1) The CAW contract has already been negotiatied, and I have little doubt that they took the opportunity to resolve any remaining issues at that time.
2) Confidential product plans? It's an old photo of a mockup of a concept car that's going to be made public in a month's time anyhow. It's not a plan to merge with Toyota. I think you're blowing things out of proportion: this was a minor leak, and something that got out accidentally. Besides, PR folks (and Lutz especially) talk about product all the time, divulging far more information than a year-old grainy photograph does.
3) Pure hogwash. Do you think GM gets screwed every time a new W-car, or J-car, or pickup truck, etc. get introduced? After all, those are well known by everyone to be cast-in-stone programs. You've obviously never worked in Purchasing if you think knowledge of upcoming programs upsets the balance of negotiations.

 

1) Given the provisos of the CAW contract, it is certainly not out of the realm of possibility. Actually, it might be more likely that the Canadian government would consider action given the tax abatements it granted GM in the late 80's.

2) See Sarbanes/Oxley legislation. It is flat out ILLEGAL for GM to leak plans without board approval and without advising stockholders. Directors and Officers can be held personally responsible without regard to D&O insurance for not having adequate controls in place. Over a half dozen high level execs at public companies have already gone to federal prison for violations of Sarbanes/Oxley in the last year and a half.

3) Besides my current position, I have extensive knowledge and background in contract negotiations and purchasing. About 15 years ago, I worked at a Fortune 500 firm that purchased over 60% of a very high volume commodity for all of North America. I also designed the purchasing system for the largest pharmacuetical supplier in the world. You're right -- I know nothing.

The bottom line is that there are far more risks for GM with far more liability for GM having these pictures published. A decided lack of understanding of the potential damage is what got the pictures published in the first place.

I do believe that all who published the pictures meant well and probably believed that they were actually helping GM. The question everyone should be asking is, "Who has a better understanding of the potential consequences of having these pictures published -- GM's management or someone who has rudimentary HTML skills?"

 

Thank you, Bearcat Steve.

You are my hero!

Preach it, brother..........you understand Sarbanes Oxley!!!

 

2) I'm well aware of SOX regulations. I'm currently on my second installation of processes that have had to be SOX-compliant. I'm audited by the SOX auditors every year, and I've never had any issues. SOX is one of those scare words that people love to use to justify something that otherwise has no merit; I see it happen all the time. I'm not saying the regulations are not real, but I am saying that if you think a grainy old picture of clay model of concept car is a SOX violation, then you are one of these people using SOX as a scare word.

3) If that is your experience, then you should have known better to make that statement. Or perhaps what you said would have been applicable in the pharmaceutical industry. But in the auto industry, suppliers are aware of future programs well before the general public or media. Most of the long-lead parts for a program such as Camaro have already bid on (many are even designed in cooperation with suppliers), and common parts will have been taken into consideration along with current volumes. To say that this leaked picture will suddenly change the price GM will pay is foolishness.

 

This is just my opinion based on nothing but I wanna throw this gut feeling out...

GM will waste more money on things unknown then they would ever spend on litigation on this matter.... which is trivial at best.