It's just a tough environment all around. I feel bad for anyone in danger of losing their job right now, since finding another one is going to be very very hard. On the flip side, making $60K in an area where the cost of living is probably incredibly low (average house = 75k) for doing essentially unskilled work is absurd. The unions have distorted the cost of labor in that area.
Ahh deflection....
Care to bring that back to your totally laughable original post?
Like I said Red, I have far more sympathy for the IT workers than I do the Union guys, the former are in a volitile industry that totally devalues skilled labor, the latter is hard work for sure, but they get benefits and protections that are pretty darn good compared to 99.99999% of other people/workers.
Starbuck1975
Lifer
- Jan 6, 2005
- 14,698
- 1,909
- 126
Relative to the cost of living in the area they live in, $60k is a fortune. In high cost of living areas, $60k doesn't seem like much...but if the average home price is $75k, a $60k can go a long way.
And then we wonder why companies outsource.
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
The cliche, "Don't cut off your nose to spite your face" comes to mind.
What if, as a result of the loss of middle class blue collar jobs across the U.S., people stop purchasing the good or service that keeps 3chorcharlie employed? Then 3chordcharlie can't find another job since we have a large oversupply of people with college degrees and advanced and professional degrees?
Then what?
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
By the way guys, a great many of these folks and their children are rushing into the colleges and universities to train for YOUR knowledge-based jobs and...they'll offer to do the work for half or a quarter of what you're being paid for it. Some of your jobs are even liable to get outsourced or filled by foreigners on work visas. (Ever heard of supply-and-demand?) Yes, now you too, sitting on your high horse, can enjoy the wonders of global labor arbitrage and the race to the bottom. Might we complain about how you're overpaid at your current position when people are willing to do your job, perhaps not as good, but for far less income?
Enjoy the sense of schaedenfrauda (sp?) while you can. I'm sure that all of the unemployed and underemployed blue collar workers won't have much sympathy for you and when the food riots and societal breakdown come, perhaps it will be your heads that they'll be putting on the guillotine and pikes.
(For the record, I have a bachelor's degree, a master's in a physical science, and a professional degree, so I'm not some ignorant, uneducated blue collar factory worker ape taking shots at you guys.)
Enjoy the sense of schaedenfrauda (sp?) while you can. I'm sure that all of the unemployed and underemployed blue collar workers won't have much sympathy for you and when the food riots and societal breakdown come, perhaps it will be your heads that they'll be putting on the guillotine and pikes.
(For the record, I have a bachelor's degree, a master's in a physical science, and a professional degree, so I'm not some ignorant, uneducated blue collar factory worker ape taking shots at you guys.)
You disagree because you either don't understand what you are saying or you are too ignorant to know better.
Labor, in non-ownership sharing companies, is as much of a partner as the next subcontractor that works with the company (they aren't a partner, they are a stakeholder). If the company has an ESOP or something similar then you can say labor is a partner.
No one said that laborers dont assume risk. I think everyone agrees that laborers have some risks but you don't earn anything for not taking any risk. Part of your paycheck and benefits are a way of compensating you for taking the risk of working at company X (the major part being compensation for your skills/abilities, unless you are in a union then its compensation for how long you have been working). It is the same type of compensation with any subcontractor that works with the company.
Your last sentence in your first paragraph is where you show just how confused you are. Unions dont have ANY stake in ANY company. They didnt start the company, they didnt put up $ for the company, they didnt make the decisions that got the company to the point where it looked attractive for unions to organize it. All unions do for a company is turn a partner type relationship (laborers & management) into a subcontractor type relationship (unions & management). You may think im arguing semantics but what you are saying is just 100% wrong.
Onto your second paragraph. Who are you to say who can afford to take risks and who cant? The ones in your "cushy management/executive/board jobs" are paid the way they are because they have the skill set to direct what a multi-billion dollar company does. Being responsible for that amount of value warrants highly skilled, intelligent executives and they dont come cheep.
Again your last sentence is the one where you REALLY show how ignorant you are. The payment structure at most companies for management gives them a small guaranteed salary ~100k with bonuses for performance. They dont get the bonus if the company doesnt do well.
You need to stop blindly defending unions and take a long hard look at reality. That is of course if your interested in having an informed opinion and you dont have some stake in unions.
JulesMaximus
No Lifer
- Jul 3, 2003
- 74,586
- 986
- 126
boomerang
Lifer
- Jun 19, 2000
- 18,883
- 641
- 126
I know union workers could all agree to work for free and hand over $5 every day on their way in the door and you guys still wouldn't be happy, but have I missed something?
Has an agreement been reached between the UAW and Chrysler that's not good enough for you guys? GM? Has either company gone under yet? Did I miss that?
If there's been some new development, please share it.
I ask because I'm trying to figure out just what it is you're all bitching about. It sounds like the same old shit that you've been expressing for years. It mostly boils down to, somebody is making more money than I am!
Here's the arguments we've got so far.
They make too much money.
They need to get training and move. (No suggestions on what field, how to sell their home, etc.)
They're dumb fucks to even have the job.
I'm entitled to benefits if I'm laid off, but they shouldn't be. (Because they make too much.)
You're a dumb ass, because you don't understand, management has all the answers. (A real favorite of mine)
To top it off, the overwhelming majority of you wouldn't be caught dead in a domestic car. You hate their products, the company and most of all the workers. You're bitching now and you'll be bitching when they're gone. Have you thought of who your new whipping boy is going to be? You're going to need one.
Has an agreement been reached between the UAW and Chrysler that's not good enough for you guys? GM? Has either company gone under yet? Did I miss that?
If there's been some new development, please share it.
I ask because I'm trying to figure out just what it is you're all bitching about. It sounds like the same old shit that you've been expressing for years. It mostly boils down to, somebody is making more money than I am!
Here's the arguments we've got so far.
They make too much money.
They need to get training and move. (No suggestions on what field, how to sell their home, etc.)
They're dumb fucks to even have the job.
I'm entitled to benefits if I'm laid off, but they shouldn't be. (Because they make too much.)
You're a dumb ass, because you don't understand, management has all the answers. (A real favorite of mine)
To top it off, the overwhelming majority of you wouldn't be caught dead in a domestic car. You hate their products, the company and most of all the workers. You're bitching now and you'll be bitching when they're gone. Have you thought of who your new whipping boy is going to be? You're going to need one.
spacejamz
Lifer
- Mar 31, 2003
- 10,980
- 1,696
- 126
If that is your assessment of the current situation, I don't think anyone here would be able to provide you an explanation that you will accept.
If you cannot see for yourself how these unions are are big contributor to the Big 3's downfall, no one here can help you. Sorry.
Some people just dont have the mental capacity to wrap their head around economics. This person is one of them. You can throw logic at them all day and they will just hear "ugh unions bad grunt!" Its like arguing with a hyper religious person. The facts just dont matter to them because they dont coincide with their point of view.
boomerang
Lifer
- Jun 19, 2000
- 18,883
- 641
- 126
It's not my assessment of the situation, it's my assessment of the thread. It's another pointless thread bashing the very people our tax dollars will soon be supporting. If it's more important to you that they all lose their jobs to prove some kind of point, well so be it.
You can't change the past. The future is all we have. That future has the potential for another million or more of unemployed to be supported by those that still have a job. What's the point of this continual arguing about the pay of autoworkers? When the contract concessions are made public, pick up the argument at that point.
As I said, it will never be enough for most of you.
Mr. boomerang,
I, for one, drive a domestic car, just not one built by the UAW. From what I read on this board I am not alone. I've watched the UAW dig its grave since the 1960s and think they may have finally completed the job.
The attitude they continue to show us today says volumes about them and hasn't really changed in over 50 years. About the same amount of time I have spent buying non-UAW built cars. I don't want them or their families to starve - but its time for a reality check.
I, for one, drive a domestic car, just not one built by the UAW. From what I read on this board I am not alone. I've watched the UAW dig its grave since the 1960s and think they may have finally completed the job.
The attitude they continue to show us today says volumes about them and hasn't really changed in over 50 years. About the same amount of time I have spent buying non-UAW built cars. I don't want them or their families to starve - but its time for a reality check.
UglyCasanova
Lifer
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
What are we trying to accomplish? Keep the big 3 in business, and if so in what form? Would it be okay to have the designs made here but have them manufactured overseas? Are we trying to save every autoworker job, no matter the cost? The US government needs to take a seriously look at where they see the US auto industry in the next 10 to 20 years. The trend is towards efficient vehicles and I don't really see this changing. China has announced its' strategy for the electric automobile market: win. The said that it is a national priority to have the world's top electric vehicle industry no matter what. Do we really expect GM to compete with this?
I predict that to many's dismay the US auto industry is going to make some radical transformations in the next 5 to 10 years. It will become smaller by necessity, that is already taking place. As much as people may dislike it, that means massive layoffs. In an open world economy we simply cannot support the costs it takes to build the cars here. Competitive pressures from cheap labor overseas are killing our domestic autoworkers' jobs (which it should). I am not rooting for these people to lose their jobs, but competition is what drives our markets in the first place. It is just natural to trend toward efficiency.
That said we need to focus on our strengths here in the US and exploit that, rather than propping up our weaknesses and bringing the whole system down. The US has a vast pool of talent which we need to utilize and foster its' growth. That is what sets us apart from China. They simply don't have the creative minds matched with engineering talent that we do to design a decent vehicle. Our engineers are doing the best they can to design a car that that has to compete with foreign cars at a similar price range while having a much greater amount of overhead and legacy costs. In order to really get back into the game and become competitive they are going to have to sever their US plants and outsource all of the actual manufacturing jobs overseas. This would also in turn eliminate the need for tariffs and suddenly every US citizen is paying a much lower cost for their vehicles.
I predict that to many's dismay the US auto industry is going to make some radical transformations in the next 5 to 10 years. It will become smaller by necessity, that is already taking place. As much as people may dislike it, that means massive layoffs. In an open world economy we simply cannot support the costs it takes to build the cars here. Competitive pressures from cheap labor overseas are killing our domestic autoworkers' jobs (which it should). I am not rooting for these people to lose their jobs, but competition is what drives our markets in the first place. It is just natural to trend toward efficiency.
That said we need to focus on our strengths here in the US and exploit that, rather than propping up our weaknesses and bringing the whole system down. The US has a vast pool of talent which we need to utilize and foster its' growth. That is what sets us apart from China. They simply don't have the creative minds matched with engineering talent that we do to design a decent vehicle. Our engineers are doing the best they can to design a car that that has to compete with foreign cars at a similar price range while having a much greater amount of overhead and legacy costs. In order to really get back into the game and become competitive they are going to have to sever their US plants and outsource all of the actual manufacturing jobs overseas. This would also in turn eliminate the need for tariffs and suddenly every US citizen is paying a much lower cost for their vehicles.
spacejamz
Lifer
- Mar 31, 2003
- 10,980
- 1,696
- 126
This thread represents each posters' perspective on this subject...obviously, many people are frustated with what the unions have done to the Big 3.
Based on recent discussions, it still does not appear the Union understands what position they are in (IMO). Instead of trying to help save a sinking ship, they standing idly by, doing nothing to improve the situation. It really doesn't appear that they will be changing their stance anytime soon.
- Mar 20, 2000
- 102,402
- 8,574
- 126
a) white collar jobs have been cut across the board. you just don't hear about it because there is no union representing them.
b) if only the unions had been concerned in the well being and profitability of the company back when they started demanding that the R&D and QC money be paid to them and defending workers who put stuff together wrong just to fuck with the company.
if you're making 60K a year in a place where the average house doesn't cost much more than that, you're an idiot if you haven't managed to secure your own future.
kalrith
Diamond Member
- Aug 22, 2005
- 6,628
- 7
- 81
I read an article comparing the wages of the Big 3 to that of foreign companies' workers in the U.S. The wages were very comparable; it's the benefits that are costing the Big 3. So the $60k isn't the problem. The problem is that those workers are probably costing another $30k in benefits.
spacejamz
Lifer
- Mar 31, 2003
- 10,980
- 1,696
- 126
actually, standing idly by, doing nothing and getting paid for it is in their job description
how can these union workers sit in their job banks, still pulling down their salaries while not doing a damn thing not think this is a problem???
Is there something about these jobs banks where these workers sit around a room, getting paid to watch TV all day that I am not understanding?
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: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter