quote:

Originally posted by shortshot:
If workers are standing around doing nothing, it is managements job to inspire them .

If a worker has been on the job more than a few days and is standing around doing nothing, management's job is to fire his ass and find someone that WANTS to earn his paycheck.

They are not there to babysit lazy fucks.

quote:

Originally posted by tom ga hunter:
Tomorrow morning I'm coming out of retirement, putting on my M&A hat and calling Winchester for an purchase package.

Sure...

H P Shooter,
If it is a union environement, management very well can't even fire the person who isn't working, the union won't allow it.
Unions were a good deal 100 years ago, but now they just breed corruption and raise the cost of doing business in my humble opinion.

quote:

As I live and breathe, Mr. Andrew Dice Clay.

File this in the FWIW bin........a news article this AM, quoting an Olin rep..... Olin is substantially unhappy with Herstal in regards to this matter....stay tuned.

I'm going to have to plead poverty with the rest of the crew here. Even with a good layaway plan, I don't think I could play....

As far as unions, let's put it this way. How many jobs have ever been created by unions?

Right. Next subject. JMO, Dutch.

quote:

Originally posted by Dutch:As far as unions, let's put it this way. How many jobs have ever been created by unions?

Right. Next subject. JMO, Dutch.

RMK, you've been owned again.

Well, I'm in on the buyout...if you'll take what I have in my wallet tight now! It'll get you lunch at the local Mexican Food place...

Since this is degenerating into a Union/anti-union thread...

I'm an engineer. We are not a union shop. I spec parts and deal with suppliers the world over. The worst suppliers are, without a doubt, union shops in the Northeast US and all of Europe. I dare anyone to light a fire under the staff or otherwise get service from suppliers in France, Germany, or Pennsylvania! The companies that moved their manufacturing out of the union areas are the better suppliers we have. It's just that simple, and trust me, I've tried like hell to find a way around it. It is just the nature of the business I am in (industrial controls and oilfield equipment).

Just my experiences from the trenches...

I've managed both union and non-union workforces, and I have a couple of comments about them.

I went into the first job as opened minded as I could get myself, but I still assumed they were the basis of quality problems. I was mistaken.

Union or not, most people want to do a good job, and given the resouces will do so. (Yes, there are bad apples - 1% maybe? In a union environment those folks are indeed hard to get rid of, and that is a problem.)

I came out of that job convinced almost all of the quality problems were management-based. The first time I had to say to one of my employees, "Yes, I know you don't have the resources, but please do the best you can with what you you have," I knew this was my problem, not his. It was my job to get him the tools, training, materials, and most of all, time to do his job right, and I had not done so. IMPO, a good number of the union/management struggle springs from these frustrations.

Unions aren't blameless, however. Sometimes it seemed as if the whole reason for their exxistence was to continue existing, rather than to accomplish anything for the membership. I recall a group of unionized employees approaching me about setting up a smoke-free environment without their union rep there. The rep stopped it when he found out about it, telling me I had to "negotiate changes in working conditions." "Let me get this straight," I asked. "You want me to give you concessions so that I can give you what your membership wants? Sorry, no can do." "Yep," he said. "The membership will understand that a strong union is more important than getting what they want."

That conversation stood me in good stead for years, as I remembered that the "Union" as an institution was completely different than the members of that union. FWIW.

Jaywalker

A updated artical:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060118/ap_on_bi_ge/winchester_closing_3

You know it wouldn't be so bad if FN decided to build the old 98's again. I know they can do it, somehow I don't think thats in their program though.

I have been a union worker while putting myself thru college when I was working at a General Motors assembly plant in New England...

I saw both sides of the story and both had good points and bad points....

I also have West Virginia roots and I have many cousins employed with either Highway Construction or Coal Mining in some sort or shape...All of my cousins are DieHARD union supporters....

The points I drew while working at GM for two years....

Unions are needed to defend their members from bad employers who have no concern for their employees....

If company's take care of their workers and employees and support them and pay them a decent wage... give decent benefits and quit trying to squeeze every last drop out of a dollar at the expense of those that build their products then there doesn't exist a need for a union....

My solution is that American business needs to invest and support their employees... It works well in Japan.. but then, the Japanese industry was taught that by an American engineer named Deming who was put in charge of coming up with plans to rebuild Japanese industry after their defeat in WW 2.... He was appointed to the post by Douglas MacArthur.......

Big business has too much greed, and then it ends up being their downfall....

OH and after working at a GM plant for two years.. I have never bought another GM product...
shows ya how impressed they made me!

cheers
seafire

So how often do you suck jeffeosso's dick there hp shooter.

Seafire,

I'm glad to see that someone remembered Mr. Deming.

The Japanese listened and learned. Many American companies didn't.

-Bob F.





http://www.deming.org/


Deming's 14 points

by Phil Cohen

W Edwards Deming was an American statistician who was credited with the rise of Japan as a manufacturing nation, and with the invention of Total Quality Management (TQM). Deming went to Japan just after the War to help set up a census of the Japanese population. While he was there, he taught 'statistical process control' to Japanese engineers - a set of techniques which allowed them to manufacture high-quality goods without expensive machinery. In 1960 he was awarded a medal by the Japanese Emperor for his services to that country's industry.

Deming returned to the US and spent some years in obscurity before the publication of his book "Out of the crisis" in 1982. In this book, Deming set out 14 points which, if applied to US manufacturing industry, would he believed, save the US from industrial doom at the hands of the Japanese.

Although Deming does not use the term Total Quality Management in his book, it is credited with launching the movement. Most of the central ideas of TQM are contained in "Out of the crisis".

The 14 points seem at first sight to be a rag-bag of radical ideas, but the key to understanding a number of them lies in Deming's thoughts about variation. Variation was seen by Deming as the disease that threatened US manufacturing. The more variation - in the length of parts supposed to be uniform, in delivery times, in prices, in work practices - the more waste, he reasoned.

From this premise, he set out his 14 points for management, which we have paraphrased here:

1."Create constancy of purpose towards improvement".
Replace short-term reaction with long-term planning.

2."Adopt the new philosophy".
The implication is that management should actually adopt his philosophy, rather than merely expect the workforce to do so.

3."Cease dependence on inspection".
If variation is reduced, there is no need to inspect manufactured items for defects, because there won't be any.

4."Move towards a single supplier for any one item."
Multiple suppliers mean variation between feedstocks.

5."Improve constantly and forever".
Constantly strive to reduce variation.

6."Institute training on the job".
If people are inadequately trained, they will not all work the same way, and this will introduce variation.

7."Institute leadership".
Deming makes a distinction between leadership and mere supervision. The latter is quota- and target-based.

8."Drive out fear".
Deming sees management by fear as counter-productive in the long term, because it prevents workers from acting in the organisation's best interests.

9."Break down barriers between departments".
Another idea central to TQM is the concept of the 'internal customer', that each department serves not the management, but the other departments that use its outputs.

10."Eliminate slogans".
Another central TQM idea is that it's not people who make most mistakes - it's the process they are working within. Harassing the workforce without improving the processes they use is counter-productive.

11."Eliminate management by objectives".
Deming saw production targets as encouraging the delivery of poor-quality goods.

12."Remove barriers to pride of workmanship".
Many of the other problems outlined reduce worker satisfaction.

13."Institute education and self-improvement".

14."The transformation is everyone's job".


Deming has been criticised for putting forward a set of goals without providing any tools for managers to use to reach those goals (just the problem he identified in point 10). His inevitable response to this question was: "You're the manager, you figure it out."

"Out of the crisis" is over 500 pages long, and it is not possible to do full justice to it in a 600 word article. If the above points interest you, we recommend the book for further information.
http://www.hci.com.au/hcisite2/articles/deming.htm

-----------------------------------------

Also see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._Edwards_Deming

posted by hp shooter- "If a worker has been on the job more than a few days and is standing around doing nothing, management's job is to fire his ass and find someone that WANTS to earn his paycheck.

They are not there to babysit lazy fucks."

my job is a union job, and 9/10 workers "hide" behind the union as an excuse to get out of work. the management (non union) knows these guys are lazy, worthless bums, but cannot fire them due to them being union! it's the same way in the concrete finishers union here, the laborers union, operating engineers union, and a host of other unions. the unions only care about money, as i have seen this, and instructing new apprectices to "fuck the company you work for" (like what was told at the laborers training center to a class full of apprentices). the "union mentality" is why GM lost the lions share of the American market, and people started buying jap cars. it wasn't the cost, as much as the quality waned, due to "union" workers not giving a shit. the union killed GM, and from what i've personally experienced, now seems to have, at least helped, kill winchester.

btw... i'm from the chicago area, not in the middle of wyoming.

quote:

Originally posted by RMK:
So how often do you suck jeffeosso's dick there hp shooter.

You are way out of your depth here, boy.

quote:

Originally posted by byf42:
posted by hp shooter- "If a worker has been on the job more than a few days and is standing around doing nothing, management's job is to fire his ass and find someone that WANTS to earn his paycheck.

They are not there to babysit lazy fucks."

my job is a union job, and 9/10 workers "hide" behind the union as an excuse to get out of work. the management (non union) knows these guys are lazy, worthless bums, but cannot fire them due to them being union! it's the same way in the concrete finishers union here, the laborers union, operating engineers union, and a host of other unions. the unions only care about money, as i have seen this, and instructing new apprectices to "fuck the company you work for" (like what was told at the laborers training center to a class full of apprentices). the "union mentality" is why GM lost the lions share of the American market, and people started buying jap cars. it wasn't the cost, as much as the quality waned, due to "union" workers not giving a shit. the union killed GM, and from what i've personally experienced, now seems to have, at least helped, kill winchester.

btw... i'm from the chicago area, not in the middle of wyoming.

RMK, you've been owned again.

This is the third time. This time by one of your union "brothers".

who is "RMK" and how has he been "owned" by one of his union brothers, i'm assuming me?

New MBAs Finding Education Pays Off Big Time Del Jones, USA TODAY Thu Jan 19

MBAs are hot, again. Salaries and signing bonuses of fresh graduates took a double-digit jump in 2005 to a record average $106,000 and signaled an end to the "perfect storm" of sour news this decade that included the dot-com bust, the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and a subsequent recession, said Dave Wilson, president of the Graduate Management Admissions Council (GMAC) that oversees the test for aspiring graduate students in business.

Corporate recruiters had disappeared from campuses. But, Wilson reports, "The MBA is back as the currency of intellectual capital."

The $106,000 salary and signing bonus was up 13.5% from 2004, according to a GMAC survey of 5,829 2005 grads. Salary alone increased to $88,600, surpassing the previous high of $85,400 set in 2001. The 2005 salary still trails 2001 by about $4,000 when adjusted for inflation, but the inflation-adjusted record will likely be broken this year.

Consulting firms and investment banks, the best-paying employers of freshly minted MBAs, had been slashing jobs. "They're back and hiring aggressively," says Nunzio Quacquarelli, the London-based director of the QS World MBA Tour that recruits students to 350 business schools in 56 cities worldwide.

The average bonus paid to a 2005 MBA graduate by investment banks was $40,000, Quacquarelli says.

Other forces are behind the rising compensation. The health care industry craves MBAs to help manage spiraling costs, and schools such as Boston University offer an MBA for those looking for careers ranging from hospital administration to biotech.

Technology hiring showed signs of life last year and is building steam in 2006, Quacquarelli says. Even the outsourcing of jobs to places such as India is driving demand for MBAs. The Labor Department estimates the outsourcing industry will need 2,000 senior executives this year, up from 100 in 2000. By 2012, it will need 9,500.

Wilson says there is also heavy demand for MBAs by the U.S. government and not-for-profit organizations. Salaries are not as high, but added demand is likely driving them up elsewhere.

The trend is global, according to a survey out Tuesday by QS World MBA Tour. Average salary and bonus for new MBAs was up 10% in 2005 to $114,000, also breaking the record set in 2001.

More than 100,000 MBA degrees are awarded each year in the USA alone. That's likely to rise. Prospective students who took the Graduate Management Admission Test rose to 228,000 in 2005 from 213,000 in 2004. And this year has started strong, Wilson says.

There are 1,500 schools worldwide offering MBAs, a number poised to explode, Quacquarelli says, as programs in China, India and Russia take off.

quote:

Originally posted by byf42:
posted by hp shooter- "If a worker has been on the job more than a few days and is standing around doing nothing, management's job is to fire his ass and find someone that WANTS to earn his paycheck.

They are not there to babysit lazy fucks."

my job is a union job, and 9/10 workers "hide" behind the union as an excuse to get out of work. the management (non union) knows these guys are lazy, worthless bums, but cannot fire them due to them being union! it's the same way in the concrete finishers union here, the laborers union, operating engineers union, and a host of other unions. the unions only care about money, as i have seen this, and instructing new apprectices to "fuck the company you work for" (like what was told at the laborers training center to a class full of apprentices). the "union mentality" is why GM lost the lions share of the American market, and people started buying jap cars. it wasn't the cost, as much as the quality waned, due to "union" workers not giving a shit. the union killed GM, and from what i've personally experienced, now seems to have, at least helped, kill winchester.

btw... i'm from the chicago area, not in the middle of wyoming.

Yup, blame the union and take the easy way out, eh? I really love the G.M. part. Remember Roger Smith? Now just what do you think happens to companies when management takes on salaries that are 10,000X what line workers make? Remember "Neutron Jack" from G.E.? Just where do you think G.E. is making its money? It certainly ain't toasters, it's the financial arm and credit cards that keep it afloat, not jet engines.
As for your worthless brethern that can't be fired, try documenting those cases and see how long they last. If you don't see results, I guess you'll just have to blame the non-union management...

quote:

In the late 1970s, after a massive strike by its machinists, Olin sold the plant to U.S. Repeating Arms along with the right to use the Winchester name until next year.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060118/ap_on_bi_ge/winchester_closing_3
I guess the union had nothing to do with USRAC's woes.

It was just a matter of time.

Sauvage said he thinks customers will continue buying the new line of weapons, which can be produced quickly and for less money, because Belgium, like America, has a reputation for quality manufacturing.

Keep in mind this is management talking. What more need be said?

quote:

Originally posted by buckshot:
Sauvage said he thinks customers will continue buying the new line of weapons, which can be produced quickly and for less money, because Belgium, like America, has a reputation for quality manufacturing.

Keep in mind this is management talking. What more need be said?

So, how many successful business have you operated? I ask because you feel so qualified to call this guy a liar and fool.

quote:

I would love to jump in. Unfortunately the only things I own are a big mouth and a flat wallet. Small town medicne is like being a colonel in the Army. It is a life of genteel poverty.

LD

To which the Reverend must chime in...AMEN!

quote:

Originally posted by HP Shooter:

quote:

Originally posted by buckshot:
Sauvage said he thinks customers will continue buying the new line of weapons, which can be produced quickly and for less money, because Belgium, like America, has a reputation for quality manufacturing.

Keep in mind this is management talking. What more need be said?

So, how many successful business have you operated? I ask because you feel so qualified to call this guy a liar and fool.

Um, nowhere did I call anyone a "liar and fool," however I did point out they fully intend to continue marketing Winchesters, albiet on a limited scale.
As for my qualification(s):
-I manage a warehouse with over 3500 lines and multi-million dollar inventory
-I have a B.S. & MFA
Now just what qualifies you to run your big yap?
-I've run at least two small businesses

quote:

Originally posted by buckshot:

quote:

Originally posted by HP Shooter:

quote:

Originally posted by buckshot:
Sauvage said he thinks customers will continue buying the new line of weapons, which can be produced quickly and for less money, because Belgium, like America, has a reputation for quality manufacturing.

Keep in mind this is management talking. What more need be said?

So, how many successful business have you operated? I ask because you feel so qualified to call this guy a liar and fool.

Um, nowhere did I call anyone a "liar and fool," however I did point out they fully intend to continue marketing Winchesters, albiet on a limited scale.
As for my qualification(s):
-I manage a warehouse with over 3500 lines and multi-million dollar inventory
-I have a B.S. & MFA
Now just what qualifies you to run your big yap?
-I've run at least two small businesses

I have an educational and career background that matches yours, and exceeds it in some ways.

Back on topic guys!!!!

WInchester really hasn't been Winchester in years, it was Olin Corporation for a long while, then US Repeating Arms. Winchester as a corporate entity ended MANY years ago, now its just who owns the name.

HP in your artical that I had posted a link to this AM, Herstal said they have been considering it for years. I read between the lines lack of capital investment, and management blaming the union workers for the whole mess. I bet the machinery is worn out and antique and Herstal has not been willing to vorrect that for years.

From the management view I am very certain that having the union in the shop didn't help.

Somewhere betwwen the two extreme arguments lies the truth. I am a manager and I know for certain that QA process intitives start at a management level, not on the shop floor. Management whining we aren't getting qaulity is a pure cop out, its there job to fix it.

My opinion is that that Winchester has really had a foot in the grave since the day US Repeating Arms got added to the Winchester label.

True in most ways. A well run union combined with a well run management team is a hard combination to beat. Unfortunately, it's rare that you find both in one company.

At the end of the day, no profits = no investors and no investors = no company so both need to be mindfull.

Investing in the gun business today is not at all like going into the computer business in the early eighties.The way the world's population is incresing we'll soon have no room to spread out our arms and legs.I think investing in food would be rewarding.Something like phytoplankton to feed the world.

I wish Winchester would do what Ruger did years ago. Move out of the northeast and go to Arizona.

It is my understanding that the union's contract prevents those models being built there from being built anywhere else until 2008 (I can't remember where I read this, so take it for what it's worth). So if anyone wishes to buy production rights to build those guns before that date, would have to deal with the union.

I suspect that it won't be until after that date that we see the 94 and 70 ressurected.

-Steve

Steve, that's why the "Assets-only" purchase was invented..... JMO, Dutch.

Tom ga hunter:

First, I wish you all the luck in the world. But I would invest one wooden nickle into U.S. Repaeting Arms. A business plan based on emotion and not sound financal basis is doomed.

U.S. Repeating Arms has followed the path of many corporate buy outs.

The stock holders expect a profit bottom line.

The good will of the Winchester name does not belong to U.S. repeating Arms.

The infastructure of the old Winchester company is not there anymore.

The cost out weight the profits.

The patents of the good stuff have all expired or been retained by the inventors.

Your business plan would be much smarter to start a new company than buy into something that does not exist anymore.

Again good luck, maybe you can get George W. to invest. If my memory serves me well he has invested heavily in failures in the past.
Longshot

quote:

Originally posted by Steve:
It is my understanding that the union's contract prevents those models being built there from being built anywhere else until 2008 (I can't remember where I read this, so take it for what it's worth). So if anyone wishes to buy production rights to build those guns before that date, would have to deal with the union.

I suspect that it won't be until after that date that we see the 94 and 70 ressurected.

-Steve

If US Repeating Arms signed a contract with the union on something they didn't have the rights to past 2006, there management is worse than I suspected.

When it coms to these models I am pretty sure the patents on these ran out many years ago. The model 70 minus the the stamp on the barrel could be reproduced. The model 94 might be down for the count, Marlin is still building lever actions, and in reality has a more modern design, anybody that decides to continue production of them will need one of two things, act quickly to keep the market share, or come from behind and recapture the market that Marlin is certainly going to capture in the next year.

Has anyone actually been through the plant? Reason I ask is I bet the only real value is the real estate, and scrap value of the machinery. When CZ picked up Dan Wesson they pretty much replaced the machinery, with significant investment on their part. I having a sneaking suspicion the machinery in New Haven is in the same boat.

My hope is Winchester will recover like a pheonix from the ashes, but leaner, meaner, and more modern needs to be factored into that. Things I would like to see are a higher quality more focused product line, the end of the good old boy marketing system which is a carry over from the 1950's ( give a rifle and pay for a hunt for Craig Boddington so he will write up a dribble article ). And one of two things either shut down the custom shop or get with the program and actually get it working.
Last would be get out of the Walmart market entirely, selling rifles with no margins and at cost doesn't do anything for the bottom line, its just cash flow. Another suggestion would be start selling bare actions. A item of historical interest; when was the last real military contract Winchester had? Seems like those were all being filled by the parent company FN, sounds like the old saying the Navy gets the gravy and the Army gets the beans.

On this subject it is just wait and see right now, a lot of things could happen but I haven't really heard anything concrete. Who knows Berreta or CZ might be negotiating right now with Olin. I am sure Sako could build the Model 70, as could CZ. I somehow think this is not the final chapter in this book, but my crystal ball is real foggy at the moment.

quote:

Originally posted by schromf:
Who knows Berreta or CZ might be negotiating right now with Olin. I am sure Sako could build the Model 70, as could CZ.

You know, of those two, I think Beretta is the most likely. First, they have serously deep pockets and have been on a buying spree for a while, particularly here in the US. Second, they make no CRF rifles, so they have a hole in their product line.

I don't see CZ as a fit. The M70 would be a direct competitor to the 550. In fact, if CZ USA were smart, they would lobby CZUB to bring back the 550 Lux (or add sights to the American), expand the caliber offerings on all 550s, and update the American with a slimmer, nicer stock. Perhaps adding a grip cap and forend tip in rosewood, reshaping the ugly cheek piece, and bringing back 100% the steel follower and magazine floorplate. Look what a simple stock update (CDL) did for the Remington M700, it is a downright handsome rifle now.

If they did those things, CZ would stand to easily fill the vacuum left by the M70.

quote:

Originally posted by Jaywalker:
Unions aren't blameless, however. Sometimes it seemed as if the whole reason for their exxistence was to continue existing, rather than to accomplish anything for the membership. Jaywalker

I'm a Teamster and totally agree with this statement. These day's the union looks out for the union not the workers. I think a lot of the other stuff I've read on this thread is complete bullshit from people that don't know what in the hell they're talking about. Poor management make's strong unions, period. I've never known anyone that got rich working for scale. I've worked plenty of non-union jobs and they had as many lazy people as the union one's and some how the lazy people at the non-union jobs some how seemed to keep their jobs too. You can fire a union worker just as easily as you can fire a non-union one, I see it happen all the time. Winchester went out of business because they turned out crap for a product. it's as much management's fault as the workers.

Terry

HP,

THe only reason I suggested either is I think they could handle the production, and both have been buying as you say.

Not sure I agree that it wouldn't fit CZ's model line up though. Aren't they buying MRC actions for there Model 3 ? Seems it would be real simple to replace the MRC action with the Model 70. If I was wishing I think Berretta would be the one I would be hoping for. Yeah a m Model 70 built to Sako Quality I think your right that would be a good marraige ( although in this case its more of a shotgun marraige ).

Pure speculation on my part, but those two companies definately have the dollars and knowhow to pull it off.

What isn't going to help is if it gets purchased and structured like Smith and Wesson did when they were owned by the British investment bankers.

Another option, although highly unlikely, which would probaly not work long term is get the union to use their retirement fund to invest in it. Again I see a lot of bad to that scenario, but it would be the only way I would be interested in staying in the New Haven plant, but 20-30 million from that source would defiantely get me to sit down at the negotiating table.

All pure guesses and swags on my part though, my guess is something will happen, but time will fill in the details.

CZ completely dropped the model 3 line.

Terry

quote:

it's as much management's fault as the workers.

I think I have said this throughout the thread. Actually I think management is more to blame, its their job to ensure quality and profit. I don't hold the workers blameless though, my quess it was a collective effort by both parties working on their own agenda's.

quote:

CZ completely dropped the model 3 line

I was unaware of that, was that do to supply issues, dollar issues or conflict with the 550 line?

quote:

Originally posted by schromf:

quote:

CZ completely dropped the model 3 line

I was unaware of that, was that do to supply issues, dollar issues or conflict with the 550 line?

I'm really not sure. Being that MRC suppied the barreled actions, I have my suspicions.

Terry