Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

Irrespective of the GM/Toyota deal, our tooling

industry is already in decline.

Census figures show that

13,000 fewer people are working in the industry in 1980

than in 1970.

It takes years to create tooling capacity.

In terms of manpower, four years of apprenticeship and

ten years of experience are necessary to create a skilled

employee.

Our industry requires complicated machinery,

including mills, presses, duplicators, cutting tools and

gigantic machining centers.

It requires the use of heavy

cranes, long bays, and complicated support facilities,

including foundries, engineering and design, and tool steels.

In years past, the loss of major customers, such as

Packard, Hudson, Studebaker, and others, has taken its

toll.

If the Toyota-General Motors joint venture further

reduces the market for tooling in the U. S., the industry

will be further diminished.

General Motors is probably the largest manufacturer in

the world, producing 55 percent of the automobiles produced in

the United States and controlling 42 percent of the U. S.

automobile market. If this type of a venture is permitted for General Motors, the other manufacturers will not be far

[merged small][ocr errors]

behind.

1

Approximately 25 percent of all U.S. tools are built for the

automotive industry and its suppliers.

If Ford, Chrysler,

International Harvester, Caterpillar and others follow the General Motors route, can be anticipated, the effect upon

as

our industry will be devastating.

That this is not an idle

concern is demonstrated by the fact that shortly after the GM-Toyota announcement, Ford cancelled 33 million tooling hours and announced joint venture plans with Toyo-Kogo. Ford

is apparently not protesting the GM-Toyota venture. American Motors, (French owned), already sources its tools primarily

from its parent in France. Chrysler is protesting the Toyota venture, but continues to use Japanese engines from Mitsubishi

in its automobiles.

The Volkswagen Pennsylvania plant is

tooled primarily from Germany. Where does this leave the American worker in our industry? I'll tell you.

It leaves

him out in the cold and out of a job!

I want this Committee to note the fact that neither

General Motors nor Toyota have made any public commitment in

connection with their joint venture as

to what portion of the

tooling for the California plant will be from United States

sources.

In addition, General Motors has made no public statement concerning the extent to which the proposed increases in its tooling capacity are intended to replace the tooling and machining obtained from outside sources. Unless General Motors and Toyota are willing to make public commitments that the new

venture will not reduce competition for tooling and machining

in the United States, the proposed GM-Toyota joint venture

should be disapproved forthwith!

I also want this Committee to note that the Japanese

[blocks in formation]

have claimed that the joint venture will create 3,000 new

jobs in the California assembly plant where the merger car

will be assembled.

What has not been explained is that this

will cost a net loss of 18,350 jobs, most of them in the

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

assembly of an automobile generally accounts for about 15-20%

of the total labor and manufacturing costs of an automobile.

The remainder is accounted for by the manufacture or purchase

of the parts which are being assembled, plus the tooling which is required for the manufacture and assembly of those parts.

The second factor is that the automobile manufactured

in a GM-Toyota joint venture will replace either immediately

or in the future, an equivalent automobile which is either

now produced or which would eventually be produced in this country by General Motors. The joint venture vehicle has been

mentioned as

a replacement for the Chevette.

All of the jobs

associated with the production of the Chevette, its successor,

or another vehicle which GM would have otherwise manufactured,

[blocks in formation]

jobs at the Flint, Michigan engine plant; the Buffalo, New

York axle plant; the Warren, Michigan front suspension plant;

and the Saginaw, Michigan steering gear plant.

Mr. Chairman,

all of these jobs will be lost.

In addition, a large number of highly skilled jobs will

be lost in the contract tooling and machining industry which is

a major supplier to General Motors.

Other supplier industries

will also suffer.

The 1982 U. S. Industrial Outlook estimated

that there were 114,000 workers in the contract tooling and

machining industry in 1981, a figure considered to be vastly

understated by the National Tooling and Machining Association.

Of those 114,000 jobs, about 25% or 28,500 are related to direct

or indirect support of the U. S. automobile industry.

General

Motors accounts for 55% of the U. S. auto industry, so 15,675 of

the jobs in this industry are attributable to sales to General

Motors.

Assuming that 15% of those jobs are related to the

manufacture of the Chevette, then 2,351 jobs in the contract

tooling industry will be lost as

a result of the merger.

Add to that another 2,000 or so jobs attributable to other

suppliers of General Motors, which may or may not be a

large enough number to take into account jobs created by

support industries to the direct suppliers of General

Motors, and the total jobs which could be lost is 18,351.

It is important to note that although we have used the

Chevette as

an example in order to be able to have some finite

numbers to work with, similar figures would apply whether the

proposed joint venture vehicle replaced another vehicle

currently in production or whether it was a new addition to

the product line.

In either case, most of the sales of the new vehicle

[ocr errors]

would come at the expense of U.S. sales and U.S. jobs related

[ocr errors]

to other U.S. vehicles priced just above or just below the

proposed joint venture vehicle.

The reason is that automobile

1

demand, like the demand for any product, is not totally elastic.

If the addition of a new vehicle would produce new sales

without affecting the sale of other domestic autos, our problems with unemployment in the auto industry would be over. All U.S.

auto manufacturers would need do would be to produce a large

number of new models, each targeted to a slightly different

market segment than current models.

Sales of U.ş. autos would

go up dramatically and unemployment in the auto industry would

disappear.

Of course, such an assumption is absurd.

There is only

a potential market for so many cars in the U.S. in a given year,

and the addition of new products only means that the pie is

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]
« AnteriorContinuar »