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)
16715 messages, Last post on Dec 01, 2009 at 7:43 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Dec 31, 2008 8:01 pm) People are the ones whom get vested. Most folks who work 30 years might be 100% vested. Therefore, they would get the full amount entitled. The question is if the pension is fully funded. As has been my experience, the way the stockmarket, so goes the pension fund. During good times they might be fully funded. That is a certain amount should be in the plan to be able to pay a certain amount of retirees for the duration of their retirement. Bottom line is that I suspect that the PBGC/taxpayers doesn't want an underfunded plan and if anything they will have to add to it above/beyond the rate of return. The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. was already in the hole before the stock-market meltdown and the credit freeze shut down U.S. economic growth this fall. "It’s hard to imagine how the PBGC could get out of this in the long run without a taxpayer bailout," said Jeffrey Brown, finance professor at the University of Illinois. Brown estimates that an additional $50 billion to $100 billion or more of taxpayer money might be needed in the next decade or later to bail out the PBGC .He said that the PBGC could inherit more than $100 billion of pension obligations if Ford or GM filed for bankruptcy and the pension funds were turned over to the agency. No one knows what kind of liabilities the PBGC could — or even would — get in such a scenario. http://www.star-telegram.com/100/story/1113339.html |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: bpeebles (Dec 31, 2008 7:54 pm) If you did twice as much, I doubt that they would pay you twice as much. I've seen green belts, black belts, and sigma six certified folks. Its a phase, prior it was TQM, and it passed too. If you read the book "lean way of thinking" you Pratt Whitney, Harley Davidson, big/small companies, union/non union companies and every kind of company you can imagine has had this lean ideology. I came away with some useful ideas, but then again I see companies stepping over a dollar to pick up a dime. I've been in keizen event too. In the end I respect the concept and would borrow from it, but I'm light years ahead and aim to stay that way. Don't get me wrong, I wish it were that easy. Processes have to be refined in some manner and it may as well be lean. Anything that innovates is fine by me. I'm sure your aware that for years Toyota and GM have been running an auto plant together. NUMMI builds cars/trucks and they are UAW represented. Fortunately I work for the most enterprising corporation on the planet and on the top ten of every list of business journals/magazines. I'm assuming your at GE. |
|
|
|
|
NUMMI, set up as a joint venture in 1984, produces the Corolla subcompact, Tacoma pickup and Pontiac Vibe wagon. One of the plant’s purposes was to have American workers learn Toyota’s production methods. It has been the topic of numerous labor relations studies, and the company claims teamwork and safety among its “core values.” Quality problems have been creeping up at Toyota, which traditionally has a stellar reputation for reliability. Toyota’s recalls have ballooned over the last couple of years, and President Katsuaki Watanabe has promised to beef up quality control. Last month, Consumer Reports said Toyota “is showing cracks in its armor” and will no longer get automatic recommendations from the magazine when it releases new or redesigned vehicles. It also removed several Toyota vehicles from its recommended list because of quality issues. The “Toyota way” of manufacturing is emulated by manufacturers around the world not only because it eliminates waste but also because it empowers the individual worker. In principle, workers are encouraged to stop an entire assembly lines if a problem arises. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21905430/
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: bpeebles (Dec 31, 2008 9:05 pm) Waste = muda = fecal matter TAKT time = I don't drink coffee, but beer is fine. I suppose we would have to drink saki? Miller beer is UAW beer. Because we live the HIGH LIFE. |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Dec 31, 2008 6:49 pm) That is speculation and being promoted by the fear-mongers. There is just as strong an argument that Chapter 11 would allow a smaller more competitive US auto industry emerge. I'd sure like to run the experiment. Chrysler and GM anyone?
|
|
|
Replying to: bpeebles (Dec 31, 2008 9:05 pm) 1)If this was a UAW worker, they could take a coffee-break until more lugnuts were available. 2)In a LEAN company, this worker would be trained and expected to find somthing else to do which is productive. (Grab a mop, grease somthing, shovel snow...whatever needs to be done) Case 2, how naive! Do you really think that a UAW worker would break their STUPID work rules to do something different? Perhaps it is too taxing to train the lug nut guy to sweep or grease something. It might endanger the worker, their needs to be an EXPERT greaser who won't hurt himself with that grease gun! The lug nut guy should take a coffee break! |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Dec 31, 2008 11:25 pm) Thank MNF |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Dec 31, 2008 7:19 am) I try to gather the news from the two extremes of Fox and CNN, throw in some CNBC and C-Span and make a decision based on that and other sources that may come along, such as your's and other's links. Keeping in mind that Bush was addressing the Department of Housing and Urban Development ( HUD). Of course he was going to say what they wanted to hear. Politicians do that. It buys votes. http://www.hud.gov/news/speeches/presremarks.cfm If he was addressing a UAW meeting, I suspect he would have talked about the glory of organized labor, even though they typically endorse democrats. Politicians do that. It buys votes. I agree that his intentions were well meaning. Some of his reasoning was good. But I would like to believe that he expected the monies to help with the down payments to folks that could actually pay back the loans. It doesn't take away from the fact that this home ownership thing was started by Jimmy Carter, accelerated by Clinton, and during his first and second term Bush was concerned that the lending practices were overwhelming the system. I agree that de regulation open too many doors. Banks were free to make loans to anybody with a pulse, because they could sell those loans to Freddie or Fannie if or when they didn't work out. I don't remember his name, but the head of either Freddie or Fannie admitted at a Senate or House hearing ( is that vague enough) that he got additional compensation for the amount of the loans they accumulated. He also reluctantly admitted that he was on the board that arrived at his compensation. There is plenty of blame to go around. I repeat: Obama needs to understand the whole picture and not blame the Bush administration for all the problems. Even though Bush recognized the problem, he accomplished nothing to fix it. So there is a lot of blame there. Unless he may have tried but congress wouldn't go along. That we will likely never know.  Different subject addressed to another poster : The landslide loss of congressional seats by the dems in the mid 90 had a lot to do with the 1994 Gun Control (10 year ban) passed by congress just prior to the election. Everyone that belonged to the NRA, or any other gun friendly group, received mail naming names of the Congress and Senate members that had voted for the Ban. There were enough pissed off gun owners that swung the outcome vote to the republicans. In 2004, when the Ban was due to "Sun Set", Bush told congress that if they voted to continue it, he would sign it into law. They apparently decided to let it sunset.  Kip
|
|
|
History does have a habit of repeating itself. "The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance." - Cicero - 55 BC" "Does anybody out there have any memory of the reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY during the Carter Administration? Anybody? Anything? No? Bottom line . . we've spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an agency the reason for which not one person who reads this can remember. Ready? It was very simple, and at the time everybody thought it very appropriate. The Department of Energy was instituted 8-04-1977 TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL. HEY, PRETTY EFFICIENT, HUH? AND NOW IT'S 2008, 31 YEARS LATER, AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS NECESSARY DEPARTMENT IS AT $24.2 BILLION A YEAR, THEY HAVE 16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, AND APPROXIMATELY 100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES AND LOOK AT THE JOB THEY HAVE DONE! THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY 'WHAT WAS I THINKING?' Ah yes, good ole bureaucracy. And now we are going to turn the Banking system over to them? God Help us."
|
|
|
Replying to: kipk (Jan 01, 2009 6:10 am) |
|
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
