Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
16701 messages, Last post on Nov 20, 2009 at 3:39 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
other reasons that WWII got us out of the Depression is the one reason no one likes to say, but truth is truth... The war removed hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of (mostly) men from the US job market and sent them overseas to fight, and many of them were simply killed and permanently removed from possible job rolls...the war took our citizens in the prime of their lives and sent them out of the country...those that remained were working on the war effort...by the time the survivors came back in 1945, I am quite sure that the available pool of workers was much smaller than it was from 1935-1941...that is another way to alter employment, have a large portion of the workers simply killed as casualties of war...cruel thinking???...yes, but that does not change the fact that many potential job takers were permanently removed from the job rolls thanks to D-Day and other battles of WWII... They shall, however, ALWAYS be remembered as heroes who gave the ultmate sacrifice, but they were removed from the employment rolls nonetheless...
|
|
|
Replying to: marsha7 (Dec 12, 2008 7:08 pm) U forgot dallasdude1. I believe he is associated with the GM plant in Arlington. Maybe not. |
|
|
The reason to bring up the Sherman Anti-Trust Act is because he likes Teddy Roosevelt, the much better Roosevelt IMO... "Walk softly and carry a big stick"...you may quote me on that as marsha7...oh no, it's Joe Biden!!!...I'm caught plagiarizing again... |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: jimbres (Dec 12, 2008 7:28 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: chikoo (Dec 12, 2008 7:29 pm) You lost me. Is that good or bad performance or both?
|
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Dec 12, 2008 7:47 pm) >You lost me. Is that good or bad performance or both? r u even serious? For a knowledgeable guy like you, this question is quite unexpected. Of course it is both. Bad performance? No Bonus + No salary raise. Good performance? Salary Raise + Bonus. |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Dec 12, 2008 7:17 pm) Yeah, right, sure. You can keep shoveling this stuff, but don't tell us that you actually believe it. The UAW has been a problem for decades Time Magazine Detroit's Uphill Battle By Alexander Taylor;Christopher Redman;Barrett Seaman Monday, Sep. 08, 1980 Detroit's labor force abetted the industry's slide into decline. Work was often sloppy. Cars built on Mondays and Fridays were frequently defective because high absenteeism meant the job was done by less experienced fill-ins. Workers at GM's notorious Lordstown, Ohio, plant rebelled at attempts to streamline production in the early '70s and brought the factory to a halt. The United Auto Workers union did little to stem the erosion of productivity. In an attempt to win ever higher wages no matter what the product, the U.A.W. went along with the automakers' insistence on quantity over quality. It failed to push for better working conditions or lower absenteeism, which would have reduced assembly line foulups. Wrote New York Times Labor Reporter William Serrin in his book The Company and the Union: "The union is aware of the problems of absenteeism and tardiness and shoddy workmanship, but whatever it does in this area must be done with great tact, if anything is done at all." Let's skip to 1997 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0DE4DC103AF934A15752C0A96195826- - 0&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss Close to 4,100 workers went on strike against the General Motors Corporation late Saturday night at a huge sport utility vehicle assembly plant in Moraine, Ohio, the fourth big strike against the world's largest auto maker in less than a year. The International Union of Electronics Workers ordered the strike at midnight on Saturday after workers voted on Friday night against ratification of a new labor agreement that their leaders had concluded earlier in the week. The pact was controversial because it included a new program designed to penalize workers with high rates of absenteeism. Jeffrey S. Kuhlman, a G.M. spokesman, said that the company had agreed to drop the absenteeism program at 7 P.M. on Saturday, but that the union had proceeded with the strike anyway. Now let's fast forward to 2007: UAW GM REPORT http://www.uaw.org/contracts/07/gm/gm14.php Changes in Attendance Procedure Changes in the Special Procedure for Attendance There was considerable discussion about the union’s insistence on preserving jobs and obtaining new work in the current highly competitive environment and the company’s concern for continued reduction in absenteeism . As a result, changes have been negotiated in the existing Special Procedure for Attendance. |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Dec 12, 2008 5:34 pm) Not sure what it has to do with the UAW. Yes last year I filed a form to get my home assessment lowered and they did. My home is now appraised for taxes $100,000 less. Saved me $1200 this year. |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Dec 12, 2008 7:43 pm) Given the same facts, one could argue just as convincingly that government screwups have done vastly more damage than unregulated free markets. The UAW created the great middle class and consumerism we enjoy today. Sorry, but this doesn't make sense. The U.S. had a large & flourishing middle class by the late 1800s - years before Henry Ford started building cars & decades before the UAW was even born. What gave rise to the American middle class was post-Civil War industrialization. All those new factories required not just laborers to man the assembly lines but an entirely new class of office workers: clerks, secretaries, accountants, engineers, salesmen & managers. These people made up the new American middle class. By 1890 - long before most Americans had even seen an automobile - the middle class as we know it today was firmly in place. The strongest claim that you can validly make is that the UAW made it possible for some blue collar workers to enjoy a white collar standard of living. That's nothing to be ashamed of, but it's a long, long way from saying that the UAW "created" the middle class, which simply isn't true.
|
|
|
Replying to: jimbres (Dec 12, 2008 8:20 pm) The UAW cannot even claim that distinction. The Teamsters of which I spent 37 years a member far pre dates the johnny come lately UAW. The only thing the UAW will have on its tombstone is they managed to destroy the US Domestic Automakers. They are currently a very small Union with less than 400k members and dwindling very fast. Their little blip in the History books will probably note how in 2008 the UAW would rather the automakers go bankrupt than to give up anything to keep the industry afloat. Arrogant fools is all you can say about the UAW management. The members are just sheep. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
