Guess who's not getting a Christmas card from the UAW?

[Okla-homey]

Sen/Dr. Tom Coburn R-OK. Doc Coburn better hope he never needs service at a GM dealership.:eek:


UAW Was 'Solely' to Blame for Collapse of Auto Industry Bailout Negotiations, Says Sen. Coburn

Monday, December 15, 2008
By Josiah Ryan, Staff Writer

(CNSNews.com) - The United Auto Workers (UAW) union is “solely” to blame for the collapse of negotiations on a $14-billion auto bailout deal that stalled in the Senate Thursday, Sen. Tom Colburn (R-Okla.) told CNSNews.com on Friday.

But UAW President Ron Gettelfinger in a press conference Friday morning blamed Republican senators, who he said resented his organization.

The auto bailout bill, which passed the House in a 237-170 vote on Wednesday, was defeated in a 52-35 procedural vote in the Senate late Thursday night after negotiations between automakers, the UAW, and Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) fell apart.

“As far as the failure of last night, it solely lies on UAW,” Coburn told CNSNews.com. “All we asked was, ‘Just give us a date at which you will have competitive wage rates. We will put it in and that’s what you will have to meet.’ They would not move. They would not renegotiate their contract with GM as far as wage rates.”

Coburn was referring to an amendment crafted by Corker that would have required the auto makers to reduce their labor costs to a level equal to the salaries paid by non-unionized foreign auto companies operating in the United States, firms such as Nissan, Toyota and Honda.

Gettelfinger, however, blamed senators like Coburn who opposed the bailout.

“Corker admitted to our people on the ground that they [concerns about pay] were largely about politics within the GOP caucus,” said Gettelfinger. “There is no question that the UAW has demonstrated leadership in this process. There were some in the Senate, who, we felt, resented that.”

Gettelfinger also said that since financial workers were not asked to make concessions in the $700 billion bailout, senators were applying a double standard to the UAW.

Before Thursday’s vote, Coburn told CNSNews.com that he thought the domestic auto companies would never be viable without the kind of sacrifices called for in Corker’s amendment.

Coburn, however, also said that he does not blame unionized labor for the financial difficulties of the automakers.

“I don’t put the blame of their long-term troubles on the UAW,” Coburn told CNSNews.com. “I put it on the management of the auto companies who signed ridiculously expensive contracts with the UAW.”

But Dan Griswold, director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the free market Cato Institute, told CNSNews.com on Friday that the UAW is, in part, to blame.

“UAW contracts have played a big role in pulling automakers into the crisis they now face,” said Griswold. “Those contracts are the single biggest difference between domestic and foreign-owned competitors operating on U.S. soil.”

Griswold also said that it was the UAW’s “adversarial attitude” in the bailout negotiations that caused the talks to collapse.

In Thursday’s Senate vote, three Democrats sided with 31 Republicans in opposing the bailout.

[OUHOMER]

I really like Coburn

[Okla-homey]

I really like Coburn

I dunno if those UAW guys play as dirty as the Teamsters, but if Doctor Tom turns up missing, well, you know.:(

[SicEmBaylor]

There's nothing worse than a union goon.

[StoopTroup]

Ummmm....? :D

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/jimmyhoffa.jpg

[Okla-homey]

Union greed killed domestic steel production, finished garments, textiles, footwear, consumer electronics, merchant shipbuilding and all manner of light manufacturing from toys to tools in this country. WTF does anyone think automobiles will be any different?

And would someone explain to me why ANY person who works on an assembly line putting together a consumer product rates $75.00, $50.00 or even $25.00 an hour? Hello?

One thing's for sure, the Chinese, Indians, and others in the Pacific Rim have damn sight lower labor costs. These UAW goofusses just need to face up to the fact that the American scene has evolved. No more should a guy graduate from high school, get a job in one of our dwindling number of factories, and expect to be able to raise his family on that income. Stick a fork in it.

[StoopTroup]

What has Corporate greed killed?

[Okla-homey]

What has Corporate greed killed?

Apparently GM, Ford and Chrysler were'nt greedy enough. They wouldn't be in this mess if they had sacked up twenty years ago and told the UAW to stick it where the sun don't shine.

Heck ST, I don't even blame management too much for their lack of inspring designs given the fact they have to pay people full pay and benefits for sitting on their tookusses during the months it takes to retool for a new model.

[StoopTroup]

Apparently GM, Ford and Chrysler were'nt greedy enough. They wouldn't be in this mess if they had sacked up twenty years ago and told the UAW to stick it where the sun don't shine.

Yeah...those poor Corporate bastards would be rich by now if they had...lol.

[Okla-homey]

Yeah...those poor Corporate bastards would be rich by now if they had...lol.

What matters is whether or not the shareholders are making money. That's one of the main reasons for incorporating in the first place. The simple fact is, and I think you know this ST, when a manufacturer pays more for employee benefits than it does for materials, something is fatally out of whack. Established concerns that don't turn a profit cease to be going concerns. It's just that simple.

Unions were needed and had their place in the early 20th century. Now all they do is artificially inflate wages, cause a decline in productivity because they force employers to keep on dead wood as opposed to more productive workers with lower seniority. Just like the Roman chariot and rotary dial telephones, some things just need to be put in a museum and pondered as history.

Heck, 'member that 80 y/o d00d you told me about this fall that AA keeps on the payroll, who naps thru his shifts, so he can maybe someday claim the title of "World's Oldest AA Maintenance D00d?" Quaint? Cute? Sure. Does it make sense in this economy? This while the rest of us are paying absurd amounts for domestic airfares?

[SicEmBaylor]

And would someone explain to me why ANY person who works on an assembly line putting together a consumer product rates $75.00, $50.00 or even $25.00 an hour? Hello?


Because there are a lot of people in this country that believe manual labor deserves a disproportionately high salary. My grandmother, who is an old school Great Depression era Roosevelt Democrat, believes that the physical difficulty of a job should determine how much a person gets paid. In other words, she believes a janitor or a guy on an assembly line should get paid more than a CEO because the work is more physically demanding. This is essentially the argument made by Karl Marx, and it's an argument that I'm sure a lot of union workers also make.

Hell, I'm not even sure that working an assembly line is even that physically difficult. Most of that **** is automated.

[SoonerInKCMO]

Heck ST, I don't even blame management too much for their lack of inspring designs given the fact they have to pay people full pay and benefits for sitting on their tookusses during the months it takes to retool for a new model.

You know, the thing is, domestic cars are pretty good these days. There is a lot less difference between the design and quality of domestic vs. Japanese cars than there was a couple of decades ago. I spent a lot of time in rental cars of many makes earlier this year and I have to say that the Pontiac G5 was one of my favorites. But, it's still just a little short of the Japanese competitors... a little more road noise, a little cheaper feeling dash materials, a little more coarseness in the drivetrain, etc. But if they could divert $1500 from healthcare and pensions to the car itself - leveling the playing field with the Corolla and Civic - it'd easily be a better car than its competitors.

Thinking about this some more... if instead of investing $1500 into the quality of the car, GM just took $1500 off of the price, the G5 would be less than a Yaris (assuming many of the current GM discounts would stay in place). I also spent three weeks with a Yaris back in April and can definitively say the G5 is a far superior car.

[King Crimson]

This is essentially the argument made by Karl Marx,

no, it isn't. what Marx claims is that there is a social relationship between capital and labor that exploits labor--based in the wage. nothing to do with what you say about physicality....more to do with unequal relationship to the means of production.

it would be nice for your crapola fantasy of being a philosopher-king at Bill Buckley's cigar farm if it was that simple, but it isn't.

[SicEmBaylor]

no, it isn't. what Marx claims is that there is a social relationship between capital and labor that exploits labor--based in the wage. nothing to do with what you say about physicality....more to do with unequal relationship to the means of production.

it would be nice for your crapola fantasy of being a philosopher-king at Bill Buckley's cigar farm if it was that simple, but it isn't.

That's basically the same thing. Marx believed that capital exploited labor because physical labor actually produced the product but most of the financial benefit went to the manager/owner. Marx believed that since the individual laborer put forth the physical effort to produce then they should reap the financial rewards of their labor and only exploitation by the capitalist prevents them from an equitable benefit of their labor.

"The means of production" IS physical labor and should be directly proportional to wages earned according to Marx.

Your crapola ability to connect A to B and B to C undermines your ability to be the Soonerfan's philosopher king.

[Jerk]

F*** Karl Marx.

100 million dead and counting.

[Sooner Born Sooner Bred]

And would someone explain to me why ANY person who works on an assembly line putting together a consumer product rates $75.00, $50.00 or even $25.00 an hour? Hello?

One thing's for sure, the Chinese, Indians, and others in the Pacific Rim have damn sight lower labor costs. These UAW goofusses just need to face up to the fact that the American scene has evolved. No more should a guy graduate from high school, get a job in one of our dwindling number of factories, and expect to be able to raise his family on that income. Stick a fork in it.You think that kind of work is easy? Let me tell you something, my Dad busted his *** for General Motors for 25 years. It could be said that kind of work put him in an early grave. Why shouldn't the workers make a good wage when those in upper management are raking in millions?

Why should a ****ing lawyer demand that kind of salary? I am so ****ing sick of people blaming the workers for doing their damn job so they can support their families.

[Sooner Born Sooner Bred]

Hell, I'm not even sure that working an assembly line is even that physically difficult. Most of that **** is automated.I'd like to see you try it, since you can't even change a tire. Sure it's not rocket science, but you try doing the same thing over and over again, hour after hour, day after day, year after year. It may not be mentally taxing, but it's hard work.

So basically you all are saying that even if the owner of a company is raking in millions, the people creating the product should be working for slave wages? **** that noise.

[SicEmBaylor]

So basically you all are saying that even if the owner of a company is raking in millions, the people creating the product should be working for slave wages? **** that noise.

If they don't like it then they're welcome to start their own car company and pay their workers whatever wage fancies them. Or they can eat cake.

[SicEmBaylor]

Why should a ****ing lawyer demand that kind of salary? I am so ****ing sick of people blaming the workers for doing their damn job so they can support their families.

I'm risking getting physically ill for defending Homey, but I think he (like myself) is blaming the unions and not the individual worker. I have no problem whatsoever with the individual worker, but I have a BIG problem with their unions.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I'm risking getting physically ill for defending Homey, but I think he (like myself) is blaming the unions and not the individual worker. I have no problem whatsoever with the individual worker, but I have a BIG problem with their unions.It's the nature of collective bargaining that artificially produces overpayment of labor. Those not pulling their share of work get paid regardless, and that causes the cost of the product to needlessly rise.
The issues I'm fuzzy on are those that pertain to why a business MUST ONLY employ those in the union. Why can't the business have a right to hire non-union people in a state where there are unions?(sure, I could look it up, but I would rather hear from those in the know here)

[47straight]

I'd like to see you try it, since you can't even change a tire. Sure it's not rocket science, but you try doing the same thing over and over again, hour after hour, day after day, year after year. It may not be mentally taxing, but it's hard work.

So basically you all are saying that even if the owner of a company is raking in millions, the people creating the product should be working for slave wages? **** that noise.



So basically you are saying that you're making an emotional reaction on what your pops did for a livin a long time ago, and making some ridiculous statement that working for the wages that Toyota, Nissan, etc. pay out and many hardworking folks gladly take is slave wages?

Yeah. 25 bucks an hour is slave wages.

Can we just sell Michigan to the Canadians?

[Okla-homey]

So basically you are saying that you're making an emotional reaction on what your pops did for a livin a long time ago, and making some ridiculous statement that working for the wages that Toyota, Nissan, etc. pay out and many hardworking folks gladly take is slave wages?

Yeah. 25 bucks an hour is slave wages.

Can we just sell Michigan to the Canadians?

ladies and gentlemen, we have a winnuh!

[olevetonahill]

I have worked Union and Non union Jobs
I got to be lazy workin union , had to work on the Nonunion Jobs .
A true story ,
I was a Builder In Elk City in the Late 70s early 80s .I worked 18 hr days .
Was working in a House when 2 dudes pulled up in a Big old Car .I walk out with My Nail Bag on ( hell I was ready for a Break anyway )
They go to running their Mouths about Trying to Get Carpenters Like Myself to Unionize , Said they could and would get ME better Pay . I asked How Much ? they said If you were Union we could Get you 10 Bucks an Hour .
I said well I Own this Company and Ill pay a Good Carpenter 12 Bucks an Hour Now Go Find em.:D

[Okla-homey]

Why should a ****ing lawyer demand that kind of salary? I am so ****ing sick of people blaming the workers for doing their damn job so they can support their families.


Two words. The market.

Apparently, people simply aren't willing to pay GM for its cars anymore because they cost too much -- because of absurdly excessive UAW contracts. American consumers seem to prefer comparable or superior cars made by non-union labor. Those workers somehow miraculously seem to be able to avoid starvation on $25.00 an hour and employer provided health insurance.

[pott_2]

Two words. The market.

Apparently, people simply aren't willing to pay GM for its cars anymore because they cost too much -- because of absurdly excessive UAW contracts. American consumers seem to prefer comparable or superior cars made by non-union labor. Those workers somehow miraculously seem to be able to avoid starvation on $25.00 an hour and employer provided health insurance.

I would like to know the percentage of the price of a US car that covers wages for manufacturing. Unions are worthless. They only drive up wages because membership fees are a percentage of the members wages. At least the Teamsters anyway.

[Turd_Ferguson]

I have worked Union and Non union Jobs
I got to be lazy workin union , had to work on the Nonunion Jobs .My high school girlfriend's dad worked at the GM plant in OKC. Everytime I seen him leaving to work, he had a lunch pale in one hand, and a pillow in the other.:D

[Sooner Born Sooner Bred]

It's the nature of collective bargaining that artificially produces overpayment of labor. Those not pulling their share of work get paid regardless, and that causes the cost of the product to needlessly rise.
The issues I'm fuzzy on are those that pertain to why a business MUST ONLY employ those in the union. Why can't the business have a right to hire non-union people in a state where there are unions?(sure, I could look it up, but I would rather hear from those in the know here)Why should a non-union person be entitled to the same benefits for which the union has negotiated including the wages and the excellent medical care?

[Sooner Born Sooner Bred]

So basically you are saying that you're making an emotional reaction on what your pops did for a livin a long time ago, and making some ridiculous statement that working for the wages that Toyota, Nissan, etc. pay out and many hardworking folks gladly take is slave wages?

Yeah. 25 bucks an hour is slave wages.

Can we just sell Michigan to the Canadians?No, I was referring to Homey's statement that someone working for an auto maker didn't "deserve" to be making $25/year because all many of them have is a HS diploma. And hell yes, I am emotional about this.

[olevetonahill]

In Days of Old we needed Unions to keep the *******s in line
Now adays we dont need em . They are causing High Prices here and driving Jobs to mexico .

[Sooner Born Sooner Bred]

Homey this is what you originally said:
And would someone explain to me why ANY person who works on an assembly line putting together a consumer product rates $75.00, $50.00 or even $25.00 an hour? Hello?

You included $25 in the "outrageous" camp because people are putting together a product on an assembly line instead of using their fancy book learning to fleece the masses.

[Harry Beanbag]

Why should a non-union person be entitled to the same benefits for which the union has negotiated including the wages and the excellent medical care?

I don't think they would be, that would be the point in hiring them. :)

[Harry Beanbag]

Homey this is what you originally said:
And would someone explain to me why ANY person who works on an assembly line putting together a consumer product rates $75.00, $50.00 or even $25.00 an hour? Hello?

You included $25 in the "outrageous" camp because people are putting together a product on an assembly line instead of using their fancy book learning to fleece the masses.

Yeah, $25 an hour isn't an outrageous wage for an good worker. It's the stories you hear about someone making $50 an hour to install turn signals and $29 an hour when they are laid off that are outrageous.

[olevetonahill]

I have a question For all that think 25 bucks an Hour Is Ok ?
You need work Done on your shack , I agree to do it, Its gonna take 6 men plus Myself to do the work .
Now If Im payin em 25 Bucks an Hour I need to charge 65 Bucks an hr for each man to Make a Profit after Payen em and Paying all the Insurance , Taxes etc.
Plus I wanta get what Im worth also . Now thats about 380 an Hour before I add In my My 65
so 445 an hour .
I dont see it it peeps
:confused:

[Turd_Ferguson]

I have a question For all that think 25 bucks an Hour Is Ok ?
You need work Done on your shack , I agree to do it, Its gonna take 6 men plus Myself to do the work .
Now If Im payin em 25 Bucks an Hour I need to charge 65 Bucks an hr for each man to Make a Profit after Payen em and Paying all the Insurance , Taxes etc.
Plus I wanta get what Im worth also . Now thats about 380 an Hour before I add In my My 65
so 445 an hour .
I dont see it it peeps
:confused:Go down to the barrio. You can get'm for 50 a day.:D

[Okla-homey]

Homey this is what you originally said:
And would someone explain to me why ANY person who works on an assembly line putting together a consumer product rates $75.00, $50.00 or even $25.00 an hour? Hello?

You included $25 in the "outrageous" camp because people are putting together a product on an assembly line instead of using their fancy book learning to fleece the masses.

It's about value. You don't need a Ph.D. in economics to undertstand that if you pay people more than the actual value of their labor, the artifically inflated unit cost of the thing they are producing sits on the shelf or on the dealer lot unsold if there are better value alternatives available. Eventually, there comes a reckoning, which results in bankruptcy for the employer. That's where we are today as to American car manufacturing.

Like I posted above, excessive union-negotiated wages killed domestic steel production, finished garments, textiles, footwear, consumer electronics, merchant shipbuilding and all manner of light manufacturing from toys to tools in this country. Why should anyone expect automobile manufacturing to be any different?

[Harry Beanbag]

I have a question For all that think 25 bucks an Hour Is Ok ?
You need work Done on your shack , I agree to do it, Its gonna take 6 men plus Myself to do the work .
Now If Im payin em 25 Bucks an Hour I need to charge 65 Bucks an hr for each man to Make a Profit after Payen em and Paying all the Insurance , Taxes etc.
Plus I wanta get what Im worth also . Now thats about 380 an Hour before I add In my My 65
so 445 an hour .
I dont see it it peeps
:confused:

That's an example of poor management. :)

$25 isn't a starting wage and has to be earned, not given by the union. I don't know the UAW's wage structure but the guys who are repairing and maintaining the fancy car building equipment should be making significantly more than guy installing lugnuts.

[olevetonahill]

Go down to the barrio. You can get'm for 50 a day.:D

Naw I understand what SBSB is sayin. If a Man aint worth 25 Bucks an Hr. for Hard work why in hell does someone who lets a paralegal do all the work get 300 an hour .

[Okla-homey]

Naw I understand what SBSB is sayin. If a Man aint worth 25 Bucks an Hr. for Hard work why in hell does someone who lets a paralegal do all the work get 300 an hour .

I dunno. Because people are still willing to pay that much?;)

When you go to the hospital, the nursing staff does all the "hard work." But who earns more? The doctors or the nursing staff?

[BillySims]

BOOMER!

[Jerk]

I dunno. Because people are still willing to pay that much?;)

When you go to the hospital, the nursing staff does all the "hard work." But who earns more? The doctors or the nursing staff?

That's a good example of how it works.

When you 'force' life to be fair, things get out of whack.

I wouldn't want to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars and many years of my life to go to medical school if I could make just as much by going to nursing school.

It's called 'self interest,' because guess who is numero uno?

[OklahomaTuba]

Homey this is what you originally said:
And would someone explain to me why ANY person who works on an assembly line putting together a consumer product rates $75.00, $50.00 or even $25.00 an hour? Hello?

You included $25 in the "outrageous" camp because people are putting together a product on an assembly line instead of using their fancy book learning to fleece the masses.

They can just ship the jobs to Mexico and China where the going labor rate is around $5.00/hour. And the quality of workmanship is even or better over there as well. Its not F'king rocket science here.

Union's do NOTHING but kill any competitive advantage American products have in global markets.

[TUSooner]

You can't blame workers for getting together to get the most for their labor. You just can't. Ever heard of sweat shops?!?!
Not everybody can go to college and law school or even become skilled craftsmen, tradesmen, or technologists. Somebody has to make our skivvies, and they ought to be paid a decent wage to do it. Raising the standard of living for 3rd-world workers would be a step toward restoring manufacturing jobs in the USA.
(An alternative would be to take all the unskilled and least productive folks and put them in slave labor camps to work until they die; that would teach 'em a lesson about the market ! In their next lives they'd be much more likely to get an education and be doctors and rocket surgeons and stuff.)

That said, the UAW and all unions have to get real: You can't milk a dried up old cow, which is pretty much what Detroit has become. Too often, labor thinks it can get whatever it wants to just because it whines and cries and threatens. Labor and management is not just a 2-factor equation like stupid labor leaders want to pretend. It's like labor wants to drive the bus without looking at the road. Well, that's a pretty lame analogy. :O I mean that Labor thinks it can dictate its desires to the Company without acknowledging the realities and complexities of the market. That's one way that unions ALWAYS **** up. (Another way is by screwing their own members.)

And there is something appealing about Tom's blunt candor, even if you don't agree with him on every little thing.

[Okla-homey]

You can't blame workers for getting together to get the most for their labor. You just can't. Ever heard of sweat shops?!?!



We have existing laws that prevent that sort of thing nowadays*. And granted, trade unions played a huge role in getting them passed. But that was fifty or more years ago. Nowadays, unions are irrelevant and a costly anachronism that exists primarily to line the pockets of the thugs who run them.

*Except for coal mines, those poor bastages still need all the help they can get, but the danged coal union apparently doesn't have the stroke (or desire) to improve mine safety.

[Sooner Born Sooner Bred]

Just to be clear, I'm not defending the unions. I'm not defending GM (especially since the workers in OKC thought they were called in to be introduced to a new model but instead were being told the plant was closing).

My defense is for the people busting their asses on the line. The blame for this fiasco lies solely with the automakers and the unions, not the people working an honest living. Sure the automakers have made some bonehead management decisions, but you can't blame the line people for that.

[OklahomaTuba]

The next shoe to drop is publicly "funded" pensions.

That is the single scariest thing I can think of, and NO ONE talks about it. Those things are very underfunded and mismanaged and it will cost us TRILLIONS to bail those things out.

Between bailing out every damn industry and union in the country and these pipe dream pension plans that teachers and gubment workers are expecting, Lord only knows what kind of economic future holds for us working slobs.

[SoonerInKCMO]

The next shoe to drop is publicly "funded" pensions.

That is the single scariest thing I can think of, and NO ONE talks about it. Those things are very underfunded and mismanaged and it will cost us TRILLIONS to bail those things out.

Have you read While America Aged (http://www.amazon.com/While-America-Aged-Bankrupted-Financial/dp/1594201676/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1229443377&sr=8-1)? Good read. Scary as hell though.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Why should a non-union person be entitled to the same benefits for which the union has negotiated including the wages and the excellent medical care?My question was why is a business forced to accept a union, and not allowed to hire people individually like a normal business can.

[Sooner_Havok]

My question was why is a business forced to accept a union, and not allowed to hire people individually like a normal business can.

They couldn't find enough qualified non-union workers to replace every union worker. You would have to fire/let go at least 2/3 of the current workforce, then replace them with non-union folks.

If you didn't, and you brought in new, non-union workers, the union workers would walk out since the new non-union guys would be reaping the rewards of the union without paying into the union dues.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

My question was why is a business forced to accept a union, and not allowed to hire people individually like a normal business can.D'oh, I forgot about picket lines, physical abuse and worse, etc. Few non-union people want to be terrorized by the unions. Who can blame them?

[picasso]

But Clark Griswold, director of the Center for Trade Policy Studies at the free market Cato Institute, told CNSNews.com on Friday that the UAW is, in part, to blame.

“UAW contracts have played a big role in pulling automakers into the crisis they now face,” said Griswold. “Those contracts are the single biggest difference between domestic and foreign-owned competitors operating on U.S. soil.”


:eek:

[Okla-homey]

:eek:

Clark Griswold? When did he give up his non-nutritional food additives research work?

[Ike]

So while everyone (me included) likes to poo-poo the Unions, I would like to point out one little issue regarding the "$75 dollars per man hour" that likes to get tossed around. It turns out that something like 20 of those dollars aren't even going to current workers (I can't remember where I read this, or I'd drag up links). They are the "legacy" costs involved. Health care for retired workers, etc. Commitments that there is no way the big 3 can get out of, even with a contract re-negotiation. And in fact, this is where the biggest discrepancy between the big 3 and the foreign automakers operating on US soil reside. Everything else that gets paid is roughly consistent with Toyta, Honda, etc.

The real problem with the "75 dollar per hour" that people like to throw around then, is that because of this, if the big 3 go through some round of layoffs, then that number automagically INCREASES. Because it includes this fixed cost that they can't get rid of.

IMO, if you give the Toyotas, Hondas and such of the world time to have such a large base of retired workers they have to pay to, I think you'll see their numbers come into line with the big 3. But the point is, the main reason they don't have this cost and the big 3 do is primarily due to the fact that the big 3 have been operating here for a much longer time.


Anyway, it seems to me that in a lot of peoples rush to blame the unions for all that is awful in this country, they tend to overlook fairly important details...and this is one of them. Asking the unions to renegotiate to bring the big 3's cost per man hour in line with the Japs would basically require that the big 3 auto workers take either zero health care, or work at minimum wage. Or that they go through and kill all the retirees.

[StoopTroup]

BOOMER!

Sooner ! ! !

[StoopTroup]

I tell you what folks...

I know many of you like to bag on the Unions...but I'll tell you right now...we give em hell from the inside where I work. We think they are lazy and not worth a damn at negotiating contracts anymore.

I think Olevet's little story speaks for itself. I'll get you all $10.00 per hour and line my pockets with Union Dues when OV will pay $12.00 it you can find some good ones.

I have never seen a worse group of management than what I endure on a daily basis. The Unions didn't do that. They didn't do that at GM, Ford or Chrysler either. Not at Semgroup or City Financial or Enron...or....

Our Country is in deep ****.

[BillySims]

Sooner ! ! !

BOOMER! ! ! !

[StoopTroup]

BOOMER! ! ! !

SOONER ! ! !

[Harry Beanbag]

So while everyone (me included) likes to poo-poo the Unions, I would like to point out one little issue regarding the "$75 dollars per man hour" that likes to get tossed around. It turns out that something like 20 of those dollars aren't even going to current workers (I can't remember where I read this, or I'd drag up links). They are the "legacy" costs involved. Health care for retired workers, etc. Commitments that there is no way the big 3 can get out of, even with a contract re-negotiation. And in fact, this is where the biggest discrepancy between the big 3 and the foreign automakers operating on US soil reside. Everything else that gets paid is roughly consistent with Toyta, Honda, etc.

The real problem with the "75 dollar per hour" that people like to throw around then, is that because of this, if the big 3 go through some round of layoffs, then that number automagically INCREASES. Because it includes this fixed cost that they can't get rid of.

IMO, if you give the Toyotas, Hondas and such of the world time to have such a large base of retired workers they have to pay to, I think you'll see their numbers come into line with the big 3. But the point is, the main reason they don't have this cost and the big 3 do is primarily due to the fact that the big 3 have been operating here for a much longer time.


Anyway, it seems to me that in a lot of peoples rush to blame the unions for all that is awful in this country, they tend to overlook fairly important details...and this is one of them. Asking the unions to renegotiate to bring the big 3's cost per man hour in line with the Japs would basically require that the big 3 auto workers take either zero health care, or work at minimum wage. Or that they go through and kill all the retirees.

The figure I heard was from a couple of years ago, but it was along the lines of GM paying over $1 billion a year just for retiree health care.

[OUHOMER]

The way I see it GM management agreed to the contracts.
My BIL still works for GM, he transferred to Kansas when they closed the plant here. I have seen so much waste due to the contracts the GM management agreed too.

We can bang the unions ( which is a hobby of mine) but the GM management agreed to it. Union members I think for the most part are hard workers but it only takes a few to give them a black eye.

You should not have to hire 1 guy to push a broom and another guy to hold the dust pan.

My SIL sat in the job bank for 2 years, read more books than anybody I know. Still pisses me off to think how much money she made just sitting around. But she bitched about it the entire time. Than would go off on how the company owed her. blah , blah blah.

But the GM management agreed to it. They basically took each employee in with a cradle to grave contract.

[Sooner Born Sooner Bred]

For those of you who think American car makers are the only ones wanting to suck on the American government's teat:
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB122940448541910059-lMyQjAxMDI4MjE5NjQxMDY0Wj.html

Your Dec. 1 editorial "America's Other Auto Industry (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122809320261867867.html)" questions whether taxpayers should provide temporary federal loans to American automakers, but conveniently ignores one fact: Our taxpayers already give huge sums of financial assistance to foreign car companies right here in the U.S.
As proposed, the requested bridge loans represent roughly $4 billion in assistance to U.S. auto makers, that is, the cost of a low-interest loan. With 240,000 employees spread among the three U.S. companies, that works out to less than $16,000 in temporary taxpayer assistance per job.
By contrast, foreign auto makers receive far more from U.S. taxpayers in various forms of government assistance. In Tennessee, for example, state and local authorities offered Volkswagen $577 million in lowered taxes and other benefits in exchange for the plants it is constructing, at a staggering cost of $288,000 per job created.
Similarly, Toyota is receiving $300 million in support for its plant in Texas, or $150,000 per job created. Alabama provided Hyundai, Toyota, Honda and Mercedes an average of $111,000 in incentives per job. The list goes on. Unlike the temporary assistance GM, Ford and Chrysler are seeking, in almost all the cases, U.S. taxpayer subsidies to foreign companies never need to be paid back.
Let's make sure to keep the discussion balanced. Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Mercedes, BMW, Kia and Hyundai already receive far more in permanent financial support from our own taxpayers than what the U.S. auto industry is seeking. Our own companies deserve equal consideration, no more, no less.
Stephen Collins
President
Automotive Trade Policy Council
Washington
ATPC is the trade association which represents Chrysler LLC, Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Corp.

[sooner n houston]

For those of you who think American car makers are the only ones wanting to suck on the American government's teat:
http://online.wsj.com/article_email/SB122940448541910059-lMyQjAxMDI4MjE5NjQxMDY0Wj.html

Your Dec. 1 editorial "America's Other Auto Industry (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122809320261867867.html)" questions whether taxpayers should provide temporary federal loans to American automakers, but conveniently ignores one fact: Our taxpayers already give huge sums of financial assistance to foreign car companies right here in the U.S.
By contrast, foreign auto makers receive far more from U.S. taxpayers in various forms of government assistance. In Tennessee, for example, state and local authorities offered Volkswagen $577 million in lowered taxes and other benefits in exchange for the plants it is constructing, at a staggering cost of $288,000 per job created.
Similarly, Toyota is receiving $300 million in support for its plant in Texas, or $150,000 per job created. Alabama provided Hyundai, Toyota, Honda and Mercedes an average of $111,000 in incentives per job. The list goes on. Unlike the temporary assistance GM, Ford and Chrysler are seeking, in almost all the cases, U.S. taxpayer subsidies to foreign companies never need to be paid back.
Let's make sure to keep the discussion balanced. Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Mercedes, BMW, Kia and Hyundai already receive far more in permanent financial support from our own taxpayers than what the U.S. auto industry is seeking. Our own companies deserve equal consideration, no more, no less.
Stephen Collins
President
Automotive Trade Policy Council
Washington
ATPC is the trade association which represents Chrysler LLC, Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Corp.


Apples to oranges. Giving companies incentives to move to your state, reduced taxes for X number of years, is hardly "financial assistance". It is also available to US auto makers. Any one know the conditions that brought GM to OKC? I bet there were incentives offered by the city and state to get those jobs.

[sooner n houston]

... They are the "legacy" costs involved. Health care for retired workers, etc. Commitments that there is no way the big 3 can get out of, even with a contract re-negotiation. And in fact, this is where the biggest discrepancy between the big 3 and the foreign automakers operating on US soil reside. Everything else that gets paid is roughly consistent with Toyta, Honda, etc.

IMO, if you give the Toyotas, Hondas and such of the world time to have such a large base of retired workers they have to pay to, I think you'll see their numbers come into line with the big 3. But the point is, the main reason they don't have this cost and the big 3 do is primarily due to the fact that the big 3 have been operating here for a much longer time.

Here is the diff between the two, the new workers, for the foreign companies, aren't going to get those type retirement benefits -- EVAR! They will get some type of matching 401K plan that they must save their own retirement money into. They wil be able to buy health insurance thru the company after they retire, at the employee's exspense, and that is it.


Anyway, it seems to me that in a lot of peoples rush to blame the unions for all that is awful in this country, they tend to overlook fairly important details...and this is one of them. Asking the unions to renegotiate to bring the big 3's cost per man hour in line with the Japs would basically require that the big 3 auto workers take either zero health care, or work at minimum wage.

There is no other way. The big three, with the blackmailing of the unions, have dug a hole so deep there is no good way out for anyone!

[Okla-homey]

Okay, okay. Yes, the workers themselves are nice people who need to eat. Got it. They deserve a decent wage for the work they do. Got it.

But here's the thing. The union ideal, as in model, is the status quo in the state of Michigan as to near universal union membership accompanied by exorbitant compensation. Does anyone here really think that's a good idea for the rest of the country? Srsly?

All I'm saying is society has evolved in the US. We are no longer a manufacturing based economy. Those jobs have largely left our shores or are in the process of getting there. They have been driven there by excessive union contracts that have a profoundly negative affect on profitability.

Corporations are owned by shareholders who demand dividends. Therefore, boards of directors are forced to do what is necessary to reduce overhead and maximize profits for distribution to the shareholder. In the case of US automobile manufacturing, their labor costs are the highest in the world. Ergo, US automakers are faced with the choice of bankruptcy or re-alignment of wages to bring them in line with their competition.

If a person strongly disagrees, then they should stay the hell out of the Wal-Marts, Target, Best Buy, etc. and pay more to BUY AMERICAN.

Finally, it may sound elitist, but its the flippin' truth Ruth; people employed in manufacturing in this country need to learn how to do something else in order to ensure their survival.

Its really no different from our historic shift from an agrarian society to a manufacturing based society. I'm quite sure a lot of people went through a very hard time as it became impossible to raise a family on a 40 acre farm. I know, I listened to my grandparents talk about it. But survive they did because they learned how to do something else!

When the going gets tough, the tough get going. That's the Okie Way. Those UAW members in Michigan should take note.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Union greed killed domestic steel production, finished garments, textiles, footwear, consumer electronics, merchant shipbuilding and all manner of light manufacturing from toys to tools in this country. WTF does anyone think automobiles will be any different?

And would someone explain to me why ANY person who works on an assembly line putting together a consumer product rates $75.00, $50.00 or even $25.00 an hour? Hello?

I don't begrudge people for getting what they can get as a salary or wage, but the Unions would sacrifice a plant or business and its employees so as not to cut wages and have co-pay health care...I don't know how that is serving your members when you get them fired or the plant moves out of the country? If I lost my job and times were tough, I would look for any job as any job > no job and money...

Yeah, there may have been Repub in-fighting, but the key thing here, there was no sacrifice by the union big-wigs to help out here. IMO - unless there is shared sacrifice, there shouldn't be any bail-out or help. Perhaps bankruptcy is the way to go so the Big 3 can void the contracts they have and set new wages levels...

[TUSooner]

We have existing laws that prevent that sort of thing nowadays*. And granted, trade unions played a huge role in getting them passed. But that was fifty or more years ago. Nowadays, unions are irrelevant and a costly anachronism that exists primarily to line the pockets of the thugs who run them.

*Except for coal mines, those poor bastages still need all the help they can get, but the danged coal union apparently doesn't have the stroke (or desire) to improve mine safety.

There's a good reason why I almost never speak in absolutes! Like just now when I said "almost never"... :D

[Scott D]

Can we just sell Michigan to the Canadians?

Only if we can give Texas to your bff Hugo Chavez...now **** off.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

^^ Huh???