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)
16705 messages, Last post on Nov 25, 2009 at 6:56 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jan 04, 2009 8:23 pm) Ron Gettlefinger was there to support the Big Three's request for bridge loans to be provided to the BIG 3 so that these companies could stay open until the worldwide credit crunch eases up. jobs and lives were on the line and he did a hellava job and he flew commercial. i'll let you in on another little fact. gettlefinger is asked to be a luncheon speak at the center about twice a month. the center is 300 miles from soldiarity house. he gets up early drives to the center has lunch buffet style in the "lavish resort" with the other rank and file members and then gets in his still warm car and drives the five hours back by himself to detroit. yeh just another union fat cat to most who have opinions but actually know very little in any event, the taxpayers have the absolute right to ask both the big three employers and the uaw what they are going to do to restructure the domestic auto industry. they also have the right to ask the debtors (the big 3 not the uaw) how the debt is going to be repaid. but the taxpayer has no right to ask the uaw to stop spending UAW dues money on its own members. I say again ( as i think you all know rather well) at no time has the uaw asked you or the taxpayers generally for a dime or a loan for continuing uaw operations or maintaining the uaw center at black lake.. You may not want to accept or believe it but the UAW is a seperate entity from Ford Chrysler and GM. I remember sitting in on a deposition of a chrysler vp tom minor some years ago. the lawyer asked something like "when or why did you give this particular benefit to the UAW' he exploded "listen sonny we never GAVE the uaw a dam thing" sometimes they negotiated hard and traded for some stuff we wanted, other times they put our feet to the fire and said your making millions in profits and we want you to share more of it with your employees--but we never GAVE the UAW anything!!" |
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jan 04, 2009 8:52 pm) but when i see things like 'let them die the slow agonizing death they have chosen. just don't ask me to subsidize it" i tend to take it very personally. what is there about some people that despise the idea of factory workers making a good living while ignoring things like tax cuts favoring the rich and powerful? i worked with the uaw and these people all of my adult life. they are the real american hereos as far as i'm concerned. I still remember my first week in the labor pool at the GM Fleetwood plant. an old timer came to me and said "sonny the pay and the benefits are great but go back to school before you get sucked in. factory work is mind numbing and boring--get out before you get stuck" I did thank god!. |
|
|
Replying to: lumoy (Jan 04, 2009 9:14 pm) This may be one to watch: "SEOUL, South Korea — Unionized workers at Ssangyong Motor began voting Monday on whether to strike if management demands massive job cuts as part of a restructuring of the ailing South Korean automaker." Ssangyong Motor workers vote on strike (Idaho Statesman) |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Jan 04, 2009 9:45 am) Well the bailouts are taxpayer money since no bank will loan the auto companies the money, isn't that correct? And Gettlefinger was at the table with the CEOs asking for the money. This is taxpayer money, yours and mine, being loaned to a very risky set of borrowers. What is "running the international"?
|
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Jan 04, 2009 9:45 am) I agree that the overall wage base sets the market. The unions have helped this. But we are now competing internationally. The J3 and others are making vehicles profitably in the USA. I don't see them having trouble hiring workers or making quality products. Since even the UAW wants the D3 to be successful, what is the magic formula that allows the D3 to get on their feet again? Even if they get bridge loans during the extended economic downturn, they are losing market share. Where are the products that beat the competition? |
|
|
Replying to: lumoy (Jan 04, 2009 1:42 pm) Well the Japanese companies making cars in this country have employees that have health care? How do they accomplish that? Perhaps the US workers contribute more? So that price advantage is going into the pockets of the UAW. Problem is that then the cars aren't priced competitively. That's not going to work out in the long term. But UAW will never NEVER ever negotiate away a vested benefit. Well the reality could end up being a choice: a - negotiate away a vested benefit; or b - company goes bankrupt and then you get NOTHING. Which is better? |
|
|
Replying to: lumoy (Jan 04, 2009 2:24 pm) No disagreement. The only issue (supposedly) was time - we were so closed to economic collapse in October that there was not time for long negotiations. (Not sure I believe that). the credit crunch has affected all worldwide auto companies but this country and its repubs are the only ones demanding that hourly workers race to the bottom to the level of non-union transplants.--why are the transplants the standards for fair wages and benefits anyway--and why stop there, how low are the mexican and south korean rates?? soon we can go down to china rates and then finally the repubs may be happy. Well the transplants are making money IN THIS COUNTRY, so that's why we don't look at China. Approximately 50% of the auto production in this country is successful and making money, what is the common denominator of the failing companies vs. the successful companies? It is the UAW. There is a very plausible explanation that the reason the D3 have been losing market share and failing is that they have high structural costs, they have high labor costs, they have cheapened their product to make up for the high costs of their labor, and as a result they are dismal failures. If we are going to endanger $Billions more of taxpayer dollars we deserve to see a good chance for success, correct? If the UAW is a significant (not the only) part of the problem, then that is one aspect of D3 operations that should change to allow for likely success. If the D3 don't like the conditions they certainly don't have to take the loan. |
|
|
Replying to: okal (Jan 04, 2009 3:13 pm) We keep hearing this -- is there a web citation that give details or shows that this is true? Perhaps manegi can comment from Japan. |
|
|
Replying to: lumoy (Jan 04, 2009 8:21 pm) So the UAW is running a golf course that loses money while Goldfinger testifies to Congress to get taxpayer money? every other foreign auto mfgrg has national health insurance which gives them a cost advantage of about $2000 a car Wrong. The transplant companies in the US make 50% of our automobiles and they don't have nationalized health care, yet they are profitable. Honda Civics made here, no nationalized health care. Toyota Camrys made here, no nationalized health care. BMW SUVs made here, no nationalized health care. Hyundai's made here, no nationalized health care. Half of US auto manufacturing is profitable, here, without nationalized health care - just not the UAW companies. when oh when will the union bashers get it thru their skull the key fact that none of the federal bridge loan money is going to the uaw. Well if the reason the D3 are not cost-competitive is because of the union, then indirectly the bailout IS going to the union. The bailout supports D3 operations so that the D3 can continue to fund Union benefits. the uaw is not asking anyone for a loan or a bailout Last I remember Goldfinger is the head of the UAW. He was sitting with the three CEOs asking Congress for the bailout loan. He was asking for the GOLD with his own FINGERS. what the hell business is it of yours!!!!...why is that something that bothers you? i really really would like to know . When it's out tax money funding the D3 due to high costs (much of which is union) then it is very much our business. It bothers me because I want this country to be successful and competitive on a world stage and bailing out failing businesses with my tax dollars is a miserable use of our funds. It weakens the USA.
|
|
|
Replying to: okal (Jan 04, 2009 3:13 pm) There is no regulation preventing US Automakers from setting up new manufacturing facilities in Japan. But you have to first consider that 1) Japan already has overcapacity (and thus exports cars from Japan); 2) Input costs are much higher in Japan (e.g. land / power etc) as compared to other locations. So it would make sense (for US companies) to export to Japan from lower cost centers, rather than building plants in Japan. US companies did take equity stakes in Mazda (Ford) and Suzuki / Subaru / Isuzu (GM), which definitely is a better option than setting up new manufacturing plants. The investments worked out well for them, a pity that they had to sell out due to their own internal cash problems (since that forced them to sell at adverse terms) - Renault's investment in Nissan has generated much larger returns. You may also ask why lower cost imports are not successful in penetrating the Japanese market. Firstly, the safety / emission requirements raise the cost of importing; Secondly Japan already has a very competitive small car market (very few countries have a 600cc capacity segment....). The high end luxury car market is dominated by the Europeans (even beating the Japanese domestic offerings - e.g. Lexus), as I have posted elsewhere before. |
|
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
