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)
16728 messages, Last post on Dec 02, 2009 at 2:34 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: grbeck (Jan 09, 2009 7:28 am) Health care costs alone – for that matter, total labor costs – don’t explain General Motor’s U.S. market share falling from 41 percent in 1985 to just over 25 percent today. Decisions about products, marketing and advertising strategies, and many other factors – including bad U.S. trade policy – have something to do with that, too." 2005 remarks by Gettelfinger In other UAW news, "Another supplier throws in the towel. A Fulton County manufacturing plant that builds plastic interiors for U.S. automakers is permanently closing. All 100 employees at Johnson Control Injection Molding, formerly Plastech will be out of a job in March. ...a number of the layoffs involved union jobs, specifically UAW jobs." Fulton County manufacturing plant closing (WTVG)
|
|
|
Replying to: lumoy (Jan 08, 2009 9:29 pm) And if private insurance coverage were so bad, one must ask why surveys regularly show that over 80 percent of Americans with such coverage are completely satisfied with it. lumoy: just to get back on point - in requesting thier 17 billion dollar bridge loan, all the big 3 claimed. along with bush, even darth vader cheney. treasury, SEC,. those involved in the wall street, AIG, Fannie Mae, Bear Stearns and numerous other "economists" involved in the prior trillion dollar round of grants -- that the auto industry problems were mainly attributable to a drying up of credit which had in turn been triggered by underegulated and somewhat greedy or risky trading in housing related mortgages. A smokescreen. GM was losing billions before 2008. It was not a healthy company even prior to the current economic downturn. GM was headed for bankruptcy even before this current mess. The collapse of the credit bubble only made the inevitable happen sooner. And a fair amount of the problem with today's auto market is that manufacturers artificially inflated sales by giving credit to buyers who had no business buying a brand-new vehicle. They did this to keep the lines running. Which two companies were the primary culprits in this? GM and Chrysler...so their claims that they are merely victims of a bursting housing/credit bubble are nonsense. If anything, THEY helped create the bubble in the first place by giving credit to anyone with a pulse (and remember that GMAC also made mortgage loans). |
|
|
Replying to: dallasdude1 (Jan 08, 2009 6:10 pm) The Toyota/Honda philosophy is to ask whether the step or process ADDS VALUE to the final product, and, if so, can it be done more efficiently.
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Jan 09, 2009 7:45 am) Saying one supports the abstract concept of "national health care" is easy...the test comes whether the UAW (or anyone else) will support a specific proposal, because any national health care plan that will not bankrupt the country will not be nearly as generous as the current UAW plan. Nothing I've seen shows me that the UAW is ready to make that sacrifice as of yet.
|
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Jan 09, 2009 7:28 am) That is an excellent point. Mr Lumpy avoids or skirts that issue when I bring it up. The Democrats had two years to implement a comprehensive health care plan. They got nowhere and the public was tired of a do nothing Congress and overwhelmingly elected Republicans to take their places in 1994. And another thing the UAW loves to rag on is NAFTA. Well it was that same do nothing Democrat Congress that pushed NAFTA through and Bill Clinton signed it December 1993. More than a full year before the Republicans gained control of Congress. If UAW members would get out of the Midwest and look around the country they would see just how LUCKY they are. They need to come out to CA where the cost of living makes Michigan look 3rd world. They would see people at a much higher skill level making about a 3rd less than they are. Instead of counting their blessings they strike for no good reason the company that is giving them a higher standard of living than most professionals in the the USA. I cannot see a reason in the World how a lug nut assembler makes more money than 99% of the college educated school teachers in the USA. I don't know of any school district that pays a thirty year tenured school teacher $100k per year. And they work many hours past the normal school day. So the OT argument does not hold water.
|
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Jan 09, 2009 7:51 am) Again you have hit it on the head. I remember a big flap during the primaries when Hillary proposed a mandatory US health care system. If you did not pay the premiums it would be garnished from your wages. That got the press going. Probably one of the nails in her coffin. Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., this morning left open the possibility that, if elected, her government would garnish the wages of people who didn't comply with her health care plan. "We will have an enforcement mechanism, whether it's that or it's some other mechanism through the tax system or automatic enrollments," Clinton said in an appearance on "This Week with George Stephanopoulos". I can hear lumpy and the UAW leaders screaming over that if it was implemented. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lumoy (Jan 08, 2009 7:40 pm) GM CEO salary ~$2 million (no OT no bonus no beni's) GM hourly worker at $30/hour ~$60,000 (no OT no bonus no beni's) 33:1 ratio GM CEO with bonus's/OT ~15 mllion GM hourly with OT/Bonus's ~80,000 187:1 ratio |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Jan 09, 2009 7:28 am) I'll tell you why - the benefits aren't as generous as those provided under the current UAW plan. That is why GM is paying so much for health care. The benefits enjoyed by both current workers and retirees are far more lavish than those enjoyed by Medicare recipients, as well as those enjoyed by the people who rely on the Canadian national plan. i believe the UAW retirees do go on medicare at 65. Where do you see elsewhere? The insurance pays for is to increase the beni's OVER what they get for medicare. At least that is what I thought happened. Something called medigap? |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 09, 2009 8:05 am) I don't care how much UAW members make...if the company can afford to pay them those wages. If GM can charge enough for Chevys, Buicks, Cadillacs, etc. to pay the UAW members $400,000 a year, with six weeks vacation, and have them carried to and from the factory parking lot in sedan chairs borne by Playboy bunnies, then that is fine with me. But if said company is going broke (which GM was even before the current bursting of the credit/housing bubble), and begging the government for money, then it's fair to ask whether the company can afford this level of generosity. For the record, I think that the federal government should have told GM and the UAW that everyone from the CEO to the janitor will accept the wages and benefits comparable to what Toyota pays for the same positions, and that all GM factories will immediately adopt the same work rules that Toyota and Honda use in their transplant factories. Ironically, that wouldn't hurt the wages of UAW members - Toyota workers make about the same amount of money. It would have exposed the disparity in work rules and health care coverage, which is why the UAW would oppose it. |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Jan 08, 2009 9:19 pm) |
|
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
