Union sets strike deadline at GM

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The United Auto Workers union set an 11 a.m. ET Monday strike deadline for its 73,000 members at General Motors late Sunday night, although talks between the union and the company were still ongoing.

The union has kept its members on the job at the automaker on an hour-by-hour contract extension since the previous pact with GM (Charts, Fortune 500) expired Sept. 14. But Sunday, as talks were reportedly making progress, the union leadership felt the need to call for a strike.

The company said in a statement that it was still hopeful of reaching a deal to avoid a shutdown. A company official told CNNMoney.com at 5:20 a.m. ET that the talks were continuing.

"The 2007 contract talks involved complex, difficult issues that affect the job security of our us work force and the long-term viability of our company," said GM spokesman Dan Flores. "We are fully committed to working with the UAW to develop solutions together to address the competitive challenges facing General Motors. We will continue focusing our efforts on reaching an agreement as soon as possible."

The strike call does not affect operations at Ford Motor (Charts, Fortune 500) or Chrysler Group. The union has granted those companies more formal extensions that require a three-day notice to end while they focused their efforts on reaching an agreement with GM.

Neither side would comment on the sticking point in the talks, although GM has been seeking to close its cost gap with nonunion automakers such as Toyota Motor (Charts) and Honda Motor (Charts) by shifting $51 billion in future retiree health care costs to a union-controlled trust fund.

Chris "Tiny" Sherwood, president of Local 652 in Lansing, Mich., said he got a call with the strike deadline just before 11 p.m. ET Sunday. He had not had any signal that there were problems before that call.

"They just said unless we're told otherwise, we're on strike as of 11 a.m.," he said "I guess they hit some kind of impasse. We'll be ready."

Sherwood's local about 3,000 of more than 4,500 members working at a GM plant in Lansing.

While most analysts have said that a long strike at General Motors would be a crippling blow for the automaker's efforts to return its North American operations to profitability, the automaker is probably in relatively good position to weather a short strike.

David Healy, analyst with Burnham Securities, said he believes GM could take a strike of up to a month without a significant problem.

"It's sort of an odd thing, the first thing that happens with an automaker in case of a strike is their cash increases, as their payroll stops, and they still keep collecting cash for the cars that have been shipped," said Healy.

He believes the two sides are close enough that a strike, if it does in fact start, will be a short one.

"Days, not weeks or months, that would be my guess," he said.

If there is a strike, it would be the nation's largest since 87,000 workers at Verizon Communications (Charts, Fortune 500) walked off the job in August 2000, but that action did not shut down the company.

GM was last hit by a strike at its Flint, Mich., locals in 1998, a work stoppage by only 9,200 workers that was felt across most of GM's North American operations since they couldn't get the parts they needed to keep making cars and trucks.

The last strike by more than 70,000 workers that shut down a company's operations was the 1997 strike by 185,000 Teamsters at United Parcel Service. (Charts, Fortune 500)


Discuss.

Free Press story - http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070924/BUSINESS01/709240367&theme=AUTOTALKS072007

My guess: Ron's just posing. I bet they've got a deal -- or 99% of one, anyway -- and this is just the opening act of the long process of selling it to his membership.

Michigan has plenty of people out of work that would love a job, let them go on strike.

Unless they already have a deal, this will be comical when 11 rolls around here and they 'change' their mind about going on strike.
At that point they lost what little clout they still have if GM see's they won't even follow through on threats to strike.

Assuming this isn't just a ploy on their part, should the UAW be stupid enough to pursue a strike, they will very likely be signing their own death warrant and one for GM domestic manufacturing as well.

It’s time for the UAW to stop worrying about their “power” and actually do what is best for their industry and the members they take money from each paycheck.

Stupid unions. They need to get with modern times and quit living in the past.

I hope you have your flame suit on, lol.

(and I agree with you)

They are protecting workers who have for years received high wages and benefits that most of the rest of America -- "workers" and white-collar folks alike -- just don't get anymore. Things like paid private health care for retirees are just unheard-of most everywhere else. At the same time, I get why they don't want to give these things up, and I sympathize, but... reality just isn't with them anymore.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070924/auto_talks.html?.v=22

Sweet I love a good train wreck.

Surprised there is no official announcement here yet. UAW is on strike and people are picketing. :(

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070924/auto_talks.html?.v=22

Sweet I love a good train wreck.

Dang it! Seconds late!

Yet another example of the reason why we DON'T need unions.

This is interesting. We'll se how this plays out. I wonder how long will it last. And I wonder how long it would take before GM tried hiring replacement workers. I bet it would have to go on for quite a while.

Heard this on the radio not too long ago...

The last time the UAW went on a strike this big, it was in the 1970s.

At that time, the union was collecting dues from 1.5 million members.

Today, the UAW is collecting alot less dues from a mere 538,000 members.

Health care costs increases since the 1970s has increased at a far greater rate than inflation has, and has acceletated even more the past few years.

After 1 week, company financed health care benefits stop, and it falls to the unions.

GM isn't paying workers while they are on strike. While on strike, workers rely on the union for allowances.

GM has enough stockpiled vehicles to last at least a month.

GM has enough stockpiled cash to last at least a month.

GM may actually save money if the strike lasts a month since labor cost will drop dramatically, stockpiled vehicles will be able to be sold off (likely without incentives since there is no pressure to both clear the lots and keep factories going).



So, you have the biggest strike since the 1970s being attempted by a union with 1/3 of the members it had back then, with health care costs probally about 6-10 times more, against a company that has been losing money the past few years that (ironically) has a pretty large cash stockpile that is being handed an opportunity to clear alot of cars at a model year changeover at the same time they are trying to essentially end incentives on the vehicles it sells.

Doesn't take alot to see how this is going to end up if it continues.

The UAW can handle roughly a month before they begin to suffer damage (cash & image) that's going to be hard to recover from. GM seems to be set up to handle at least a 1 month shutdown, and may actually see benefit in shutting down at least a month before diminishing returns starts about a month and a half.


The UAW has fair wages (unlike many here, I don't think they're overpaid). Also, the UAW bears no responsibility in any of the US automakers current problems. They didn't make Ford kill off the line of new cars on the drawing boards at the start of the decade. They didn't hire the marketing department at Chrysler whose policy was ignore the change in the US market and keep making vehicles that dealers couldn't sell, and they didn't entice GM to hand the car market over to Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, and every other import in favor of trucks (despite it's venerability to fuel price jumps).

Job security, good working conditions, and fair pay is the basis & the DNA of the union. Although there may be some here that feel that they simply have a degree, they should be paid more and have better coverage than someone working in a craft or in manual labor. I strongly disagree. There is no reason for UAW or any union to abandon their basics for existing because the very nature of business is to get more at less cost. Because labor is usually the largest share of cost in any manufacturing business (from airplanes to pizzas), every time cost cutting comes up, whether for survival or simply to get bigger bonuses, labor is always going to be the first target.

But at the same time, the UAW isn't anywhere near as powerful as they used to be, even 5 years ago. Although Canada's currency now equals that of the US, Canadian national health care makes production there cheaper. To compete against countries that have companies that don't health care coverage in their budgets because their governments do, there's going to need to be some type of compromises. They have to admit that the Job Bank needs to be eliminated and those on it found other jobs or removed & compensated. Workplace rules can no longer be rigid. Workers can no longer do a single job, and need to have a separate UAW member sweep up after them or tend to the outside landscaping.

Although the UAW didn't create the current mess that Ford's in the middle of, GM's crawling out of, or that prompted Daimler to sell most all intrest in Chrysler, they have to realize that this is one fight that they really can't win. I know that they need to save face, flex their muscles, and do something to keep their offices. There are plenty of vocal (and quite honestly, stupid) lower and mid-level union officers who are more confrontational than the national leaders are, but they have to put on a show for them.

This is either going to be a turning point for the UAW or their disinegration. They will never disappear, they won't vanish. But if they aren't careful, they will soon be so minute in numbers that even todays small fraction of their former selves will seem like a massive army of the good old days.

They better play carefully & think fully every move they make from this point on.

They may not be overpaid in an absolute sense. It is hard, skilled work.

But they are definitely overpaid (and overbenefited) in a relative sense. Nobody, but nobody, gets (for instance) paid private health insurance in retirement anymore. Very few companies offer both an extremely generous 401k AND a rich defined benefit plan. Very few companies offer lavish health insurance with no copay.

The world the UAW wants to live in doesn't exist any more, plain and simple. I sympathize, as I said, but it's gone. And a strike isn't going to bring it back.

If the strike drags out and depletes the UAW cash reserve, will they have enough to even consider a strike against Ford, or Chrysler?

They may not be overpaid in an absolute sense. It is hard, skilled work.

But they are definitely overpaid (and overbenefited) in a relative sense. Nobody, but nobody, gets (for instance) paid private health insurance in retirement anymore. Very few companies offer both an extremely generous 401k AND a rich defined benefit plan. Very few companies offer lavish health insurance with no copay.

The world the UAW wants to live in doesn't exist any more, plain and simple. I sympathize, as I said, but it's gone. And a strike isn't going to bring it back.

This is one of those compromises that the UAW has to accept, and I agree with you 100%. Even newly retired military doesn't recieve 100% free health coverage anymore (unless it's a service related illness or injury). Sure, we pay based on income, and it's cheaper than what I pay for oil changes each year, but I still pay something.

My point is that while I don't agree with the union bashers that blame the unions for everything wrong with the auto industry, and that the UAW has done alot and gone the extra mile over the past number of years to help Detroit, if they don't want to go the way of the textile Unions, they need to think their way through this.




* For those who don't know, the textile unions also ended up in competition with non union southern plants and then foreign competition, and eventially became so decimated they were forced to merge with another clothing union, which shrunk and had to merge with another union.

Today, what used to be the textile union was adsorbed into Unite Here, which is a union of hotel, food service, casino, and laundry workers in both the United States and Canada that combined has a membership slightly smaller than even the UAW.

Right now the UAW is at a point where it will continue as a independent and fairly strong and respected union, or it will be decimated and eventually be adsorbed into a union of outcasts who individually shrunk to a point where it would be impossible for them to stand alone... and still most of the people in their respective fields are non-union.

Just like "Unite Here".

Michigan has plenty of people out of work that would love a job, let them go on strike.

North Carolina would love to offer GM a tax package to build a new plant down here too!!! It's a law now in our state!!! :D

We are a "right to work state" and we don't have much legal support for union shops because of it. We are educated, we work hard, and we work cheap (compared to other areas in the US that is).

[Yeah... I know I know... it's pimping. See the "incentives" thread from last week.
Well, if they are going to take my tax money and give it to industry, I'd like to try to get something back for it. :shrug:]

What's funny is this... right now, I am working 7 miles from my home, yet I am working with about 70% of a team that is all from up north... 3 from Ohio (Lear Corp), 1 from Michigan (Delphi), 2 from GM proper in Detroit, and a slew of others... all these guys are moving their families down south because of the climate and the work available, and all of them have just come down in the last 6-12 months.
It's like there's a mass exodus from up there!!! :D

The strike is off, talks are back on.
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUKN2429437020070924?rpc=44

The strike is off, talks are back on.
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUKN2429437020070924?rpc=44

I don't think this means the strike is off...I think it is just stating that they are back at the table...while the strike continues...can someone confirm?

The talks were never "off". The strike will continue while the two sides negotiate.

The talks were never "off". The strike will continue while the two sides negotiate.
Gotcha.

I could use a job that pays $20+ with only a High school diploma.

The UAW has fair wages (unlike many here, I don't think they're overpaid). Many would disagree.Also, the UAW bears no responsibility in any of the US automakers current problems. They didn't make Ford kill off the line of new cars on the drawing boards at the start of the decade. They didn't hire the marketing department at Chrysler whose policy was ignore the change in the US market and keep making vehicles that dealers couldn't sell, and they didn't entice GM to hand the car market over to Toyota, Honda, Hyundai, and every other import in favor of trucks (despite it's venerability to fuel price jumps). No responsibility? Could it be that the huge cost advantage that the imports have vs. the union-chained Big 3 has played a role in some decisions (and in profit margins in general)? Sure, they didn't actually sit in product planning meetings and make GM focus more on trucks than cars. But when they struggle to make a profit on cars, and the public is demanding and is willing to pay large profit margins for trucks and suvs, they are going to focus more on the money makers. After all, the Big 3 have been struggling to make money for a while.

It may have been shortsighted of GM to do that, but you could also argue that it was shortsighted (over a longer term) for management to agree to the lavish health care and benefits packages going back several decades. Except that if they didn't agree, they were faced with the union striking...

The reality is that the domestics are in their current situation for a number of reasons, including (but certainly not limited to) some bad decisions, some shortsighted decisions, lesser quality at times, the inevitibility of inroads being made as more and more competitors spring up, currency exchanges, AND costly policies demanded by the UAW by threat of strike...

:)

It's pretty much a given that the UAW is going to eat it in numerous ways. It looks like the strike is a way of demonstrating to membership that they did the best they could so they can get it through.

Ford and especially Chrysler will be asking for an even better deal than GM gets, and both are more likely to weather a long strike or a lockout. So, its in the UAWs interest to blow their load up front.

The world the UAW wants to live in doesn't exist any more, plain and simple. I sympathize, as I said, but it's gone. And a strike isn't going to bring it back.


I've said this in detail over the years - it's true.

The average worker in a factory would have a MUCH better chance of becoming wealthy by complaining to an attorney about their "exposures" at work, being mis-treated on the job, discriminated against in ANY way, or simply being harrassed. In this letigious society, some attorney will take the case and seek a payment - guaranteed.

It was not like that 80 years ago. The Unions are what kept the workplace safe, hours in check, pay levels decent, and treatment fair. But since the Unions were founded, we have legislated OSHA, the Dept of Labor, State and Local health codes, Labor Laws, and a dozen other regulatory and investigative bureaus to monitor and police the workplace for "bad things".

Quite honestly, I just don't see the need for the kind of "protection" they provided 80 years ago... not anymore. And quite simply, if you don't like the pay offered for the job you are doing, you can either quit and find another one, or open your own business and di the way you want to for your own payrate. It has worked for me all my life, and I'm not doing too terrible if I do say so myself.

What sucks is that pissed off workers produce less than stellar cars.....

If GM gets some kind or break (cut incentives, reduced pay, or WHATEVER) I'm sure the employees will feel they got a raw deal....

Sorry Michigan, buy maybe it's time GM pulled up roots and moved to the southeast? Maybe then they could even afford to stop producing vehicles in mexico and bring those plants back here as well, or at least make US destined vehicles IN the US.

This is interesting. We'll se how this plays out. I wonder how long will it last. And I wonder how long it would take before GM tried hiring replacement workers. I bet it would have to go on for quite a while.

The replacement workers are already working ... for Toyota, Honda, etc.

If the strike goes on for any length of time, the UAW will have killed the golden goose.

I hope GM drops all UAW's. Any other job you'd be fired if you walked off the job.

If the strike goes on for any length of time, the UAW will have killed the golden goose.

I hope it does. It may be the wake up call everyone needs?

I’m actually kind of stunned they went on strike...I really expected a last-second announcement that they had reached a tentative agreement and that the strike was postponed. In other words, I didn’t think the UAW leadership was this stupid but apparently I was wrong. :nuts:

I don’t discount the difficult decisions that have to be made (I’d hate to be on either side of that table) but the UAW needs to wake-up and realize that this isn’t post-war 1950s when the Big 3 OWNED the domestic market, Unions all but ruled the world and companies had no real choice when it came to “where” they were going to manufacture or where workers were going to come from

If I had to guess, I'd say the deal is basically done. The union knows they're going to take a hit, and that GM has them by their balls, and Gettlefinger is just saving face by having them strike for a few days. This way, it seems like Gettlefinger tried to get the best deal possible, knowing neither GM nor the UAW would be hurt terribly, so long as the strike lasted only a few days. The idea is far out there, but it's definitely possible.

Sorry Michigan, buy maybe it's time GM pulled up roots and moved to the southeast? Maybe then they could even afford to stop producing vehicles in mexico and bring those plants back here as well, or at least make US destined vehicles IN the US.

I don't think having a headquarters in any particular place is going to make it easier to deal with the UAW.

I know there won't be any new factories going up in Michigan ever again though, that much is for sure. :(

Way to go UAW. Nice to know they are in touch with reality. :rolleyes:

I'm sick of reading about GM paying for employees Viagra prescriptions.

Is it any wonder Toyota Nissan Honda Hyundai want to steer clear of the UAW?

If I had to guess, I'd say the deal is basically done. The union knows they're going to take a hit, and that GM has them by their balls, and Gettlefinger is just saving face by having them strike for a few days. This way, it seems like Gettlefinger tried to get the best deal possible, knowing neither GM nor the UAW would be hurt terribly, so long as the strike lasted only a few days. The idea is far out there, but it's definitely possible.

Seems plausible. Politics is a strange game.

Guy, some good stuff...we don't need bashing on either side, just solutions, we all got here together.

The following summary record is the culmination of the congressional e-hearing, “The American Automobile Industry in Crisis: Threats to Middle-Class Jobs, Wages, Health Care and Pensions” held from December 6, 2005 to January 1, 2006. Congressional sponsors included Representatives George Miller of California, Tim Ryan of Ohio, Dale Kildee of Michigan, Dennis Kucinich of Ohio, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Brian Higgins of New York, John Conyers of Michigan, Rush Holt of New Jersey, Major Owens of New York, Michael Michaud of Maine, Emanuel Cleaver, II of Missouri, Ted Strickland of Ohio, Hilda L. Solis of California, Jan Schakowsky of Illinois, Fortney Pete Stark of California, Carolyn Kilpatrick of Michigan, and Marcy Kaptur of Ohio.

We aim to give working people and their communities a voice in this Congress. Using the Internet, e-hearings allow Americans and policy makers to come together in dialogues on critical issues neglected by this Congress. The House has failed to schedule any official hearings on the events at Delphi Corporation and General Motors (GM). The subsequent announcement by Ford to close 14 plants and cut 30,000 jobs reiterates the urgency of the automobile crisis. This e-hearing on the crisis of the American automobile industry is a step toward saving American jobs.

The crisis strikes at the heart of the American middle class. The auto industry helped build the modern American economy. The hard work and commitment of the auto workforce set the standard for American productivity and American employment. For decades, autoworkers have proven that, for working people, a decent standard of living and a share in the American Dream were possible. They fought for and earned family-supporting wages, affordable health care for those working and those retired, and a fair pension that guarantees a secure retirement in old age. These basic employment standards have long-served as a benchmark for other workers and companies.

However, recent events have shaken the American automobile industry. On October 8, 2005, Delphi Corporation, a key auto parts supplier, filed for bankruptcy. The company, with a 33,000-strong American workforce, has proposed wage cuts of up to 60 percent, threatened to terminate its pension plans and cut health benefits, and indicated that it may close some of its U.S. plants.

Then, on November 21, 2005, GM announced that it would close nine U.S. plants and cut its workforce by 30,000 people. Under threat by rising health care costs, slumping sales, increased competition, and a Republican pension bill which would freeze its pension plan and dramatically increase its liabilities, GM, some analysts warn, could also be headed to bankruptcy.

The stakes are very high. If these companies cut wages, benefits, and jobs, hundreds of thousands of workers and their families across the country will be devastated. The ripple effect of wage cuts and job losses will be felt throughout entire communities. And a blow of this magnitude to the auto workforce – a bulwark for the middle class way of life – threatens the employment standards for all working Americans. This is a crisis in urgent need of Congress’s attention.
2
http://edworkforce.house.gov/democrats/autocrisis.html.

http://www.house.gov/ed_workforce/publications/gmdelphireport.pdf

Here’s some good info.

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070924/auto_talks.html?.v=35
GM reported that it had just under 950,000 vehicles in its inventory at the end of August, about 35,000 below the same time last year.

Tom Libby, senior director of industry analysis for J.D. Power and Associates, said even a short strike could hurt the company because its new crossover vehicles, the Buick Enclave, GMC Acadia and Saturn Outlook, are selling well and in short supply.

"The momentum they've established for those products would be interrupted if there's a supply interruption," Libby said. "There's not a lot of inventory available to sell down. So they need to keep that pipeline full."

Libby called the Enclave and Acadia a success story for GM because they don't stay on lots for long and they sell at or near full price.

"GM, financially, they don't have a lot of cushion," he said. "I just think it's going to hurt both sides in the long run."

GM had about a 65-day supply of cars and trucks as September began, versus a 71-day supply at the same time last year, said Paul Taylor, chief economist for the National Automobile Dealers Association. The Enclave, he said, is at a tight 24-day supply.

The strike will cost GM about 12,200 vehicles per day or 760 per hour, according to the auto forecasting firm CSM Worldwide of Northville.

We all seem deadlocked in a "Race to the Bottom".
Industry, endlessly making cuts; Labor, becoming less and less concerned about quality as wages, benefits and jobs dissappear.

What happened to :"Build a better mouse trap, and the world will beat a path to your door"...??
Now the focus, near tunnel vision, is: bottom line...by cuts.

I don't see this as just a struggle for the working middle class jobs, but for the philosophy that made America great.

For the record, I don't work @ GM, and hate to see any strike, as much as any war...too bad, in this day and age, that we can't work out our differences in more civilized manners.

My company just decided to lock us out at the end of our contract, beginning at the end of September, to apparently put pressure Labor into a speedy signing.
And ofcourse the Union voted to enpower the Union to authorize a strike.
They too, did NOTHING to get a compromise before the contract ends.

If congress wants to know why the middle class is disolving all they have to do is look in the mirror.

I don't know. On the one hand health care costs are a problem. But on the other if the Big 3 had continued to innovate and had better administrative decisions decades ago perhaps they could have continued to have nearly as much market share and been profitable enough to have attractive benefits packages as well.

I don't know. On the one hand health care costs are a problem. But on the other if the Big 3 had continued to innovate and had better administrative decisions decades ago perhaps they could have continued to have nearly as much market share and been profitable enough to have attractive benefits packages as well.

Even if they had the market share of 20 years ago they would be closing US plants and building them in Mexico or China. They would just make far more money doing it.

I’m actually kind of stunned they went on strike...I really expected a last-second announcement that they had reached a tentative agreement and that the strike was postponed. In other words, I didn’t think the UAW leadership was this stupid but apparently I was wrong. :nuts:


You're assuming that the UAW acted without provocation from GM - we don't know what ultimately caused the union to pull the trigger. Something is fishy; both sides were talking as if everything was sunshine and roses up until this morning.

An interesting point is that GM's stock price barely dropped today, so Wall Street ain't too worried about the situation. That's going to give GM some incentive to stick to its guns.

you know one part of me would love to see the UAW go on a long strike and crumble GM..pull them right out of the market..
Then what?? No company ever that you wanted more from..good idea..
Go to Ford? Or Chrysler?? Yea right..
Like I said its just a thought on how I feel sometimes..the go ahead and we will see how it does..kinda mentality..
But if GM went down..were all screwed..Just shows you how messed up the Unions are in thinking...

and the plants being built in MI. heck they cant keep the ones they have open..How many factories are laying desolate in Detroit from the big 3??? Yea...those thousands of places and millions of jobs turning Detroit into a slum...yea thats great..Americans buying and supporting foreign products is the reason outsourcing is done to stay competative..were doing it to ourselves..this is just another shovel full of dirt on our own graves..

BUT HEY..Toyota is building a great facility down in Texas employing a couple thousand people on a start up town....Yup that offsets the millions lost and out of work in Detroit..
GM is fianlly figuring it out, Ford and Chrysler are following, the UAW have no clue to what they are doing..and it trickles down to us..keep buying foreign products. Great way to support the local economy..you can see right there when the food gets scarce the dogs will bite one another to stay alive..Something is terribly wrong with this country..
I wish we had the balls and the pride that the Japanese do in thier country..Look at what its doing for them...Waiting and watching to pick the carcass of the once mighty U.S. to the bone..We just do not care as a country and were looking at it right now as the set up to be puppets to other countries economies, industry and cars...If we cared we should not be welcoming foregn companies to our shores with open arms while our industry rots and leave for cheaper places..If things were right and we stood proud we would be putting factories in Japan as many as they have put here..we would be growing our companies here and expanding outwards. Not uprooting to save a buck.. instead Like Proud says..Hope you like working for Toyota...

Guy, some good stuff...we don't need bashing on either side, just solutions, we all got here together.


2
http://edworkforce.house.gov/democrats/autocrisis.html.

http://www.house.gov/ed_workforce/publications/gmdelphireport.pdf

That's interesting reading, but rather one-sided. All of the sponsors of the "e-hearing" that you quoted are Democrats, and both links are from the Democrat Chairman of the the Education & Labor committee.

Bob

PS...first link didn't work.

I don't know. On the one hand health care costs are a problem. But on the other if the Big 3 had continued to innovate and had better administrative decisions decades ago perhaps they could have continued to have nearly as much market share and been profitable enough to have attractive benefits packages as well.

Given that the Big 3 have significantly higher labor costs, the only way to succeed is by being more productive. That can be accomplished by producing more vehicles per hour or by producing vehicles with a higher value. Both of those rely on the competition screwing up, which Toyota and Honda didn't do.

Faced with higher production costs, the Big3 tried to save money in other areas in the car lineup, succeeding only in lowering the perceived value of their cars. Trucks were a success story, as there was much less competition there, allowing GM to set prices at a profitable level.

At this point, it's going to be very difficult for both GM and the UAW to be successful (success for the GM defined as staying in business, and success for the UAW defined as continued existence). If the UAW fails to realize that they have to get their labor costs down to parity with the Toyota and Honda plants, then GM will die quickly or slowly, depending on whether GM makes a deal or not.

you know one part of me would love to see the UAW go on a long strike and crumble GM..pull them right out of the market..

Do you think that is even possible? :shrug:

BUT HEY..Toyota is building a great facility down in Texas employing a couple thousand people on a start up town....Yup that offsets the millions lost and out of work in Detroit..


When fewer people can do the work of many, then the problem isn't so much what brand of car people buy, but rather the efficiency of the employer on the downslope.

Do you think that is even possible? :shrug:

No no..just the way I feel sometimes..like you want to do this go ahead..

When fewer people can do the work of many, then the problem isn't so much what brand of car people buy, but rather the efficiency of the employer on the downslope.

Not what I meant. I know what you mean and yes thats true. I mean the fact that if GM could do it without UAW sticking thier foot in the way..yea..But I mean the fact that this problem we caused..the import companies are exploiting our wonderful laws we created and using it against us. Sure building a brand new cost effiecent mass volume factory is great..generating thousands of jobs in places that were doing very well before that started..while the north rots?? While Detroit turns into a slum?? Thats okay..thats what buying an import or supporting an import market is for?? To destroy the cities that once made this economy the envy of the world..that is what you are doing by turning the blind eye to whats going on..Like I have said..if what the U.S. is doing is so good for the global economy why is Japan doing the EXACT OPPOSITE???

Lets put it this was..Toyotas marketing slogan:

"Moving Forward"

Makes you wonder what that really means. Moving forward to what goal??? Yea that freaks me out..

....GM has enough stockpiled vehicles to last at least a month.

GM has enough stockpiled cash to last at least a month.

GM may actually save money if the strike lasts a month since labor cost will drop dramatically, stockpiled vehicles will be able to be sold off (likely without incentives since there is no pressure to both clear the lots and keep factories going)....

I know this is VERY serious business; both sides are very shrewd and are trying to protect their interests. We know nothing here about what is really going on; it's a ton of politics as mentioned earlier.

This just seems like a brilliant move on GM's part; idle the plants, sell off excess inventory (at a profit without incentives), save a bundle on labor costs and, in the end, they can even look good by "reaching out" to labor and reaching an agreement (once the books are balanced). Labor looks good for really going to bat for their members and playing "hard-ball".

Looks similar to the strike (actually it was a lock-out IIRC) at Harley Davidson earlier this year. Labor gained nothing really and HD managed to move a lot of inventory before the new models went into production. They saved a fortune, moved inventory and got labor to agree to a better contract.

GM has the potential to come out far stronger than it is today. I am not part of a union (AD military actually) but I don't ever see them going away. Right-sizing maybe but not gone.

Brilliant move on GM's part if you ask me....

Here is to hoping a resolution can be reached as quickly and as painless for all sides involved as soon as possible.

Many of us here on this forum and others have a heightened interest in these auto talks as many of us either work directly for GM, for a supplier to GM, or has a family member that works in the aforementioned position.

My sister just ordered a brand new Buick Enclave. This will probably push back the production date :mad:

Here is to hoping a resolution can be reached as quickly and as painless for all sides involved as soon as possible.

Many of us here on this forum and others have a heightened interest in these auto talks as many of us either work directly for GM, for a supplier to GM, or has a family member that works in the aforementioned position.

Most of us reading this forum have an interest in this being settled, but not if it means that GM would have to go into bankruptcy down the road. So they need a deal that brings labor costs into line. Guaranteeing jobs when they already have too many workers and there is still lots of potential for downslope in the sales number curve would likely be a prescription for just that. I hope the UAW realizes that.

Does anyone remember the result of too many strikes in our steel industry?

From all reports, UAW want job security for its workers. It's stating the bleeding obvious that the auto industry is extremely competitive and doesn't stand still. How does a company, any company, these days guarantee job security? Especially considering GM need to downsize to be competitive? I realize blue collar jobs are comparatively harder to find than white collar jobs but times have changed.

I know I don't know the full story, but when the UAW boss gets quoted in news headlines, he doesn't appear to be very flexible... at least in the eyes of the public.

I think at the end of the day, we all want GM and other US automotive companies to return to health, have great people make great cars, and most importantly, compete!!

There are people here to whom the UAW can do nothing right, other's who are peeved that there's people around who make more than they do despite never going to college (of whom you can include Microsoft's Bill Gates and Richard Branson founder of Virgin Records, Media, and Airways). The point is that these people are going to be making the cars and trucks that's going to make our automakers compete with import based brands.

Regardless as to how things play out, or if the union survives or not, they are still going to be well paid. They are still going to have health coverage.. quite possibly better than many of the people who bash them. None of us wants to see GM close a plant here to reopen it over in China. I think there isn't too many of us here that want to see executives get fat bonuses for shutting down plants. If we don't want to see any of those things, one can easily imagine that the very people it affects certainly doesn't want to see it either.

I agree with the assesment that a deal is probally done, and this is just posturing. Just like going into the showroom with a price in your mind of what you plan to pay, and the willingness to walk out to get an agreement on price, I suspect much the same is happening here.

Eric brings up a very profound point. Everything was peaches and cream till out of the blue last night, there was a sudden deadline in which unless they heard otherwise, they would strike. Also, there is no leaks that normally get out to apply pressure to the process. UAW has already let slip that there is no disagreement on plans for the UAW taking on the responsibility for member's health insurence. And I know the chief negotiators for both GM and the UAW are alot smarter than we are, so any point we make today, they probally saw it coming last year.

Intresting. :think:

An interesting picture is painted in this article... the workers will be hardest hit as a result of the decision to strike especially when they each receive a $200 pay check instead of the GM weekly wage...

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070924/AUTO02/709240457/1148/AUTO01

As sad and disastrous as this is for many working families, there is a silver lining.

I say 'sad' because in the long run, the decision by the shortsighted UAW leaders will cripple income stability for their members. But the good news for buyers of GM vehicles is that it will be more obvious why GM needs to globalize, and they will be able to proceed in their recovery as a result.

What I don't understand is that people buy that the Union must let their jobs simply get up and walk away to go to foreign countries, while we "give give give" for the past several years.

Lets look at what happened in 2005. GM was given the option of the VEBA by the UAW, however GM turned it down. This would have saved GM some $2 Billion annually AND would have cut $2,000 in cost out of each and every GM vehicle produced.

Second, the reason for the massive buy-outs in 2005? GM cited the need to be competitive. They set a target at 20,000 workers to take the buy-out needed to be competitive again. They surpassed that goal and ended with 30,000 buy-outs. So, does that mean they are "ultra-competitive" now?

This last round of talks there were reports that the UAW was willing to again, accept a VEBA, lifting billions of debt from GM's shoulders.

It was also reported that the UAW would be willing to accept a two-tier wage agreement to get some tens of thousands of UAW temp workers hired in at a much lower rate than a current GM employee.

ALL IN THE NAME TO PRESERVE JOBS IN THE U.S. Is that so bad? Should the UAW just sit back, take it in the ass and say "yea, take this, take that, but don't give us job protection down the line, because our jobs don't mean squat."

I challenge somebody to tell me what the UAW has taken in the past 8, or even 12 years from General Motors or any of the Big 3. I'd like facts also, not some rant about how the UAW is teh suxors.

What I don't understand is that people buy that the Union must let their jobs simply get up and walk away to go to foreign countries, while we "give give give" for the past several years.


Josh, with all due respect, your whole line of argument misses the point: the landscape has shifted. There isn't some fixed set of resources that is being "given" and "taken" between the company and the union; the pile of resources has shrunk significantly because the world has changed.

If the union fails to accept significant reductions in total compensation, including changes to benefits and the elimination of the ridiculous "jobs bank", and fails to accept that the company needs flexibility in scheduling products and programs among its plants, and further fails to "let their jobs simply get up and walk away to go to foreign countries", the company will cease to exist. Then there will be no GM jobs for anyone. How will you feel then?

Your team has its head stuck in the sand. Ron G et al seem to think that if they just have a big enough tantrum, somehow it will magically be 1978 again. It isn't going to work.

Josh, with all due respect, your whole line of argument misses the point: the landscape has shifted. There isn't some fixed set of resources that is being "given" and "taken" between the company and the union; the pile of resources has shrunk significantly because the world has changed.

If the union fails to accept significant reductions in total compensation, including changes to benefits and the elimination of the ridiculous "jobs bank", and fails to accept that the company needs flexibility in scheduling products and programs among its plants, and further fails to "let their jobs simply get up and walk away to go to foreign countries", the company will cease to exist. Then there will be no GM jobs for anyone. How will you feel then?

Your team has its head stuck in the sand. Ron G et al seem to think that if they just have a big enough tantrum, somehow it will magically be 1978 again. It isn't going to work.

First, I don't play "teams." I am pro GM, I am pro UAW. I am PRO AMERICAN WORK.

Now, your second paragraph must have missed what I said up top. The UAW offered a VEBA that would have lifted BILLIONS off of GM. The UAW reportedly is willing to accept a two-tier wage agreement.

Those are both significant cuts and changes to their benefits. A two-tier wage agreement generally means a new hire UAW employee will never make over $18 an hour, where as current UAW line workers can make $27-$30 an hour. Skilled Trades higher.

So, GM had the chance to have a VEBA and unload their health care liability in 2005. They passed. However, you still heard about executives saying that the major reason Detroit is not competitive is because of the high cost of health care. Well, they had a chance to fix that in '05 but said no thanks.

How can somebody defend that way of thinking by the company?

I'm really trying to keep personal feelings out of this as it relates to both the UAW and to GM. So, I'll stick to that basic argument and say, where are the facts that the UAW has "taken" anything, when all the UAW has done was give, give, give, as I've laid out with facts and not hearsay or rumors.

The UAW offered a VEBA that would have lifted BILLIONS off of GM. The UAW reportedly is willing to accept a two-tier wage agreement.

Those are both significant cuts and changes to their benefits.

But not nearly enough, clearly.

And as far as facts vs "hearsay and rumors", you don't have any more facts than the rest of us at this point. Ron G's spin is just that, and GM doesn't seem to be saying anything at all.

What I don't understand is that people buy that the Union must let their jobs simply get up and walk away to go to foreign countries, while we "give give give" for the past several years.

...

Should the UAW just sit back, take it in the ass and say "yea, take this, take that, but don't give us job protection down the line, because our jobs don't mean squat."



Josh,

I think that the bigger question is this; Why should GM offer job guarantees to UAW workers? Most other jobs simply do not have this kind of protection. They are performance based. A skilled worker will offer value to their employer. Skill and work ethic are the attributes that keep most workers relevant to the workplace. The UAW does not want to operate in this environment like most of the country does. They want 'job protection' at the expense of the individuals responsibility to ensure their worth. IMO, this approach is selfish and removes GM's authority to manage quality control. Everyone wants GM to produce good cars but they are at a disadvantage when the UAW is pulling the strings. Just my 2 cents...

Brian

How can you make the argument that "Everyone wants GM to produce good cars but they are at a disadvantage when the UAW is pulling the strings" when the top performing plant in the last Harbour Reports are those that employ UAW workers? I don't call that a disadvantage.

Josh, with all due respect, your whole line of argument misses the point: the landscape has shifted. There isn't some fixed set of resources that is being "given" and "taken" between the company and the union; the pile of resources has shrunk significantly because the world has changed.

If the union fails to accept significant reductions in total compensation, including changes to benefits and the elimination of the ridiculous "jobs bank", and fails to accept that the company needs flexibility in scheduling products and programs among its plants, and further fails to "let their jobs simply get up and walk away to go to foreign countries", the company will cease to exist. Then there will be no GM jobs for anyone. How will you feel then?

Your team has its head stuck in the sand. Ron G et al seem to think that if they just have a big enough tantrum, somehow it will magically be 1978 again. It isn't going to work.
Well said. I agree 100%.

I don't think having a headquarters in any particular place is going to make it easier to deal with the UAW.

I know there won't be any new factories going up in Michigan ever again though, that much is for sure. :(

My bad, I didn't mean headquarters, no need to move that. I was just bein' a smart ass. GM should just pull all of it's plants from Union areas and move to non union areas... Kinda like Toyota did :lol:

Might actually save money in the long run...:eek:

You're assuming that the UAW acted without provocation from GM - we don't know what ultimately caused the union to pull the trigger. Something is fishy; both sides were talking as if everything was sunshine and roses up until this morning.

An interesting point is that GM's stock price barely dropped today, so Wall Street ain't too worried about the situation. That's going to give GM some incentive to stick to its guns.
It's true that we don't know exactly why the UAW decided to strike but I wasn't assuming it was without provocation; I am saying that, provoked or not, I think it's a really stupid (and potentially very destructive) move.

As far as GM's stock prices; word on the street is not that investors "aren't worried" but that they see GM standing up to the UAW as a good sign that the contract they finally wind up with will be a measurable benefit to GM and help them bring their labor costs in line (and therefore make it a better investment).

Since there's an abundance of information / opinions against the UAW, I wanted to let some see the other side...

UAW shocked by GM’s failure to recognize worker contributions; sets strike deadline for 11 a.m. on Monday, Sept. 24
The UAW announced today that due to the failure of General Motors to address job security and other mandatory issues of bargaining, the union has set a firm strike deadline for 11 a.m. on Monday, Sept. 24.

“We’re shocked and disappointed that General Motors has failed to recognize and appreciate what our membership has contributed during the past four years,” said UAW President Ron Gettelfinger. “Since 2003 our members have made extraordinary efforts every time the company came to us with a problem: the corporate restructuring, the attrition plan, the Delphi bankruptcy, the 2005 health care agreement. In every case, our members went the extra mile to find reasonable solutions.

“Throughout this time period," said Gettelfinger, "it has been the dedication of UAW members that has helped GM set new standards for safety, quality and productivity in their manufacturing facilities. And in this current round of bargaining, we did everything possible to negotiate a new contract, including an unprecedented agreement to stay at the bargaining table nine days past the expiration of the previous agreement.”
“This is our reward: a complete failure by GM to address the reasonable needs and concerns of our members,” said UAW Vice President Cal Rapson, director of the union's GM Department. “Instead, in 2007 company executives continued to award themselves bonuses while demanding that our members accept a reduced standard of living.

“The company’s disregard for our members has forced our bargaining committee to take this course of action,” said Rapson. “Unless UAW members hear otherwise between now and the deadline, we will be on a national strike against GM at 11 a.m. EDT on Monday, Sept. 24th.”

The UAW negotiating team will remain at the bargaining table, Rapson said, throughout the night and up until the 11 a.m. deadline.

Since there's an abundance of information / opinions against the UAW, I wanted to let some see the other side...

C'mon 90Rocz...you know that's just more UAW spin. ;)

The UAW announced today that due to the failure of General Motors to address job security

Now there's a statement loaded with irony. GM hasn't made a profit in this country for years. Even though there are overall world profits, GM is still bleeding money in the US. Can't imagine why? Why is GM making money elsewhere and not here.... hmmmm... tough one to figure out.

While it is wrong for the executives to get big bonuses, that's the way the world works. Deal with it.

I'm a civil engineer and UAW GM factory workers make more than I do :confused:

Thanks Josh for adding some detail to to this story. Not a lot being reported in the mainstream news.

Seems to be basic negotiation that GM has to give the UAW something if they want this settled. If they aren't willing to budge, its probably a good sign that production is being moved off shore in a similar manner to Delphi.

I have probably made it clear over the years through my posts that I am anti-union. I want people to have good jobs but I think it is not in GM best interest to guarantee jobs to the union like they do. GM needs to be more flexible now than ever. If a worker is not performing well they need to be able to let him go and find a replacement. If a vehicle line is not doing well they need to be able to reduce production and make necessary cuts to the workforce or move people where they are needed. It sucks. Ask people who work in aerospace. It's just a fact of life these days.

What advantage does GM gain if they stay with the UAW? Personally I think if GM opened a plant down the road from here and offered jobs around $15-$30 with a 401k and outsourced healthcare this area would start booming.

C'mon 90Rocz...you know that's just more UAW spin. ;)

Dude, that text is from a UAW press release. If that's not "UAW spin", then what exactly is it?

Regardless as to which side of the fence you're on.....

Has there been any further negotiations or movement on this? All we've heard for weeks now is how close they were to a deal. Now it doesn't seem like it.

Is it fair to say they'll either strike a deal very soon (within days), or it will be a long, painful process?

Regardless as to which side of the fence you're on.....

Has there been any further negotiations or movement on this? All we've heard for weeks now is how close they were to a deal. Now it doesn't seem like it.

Is it fair to say they'll either strike a deal very soon (within days), or it will be a long, painful process?

They went back to talks at about 10:00am I want to say. The issue is not VEBA as people have thought, it's more job security.

So, it really depends on if GM is willing to commit X amount of jobs to UAW plants. We shall see.

What advantage does GM gain if they stay with the UAW? Personally I think if GM opened a plant down the road from here and offered jobs around $15-$30 with a 401k and outsourced healthcare this area would start booming.

Same here. Out best employer is John Deere in Waterloo......I think they pay around $15/hr starting. People get let go there all the time. GM could open a plant here and it would be heaven sent. People here would work their asses off to keep that job, not expect some ******* in his office to get a contract to do it for them.

The United Auto Workers launched a nationwide strike Monday to pressure General Motors to protect jobs and wages. The Detroit News reports that the auto talks of 2007 boiled over at 11 a.m. Monday when UAW President Ron Gettelfinger ordered 73,000 workers off the job and onto the picket line. The order to strike came in short phone calls from local UAW leaders to representatives on the factory floor - like the message from Local 599 in Flint that said simply, "Take them out."

"Nobody wants a strike," Gettelfinger said, "But there comes a time when somebody pushes you off a cliff and that's exactly what happened."

While GM has sufficient vehicle inventories to weather a short-term strike, a walkout lasting weeks or months would cripple its operations and push the automaker perilously close to bankruptcy. Click here for video from strike day one. The Wall Street Journal noted an interesting phenomenon related to the strike: GM's stock actually rose after the strike began, before falling later in the day in the general market decline. Wall Street apparently thinks GM is better off not making cars if a strike will help rationalize its labor and benefit costs.


Detroit News Story: http://detroitnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070925/AUTO01/709250380/1148

Pictures from the WSJ: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119065098245037571.html

Strike Timeline: http://info.detnews.com/graphics/2007/gmtimeline_092507.pdf

Video from the Detroit News (hopefully this link will work for most; it doesn't for me because of restrictiong on vidwos while online from my office): http://info.detnews.com/video/index.cfm

Wall Street Journal (only a partial article for non-subscribers): http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119068438605038283.html

There is no question that this strike could have a devestating impact on either the UAW, GM or both but I think those really "at risk" ar suppliers...many auto industry suppliers are already "on the edge" and loosing business form GM for any significant period of time could send them right out of business (and their workers right to the unemployment lines).

Same here. Out best employer is John Deere in Waterloo......I think they pay around $15/hr starting. People get let go there all the time. GM could open a plant here and it would be heaven sent. People here would work their asses off to keep that job, not expect some ******* in his office to get a contract to do it for them.
I may be wrong on this but as things stand right now (or at least up until now) GM coulnd not just "open a new plant" and not have to meet the UAW's contract rates, etc.

In other words, GM can't just open a plant in Texas or Mississippi and have the same advantages of a Toyota or Honda, or Kia because the UAW still has control over the plant.

If memory serves, GM had to get special concessions from the UAW when it opened what used to be the Saturn plant in Spring Hill, TN...without those, the Sataurn plant would have been operated just like any other UAW plant.

As I said before.

Whatever the outcome, hopefully it is quick, swift, and benefits all parties involved. Please GM/UAW send my dad back to work!

So, it really depends on if GM is willing to commit X amount of jobs to UAW plants. We shall see.

I don't know if that's it or if there's a larger issue -- specifically, GM's ongoing efforts to leverage its global organization. I doubt the UAW is a big fan of Australian Pontiacs, Chinese Buicks, et cetera... but those cars may be essential to the future of the company in the US.

I don't know if that's it or if there's a larger issue -- specifically, GM's ongoing efforts to leverage its global organization. I doubt the UAW is a big fan of Australian Pontiacs, Chinese Buicks, et cetera... but those cars may be essential to the future of the company in the US.

Farming out US built cars to foreign plants was happening LONG before GM started it's "globalization" plan. They only have themselves to blame (BOTH GM and the UAW.) :mad:

What I don't understand is that people buy that the Union must let their jobs simply get up and walk away to go to foreign countries, while we "give give give" for the past several years.

Lets look at what happened in 2005. GM was given the option of the VEBA by the UAW, however GM turned it down. This would have saved GM some $2 Billion annually AND would have cut $2,000 in cost out of each and every GM vehicle produced.

Second, the reason for the massive buy-outs in 2005? GM cited the need to be competitive. They set a target at 20,000 workers to take the buy-out needed to be competitive again. They surpassed that goal and ended with 30,000 buy-outs. So, does that mean they are "ultra-competitive" now?

This last round of talks there were reports that the UAW was willing to again, accept a VEBA, lifting billions of debt from GM's shoulders.

It was also reported that the UAW would be willing to accept a two-tier wage agreement to get some tens of thousands of UAW temp workers hired in at a much lower rate than a current GM employee.

ALL IN THE NAME TO PRESERVE JOBS IN THE U.S. Is that so bad? Should the UAW just sit back, take it in the ass and say "yea, take this, take that, but don't give us job protection down the line, because our jobs don't mean squat."

I challenge somebody to tell me what the UAW has taken in the past 8, or even 12 years from General Motors or any of the Big 3. I'd like facts also, not some rant about how the UAW is teh suxors.


That's just it, we don't know all of the details. If the UAW was playing Santa and continued to "give, give, give" then why would GM turn it down?! It seems to solve a ton of problems GM and apears to show the UAW acting in GM's best interest- a no brainer for GM..... right? Because the UAW wanted something that grabbed GM by the short-and-curlies so they had to refuse to protect their buisness. I don't have a clue what the details were, but you can bet the UAW is going to spin it in their favor based on the press they have been getting and looking at their membership numbers (and trends) over the last twenty years.

It's like saying "shure, I'll happily clean the house every day for the next 90 days, mow the lawn once a week for 12 weeks, renovate the kitchen and even change the oil in the cars...." sounds great so far.... "but you have to sign over the deed to the house to get the deal". And you still can't fire me even if I do a crappy job since I would now have the deed to the place....:rolleyes:

Here's a novel concept; have the unions establish a contract to protect the JOB not the WORKER. Menaing, if company X wants to fire someone for whatever reason, they call the union to axe them. If the worker is not competitive or his job can be done faster/cheaper/better by another person, the union fires them and replaces them with a more efficient cost effective person. If the person performs, no worries. If they don't the union takes the hit and has to find a replacement. The union contract is negotiated for total required workforce for a set price and it is adjusted based on performance, production and profits the company sees.

I'm not bashing unions, far from it, but they will bankrupt GM before it's over with.

Here's a novel concept; have the unions establish a contract to protect the JOB not the WORKER. Menaing, if company X wants to fire someone for whatever reason, they call the union to axe them. If the worker is not competitive or his job can be done faster/cheaper/better by another person, the union fires them and replaces them with a more efficient cost effective person. If the person performs, no worries. If they don't the union takes the hit and has to find a replacement. The union contract is negotiated for total required workforce for a set price and it is adjusted based on performance, production and profits the company sees.

That sounds like a good idea to me.

I dont know. I work in IT. There is always a possiablity of outsourcing to another country. If my department doesnt preform it will get outsourced. If I dont preform I will get fired... We are still around because we save the company money. I am still around because I do a good job.

As someone who goes to work everyday with the threat of being outsourced I dont see why the UWA shouldnt face the same? What does the UAW have that GM wants? WHY should GM stick with UAW?

Why not say; no thanks; then hire new workers?

If this continues, I wonder if/how it will affect the launch of the new Malibu and Cadillac?

GM Strike is already starting it's ripple effect.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070925/wl_canada_nm/canada_gm_canada_layoffs_col

What I don't understand is that people buy that the Union must let their jobs simply get up and walk away to go to foreign countries, while we "give give give" for the past several years.


That's not what I'm buying. What I'm buying is that GM may not be able to stay in business if it continues to guarantee jobs. It's as simple as that.

And while the UAW feels sorry for itself for "give give give", it's still the has the best pay and benefits in the country for manufacturing jobs.

TThe UAW has fair wages (unlike many here, I don't think they're overpaid).
I looked for the wink smilie, but I didn't see it. I guess you're serious?

Please explain how a janitor isn't overpaid when he makes ~$30/hour.

I believe Janitorial work at GM is now all outsourced, at least the clean up, by an earlier concession. I know it is at my UAW plant, and we usually follow what GM does.
Besides, in-house UAW janitor work isn't the same as other places, it usually is the bulk of the job but involves other work too. There's a lot of square footage to sweep, a lot of trash cans to change, dumpsters to empty, bathrooms to clean, mop and restock daily. Dirty coveralls and gloves etc to take to MRO for cleaning, and restocking clean gloves and coveralls and other PPE etc...etc...And if we're short on people, Janitors fill voids on the Line.

That's part of the problem. People hear job titles, and think that the job desciptions are the same everywhere.

More from the Union:
The following is the transcript of the UAW news conference held at Solidarity House, Detroit, at 12:15 p.m. on Monday, Sept. 24, 2007.

Good afternoon everyone, I am Ron Gettelfinger with the UAW. Of course you know Vice President Cal Rapson, and we have all of our national negotiating committee here. The first thing I want to do is applaud our national negotiators for the long hours and dedication and commitment and the hard work they put in to trying to reach an equitable agreement with the General Motors Corporation. As you are aware, we opened negotiations with DaimlerChrysler on July 20. On July 23 we opened negotiations with General Motors and then we proceeded to Ford Motor Company.

As we got closer to Labor Day, it became apparent to us that we thought the best place for us to go to get a contract was General Motors, and immediately after Labor Day we started moving more and more in that direction. And I just want to step back and say to you that going into these negotiations, if we go back to the `03 national negotiations our membership took the line item off the cost of living, which amounted to 8 cents an hour at the end of the contract. Additionally we gave up an immediate 2 cents per quarter that continues to this day. Additionally, we worked with General Motors on every issue that came before them. In `05 we worked out the VEBA to help them with their health care obligation that’s $18 billion right down, $3 billion in annualized expenses and a billion dollars in cash. Additionally, we worked with them on an attrition program and their restructuring announcement, and just as importantly we worked through the issues at Delphi.

We were very disappointed in this round of negotiations to discover as we moved forward that it was a one-way set of negotiations. It was going to be General Motors’ way at the expense of the workers. We honestly believed that when we got to the contract expiration date and then we extended the contract, that General Motors would come to the bargaining table and work hard with us to get an agreement. They gave us every reason to believe that would happen.

On Thursday night we had a meeting with them wherein we made it clear that we expected to see movement on the subcommittees. There had been a lot of talk and a lot of leading up to what was going on.

From Thursday night when we had that discussion until Friday night the company moved on one issue and that was the issue where they had put a cap on profit sharing, and in that period of time that was the only issue. And we knew then that we were headed to a difficult conclusion to these negotiations. We continued to meet with the company over the weekend. We went in early yesterday morning — I think yesterday was Sunday — yesterday morning, and we stayed all night. We worked all night; we worked up until the deadline. As you are aware, we did give the company a deadline on Sunday night and we said it was a firm deadline, that this bargaining committee was here to represent their membership and that we would not deviate from that deadline. The company walked right up to the deadline like they really didn’t care. And as a result of that we called a strike at 11 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time this morning.



Ron Gettelfinger's responses to questions from news media:

And we were going to go back and see if the company has indicated they want to meet. They contacted Vice President Cal Rapson and we will be going back to the bargaining table today. However, the frame of mind we’re in right now, we would expect that the company would move rather expeditiously on the open issues that are in front of us. As we discovered more and more as these negotiations progressed, it has to be a two-way street. The company was willing to meet as long as we were willing to give them something. But when it comes to them giving something back, it becomes more and more difficult. So from our standpoint we are ready to go in and wrap this strike up and wrap and conclude these negotiations.

I think that UAW wages are reasonable (and benefits very generous), and that Walmart wages are often too low. But what does that matter? If GM goes out of business paying reasonable wages and generous benefits....

There are two issues here.

1. What is right and fair and proper.

2. What is necessary to survive.

Issue 1 is fodder for a philosophy discussion, but not really germane to the problem at hand. The real question is how far the UAW thinks they can push without killing their employer. Given the huge executive pay potential if the ship gets turned around, I'd expect the union to push this. I just hope it isn't too far.

My Co-Pay is $65 P.O.S.(point of service)every visit!
Perscriptions $10 generics, $25 brand name...My in-laws actually have much better coverage through the school system where my mom-in-law works.:)
My wife is a manager for Assurant (Insurance), and she laughs at my coverage...

I also hate the thought of the executives helping themselves to bonuses. I think the UAW should push hard against that. If the executives award themselves bonuses then the workers are also entitled to better awards. Is this what is meant by a two-way street?

Besides, in-house UAW janitor work isn't the same as other places, it usually is the bulk of the job but involves other work too. There's a lot of square footage to sweep, a lot of trash cans to change, dumpsters to empty, bathrooms to clean, mop and restock daily. Dirty coveralls and gloves etc to take to MRO for cleaning, and restocking clean gloves and coveralls and other PPE etc...etc...And if we're short on people, Janitors fill voids on the Line.

That's part of the problem. People hear job titles, and think that the job desciptions are the same everywhere.

So basically janitors were expected to clean :confused:

I'm very overpaid but I have absolutely zero job security and no good benefits. I'm planning accordingly and not expecting what I currently make to always be there. Planning ahead and planning for the worst. If the worst happens, I'm ready for it, if not, I appreciate all I've gotten for my hard work.

I don't expect any company to kiss my ass. I simply do my best and collect what I've earned. I can leave at any time, they can can me at any time. You know, capitalism.

I have family in the UAW, even the "new" UAW members got it good but fail to realize it. :shrug: The guys from the heyday have it very good.

My Co-Pay is $65 P.O.S.(point of service)every visit!
Perscriptions $10 generics, $25 brand name...My in-laws actually have much better coverage through the school system where my mom-in-law works.:)
My wife is a manager for Assurant (Insurance), and she laughs at my coverage...

Are you a GM assembly worker?

Just as an FYI I heard that a deal is close as of 10:07pm, and as of 10:22pm the AP is also reporting that a deal is close, and that only "small details" are being worked out now.

Didn't they say that for the last two weeks now?
:lol:

Well, its 1222pm EST, and I have not heard a thing...then again, not a SINGULAR friggin 24 hr news station is saying anything about it. Its all about the crazy Iranian Pres who sai dthat America sucks for 40 mins today.

apparently they will announce it tomorrow.

90rocz,I think we work for the same company.The Springfield,OH and the $65 co-pay gave it away.Everyone laughs at that too.Damn,spoiled ass UAW workers with their lavish $65 co-pay. I think we are getting locked out next week.lol!

Hooray! Strike is over.

http://detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070926/UPDATE/70926001

Besides, in-house UAW janitor work isn't the same as other places, it usually is the bulk of the job but involves other work too. There's a lot of square footage to sweep, a lot of trash cans to change, dumpsters to empty, bathrooms to clean, mop and restock daily. Woah woah woah woah woah woah woah woah. Are you serious? That's just total BS. I mean, expecting her to do a job she's paid for? I'm shocked and chagrined. Never mind that she is one of many who does the same job.

Here's a story that ran in the April 11, 2006 edition of the Detroit Free Press:

No Reason To Leave GM by Michael Ellis/The Detroit Free Press

$74,000 for cleaning job. On her 83rd birthday, Lillian Winkel celebrated the same way she spends every day — going to work at a General Motors Corp. metal stamping plant in Indianapolis.

The great-great grandmother, who is the second-oldest woman working at GM, made $74,000 last year cleaning floors and emptying wastebaskets.

“I always work on my birthday,” said Winkel, who turned 83 on March 2. “I don’t know anybody else who’s going to give me three hundred and some-odd dollars for my birthday. Thank God for General Motors.”

...


At nonunion plants, somebody cleaning offices couldn’t dream of making the $74,000 that Winkel earned last year. Including the pension and Social Security she also gets, she received $114,000.

...http://futureoftheunion.com/?p=2446

(You can do an archive search for the Free Press (http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?s_site=freep&f_site=freep&f_sitename=Detroit+Free+Press&p_theme=gannett&p_product=FP&p_action=search&p_field_base-0=&p_text_base-0=Lillian+Winkel&Search=Search&p_perpage=10&p_maxdocs=200&p_queryname=700&s_search_type=keyword&p_sort=_rank_%3AD&p_field_date-0=YMD_date&p_params_date-0=date%3AB%2CE&p_text_date-0=) and it comes up, but you have to login to view it.)

Read that and tell me again that they aren't overpaid.

As I said last night a deal was hours away, and yes, indeed. The strike is over, we have a deal.

Good News!..
UAW recesses strike after reaching tentative agreement with General Motors
DETROIT -- UAW negotiators reached a tentative agreement with General Motors at 3:05 a.m. on Wednesday, Sept. 26.

The strike by union members was recessed at 4 a.m., and workers will report for work beginning with second shift today. Certain skilled trades workers may be notified to report to work earlier by management at their facilities.

“We’re proud of this tentative agreement and we look forward to getting into the field and discussing it with our membership,” UAW President Ron Gettelfinger said.

The UAW International Executive Board and the UAW GM National Negotiating Committee -- made up of elected representatives from UAW GM locations throughout the country -- have unanimously recommended ratification of the agreement.

“We reached this agreement because of the extraordinary solidarity of our membership, and through a tremendous amount of hard work by the committee they elected to negotiate a new contract,” said UAW Vice President Cal Rapson, director of the union’s GM Department.

Details of the agreement are being withheld pending ratification

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070926/BUSINESS01/70926007&theme=AUTOTALKS072007

originally posted by Mighty:
Read that and tell me again that they aren't overpaid.
I'm not going into arguing on half truths, and sesationalism, but I'll nibble..

First, the oldest employees work more hours than anyone, partly b/c all their friends are at work, or at least, most of them. And working so much for so long, the don't really have a life outside of work.

The article says NOTHING about how many hours this woman has to work to get that...$74 K

From my experience, 80-100 a week is NOT uncommon for these older workers...partly b/c they have the seniority to get less stressful, less physical jobs...not necessarily less busy.
I guarantee she works hard for her money...not the picture of some old granny shuffling around with her walker, liesurely picking up trash, you and other Republican backed news would paint for us.
My$.02...I'm done.

The job bank lives, the overgenerous pension package lives, they're still stuck with the overmassive US infrastructure... GM got the VEBA, but so far it doesn't sound like they got much else that's worth anything. At a time when they needed massive change, an incremental deal isn't gonna do it.

I'm not going into arguing on half truths, and sesationalism, but I'll nibble..

First, the oldest employees work more hours than anyone, partly b/c all their friends are at work, or at least, most of them. And working so much for so long, the don't really have a life outside of work.

The article says NOTHING about how many hours this woman has to work to get that...$74 K

From my experience, 80-100 a week is NOT uncommon for these older workers...partly b/c they have the seniority to get less stressful, less physical jobs...not necessarily less busy.
I guarantee she works hard for her money...not the picture of some old granny shuffling around with her walker, liesurely picking up trash, you and other Republican backed news would paint for us.
My$.02...I'm done.

Wait a minute, are you suggesting older union workers working more than 40 hours a week is common? Are you serious?

That woman is probably barely working 40 hrs as it is and making $74k a year... WAKE UP!!!

The job bank lives

That is the single most ridiculous part of the package. I am very surprised they didn't push harder for that to be eliminated.

As far as the janitor making $74,000 a year, that is not uncommon. Ask my friend 2K1SunsetSS how much a Ford janitor he knows was making right up until he retired. It will blow your mind -- and this guy is the first to say Ford is stupid for paying him what they were.

Wait a minute, are you suggesting older union workers working more than 40 hours a week is common? Are you serious?

That woman is probably barely working 40 hrs as it is and making $74k a year... WAKE UP!!!

I am going to have to agree with 90rocz on this one...I have friends that work for Chrysler in Brampton, and the scenario is much the same there. The older union worker can't be forced into retirement and since they have spent the better part of their life working in the factory...that is the only life they know...as 90rocz stated...this is where all their friends are...it is their life...and thus, this is where they spend all of their time. With the seniority that they have, they are able to work the less than demanding jobs...thus working the 80-100 hours per week. I once read an interesting report about retired auto workers life expectancy after retirement...is something like 3-5 years after retirement...the thought was, they had nothing left to live for once they were out...dunno...just my $0.02...

The job bank lives, the overgenerous pension package lives, they're still stuck with the overmassive US infrastructure... GM got the VEBA, but so far it doesn't sound like they got much else that's worth anything. At a time when they needed massive change, an incremental deal isn't gonna do it.

I am glad to see the strike end quickly but disappointed that the wasteful jobs bank continues. It will be interesting to see the details of this agreement after the vote takes place. I hope this new agreement will allow GM to be more competitive with their products in the U.S. market.

I am going to have to agree with 90rocz on this one...I have friends that work for Chrysler in Brampton, and the scenario is much the same there. The older union worker can't be forced into retirement and since they have spent the better part of their life working in the factory...that is the only life they know...as 90rocz stated...this is where all their friends are...it is their life...and thus, this is where they spend all of their time. With the seniority that they have, they are able to work the less than demanding jobs...thus working the 80-100 hours per week. I once read an interesting report about retired auto workers life expectancy after retirement...is something like 3-5 years after retirement...the thought was, they had nothing left to live for once they were out...dunno...just my $0.02...
Interesting.

Around here some employees with seniority work "smarter". They arrange for sick leave on their regular work days, and volunteer for overtime when they know they can get time and a half. Its not uncommon to see frontline employees pull over $100k with overtime when all is said and done.

Its also pretty funny when we find "hideouts" around the "plant". Places no one knew about, but some ambitious employee smuggled in an old sofa to "work on" during their regular shift when they are supposed to be out doing "inspections".
:rolleyes:

Josh,

I think that the bigger question is this; Why should GM offer job guarantees to UAW workers? Most other jobs simply do not have this kind of protection. They are performance based. A skilled worker will offer value to their employer. Skill and work ethic are the attributes that keep most workers relevant to the workplace. The UAW does not want to operate in this environment like most of the country does. They want 'job protection' at the expense of the individuals responsibility to ensure their worth. IMO, this approach is selfish and removes GM's authority to manage quality control. Everyone wants GM to produce good cars but they are at a disadvantage when the UAW is pulling the strings. Just my 2 cents...

Brian

I think "job guarantee" in this case means keeping a factory open, not promising individuals jobs. I believe if a way is created to make a car at a plant with less workers, they'll use attrition to cut back.

Oh please . . . quit with the "we're here protecting American workers" mantra. It's getting old. The job you're trying to preserve is your own, plain and simple. The time has come and gone for unions. It's a global market with a global economy. The only way to get job protection is to make yourself so valuable to the company that they don't want to fire you. Noone gets that kind of crap written into their contracts for the very reason it makes the company less competitive. If the company isn't competitive, then they lose money. If they can't cut back on spending, then they lose more money. Eventually you get to the point where the company can't operate anymore and then what? . . . . well atleast you had your job up to the point of implosion right? :rolleyes:

Gunny, being a retired military guy myself, I can say we live entirely different world than the folks working in manufacturing. In a factory, while you might make yourself very valuable & your job is secured there, that has no effect on the factory itself staying around.

Look at Ford's truck plant, for example. Sales dropped severely. Ford is closing at least 1 of the plants that make the trucks. Doesn't matter how great the workers are, there are a multitude of other reasons that factor into a decision to close a plant. Ste Therese closed due to overcapacity & GM simply didn't need it anymore. GM's Wilmington plant got a 2nd life (after it was already closed down) only because the unlikely decision was made to produce the Pontiac Solstice. GM's Oshawa rennovation is going to cut a sizable number of jobs due to better machinary and automation. There's simply certain jobs that are going to disappear.

Suppose the government decided that they no longer needed your unit. They figured that because of reduced need and to save cost they decided to train and use members of the Philippene Army or Japan's Self Defense Force instead & members of your unit were going to be suddenly discharged within a few months. Yes, you were invaluable to the unit. You did an exceptional job. But your unit and you are no longer needed.

Throw in concern about the future of your family, your benefits, and the time you've put in as well as what are you going to do next, and at the very least, you can understand these guys concerns.

Gee. Those sound like the same concerns I have when every I go into work.

...
I can understand the UAW wanting to preserve jobs/plants and there is no question that private industry (manufacturing and otherwise) is significantly different than the military. IMHO, however, I don't think that difference is a good basis for advancing the argument that unions are good institutions or needed institutions (and if I misunderstood your intent I apologize).

In the Ford example you gave, one of the reasons Ford (or GM or Chrysler) has to close a whole plant when demand falls is 1) In-efficient plants that only make one vehicle line and 2) the inability to control production by any other means than taking the drastic step of closing down a plant.

Were Ford able to have real control without the UAW bureaucracy they might be able to keep a plant open (even at a reduced output) rather than close it. But with the red tape involved, it’s often easier for them to close a whole plant which puts everyone out of work.

By their very nature, unions make companies LESS competitive by taking power away from business owners to make decisions that are best (and sometimes absolutely necessary for the survival of) the business.

Businesses do not exist to provide employment, benefits, support families or for any other reason but to make a profit for their owners.

The Detroit Big Three may survive with the UAW but they will never be truly competitive with foreign manufacturers as long as the UAW has power.

That said, I’m glad the workers are back to work and I hope GM got enough concessions out of the UAW to keep its momentum going. :thumb:

Obviously what you guys are missing is that we should not reward employees that demonstrate loyalty to the company by staying on for decades. Additionally we should pay China wages to our workers because they do not need to make a living, and all the things they need to buy can be done so on credit.

Woah woah woah woah woah woah woah woah. Are you serious? That's just total BS. I mean, expecting her to do a job she's paid for? I'm shocked and chagrined. Never mind that she is one of many who does the same job.

Here's a story that ran in the April 11, 2006 edition of the Detroit Free Press:

http://futureoftheunion.com/?p=2446

(You can do an archive search for the Free Press (http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?s_site=freep&f_site=freep&f_sitename=Detroit+Free+Press&p_theme=gannett&p_product=FP&p_action=search&p_field_base-0=&p_text_base-0=Lillian+Winkel&Search=Search&p_perpage=10&p_maxdocs=200&p_queryname=700&s_search_type=keyword&p_sort=_rank_%3AD&p_field_date-0=YMD_date&p_params_date-0=date%3AB%2CE&p_text_date-0=) and it comes up, but you have to login to view it.)

Read that and tell me again that they aren't overpaid.

You're taking a single, unique story and sensationalizing it.

Re-read that article.

We're talking about a very old woman who has spent decades with GM, who has built up an amazing amount of senority, has her pick of jobs based on that, and isn't going to go down the pay scale simply because of age.

Using this as a basis for posting janitors get paid $30 per hour is like me using a fatal blowout on the freeway as grounds for saying cars are dangerous and should be outlawed. You gotta look at the whole picture and not just a soundbite.
I looked for the wink smilie, but I didn't see it. I guess you're serious?

Please explain how a janitor isn't overpaid when he makes ~$30/hour.

He doesn't. As mentioned before, it's outsourced.

I think that UAW wages are reasonable (and benefits very generous), and that Walmart wages are often too low. But what does that matter? If GM goes out of business paying reasonable wages and generous benefits....

There are two issues here.

1. What is right and fair and proper.

2. What is necessary to survive.

Issue 1 is fodder for a philosophy discussion, but not really germane to the problem at hand. The real question is how far the UAW thinks they can push without killing their employer. Given the huge executive pay potential if the ship gets turned around, I'd expect the union to push this. I just hope it isn't too far.

You nailed it. :bow:

I have family in the UAW, even the "new" UAW members got it good but fail to realize it. :shrug: The guys from the heyday have it very good.

I'd say the new guys have it very good and the heyday guys are spoiled. The new guys see what the old hands are making, and of course, think they aren't getting what they should.



Wait a minute, are you suggesting older union workers working more than 40 hours a week is common? Are you serious?

That woman is probably barely working 40 hrs as it is and making $74k a year... WAKE UP!!!

I also have to throw my hat opposite of your's on this one.

Combine No Forced Retirement, with Senority with Choice Job Assignments and throw in the fact that at that age, even I'd prefer to be around the action and social network of work than drying up alone at home or in a retirement community, and I can easily believe that.

First, the oldest employees work more hours than anyone, partly b/c all their friends are at work, or at least, most of them. And working so much for so long, the don't really have a life outside of work.

The article says NOTHING about how many hours this woman has to work to get that...$74 KI guess you missed the part where she said, "I don’t know anybody else who’s going to give me three hundred and some-odd dollars for my birthday."

Let's assume that "some-odd dollars" is just one dollar. That means she got paid $301 for one day of work. It's pretty safe to assume that's gross income. So, what do we know? Well, the following:

The quote from my original post says her birthday was March 2. Looking at a calendar I see that was a Tuesday. That means at least 8 hours of straight time.

If she only worked 8 hours that day, she gets paid ~$37.62
If she worked 10 hours that day, she gets paid ~$27.37
If she worked 12 hours that day, she gets paid ~$21.50

Now, that's assuming that she only made $301 that day. It could be anywhere from $301-$399. The higher the gross, the higher her pay.

Even if she gets paid $21.50, which I seriously doubt, she still makes $7 more an hour than a janitor at my shop. I would say that our janitors are paid a good wage, by the way.

Bottom line is, she's overpaid.

We're talking about a very old woman who has spent decades with GM, who has built up an amazing amount of senority, has her pick of jobs based on that, and isn't going to go down the pay scale simply because of age.

Using this as a basis for posting janitors get paid $30 per hour is like me using a fatal blowout on the freeway as grounds for saying cars are dangerous and should be outlawed. You gotta look at the whole picture and not just a soundbite. Are you saying that pay is determined by age and not job class?

The union mentality of today is similiar to that of isolationist. The world is changing and they don't want to change with it. A different world indeed . . .

I think that's some of the leaders who are taking stances to reach higher union office. I think both the rank & file as well as the top UAW guys want what's best.

I can understand the UAW wanting to preserve jobs/plants and there is no question that private industry (manufacturing and otherwise) is significantly different than the military. IMHO, however, I don't think that difference is a good basis for advancing the argument that unions are good institutions or needed institutions (and if I misunderstood your intent I apologize).

In the Ford example you gave, one of the reasons Ford (or GM or Chrysler) has to close a whole plant when demand falls is 1) In-efficient plants that only make one vehicle line and 2) the inability to control production by any other means than taking the drastic step of closing down a plant.

Were Ford able to have real control without the UAW bureaucracy they might be able to keep a plant open (even at a reduced output) rather than close it. But with the red tape involved, it’s often easier for them to close a whole plant which puts everyone out of work.

By their very nature, unions make companies LESS competitive by taking power away from business owners to make decisions that are best (and sometimes absolutely necessary for the survival of) the business.

Businesses do not exist to provide employment, benefits, support families or for any other reason but to make a profit for their owners.

The Detroit Big Three may survive with the UAW but they will never be truly competitive with foreign manufacturers as long as the UAW has power.

That said, I’m glad the workers are back to work and I hope GM got enough concessions out of the UAW to keep its momentum going. :thumb:

Good points all. Only one area I question.

Sure, business needs to be able to operate freely to stay competitive. But at the same time you need some type of firewall to protect against the Roger Smiths and other executives who shut down plants and force more work on fewer people simply to send up stock and earn obscene bonuses.

Sure, today's auto industry is different from many of those situations, but there needs to be an entity to stand between these types of decisionmakers and the guy on the plant floor.

UAW to an extent is necessary. In recent years, they have done far more good than harm. Outside of the Job Bank, I really can't fault them with much they've done in recent years. But like the American car companies themselves, it takes a long time to overturn bad reputations.

Are you saying that pay is determined by age and not job class?

Determined by years on the job. I'm sure highest job classification also has something to do with it.

She's been working with GM for 35 years. Started off as a spot welder.

She earned 74K with overtime last year.

Social Security is a different item entirely. Even multi billionaire Kirk Kerorian can collect taxpayer funded Social Security checks.

Wild guess. Based on the story, she makes about 50-60K per year base salary from GM.

There's probally a few dozen people out of 75,000+ GM workers anywhere near her situation in age, job classification, and pay. Hardly enough to use as a example for a broadbased assumption that GM pays it's janitors $30 per hour.

...Good points all. Only one area I question.

Sure, business needs to be able to operate freely to stay competitive. But at the same time you need some type of firewall to protect against the Roger Smiths and other executives who shut down plants and force more work on fewer people simply to send up stock and earn obscene bonuses.

Sure, today's auto industry is different from many of those situations, but there needs to be an entity to stand between these types of decisionmakers and the guy on the plant floor.

UAW to an extent is necessary. In recent years, they have done far more good than harm. Outside of the Job Bank, I really can't fault them with much they've done in recent years. But like the American car companies themselves, it takes a long time to overturn bad reputations.
I understand what you are saying but it begs the question of where is the worker's backbone and responsibility in the process?

I've worked for companies that have gotten rid of people with no intention of replacing them and simply expecting those who are left to take up the slack...that can be understandable in the short term but not as a normal way of doing business...in those cases, I quite and went to work somewhere else; in one case, moving three states away for the work I wanted.

Tennessee, where I live now, is a right to work state; my employer can fire me for just about any reason at all (except for the big "no-no" reasons such as age, race, religion, sex, etc) and by the same token, I can walk out the door at any time. I see no value to either the company or ultimately the emplyee to putting up an artificial barrier that prevents (or at least slows down) that process.

I find very little that a union can do for its members today that can't be done (and oftern done better and more quickly) by the employee himslef and through Federal and State laws.

My highly personal and totally subjective opinion about unions and union workers today is that most union workers belong to/feel they need a union because of an infeiority complex - believeing they aren't good enough, on their own, to keep a job or get one as good or better on their own if they loos the one they have at the moment....just my $0.02, not intended to offend anyone.

Determined by years on the job. I'm sure highest job classification also has something to do with it.

She's been working with GM for 35 years. Started off as a spot welder.

She earned 74K with overtime.

Wild guess. Based on the story, she makes about 50-60K per year base.

There's probally a few dozen people out of 75,000+ GM workers anywhere near her situation in age, job classification, and pay. Hardly enough to use as a example for a broadbased assumption that GM pays it's janitors $30 per hour.I really doubt that janitor is the highest job class. Here's how it works at my shop (UAW Local 9699):

Each job has its own class. There are different pay rates for that class depending on your seniority (up to a certain max). Let's take Utility (janitor), for instance:

It's third from the bottom on the job class list. Starting pay is $10.87. After 3 years, you max out at $13.74. That goes for a guy who has 30 years in the shop. Even if he was a Machine Builder/Toolmaker making $20 an hour with 30 years, if he bids on that Utility job, his pay drops to the max wage of $13.74.

I think it's perfectly fair to base my argument on her alone since I can assume that each job class has a max wage, regardless of seniority.

Now granted, my shop could be completely different. If it is, I've learned something new and I will happily rescind my argument. If it's similar, however, I'm right.

I also have to throw my hat opposite of your's on this one.

Combine No Forced Retirement, with Senority with Choice Job Assignments and throw in the fact that at that age, even I'd prefer to be around the action and social network of work than drying up alone at home or in a retirement community, and I can easily believe that.
Not exactly the point I was making. However I disagree. You need to work smarter and plan ahead so you can retire earlier. There has been proven research that you live longer after retiring based upon how old you are when you retire.

My former boss sent this to us when he retired last year:

http://www.mytruebrain.com/Creativity%20&%20Longevity.pdf

Here we have people that have been with the "company" so long now that they are literally making only 10¢ on the dollar. Meaning their retirement pension would be 90% of their current take home pay. What many people do is retire at 55, then comeback as a paid consultant while they are collecting their pension, so they can get their 40-quarters in for social security. (We don't pay social security.) Most of them are fully retired by 60 and making more than they were when they worked full-time. :D

My highly personal and totally subjective opinion about unions and union workers today is that most union workers belong to/feel they need a union because of an infeiority complex - believeing they aren't good enough, on their own, to keep a job or get one as good or better on their own if they loos the one they have at the moment....just my $0.02, not intended to offend anyone.

I think everyone in the UAW understands that there's almost zero chance they could find a job that's as good as the one they have, and its because of dollars-and-cents, not any sort of complex. (I also wonder if non-union transplant companies are even willing to hire "union guys" anyway, experienced autoworkers or not.)

The irony is that because they are so well-compensated, they are far more likely to take extreme actions to preserve that situation, up to and including endangering the financial health of the company. If this was simply a dollar or two an hour, you wouldn't see this sort of gamesmanship.

In my experience working crappy union jobs as a young man (grocery store, hospital), even though the unions were pussycats compared the UAW, its simply a better experience to work in an organized environment where work rules and so on are standardized. Particularly because managerial pool for these jobs tends not to be humanity's cream-of-the-crop, and the working environment is frequently awful just for the sake of being awful. Now, obviously as a skilled professional I have a different take on market value and prospects, but there's only so many ways to bag groceries.

Working 80-100 hours a week without burnout? They must not be working very hard.
Their social lives are at work? How much time are they spending working vs not working?
At 80 hours a week with cost of overtime, itd be cheaper to pull one person to 40 hours and hire another to work another 40. Not even including burnout effects. Health insurance may tip the scales though, but hourly it will be cheaper. I'd pull that for health reasons too. Its not healthy to work hard for 80 hours a week... Oh wait, they arent.
Start naming me jobs in the 60-80k range (salaried or hourly) where there isnt massive burnout when you have to constantly pull even 60 hours a week.
If these people were actually working hard for 80-100 hours a week OSHA would be all over GM. Any factory job where you work in one (no matter what you are doing) exposes you to equipment and chemicals that are extremely dangerous. Tired on the job=accidents. 100 hours a week means 7 14 hour days. There is no physical way you can work 14 hour days every day, get 8 hours of sleep, shower, eat, and have time for your own personal well-being

The point is, UAW workers do good work. Too bad they are bleeding the automotive big 3 dry.

The point is we're loosing jobs in this country cause for all those $60k+ janitors (even if they were working productively for 80 hours a week) I could get 4 mexican workers in a mexican plant to work 40-50 hours a week each for that money.

The point is the Steel industry in this country is dead and look how the UAW is riding the Automotive industry.

And the reality is that if GM could cut $2000 off every car they could get rid of incentives. If they cut $3000 off every car, the imports would be scared white. If GM can do that while bringing jobs back into this country, so much the better. Lets make labor copetitive as all get out, take pride in our work, and work hard when we're getting paid for it.

Here's some of the items of the agreement between the UAW and GM:

* The creation of a voluntary employees' beneficiary association, or VEBA, that Gettelfinger said will cover retiree health care benefits for the next 80 years.

GM agreed to fund the VEBA near 70 cents on the dollar, sources said. That's significantly more then the 65 cent contribution the company originally pushed for.

*GM will implement a two-tier wage system for workers not doing core manufacturing jobs. The lower tier will be as little as half the current $28-an-hour wage for an hourly worker. The new wage structure would apply to new hires, not current workers.

*The automaker will make 4,100 temporary workers permanent employees paid at the lower rate. A special attrition program offering workers buyouts or early retirement would help clear out senior workers and make room for the new workers.

*Also part of a deal is a trade-off in which workers will give up cost-of-living adjustments in exchange for no increases in medical premiums.

*The agreement would include modifications to the controversial jobs bank program in which laid-off workers receive pay and benefits. The changes will expand the geographic area in which workers would be required to take a new job if one is available. Under current rules, workers are allowed to remain off the job and in the bank unless there's an opening within 50 miles of their old job.

*Signing bonuses, meanwhile, could help win ratification of a contract. The payments would be $3,000 to start, followed by three years of lump-sum payments equal to 3 percent, 4 percent, and 3 percent of their annual pay in the last three years of the contract.

So, there's a 2 tier wage system, emabling GM to lower wages through attrition. Bonuses in place of annual cost of living adjustments, that protects GM in case of inflation. The area "Jobs Bank" people have to accept work or be dropped.

None of it sounds unreasonable, and based on Eric's earlier belief that the deal was already made, and the idea that the strike was barely more than simply face saving posturing, that (at least on the surface) seems pretty accurate. Seems all the early points stayed the same, and a 2 day strike barely affected anybody. :shrug:

I think everyone in the UAW understands that there's almost zero chance they could find a job that's as good as the one they have, and its because of dollars-and-cents, not any sort of complex. (I also wonder if non-union transplant companies are even willing to hire "union guys" anyway, experienced autoworkers or not.)

The irony is that because they are so well-compensated, they are far more likely to take extreme actions to preserve that situation, up to and including endangering the financial health of the company. If this was simply a dollar or two an hour, you wouldn't see this sort of gamesmanship.

In my experience working crappy union jobs as a young man (grocery store, hospital), even though the unions were pussycats compared the UAW, its simply a better experience to work in an organized environment where work rules and so on are standardized. Particularly because managerial pool for these jobs tends not to be humanity's cream-of-the-crop, and the working environment is frequently awful just for the sake of being awful. Now, obviously as a skilled professional I have a different take on market value and prospects, but there's only so many ways to bag groceries.
I was speaking more about unions/union workers in general than specifically about the UAW with my "inferiority complex" theory. :) That said, no question, when speaking about the UAW, their wages (and fear they could never make as much anywhere else) very much come into the mix.

But, doesn't that just help substantiate the argument that these workers are being artificially paid more than their skills justify on the open market? And if that's the case, how can the domestic auto manufcturers ever hope to be competative with their foreign counterparts?

Originally posted by GunnyHighway:
The union mentality of today is similiar to that of isolationist. The world is changing and they don't want to change with it. A different world indeed . . .
Just b/c the world seems to be changing, doesn't mean those changes are good, right or worthy of support; some should and must be challenged and opposed.

(Like my sig:"It is not a sign of good health to be well adjusted to a sick society."- )

Just b/c the world seems to be changing, doesn't mean those changes are good, right or worthy of support; some should and must be challenged and opposed.

(Like my sig:"It is not a sign of good health to be well adjusted to a sick society."- )
Some would say that long trains blocking a roadway for long periods of time is a bad thing and worthy of standing against it but standing in front of an oncoming locomotive to “stand firm” in your convictions may not be such a great idea.

Globalization is here to stay; and the U.S. and U.S Industry must find ways to compete, innovate, and do better at the globalization game than other countries if it is to stay a world economic power.

Artificial protections/trying to preserve the status quo will only postpone the inevitable and may well make the ultimate transition devastating when it could have been positive.

But, doesn't that just help substantiate the argument that these workers are being artificially paid more than their skills justify on the open market? And if that's the case, how can the domestic auto manufcturers ever hope to be competative with their foreign counterparts?

In the long run, there's always someone who will do any job cheaper on the open market. The trick is postponing that long run :)

But, yes, I agree that the automotive unions have no choice but to be realistic about the current situation. And they largely seem like they have been. (And IMO, a more humble UAW has a greater chance of successfully organizing the transplants.)

Great job by all negotiating teams involved. GM lifted $50 Billion off their books, the UAW is promised job security with significant investment in American plants.

Great job for all sides.

In the long run, there's always someone who will do any job cheaper on the open market. The trick is postponing that long run :)

But, yes, I agree that the automotive unions have no choice but to be realistic about the current situation. And they largely seem like they have been. (And IMO, a more humble UAW has a greater chance of successfully organizing the transplants.)
But postponing only helps a few and tends to hurt everyone else...if something is inevitble then it's best overall to embrace it and find ways to flourish with the new than try to artificially maintain the old.

As for organizazing transplants; the only way the UAW will ever have a chance of unionizing a transplant is if the transplant company really screws with their employees...as long as the Toyota's and Honda's and others continue to act responsibility to their employees, the UAW has nothing to offer technicians (except large chunks of their paychecks going to support the UAW).

Executive pay and perks is more outrageous than $75k/yr janitors. Granted, there are more janitors than execs, but if we're gonna get outraged about a number, it might as well be a 7-8 digit number than a 5 digit number.

I'm glad to see the strike settled. Hopefully the concessions, combined with renewed emphasis on product will be enough to get through the next four years, at which point the situation will be reviewed again, I'm sure.