• Got the Contributing Memberships stuff finally worked out and made up a thread as a sort of "How-To" to help people figure out how to participate. So if you need help figuring it out, here's the thread you need to take a look at -> http://www.corvetteflorida.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3581 Thank you, everyone! Rich Z.

General Motors/Ford/Chrysler/UAW

Harbor Master

New member
There is something I have noticed. When many of the Florida natives talk about the problems the auto industry is experiencing. They put much of the blame on the unions (UAW). I will be the first to admit that unions share in the problems that the big three are going through. I am not sure exactly what it is that some of you feel the unions have done. Wages, benefits, job boundaries, job classifications, or maybe work ethic. Many people I associate with work for GM in both union and salary jobs. I have heard both sides of their stories. So I am somewhat versed on the subject.

I do not feel this can be discussed very well using PMs. If PMs must be used so be it. Unless I am directed to do different, let's try using quotes.

I will not argue this subject. I will constructively discuss it and attempt to take labors side in the discussion. I encourage all those with questions or criticisms to join in the discussion. :thumbsup: HUTCH
 
I am sure that through the years, unions have done a great service to their members.
However, unions have also been known to be in many cases controlled by mobsters.
In New York city, nothing, absolutely nothing gets done unless you pay people off.
In order to keep their members employed, unions many times have delayed progressive ideas rather than educating their members to use new tools, etc.
I know for a fact that in the railroad in New Jersey a few years ago, there was a new improved way to tabulate train costs, etc. The new procedure was implemented but union workers also continued the old way and threw their work in the garbage at the end of the day. I don't see the incentive for union members to excel at their jobs.
Now, my understanding is that unions do not want a secret ballot when company employees vote on whether they want a union or not. Not very democratic to me.
 
GEEZ.........I'm just over wellmed by this knowledge!!!!

This discussion is just beginning DVD. Be patient my friend. I think we all have a lot to learn from both sides of the discussion. I would like very much for this to be a proactive thread. HUTCH
 
I am sure that through the years, unions have done a great service to their members.
However, unions have also been known to be in many cases controlled by mobsters.
In New York city, nothing, absolutely nothing gets done unless you pay people off.
In order to keep their members employed, unions many times have delayed progressive ideas rather than educating their members to use new tools, etc.
I know for a fact that in the railroad in New Jersey a few years ago, there was a new improved way to tabulate train costs, etc. The new procedure was implemented but union workers also continued the old way and threw their work in the garbage at the end of the day. I don't see the incentive for union members to excel at their jobs.
Now, my understanding is that unions do not want a secret ballot when company employees vote on whether they want a union or not. Not very democratic to me.

Lou G, I agree that any vote should be by secret ballot. Sometimes it is like any election. When people feel pressured in public by their piers they will agree just to put it to rest. This is true no matter if it is from a company side or union. The end result if it was open for viewing would be bad no matter which way they voted.

I cannot intelligently talk to unions and organized crime. There are ways for unions and their members to combat this problem. I would assume it a dangerous and even life threatening thing to do. Government has agencies to deal with this, but again very scary. Sad but true.

I am familiar with the UAW and the Utility workers Union. Both of which I grew up with, and one that I was very active in.

HUTCH
 
Well, I can speak from the construction industry from dealing with mechanical contractors for the past 12 years. I have found that generally a contractor with unionized employees has a tough time competing with a contractor that does not have unionized employees in a public bid (low) environment. The difference sometimes is staggering. Everyone buys similar equipment, the difference is labor cost and company overhead. If these companies have a tough time competing, then I can understand the automobile manufacturer's having a tough time competing on a global market when faced with similar problems. Is the root of their problems all union? Not hardly, but I do believe it is a major part.

My personal opinion on unions is that this is not the early 1900's and people have a choice who they work for. The reasons people strike in modern times is comical compared to the reasons unions were originally formed. If your employer does not treat you right, find one that will. If you can't get the benefits, salary, etc that you want in your current field of work, find another one. There a thousands of people in the community I live in that would love to have the jobs that many of the auto workers have at half of the reported pay and benefits of the big three's employees.
 
Lou G, I agree that any vote should be by secret ballot. Sometimes it is like any election. When people feel pressured in public by their piers they will agree just to put it to rest. This is true no matter if it is from a company side or union. The end result if it was open for viewing would be bad no matter which way they voted.

I cannot intelligently talk to unions and organized crime. There are ways for unions and their members to combat this problem. I would assume it a dangerous and even life threatening thing to do. Government has agencies to deal with this, but again very scary. Sad but true.

I am familiar with the UAW and the Utility workers Union. Both of which I grew up with, and one that I was very active in.

DID I EVER TELL YOU?? I'M A sicilian...... NOW THE CHIT REALLY DID HIT THE FAN?????????? YOUR BUD ! AKA THE PHANTOM!!!..........DON'T FORGET TO TAKE OUT THE TRASH TO NIGHT!!!! OR YOUR LADY IS GOIN TO BE PIS**D...........PHANTOM!!!! :thumbsup::thumbsup: HUTCH
??????????
 
DVD, you aren't making any sense in your posts. The other guys are making valid points and interesting to read. Please stay on topic so there is a continuity of thought. THis is a polite request, please.
Regarding the history of Unions, I can understand why they exist. Previously, the workers had no rights and were almost slave labor mentality.
But the old cliche' holds true here-Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Unions dictating what work can be done or not done is not good for business. Take the tire industry for example. John Doe can build 6 large truck tires a day. His co-worker Lazy Bob can only build 3 of the same tires per day. The union protects Lazy Bob and takes any incentive away from John Doe by allowing the workers to build only 3 tires a day!!
Why short change innovation and hard work. We've become a nation of doing just enough to get by and therfore losing our global influence in the market place.
 
Well, I can speak from the construction industry from dealing with mechanical contractors for the past 12 years. I have found that generally a contractor with unionized employees has a tough time competing with a contractor that does not have unionized employees in a public bid (low) environment. The difference sometimes is staggering. Everyone buys similar equipment, the difference is labor cost and company overhead. If these companies have a tough time competing, then I can understand the automobile manufacturer's having a tough time competing on a global market when faced with similar problems. Is the root of their problems all union? Not hardly, but I do believe it is a major part.

My personal opinion on unions is that this is not the early 1900's and people have a choice who they work for. The reasons people strike in modern times is comical compared to the reasons unions were originally formed. If your employer does not treat you right, find one that will. If you can't get the benefits, salary, etc that you want in your current field of work, find another one. There a thousands of people in the community I live in that would love to have the jobs that many of the auto workers have at half of the reported pay and benefits of the big three's employees.

gsdave, No disagreement about union labor driving up the cost of doing business. eg: Just got quotes for asphalt work from a very large and reputable company. The man doing the bid asked if I had any other bids. I told him yes and gave the names of the other bidders. He flat out told me he could not compete because his company was union and the others were not. His company still gets the majority of the jobs in the area he services. State and private customers alike choose him over the other companies. He has the highest quality at a slightly higher price.

The population of unions I am familiar with are either young or older. It matters not which group you fall into. The truth of the matter is that they have been treated like spoiled rich kids. Usually if they want it they get it. The company shares in the blame for this. Profits are high and the company wants labor rest on the property. Rather than say no to union demands the company rolls over and gives in to the demands to avoid a possible work stoppage.

For the most part your right about union demands being trivial. Goes back to the same thing about spoiled rich kids. I spoiled my children. To the point at Christmas after they opened there new toy they would play in the box the toy came in. Now how crazy is that.

HUTCH
 
DVD, you aren't making any sense in your posts. The other guys are making valid points and interesting to read. Please stay on topic so there is a continuity of thought. THis is a polite request, please.
Regarding the history of Unions, I can understand why they exist. Previously, the workers had no rights and were almost slave labor mentality.
But the old cliche' holds true here-Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Unions dictating what work can be done or not done is not good for business. Take the tire industry for example. John Doe can build 6 large truck tires a day. His co-worker Lazy Bob can only build 3 of the same tires per day. The union protects Lazy Bob and takes any incentive away from John Doe by allowing the workers to build only 3 tires a day!!
Why short change innovation and hard work. We've become a nation of doing just enough to get by and therfore losing our global influence in the market place.

THOR, Management has to manage the work place. I will not make argument for the three tire person. In fact quite the opposite. Take the three tire person to task. Set quotas and enforce those quotas for all employees. Document everything you do as a manager. Have in place a progressive discipline policy to deal with these kind of issues.Be consistent and treat all employees the same. Address issues as they arise and do not use save ups that are not documented.

I feel employees should rise to the challenges and not only meet them but strive to exceed them. Probably wishful thinking on my part but it is the way I feel. HUTCH
 
DVD, you aren't making any sense in your posts. The other guys are making valid points and interesting to read. Please stay on topic so there is a continuity of thought. THis is a polite request, please.
Regarding the history of Unions, I can understand why they exist. Previously, the workers had no rights and were almost slave labor mentality.
But the old cliche' holds true here-Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Unions dictating what work can be done or not done is not good for business. Take the tire industry for example. John Doe can build 6 large truck tires a day. His co-worker Lazy Bob can only build 3 of the same tires per day. The union protects Lazy Bob and takes any incentive away from John Doe by allowing the workers to build only 3 tires a day!!
Why short change innovation and hard work. We've become a nation of doing just enough to get by and therfore losing our global influence in the market place.

THOR!!! I HAVE BEEN IN A UNION, & YOU KNOW WHAT, THEY DIDN'T DO JACK CHIT FOR YOU, EXCEPT COLLECT THEIR... DOOOES!!........I have to admit I'M quick on the keys!!..........Florida is a right to work state, WTF is that??? Explane????? :thumbsup:
 
THOR!!! I HAVE BEEN IN A UNION, & YOU KNOW WHAT, THEY DIDN'T DO JACK CHIT FOR YOU, EXCEPT COLLECT THEIR... DOOOES!!........I have to admit I'M quick on the keys!!..........Florida is a right to work state, WTF is that??? Explane????? :thumbsup:

I strongly disagree DVD about the unions not doing anything for the membership. I do not know which union you were affiliated with but if what you are saying is true shame on the union and its members.

Right to work state is one that you do not have to belong to the union in what use to be a closed shop. (Union or no can work) A lot of labor laws were changed to the benefit of employers. It started in the R Regan years and continues today. Replacement workers, right to work, ect. HUTCH
 
I strongly disagree DVD about the unions not doing anything for the membership. I do not know which union you were affiliated with but if what you are saying is true shame on the union and its members.

Right to work state is one that you do not have to belong to the union in what use to be a closed shop. (Union or no can work) A lot of labor laws were changed to the benefit of employers. It started in the R Regan years and continues today. Replacement workers, right to work, ect. HUTCH
THE RIGHT, TO WORK IS!!!!!!!!!!! MIN WAGE, & YA KNOW WHAT THAT'S GOING TO BE. THEIR...........DEMISE.......Cause who in the h* ll can live on 6 bucks an hr.???????? Cause I see it !! THE RICH KEEP GETTING RICHER & THE POOR KEEP GETTING POORER!!!!! :thumbsup: From the desk of the HEAD Honcho @ the PHANTOM!!! :thumbsup:
 
gsdave, No disagreement about union labor driving up the cost of doing business. eg: Just got quotes for asphalt work from a very large and reputable company. The man doing the bid asked if I had any other bids. I told him yes and gave the names of the other bidders. He flat out told me he could not compete because his company was union and the others were not. His company still gets the majority of the jobs in the area he services. State and private customers alike choose him over the other companies. He has the highest quality at a slightly higher price.

The population of unions I am familiar with are either young or older. It matters not which group you fall into. The truth of the matter is that they have been treated like spoiled rich kids. Usually if they want it they get it. The company shares in the blame for this. Profits are high and the company wants labor rest on the property. Rather than say no to union demands the company rolls over and gives in to the demands to avoid a possible work stoppage.

For the most part your right about union demands being trivial. Goes back to the same thing about spoiled rich kids. I spoiled my children. To the point at Christmas after they opened there new toy they would play in the box the toy came in. Now how crazy is that.

HUTCH

I agree with what you have said here. The only thing I'll add is that I have inspected the work of union and nonunion workers in the surrounding areas and have to say that there is no discernable difference in the quality. I've seen some of the best jobs (workmanship wise) come out of non-union shops and some of the worst come out of union shops. And vice-versa.

I really agree with your middle paragraph.
 
Minimum wage is better than no wage at all. I do believe that minimum wage is nearing $8.00/hour which may not seem like much but at least you're earning and contributing something.
We have plenty of sponges out there soaking up all they can from all the others.:banghead:
Like I said minimum wage is better than no wage at all.
Not sure how true this is:shrug01: but I have heard of some union line employees in the auto industry making ~$60/hour. If that is true it's no wonder the companies are in the state they're in. I will concede that is not the only reason and like I said I don't know how true that is.:shrug01:

Right to work = get your A** to work!!!:thumbsup:
 
I agree with what you have said here. The only thing I'll add is that I have inspected the work of union and nonunion workers in the surrounding areas and have to say that there is no discernable difference in the quality. I've seen some of the best jobs (workmanship wise) come out of non-union shops and some of the worst come out of union shops. And vice-versa.

I really agree with your middle paragraph.

Again I will agree with you on the quality and workmanship issue.
To fill in the winter months I am working for a friend in his non union machine and tool business. He has top notch machinist working for him, and supplies the highest quality products to his customers. The reason for the high quality product is the owners insistence on only turning out this level of work. He quality inspects the work going out of his business.

The point I am trying to make is if the owners of a business do not care about the products they supply to their customers then who should. If the people he employs aren't doing their jobs then they need to be taken to task. Likewise if the union has committee people on the floor they should be doing the same. I know this is not a perfect world but dammit everyone is responsible to make this happen. HUTCH
 
Minimum wage is better than no wage at all. I do believe that minimum wage is nearing $8.00/hour which may not seem like much but at least you're earning and contributing something.
We have plenty of sponges out there soaking up all they can from all the others.:banghead:
Like I said minimum wage is better than no wage at all.
Not sure how true this is:shrug01: but I have heard of some union line employees in the auto industry making ~$60/hour. If that is true it's no wonder the companies are in the state they're in. I will concede that is not the only reason and like I said I don't know how true that is.:shrug01:

Right to work = get your A** to work!!!:thumbsup:

I have had the opportunity to look at the UAW contract with GM on more than one occasion, and on more than one topic. The skilled trades make in the twenty eight to thirty dollar an hour range. This would be wages only. I do not know the value of their benefit package.

Minimum wage does not apply to all jobs. People that work in the service industry, wait people in particular are not required by law to get minimum wage. In our area they pay wait people about two fifty an hour. Any thing above that is gratuities. Their gratuities are subject to taxation. HUTCH
 
Minimum wage is better than no wage at all. I do believe that minimum wage is nearing $8.00/hour which may not seem like much but at least you're earning and contributing something.
We have plenty of sponges out there soaking up all they can from all the others.:banghead:
Like I said minimum wage is better than no wage at all.
Not sure how true this is:shrug01: but I have heard of some union line employees in the auto industry making ~$60/hour. If that is true it's no wonder the companies are in the state they're in. I will concede that is not the only reason and like I said I don't know how true that is.:shrug01:

Right to work = get your A** to work!!!:thumbsup:

This is a CNN article from February of this year:

Auto giant aims to replace much of U.S. workforce with lower-paid new hires - dangles $140,000 buyouts to UAW members to stem North American losses.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- In an effort to shave ongoing losses, General Motors offered lucrative buyouts to 74,000 employees - its entire U.S. hourly workforce.

The nation's largest automaker reported the latest round of buyouts as it reported another loss on its core auto operations in the fourth quarter, which combined with charges taken earlier in the year left GM (GM, Fortune 500) with a company record $38.7 billion net loss for 2007.

To try to stem automotive losses that have dogged the company since 2005, the company is making a range of offers, up to cash payments of $140,000 to the remaining 74,000 GM workers represented by the United Auto Workers union.

The goal is not to reduce headcount but rather to bring in new workers at a lower cost.

About 46,000 of the GM employees are eligible to retire today and they can take pension incentives worth between $45,000 to $62,500 to retire.

In addition there are inducements for those who are within five years of retirement to leave early and receive benefits.

Those who leave and agree to sever all ties with the company - including giving up lucrative pension and health care coverage - will receive a lump sum of $140,000 if they have 10 years of service. They will receive $70,000 if they have less than 10 years of service.

"We've worked with our UAW partners to ensure our employees have a variety of attractive options to consider," GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner said in a statement. "The special attrition program is an important initiative that will help us transform the workforce."

The savings GM is likely to see with this offer are substantial. The Center for Automotive Research estimates that by 2011 GM's hourly workforce will be only 8% smaller than current levels - but more than four out 10 of those workers will be new hires being paid a lower wage rate.

The current veteran UAW member at GM today has an average base wage of $28.12 an hour, but the cost of benefits, including pension and future retiree health care costs, nearly triples the cost to GM to $78.21, according to the Center for Automotive Research.

By comparison, new hires will be paid between $14 and $16.23 an hour. And even as they start to accumulate raises tied to seniority, the far less lucrative benefit package will limit GM's cost for those employees to $25.65 an hour.

Lucrative buyout packages are not new at GM (GM, Fortune 500) and other U.S. automakers Ford Motor (F, Fortune 500) and Chrysler LLC. GM offered similar deals to all its U.S. workers in 2006. That package helped it pare U.S. hourly employment by nearly 40,000 in the past two years.

Ford and Chrysler also have the provision in their new contracts to pay new hires less in salary and benefits, but their workforces are not nearly as old as the UAW membership at GM, so they may end up seeing less turnover in their hourly staff.

Ford has its own buyout offer out to all its remaining 54,000 hourly U.S. workers. The proposal was announced last month when the company reported a fourth-quarter loss. Privately-owned Chrysler has offered buyout packages to hourly employees at targeted plants, but has not make a companywide offer.
Fourth-quarter results

GM unveiled its latest cost-cutting moves as it reported a narrow profit of $46 million, or 8 cents a share, excluding special items, in the fourth quarter.

The adjusted earnings were far better than the loss of 54 cents a share that analysts surveyed by earnings tracker Thomson First Call had forecast, but worse than the year-ago result of a $180 million profit, or 32 cents a share.

But the profit in the most recent quarter was due primarily to a $1.6 billion tax benefit. GM would have otherwise lost about $2.75 a share in the period excluding items, although First Call and analysts are not likely to exclude that gain when comparing results to forecasts.

Including special items, the company reported a quarterly net loss of $722 million, or $1.28 a share. That compares to net income of $950 million, or $1.68 a share, it posted in the year-ago period.

Concerns by traders that the company's actual performance was worse than it seemed at first blush sent shares down 1.7% in pre-market trading.

The company saw strong vehicle sales, as automotive revenue hit a record $46.7 billion, easily topping forecasts of $44.4 billion. But the company's automotive profit-loss performance took a step backwards most of its regions around the globe.

The company posted a $803 million fourth quarter pre-tax loss in its auto unit, compared to a narrow $8 million profit on that basis a year earlier. The worsening performance was due to its core North American operations, where industrywide sales were weak in the period. North American plants lost $1.06 billion in the period on that basis, compared to only a $129 million loss a year earlier.

The company also saw pre-tax losses rise in its European operations and profits decline in the Asia-Pacific region that has become increasingly important for the company's fortunes. But improved pre-tax profits in GM's Latin America-Africa-Middle East region more than balanced out the worsening performance in the other overseas regions.
 
DVD, Florida minimum wage is 5.85, so after taxes youll make 4.87 an hour.

floridas right to work theory is basicly, any job can fire you for any reason. They can fire you for wearing purple shoes, or just randomly dying your hair pink an green. They dont need a valid excuse to let you go.
 
Back
Top