Pre-2007, the average UAW worker made $28 in wages, and about $10 in benefits, including pension contributions.
Now, since you apparently understand everything so well, explain how $38 = $70.
Hint: The quote is from the article, which you would have known had you _____ it.
No, I’m wrong about that and you are right. We are talking past each other here though as the $70 figure wasn’t what I was really addressing there. However, they get to the $70/hour figure by using the base salary, then factoring in benefits, and then adding in legacy costs (retirement and benefits for retired and disabled workers). Granted, this is disingenuous, though in actuality those costs are part of the equation (just shouldn’t be lumped in as part of workers salaries).
However, I’m wrong and you are right about the $70 figure Sam used. IIRC a better figure is something like $41-$45/hour in total compensation for the average…which is still a lot of money, though it’s in line with what the Japanese also pay.
I did skim the article…was I supposed to have completely memorized it? Perhaps next time you can credit the proper source for a quote, then we wouldn’t have to go through this, ehe? Normally when you credit the first quote and don’t credit subsequent quotes that implies that they are from the same source.
-XT
I don’t like jumping in so late to a discussion but Left 4 Dead had me too occupied recently.
I go back and forth on unions, and am not a conservative.
A) It is clear to me that companies (“management”) has, in the general case, more power in negotiations than individual employees. I believe such an imbalance in negotiation powers leads to inefficient results… essentially, price-fixing against the employee. It is the company’s responsibility to get as much work as possible for as small of a wage as possible. (Though I believe this statement is 100% accurate and I also believe companies are not stupid and that they do try to pay people fairly, if they have more power in negotiation it is clear that there will be an imbalance in equitable outcome.)
B) Unions help correct this imbalance.
But
C) Unions bring their own problems, especially in the form of “union shops” and anti-“scab” behavior which I find a bit offputting.
D) Some union tactics like direct striking are also offputting to me. I’ve read about the strike tactic where everyone works but neither the company nor employees draw income (profit / salary) during a strike until things are settled. I think this is the best way to go about things. Joe Dockworker’s problem isn’t with me, yet I pay the costs for his interaction with the company (or the company’s refusal to negotiate, or… whatever caused a strike). Correcting this is important.
When company 1 interacts with company 2 they want contracts, they want clear PO’s on good credit, etc. The reasons for this should be clear to everyone. All I ask you to consider is why, then, companies would prefer at-will employment so strongly when they cannot get it and in fact refuse to accept “at-will” in any other business dealing. Something stinks.
Well, not to interrupt the pissing contest, but the report in question explains that rather clearly -
The figure is what the company is paying, not what its currently active workers are receiving. Sinaijon and xtisme covered this already.
Now, if you would care to explain how the company doesn’t actually have to pay this money, or that it wasn’t really the result of union negotiations, then we could move on. Otherwise, the analysis that “the workers in the UAW are getting in the ass because they are only getting $38 an hour” is rather beside the point.
This, as mentioned, is accounting, but it is not terribly complex accounting.
Regards,
Shodan
The average assembler at Ford makes about 20 bucks an hr. The skilled workers can make up to 32 an hour. If you can run a 5 axis milling machine go for it.
American Axle got starting wages cut to 10 bucks an hr. Only slightly better than Wal-Mart . The pres. of the company made 31 million not counting stock options. I suggest someone there is overpaid. I have been in many big 3 plants , I would not want to work in one. It can be rough and ugly work.
The 72 an hour is a joke. Do you thing a Ford worker actually brings down 140 thou a year. Most of us know better.
Now if you could explain to me why when the compnay negotiates a deal with the union, and it ends up being of a certain cost, that is always considered to be the union’s fault by conservatives?
Why do all these freedom loving conservatives never blame the corporations for the deals they voluntarily entered into?
For the same reason that it’s always seen as the companies fault by the liberals? That’s the problem with trying to arbitrarily assign ‘fault’ to a complex situation.
Why do all these freedom loving liberals never blame the unions for the deals they forced down the throats of the corporations?
-XT
xt: Word.
Not quite. They were both contradicting gonzo’s objection to the $70/hour compensation question.
$70/hour in labor costs is correct, but that includes current costs for retirees. And the Big 3, having been around for awhile, have lots of retirees.
I don’t think anybody ever said the UAW was “getting it in the ass.” My objection is to the assertion that auto workers are bringing in $140,000 each after benefits, which is BS. I doubt you’ll find many pro-union folks who think $60k is a bad wage for a factory job. Or even the $50k that non-union Toyota workers make.
The fact you cannot see a difference in the language there makes my point pretty clear.
A quick question. If a worker earns $50K a year for 20 years. He then retires, and receives a pension of $25K for 20 years before he kicks the bucket.
What would you say his yearly compensation was?
I’ve seen it happen too. One poor slob got fired for asking when payday was. Never underestimate the power of a small business owner to be a jackass.
So we have a model employee that asks an owner when payday was, and he was told to GTFO? There were no other factors at play here?
:eek: Do you really think that employees have no vested interest in their source of employment? Have you ever seen what happens in a small town when a factory closes?
Now, I can see the argument against non-secret balloting, if one is trying to let union membership be only an option & not a favored one.
But there’s a very good reason for collective bargaining–that a more easily replaced employee has great difficulty getting fair compensation for his work.
Personally, I would support unionizing the world. Yes, the whole world.
Not everything a union asks for should be granted. Reckless pro-unionism is a danger to be avoided. But we are better off with labor representatives. This is empirically proven, & those who deny it speak from ignorance & awkward a priori ruminations.
And by going somewhere else, if you’re working class, you will take a pay cut. So that doesn’t get you the pay you think you deserve.
You need some remedial education in economics. The free market is all about negotiation. Everyone has a right to negotiate for his wage. But you seem to think that an employee should just accept whatever his employer gives him. Like a dog.
With that attitude, you should be very happy in the military. I hope you’ve stayed & continue to stay in uniform. I’d rather leave your indentured-servant attitudes out of the private sector.
It was the kid’s first day on the job as unskilled labor. The business owner was a building contractor. Who knows what was up his ass? Worried about his own financial state? Hung over? Just a general jerk-off? The fact remains the kid asked about payday and got fired on the spot for it. I quit after a couple weeks exactly because the owner was a loudmouthed, cranky little tyrant.
If that’s so easy, why isn’t everyone a small independent contractor? Why are there corporations at all?
This nonsense went out with the Nineteenth Century.
So this business owner, even though he ***was ***an idiot, should have been forced to continue paying him money if he did not want to?
Valete,
Vox Imperatoris
foolsguinea, are you done deliberately misquoting and insulting me yet?
As the old saying goes, if you don’t want to know the answer, don’t ask the question. I asserted my opinion, no more and no less. Have I insulted you or anybody else in this thread? No.
We have unions today because of what it was like when we didn’t have them.
Actually, I think this is a great test case for the laboratory of democracy. We let the Consurvatives secede with a chunk of the country & abolish trade unions & the like, & see how long until their children end up instituting labor laws themselves.
To the extent that they were voluntarily entered into, I don’t think they do. To the extent that the government colluded in creating a monopoly for the benefit of the unions, we do.
If the people at Joe’s Widget Factory decide they’re underpaid, form a union, and go on strike, there can be several outcomes. [ul][li]One is that Joe finds he cannot replace his workforce, and gives them a raise. Conservatives (at least, this one) have no problem with that. []Or, Joe hires a whole bunch of scabs and carries on, the strike is broken, and the union workers come back at the old wage. Conservatives (at least, this one) have no problem with that. []Or, Joe says “chuck you, Farley” to the union workers, doesn’t hire any of them back, and carries on with his new, scab workforce. Conservatives (at least, this one) have no problem with that. [*]Or, the government can pass a law saying that he has to hire back the strikers and fire the scabs. Conservatives (at least, this one) do have a problem with that.[/ul][/li][quote=foolsguinea]
Actually, I think this is a great test case for the laboratory of democracy. We let the Consurvatives secede with a chunk of the country & abolish trade unions & the like, & see how long until their children end up instituting labor laws themselves.
[/quote]
And the UAW seems to be an experiment on the other side - give the unions what they ask for to buy labor peace, and see what happens to the industry in which they work. You could then compare it to another company with a very different union attitude, like Toyota, and see who turns a profit and who asks for government bailouts.
Regards,
Shodan