UNIONS: Are they partly to blame?

[Mr. Wyndham]

Everybody's partly to blame for this mess....but it's real easy to pick on the entity with the biggest mouth.

The workers are already making the same as foreign transplant workers, for the most part. The difference everyone's always quoting comes in retiree pensions and healthcare. It's a slippery slope.

[CaptianSam]

Originally Posted by phatman

What Union does Mr Wagoner belong to - I want to retire too!

Wow some people finally get it.... The exec's are all garbage... And don't do anything (hardly) but make ALL the money!!!

Ill say it once and ill say it every day till sunday next may...
UNIONS FOR THE LOSS!

I love how g'vmnt finally tried to limit union power and got booted out with co-alition, I love how everthing works in the favour of a few selfish dumb retards. Democracy shemo-ocracy.

Shemo- italian for stupid(basically)

You want a job work for it you want benefits work for it you want higher pay work for it... I'm so sick of hearing unions say NO!!!!!!!!!! We aren't settling!!!!!!!!!!!! You will all be outta jobs if you don't numbskulls!!!!!!! Hey wagoner gets 4 million a year? what the hell for?

Gm deserves to die if that is actually true...

It makes me not even want this car anymore...
Who makes these rules?
Between the union, management, and government. One can understand why FAIL is now at hand...

Somebody needa to make a black net poster borded with a picture of the gm logo... Titled: FAIL BUS

Built by gm

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by CaptianSam

Wow some people finally get it.... The exec's are all garbage... And don't do anything (hardly) but make ALL the money!!!

I'll agree they make lotsa money....I won't agree they "hardly do anything"....

And what's with all the GM= fail, stuff....you think they're the only ones who treat their CEOs better-than-nice? For what it's worth, Wagoner was the lowest-paid CEO in the INDUSTRY...I'm pretty sure Fritz will be inheriting that title...

[CaptianSam]

Originally Posted by Vash

30 million dollar golf course is the ice on the cake. Why does a labor union need a PGA class golf course if they are auto workers? They don't.

Mr Wagoner worked his arse off for GM he earned his check. I like the guy myself. People on the line seemed to like him too.

Ohhh I see being likeable justifys taking 4 milion a year for life after tanking a company
While its approaching bankruptcy

[CaptianSam]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

I'll agree they make lotsa money....I won't agree they "hardly do anything"....

And what's with all the GM= fail, stuff....you think they're the only ones who treat their CEOs better-than-nice? For what it's worth, Wagoner was the lowest-paid CEO in the INDUSTRY...I'm pretty sure Fritz will be inheriting that title...

Ill believe it when I see it...

Who really needs 4 million a year to retire... I'm saying ALLLLLL companys need to stop this because its ludacris

[The_Blur]

It's worth pointing out that all parties in a situation are out for their own interests. If you were asked to take a pay cut at your current job to keep the business viable, for the sake of argument, you will probably claim to say that you will. I respectfully disagree and argue that you would point out that your boss makes more than you or that their boss makes more than that. You would try to shift the blame to someone else and wouldn't take the loss.

The auto companies want to profit as much as possible. The unions want to make more money. The auto companies originally agreed to pay more because they thought that it would be more profitable to use the union than to use foreign labor because Americans, on the whole, really don't like globalization because it costs them jobs.

In the end, the unions asked for more and took advantage of a situation. If you were offered a ridiculous deal for something simply because you asked for it, then you might take that deal as well. It can be blamed on the unions for asking or the company for accepting. If you want to go further in depth, it can be blamed on other countries for not protecting their workers with higher wage laws, or it can be blamed on other companies for lowering their costs. It can be blamed on anything if you stretch it enough.

Let's stop focussing on the blame and start focussing on the solution.

[CaptianSam]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

It's worth pointing out that all parties in a situation are out for their own interests. If you were asked to take a pay cut at your current job to keep the business viable, for the sake of argument, you will probably claim to say that you will. I respectfully disagree and argue that you would point out that your boss makes more than you or that their boss makes more than that. You would try to shift the blame to someone else and wouldn't take the loss.

The auto companies want to profit as much as possible. The unions want to make more money. The auto companies originally agreed to pay more because they thought that it would be more profitable to use the union than to use foreign labor because Americans, on the whole, really don't like globalization because it costs them jobs.

In the end, the unions asked for more and took advantage of a situation. If you were offered a ridiculous deal for something simply because you asked for it, then you might take that deal as well. It can be blamed on the unions for asking or the company for accepting. If you want to go further in depth, it can be blamed on other countries for not protecting their workers with higher wage laws, or it can be blamed on other companies for lowering their costs. It can be blamed on anything if you stretch it enough.

Let's stop focussing on the blame and start focussing on the solution.

Yea I got one... Dissolute the UAW completly and re vamp execs pay and find out where all the damn money goes

[phatman]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

It's worth pointing out that all parties in a situation are out for their own interests. If you were asked to take a pay cut at your current job to keep the business viable, for the sake of argument, you will probably claim to say that you will. I respectfully disagree and argue that you would point out that your boss makes more than you or that their boss makes more than that. You would try to shift the blame to someone else and wouldn't take the loss.

The auto companies want to profit as much as possible. The unions want to make more money. The auto companies originally agreed to pay more because they thought that it would be more profitable to use the union than to use foreign labor because Americans, on the whole, really don't like globalization because it costs them jobs.

In the end, the unions asked for more and took advantage of a situation. If you were offered a ridiculous deal for something simply because you asked for it, then you might take that deal as well. It can be blamed on the unions for asking or the company for accepting. If you want to go further in depth, it can be blamed on other countries for not protecting their workers with higher wage laws, or it can be blamed on other companies for lowering their costs. It can be blamed on anything if you stretch it enough..

Let's stop focussing on the blame and start focussing on the solution

Amen - here is a guy that 'gets it'.

Believe it or not we are in this thing together - and the only way to get out of it is by acting on a unified front. And you know what kills me? It wasn't even our fault! It was the financial sector!!!

GM has nothing to gain by going into Chapter 11 (how many companies do you know that were successful after bankruptcy)

The Unions have nothing to gain by biting the hand that feeds them.

So lets tackle the current problem and when the economy recovers we can resume bashing each other...

[MrIcky]

This has been argued to death. I want to know more about Splitters 914.

[bigralph]

[Tanner]

Unions can be good if the protect the employees from bad employers. Execs. should also take a pay cut if employees take one. If execs. take a cut the employee pay cuts won't be so bad.

I had union employees in NY working for a pest control company. When I got there I started giving employees pay for the hours they worked. If they worked 5 hours on Monday, 5 hours on Tuesday, 8 hours on Wednesday, 9 hours on Thursday and 5 hours on Friday, I paid them for 32 hours of work. All hell broke loose. Union Rep came down and explained to me that if they 5 hours, they get paid for 8. If they work 9 hours they get an hour of overtime. So, for the guy that worked 32 hours, I had to pay him 40 regular hours and 1 hour at time and a half. No problem, I made the guys call their managers if they were done working before the 8 hour shift was up to go help other guys still out there working. Did I ever have a bunch of whiners after that. They actually had to work 40 hours to get paid for 40 hours. Then we started catching the guys sleeping in their vehicles on side streets until their 8 hours was up. Jobs that use to take 2 hours now took 4 hours to complete.

These guys got so use to abusing the system they didn't know how to work 8 hours straight. Total abuse of the system. Needless to say we broke the union and the guys got paid commission for the work they did. Some of the old die hard abuse the system union guys quit. No sweat, we did a lot better without them. We went from losing 7.5 million in two years after buying that company to gaining 7.5 million in the 5 years I was there.

Sorry so long, this kind of hit home for me. Thanks for reading this if you made it this far.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by CaptianSam

Yea I got one... Dissolute the UAW completly and re vamp execs pay and find out where all the damn money goes

And may I ask....who would be responsible for carrying such a drastic plan out (with many unintended consequences, mind you)?

'Cause that's the problem...sure, we can spout off "solutions" till we're blue in the face, but who's qualified to dictate who gets what amount of money? I don't like even the sound of it.

[2010SSRS]

Originally Posted by dayvedayve

Maybe the Union would be more likelt to negfotiate if Chrysler execs and Higher ups take the same percentage of cuts to their own pay. Dont ask people making $70K a year to take a 50% cut if the big wigs makin $1 mil or more wont take a 50% cut.

this is such a very, very point!

[Tanner]

Originally Posted by Libertyforall1776

Yes, they are in bed with government. When corporations and government meld, it is called FASCISM. Look it up...

Totally!!!!!