Union Auto Workers Paid to do NOTHING???

[Charade]

Your disdain aside, it happens to be true.

PD, you need to follow the political threads a little more closely.

I wasn't taking a shot at the company you work for, I was channeling the people who do!

 

[S. C.]

Fox news can't even get the $$ amount right. NOW they are saying the auto workers make $31 an hour.

 

[DisneyMomOK]

This 'travesty' is a loan, not a bailout.

And when they finally go into bankruptcy, the US taxpayer will be one of many on the creditor list.

 

[LisaR]

The other part of this is that Most of the time, they also qualify for unemployment benefits since they are not "technically" employed. My BIL worked for one of the big three and could not believe all that happens there.

Unfortunately, only the strong can survive. How many companies have we seen go away in our lifetimes. It is part of the evolution of our economy and businesses. We can not keep every company in business. If one of the big three went away tomorrow, many of those people would/could be hired by one of the other two. We have seen it many times in the airlines, major department stores, food processors, and so many other industries. If their business model does not work, they need to restructure or be gone.

No, it will not work this way for the auto industry. It worked like that for airlines and department stores for a couple reasons. 1. There were more of them so when one went out of business, there were plenty of places to get another job. 2. They weren't already cutting HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of their workforce. Ford alone has let over 60,000 people go in the past year (early retirement, buyouts, etc). They are not filling those positions. If GM and/or Chrysler goes out of business, Ford can barely make ends meet right now. They can't hire THOUSANDS of people. It isn't possible.

In addition, you are not factoring in the suppliers. Supplier #1 provides steering wheels to all three companies. Supplier #2 supplies brake pads to all three.....and so on. If two of the three go out of business, the suppliers take a HUGE hit. They aren't going to be hiring any new employees, they will be letting people go, if not closing the doors themselves.

We need manufacturing in America. The Big 3 are all we have. They have some SERIOUS things they need to fix quickly to get back on their feet but they can not fail. Not at this point in the game. We are talking about millions of other jobs that come into play if the Big 3 goes under. I truly feel it would have devastating consequences.

 

[WebmasterAlex]

Why is Fox news even being mentioned like this is some kind of big scoop? Every new outlet has been talking about the job bank since the bail out talk started.

 

[manning]

Let's be clear, and it looks like you are, that most unions don't get these types of deals. But, as far as CEO's go, I am with you "mostly".... I don't mind if they make millions, many millions in fact, AS LONG AS THEIR COMPANIES PERFORM WELL.

Their pay should be mostly based on reaching goals. And it should go down if the don't. Who I really blame are the dumb board members who authorize these outrageous salaries.

Let's face it, rare is the person who will turn down extreme amounts of money, so the trick is not offer so much.

Unfortunately the CEO stacks the board in his favor. Can you say Eisner. Board members are elected the old soviet way. The nominating committee selects them, the stock holder votes yes or no. If "no" rules the committee picks another one. Stockholders have no chance of nominating someone to run for election.

 

[S. C.]

No, it will not work this way for the auto industry. It worked like that for airlines and department stores for a couple reasons. 1. There were more of them so when one went out of business, there were plenty of places to get another job. 2. They weren't already cutting HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of their workforce. Ford alone has let over 60,000 people go in the past year (early retirement, buyouts, etc). They are not filling those positions. If GM and/or Chrysler goes out of business, Ford can barely make ends meet right now. They can't hire THOUSANDS of people. It isn't possible.

In addition, you are not factoring in the suppliers. Supplier #1 provides steering wheels to all three companies. Supplier #2 supplies brake pads to all three.....and so on. If two of the three go out of business, the suppliers take a HUGE hit. They aren't going to be hiring any new employees, they will be letting people go, if not closing the doors themselves.

We need manufacturing in America. The Big 3 are all we have. They have some SERIOUS things they need to fix quickly to get back on their feet but they can not fail. Not at this point in the game. We are talking about millions of other jobs that come into play if the Big 3 goes under. I truly feel it would have devastating consequences.

I agree!



The GM plant I work at had over 12,000 hourly employees when I was hired in 1979. Now we have less than 3000 hourly. We had 800 hourly employees retire this year and I don't know the # of salary workers that retired but the list was long.

And this is just at one plant.

 

[GeorgeG]

There is a significant between some unions and others. There are some who take pride in providing quality workers and quality craftsmanship while others are simply strong-arm organizations for keeping dead-beats on the payroll. Unfortunately, we are seeing the worst side of them right now and I don't excuse the CEO's either.

No bailout, loan, or any other measure is going to fix all the problems. They will simply ensure that some people, perhaps the wrong people, will get to stuff their pockets while others suffer.

The only way to really fix these problems is for everyone to get past the greed and take pride in what they do and show that by making a good product at a reasonable price. If they can't do that, then those who can and will are going to win. So they might have to settle for a smaller TV and a more practical car.

About forty years ago I was still a union worker and we were about to go on strike. There was a huge project being done by a contractor and one of the engineers was a young guy from England. I remember him making the comment that he had seen unions destroy his country. I never really understood that at the time, though. Perhaps some of our British friends can enlighten us (this would have been in the late 1960's). I've always wondered about his comment and never saw him again after that day.

Just for the record, I ended up in management for most of my career and had both union and management people working for me. In all fairness, many of my union employees were better workers than some of the management ones. So, as I said, there are unions, and then there are unions. They are not all the same, but I don't think we can get out of this mess without bringing some common sense to both unions and top management.

 

[Eeyores Butterfly]

Please forgive the ignorance, but I am having a hard time understanding how exactly this Jobs Bank works. It sounds like an unemployment office. Why are they showing up to this place? Are they supposed to be actively filling out applications for other jobs within the company? Why were they allowed to continue receiving benefits after refusing jobs?

This whole thing just makes no sense to me. (Not saying that it isn't happening, it just doesn't make sense).

 

[Eeyores Butterfly]

There is a significant between some unions and others. There are some who take pride in providing quality workers and quality craftsmanship while others are simply strong-arm organizations for keeping dead-beats on the payroll. Unfortunately, we are seeing the worst side of them right now and I don't excuse the CEO's either.

This is a good point. Like anything else, unions can be good or bad. When the unions and management provide a balance for each other, it can be a good thing. I worked in a job that had a strong union that did not overstep its boundaries. There were many aspects of my job that were the way they were because it had been negotiated by the union. These were health and safety issues, and allowed me to do my job better.

The other issue with this particular job was that it was not unusual for a person to be accused of something they didn't do, it was the nature of our job. It doesn't help when you work with a different manager in a different location every day sometimes. The union provided representatives should you ever be fired or censured unfairly. However, the union was not overly powerful. I did not belong to the union because as an intern I did not qualify, but I benefitted directly from their activities.

As far as I know, they have never gone on strike, and are an example of how a good union can work. It is when the balance of power shifts to the union that we problems like this. I don't think unions as a whole are bad, but unions that are too powerful are bad.

 

[Charade]

Please forgive the ignorance, but I am having a hard time understanding how exactly this Jobs Bank works. It sounds like an unemployment office. Why are they showing up to this place? Are they supposed to be actively filling out applications for other jobs within the company? Why were they allowed to continue receiving benefits after refusing jobs?

This whole thing just makes no sense to me. (Not saying that it isn't happening, it just doesn't make sense).

It's a little dated but this explains it.

http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0510/17/A01-351179.htm

 

[bicker]

So basically, it represents a guarantee the union extorted from the companies to employ a certain number of people, practically in perpetuity, and should the companies not need that many workers, they'd still have to pay them. It represents the unfair outcome of extraordinarily unfair labor practices imposed on industry by a fiscally irresponsible government that granted members of unions the right to collude, resulting in a situation where there is only one source of labor for companies to draw from (while labor has multiple companies it could work for).

 

[powellrj]

You missed the good ole TRA days back in the 80's when they were laid off, got 95% of their pay and then received HUGE TRA (Trade Readjustment Allowances) checks. The job banks around here came after all the out cry from people getting 95% of their pay, TRA checks and then doing nothing for the next 4 years. At least at the job banks they had to BE some place.

 

[Charade]

So basically, it represents a guarantee the union extorted from the companies to employ a certain number of people, practically in perpetuity, and should the companies not need that many workers, they'd still have to pay them. It represents the unfair outcome of extraordinarily unfair labor practices imposed on industry by a fiscally irresponsible government that granted members of unions the right to collude, resulting in a situation where there is only one source of labor for companies to draw from (while labor has multiple companies it could work for).

Something like that.