UAW to strike at midnight tonight at GM

[silver billet]

Yeah the unions have corruption, but who else is going to push back against the corporations? If you want a functioning society, either the gov't or some other force has to push back against these massive juggernauts or they will just steam roll right over everybody. A company like GM/FCA understands/priorities only one thing; how much money do we make in the next quarter.

Also keep in mind that unions can benefit non-union workers in the same industry, by raising wages or improving working conditions in that industry. It trickles through.

(in case you're wondering, I own my own very small business; so I'm not unionized and shilling to protect my butt)

 

[ColoradoCub]

Yeah the unions have corruption, but who else is going to push back against the corporations? If you want a functioning society, either the gov't or some other force has to push back against these massive juggernauts or they will just steam roll right over everybody. A company like GM/FCA understands/priorities only one thing; how much money do we make in the next quarter.

Also keep in mind that unions can benefit non-union workers in the same industry, by raising wages or improving working conditions in that industry. It trickles through.

(in case you're wondering, I own my own very small business; so I'm not unionized and shilling to protect my butt)

I have a couple buddies that work at the Toyota plant in San Antonio, they are great jobs with great benefits and amazing purchasing options for them and family members and guess what.......no UAW. What a lot of people don’t see is that the more unions nip at business managers profits the more resistant business managers get. UAW are pit bulls, they get what they want or they force a strike period! They have cornered and made automakers agree to and comply with financial demands that have been and are ridiculous. When you are in a corner you don’t get out of it by being generous to your employees.

 

[silver billet]

I have a couple buddies that work at the Toyota plant in San Antonio, they are great jobs with great benefits and amazing purchasing options for them and family members and guess what.......no UAW. What a lot of people don’t see is that the more unions nip at business managers profits the more resistant business managers get. UAW are pit bulls, they get what they want or they force a strike period! They have cornered and made automakers agree to and comply with financial demands that have been and are ridiculous. When you are in a corner you don’t get out of it by being generous to your employees.

You have the order reversed Toyota can only do that, precisely because there are unions in the rest of the automotive sector keeping them honest. Like I said it trickles through. Here in Hamilton ON we used to have 2 major steel mills right beside eachother, "Stellco" and "DeFasco" (probably misspelled). One was unionized, the other wasn't. Guess what, as soon as wages went up in the unionized factory, the non-unionized followed that up immediately, they were so scared and trying to prevent uninions from walking in. Their theory was, "there will be no push for unions from our workers, if we are competive with wages/conditions/benefits".

You guys seem to forget how the world worked before the unions were created. The little worker was absolutely smushed by the large factories. You in the USA have a strong aversion to government regulations (I'm not arguing whether that is good or bad, just that it is the case), so if you don't want the government to step in and improve the workers lives, who else is going to do it?

There is a lot of good information on the 'net describing life before unions. It was not pretty.

I'll just leave this sort of relevant quote here that I found on reddit:

 

[VoiceOfReason]

If you want a functioning society, either the gov't or some other force has to push back against these massive juggernauts or they will just steam roll right over everybody

No . . .
As strikes clearly indicate, companies need workers. It is every worker's responsibility to force companies to compete for their labor. If you aren't satisfied with your current employment arrangement, rather than complain (not you specifically, but the plural "you" in general), then find a better employer. When people start voluntarily leaving an organization, that creates problems for the company.
Much like how people willing to pay more for trucks enables companies to continue charging more for them, people willing to accept low wages enable companies to continue paying low wages. Leaving for more money benefits both you and your former co-workers. Once a company realizes that people are unwilling to accept low wages, they have no choice but to respond with pay increases as far as the business model will permit, which must be reasonable.

Too many people just assume all the numbers are arbitrary and set for the express purpose of oppression. There are reasons the numbers are what they are.
"You have to ask yourself, what are you in business for? We're in business to make money and we're making money."
- Lee Iacocca

Supply and Demand

Please detail how Mr. Sanders intends to pay for his takeover of healthcare - and while you're at it, go ahead and explain why people from government run healthcare countries come to the United States for treatment.

I'll wait.

 

[VoiceOfReason]

That 60 dollars an hour is total compensation including benefits. I am confident the hourly pay rate ranges from 15 an hour for temps to 30 for full time employees.

The article stated $90k/year, plus benefits. However, they do have ways around that including long term temps, etc.
Union members who were around under prior agreements probably do make that much, but that was from the echoes of negotiations that took place in the boom of the late 1990s, when money was fast flowing. When the market cooled, the wages didn’t and ultimately the UAW priced itself out of the market driving companies into bankruptcy. The employers do not want to repeat that mistake and they shouldn’t be forced to. If the pay structure is reasonable (that is to say, competitive), these gimmicks lose their luster.

 

[GraniteRam]

The article stated $90k/year, plus benefits. However, they do have ways around that including long term temps, etc.
Union members who were around under prior agreements probably do make that much, but that was from the echoes of negotiations that took place in the boom of the late 1990s, when money was fast flowing. When the market cooled, the wages didn’t and ultimately the UAW priced itself out of the market driving companies into bankruptcy. The employers do not want to repeat that mistake and they shouldn’t be forced to. If the pay structure is reasonable (that is to say, competitive), these gimmicks lose their luster.

thebluegoat is correct. I can guarantee you that no UAW employee makes $90k a year unless there's SERIOUS overtime involved. Skilled trades MIGHT get close to that.

 

[drstein]

GM is no ones friend. Bailed them out, and next its close this plant, close that plant Lay off this many, lay off that many. All in the US, not Mexico, not Canada, not China, the good ole USA. When I needed a vehicle, I wouldn't even consider GM

 

[2019REBEL]

GM is no ones friend. Bailed them out, and next its close this plant, close that plant Lay off this many, lay off that many. All in the US, not Mexico, not Canada, not China, the good ole USA. When I needed a vehicle, I wouldn't even consider GM

Did you miss the closing of the plant is Oshawa, ON, Canada.

 

[drstein]

Did you miss the closing of the plant is Oshawa, ON, Canada.

Apparently I did. When was that ??

 

[drstein]

Ahhh, twenty five hundred laid off at Oshawa. Apparently GM is not a friend of Canada either.

 

[silver billet]

If you aren't satisfied with your current employment arrangement, rather than complain (not you specifically, but the plural "you" in general), then find a better employer. When people start voluntarily leaving an organization, that creates problems for the company.
Much like how people willing to pay more for trucks enables companies to continue charging more for them, people willing to accept low wages enable companies to continue paying low wages. Leaving for more money benefits both you and your former co-workers. Once a company realizes that people are unwilling to accept low wages, they have no choice but to respond with pay increases as far as the business model will permit, which must be reasonable.

That's a lovely libertarian viewpoint, unfortunately we have past history to prove it incorrect. We don't have to theorize what the world looked like before unions forced employers to pay ball, we know exactly what those conditions were.

Thank a Union: 36 Ways Unions Have Improved Your Life

This is repost of a blog I wrote in winter of last year when the protests against Governor Walker and union busting were gearing up. Way beyond my wildest expectations, this post actually went ...

www.dailykos.com

The unions helped to allow a middle class society to thrive. That middle class is now in serious danger, and it is shrinking more and more every year thanks to poor government policies, like "trickle down effect" etc.

Please detail how Mr. Sanders intends to pay for his takeover of healthcare - and while you're at it, go ahead and explain why people from government run healthcare countries come to the United States for treatment.

I'm not American, I don't know Mr. Sanders all that well so I can't answer that. However I think it's fairly obvious by the amount of horror stories (bankruptcies) in America (#1 cause of Bankruptcy is due to healthcare costs) that something has gone wrong there. Nobody is doubting the quality of the care you can get in the USA, just the cost. While medical tourism to the USA is a thing (like you pointed out), the opposite is also true. Many Americans are flying out of the USA to other countries to get health care:

https://www.insider.com/medical-tourism-americans-save-money-healthcare-2018-6

 

[VoiceOfReason]

That's a lovely libertarian viewpoint, unfortunately we have past history to prove it incorrect. We don't have to theorize what the world looked like before unions forced employers to pay ball, we know exactly what those conditions were.

Thank a Union: 36 Ways Unions Have Improved Your Life

This is repost of a blog I wrote in winter of last year when the protests against Governor Walker and union busting were gearing up. Way beyond my wildest expectations, this post actually went ...

www.dailykos.com

The unions helped to allow a middle class society to thrive. That middle class is now in serious danger, and it is shrinking more and more every year thanks to poor government policies, like "trickle down effect" etc.



I'm not American, I don't know Mr. Sanders all that well so I can't answer that. However I think it's fairly obvious by the amount of horror stories (bankruptcies) in America (#1 cause of Bankruptcy is due to healthcare costs) that something has gone wrong there. Nobody is doubting the quality of the care you can get in the USA, just the cost. While medical tourism to the USA is a thing (like you pointed out), the opposite is also true. Many Americans are flying out of the USA to other countries to get health care:

https://www.insider.com/medical-tourism-americans-save-money-healthcare-2018-6

I’m speaking from personal experience.
In changing employers, my pay raises were:
67% in 2011
5.7% in 2015
13% in 2016
All but one of those times, I was negotiating from a perspective of strength (I was employed at the time and did not need to switch employers). Even the one occasion I was not negotiating from a perspective of strength, I still managed to make more than what I was before.
Health care is like everything else, it is no one’s responsibility but yours. No one should be forced to either provide care for your body for free nor should they be forced to labor or have a portion of their labor (income so derived) to pay someone to care for your body (again, “you” plural/general).

Everyone’s first priority is to take care of themselves so as to not burden others. Those willing, but incapable/infirm, are the realm of charity, not governance.

 

[VoiceOfReason]

thebluegoat is correct. I can guarantee you that no UAW employee makes $90k a year unless there's SERIOUS overtime involved. Skilled trades MIGHT get close to that.

Rather than claim a guarantee, present evidence. It was not uncommon for union members “working” overtime to exceed six figures even outside of the skilled trades near the turn of the recent century.
I know one former GM employee who “worked” as an electrician and made more than the plant manager. He slept in the plant. He was once helping a single mother move furniture when he got a call about an electrical problem.
He said into the phone, “I’m on the other side of the plant. It will take me about 20 minutes to get there.” Hung up the phone then said, “Gotta go!” and went in to work.
Dave Donna
Great guy, but he wasn’t entirely honest in his time tracking. I can’t be too hard on the guy though because it was his funeral that basically enabled me to attend the interview for the job I have today. I wasn’t interested in the job enough to take a day of vacation over it, but I took the day off because of his funeral which enabled attending the interview.
Point being, GM gets it own share of getting screwed by union members playing cards in the break room during overtime.
Anyone who has ever had to try to accomplish anything where union members are involved is well aware of the frustration. Things you could do yourself in minutes (moving a pallet of servers) can take weeks if you have to get a millwright involved. You can escalate to get things done faster, but it is always far slower than just doing things yourself.

 

[GraniteRam]

Rather than claim a guarantee, present evidence. It was not uncommon for union members “working” overtime to exceed six figures even outside of the skilled trades near the turn of the recent century.
I know one former GM employee who “worked” as an electrician and made more than the plant manager. He slept in the plant. He was once helping a single mother move furniture when he got a call about an electrical problem.
He said into the phone, “I’m on the other side of the plant. It will take me about 20 minutes to get there.” Hung up the phone then said, “Gotta go!” and went in to work.
Dave Donna
Great guy, but he wasn’t entirely honest in his time tracking. I can’t be too hard on the guy though because it was his funeral that basically enabled me to attend the interview for the job I have today. I wasn’t interested in the job enough to take a day of vacation over it, but I took the day off because of his funeral which enabled attending the interview.
Point being, GM gets it own share of getting screwed by union members playing cards in the break room during overtime.
Anyone who has ever had to try to accomplish anything where union members are involved is well aware of the frustration. Things you could do yourself in minutes (moving a pallet of servers) can take weeks if you have to get a millwright involved. You can escalate to get things done faster, but it is always far slower than just doing things yourself.

The $90k figure is about current employees, not about one employee that worked back in the day stealing time. That's why there are turnstiles installed at the entrance of every plant which a badge is required to get in or out now.

 

[silver billet]

All but one of those times, I was negotiating from a perspective of strength (I was employed at the time and did not need to switch employers). Even the one occasion I was not negotiating from a perspective of strength, I still managed to make more than what I was before.

You can't argue that you have "strength" right now, when we're living for many decades with the results of the union at work. Guaranteed your life would be much worse off today had the unions not fought for so much. Did you even read the article I posted? It's not just about wages. Before the unions, you would have said "I need a raise" and the boss would have said "fly a kite" and you would have lost your job. Wages would be just above poverty levels.

Health care is like everything else, it is no one’s responsibility but yours. No one should be forced to either provide care for your body for free nor should they be forced to labor or have a portion of their labor (income so derived) to pay someone to care for your body (again, “you” plural/general).

How do you get such a poor understanding of "medical care"? Nobody in any first world country that has a proper health care system (so every first world country minus the USA) is forced to provide care for anybody, either for free or for payment.

Beside that, that entire train of thought is such a poorly thought out view point. Government is required to provide many essential services, like police/military, education, roads, garbage disposal, environmental protections, etc etc. Your taxes pay for all of that, why do you get so hung up on health care? If you're so dead set against a proper medicare system, in order to be logically consistent you would need to be against all forms of government services, meaning, you're a libertarian and you should be voting for Ron/Rand Paul (those two are certifiably naive).

I encourage you to investigate other first world countries that have an excellent health care system, it might change your view. And keep in mind that the USA pays more per person for health care, than any other country. And yet there are many millions who have no healthcare, can't afford it, and many others who go bankrupt (again, leading cause of banruptcy is from healthcare).

A proper system of education and medical care is absolutely critical for a country, even if you look at it just economically. "A rising tide floats all boats".

Anyway I've said enough on this, it's not my country after all.

 

[airgas1998]

That 60 dollars an hour is total compensation including benefits. I am confident the hourly pay rate ranges from 15 an hour for temps to 30 for full time employees.

no way they old fart at gm with 20+ yrs is making 30 an hr...way way more...

 

[SD Rebel]

You have the order reversed Toyota can only do that, precisely because there are unions in the rest of the automotive sector keeping them honest. Like I said it trickles through. Here in Hamilton ON we used to have 2 major steel mills right beside eachother, "Stellco" and "DeFasco" (probably misspelled). One was unionized, the other wasn't. Guess what, as soon as wages went up in the unionized factory, the non-unionized followed that up immediately, they were so scared and trying to prevent uninions from walking in. Their theory was, "there will be no push for unions from our workers, if we are competive with wages/conditions/benefits".

You guys seem to forget how the world worked before the unions were created. The little worker was absolutely smushed by the large factories. You in the USA have a strong aversion to government regulations (I'm not arguing whether that is good or bad, just that it is the case), so if you don't want the government to step in and improve the workers lives, who else is going to do it?

There is a lot of good information on the 'net describing life before unions. It was not pretty.

I'll just leave this sort of relevant quote here that I found on reddit:

No one lost their coverage, those striking are supposed to have Cobra take over their health care during the strike. They have a mechanism already setup and a process in place for it, but it sure did make nice headlines.

 

[VoiceOfReason]

The $90k figure is about current employees, not about one employee that worked back in the day stealing time. That's why there are turnstiles installed at the entrance of every plant which a badge is required to get in or out now.

Some of those people are still employed there.

 

[VoiceOfReason]

Before the unions, you would have said "I need a raise" and the boss would have said "fly a kite" and you would have lost your job.

Did you not read my comment?
I never asked for a raise.
I changed employers. The union was not a factor in anyone’s ability to change an employer, then or now.

 

[VoiceOfReason]

Government is required to provide many essential services, like police/military, education, roads, garbage disposal, environmental protections, etc etc.

Wrong.
The function of government is to protect the rights of citizens. Healthcare is not (and never has been) an essential “service” of governing. Healthcare, like housing, food, water, etc. are personal responsibilities. It is the citizen’s responsibility to procure such services, not the government’s responsibility to provide them. That is not the role of government.
You present the assertion that people cannot afford healthcare, yet ignore the cause. Outside of the disabled and infirm, who are the realm of charity, those who cannot afford (insert any expense here) have simply failed to earn the income that would enable such purchase or have spent frivolously in other ways, which is a result of their own inability to prioritize their spending.
I knew a guy making minimum wage who had a nicer/newer phone than I did.
My tenants at my rental had a larger TV and a newer, more expensive car than I did.
People CAN “afford it”, they just choose to instead invest in entertainment related liabilities then complain that no one is taking care of them, apparently oblivious to their responsibility for same.