheaper to use a private aircraft and once you decide to do that it may as well be something that can get you to the far side of the country non-stop and the Europe or Japan on one stop. ( I don't know if GM's G4 can do that but in his position I'd want an aircraft that could so do)

Perhaps if Wagoner had to wait for a commercial flight he we have had time to reflect on why he has done such a poor job. Heaven forbid he might have actually rubbed shoulders with the ordinary citizens and found out why his cars are not selling.