By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Yes, but hard work has never been a reason for paying high wages. While the jobs may be "hard", they (the UAW jobs) are ones that almost anyone can do. many. What has always commanded premium wages is a skill set in demand - a skill set one that not everyone has and may be difficult to obtain, such as a surgeon.
I took me years with a college degree to make over 80K. Shoot my engineer buddy said he didn't make much more than the bumper dudes. You wonder why American Auto isn't competitive?
I hear ya. Years ago it used to be similar at my company. Technicians and assembly line workers would regularly make more than degreed engineers. They could loaf during the day, then be asked to work OT at time-and-a-half. The professionals were salaried so, depending on the cost structure of the program they were supporting, they would get the same pay regardless of how many hours they worked.
Don't see much of that anymore. With EDA tools, modeling and simulation have taken the place of breadboarding, so not much need for technicians. With robotic assembly facilities putting together circuit cards now, not much need for those rows upon rows of assemblers.
A lot of low-wage people would best heed your advice. I'm tired of low-wage people complaining about being broke, yet they have four or five kids in tow. If you can't even take care of yourself, why make it even harder for yourself by having kids?
Heck, I won't consider marriage or kids even at my income and I make a pretty decent living. The level at which it truly becomes affordable keeps getting higher and higher every year.
Raises hand.
I still live this way, except I can afford a new Cadillac or Buick if I so desire.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
Cooter, do you realize we're talking about global? Global doesn't mean Europeans take Europeans and Americans take Americans alone, it means Americans can take Asians, Europeans, Middle-Easterns, Africans, even aliens (literally :P ), anyone from anywhere as long as they're qualified.
Sure some companies look for equal employee who'd settle for less pay, but if the companies wish to be better, then the focus will be finding the best they can get.
No kidding, the broke middle class people buy a new car every three years. My dad has never kept a car less than 5 years, he's still driving his 2000 Taurus, and he has a 6 figure job with no kids at home. My FIL was a well paid iron worker in the steel mills and I think my inlaws have bought two new cars ever. My FIL buy's used cars with nearly 100k miles on them and drives them for another 100k miles.
Yes I do realize no matter what bolting seats is still work. I seriously doubt it's worth $28/hr, thus union negotiations imo isn't to determine the right wage, but the best they can squeeze out of their employers.
As non-union workers decide that less is still enough UAW will have less and less power in negotiating, plus the employer can always move elsewhere. Given the ridiculous (by my standard) wage the Union insists on I honestly don't blame the manufacturers for moving out.
Our children have seen the handwriting on the wall, which is one of the reasons why they are not choosing fields like engineering. Yes, you're right, the field and course of study is extremely challenging. Why should someone entering college chose EE as a major when all they hear about are jobs being lost because of outsourcing to India?
Honestly, if this kid, being a college grad, lost his/her job opportunity over an outsourced, imports, whatever they're called, it's not because of the need, it's simply because he/she is not appealing enough, period. Companies look for:
1) The best they can get, or if they can't then...
2) They look for an equal that agrees to less pay.
You and so many others are dead wrong thinking companies only look for the cheapest. They want the best, then the want the cheaper. If the kid has qualities that makes him/her more appealing than the imports, I dare bet job is readily available.
The mentality I keep laughing at is "it's enough to be competitive and up to class standard", it's not and will never be enough. Always aim to be the best if you dont want to get dumped.
Like UAW workers, just because they work "hard" doesn't mean it's good enough. Others are always ready to steal your job and they failed to notice that. They always think they're better than they really are, that's the big problem here.
They claim auto mechanics as engineers.
Well, UAW mechanics claim themselves on par with engineers too. :P
Well said. The UAW has forced over a million jobs to go to Mexico and elsewhere. There are no 100% content domestic or import vehicles. Many UAW supporters are suffering under the misconception that everyone wants to be in the the UAW to get the big bucks. Not everyone wants to drive their companies into the ground and lose their jobs. Most thinking people have watched what has happened to Union companies and ESPECIALLY companies represented by the UAW. If the UAW wins the company goes broke. Is that just a coincidence or what?
"Deliverance experience" - I just loved that
Every time I hear those "I'm not going to school because it doesn't pay to work hard and lose job nonsense", I think suit yourself - more work for me. Just look at numbers: how many unemployed engineers (as percentage of their profession) you have vs "skilled" lugnut tighteners and you get your answer.
For me it's simple - people say stuff like that so they can feel better with their own poor choices and push blame for their failures to some other entity. It is "fille the blank" (government, evil corporations, NAFTA, aliens, Moon phases, locust in Africa, you choose), not me.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
Hmmm, my son is graduating from UF with an engineering degree this summer and already has a job lined up, starting pay $60K/year with a $5K signing bonus. The engineer grads are doing quite well, but not so those with business degrees.
What planet did you get your information from?
Agree. Sadly true, and truly sad.
Same here, but I don't begrudge the bumper dude his $80K salary. Fast paced assembly work is physically exhausting and job security is tenuous. Bumper dude's body is going to be worn-out at 50. I see a current UAW's career like that of a pro football player. The pay is great, but the career is short and your body's going to take a beating.
However, from the news I read and heard so many of said people keep whining about how their jobs aren't paying them enough, that their wages get constant "brutal" cut. Yet at the same time they waste all their money on so called "lake-side cottage", "RV', "sea-doo", and so many other craps that these people (and even many middle classers) cant afford in reality. Then they drown in debt and they blame it on "poor wages"????
They sound like whiny spoiled brats who think they're the best and deserve the most when in reality they're little more than nobody.
I've said this and will say it again: even without joining union or if the union falls, one can always find a job if one's capable and appealing enough, and if you're really good then the employer won't mind paying you healthy salaries.
The whining brats? Drop dead.
"B-b-but I've got $100K in student loan debt!"
"Too bad, sucka! You'll be in debt up to your eyeballs until the day you die! Then we'll harvest all you organs for their cash value and ship your carcass to the rendering plant for the rest!"
According to the Center for Automotive Research, the average age of a GM worker is 50, and many are within a few years of hitting the 30-year retirement.
No wonder GM is having such trouble, their factory's are full of geriatric patients. Hopefully those factories are handicap accessible.
If input cost is too high, the seller has two choices: abandon production or lower input cost. Well there is choice three, pay politicians to coerce buyers to pay more.
Nobody says the bumper dude is not working his butt off. The question is about value of his product vs. value of engineer's work. You cling to concept of job and pay as entitlement to support some lifestyle that you deem fitting your aspirations. Rest of us recognizes work and pay as products whose values are verified by other market players. Just as ipod's value is validated by increasing sales and Zune's is not. Takes about the same to produce them - yet we as consumers are willing to tolerate Apple's outrageus pricing and will have none of that from Microsoft.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
No, he represents the 1000s of UAW workers that filed for bankruptcy. It is not the fact that he could not make all his payments when his loss of OT cut his wages down to $87k per year. It is the fact that he felt he was ENTITLED to that $100k plus wage for as long as HE wanted to work. The UAW gives these bumper dudes a false sense of security and entitlement. They should be told from the get go that this is a very tenuous arrangement. It is very likely that you will be replaced by a machine in a couple years. No, the UAW writes in more pages of work rules that keeps the domestic auto makers in the 20th century. Quite frankly I would hate to think I could be replaced by a robot. I would be looking for a different line of work. The UAW would be happier if their workers were still making fenders with a ball peen hammer.
Bumper dude's body is going to be worn-out at 50.
If they know that and do not further their education or look for a different type of work, why should the tax payers subsidize them? Most military people retire before they are fifty then go get a another job. Why are the UAW workers anymore entitled to a fat pension for life than someone that spent 30 years in the Army?
I'll gladly take Walmart wages. The store manager can make $200k/yr with bonus and their pharmacists' make a minimum of $50/hr.
It's worth whatever an employer is willing to pay.
Some people negotiate their salary and some let the UAW do it. The manufacturer can say enough, there's cheaper labor in Mexico or India. But it's not cheap moving car production off-shore either.
In the morning news:
"He [Gettlefinger] also said there's enough time for the automakers to get viability plans done by the Feb. 17 deadline, but he said it would be better to have more time. Last week, he said the timetable for completing the plans was "almost unattainable."
The union, he said Wednesday night, should get credit for concessions it made to the automakers in 2005 and 2007, some of which have not yet hit the companies' balance sheets. The health care trust and lump sums in place of pay raises were among the concessions, he said."
UAW head says union will make more concessions (Canadian Press)
Again - just the fact that some UAW-born kid thought screwing bumpers is a better way of life doesn't make it an excuse if GM bancrupcy brings that dream to a halt.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
This is so true. I'd gladly donate some of the tax money to the veterans, they served the country and directly protected us from harm. UAW? They did nothing for me, directly or not (all the talks about how UAW supports the economy is total BS), thus deserve not a single penny of taxpayers' money (except those who received direct benefit from the UAW that is :P ).
Pretty soon there won't be a future for any American workers. We'll all be lined up in front of corporate buildings downtown like unemployed longshoremen looking for day labor on the docks. The boss will be out front on top of a pile of crates, "I need five financial analysts...I'll take you, you, you, you, and...you!" The rest of the unemployed financial analysts hang the heads in dispair and either head home or to the nearest bar.
But it's not cheap moving car production off-shore either.
No, not cheap, Steve, but still cheaper than keeping them in US. Labor costs play a huge part in this, as US labor cost is among the highest (if not the highest already) in the world. Parts cost, why bother, most of them are already imported. That leaves only distribution-transportation costs to consider.
NOTHING IS GIVEN FOR LIFE. Not to corporations, not to individuals. Tough. Deal with it.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
What do you think they should be doing instead? Embracing joblessness?
Why do people feel such antipathy towards Walmart's efficiency? Would you feel better if for every $ you spend at Walmart (or anywhere else for that matter where you find your good price), you have to pay another $ to me to "create jobs"? If you believe that would work, why not give me $9 for every $1 you spend at stores that deliver efficiently, and effectively convert the Dollar to Peso (1:10). Sure, there will be "higher paying" jobs (in nominal terms), but everything is 10 times as expensive in nominal terms.
True, but what do you expect these positions to pay? Cashier, clerks, stockers, and greeters etc. have always been low paying wages whether union or not. My dad started out as a bottle boy at a grocery store in the 60's while in HS. When I was born (early 70's) he was the head frozen food clerk and my mom was a waitress. We lived in a one bedroom apartment above a pet & hobby store. At that time, my parents only had one car and my mom walked to work. I'd say they were barely getting by. No different than those in the same type of positions today.
Dad was good at what he did and worked hard. By the time he was in his late 20's he was the store manager, we moved to a nice tri-level house, mom stayed home with me and my two siblings. He eventually worked his way up to where he is now with a high purchasing position making a lot more than UAW wages. If he would have stayed a clerk, he would have never been able to buy a house and support a wife and 3 kids.
I do hate walmart. I shop there is little as possible only going as a last resort. I guarantee the name Wal-Mart is brought up in every retail company that has union negotiations. I can hear it now, "We'd love to offer these wage increases, but with Wal-Mart across the street we can't". It would be interesting to see the UFCW get into Wal-mart..
The comment made earlier about employee costs not impacting the cost of a product? A prime example of American math -- something all of us are all too familiar with. Our city takes in $1 so they spend $3 and wonder why in the hell they are broke? People think!! If costs you $100 to build a product and you sell it for $100 - why in the hell are you even making it? Better yet if it costs you $100 to make it and by the time that product has sat in warehouses - been shelved in a store and finally sold it actually cost you $140 but you sold it for $100 your going out of business. Even if your breaking even costs you $100 and you sell for $100 where do you get money to develop your next product? Grandma's cookie jar?
To be competitive you need to sell a better product than your competitors and you need to find a smart way to get enough cash to pay for development of even better product later. The cost of your employee's is the #1 factor in determining if your product is competitive Look at GM!!! GM products have weaknesses that its competitors do not have because their costs impact the materials they can afford to put in a vehicle that competes for the same customers and price points as Subarus - Nissans and Toyotas. If Toyota has a lower employee cost building their cars they can slip a couple of nicer things into their car and still offer it at a competitive price - The only way GM can do that is if they figure out how to remove cost some place so they can spend that money on something else so that their car appears to have the same options as Toyota. Where do you think they are finding that money? Cheaper parts that are less visible to the buyer? Parts that may not be as easily assembled resulting in a car that has more issues than the competitor? Then you have the higher wage assemblers getting fingered for the poor quality- sure they might be a cause but its because their wages force the company to use lower quality parts to remain competitive. Consumers eventually catch on and stop buying the product sound familiar? Thus GM is not competitive no matter what fancy foot work they do to appear that they are competitive.
Employee costs and skill are the #1 factor to your competitive level the product price is determined by the consumer but if the consumer doesn't see the value in it they don't buy it. So how do you make sure it offers a value worth buying? Simple you build it the best you can for the value consumers find worthy of their money - if competitors are building a better product for the same price - your not competitive. Simple concept you don't need to be an MBA grad or a rocket scientist to figure that out.
Would you like all stores get together and set prices and take the money directly out of your bank account whether you want the stuff or need the stuff or not?
Collective negotiations are inherently inefficient as it suppress individual difference, discouraging the productive workers and attracing the unproductive workers at the same time. When collective bargaining is coercive, it's not only inefficient but also infringes upon liberty, freedom and property rights. When that happens, it becomes magnet for corruption. IMHO, many UAW workers are victims of the union itself.
The economy as a whole, and the rest of the population, however, are even bigger victims. The reason why price mechanism exists in the economy is so that price fluctuations can transmit local knowledges or technology advance to the rest of the world, so as to redirect resources to places needed the most according to new methods of production. With division of labor, local knowledge and expertise is always superior to central planners from afar. That's why market economy works, whereas central planning doesn't and only creates chaos (as central planners' intentions are thwarted by superior local knowledge at every turn; disconnect between the two show up as corruption and perversion). Collective bargaining labor price setting is anathama to the price mechanism and transmission of new knowledge. When GM comes up with a superior product or method of making cars, it should be able to pay more than its competitors in order to attract workers from less productive competitors; same goes when a division within GM comes up with better solutions. Industry-wide labor price setting gets in the way of all that. The result is lost opportunities, and a stagnant industry.
See <http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind04/c2/c2s2.htm
I wasn't saying an engineering graduate can't do well or start out with a decent salary ( know the ones my company hires do). I was just saying that young people are not choosing fields like engineering for a reason.
That's been true of discount retail stores for over 60 years - long before Wal-Mart was born in the early 1960s. Wal-Mart didn't invent that piece of the business model.
Wal-Mart's innovation was the introduction of advanced technology to the retailing business, beginning in the late 1970s. Before that, the retailing industry lagged way behind other sectors of the economy, like manufacturing & finance, in using computers to help run day-to-day operations. (When I interviewed for an IT position at Macy's in the late 1980s, I was amazed at how primitive its systems were compared to the banking systems that I had worked on previously.)
Wal-Mart was the first to provide detailed real-time sales & inventory information to its corporate buying staff. That enabled it to spot trends early on & gave it a huge advantage over its competition. If Wal-Mart could see that a particular item would be a hot seller 2 weeks before its competitors caught on, it could lock down supplies before the competition had a chance to react. That's why Wal-Mart grew so quickly & why it's so big today.
Wal-Mart is like any other modern company when it comes to employee compensation: what you earn is tied to your skills. So it shouldn't be too surprising that a database administrator or systems analyst earns more than a cashier or a shelf stocker.
----
It's too hard to drink 4 nights a week and do all those complicated math and physics in class the next day.
Find the #'s on art degrees and undergrad psychology degrees the numbers will be staggering. Then if you can find the #'s of those who are actually in careers related to the art or psychology degree they spent all that money on in college - I suspect the numbers will be staggeringly low.
I have 8 cousins with psychology degrees - none - zero - nada are doing psychology related jobs. All of them are doing jobs that are either non skilled or they went back to school and got a degree that let them find work. Not that this is directly related but in every case mom and dad funded their college and the child didn't need to work to pay for their food or any other critical bills.
I have co-workers who have two degrees their first one that wasn't worth much but cost alot then their 2nd one which they had to get so they could find a job.
Then there are the kids that worked their asses off even with parents helping cover costs who targeted degrees they knew had a good potential of resulting in plenty of job opportunities. I had 3 job offers 5 months before I graduated I was actually working 3 months before I graduated. I knew there was demand for the skill set I would gain from my degree - I chose it for that reason. Many of my school mates even with a great degree and even having good grades could not make the transition from school to work. I hired two of them a year after we graduated - one was a wedding photographer assistant and the other was an Assistant store manager at a Gap store! I basically sat them down and said what the hell are you doing? I know the skills you have I need them in my company - and gave them a swift kick in the backside and got them going in their career. One of them is still in the biz and doing great - every time I see her she thanks me. The other guy worked for 8 years in the biz and found a new interest that fit his skill set and moved on but still doing high level college grad work.
A college degree isn't an instant job - you as a person need to continue working your [non-permissible content removed] off being the best option for the cost so people want you working for them.
If you install floors and do a so so job but cost more than the guy that just kicks [non-permissible content removed] and does a pretty nice job who are people going to hire?
That's been true of discount retail stores for over 60 years - long before Wal-Mart was born in the early 1960s. Wal-Mart didn't invent that piece of the business model.
Walmart greeters and cashiers are making the going wage for wherever they are. This ignorant "UNIONIZE EVERYONE" mentality is so out of touch with reality. If more Unions were needed people would be signing cards. Having spent time organizing, I know how hard it is to get people to even sign a card to have an NLRB election. Walmart, McDonald's, Taco Bell etc etc do not need to be unionized. Those are entry level jobs that are not meant as a life time career. Unless you take some courses and go into management at any of the above. At which time you will make a decent living wage.
Inefficient to say the least. The lazy ones go along for the ride! Not in my world, they wouldn't.
Unions are so last Century! The UAW is King of the loss leaders in my book.
Regards,
OW
Now, I don't want to be at the mercy of a greedy coal baron and his vicious coal & iron police, being paid in worthless company scrip and forever in debt to the company store. If you think, "Oh, don't be so dramatic! This isn't the 1890s, it's the 21st Century!" think again. This is where we were 100 years ago and this is where we're going within the next 10 to 50 if these trends continue.
No I would say a lot are at 30 years or beyond (over 50%). Most started at 20 or less so if the average age is 50 almost all those above 50 have 30 years. My brother retired last year at 48 with 30 years. Issue is most will not leave. The pay is too good to give up. That is why GM feels the UAW wage issue is pretty much a non issue. Most will be gone in the next 2-3 years and will be replaced by the $15 workers. Issue is this economy screwed up the timing.
What the UAW needs to do is agree to somehow retire all those with 30 years. Of course that is impossible with the anti discrimination laws today.
Separately, he said the UAW-Chrysler National Training Center along Jefferson Avenue in Detroit is for sale. It opened in 1985.
Speaking on the sidelines of the Automotive News World Congress, Gettelfinger said automaker executives have indicated publicly that wage concessions would not be required of the union as part of federal bailout provisions being demanded of General Motors and Chrysler LLC. "We're not expecting lower wages," he said.
The federal government made union concessions a major condition of a $17.4 billion loan package to GM and Chrysler. The UAW is required to take automaker equity instead of cash for half the funding of retiree health care trusts that the union will create in 2010. Those trusts will take $100 billion in those obligations off the books of the Detroit 3.
The union also is being asked to bring UAW compensation in line with that paid by the Japanese transplants.
Gettelfinger said that if the union made concessions, it would expect any agreement to have a mechanism to recoup the sacrifices if other stakeholders eventually benefit from the companies' return to health. Dealers, suppliers and investors are all being asked to take "a haircut," in the words of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
If I recall correctly, there are 6 socio-economic classifications in which ones standard of living is rated. You have the upper upper class, lower upper class, upper middle class, lower middle class, upper lower class and lower lower class. There is really no generic "middle class" per say. So, an upper middle class individual may be able to afford a new car every 3 years, while a lower middle class person could not.