NUMMI Employee Says Plant Hides Defects

Whistleblower says defects hidden at Toyota-GM Calif. plant

Ironically enough, while on the topic of not counting defects (the TSA), this disturbing story was in the Detroit News today. A 23-year employee, a quality inspector, has filed a lawsuit claiming that the company mistreated her when she reported defects.

"According to legal documents obtained Tuesday by The Associated Press, defects that were intentionally passed over included broken seat belts, faulty headlights, inadequate braking, mirrors falling off, engine oil leaks and steering wheel alignment problems -- all in an effort to decrease the number of defects. It is not clear whether any defects resulted in accidents.

When Cameron, a trained expert at spotting defects, complained, her bosses struck back, demoting her twice, accusing her of being crazy and violent, forcing her to submit to mental fitness tests, according to the documents. "

I certainly hope none of that is true. As the article points out, that isn't supposed to be Toyota behavior. It doesn't illustrate the ideals of quality and teamwork, nor does it seem to represent empowered employees who are able to stop the line.

I don't know what is going on inside NUMMI, by any stretch. My earlier posts about a plant tour I was on two years ago sometimes bring random and angry comments from people claiming to be NUMMI employees. The quality reputation of NUMMI is good, as judged by outsiders, not just from internal quality reports. Is the story overblown here or is NUMMI "the best of a bad bunch," where things like this are just commonplace for the industry? I certainly have my own first hand experience at an auto parts plant where top managers bent the rules on quality to keep the line running, although I never heard of falsification of quality records.

Is Toyota perfect? No, they are a company full of people, and we are fallible, we make mistakes. That's not an excuse for any of the alleged behavior, if it is true. If stories like this are true, that's bad, for the people involved, and for anyone trying to use Toyota as an inspiration for trying to do things differently, in terms of quality and employee relations. Are people at Toyota capable of those things? Probably. Is it widespread throughout the company? I hope not. Does stuff like that happen at "mass production" companies? I'm certain of it. But we hold Toyota to a higher standard -- they have asked to be, right?

While NUMMI is "jointly managed" by GM and Toyota, I consider it a Toyota plant under the Toyota Production System. It's jointly owned, but the burden needs to be on Toyota, I'd say.

It will be interesting to see how this case plays out. Here are more stories via Google News. Here is a post at TheTruthAboutCars.com that includes an alleged detail:

Cameron began retaining her original pencil written reports (to document the changes) and turning-in photocopies.

The blog has reader comments, including this story (from another auto factory) about fudging the quality numbers.

The SF Gate has a story on this, as well.

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board

Updated: An Interesting "Respect for People" Question

Lean Insider - Toyota Shifting Production to Lower Labor Costs? It Could Happen

The Lean Insider blog poses an interesting question.... is it keeping with the "respect for people" principle of the Toyota Production System if Toyota wants to move some production away from high-cost NUMMI (in high-cost California). Or, what if Toyota wanted to pull out completely, as rumored here on this other blog.

I'm still chewing on that one. What do you think? Feel free to comment here also. I'll post my thoughts later.

Update: Our friend Ron posted his thoughts at his Lean Six Sigma Academy blog.

"Worker Productivity"

Worker productivity weaker than first thought | Reuters.com

I heard this phase listening to Marketplace on the way home, I've heard it many times in the economic reports, but it struck me today.... "worker productivity."

I know I read too much into things sometimes, but the language there fascinates me. Do workers have control over worker productivity? Do they really? Do we see reports like this and tell them, "bad workers, bad productivity?"

In how many systems do workers really have control over their own productivity? If worker productivity is down, are we assuming workers are lazy and not trying hard? That they're taking naps on the job? I can only think of one company where I've seen that happening, and it was, ahem a non-Toyota automaker, formerly the top producer in the industry.

What if it was called "management system productivity"??

When productivity improved at NUMMI after Toyota started running it with GM, wasn't that the result of the management system? Isn't that true in any Lean implementation, that productivity improvement is the result of the management system?

Existing Culture vs. a New Manager

SI.com - Writers - The Bonus: Bobby Valentine's Super Terrific Happy Hour

As a lifelong baseball fan (especially as a kid), I found the above article interesting when I saw it yesterday. It's about former Rangers and Mets manager Bobby Valentine, who is now managing a team in the Japanese major leagues. He is trying to bring his American baseball style to Japan, namely, the idea of swinging for the fences.

"...he did something heretical: He didn't bunt. In Japan the sacrifice is sacred, a symbol of the team's predominance over the individual. Even power hitters bunt runners over. Valentine bunted only for a hit. In his first stint in Chiba his players had at times disobeyed him, bunting against his wishes and once practicing without him when he had given them a day off.

If you're not a baseball fan, a "bunt" is when a batter purposely "sacrifices" himself by not taking a full swing, just tapping the ball in front of home plate, allowing himself to be thrown out at first so the baserunner(s) can advance, to be more likely to score a run (wikipedia explanation).

Now I'm not about to bring up the point you might expect.... lean, Japanese culture, blah blah blah. Lean is NOT strictly a Japanese system. Sure, it is strongly influenced by Toyota, who was strongly influenced by Deming, Ford, and other Westerners. Valentine was asked about the unauthorized bunting, going against his orders.

"I hear your fourth hitter, the catcher, bunts by himself."

Valentine nods. "Nine times ... because he wants to show his teammates he's unselfish."

The thing that struck me was this: the manager (the boss) was giving the players a direct order -- do not bunt, but they did anyway. Why is this? The culture was so strong that the culture (we must sacrifices ourselves) that a single strong-minded manager had trouble changing it.

Sound familiar?

Non-lean, mass production cultures are very hard to change. How many managers have gone into a plant and told people "don't build excess inventory" only to have people doing it anyway? The old culture said "keep the machines running" and that culture can be hard to change. Employees are supervisors might ignore direct orders because they think they're doing the right thing, according to the old culture.

Same thing seems to be true with the Japanese players. When I was at GM, the new NUMMI-trained manager (an American) was "foreign", seemed to be speaking a different language, people didn't want to listen to him. That's Bobby Valentine, I guess.

One other thing stood out:

There is a Japanese phrase that Valentine likes to quote: Chisai kuni desu kara. It means "because it's a small country." "People ask why there are no garbage cans," he says, "and they answer, 'because there's no litter.' Ask why there is no litter and they say, 'because it's a small country.'"

I guess this might be the same reason Lean/Toyota thinking so values conserving space? This was probably NOT something learned from Henry Ford.

The BBC on Lean Production

BBC NEWS | Business | The triumph of lean production

The BBC highlights lean practices and provides a stunning contrast between Toyota and Ford:

On the assembly line at Toyota's giant plant, Laura Wilshire is not happy.

There is something wrong with a seatbelt fitting on the Camry she is working on.

Laura pulls a cord, stopping the production line - and prompting her five fellow workers on trim line three to crowd round.

They soon see why it is not screwed in properly and fix the problem.

"I don't like to let something like that go," she says. "That's really important for people who buy our cars."

Workers at the Toyota plant in Georgetown, Kentucky, pull the cord 2,000 times a week - and their care is what makes Toyota one of the most reliable, and most desired, brands in the US.

In contrast, workers at Ford's brand-new truck plant in Dearborn, Michigan, pull the cord only twice a week - the legacy of generations of mistrust between shop-floor workers and managers.

There's a huge cultural difference between Toyota and Ford. Even with Ford's attempts at reclaiming the "Ford Production System," all of the lean design and lean documentation doesn't matter if you're not going to "manage lean" which includes letting workers pull the cord to fix quality problems.

The article doesn't delve deeper into Ford, but instead looks at GM's efforts to catch up to Toyota from a labor productivity standpoint. But it mentions nothing about quality or how GM's "andon" (not "andan" as the BBC spelled it) process works any better than Ford's. GM has had the chance to learn from Toyota at NUMMI, so you'd hope they would have a more robust line stop and quality improvement process. Do they?

The article doesn't draw a direct comparison to GM, Ford, and Chrysler building what they want (or what they can) and dumping it on dealers, but I will. Here's Toyota's approach:

Toyota also has a close relationship between the dealers who sell its cars and its plants.

The production run is adjusted at the Georgetown plant, and extra Saturday working is added, only when computerised orders from the dealer network show it is needed.

And individual buyers can alter what they want in their car - changing the paint colour or specifications - right on the production line, by notifying their dealers.

Let's not point out management practices as the differences between the "Detroit 3" and Toyota... let's blame healthcare and currency policy. Right. The differences between Toyota and the Detroit gang are so obvious. Having the better management system -- that's the key to Toyota's success.

The article ends with some added cynicism from our friend and future Podcast guest Jim Womack:

At a deeper level, the question is whether GM and Ford - the companies that perfected mass production -can fundamentally change their culture to the new lean production system.

"I hope they make it - but I am not optimistic they all will be able to," says James Womack, an expert who has advised many global companies, from Tesco to Boeing, on the advantages of lean production.

Mr Womack says it has to be something that is inculcated in all the company's workers, from the bosses to those on the factory floor.

"This is not Japanese companies vs American companies, it is smart Japanese companies vs smart American companies," he says.

"GM has caught up on assembly plants, but Toyota is still ahead on suppliers, product development and a problem-solving approach to issues.

"For too long, managers at US car companies were in denial about their problems."

Toyota and "Gung Ho"

Why Toyota Is Afraid Of Being Number One:

In this Business Week piece about Toyota's fear of a backlash against them, with their continued success, there was this tidbit I found interesting:

"That same year [as NUMMI opened], a Ron Howard comedy called Gung Ho appeared; it contrasted the American and Japanese work ethic at a car plant operated by an Asian company called Assan Motors. (Toyota later used the film as an example of how not to manage Americans.)"

Who knew?

Kaizen or "Greedy"?

Toyota sweats U.S. labor costs

Another article about the report that was taken from a Toyota computer, this time focused on Toyota's concerns about rising labor costs. You might call this healthy level of desire for continuous improvement, always striving to get better.

One employee (who supports UAW representation) says:

"Now I can understand if the company is having a hard time," said Harper, who has been off work for 12 weeks while healing from shoulder surgery after an on-the-job injury. "I'm more than willing to work with that company to keep my job. But when they just take it because they want more, I don't agree with it at all."

You'd think that the employee would be somewhat thankful that Toyota is trying to make sure they don't end up in the same position as GM is in today because GM gave away unsustainable pay and benefit packages.

In a memo to workers at the plant after the report was circulated, Toyota noted that workers at Georgetown earned $3 an hour more than the U.S. auto industry standard. The Free Press reported last week the workers averaged $30 an hour, including bonuses.

Currently, the median for comparable manufacturing jobs in Kentucky -- half earn more, half earn less -- is $12.64, according to the U.S. Department of Labor.

Toyota's strategy resembles what Hyundai Motor Co. uses at its plant in Montgomery, Ala. Assembly workers there make $14 an hour, about half the wages, bonuses and benefits of Toyota, Honda, Nissan and Detroit's automakers. But Hyundai's wages still are considerably higher than for comparable Alabama jobs, which pay $10.79 an hour.

I don't see where Toyota's strategy is like Hyundai's at all. Toyota seems to have purposely "overpaid" in order to attract and keep excellent employees (and to keep the UAW at bay). Hyundai seems to be going for a "cheap as possible" strategy, at least compared to Toyota.

A UAW rep at the Toyota/GM NUMMI plant (which does have UAW representation) put it more bluntly:

UAW Local 2244 President George Nano, who represents members at Fremont, the only plant where Toyota managers must negotiate with the UAW, said Toyota is just being greedy.

I guess that's one potential backlash against Toyota and their success, particularly as they move into the #1 spot... Toyota's nature is to keep pushing for more and more profit, but when will other stakeholders say "enough?" I hope this backlash doesn't lead to Toyota slowing their North American factory expansion.

Signs are not Error Proofing

I saw this at a hospital lab last year, a great example of true error proofing vs. just putting up warning signs. "Cautions" and "Warnings" are lazy engineering, in general, with product design. Signs are not good problem solving in any process environment, it falls far short of true error proofing.

Image #1 was just outside the lab. I'm sure putting beverages or liquids on top of the circuit break enclosures poses a lot of risk. I'm guessing that spilling would short out things, causing major downtime or maybe even an injury. The sign doesn't prevent anything. Signs are too easily ignored. Furthermore, the sign doesn't explain "Why" you shouldn't put cups up there. As I've blogged about before, a key point of the Toyota Production System is the power of EXPLAINING "why" to people, not just asking "why?" This point is often overlooked or not talked about. Part of the "respect for people" notion is realizing that they are smart enough to do the right thing if you explain it. This sign says "don't do it... because management says so."

















Photo 2 was in a different hallway, some employee lockers, like you might see at a high school. Can anyone put items up on top? No! Because the top of the lockers isn't flat. It's error proofed. Items would just fall off. No sign required!



















Think about your workplace. How often do you rely on warning signs, caution signs, or "because I said so" signs? Error proofing requires a little bit of creativity, but it's worth it. What solutions can you come up with?

NUMMI and Worker Health

Inside Bay Area - IBA - Alameda Times-Star - Home

Here's a pretty glowing article about how NUMMI, the Toyota/GM joint venture plant in Fremont CA, focuses on employee health and safety. When I visited NUMMI last year, one of our hosts, a GM employee, was pretty sour on Toyota and claimed that GM did a much better job on safety. That sounded like sour grapes to me.

That said, Toyota gets pretty overwhelming positive press in the news. I'm certainly a fan of Toyota, but this article reads like a press release. It's sad that GM is constantly being beat up on the front page of the WSJ almost weekly.

What do you think? Is Toyota really that good on health and safety? Does the press take it easy on them, or are they just reporting a good example that we should all follow?

Nice NUMMI Article

Inside Bay Area - IBA - Tri-Valley Herald - Local News

Here's an article about the Toyota-GM joint venture plant known as NUMMI. I had a chance to visit NUMMI late last year and I published some of my "tour tales" here.

The plant has been running as a JV for 20 years now. It's noteworthy that the plant has NOT had a layoff over that timeframe. It's also noteworthy that the NUMMI people are very forthcoming about their problems and challenges, including this one:

In 2002, during a new model year for the Toyota Corolla, the plant got a "wake-up call," said Ernesto Gonzalez-Beltran, NUMMI's vice president of manufacturing operations. NUMMI had hired nearly 1,000 new people to help build the new model, but the launch did not go as smoothly as expected.

The "tribal knowledge" about lean manufacturing had not been passed down to the new workers, and even some veterans needed a refresher course. They received one in the past two years.

"We had a difficult time getting vehicles off the line," Gonzalez-Beltran said. "A lot of older guys were gone, and a lot of folks didn't understand the system."

So they revved up the system that embraces Japanese terms such as "kanban," which allows for the efficient just-in-time delivery of parts to the assembly line, saving the cost of warehousing parts.

The push to reteach lean manufacturing also has been good for some workers.

"We're making the production line better," said Edwin San Pedro, a former welder who is now a safety representative in NUMMI's body shop. "It's making the workers feel better and safer."

Lean at NUMMI

Society of Manufacturing Engineers

Here's a good overview of the Toyota/GM "Joint Venture" plant, NUMMI. I put "JV" in quotes because, sure there is joint ownership, but it's not really jointly managed.

A manager at NUMMI says:

Most people are under the impression that since NUMMI's a joint venture there is a very strong involvement from GM on the operation side, but in reality there isn't," says Gonzalez-Beltran. "NUMMI is run like any other NAMC [North American Manufacturing Company], as a Toyota plant, basically. All of our direction, all of our policies and long-term plans are basically in line with TMC [Toyota] policies and plans, so--other than the board of directors, which is divided 50:50 between GM and Toyota--we do not see a lot of the GM side.

There are some good stories about how the lean culture was adopted at NUMMI and how they have taken efforts over the past few years to refresh their TPS knowledge. When I visited NUMMI in 2005, the people there freely admitted that they had placed a focus on re-learning and re-training TPS.

This quote also jumped out at me:

"Lean manufacturing is a necessity for us, in order to stay in business and remain competitive," Gonzalez-Beltran states. "The application of TPS and lean manufacturing is the only tool that we have to offset the high cost of doing business in California. That's why we put special emphasis and always try to stay at the leading edge of any new developments or new techniques to make our operation leaner and more efficient."

Compare this to how GM complains about their legacy costs. Toyota is taking action, through TPS, to reduce costs and get more competitive in spite of California cost disadvantages. Imagine if GM could do the same thing.

NUMMI Tour Tales #6: "You Get What You Inspect"

Here is the sixth, and probably final, installment of my tales from the NUMMI tour.

You can revisit them, by starting with Tale #1 and continuing on from there.

Another good reminder from the NUMMI tour was an idea that I have been preaching the past few years – that “Standard Work” and “5S” aren’t one-time exercises to be “completed.” The real key is having a living management system to audit, monitor, and improve practices over time. This takes real discipline, a type of discipline that’s often lacking. It would be a huge waste of time to document your standard work and then let it gather dust. Standard Work and 5S require ongoing attention.

NUMMI emphasized their standard work audit process. A very visual board is posted in the work area with cards illustrating what jobs have been or have not been audited. A group leader is supposed to audit one job every day.

Our host said their mantra is “You get what you inspect, not what you expect.” If you blindly expect that people are going to follow 5S practices, but you don’t “Genchi Genbutsu” (go and see) on the “Gemba” (shopfloor or “actual place”), it might just be wishful thinking. You have to actively monitor the health of your standard work or 5S system, correcting/coaching/disciplining people as necessary.

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board

NUMMI Tour Tales #5: Nobody is Perfect

NUMMI Tour Tale #4: The Pull Gift Shop

While the NUMMI plant would score very highly on any measure of “Visual Management” standards, you can see on a tour that the plant is not 100% perfect in their 5S compliance. In passing, one can see many items that appear to be out of place or shadowed items on the floor that appear to be missing.. Not that the plant was messy, by any means, but it wasn’t the “perfection” that you might expect to see.

Our host told a story about how the plant had “gotten away from” doing regular Standard Work audits and that they had to re-implement that (at the urging of a GM person, they said). In discussing their backsliding or problems, the NUMMI people seemed to be quite open in admitting that they are always striving to get better. Good lessons, I think – although you should set goals of perfection, it’s very tough to be 100% there. Be open about your problems and be sincere in your desire to do better, without being defensive. That seems to be a good lesson from NUMMI.

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board

NUMMI Tour Tale #4: The Pull Gift Shop

NUMMI Tour Tale #1: Why Fix the Escalator?
NUMMI Tour Tale #2: The Power of Reynolds Wrap
NUMMI Tour Tale #3: The Power of Why

Back to stories about my tour of the Toyota/GM plant in Fremont CA.

The NUMMI lobby has a “virtual” (my term, not theirs) gift shop display of items available for purchase. To buy items, such as hats, pens, or coffee cups, you call a number using a provided phone. In effect, you “pull” items that are delivered to you at the end of your tour. No inventory, other than display items, is kept in the lobby. Tour guests don’t have to carry items with them on the tour tram. Seems to work out just fine.

Maybe it would be a more interesting illustration of lean practices to have a small quantity of each item on display, with a working kanban system used to replenish items from their hidden gift shop “supermarket”?

NUMMI Tour Tale #5: Nobody is Perfect

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board

NUMMI Tour Tale #3: The Power of Why

NUMMI Tour Tale #1: Why Fix the Escalator?
NUMMI Tour Tale #2: The Power of Reynolds Wrap

I think, by now, that Toyota is pretty famous for it's "5 Why's" approach for root cause problem solving. Asking why five times, in succession will likely get to the root cause of any problem. I've seen it applied to safety investigations, for example -- why did the worker trip and fall? Usually, it points back to training and leadership issues, but that's another story.

One thing I noticed at NUMMI was that you can "ask" why but it's also important to "explain" why. Many of the signs and visual controls I saw included a "why" element to them. To me, this seems to illustrate the idea of having respect for your employees and your workforce. This idea is also illustrated in NUMMI Tour Tale #1: Why Fix the Escalator?

At previous companies, not as lean as NUMMI, it was pretty common to see a box of parts tagged with a sign that said, sternly, "DO NOT USE." Sometimes there was an important manager's name associated to illustrate who is making that pronouncement.

At NUMMI, a box was labeled with a sign that included the "why." The sign said something like “using these parts would result in brake failures or problems for the customer.”

Again, another "wow" moment. For one, NUMMI put the situation in customer terms. Do not use these parts, because there would be a negative impact on the customer. It didn't say "do not use the parts because I say so (and you wouldn't understand the reason anyway)". Secondly, if the line was in a pinch and had no other parts, it seems less likely that someone would feel pressured into using those parts, being reminded of the customer and a potentially dangerous situation that would be created.

So, my challenge is to explain "why" as much as possible. Not just asking why, but explaining why. I hope you can take that challenge on for yourself. Why are we doing lean? Why is it necessary to standardize our workbenches? Why is it important to get these parts off MRP and onto a kanban system? I bet we would all do better by taking the time to explain why.

NUMMI Tour Tale #4: The Pull Gift Shop

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board

NUMMI Tour Tale #2: The Power of Reynolds Wrap

NUMMI Tour Tale #1: Why Fix the Escalator?

The NUMMI tour guide told an interesting kaizen story as we went past the body weld area. Car bodies are held and transported on metal carrier racks that re-circulate through the welding process. The bodies move on to painting and the racks cycle back all day long. The racks get greasy and dirty from the process (Note: It's not grease, see comment at the end of the post), so workers were cleaning the racks by hand with wire brushes. This took 4 hours to do, once a week, shutting the line down, I assume.

An operator had an idea to instead cover the rack bases with plain old aluminum foil. After a week, they remove the dirty foil and replace it, which takes only 1 hour instead of 4. The team member received a cash bonus for the suggestion.

I think that was a clever idea, one that saves the company money, even with the cost of aluminum foil factored in.

But, could one push farther to a root cause here? Why are they having to clean those racks? Is there anything that can be done to prevent the racks from getting dirty, or slowing that down? I'm not a welding expert, so I can't say, but it's interesting to think about.

Go To NUMMI Tour Tale #3: The Power of Why

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board

NUMMI Tour Tale #1: Why Fix the Escalator?

I really enjoyed my tour of the NUMMI plant last Friday. I'll post my summary thoughts and impressions from the tour, but I wanted to post a few of the more interesting stories first.

In a back part of the factory that led up to some offices, there was a very old looking and HUGE escalator that must have been at least three stories tall. It was bigger than your standard escalator and must have been there since the plant opened in the early 1960's.

The escalator was turned off and blocked off (we had stairs, and I assume, an elevator for anyone who needed it). There was a small State of California safety notice that had originally shut it down, I assume.

You might wonder at first, this is Toyota, the home of TPM. Can't they keep an escalator running?

A very large permanent sign above the escalator said something like:

"Sorry for inoperative
escalator. It would cost
$120k to repair. We feel
money could be better
spent on other things.
Please accept our apologies."

Wow. The frugality and practicality of TPS was illustrated by that sign, our tour group thought. Rather than a knee-jerk reaction of fixing it when broken, somebody asked that powerful question: "Why?"

• Why fix the escalator when it's in a far back corner of the plant?
• Why fix the escalator when we have a perfectly good set of stairs, which are healthier to use?
• Why fix the escalator when somebody who can't walk might have to use the elevator anyway?
• Why spend the money there when it could be used to improve safety, quality, or the production process?

This wasn't the sequential "5 Why's", but I think you see what I mean.

How often do you spend money because you "should" or because of history rather than really questioning that spending? "Why" is a very powerful word, a theme that will continue through my stories.

Another question I'm challenging myself with: If this had been a GM plant, would I be criticizing them for being cheap?

Go To NUMMI Tour Tale #2: The Power of Reynolds Wrap

Subscribe via RSS | Lean Blog Main Page | Podcast | Message Board

NUMMI opens new training facility at plant

Milpitas Post - Local

I saw the plant on Friday, it was pretty cool. Some excerpts from my visit notes are below, I should be posting the whole thing soon:

Before entering the Gemba, you walk past a “Simulated Work Environment” where new employees are trained on fundamentals of TPS. There is a small scale u-shaped line with wooden model vehicles. Kanban racks, position markings, and work instructions are posted just as they would be in the factory.

It's interesting to hear about the committment to training. The article says, in part:

Robin Coonen, training center manager, said employees began using the new building two weeks ago.

She said, as of this week, 88 percent of all NUMMI employees had been trained in the TPS. The company hopes to have all employees trained by the end of the year.

Are you doing as well training all of your employees on your process and the fundamentals of TPS?

Touring NUMMI on Friday

I'm getting a chance to tour the NUMMI plant in Fremont CA, the joint venture between Toyota and General Motors. I'm very excited about it and will post some thoughts over the weekend. Anybody already been there and have perspectives on the plant?

Updated: NUMMI Plant Workers, Cos. Talk as Contract Deadline Passes

Bloomberg.com: U.S.:

Updated 8/11: Looks like the plant has a tentative agreement.

Last post before vacation... still sounds like there could be a labor stoppage at NUMMI. I found this interesting:

"While GM and Toyota own the plant equally, most of its capacity is used by Toyota. In this year's first half, 84 percent of the 205,563 vehicles the California plant produced were Toyota models."

I remember, at one point, at the Toyota Corolla, while being practically identical to the GM Geo/Chevy Metro, sold at a nice ($500?) price premium over the GM product. People said this was due to Toyota's quality reputation and reliability. GM was being punished by the market for poor quality.

That's a great illustration of the Profit = Market Price - Cost principle. Although the "Cost" for the GM and Toyota NUMMI products were the same, I'd guess, Toyota's profit was higher because the market placed a higher value on the Corolla over the Metro.