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)
16735 messages, Last post on Dec 03, 2009 at 5:49 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 16, 2008 12:47 pm) This is one of the most offensive things about some unions. Instead of appreciating having a job and being paid to work, they are like spoiled children. Clearly NOT concerned about the best interests of the company, who feeds them. Now that the UAW has almost strangled GM to death they want the non-union taxpayers to bail them out so that their gilded lifestyle does not get hurt. They should have been more concerned about working with their employer to make the company successful. |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 16, 2008 12:35 pm) Should have gone to work on the railroad.
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Dec 16, 2008 11:09 am) As a former Social Security Administration employee, I can explain this. When Social Security was enacted in the 1930s, state & local civil service employees weren't covered at all - partly because most of them had pensions but mainly because the legal experts of the day thought that it would be unconstitutional for the Federal government to force state governments to pay FICA tax. Then, in the 1950s, someone came up with a workaround: amend the Social Security Act to allow states to sign voluntary "coverage agreements" with the Feds to cover specific groups of employees. A state might, for example, designate all members of the teachers' pension plan in that state as a "coverage group" & have them vote for or against SS coverage. If a majority voted for it, the state would then sign an agreement with the Feds. Employees already in the retirement system prior to the effective date could elect or decline SS coverage, but for new employees, SS would be mandatory. Most states in my part of the country (the Northeast) signed coverage agreements, but there were still some holdouts when I left the agency in the early 80s. Even in my state (NY), which was one of the first to sign coverage agreements, temp employees weren't covered because they didn't belong to a state retirement plan. Other states (NJ, for example), signed separate agreements to cover temps. I don't think that a state can revoke a coverage agreement but I'm not sure of this. |
|
|
(thanks Jimbres) "The UAW leadership has given one cutback after another to the auto bosses since president Ron Gettelfinger took office in 2002. In 2002, 2005 and 2007 the UAW gave up health benefits and agreed to sweeping wage cuts. These concessions include two-tier pay levels so that newly hired workers are making under $14 per hour. Now as profits and stock values plummet for GM, Chrysler and Ford, the ruling class has initiated a full-throttled campaign to blame "rich auto workers" for the crisis facing the companies. Politicians and the corporate media have demanded the auto workers’ union surrender every advance won through decades of organizing, picketing and strikes, including during the heroic era of the sit-down strikes in the mid-1930s." Lessons for labor: capitulation is not the only way (Party for Socialism and Liberation - nice graphic of Che on their site too  )
|
|
|
Replying to: bumpy (Dec 16, 2008 1:31 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 16, 2008 12:35 pm) I do wish that I had chosen to pay into SS also. Since that I am 100% Disabled Veteran and unable to get SSD. |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 16, 2008 2:22 pm) I'll know what happens with me in four years and a month if I go at 62. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 15, 2008 8:37 pm) i saw a group of houses that had 1 exterior wall painted a dull orange. all had had fires. not sure if it was related.
|
|
|
|
detroit free press article
|
|
|
Replying to: explorerx4 (Dec 16, 2008 3:21 pm) He makes a point in spite of his being all wet. We should not rebuild New Orleans any more than we should save GM from their inability to build cars people want and make a profit doing so. Rebuilding homes in a floodplain is very much like giving money to the Big 3. A huge waste of resources. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)
