Robert_Nashville

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.

Mighty

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.

jg95z28

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/Creativit...0Longevity.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.

flowmotion

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.

Geoff Chadwick

• 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.

guionM

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.

Robert_Nashville

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?

90rocz

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."- )

Robert_Nashville

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.

flowmotion

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.)

Josh452

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.

Robert_Nashville

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).

teal98

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.