WI: auto worker Joel Goddard as folk hero; and why did U.S. auto companies take hit in '78?

The Reckoning, David Halberstam, 1986, Ch. 38 "Hard Times Come Home," page 607:

" . . . When just before Thanksgiving [1978], he was told that he was laid off, the twelfth in his department to go, he was delighted. He had carefully planned a six-week vacation in Florida, where his wife's parents lived. His children would miss about a week of school, but that was all right; this was a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. Soon it would be over and he would be back at work—in about six weeks to two months, he figured. Three and a half years later, in March of 1982, he was called back to work. He returned a different man.

"Thus began the real education of Joel Goddard, . . . "
Kind of makes you want to keep reading, doesn't it? Yes, David Halberstam can be a pretty damn good writer.

What if Joel had come to symbolize the plight of himself and fellow workers, how far could the majority of American voters have gone in embracing somewhat radical approaches to job creation?
 
Last edited:
Reckoning, Halberstam:

" . . . the diecast diemakers were the true artisans—they made the molds for the most important exterior auto parts, like the grilles. . . "

" . . . But already the company was beginning to respond to events in Iran, and because the diemakers did the molds for other Ford factories, they felt the early shock waves before the men on the line. . . "
Okay, the situation in Iran as one contributing factor. And there would be a double dip recession in '80 and '82 (with 1981 actually okay!).

But Nov. '78 does seem rather early.
 

This is John Green on Crash Course giving a pretty good view of the late '70s.

Of course, he does get it wrong about Carter's "Crisis of Confidence" speech on July 15, 1979. John links the speech itself to President Carter's drop in popularity. We, as alternate hist buffs, know it was Carter clumsily announcing the firing of about half his cabinet two days later. Plus, that he didn't really follow up on the speech with some can-do efforts, or was not perceived this way by the American public.
 
Last edited:
Goddard's story is indeed the best part of The Reckoning. But in terms of changing policy, it's not a good one.

-Goddard did find work between his first layoff and ultimate return to Ford. It wasn't nearly as good in terms of either money or conditions, but it was still work.
-The book itself mentions that Goddard was one of the luckiest, in that he had a skill, and that his wife stayed with him despite undeniable issues (this also helped financially as she found a job of her own). Other autoworkers were far less fortunate.

I think it would fall flat because people either don't need reminding when they're facing the same if not worse problems. Or it'll fall flat on the more fortunate because no matter how sympathetic he is, it's not affecting them personally and thus it's cushioned.
 
I don't see how the problem could be solved for auto workers short of putting a big tariff on imports and banning the use of robots. The problem is that it isn't the 1950's any more and the US auto companies are facing actual foreign competition. If foreign auto makers are under-pricing them the auto companies either cut wages or go under.
 

This is John Green on Crash Course giving a pretty good view of the late '70s.

Of course, he does get it wrong about Carter's "Crisis of Confidence" speech on July 15, 1979. John links the speech itself to President Carter's drop in popularity. We, as alt history buffs, know it was Carter clumsily announcing the firing of about half his cabinet two days later. Plus, that he didn't really follow up on the speech with some can-do efforts, or was not perceived that way by the American public.

And that the Nixon Pardon cost Ford the election, while it was highly unpopular at the time Ford only just lost to Carter and that was more down to his campaign gaffes. He only needed about 9,000 votes to go differently in Ohio and Hawaii.
 
I think it would fall flat because people either don't need reminding when they're facing the same if not worse problems. Or it'll fall flat on the more fortunate because no matter how sympathetic he is, it's not affecting them personally and thus it's cushioned.
Amen, there's some real obstacles.

But, Joel kind of spanned the middle class and working class. And that's something going in our favor.

Maybe if local talk radio and if national talk radio had come earlier and from a liberal or middle-of-the-road perspective, laid off auto workers could tell their stories. And maybe as "Joel G.", that is, first name and last initial
 
Amen, there's some real obstacles.

But, Joel kind of spanned the middle class and working class. And that's something going in our favor.

Maybe if local talk radio and if national talk radio had come earlier and from a liberal or middle-of-the-road perspective, laid off auto workers could tell their stories. And maybe as "Joel G.", that is, first name and last initial

Again, how do you solve this problem? Even if you dropped auto exec's salaries to that of line workers it isn't enough. The problem was/is that it is no longer 1952 when there was no real competition for American auto manufacturers . Unless you raise tariffs and ban robots and ban outsourcing auto worker salaries/benefits are going to go down and/or have major layoffs after the 1960's.
 
. . . Unless you raise tariffs . . .
I'm not in favor of big tariffs, and it sounds like you're probably not either.

And even today, I think American manufacturing employees are among the most productive in the world. Because of a combination, getting the equipment right, managerial experience, unions which serve to professionalize the workforce, and perhaps a couple of other factors.

And so whether the GM, Ford, or Chrysler factory's in the Detroit area, or the Toyota factory in Ohio, or the Nissan factory in Tennessee, fewer labor hours per car than in many other parts of the world.

But that's not the standard, is not? No, it's all about money.

When I was a kid, my dad bought a Mazda with a rotary engine around '74. It broke down so much they finally cancelled my dad's towing insurance. Years later, in a book reviewing used cars: This car will break down constantly and drive you crazy. When I read that, I laughed and laughed and laughed.

A friend of mine's dad had a Volkswagon Rabbit he bought around '77. People forget about these now, but for a couple of years I think this was a pretty big selling Volkswagon.

Point being, for a while foreign cars were a lot cheaper and almost as good.

And then when the Toyota become both cheaper and better (maybe 1980 ? ? ? ), that's a hard combination to beat.

=====

So, if American citizens really listen to Joel and maybe a half dozen other auto workers, not going to save that many auto jobs, might make the transition a little better.

But, might push forward the conversation about what else might take the place of these good-paying jobs.
 
I'm not in favor of big tariffs, and it sounds like you're probably not either.

And even today, I think American manufacturing employees are among the most productive in the world. Because of a combination, getting the equipment right, managerial experience, unions which serve to professionalize the workforce, and perhaps a couple of other factors.

And so whether the GM, Ford, or Chrysler factory's in the Detroit area, or the Toyota factory in Ohio, or the Nissan factory in Tennessee, fewer labor hours per car than in many other parts of the world.

But that's not the standard, is not? No, it's all about money.

When I was a kid, my dad bought a Mazda with a rotary engine around '74. It broke down so much they finally cancelled my dad's towing insurance. Years later, in a book reviewing used cars: This car will break down constantly and drive you crazy. When I read that, I laughed and laughed and laughed.

A friend of mine's dad had a Volkswagon Rabbit he bought around '77. People forget about these now, but for a couple of years I think this was a pretty big selling Volkswagon.

Point being, for a while foreign cars were a lot cheaper and almost as good.

And then when the Toyota become both cheaper and better (maybe 1980 ? ? ? ), that's a hard combination to beat.

=====

So, if American citizens really listen to Joel and maybe a half dozen other auto workers, not going to save that many auto jobs, might make the transition a little better.

But, might push forward the conversation about what else might take the place of these good-paying jobs.

I'm sorry but it is all about money. If GM and Ford can't make money on their cars they go under. If they are paid in benefits/wage more than the fewer hours making car costs than it is a net loss no matter how much labor you save. IOW they need to be enough times more productive to make up the differential in pay, if not the company loses money and goes under.
 
Last edited:
And that the Nixon Pardon cost Ford the election, while it was highly unpopular at the time Ford only just lost to Carter and that was more down to his campaign gaffes. He only needed about 9,000 votes to go differently in Ohio and Hawaii.
Ford did come almost all the way back. He did start way behind Carter, which is why Ford agreed to debates thereby helping to establish this as a pretty solid modern tradition.

PS I think John Green might be better at broader history, rather than being a political junkie like you and me! ;)
 
So, let's say throughout 1979 Joel and about half a dozen co-workers regularly appear on new and growing talk radio. And they're identified by first name and last initial such as "Mike T." and "Stu M." and "Carol A." to show that they're real people but also to preserve some privacy.

And it's a wide-ranging discussion on trade deficit, free-floating currency, legacy costs, etc.

But then early Dec. '79, the discussion seems to settle on GDP growth as the single most important economic number and wise stewardship of the environment as the main tension / challenge / dilemma. That is, this focus emerges about six weeks before the Iowa Caucus on Monday, Jan. 21, 1980. Ron Reagan all in favor of cutting taxes to rev up the economy no longer seems like such a revolutionary position, nor does ol' RR have such a monopoly position regarding this.
 
Last edited:
So, let's say throughout 1979 Joel and about half a dozen co-workers regularly appear on new and growing talk radio. And they're identified by first name and last initial such as "Mike T." and "Stu M." and "Carol A." to show that they're real people but also to preserve some privacy.

And it's a wide-ranging discussion on trade deficit, free-floating currency, legacy costs, etc.

I don't want to stereotype all autoworkers as being dumb assembly drones. But it still seems unlikely that they'd have that much knowledge of economics to be able to have a conversation like that.

But then early Dec. '79, the discussion seems to settle on GDP growth as the single most important economic number and wise stewardship of the environment as the main tension / challenge / dilemma. That is, this focus emerges about six weeks before the Iowa Caucus on Monday, Jan. 21, 1980. Ron Reagan all in favor of cutting taxes to rev up the economy no longer seems like such a revolutionary position, nor does ol' RR have such a monopoly position regarding this.

GDP growth was actually the brightest spot in the economy in the late 1970s. In 1979, the US economy grew by over 3%.
 
I think you're right about GDP growth in '79:


https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/A191RO1Q156NBEA

1979:

Jan-March: 6.5% growth

April-June: 2.7%

July-Sept: 2.4%

Oct-Dec: 1.3%​


although is starting to slide into the 1980 recession

=======

One question, Why is the auto industry laying off people as early as 1978 ? ? don't know if Iran was that big of an issue yet and/or not sure it was only factor
 
Last edited:
I don't want to stereotype all autoworkers as being dumb assembly drones. But it still seems unlikely that they'd have that much knowledge of economics to be able to have a conversation like that.
That's where people can surprise us. :) When people become keenly interested in a topic and dive in, one just never knows.
 
Top