- Mar 29, 2004
- 13,051
- 6
- 81
9 pages of belly-aching about whether it was the union workers or the management. These car companies were losing money at the height of the boom, the workers are way overpaid relative to the ones in the South, and the management is idiotic and in bed with government. God forbid we allow allow bankruptcy to purge the refuse so that someone with a brain can buy up the good assets and move forward with their investment at risk.
- Mar 29, 2004
- 13,051
- 6
- 81
and 9 pages in and you still did not pick up the simple aspect of why it was posted, it is a myth.
It's not a myth, the retirement costs are real costs. That Toyota doesn't have them now doesn't change the fact that they exist for GM. Toyota, too, might one day go bankrupt from making the same boneheaded deals now in an economic environment that is being taxed and inflated and regulated to death. That is immaterial for the moment. Health care costs are going up for a reason, your precious socialist government has borrowed and spent this country into oblivion. That has consequences on businesses that made deals with union employees based on projected costs. And don't look now, their solution is to print up even more to get foreign bond holders to socialize the losses. Too bad foreigners are going to stop buying, leaving the Fed with 9 trillion of debt to buy up from the government with a printing press, effectively socializing the loss on American savers and wage earners.
- Mar 29, 2004
- 13,051
- 6
- 81
Yes, they the companies have them, but the current employees are not making that supposed 70$ an hour figure.
If we had UHC the whole point would be moot anyhow, and this bailout is not socialized onto the American people, we do not own the companies. Nor are we going to get a piece for propping them up. 404 Socialism not found.
True, the current workers are not geting paid $70 per hour, but they are still overpaid. That will get corrected when the companies go out of business and come back without the burden of a union dragging them down.
What the statistic is doing is spreading the legacy costs of old employees over active ones. Maybe it's disingenuous to show them in this way, but the fact is that union members do cost more and legacy costs are real burdens. The real underlying issue is what caused health care costs to skyrocket to make these deals so painful to maintain, and the answer, of course, is inflation and regulation. Ron Paul was an OBGYN, he would know.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWLwJyc0ZqI
Of course we can't compete with foreign labor, our government way too spendthrift. And instead of fighting the appropriation of the ingredients, we have people fighting over the distribution of the cake.
- Mar 29, 2004
- 13,051
- 6
- 81
Ron Paul is not economist, nor is he a Accountant. He is a doctor.
The dude has been around too many yeast infections methinks, its gone to his head and showing.
Speaking of the UAW and GM , sample the Yahoo Finance GM Message board - http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/mb/GM
look at this too -
http://www.clickondetroit.com/...271/index.html?taf=det
look at this too -
http://www.clickondetroit.com/...271/index.html?taf=det
It does. Most people with a real degree don't need to go into a blue collared workforce... and definitely not unionized labor.
Ktulu
Diamond Member
- Dec 16, 2000
- 4,354
- 0
- 0
I work as a programmer, but I get the same amount of satisfaction when i work on my car, work on my lawn, build something for my home or any other blue collar type of task. Degrees only offer people more opportunities they would not have had with out the degree. But it doesn't make you better just for having it.
zerocool84
Lifer
- Nov 11, 2004
- 36,041
- 472
- 126
I just read that if a UAW worker gets laid off, they get 95% of their pay. WTF is up with that. They seriously need to cut pay/benefits from CEO to the lowest UAW worker. It's better to have a $20/hr and reduced benefits job than have no job at all. The UAW would never allow that though. There is seriously no reason for unions in today's world. We have laws to protect workers. We needed them in the early part of the twentieth but not any more.
boomerang
Lifer
- Jun 19, 2000
- 18,883
- 641
- 126
Let me explain to you how that works. Part of that pay comes from unemployment benefits from the state. The remaining pay is from the UAW - that's right, the union makes up the difference. The money comes from dues the union members paid.
It's no skin off your nose at all.
In addition, the UAW has agreed to the changes they have outlined publicly, (elimination of the jobs bank and delaying of VEBA payments) and also has made the commitment to consider other cost cutting changes. The 'burden' of the autoworkers amounts to 10% of the cost of a car. So get rid of them entirely, then find a way for the cars to magically be built and that $30,000 car then costs $27,000.
BoomerD
No Lifer
- Feb 26, 2006
- 66,709
- 15,110
- 146
While a degree gives you knowledge that can lead to a better paying job, it does not make you a better person in any way.
Why the fuck people think their Bachelor's degree entitles them to more $$ than someone who puts in 8000 hours in an apprenticeship learning their trade baffles me.
At the end of my apprenticeship, I knew my job inside and out..when you graduate, you know the basics of some aspects of a job, such as the math and engineering principles, but usually have little to no practical experience.
Originally posted by: Triumph
Originally posted by: Zebo
Originally posted by: frostedflakes
We figured this out a long time ago.
$60k/yr is still good money for unskilled labor, though. And I'm sure the work is tough, but there are plenty of people out there working physically demanding jobs that don't get paid $60k/yr.
But I think it's great that the UAW has made concessions, the new contracts should allow the domestic auto industry to be more competitive with non-union labor working for foreign automakers.
Why do you say the work is unskilled? If that were the case wouldn't all cars be built in Mexico or Chad instead of places like Korea, Japan, Germany and USA?
Calling assembly line workers skilled is an insult to truly skilled workers. Skilled labor is maintenance of a vehicle. Going to school for more than a week to learn to do a job, is skilled labor. Following simple instructions like, "Screw in this bolt, now tighten this nut, and then repeat 100 times," is not skilled labor.
There really is no replacement for on the job training. which is what factory work is.
Ask any manager that has had to try and fill in while employees are on strike.
Factory employees substitute years of practical experience /skills for hours in the classroom that a degree is..
Now on the otherhand you take an individual like that with years of Life experience and add a degree, then even better.
In many cases it is not highly technical work, but to call it unskilled would also be misnomer.
Corn
Diamond Member
- Nov 12, 1999
- 6,390
- 29
- 91
Sorry, but that stretches the truth beyond comprehension as the automakers pay billions of dollars into the jobs bank fund. The jobs bank cost is ~ $699 million dollars per year (12,000 employee average being paid $28/hour). Total UAW membership dues collected per year (~ $191 million) is but a fraction of the cost of the jobs bank in totality. The only time the union pays out earnings is with its own employees or strike pay. I don't believe it pays a single cent of union dues for the jobs bank, you are free to provide evidence to the contrary.
Source.
Squisher
Lifer
- Aug 17, 2000
- 21,204
- 66
- 91
That is pathetic. I don't understand how they got off property during work hours. All your hours are managed on a computer. Work badges have a proximity sensor that records all your time. The only way this could happen is if these were one a few people that normally need access to the exterior of the plant like building maintenance AND their bosses were complicit to the charade. In most cases even your boss could not cover for you. Beyond the boss being fired it wouldn't be beyond the realm of imagination of being prosecuted for fraud/theft.
I doubt it comes as a shock to most people that dirt bags exist, the jails are filled with them.
We had a boss along a number of workers that were fired and prosecuted for doing work for another company while on company time.
boomerang
Lifer
- Jun 19, 2000
- 18,883
- 641
- 126
Your assumption that my statement is wrong is a mistake on your part. You are mixing up the jobs bank with layoffs. They are two completely different entities.
The jobs bank (which is soon to be history) was dreamed up by the Union (and agreed to by management) during the era of Roger Smiths tenure as CEO of GM. Mr. Smiths idea was that he could use robots to do the majority of the work on the assembly line and replace workers in the process. The jobs bank was created to ensure that workers that were displaced by technology would not lose their jobs. The corporation agreed to this, thinking that the productivity gains would offset the losses. It was failure then and it's a failure now. Anyone keeping up with the news is aware of the fact that the jobs bank is history.
zerocool84's post specifically stated "layoffs". I responded to that statement. You did not quote that, either by mistake or by convenience. I will stand by my statement 100% of how laid off autoworkers get 95% of their pay. Be aware that when their unemployment benefits run out, they are thrown to the lions the same as the average Joe.
Quoting articles from 2005 is good for stirring up the unwashed masses, but is not at all relevant to what is happening today.
BTW, your second quote specifically states salaried employees, UAW represented workers at Ford and GM are hourly. I'm not willing to search out where in your outdated link that paragraph exists so I will leave it up to you to defend its true meaning.
Edit: Just to set the record straight, UAW represented workers that were in the jobs bank were paid 100% of their pay, not 95% as is widely thought to be the case. They got 100% of a 40 hour paycheck.
Laid off workers, when you add together their unemployment benefits and their UAW subsidy (SUB Pay) get 95% of their 40 hour take home pay. In other words, 95% of their pay after taxes. But their unemployment check (in the state of Michigan) is not taxed. So at tax time they have to pay the piper.
Corn
Diamond Member
- Nov 12, 1999
- 6,390
- 29
- 91
The UAW contributes nothing to a laid off employee's income, whether its during the period an employee is eligible for unemployment or beyond that when the laid off employee is participating in the jobs bank. If you want something more recent, how about this piece in the Detroit Free Press published a few weeks ago.
Pay particular attention to the bolding and italics. Nowhere does it state the union pays any wages, it specifically states "employer" and "company".
More here, and published today:
I don't see any mention of the union subsidising wages for laid off employees, but I do see the auto companies mentioned...........I wonder why.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter