So now we let foreign-based (and government-subsidized) corporations dictate the wages of American workers? What’s next: “Hey if Americans want manufacturing jobs, they need to come down to the level of the Chinese factory workers.”
And not that I don’t believe you, but can I get a site for all the cuts that are being made outside the UAW? I know several exempt Ford and Chrysler employees and supervisors and retirees, and haven’t heard anything about cuts of that magnitude yet.
If you think it’s strictly the UAW’s fault that all of this is happening, why is Ford not on the brink of failing like GM and Chrysler? Because at the end of the day, it’s *not *the UAW’s fault. It’s mismanagement, a rotten economy, it’s competing with Asian companies that are subsidized and regulated by their governments.
And here’s the bottom line: A top-tier white-collar executive taking even a 75%-100% salary cut for a couple of years will still be living a very comfortable life, and he’ll eventually recoup those reduced wages somehwere along the line. The supervisor or manager (that makes between $100,000 and $200,000), could take a 20% pay cut and still live comfortably. On the flip side, the blue-collar UAW worker will most definitely be hit like a ton of bricks with a $5-$8/hour pay cut, and that’s a concession he or she will never get back again.
So…anti-union fucks bitch for years because the UAW has negotiated a job bank. And now when it’s pointed out that the UAW has agreed to kill it, it’s time to mock the UAW for being so “generous?” It really is just about hating unions, isn’t it? You’re snarky when they negotiate things effectively, you’re snarky when they concede…
It is generous. It is in a contract and both sides agreed and signed. The jobs bank is designed to help guys survive when the periodic layoffs happen. If they give it back ,it will be a nice gesture. It is a whiff of money in the crisis. Give it or not it wont change a thing.
This is just ridiculous. The reference that is being used is the well paid American workers of the foreign automakers. They aren’t being asked to cut down to Chinese wages.
There are three cites that cover some of the things I mentioned. You can google for the rest.
Nobody is saying that it is strictly the UAWs fault. That is all in your imagination. However, they are certainly part of the problem and that problem needs to be fixed. Unfortunately it seems a lot of people in this thread read “the UAW is part of the problem” as “the UAW is the entire problem”, and “the UAW needs to cut wages to match the Big 3 competitors” as “ZOMG they want to bust the union and pay them Chinese wages!”.
Not really. The UAW workers make a very good wage, well above the median salary. They can easily take a cut to the level of the foreign automakers workers. It’s not as though those workers are in the poor house. They make good money, and so will the UAW workers.
Because it’s such a ridiculous benefit that giving it back hardly counts as a concession. Besides, the UAW hasn’t agreed to kill it. They’ve merely agreed to “suspend” it.
Of course it’s about hating unions. All the righties know how to do is fuck stuff up and scapegoat others. That’s what this thread is all about. Unions owe no duties to people who are not their dues paying members. The reason that Chrysler, GM and Ford are in hot water compared to their foreign competition is only a very small part that the UAW is organized. Much bigger factors are better social services in those countries and much better management of the companies over many decades. All three of these factors can be laid at the feet of the American right wing nut bag movement: (1) Conservatives in this country have successfully opposed and killed national health care, and those costs are born by the manufacturers here, and by the government in competing countries. (2) American car companies are run by people who killed downsizing, giving us disproportionate percentages of SUVs, while foreign companies correctly guessed that gas would continue to become a scarcer commodity. Management tends to be, gasp, Republican by a substantial margin. (3) Scapegoating is what Republicans do best as they must be good at something to avoid all the blame for fucking things up all the time in all places for all people except the very richest.
Lastly, other industrialized countries heavily tax fuel. This has the tendency of (1) paying for things government needs to pay for and (2) encouraging fuel conservation over the long term. Republicans oppose both of these things on principle and in practice.
Really? Perhaps what is needed is a conversation about work, what it means, what its worth. You seem to be affixed to the notion that these executive types perform work that is worth 100 times, or more, what the lumpenprole on the assembly line makes. Why, if I may ask? I’ve seen these guys, kinda guys who like to be seen reading The Eleven Managerial Maxims of Vlad the Impaler: they don’t glow, there is no magical aura. They ain’t that smart. You think no one will do their job for less money? Wanna bet?
And how are they faring, the elite? Who has failed America, the working class, or the expert suits? Do recall seeing lots of statistics about how the working class guy is more productive every year, how’re the bosses doing? How do their wondrous decision making skills show fruit? Gotta say, not so much. Point of fact, they’ve mostly screwed the Golden Pooch, haven’t they?
So, tell me again: why should we value these guys so much more than a teacher, a cop, or a paramedic?
Tell you what: you answer the main questions with stunning clarity, and I’ll probably concede on the “productivity” thing, because its a pretty minor point, and I really don’t have the googlefu to go cite-fetching. Somebody else probably has it close to hand. Besides, I’m lazy and easily…oooh! Dull!
When you say that somebody “deserves” a hundred times more money for his job, do you really mean it, or is it merely an imperfect choice of wording? And if you do mean it, can you explain why? That’s really what I was on about, anyway. Is it going to be the Magic of the Free Market again? The voodoo of St. Ayn? What, perzackly?
Because if Wagoner (CEO of GM) manages to turn around GM he will create billions of dollars worth of value and save the jobs of hundreds of thousands of other people. Since you seem to be so comfortable blaming executives for problems at the Big 3, you certainly shouldn’t have any trouble recognizing that through their competence they can create an enormous amount of value. As a moral sense, people have a right to the value they create. Since the executives are creating a great deal of value, they deserve a great deal of value. In a practical sense, you want executive jobs to pay a lot because you want the best possible people in them since the jobs are so important.
Even if you are the greatest machinist in the history of the free world, you are probably only going to be 3x as productive as your average machinist. If I am an employer I say great, I can hire you at 2x my average machinists salary and get rid of 3 other machinists. This is great. We, as a company, now produce the same amount of stuff with less people. If I can hire some guy that will make my 100 machinists 20% more efficient well then hell, I can pay him 10x my average machinist salary and get rid of 20 machinists. This is even better because now we make the same amount of stuff with a lot less people.
I know this won’t penetrate your thick stupid ass head, and I expect nothing but a snarky response. However, if you ever truly comprehend the answer to “why are workers more productive” you will understand why management makes more money than the workers.
Hey fuckwit: Wagoner has comandeered the single greatest loss of GM market-share, profits and stock price in company history. Of all the sucky situations car company CEOs are in right now, that suck is suckiest suck of all sucks that have ever sucked. If any worker-- UAW, exempt or otherwise-- did their job half as badly as he did, do you think they’d deserve $14,000,000+ last year? Do you think they’d deserve to keep their job this year, while workers are being laid off?The UAW workers did exactly what they were asked to do for the past 70+ years: build the cars that were sent down the line. Was it Rick Wagoner’s job to lead GM into the worst financial crisis in the company’s history with absolutely no fucking foresight or plan? Cuz if so, I guess he earned the right to keep his job for another year! But, wait, you say that the executives create a “great deal of value.” Well, I ain’t no cypherin’ wizard, but it would appear that since Wagoner’s taken control of GM’s reigns, GM’s stock has dropped from over $60/share to a low of under $3-- a whopping 95% drop. Is that your idea of “creating value?” Cuz if so, it doesn’t surprise me a genius like you is defending meatheads like Wagoner.
Much obliged on the links, but if you want to continue to throw facts around and then tell me to Google for the cites, you can go suck your own pencil dick.
Of course the lousy decisions the execs made in the past put the companies in the hole they are in. They still got huge salaries and enormous bonuses. The workers lost their jobs.
I wish we lived in a fairy tale world where magnanimous execs had the long term interests of the company and the USA at the front of their management decisions. That is so far in the background it does not matter.
Why the need to be so insulting? Are you too emotionally involved to respond like an adult? treis
Frankly I don’t really know about Wagoner’s performance, but he probably should be fired for fucking up so badly.
Whatever. Everything I said in that post is something anyone who’s following the situation should know about. If you can’t rub two brain cells together and figure out how to google, then that isn’t my problem.
Not correct. They had givebacks in 2 003 and 2005. I explained that clearly. Gettlefinger also said they will probably have to abandon the jobs bank. Because the news says they make 70 bucks and refuse to give back, does not make it so. The UAW has given back a lot.
You still haven’t said exactly what those sacrifices were.
The UAW said they would “suspend” the job bank. That’s not the same as abandoning it. Even if they do abandon it, they still will be paid well above their counterparts at the foreign automakers.
“More”? Sure, more, then. What do you think is fair, twice as much? Three times? But surely not ten times? Surely not a hundred? Merciful Og, not a thousand?
You seem to suggest that value is a purely market function, and it is a common trope. But if that is so, then the workers have just as much right to greed as their managers, do they not? If its all about grabbing what you can get when you can get it, as you seem to suggest.
Go back to my hypothetical of workers hiring a manager. You don’t think they could find even one person with talent and intelligence willing to work for a larger good and maybe even forgo summering in the Hamptons? Not one?
As far as my being too stupid too agree with you, I’ll just brush that aside, I know you get testy when you lose. Quite all right.
Honestly, it doesn’t concern me very much. The appreciable affect of a CEO’s salary on my life is too small to be noticed. I’m fine with the market setting CEO salaries, and evening out the returns with a progressive tax structure.
I didn’t care what the UAW workers made until the point that Big 3 went with their hat in hand to the Govt to get bailed out. At that point, the only thing I care about is ensuring the tax payers get their money back. Once they repay the loans, I don’t really care what they do. However, I want some assurances that the loans will be repaid. That requires the Big 3 to be competitive with the foreign automakers, and part of that is reducing labor costs to a level roughly equal to their competition.
Do you work for a larger good or did you generally get the best deal you could get? I know I did the latter, and I’d wager that almost everyone does. I’m guessing everyone qualified to run a Big 3 auto company likely does the same, but I can’t say for certain that there doesn’t exist one person who would be CEO of a Big 3 company for little pay.