Author Topic: Is the UAW run by dolts? (Read 2288 times)

VWE · « **on:** September 24, 2007, 08:26:36 AM »

I like Honda, the cars are mostly built by robots and seem to last for ever. As soon as it looks like an American auto maker is coming back strong here is a group of some of the wealthiest workers in America saying that $40.00 an hour just aint cuttin it! http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070924/auto_talks.html?.v=10

Actually wage and benefits come out to $73.26 an hour average for GM workers.

Shamus · « **Reply #1 on:** September 24, 2007, 08:41:54 AM »

The sticking point here seems to be retiree health care, the UAW is afraid that it may go away.

I agree with you, retiree's should not get employer provided health insurance, especially the public sector and military, it just raises taxes.

shamus

btw, I am not being sarcastic this time

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #2 on:** September 24, 2007, 09:00:53 AM »

If they go on strike, fire them all.

rabbidrabbit · « **Reply #3 on:** September 24, 2007, 09:31:31 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Shamus
The sticking point here seems to be retiree health care, the UAW is afraid that it may go away.

I agree with you, retiree's should not get employer provided health insurance, especially the public sector and military, it just raises taxes.

shamus

btw, I am not being sarcastic this time

Let me guess, you never served did you?

Toad · « **Reply #4 on:** September 24, 2007, 10:36:19 AM »

Yep, it's totally fair and right to promise your employees for the last 40 years that you'll provide healthcare in their retirement package and then take it away from them.

Suckers! What a hoot! How could they believe such BS? After all, contractual agreements are merely suggestions that management follows or discards as the whim strikes them.

FrodeMk3 · « **Reply #5 on:** September 24, 2007, 10:54:15 AM »

This will tell you quite a lot more about the strike, for those of you who wondering where the numbers were coming from:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070924/bs_nm/gm_uaw_dc;_ylt=Ah2YvR.2sx2CdUIEd9jFTitv24cA

Alot of this has to do with GM's overall success in the market, btw. They've been wanting a break to help compete, with the shrinking share of the market.

68Wooley · « **Reply #6 on:** September 24, 2007, 11:11:13 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Yep, it's totally fair and right to promise your employees for the last 40 years that you'll provide healthcare in their retirement package and then take it away from them.

Suckers! What a hoot! How could they believe such BS? After all, contractual agreements are merely suggestions that management follows or discards as the whim strikes them.

OK, lets assume GM agrees this week to continue to offer final-salary pensions and retiree health care. Seems fair. They've been promising workers that for the last 40 years, so why change. Lets also assume Ford and Chrysler are forced by the UAW to follow suit.

Problem is, who's going to pay for it all when - in five years time - all three are bankrupt?

If I was an auto-worker right now, I'd be looking for the UAW to come up with something that ensured the long-term survivability of the the US auto industry rather than maintain a status-quo for a couple more years while the industry descends into oblivion.

Final salary pensions and retiree health-care are a thing of the past. What other private industry still offers them? The UAW is living in a fantasy.

Toad · « **Reply #7 on:** September 24, 2007, 11:24:15 AM »

So if you enter into a 30 year contract for a home loan and you abide by the terms of the agreement for 29 years and then the going-broke mortgage company changes the deal and doesn't give you title you'd be OK with that?

The employees already paid for that healthcare. It's a point often overlooked in these discussions. When the contracts were voluntarily signed by BOTH sides, some pay was taken in cash and some pay was taken in benefits. The benefits were paid for with work that was done.

One thing you can be 100% certain about; the executives of these poor, going-bankrupt automobile companies will never, ever give up their health and retirement benefits.

The moral of the story is cash on the barrelhead.

If the company you work for promises you ANYTHING that will be paid or given at some point in the future, politely decline and just insist on the monthly current cost/value of that benefit be added to your paycheck.

If we've been shown anything in the last 25 years it is that the managers of companies will steal from their employees. They'll steal every last thing they can get despite any promises given or contracts signed.

Probably the best idea of all is work for yourself. You are the only person that won't try to cheat you.

SteveBailey · « **Reply #8 on:** September 24, 2007, 11:27:37 AM »

The UAW will be singularly responsible for the collapse of most of the US auto industry. I wonder what these tards will do for a living once they ruin their current employers. The UAW's do not work in the real world. They are perhaps the finest example of a Union artificially driving wages up, compared to skill levels. The cold slap of reality will be harsh indeed.

I'm glad I put this in writing. Within the next couple of years, I'll be able to say "I told you so."

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #9 on:** September 24, 2007, 11:28:54 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
So if you enter into a 30 year contract for a home loan and you abide by the terms of the agreement for 29 years and then the going-broke mortgage company changes the deal and doesn't give you title you'd be OK with that?

The employees already paid for that healthcare. It's a point often overlooked in these discussions. When the contracts were voluntarily signed by BOTH sides, some pay was taken in cash and some pay was taken in benefits. The benefits were paid for with work that was done.

One thing you can be 100% certain about; the executives of these poor, going-bankrupt automobile companies will never, ever give up their health and retirement benefits.

The moral of the story is cash on the barrelhead.

If the company you work for promises you ANYTHING that will be paid or given at some point in the future, politely decline and just insist on the monthly current cost/value of that benefit be added to your paycheck.

If we've been shown anything in the last 25 years it is that the managers of companies will steal from their employees. They'll steal every last thing they can get despite any promises given or contracts signed.

Probably the best idea of all is work for yourself. You are the only person that won't try to cheat you.

Boohoo, the managers are to blame.

The truth is that it was stupid for both of them to sign the contract that would eventually lead to the demise of the company.

By the way, your mortgage analogy clearly does not stand.

Toad · « **Reply #10 on:** September 24, 2007, 11:30:21 AM »

Oh, btw, the ONLY thing that will ensure the long term survivability of US car companies is designing and building a better product than the other guy.

The US companies have lost just about every market to people that just do it better. They are on the verge of losing the pickup truck market to the Japanese; I think it will happen. It's the last major market segment where the US predominates. However, Nissan and Toyota have set their sights on this market and it won't be long until they have the best selling trucks.

That will happen for one simple reason. US auto executives aren't smart enough or innovative enough to compete with their betters. Econo boxes? Got their butts whipped. Family sedans? Got their butts whipped. They'll lose the truck segment too.

But only after finding some way to blame the fact that their trucks lack all the innovative features of the Nissans and Toyos on the UAW.

Toad · « **Reply #11 on:** September 24, 2007, 11:35:21 AM »

Laser, yes it is managment. Clearly.

They make ALL the decisions on what to build, where to build it, how to build it, how to market it and what contract they will sign with the UAW.

You blame the UAW for asking for more in their contracts over the last 50 years? How many times have you asked someone you worked for to pay you less?

If the managers agree to give the employee a raise, is it the manager's fault for granting it or the employees fault for asking for it? Who signs those checks, the employees?

The mortgage analogy? Take any contract you like. When one side and only one side fails to fulfill its obligations under the contract it is clear where the blame lies.

FrodeMk3 · « **Reply #12 on:** September 24, 2007, 11:40:25 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by SteveBailey
The UAW will be singularly responsible for the collapse of most of the US auto industry. I wonder what these tards will do for a living once they ruin their current employers. The UAW's do not work in the real world. They are perhaps the finest example of a Union artificially driving wages up, compared to skill levels. The cold slap of reality will be harsh indeed.

I'm glad I put this in writing. Within the next couple of years, I'll be able to say "I told you so."

Well...I would not say that the UAW will put the big 3 under on it's own, Steve. The American people, as the consumer's that could potentially buy American cars, but increasingly buy foreign, will.

GM's share of the market has been shrinking, and that's simply because of competition from imports. For every American Auto manufactured, there are at least 2-3 competing foreign brands. Which, I might add, can sell in the U.S. without the stiff tarriff's and penalties which U.S. Manufacturers' face when they sell abroad. Oh, I know that the Big 3 have factories making cars in places like Mexico, where the average assembly line worker makes something like $5 a day, No health or retirement benefits, and no environmental constraints on how they operate, No real safety concerns...
I figure for what they spend on the UAW up here, they more than make up for in places like Mexico.

P.S. Hey VWE, where did you get the numbers' from in your original post? I did'nt see them in your news linky.

hubsonfire · « **Reply #13 on:** September 24, 2007, 11:49:19 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Oh, btw, the ONLY thing that will ensure the long term survivability of US car companies is designing and building a better product than the other guy.

Mmm, no, it will have to be a better built and designed product than the other guys that people can afford to buy. One of my first experiences with the newer GM trucks was a fully loaded 3/4 ton shutting down on the interstate with 4.5 miles on the odometer. $35K worth of truck, dead after 5 minutes. I drive an older Jeep now. A fraction of the cost, and I've put 16 thousand times as many miles on it without getting stranded once.

FrodeMk3 · « **Reply #14 on:** September 24, 2007, 11:52:13 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by hubsonfire
Mmm, no, it will have to be a better built and designed product than the other guys that people can afford to buy. One of my first experiences with the newer GM trucks was a fully loaded 3/4 ton shutting down on the interstate with 4.5 miles on the odometer. $35K worth of truck, dead after 5 minutes. I drive an older Jeep now. A fraction of the cost, and I've put 16 thousand times as many miles on it without getting stranded once.

Incidentally Hub, Did you find out what caused it to conk out?