As I was driving this morning with my right turn signal going the turn
signal indicator on the dash, and the lights at the front and rear of
the car stopped blinking.  The wand on the steering column remain
locked into place, and clicked back into neutral position when I
completed my turn, just no lights – outside or in.  And that
"clicking" noise that is made whenever the turn signal is blinking was
gone, as well.

This occurs for both the left and right turn indicators.

Everything else on the wand appears to be operational (brights,
wipers, washer fluid).

Possible fuse?  Didn’t have the time to check this morning – had to
get to work!

The car is a 2001 Monte Carlo SS.

FLINT — Delphi Corp. worker Darrell Snell felt months of stress and
worry slip away as he left his union hall on Monday after learning
details of a landmark wage deal between the parts supplier and the
United Auto Workers.

"I’ve got a job," the 24-year-old from Mount Morris said with a slight
grin. "I can move on with my life. Makes me feel good about the union."

Like many workers at the Flint Delphi East plant — one of four saved
from closure under the deal — Snell sees the agreement as a sign of the
UAW’s enduring strength in tough times.In that sense, the tentative deal
is a victory of sorts for the UAW because the concessions were not as
deep as many had feared given Delphi’s bankruptcy. But the givebacks
were significant and could foreshadow the sacrifices workers will be
asked to make when the UAW negotiates new national contracts this summer
with Detroit’s Big Three automakers.

"The Delphi agreement will be the lens through which the companies will
view the national contracts," said auto analyst John Casesa of the
Casesa Shapiro Group. "That doesn’t mean it will be easy to get
concessions from the union. It shows a union that is willing to be more
flexible than people expected."

Under the agreement reached Friday among the UAW, Delphi and General
Motors Corp., the supplier’s former parent, Delphi workers will get cash
payouts and other compensation in exchange for leaving the company or
accepting significantly lower wages.

For many, the reductions will be drastic, more than $10 an hour in pay
along with scaled back health benefits. And workers who started with the
company decades ago when it was part of GM will make wages similar to
those earned by relative newcomers.

The deal, which still must be ratified by union members, was needed to
avert the threat of a strike at Delphi that would have crippled GM,
Delphi’s largest customer, and disrupted the coming labor talks.

With the agreement, which paves the way for Delphi to emerge from
bankruptcy, at least one Wall Street analyst is predicting the union
will also grant major concessions to automakers.

GM shares climbed 81 cents, or 2.3 percent, Monday on the New York Stock
Exchange after Goldman Sachs analyst Robert Berry raised his rating on
the automaker to "buy" from "neutral," largely on the belief that the
UAW will give concessions beyond what investors were expecting.

"We suspect members and retirees are increasingly amenable to," wage and
benefit cuts, Berry said in a research note without mentioning Delphi.
"We think that translates into progress on health care costs, work
rules, and potentially on wages in 2007 union talks."

Others say not so fast.

Harley Shaiken, a labor expert at the University of California,
Berkeley, said the UAW’s ability to hold ground against Delphi signals
that the union will have clout when it deals with the automakers.

Terms of the Delphi deal were far better than the company’s earlier
offers, which at one point included cutting wages to $9 an hour. The
cash payments are significant as well, including $105,000 to be paid
over three years to about 4,000 high-seniority workers in exchange for
accepting lower hourly wages. There also are generous cash retirement
incentives.

"This (Delphi) deal shows the UAW remains very powerful even in a very
tough situation," said Shaiken, who has maintained that the union’s
power remains formidable — and often underestimated — in an industry
where labor-management cooperation is critical to both sides.

"Reports of the death of the UAW have been greatly exaggerated," Shaiken
quipped.

Even with the concessions, many workers said they were pleased with the
way union leaders handled the deal.

"This shows the union still has power and that it still protects its
workers," said 20-year Flint East worker Tammy Scofield.

"It would have been a lot worse if it was decided in bankruptcy court,"
she said.

Jeff Reno, a worker at the Saginaw Steering Systems plant, which is set
to be sold, thinks the deal hurts more senior workers by cutting their
pay about 40 percent. But despite his gripes, and his plans to vote
against the deal, Reno still feels the UAW did the best it could in a
tough situation.

"I don’t think the union had much of a chance given the environment,"
said Reno, 33, of Kawkawlin.

Workers’ relief, in part, reflects a masterful job by UAW President Ron
Gettelfinger in managing the expectations of the rank and file, analyst
Casesa said.

Gettelfinger weighed in on the deal for the first time Monday, crediting
GM with brokering the agreement while continuing to criticize Delphi
leaders.

He said Delphi focused only on extending the bankruptcy and turning
Delphi into a foreign company.

"If it weren’t for (GM Chief Financial Officer) Fritz Henderson and his
team … this agreement never would have come about," Gettelfinger told
NewsTalk-760 WJR’s Paul W. Smith.

WASHINGTON — A Senate bill to raise fuel economy mandates by 40 percent
would force Detroit’s Big Three automakers to dramatically reduce sales
of profitable larger sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks, according
to one Wall Street analyst.

Under the Senate bill, which passed 65-27 last Thursday, fuel economy
mandates would increase to 35 miles per gallon for cars and trucks by
2020. Automakers have said such a mandate would require them to add
costly technology, reduce the size of some vehicles and stop selling
some larger vehicles.

"We estimate the Big Three could meet the 35 mpg standard only by
dramatically reducing sales of large SUVs and pickups by 60 percent,
while improving car fuel economy by about 34 percent and truck fuel
economy by 25 percent," Brian Johnson, an auto analyst with Lehman
Brothers in New York, wrote in a report Monday.

Automakers say the Senate bill, which would be the first passenger car
fuel economy increase in 25 years, would cost them tens of billions of
dollars. DaimlerChrysler AG’s Chrysler Group has said it could bankrupt
the company.

Environmentalists and others in favor of tougher mileage standards have
argued there would be no need for automakers to downsize vehicles to
meet the requirements.

What isn’t disputed is that SUV and pickup truck sales have been the
bread and butter of General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler
for years. In 2007, 34 percent of GM sales have been large SUVs and
full-size pickups. At Ford, it’s 31 percent, and for Chrysler it’s 20
percent.

By comparison, large SUV and full-size sales have accounted for just
10.5 percent of Nissan Motor Co. sales so far this year and 8 percent of
Toyota Motor Corp. sales.

One major area of concern for GM and Ford is their reliance on large and
powerful but less efficient engines, Johnson said.

While about 60 percent of Honda Motor Co.’s and Toyota’s 2006 production
was four-cylinder engines, only 14 percent of Chrysler and Ford engine
production was four-cylinder and only 21 percent of GM’s.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, a trade group that represents
the Detroit Three and Toyota among others, said the report shows there
are real impacts to a dramatic increase.

"Fuel economy standards need to be increased, but at reasonable levels
so workers around the country do not lose their jobs or pensions or
other benefits," spokeswoman Gloria Bergquist said. "As this reports
shows, the economic threat is real and it is serious."

In May, Standard and Poor’s issued a report arguing that tough fuel
economy and vehicle emissions legislation would "pose a real risk to
global automakers’ financial performance, particularly as some are
already under pressure from razor-thin margins."

Dingell steps in

With the Senate bill passed, the legislation now moves to the House,
which isn’t expected to address raising Corporate Average Fuel Economy
mandates until the fall.

On Wednesday, the House Energy and Commerce committee is expected to
approve a package of six bills to improve fuel efficiency.

U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Dearborn, chairman of the committee and an
ally of the auto industry, on Friday called the CEOs of GM, Ford and
Chrysler, along with the United Auto Workers president, to talk about
the fuel economy bill, the Detroit News has learned. He urged the
companies to be more aggressive in emphasizing what they can agree to do
to improve fuel efficiency.

Dingell also held a closed-door meeting with automakers’ top Washington
officials late Monday.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi will have an event Thursday to tout the
Democrats’ energy package — including the six bills from Dingell’s
committee — but she does not plan on including fuel economy as part of
this package.

Of note… I did remove the air conditioning from the car. I
disconnected the silver canister connected to the black box on the
firewall via two metal hose connectors. I didn’t seal those
connections after removing the canister. Could that be the problem? I
am not sure if I had the defrost/heater/vent problem immediately after
removing the air conditioning canister.

                                            Thanks Mike

I’m going to assume (a bad thing, I know) that the top is the feed and
the bottom is the return?

Thanks
Mark

Thanks in Advance