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
What you are refusing to see is as plain as day. If GM never went down and built factories in Mexico, they would have gone broke at least 10 years sooner with the over paid under worked unskilled UAW labor force.
Has Bell started hauling out equipment to build factories in Mexico yet? At least the UAW leaders are not the ones that are clueless in this strike. They may not even want to go in and negotiate after hammering out such a good contract only to have it shot down by a bunch of simple minded workers.
How about the unionized automakers in the US are almost all failing and shipping jobs overseas and the non-unionized automakers are relatively successful and creating new US jobs? Now *there's* some intellectual honesty. :P
You see, at the end of the day, it's really all about product. If a company or industry gets way off balance, it looses to the global competition due to better product, proven by the market. C11 should have been taken years ago at all 3 US firms, particularly to re-balance all 3 stakeholder contributions to the business: Stockholders, Employees and Customers. For the US Auto industry, the arrows were pointing up for the first 2 but down for the last one for many years.
The House of Cards was formed from the previous winning model that is now the skeleton of a once great industry.
Regards,
OW
"After all the money the UAW spent to help get Barack Obama elected, I resent that he has now ordered cuts to my GM retiree benefits. I have paid union dues all my life, and now my retirement security is not as good as some of my nonunion peers."
Link to newspaper
I'd like to know how much he earned when he was working and how much his retirement and full healthcare benefits are/were. I have trouble feeling sorry for him.
I'm sure there are many, many other retirees out there thinking the same thing: they're not being cared for.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Please, gagrice, stop using UAW and skilled in the same sentence...
My suggestion for that retiree would be to compare how he's making out under the reorg of GM and Chrysler and compare it to what happened to the steel workers when their companies went belly up.
You know, as much as I am anti-union, this is a no-win situation and I can sympathize with the UAW worker. One analogy is my wife's sister-in-law. She is a LA city school teacher nearing retirement. The California teacher's unions are horrible, corrupt organizations that have the citizens of this state by the neck and are draining the state of its money. She is going to retire with full health care for her and her husband at 70% of her full time salary. That is an exorbitant benefit and the taxpayers of this state are paying for it. But her and her husband's entire retirement planning assumes these benefits after >30 years of work.
Still, when you work 30 years and you plan your retirement based upon a set of promises of what level of benefits you will receive, it's pretty crappy if you retire and then you don't get what you were promised. Regardless of how I feel about the level of retirement benefits, on an individual level it is really unfair to have that promise broken when you are not working any more and might be aged and not able to work again.
Coming back to the UAW, while their benefits in retirement may be ridiculously high, I feel sorry for those who planned appropriately and are now being screwed. But it is the failure of GM, C that ultimately couldn't provide the promised benefits.
On the other hand, you have the taxpayers who were not told that those promised benefits are going to come out of their and their childrens' pocket in the form of higher taxes sometimes in the future.
Which is more unfair? Denying the retirees their unfunded benefit? Or forcing the taxpayers to pony up the money (recognizing that most of those taxpayers do not have the benefits the govt retirees do)?
With all the rants of a few posters here about extravagant retirements, as well as working pay rates, of the UAW,
I find critiquing teachers retirements an interesting contrast. I suspect most of them worked much harder at professional jobs than did UAW workers who had no college degrees.
BUT try to find out the retirement plans for your state legislators, e.g., or even for Congressfolk. I recall many years back the local newspaper had investigative reporters who unraveled part of the quality retirement for Ohio legislators and pritned it. I think Congress gets better retirements. They both get gold-plated healthcare, I'm sure.
The legislator retirements make UAW look like paupers, if I recall correctly.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
And back to golf....
"The UAW still owns and operates a $33 million posh golf resort on Black Lake near Cheboygan that ostensibly serves as an education center but provides an elegant getaway for union leadership.
And now the union is appealing to the state Tax Tribunal for $3 million in property tax relief from Waverly Township, disputing the assessment of the property. If the UAW wins, schools will be hurt."
UAW seeks another bailout (Detroit News)
Excellent point SRS. There really is no good answer.
Bob, isn't it true that the mismanaged company (say Kaiser Aluminum) paid premiums to the PBGC? And isn't the PBGC an "insurance policy" to protect pension funds? The only reason taxpayer monies are used is that the PBGC system is overburdened.
That's true. But, this thread was talking about promised, but unfunded benefits (primarily health care) to government workers, including teachers. So far as I know, no municipality's retirees pension plan has ever been taken over by the PBGC, and state/city/local governments do not pay PBGC insurance, as least that I know of.
Bring me up to speed on this, if you would...I know just enough to sound dangerous (which is where most folks on this board place me, anyway...:):):):):)...)
This is from the PBGC website
Although PBGC insures most defined benefit plans, some are not covered. For example, plans offered by “professional service employers” (such as doctors and lawyers) with fewer than 26 employees, by church groups, or by federal, state or local governments usually are not insured.
Instead of being angry at his great company and his great union for basically slowly killing the golden egg laying goose (by putting out substandard product at too high price), he is angry at Obama that he didn't pony up more of taxpayer's money. Classic. It's always been that way - when people get what they don't deserve, instead of saying thank you, then shutting up and cashing the check, they are going on TV and proclaiming they got screwed and the check wasn't even close to be enough.
Pretty much universal sentiment, whether it's a union, unemployment, welfare, or corporate handout, bank bailout, corporate subsidies, farm subsidies, "targetted" tax breaks, "pain and suffering" lawsuits etc. The more they get in unfair, undeserved money (one that does not come from market forces, but rather from redistribution of existing wealth), the more they are convinced that is was not enough. I wonder if there is psychological research that supports that, but I see this all the time around me - sometimes even catch myself in that thinking
2018 430i Gran Coupe
Good to hear it straight from the horse's mouth.
Certainly better than the horse's other end.... :surprise:
Perhaps he now realizes that the primary reason that GM and Chrysler tanked is the UAW's greed. OK, managment probably was the primary reason, I'm just trying to get rockylee attracted to this thread again so we can enjoy picking on him some more. :shades:
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
W/o checking their site, I believe that to be true. I think the problem we see now is that, like SS, there are less companies w/ pensions, therefore less premiums coming in. Less coming in means PBGC would have to rely on more of our money (taxes) to pay unfunded liabilities.
As far as I know, if a State or muni pension is underfunded, then taxes go up to make up for the unfunded portion. Then again, the Gov't's may play by the rules and make pension payments every year, whereas private companies may not.
It's another Ponzi scheme. :surprise:
iluv: "Perhaps he now realizes that the primary reason that GM and Chrysler tanked is the UAW's greed."...one would think after seeing what has happened in the last month, it would tend to open the eyes of everyone but the most blind...but what do I know???
I have the same problem with gagrice in here.
I don't know what you mean by this. There have never been any laws that require a private company to offer a defined benefit retirement plan to its employees. In any case, most Americans work for companies too small to afford a rich pension plan.
As for civil service pension plans, the cost of these will be a huge political issue in a few years. Most of us would be far better off if states scrapped their pension systems & replaced them with defined contribution plans, like 401(k) or 403(b) plans.
West Virginia teachers tried that in '91 and the results aren't encouraging.
When 401(k) investing goes bad (nola.com)
Meanwhile the UAW and Ford continue to talk about competitiveness. (Reuters)
Ford is trying for the same no-strike clause that GM and Chrysler got, and are trying to lower the $55 an hour wage to "$50 per hour by 2011, or roughly on a par with what Japanese automakers led by Toyota Motor Corp will be paying their nonunion U.S. factory workers."
That $50 number represents average wages and benefits.
Perhaps not, but the traditional civil service pension system hits taxpayers much harder, as those of us who live in the Northeast, where benefits are particularly rich, can tell you. One of our local school superintendents retired not long ago with a pension approaching $200K per year.
We can't afford to keep doing this. Something has to change.
Yeah, this is crazy. One of my neighbors is a retired public school administrator (not sure what his position was). He's probably in his mid 70's, lives in a $400k plus house, his wife drives a new STS and he drives a new Avalanche. He must have one heck of a pension. Must be partly why my property taxes here in Illinois are over $8k/yr and they are wanting to raise the state income tax nearly 50%. I just love how the state retirees refuse to accept benefit cuts while expecting the tax payers to foot the bill. PURE B.S.
There's a good argument if you were a lucky one to work much of your career and retire with golden benefits and then expire just before the benefits get slashed. :P
Watch California, as we are in the middle of it. As usual, we lead the country. Right now it is financial meltdown. Unlike the UAW, the state can to keep raising taxes for revenue. And the affluent start to flee to other locations. Like the UAW should.
Right. But companies that do have such plans (or have in the past, as defined benefit plans are a dying breed) have always been required to maintain some minimum levels of funding to cover expected benefits down the road. Companies who's plans were considered underfunded had to pay a higher insurance premium to the PBGC.
I think what happened is that PBGC grossly underestimated the the risk of a company like US Steel going bankrupt with a grossly underfunded plan. US Steel and others should have been paying much higher premiums in the years leading up to their demise.
I'm not sure how this relates to the UAW but superintendents are employed by the local school board, not by the state of Illinois. They also pay into their retirement plan and I have little idea of how Illinois' is set up for professional educators. I assume they pay into SS and also pay into a teachers' retirement system plan and the school district pays into the same retirement plan on their behalf.
Did the UAW employees pay into the retirement plan along with the auto company? Or was it all one-sided with the auto company paying (sooner or later).
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Again I'm not sure how this relates to the UAW's retirement setup. If he is a school administrator he's employed by the local school district. A $400K house and drives a US brand/built Cadillac and a US brand/built Avalanche. Oh the horror. Would it be better if he bought a Lexus and a Honda?
Don't forget SS as a retirement income with Medicare for the medical paid partly by U.S.
I am curious as to his wife's employement and retirement status. I know several of my wife's coworkers in education were able to be in education only because their husbands paid for the homes and the cars and the costs of being a professional educator. I hardly critique them for living in nice moderate homes and driving recent cars. Does this person's wife have a great job or retirement?
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
In Colorado, there is an optional 401(k)-like program they can contribute to as well.
My wife works for a school district here in Colorado, and they base your pension off of the three highest earning years. I think it's 50% of that amount after 20 years, then an additional 2% for each year afterwards, up to a maximum of something like 75-80%.
She's got 11 years to go to get to 20.
I've got my years and my age in but until I'm old enough to collect Social Security it doesn't make sense to retire.
We're so far away from retirement it's not something that we think about that much.
After 25 years you can retire at 65% of your last years base salary.No age restriction. Overtime is NOT considered part of the base. Anything over the twenty five years is 1%/year, but ONLY up to 70%.That's the limit. Disability pension is 65% of your last year of employment. We also get a cost of living raise which is approx. one half of the yearly national cost of living. We also pay soc. security tax and can collect when 62 or whatever.
When I die, my wife gets 1/2 of my pension and the medical benefits until she dies. At age 65 we must take Medicare and our health insurance picks up whatever medicare does not pay.
One of the things that we've found is that many young people prefer a 401k to the defined-benefit pension plan. They don't expect to stay long enough with one company to collect a pension. They want the portability of the 401k. It's cash they can carry off with them, while pension plan contributions are usually lost, or are very small in cashout value.
We've also found it makes it harder to recruit people in their 50's (when we want to buy the knowledge and experience rather than grow our own). Those people don't want the defined-benefit pension as they won't have enough time with us to grow it into a decent check. They would also rather have the 401k option.
This may be changing since all our 401k's turned into 301k's, but that's what we've seen for the past several years.
I personally am old enough, with enough years with my company, that I'm THRILLED that we still have a pension plan. I tend to believe that Steve's article about the experience of the WVA teachers is going to ring true for a lot of people.
Still, I have to admit... the young generation doesn't seem interested in what we used to call a "career" with one company. Now a "career" involves hunting companies that will pay you for what you learned on your last job.
At this point I'm past 50% of salary fir full benefit and, like you, would have to hit Medicare at 65. I still have young kids though so I'd be costing eth state money. So it goes....
Where in NJ?
I'm down just off the shore - Manahawkin. You have to come through to get to Long Beach Island unless you go there by boat.
I look at their experience and shudder to think what might have happened if Social Security had been opened up for individual investing - that plan got floated as the stock market (DOW) eventually ran up over 14,000 points.
Ratify or close. UAW workers at Lear to vote on concessions (Roscommmon County Herald News)
That's in Michigan for those of us who've never heard of Roscommmon County.