U.S. Motor Vehicle Industry Restructuring and Dealership Terminations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As Chrysler and General Motors (GM) moved toward and into bankruptcy, they sought and received permission from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court to terminate about 2,000 contracts with auto dealers.Many of the dealers want their contracts reinstated and have sought relief from Congress to accomplish that goal.This report examines the changed economic landscape facing the auto sector, automaker arguments in favor of dealer reductions, and dealer counterpoints.It also highlights recent legislation introduced to address dealers' concerns.Chrysler and GM have emerged from bankruptcy as significantly smaller companies, reflecting the end of a multiyear restructuring process for both companies.Chrysler is now controlled by the Italian carmaker, Fiat, while GM's current majority owner is the U.S. Government.GM, which in 2008 operated 47 assembly, powertrain, and stamping facilities, is to operate 34 plants by the end of 2010 and 33 by 2012.The number of hourly employees will have declined from 78,000 on December 31, 2007 to 62,200 at end-2008, to an estimated 40,000 in 2010.By way of contrast, GM had 304,000 hourly workers in 1991.GM also discontinued one brand (Pontiac) and is to sell Hummer, Saab, and Saturn, and some percentage of its GM Europe operations, Opel and Vauxhall.The new Chrysler reduced its number of production facilities from 25 to 17 as part of its restructuring.The company employed 45,000 hourly U.S. employees in January 2008 and 27,000 in February 2009.For the first time, GM and Chrysler are not owned by private investors; rather, the UAW's retiree health trust, the U.S. Treasury, and the Canadian government have taken ownership stakes in both companies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".