Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion Automotive news and discussion about upcoming vehicles

A Car Wreck Made in Washington

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Nov 27, 2008 | 03:10 PM
  #16  
Maximum Bob's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 178
Originally Posted by My Red 93Z-28
That would be great and competitive if they didn't pay benefits to all of the retired workers and their spouses, but unfortunately they do, so the $7x.xx/hr compensation figure is not misleading at all. It all comes back to the benefits of retired workers hurting the Big 3.
So what would you have them do? Stop paying the workers & their spouses once they leave the Co.? Even the foreign brands wouldn't do that! And if you use the same method of calculation on them what would their numbers be I wonder. And yes I'm pro-union. My dad's a retired union worker & we only had a middle-middle class standard of living even when he put in a lot of overtime! I'm sure we wouldn't have had that if not for the union. As for the health care costs the workers in other countries have Govt. supplied health care. Which the Clintons tried to give us in the 90's but the conservatives scared everyone into voting it down by calling it communism. So in the end it's EVERYONES fault the Big 3 have to pay health care, not the unions. I just wonder how many of these union bashers grew up in a union home or had some family member in 1?
Old Nov 28, 2008 | 12:00 AM
  #17  
teal98's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
Originally Posted by HuJass
I saw on television last night that the $70 per hour total compensation figure for an American auto worker is a little misleading.
That number is achieved by taking the salaries and benefits of all the active workers, AND all of the retired workers, AND all of the retired workers spouses (if worker is dead) and then dividing it ONLY by the number of active workers.
If you took the total compensation figure for the active workers, and divided it by the number of JUST the active workers, that number comes out to be around $38 per hour, which is actually LESS than the transplant workers.

This info comes from the Center of Automotive Studies (I think that was the name).
If they dump those pensions and benefits to retired workers through some sort of bankruptcy, while that may no longer impact the GM bottom line, the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation will have to pick that up, and it's already in trouble. Loss of health benefits will be absorbed by the individuals, hospitals, government, etc., whoever ends up paying for them.

I remain unconvinced about the advantages of bankruptcy.
Old Nov 28, 2008 | 12:58 AM
  #18  
Dan Daly's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 167
From: USA
Originally Posted by HuJass
They are greedy. Period.


Pot meet kettle.

Old Nov 28, 2008 | 01:06 AM
  #19  
Dan Daly's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 167
From: USA
Originally Posted by HuJass
I'm not saying it's not an important number, but I still think it's a little misleading
The media should show both numbers and how they are calculated to give a clearer picture.
People think that a line worker makes $70 per hour wages & benefits when it's simply not true.
Oh, so $38 hour for a line worker is somehow a "fair wage" now? No education, no real job skills, full benefits and protection, etc . . . and you wonder why there is such anti-union setiment throughtout the country?
Old Nov 28, 2008 | 01:12 AM
  #20  
teal98's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
Originally Posted by Dan Daly
Oh, so $38 hour for a line worker is somehow a "fair wage" now? No education, no real job skills, full benefits and protection, etc . . . and you wonder why there is such anti-union setiment throughtout the country?
I don't think that's the wage. The wage is less -- more like $28 I think. The $38 includes benefits. What's wrong with $55-60K/yr, based on a 40 hr workweek? Seems like a fair wage for the job.
Old Nov 28, 2008 | 02:08 AM
  #21  
Dan Daly's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 167
From: USA
Originally Posted by teal98
I don't think that's the wage. The wage is less -- more like $28 I think. The $38 includes benefits. What's wrong with $55-60K/yr, based on a 40 hr workweek? Seems like a fair wage for the job.
For pushing a button or pealing a sticker off or doing the same task over and over again?


There are soldiers and teachers and countless of other jobs out there who make 2/3 of that who are content.
Old Nov 28, 2008 | 09:53 AM
  #22  
HuJass's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 2,224
From: CNY
Originally Posted by Dan Daly


Pot meet kettle.

So now you're calling ME greedy?

You don't even know me but you feel you can label me. Riiiiiiight.
Old Nov 28, 2008 | 09:57 AM
  #23  
HuJass's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 2,224
From: CNY
Originally Posted by Dan Daly
Oh, so $38 hour for a line worker is somehow a "fair wage" now? No education, no real job skills, full benefits and protection, etc . . . and you wonder why there is such anti-union setiment throughtout the country?
You don't know what their education or job skills are or what their job assignments really are.
You are in no position to be passing judgement on these people; no, scratch that; on ANYONE.

And the $38 is wages AND benefits. Total compensation. Which is actually LESS than the transplants.
Old Nov 28, 2008 | 10:35 AM
  #24  
My Red 93Z-28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,503
From: BFE, Ohio
Originally Posted by Maximum Bob
So what would you have them do? Stop paying the workers & their spouses once they leave the Co.? Even the foreign brands wouldn't do that! And if you use the same method of calculation on them what would their numbers be I wonder. And yes I'm pro-union. My dad's a retired union worker & we only had a middle-middle class standard of living even when he put in a lot of overtime! I'm sure we wouldn't have had that if not for the union. As for the health care costs the workers in other countries have Govt. supplied health care. Which the Clintons tried to give us in the 90's but the conservatives scared everyone into voting it down by calling it communism. So in the end it's EVERYONES fault the Big 3 have to pay health care, not the unions. I just wonder how many of these union bashers grew up in a union home or had some family member in 1?
And I wonder how many of these union bashers grew up in a home with someone who was a non-rep and got to listen to how rediculous it could be to work with the union at times, or actually work in a union plant (non-rep) and get to see it firsthand?

I'm not saying they should stop paying those retirees, I'm just saying you have to figure that in because it is reality.
Old Nov 28, 2008 | 10:40 AM
  #25  
Dan Daly's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 167
From: USA
Originally Posted by HuJass
So now you're calling ME greedy?

You don't even know me but you feel you can label me. Riiiiiiight.
Reading comprehension > you
Old Nov 28, 2008 | 10:12 PM
  #26  
Robert_Nashville's Avatar
Thread Starter
Banned
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,938
Originally Posted by Maximum Bob
So what would you have them do? Stop paying the workers & their spouses once they leave the Co.?
There is nothing wrong with GM or Ford or any company paying full retirement benefits so long as the company can afford to do so; whey they can no longer afford to do so and stay in business something has to give or the company goes out of business.

No doubt about it; it’s a lousy situation to tell a retired worker who gave 30 or 40 years to a company and depended on a pension/other benefits that the company can no longer afford to keep its promise but if it aint got the money then it aint got the money…reducing benefits/pension payments my be the best of two bad options; the other being for the company to go bankrupt and those retirees get stuck with whatever the government pension insurance will provide (which will probably not be at the level they are accustomed to receiving).


Originally Posted by Maximum Bob
… As for the health care costs the workers in other countries have Govt. supplied health care. Which the Clintons tried to give us in the 90's but the conservatives scared everyone into voting it down by calling it communism.
Socialized medicine is socialism (communism is just the ultimate expression of socialism but they are not quite interchangeable). However, while many, many people objected to the mid-90’s attempt at universal health care because such health care is socialism, there was a much more pragmatic reason it was opposed – Government run health care PROVIDES LOUSY, SUBSTANDATD CARE.

If you’ve ever had the privilege of seeing government supplied health care up close and personal you wouldn’t want it in a million years.

I sometimes wonder if some here are so blinded by their passion for “saving” GM that they have rendered themselves unable to see just how bad an idea that socialized medicine is.

And let's keep in mind, the transplant manufacturers don't get government supplied health care; they may get that in Germany or Japan or Mexico but not here.

And let's also keep in mind that "free" government health care is NOT free.
Old Nov 29, 2008 | 01:35 PM
  #27  
Maximum Bob's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 178
I agree that if the company doesn't have the money to keep paying pensions then there isn't a whole lot that can be done about it. It's just that before they start start cutting benefits they ought to stop bonuses 1st. Those multi million dollar bonus checks could probably cover the benefits for a year. But, of course, the CEO's, COO's, CFO's & whatnot would NEVER consider the notion of giving those up just to help out the lowly! And while socialized medicine may be sub-standard compared to SOME private health care plans, There are millions of working americans who can't afford a health care plan at all, let alone 1 of the good plans! So for them socialized health care, for all it's problems, would be a godsend. BTW the plan would've been pais for same way as Social Security with a health care income tax that would probably be lower than most private plans premiums.
Old Nov 29, 2008 | 08:21 PM
  #28  
mzgp5x's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,174
From: MI
The problem is, cafe includes trucks and car for the US autos as well as all the transplants. US supplies all the trucks cuz, transplant trucks are junk. And yes... the new toyota truck is junk. The honda is not a truck. It's been that way for years. Hey I'm an Engineer that walked away. Gave me nothing. Designed all of the YAG welding atomation/equipment for one of the Detroit-3. I've seen alot of idiot management and do nothing union skilled trades. Most of the line workers busted their azz. I have a job here in MI after walking away. Wow... how about that!!! Alot of hate out there for D-town as well as the Detroit-3. The Left is intent on destroying the US and keep the hate going. Look at history... NC machine tool industry, ram chip industry in Cal, ship building, elecronics, YV, etc, the US industry death list goes on. Get real people. OK, so Nash, hows that Nisan doing??? How bout a little 97ss 383 FI action??? Your always starting trouble on this web site. This is a Camaro tech web site. Got any tech??? B.
Old Nov 29, 2008 | 09:20 PM
  #29  
DvBoard's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 940
From: Southern Indiana
Originally Posted by teal98
I don't think that's the wage. The wage is less -- more like $28 I think. The $38 includes benefits. What's wrong with $55-60K/yr, based on a 40 hr workweek? Seems like a fair wage for the job.
For a factory job $55k is damn nice.

Of course it all comes down to the area you live in too. Around here $55k would get you a nice house and 2 cars. In other areas you could afford decent transportation and an apartment.
Old Nov 30, 2008 | 11:37 AM
  #30  
94LightningGal's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,178
From: Payson, AZ USA
Originally Posted by Maximum Bob
BTW the plan would've been pais for same way as Social Security with a health care income tax that would probably be lower than most private plans premiums.
Your joking.............. right???

You have to be joking.............. you couldn't ACTUALLY believe that propaganda............ could you???

In answer, I submit this. Name one thing that the government has gotten its hands into, that cost less than what the private sector could do.

One thing.

Canadians pay appx 1.5-2X the taxes that we pay............. and most of that is for the priveledge of having socialized medicine. The population of Canada is minute, compared to the population of the US. Thus, multiply the beaurocracy many fold, for a US version. Add in all of the stupidity that our fine government would pile on such a plan................ and at the very minimum, we would pay double our current taxes to support this behemouth (understanding that socialized medicine in the US could cost more than the military).

Finally, all of my relatives are in Canada. I have a very close, and personal relationship with socialized medicine. Lets just say that it works great if you have a cold. Anything else................ well, get ready to wait. Oh, if you really want good care, you just go across the border to the US, and pay for the proceedures you need, right now (what many Canadians do). Thus, their system is no different than ours................ the rich get the best care, because they pay for it, and the rest of us get whatever care we can afford.

BTW, Canadian healthcare killed my Grandmother............... due to the layer upon layer of stupidity, and lack of oversight. Thus, paint me unimpressed.

Our current system may suck................. but it sucks less than the alternative.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:53 PM.