Joined
·
1,028 Posts
GM offers buyouts to ENTIRE workforce
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Joined
·
735 Posts
This is MUCH MORE in line with every other manufacturing (non union) plant in the US.
Makes sense, the most they should make should be around the $20 mark yet here they are making $30+ and hour and bitching they don't make enough to survive, yet here you have people who make $10 an hour and supporting a family of 3. :disappoin
It's a shame how most unionized workers I know live such a lavish life and then still complain they can't afford this and that, I probably make half what they make and somehow make it work. :lol:
It's a shame how most unionized workers I know live such a lavish life and then still complain they can't afford this and that, I probably make half what they make and somehow make it work. :lol:
Joined
·
1,028 Posts
It will be interesting to see how many give up their job and pension plan, especially with such negative economic news out there.
Fan
Joined
·
6,039 Posts
Pretty sure most of them do not read your posts fan. :lol:
In this article about the same topic, it says that GM outsold Toyota by 3,000 cars. http://money.aol.com/news/articles/_a/gm-posts-record-loss-offers-buyouts/20080212070909990001
Joined
·
1,028 Posts
From that article:
There's nothing I like more than to see greedy unions get their asses handed to them.
Fan
U A W
this unoin pretty much destroyed the US auto industry
this unoin pretty much destroyed the US auto industry
At $28.12 an hour... that's like $58k a year right? For senior workers? That ain't a ton of money guys. After taxes what are they bringing home? $1600 a paycheck? I guarantee you being a Autoworker was a better gig 20 years ago than it is now. The day of a UAW working being considered FREAKING RICH is pretty much over. Chances are his wife now works to make ends meet, when back in the 60's and 70's she was home with the kids and they had 2 new cars out in the driveway.
In actuality, our whole society has been pushed into the dual income household by lower wages... almost no guys make enough to live 'middle class' anymore unless their wives work. But that's a whole other rant.
Personally I'd rather have the person bolting my $$$ new car together be a little more motivated than the highschool kid making $7+ at the local burger joint. Guys on a assembly line thinking they are getting a raw deal while their execs make millions are not very motivated to do a good job. Then again, I would say the UAW has tolerated poor performance by its members, and has pushed way too hard on a industry devestated by poor quality. (domestics that is)
Where GM is screwed blue is the insane healthcare cost its still paying out to employees and retirees. Pretty soon, like it or not, we'll have universal healthcare in this country and it's gonna be companies like GM pushing for it. (They already are.) Eventually both parties will act like its their idea and its something good for America.
In actuality, our whole society has been pushed into the dual income household by lower wages... almost no guys make enough to live 'middle class' anymore unless their wives work. But that's a whole other rant.
Personally I'd rather have the person bolting my $$$ new car together be a little more motivated than the highschool kid making $7+ at the local burger joint. Guys on a assembly line thinking they are getting a raw deal while their execs make millions are not very motivated to do a good job. Then again, I would say the UAW has tolerated poor performance by its members, and has pushed way too hard on a industry devestated by poor quality. (domestics that is)
Where GM is screwed blue is the insane healthcare cost its still paying out to employees and retirees. Pretty soon, like it or not, we'll have universal healthcare in this country and it's gonna be companies like GM pushing for it. (They already are.) Eventually both parties will act like its their idea and its something good for America.
Actually in Canada is somewhere around $32-35hr for most of them, now compare that to a non-unionized automotive worker making anywhere from $10 to $16 US/CDN, you're working 40hrs a week, so anywhere from $400-640 a week before taxes, after taxes (let's base it on Ontario's average of 20-22% depending on your income) you're looking at anywhere from $320 - $500 a week take home, now these days if you're making that much BOTH parents have to work, so lets say combined they take close to $1000 a week after tax.. compare that to the $1600 - 2000 a GM worker brings home and I bet you you're now saying WTF!!
I mean come on, they've already got FULL COVERAGE for health benefits including medicine most of the time, there's only very few things they have to pay for (and still bitch about paying for), now other automotive workers are lucky to get 70% health benefits and partial medicine coverage (if that!), now tell me who's got the right to complain that they don't make enough money?? :whatthe:
I've seen people raise a family of 3 making 40% of the income COMBINED of what a GM, Chrysler or Ford worker makes ALONE, where's the sense in that? I still don't understand how these people go on about their daily life complaining that they don't make enough. :disappoin
And people still wonder why the big 3 are going down the hole, I'm sorry but you have nowhere else to point but in the UAW/CAW's direction. :disappoin
So you believe assembly workers SHOULD make more then engineers, programmers and other with a degree? So you'll prefer a motivated assembly worker other then an engineer responsible for safety design?
Do the pay scale with skill properly? Why go to school/college/university if you can make more money without going?
Then add ALL the benefits they recieve and the fact that they cover their families as well. Look at the over all picture rather then focus on the salary.
Nowhere in mx5rush's post did I see him say that he believes that "assembly workers SHOULD make more than engineers, programmers and others with a degree". He merely stated that he would be more comfortable knowing that the person bolting together the complex piece of machinery that is the modern automobile be more motivated to do a good job than the teenager working at the local burger joint (and we all know how poorly motivated that teenager is). Money can be an extremely good motivator, and I agree that if it takes a few extra dollars to motivate the automotive assembly line worker to do a good job, I would gladly pay it. If it would have taken a few extra dollars for the workers who screwed together my 2007, Kentucky-assembled Camry to do a better job, I would gladly have paid it. As it is, the assembly quality of my Camry is not what I expect of a Toyota.
I agree that it is important that the engineer designing-in the safety be highly competent and paid well, but what is the use of designed-in safety if the assembly line worker responsible for putting that design together into a working product couldn't give a sh** because he is not making much money? And to think that assembly line work is unskilled labour is wrong. Unskilled labour is sweeping the floor of the assembly line. The experienced assembly line workers are skilled labourers; those are jobs that they may not learn at school, but they certainly learn on the job. At one time, engineering was not a subject that you learned at school, but a skill that you learned on the job, as an apprentice. We put engineers in high regard now, as well-educated knowledge workers, but 100 or so years ago, it was skilled labour. And I know people -- front-line skilled labourers -- who believe they know more (and should be paid more) than the engineer working in the office because that front-line worker sees things being put together and knows what designs work and what do not.
You're missing the point.. People shouldn't have to assemble a car because they get "Paid enough to do so" they should do it because they have a job and they do it right. :disappoin
If knowing how to pick up an airgun and putting a bolt in place is skilled labour, then why isn't cleaning "skilled labour"??? you don't go to school to learn either one.
If knowing how to pick up an airgun and putting a bolt in place is skilled labour, then why isn't cleaning "skilled labour"??? you don't go to school to learn either one.
The very paternalistic attitude of "you should be happy that you have a job" is exactly why we needed unions.
I can foresee this discussion becoming a "he said / she said" match, so you are welcome to discuss all you want, but I shall contribute nothing more. I refuse to become caught in a pissing match.
I can foresee this discussion becoming a "he said / she said" match, so you are welcome to discuss all you want, but I shall contribute nothing more. I refuse to become caught in a pissing match.
Exactly! I knew I'd have to come back to defend my statements. No I didn't say assembly line workers should be paid more than engineers... and at $58-60k a year, that's probably not a problem. Most of the people with engineering degrees at my railroad are making way more, and are in the management class that gets real bonuses.
In my office, the highest rated person in the office this year had just over 2 years seniority... In many ways she's clueless... still asks older people like me questions from time to time. She can do her job adequately, yet sat behind a person who was training with her 2 nights ago and let him make a rule violation that could have derailed a train (got any tracks near you?) or killed some company workers... They are pinning the violation on the guy training with her, and not her. After 15 years in the position, she makes like 3 grand less than me. Next year I'm sure she'll make more than me... unless...
Guess what? Because of senseless management like the guys that made her the top rated employee in the office... We're about to have a union vote for my craft at my company. Most of the older people are praying it finally goes thru. Some of those older people were around in the early 80's when the union was voted out because it wasn't protecting the employees!
OK, back to what UAW people make... Sure people can live on less, and many of those autoworkers are making a bunch more (not adjusted for inflation) than their dads... but I guarantee you their money isn't going near as far as their dads did. The money a UAW employee makes now adjusted for inflation isn't near what it was. That's my big problem with whats going on with society. Many of us seem to be making more than our parents, but few really are. Sure, you could argue that we are paying more for extraneous stuff our parents didn't have, like cellphones, cable, etc... but some stuff our parents bought was way way more expensive. My parents paid over $300 for their first color TV in 1970 dollars
Here's a little tale. When I was a kid in 1972 my dad was a LT. in the Navy. My parents bought a new house in Va. Beach for $32k, and a loaded big 73 buick Estate Wagon for just a hair over $7k! The house was in a nice upper middle class area... now ragged for being a golden ghetto of nice schools, and being disgustingly white. My parents caught shit for buying a car OVER 7 thousand dollars from the neighbors. This was back when the only cars GM made more than 7k would have been a Vette or some Caddy's. That loaded buick would be like the equivalent of a H2 hummer for the mom to wheel the kids around in.
Of note here, my parents were financially conservative. My dad grew up without a father, so he had no one to fall back on. And my mom came from a family of freaking misers. We didn't live a life of credit card excess. My parents bought what they could swing. Also of note, this was in 1972... I didn't know anyone who had a working mom. Being military we moved a bunch. It was a single income household.
Lets move that situation up to today.
Today a Hummer H2 is about $49k, and that house cost $240k. That would be $290 or almost $300k. A Navy Lt. couldn't pull that off today. That's why his wife likely works. Likewise the dollars paid those autoworkers today don't go near as far as they did 15,20, or 30 years ago. Wage deflation for the middle class is one of the major reasons we see some many dual income households. Sure we have more crap... but the median income for a man in 1973 in America was $28,100 (at least on the site I found... correct me if I'm wrong) Adjusted for inflation to 2007 dollars thats a stunning $131,223!!!! (my dad's military pay probably put them in the low 20's back then, but military get taxed less, so his take home was closer to someone making mid to upper 20's.) Wage deflation now has both couples working to try to keep up with cost.
And another thing (sorry I'm jumping around, its 0430 in the morning!) not only are cars are more complex today, all unions have taken hits. Productivity per worker has gone way up despite union protection. You know the UAW workers today are having to do more work than they did 20 years ago. I guarantee you the old guys at auto assembly plants today aren't saying that 'these are the good days!'... Nope, they are saying "working here used to be fun!"
All companies have tightened the screws. Bottom line in my opinion is the companies are getting more productivity per man hour, AND paying less out today than they did in the past. They merely want more profit and are whining. Instead of building a solid product tht sells like hot cakes, they are trying to cost cut their way to profitibility.
I do not think that $28 bucks an hour is insane to pay someone who is putting together something of value. Just like I'd pay a little more to know my new house was being built correctly. I don't want a sagging garage roof in 5 years.
Like I said though, the UAW hasn't made their employees stand up and take any responsibility for doing a good job. They are much more concerned with protecting the employees, than offering a quality service from their members. This is a major fault of some unions. Not only do unions have to protect the employee, they also need to offer some value to the employer, or its never going to be more than a purely confrontational relationship.
Flame away...
In my office, the highest rated person in the office this year had just over 2 years seniority... In many ways she's clueless... still asks older people like me questions from time to time. She can do her job adequately, yet sat behind a person who was training with her 2 nights ago and let him make a rule violation that could have derailed a train (got any tracks near you?) or killed some company workers... They are pinning the violation on the guy training with her, and not her. After 15 years in the position, she makes like 3 grand less than me. Next year I'm sure she'll make more than me... unless...
Guess what? Because of senseless management like the guys that made her the top rated employee in the office... We're about to have a union vote for my craft at my company. Most of the older people are praying it finally goes thru. Some of those older people were around in the early 80's when the union was voted out because it wasn't protecting the employees!
OK, back to what UAW people make... Sure people can live on less, and many of those autoworkers are making a bunch more (not adjusted for inflation) than their dads... but I guarantee you their money isn't going near as far as their dads did. The money a UAW employee makes now adjusted for inflation isn't near what it was. That's my big problem with whats going on with society. Many of us seem to be making more than our parents, but few really are. Sure, you could argue that we are paying more for extraneous stuff our parents didn't have, like cellphones, cable, etc... but some stuff our parents bought was way way more expensive. My parents paid over $300 for their first color TV in 1970 dollars
Here's a little tale. When I was a kid in 1972 my dad was a LT. in the Navy. My parents bought a new house in Va. Beach for $32k, and a loaded big 73 buick Estate Wagon for just a hair over $7k! The house was in a nice upper middle class area... now ragged for being a golden ghetto of nice schools, and being disgustingly white. My parents caught shit for buying a car OVER 7 thousand dollars from the neighbors. This was back when the only cars GM made more than 7k would have been a Vette or some Caddy's. That loaded buick would be like the equivalent of a H2 hummer for the mom to wheel the kids around in.
Of note here, my parents were financially conservative. My dad grew up without a father, so he had no one to fall back on. And my mom came from a family of freaking misers. We didn't live a life of credit card excess. My parents bought what they could swing. Also of note, this was in 1972... I didn't know anyone who had a working mom. Being military we moved a bunch. It was a single income household.
Lets move that situation up to today.
Today a Hummer H2 is about $49k, and that house cost $240k. That would be $290 or almost $300k. A Navy Lt. couldn't pull that off today. That's why his wife likely works. Likewise the dollars paid those autoworkers today don't go near as far as they did 15,20, or 30 years ago. Wage deflation for the middle class is one of the major reasons we see some many dual income households. Sure we have more crap... but the median income for a man in 1973 in America was $28,100 (at least on the site I found... correct me if I'm wrong) Adjusted for inflation to 2007 dollars thats a stunning $131,223!!!! (my dad's military pay probably put them in the low 20's back then, but military get taxed less, so his take home was closer to someone making mid to upper 20's.) Wage deflation now has both couples working to try to keep up with cost.
And another thing (sorry I'm jumping around, its 0430 in the morning!) not only are cars are more complex today, all unions have taken hits. Productivity per worker has gone way up despite union protection. You know the UAW workers today are having to do more work than they did 20 years ago. I guarantee you the old guys at auto assembly plants today aren't saying that 'these are the good days!'... Nope, they are saying "working here used to be fun!"
All companies have tightened the screws. Bottom line in my opinion is the companies are getting more productivity per man hour, AND paying less out today than they did in the past. They merely want more profit and are whining. Instead of building a solid product tht sells like hot cakes, they are trying to cost cut their way to profitibility.
I do not think that $28 bucks an hour is insane to pay someone who is putting together something of value. Just like I'd pay a little more to know my new house was being built correctly. I don't want a sagging garage roof in 5 years.
Like I said though, the UAW hasn't made their employees stand up and take any responsibility for doing a good job. They are much more concerned with protecting the employees, than offering a quality service from their members. This is a major fault of some unions. Not only do unions have to protect the employee, they also need to offer some value to the employer, or its never going to be more than a purely confrontational relationship.
Flame away...
^^^ That's a great post btw :thumbup: I see no reason to flame
Bottomline is whether it's good to have a Union-controlled workforce or one without, or something in between? :dunno: And don't forget, we're talking about human beings after all, possibly with feelings of greed and power. It's hard to say :dunno:
Bottomline is whether it's good to have a Union-controlled workforce or one without, or something in between? :dunno: And don't forget, we're talking about human beings after all, possibly with feelings of greed and power. It's hard to say :dunno:
Mx5rush, I agree with you, $28 per hour is reasonable for an hourly wage...I make more than that and I'm a toilet technician, lol.
Its the benefit package that goes along with the $28 per hour that is the real culprit. How can GM compete with Toyota for profits, when profits per sale of a vehicle are lower because they are handicapped by paying their employees benefit package on top of their wages.
As for your fathers pay in the military, it really has not gone up too much since then. An 0-1 or 0-2 (LT's) both make less than 30k if they have less than 2 years in the service. I think I made less than 12k per year when I was an E-3.
Its the benefit package that goes along with the $28 per hour that is the real culprit. How can GM compete with Toyota for profits, when profits per sale of a vehicle are lower because they are handicapped by paying their employees benefit package on top of their wages.
As for your fathers pay in the military, it really has not gone up too much since then. An 0-1 or 0-2 (LT's) both make less than 30k if they have less than 2 years in the service. I think I made less than 12k per year when I was an E-3.
Agreed. I did some active time in the military after college as a reservist... got sent home, RIF'd right before the first Desert Storm deal! Whew!
GM's 'benefit' package is crazy, and the UAW is nuts trying to claw and hang onto it. I don't think the hourly wages are anything to brag about thought. Its the extra benefits that is going to screw the UAW eventually. At some point they will screw GM so badly, that some federal judge is likely to toss out the 'deal' in a bankruptcy hearing... just like some of the airlines sluffed off their employees benefits. Those same airlines recently had very very profitable quarters! That should be something the UAW should be paying attention to. If they don't flex on the items killing GM (and they are hurting the company badly) they will eventually be forced to give up across the board... wages, job security, etc. They'll loose on every front that a union is supposed to help protect employees on.
If GM were able to get rid of the majority of its employees that have the 'awesome package' and replace them with lower paid employees without that package... their profits would be insane within 2 or 3 years. We'd be talking about GM's corporate greed!
I have a problem with corporations that seem to be on a 'bigger profit every quarter regardless' strategy. Many companies have streamlined so much, and are making way more profit. My RR is a good example. One of the few areas to find a profit at my company is to cut benefits. At my company we are now on a high deductible health plan... and that means absolutely no medication coverage and I have to pay the first $9100 of my annual (every year!) healthcare cost out of pocket. To me, I see that as a potential $9100 pay cut!!!! More when you take into account how much that blood pressure meds cost out of pocket each month!
That healthcare package is a big driver of my jobs recent union push.
Other companies are doing it too. I have a cousin who is a electrician at a Proctor & Gamble plant. He makes just over $80k, with the overtime he works. And that is in a very depressed part of SouthEast Missouri, so its awesome cash. He isn't complaining about what he makes... but what bothers him is what the company is doing incrementally to its non union employees. I think most P&G plants are non-union and have had a reputation of treating employees well. Maybe that is changing.
When he hired on he told me he started around $12 or 14 per hour, and P&G put something like $14k into his 'profit sharing' account. That was on day one. He got 2 upgrades or pay raises in like the first 16 months of being there. I think they call them 'rates'. He said some recent new hires are starting at the same $ amount he did 8 years ago, and they were given $9k in their 'profit sharing account'! They were also told their first 'rate' increase would be in 24 months. Compared to the deal he got 8 or so years ago, these new kids are screwed blue. They are probably glad to have a job with healthcare, and a 'solid future'... but damn. $14 today doesn't buy what it did 8 years ago, and retiring ain't getting any cheaper. Those kids are effectively starting quite a few steps behind guys just a few years older did.
I don't know what P&G stock is worth now compare to 8 years ago... But I can guarantee you my companies stock is doing awesome compared to 8 years ago. We have made profits almost undreamed of. (high fuel cost are good for RR's as they drive the price of trucking up.) Still with record amounts of cash coming in, productivity at all time highs, the company still feels the need to trim the fat off the employees compensation in the form of giving us this jacked up $9100 out of pocket benefit package. Personally I think it is simple greed.
GM's 'benefit' package is crazy, and the UAW is nuts trying to claw and hang onto it. I don't think the hourly wages are anything to brag about thought. Its the extra benefits that is going to screw the UAW eventually. At some point they will screw GM so badly, that some federal judge is likely to toss out the 'deal' in a bankruptcy hearing... just like some of the airlines sluffed off their employees benefits. Those same airlines recently had very very profitable quarters! That should be something the UAW should be paying attention to. If they don't flex on the items killing GM (and they are hurting the company badly) they will eventually be forced to give up across the board... wages, job security, etc. They'll loose on every front that a union is supposed to help protect employees on.
If GM were able to get rid of the majority of its employees that have the 'awesome package' and replace them with lower paid employees without that package... their profits would be insane within 2 or 3 years. We'd be talking about GM's corporate greed!
I have a problem with corporations that seem to be on a 'bigger profit every quarter regardless' strategy. Many companies have streamlined so much, and are making way more profit. My RR is a good example. One of the few areas to find a profit at my company is to cut benefits. At my company we are now on a high deductible health plan... and that means absolutely no medication coverage and I have to pay the first $9100 of my annual (every year!) healthcare cost out of pocket. To me, I see that as a potential $9100 pay cut!!!! More when you take into account how much that blood pressure meds cost out of pocket each month!
That healthcare package is a big driver of my jobs recent union push.
Other companies are doing it too. I have a cousin who is a electrician at a Proctor & Gamble plant. He makes just over $80k, with the overtime he works. And that is in a very depressed part of SouthEast Missouri, so its awesome cash. He isn't complaining about what he makes... but what bothers him is what the company is doing incrementally to its non union employees. I think most P&G plants are non-union and have had a reputation of treating employees well. Maybe that is changing.
When he hired on he told me he started around $12 or 14 per hour, and P&G put something like $14k into his 'profit sharing' account. That was on day one. He got 2 upgrades or pay raises in like the first 16 months of being there. I think they call them 'rates'. He said some recent new hires are starting at the same $ amount he did 8 years ago, and they were given $9k in their 'profit sharing account'! They were also told their first 'rate' increase would be in 24 months. Compared to the deal he got 8 or so years ago, these new kids are screwed blue. They are probably glad to have a job with healthcare, and a 'solid future'... but damn. $14 today doesn't buy what it did 8 years ago, and retiring ain't getting any cheaper. Those kids are effectively starting quite a few steps behind guys just a few years older did.
I don't know what P&G stock is worth now compare to 8 years ago... But I can guarantee you my companies stock is doing awesome compared to 8 years ago. We have made profits almost undreamed of. (high fuel cost are good for RR's as they drive the price of trucking up.) Still with record amounts of cash coming in, productivity at all time highs, the company still feels the need to trim the fat off the employees compensation in the form of giving us this jacked up $9100 out of pocket benefit package. Personally I think it is simple greed.
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
