Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Vararam
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Members Area > General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-13-2008, 07:35 AM   #1
Scott@Bjorn3D


 
Scott@Bjorn3D's Avatar
 
Drives: Kami, 2013 2SS LS3 Luvin
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Eufaula, Alabama
Posts: 6,427
Send a message via MSN to Scott@Bjorn3D
UAW Killing Big 3?

I have been doing alot of reading on this and it looks like the unions are what are killing the big 3. Being down here in Alabama we have a few car plants and they make around 30.00 an hour for a worker. Most of the non union auto plants in the USA are paying 30-40 an hour. Seems pretty good to me.

But the UAW is charging 75.00 an hour to the big 3. Can anyone see the problem here? I would think people would rather make 40.00 an hour and know they will have a job and their company will survive than making 75.00 an hour and lots of layoffs and really not much job security.

And if the big 3 do not file bankruptcy they can't get out of these contracts. I would say file now and come out a leaner meaner company that can make it. Bailouts are not going to make the companys survive since they are still going to have to pay high union wages.

I do not want this to be a pissing match, but what do you guys and gals think on this? I want my Camaro but at the rate it is going GM may not be around to build it.
Scott@Bjorn3D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 08:03 AM   #2
AZZ28
 
AZZ28's Avatar
 
Drives: '05 Thunderbird
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 37
I agree...100 %. They are no longer relevant and are no longer watching out for the worker, but rather padding the union's pocket. Arizona is a right-to-work state, which means NO ONE can be forced to join a union. The union came into the resort where my wife's worked for over 30 years. She tried to warn the workers that the union wouldn't keep their promise, but many didn't listen. And now, the workers are finding out the union has moved on and all they're left with is union dues and no benefits...andthey still have their contract with the union that they have to fulfill...I have NEVER been a fan of unions - they have long since served their purpose.
AZZ28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 08:09 AM   #3
Croathlete
Danny
 
Croathlete's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,656
Send a message via AIM to Croathlete
As much as I agree with you, GM should not take the easy way out and honor the contracts they signed. I say give them the money they're asking for provided they can prove that this will solve their problems in the long run. You don't want them coming back in a year and asking for another $20 billion.

Last edited by Croathlete; 11-13-2008 at 08:22 AM.
Croathlete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 08:13 AM   #4
Crowley
Okie doke
 
Crowley's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 GT500
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: McKinney Texas
Posts: 3,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott@Bjorn3D View Post
I have been doing alot of reading on this and it looks like the unions are what are killing the big 3. Being down here in Alabama we have a few car plants and they make around 30.00 an hour for a worker. Most of the non union auto plants in the USA are paying 30-40 an hour. Seems pretty good to me.

But the UAW is charging 75.00 an hour to the big 3. Can anyone see the problem here? I would think people would rather make 40.00 an hour and know they will have a job and their company will survive than making 75.00 an hour and lots of layoffs and really not much job security.

And if the big 3 do not file bankruptcy they can't get out of these contracts. I would say file now and come out a leaner meaner company that can make it. Bailouts are not going to make the companys survive since they are still going to have to pay high union wages.

I do not want this to be a pissing match, but what do you guys and gals think on this? I want my Camaro but at the rate it is going GM may not be around to build it.


__________________
Crowley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 08:25 AM   #5
Jak
 
Jak's Avatar
 
Drives: 03 Dodge Dakota
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: New York
Posts: 627
. The employees are going to have to make up their minds. They have to see whats happening. It's come down to what you've stated. Keep making what you are now an run the very strong risk of lossing everything or take a cut in pay an keep the company running, but also, lets add that the people at the top (the suits) have to tighten their belts too, not just the line workers. Just think how many workers you could save by cutting from the highest paid at the top.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott@Bjorn3D View Post
I have been doing alot of reading on this and it looks like the unions are what are killing the big 3. Being down here in Alabama we have a few car plants and they make around 30.00 an hour for a worker. Most of the non union auto plants in the USA are paying 30-40 an hour. Seems pretty good to me.

But the UAW is charging 75.00 an hour to the big 3. Can anyone see the problem here? I would think people would rather make 40.00 an hour and know they will have a job and their company will survive than making 75.00 an hour and lots of layoffs and really not much job security.

And if the big 3 do not file bankruptcy they can't get out of these contracts. I would say file now and come out a leaner meaner company that can make it. Bailouts are not going to make the companys survive since they are still going to have to pay high union wages.

I do not want this to be a pissing match, but what do you guys and gals think on this? I want my Camaro but at the rate it is going GM may not be around to build it.
Jak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 08:33 AM   #6
Scott@Bjorn3D


 
Scott@Bjorn3D's Avatar
 
Drives: Kami, 2013 2SS LS3 Luvin
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Eufaula, Alabama
Posts: 6,427
Send a message via MSN to Scott@Bjorn3D
I agree with that greatly. Suits have to take pay cuts also.

Personally I think there should be a law that the top dogs at a company can not make any more than 10x the pay of their lowest paid employee.
Scott@Bjorn3D is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 09:36 AM   #7
Georgie

 
Georgie's Avatar
 
Drives: Camaro... soon
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,217
the reason i don't like the bailout for automakers is because the UAW will be all over it; a lot will go to the union and less will go to helping the automakers. that and the new proposal of open ballot union voting makes me weary of this whole situation
Georgie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 09:39 AM   #8
GTAHVIT
Blessed
 
GTAHVIT's Avatar
 
Drives: 2013 Sonic RS MT
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Saint Augustine FL
Posts: 28,444
^ LOAN!
not bailout. They have to pay it back with interest.

GTAHVIT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 09:46 AM   #9
bcannan354
 
bcannan354's Avatar
 
Drives: 1968 Camaro
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Naples,Florida
Posts: 184
Don't get me started on Unions.
bcannan354 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 09:53 AM   #10
The_Blur
Moderator
 
The_Blur's Avatar
 
Drives: 2018 Harley-Davidson Street Bob
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 14,769
Send a message via AIM to The_Blur
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit View Post
^ LOAN!
not bailout. They have to pay it back with interest.

__________________
RDP Motorsport//GEN5DIY//Cultrag Performance//JPSS//Rodgets Chevrolet//
Operation Demon//Buy at Invoice//RACECARWEAR
RESPECT ALL CARS. LOVE YOUR OWN.
warn 145:159 ban
The_Blur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 10:01 AM   #11
Georgie

 
Georgie's Avatar
 
Drives: Camaro... soon
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,217
whatever it is, UAW should not get their hands on it; they need to pay workers a market wage and benefits, which are pretty d--m good already
Georgie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 10:26 AM   #12
PsyDoc
 
Drives: Soon-to-be 1st Gen
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Southeast
Posts: 249
Quote:
Originally Posted by gtahvit View Post
^ LOAN!
not bailout. They have to pay it back with interest.
Potato...Patatah. "Loan" just sounds better than "Bailout" plain and simple. There is nothing stated in the definition of "bailout" that implies it's money that never has to be paid back. In my opinion, the term bailout is more applicable because the Big 3 cannot secure loan anywhere else...it's government to the rescue or bust.

The real issue is whether an infusion of capital will save them and whether another $25 billion is enough or if it's just the foot-in-the-door technique where they keep asking for "a little" multiple times rather than one big chunk at once where most people would likely balk. Look at AIG..."We need $85 billion (Sept. 16th)...yeah...that will set things right. No wait, that's just not enough...now we need another $37.8 billion (Oct. 8th)...yeah, that will do it for sure. Wait...we still need more money...how about $20.9 billion (Oct. 31) for now. Crap, sorry...if we could just get a little more...perhaps $40 billion (Nov. 11th...looks like)." If they had stated up front that they needed well over $150 billion, then they might not have gotten the money. But, once they got their foot-in-the-door and the government committed to "saving them," then it is easy to keep getting more money. Why? Because if AIG failed, the government would appear to have wasted all that money. The government is basically honoring sunk costs (Dawes, 2001); they are in too deep to back out now.

What if each year, as individuals, we had to allocate what percent of our taxes would go to which programs. For example, some people might allocate 40% military, 20% homeland security, 40% infrastructure, or whatever while others would chose to support different programs. This might make the statement "government by the people" a bit more salient.
PsyDoc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 11:03 AM   #13
bigralph
 
bigralph's Avatar
 
Drives: 2001 v6 Camaro
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Northborough, MA
Posts: 268
I like how you think.


Quote:
Originally Posted by PsyDoc View Post
Potato...Patatah. "Loan" just sounds better than "Bailout" plain and simple. There is nothing stated in the definition of "bailout" that implies it's money that never has to be paid back. In my opinion, the term bailout is more applicable because the Big 3 cannot secure loan anywhere else...it's government to the rescue or bust.

The real issue is whether an infusion of capital will save them and whether another $25 billion is enough or if it's just the foot-in-the-door technique where they keep asking for "a little" multiple times rather than one big chunk at once where most people would likely balk. Look at AIG..."We need $85 billion (Sept. 16th)...yeah...that will set things right. No wait, that's just not enough...now we need another $37.8 billion (Oct. 8th)...yeah, that will do it for sure. Wait...we still need more money...how about $20.9 billion (Oct. 31) for now. Crap, sorry...if we could just get a little more...perhaps $40 billion (Nov. 11th...looks like)." If they had stated up front that they needed well over $150 billion, then they might not have gotten the money. But, once they got their foot-in-the-door and the government committed to "saving them," then it is easy to keep getting more money. Why? Because if AIG failed, the government would appear to have wasted all that money. The government is basically honoring sunk costs (Dawes, 2001); they are in too deep to back out now.

What if each year, as individuals, we had to allocate what percent of our taxes would go to which programs. For example, some people might allocate 40% military, 20% homeland security, 40% infrastructure, or whatever while others would chose to support different programs. This might make the statement "government by the people" a bit more salient.
bigralph is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-13-2008, 11:12 AM   #14
headpunter
Not That sad..considering
 
headpunter's Avatar
 
Drives: Man
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: the part of washington the capital forgot about.
Posts: 3,747
Send a message via AIM to headpunter
Quote:
Originally Posted by Georgie View Post
whatever it is, UAW should not get their hands on it; they need to pay workers a market wage and benefits, which are pretty d--m good already
exactly. the UAW is raping GM/Ford/Chrysler and putting themselves right out of a job while they are at it.
__________________
headpunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
572 Big Block Tomcat2010 4th Generation Camaros 7 05-08-2015 09:44 PM
BIG RED - The WORLDS BADDEST CAMARO and its '69 Z/28 non the less (True Story) NOODLESgoneWILD 1st & 2nd Generation Camaros 12 10-01-2014 09:15 AM
Big Oil seems slick as U.S. turns to diesel cars Scotsman General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 2 04-16-2008 04:23 PM
Healthcare Agreement btw. UAW, and GM finally approved Mr. Wyndham Off-topic Discussions 3 03-05-2008 09:53 AM
GM negotiations pick up steam after deadline KILLER74Z28 General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion 3 09-23-2007 11:01 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.