posted on December 12, 2008 09:31:11 AM new
The UAW is refusing to make any concessions! ARE YOU KIDDING ME!?!
GM needs to start taking applications for workers with pay starting at $18.00 and I bet you folks line up by the thousands. The current workers can take the cut or walk. There are plenty of folks that would love to make $18.00 and hour.
When it comes to the Big Three its everybodys fault but their own.
posted on December 12, 2008 07:01:21 PM new
New news the UAW is refusing to make wage concessions to be more in line with the Honda and Toyota USA plants.
We have a GM truck plant nearby and my wife works for a part supplier. What the goons at at GM are doing is holding firm on their wages and are moving all of their suppliers to Mexico to reduce their costs. Honda and Toyota by the way don't do that. They (Honda & Toyota) keep their suppliers in the US and don't extort 3% plus from the suppliers profits.
Seems fair lets let the UAW keep there $28.00+ an hour jobs with 17 holidays 4 weeks vacation plus paid shutdown for another 4 weeks a year and move everybody elses jobs to Mexico. The UAW and GM can BITE ME!
posted on December 13, 2008 08:05:16 PM new
Let's say that the UAW is willing to capitulate, giving up $15/hour in wages/benefits to be in line with US non-Big 3 automakers wages. And let's also surmise that the government helps in kicking in an additional $10/hour to support the large number of pensioners that the non-Big three don't have to support. That would reduce the per-car cost by $800. Would that solve the problem? Not likely. The big 3 cars already cost less than $2000 per car than their foreign competitors, made in the US cars. Americans choose to not purchase US branded cars. I drive one, my mom drives one, but most Americans choose not to. The big 3 lost the battle in the 1970's with shoddy merchandise and have failed to regain it. The product has improved but Americans will not embrace it.
Edited to add: I'm no expert in bankruptcy laws , but if the UAW is under the assumption that some of the Big 3's fate will eventually end in bankruptcy, perhaps it is in their best interest to not negotiate now, to ensure that a larger amount of awarded funds goes to workers instead of golden parachutes?
posted on December 14, 2008 12:07:51 AM new
American cars do not cost less than imports, they are SOLD for less than imports. The production cost disadvantage is a fact. The American business model has always been "keep the line moving" because of commitments to labor and suppliers. So your market is 20000 cars and you make 30000. Those 30000 flood the market and you require rebates and sweetheart deals to get rid of them. Import nameplates make 20000 and close a plant if needed. You don't have $2k rebates on Civics.
"Quality" has both perceptual and statistical sides. American nameplates have dramatically improved product, with Ford even rated equal to Japanese nameplates. But the production cost deficit rears its head. To get people into the showroom, Chevy has to have a $20k Malibu if Honda has a $20k Accord. The Malibu is a world classed car based on a European model. But for 20K you get a buzzy engine and a cheapo hard plastic interior that reeks of "loss leader". Even the cheapest Accord has a nice interior with quality materials and an engine like a sewing machine.
American mfg hang on because in the vehicles which have cost parity their ability to give the customer "what he wants" is unsurpassed. But government policies and volatile economic conditions mean "what he wants" can change overnight and now they have nothing left.
posted on December 14, 2008 04:50:12 PM new
Senate to Middle Class: Drop Dead
Friday, December 12th, 2008
Friends,
They could have given the loan on the condition that the automakers start building only cars and mass transit that reduce our dependency on oil.
They could have given the loan on the condition that the automakers build cars that reduce global warming.
They could have given the loan on the condition that the automakers withdraw their many lawsuits against state governments in their attempts to not comply with our environmental laws.
They could have given the loan on the condition that the management team which drove these once-great manufacturers into the ground resign and be replaced with a team who understands the transportation needs of the 21st century.
Yes, they could have given the loan for any of these reasons because, in the end, to lose our manufacturing infrastructure and throw 3 million people out of work would be a catastrophe.
But instead, the Senate said, we'll give you the loan only if the factory workers take a $20 an hour cut in wages, pension and health care. That's right. After giving BILLIONS to Wall Street hucksters and criminal investment bankers -- billions with no strings attached and, as we have since learned, no oversight whatsoever -- the Senate decided it is more important to break a union, more important to throw middle class wage earners into the ranks of the working poor than to prevent the total collapse of industrial America.
We have a little more than a month to go of this madness. As I sit here in Michigan today, tens of thousands of hard working, honest, decent Americans do not believe they can make it to January 20th. The malaise here is astounding. Why must they suffer because of the mistakes of every CEO from Roger Smith to Rick Wagoner? Make management and the boards of directors and the shareholders pay for this.
Of course that is heresy to the 31 Republicans who decided to blame the poor, miserable autoworkers for this mess. And our wonderful media complied with their spin on the morning news shows: "UAW Refuses to Give Concessions Killing Auto Bailout Bill." In fact the UAW has given concession after concession, reduced their benefits, agreed to get rid of the Jobs Bank and agreed to make it harder for their retirees to live from week to week. Yes! That's what we need to do! It's the Jobs Bank and the old people who have led the nation to economic ruin!
But even doing all that wasn't enough to satisfy the bastard Republicans. These Senate vampires wanted blood. Blue collar blood. You see, they weren't opposed to the bailout because they believed in the free market or capitalism. No, they were opposed to the bailout because they're opposed to workers making a decent wage. In their rage, they were driven to destroy the backbone of this country, not because the UAW hadn't given back enough, but because the UAW hadn't given up.
It appears that the sitting President has been looking for a way to end his reign by one magnanimous act, just like a warlord on his feast day. He will put his finger in the dike, and the fragile mess of an auto industry will eke through the next few months.
That will give the Senate enough time to demand that the bankers and investment sharks who've already swiped nearly half of the $700 billion gift a chance to make the offer of cutting their pay.
posted on December 14, 2008 06:53:34 PM new
I agree, Shething. How about also adding that any monies received from a bailout be spent on US suppliers only. That way, any bailout might benefit other American workers dependent on the Big 3 for survival.
posted on December 14, 2008 07:05:41 PM new
"They could have given the loan on the condition that the automakers start building only cars and mass transit that reduce our dependency on oil."
You build what people want to buy. Making rules to the contrary has not worked since time began.
And there is not enough money on the planet to build mass transit throughout the US. There are tremendous technologies out there that are not even being introduced in tiny places like Europe and Japan. Reason: They can't afford it.
"They could have given the loan on the condition that the automakers build cars that reduce global warming."
Based on whose crackpot math? For example I was reading an interesting tech journal about how from creation to disposal, the carbon footprint for a Prius is higher than standard vehicles.
"They could have given the loan on the condition that the automakers withdraw their many lawsuits against state governments in their attempts to not comply with our environmental laws."
Wow imagine a mfg not wanting to make 50 different versions of the same thing which is federally regulated beside.
"in the end, to lose our manufacturing infrastructure and throw 3 million people out of work would be a catastrophe.
But instead, the Senate said, we'll give you the loan only if the factory workers take a $20 an hour cut in wages, pension and health care.
No, they were opposed to the bailout because they're opposed to workers making a decent wage."
What clowns like Moore forget is that this is not 1880. A "job" has a value like anything else. They talk in terms of what companies make and that the professional pencil sharpener on the 3rd floor has 4 kids in college and therefore "has to get" $100k/yr.
Tough. If you have 4 kids in college don't be a prof pencil sharpener. There are few skilled jobs in Auto factories. The rest are not "careers". American car mfg gave huge concessions to workers because PRODUCTION was ever rising due to efficiency increases. You could pay a janitor $30/hr because you were building 20% more cars than the year before.
But the rest of the world got smart too, and the concessions started to multiply geometrically as life spans increased and medical costs skyrocketed. Now comes the evening process.
I wonder how it is that nobody asks idiots like Moore his theories on why a janitor at Ford should make what a University professor with tenure makes. What about the poor downtrodden professors working for janitor's wages?? Why doesn't he stump to give them a helping hand.
posted on December 15, 2008 05:47:03 AM new
<i>New news the UAW is refusing to make wage concessions to be more in line with the Honda and Toyota USA plants.</i>
So, we are to allow foreign companies to determine what American workers should be making? While I agree that autoworkers tend to be a bit overpaid, let's work from the top down on reducing incomes. The UAW autoworker isn't running around the country in a private jet with their hands out.
It irks me to think that senators from the south who were elected by the AMERICAN public are making decisions based on their perceptions of FOREIGN companies in their districts. Don't think for one moment that their pockets aren't being lined just a little bit.
posted on December 15, 2008 07:03:59 AM new
I worked 20 years for a large supplier in the automotive industry, making frames for the Big 3's cars and trucks. You've never met a harder working bunch in a more dangerous place to work. When I started working there at 23 it was with the expectation that I would give them 30 years of my blood, sweat and tears in exchange for a decent middle-class wage, insurance benefits and a pension. Yes, it was a union shop, and I was proud to work with a union, United Steel Workers of America. I still am proud, though I don't dare even mention union at my current workplace.
As it turns out, after 20 years they closed up shop and sent all the work South where they could pay half as much in wages and benefits in a non-union shop. In the ensuing 8 years, I've learned what kind of BS employers are getting away with out here in non-union shops, and my former employer has gone bankrupt. Blaming the union for their problems was not the answer. Bad management was.
posted on December 15, 2008 10:15:47 AM new
shething - You are so very right!
Edited to add: I worked at a metal stamping place for three years. The shop was unionized. It was a very dangerous place to work. The heat in the shop in the summer was enough to make you keel over. The machinery alone could rip your arm off if you weren't careful. The few times I had to walk through the shop were experience enough for me. IMHO, you couldn't pay me enough to do the jobs those people do.
A friend of mine lost two of her fingers in an auto plant accident about 6 years ago and ended up having severe complications. She had to go on disability. The stress of that combined with her ensuing poor health due to the complications lead to her suicide two years ago. Still think she made too much money? I don't excuse her way of easing her pain, but I'm sure she wasn't alone.
Cheryl
http://www.youravon.com/cherylblevins
Now you can buy Avon from me from anywhere in the world.
[ edited by cblev65252 on Dec 15, 2008 10:19 AM ]
posted on December 15, 2008 10:55:30 AM new "As it turns out, after 20 years they closed up shop and sent all the work South where they could pay half as much in wages and benefits in a non-union shop. In the ensuing 8 years, I've learned what kind of BS employers are getting away with out here in non-union shops, and my former employer has gone bankrupt. Blaming the union for their problems was not the answer. Bad management was.
Exactly right. Now, the GOP union busters want to send GM south where low wages and anti union sentiment prevails.
posted on December 15, 2008 11:38:47 AM new
Unions WERE a method where workers could insure they were treated fairly, not a method of creating a career. Assembly work is not a career.
Instead of endless trite phrases you could help out by paying $5k more for your next vehicle so that some wheel lug tightener can have cradle to grave welfare after 15 years, but don't stop there. Make sure you patronize the Food Giant around the corner. Rest assured the $3 more per pound for meat comforts a legion of retired stock boys. LOL
I could imagine this same discussion was had 100 years ago about the downtrodden workers at the buggy whip factory even though they spent 20 years making the best damn buggy whips the world ever saw.
All of the sing song 1920s socialist rhetoric will not slow the inevitable.
posted on December 15, 2008 11:50:30 AM new
Cradle to grave? Are you nuts? My uncle worked for LTV Steel for over 30 years. He was union. Got full benefits when he retired. Lost all benefits when the company went under including his so-called guaranteed pension. Guess who didn't lose any benefits and who gained millions of dollars? Their top executives, that's who and at the expense of their blue collar workers.
posted on December 15, 2008 12:52:50 PM new
Squirrel has more than once stated that assembly line work is not a career. How borish and thinking indicative of someone looking down the lofty heights of a single rung higher on the ladder. And get your facts straight. Higher labor costs in the Big 3 add $800 per car, not $5,000. Sorry, I forgot squirrels are mathematically challenged.
posted on December 15, 2008 10:11:57 PM new
I gave no deficit per car figure. Even someone with your enhanced stupidity must realize that your dramatic appeals to save the poor downtrodden worker earning an AVERAGE of 130k/yr in wages and benefits ($20/month family payment, including Lasik, dental, durable items like hearing aids, on and on)is met with hysterical laughter by the general public.
Perhaps the laughter will return you to the real world, but in any case, it is time to realize the gravy train is over.
posted on December 15, 2008 11:43:59 PM new
Of course, you never bothered to do the math, just spewed out whateevr numbers suited you, Your joe-the-wannnabe-plumber's mindset is clear. Dump on the workers one wrung behind you to further your own importance, How pathteic...
posted on December 16, 2008 05:13:49 AM new
"Joe the Plumber". Boy, he was a flash-in-the-pan, wasn't he? I wonder if he ever got into trouble for not having a license? My son's BF, who is a licensed plumber, was really mad over that one. He had to work hard to get that license.
posted on December 16, 2008 07:59:46 AM newUnions WERE a method where workers could insure they were treated fairly, not a method of creating a career. Assembly work is not a career.
WTF kind of nonsense is that?? A union is not a "method" but an organization:
And there are at least hundreds of thousands of retired assembly line workers in this country who would take umbrage to your statement that "assembly work is not a career." They worked hard on that assembly line their entire lives to support their families and make a better life for themselves and their loved ones.
You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Your statements are insulting and offensive.
___________________________________
posted on December 16, 2008 09:36:29 AM new
Perhaps Squirrel is mistaking "career" for "profession." All of the definitions of career that I found qualify assembly work as a career. Assembly work would not qualify under most of the definitions of profession.
posted on December 16, 2008 12:20:44 PM new
Car sales are down and here is part of the problem that nobody wants to address.
Let’s say you buy a new car for $30,000. Now tack on sales tax in the great state of Indiana its 7% ($2100.00) and you financed it for 60 months at 7% which gives you a payment of $643.22 At the end of 5 years you have spent $38,593.00 plus the cost of maintenance, plates and insurance. At the end of 5 years it might be worth if your lucky 25% of its original value or $7500. Sweeeet!
Now what happens to the person that wants to trade cars in 2 years They still owe $20,700 on a car that if they are lucky is worth 12,000. If they can find a bank that will finance that much, all that inequity ($8,700) gets rolled over to the next car making a bad situation even worse. Banks were doing that and thats part of the reason they are in the mess they are in.
Almost all cars lose OVER 50% of their original value in just 2 years. Why is that? Could it be because they are overpriced to begin with. Who sets the price? The manufacturer does.
posted on December 16, 2008 01:35:03 PM new
The problem with the whackers is they base what people "deserve" based on their lifestyles not what they do.
What does it matter if somebody "worked hard"?
They should get a gov pension of $10,000/mo???
The other thing is when they relate the profitability of a company to somebody's salary.
ie: Joe the janitor at the Quickie check makes $8/hr. Ted the janitor at the Ford plant across the street is "entitled" to $24/hr.
A janitor is a janitor.
Government is not destroying unions, the general public is. Every time the UAW whines, nobody leaps to the barricades in defense. They are outraged at the arrogance of demanding more when their sought after supporters "work hard" and get a fraction of what these people already have.
posted on December 16, 2008 07:22:55 PM new
Squirrel, a hard working janitor working 40 hours per week should be able to support himself, and with the aid of a hard working wife, be able to support a small family and pay child care expenses while the wife works, hopefully putting a little aside for their kid's education, so they will have an easier life. This used to be the case in America. Unions helped make this happen. The disparity between the top paid execs and the lowest paid wage earners has grown astronomically, it's the highest in US history. I believe it's due to corporate greed, government deregulation, exporting of jobs and the loss of Union power. Two people making minimum wage will have an extremely hard job , if not impossible, of providing a stable life for their families. And yet minimum pay jobs are the only ones with openings. That janitor at the Quik-Check store may have a college diploma and is struggling to wait until the Bushenomics have run their course.
Edited to add: Of all the posters on this board, you win the prize for the most whacko, you are totally oblivious to the scientific realities of global warming, totally uneducated on economic realities, eschew anecdotal examples while working from a gut Joe-the-Plumber outlook. I haven't found an ounce of creative or even thoughtful thinking in your posts.
[ edited by pixiamom on Dec 16, 2008 07:40 PM ]
posted on December 17, 2008 09:53:50 AM new
If you are a janitor, don't buy a house or work a second job is the answer. The answer is NOT that I have to buy a house for him in one shape or form or another.
People make choices and take the consequences. If you make a bad choice, you have to fix it.
You know, I'll bet most UAW people started working and said to themselves, "wow this is pretty good money", just stayed there, didn't invest or save anything, and today have a laundry list of things they are "owed".
As to global warming, economics, etc. I'll match my degrees against yours any day. And they are not in Sociology, or Psychology.
I heard a good description of the "consensus" on global warming the other day. Very very few people have an understanding of climatic models, so the net result in the scientific community is that "you have a bunch of dermatologists agreeing on the best way to treat brain cancer".
You NEVER seem to answer my questions. I just attributed it to stupidity. You know, when you go "Katrina!!! Global warming" and I say historical analysis says hurricanes run in 1500 year cycles and we are nearing the end of a very mild cycle. Or you go "The arctic is melting!!! Global warming" and I ask if, in your opinion, the melting is worse than the period 10,000 years ago when man became virtually extinct in the Eastern US, or the period 25,000 years ago. Hey, how about those Dark Ages, you know what happened then right???
Ever read about deep ocean cycles and how this is a perpetual process where every few hundred million years virtually all life is destroyed and then recreated by the same process?
posted on December 18, 2008 08:09:31 PM new
Global warming is a fact, despite the fictitious emails ignorant prawns receive from parties who will profit in the short term by ignoring it.
Squirrel, I am really worried by your increasing list of hard working folks who do not deserve the American dream. Are you including everybody below you in economic stature? Assembly line workers, custodians. How about grounds keepers (i.e., Forrest Gump). Here's an anecdote for you: A classmate of mine was born with fetal alcohal syndrome. He was from an old money family, lived in a mansion on the lake, had extremely gifted older siblings. His mother, when I met her, was sober and was one of the loveliest and most gracious ladies I've known. He was mainstreamed in our high school. I can't remember any friends he had in our cliquish high school, but I can't remember any ridicule, except for when he predicted in the late '60's that Reagan would some day become president. Unlike his siblings (one became a top-rated conductor in Germany, the other married into an even older-moneyed family) he had few career options available to him. He loved growing things and became a grounds keeper for Minneapolis Public Schools- a union job. Out of love for his mother, I like to visit with him at each reunion. Unlike his younger sibling, he held no animosity to his mother, only sadness that she returned to alcohol in her final days. The family's fortunes diminished and his father ended up moving into my classmate's condo. Strong in work habits and having few vices, I wonder why you might want to deny him the ownership of his condo. Why should we put beyond reach home ownership, college education for our kids for hardworking folks? Totally unamerican. Squirrel, you should be ashamed.
posted on December 18, 2008 08:31:18 PM new
Who said global warming is not happening?? It is something that can be measured. The tough part is linking human activities to changes in immense planetary scale mechanisms.
I don't care what he buys. Your problem seems to be the list of things people are entitled to. You're not "entitled" to own a house, have somebody pay for your health care, or not be "upset".
posted on December 18, 2008 09:30:46 PM new
Isn't the hole in the ozone a result of man-made global warming?
Squirrel: Even if it were true (which it isn't), that man isn't "causing" global warming, wouldn't it be wise for mankind to do all in our power to slow it down by being more prudent?
_____________________
