imdevo

If 24 Billion ain't shit for a car company, then how is us giving them about $600 MILLION in savings going to help the bottom line? The cuts and give-backs that are being asked of us seem more like "sticking it to us" rather than saving the company from bankruptcy. We haven't had an hourly raise in roughly 6 years, back when we mistakenly agreed to a lump-sum bonus rather that an hourly percentage raise. Now we won't even get the "bonus"/raise. This whole situation sucks. I've seen what bankruptcy does to workers; when Northwest Airlines went through it here in MN the hourly got screwed. There are no easy answers. Either we say screw them and hope to call their bluff, or we hope to live and fight for another day. Just seems like the IUAW could have done a better job negotiating. These concessions affect us more adversly than they do to help the company.

About 200 full-time Ford hourly.

IMO, probably not. Since we're still slated to close in 2011, I don't think the company would pay moving costs, and then pay again for a transfer in 2 years. For us full-timers that are still here, we really don't know how this will all play out in the future. Will transfers be available when we close? No more gen might mean unemployment is our only option? We can only keep building Rangers as best as we can and hope for the best.

Yes, it is the employees' personal and private business and I don't need to know about them personally. I really don't care who is taking what course. I'm talking about numbers that are reported to be saved by suspending this benefit. I would think that if one of my negotiated benefits is being suspended because of a cost savings, I should be able to verify the savings. By the way, I am part of the company (hourly) and a stockholder with the company's future at heart! MyUAWFord is basically for individual use only and wouldn't provide total useage numbers. My bet is that these are internal corporate numbers that can be manipulated for accounting purposes and/or f***ing the UNION.

If current JSP employees will have one shot at placement, and it is open to all plants, then how will Ford deal with tpt's? At our plant, which is scheduled to close maybe in 2011, we have roughly 250 full timers and 600 temporaries. Will someone in JSP be offered to come to our plant and replace a temp for 2 years? I assume that there are plenty of temps at other plants as well. So, how will this all play out? I think that maybe there will be some changes to JSP, but not eliminated? I guess we'll wait and see.

Let's try again, without going off track. There are plenty of other posts available to rant about whatever you want. Does anyone know how an hourly employee can get the stats on ETAP? Our plant is on layoff untill at least Jan. 12th, so seeking info. is difficult right now. Are there any elected officials and/or salary reading this that can post or point me to the info that shows how many employees and dependents use the ETAP benefit and its cost? Is it true that this money is from a nickel fund that we contribute to? Does ETAP actually cost Ford anything (other than the salary personnel that is considered administrative costs)? I don't think it is asking too much to verify the cost savings, particularly when this is a huge benefit for those that use it.

Is there a way to see, on paper, the actual cost of ETAP? I know this has been discussed before, but I am still having a hard time believing the numbers that are being thrown at us as far as a cost saving to Ford. Is the ETAP suspension for all of the Big 3? The numbers might make a little more sense if this is the case. Still, to save $8-$15 million by suspending this benefit would mean that A LOT of employees are using this benefit. Also, are these savings projected for 1, 2, 4, years? I would like to see these numbers, how many employees and their dependents are actually using this benefit and how much it costs. Or, is it a case of the bean counters playing with numbers? I don't think that these numbers need to be a secret. Just show us on paper the number of employees using the benefit and how much it costs.

I understand that some of the salary "perks" have been getting chipped away as well. I might be wrong, but I also think that the average line surpervisor earns 20% more than the highest hourly he/she supervises. I have an idea of what each level of management in a plant earns (rediculous for what some of them actually do). I won't get into whether that is money well spent. I could have joined management 16 years ago (I had my BA before I started at Ford), but after seeing Ford's overall management program I opted to stay hourly. The "old school" method of management turned me off, ie. screaming and berating from the top on down the food chain. Also didn't want to become an overpaid babysitter. Concerning pay, I realize that in most industries CEO pay is obscene. When it comes to sports, movie, rock stars etc. I suppose one would have to look at how much additional revenue these individuals bring to the company, team, etc. I believe the term the company likes to use is 'value added'. In our case, actually touching the vehicle in assembly is considered value added. In this context, Mr. Mullaly probably has not added much value to the company. Yes, it appears that some of his ideas and direction might lead to better times in the future, but in my case it will come at the expense of my plant. My plant was scheduled to be closed by now, but was given some life until 2011, maybe beyond? I think that cutting and closing will only go so far. Maybe suspending the M10 program, or the free leases and travel expenses would help more? I'm not sure where I am going with this, other than ranting about a small bone like ETAP that helped me is now gone and I'm not happy about it.

OK. I'm not an accountant either, so let's just agree that suspending ETAP will save Ford $8 million (I assume per year, which should cover CEO's salary for about 1 1/2 months or so). For me personally, it isn't that big of a deal. I will soon graduate with a Masters degree so I was lucky to have most of my course work completed before the suspension. I guess I'm more irritated with the idea that my contract that I voted for is now being rewritten without my consent. I feel that ETAP was a benefit I received for not getting an hourly raise for the last 6 years or for the next 4 years. ETAP is a benefit for agreeing to an alternative work schedule, for agreeing to the establishment of VEBA, for agreeing to a wage for new-hires at $14, and for the countless other items that Ford wanted me to agree to. I assumed that this is how we bargained for a contract. I'm all for helping my company during hard times but I wonder how much money we could save by "suspending" some programs that management enjoy? (Other than cutting white collar jobs).

Level, if this program is being used by less than 10% of the employees and/or their children, then how could it cost $8 million a year? You stated that this is money that is not initially set aside therefore it is coming directly out of Ford's pocket. Therefore, I would assume that the only moeny spent is when employees are using the program. $8 million a year would seem to equate to more than 10% of employees, particularly when the yearly cap for each employee is around $4500. Just wondering.

Does anyone know or care to take a guess as to what "suspended' actually means? Is ETAP officially eliminated, or is the program temporarily suspended until we see better days? I have a bad feeling that UAW/Ford will use the term of "suspended" for ETAP as well as anything else our Reps. concede. I'm not certain, but I am thinking that by "suspending" programs, that means WE, the membership, do not get to vote on these concessions! I hope I'm wrong on this, but I've got a bad feeling that this is contractual language BS that originally was agreed upon in our contract, but since these programs aren't being eliminated but only "suspended", then we have no say in these concessions! I don't like the looks of this.

davdog, try to seriously look at the overall picture of our production system. The negotiated contract set up the gen many years ago and both sides (salary & hourly) have utilized this situation for their own benefit. We currently have salary employees getting paid (notice I didn't say EARN) BIG BUCKS, over $100,000, who probably shouldn't even be working on the line let alone in management. But, this is Ford. So, please don't go on about employees receiving wages when the company puts them out of work. When the company corrects their management situation, then I will listen to complaints about hourly people receiving paychecks if they are not adding value to the company.

Excellent post. But, the next obvious question, logically, should be: What can be done about this current situation? Since the International cult is self-selected, how do we go about making a change? All of our legitimate anger and angst might be heard but what do they care? Any suggestions?

JW, Great to hear that you're happy with your Ranger. It's still a mystery to us why Ford has shown absolutely no support for this vehicle. It really is a shame to have let the Ranger, as well as this market, slip away. Oh well, we'll keep doing our part till they kick us out the door.

Yep. We're still assembling the best-built small truck on the market, with quality and pride. As of right now, we're scheduled to shut down around this time next year. With Ford, who knows what exactly will happen, but until then we're still putting out the highest quality possible with a whole lot of pride! Hope you enjoy the new Ranger.

Very good response. You're absoulutely correct that if a manufacturer is interested, they could just as easily come forward to make an offer. I was just trying to point out a middle ground; that is for us, or at least for me, this isn't all about Union vs. Ford. Whatever happens to the site, hopefully it will be beneficial for the Highland Park community, St. Paul, and MN. What really interests me though is why anyone of you/these posters care about this situation? I assume none of you live or work here. None of you are being directly affected by the closing of this plant. Is is that important to you that Ford makes a quick 50 million (or whatever the amount)? I would think that this money is chump change in the overall scheme of things. If you people care that much about Ford and its future, I would think you would be beating on the corporate door to find out why they aren't designing vehicles that people want to buy. Or why they didn't update the Ranger years ago and allow our plant to stay open. I understand how silly it appears to try to have Ford politically blocked from selling their own assets. But, at least for me, this has nothing to do with the Union and everything to do with the people who have been devastated by this closing. Somewhere, somebody should make a statement about what is happening to the working class - and I guess somebody here has. What do we have to lose?

Try to get off the anti-union soapbox and take a second look at what is actually happening in this situation. Some local union officials and local politicians are only asking Ford to look at some options concerning the sale of the facility and land. Perhaps there is another manufacturer that might be interested in the plant and exceptional existing workforce. Creating decent-paying jobs, economically, is probably better than putting up some expensive housing and smaller businesses. What do you expect? Regardless of what we do, the plant closes and everyone looks for work. At this point, why should I care if Ford can make a few extra bucks by selling immediately to the highest developer? Well, I guess maybe Ford would lower their prices on the soon-to-be imported Global Ranger. LOL, LOL.

Great postings Aneekr. Thanks for the statistical information. I think it supports what I was trying to say. It would appear that Ford and GM did not and has not really studied these numbers, or they have and was hoping to rely on Americans' brand loyalty to domestic vehicles. I suppose on the bright side from a business standpoint, this is something of a "perfect storm" for the domestics. They have cause to close American plants to fit capacity, thus eliminating American/Union wages (this is the usual scapegoat for being competitive). At the same time they can invest billions in their plants overseas or in Mexico to benefit from cheap labor. I suppose that Ford and GM can only hope to be competitive on a global basis because I don't think that the American market will be reversing any time soon.

Let's try not to turn this into the "white people" vs. everyone else that is not white. I'm thinking that this is more along the lines of "American-born" customers will purchase what they like whether it's American or Import. I think their buying patterns kept the market share somewhat constant up until about the year 2000. Some years were better than others but it seems that over the years sales averaged out to maintain a consistant Amarican market. I do think that the Asian population growth has changed this market. Asian-born customers and their offspring appear to purchase only Asian brand vehicles. I'm not necessarily knocking them for doing so, but I find it difficult for Ford or GM to fairly compete if the overall customer base is not fairly purchasing. I have not been able to find any reports of brand loyalty by different cultures (if those numbers even exist). I may be way off base with these thoughts, just trying to make some sense out of the situation we're facing.

This is probabley just a wild thought and I have no stats to prove me right or wrong but here goes. Is it posible that our (domestics') loss of market share is due to America's changing (diverse) population? Within the past 15 years there has been a huge increase in the Asian population in America. From what I can see, around the Twin Cities area, Asian people almost strictly drive Asian imports (Toyota, Honda, etc.). Rather than Ford and GM losing sales maybe it's just that they're not gaining with the new buyers? I don't know if this makes any sense, and by NO MEANS is this meant to be anti-Asian or bigotted. Just some thoughts and looking for further discussion.

Now I was not at the bargaining table when our GEN agreement was negotiated, but I highly doubt that a threat of strike was presented. The negotiations were probably more in the line of we, the union, will give up this, that, and the other thing while the company agrees to wave a carrot of some form of job security in front of us. This, that, and the other thing given up usually are in terms of wage increases, paid sick days, or rate of pay for new hires. Since my hire date in 1992, I don't recall a strike ever being seriously considered during contract talks.

Hey Waldo, that's exactly my point. Maybe it didn't come out right. Our GEN numbers/cost is pocket change to Ford. GEN has never been a cost disadvantage. As a matter of fact, IMO, it has saved Ford a lot of money to have trained, experienced auto workers available when needed. I agree with you; if the original poster is going to base his purchase on our contract agreement then let him drive a KIA. Ford spends more money on their jet rides to work than on our GEN agreement.

Excellent point Pioneer. IMO it really comes down to greed. Of course the stability and future of a company must come first. But when it comes to profits, how much is enough? If Ford, GM, or Toyota can produce a vehicle for $5000 rather than $10000, the price to the consumer will remain at $25000. Whether a person is pro or anti-union, labor costs are not creating the latest problems. IMO, vehicle design and public perception as well as corporate greed are more to blame. Keep in mind that GEN pool and a Jobs bank were created a long time ago, and Ford and GM didn't have problems making plenty of profit throughout the 1990's.

Our GEN pool number wouldn't be even a blip on Ford's overall costs and/or problems to the company. Currently there are very few people in GEN, and will be even less after these buyout numbers take place. But let's just say GEN is gone after the next contract. It would then, by your logic, allow Ford to dramatically reduce the cost of producing vehicles which of course means lower prices to the consumer. Similar to the tv, dvd, ipod, etc. That, I will bet the farm on, WILL NOT HAPPEN. Same story with health care. $1500 to $3000 extra per vehicle because of health care costs. If I were to pay 100% for my health care would Ford lower the cost of a Mustang by $3000? Of course not. Whether it's our hourly rate or negotiated benefits, labor cost issues should not influence your purchasing decision - if a jobs bank is so bad and Imports do not have this benefit, then why are their vehicles similarly priced? There is so much more to this entire issue than what the media covers and/or what the public believes to be true. Maybe someday the price of a vehicle will be lower, but I'm afraid there will be even less people that can afford to buy one.

I am one of a few that are staying. With 14 yrs in and my situatation I believe that it is best that I stay and use whatever benefits that are available. I only hope that the job posting/survey is done appropiately. Whatever you decided to do with your future, good luck and have a happy Holiday.