“it was either Janesville or Arlington”
Seems like Wisconsin just lost a business to Arlington.
The decision by General Motors to phase out the Janesville plant means a GM plant in Arlington, Texas, becomes the main producer of the once-popular SUVs built here.
GM executives never said it was either Janesville or Arlington as they decided on what plant closing to make in addition to plants in Canada, Mexico and Ohio.
But the Janesville and Arlington plants were once considered industrial mirror images. They’ve both worried about being shut down in the past.
Texas Republican congressman Joe Barton said the quality of Arlington’s workforce was a factor in the plant avoiding closure. But Wisconsin governor Jim Doyle said GM officials had also praised the output and performance of GM’s workforce.
Barton said other factors in Texas’ favor were the state’s lack of an income tax, and the state’s status as a right-to-work-state. Doyle said the Janesville local union’s efforts at accomodation with GM had been praised.
Some have suggested a state leader’s pure power of persuasion comes into play with corporate siting decisions.
[...]
Auto industry analysts said Texas’ proximity to lower-cost, Mexican supply factories, and lower wages for GM workers in Arlington, worked against Wisconsin.
You think the constant threats of combined reporting might have also played a part?
One more thing in Arlington’s favor; that factory is the sole provider of the Cadillac Escalade (upscale Tahoe), with the Silao, Mexico factory being the sole provider of the Escalade ESV (upscale Suburban).
Posted by steveegg on June 05, 2008 at 1152 hrs
I would like to hear what Doyle really said, because this article made it sound like the reporter said on thing and Doyle responded with “but, but, but…they said they like us.”
I would like to know if Doyle made his comments with the knowledge of the reasons given above or if he was asked for comments and that’s just what he said and the reasons were added in later as a kind of “one on hand…”/“on the other hand…”
The article makes it appear that Doyle is completely oblivious to the reasons GM chose Arlington. I would hope that the article is just poorly written.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 05, 2008 at 1218 hrs
Actually the Truth is the Arlington Plant currently makes the Hybrid versions of all the Suv’s. Thats where any hope of selling Suv’s in the future is.
Sorry it doesn’t fit into your pre conceived ideas!
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 05, 2008 at 1245 hrs
You think the constant threats of combined reporting might have also played a part?
Seeing as 21 states currently have combined reporting laws on the books, and the number is growing, I don’t think corporations can forever hide from having to actually pony up for their fair share for the special legal protections they are granted.
So no.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 05, 2008 at 1250 hrs
Willy, Why did GM choose Janesville over Arlington when they were deciding where to make the hybrids?
I’ll resist my preconceived idea until I hear back from you.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 05, 2008 at 1256 hrs
Seems like Wisconsin just lost a business to Arlington.
So, how many employees is Arlington gaining? For some reason, I thought this was a reduction in manufacturing capacity & staffing for GM. Will Arlington be adding to their plant to increase production? Or will Arlington be looking over their shoulder wondering when the axe will fall on them?
Reading the business section this AM, industry analysts were making the points that, one, it’s a surprise that GM kept the Janesville plant open as long as they did; two, that this was GMs oldest plant & because of if being multi-storied it wasn’t as well suited to current manufacturing methods; and three, that there has not been any new automotive manufacturing capacity added anywhere in the North in recent years.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 05, 2008 at 1336 hrs
All I see are a bunch of ostrichs in here.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 05, 2008 at 1542 hrs
Auto industry analysts said Texas’ proximity to lower-cost, Mexican supply factories, and lower wages for GM workers in Arlington, worked against Wisconsin.
Seem’s like the guys who actually study this industry, instead of trying to politicize it, have got it figured out
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 05, 2008 at 1645 hrs
Might it have something to do with Janesville having a multi-story plant built in 1919? You don’t see Toyota building those kinds of plants today.
Judging from GM’s predicament they have too many plants making too many cars and trucks they aren’t selling. If it was a choice between Arlington and Janesville I go back to the latter having an older plant. Janesville’s days have been numbered for some time.
Posted by Sean Hackbarth on June 05, 2008 at 1842 hrs
It’s also worth noting that at the same time it was announcing plans to cease operations at four plants, GM also announced that it would be adding additional shifts at plants in Orion, MI, and Lordstown, OH, plants that manufacture the Chevy Cobalt and the Pontiac G5.
Even aside from the issues about an aging facility, Janesville was just stuck holding the wrong cards in terms of product development. If Janesville was producing Cobalts and Malibus, the story would likely have been the opposite.
Like I said on my own blog, Republicans are going to spin this as being about Wisconsin’s crappy business climate (whatever), and a lot of Democrats are going to blame oil companies for the high gas prices that contributed to this shift (again, whatever).
The reality is that GM has had its head buried in the sand for 20 years about the future of the automotive industry. Anyone who’s ever been to Europe knows that they’re a decades-long case study of what happens to consumer preferences when gas prices go up. That companies like Toyota and Honda figured this out but GM somehow couldn’t is simply inexcusable. Any CEO who was dumb enough to think gas would be $1.50 a gallon indefinitely should be dragged behind the building and shot.
Also, perhaps someone would like to tell GM that in an industry that rewards efficiency, producing and marketing vehicles under 12 different brands is also colossally stupid.
Posted by Recess Supervisor on June 05, 2008 at 1940 hrs
I think recess super pretty much hit it on the head. While I think Wisconsin has a crappy biz environment I can’t pin this one on Doyle. But, watch him try and sue GM for some stupid reason. That will help prevent other companies from locating here.
A multi-level production plant is unheard of these days and is totally obsolete. From all accounts it appeared that the union played ball to keep the plant alive. This is just a bad/sad kick in the butt for Wisconsin and Janesville.
With the lack of current leadershp and the void years before Doyle we are not likely to recover from this torpedo for a long time.
Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 05, 2008 at 2113 hrs
I’m curious, does anyone in the legislature from the GOP side have an idea to stem the outflow of jobs, taxes and money from Wisconsin’s economy? Where is our intrepid leadership? What does Dale Schultz, Scott Fitzgerald and Kevin Gilkes have to say for the path we must follow in our future? Or, is Dale Schultz busy counting his campaign contributions from big ethanol whil Fitzgerald and Gilkes sleep?
Is anyone alive in there? Feel like Will Smith.Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on June 06, 2008 at 1647 hrs
Total Entries: 19656
Total Comments: 129831
Most Recent Entry: 02/11/2012 09:52 pm
Most Recent Comment on: 02/11/2012 04:55 pm
Total Members: 9751
Total Logged in members: 0
Total guests: 105
Total anonymous users: 0
Most Recent Visitor on: 02/12/2012 02:11 am
The most visitors ever was 538 on 12/01/2007 02:11 pm
Protected and licensed under a Creative Commons License (some rights reserved).