Auto CEOs Like Their Private Jets, but Union Busting is the Goal
By John Amato Thursday Nov 20, 2008 8:00am
Auto industry CEOs appeared on Capitol Hill today to ask for a $25 billion bailout. Rep. Brad Sherman (D-CA) asked the top execs if they would be willing sell their corporate jets and travel home on commercial flights.
Sherman asked the CEOs, "I'm going to ask you to raise your hand if you are planning to sell your jet in place now and fly back commercial." "Let the record show, no hands went up," noted Sherman
MSNBC's Contessa Brewer and Mike Viqueira discussed the CEOs' lack of response. "I have to tell you, just listening to that is awkward," said Brewer.
These idiot CEO's are not helping themselves and they need to change their King Maker mentality very fast or they will go down in flames. Asking for a rescue package while flying in on private jets is freaking ludicrous.
No matter how we slice it, the Auto Industry is in big trouble and needs some help. We can't allow it to fold because of the ramifications that will be felt throughout the country and the good people who will lose their jobs. Millions of them actually. Matt Stoller told me in an email exchange: "What most people (including politicians I've talked to) don't realize is that the auto industry dying will hurt every single community in America through the dealer network."
Richard Shelby and his pals are hellbent to break the UAW and as many unions as they can get their hands on and that's what is really going on here, but the media will never say that. Shelby has deep ties into the auto industry that wants unions busted.
What Shelby doesn't mention, of course, is that Alabama is a right to work state. Shelby also doesn't mention that Alabama is home to Honda, Toyota, Hyundai, and Mercedes plants.
Shelby also doesn't reveal that many of the cars those manufacturers make in Alabama, without unions, are precisely the kind of behemoths critics attack Detroit for making--only these have foreign nameplates: M-Class SUV, GL-Class SUV (a new model), Pilot SUV, Santa Fe SUV, plus engines for Tacoma and Tundra pick-ups and Sequoia SUVs.
In other words, Shelby isn't opposed to car companies that are stupidly committing and recommitting to SUVs. Rather, he's just opposed to car companies that make SUVs with union labor.
If you remember, Shelby was the one who leaked NSA intercepts to Carl Cameron of FOX News and the media and then refused to take a lie detector test about it right after 9/11.
"A sharp disagreement ensued between the FBI and senior Justice Department officials overseeing the case, according to federal law enforcement officials. The FBI was convinced not only that Shelby leaked the information regarding the intercepts, but also that the senator might have misled the FBI when he was interviewed about his actions, according to sources. They advocated that Shelby be prosecuted." Read the whole article. Pat Roberts helps ruin the investigation.
He got off because Pat Roberts screwed up the investigation like he usually does. And he's the one on TV the most trying to force the auto industry to go belly up.
And Kathy G writes:
I've written about this before, but I'm doing it here again, because the wingnuts really need to put an end to this irresponsible bullshit, and pronto. Repeat after me: unions do not cause lower productivity.
The latest conservative to lie about this is Soren Dayton (who, last I heard, was "suspended" from the McCain campaign for peddling a sleazy, racially charged anti-Obama video). In a recent post about "card check," aka the Employee Free Choice Act (a proposed law that will make it easier to organize a union -- see here for more), Dayton wrote:
The unions and their lackeys in the Democratic party are intent on a path that will destroy our productivity for a significant period of time.
Um, not hardly. Even if you didn't know what the economic literature says about this topic, if you stop to consider that the postwar era saw the record high union density in this country as well as unprecedented economic growth and productivity gains, it might give you pause. Indeed, Ezra made just this argument recently.
I want an overhaul in the auto industry for sure, but this country is spending millions of dollars a day to pay for two wars while our country is going bankrupt. This is criminal and I think we have to remember that these are incredibly difficult times. Historic times and Obama is facing challenges like almost no other president has had to face as he gets ready to take office.
Login or Register to post comments.
First, while I am certainly one of the biggest promoters of unions and worker rights here, the bottom line is that this country can no longer support 3 auto companies. There is too much foreign competition, and the fact is that american makers are making the wrong cars.
I have no problem in providing "loans" or some type of support to the auto makers, but there has to be an understanding that things cannot continue in the same manner.
First, the minute they get government money, government has a say...in everything....management, strategy, etc. Yeah...I expect the free marketers to jump up and down, but the bottom line...you want government money...you are no longer subject to free market rules...otherwise...have a nice day...and go off and DIE.
Second, Chrysler is finished. They are owned by a venture capital firm. There is no buyer for Chrysler. Goodbye...sayonara.
Second, Ford and GM have too much production capacity. They should be merged, management scaled down and subject to government limits on salary until such time as the loan is paid off...capacity needs to be reduced...factories closed, remaining factories retooled for more fuel efficient cars.
Third, new EPA standards, for fuel efficiency and emissions controls.
Fourth, R&D totally focused on replacing the internal combustion engine and looking for alternative sources that do not create polluting emissions.
Fifth, monies set aside to assist laid off union workers, to provide for reeducation in other industries, pension fund protections.
Lastly, Ford has already elimnated roughly 20% of its dealers. GM has also scaled down dealers...the local dealer impact is not as big as it is being made here. I have friends in this industry. The dealer closings started two years ago.
it's that their total volume is too big, so it's not the number of companies, it's total capasity. also, how much foreign car company help do we give out? can we favor the foreign companies over our own, can we make it fair?
Unions have done so much for this country...70+ years ago!
Wages have been flat for Americans for 30 years.
I like the idea of unions, but try going to a Carpenter's Union
event. Harleys, flags and McCain stickers.
Maybe I am not informed enough, but what have they done lately?
The BIG Unions endorsed Clinton!!!!
Labor Unions the working person's version of too big to fail. we need unions.
But some unions need to stop asking for so much...
Unions nearly caused a Freightliner factory in my hometown to shutdown.
if you were no -union, they'd leave death threats on the hood of your car, on your phone, on your front door...that has to stop.
I'm sure that some will agree with me, and some won't.
But I stand by my position, that unions while necessary, must pull back on the reigns a wee bit.
And what were management's tactics to stop the unions? You neglected the assault on workers that want to be represented by a union. CEOs have other CEOs on their boards to ensure they make their exorbitant wages. Workers have a union - if management allows them to have one.
the unions, and in this case, I don't know of any non-union workers threatened by other non-union workers. It may have happened, but the union threats to the non-union workers and foremen definitely happened.
I am not against unions at all, I just think that in some cases, they abuse their position.
And we all know that 99% of CEO's are greedy bastards.
If you were honest why would you attack the union?
Management is non union. And they threaten union workers. I know that for a fact. Been there, have the tshirt.
There's your example.
I have heard a couple local right wing radio blowahards call unions 'terrorist' groups, by being guilty of 'economic terrorism'. Is it possible that union busters will try and use the very vague anti terrorist legislation to break up the unions? After all, the Patriot Act is so vague, we could all be labled terrorists for even discussing the issue.
Unions have given tremendous concessions over the past 5-10 years to ensure job security. From cuts in pay, cuts to retirement guarantees (which is REALLY deferred wages), to reductions in insurance premiums... I have not seen any corresponding CUTS in shareholder value. Except the markets punishing badly run businesses. No, bold corporate strategic thinking... No visions of where the industry will be in 5-25 years... Nothing beyond mergers and cuts. Absolutely NO shared losses.
This is an unfortunate meme in post-Reagan America - It is all labor's fault! A corollary to this is that "American workers are paid too much."
So, Reagan-lovers no longer believe in the Protestant work ethic? If the average family earns $50K per year. Than the average full-time worker should be earning MORE than approx $25 per hour. The average GM employee earns $27. Toyota pays $30/hour! How is it the laborers fault?
Meanwhile Mr Executive earning a $250K base salary (plus extra goodies and stock options) which is $125/hour.
Actually, we have the the dumbest, most narrow-minded executives in the world. Who are correspondingly the most over-paid. NO ONE in our Country should earn multi-million stock options unless they took the risk (i.e. it's their company) (Yeah - I am pointing at you ARod!)
In the auto-industry specifically, top bosses should be paid no more than $100K annually until they return to profitably. Maybe they earn stock options once the company has demonstrated 8+ quarters of profit growth.
Driving a Big 3 product (although they are definitely getting better) you can SEE the bean counters. You can FEEL the design concessions made to hit price points. (BTW these engineers and designers? $50-75 an hour)... Again .. has nothing to do with workers.
Reagan-lovers pine for the good old days ... when Executives are the fat cats wining and dining in Victorian houses with their fancy hats and long wool coats, while the workers toil in their ripped clothes and coal-dirtied faces begging for an extra quarter an hour!
Ahhh! The good old days!
I guess steve jobs of apple, Michael Dell of Dell, Bill Gates of Microsoft are idiot CEO's of U.S. companies... they are successful cause they have a workforce that is rewarded for intelligence, hard work, not job banks and seniority
Jobs, Dell, and Gates (a) started their company - i.e. took the risk and should be compensated handsomely in times of success; (b) run (or used to run in Gates' case) profitable companies; and (c) are not IN the AUTO industry.
Many of your cherry-picked arguments to tech companies can be equally dismissed in one word - Sun.
Again, job banks and seniority has NOTHING to do with why the auto industry is not competitive.
Really poor investment decisions are to blame.
Complete total disconnect with where our less-than-visionary auto execs are directing the company and where the industry needed to go is! Look into the internal sqabbles between Nasser and Ford at Ford. Had Ford a better 'personality' (i.e. bastard-tough), the company would have been exceptionally well-positioned to compete today. But rather Nasser sent the company off buying big expensive luxury brands.
The Big Three have WASTED $500 billion in capital expenditures over the past few years! This has NOTHING to do with Pension or retiree healthcare cost obligations (which Executives mismanaged to meet profit goals), seniority (which applies in nearly every private or public industry), or job banks (which should be superfluous).
Except health care. Which should be universal like every one of our competitors! BTW Another STUPID meme is the idea that business owners WANT private health care! Dude... only a corporatist does!
Bill Gates retired in July.
Ooooh you been supping with the Corporate masters?
Maybe the corporations need to lobby AS HARD for Universal health care, as they do to be able to make Hummers, keep safety gear at a minimum, their costs would go down about $30 per hour per person. How do I know their costs would go down if they lobbied for UHC? Because, they've been so successful in their lobbying efforts to get shit that does only them any good, I'm sure they'd be successful w/ an attempt at UHC.
Healthcare costs are always a major sticking point in present day labour disputes.
still believe that old lie that America is the wealthiest nation in the world.
I've spoken to friends who insist they are among the 1% wealthiest humans who ever lived. All while they are up to the ears in mortgages and student loans that would have dwarfed the fiscal debts of any previous generation.
Americans need to be told "You know what? We can't afford this. We're broke and deeply in debt" but no politician is ever going to do that.
I was hearing an older guy today on the bus ride to work, who always seemed to be old school Democrat, blaming the Unions for Detroit's downfall. I was saying Detroit put all their eggs into one basket, selling gas guzzlers like SUV's and now they're paying the consequences.
He said the Japanese companies don't have unions and we're expected to compete against that. I said in Japan they have a better medical health distribution system. But he pointed out they have car factories here. I said we should pass laws to require them to have unions to level the playing field. And although I did not say well paid union workers should remain untouched, when times are bad they should hit the CEO's and the executives first.
But then the guy was probably typical for what Democrats were like 50 years ago in Texas.
when these corporate-types go crying that they don't have money, yet they fly on private jets or take corporate retreats or perform other similar feats of fiscal irresponsibility. These people are not willing to give up anything, but they want us to hand over billions of dollars for them to waste on their inflated salaries & corporate perks. How about trimming the fat from the top instead of chopping the legs out from under the company and blaming the workers for the problems? ARGH!!
these CEOs and upper management types need to trim their salaries to be commensurate with what they actually do... which is delegate and get ideas from their subordinates, then lead their respective employer's charge. I don't think that needs a high 6 figure salary or even a 7 figure one... These greedy ba$tards need to rethink their worth and rightfully give themselves a significant drop in pay. Then the people who do the work could make a good living where they can afford to live at a reasonable level. I'm not talking communism or socialism or any of that so anyone wanting to comment along those lines can bite me. I think it's time for rational thinking, some common sense and I like the idea of the big 3 building cars that are economical, environmentally sound, and work well.
We should caution our lawmakers that if there is going to be a loan or a bailout for the auto industry there should be restrictions (no CEO or corporate officer bonus, trips, etc.) and requirements (higher fuel standards) that come attached with the money.
When Obama and Co. arrive in January, they should place the same restrictions on the remaining money that was set up for the banking industry bailout.
look it up.
Flying commercial would be more expensive than their private jet. Since they own it already. Whereas they would have to purchase all of the tickets
The only variable is the cost of jet fuel.
The other difference is with private planes, a CEO can minimize the amount of unproductive time. Rather than having to show up 60 minutes before the flight and wasting time waiting for a commercial gate, they can all drive right the runway and be in the air in 10 minutes. Ditto for landing.
This is a complete strawman argument. Laughable.
I realize that they may own the jets, but how about the costs of people to service & fly those jets and the fuel and storage and and and...even if the jet is lying dormant and no one's flying anywhere, it's still costing them money. And if we give them a bail out and they keep their jets, that means that it's costing US money.
look it up.
When you go to the bread line, do you wear tuxedo and pull in a limo?
The estimated cost of each traveler was $20K, i dunno which airline you fly. But I assure you they could have flown for a few hundred bucks each.
Alas, with such "great" sense of marketing and accounting, no wonder these idiots are running their business into the ground.
Apologists like you ain't helping any either.
Sorry. Commercial flight is far more economical. It does save them time, but that isolates them from the real world. Those corporate jets are used for non-business use too - like for shopping trips for the wives of CEOs. Ground them!
That is not what sunk cost means. Sunk Cost is when an investment is a lost cause and corresponding investment value cannot be recovered!
AKA "Do not throw good money after bad."
Actually, what everyone here is suggesting is truly sunk cost. They made a bad decision to buy these jets. Now, they need to shutter the planes and fly commercial because they are wasting shareholder value.
Again ... we have the DUMBEST auto execs. Not worth 1/5 of their SALARY let alone total compensation packages. (Still holding my opinion of Mullaly at Ford).
Part of the problem with detroit spending is that the average UAW worker makes over $70/hr. That's 140,000 per year (assuming a 2000 hour work year). That's ridiculous. There are PhD's and MBA graduates who do not make that much money. Yes it is a 'skilled' job, but the UAW has put the auto industry over a barrel with its ludicrous salaries. Perhaps a bankruptcy and renegotiation of auto worker salaries back to normal levels would be in order. The average salary of a japanese autoworker is around $40.00/hr. It's no wonder they are eating our lunch.
cite your source. No way does the "average" UAW worker make $70 an hour, which means they "average" $140k salary?
Rush Limbaugh?
aka Rump Pim-ple
$70 per hour may be the "cost" of an employee. Which is different than what each employee "makes".
So salary + healthcare + pension + insurance + overhead or something like that.
The only thing I can guess is that the OP called "cost" "income", which it clearly isn't.
It's because these bloated Companies have one suit for every three workers, then they add that to the workers wages
I'll equally call out your bullshit claims.
Cite your source on a) the claim that there are 3 white collar workers for every factory worker and b) that they are rolling that overhead into factory workers cost.
Because if they were, that would be illegal. Accounting rules dictate that salaries and overhead that doesen't directly go into manufacturing are expensed under S,G&A, not inventory - which is where the cost of factory workers would go.
So again, cite your source or don't make bogus uninformed statements.
You quoted me wrong dipstick, I said One suit for every three blue collars, and yes it is management so it is added to the cost of labor.
not sure of the reliability but figured I'd share a couple links I found & let others read & decide for themselves
http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/07/uaw-prici...
http://www.npr.org/news/specials/gmvstoyota/
http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/beat_the_p...
I have to agree that from what I've seen, the $70 per hour is the cost for an employee, which is higher than what the salary of an employee is. But still, even if the base pay is $28-$41/hr, that's really good pay. I'm not saying it's too high or it's too low or that the job is easy or hard, I'm just saying it's very decent pay for a job that requires a H.S. education. My husband doesn't make that much and he's got a Ph.d and is a university professor!
I, too, have one of those things, and the MOST I ever got paid doing Ph>D. work was about $55k/yr.
But the work's not that hard, really. You gotta put up with snotty kids, and asshole colleagues, and moronic administrations.
But you don't hear much about 'em getting killed on the job, or losing a limb, or such.
on what field they work in. My husband's a geochemist & has worked with high pressure/high temperature equipment and has gone underground to mines and down in a sub to the bottom of the ocean (granted most of this was done when he was still a ph.d. student or a post-doc, and he was getting paid even less then!). There's been many a day when he's been in danger and at risk of losing body parts.
And I never knew just how hard (good) professors worked to get their class materials ready...he's a first year prof and he's been working NONSTOP since end of August.
There are PhDs and then there are PhDs.
Although the thing that really pisses me off, when a two bit simpleton can get a couple years in theology school and call themselves a doctor.
I can think up about four that murdered by unhappy grad students (all in California, oddly enough).
But on the whole it's a fairly safe profession and after the first five to seven years, the job security is nearly absolute.
I seem to recall that the usual ratio between cost and wages is a factor of 2 to 3 (and I think it's nearer to 3 though I couldn't find anything right google anything up quickly). That puts the hourly wage in the range of $23 to $35 per hour given a $70/hr cost.
Spins chickenshit and bullshit into gold.
The problem is some fools, like some of the trolls we have to endure, think it is "dark gold."
Here is a hint idiots: Gold does not stink.
... in his deep pockets so he can live like a CEO.
So the workers were able to negotiate a better package than most... and we're to punish them for that?
The auto industry CEOs should be advocating universal health care, to help bring down their costs.
Source: Center for Automotive Research via this website:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/02/12/news/companie...
I stand corrected, the COST of the average UAW worker is $78.00/hr, but the average base wage is still $28.00/hr. Once again, still higher than many advanced degree holders. My original point remains unchanged.
Tell me what is your definition of "advanced degrees"
I have a PhD and make definitively more than the $50K an UAW worker pulls.
My definition of advanced degree is a JD, PhD, Masters, MBA. The dictionary definition. The average starting salary for an assistant district attorney in many states is around $37,000, the same with many attorney positions that start in the forties. Many masters degree holders that work in highly technical scientific fields are only in the forties, low to mid fifties.
My point is that, as a matter of pure economic theory, unions skew the supply/demand curve when it comes to labor rates. In a right to work state, the wage is determined by simple supply and demand. In a union state, the union's threats, strikes, etc, artifically increase the wages earned by their members to levels far above what the natural market will bear. That's not just some conservative right wing union busting viewpoint, it's simple fact. Any economist will tell you that. Now, there are plenty of other factors involved than a simple supply/demand curve, but when the rest of the industry (read: Japanese and Korean automakers) are making a) better cars (perceived or not) at b) lower cost (because of no union interference) it is going to lead to the types of problems we are seeing. That's also simple economics. I don't want to get into an argument about who makes more money, but the fact is that there are many people out there who study years and years and don't make the type of money that an autoworker with a 10th grade education makes. Is that fair? Who cares, i'm just pointing out a fact.
The UAW is going to end up eating its seed corn if it doesn't realize that it is partially to blame for holding the industry hostage for years demanding salaries and benefits light years beyond what the market should/could bear. The management is also to blame, for sure, but it is strictly the cost side to which I am referring.
The average salary for those degrees you listed is $100K, and if we throw out Masters of Arts. That average may jump at well over $150K.
That is 2 to 3 times the salary of the average UAW worker. So your original "point" that they make more than an advanced degree is bogus. You could have saved all the energy you wasted on those 3 paragraphs.
And btw, it is obvious that Americans are very very shielded people. Koreans do have unions. You have never ever seen the massive labor riots they have over there? It used to be like their national sport a few years back.
Toyota Salaries are less than GM.
http://www.npr.org/news/specials/gmvstoyota/
This is an example. I never said anything about other companies or countries not having unions. All I said was the basic economic theory says that unions have a skewing effect on wages in the marketplace. By increasing the wages, you increase the cost of a good. By increasing the cost of a good, you increase the price of a good. That is as basic as I can make it. Unions are bad for prices of goods for the rest of us, especially in this situation when the very company that is coming for a handout from the rest of us taxpayers is the very one that pays its people (under threat of strke) so much money.
Also, I never mentioned anything about average salaries for those positions. I said that there were many positions (teachers anyone?) that do not pay as much as an uneducated autoworker makes. That's all. It's not good or bad, it just is. But what it does is show the power of unions and how they can skew the market demand for a given labor supply.
Take a basic economics course and then come back to me with a more coherent argument in favor of unions.
Or are you so disconnected with reality, that you can refute your own posts thinking people can't scroll up and read them in all their glory.
I sure do hope they are at least paying you for the trolling though... in these tough economic times, even the underside of a bridge may not be a sure thing (with infrastructure collapsing and all).
Who says I'm trolling. I'm just trying to get you to form a coherent argument in favor of unions, or to contradict my original point. You have yet to do it. Why is it whenever says something that you disagree with, you call them a troll? I made a very rational point based on economic theory. If you can refute it, please do. But don't call me a troll when you have no argument with which to back it up.
Again, you put forth your points, they get refuted, and then you think you somehow "won" the argument.
What rational point based on economic theory did you make? None, you put forth YOUR OPINION, that is a fucking long ways from being anything backed by "economic theory."
People can read this thread, and they can reach your own conclusions. But the fact that you can bald faced LIE in less than 2 posts apart points out your intellectual dishonesty.
For example; You claimed that UAW workers made more money than people with advanced degrees. When asked to define what an advanced degrees are, you said JDs, PhDs, Masters, et al. When pointed out the obvious fact that people with those degrees make on average 2x to 3x the UAW worker, ergo your original point gets trashed. Then you claim you were talking about highschool teachers.
And that is the same for every other argument you have had in this thread. When proven you are full of shit, you simple disown your previous claim, and move the goalposts.
Maybe that passes for "intelligent argument" in your neck of the woods. But every where else it is known as "intellectual dishonesty." Again there is a written record for everyone to see...
Whatever floats your boat...
Let's go back to my original point "doctor". My original point was related to economics. Supply and demand. I can't get any more basic than that. If you had the intellectual capacity to do a bit of independent research instead of relying on ad hominem attacks you might find that
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supply_and_demand
there is ample support for my argument that increasing COSTS to a company through increased LABOR RATES necessarily increases PRICES and/or reduces PROFITABILITY. Therefore, "doctor", if a union uses threats of strikes, etc, to artificially increase the COST of the union member's LABOR, then either a) prices of the vehicles said union member builds will go UP or b) profitability of the company who employs said union member will go DOWN. That is my argument, based on sound economic theory. It is not my OPINION, it is an application of economic FACT. Now, your job, 'doctor' before you post again attacking me for something completely unrelated to my underlying point, is to do a little bit of RESEARCH (i'm sure you had to do that in 'doctor' school), perhaps by reading that link above, and then get back to me with a coherent argument to REFUTE my underlying point, outlined above.
OTher than that, there is nothing more that I can say to you, because you are too intellectually DISHONEST yourself to actually engage in a civil discussion without cursing.
With a name like "tyler durden", I can understand the reason why you couldn't go three posts without throwing out a curse word.
That would seem to contradict basic economic theory especially in multi-producer market.
I'm curious. My point was this. If a widget costs $5.00 to make, and sells of $7.00, if the cost of that widget increases by two dollars (to 7), then the price of that widget must necessarily increase to cover the increased cost.
Simple. Where does a 'multi-producer' market come in? Are you saying that if another producer's cost doesn't increase, then the price of that producer's good stays the same? If you are, then yes. You are correct, but it only goes to prove my point. By the UAW constantly threating strikes, etc, to increase their wages and benefits, they are driving up the overall cost of GM, Ford, and Chrysler products, and thus their price. Hence, everyone suffers (the marketplace) because of the demands of a relatively few individuals. (This is, of course, looked at in a vacuum, and is not considering other factors that increase price, of which I am well aware).
Did you mean "right to get screwed states"?
No. Workers at GM are paid between $27.81 to $32.32 per hour depending on skill level. That's $57,884 to $67,225 annually based on a 40 hour work week. That's what an effective union will do for you. On the other hand the GM CEO earned $6,923 per hour or around $14,400,000 annually. That's what having your CEO friends on the board will do for you.
If you think that the CEO worked 40 hour weeks, you've never worked in a big company before.
that figure includes benefits ie health care, pension, etc.... You also leave out the fact that last years contracts created a 2 tier pay system that compensates new hires at a considerably lower pay rate and benefit package.
Union busting is absolutely the goal. CEOs sit on each others' boards and vote their salaries, benefits and perks higher and higher. But the union is the only option for working people. Auto workers in Detroit earn a living wage. Cut out the tremendous fat at the top - that's where the wealth of the corporation is being sucked out. Then the CEOs are making bad decisions in addition to looting the company. When they go begging for taxpayer money, put the non-union workers (from top to bottom) on a federal pay scale.
Republicans are crying that Michigan, Ohio and Indiana went to the Democrats in the last election and they want to punish the good folks there.
Those Republicans are a class act.
That seems to be the mentality amongst the Big Three CEOs
n/t
The big three loves unions. They are the straw man and whipping boy used to cover up their incompetence, When they sell cars like hotcakes they are built with American pride, when the bankers crash the economy and cars don't sell it's the workers fault. How many times do we have to see this story?
You fart and kick the dog!
People don't listen to this bullshit anymore. The working man knows better. Here we have the typical old, white rich guys blaming the unwashed masses for their woe and misery. Yeah right! So, it's unaccceptable to have a decent hourly wage? It's asking too much for quality health insurance? This is class warfare, plain and simple.
It's "Pavlovian talk radio conditioning."
Bust the Unions! The swan song of MSM.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ea90L91eZk
As true now as for the last 200 years...
I've been working since I was 15, and only once in my life did I ever think I needed a union.
... the battles over a standardized work week and other items you might take for granted were already fought for and won by those unions?
And quite true, but some unions cause more harm than good,IMHO... at the Freightliner plant I mentioned earlier, a newbie operating a forklift STARTED at 18 an hour..and this was well over 10 years ago, it's likely gone up a bit since then...but 18 is way too much to pay someone to operate a forklift who just got the job.
I make 16 an hour, and I've been here almost 5 years, I started off at 10 an hour.
Just saying...
And that depends on the context.
But there are far more benefits that have come from organized labor than not. So one should be able to look at the overall picture.
It is my observation, that for the most part, most people attacking unions tend to focus on pinpoint exception cases. And they tend to blatantly ignore the trend of beneficial outcomes. It is like parents who don't want to vaccinate their kids because 1 or 2 cases of bad outcomes, while ignoring the millions of other kids spared from the disease.
Unions are their members. Study the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, 29 USC Chapter 11.
This law is well written to guarantee democratic process and transparency in union management.
Union management that fails to live up to that law does so at its own peril.
Only apologists for Corporate management and those people who fall prey to the Corporate propaganda rail against unions. You know the ring leaders instantly when they use terms like 'Union Boss'.
Unions do not have bosses, their members have employers who are their bosses. When there is a union there is strength for the members to talk back to those bosses when they are bullies. You will never do it one on one.
The employers, who are the REAL BOSSES hate that strength.
Unions have ELECTED management whose purpose is to improve and maintain working conditions for its members. Whenever that management is unresponsive to its members it can and should be voted out.
Unions are their members who through their industriousness create the wealth.
That unions succeed in improving conditions for their members is something that only a Corporatist should complain about.
Wealth is created from the bottom up. Don't forget it.
really
it is sad that this country was one of the cradles of organized labor. And seeing some peons vouching to the death for the same people who are sucking them dry, and actually do so happily and willingly, is disheartening.
When it comes to side with the people who gave us the weekend, the 40hr labor week, the vacation, the work benefits, the retirement. Or with the people who gave us more work for less pay. I know which side my bread has the butter on.
A lot of the concern trolls here don't seem to know though. Maybe they should form an union?
... that as the power of labor unions has declined, the typical employment benefits earned by all workers (blue collar and white collar) have failed to keep pace with other civilized nations (assuming you count this one as civilized) and have often regressed.
I stumbled across two benefits pages for a high-tech company with both American and European locations. The paid time-off given to the European employees was two to three times that offered to the Americans. There are also workspace rules in some European countries requiring windows for all workers, not just the big bosses while the rest of the employees are warehoused in cube farms.
the American workforce has increased significantly their productivity, but the pay rate has been either stagnant or effectively reduced (taking inflation into account) over the past 3 decades.
This is we get paid less for the "privilege" of working more.
Looking at some of the few idiots in this thread, I can see why this came to be... It takes two to tango: a greedy asshole to overwork and cut the pay of other people, and a moron who thinks they are doing him a favor.
Thank you, Alice. Well put.
To paraphrase a slogan we used one year during negotiations, America works because we do.
(I am a member of IBEW, Local 45, Broadcast Division.)
if you're only making $55K that's not union workers fault...either you're not talented or join a union.
My significant other went to Georgia Tech but did not graduate...because she came from a broken home...went to work in the computer center of that school....leveraged that experience into a real job...while working min wage jobs to pay for her schooling...and now...at age 39 is making $170K/year in the IT male dominated industry.
Work harder.
And believe me...she is a libertarian...but understands the role of unions, has a progressive outlook on economics and spends a significant amount of her time and money, when she's not working, to do charity work.
maybe I missed it, but no one said anything about it being a union worker's "fault" that they're making or not making any amount of money. We all have choices in life, some more than others, and where we are & how much we make is a result of the path we've taken. As with your significant other's case, it's entirely possible to overcome odds and find that there are more and better choices that are outside the "norm" or that don't fit the stereotype for your gender or background.
They're not directly stating it, but what they are doing is setting themselves up to get massive bail-out money at taxpayer's expense for their mistake of promoting inefficient cars, or they declare Chapter 11 bankruptcy, and like the airlines, renegotiate any contract and agreements regarding pension, health insurance, pay and union power. So whether they get the government (our) money or not they win.
Where have been in the last 3 weeks. According to the MSM and talk radio and the word on the street, It is all the Unions fault, for every thing wrong in the automotive world. Please remove your head from your ass!
"Please remove your head from your ass!"
My retort would be "Please remove the bad attitude from your post!" I do not have a rectal-cranial inversion, thank you very much.
There's no need to be an arse. I just made a (what I think is a pretty safe) assumption that the post I was responding to was in response to something written here, and not a response to what someone else somewhere else was saying.
It's usually common sense that when you're having a conversation, it's with the people that are in the general vicinity, and not a conversation with everyone that's ever discussed the topic. I'll grant you that I could have said "No one HERE said anything..." in my post for absolute and total clarity's sake, but still, there's no need to be a jerk about your reply.
On a side note, 99% of the libertarians I know are drop-out people working on the IT field.
Alas, your significant other seems more reasonable than the ones I know.
.At what point will Americans argue the pros and cons of a subject using the same set of "facts". Adam Franklin the typical union worker in UAW makes $32.32 per hour. Is it jealousy that leads people to want so hard to believe that the "other" makes so much money that they are the real problem and if the "other" were to make more like me everything would be OK? Jeff Akston really? Private jets were less expensive than commercial jets? Are you basing that on a per passenger basis? Give me a break, everything in the work place that people have today is thanks to the blood and sweat of Unions. All of you "I worked for everything I got" people can kiss my ass
without unions...there would be no paid vacation except for a select few...or paid sick leave...or sick leave at all for that matter. No maternity leave...no personal days....etc etc.
All of those things became the rule in "non union" businessess because of the fights fought by unions.
And again...these "free market" types...miss the whole hypocrisy of their argument...which is...these companies NEED government help, but the unions...i.e. people...are on their own.
Again, as we've said on the podcast. They should get their money ONLY if:
1) All executives agree to earn what the average line worker makes until the loan is completely paid off. No loopholes.
2) A financial penalty if at least half their cars put out in 10 years are not hybrid / alternative fuel cars.
Then give them the 25B.
Stu
John, you are the first person to correctly identify what is really going on here. The republicans have spent the past 40 years pairing with the auto industry in protecting them from CAFE standards and increase in smaller fuel efficient cars, etc. It has been evident these changes needed to be done, but because Dingell and other conservative democrats and republicans, they have been able to stop any meaningful reforms. Now the republicans want to do the same thing they did to the airline unions in the 80's, and that is force them into bankruptcy and break the unions. I listened to Zack Wamp from Tennessee on Hardball yesterday praise their right to work status in TN and the fact the workers make lower wages and they accept "less healthcare", his words. Now you get why the Regressive party is against helping the auto industry. Shelby has basically said the same thing, he is just more careful how he states the truth of their opposition. These idiots oppose any national healthcare system, a minimum wage, any change in auto standards, and they are "free marketers", which means they "luv the rich". Can someone please tell me why the people of the South and other "blue collar workers" vote for these insipid people. Talk about brainwashing. Joe the Moron thinks these people are actually better for him economically than Obama and the Democrats.
Can someone please tell me why the people of the South and other "blue collar workers" vote for these insipid people.
To fight teh gay and to promote religion.
You know...the "praise the lord and pass the ammunition" types.
When some day people realize that it is all about class and not race, we may see the South actually voting and defending their own interests.
A black person in the projects has more in common with the average trailer park redneck, than either of them have with P. Diddy or George Bush respectively.
Until that happens, you will continue seeing how the GOP, who admittedly only represent the interest of the top 5% of the population, getting almost 50% of the vote. In any other industrialized society. The GOP is so far right and reactionary that they would be lucky to get 10% of the vote.
In my life time the "Red Scare" was equated with "godlessness". It was easy to claim that the Liberals were much the same as Communist and the "godless" tag. We put God in the pledge of allegiance for the sole reason to separate us from the Communist. Also I can't stress enough the power of the Reagan image of the "welfare queen" driving her Cadillac to pick up her big welfare checks. It still resounds today and give people an excuse to blame the "other" for their problems. Just a couple of thoughts.
The "welfare queen" story was pure BS. Amazing how we can contrast that fairy tale, to the true life image of WELFARE KINGS flying in on private jets to ask for gigantic welfare checks. BASTARDOS!!!
Taft Hartley 1947, allows States to deny unions, in their collective bargaining, the right to union security.
They cannot put it in the contract. There are 22 such States, they are called euphimistically, the 'Right to work States'.
No small coincidence that they are the Red States.
So then there is a Union but not everyone who benefits from the Union negotiated contract is required to pay the union fee to support the negotiation.
No money, no firepower in negotiation. Hence, weaker contracts.
The right wingers, who always seem to hijack the English language more efficiently in their propaganda, thereby hoodwink the little guys into buying their bill of goods, first coined in the phrase 'Right To Work'.
IT IS THE RIGHT TO WORK CHEAP and apparently those Red State people like that right.
Tyler, she is extremely reasonable, good hearted, intelligent, well traveled and a realist.
Of course, she's involved with me, which has to immediately call into question her judgement. ; 0 )
I was just fascinated, there seems something in the water of some of the IT types.
Especially sysadmins, every f*cking sysadmin I have to deal with is a libertarian. They all share this weird god complex too. I went to a couple of their meetups, and they left a very very very negative movement of the libertarian movement.
Alas, there are exceptions... so you may be dating one :-)
I bet many of the people supporting the CEO's use of corporate jets are the same folks who were cheering Sarah Palin when she claimed she sold the AK Gov's private jet on Ebay. They might say it's different because the auto companies are privately held but it's not different if they're asking for public funds to bail them out (again.) It's funny how occasionally you'll get a politician or aspiring politician, usually on the right, who'll say 'We need to run govt like a business.' Really? Should we run it like GM? Lehmen Brothers? Enron?
Congress Asks Auto Execs to Use Park-and-Ride
Actually, here in Ontario, wages at the auto plants are extremely high. The sticker prices on the cars reflect that. Every time there's a business slump, the union goes on strike for more money, or threatens to.
The main problem I have with unions is that they create an 'us and them' attitude in the workplace, rather than a 'we' culture. They tend to view the employer as an adversary. While they had and still have their place because they've worked to improve conditions, these days most unions are just another level of bureaucracy in the workplace. Our labour laws are pretty comprehensive up here, due of course to the union movements of the past.
I've never been on the same wavelength as far as how I view my employer so have never joined a union - I figure if I don't like working somewhere I'll just work somewhere else. If I want a raise, I just ask for it (and I usually get it). I'd rather deal directly with the person who pays me in other words.
As the American car plants close, the Japanese plants continue to expand in Ontario. How long that will last is anyone's guess. They will not hire anyone who has been a member of a trade union as part of their policy, so unfortunately, all the guys from the (former) Big 3 are shut out of those jobs. I'm not sure it's fair but I guess they don't want people stirring the pot at the plants.
Auto plant failures affect more than people who work in the auto industry - they affect pretty much every business in an area, since these towns tend to be directly tied to local plants. I'd go so far as to say that almost every aspect of the economy is affected by the auto and construction industries.
What a mess.
I've been wondering whether GM might do well with reproducing some of its classic models such as the '57 Chevy, '56 Caddy, '64 Corvette, etc, but with modern engines designed with fuel economy in mind and modern safety features. Chrysler Imperial, T-bird, etc.
I don't know if they still have the molds or tools they'd need, but I'd buy one for sure.
Toyota regularly hires former Big 3 Union members in the US. I don't know why they don't in Canada (maybe different employment laws), but in the US Toyota and Honda are well known for sniping the quality workers from GM, Ford, and Chrysler. And there have been Union votes at some of the Japanese plants, and they're always voted down. Management acts like the Union for the workers because the company understands the long term value of having the best and happiest work force possible.
Japanese and European counterparts, is that in most foreign auto makes technical people ascend in the management ladder in larger numbers than marketing-types. Where as in domestic auto makers is the opposite; most technical (engineering, development, production, etc) positions remain stagnant, whereas business/marketing positions raise quicker and almost exclusively to the top.
In fact most German auto makers have by tradition, being directed by PhDs (in either mechanical or industrial engineering). The understanding is that it is easier for a person with an advanced degree in science to understand business, than for a business-centric person to understand engineering. And same applies to Japanese auto makers, a big percentage of the board members in Toyota, and Honda for example, have a big portfolio of patents to their names.
Also the differential in salary between production workers and management is 1 order of magnitude for foreign auto makers. Where as in the US can be over 2 orders of magnitude.
So all signs tend to point at really really bad management as being a larger reason of their under performing as a company, than organized labor. BTW, European auto makers have to endure labor conditions that would make the UAW's as being some sort of crumps.
I completely agree - there are no good guys in this situation, and the only losers will be the individual auto plant workers who lose their jobs. I think that the Government needs to offer to help the Big 3 through a structured bankruptcy like Romney suggests, but with the requirements that all car warranties will be honored, all employees that are laid off will be given education grants that will only become loans if they don't finish their re-education and get a degree, and that during the time CEO pay will be capped at a maximum if 10x the pay of the lowest paid employee in the company - a technique employed by the CEO of Costco.
The GM corporate aircraft (N5116) used for the hearings trip is leased. The pilots, also are probably contracted and not GM employees. This is part of the "freight train" that has yet to come to a halt at GM along with Ford and Chrysler.
Once the aircraft leases expire they can go to another expensive hanger that's not the automakers. The hangers too have leases which carry penalties should payments stop.
I think that one of the underlying stories here is that the American public is not being told that the current decline of gasoline prices should not be an invitation to driving more, as they are doing nowadays ($1.99/Gal).
These auto chiefs say that the use of corporate aircraft is a "more efficient" use of their time which is bunk but the public isn't allowed to parallel that mindset with information about the supposed efficient use of automobiles over alternatives regardless of pump prices.
SEE> http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/WallStreet/stor...
SEE> http://www.landings.com/evird.acgi?pass=11325...
GM shareholders (the owners) have been complacent, allowing those who operate GM into the hole they're in now. And unions have squeezed their employer, and excluded competition. Both sides of this are effectively price fixing and aren't producing products customers want. Why the fuck should taxpayers bail this out? This isn't our business? This isn't our responsibility. If shareholders aren't smart enough to hire competent leadership and union negotiators, then shareholder should lose their fuckin money. And unions will lose their jobs.
It boggles my mind how people are so eager to become thieves, forcing everyone to pitch in for poor GM shareholders, dealerships and unions. It's not my problem. Cars are fucking stupid pieces of shit anyway. This isn't the kind of transportation system we should have and $150/barrel oil proved that if it wasn't already obvious.
She is a senior systems architect for net backup.
She's scary smart...but...she ain't smarter than me! LOL! ; 0 )
but her true genius lies in her letting you THINK that you're smarter than her...known tactic that a lot of chicks like to use to lull their fellas into a false sense of security. I'm not saying I'm one of those chicks, but I'm not saying I'm not either... *giggle*
He's partially correct. But to be brutally and completely honest both sides have really screwed things up.
Toyota has a culture of management /being/ the Union for it's workers. Read this article:
http://edgehopper.com/what-toyota-knows-that-...
Toyota pays the same as the Unionized Big 3, and while their retirement benefits aren't as nice, why should it be? The Big 3 hamstrung themselves with those ludicrous deals. I'm sorry, but I don't see how any person, union or no can justify full pay and full health care paid completely by the company you worked for for the rest of your life. Yes, age expectancy was lower back in the day, but like SS the time line of benefits needs to be adjusted or set where you don't receive these benefits if you are employed anywhere else.
The Big 3 have wounded themselves and made poor choices, but the Union hit them over the head with the shovel and rolled them into their grave.
GM Asked congress, for years, for lower fuel economy standards, and they got it. This was not in their best interest in the long run. So when GM asks for something from congress, maybe they shouldn't get it. Congress is partly at fault here, GM asked to raid the cookie jar, congress let them, and they are all guilty.
I'm reminded of the Marketing Division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation when I look at this line up of idiots. And we all know where they ended up.
There was an article about how there were a lot of cars backing up in the Long Beach harbor holding lot, cars that could not be sold so they had to put them somewhere. Here is my question, in the article and in the photo there were mercedes cars in the lot, HOW? Why would Mercedes send there cars three quaters of the way around the world instead of crossing the Atlantic and putting them on a train to the west coast? Are we sending American made Mercedes to the Far East, is there a Mercedes plant in the Far East that is sending them here, or is there a another reason that I haven't thought of? My bullshit meter is pegging on this whole auto industry going into the crapper thing.
My bullshit meter is pegging...
You have excellent metering. Trust your instruments!
to ship cars that are to be sold in california by ship than to transport them by roads 3000 miles from the east coast.
To ship across the Atlantic and then put them on a train is easier, or cheaper, than shipping around the world, I dont know about that?
They have this thing called the Panama Canal, you know?
Granted it was returned to the Panamanians after Carter. But trust me, it is still there.
After all of the unions are finally and successfully busted and nobody has medical care and nobody can make a living wage -
Who, do these short-sighted greedheads think, is going to buy their shoddy, toxic products?
from china, made by 7 year olds.
Hi John,
This is nothing new. Dad went to the Retirees meeting today and there was a TON of people there.
I'm a Libertarian Conservative, but what I'm seeing these idiot Republicans doing is just totally inexcusable.
Anyhow, thanks for looking out for us Detroit people. Because if that industry fails, this whole area fails.
Be well friends.
-Pat
add collapsed auto industry to bush's list of failure.
When Stewart was commenting on the bank failures being Bush's swan song. Then one of the reporters replied that we should not count Bush out, he still has one or two good clusterfucks left in him.
Sometimes the Onion and the Daily Show may be the two last bastions of journalism left in this country. I laugh because other wise I would be sobbing uncontrollably.
Along with the Cons, CEOs are the cause of all of our nation's economic woes!! Remember when the airline CEOs begged the unions to take pay cuts after 9/11 only to turn around and give themselves big, fat bonuses? Dirty fuckers!! Cons always blame the workers but have no problem with CEOs making hundreds of millions of dollars even as their company flounders.
I say if their company needs to be bailed out, we take all that company's CEO's possesions, sell them on eBay and use that money to fund the bailout.
Either that or we can just string 'em up. Both plans work for me.
Can't they tie their own tennis shoes?
with the money your mom gave you for comedy school?
With the bailout, each of us taxpayers will now be a part owner of those well-dressed CEOs. As for me, I have a few odd jobs around the house which I think they can handle nicely. And I plan to use that corporate jet to take my friends to lunch in Jamaica. (Although my 1/300 millionth of the jet will probably be scraped off the tires on landing, meaning we'll have to find another way home.)
G.W. Bush...rose to level of his incompetency, and now the country will pay for it.
And like the weasel he is...he is in hiding...probably wondering when his daddy's rich friends will come and rescue him.
Shoving money at this problem isn't going to help AT ALL in the long run.
Don't throw money at it, but force the industry to restructure and adhere to higher standards. The legislators can do that... at least since they dropped the ball for the banking industry.
Raises - We struggle just to get 3.5% over three years. Union shops aren't a bastion of overpaid and lazy workers. I started in a non-union position and made around $25K ... now, 22 years later, I'm making around $60K. (In the meantime, we've had corporate leadership like Paul Lego, under whose tenure the stock dropped from $50/share to below $20/share ... he got a $800K bonus, plus close to that in an annual pension for his 'hard work'. If I'd done the same caliber of 'hard work,' I'd be looking for another job.)
"Merit Pay" - the idea that no one gets a raise just because they happen to be working at the station, you have to EARN it. This was followed by a 'new, improved' job performance form that was designed so that you could never achieve the top ratings.
"Seniority Lists" - breaking the list of union employees into separate lists, such as photographers, editors, studio techs, master control. What happens then is that a person with seniority in a 50-member shop might end up on a list by themselves and be subject to layoffs. This time around, they're asking to do away with seniority lists completely, on the basis that it keeps them from retaining valuable, productive employees (translated: younger people who don't have the long-term experience with management and can be steamrollered).
A simple rule of thumb. If representatives are not honest regarding the main issues they deal with (and I'm not talking about sexual escapades), then we need to get rid of them. Dingell and Shelby are good examples of dishonest representatives that need to be pushed out.
Hey...as long as I'm "gettin' some"...I'll think whatever she wants. ; 0)
... is that the period that the GOPers and other cons love to exalt as the good ol' days in America, i.e. the 50s. Where the golden age of organized labor.
So conservatives love the outcomes afforded by unions, but hate organized labor.
Now that we have established their Valhalla of wild and rampant unchecked capitalism, everything that organized labor built is being run to the ground.
And yet it is all labor's fault. Ain't that a bitch...
Those elitist bastards! How dare they need extravangances like sunlight and extended vacations! Who do they think they are...executives?!?
So what? These car companies began with a simple straightforward intention and they can do it again.
They had no vision times changed and they collapsed.
So yeah they have to consolidate down to the essence of the business and rebuild just as they did at the beginning.
The same is true for the unions. They too have to take temporary hits while the car companies consolidate. They too must undergo metamorphosis. It doesn't mean unions are done away with, but their health is directly dependant on their company's health. It isn't the 1930's anymore and the situation calls for realism.
It doesn't even matter that these companies would prefer to kill the unions. It's always been like that. This industry has to grow up, start where they dropped the ball 20 years ago, fly coach and eat bologna for awhile. So what.
I shudder when I hear republicans crow about "right to work". Sure, everyone has a "right to work" for unlivable wages. They tried to bring "right to work" to Michigan, but that ain't gonna happen. The unions in MI have made many concessions over the years, while management salaries continue to rise. They have made no concessions. If righties get their way and do away with unions, our economy will be further in the hole. People who make substandard wages cannot afford to buy cars, houses, anything. As another poster remarked, why do you want workers to try to survive on unlivable wages?? If you think these big corporations would give livable wages, raises, health insurance, job security out of the kindness of their hearts, you aren't dealing with reality.
which precedes reinventing the industry. CEO's reaching for their usual caviar and crackers aren't getting away with this like Paulson's luxurious no questions asked bailout to the banks got.
These scumbags have to fail before any of the rest of us can have a life again. Meaning the collapse we're having, and all of us without exception are getting hurt. Like it was during the depression era the government put the population to work on infrastructure and fantastic things came out of that. Seems those fat-asses are taking us all down with them but they won't be able to build their own private Idaho's at our expense anymore.
By the UAW constantly threating strikes, etc, to increase their wages and benefits, they are driving up the overall cost of GM, Ford, and Chrysler products, and thus their price.
Here's the problem. UAW and other unions don't just arbitrarily call strikes to drive up wages. They honor contracts. When the contract is up, there is a negotiation, which includes looking at a companies profitability...and workers fair claim to a percentage of the profits they helped to create. If a compnay is broke...obviously there is no point to a strike...the company will likely close and unions lose their jobs. Workers strike for their fair share. That is the leverage they have...and the law recognizes a right to strike. Courts often will resolve labor disputes if parties can't....particularly if management will not open its books.
Understand the process...and then we'll talk. This whole argument that unions strike arbitrarily...is simple bullshit. Wildcat strikes only occur if there is an issue which may be in violation of a contract...such as opening a factory with non union workers, offshoring union jobs, unsafe workplace issues...etc.
And unions continue to work through contract negotiations. It is only when negotiations break down...that union leaders will call for a strike.
Bob Nardelli is an old friend from grade and high school. He has been contacted on numerous occasions by other friends from Auburn High School in Rockford, IL. but he dismisses their calls. I wonder if he thinks he's too important. Think again BOB!!
Without National Health no big corporation can survive. This will have to part of the saving of America.
I'm shocked that no one has spoken about the 900 elephant in the living room. Health cost are killing the Big Three.
Hooray for Brad Sherman, my local representative from here in the San Fernando Valley. I am so proud to have voted for him. First he blows the whistle on the White House's threat of martial law if Congress did not pass the 1st bailout bill, and now he has asked the greatest question of these fatcats. Good on you, Brad.
but not these arrogant pricks. However the Chrysler guy (Nardelli) said he'd take a salary of a dollar, but that shithead mulally apparently has millions of mouths to feed, because 9.3m per annum is his aboslute minimum rq for him.
Shit ass Mulally. Mulally revived Boeing by eliminating 30,000 jobs and discontinued some jet models. nice.
This is the same turd who moved Boeing HQ from Seattle to Chicago to 'be closer to world markets.' Yeah. Closer to Tokyo, Beijing, Korea, Indonesia...wait -- those major purchasers of airgear are closer to Seattle? Ooops Mulally's bad.
Then he was all shocked when Illinois told Boeing "no" on some bullshit he wanted. I guess he forgot, them city slickers have more than one industry to keep the economy going, and Boeing was now in the pack with the rest of the herd. Not quite the arse kissing that arrogant prick was used to.
The only way Mulally knows how to cut costs is through layoffs and model discontinuation. The auto industry needs a much more profound change than business as usual, and the people who work for them deserve better.
Mulally is also only used to handling one competitor. Ford has 14 competitors, and I'd say 13 are better choices than Ford
"Let them eat cake," at least until they figure out what that means. Bail them out???? Maybe, but scare the bejeezuz out of them. Let them see the wolves at the door, and try to economize to save their very lives. $20 million pay packages, $36 million private jets (they could have shared one jet, at least: not taken 3 separate jets, but commercial would be far far better.) They need to go on a budget. Start by cutting up their credit cards, and making them get counselling, like everyone else.
They just don't get it. It's America: you don't reward failure, and not for those that seem set to carry on with "business as usual."
They need a good shake up and several sleepless nights, as their jets get repossessed, and their "pay cheques bounce." Then maybe they'll get it.
I worked for a man that was the owner of a huge auto dealership down in Southern California. He told me in 2006 that GM's goal was to destroy the union by 2007. They have almost succeeded. I hate the people that claim the autoworkers are making too much money!! How many workers would a CEO's salary employ?? Give me a break! Bush cannot get out of office soon enough, hopefully Obama will be able to stop the war between the haves and the have nots.
is woefully ignorant of the real world. Whether or not unions affect productivity is really quite a matter of local.In thirty years as an engineer I've visited literally hundreds of plants in various industries and more than a few of those were auto related plants. Some were models of employee/ employer relations but sadly many more had such toxic relations that accomplishing anything in a reasonable amount of time is virtually impossible. The burden of wages, pensions and benefits aren't the only problem. Indeed in some places they aren't a problem at all. You can have whatever wages and benefits you can justify by productivity. I've sat on my ass for three days waiting to do a one day job while vague union demarcation lines were sorted out. After three days four guys are assigned and paid to do the job while eight other guys are paid not to do the job because they've grieved the fact that they thought they should have gotten the job. That lack of flexibility and Can't Do attitude is frankly more common in the auto industry than anywhere else I've worked. The adversarial system of negotiation used in North America is, in my opinion, largely responsible for this. If you look at other jurisdictions GM and Ford have operations and don't use this system they are very successful. 9See GM Brazil for example). Don't tell me unions never adversely affect productivity because that's just not true. If they want to survive both unions and management in the auto business are going to have to change.
My brother's has already closed and he is now officially unemployed. He worked for Dodge/Chrysler.
He said his closing is just the tip of the iceberg - that much more is coming.
*
How about if the federal government took on the healthcare of the employees and retirees? That would reduce the cost of car production, move toward single payer, and make those employees mobile in case of layoffs. It would be a large infusion of cash, but would not get into the business of managing car manufacture.
I keep hearing how much blue collar perks add to the cost of a vehicle produced by Detroit on a per car basis , has anyone ever figured out how much is added when you take into consideration white collar perks:ie , exorbinate salaries , bonuses , private jets and other bennies
cutting white collar perks would lead to undue hardship on the part of management. It would be embarrassing for them not to be able to offer the best brie and beluga caviar at their children's birthday parties. Really...do you know how mentally debilitating and disheartening for these executives to have to deal with not being able to bath in gold laced bathtubs or take a dump into a platinum toilet.
It would reduce their productivity and creativity. This would lead to a collapse of their industry...which would then impact the overall economy...putting our free market system in jeopardy...and then...and then...oh gawwwd....and then....the TERRORISTS WIN!!!
LandP = WIN :-)
"But I wanna keep my jet"
Keep/Save the unions. Dump the management.
I live in TN and it is a right to work states also. I try to tell people this country wouldn't have gotten where they had if it hadn't been for the unions. The problem with the some unions they got to greedy. They have done alot of good things for the middle class. But these rednecks down here don't want unions. The republicans have sold the american people a bill of goods.
Where would the auto industry be if people had brushed them off in favour of the horse and buggy? The Greedy Old Plutocrats running Detroit should learn about the modern conveniences available to them to cut travel on their part.
Why the fuck does each one of the individuals need a private jet? There are rentals. And in mod cons news, why do these a holes need to fly anywhere? Have they not heard of conference calling, Skype, emails &c?
Would it be too much for them to be chauffeured to the airport and hangin the VIP lounge, where they would wait for there commercial flight, which they'll do first class of course.
These arseholes. Run-of-the-mill luxury isn't good enough for them, and because of that, the rank and file suffer and are told they need to give up medical and retirement benefits.
As I watch the auto CEOs tell congress why they need now 35 billion to keep them from going down the drain, most of what I am hearing from them is "IF"we don't get the money millions will end up on the unemployment line. This sounds to me as a thret, nothing more than the bush people were saying, about Iraq and the WMD's.
One thing that is crap that bush ran to the bank to give aig,citi,and others ( who are NOT UNION) all the money they wanted, with out any plain of where the mnoey was going!!!!!!!! From the start bush has trashed UNIONS. first with INS and Customs, Made them 1 department under homeland security. The one thing the people of America was NOT told is that INS was in a UNION, The Federal Employes Union. Under homeland security, the new ICE had NO UNION RIGHTS.
I see now that this bail out for the big 3 auto makers have one thing that the bush Admin hates, "UNION RIGHTS"
The big 3 auto makers CEO's not the UNION have changed there cars and trucks. The trucks are NOT just trucks, they are like "PLUSH" trucks. I have a 2000 ford. I went down to see what they have "LIKE" my 2000. What I found is (same make & model) was trucks that were LOADED with crap I don't want at a cost of over $45 grand. Learther seats, bullshit packages, short beeds. What kind of shit are they trying to sell at a price most people can not buy.
If you look at the pay for the American worker in the last 10 years vs the pay for the CEO's and the price of Autos, the American worker can't buy what they are selling. Hell, when a mini cooper cost $22,000, are they NUTS. In 1978 I bought a Ford F150 4x4. it cost me $4,755. This truck was made out of metal NOT PLASTIC!!!!!!!!
The quality of American cars is NOT the UNIONS FALT either, the CEO's tell the UNIONS what to buils and set the Quality standards. In the 80's and the 90's the forgin cars were buils to run "not to break down" Where the big 3 auto makers were making lots of money is on parts. Buy a auto, you bargin the price, on parts, if it is $239.00 that is what it is. Back in the 70's, the insurance Co put a comparision on a new cat vs parts. New car=$12,500. Parts on that new car was $32,500.
And I heats it when the autor makers and the OIL Co say, we lost millions in profit over last year. If you made 20 million last year and you only made 12.5 million this year "YOU" still made money. The OIL Co are the best at this for the last 30 years.
One last thing "IF YOU CONTROL THE OIL, YOU CONTROL THE WORLD.
WATCHhttp://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3340274697167011147
Login or Register to post comments.