Fiat to UAW: Accept pay cuts or no Chrysler deal.
04-17-09, 11:37 AM
#31
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: California
Posts: 6,084
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chrysler released a memo today to the Canadian Auto Workers. I don't know whether Fiat is only talking about the CAW contract but Fox News (I tried to find it somewhere else but I am just posting the memo, Fox News got it so just deal with it) got a copy of the memo and there are some interesting points that ChryCo raises. Generally, all of us are talking through our hats on both sides of the argument as to what the UAW and CAW are costing GFC to operate. Well, we have some pretty good glimpses today.
The memo:
A Message to Chrysler Canada Employees from Bob Nardelli and Tom LaSoarda
Dear Employees,
Today, we are at a crossroads in the history of Chrysler. Let’s take a look at what’s happened in the past few weeks. On February 17 and February 20, Chrysler submitted its Viability Plan to the U.S. Treasury and U. S. Administration; and to the Canadian governments, respectively.
On March 30, U.S. President Barack Obama stated that Chrysler’s Viability Plan was unacceptable. “It’s with deep reluctance but also a clear-eyed recognition of the facts that we’ve determined, after careful review, that Chrysler needs a partner to remain viable.”
He went on to state: “I’m committed to doing all I can to see if a deal can be struck in a way that upholds the interests of American taxpayers. And that’s why we’ll give Chrysler and Fiat 30 days to overcome these hurdles and reach a final agreement — and we will provide Chrysler with adequate capital to continue operating during that time. If they are able to come to a sound agreement that protects American taxpayers, we will consider lending up to $6 billion to help their plan succeed. But if they and their stakeholders are unable to reach such an agreement, and in the absence of any other viable partnership, we will not be able to justify investing additional tax dollars to keep Chrysler in business.”
U.S. President Obama has made it clear that our company must attain competitive labour rates: “Now, what we’re asking for is difficult. It will require hard choices by companies. It will require unions and workers who have already made extraordinarily painful concessions to do more … It will require efforts from a whole host of other stakeholders, including dealers and suppliers.”
Also on March 30, the Honourable Tony Clement, Minister of Industry, said, “While the restructuring plans represent progress, they do not go far enough to ensure the long-term viability of these companies. Therefore, we are not certifying their proposals. Together with our U.S. counterparts we believe that further fundamental changes are needed.”
Just this week, Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne has made it clear that an alliance is contingent on the UAW and CAW meeting transplant all-in labour rates: “Absolutely, we are prepared to walk. There is no doubt in my mind,” Marchionne was quoted as saying. “We cannot commit to this organization unless we see light at the end of the tunnel.”
The Canadian government has been very supportive of our viability, providing a loan of $1 billion (CDN, $750 million drawn to date), with an agreement to provide additional support in proportion to the loans received from the U.S. Treasury.
On April 14, the Canadian governments, both federal and provincial, invited the CAW and Chrysler to attend a meeting in Toronto where they laid out four specific guidelines that must be met for providing further financial support. Their “asks” were:
1. That labour costs be reduced to a level equal to those of Toyota Canada. We believe that a Canadian benchmark is the appropriate one for you to achieve. We ask that you jointly demonstrate to us that the agreement you reach attains this benchmark.
2. That Chrysler complete an alliance with Fiat that, in return for equity participation gives Chrysler access to Fiat management, Fiat technology, Fiat sales and distribution outside of NAFTA, and distribution of Fiat products inside NAFTA.
3. That Chrysler and Fiat submit revised plans to Canadian governments and U.S. Treasury based on appropriate assumptions that show clearly Canadian production, product mix, capital investment and R&D.
4. That Chrysler and Fiat commit to maintain Canada’s proportion of North American production and to invest over the medium term that same share of total capital investment and R&D expenditure in Canada.
Let’s keep in mind, the all-in labour costs at Chrysler Canada are $76 per hour while the Toyota Canada all-in rate is approximately $57 per hour.
While we have made some progress with the CAW, it falls significantly short of closing the $19 gap. And yet, as recent as Wednesday this week, the CAW continues to ignore this clear mandate from the government stating that they will not go any further. This unwillingness to work within the government’s guidelines jeopardizes the future of Chrysler and our operations in Canada.
We have made several proposals to the CAW to offset these costs, without affecting base wages and pensions. Some specific examples include:
Prescription drug dispensing fees, by eliminating the cap results in estimated savings of $2.16 per hour.
Elimination of out-of-province health care coverage (snowbirds), with employees and retirees assuming responsibility for any coverage results in a cost savings of $1.00 per hour.
The change from semi-private hospital room coverage to “ward” coverage saves an estimated $0.97 per hour.
Elimination of life insurance for current and future employees results in a cost savings of $1.54 per hour.
The reduction of shift premiums to 2.5 percent results in a cost savings of $.80 per hour.
By increasing health care premiums would save an estimated $1.04 per hour.
The elimination of non-traditional benefits such as child care, legal services, tuition reimbursement, dependant scholarships and extended health care coverage (chiropractic services, massage therapy, naturopath, orthotics, etc.) results in a cost savings of $0.73 per hour.
Unfortunately, the CAW has been opposed to these solutions – however, we are open to alternative ideas. Next week, we plan to meet with the CAW to attempt to reach an agreement that is acceptable to Fiat and the Canadian government.
The clock is running. Without labour concessions, Chrysler Canada’s manufacturing operations will not survive long-term. Thousands of good-paying jobs are in jeopardy, as well as the economic health of communities such as Windsor and Brampton.
Canada has always been an important manufacturing and sales market for Chrysler LLC. It represents the largest vehicle sales market for Chrysler outside of the U.S. and no other vehicle manufacturer has a larger portion of its total manufacturing in Canada than Chrysler.
However, these are not normal business circumstances and all Chrysler constituents have been asked to “break pattern” – employees, retirees, dealers, suppliers and others.
Time is very short. We have only two weeks before a final decision must be made. Let me be clear, our negotiations are about saving Chrysler Canada. We are coming down to the wire in the fight for our company’s survival – and we need your support.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/mar...ada-employees/
No one should underestimate the fact that ChryCo went public with this, at least one outlet got the memo. I don't see anything on that list that is out of line compared to what those in the private sector have been facing for years. The reduction of those areas alone represent, according to the memo, $7.44/hr if my trusty calculator is right. If ChryCo was healthy, they can do whatever they want for the employees but as Fiat pointed out, they are a wreck, time to start facing reality.
The memo:
A Message to Chrysler Canada Employees from Bob Nardelli and Tom LaSoarda
Dear Employees,
Today, we are at a crossroads in the history of Chrysler. Let’s take a look at what’s happened in the past few weeks. On February 17 and February 20, Chrysler submitted its Viability Plan to the U.S. Treasury and U. S. Administration; and to the Canadian governments, respectively.
On March 30, U.S. President Barack Obama stated that Chrysler’s Viability Plan was unacceptable. “It’s with deep reluctance but also a clear-eyed recognition of the facts that we’ve determined, after careful review, that Chrysler needs a partner to remain viable.”
He went on to state: “I’m committed to doing all I can to see if a deal can be struck in a way that upholds the interests of American taxpayers. And that’s why we’ll give Chrysler and Fiat 30 days to overcome these hurdles and reach a final agreement — and we will provide Chrysler with adequate capital to continue operating during that time. If they are able to come to a sound agreement that protects American taxpayers, we will consider lending up to $6 billion to help their plan succeed. But if they and their stakeholders are unable to reach such an agreement, and in the absence of any other viable partnership, we will not be able to justify investing additional tax dollars to keep Chrysler in business.”
U.S. President Obama has made it clear that our company must attain competitive labour rates: “Now, what we’re asking for is difficult. It will require hard choices by companies. It will require unions and workers who have already made extraordinarily painful concessions to do more … It will require efforts from a whole host of other stakeholders, including dealers and suppliers.”
Also on March 30, the Honourable Tony Clement, Minister of Industry, said, “While the restructuring plans represent progress, they do not go far enough to ensure the long-term viability of these companies. Therefore, we are not certifying their proposals. Together with our U.S. counterparts we believe that further fundamental changes are needed.”
Just this week, Fiat CEO Sergio Marchionne has made it clear that an alliance is contingent on the UAW and CAW meeting transplant all-in labour rates: “Absolutely, we are prepared to walk. There is no doubt in my mind,” Marchionne was quoted as saying. “We cannot commit to this organization unless we see light at the end of the tunnel.”
The Canadian government has been very supportive of our viability, providing a loan of $1 billion (CDN, $750 million drawn to date), with an agreement to provide additional support in proportion to the loans received from the U.S. Treasury.
On April 14, the Canadian governments, both federal and provincial, invited the CAW and Chrysler to attend a meeting in Toronto where they laid out four specific guidelines that must be met for providing further financial support. Their “asks” were:
1. That labour costs be reduced to a level equal to those of Toyota Canada. We believe that a Canadian benchmark is the appropriate one for you to achieve. We ask that you jointly demonstrate to us that the agreement you reach attains this benchmark.
2. That Chrysler complete an alliance with Fiat that, in return for equity participation gives Chrysler access to Fiat management, Fiat technology, Fiat sales and distribution outside of NAFTA, and distribution of Fiat products inside NAFTA.
3. That Chrysler and Fiat submit revised plans to Canadian governments and U.S. Treasury based on appropriate assumptions that show clearly Canadian production, product mix, capital investment and R&D.
4. That Chrysler and Fiat commit to maintain Canada’s proportion of North American production and to invest over the medium term that same share of total capital investment and R&D expenditure in Canada.
Let’s keep in mind, the all-in labour costs at Chrysler Canada are $76 per hour while the Toyota Canada all-in rate is approximately $57 per hour.
While we have made some progress with the CAW, it falls significantly short of closing the $19 gap. And yet, as recent as Wednesday this week, the CAW continues to ignore this clear mandate from the government stating that they will not go any further. This unwillingness to work within the government’s guidelines jeopardizes the future of Chrysler and our operations in Canada.
We have made several proposals to the CAW to offset these costs, without affecting base wages and pensions. Some specific examples include:
Prescription drug dispensing fees, by eliminating the cap results in estimated savings of $2.16 per hour.
Elimination of out-of-province health care coverage (snowbirds), with employees and retirees assuming responsibility for any coverage results in a cost savings of $1.00 per hour.
The change from semi-private hospital room coverage to “ward” coverage saves an estimated $0.97 per hour.
Elimination of life insurance for current and future employees results in a cost savings of $1.54 per hour.
The reduction of shift premiums to 2.5 percent results in a cost savings of $.80 per hour.
By increasing health care premiums would save an estimated $1.04 per hour.
The elimination of non-traditional benefits such as child care, legal services, tuition reimbursement, dependant scholarships and extended health care coverage (chiropractic services, massage therapy, naturopath, orthotics, etc.) results in a cost savings of $0.73 per hour.
Unfortunately, the CAW has been opposed to these solutions – however, we are open to alternative ideas. Next week, we plan to meet with the CAW to attempt to reach an agreement that is acceptable to Fiat and the Canadian government.
The clock is running. Without labour concessions, Chrysler Canada’s manufacturing operations will not survive long-term. Thousands of good-paying jobs are in jeopardy, as well as the economic health of communities such as Windsor and Brampton.
Canada has always been an important manufacturing and sales market for Chrysler LLC. It represents the largest vehicle sales market for Chrysler outside of the U.S. and no other vehicle manufacturer has a larger portion of its total manufacturing in Canada than Chrysler.
However, these are not normal business circumstances and all Chrysler constituents have been asked to “break pattern” – employees, retirees, dealers, suppliers and others.
Time is very short. We have only two weeks before a final decision must be made. Let me be clear, our negotiations are about saving Chrysler Canada. We are coming down to the wire in the fight for our company’s survival – and we need your support.
http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/mar...ada-employees/
No one should underestimate the fact that ChryCo went public with this, at least one outlet got the memo. I don't see anything on that list that is out of line compared to what those in the private sector have been facing for years. The reduction of those areas alone represent, according to the memo, $7.44/hr if my trusty calculator is right. If ChryCo was healthy, they can do whatever they want for the employees but as Fiat pointed out, they are a wreck, time to start facing reality.
04-17-09, 12:39 PM
#32
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
That is one thing the companies seem to have forgotten.....lay off workers, or cut back to much on their salaries and benefits, and you're going to lose sales. Unemployed auto workers, or those making half of what they once did, are not likely to be buying new cars.....and companies HAVE to sell new cars to survive.
And another thing that Nardelli and Marchionne seem to have forgotten is that the workers in the plant make their multi-million-dollar executive salaries POSSIBLE. Not only do they assemble the company's vehicles in often tough conditions, but their jobs, in some ways, as I see it, carry just as much responsibility as the big-money jobs in the boardroom. If the guy on the assembly line doesn't tighten the lug nuts down properly on the wheels, install the seat belts correctly, hook up the steering gear correctly, (or operate the machines properly that do those jobs) then you could end up with a dangerous vehicle.....and enormous lawsuits for the company.
Managers, IMO, need to THINK about these things a little before they try to balance their budgets on the backs of the people who are their bread-and-butter.
Of course the auto industry is competitive. Of course companies want to (and sometimes need to) watch their costs. But, if you don't take care of the people that make your company, and its vehicles, POSSIBLE, then what good are you doing? You might as well be running a slave-labor sweat-shop like they do in China.
Last edited by mmarshall; 04-17-09 at 12:54 PM.
04-17-09, 01:04 PM
#33
Lexus Fanatic
Certainly above dissertation is lengthy, the amusing part that sure sounds like a stereotype was "You might as well be running a slave-labor sweat-shop like they do in China", jeeezzzzz.
Expecting the declining number of the UAW workers to buy cars and prop up the economy or prop up nearly dead car divisions is not going to happen to any significant degree.
But on topic, UAW at Chrysler has severely diminished bargaining power as the deadline approaches, the clock is ticking.....
Expecting the declining number of the UAW workers to buy cars and prop up the economy or prop up nearly dead car divisions is not going to happen to any significant degree.
But on topic, UAW at Chrysler has severely diminished bargaining power as the deadline approaches, the clock is ticking.....
04-17-09, 01:19 PM
#34
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Certainly above dissertation is lengthy, the amusing part that sure sounds like a stereotype was "You might as well be running a slave-labor sweat-shop like they do in China", jeeezzzzz.
Expecting the declining number of the UAW workers to buy cars and prop up the economy or prop up nearly dead car divisions is not going to happen to any significant degree.
But on topic, UAW at Chrysler has severely diminished bargaining power as the deadline approaches, the clock is ticking.....
Expecting the declining number of the UAW workers to buy cars and prop up the economy or prop up nearly dead car divisions is not going to happen to any significant degree.
But on topic, UAW at Chrysler has severely diminished bargaining power as the deadline approaches, the clock is ticking.....
And, though, there are some air-conditioned plants where workers can work in relative comfort, in many other plants, that is not the case. A lot of repetititive-motion injuries to bones, muscles, and joints are attributed to assembly-line work...it is not a piece of cake by any means.
Now....could you consider it "sweat-shop" work? Obviously, auto workers in America, even non-union ones, make a lot more than in China....but that still doesn't make some of the work a piece of cake.
04-17-09, 01:35 PM
#35
Lexus Fanatic
I wasn't exactly off-topic, IS-SV. What I posted above mostly covered the subject of the thread.....Fiat's managers trying to balance their budgets on the backs of the Chrysler workers. (I know what this thread is about.....I started it).
And, though, there are some air-conditioned plants where workers can work in relative comfort, in many other plants, that is not the case. A lot of repetititive-motion injuries to bones, muscles, and joints are attributed to assembly-line work...it is not a piece of cake by any means.
Now....could you consider it "sweat-shop" work? Obviously, auto workers in America, even non-union ones, make a lot more than in China....but that still doesn't make some of the work a piece of cake.
And, though, there are some air-conditioned plants where workers can work in relative comfort, in many other plants, that is not the case. A lot of repetititive-motion injuries to bones, muscles, and joints are attributed to assembly-line work...it is not a piece of cake by any means.
Now....could you consider it "sweat-shop" work? Obviously, auto workers in America, even non-union ones, make a lot more than in China....but that still doesn't make some of the work a piece of cake.
Back on topic, take a look in the IS-2nd generation forum. There is a recent short video on the IS production line in Japan. Auto assembly line work in year 2009 is something very different fortunately.
04-17-09, 03:33 PM
#36
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Note: I meant I was off-topic when I mentioned the stereotypical slave shop thing in China.
Back on topic, take a look in the IS-2nd generation forum. There is a recent short video on the IS production line in Japan. Auto assembly line work in year 2009 is something very different fortunately.
Back on topic, take a look in the IS-2nd generation forum. There is a recent short video on the IS production line in Japan. Auto assembly line work in year 2009 is something very different fortunately.
04-17-09, 03:48 PM
#37
Lexus Fanatic
I have a hard time downloadling videos, but it is no secret that the Japanese modernized their assembly lines before we did. They also, in general, have a more dedicated work force (in Japan, company work is traditionally considered a priviledge). That is one of the reasons why they were building quality back when we were still doing junk. Some American-nameplate vehicles (fortunately, not all) are STILL junk.
The video is worth watching, if only to see what modern manufacturing actually looks like today in 2009, highlighting some improvements aimed at improving worker ergonomics, etc. It's a cool vid.
04-17-09, 06:43 PM
#38
Lexus Fanatic
Let me try to put that in plain English...
So you are trying to say that because their jobs are so simple and boring thus they should get paid more than other more interesting and complicated positions?
WHAT THE...
Spin it all you want but when a job that only requires a high school diploma with minimal training is getting paid the same as a job that requires at least a master's degree in engineering then something is wrong.
It's really as simple as that.
So you are trying to say that because their jobs are so simple and boring thus they should get paid more than other more interesting and complicated positions?
WHAT THE...
Spin it all you want but when a job that only requires a high school diploma with minimal training is getting paid the same as a job that requires at least a master's degree in engineering then something is wrong.
It's really as simple as that.
sorry to sound like a snob, but I guess the point is that a blue collar worker should not make white collar money, then wonder why they want to cut his white collar pay because the company is about to go under
04-17-09, 06:55 PM
#39
Lexus Fanatic
It sounds like you are more bothered and angry that their are jobs out there that don't require a bachelors/masters degree or a huge amount of skill that pay as much or more then you or someone who spent more on their education even if UAW wages are not the main problem or what is at issue with the big 3. The bigger problem lies with the top level decisions since the 70's and how the cars were so poorly designed by the engineers and the decision to use cheap materials and focus mainly on trucks/SUVs which is the root of the big 3s problem and why they don't sell well. They can decide to cut UAW's wages to $12 an hour but that is still not going to solve the big 3's woes or why not many people will buy them unless they are given huge incentives. It is not the workers fault the cars are designed so poorly, use cheap materials with loose tolerances, use outdated technology, drive poorly, and why they are so unreliable compared to Japanese cars.
Thing is the automotive business is a huge money making business, one of the biggest in the world and you can't just let all the profit just go to the educated white collar part of the business where the people who actually assemble the cars and do the crappy jobs in poor conditions get paid very little of those profits because they don't happen to have a job that requires an education. UAW autoworkers still don't get paid anywhere near what the managers, executives, CEO's make at the big 3.
I also never said the jobs are simple and boring as to the reason they should be paid as much or even more then some other more complicated jobs, don't know how you got that. I was saying the jobs are not that easy especially to do day in and day out in those factory conditions and if some people did it like I did they would not feel they are so easy and overpayed. I used to think it was just a cushy job and they are way overpaid before I worked there. Just because those jobs don't require a college education does not mean they should be punished with poor wages. Most of the jobs are not as easy as just screwing a bolt in, you do have to get trained and certified to do several jobs(welding, bodyshop repair, forklift/unloading and delivering material to the line when needed, operating complex machinery, fixing machinery that goes down or malfunctions, etc
It is just a fact that not all white collar jobs, even complicated ones that require a college education, certifications, masters, etc pay well, some pay quite poorly. It is also a fact that many blue collar jobs that don't require a bachelors degree pay well and as much if not much more then those jobs that require higher education. I know plenty of people who are electricians, in HVAC, work in factories, mechanics, drive trucks, etc that make 65 to over a 100K a year and they did not have to get a bachelors degree or even an associates and I think they deserve what they got paid. I also know people who have a college education and even a masters with plenty of experience in their field who make well under 60K a year because that is all the job pays. The amount of work blue/white collar workers do can often generate the same amount of profit/growth so paying someone vastly more just because they have an education may not make sense in all circumstance, in autoplants all the work those workers do and the number of cars they build generates very high profits in most cases and they should be paid accordingly.
I have a bachelors degree so it is not like I am just saying this because I never went to college, I have just worked several blue/white collar jobs and don't find all blue collar jobs to be easier then all white collar jobs.
I also said that with all the problems the big 3 is going through workers are going to have to give up some pay and especially benefits/options but their hourly pay is not the main problem with the big 3 and it is not $50-$70 an hour like many sources try to say. They make a nice middle income wage much like what people are paid in the import plants in the US except their benefits/retirement don't add up to nearly as much and I don't think paying UAW a low poor wage is going to solver anything. If you are mad at US UAW workers pay and how the jobs do not require higher education then you should also be mad at European autoworkers who make much more and Japanese autoworkers who make good wages and have strong unions. It seems those auto companies can pay their workers decent/good wages and still turn big profits and function because they have generally made good business decisions over the years where US big 3 companies have made poor decisions and are paying the price regardless of what the hourly pay is for their factory workers.
Thing is the automotive business is a huge money making business, one of the biggest in the world and you can't just let all the profit just go to the educated white collar part of the business where the people who actually assemble the cars and do the crappy jobs in poor conditions get paid very little of those profits because they don't happen to have a job that requires an education. UAW autoworkers still don't get paid anywhere near what the managers, executives, CEO's make at the big 3.
I also never said the jobs are simple and boring as to the reason they should be paid as much or even more then some other more complicated jobs, don't know how you got that. I was saying the jobs are not that easy especially to do day in and day out in those factory conditions and if some people did it like I did they would not feel they are so easy and overpayed. I used to think it was just a cushy job and they are way overpaid before I worked there. Just because those jobs don't require a college education does not mean they should be punished with poor wages. Most of the jobs are not as easy as just screwing a bolt in, you do have to get trained and certified to do several jobs(welding, bodyshop repair, forklift/unloading and delivering material to the line when needed, operating complex machinery, fixing machinery that goes down or malfunctions, etc
It is just a fact that not all white collar jobs, even complicated ones that require a college education, certifications, masters, etc pay well, some pay quite poorly. It is also a fact that many blue collar jobs that don't require a bachelors degree pay well and as much if not much more then those jobs that require higher education. I know plenty of people who are electricians, in HVAC, work in factories, mechanics, drive trucks, etc that make 65 to over a 100K a year and they did not have to get a bachelors degree or even an associates and I think they deserve what they got paid. I also know people who have a college education and even a masters with plenty of experience in their field who make well under 60K a year because that is all the job pays. The amount of work blue/white collar workers do can often generate the same amount of profit/growth so paying someone vastly more just because they have an education may not make sense in all circumstance, in autoplants all the work those workers do and the number of cars they build generates very high profits in most cases and they should be paid accordingly.
I have a bachelors degree so it is not like I am just saying this because I never went to college, I have just worked several blue/white collar jobs and don't find all blue collar jobs to be easier then all white collar jobs.
I also said that with all the problems the big 3 is going through workers are going to have to give up some pay and especially benefits/options but their hourly pay is not the main problem with the big 3 and it is not $50-$70 an hour like many sources try to say. They make a nice middle income wage much like what people are paid in the import plants in the US except their benefits/retirement don't add up to nearly as much and I don't think paying UAW a low poor wage is going to solver anything. If you are mad at US UAW workers pay and how the jobs do not require higher education then you should also be mad at European autoworkers who make much more and Japanese autoworkers who make good wages and have strong unions. It seems those auto companies can pay their workers decent/good wages and still turn big profits and function because they have generally made good business decisions over the years where US big 3 companies have made poor decisions and are paying the price regardless of what the hourly pay is for their factory workers.
04-17-09, 06:59 PM
#40
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: California
Posts: 6,084
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dude you are spot on with the argument I am making. I have to agree that a factory worker should not be making 72K a year, even after working there for 13 years. This country is headed in a direction where the "old values" will be coming back into play. No home loans with no money down, you dont spend more than you make, and you cant "make it" without an education. How is it that a guy who is only qualified to really get another factory job, or a fast food job get paid as much as a person who went to graduate school.
sorry to sound like a snob, but I guess the point is that a blue collar worker should not make white collar money, then wonder why they want to cut his white collar pay because the company is about to go under
sorry to sound like a snob, but I guess the point is that a blue collar worker should not make white collar money, then wonder why they want to cut his white collar pay because the company is about to go under
04-17-09, 07:00 PM
#41
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Dude you are spot on with the argument I am making. I have to agree that a factory worker should not be making 72K a year, even after working there for 13 years. This country is headed in a direction where the "old values" will be coming back into play. No home loans with no money down, you dont spend more than you make, and you cant "make it" without an education. How is it that a guy who is only qualified to really get another factory job, or a fast food job get paid as much as a person who went to graduate school.
sorry to sound like a snob, but I guess the point is that a blue collar worker should not make white collar money, then wonder why they want to cut his white collar pay because the company is about to go under
sorry to sound like a snob, but I guess the point is that a blue collar worker should not make white collar money, then wonder why they want to cut his white collar pay because the company is about to go under
Last edited by mmarshall; 04-17-09 at 07:04 PM.
04-17-09, 08:36 PM
#42
mmarshall, so fine, let's compare apples to apples.
So we have...
(1) UAW workers who work with PRECISION and STATE-OF-THE art machines to build automobiles and,
(2) Major defense contractor (for example, LM, Boeing, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon) Mechanics who work with PRECISION and STATE-OF-THE art machines to build airplanes, missiles, radars and satellites.
Which one do you think deserve to get pay more?
I can tell you right now, the defense contractor mechanics don't have an average salary of $30/hour.
Still think there's nothing wrong with the UAW?
So we have...
(1) UAW workers who work with PRECISION and STATE-OF-THE art machines to build automobiles and,
(2) Major defense contractor (for example, LM, Boeing, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon) Mechanics who work with PRECISION and STATE-OF-THE art machines to build airplanes, missiles, radars and satellites.
Which one do you think deserve to get pay more?
I can tell you right now, the defense contractor mechanics don't have an average salary of $30/hour.
Still think there's nothing wrong with the UAW?
04-17-09, 09:32 PM
#43
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
mmarshall, so fine, let's compare apples to apples.
So we have...
(1) UAW workers who work with PRECISION and STATE-OF-THE art machines to build automobiles and,
(2) Major defense contractor (for example, LM, Boeing, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon) Mechanics who work with PRECISION and STATE-OF-THE art machines to build airplanes, missiles, radars and satellites.
Which one do you think deserve to get pay more?
I can tell you right now, the defense contractor mechanics don't have an average salary of $30/hour.
Still think there's nothing wrong with the UAW?
So we have...
(1) UAW workers who work with PRECISION and STATE-OF-THE art machines to build automobiles and,
(2) Major defense contractor (for example, LM, Boeing, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon) Mechanics who work with PRECISION and STATE-OF-THE art machines to build airplanes, missiles, radars and satellites.
Which one do you think deserve to get pay more?
I can tell you right now, the defense contractor mechanics don't have an average salary of $30/hour.
Still think there's nothing wrong with the UAW?
04-17-09, 09:44 PM
#44
Lexus Fanatic
You are certainly not a snob, but perhaps (?) you (and many others) may be trying to classify auto-manufacturing jobs as blue-collar when, in fact, they may not actually BE blue-collar work any more. Modern auto plants are not just a matter of grabbing a tire/wheel like a monkey, tossing it on blindly, and hitting 4 or 5 lugs with a poorly-adjusted, manual air wrench. Nor do you just take a paint gun and start mindlessly spraying it like you were aiming bug spray at an insect. Today's cars are built with REAL precision. It is a skill that is not easily taught in just a few minutes, like decades ago. Even the machines and robots that do a lot of today's work that was formerly done by hand take skilled operators to use them. There is a reason why a good auto worker, today, dserves a good wage and benefits.....not just because he or she happens to belong to the UAW, or the Union having clout.
04-17-09, 10:07 PM
#45
The issue is not so much the UAW itself, but what companies actually give their employees in salary and benefits. There are a number of well-treated and well-paid employees in American non-UAW plants scattered throughout the country, building Toyotas, Hondas, Nissans, BMWs, Mercedes, Subarus and other makes. My own Outback came from a Subaru plant in Lafayette, IN.