United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)

stever · February 2015

Well, you get what you pay for (and how you treat people). I shop 'em here and the employees are pretty good. Someone stole my wife's cart last week (with some fruit in it) and she asked a "blue shirt" if he had seen one "loose". He hadn't, but he walked to the front and got her another cart.

That could just be a small town New Mexico thing too; haven't really run into any surly clerks anywhere yet.

gagrice · February 2015

stever said:
Companies who marginalize their workers these days may have a bigger threat to worry about than unions. Imagine if all those Walmart workers talked on the internet (they do). And imagine is someone tweeted about a flash mob nationwide to do a sickout over pay and it took hold.

Just who would Walmart negotiate with to get their workers (any sympathetic customers) back as they bleed green ink?

One big problem with that scenario. We have millions of unemployed people that would go to work for Walmart or McDonalds in a heartbeat. You don't have to be highly educated to work there. The manager in the Lube shop at WM near us has a masters degree in business, and went from Target to Walmart and says they are far better to work for. My daughter worked for WM and was very happy as they gave her the hours while her son was in school. Most mom and pop stores are not that great to their employees.

stever · February 2015

Glassdoor rates them a bit differently. Even the UAW gets a higher score (way fewer reviews though, lol).

fintail · February 2015

Yes, that brave warrior for fiscal responsibility and hard work Scott Walker, a real man among men with loads of real world experience, is out to protect the taxpayer. That's why he hasn't laid a finger on untouchable police unions, and certainly won't even comment on the insane perks given to the judicial sector and tenured similars.

gagrice said:

The laws Walker pushed through were PRO TAX PAYER more than anti Union.

andres3 · February 2015

stever said:
Begs the age-old (in here) question of whether the problem was how it was screwed together, or design/engineering issues or supplier problems.

Interesting article in the Washington Post today on Walker and RTW, at least related to public unions.

The only way for a car to be as horrifically and terribly bad as the Neon was, it requires Both the screwing together, and the design/engineering to be massively flawed. The answer is both.

andres3 · February 2015

imidazol97 said:

stever said:
Companies who marginalize their workers these days may have a bigger threat to worry about than unions. Imagine if all those Walmart workers talked on the internet (and they do). And imagine is someone tweeted about a flash mob nationwide to do a sickout over pay.

Just who would Walmart negotiate with to get their workers (any sympathetic customers) back as they bleed green ink?
Walmart's workers in this area are typically "non-caring" about the customer. The closest store has had several managers comment about their worker problem when my wife confronts them about things that happen in the store. They keep making mistakes in the ones they choose to employ.

Last night I watched two workers at the third closest Walmart in our area spend 10-15 minutes talking in a rear aisle in front of TVs before both heading on out. I was looking for DVD players and looking at phones. Did either make eye contact to ask if they could help me? No. Lost productivity time.

If I worked in retail I would think you'd want to help customers as that would help the time fly by faster. Maybe kids these days just enjoy blowing time on their phones hiding in a back room.

berri · February 2015

Personally, I think all of these unbalanced free trade agreements are hurting workers more than companies and whether they are unionized. Just look at the plight of so many college grads over the past decade. As for WM, I think the raise has more to do with meeting wage increases elsewhere and facing the reality of increasing minimum wage rates around the country. What gets me is how WM workers are portrayed in the media as the most abused workers in America, when many other large retailers don't pay any better, and some pay worse. Retailing, whether WM or McDonald's has always been set up more as a part time job. It's the exporting of manufacturing that is moving workers into retailing and the resulting significant reduction to their living standards. But don't worry, Congress is taking in all those campaign and lobbyist dollars to assure the rich are protected so that some crumbs may "trickle down" to everyone else. Our elected officials conveniently ignore the fact that many of the Wall Street and venture capitalist wealthy are behind the unbalanced trade agreements that are destroying our middle class while padding their own pockets. Then again, how many Americans base their votes on 30 second TV advertising spots instead of exercising any brain power in their decisions?

imidazol97 · February 2015

berri said:
all of these unbalanced free trade agreements are hurting workers

x2

gagrice · February 2015

berri said:
Personally, I think all of these unbalanced free trade agreements are hurting workers more than companies and whether they are unionized. Just look at the plight of so many college grads over the past decade. As for WM, I think the raise has more to do with meeting wage increases elsewhere and facing the reality of increasing minimum wage rates around the country. What gets me is how WM workers are portrayed in the media as the most abused workers in America, when many other large retailers don't pay any better, and some pay worse. Retailing, whether WM or McDonald's has always been set up more as a part time job. It's the exporting of manufacturing that is moving workers into retailing and the resulting significant reduction to their living standards. But don't worry, Congress is taking in all those campaign and lobbyist dollars to assure the rich are protected so that some crumbs may "trickle down" to everyone else. Our elected officials conveniently ignore the fact that many of the Wall Street and venture capitalist wealthy are behind the unbalanced trade agreements that are destroying our middle class while padding their own pockets. Then again, how many Americans base their votes on 30 second TV advertising spots instead of exercising any brain power in their decisions?

I do agree with you on trade agreements that are not balanced. We were once a manufacturing powerhouse. As those jobs required less and less skill due to automation, the competition from offshore increased. We have never been equal to Japan and now China and Korea on consumer electronics. It was not long after WW2 that we started seeing CE coming in from Japan. Now with almost everyone wanting and owning the latest in Smartphones that market is HUGE. We never got to be part of it. The glunky flip phones from Motorola don't count. I think it is fair to say that CE is larger than automotive the World over. Samsung sold more stuff than Toyota and VW combined.

All that said to get back to where we are. We are evolving into a Service country vs an industrial. Most of the EU has passed the 70% service jobs threshold including Germany. Countries like Denmark are 77% service. Service jobs as you have pointed out were entry level when we built more stuff. With a very large segment of our population not working I don't see those jobs paying middle class incomes. WM is already feeling the competition from 20,000+ dollar type stores on every corner. It makes high wages for low level jobs unlikely.

stever · February 2015

Funny how Apple gobbled up all that "offshore" money.

berri · February 2015

There are certainly exceptions like Apple or Boeing that sell a lot overseas, except Apple produces a lot of what they sell overseas as well. There are also transplants like Toyota that have established US plants because of transportation costs for large items and the economies of piggybacking into the US auto supply base. But in general, when you look at the macro economics it sure appears to me that these unbalanced free trade agreements and globalization are essentially lowering the working middle class living standards in America, while raising the same elsewhere. Remember, more US jobs emanate from small and medium sized companies, than the large global giants. Less contracts from big global players, often can result in less jobs in these small and medium companies. Now for these large companies that get all the press, globalization is great for them because it increases both profit margins and sales revenues. Unfortunately, that fattens the wallets of their senior executives and large shareholders, but hurts many others. Moving work overseas also has the advantage for them that higher unemployment rates means more competition for open US jobs thereby lowering working people's wages here. Top that off with professional work in areas like STEM being increasingly contracted to places like India and corporate greed moving their headquarters out of the US to lower their taxes, and I'm concluding that our economic numbers may well look better than they actually are. All of this is actually hurting the majority of Americans and that is why the our economy is just kind of stalled in a low growth environment.

marsha7 · February 2015

All these thoughts are valid, but one way to stop cheap goods from China and overseas is to place a tariff on everything that comes into this country. But that would then raise prices on almost everything, and could the average person afford it, due to the price inflation. Shirts that sell for $12 at WalMart, which can be afforded by everyone, might jump to $19, 20 or more, meaning fewer people can afford to buy as many as they can now.

So, we can place tariffs on imported goods, but now the prices skyrocket because those goods would be priced as though they were made by (probably overpaid) union labor here...it is like a see saw, you cannot affect one side without affecting the other side...

That might also include Fords made in Mexico, as their prices went up due to import tariffs...

Also, keep in mind how imported goods have made OURS better...Big 3 cars in the 70s and 80s were junk, and I mean that almost literally...the wave of quality Hondas and Toyotas showed us how much better cars could be made, and Big 3 cars are better today because of the past junk...I realize this is ancient history to some, but the quality of our cars today is so good because we had some real competition from the Japanese and, grudgingly, we made out cars to the quality products they are today...

If import tariffs had made Honda and Toyota too expensive, the masses never would have bought as many as it did, and Big 3 would have had no reason to improve their product...

Plus, with all the transplant factories here now, I wonder if buying a Toyota or a Honda or Hyundai now puts money in more American's pockets than the Big 3 do...Ohio, Tenn, GA, Alabama, SC, KY are some states that now HAVE a middle class because of factory jobs with "imports cars" that pay better then floor sweeper at the local school, with benefits...

fintail · February 2015

"Free trade" is usually an oxymoron, at best.

Regressing towards a mean, as has been said. More to show that class warfare is real, and it is obvious who declared it, and who is winning.

imidazol97 said:

berri said:
all of these unbalanced free trade agreements are hurting workers
x2

tlong · February 2015

fintail said:
"Free trade" is usually an oxymoron, at best.

Regressing towards a mean, as has been said. More to show that class warfare is real, and it is obvious who declared it, and who is winning.

imidazol97 said:

berri said:
all of these unbalanced free trade agreements are hurting workers
x2

I don't see class warfare as a conscious thing - it is a result of the systems that are put in place. Allow corporations to contribute as if they are "people" and see how that corrupts our society.

So globalization:
- makes execs richer
- raises the standard of living in the underdeveloped countries
- lowers the standard of living in the US

Did we really expect it to be any other way? When the US was leading in the 40s, 50s, 60s, our standard of living grew rapidly. But that was always a bubble, as it's not like our head start was going to last forever. We need to be constantly ahead of other countries to be able to expect to maintain that standard.

On topic, the Unions started to protect innocent workers at a time when no laws were there to do so, but now the unions are an attempt to preserve the unsustainable bubbles. But in the end it doesn't work, although if you were lucky with your timing (such as the UAW high-tier legacy workers), you got to have the golden goose while those who came after are just sitting in bird poop...

stever · February 2015

@marsha7, good to see you checking in Bob.

berri · February 2015

Marsh, you make valid points and the competition and offshoring have brought on lower prices.. But I think that begets the question of if people were more fully employed at wages that weren't diminished, would they end up buying more of the $19 dollar shirts than the current $12 ones? Turnover could be achieved either through consumers having the money to buy more shirts, or feeling flush enough to replace their current ones more frequently. Personally, I think they drag on most Americans is easily displayed by the record wealth gap between the 1% and everyone else.

Fin, I think Washington is very responsible for the growth in belief of class warfare. The convoluted laws, including all of the special tax breaks for people who can afford tax lawyers or CPA's, like trusts that can perpetually defer payment of capital gains, or allowing corporations to pay senior execs with stock instead of wages resulting in big tax savings (if the stock is received as payment to them for company performance, then it should be taxed the same as a wage because it was really earned that way), are leading America in this direction. It's easily remedied by stopping all of that and simplifying the tax code to make it flatter and fairer to all, but the wealthy are the big politician sponsors and contributors.

Tiong, I think as we move more toward service (and more professional service like law, programming, and engineering are also being offshored); when the economy turns around down the road there will be a greater potential for unionizing disenchanted technical and professional workers.

One of my big concerns about the huge loss of our internal industrial capabilities is what happens if we get into a big jam and countries like China decide to cut us off and tell us to pound sand? Nowadays war can be economic instead of military. Further, all of this offshoring is transferring our technical knowledge and advantage. As other countries get that, or steal it, what happens to us - we can't all be plumbers or HVAC repair people. The service economy concept is going to melt away too.

fintail · February 2015

It seems hellishly coincidental though, doesn't it?

Raising the standard of living in other countries is immaterial, it is not part of the plan. The guillotine-worthy execs and treacherous politicos in their pockets don't do it out of altruism. Did the US start to fall behind just by not staying ahead, or by being helped in decline by some of its own so-called citizens? The lowest common denominator is a profitable ideal.

Lucky with timing, very true for some people...

tlong said:

I don't see class warfare as a conscious thing - it is a result of the systems that are put in place. Allow corporations to contribute as if they are "people" and see how that corrupts our society.

So globalization:
- makes execs richer
- raises the standard of living in the underdeveloped countries
- lowers the standard of living in the US

Did we really expect it to be any other way? When the US was leading in the 40s, 50s, 60s, our standard of living grew rapidly. But that was always a bubble, as it's not like our head start was going to last forever. We need to be constantly ahead of other countries to be able to expect to maintain that standard.

On topic, the Unions started to protect innocent workers at a time when no laws were there to do so, but now the unions are an attempt to preserve the unsustainable bubbles. But in the end it doesn't work, although if you were lucky with your timing (such as the UAW high-tier legacy workers), you got to have the golden goose while those who came after are just sitting in bird poop...

fintail · February 2015

I use the term with sarcasm - usually the halfwit so-called right uses it, but they don't seem to have the ability to grasp socio-economic trends. But it is a real thing, and the results speak for themselves.

All the union talk is just a pendulum. It'll swing back, even if the guilted grey population expanders try to increase the amount of workers enough to make it difficult.

berri said:

Fin, I think Washington is very responsible for the growth in belief of class warfare. The convoluted laws, including all of the special tax breaks for people who can afford tax lawyers or CPA's, like trusts that can perpetually defer payment of capital gains, or allowing corporations to pay senior execs with stock instead of wages resulting in big tax savings (if the stock is received as payment to them for company performance, then it should be taxed the same as a wage because it was really earned that way), are leading America in this direction. It's easily remedied by stopping all of that and simplifying the tax code to make it flatter and fairer to all, but the wealthy are the big politician sponsors and contributors.

marsha7 · February 2015

stever: thanks for the welcome back...:):):)

berri: if you want a simpler and fairer tax code, I am with you...if it must be an income tax, a simple flat tax, or no more than 2 brackets (like in 1986 under Reagan, 15 and 28%) altho I would lower the rates to say, 8 and 15% and take away ALL deductions, like church, charity and mortgage interest...spend your money as you wish, and nobody gets ANY deductions, which would be a true flat tax on income...what I really want is a national retail sales tax (NOT the Fair Tax, too complicated)...set tha tax, say at 8 or 10%, which means your gross paycheck is your net paycheck, so your takehome pay would jump easily 20% or more, which easily offsets the "increase" in the cost of goods, because you are paying that sales tax from your whole paycheck, not the paycheck "after tax"...there would be no "after tax" because there are no more withholding taxes...much simpler, and only businesses have to file tax returns (about 5 million in US) not 150 million-plus, and our privacy would be restored, with no need for the IRS to know what we make...whether you make cars, sell drugs, or do surgery, when you spend your money you would pay retail sales tax to the federal govt just like the state govt...the only exemptions would be raw food (potatoes, not potato chips; eggs, not egg beaters; milk, not chocolate milk;) and prescription medications...all else is taxed at the final point of sale, which is, for most, the retail store...

" But I think that begets the question of if people were more fully employed at wages that weren't diminished, would they end up buying more of the $19 dollar shirts than the current $12 ones?"...good point, but would hamburger flippers, floor sweepers, etc really be worth more and receive more income???...there comes a point where some jobs simply are not worth paying much, and they would not be able to pay the $19 for the shirt...

To me, it seems that WalMart grew like it did because people found a place where they could buy goods cheaper because of China manufacturing and good business practices (Sam Walton pioneered, I believe, much of the high efficiency distribution system that allowed him to sell cheaper than Kmart, long before he was buying from China)...

I guess what it boils down to is that just because a company raises its price on shirts by a few dollars, or if BMW raises the price of its M3, that does not mean that everybody in the United States mandates a raise so they can buy it, some things will just cost more and some folks will not be able to afford it...just because someone could afford a $10K Cadillac 25 years ago does not mean that they would be able to afford a $70K Caddy today...besides, wait for a 2 year old cream puff, and that $70K Caddy can be bought for under $30K, still get the 100K mile, 7 year, extended warranty (I believe in extended warranties on cars, but cars only, not toasters), and have a much better car that the one that could be bought 25 years ago...

Rant over...:):):)

Mr_Shiftright · February 2015

I think that workers demanding a $15/hr minimum wage deserve that--all we're doing by denying a basic living wage is throwing these people into government programs. So really, huge corporations have the taxpayer pick up the tab that they don't want to pay. Sometimes unions get it right and in this case, I think so. The UAWs beefs have not been about a living wage for quite some time now.

A long time ago, unions were a progressive idea; now they seem to have lost their original intent.

stever · February 2015

@marsha7‌, eggs, not egg beaters would discriminate against people like my wife, who's allergic to eggs.

I'm sure there's no other issues with your proposals though. Can we implement the rest by next Wednesday?

No one has mentioned the expansion of Right to Work in Wisconsin's private sector that may be finalized next week? Notably absent from the "reforms" are the police and fire unions. (NPR)

berri · February 2015

Marsh - the universities all have their econometrics and Wall St. has it's models and algorithms, but personally I don't have a clue as to what the real answer will turn out to be on increased wages. The very underrated area of human behavior can be difficult to predict. Shifty mentioned the $15 minimum wage. I believe Seattle may be in the vanguard on this approach. It will take a bit of time before we know if that will increase prices enough to reduce sales, cut margins enough to impede future investment, or lead to reduced work hours. Seattle is a city with some smart and creative people that have an entrepreneurial spirit, so I think it will be a good test venue. But then I recall back in the 70's and 80's when Atlanta was in this sort of position. People referred to it as the spirit that will lead to the rebirth of the new south. And for awhile it seemed very successful. However, while I personally still like the city, it strikes me more like most any big city up north these days with it's successes and failures.

Shifty, I think the real problem with many unions may be their too often insistence on excess work rules and featherbedding, more than above market wage rates (except for the Longshoremen). Long time, large unions like the UAW or the different airline unions also seem to frequently end up in an "us versus them" mode which ends up poorly for both the company and the employees. If GM employees see themselves more as a UAW employee, than a GM team member, that will not enhance either organization's future longer term. Additionally, many organizations, be they unions, corporations, or government seem to become far too inward over time leading to either some ugly wake ups, or failures.

andres3 · February 2015

Why does raw food deserve an exemption? How is "prepared" food different than so-called raw food? Food is food. I get my Subway sandwich cold to avoid sales tax, LOL. Raw milk would be unpasteurized raw whole milk, not the 2%, Low-fat 1%, or Nonfat most people get. Pasteurizing is a service! So don't use that argument.

gagrice · February 2015

Andres3, I think you missed the point. When people say processed they mean food prepared with questionable ingredients mostly HFCS. Like fish sticks or TV dinners. Stuff that is NOT good for you and especially bad for children. Same goes for any kind of sodas and juice creations, which are mostly from China. Raw Milk is illegal only pasteurized is allowed. Most kids do not get nearly enough fresh vegetables and fruit. Milk, Eggs real cheese not that American cheese crap that is not good for you. Whole wheat breads. A person can feed their children a healthy diet on food stamps, if they were restricted to only Healthy foods. And I am sure you know what they are. It is NOT RC Cola and MoonPies.

fintail · February 2015

Don't ask questions where the money comes from, good idea. Welcome to the west coast housing market

Regarding wages, I guess one can choose from a Seattle area arrangement, or a southeast style arrangement. Both have pros and cons, some more than others.

The MN RTW war is funny, of course one militant rabid untouchable union is exempt. Walker is a sham.

gagrice · February 2015

fintail said:
Don't ask questions where the money comes from, good idea. Welcome to the west coast housing market

Regarding wages, I guess one can choose from a Seattle area arrangement, or a southeast style arrangement. Both have pros and cons, some more than others.

The MN RTW war is funny, of course one militant rabid untouchable union is exempt. Walker is a sham.

It is actually Wisconsin. Will be interesting to see if he goes after the cops and firemen next. RTW will have little impact on public employee unions. Only private unions that are not doing their job. And companies that want to set up shop where Unions are not running the state.

fintail · February 2015

Same difference

He won't touch the cops. Nobody will. That's a union that makes the UAW look like toddlers, and nobody has the stones to touch it, because of course. Such fighting about RTW, yet states who embrace it still have plenty of problems regarding socio-economic development. Maybe it isn't the real problem.

gagrice · February 2015

I think RTW has a positive effect on states like Michigan, Indiana and Wisconsin, where Unions like the UAW ruled with an iron fist. It should be good for the workers as well. The UAW leaders know if they don't treat all the workers equal, the ones on the bottom will drop out and quit paying dues. They will still by law be represented and get all the wages and benefits. Even in states where closed shops are the rule, there are ways to get around the union dues. We had a guy that refused to pay into the strike fund because we had a no strike clause in our contract. Union tried to get RCA Alascom to fire him. Company said no he is a good employee. He was there 35 years and retired with full Teamster Pension.

iluvmysephia1 · February 2015

The glunky flip phones from Motorola don't count.

gagrice - I gotta tell ya that my Motorola Moto G is a great smartphone and I only paid $99 for the thing. 3G, Quadcore processor, great surfing capabilities and no storage problems whatsoever. Calls are clear coming in and going out. Using Boost Mobile as the carrier I'm down to only $40 a month, too.

I'm now in rural eastern Washington state doing a Sleep Tech. job. My wife and I are not wanting ta move again anytime soon. Ugh.

fintail · February 2015

I can see your point, gagrice - so long as the leader of the movement doesn't make himself out as some kind of champion of responsibility and hard work. If they won't go after the untouchable union, no dice.

Rural eastern WA as opposed to urban eastern WA?

berri · February 2015

Spokane always reminded me of the Midwest. Rather surprising when I first flew there.

iluvmysephia1 · February 2015

Rural eastern WA as opposed to urban eastern WA?

Yeah, I think I said that because we just enjoyed the Hasting's store in the "big city" for around us here, Wenatchee.

gagrice · February 2015

iluvmysephia1 said:
The glunky flip phones from Motorola don't count.

gagrice - I gotta tell ya that my Motorola Moto G is a great smartphone and I only paid $99 for the thing. 3G, Quadcore processor, great surfing capabilities and no storage problems whatsoever. Calls are clear coming in and going out. Using Boost Mobile as the carrier I'm down to only $40 a month, too.

I'm now in rural eastern Washington state doing a Sleep Tech. job. My wife and I are not wanting ta move again anytime soon. Ugh.

You are harder to keep track of than my parents were. You need a diesel Sprinter that you can just keep everything in and move. We have several friends that have moved to Idaho in the last year. Boise and Moscow.

This was my first cell phone. We set up several new cell sites with it. I miss the clear talking on the analog phones.

Then we started using these and sold hundreds of them.

That was the last of the Made in America phones. The best selling phone in the Arctic was the bag phone. It would work out 50 miles from the cell site. No longer as analog takes too much bandwidth. They just recently turned down all the analog channels in the Arctic villages. Made a lot of people very unhappy.

iluvmysephia1 · February 2015

You are harder to keep track of than my parents were. You need a diesel Sprinter that you can just keep everything in and move. We have several friends that have moved to Idaho in the last year. Boise and Moscow.

You're right on, gagrice. I will have to prove to my wife I'm done moving by just...staying put from now on!

fintail · February 2015

Spokane isn't a bad city, some of it is a little rough, but it has some really pleasant old neighborhoods. Some call it "Spokompton", however.

Wenatchee, nice weather there. More than a few west side lucky retirees who saw 1000% appreciation on the houses they bought in the early 80s have moved out there.

Two places the UAW will never seek to exist

Mr_Shiftright · February 2015

RTW strikes me as righteously unfair. So if the union bargains hard, or has its lawyers to correct a labor grievance against workers, then the non-union workers at that same business also get the benefit, without having supported the very union that defended their rights. It's just un-American to do it that way.

It's also ironic, since there are more autoworkers now at work in Mexico than in all of America. RTW is turning into "right to lose your job at any moment to Mexico".

There is one highly effective autoworkers union in Mexico, at Pueblo I think it is, but most unions in Mexico are pretty much controlled by the PRI.

So some Mexican people are benefitting from American job loss. Once Mexico becomes too expensive, they will move the plants to some other cheap labor source I believe.

gagrice said:
I think RTW has a positive effect on states like Michigan, Indiana and Wisconsin, where Unions like the UAW ruled with an iron fist. It should be good for the workers as well. The UAW leaders know if they don't treat all the workers equal, the ones on the bottom will drop out and quit paying dues. They will still by law be represented and get all the wages and benefits. Even in states where closed shops are the rule, there are ways to get around the union dues. We had a guy that refused to pay into the strike fund because we had a no strike clause in our contract. Union tried to get RCA Alascom to fire him. Company said no he is a good employee. He was there 35 years and retired with full Teamster Pension.

gagrice · February 2015

RTW strikes me as righteously unfair. So if the union bargains hard, or has its lawyers to correct a labor grievance against workers, then the non-union workers at that same business also get the benefit, without having supported the very union that defended their rights. It's just un-American to do it that way.

You have to remember that RTW is a Federal Law that is almost 70 years old. A large portion of Federal workers get all the benefits of the Union negotiations without paying dues or even joining the Union. When I went to work for Pacific Telephone I was not approached to join the CWA until I had worked there about 4 years. I joined voluntarily when I was approached and given good reason to be part of the group. And they did go to bat for me when I got crossways with a supervisor.

What is fair about being forced to join a Union that only looks out for the workers that have been there a long time? The two tier wage schedule in the UAW is an abomination. And from all I read it will not be done away with in the current negotiations.

Mr_Shiftright · February 2015

Switzerland is considering a proposal to give every Swiss citizen $2800 a month as guaranteed basic income--this would substantially eliminate government assistance and labor problems. Naturally they are a small country and the USA could not afford that sum per month, but the Swiss might actually try this out. This is for every person to do with as one wishes. No strings. You have to admit, the Swiss are no strangers to money and how it works.

In the USA, we could afford about $6000 per year per person with no substantial increase in spending (since we would eliminate about $1 trillion in government assistance).

What a wild idea! Of course, no human being is ever satisfied with the amount of money he gets--"if I only had X dollars more, THEN I'd be happy".

Still, better than no job and living totally on welfare with its indignities. Even Warren Buffett will get the $6K.

gagrice · February 2015

In the USA, we could afford about $6000 per year per person with no substantial increase in spending (since we would eliminate about $1 trillion in government assistance).

Not sure how you calculated that. I get $1.896 Trillion to give 316 million people $6k. And that would not even cover most middle class HC Premiums. My SIL just got hooked up in Washington State and was lucky to get coverage in her area at $5.25 per month. My nephew's company is paying $4000 per month for him, his wife and 5 children. He has to pay $1000 per month. Before ACA his company was paying $1800 per month. Too many people paying little or nothing. Just as a side note the Swiss spend less than half of what we spend per capita on HC. It would be nice if we could cut HC cost in half.

fintail · February 2015

I don't know if comparing any aspect of the US to Swissieland is relevant. One can simply look at what one nation spends on bottomless pits like the war on drugs, aid to ungrateful petulant nations (some for generations) and on the praetorian complex compared to the other, not really apples to oranges when examines the flow of funds into invincible untouchable black holes. And I won't even get into taxation.

Unions are also much less powerful in Switzerland compared to much of Europe. Huge standard of living, but they bank for monsters and criminals, so there's that.

HC costs won't ever improve with corporations who are people too running the show.

andres3 · March 2015

gagrice said:
Andres3, I think you missed the point. When people say processed they mean food prepared with questionable ingredients mostly HFCS. Like fish sticks or TV dinners. Stuff that is NOT good for you and especially bad for children. Same goes for any kind of sodas and juice creations, which are mostly from China. Raw Milk is illegal only pasteurized is allowed. Most kids do not get nearly enough fresh vegetables and fruit. Milk, Eggs real cheese not that American cheese crap that is not good for you. Whole wheat breads. A person can feed their children a healthy diet on food stamps, if they were restricted to only Healthy foods. And I am sure you know what they are. It is NOT RC Cola and MoonPies.

Fair enough, but I'm more concerned with the over taxation of goods, and sales tax is one of my least favorite taxes.

andres3 · March 2015

gagrice said:
RTW strikes me as righteously unfair. So if the union bargains hard, or has its lawyers to correct a labor grievance against workers, then the non-union workers at that same business also get the benefit, without having supported the very union that defended their rights. It's just un-American to do it that way.

You have to remember that RTW is a Federal Law that is almost 70 years old. A large portion of Federal workers get all the benefits of the Union negotiations without paying dues or even joining the Union. When I went to work for Pacific Telephone I was not approached to join the CWA until I had worked there about 4 years. I joined voluntarily when I was approached and given good reason to be part of the group. And they did go to bat for me when I got crossways with a supervisor.

What is fair about being forced to join a Union that only looks out for the workers that have been there a long time? The two tier wage schedule in the UAW is an abomination. And from all I read it will not be done away with in the current negotiations.

Yes, the two tier wage schedule reeks of I got mine, to hell with you getting yours; from the older to the younger generation. I think the younger generation would have been MUCH better off letting all of the older generation's banks, auto companies, unions, and insurance all fail without bailouts.

andres3 · March 2015

fintail said:
I don't know if comparing any aspect of the US to Swissieland is relevant. One can simply look at what one nation spends on bottomless pits like the war on drugs, aid to ungrateful petulant nations (some for generations) and on the praetorian complex compared to the other, not really apples to oranges when examines the flow of funds into invincible untouchable black holes. And I won't even get into taxation.

Unions are also much less powerful in Switzerland compared to much of Europe. Huge standard of living, but they bank for monsters and criminals, so there's that.

HC costs won't ever improve with corporations who are people too running the show.

They bank with monsters and criminals but how many people think US banks aren't run by monsters and criminals. They seem self-serving. One just manage to have better lobbyists and lawyers to keep them out of jail.

gagrice · March 2015

Yes, the two tier wage schedule reeks of I got mine, to hell with you getting yours; from the older to the younger generation. I think the younger generation would have been MUCH better off letting all of the older generation's banks, auto companies, unions, and insurance all fail without bailouts.

Precisely why I would have let GM and C go normal bankruptcy. The good stuff, if there was any, would have been picked up by entrepreneurs. The bond holders would have gotten their legal due. Much of which was investments by Pension plans. The dirtiest little secret of the illegal auto bankruptcy, the fact it was purely paybacks to the UAW. Now the tax payers will continue paying when the UAW Pension plan goes into default again. With all the pension plans at the time critically underfunded, why did we give the UAW pension plan $27 billion to bail it out? At the time there were 100s of Union pension plans in bad shape many worse than the UAW Pension plan. Still with the massive increase in the Stock market over the last 3 years at least 235 pension plans are still endangered or critical status. That does not include the State and municipal pension plans in critical condition. Bailing out the UAW was a travesty.

I can imagine the UAW’s unspoken message for the White House in June of 2009: “Mr. President, in a normal bankruptcy, we might end up with the same wages as those scabs at Toyota and Volkswagen in the South. The court might order cuts in our pensions. We gave you our money, and you protect us. You can claim you are doing it for the middle class. That story might sell.”

“I saved the auto industry” will be a cornerstone of Obama’s reelection campaign. He featured it in his State of the Union address. Paul Krugman, in his Jobs, Jobs, and Cars, hailed Obama’s auto bailout as “the single most successful policy initiative of recent years.”

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2012/02/06/american-airlines-shows-the-corruption-of-obamas-gm-bailout/

Mr_Shiftright · March 2015

Oh I think one had to give credit where it is due. There were many people in Congress who were content to just let the auto industry disintegrate into nothing. At the time there wasn't much subtlety in the arguments--hindsight allows us to criticize on what might have been a better plan (and legitimately criticize it) but hindsight also blinds us to the urgency of the problem and the palpable fear running through the nation. We are not in the "fog of war" as those people were. We can't run the alternate path in some parallel universe so the best we can do is say, look, we have a thriving auto industry so let's work with that.

stever · March 2015

Thinking about how fragile the economy was at the time, I still think it was a good move, as was all the infrastructure money dump. As you'll recall, another White House resident at the time also supported the bailout. Sounds like Bush wanted to accelerate the bankruptcies but didn't have Congressional support. (Detroit Bureau)

(Kind of surprised that was American's first bankruptcy, and I was thinking UAL had more than one too. There's been so many, it's hard to keep up). (Wiki)

iluvmysephia1 · March 2015

Yes, the two tier wage schedule reeks of I got mine, to hell with you getting yours; from the older to the younger generation. I think the younger generation would have been MUCH better off letting all of the older generation's banks, auto companies, unions, and insurance all fail without bailouts.

But what about all of those UAW force-fed jobs, people. It was all about continuing ta have a job for one and a job for all. It would have hit the balance-books more spot on ta have just let the Big Three fail, agreed, but, since post Twin Tower America has been such a fear-fed fiasco, the Big Bailout was something that had ta be done for the well-being of those who heavily worry about those types of things. And who doesn't, right?

andres3 · March 2015

Mr_Shiftright said:
Oh I think one had to give credit where it is due. There were many people in Congress who were content to just let the auto industry disintegrate into nothing. At the time there wasn't much subtlety in the arguments--hindsight allows us to criticize on what might have been a better plan (and legitimately criticize it) but hindsight also blinds us to the urgency of the problem and the palpable fear running through the nation. We are not in the "fog of war" as those people were. We can't run the alternate path in some parallel universe so the best we can do is say, look, we have a thriving auto industry so let's work with that.

Now the opponents of the bailout don't believe in "disintegration of US auto industry. We could have had Tesla making Corvettes, Penske Volts, Buffet Rams, and so on and so forth. The main things that would have disintegrated would be the failed parts of GM and Chrysler, and the UAW.

And we should ask ourselves who was causing this "fog of economic war" and fear? Bush did a good job as shown on a Michael Moore movie. But who was really scared, because the majority were not scared of letting companies fail.

Yes, fear mongering seems to be an effective tactic with the American public (unfortunate, IMO), but it wasn't that effective on the bailouts; at least not at fooling the majority. Certainly, it proved our elected representatives were spineless.

fintail · March 2015

The monsters in those places are the ones the ethics-free members of the FIRE sector here won't even touch. Makes the sketchy developing world corrupt official who moves to the west coast to launder money in real estate and have his devilspawn flit around in supercars look like the Pope.

Regarding the failures, I'd worry more about the supplier ripple effect than the damage to the big boys.

andres3 said:

They bank with monsters and criminals but how many people think US banks aren't run by monsters and criminals. They seem self-serving. One just manage to have better lobbyists and lawyers to keep them out of jail.

Mr_Shiftright · March 2015

Oh I think a complete failure of the auto industry would have been an utter catastrophe. You only have to read the headlines of any newspaper you choose, or Forbes or Fortune or the Economist to see how it felt like Doomsday back then. People really were scared, and were getting socked financially all across the board. In my whole lifetime I never felt such fear amidst the general public--maybe 1968, but that was political fear, not economic fear so much.

United Automobile Workers of America (UAW)

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles