Your article is obviously biased Chris, so what's the difference?

 

Perhaps you missed this part:

 

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

Well, I'm Laid Off again right now, so, I got some experience about what I'm saying. We dropped production by a little over 50 units per day, and that sent nearly 500 people home for the holidays...Ofcourse, after the first of the year, orders are expected to ramp back up, and we'll just resume where we left off. No retraining, kinda like we never left. The last time I was off for over 18 months, and went back hitting the ground running. Just like they'd expected me too.
I'm trying to understand the confusion, most people have theories of how things should work, but the realities of Autoworking are far from ideal.

 

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

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

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

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

 

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

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

 

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

 

D@mn, and I was looking forward to a New Camaro...

 

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


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

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

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

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

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

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



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

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



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

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

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

 

j/k. Good points Guy.

 

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

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

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

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