![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-439678-100x100.png\")
this == fail...but I wonder if it will turn out better than GM long term.
this == fail...but I wonder if it will turn out better than GM long term.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-789978-100x100.png\")
Question - If Chrysler goes bankrupt, would that null-and-void their contracts with the UAW? If so, that would be a quick way around all the stupid negotiations with the \"We'll burn this ship before we save it\" attitudes the UAW seems to love to toss out....
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-930037-100x100.png\")
@SanDiegoDude:
The Bankruptcy Judge CAN void the Union agreement if asked to by Chrysler. However, the expectation is that Chrysler won't ask for the new agreement to be voided.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/css/images/default.gif\")
@SanDiegoDude: I read that all contracts can be broken via bankruptcy. That includes union deals. A comment from some official had said that a bankruptcy judge would be crazy to break the new union agreement and everyone expects the agreement to make it through bankruptcy.
Oh and don't let anyone tell you the unions did not cause this. If a company cannot cut off bonuses, fire workers, and drop life time cushy benefits and pension options while they are generating no profits, they will fail. These union agreements directly caused this failure. There is a reason management went with bigger engines and more expensive add-ons in these cars. They hoped that a customer would easily pay more for stuff they did not need or for things that should have been standard. After gas spiked, customers were no longer willing to pay extra for that v6, alloy wheels, or better stereo. And it turns out when buying a bare bones 4 cylinder, the foreign companies had the US auto industry beat. Make no mistake, the \"bad\" management decisions were a result of higher costs due to the union.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-773092-100x100.png\")
@SanDiegoDude: \"We'll burn this ship before we save it\"?
Seriously, do you even read the news? Or do you just filter out facts so that you can feel justified in your silly, anti-union notions?
The car companies are in this mess because of mismanagement, not because the people that make their cars want to destroy their employer.
Labor agreements are not null and void in bankruptcy. Which is probably a good thing, since many of the workers would wind up making minimum wage while the executives continued raking in the big bucks.
@fredbiscotti: A reasonable person will agree however that auto workers get paid waaay to much for what they do.
Especially when (like in Canada) the government may get stuck paying pensions. Not to mention the super-bailouts getting handed out currently.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-26461-100x100.png\")
@dave_coder:
I look at it more like most people get paid waaay too little for what they do.
We should all be able to find a good job with decent pay, benefits, and pension. Just because it's unheard of these days for most people doesn't mean auto workers are evil for having it.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-343837-100x100.png\")
I will agree with you that the UAW average is WAY too high for the work being done, but others on here won't so be ready...
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-537475-100x100.png\")
@dave_coder: How it was explained to me by a friend whose family has a long legacy of working in the big three industry (they all live in Michigan) is that when Toyota, Nissan, et. al. decided to begin producing cars in the U.S., they purposely avoided unionizing, and went to great lengths to discourage unions. Toyota pays their workers about $50 less than the unionized employees of the big three do - but Toyota workers are being paid $150 an hour! So in the bigger scheme, when you really factor how much these workers are all being paid...$50 difference doesn't seem so big.
Hmmm, well, I live in an auto town. The average CAW worker makes $35 an hour (from the CAW themselves). The average worker at the local non-unionized Toyota plant makes $33.45 an hour (published), which, considering Cambridge is one of the cheapest urban areas here to live, is pretty damn good and not unfair at all.
The CAW is upset because they aren't getting dues. They actually picket the WORKERS at the Toyota factory to get them to join the union. The workers say, firmly, \"no\". They like working for an employer that respects them, that they don't have to fight with, and, most importantly, willingly gives them the same benefits and pay that the CAW workers have.
Let me give you some history to prove that unions (not just the CAW) in general just don't know when to give up:
IAW - March 2008
CAW women - February 2005
It goes back before then, because I know there was another push back sometime between 2001-2003, but of course, not a lot of newspaper articles online from that time.
Always rejected, always told to go away, but they won't give up. You would think after the second time they would have figured it out. Now the company hires lawyers to fight union votes, not because it wants to stop a union going in there, but because the unions piss off the *workers* so much.
The conditions aren't bad either, I've known people who worked there, and while it's monotonous as hell (what assembly line work ISN'T?) I have never heard a peep regarding working conditions. Now, my dad worked for a unionized auto plant (and a unionized tire factory before that), and not only is it not in business anymore, but the conditions were ridiculously bad.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-413611-100x100.png\")
@shepd: You want irony, watch the union take a pay cut and then watch the executives take bonus that same quarter / fiscal year.
Honestly: Why the f*ck should the unions ever back down if they have even an inkling that a majority of the paycut will end up in the pocket of the executives?
@pecan 3.14159265: Where is that $150/hr number coming from. I've always heard union workers are \"overpaid\" but never heard a rate like that. That works out to a bit over 300K/year, which is waaay too much, even for skilled labor. If that's what they've been getting paid, then they're not getting any sympathy from me. They can all go retire.
@ilovemom: Ahh, so it's too much for an executive as well, right? I mean, good for the good, good for the gander.
The most recent number I have seen puts the average pay of a domestice UAW worker at $28/hour. Toyota and Nissan workers are paid less, around $20/ hour, I believe. The hourly wage numbers of $70+ per hour include the cost of pensions, health care, etc. I would really find it hard to believe a Toyota worker can pull in $300k per year, but I could be wrong.
@wgrune:
One more note on pay, I worked as a junior year 1 electrician's apprentice (actually, for the first three months I was just an electrician's assistant due to apprenticing laws here) and I was paid $16+ an hour two years ago by a non-union auto parts manufacturer. That was actually the highest anyone I know of that started out as an electrician got paid in their first year, including in union places.
I find it incredibly hard to believe the average wage is $20 an hour at ANY auto plant (union or not) considering this place was considered \"cheap\" by fellow workers when it comes to pay.
@shepd: What I'm wondering is, what do the auto workers do? Is their job extremely technical in nature? I can imagine structural engineers get high pay because there's a great deal of education involved, but I never considered auto worker jobs to be low-education jobs by any means. But if the environment they're working in is dangerous in any way, or if it requires a good amount of mechanical and technical expertise, I could see how they would get paid a lot more than joe schmoe.
@pecan 3.14159265: You too can be an executive. Skills include bullsh*tting people, wasting time, and getting your meals catered.
Honestly, too many people have bought into the Corporatist \"CEO's create wealth\" bullsh*t. Yeah, maybe 1% do. Google, MS, et al.
VERY few CEO's really create anything. I've dealt with these nozzles day in and out on a contract basis, and most of them are good at looking good and saying a LOT of nothing.
@pecan 3.14159265:
Not claiming to be an expert, never been to a car factory. But I will note that just because they always show a couple robot arms in the commercials doesn't mean robots build the cars. (Not that you said it, I've seen a few comments on Consumerist to that effect.) Real people do need to assemble the vehicles. There is at least some amount of mechanical/technical knowledge and physical labor.
@wgrune: Ahh, apologies for the $150 number. That was anecdotal from a friend and inaccurate...though at some point, I did see that number floating around somewhere on the news.
I want Slate's Explainer to explain one thing to me: What exactly do auto workers do if robots are putting together doors and such? Do they watch the robots? Maintenance? Or do robots not do anything at all, and they actually piece together cars?
I really like the part about the warranties for a company that makes CRAP to be backed by MY tax dollars. If they made good vehicles to begin with, they wouldn't be having this problem.
@ChrisC1234: Your tax dollars don't pay for anything unless one of the companies goes under and only if people make warranty claims. Plus this only effects cars bought after the plan is setup. Cars bought before the announcement are not covered.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-414437-100x100.png\")
@Lincolnsbeard33: It's actually common practice for something this important (i.e. on the level of an auto warranty) to be backed by the government during bankruptcy.
Hear that sound?
My grandpa rolling in his grave.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-386301-100x100.png\")
@ElizabethD: Your grandfather does ecstasy, post-mortem?
No, I kid. His rolling is joined by a large portion of my deceased relatives as well.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-332258-100x100.png\")
Chrysler to merge with Fiat by fiat.
Oh great. We get taxed enough and now we see just how well used our money is....
And the auto unions still won't budge to lower wages to reasonable levels.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-103878-100x100.png\")
@dave_coder: Uh, they made huge concessions to help avoid this.
Please send me the articles about how senior leadership made big concessions in their salary.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-327517-100x100.png\")
@ARP: This is true. In the last few days of pre-bankruptcy, the UAW agreed to significant cuts and modifications to its 2007 contract w/ Chrysler. Granted they also got a 55% stake in the company by doing this, but hey it just means more is on the line for them as well, seems fair enough. While they could've made these arrangements earlier, at least they did finally admit to reality and make concessions. It's too bad the greedy hedge funders that control Chrysler were too interested in their own pocketbooks than making realistic concessions as well.
Corporate_Guy wrote:\" I just hope the creditors get less than what they could have gotten before bankruptcy. They deserve it.\"Why? They lent the money to Chrysler in good faith, and Chrysler is unable to pay them back--we have a legal process for such contingencies, it's called \"bankruptcy.\"
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-890779-100x100.png\")
I think I would much prefer Chrysler dies a horrible death, creditors take over and sell off their remaining assets, and let someone with a fresh, inspirational business model rise up to take their place (you know, like Capitalism SHOULD do it)
@Radi0logy: Yeah, that'll happen. Capitalism has nothing to do with inspirational business models. Capitalism is all about short-term profits today, and that's the same thing that got the Big 3 into trouble. Don't believe me, go look through their books for the last 50 years, especially the last 30.
People act like Detroit started making crappy cars back in the late 70's forward. I'm sorry to burst your f*ckin' bubble, but the big 3 were making sh*tty cars in the 50's.
does anyone know whether or not the UAW is still getting the 55% stake in Chrystler?
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-390449-100x100.png\")
@pecan 3.14159265: doesn't matter if its 30 or 55, companies with union ownership that high have little history of success.
@Tmoney02: But I think it does make a difference because if they own 55% that means they own the company, and can have power over it, right? Or does a union technically not have any power because they're not a company, or are subjected to a board with veto power?
@pecan 3.14159265: this is a critical question, because from what I had heard, the 55% stake was in exchange for cutting Chrysler's obligations to the UAW by 50%. However, I am concerned as to whether or not such a 55% stake could give the UAW the power to influence or outright control the bargaining as it relates to UAW contracts. In essence, can they abuse that stake in the company to make the company pay up as if they never had cut their obligation in half?
@Shane Elliott: It would be an interesting study. Would they push hard for really high wages for their workers, would they kill models that aren't making money, etc. if it was THEIR money at stake?
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-816950-100x100.png\")
The first dominoe topples...
This had, and continues to have, disaster written all over it.
Remember to smile widely, Chrysler workers, as you greet your new National Socialist overlords.
Err... that was odd. That should just read
\"I Hate Illinois Nazis\"
@squinko: only according to the map. Culturally speaking, most of the people south of Cook County do really look at Chicago as being its own separate little corrupt fiefdom that somehow screws with our state government.
@Shane Elliott: You've been watching too much Beck. Nazi's are not the same as socialists. They're nearly the opposite. One of the first groups Hitler jailed were Socialists and Communists. Facists historically were ultra-nationalists (e.g. you're either with us or against us, you must support the president or you want the terrorsists to win and hate the troops), and unltra-corporatists. Meaning, they would develop close relationships with large corporations and let them do what they wanted. Which modern party does that sound like?
PS- \"I hate Illinois Nazi's\" is from the Blues Brothers. Classic line.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-16563-100x100.png\")
@ARP: I'm struggling to recall if suburban Illinois is justly renowned for being anything but a Chicago writ smaller. And I'm failing.
Great parades with beefy guys wearing colorful armbands? What else?
@ARP: Unfortunately, the \"Nazi\" party was properly named the \"National Socialist\" party in Germany. I doubt that is what the OP meant to portray when he said it, but it was poor wording.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-545239-100x100.png\")
@Shane Elliott: I didn't know there would be anyone outside of Michigan who would understand what it's like to have a Detroit in their state.
@WiglyWorm: Who/what, exactly, is this \"Illinois Nazi\" you're referring to?
(I'm hoping it's not President Obama, because then you'd be a complete idiot.)
Well, the NWO strikes again. Fiat is part of the Buildabear Group, who really runs the world!
Now where is my anti-abduction helmet?
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-410094-100x100.png\")
Maybe if they made cars people wanted, this wouldn't happen.
That said, I love my little Honda. <3
Here's what I've been told about the warranties. The government is only backing the warranties for those who purchased Chrysler cars during this restructuring period. Those of us who own Chrysler cars and are partially through warranty periods are left out in the cold. I have an extended warranty that is good until 2011 and now it's worthless. I'm trying to get the balance refunded, but I've been laughed at and told to go deal with the dealer I purchased the car from because they're my last hope.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-72607-100x100.png\")
@vermontwriter: I really feel bad for you. I bought a Dodge a while back with the extended warranty and that ran out just a few months ago. In fact I sold the Dodge 4 days before the extended warranty ran out. But I assume that you already saved what you paid for the extended warranty, I did in the first year. So look at the bright side.
I think the best thing you should do is sell your car. If it was anything like my Grand Caravan, it is simply a ticking time bomb until the next +$800 repair. Also I don't know what car you have but say you paid $20K for it new, your looking at $4-6K at CarMax now. That is a good down payment on a Honda say.
Finally when I got the extended warranty after a lot of haggling the dealership would no longer agree to lower price, so I got them to throw in oil changes, tire rotaions, and a cleaning/detailing certificate. The dealership was out of business in less than a month. The new dealership would not honor the old ones papers. That ruffled my feathers at the time, but again I came so much ahead on the repairs of that turd of a car that I like to look at the bright side and not care anymore.
How the hell is letting a failed company go bankrupt socialism?
That is the very essence of the free market.
question B: without Invoking the red scare and the lessons your pappy taught you in the 50s, what's wrong with socialism?
What's going to happen with the investment group that purchased Chrysler from Daimler? They bought it and then refused to back/help it, and now the US government is going to fix Chrysler, will the owner profit?
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-926607-100x100.png\")
@pecan 3.14159265: Where on earth do Toyota line workers get paid $150 an hour?
From: [www.aftermarketnews.com]
via the Detriot Free Press, 2007 (apparently)
Toyota Motor Corp. gave workers at its largest U.S. plant bonuses of $6,000 to $8,000, boosting the average pay at the Georgetown, KY, plant to the equivalent of $30 an hour. That compares with a $27 hourly average for UAW workers, most of whom did not receive profit-sharing checks last year. Toyota would not provide a U.S. average, but said its 7,000-worker Georgetown plant is representative of its U.S. operations.
In other news, Fiat S.p.A. announced that they would be renaming themselves to Fiao. This move was spurred by the old joke to ensure it remains current. Fix It Again, Obama!
Obama announces Chrysler's BK. Interesting. I guess he is the one calling the shots at the private company. When the majority voted Obama as president of the USA, did they know he would use taxpayer funded welfare money to take control of private business in the USA. Therefore, become the voice of that company? If it smells like economic central planning, it probably is.
What is wrong with socialism? Do I have to answer that question? Hey, you want to give more and more of your liberty and freedom to a small group that will make all your decisions, you should move to Cuba. How exactly great is life in that country during the past 50 years? What is wrong with socialism? OMG.
@kwsventures: OMG another moron that doesn't know what Socialism is! Yippee!
Listen to Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, O'Reilly, or Beck?
I love you guys, you're as entertaining as Marxists. OMG OMG OMG ZEE SOCIALISTS! OMG OMG OMG ZEE FASCISTS!
You guys don't even know what you're talking about. Now when you get all growed up and actually read up on what you're speaking, us older folk that actually fought the real Commies will take you seriously. Until then, you're just making conservatives look bad. STFU and go learn something.
I don't know why Republicans have cultivated this culture of ignorance. This is only detrimental, in the long run, as decisions based on gut reactions are often wholly incorrect.
@Inglix_the_Mad: You my friend need to heed your own advice; \"STFU and go learn something\". It is the Democrats who\"have cultivated this culture of ignorance\". Dating back to the Clinton years, Democrats have freely stated that \"they know better than the average american how our tax money should be spent\"...therefore, (I'm paraphrasing) Democrats are against any kind of tax cut that would put more money into the taxpayers hand. I don't understand why you, supposedly a \"grown-up\" have fialed to miss all this. Speaking of \"gut reactions\" - how else would you catagorize the bailouts?!
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-384485-100x100.png\")
It's up to the bankruptcy judge to determine if the UAW contracts should be restructured or voided. The determining factor will be Chrysler's ability to maintain itself under those agreements. The bankruptcy judge will seek a mutual decision between UAW and Chrysler, but will ultimately have the final say on whether the contracts remain enforceable, are voided entirely, or are restructured to allow for Chrysler's viability.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-259013-100x100.png\")
Chrysler, put the Hornet or Demon into production, and I'll go buy one.
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-125641-100x100.png\")
Can I declare bankrupcy too? I want a free 8 billion dollars.
@vladthepaler: Do you employ 40k people as one of the lynch pins of a national economy?
No?
Then shut up.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-87429-100x100.png\")
Wow, I thought the government was spending a lot before. But now...they are backing Chrysler warranties? Is there that much money in the world?
Thank you for buying a new car.....
When you take your car in for that \"recall\" the dealership will say what recall? theres no recall. Get off our property, oil changes will be handled via FOOD STAMPS. And any service work you need will be in the form of a vehicle exchange congrats you now get a tank.
To those whose union-haters whose livelihood is not based on skimming from the proceeds of your investments and trust funds, allow me to give a metaphor that captures the brilliance of your position.
Mouse: \"Cats must be allowed to range where they like and we demand that collars with bells be outlawed. It's against the natural order of things. How else will the craven song bird population learn important survival skills that benefit them in the long run?\"
Tweety: \"But that's insane. Cats already have stealth, claws, fangs and lighting fast reflexes. They've banded together in hunting packs. We must organize too. And, besides, birds aren't the only thing cats eat, grain-breath.
Mouse: \"Nonsense. Overruled. Cats r-u-l-e, birds da f-o-o-l!\"
Cat: \"Heh. Heh. Heh. Now I'm hungry.\"
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-520287-100x100.png\")
@Trai_Dep: While anecdote != data, I'd mention that my father was once a Teamster, and often told me how the union always accepted and spent his dues money, but never stood up for him when needed.
I can't speak with any authority whatsoever on the UAW, but I would think that, without strong internal vigilance, it is possible for them to have metastasized into an organization seeking the organization's good over the members' good. Whether or not that's the case, I don't have the research to say.
@Red_Flag: I have a natural distrust of any large organization.
But labor not organizing when management seems quite foolish.
And it's quite amusing when working-class people fed on a constant Fox News diet are so vociferous in their hatred towards unions, when it's so clearly against their economic interest. (shrug)
I have to say, Yay Canada for pitching in.
Although Mexico, next time? Cash vastly preferred over pandemic viruses. \"A\" for effort, though!
what happens to the retirees pension?
There are some major lies being told about the union pay at these plants. On ething that the car companies keep adding in is the pensions, and health care of retirees. Isnt it logical that a company around for as many years as GHM or Chrysler will have older, and more retired workers. Guess what, when the Toyota people retire Toyota has the same issue. By the way, TOYOTA is losing MAJOR money in this recession. As is Nissan, and every other car company. The foreign companies have help in RD from their governments as well.
This is how communism starts. The government and the unions (same thing) now own two major auto makers. They'll attempt to create some piece of crap green car that would get slaughtered if it ran on a bumper car track and nobody will want them. No problem. They'll slap enormous tariffs on all cool imported cars or perhaps even ban them altogether since they'll be considered hazardous to the environment. Voila! Socialized industry.
Fiat?
Yes I know this is not new news but really? Does anyone think Fiat is the white knight that will shoe Chrysler the path to making good and profitable cars? My wife has had two Fiat Spyders and while they were fun at the time, they were clearly not high quality cars. Not to worry, they have gotten worse since then.
Maybe when this relationship fails the Edsel Company can bail them both out.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-453252-100x100.png\")
Jesus Chrystler! I knew they would fail anyway.
Question on the warranties. I bought a Jeep in November of 2008, this was before any \"restructuring\". Does this mean my warranty is no longer good? Does this also mean that the lifetime powertrain warranty will no longer be good?
Canada is providing about 3.8 billion, but was promised it would be paid back in interest. here is where I found the story in my local paper. Its an effort by both the government of the province of Ontario and the federal government in Ottawa.
I'm a Honda of America worker and what disturbs me most about this is the fact that my company -- a company that's been in this country for 30 years -- is now put in a position of competing not only against the Detroit Three, but also the United States government now that the US is essentially a stakeholder in GM and Chrysler. I worry that this is going to affect future legislation in regard to penalizing any non-Detroit Three auto company, whether it be Honda, Toyota, BMW, VW, or any of the foreign companies that have operations here in the US. The US government already skews much automotive legislation in favor of the GM, Chrysler, and Ford (CAFE is a good example of that), now I fear that there will be a stronger push to do so -- after all, what would be their motivation? The government's going to want to make it as easy as possible to get their money back and helping their \"competitors\" isn't going to help meet that end.
thank god for the unions, because we know that companies cannot survive and workers cannot prosper without unions...
unions save the lazy and the stupid...the smart will excel on their own.
@ZManGT: I bought a Dodge in 2004 and got the extended warranty. Up until this month, nothing has gone wrong with the car, so I've never touched the warranty and the tie-rod wasn't covered anyway.
I called Dodge about this and was told that my extended warranty is no good and the powertrain warranty is also no longer any good. I can bring the paperwork back to the dealer for a refund of what's left (2 years) but they'll deduct a $75 cancellation fee to start.
I know others have told me to sell the car, but right now, I can't afford to. My husband's car is 11 years old and the plan was to buy him a new car now and mine becomes the \"junker\" of the family, though with 50k on it and it's still in great condition (knocking on wood) I can't really call it a junker.
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-21984-100x100.png\")
Unions need to mass market their message more just like businesses have marketed the \"unions are stupid\" message since business seeks to pay the least amount of money for the most amount of work right down to slave wage level...
![\"user-pic\"](\"http://consumerist.com/assets_c/userpics/userpic-775624-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-614980-100x100.png\")
![\"user-pic\"](\"/mt-static/support/assets_c/userpics/userpic-369596-100x100.png\")
I just hope the creditors get less than what they could have gotten before bankruptcy. They deserve it.
@Corporate_guy: I doubt it. Secured creditors (i.e. bond holders) are generally at the top of the list when it comes to recouping assets in a bankruptcy. I'm guessing that they'll do much better than what they were offered since the courts will probably recognize that as secured creditors, they are legally entitled to priority in the new division of assets.
@Corporate_guy: Yup.
High risk bet that unsuprisingly blew up in their faces. You'd think with that much supposed intelligence, they'd have learned from the last year. I guess that they won't until they've gambled away every last dime in their portfolio.
@Corporate_guy: yes, i'm going to second that. i don't even care if 100% of my 401(k) is invested in one of those hedge funds. the executive branch REPEATEDLY said there would be no more money unless certain concessions were made. wipe 'em out.