Excellent commentary on how UAW's anti-market nature is killing the Big 3 (big 5)

Excellent article in National Review today. Of note is the $1319 wage gap in production costs between the Big 3 and foreign domestic manufacturers. Also the Job bank of 12,000 people paid to do nothing stands out as particularly corrupt.

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/payne200511290819.asp

Labor Pains
Detroit needs to play by market rules.

By Henry Payne

Detroit, Michigan — Massive job cuts at General Motors, America's largest carmaker — coupled with the bankruptcy of Delphi, America's biggest autoparts maker — have provoked predictable handwringing from liberal pundits who worry that America is "losing its manufacturing base." But the wrenching change now buffeting the auto industry defies the usual press formulas. Just listen to Steve Miller a turnaround specialist who is steering Delphi's restructuring process. He exploded the myth of America's "endangered" union manufacturing jobs at his October press conference announcing Delphi's move into Chapter 11: "We cannot continue to pay $65 an hour for someone to cut the grass and remain competitive."

Grass cutting is a manufacturing job?

Miller's frank assessment of unsustainable labor contracts is a refreshing dose of candor in an industry that for too long has talked around union-labor costs in a way that is totally divorced from the realities of the U.S. labor market — much less the global labor market.

While America's national press has gleefully covered the front-office shenanigans of Republican fat cats like Enron's Ken Lay, it has entirely missed the disease eating away at the roots of American manufacturing: Behind the threat of strike, greedy Democratic union bosses have built an unsustainable entitlement-wage culture that is now crashing spectacularly in America's heartland, disrupting lives, and threatening some of America's biggest publicly traded companies.

Take grass cutting. As defined by the current United Auto Worker contract negotiated with the "Big Five" (GM, Ford, Chrysler, and top parts makers Delphi and Visteon), an auto "production worker" is a job description that covers anything from mowing grass to cleaning the toilets. In the real world, these jobs would be outsourced to $8 an hour, no-benefit wage earners, but on Planet Big Five, these jobs get the same wages as any auto line-worker: an average $26 an hour ($60,000 a year) plus benefits that bring the company's total cost per worker to a staggering $65 an hour.

But at least the grass cutters are working for their pay. The UAW contract also guarantees that 12,000 autoworkers get full wage for doing nothing. On the heels of Miller's straight-talk, the Detroit News reported that "12,000 American autoworkers, instead of bending sheet metal, spend their days counting the hours in a jobs bank." These aren't jobs. And they certainly aren't being "lost" to China.

"We just go in (to Ford's Michigan Truck Plant) and play crossword puzzles, watch videos that someone brings in or read the newspaper," The News quoted one UAW worker as saying. "Otherwise, I've just sat."

For Delphi, this idled labor cost $400 million in the second quarter of this year alone. Facing similar numbers until the contract's end in 2007, Delphi took refuge in bankruptcy. "The jobs bank must be eliminated," says Miller. "Paying people not to work is just not sustainable."

As the auto companies have increased productivity through automation, the UAW calculated that jobs banks would make it too expensive for automakers to close plants and lay off workers. While that plan has worked, it has severely damaged the long-term viability of the industry — and by extension, future job creation. It also led to this week's GM bloodbath, as the company struggles to close a wage gap with American internationals (foreign automakers manufacturing in the U.S.) that now stands at $1319 per vehicle produced.

Simply put, Big Three autoworkers have been living in a fantasy world.

Statistics tell the tale. In his landmark study of the 2003 Big Five contract, Sean McLinden of the Center for Automotive Research (CAR) found that "in 1960, the UAW was 16 percent higher than the overall U.S. wage rate. . . . By 2003, the UAW average rate (with COLA) was 68-percent higher than the average manufacturing rate of $15.74 an hour."

McLinden notes that the contract reads as if autoworkers labor in a vacuum, without regard for market forces. "The workers involved will not lose their jobs at the company — they must be transferred to other facilities, bought out, voluntarily retired, or supported by protected status programs (jobs banks). Workers who refuse to transfer after layoff will... eventually be paid 100 percent of their straight pay. Indeed, UAW employment can only fall at the rate of natural retirement."

Furthermore, UAW members are guaranteed a traditional "30 years and out" provision, meaning that many retirees begin drawing full pensions in their early Fifties, burdening the Big Five with unrivaled legacy costs. Delphi, for example, shoulders $22 per worker-hour in legacy costs compared to as little as 25 cents for independent competitors like Leer and Johnson Controls.

Miller stresses that Delphi's competition for these jobs are not foreign laborers in China or Mexico — but workers right here in the Unites States. Given the huge productivity advantages of U.S. factories, relatively high-paid American autoworkers remain competitive with Mexican workers paid $3 an hour. CAR's McLinden confirms this. His analysis of independent suppliers (workers not covered by the fat Big Five contract) covering 19,379 UAW members in the U.S. found an "average wage of $15.76 an hour — remarkably close to the $15.77 per hour U.S. average manufacturing wage in 2003."

Miller does not deny that some labor-intensive auto-parts jobs (such as spark plugs manufacturing) must be moved abroad. But in production, where assembly, transportation, or quality are key factors (in the making of dashboards, for example), manufacturers will rely on U.S. workers — assuming they don't cost two to four times the market rate. Indeed, Japanese manufacturers and their suppliers have created 60,000 good-paying jobs for Americans.

The coming months will be painful for many American autoworkers. Accustomed to a certain lifestyle, they will see their wages cut in half, jeopardizing second homes, college tuitions, and car payments. One blue-collar Delphi worker interviewed by the Detroit News makes $103,000 a year operating a forklift and fears the consequences if his pay is drastically reduced. But many Americans will ask how a forklift operator felt entitled to a six-figure income in the first place (according to Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average forklift operator wage in the U.S. is $26,000).
It is an opportune time for political leadership to step to the plate and speak with candor, but the signs are not encouraging.

UAW leaders are threatening strikes, and their Democratic allies are parroting tired slogans of government bailouts and trade protectionism. Michigan's Democratic governor Jennifer Granholm recently traveled to Washington, D.C. to stump for auto-import tariffs, while Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton demanded President Bush convene a "manufacturing summit" to examine a taxpayer bailout for the Big Five's "enormous legacy costs, including paying the health care and pensions of retirees."

These dinosaurs insist on turning back the clock, but Steve Miller understands that America's manufacturing future will only be lost if it loses sight of market economics: "We are in a market for human capital," he explains "If you pay too much for a particular class of employee, you go broke."

. — Henry Payne is a Detroit freelance writer and editorial cartoonist for the Detroit News.

The UAW has to go simple as that.

The UAW was great. It made sure workers got a piece of the pie they were baking. That pie has shrunk and they need to realize it. The reality is they wont stop sucking the teet dry until GM and Ford are bankrupt.

I don't understand why GM bothers to renew their contracts every few years.
When it runs out they could hire much cheaper labor that would love to work for $20 and hour.

When an uneducated auto worker makes way more then I do with a degree in MIS for doing something I do for a hobby and certainly know more about then him something is seriously F'ed up.

"If you pay too much for a particular class of employee, you go broke."

Im sorry but it is Unions like that, that give Unions a bad name. They got their share when GM was doing well but now they have to take a hit just like GM.
And no this is not an anti-union post im in a union and the rep for my department

I don't understand why GM bothers to renew their contracts every few years.
When it runs out they could hire much cheaper labor that would love to work for $20 and hour.


They can't risk the work stoppage, that's why....you can't replace 150,000 union workers with scabs overnight. They'd be down for months before they got new people in and trained. Plus UAW membership are trained to be fiercely loyal, so you'd get almost none of them to cross the picket line and go in to work non-union. The UAW has had GM and Ford by the balls for decades IMO. Also its not very fun or safe sometimes to break a picket line as a scab.

They can't risk the work stoppage, that's why....you can't replace 150,000 union workers with scabs overnight. They'd be down for months before they got new people in and trained. Plus UAW membership are trained to be fiercely loyal, so you'd get almost none of them to cross the picket line and go in to work non-union. The UAW has had GM and Ford by the balls for decades IMO. Also its not very fun or safe sometimes to break a picket line as a scab.
Actually, there was an interesting article in last week's Economist. It said risking a strike might be a better step to take rather than continuing the decline they are on now. If I can find it, I'll post it up as it's not a huge article. It mentions that a prolonged strike may be better because the UAW needs to concede, whether they want to or not. The suggestion was maybe..."to follow Delphi into Chapter 11 sooner rather than later, and seek the protection of the courts to help it break free of the UAW." It goes on to note how it worked for the damaged American airlines.

Actually, there was an interesting article in last week's Economist. It said risking a strike might be a better step to take rather than continuing the decline they are on now. If I can find it, I'll post it up as it's not a huge article. It mentions that a prolonged strike may be better because the UAW needs to concede, whether they want to or not. The suggestion was maybe..."to follow Delphi into Chapter 11 sooner rather than later, and seek the protection of the courts to help it break free of the UAW." It goes on to note how it worked for the damaged American airlines.

Good point. At some point the cost benefit changes enough maybe it is worth a long work stoppage. Take the NHL lockout for example. The owners decided they'd lose less money by not playing hockey.

Good point. At some point the cost benefit changes enough maybe it is worth a long work stoppage. Take the NHL lockout for example. The owners decided they'd lose less money by not playing hockey.

I know that a lot of companies actually save money during a strike becuase they ony pay the contractors a stright hourly salary...no medical benefits, 401K, pension, retirement, and other perks.

Holy Sh1t !! :eek:

No wonder GM thinks that a 40K sticker for a Tahoe is "reasonable" ...


On that money per year, maybe it would be.

From what I am reading , the Unions - and, in all fairness, the execs at GM & other major corporations - are way out of step with what the rest of the real world earns, and can spend.

My .02.

Britt

There are a bunch of qualified people who would love to work for GM. However, you can't get a job there unless you know someone.
If I was GM I would start taking applications now. Doing drug tests, references and filtering out the bad employees.
When the contract comes up don't renew it.
Yes it's going to hurt like hell in the short term, but in the long term it would be better.
Bring in these new people. Offer any union employee the opportunity to cross the line and they would keep their pay as it was in the contract that just ended. I believe when someone has a choice between being unemployeed and making 100K to drive a forklift your going to cross the line.
So say 25% of the people cross in the first two months.
Put these people in charge of their departments to train the new people coming in. At least to train in the simple jobs like press this button to tighten this bolt. Repeat.
I'm sure the R&D jobs are all non-union workers so you would still have your high level engineers who program the ECM that runs the vette etc. So R&D shouldn't suffer.
In 6 months your going to have a staff that is trained well enough to produce at probably 70% capacity of the old one, but your going to have a coverall cost that is probably 60% less then before.
In the long term I think it makes sense.

Northwest airlines trained Mechanics in the desert for a year before telling the union it would not negotiate pay decreases. They then replaced the union workers when they said they would rather see it bankrupt then take a decrease. The secret there was to convince all the other sympatheic unions to stay on the job. They worked that out with each one individually. It seems to have worked somewhat but the airline is still in trouble.

this also blows my mind:

How GM Can Fix Itself (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1134747-1,00.html)

"What happens to a GM worker when his or her plant shuts down? Not much. Under GM's contract with the U.A.W., laid-off workers are entitled to 95% of their salary plus benefits for nearly two years."

that ain't 'union' that's just ****in greedy. you sow the storm you reap the whirlwind

I'm kind of suprised the pro-union crowd hasn't jumped in here yet. I guess its sort of like the Wizard of Oz...."pay no attention to the man behind the curtain"

I despise unions straight up...my current job is unionized, but I refuse to join it, because I get the same pay/benefits as the union workers. All the union does is take money in monthly fees, and the next vote isnt for another 5 years....crap like that is pointless.

Unions are part of what's ruining the American economy and sending jobs overseas. I used to work at a steel mill (I was technically management so I wasn't union), and a lot of the line operators and crane operators would pull in 100k+ per year and all they had to do was sit around, look at computer screens, and press buttons for 10% of the day. The rest of the day was spent staring off into space or playing on their laptop. It was near impossible for them to be fired too. Of course, a lot of that lies with the retarded upper management, who would hire back convicts after they get out of jail with full seniority. But their union is very powerful, it is literally impossible to fire a union worker there for being incompetant.

I'm kind of suprised the pro-union crowd hasn't jumped in here yet. I guess its sort of like the Wizard of Oz...."pay no attention to the man behind the curtain"


What is there for the pro-union crowd to say that would be of any benefit on camaroz28.com?

Should'nt this be in the lounge?


Are ya happy now Chris? ;)

Unions are part of what's ruining the American economy and sending jobs overseas. .


Really? These free tade agreements dont have nothing to do with either I take it?:rolleyes:

FWIW.... Again... FWIW.... Unions do not have anything to do with our crumbling economy. But if your refering to how the fights the unions have faught to raise their members pay also raised the wages across the nation (fact!), And it is now all of a sudden hurting the nation because our president is incapable of doing his job correctly? Then sure, I'll agree to that! :D

Really? These free tade agreements dont have nothing to do with either I take it?:rolleyes:

FWIW.... Again... FWIW.... Unions do not have anything to do with our crumbling economy. But if your refering to how the fights the unions have faught to raise their members pay also raised the wages across the nation (fact!), And it is now all of a sudden hurting the nation because our president is incapable of doing his job correctly? Then sure, I'll agree to that! :D
That post made no sense.

What kind of work force do you think an employer would rather select their workers from, a unskilled yet highly paid one...or an unskilled and much lower paid one?

It's pretty simple.

I don't know why any company in their right mind would use union labor. The contracts give the workers too much power to jerk the company around. How can you go on strike from your job and still get paid?? If I tried that I would be fired and replaced.

I don't know why any company in their right mind would use union labor. The contracts give the workers too much power to jerk the company around. How can you go on strike from your job and still get paid?? If I tried that I would be fired and replaced.
Well if they don't use union labor and everybody else does, don't you think it will be a little difficult to find people willing to work for them?

Good thing he's a cartoonist, b/c his understanding of problems facing the Big-3 are skewed...(to be nice :) )
Like many armchair physicians, just looking at the symptoms, not the underlying causes...:rolleyes:

Solidarity Magazine..
The Real Crisis
Cover the Uninsured Week focuses on health insurance problems

While Social Security garners the headlines and attention, the real crisis devastating American working families gets little attention on Capitol Hill — health care costs.

For unions at the bargaining table, no other issue is as challenging as health insurance costs. And indications are it will get worse. With health care costs rising at double-digit rates each year, employers are getting squeezed. And they turn around and shift costs onto workers or drop coverage altogether. In 2004 employer health care insurance premiums jumped an average of 11.2 percent — more than five times the rate of inflation.

“It’s very serious,” said Rick Klingenberg, vice president of amalgamated UAW Local 710 that represents 24 plants in the Kansas City, Mo., area. “When we’re negotiating, every nickel you get on the wage package is offset on the health care.”

According to Families USA, a nonprofit group working for affordable health care, premiums paid by workers from 2000 to 2004 rose nearly three times faster than average U.S. earnings. Three-fourths of small businesses in this country offer no health insurance at all.

Cover the Uninsured Week, May 1-8, focuses attention on this national disgrace. Today 45 million Americans under 65, including 8 million children, are uninsured. That’s one of every seven Americans. They come from every community, ethnic group and income level. And since 2000 their numbers have grown more than 5 million.

“The current health care crisis cannot be solved at the bargaining table,” said UAW President Ron Gettelfinger. “We need a national health care plan that can bring relief for the millions of workers who have no insurance coverage, and for those hit with higher deductibles, monthly premium sharing and rising co-pays.”

The problem grows worse each year as health care premiums soar, fewer companies offer health care for their workers, and unions lose ground holding down health care costs for workers and retirees. And while union workers have a better chance of having insurance, the number of workers with insurance coverage is dwindling. In 2003 more than eight in 10 uninsured came from working families —- 70 percent from families with one or more full-time workers and 12 percent from families with part-time workers. Only 19 percent of uninsured Americans came from unemployed families.

Even those with insurance aren’t immune from high medical bills. The Journal of Health Affairs recently reported that half of the 4 million U.S. bankruptcies filed last year were by people who faced high medical bills from a recent health problem. And 75.7 percent of them had health insurance at the onset of their bankrupting illness.

Lack of health insurance isn’t a saving, it’s a public cost. People with minor medical problems don’t seek treatment until they are big problems, often handled in super expensive emergency rooms. Then those costs are shifted onto others through higher insurance rates and tax-funded public programs.

A single-payer national insurance program would make a huge difference. At $6,200 per capita, Americans already pay more for health care than any other country, but we are the only major industrialized country with no national health insurance. Not only would a single-payer plan insure every worker, it wouldn’t cost any more than we already pay.

According to several studies, including one by Physicians for a National Health Plan, national health insurance would pay for itself by eliminating the high overhead and profits of the private insurance industry, and reducing marketing costs.

Doctors and hospitals would be relieved of paperwork costs from doing business with multiple insurers with different rules. Even the Congressional Budget Office and the General Accountability Office agree that national health insurance could save enough on bureaucracy to cover all Americans for what we’re now spending.

“We need to activate our members and make sure they understand what is at stake,” said Klingenberg.

Sandra Davis

Job banks are a crime against any corporation. Period. The fact that the UAW EVER had the balls to bargain such a thing is ludicrous. The gravy train has ended, and its time to pay the piper. The UAW is not the root of all GM's problems...but it sure as hell remains a rather large one.

How can you go on strike from your job and still get paid?? The Union pays a small weekly wage, from a small, UAW donated fund, during a strike....

(This all reminds me of the, "Imports Rule and domestic cars are junk," crowd...strereotypes are killing us....I guess it's true, people fear what the DON'T understand.)

Job banks are a crime against any corporation. Period. The fact that the UAW EVER had the balls to bargain such a thing is ludicrous. The gravy train has ended, and its time to pay the piper. The UAW is not the root of all GM's problems...but it sure as hell remains a rather large one.What makes you think the Companies didn't want this as much as the Union..... Let's see, a few thousand, trained, employees, BOUND, to drop everything or everyjob, and come back to work on a moments notice, when they decide to increase production...sounds like a flexible workforce.
Like I said, they don't get paid until all benefits are depleted, then they get like 75% of their wage...plus whatever low wage job they're working. Many Laid off worker, can't find work in their field, w/o driving like 100-200 miles.

Yes, I can see where the millions it costs do this is a major benefit for any corporation :rolleyes:

If I get laid off at the bank, if they decide tomorrow they need to expand operations they bring in someone new, train them, and send them on their way. Why the HELL does this have to be any different?

Good thing he's a cartoonist, b/c his understanding of problems facing the Big-3 are skewed...(to be nice :) )
Like many armchair physicians, just looking at the symptoms, not the underlying causes...:rolleyes:


You quote SOLIDARITY MAGAZINE? Might as well pull quotes from The Nation.........

Can't you see your socialist/communist economic model doesn't work? I can't believe there even are any communists anymore, but that's the thing about life, it suprises me every day.

Trade: ‘Free’ or fair?
CAFTA vote was ‘betrayal’ all around

Ron Gettelfinger called it a betrayal to workers, farmers and ordinary citizens in the United States and Central America.

The Central American Free Trade Agreement, better known as CAFTA, passed the House by a razor-thin vote of 217-215 just after midnight July 28.

“CAFTA, like NAFTA before it, protects the profits of the pharmaceutical industry, agribusiness and other multinational companies,” UAW President Gettelfinger said. “But it offers no meaningful protection for working men and women, family farmers, consumers or the environment.”

CAFTA is patterned closely on NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement between Mexico, Canada and the United States which took effect 11 years ago, promising increased jobs, prosperity and economic growth.

It didn’t turn out that way.

The U.S. trade deficit with Canada and Mexico has exploded from $9 billion in 1993 to more than $111 billion in 2004. Hundreds of thousands of U.S. manufacturing jobs have been lost, and there is fierce pressure to lower wages and benefits for those jobs that remain.

Mexico’s workers didn’t benefit, either. The buying power of the average Mexican worker’s wage has fallen since NAFTA went into effect, so fewer good-paying jobs in Mexico are available for the growing labor force. One result is the flow of immigrants to the United States from Mexico has doubled since 1994.

With CAFTA, if jobs in Mexico are moved to Central America, then Mexico, in turn, will compete for even more jobs in the United States.

The end result: a merciless competition to see who can perform the most productive labor for the lowest possible wage.

Short of the majority needed to approve CAFTA, GOP leaders used bare-knuckled tactics to buy votes – in addition to promises of help in campaign fund raising.

“CAFTA did not win on the merits,” said Gettelfinger. “The Republican House leadership had to hold the vote open and President Bush had to twist arms and load up the energy and transportation bills with pork-barrel projects to win the narrowest possible victory.”

But the Democratic vote against CAFTA was the most unified ever against a trade agreement. Rep. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, led the effort to round up votes against the deal, along with Democratic Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland.

“Although the final outcome was disappointing, the UAW and other unions can be proud of the campaign we waged against CAFTA,” Gettelfinger said.

Jennifer JohnYep, them there Unions are the source of all our problems, yep...

If I get laid off at the bank, if they decide tomorrow they need to expand operations they bring in someone new, train them, and send them on their way. Why the HELL does this have to be any different?B/c we're not talking about a hand full of people, Jason, but hundreds, or even thousands, and if you know the industry...You need them to start yesterday, when you need them.

You quote SOLIDARITY MAGAZINE? Might as well pull quotes from The Nation.........Your article is obviously biased Chris, so what's the difference?

FWIW.... Again... FWIW.... Unions do not have anything to do with our crumbling economy. But if your refering to how the fights the unions have faught to raise their members pay also raised the wages across the nation (fact!), And it is now all of a sudden hurting the nation because our president is incapable of doing his job correctly? Then sure, I'll agree to that! :D

Perhaps you missed this part:

Statistics tell the tale. In his landmark study of the 2003 Big Five contract, Sean McLinden of the Center for Automotive Research (CAR) found that "in 1960, the UAW was 16 percent higher than the overall U.S. wage rate. . . . By 2003, the UAW average rate (with COLA) was 68-percent higher than the average manufacturing rate of $15.74 an hour."

B/c we're not talking about a hand full of people, Jason, but hundreds, or even thousands, and if you know the industry...You need them to start yesterday, when you need them.
Not true. You just don't wake up one day and decide to add a shift to a plant.

If an auto manufacturer decides it needs to significantly increase output at an existing plant, it takes months. Among other things, you have to get the supplier community ramped up to the new production levels, and eliminate bottlenecks in the current facility's production process before you come close to worrying about hiring additional assembly labour.

Alot of these workers are from facilities that had the production capacity though. Lets say GM needed to lay off 400 workers for 6 months because of low demand. Demand picks up and you need to add that shift back. Its cheaper to bring back an already trained workforce than to have to pay to train 400 more workers. You get low production out of the trainees and also have to pay someone to train them.

Of course with that said I think the job banks idea had good intentions but when you are talking 12,000 workers instead of 3-400 it can be very costly.

Most on this board are never happy. People supporting their families making $26/hr and contributing to the tax base of their local communites and people complain.

WalMart employees make $8-$10/hr and people complain Wal Mart doesnt pay enough to keep families out of poverty. I guess the happy median is everybody make $15/hr Comrade Stalin.

I think its another case of "they make more than I do" and thats not fair!

Not true. You just don't wake up one day and decide to add a shift to a plant.

If an auto manufacturer decides it needs to significantly increase output at an existing plant, it takes months. Among other things, you have to get the supplier community ramped up to the new production levels, and eliminate bottlenecks in the current facility's production process before you come close to worrying about hiring additional assembly labour.Well, I'm Laid Off again right now, so, I got some experience about what I'm saying. We dropped production by a little over 50 units per day, and that sent nearly 500 people home for the holidays...Ofcourse, after the first of the year, orders are expected to ramp back up, and we'll just resume where we left off. No retraining, kinda like we never left. The last time I was off for over 18 months, and went back hitting the ground running. Just like they'd expected me too.:)
I'm trying to understand the confusion, most people have theories of how things should work, but the realities of Autoworking are far from ideal.

Why you don't hear too much from the pro-union crowd here is because we're a very small minority. We're tired of trying to make anti-union people see the benefits of a union. Because they're on the outside, they will never understand.
It's very obvious that most on this board are conservative, pro-big business, republicans. They really don't care about workers' rights, living wages, and the middle class. The ironic part is most on this board will never attain the success that they believe they can with our system because the REAL big business people will make sure you never succeed. It's in their best interest to keep the majority down and them on top. And yet you people keep supporting big business. You don't get it. Big business will crush you like a bug if it wants.
So the unions get just a LITTLE bit more of level playing field. Just a very little bit. And we're considered communists or socialists because we believe that with all the money a company makes, they can compensate it's workers a little better. You calling me a communist/socialist is infuriating and offensive! I'm no more one of those than any of you!
I'm definately for workers rights and regulation of big business. One just has to look around to see corporate scandal after corporate scandal, corruption and ineptness in the government, etc. And yet you still believe that business should be able to operate unchecked (currently, big business is the government and vice versa).
Bottom line is, people believe that a union workers' compensation is not fair. Why? Because of level of education? Hey, some people are just not cut out for college for a number of reasons. What if they're flat out dumb and school just didn't click for them? Should these people be forced into poverty because they didn't attend college. Or maybe because you believe they didn't earn it? And why are you dwelling on it so much?

I'm rambling because I'm tired and totally p***ed off at union-bashers.
We've made good point after good point in other posts and they fall on deaf ears. I guess if you haven't gotten it by now, you never will.
And I agree with the poster above who asked that shouldn't this topic be in the lounge.

**** unions. All mine does is increase its dues every year, not wages.

That's ok, just keep the Union Labor up. We have a division with Automation products and the super high Union wages drive up interest and sales in Automation. Increase it to $100/hr please! :)

Guys, of course those IN a union tend to LIKE a union. They help you out. Why wouldn't you like them?

To be objective though? I went to college for 6 years, and have an Economics degree and an MBA. And I make less than the guys sweeping the floor at UAW plants. I make less than the guys cleaning the toilets. I also pay way more for my healthcare, and have to work until I'm at least 65 (probably 70 at the rate Social Security is going) to get my check I'll need to live...not some "30 and out" bullsh!t. Granted, I'm only 25, but still...the guy cleaning the toilet at the bank probably makes $8/hr, not $26!

With that said, no wonder those in a union like it, and those outside are saying "what the f***!!!!!"

I think unions have crossed the line. Their purpose is to defend workers basic rights, not desires.

A union should make sure that an unskilled worker isn't paid so little that they cannot sustain their basic needs. Since there is no regulation in america this is important because business is about profit and lower wages mean more profit. A business can take advantage of workers. Therefore it is essential that it is made sure people can't be paid too little.
On the other hand an unskilled worker should not be able to buy a nice sports car.
The whole purpose of aquiring a skill is so that you can give the world skill that is in demand. The more your skill is in demand, usually the more you will make.
An unskilled worker does not have a skill...anyone can do it, there is no demand for his job since there is a large supply of people to do it.
Unions are also essential to make sure there are no worker abuses, such as poor working environments, dangerous condition, too long hours, etc. This was VERY important a long time ago. What unions are doing is going too far. Instead of making sure that workers rights are respected, they are making sure that workers desires are respected. A person operating a forklift should be enough to live in a small house or apartment, have some fun, feed himself. Not so much that he can make the same living as someone with 7 years university education with a job in demand. When you look at it this reminds you of communism where people make the same, doesn't matter what kind of work your doing or your skills required.
Unions doing this will hurt an economy functioning on capitalism, because in doing this unions are sort of working against capitalism, and that hurts the economy. Capitalism is based on motivation, when you don't have to work hard for your money, you lose drive (this could be seen in the USSR when one person could work harder than the other and still make the same). When you see unskilled labourers making more than your skilled trait, you lose motivation. Unions are important but they have to go back to their roots and remember what their essential purpose is while evolving with our society.

Jason, you're right, you're 25 and the baby boomer making $25/hr sweeping floors is like 55...and don't be jealous, those jobs are disappearing like Free Beer!..
I think we, as a nation, are placing way too much emphasis on education = $$$. There are many jobs out there that don't require much education, but pay way more than an entry level job like yours. Just see what you make with your Masters' with about 5-6 years experience in your field...You'll forget all about those sub-$25/hr days.
My wife has it worse than you, for one she's well, a woman, and she has a Master's in Buisness/Global Mgmt, minor in Accounting etc...and can't find a job making more than $17/hr.
Why??
B/c the Outsourcing and Downsizing has washed many a seasoned veteran in Educated fields, back into those once, intermediate level jobs.
The solution is not as simple as some like to think.

On the other hand an unskilled worker should not be able to buy a nice sports car. D@mn, and I was looking forward to a New Camaro...
:(

I'm kind of suprised the pro-union crowd hasn't jumped in here yet. I guess its sort of like the Wizard of Oz...."pay no attention to the man behind the curtain"

OK, I'm not part of a pro-union crowd, and I think unions have pushed their luck too much in recent years, but what the heck...I'll take the bait. :lol:


The author takes this to a political twist in the very 1st sentence with his "liberal" swipe before he even tells us what he's talking about. He even whines that papers have focused on "Republican fat cats like Ken Lay". He gripes about "Democratic" union bosses. Henry Payne an objective writer? Yeah, and I wear pink underwear.

If he want's to compare wages of the UAW to something, why compare it to third world countries? I wouldn't work for those wages. I wouldn't expect any of you to. Let's compare compensation to other 1st world nations. Germany. Japan. France..... maybe that last one's a bad example. The point is that paying someone who has been assembling cars for many, many years a good wage is not only fair, but it's right.

The UAW had over 1,500,000 members in the late 70s. Today, it's just over 650K. In short, UAW membership is about 40% of what it once was. And it's going to get ALOT smaller in the next few years. As for the $65 grass mower, it's presented as if this is the norm. Do we know if perhaps this is a position and pay that went to a person who formerly worked on an assembly line for many years, but due to age or injury and a desire to work, he's assigned to mowing grass instead? The author conviently leaves this info out.

To make matters worse, the guy has the balls for critisizing the prospect of bailouts for legacy costs. I guess we should simply say to all those old geezers that put in 30 & 40 to a company, too bad your company went under... you're on your own.

New employees hired in a UAW job make between $14 and $20 per hour, depending on position and experience. roughly the range of a bouncer at a popular club, an assistant manager at Dennys, or a paygrade E3 fortunate enough to be working only 40 hours per week.

I'm sorry for some of you Phds who feel that's unfair. Next time get the your Phd if banking, or take up a trade. The truth is that uneducated, & unwashed plumbers and electricians can make 100 grand a year. 72% of all adults don't have college degrees, and it's not mandatory in many jobs. Thats life. Be glad you're in a job you like instead of worrying what everyone else is making.



GM's Craft Center makes SSRs. Ther is a 300+ day supply of SSRs now on lots. Most of the people that work there are sitting at home. Should they be kicked to the streets with no compensation because management decided to do an SSR instead of using the money to perhaps do a redesign on the "W" car? GM decided to close down the Ste Therese plant because they didn't plan ahead enough to make a 5th gen Camaro. Would it be right to cut everyone loose, with nothing more than a handshake?

It's easy to sit in an armchair, and point to the lowly workers as the source of all your problems. But when you run a company, you have a responsibility to your employees. Not just because you don't want them to sabotage your product, but because it's the right thing to do.



Not sayingby any streach of the imagination that the UAW should skate away worry free from all of this. The UAW benefitted from the fat years. Now it's time for them to kick in their share to get everyone back in the game. They did it for Chrysler and Ford in the 80s, and again in recent years as both companies got back on track.

If GM keeps hammering unions for all their trouble (and ignoring a lack of competitive product), and of course there's going to be resistance.

The author of that article was more intrested in applying the old tired political debate to a situation that has nothing to do with politics. The last time I checked, there were plenty of Republican voting autoworkers too.

Yeah, and I wear pink underwear.

.


:eek:









j/k. Good points Guy.

Well it looks like a combination of bad management and bad wage scales.

I suppose if GM had made all the right strategic decisions in last 20 years, the union labor could have kept on living high on the hog well into the 21st century.

As it is, their wage rates left no room for GM or Ford or Delphi to stumble. And they get to reap the benefit. They will be out of a job.

I have a distinct feeling the average GM/Ford design engineer make less than the average assembly line worker. Guess which one adds more value to the product(or can take away more when the "it's good enough attitude" takes over).

Originally posted by guionM:
New employees hired in a UAW job make between $14 and $20 per hour, depending on position and experience. roughly the range of a bouncer at a popular club, an assistant manager at Dennys, or a paygrade E3 fortunate enough to be working only 40 hours per week.

I'm sorry for some of you Phds who feel that's unfair. Next time get the your Phd if banking, or take up a trade. The truth is that uneducated, & unwashed plumbers and electricians can make 100 grand a year. 72% of all adults don't have college degrees, and it's not mandatory in many jobs. Thats life. Be glad you're in a job you like instead of worrying what everyone else is making.:bow:
Some people get an education, so they don't have to do these kind of jobs, even at the same salary. Some don't b/c, Life happens........

Guy, this isn't in anyway a criticism of you, but you covered just about all the major points I was going to touch on. So here goes....

Yeah, and I wear pink underwear.
Not sure I wanted to know that :)



If he want's to compare wages of the UAW to something, why compare it to third world countries? I wouldn't work for those wages.
I believe he compared it to non-union US workers, but that was like 4 pages ago...


As for the $65 grass mower, it's presented as if this is the norm. Do we know if perhaps this is a position and pay that went to a person who formerly worked on an assembly line for many years, but due to age or injury and a desire to work, he's assigned to mowing grass instead? The author conviently leaves this info out.

Ever hear of collective bargaining agreement? That means tha EVERYONE gets the EXACT same deal wheather they bust their butt on the line or clean toilets.


GM's Craft Center makes SSRs. Ther is a 300+ day supply of SSRs now on lots. Most of the people that work there are sitting at home. Should they be kicked to the streets with no compensation because management decided to do an SSR instead of using the money to perhaps do a redesign on the "W" car? GM decided to close down the Ste Therese plant because they didn't plan ahead enough to make a 5th gen Camaro. Would it be right to cut everyone loose, with nothing more than a handshake?

As a mechanic I'd be out on the street the minute my employer decides he can't afford me (work slowdown or whatever). So, whats different if you happen to work in an autoplant esp as an unskilled worker?

It's easy to sit in an armchair, and point to the lowly workers as the source of all your problems. But when you run a company, you have a responsibility to your employees. Not just because you don't want them to sabotage your product, but because it's the right thing to do.

Not sayingby any streach of the imagination that the UAW should skate away worry free from all of this. The UAW benefitted from the fat years. Now it's time for them to kick in their share to get everyone back in the game. They did it for Chrysler and Ford in the 80s, and again in recent years as both companies got back on track.

You're right it's easy :) thats why we're all having this discussion!! There definatly should be some responsibility to you're employees, but if for whatever reason their job is no longer needed, wheather by redundency/work slowdown or your own incompetance, why do you deserve to receive a higher wage than most ppl for doing nothing?

If you want to see the difference in the work environment between a UAW/ non-UAW plant, go spend some time at a big 5 plant. Talk with all the people you want to. Then go to the new Hyundi plant in Alabama (my dad went there as he is an engineer at a supplier) or the plant I worked at while in school (which has since gone union and EVERYONE's wages dropped down to the entry level wage, yup unions are good for the workers). Noone has dilly-dally time and when the line does stop, everyone picks up a broom and starts sweeping, none of this "ain't my job, call the floor sweeper guy" crap
[/rant]
sorry its late and i need to get some sleep so that I'm not late to work and get fired.

Guys, of course those IN a union tend to LIKE a union. They help you out. Why wouldn't you like them?

To be objective though? I went to college for 6 years, and have an Economics degree and an MBA. And I make less than the guys sweeping the floor at UAW plants. I make less than the guys cleaning the toilets. I also pay way more for my healthcare, and have to work until I'm at least 65 (probably 70 at the rate Social Security is going) to get my check I'll need to live...not some "30 and out" bullsh!t. Granted, I'm only 25, but still...the guy cleaning the toilet at the bank probably makes $8/hr, not $26!

With that said, no wonder those in a union like it, and those outside are saying "what the f***!!!!!"

Yep, it would be like asking Saddam Hussein if he liked dictators. Of course he's going to say yes

Ok, I can see the Job Bank thing as a good thing, bcuz no one can forsee the good times and the bad times for a vehical on the line....BUT, why get paid 60k dollars that requires on the job training and no form of higher education? I currently work at a job that requires no formal education and only on the job training. Does that entitle me to more then the ~21k I would make if I were full time? My buddy is an electrician and doesn't even make the kind of money that a UAW worker makes and his job requires a lot more formal education, that the Union gives at no cost to him. Why does someone get paid overtime for more then 8hrs a day, time and a half on saturdays, and double time on Sundays (per someone at a local UAW plant)? When did saturdays and sundays become special?

These are the kind of things that don't make sense to all the non-union people. What makes the UAW so special to get the privlages when others have gone to school to learn their craft and don't even make anything close to what a UAW worker does.

Lastly, it's was like my dad said the other day, "health coverage doesn't pay the bills". The new job he is looking at wants to pay him a little while paying a big chunk of his healthcare cost. Thats great...if your visiting the doctor a lot. The UAW is wanting their cake and eat it too with wage increases and healthcare coverage, but why? Just bcuz they can or they will go on strike if they don't get it? Talk about pitching a fit when you don't get your way. When I did that as a kid...well, I guess you get the idea of what my parents did.

Why you don't hear too much from the pro-union crowd here is because we're a very small minority. We're tired of trying to make anti-union people see the benefits of a union. Because they're on the outside, they will never understand.
It's very obvious that most on this board are conservative, pro-big business, republicans. They really don't care about workers' rights, living wages, and the middle class. The ironic part is most on this board will never attain the success that they believe they can with our system because the REAL big business people will make sure you never succeed. It's in their best interest to keep the majority down and them on top. And yet you people keep supporting big business. You don't get it. Big business will crush you like a bug if it wants.
So the unions get just a LITTLE bit more of level playing field. Just a very little bit. And we're considered communists or socialists because we believe that with all the money a company makes, they can compensate it's workers a little better. You calling me a communist/socialist is infuriating and offensive! I'm no more one of those than any of you!
I'm definately for workers rights and regulation of big business. One just has to look around to see corporate scandal after corporate scandal, corruption and ineptness in the government, etc. And yet you still believe that business should be able to operate unchecked (currently, big business is the government and vice versa).
Bottom line is, people believe that a union workers' compensation is not fair. Why? Because of level of education? Hey, some people are just not cut out for college for a number of reasons. What if they're flat out dumb and school just didn't click for them? Should these people be forced into poverty because they didn't attend college. Or maybe because you believe they didn't earn it? And why are you dwelling on it so much?

I'm rambling because I'm tired and totally p***ed off at union-bashers.
We've made good point after good point in other posts and they fall on deaf ears. I guess if you haven't gotten it by now, you never will.
And I agree with the poster above who asked that shouldn't this topic be in the lounge.

Just because a company makes so much in profits, why does that give workers doing very little or doing unskilled jobs the right to a fat pay check?

If you owned a small company and all of a sudden started doing 5 million a year in sales, would you jack up the office managers salary to $120,000/yr? Or make all of the employess earn higher then standard rates? Fair compensation is one thing, over compensation is another. Thats the power that a union gives to the worker who does not deserve it!

Guys, of course those IN a union tend to LIKE a union. They help you out. Why wouldn't you like them?

Precisely, I was waiting for someone to make that point. Consistently, the only people that defend unions in this forum are actual union members.

Asking union members their opinion of unions is like asking the family of a murder victim to decide the sentence for the murderer. There's a reason we have impartial judges in courts. And there's a reason a non-union outsider can see unions for what they really are better than a union-member.

Jason, you're right, you're 25 and the baby boomer making $25/hr sweeping floors is like 55...and don't be jealous, those jobs are disappearing like Free Beer!..
I think we, as a nation, are placing way too much emphasis on education = $$$. There are many jobs out there that don't require much education, but pay way more than an entry level job like yours. Just see what you make with your Masters' with about 5-6 years experience in your field...You'll forget all about those sub-$25/hr days.
My wife has it worse than you, for one she's well, a woman, and she has a Master's in Buisness/Global Mgmt, minor in Accounting etc...and can't find a job making more than $17/hr.
Why??
B/c the Outsourcing and Downsizing has washed many a seasoned veteran in Educated fields, back into those once, intermediate level jobs.
The solution is not as simple as some like to think.

Age has nothing to do with it. Everywhere else in the country a job has limits on what the worker makes. Once you reach that limit you are promoted or you stay at that rate. If there is a 55 year old man still sweeping floors then he obviously did not work hard enough to move up. Why reward lazy with a raise each year? Because if you dont the rest of your workforce will strike? Yeah, thats fair.

The way a union works and the way it treats its members is very similar to communism. 40% of union members vote Republican by the way, but 100% of union dues go to Democrat candidates. Yeah, that's real democratic.

Within a union there is zero competition, zero market incentives. No incentives for working harder than the next guy, because its all based on seniority, not how good of a job you do. Collective bargaining? Collective anything hints of socialism to me.

Somebody explain to me how Unions are anything but insulation against the free market.

Forget it...nothing about a union has ever appealed to me. Let me go out there in the marketplace and compete on my own. If I work hard enough I can do better than 90% of the people out there...aka I don't need a union to protect me from "the man".

If I think I don't make enough money at a job, guess what...I LOOK FOR A BETTER JOB. If I'm good enough then I'll be successful. That's how the job market is supposed to work, but the article clearly demonstrates how the UAW not only totally FUBAR's the wage scales and throws labor markets out of whack but it seriously screws with a corporation's ability to be competitive globally.

Did you guys not read the end of the article where Sen. Clinton wants tariffs on import cars? Do you realize that would only make things worse? Of course not.

You have a corporation that at one time was the heart and sole of America, that is teetering on bankruptcy, and the union boys are DEFENDING their outrageously good compensation packages. Its never enough is it?

Age has nothing to do with it. Everywhere else in the country a job has limits on what the worker makes. Once you reach that limit you are promoted or you stay at that rate. If there is a 55 year old man still sweeping floors then he obviously did not work hard enough to move up. Why reward lazy with a raise each year? Because if you dont the rest of your workforce will strike? Yeah, thats fair.

Exactly, What 90Rocz fails to understand is that the way jobs work in America is we don't pay you based on your worth as a human being, we pay (or we're supposed to, in non-union fairytale land) what the JOB is worth.

The economic output value of the work being done is what determines the wage. No way in hell mowing the grass and cleaning toilets is worth $65/hr total compensation. Its unskilled, and a high school student would do it for 1/10th of that. Its an artificial wage not tied to what the market will bear.

FWIW.... Again... FWIW.... Unions do not have anything to do with our crumbling economy.

ARE YOU BLIND? The DJIA is at a 4.5 year high, the US Economy grew at 4.3% last quarter, unemployment rate is steady despite all the Katrina displacees, manufacturing sector is actually GROWING, Oct new home sales set a record, gasoline is down 30% vs 3 mos ago, the dollar is gaining value vs. the Yen and Euro, and you think our economy is crumbling?

Just the fact the Fed keeps jacking up interest rates should demonstrate the economy is in high-gear. They do that to restrict the money supply and cool the economy off a bit so we don't have a replay of the late 90's tech bubble collapse.

I'm continually amazed at the lack of knowledge among the public of how the economy actually works.

And since when is this lounge material? This thread is discussing the health of the domestic automotive industry as affected by the current labor situation. Its entirely appropriate for this forum IMO.

The way I see it, you have greed at every level. There are greedy big business executives giving themselves enormous salaries, pensions, and severance package, even when the company they work for is tanking. You have greedy employees who think that because they clean the toilet for a big company, they should live like Bill Gates; and they are short-sighted enough to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs because they want more. And you have greedy union bosses, with their own huge pay cheques and perks, who put their own needs far above the needs of either the union members or the companies they work for.

Did you guys not read the end of the article where Sen. Clinton wants tariffs on import cars? Do you realize that would only make things worse?




Beings your ALWAYS right, I would LOVE to know why this is a bad idea. I would not for one second, Want to think I know anything.

How could it make matters worse then it already is.

And why on earth, (Beings you LOVE unions SO MUCH) You keep posting about them?

Chris, I agree with almost everything you say. I do think that we should tax imports as much as other countries tax our exports though. How can they complain if it is an equal amount? I don't like having in unequal balance of trade in favor of countries like China.

Exactly, What 90Rocz fails to understand is that the way jobs work in America is we don't pay you based on your worth as a human being, we pay (or we're supposed to, in non-union fairytale land) what the JOB is worth.For the record...I have NEVER, nor well I ever be or admit to being Communist....Grow up Chris.

And you know JACK, about a UAW Facility, how hard the labor is, even sweeping floors...so why don't you show off your "learned" Economic b/s somewhere else.

For the record...I have NEVER, nor well I ever be or admit to being Communist....Grow up Chris.

And you know JACK, about a UAW Facility, how hard the labor is, even sweeping floors...so why don't you show off your "learned" Economic b/s somewhere else.


Give me a break. Sweeping floors is hard? You can take a mentally deficient person and train them to do that with ease.

we pay (or we're supposed to, in non-union fairytale land) what the JOB is worth.Not ALL jobs require, higher thought and high tech training to be hard, PHYSICALLY hard, fast paced and continuous, hard.
Give me a break. Sweeping floors is hard? You can take a mentally deficient person and train them to do that with ease.Yes, you can train practically anyone to sweep, the physical motions of sweeping. BUT...that doesn't mean, anyone, will be able to do it at a high speed pace, for hours at a time...and requires a certain level of physical fitness.
You all have this picture of a guy, leizurely walking around with a broom in his hands..:lol: that's the kinda thing that kills me.
My department alone is over 1/4 MILE LONG!..and over 100 yards wide...and boy does it get dirty!..I wouldn't take his job for a $5/hr increase.:lol:
You guys are clueless...by all the rhetoric, anyways.;)

The problem with the UAW and what its members get paid is NOT in line with what the market bears for similar jobs. That is what is causing the problem, and that was the point of the original artical.

What makes you think the Companies didn't want this as much as the Union..... Let's see, a few thousand, trained, employees, BOUND, to drop everything or everyjob, and come back to work on a moments notice, when they decide to increase production...sounds like a flexible workforce.
Like I said, they don't get paid until all benefits are depleted, then they get like 75% of their wage...plus whatever low wage job they're working. Many Laid off worker, can't find work in their field, w/o driving like 100-200 miles.
say what again??? drop everything?? you mean like you're expeced to stop right in the middle of watching the game on tv while playing poker and hurry on over to actually work for money?

wow you're completely right! why shouldn't a company be thankful for such a thing...

Here's a hint for you. If you're in such a dire situation that you can't find work in your field within 100-200 miles then GM SHOULDN'T be paying you money. The absolute truth is every one of those workers would "drop everything" and come back to work a week ago if they WEREN'T being payed to sit on their ass and do nothing in the mean time. And you know what else? They would be no less qualified to return to work if not payed to sit on their ass, to boot. So what's the advantage to GM for having a jobs bank again?

I mean, do you have GM pay someone to wipe your ass too?

You know what, you shouldn't even speak on behalf of the UAW because if your "ideas" and your tone are ANY indication of what the UAW is like, then its probably much worse than we all understand it to be.

PUT DOWN THE KOOL-AID.

Not ALL jobs require, higher thought and high tech training to be hard, PHYSICALLY hard, fast paced and continuous, hard.
Yes, you can train practically anyone to sweep, the physical motions of sweeping. BUT...that doesn't mean, anyone, will be able to do it at a high speed pace, for hours at a time...and requires a certain level of physical fitness.
You all have this picture of a guy, leizurely walking around with a broom in his hands..:lol: that's the kinda thing that kills me.
My department alone is over 1/4 MILE LONG!..and over 100 yards wide...and boy does it get dirty!..I wouldn't take his job for a $5/hr increase.:lol:
You guys are clueless...by all the rhetoric, anyways.;)
I used to do just such a job... and I can tell you it's not as "hard" as you make it out to be. In fact the union people got upset with me because I actually did TOO GOOD of a job since I'm not used to working under a union. You probably don't want to be 55 and still doing it, but hey if your back is all you've got and you're unwilling or unable to put your mind to better use, then why should you be afforded a lifestyle you don't deserve?

You know the funny thing? The union sent me a threatning letter a month AFTER I left the job demanding I pay my dues I owed that turned out to be like 20% of all my earnings. They never saw a single cent from me. They can take me to court for all I care, I'm not giving that mob my hard earned money for nothing.

People arguing and bickering over something that is out of almost everyone's control is not appropriate for this forum.

Cool it.