UAW leader says blame economy for Detroit 3 woes

Dom Pody

Good. Then let it die. Then what do you think is going to happen? Workers have given enough for centuries. Now it's time for the Masterclass to sweat !

====

greenpagan, what will happen? 500,000 people will lose their jobs. Would you rather get paid less, or get paid zero?

doodnothin-717580

That's a very short-sighted, flippant "analysis". Something I'd expect from Joe the Plumber…

====

Then let it die. Then what do you think is going to happen? 

I think what would actually happen is that a new group of investors would buy up all their assets and start up business again. However, the new operation would not cater to the UAW and would not run the operation as a jobs program instead of a for-profit business.

Net result? The auto industry survives in a non-union form.

What benefit do the car manufacturers get from the union?  I'm confident that they could staff their rolls with employees making $40 a hour, since that's exactly what Toyota and Honda do.  The idea that these manufacturing jobs are worth nearly $80 an hour is ridiculous and unjustifiable. 

What part of the problem is.........the big three American Auto Makers pay too much for Labor......and can't be competitive with Toyota or Honda................When you add up medical benefits.. 401K's and wages..... it cost the big three more than 70 dollars an hour per worker...........Now Toyota and Honda have plants in America but their cost is less than 50 dollars an hour for the same American worker...........do the math............And that's why the Democrats are pushing for the auto bailout.........to make nice with the union workers...............Sorry....... but the unions refusing to make concessions are sinking their own ship.........The Big-wigs also have to make concessions as well...................

Well for years the workers have made concessions, why won't management, like board memebers and CEOs ever take a pay cut? We've got welfare executives at AIG using their bailout money for 3 separate hundred thousand dollar plus trips to luxurious locations and yet the bigshots refuse to take a pay cut even!

This whole bailout thing needs to be reworked with tighter controls and regulation, if these companies that want in on it, or are already in on it and won't play ball for the good of the country then I say let them fail. However if they are willing to take their medicine and learn to live within their means, submit to pretty much whatever stipulations the government put on them like no bonuses, no raises, cutting pay from the top down, giving board seats to their benefactors, etc, etc, etc, then I say welcome to my wallet. Otherwise they can do like 2 of my other small business, fail, find other ways to make money. Like they've been telling we the people for years, it's a jungle out here and if you want  friend, get a dog.

You are right though on the healthcare and bennies packages, national healthcare would solve a LOT of that cost to the U.S. automakers.

My anger is directed at the CEO's as well....more than the UNIONS................CEO's need to get some dirt under their finger nails and start working with the men.......Compare what they do and get paid vs the CEO's of Honda and Toyota...The big 3 CEO's would be cryin' for their mommies if they had to actually work for a living.............................As far as CEO's.............I got something for them...their mothers.........and the horse they rode in on..................So in a way I can understand the workers anger..............They are told to eat Hamburger Helper while some fat ass turd called a CEO is eating steak and eggs............If it were me..................... I'd piss in his coffee

Don't budge, then when they go bankrupt the court nullifies the union contracts the pension plan gets shifted to the government (no more legacy costs) the tax payers get screwed the retires get screwed the Union gets killed (finally) and Toyota and Honda which will buy the profitable divisons and win and more profit goes to Japan.  The UAW will finally die the Democrats will lose their voter base in Ohio and Michigan, Conservatives will then get back into state offices and business will have a chance again in Ohio and Michigan.  Sounds like a win-win for the auto industry. 

Save the bail-out money and put it into the gov't pension plan which will have to take over the auto workers pension fund. 

lets say im a student and practitioner of business, and i am. heres the real deal, decertify the union, so that union members dont get gouged any more, and lower wages, slash management salaried by a third or more, subject to a 40000 a year minimum. then institute a profit sharing plan, where workers can dramatically increase their take home pay. unions are terrible for america and terrible for their members. they suck too much cash out of the union members disposable income, and their time has past, years ago.

In hard economic times, EVERYONE must sacrifice.  This includes those on the top rungs AND those on the bottom rungs.  If UAW refuses to give up some of their perks, then so be it; The Big Three should be left to die on the vine.  People will still have a need for new cars and trucks and those that used to buy autos from Ford, General Motors, and Chrysler will begin buying from Honda, Toyota, and Nissan.  These three will pick up the slack for the void left behind by Ford, General Motors, and Chrysler.  They will need to increase production of their vehicles and will therefore hire many of the out of work UAW members.  Most of these so-called foreign cars and trucks will be produced right here in America, using American labor.

As far as parts production for Ford, General Motors, and Chrysler, other businesses will pick up this slack by producing parts for these vehicles.

Like I said, EVERYONE needs to lower their expectations during hard economic times.  Whether it be the UAW giving up some of their generous perks, millionaires temporarily using money formerly set aside for their portfolios and instead sending this money in taxes, the middle class paying a little bit more in taxes instead of buying that morning latte (Hey, Folger's makes coffee too), or the perpetually poor by giving up some of their social services.  NOBODY should be allowed to ride in the wagon at a time when that wagon is heavy and our country is in desperate need of people to pull it.  If we all do our part, from the top to the bottom, we can get out of this mess.  If even one person on the lowest rungs refuses to do their part, then they are part of the problem instead of the solution and should be made to suffer the most.  This also applies to UAW.  If they're not willing to be a part of the solution then they are part of the problem.  Let them suffer.

And how about the executives? 

How about the people who decided to buy Hummer as a brand and build that piece of crap?

People, first of all half million jobs is huge in this country given the numbers already out of work. Secondly, its not the labor costs, foreign car makers make cars here in the US, and pay well including benefits.

The problem is with the products, they suck. Gas guzzlers, clunky, always breaking down and expensive to fix. These shoddy products are because of poor engineering, planned obsolescence, faulty parts, and the gas mileage on the sticker lies. Plus, when the demands of the market changed, these dinosaurs did not, this lack of response is causing their self destruction.

If they speed to a change, produce a product that saves gas, protects the environment, is cheap to afford, and affordable to repair (after the warrenty has expired) people would buy (provided they have a job).

And how about the executives?

No bailouts, period.

How about the people who decided to buy Hummer as a brand and build that piece of crap?

Hummers were the result of a materialist society that felt they obtained status by the products that they own.  I mean, seriously, is a Hummer worth the sticker price?  For the average American female, how about a Coach purse?  Is that purse really worth $250 to $400?  How about that Gucci wallet for the 'metromale', when a generic leather wallet would have worked just fine?  People are so concerned about how others view them that they go broke overpaying for the latest, 'in' products, just to gain status amongst their peers, who are equally as shallow and in debt.  Give me a Honda Accord over a Hummer H2 any day of the week.  I may not be seen quite as 'cool' as the Hummer driver, but I paid a helluva lot less for the car, pay a helluva lot less for gas, pay a helluva lot less for insurance, and STILL have an attractive and comfortable car that will still be on the road long after that Hummer has gone to the scrapyard.  I also have money left over at the end of the month to save for rainy days such as what we are experiencing now.  Once that Hummer, Coach, Gucci, or other status item is no longer the latest 'in' thing to own, how many people wish they wouldn't have charged those purchases?  Especially now that they are in debt up to their eyeballs with 20+% interest on 10 different maxed out credit cards and struggle just to pay the interest, much less pay the cards off.

Ron Gettelfinger is not living in reality. The automakers are in trouble mostly because they got greedy in the 90's and ignored the warning signs about higher prices for oil and spent billions selling Americans on the idea that 'bigger was better'.

Now they're stuck with a boatload of fat, gas-hogging vehicles no one wants, and they fell behind in technology trying to boost mileage. It's greed, pure and simple. Car companies MAKE MORE on each car when the car is BIGGER.

The economy isn't helping, but they would be in a lot better shape had they faced reality and re-tooled. Now they whine to the government and hold out their hands. Any bailout to automakers needs to come with two serious strings: no more gas hog production, 40+ mpg vehicles, alternative fuel and electric available, and a few models of the same that regular working folks can afford.

Otherwise they can all take a long walk off a short pier as far as I'm concerned. Taxpayers should not be footing the bill for their ignorance.

Havent't purchased or driven a Detroit car over a decade.

I want to buy american and have been renting Detroit models before I make a purchase. I find their quality, engineering, attention to detail - all has been dismal.

Our family drives Toyotas, Hondas and now Hyundais - some of which are also made in the U.S. - and never regretted owning them.

I hold the big 3 leadership responsible. The workers also should try to do their best to not put all their eggs in a single basket. Go to community college, get some more skills - do something else to make a living - do not depend on the dinasour auto companies for your livelihood!

My favorite auto ever: my Honda Element.

Made in East Liberty, Ohio. 

Agree with 1.14, 1.15, and1.16.  And Kim, you are correct.  Just because these cars are considered foreign doesn't mean that purchasing them negatively affects American workers.  Most of these these so-called foreign cars are manufactured right here in the good ol' U.S.A., and with the American automakers going bankrupt, this will only expand the production of these so-called foreign cars and trucks.  UAW may lose their jobs, but I'm sure Honda, Toyota, Nissan, and Hyundai will be hiring soon so as to keep up with this new heightened demand for their products.    

Good point, Ron Black.  To be sure, Americans are indeed *buying* the cars/trucks made by the Big 3 producers.  When the Big 3 file for bankruptcy, they will continue selling, presuming they have skilled management in place that can operate under bankruptcy.  If not, they will need to procure this talent pretty quickly.

You are spot on... if the Big 3 can't execute under chapter 11, then the others will have the opportunity to grab that customer demand, and will potentially need to add workers to meet demand.

"Gettelfinger also called on Congress to act quickly on a bailout plan for the auto industry, saying action is necessary before President-elect Barack Obama takes office in January."

Stop building crap!!!   Make cars safer and more fuel efficent and MAYBE they will sale!

Every time there is a gas crunch the BIG 3 get slammed.   Let them die!  We already bailed out Chrysler once and what did that get us??  NOTHING!  How many more companys with billion dollar CEO's are we gonna bail out so they can keep there bonus checks for not doing there jobs?!?!?!

Send the CEO's to prison where they can work for cigerettes for there new boyfriend instead of living the county club lavish life and Laughing at the stupid American people.

American Auto Makers has failed the public that buys its cars and trucks,numerous reasons.

 Regulation (in the 60s they had designs with appeal )but mandates forced change ,safety(deservedly needed),early EPA standards(which were a joke).

Marketing(If they have a successful design they over price it for profit),or cash cows SUV's,PU's( they use to be for work not to commute).

Reliability,(do we really want to go there)almost as as Summer follows Spring the public were led to believe once the odometer hit 100,000 it was worth less(some cases they were right)thus the 12 mo 12 thousand mile warranty.

Production Cost ,early years Unions to pride in their company but latter ones they took pride in the Union.

Duplication, Buick ,Chevrolet,Pontaic,(all had the same product but their personal manufacturing brand )way too many designs in drive train to be cost effective.

Your comments are accurate, unfortunately.  I wonder if anybody ever took the time to look at total Big Three Executive Pay compared to domestic Japanese counter parts and then look at UAW pay and benefits compared to domestic Japanese counter parts.  I wonder who really killed Detroit?  Gettlefinger is now supported by a Democrat congress and White House that will probably give Detroit financial help that will limit executive pay (I'm for that) but there will be no corresponding contribution by the UAW.  Watch what happens!!  

I don't normally participate in internet jibber jabber, but today I watched meet the press and listened to politicians and newscasters debate the Big Three ailments and what to do about it.  What is apparant after sifting through your collective comments is several things:  first: many of you have no clue what you are commenting on.  GM's commitment to quality, safety, efficiency, the environment and affordability are real and quantifiable.  The GM execs that decided to build the Hummer, large SUV's and trucks were  reacting to the presence of demand, not the creation of it.  As a matter of fact your precious Toyota made the same marketing decisions and is suffering the same plight with their large SUV's and trucks.  second:  Many of you are mad at something that you can't even quantify.  What does a GM exec make?  What concessions have they made?  You don't know but are quick to guess.  Why don't you find out what GM execs have done and then look at UAW concessions (there have been some) and do the math.  The future should be forged with common sense and not blinded by class envy and creative guess work.  We are competing in a global economy that will demand union and management reality checks.  Any congressional fix funded by tax payers should include significant contributions by management and labor.  Neither is all bad or all good but if Ron draws a line in the sand he is writing the epitaph of the largest employers in the US, one out of ten jobs depend on it.  My advice, get smart on the issues, stop pointing fingers and instead consider extending a hand.   I'm a gm dealer and proud to be one.  I hope those of you who have never driven a GM vehicle will visit a GM showroom soon to see what GM management and the UAW have built.  I think you will be proud.

The Republicans and Bush know that Obama is going to bring back protectionism on jobs so they are trying to use this latest crisis as a chance to break the union before the economy can strengthen itself again when companies are forced to bring some amount of manufacturing back to this country.

Why else all the talk over the last few days about union workers making concessions and not much of any real talk about the CEO and board of directors having to live with less?

This is nothing but a last ditch attempt to hoodwink the working men and women with scare tactics about them losing their jobs. They are willing to bankrupt these dinosaurs instead of helping them to retool while they are in a slowdown all to break the unions and screw the working man some more. It's as plain as the nose on our faces.

Once they've done this and more and more middle class people become former middle class people, then they'll get their riots, they'll get their martial law. They'll be able to blame it on the Democrat in office and we'll get fooled into thinking that they have all the answers once again. That is if we are dumb enough to fall for it again.

They did this to Gen X in the early 90's when they said, while many were still in high school that we'd be the first generation to not do as well as our parents, much less better. Then they came out with all of this rhetoric about how all of that was the fault of Democrats in Congress so we should give them the power because they were the only ones with the answer to fix the country. Never mind the fact that they were the ones largely in the White House, save four years of Carter for the past 25 years.

What to do, what to do? Well the answer is simple. We've retracted back now on average as far as wages are concerned to the early 70's, right before we got into our (thankfully) now dying debt ridden culture. We're back to where we began, back to the days before Reagan's smoke and mirrors of better times, I say smoke and mirror because it wasn't real, it was a fantasy based on debt, a big pyramid that we've reached the top of. Hell we're back before Jimmy Carter and are actually kind of like where we were in the last days of Nixon and Gerry Ford's time in office.

The problems we faced then are much the same as they are now and we're at a cross roads. Do we get back to sound, solvent business practices or do we get fooled into thinking that the people with the real power, the modern day plutocrats, buildaburgers or whatever you want to call them, actually have our best intrests at heart?

I pray that we've come far enough along since then that we've learned that these are nothing more than tricks to scare the middle class into giving up more of their share.

Mick

Are we ready for that much devaluation in our market.The nets not up yet and it's not strong enough.Like all things a little at a time .

Kinda like the frog in the frying pan.

"The Republicans and Bush know that Obama is going to bring back protectionism on jobs so they are trying to use this latest crisis as a chance to break the union before the economy can strengthen itself again when companies are forced to bring some amount of manufacturing back to this country."  --- Mick

I know you desperately want to blame this latest bailout bill on Republicans, but Bush has no legislative power.  All he can do is sign or veto any bill that the Democrat Congress sends to him.  They hold all the cards.  They send Bush what THEY want.  He has no power to alter the legislation that comes to his desk.  If the bill thats put before him is pro-management, then it is because the Democrat Congress wrote it up that way.  If the bill is pro-union, this is also the result of the Democrat majorities wishes.  If they don't think Bush will sign their bill into law, they can easily just hold out until January 21st, then let Obama give them their way.  There is nothing the Republicans can do at this point because they have no power to override the Democrat majority in Congress, and the Democrat majority in Congress has time on their side with Barack Obama being sworn in on January 20th.  Whatever makes it to the presidents desk, either before Jan 20th or after, will be just what the Democrats request.....period.  We'll see who the Democrats decide to reward with THEIR congressional bill.

No, we aren't ready to just jump in the deep end, but we're pretty deep right now as it stands.

The truth is it's going to hurt before it can get better no matter what we do. It's going to have to hurt those at the top as well, I don't mean to sound like I want to punish the top, but they will take their share of the hard knocks no matter hard much they try to put it off on the rest of us.

However if we are careful and make the right moves we can navigate out of it sooner than we think. We have to look at things honestly, introspectivly even forgetting about hard line ideology, be left wing or right wing and take what has actually worked from both to rebuild this thing.

I hope that didn't sound preachy. I totally agree, it's gonna take some time, before a flower can grow ya'll, it's gotta have a little bit of rain. But with diligence, it can grow. remember, the might oak tree was once nothing more than an acorn. :)

Dear gmdealer, I wish you the best of luck over the next 12 months.

Wow Ron, you can always tell a true right wing radio fan by the way they misuse of the word "Democrat" when the proper term in this instance would be the Democratic Congress. The Democrat Congress? Nouns don't modify other nouns. That's another thing Rush has been wrong on.

No the Repugnacons don't have the power to stop it other than Bush and his veto pen, but they are on Fox News right now talking about the unions evil stance on causing this problem and all I'm saying by that loooong rant above is that they are trying to force the hand of the union to make concessions first when knowing how management has forced labor's hand in the past on these things and then given themselves big bonuses and raises and stock options, etc so they were sitting pretty when they came out of these slumps, labor was still stuck in the mud.

The management should make the first move in good faith with their workers and offer to cut their own pay and package first. It's good stewardship, it's REAL leadership. Without management making the first move in this there is no reason for the labor force to think that anything different is going to happen outside business as usual.

Does it really sound like a ridiculous idea that a plutocrat like Bush would force the issue, sit on it and let it ride until late January when perhaps the slide downhill was terminal and a depression was on the way? I mean really, the plutocrats don't care if the middle class fails, they don't care if the country goes into depression and they WILL do it just to try to make the sitting Democratic POTUS look bad on his first day at work. Then Limbaugh's blaming the economy on Obama over the next year would actually start to seem plausible to the public at large. If you repeat the same lie as truth enough, then it will eventually be viewed as such, especially if you can manipulate the situation at the very beginning.

I say they not only would do that, I say that's what they are trying to do right now. They aren't going to be the ones hurting. They've got useful idiots in their own party that will follow them on it and help them out due to ideological reasons and by the time they are ready to admit to themselves that they were wrong, it will be too late.

Yes I say they would do that. Why do I think so? So they can jump back into power as soon as possible and hose the workers some more and pad their own pockets. They follow the Gordon Gekko economic idea that greed is good and greed is what makes the market work. That's something that is simply not sound, it's been proven to be the wrong way to go.

Sorry to ramble, it's been a long night.

"Nouns don't modify other nouns" --- Mick

I've been quite open on this website that I dropped out of high school, so if my words are not grammatically correct, my apologies.

"Does it really sound like a ridiculous idea that a plutocrat like Bush would force the issue, sit on it and let it ride until late January when perhaps the slide downhill was terminal and a depression was on the way?" --- Mick

What to do?  As a Democrat, what do you suggest Bush do?  He got raked over the coals for signing the first bail out bill that was passed by the majority-Democrat Congress.  We were told that the first bail out bill was of the utmost importance.  They rushed a bill through Congress because we were told the bail out was needed NOW.  But now that the bill passed and Paulson has the money in hand, he's suddenly acting slowly to disperse it to the ones we were told deperately needed it.  In hindsight, it looks like Congress had a little more time than we were initially told.  Maybe they could have written a better bail out bill and demanded higher standards of accountability had they taken their time.

Now, we are told the same exact thing with this automaker bail out discussion.  We are told that the sky is going to fall if we don't bail them out NOW.  Sound familiar?  I am skeptical.  I'd prefer they take their time and make sure this bail out is done right so that we don't later regret it.

I wasn't trying to insult your education, I dropped out of school myself to become a teenage parent  but what Bush should have done was not used his usual scare tactics to get something rammed through Congress. The Democratic Congress has repeatedly said that they were threatened with martial law if they didn't hurry up and pass it, were they week? Yes. Should we hold them and Bush's feet to the fire to do the right thing and put some heavy controls on the bank bailout even now? Of course, they can change the terms anytime they want. Do I think Congress will? No, I think they know if they do that Bush would veto it but I'd say that's all the more reason try to force his hand now and make him show how willing he (and that'll point out who in Congress is for or against it too) isn't to go to bat for the people who's money he's using to do this.

Oh I don't think that they'll be in quite such a rush to get something just rammed through without some control this time, of course like with all politicians both Republican and Democratic, who knows?

First, let's talk about the fake number that has been tossed around as the hourly compensation of a union auto worker.  Here is how that number was created:

1.) Take all of the money paid out to current workers, retired workers and surviving spouses.

2.) Add the total cost for benefits to current workers, retired workers and surviving spouses.

3.) Divide the total dollar amount by the hours worked by presently-employed auto workers.

4.) You have now created an inaccurate, inflammatory figure that can be used to illustrate the 'excess' of the blue-collar worker.

Why is it that the GOP, a so-called advocate of Joe-Six-Pack, is going after the auto workers while at the same time turning a blind eye to the excesses of the executives?

Mick

I heard talk about the use of the word Democrat instead of Democratic,nothing to do with grammar its to tick off the loyals.But  really Repugnacons I don't think Websters carries that one.

Who killed the electric car,who went for bigger rather than better,I own a 96 nissan made with 230,000 miles and I still get 29 to 30 mpg.I'll never own another big three car again.I feel as long as the big three are led by the oil companies they will never catch up.I also believe 50 or more mpg is out there. it was out there a long time ago I also think.....and I worked for gm in maryland.......and I saw people with an attitude every day....the more money you give them the more they want.........The big three believe if it won't break down we won't make any money. Let them die....they sell crap

Let them die....they sell crap

Exactly myargument, I won't get behind the wheel of any of Detroit brand. Every domestic I owned failed to satisfy my needs before the car was even paid for. Multiple trips to the dealer despite warranty coverage is too much inconvenience. Why can't they make it right the first time? Sometimes I want to believe the people suggesting not to buy a car built on a Monday because the assembly workers are not to speed on the first day of the week. But in many instances, this is a question you will fail to ask a auto salesman when you are shopping for your next car. OTOH, I wonder why dealers try to sell you unnecessary services when you come in for a simple oil change and tire rotation. To me the more the car is handled by the mechanic during service schedule, the more mechanical problem occur after that visit. This make me believe that dealers mostly on domestic brands are crooks.

.I feel as long as the big three are led by the oil companies they will never catch up.I also believe 50 or more mpg is out there.

Mr. Wizard59, I believe you are right.  I have seen documents and read stories that make me believe that 70 mpg is available today with the cars and fuel that is here now!  I also believe that some cars could get better than 100 mpg, now with the fuels being sold today.  We are all ready to grow corn crops and burn ethyl, why, because we were told that is the only way to get better gas mileage.  Not true!  These cars have computers built into them and they have reported that the amount of unburnt fuel and wasted energy could easily be converted.  We could get better milage and energy from the cars today, without having to gently ease off the brake and smoothly accelorate, although that is better for the engine and car (in general) and prevents tickets!  The Big 3 have for years now, held out that they could produce better milage cars, but at a cost of 'raw hp' and it would be too expensive to retool the whole plant and the price of the average car would be $35,000 and up.  Well, with the computerized builders, higher worker safety and new technologies, they have retooled their buildings and we have cars that start at $26k and up, however...we still have to be ''excited" by 30mpg!  That's a 4 cylinder, "powerful!" 1.4 hp engine.  We are told that this is the "best" they can do!  Honda, Toyota, KIA and others have had to "play by the rules" of the American auto industry, too.  These cars in other countries, have proven a better than 65 mpg technology, but they are not allowed to sell them in the U.S.  Why not?  It would prove that the Big 3 have been lying to us all this time!  There was a Saturn that had an "experimental" chip in the engine and the lucky owners charted better than 70 mpg with the car.  They made the mistake of telling Saturn about it and once Saturn realized what the new owners were talking about, they sent a team to recover the item from the car.  It now gets 30 mpg!

nodomestic4evr, I can only say that dealers are crooks, by most standards, and businesspeople by other standards.  They are trying to stay in business and make a profit, is that so wrong?  On the backs of the car owners?  Yeah!  The dealerships mechanical services used to charge an unbelievable $45/hr for labor, that went to $85 and not too long ago is now over $100/hr!!!  The parts that we can purchase at the store, ie a starter that sells for $40 at Checker or whatever, they sell for $85 or more and we all know that they purchase in bulk and pay less than retail for it!  So WHY?!!??  Why can't they do an honest job and charge an honest price?  I replaced my own starter and battery on my Jeep and was looking at a repair shop for pricing.  I paid $35 for the starter (with a lifetime warranty) and $65 for the battery with 5 yr warranty (pro-rated) so for $100 I paid and about an hour of my time I priced it at this shop, not even a dealership and it would have cost me $350!  WHY?!?!?  The Jeep dealership wanted $400!!!  CROOKS!

congratulations and give that person a prize... someone is looking through the smokescreen into reality. how about we leave hourly wages alone but reduce upper management salaries, board member's bonuses and union dues and fees. all of a sudden you've reduced operating costs without affecting the workers paychecks. there's a reason unions don't ask the workers what they want.

My son is a Chrysler worker.  He would rather give up a little in income and benefits than give up everything he has because of the company going under.

By the way, the union hasn't asked the workers here what they would rather do.  So, how do they know what the workers want? They only care about what the union officials want!!!

You summed it up well.  The union will not (currently) allow anything to happen that will damage their position.

The union leadership will also not discuss this with their members....because their members might just vote for major concessions that will allow them to keep their jobs.

replytoj001

I sort of agree with the idea greenpagan. I mean, we need to return to more unions given as they were, at one time, one of the major checks on the excesses of the CEO's and their ilk- and I have yet to see anyone propose anything better. Another part would be a return to regulations and not the removal of more.

Frankly? The lack of regulations never made sense to me. I mean, we pass laws to protect people physically and we call it good but when it comes to laws that protect us financially we're supposed to believe that complete anarchy (lack of laws) is the solution to all of our ills? Never made sense to me.

"There is a line between complete totalitarianism and total anarchy, and it is this line where good government lies."

It's not a bad idea.  The original purpose of the unions, and their amazing history, is being tainted by this unwillingness to negotiate.  Gettelfinger's comment regarding the automakers needing to find a way to "turn around the economy" completely disregards the unions' role in that process.  The basis of the unions was to stop unsafe work conditions, long hours on the lines, etc.  They need to re-visit their roots.  

Unions have become what they were fighting......big business!

I think the UAW knows that they are in trouble. This is just the first salvo of the impending battle that they know is coming at them next. Every time the automakers get into trouble by mismanaging the company, the first place they look to for cuts is the workers. They will end up making concessions to the automakers. It is inevitable. It always is. I think that they are tired of giving back that which they had to fight for to gain. Wage freezes probably are in order when you are working for a company that is not turning a profit. I know I would be miffed if my boss said, "you know that raise I gave you last year, uh, I need to take that back this year for the company to remain profitable". Most for us are never faced with that situation. It is an never ending cycle for UAW employees.

Turning the economy around is the most important job that needs doing. You wont turn the economy around by taking more money away from employees. You wont turn the economy around by taking more money away from business. It will only turn around when more people are working. Spending money they have MADE. Not money that was given to them from the government. (you and I) If the big 3 need help, how about asking the unions to roll up their sleeves and fight the best fight that they can, the fight for their survival. Work harder, work smarter, build a superior product, charge a premium price. This was the American way. That is what it used to mean when a label said "made in with pride in the USA" You were getting the best money could buy. Our products were coveted above all others. They still are in some industries that haven't forgotten how to make a quality product.

The unions ROLE!!.. let me see.. you are saying that the 172,000 uaw workers are the major cause of the problem???.. That is the total of ALL uaw workers.. in the 90´s it was over 500,000... no,, the UAW is not the problem.. the problem is that the big 3 have refused to be the best there is.. they have conceded the intermediate and small car market to the imports because they instead want to make their money on high profit SUV´s.  With the past low gas prices.. can you blame them??.. no. If the US gummint had taxed gas the way it is in europe(so we pay 6 to 8 dollars a gallon)  we would have the cars, and buyer loyalty that other makes have here and worldwide.. but GM especially let the small car biz just turn into an after thought.  take a ride in a calibre, or a cobalt.. and you will know why people refer to them as ¨penalty boxes¨.  Personally I thing G-Feld is right.. the unions conceded.. new hires are at $14 an hour, and for that they get to do nasty repetative jobs that sap your body and mind.  remember that in Oregon the minimum wage is $8.. 6 bux more isn´t a whole lot more money to ruin your body over. It surely isn´t a job that I would do for that kind of money, if it weren´t for the benifits.. that you will surely need after your body starts to fail after 5 yrs.  What do you think an appropriate wage should be for a new uaw hire.. 7??? 8 bux an hour... for that money you can be a dishwasher.

Right ON!!! Back when the majority of workers in America belonged to a union the middle class wan't just strong, it existed. Not because of the charitable CEO but because the union was the primary force keeping the board and CEO in check.

Also, the guy who's father was a retired GM worker, how do you think his job was safe and secure and had a retirment pension at all. Look folks, this ain't 1957 when the country was strong, this isn't even 1977 when though we were in a recession we at least had sensible trade policies that kept these greedy bastards from shipping American jobs overseas. The whole debate is kind of moot really until we can get some tarrifs and good ol' 100% American PROTECTIONISM going again. Then we'll see this economy take off like shot from a gun.

Many of these cars aren't made in America anymore anymore so if the big three are failing it isn't because of the unions. The reason, the ONLY reason they are failing is because of Republican's short sighted failed economic policies.

Is it that the workers are too weak or the uneducated have risen to the upper management of the Unions and have become drunk on the power and forgotten about their duty to protect jobs. 

The unions quit being of any use to the blue collar worker 30+ years ago.  What you union flunkies don't get is that if you don't allow the company to be profitable it goes under and you have no job.  If you don't like working for the bigwigs get educated, start your own business and be a bigwig.  The unions are so short sighted about getting free coffee and United Nations day off they don't realize they need jobs more than these trival perks. 

Every UAW worker should be given a free copy of "Who moved my cheese?" perhaps they would understand the situation better.

Unions started out with the correct cause then somewhere they got lost.

The US Goverment was an investor in our industry during WWII. I worked for Corning Glass, one of the companys to benefit. Property of the United States Gov. was on metal plates attatched to lots of stuff.  Even the toilet paper dispensers. 

I was there to watch the demise of Corning in the '80's.. I saw little respect for the workers in the factory.  Way too many managers, with huge salaries and perks and an every day 'PRODUCTION MEETING' that lasted for hours.

 Corning went down, not because of the workers, but because of way too many managers, and not reinvesting to re-tool!

 I was tech support, so I have no ax to grind. Here is what I saw. 1/3 of the labor force laid off. Some only had a year or two till retirement. Rehires at a much lower rate. Still, they kept all their managers.  Then had a 40K weekend at a luxury resort to congradulate themselves.

Its time we see the changes from the top. If 'Management' is truly committed and not just soaking up the $ and benefits, there wouldn't be a problem...

 There should be No Golden Parrachutes & 50% Salary cuts for ALL Corporate Managers (This way,  those  not committed to productivity,will wander off) plus Money MUST go to ReTooling for alternative energy cars.!  Violators should be held accountable to Federal Criminal Charges..for theft and fraud...oh, and make the guilty serve time.

wow, go directly to cuba, do not pass go, are you really american. ding dong, socialism doesnt work, it doesnt create the wealth to service our social services for all in america. ding dong ding dong, reality is calling.

I would agree to cutting managers pay by 50% if everyone's salary is cut by 50%. 

Why should a job that I can teach a kid to do earn $50+K a year.  You were in tech support you have no idea what it takes to run a multi-billion dollar company.  Are some managers worthless, of course but let's face it the golden parachute which was negotiated for union workers in the 50's and 60's was way far and above what one or two top level execs get (who by the way average 60+ hour work weeks) while your union boys without OT barely work 25-30. 

Well apparantly you are not old enough to remember the days before Reaganomics and this whole smoke and mirror of easy credit. You see, that isn't socialism at all.

The government helping out business back during the depression and WWII was all that kept this country alive at the time. For decades we had a compromise on socialistic and free market policies. It was the only sane thing to do and it is what we need to get back to. From the late 40's on through the early 70's wages and standards of living GREW by leaps and bounds, that is until Nixon took us off the gold standard and started us on this downward spiral. Now I know that the neocons in the business schools argue that the standard of living went up under supply side economics however that isn't really the case. If you strip away the debt and actually look at wages and benefits the standard went down. It was that we the consumer were allowed lots more credit to keep up the standard of living that we Americans had from the 40's 50's and 60's.

America has been on a big credit pyramid for the last 35 years. We finally reached the top. This has been coming for a long time and if we've been honest with ourselves we knew it. There is a reason wages on average are no more than they were in 1973 these days. We're right back to were the monkey business started, now is the time to get back to smart, proven demand side economic principles that guided this country so well until we reached the credit culture in 1971.

So ding dong! That's not socialism, and here's your reality check kiddo, supply side economics doesn't work either,that's right! Reagan was wrong, Greenspan was wrong, Bill Clinton was wrong. Hmmm, while we're at it, Gingrich, HW, W, Milton Friedman, Dick Nixon, and company, all supply siders, all wrong.

I'm just glad that the majority of voters quit drinking Ronald Reagan's & Rush Limbaugh's Kool Aid before it was too late.

The UAW has already cut their own wages.  I have worked management, also.  You can't teach a kid to do most of the skilled jobs in production.  My father was a carpenter. He studied and worked for 5 years to do the job.  Many jobs require more than the skill of a B.S. degree.  I have worked on both sides.  There are many skilled jobs that require, not just book education, but  talent and are an art that is aquired through long years of apprenticship. You may be able to tell someone how to do it, but I doubt that you will be able to do it, just following an SOP. 

Mick, I couldn't agree with you more. The "easy credit" mentality has always been a fools move, somewhere down the line the piper has to be paid. This showed itself best in the bursting of the housing bubble. the neocons try to blame the poor for taking debt they couldn't afford to repay while they were the ones pushing mortgage paper they weren't properly clearing. I can understand thy possition of the poor, it was a chance to actually own their own piece of the american dream and maybe improve their lot. Do I blame them? partially, they knew they were taking a great risk. But the banks have to carry part of the blame as the ones who truely should have known better when they allowed the loans. Supply side economics in action. the banks had paper to push and a somewhat naive (financially) audience to push it to. they had an outlet for the bundled securities so they wouldn't have to accept the risk they had created. More supply siding.

The easy credit mantra was never meant to make peoples standard of living better, it was meant to allow people to live beyond their means.

Mick Hubbard! You Rock!!

Mick and D,

I am old enough to remember Carter screwing the country up.  And history and economics is now showing socialistic policies extend the depression for 7 years longer than it should have lasted.  To blame the banks is like blaming a 5year old for his stomach ache when mom and dad left the candy on the counter and provided no supervision.  The banks were doing what they were mandated by Carter give credit to those who can't afford it or face the full weight and force of the federal government.  The banks figured out how to make money in spite of the ignorance of socialists, that's what capitalist do, they make lemonade from the lemons the democrats produce.  And you are incorrectly using statistics to justify faulty logic in regards to Reagan, history does not agree with you and I choose to believe nonpartisan historians over you if you don't mind. 

Mick, you do have some good points, however, you blow the argument when you used bad logic to blame Reagan and polices which produced the largest, longest peace time economic growth in modern history.  

Ener,

I was referring to line jobs in an assembly plant.  These jobs are very easy, they are just repetitive.  I am not saying people should not earn a living but it should be commensurate with difficulty and skill/education necessary to accomplish it. 

LIAMD,

 you blow the argument when you used bad logic to blame Reagan and polices which produced the largest, longest peace time economic growth in modern history.  

ROTFLMAO!!! Savings and Loan Scandal, Voodoo Economics, Recession- millions out on the street- you're either way to young to remember all of this or you are deluded dearheart. Yeah, that was real "growth" there! Quit trying to rewrite history for those of us who actually lived through it dearest.

Sick,

I'm glad you got a good laugh and I'm glad you enjoy living in denial. But your opinion doesn't jive with reality.  Additionally, your insults are unfounded and childish.

"This showed itself best in the bursting of the housing bubble. the neocons try to blame the poor for taking debt they couldn't afford to repay while they were the ones pushing mortgage paper they weren't properly clearing."  --- D DeMilo

I will agree with your premise if you will agree that it wasn't just Republicans.  The ball got rolling on demands by Democrats to increase home ownership to historically under represented homeowners (ie: minorities).  These banks were threatened with lawsuits and the loss of federal financial backing should minority loans not increase.  What were banks to do?  Continue denying loans to those with poor credit histories and face federal discriminatory lawsuits based on mortgage approval statistics?  Hell, credit history is not a static number across the board for all races.  It shows the likelihood of someone repaying their debts and overall, some races pay their debts at a higher percentage than others.  Because of this fact alone, people with better credit histories were qualified in higher numbers overall for mortgage loans than others.  And because of the overall higher credit scores of whites and asians compared to blacks and hispanics, whites and asians were approved for more mortgage loans than blacks and hispanics.  Whites and asians also got better terms, just as someone with an exemplary credit history will be offered credit cards at a low interest rate while those with poor credit histories will be offered credit cards at a 20% interest rate or higher.  Banks offset the risk by applying unfavorable terms to those that have shown to not be responsible with credit.  This is nothing new.  Would you loan money to a relative if that relative refused to take paying you back seriously?  I doubt it, so if you wouldn't do it for a relative, why would banks do it for a stranger?  You KNOW your relative, while a bank has nothing to go by but the loan applicants credit history.  The problem began when the government began placing racial quotas on homeownership and demanded that banks meet these racial quotas, irregardless of credit history. 

So had the government (mostly Democrats) initially stayed out of the business of dictating racial quotas on bank loans, we would have never travelled down this road of subprime and ARM loans.  Because subprime and ARM loans were the response by banks for having been threatened with lawsuits by the government to increase loan statistics to those with poor credit histories (ie: minorities) that would have never qualified prior to this government intervention.

Ron,

Nicely said.

 you blow the argument when you used bad logic to blame Reagan and polices which produced the largest, longest peace time economic growth in modern history. 

I'm sorry LIAMD you're just wrong about that. If you strip away the debt then the standard went down. See, if I make 5k a day and spend 5k a day then though I'm being foolish in saving I'm at least living in my means. If I make 5k a day and spend 5k an hour then I'm over extending myself. That's what happened under Reagan, and I'll concede under Clinton as well. It was all a fantasy, it has been since the early 70's.

Carter didn't ruin this country, he had a horrible mess leftover from the Nixon administration. It was Nixon that started this whole mess. Do you know the reason we went off the gold standard? It was because we had more debt than we had money to cover it. In his defense it wasn't meant to be everlasting, and as it turns out. It won't be.

Yeah because if I'm a talented executive I can't wait to jump on board a company like American Airlines and take a reduced wage in order to turn the company around...

You can't see that there is absolutely no incentive for any talented potential recruits? 

All BS is right. Think it through.

They are out there. Back in the 60's NASA over here in Huntsville Alabama had a lot of people with a vision and a passion for doing the work that were independently wealthy when they came so taking the lower paying government job didn't matter to them. Heck, one guy was a Yardley, as of Yardley of London.

There are still visionaries left out there, they've just largely been left untapped. It's not always about the money with the old money people. It's the Gekko type model business man that has passed for what money people look like for the past 20 years.. New money by in large doesn't have the class to be visionary in many instances.

nick, i didn't say they would necessarily get talented execs. they will get someone, most likely one who is after the money and the wee chance that gee, if they turn the company around they'll make even more in that job or in their next job. if not, then hey, they got bookoos of money for taking the job and if they fail, it was not their fault anyway.

I do believe this is why so many people have no pity or see a value to support unions. How do you relate to someone making $50 - $75 per hour?  Someone who might actually strike for more benefits????

Unions have protected and supported union members who should have been and should be fired.  In standing up for and protecting those who should be fired, those who do the minimum, and those who will not do anything "beyond the contract". 

Union members have intimidated and threatened those who do not want to join the union.

Unions, and their collective leadership,  have pushed the envelope for job protection, salaries, and benefits, gaining for their members far beyond what non-union employees have achieved. 

Unions leaders have gotten rich and fat off their members....union leaders don't get strike pay, they are still collecting their salaries. 

NOTE TO CITY, STATE, AND FEDERAL EMPLOYEE UNIONS -Get Ready....

You are the next group who is going to have to make some major concessions.....city, state, and federal governments are going broke......

replytoj001

I grew up in an ILWU home. For those who don't know that is the International Long shore Workers Union, AKA dockworkers. My ex-stepfather has been in the union since he was 22. Now that I am older I look back in amazement at some of the stuff he could get away with. Back then he was bring in 100K and that was in the 80's!

Unions protect those who want to do the least and hinder those who want to excel.

So now that you are grown and know better would you rather have had him making 10 to 15k a year? I'll bet that would've bought you a lot of jelly shoes and kangaroos back in the day. My famiy's carpet cleaning company brought in about 350k in the 80's and that was 2 men in a van, and that was in Alabama.

These shipping companies could afford to pay it, I'd about guarantee it.

Mike,

I bet those two men had to work their butt off to make that kind of money.

Here is an example of what I now know is stealing. Two people would be assigned to one job. They would "flip" meaning flip a coin the winner got to decide if they wanted to work the first four or the second four. They were both assigned to work the eight hour shift together but guess what since they has so much seniority they just skated around the rules. So they would work only four hours and get paid for eight.

Oh I forgot to mention my mother worked in sales for one of the shipping companies at that time. Guess what in the end who do you think paid for the shipping costs????

NOT THE SHIPPING COMPANY! The cost is passed to the customer and the customer passes it to their customer. AKA the buying public!

Readyto...NOTE TO CITY, STATE, AND FEDERAL EMPLOYEE UNIONS -Get Ready..

Brilliant ! A large block of votes for the Democrats too I might add will become major players in 2010.

              Socalgal           The cost is passed to the customer and the customer passes it to their customer. AKA the buying public!

Like taxing the company's that provide jobs.

Note to Pelosi.

Figure out how to blame Republican Party on that.

We worked from 8:30 am to around 4:30 or 5pm. Sure we worked, but we didn't kill ourselves, we just managed it well. You have to build business and stand behind what you're offering. Did the other carpet cleaners make that kind of money? No. We spent time making relationships with the customers that built trust, they knew that our service was A-1 and satisfaction guaranteed were more than just words in a yellow page ad. That's how solid money was made.

Oh I understand where you're coming from. 100k a year is rather a silly price to pay for dock work in the 80's I think but if the market was willing to pay it then the market rules right?

And I understand that for a long while there unions did a lot of over reaching however that's not really the case today. Less than 12% of the population are union members today compared to the early 60's when the country was strong, wages were solid and business actually took place here in the U.S. and more than 30% of workers were union.

I just wondered if you'd rather he worked for the more reasonable rate of say $15 or 20K considering how that would have affected you personally. None of my business really, I was just curious.

I just wondered if you'd rather he worked for the more reasonable rate of say $15 or 20K considering how that would have affected you personally. None of my business really, I was just curious.

Considering the longtime viability of the American economy has been destroyed by such workers being paid such ridiculous wages, I'd say it personally affects him quite a lot now.

Now you know good and well it wasn't so much labor that caused this problem, sure they might have contributed to it with wild demands, but that was more than 30 years ago when the long shoremen had their famous strike. I remember the KISS album "Destroyer" began with a news report the said something thing about President Ford and the striking Long Shoremen before the music began. There have been mistakes made on both sides and it's the powerful people at the top who have held the purse strings for many years now. Blaming unions and working people when less than 12% of the workforce of this country is union these days just doesn't make any sense. This isn't 1975, unions have been losing power for decades.

These Longshore workers still do work an hour for a full day's pay.   And we, the consumers pay for it.  Watch the prices of our food and etc rise when they go on strike.

All unions need to stop promoting laziness and destroying American economy.  By the way, how did union get $80 million to donate to Obama campaign?

Sure, I didn't mean there were weren't abuses, it's just that most unions have been broken everywhere anyway, there's just not that many union members anymore.

It has everything to do with labor costs.

"Mismanagement" is a catch-all, useless term. 

Countless poor decisions were made on all parties' behalves. 

When it's all over and done with.............all Gettelfinger will be getting is THE FINGER...............from all the Union workers without a job...............don't be stupid......................times aren't good for anybody right now......many people have lost their jobs.....lost their homes...they would take your job in a minute at half the pay..................this ain't the time to be talikng tough........you have to pick your spots...................don't be foolish......people won't feel sorry for you in the least

I can't buy an American car cause it costs more than it's worth.................Sorry but they are overpaid.................................And that goes for those freakin' LONGSHOREMEN as well....................Over paid guerrillas.............they won't even let the loading and unloading docks upgrade to computer systems cause the are afraid they will lose jobs..........We overpay for all our goods because of these hacks.....

I agree Digadogabone, grew up in a ILWU house they sit and laugh each time it is time to sign that contract why? They are a closed shop NO and I mean NO ONE touches those docks! So they get most of what they want on the contract or bring the entire international shipping to a grinding halt.

Crazy!

And my favorite LOSERS UNION AWARD goes to .............................THE POSTAL WORKERS...................the biggest bunch of overpaid losing turds in AMERICA.....................hand down........ bar none..............my dog could deliver the mail better than these overpaid clowns....................Long Shoremen comen in second.......................Both  deserve 2 ply toilet paper because they are the biggest turds in town

@digadogabone:

Back in 1997, the US Post Office allowed an outside company to take over the Priority Mail piece. Before 1997 the acceptance rate for a piece of mail stamped "priority" was around 48% that it would get there on time and in one piece. The US Post Office granted CNF the contract for 2 years to do what the Post Office couldn't do. Since CNF made a sub-company called CNF Postal Logistics we didn't have to hire and establish a union. The workers got paid a decent paycheck with nice benefit package and able to make a profit. With CNF working the priority mail, the acceptance rate went to 98% overnight. It got so good that the US Postal Union filed a formal protest and grivence at the "loss" of US Post worker jobs and employment slots. We had 2 senior Postal Managers on site at all time. They made about 75,000 a piece to basically sit in a office, sleep, and do various tasks like run to the mall, surf the internet, watch TV, and talk on the phone. For one hour at the end of the shift they would inspect the last shipments out and ensure that no lose piece of mail was still in the docks. After 2 years the project was disbanded due to union pressure, the priority mail slipped back to around 70% The US Postal union is unique.

But I would say that there are a number of Federal employees that are the same way. Almost impossible to fire, seems to know more rights on how not to get fired than do anything productive, and is a waste of space. I could count a dozen employees here on post that do nothing but waste oxygen. When you are viewed not as a customer but as a hinderance to their personal discussion on the telephone then we have a serious problem.

I don't see the Japanese asking for handout, wonder why?

Among other reasons, the Japanese have a cost structure that enables them to repeatedly turn a profit.

LONG SHORE MEN is an invalid term.................there are no men.......that work in that rat hole union..............it's a union for people who don't have real jobs......................................wussy boys....all of them

It's my belief whether right or wrong that Unions kept these auto makers alive, well past their utility. America doesn't need a big three.

If employees had regular pay checks/benefits like other non Union businesses, without Unions negotiating the auto makers would have on their own improved employees pay, benefits in a more free market method. If not, the auto makers would lose employees, those employees would move and have gotten new jobs in other industries (diversify the work force) and lessoned the burden we see today. Heck, electric cars might have even been a reality if employees had been left to come up with alternatives, instead of guaranteed pensions and job security. Some might have left the security blanket and created a new business.

Chrysler would never have been bailed out the first time, but because of Unions power, they lobbied hard and Government rescued them. No Unions, one less auto maker, less competition, the other auto makers would now be looking better. They would also have felt more pressure to come up with alternative products buyers want.

For the record, the US Government got paid back by Chrysler and made a profit on the warrants Chrysler issued in exchange for the loans.  I'm not suggesting this would work now, but that deal wasn't bad at the time.