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
|
|
|---|---|
|
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) |
|
|
Finally catching up here..."The government severely limits malpractice lawsuits"... It is easy to say that, but if it happens to you you won't feel that way...I realize, as an attorney, that I am biased, but tort reform is the equivalent to disarming David and giving the slingshot to Goliath... Say you limit medmal to $100K or $250K...that sounds like a lot of money, but, over a potental lifetime, it isn't...let's say that you go in for an appendectomy but the Doc negligently removes your left leg or your right arm...your life is radically altered forever, possibly needing assistance or a wheelchair...you really think that the interest on $250K would assist in your living expenses for the next 25 years, always remembering that it was a Doctor's negligence that put you in this condition???...now, if you are trying to stop awards of $50 million or more, I see your point...but most "tort reform" wants to limit awards to $250K or less, and, for the damage stupid medics can do to a person, $250K is a drop in the bucket...plus, maybe we could change the laws so that if an award for medmal exceeds a certain level, then the Doc's license is revoked, in all states, so he can never practice and make that mistake again... Let's really go off the wall...you are 27 years old, blind in one eye and going in for surgery...the Doc accidentally operates on the wrong eye, and screws up and you are now totally blind...is $100K enough???...let's not be absurd...$250K enough???...let's not be ridiculous...is a $million enough???...is $5 million enough???...how would you like to spend the next 50-plus years without vision, and you want to limit the medmal payout???...if it was your daughter, would YOU think $250K is EXCESSIVE, like tort reform advocates say it is??? Everybody wants to limit the payout caused by bad doctors, but nobody EVER thinks about stopping the Doc from ever doing it again...leva the payout limits alone and get rid of Docs who have more than one medmal payout...maybe THAT will cause medmal rates to go down, along with the cost of defensive medicine...enough points on your driver's license and it is revoked...why not the same on medmal Docs licenses??? Those who scream for tort reform the loudest often have no idea of the real consequences of what they are asking for... FWIW...in GA, 85% of all medmal suits are found IN FAVOR of the Doc, meaning that very little medmal is actually medmal, but more like "bad outcome", meaning the Doc made no mistakes, but the patient did not like the outcome...kinda like Phyllis Diller suing a facial plastic surgeon because her facelift did not make her look like Britney Spears or Christie Brinkley... Staying on topic, as I never wander, I also note that there are probably UAW members, and spouses of UAW members that may have had their opinions on tort reform, and this is a response to them, and a criticism of the stupid restrictive work rules that will cause GM and Ford to file Chapter 11... |
|
|
Replying to: marsha7 (Jan 09, 2009 9:37 am) At least all of y'all have learned to briefly mention the UAW in passing as you gripe about everything else under the sun.  (and welcome back to the fray, Bob) Lauer Interviews GM's CEO, UAW President "Gettelfinger said he was not willing to reopen agreements he signed with GM in 2007." |
|
|
Replying to: marsha7 (Jan 09, 2009 9:37 am) Want to punish companies - fine, make them pay those miltimilion dollar as donations to charities (say family makes determination which ones). Reduce legal fees to be collected on those, too. Enough incentive for the companies to "do good" and prevent lawyers from chasing ambulances without real cause.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: marsha7 (Jan 09, 2009 9:37 am) Let's really go off the wall...you are 27 years old, blind in one eye and going in for surgery...the Doc accidentally operates on the wrong eye, and screws up and you are now totally blind...is $100K enough???...let's not be absurd...$250K enough???...let's not be ridiculous...is a $million enough???...is $5 million enough???...how would you like to spend the next 50-plus years without vision, and you want to limit the medmal payout???...if it was your daughter, would YOU think $250K is EXCESSIVE, like tort reform advocates say it is??? I see why medical is so expensive in this country now. There is never enough. |
|
|
Replying to: marsha7 (Jan 09, 2009 9:37 am) That tells me 85% of malpractice lawsuits are frivolous. GM and the rest of US have to pay more for medical care because each and every health care person carries a HUGE malpractice insurance policy. I would agree with you if those that do sue and lose are forced to pay all costs including the malpractice insurance for the health care person they sued. Malpractice lawsuits are too one sided. The cost to all of US is not warranted by a very minute number of high profile cases where a doctor screwed up. My auto liability insurance does not cost what malpractice insurance costs. Yet I can do as much damage to another individual as any doctor. What gives with that? Sorry Steve, I just don't believe the big paydays for people are good for the country. It is sad when a wrong foot gets cut off. But I should not have to pay the price. Same goes for GM and their over paid UAW workers. I don't want to reward the UAW greed that has driven the domestics into bankruptcy. |
|
|
Replying to: marsha7 (Jan 09, 2009 9:37 am) My brother's been a physician for 20 years, and he's nearly quit; selling his practice instead and working as an employee of an HMO. He's told me that most malpractice claims never go to court for anyone to rule IN FAVOR; meaning that insurance companies are very likely to settle any case with any close validity BEFORE going to trial. Insurance companies fight those cases that have little to no validity, and thus that is why you see a high-% in favor of the doctors/hospitals (defendants). Again paper pushing to process claims, and legal bills to sue and defend do not provide any benefit to the UAW member or people in general. It is all WASTE. That waste is then passed on to us in the price of labor that goes into the car. We live in a ridiculously complex and expensive society where very few people actually make anything; with swarms of other professions and bureacrats basically adding parasitic costs. My latest personal example of adding wasteful cost - the ISO 14001 Environmental Consultants that have leached onto my company.
|
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Jan 09, 2009 1:06 pm) You need to hire a couple UAW thugs to handle that situation 
|
|
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
