Big 3 bailout.

[fohfoh]

Does UAW workers make more then $70 an hour?

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/do_auto_workers_really_make_more_than.html


So if you include benefits, and retired people, you get $70 an hour. Easy way to fix benefits is nationalizing/socializing health care.

About comparing them to foreign automakers as Pigeon did?

The oldest domestic import plant in the US is 27 years old. They do not have to deal with paying their retirees because they barely have any. Once people start retiring from these plants, the costs will go up to match the big three.

Why is why they fucked up. They should have a trust set up that puts money towards retirees which should also GROW so that the trust is self sustaining in the long run. Which means they don't need to put the raw 70 bucks per person, that later on, it should drop if the trust grows properly. Which seems like it wasn't.

If the foreign automakers build the trust properly, they shouldn't have to worry. In fact, they might even have surpluses. (I recall a while back, some corps with problems with trusts with way to much excess cash/value)

[AceHigh]

I'm all for fair treatment of workers, and there was a time when unions were a necessary end to ensure that workers were protected, but those times are gone. 40 hour work weeks, benefits such as health coverage, minimum wages, safety regs are all mandated by law.

Not quite right, there is need and will always be need for unions. What is mandated by law is only a small percentage of worker's rights. Minimum wage is a good law, but different work places have different levels, unions regulate that all workers that have the same kind of position in the company receive same wage as well as it is unions that negotiate salary adjustments in time of inflation and such. Would you trust the federal government with that? Without unions workers will all be fucked over in a matter of few years.

[Pigeon]

About comparing them to foreign automakers as Pigeon did?

The chart above shows average hourly compensation for the Big Three ($73.20) and Toyota (TM) ($48.00), compared to average hourly compensation for Management and Professional Workers ($47.57), Manufacturing/Goods Producing ($31.59) and all workers ($28.48), data available here.

Should U.S. taxpayers really be providing billions of dollars to bailout companies (GM (GM), Ford (F) and Chrysler) that compensate their workers 52.5% more than the market (assuming Toyota wages and benefits are market), 54% more than management and professional workers, 132% more than the average manufacturing wage, and 157% more than the average compensation of all American workers?

Fine. Don't compare them to Toyota. Compare them to the average manufacturing/goods production, since those industries have been around just as long as the oldest auto workers. Be my guest, but: you're still completely fucking wrong. Other industries don't have this problem. The problem is specific to the big 3.

About the rest of your post: No shit. I don't say they earn $70 an hour in wages I say they're compensated $70 an hour.

Several Republics in the Senate have said that they'd support the auto bailout if a single clause was added to the bill - make compensation for the big three competitive with compensation for transplant factories. Such a clause was not added to the bill, even though that would virtually ensure its passage. Why? Because the unions aren't fighting for their workers rights, the unions are fighting for their own existence. If the bill passed with such a clause, there would be no reason for the unions to exist, because the automakers would have no method of fulfilling their unreasonable demands. There is an enormous disparity between unionized big 3 workers and the non-unionized transplant workers, and everybody fucking knows it. The Republicans who demanded a competitive rates clause know it, and the Democrats who refused a competitive rates clause know it, the union workers know it, and the transplant workers know it.

I'm all for fair treatment of workers, and there was a time when unions were a necessary end to ensure that workers were protected, but those times are gone. 40 hour work weeks, benefits such as health coverage, minimum wages, safety regs are all mandated by law.

Not quite right, there is need and will always be need for unions. What is mandated by law is only a small percentage of worker's rights. Minimum wage is a good law, but different work places have different levels, unions regulate that all workers that have the same kind of position in the company receive same wage as well as it is unions that negotiate salary adjustments in time of inflation and such. Would you trust the federal government with that? Without unions workers will all be fucked over in a matter of few years.

Most workers in the US are not unionized. Unions are in a minority, and the industries that are unionized - auto workers, road construction, airlines - tend to do the worst. In non-unionized industries, managers who do not manager their employees properly tend to have all their employees quit - productivity goes down - and then the manager gets fired and replaced with someone else. At least, that's how it works in my company, and whaddya know, my company actually makes a healthy profit, no small part of which is passed on to me.

[moonspot]

Pigeon - no I do not entirely disagree with what you and MGZ are saying.  I do not in anyway believe that the amount of money that auto workers make is fair especially since they usually make 33% to 50% MORE than skill trades personnel (you know the people that worked hard to actually acquire REAL skills).  HOWEVER putting soo much of the blame on the line workers strikes me as something more along the lines of the lashings of a jealousy MOB more so than an analysis of the entire picture and route out the real problems.  The numbers don't even come close to adding up when all you do is point your finger at the line workers, retirees & their health befits.  It's very clear to me that the line workers are very selfish & greedy when they have NO problems selling out the new hires to making a 3rd of what they themselves enjoy.  It's just more Babyboomer BS.

I agree that the auto works MUST give concessions.  But its ONLY 1 part (the obvious one at that) of what needs to be done, if it ends just cutting UAW & CAW wages & benefits we'll be back to this same spot in a year.  In which time a select few will walk away with millions
example Bricklin SV-1 (took me 2 hours to find, couldn't remember the name of the car)

I've always hated half measures, incredibly costly short term goals and will never support government giving big cash freebies to any company.  If government money (Canadian, US) is need to save jobs, fine.  I want to see the people own those companies (AKA a Crown Company in Canada).  If we pay for it we own shares or it's to be paid back.    

just because I don't share your stance doesn't make me wrong

fohfoh - yeah the taxes on your pay check are on thing, then 5% GST, 8% PST, 4% goods & service, water and sewage tax, property tax, income tax, fuel tax (possible carbon tax on top of that in the future) and the constant nickel and dimming on other stuff like permits, licensing, plates, booze (LCBO)..god I don't even want to talk about having a cabin, hunting & fisheries...it never ends

[Pigeon]

I agree that the auto works MUST give concessions.  But its ONLY 1 part (the obvious one at that) of what needs to be done, if it ends just cutting UAW & CAW wages & benefits we'll be back to this same spot in a year.

I agree. That's why I think bankruptcy is the best option, followed by a bailout that guts the shit out of the auto companies, reorgs from the basement up, and forces them to dump all excess cruft - including the unions, including ineffectively leadership, including the worthless brands, including the incessant focus on trucks and SUVs and Mustang and Camero style 'sports' cars. (I can't fully express my disdain for muscle cars. Corvette Z06 are fucking amazing performers though. Shame the cockpit sucks.)

If the bailout goes through as it is, it is a tacit endorsement of the way the big 3 have been doing business. Clearly what they've been doing hasn't been working. Having the government step in and say, "Well, you guys haven't been profitable in ~20+ years, but I'm sure it's just a temporary thing. Here's 36 billion dollars," is fucking retarded.

[AceHigh]

Americans have far fewer rights at work than employees in other democratic societies. Current federal laws are an impediment to union organizing rather than a protector of workers' rights. The rules are stacked against workers, making it extremely difficult for even the most talented organizers to win union elections. Under current National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regulations, any employer with a clever attorney can stall union elections, giving management time to scare the living daylights out of potential recruits.

Big business spends hundreds of millions a year to hire anti-union consultants to intimidate workers from participating in or showing support for union campaigns. Employers can require workers to attend meetings on work time during which company managers give anti-union speeches, show anti-union films, and distribute anti-union literature. Unions have no equivalent rights of access to employees. To reach them, organizers must visit their homes or hold secret meetings. This is hardly workplace democracy.

In fact, the U.S. has the most inequality and poverty of any industrialized country. And it's no coincidence that the U.S. has, by far, the fewest workers covered by a union contract among all major affluent nations.

Although the U.S. ranks third behind Norway and Japan in per capita income, American workers do not derive the benefits of prosperity compared with their counterparts elsewhere. Workers in other countries have used their political clout to take their productivity gains in the form of reduced hours -- shorter work weeks, longer vacations, and earlier retirements. (Unlike every other affluent country, the U.S. has no statutory minimum vacation policy.) But they also do better in terms of their paychecks and benefits, including office and service workers as well as blue-collar factory employees. In 2004, the year of the latest data, Americans worked an average of 1,824 hours annually, compared with 1,751 hours in Canada, 1,443 in Germany, and 1,363 in Norway.

The United States is the only democratic society without universal health insurance. It spends less on job training, child care, and affordable housing, and more on prisons, than do other nations. Our environmental and workplace safety laws are weak and poorly enforced. The pay gap between men and women is wider in the U.S. than in other affluent countries.

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=why_we_need_efca

Oh Yeah! I will enjoy my extra hours home while getting more then you and without my company going broke. I have said on some occasions that Americans are about 200 years behind us, but I never knew before now that it was true for unions and workers rights as well. Note that it is a higher gap in salary for women and men too.... 

[relic2279]

Oh Yeah! I will enjoy my extra hours home while getting more then you and without my company going broke. I have said on some occasions that Americans are about 200 years behind us, but I never knew before now that it was true for unions and workers rights as well. Note that it is a higher gap in salary for women and men too.... 

That's a good post. And a good point. Companies have the money and lawyers to keep us behind to maximize profits anyway they can. If you are not at the top, or are rich, you are getting suckered. Unions are one of the few groups who fight for the workers. Lawyers and propagandists fight for the investors and business owners. And they are winning.

We need to make a change at the federal level. Hopefully Obama will do something about healthcare. Clinton should have done something about it in the 90's, but due to the republican majority in congress at the time, we got fucked.

Things look much much brighter now.

[fohfoh]

fohfoh - yeah the taxes on your pay check are on thing, then 5% GST, 8% PST, 4% goods & service, water and sewage tax, property tax, income tax, fuel tax (possible carbon tax on top of that in the future) and the constant nickel and dimming on other stuff like permits, licensing, plates, booze (LCBO)..god I don't even want to talk about having a cabin, hunting & fisheries...it never ends

Dude, you live in a shitty province then.

I'm in Alberta. No PST. GST Only. Provincial income tax is a flat rate of 10% (which is only bad if you're making less than 30k a year I think) I don't think we pay that much on environmental taxes either.

But unions are kind of annoying at times. You pay so much to them and they don't do much. I used to work at superstore (god damn place was a joke) the MOST I heard of the unions doing was the anti-fatigue mats for the cashiers... I NEVER GOT TO USE ONE EVEN THOUGH I WORKED AT A TILL PART TIME.

Fuck the blood sucking union bitches.

By the way, I think I saw something about one of the big 3 filing for bankruptcy in today's paper.

[Pigeon]

Unions are one of the few groups who fight for the workers.

Too bad the UAW spends more time fighting for their own ass than fighting for the quality of life of their members.

There's a very, very specific reason unions threaten to strike every time one of the big three (most recently, Ford) attempts to open a more automated, more efficient and safer factory that requires less workers, even though doing so would dramatically improve quality of life of the workers at that factory. It's because it's less money in the greasy palms of the union. It's got to stop.

If, as you claim, unions fought to improve the long term quality of life of the workers, and that only, they'd have my unwavering support. But they don't. They've strangled the big three, and now we're stuck with the prospect of using taxpayer money to clean up their mess.

Anyone know if this graph is accurate? I have difficulty believing the US has a higher percentage of unionized workers than France. Maybe they're talking percentage of citizens, not percentage of workers.

[sdedalus83]

Anyone know if this graph is accurate? I have difficulty believing the US has a higher percentage of unionized workers than France. Maybe they're talking percentage of citizens, not percentage of workers.

Since the graph is based on data collected by a wikipedia contributor, includes none of the data used to generate the graph, and has no information on how said data was obtained, I'd take it with a huge chunk of salt-lick. 

[Pigeon]

Sounds good to me. Forget I brought it up.

[fohfoh]

Can we figure out the difference between unions if there is any?

Here in Canada:

Unions take out a 30 dollar per paycheque fee
Unionized workers almost have no say in what the unions want to fight for
Layman workers are allowed to be unionized, Supervisors and managers are not.
Unions have super elaborate websites, handouts etc.


All in all, it looks like the union leeches a shitload of money and spends barely any of it on proper projects. Of the 6 months I paid union dues, I only ever heard of getting anti fatigue mats. AND the corporation had to pay for more than half of it themselves! What the fuck! 60 bucks a month per worker and that's all they could afford to do? Oh... I'll also note that this union was for a super market.

[relic2279]

Unions take out a 30 dollar per paycheque fee

Is that in Canadian? If so, in US it'd be like $23-24 or so with conversion (I think). Not that it matters though I guess.

Edit: Why does everyone say unions do nothing for their members? What's the most important thing? Money. They strike if they don't get what they want and the workers still get paid (most of the time). That's why we are arguing if unions are good or bad. Because the salary and benefits of the UAW are too high.

You can't say they do "nothing". They do what matters to the workers at the time. And most of the time, it's money.

[fohfoh]

They argued wages... whoop dee doo. we got 30 cent pay raises. I was moving up the ladder than that.

Also, the things that people aske for at my place was at least like 50 different things. We got 1 in a period of a year and there were poster boards showing the "epic awesomeness of the union" for standing out for the cashiers.

[AceHigh]

Can we figure out the difference between unions if there is any?

Ok here we go:

Employed force in Norway:
2.507 million
Unionisation rate is more then 85% (applies to all scandinavic countries)
Biggest unions:
LO: 830,000 (blue collar workers)
NITO: 60,000 (engineers and technologists)
NHO: 18,500 (employer's union) yes they have unions too so that they won't be fucked with either.
Academic's union 137,250 (professors, doctors and all other phd folks)

As you see I mentioned that NHO is an employer's union. During clashes it happens that they negotiate with other unions and a governmental agency is a mediator. That being said if a union doesn't follow some rules in the process of negotiation, like unlawful strike, then they will not be protected by law (it is very complicated, so I am trying to make it simple). In any case theoretically then they can be fired etc...

As a Union worker, people usually get house insurance, health insurance is not an issue because nobody needs it. You also pay a small fee per year as a member, if your work has to lay off people they will fire non union workers first (not a law, it is just easier and faster process for them). Now here comes the part I don't like with unions: when employer is going to fire people, it is based on seniority (as long as they fill same job position), I believe strongly for meritocracy, so I oppose this rule of seniority strongly. Otherwise union workers are guaranteed to get same salary for as everyone of the same position in that company.

Also labour union in Norway is the one that is responsible for most work laws the government has adopted and it is no secret that LO has a big influence on the government.

[mgz]

Is everything in USA just a free ride and nothing gets regulated?
There is one thing union is created for: fair treatment of workers..... as long as they are workers. Things like firing employees, closing down factories, modernizing them is way out of union's jurisdiction. If they have that power it can only come from corruption.

I'm all for fair treatment of workers, and there was a time when unions were a necessary end to ensure that workers were protected, but those times are gone. 40 hour work weeks, benefits such as health coverage, minimum wages, safety regs are all mandated by law. Once the government stepped in to ensure workers are protected and treated fairly, the unions should have been done. But that's not what happened - with their raison d'être gone, the unions stopped being a workers rights movement and became, for all intents and purposes, its own corporate entity. Letting the big 3 have highly automated factories is bad for business, because less workers means less union dues.

And no, unions aren't regulated. In fact, it's the opposite. Racketeering, conspiracy, and extortion laws have exemptions for union related activities.

I honestly want them to go bankrupt, because they would finally be able to cut loose from the UAW. Except Chrysler. They're fucked.

pretty much my sentiments exactly,unions as a whole are pretty much wastes of life and burdens on the country atm, the people in them have it good no doubt, and a lot of the unions out there arent anywhere near as bad as the UAW.

But the unions arent really a necessary thing now a days but they wont go away, companies for the most part dont horribly fuck employees nowadays, and while unions used to be a good thing protect the workers fair treatment blah blah blah. They lost their purpose they won the battle. Its like feminists and minority groups they push and push and push for one thing, and once that thing happens they lose their purpose and begin chasing bullshit.

For the unions it became make as much money for the union as they can and make it as hard as possible to fire union workers.
Not to mention many times there is contracts between the place of employment when its a large company like the big 3 that they have signed requiring X amount of thier workforce to be union workers, and make it nearly impossible to fire someone as long as they show up on time.

[Stsin]

While I don't agree with the practices of many unions, I do think it's good that they exist.  Just for the reason if the employees feel unhappy or mistreated, they can opt to form one.

Just the existence of unions encourage large companies to keep their workers happy so they don't feel a need to form one.

I truly don't think most US companies have the best interest of their employees at heart, unlike what I hear from the Japanese.  They are quick to lay off to just meet stock holder expectations and fiscal budgets, and continually recycle temp workers to prevent paying benefits.  I'm sure many people are being laid off now, just before Christmas.

[AceHigh]

They lost their purpose they won the battle. Its like feminists and minority groups they push and push and push for one thing, and once that thing happens they lose their purpose and begin chasing bullshit.

The pay gap between men and women is wider in the U.S. than in other affluent countries.

Think a bit before you say things like that. And no, I don't have a country that treats gender equally in workforce, all of them have room for improvement.

[mgz]

They lost their purpose they won the battle. Its like feminists and minority groups they push and push and push for one thing, and once that thing happens they lose their purpose and begin chasing bullshit.

The pay gap between men and women is wider in the U.S. than in other affluent countries.

Think a bit before you say things like that. And no, I don't have a country that treats gender equally in workforce, all of them have room for improvement.

pay gap is wider yes, but comparing similar jobs many women are paid as well as men, it just happens that many women dont do alot of jobs that your average man will do in american that will make him 60-75k a year and is hard fucking work, how many women are plumbers, a good plumber makes like 60-75k a year. Same with ALOT of manual labor jobs like construction electritions ect ect, areas where there are union, but also alot of private contractors and you simply dont see women in them, women typically shoot more for an office job then a manual labor position, not true as far as alot of factory work goes but those jobs i listed are some of the most common professions.
And things like that help keep those pay gap numbers up. That and the fact that a majority of your top % of wealth in the country is men.




@stsin
yea most large companies dont have the best interest of their employees in mind, but they do however not treat them like fucking garbage, the fact that large companies will keep massive bonuses for their CEOs and fire employees to try and keep investors happy is a completely different issue, and wouldnt stop something like layoffs from happening to union workers.

Now unlike most companies where even as a union worker if y our layed off sometimes your payed. The big 3 have many employees recieving 95% of their salary while layed off which basically makes it fucking useless to layoff employees to help cut expenses if your in an economic slump and need to cut production

[AceHigh]

pay gap is wider yes, but comparing similar jobs many women are paid as well as men, it just happens that many women dont do alot of jobs that your average man will do in american that will make him 60-75k a year and is hard fucking work, how many women are plumbers, a good plumber makes like 60-75k a year.

I will tell you that being a nurse and lifting up crippled people on daily basis is both hard work, it is not pleasant work and you need education in order to become a nurse. Why are they not paid the same as a plumber? Because the position as nurse has and is dominated by women and maybe back in 30-ies it was ok to say "hey we can give all nurses less money because nearly all of them are women. Now they have less money then man dominated jobs that do not require that level of education.