iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Mike Elk

Mike Elk

Posted: July 24, 2009 10:48 AM

GE Moves Green Jobs To China


While Ohio is traditionally thought of once being a center of auto manufacturing, there was such a strong tradition of light-bulb production in the state that the world's largest maker of light bulbs, General Electric, located the headquarters of its light bulb division in Cleveland. The jobs provided by light-bulb manufacturing allowed people to buy homes, send their kids to college, and fuel a vibrant economy in Ohio for decades.

But in the last decade, GE has closed over fifteen factories in Ohio and downsized numerous others. Since 1980, employment in GE Lighting has dropped by 68 percent.

A large chunk of that manufacturing has gone to China, and now GE plans to send even more to China in the wake of new clean energy policies. By 2014, Americans will only be able to purchase more energy efficient CFL light bulbs. However, GE has located all of its facilities for high-efficiency light bulbs to China and has told the union representing the workers that they have no intention to locate compact flourescent facilities in the United States.

GE is currently threatening to close one factory in Niles, Ohio that produces light bulbs. The workers, members of United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America (UE) at one are calling on GE to look for a way to refit their plant so that they can be part of the new clean energy economy. Ohio Sen. Sherrod Brown and Rep. Tim Ryan wrote a letter to GE's CEO Jeffery Immelt expressing "deep concern" for the workers at the plant:


"The workers and tradition of the Niles facility present an enormous opportunity to show how we can transition manufacturers from contracting industries, like incandescent bulbs, to emerging industries in energy and medical IT."

Ohio could indeed be a hub of new light bulb production. Recently, a Chinese-owned manufacturer of high-efficiency light bulbs has opened a factory, citing Ohio as having some of the world's most highly skilled light-bulb workers.

Ohio's legacy of bulb production, and its factories that could easily be converted from incandescent production to CFL production, presents a grand opportunity to employ workers in building a green energy economy in Ohio.

The IMPACT Act introduced by Brown in the Senate would help small and medium-sized manufacturers transition to the clean energy economy. Brown's bill creates a $30 billion Manufacturing Revolving Loan Fund to provide these manufacturers with much-needed access to credit to improve energy efficiency and retool for the clean energy industry.

The Apollo Alliance--a coalition of business, labor, and environmental groups--estimates that the IMPACT Act could create 680,000 direct manufacturing jobs nationally and 1,972,000 related jobs over the next fiver year.

So far, GE has shown every intention to take the American tax dollars being used to subsidize the green-energy economy and use them to build Chinese factories and pay Chinese workers. As I wrote earlier this week, in spite of GE CEO Jeffery Immelt's statement that companies need to stop outsourcing, GE continues to lead the effort to outsource clean-energy jobs. Most recently, GE has cut off a contract with a windmill factory in Indiana and shipped the work to China despite the factory offering to sell their parts at the same price as their Chinese competitors.

To add insult to injury to workers losing their jobs from foreign outsourcing, GE has even launched a television ad campaign promoting American manufacturing. "GE has the ability to locate its new manufacturing for CFL's, LED's, as well as the new incandescent lighting technologies in Ohio and elsewhere in the U.S. So far they have not done this, and we see no sign that they are even considering doing this. GE Lighting workers in the U.S. see little to cheer in GE's pronouncements and feel good advertising because for several decades now every plant has been on an extended deathwatch," said Chris Townsend of the United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers.

It's time that CEO's like Jeffery Immelt live up to their word and help rebuild the American economy by keeping American manufacturing jobs in America. It's also time that we adopt a comprehensive policy that promotes American manufacturing and prevents companies like GE from using taxpayer funds intended to stimulate the American economy to undermine our economy instead.

Follow Mike Elk on Twitter: www.twitter.com/MikeElk

 
 
  • Comments
  • 146
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
DakotaMinnesota
Read About Smedley Butler.
03:51 PM on 07/28/2009
The problems of our world are classic American North vs. South.

Wage labor in China is slavery plus inflation.

Put the pieces together, people.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:43 PM on 07/28/2009
Wait till something happens to make China mad enough ( dollar dropping....repayment of debt...etc ) to start seizing these factories like Hugo Chavez.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aaror
02:10 PM on 07/27/2009
Suggestion, implement a "world minimum wage," of, say, 25 cents per hour. Goods imported to the US from any factory that pays less than 25 cents per hour would have a tarriff of double the pay difference to prevent unfair competition from underpaid workers. Let people buy what they want.
And if China or some other country wants to have a tarriff war on the basis of us demanding that goods imported to the US pay workers at least a quarter an hour, let them. A trade war with China would solve our manufacturing jobs shortage quickly.
02:39 PM on 07/27/2009
That would do absolutely nothing to our Chinese trade. China pays way higher wages than that. As of today the relevant Chinese companies pay between one tenth and one quarter of the pay in the US (depending on skill), but that ratio is closing quickly. So quickly, actually, that many Chinese business models (in technology and life sciences) are running out of runway, already, because their cost structure is not fundamentally different from that in the US, any longer.

"A trade war with China would solve our manufacturing jobs shortage quickly."

Hardly. For one thing we do not have the necessary workforce to replace their manufacturing capacity (a burger flipper is not going to become a metal worker over night). We would have to shell out the capital investment (which only amortizes in 5-15 years) and in many cases we do not even own the necessary IP... so we would have to buy that, too.
09:57 PM on 07/27/2009
The differences in the cost of living make nominal wage levels meaningless. For example, my wife owns a store in Europe that pays employees $350 a month. But in that country, $350 a month probably equates to about $8 an hour in Washington DC. In china, some folks might make $1 an hour, but considering how little everything costs, that $1 an hour might equate to $10 an hour in the US. About a trade war, it would throw the global economy immediately into a depression. There would be wholesale capital flight from the dollar and interest rates in the US would skyrocket.
01:31 PM on 07/27/2009
Let's talk about tariffs for a moment. My company manufactures electronic devices. Most of the components are made by US companies, some in Asia. Let's say we implement import tariffs on products made in Asia, what is going to happen? Well, we still would be buying the same products from the same US companies... we don't have a choice, these parts are the best in the world and nobody else makes them (and nobody else will for a diversity of technical and legal reasons). Those US companies would still be manufacturing in Asia because you do not simply move a semiconductor fab from one location to another. But now their products would be more expensive to us. As a consequence we would raise prices and our customers would pay the higher prices because we are the only source for many of their needs. Virtually all the money for these products comes from R&D budgets (science funding and commercial R&D). So either the US government and our commercial buyers would increase their science and R&D funding or we would sell less. We would be no more competitive than before, we would not hire any more people (and maybe actually shrink the company) and the quality of our products would not increase.

The very same can be achieved with a higher corporate income tax and that might even be the better solution.
01:56 PM on 07/27/2009
=

You are probably correct , given that most economists seem to agree with you. It is the economic orthodoxy.

However, there is a possibility that tariffs applied only on low wage low ecological standard countries would be a motivation for the next plant to be placed in the USA. This is the same effect that occurs when the dollars declines in value - something that does not happen when countries artificially support their currency.

How would a low wage low ecological standard country retaliate?

Personally, I am willing to pay 10% more for a light bulb if it means that we are supporting a robust middle class. That seems to be what it comes down to.

But like I said , based upon prevailing opinion you are probably correct. I merely think that I might be correct and am willing to risk being wrong:

http://corporatestatesmen.org/images/LEVELISM.pdf

http://corporatestatesmen.org/policies.html

+
02:22 PM on 07/27/2009
"However, there is a possibility that tariffs applied only on low wage low ecological standard countries would be a motivation for the next plant to be placed in the USA."

Why would a semiconductor manufacturer who is running their plants below capacity at the moment, and will be running them even lower after the price of their products have been increased artificially, open a new plant in the US? Especially since they do not have any significant competition for their product? Your hypothesis only works for products for which competition exists or can be built quickly. And that is simply not true for the majority of high tech products which are literally owned by a handful of manufacturers in their fields. And those happen to be the only products for which the US is truly competitive and a market leader... so you are shooting your good foot to help your bad one?

"How would a low wage low ecological standard country retaliate?"

You misunderstood the argument... there is nobody to retaliate because the only people your tariffs would hit are US. And my company would, for sure, not even write a letter to Washington. We are way to smart to assume that a small business can make any difference on that level. Why waste a piece of paper? Instead, we would simply raise prices and be done with the problem.
02:22 PM on 07/27/2009
"Personally, I am willing to pay 10% more for a light bulb if it means that we are supporting a robust middle class. That seems to be what it comes down to."

In order to be effective with tariffs, you would have to make them between 100-200% on most industrial and consumer products. We are talking about factors of two here, not 10% effects.

"I merely think that I might be correct and am willing to risk being wrong:"

Happens to a lot of guys who do not know what they are talking about because they do not work in industry in positions where they can actually see the magnitude of the problem.

:-)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
armadillious2002
09:28 AM on 07/27/2009
GE should be allowed to move their operations overseas but they should not be allowed to substitute China's cheap labor for America's more expensive labor. All foreign made items sold in this country should have a tariff that would effectively neuter any such notions.

And, there should be no avoidance of taxes on overseas companies based in the USA and there should be tax incentives for companies that are based over here coupled with penalties for moving overseas.

I realize this is all wishful thinking but that is exactly what it will take to get American jobs going again. There is going to have to be a carrot and a stick somewhere along the line.
10:07 AM on 07/27/2009
Many manufacturing operations abroad produce for those local markets as well as to ship back to the US. Tariffs would just increase prices on consumer, reduce the total volume of global trade, result in retalliatory tariffs and exclusions on US goods, as well as cause foreign dumping of US assets, which would cause interest rates here to skyrocket. As for the so called "avoidance of taxes on overseas companies", US multi-national companies pay taxes in the countries they are based in. Paying US taxes as well as foreign taxes would mean double taxation, and cause US multi-nationals to be completely uncompetitive vs other multi-nationals. It would also take away corporate profits, which would result in less investment and less growth in the global and US economies. A far better solution would be for the US govt to lower corporate tax rates, which we all know are very high. Also don't forget that more US multi-nationals are based in Western Europe than anywhere else, and tax rates in those countries are about the same as they are here. As for jobs, increasing taxes on corporations would result in less jobs, not more. You take away their profits, and there is less investment and jobs cuts. How anyone could think increased taxes would result in increased investment and hiring is beyond me. If it's not profitable to produce in the US, then companies won't produce in the US.
photo
BBackSoon
Hello, I must be going.
12:15 PM on 07/27/2009
I cannot possibly disagree with your comment any more.

Our corporate taxes are indeed high as you state, but you conveniently omit all the available tax breaks and loop holes that US corporations enjoy.

As far as tariffs on foreign goods sold in the US I will concede that this might not be the best way to level the playing field but when the Chinese Government will not buy products from Foreign owned corporations but prefers to buy from Chinese owned corporations instead, I have to ask why is it wrong when we do that?

One last point, you are throwing around the tired Free Market Capitalism BS about lower taxes on Corporations will increase domestic spending when the entire article was written to show that GE is going to take Manufacturing Revolving Loan money and spend it on new production facilities in China. If they will take loan money and not keep or create jobs in the states what in the world makes you think they would do anything different with tax cuts?
photo
DakotaMinnesota
Read About Smedley Butler.
03:56 PM on 07/28/2009
You you're saying that US corporations essentially have the American people hostage.
01:07 PM on 07/27/2009
"GE should be allowed to move their operations overseas but they should not be allowed to substitute China's cheap labor for America's more expensive labor."

Please explain where the Constitution says that. And if the Constitution does not, why would you make a law that cuts your own people off the pursuit of happiness (i.e. in this case profit)?

"All foreign made items sold in this country should have a tariff that would effectively neuter any such notions."

A tariff is still just a consumption tax on US citizens. It does not force anyone to manufacture at home. All it does is to make the manufactured items more expensive to us. But since the factory might (and in almost all cases will) sell their goods also to other countries, it's effectively useless to prevent the corporation to move it to the most cost effective location.

"And, there should be no avoidance of taxes on overseas companies based in the USA and there should be tax incentives for companies that are based over here coupled with penalties for moving overseas."

This will never pass. If it would, all it would do is to split off the foreign holdings of US corporations as independent firms. That's something that can be easily done and has been done many times in the past. So if you are trying to decapitate your own manufacturing sector by completely removing any and all foreign proceeds from US balance sheets...
bethel1974
My shield=knowledge
07:43 PM on 07/26/2009
U.S. companies are still blinded by the over 1 billion population number provided by China. If they could just crack the consumer code they would have untold wealth and admiration from those all over the world. But they fail to realize is that China is poor. The products that a mature society like America buys it would take a Chinese worker 10 years to even think about buying. U.S. corporations after they are milked for the infrastructure and capital spend in China to build plants then they are stuck with goods that only can be bought in North America (Canada and U.S.A.) So basically they are using cheap labor to subsidize a false dream. The only company that does not hide this fact is Nike. They tell you cheap labor provides them a comfortable profit margin and we live with it. China will never open its economy to full competition for example (rice production and soft drinks). CEO's are fools to think they will be the ones to unlock the gate. Nor will it happen in India. They have a billion population society as well with more problems that American ingenuity could solve tomorrow but they want a countrymen to provide the solution not an outsider.
08:58 PM on 07/26/2009
Not all of China is poor, they have 400 million moving in the middle class.
11:47 PM on 07/26/2009
suggest you come and take a real look at China and the market dude.
03:50 AM on 07/26/2009
were you a big firm's owner, you would do the same. there's no doubt that, China is the huge market of such kind of products, to sell the products as much and quick as you can to make money, the easiest way is to open a factory there, so called "close to market". as you know, the labor cost and other conditions related to creating a light bulb there in China are cheaper than it in the US, so it is reasonable to invest production facilities there. and it will be UNreasonable that GE still keeps the plants in the US running for the same purposes...i know that the unemployment situation in the US is serious and sharp now, but it is not to say that you must have the factories remained only for offering jobs. what if GE does not shut down the facilities in the US? for sure, the benefits will be the workers have jobs and lead lives; but GE itself will grow slowly or even degative due to high cost and low profit. if things continue, GE will have to think about selling the divisions which mean heavy burden. so, same result but worse situation. now GE decides to enlarge facilities in China, at least it can help GE keep growing, and making money. and that will mean GE can still pays more taxes to the US, indirectly, it is good to American people though it looks not so exciting. I am from Beijing, China.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:59 AM on 07/26/2009
China, the place where trying to unionise, for better working conditions and a retirement plan, is considered treason, and is subject to capital punishment. What a way for "American" companies to cut costs.
10:28 AM on 07/26/2009
today's Chinese socialism system is making change. on the top of management, the way they are doing is to collect the money from all the people and enterprises, put them into a "fund", and run it in capitalism way aiming to make more money, and invest back on society and industries for people and enterprises to grow. while under the top of management, the people and the enterprises are living in "capitalism like" way, that is not different from international companies like GE, i mean today. however the fact is that, the workers' income level here in China as well as social welfares are still relatively much lower than it in America and Europe (maybe we pay too much to government and get little back), and this causes "attractive" and "competitive" labor cost. besides, the cost of building facilities and buying energies are also attractive, this is because many places in China are still poor, so the local governments offer attractive policies for potential investors to open factories there. zooming in on this, there is competition even among the provinces, cities, and even counties to get investors... this "domestic competition" directly bring even better policies which are more attractive. so all of these are just the reasons for GE to seriously consider to invest in China or America? plus, the market of those "brand new daily use products" here in China should be larger than it in America, due to bigger population, and more old stuff to be upgraded.
01:42 PM on 07/27/2009
The Chinese have far better ways to better their living conditions than unions. You really need to talk to someone who does business in China...
01:57 AM on 07/26/2009
What is good for GE is bad for America.
And they will not hold GE liable for all the toxic mercury in CFL lights they sell. This is truely a lose lose situation for America.
01:43 PM on 07/27/2009
Pssttt... don't tell anyone... that toxic mercury is in EVERY fluorescent light, even those made in the US. It's simply part of the physics that makes a fluorescent light produce light... you could take it out, of course... then the bulb would glow very, very dimly and produce mostly heat.

:-)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marinara
08:08 PM on 07/25/2009
I wanna point out that CFL lights, ( the new type fluorescent lights replacing the old light bulbs) have enough mercury in them to trigger a toxic waste emergency. If Chinese workers want to absorb toxic elemental mercury, LET THEM. Inhaling broken CFL dust is about like eating lead paint chips.
01:48 PM on 07/27/2009
"CFL dust" does not contain mercury. And why would you pulverize your CFL and inhale the powder to begin with? It's mostly glass, anyway. Much of the mercury is in vapor form in the gas inside the tube and most of it escapes almost immediately when the tube breaks, which almost never happens if you are careful. At least it never happened to me...

So you break a tube, you open the windows and let a breeze go through it. Then you remove the broken glass of the tube and dispose of it in the trash. Let the room air our for the next couple of hours. Nothing bad will happen to you unless you do this a couple of times a week. And who does that and why?
photo
DakotaMinnesota
Read About Smedley Butler.
04:14 PM on 07/28/2009
As devil's advocate, think of the repeated broken bulbs in an unregulated factory.
07:42 PM on 07/25/2009
For God's sake, we have a 20 percent unemployment rate, anothter 20 percent under employed, probably 1 billion out of the total 1.4 billion without medicare at all. We don't need your sympathy for we don't believe that, but stop whining, will you?
08:00 AM on 07/26/2009
The unemployment rate plus discouraged workers and the underemployed comes out currently to 16.5%. Where does the 20% + 20% number come from?

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:44 PM on 07/25/2009
The title of the article bears considering; "GE moves green jobs to China."
While the specific facts of the article are pretty much indusputable, that the light bulb factories in question were moved to China (probably at U.S. taxpayer expense), there is another truth that is not addressed in the article. It is that the largest growing sector of the economy today is the green sector, the renewable energy sector, and that most of that sector cannot be outsourced.

A wind turbine farm, a solar collector, a geothermal plant, a biomass plant, an insulation company,or a tidal energy plant, employs U.S. workers both in the construction and in the continueing operation and maintenance. There have been abuses in the economic models of many American manufacturers, who have shifted production overseas for short term profit, but the green sector in general, when the construction of power plants is in America, cannot easily be outsourced.

Overall there are huge benefits to be accrued from the building of a renewable energy infrastructure. From possibly halting global warming, to the permanent creation of good jobs, to the ending of our reliance on oveseas petroleum production, there are many reasons to go ahead with the development of green jobs.
10:27 AM on 07/25/2009
I have to wonder just how much of the 680 billion dollar defense budget the Senate just passed (while we were talking about Gates) is going to go to contractors that take them to Singapore.
Maybe Monday we will hear about the passage of this taxpayer nightmare, but that will be after it is voted in. How many of these senators are against single payer?

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=1&vote=00242
12:53 PM on 07/25/2009
An what does Singapore have to do with our health care? Got sources?
08:43 PM on 07/25/2009
This is not an article about health care. It is about jobs. I posted the site for bill votes it should be easy for you to check the other bill voted on that day. I know for sure that Lockheed took a military contract for the upgrading of warships to Singapore. Our guns are made by contract in Belgium. and on and on. Do you own damn research. You will be suprised.
09:03 AM on 07/25/2009
thank you a lot of knowledge through to give any posts brother.

Mukhtar AK. Knoladge Computers
08:28 AM on 07/25/2009
Don't worry! Obama will make sure that all Green Jobs stay here in the U.S. of A.! Expect Obama to give a Keep Green Jobs in America speech very soon.
02:04 AM on 07/26/2009
Another Promise? He is already elected. He does not have to make more empty promises anymore.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:42 AM on 07/25/2009
As a famous Communist once said, " A capitalist will sell you the rope to hang him with."

GE's policies are shortsighted, to say the least. They not only have eliminated blue-collar jobs, but they have eliminated the need for American white-collar jobs, as well. Once the factories are set up and running smoothly in China, only a very few people at the top of the GE food chain will see any profit from this, and that only temporarily. In the end, the factories will be able to save money by selling under a different brand name, eliminating GE (and their stockholders) from the light-bulb picture completely.

I really thought GE management was smarter than this. They have cut their own throats, and they are too dumb to realise it.
12:39 PM on 07/25/2009
Welch and his protege Immelt were the very ones that shifted GE away from being a mfg giant and transformed them into a finacial service company

Immelts "keep American jobs in America" speech is pretty hollow
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
05:54 PM on 07/25/2009
Didn't we just bail out GE's financail service arm to the tune of $80 billion?
12:56 PM on 07/25/2009
If you think you can produce things profitably in the US, please invest your own money in your own factories. Thank you.
02:07 AM on 07/26/2009
Too bad our corporations put their money in our politicians and overseas factories. Now we live and die with poisoned food, toothpaste, toys, building materials, medicine ... all from China