1974

Nonunion automakers, with the exception of Hyundai, followed the UAW's lead to avoid unionization, Shaiken said. This is part of what the American people don't realize. We keep there wages high by just having the union threat on them. "It really represents a shift in direction," Shaiken said. "Up until now the UAW set wages for the industry and the talks in Detroit."

http://www.boycottalabamanow.com/ Go to this site and email the dumb son of a bitches. Or call the number and tell em.

First you piss in them,dip em in some shit, then deliver it.

He's never going to buy a Ford anyway! I have to admit. I'm more curtious toward people who drive one of the Big Three vehicles when I'm driving. It's my way of saying,"You can kiss my ass."

I agree with you. But pass quality issues have really gotten a lot of the American people against us. Most people you talk to will tell you they had American car at one time. Our quality hurt use in the past. It will time some time to convince them otherwise. The resale value hurts us also. I believe that's the main reason we have stopped selling to fleet markets in bulk like we use to do. We just need to keep the quality up and recalls down as much as possible. And make goodlooking,reliable vehicles people want to buy.

This one explains it pretty good also. GOP to UAW: "Drop Dead" - Jonathan Alter on Countdown http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6g80e8bO24

Yep! The war is on. The Republicans are pissed and they want revenge,U.S. economy be damned. Southern Republican Senators........Foreign car companies best friend........ GOP to UAW: "Drop Dead" - Jonathan Alter on Countdown http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6g80e8bO24 Republicans vs. Detroit - "Countdown with Keith Olbermann". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWawlRnMNCY...feature=related Republicans Want To Destroy The Middle Class By Busting Unions http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZgye7arYmc...feature=related Republicans believe the only good labor is owned Republicans vs. Detroit - "The Rachel Maddow Show" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07kqenR6M0Q...feature=related

You are correct. He did support the auto bridge loan. http://mccotter.house.gov/HoR/MI11/Newsroo...ill+Passage.htm

WOW!! This video needs to be watch by everyone. The last two minutes could be a real eye opener for some. This crap started almost 30 years ago and it is for real.

We are in a war people!!! Wake the fuck up. http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heathe...-now-reduce-wag Rachel Maddow hits the nail on the head with this one. The GOP has now decided it is good for them politically to rail against unions and against Americans earning a living wage. I'd love to know just how low the wages of auto workers should go before it would satisfy these guys if someone is a union member, or if it just doesn't matter as long as the UAW is busted and their foreign interests in their states are satisfied. It's a fine rant, kind of like an extended symphony, and she wraps it up by setting off the cannons behind Barack Obama's express concerns about the "devastating ripple effect throughout our economy" the collapse of the Big Three would have: Maddow: That's what most Americans are worried about with this issue. What are the Republican Senators worried about who say they don't want to deal unless they can break the unions in this way? Besides their friends in Japan, I guess, who have state-subsidized plants in their home states, we can tell that Senator Corker's plan requires even further cuts from union workers and stakeholders in the companies than already have been offered. Blame the workers -- especially, blame the United Auto Workers. That's what we're hearing from Senate Republicans as our auto industry skids toward the brink of extinction. And they're saying if you do save the industry, they want to do it with conditions that break the unions while the industry is being saved. It appears to me that Senate Republicans are on an ideologically driven union-busting adventure here, that happens to have the prospect of increasing the market share of the foreign-owned companies who work in their states. American-owned companies and the American economy as a whole be darned -- those foreign-owned companies that serve the individual states of these senators who are objecting to this bailout, they're the ones who are getting served. Why aren't Democrats making them filibuster this -- making them stand up and defend this, if this is really what they want the country to know they're doing? Tags: Auto Bailout, Fair Wages, Foreign Automorive Companies, Southern Senators, The Rachel Maddow Show, UAW, Union Busting Email Print

Well http://crooksandliars.com/john-amato/new-g...tion-alert-abou New GOP Memo entitled Action Alert about the Auto Bail Out makes clear that it's all about "Union Busting" By John Amato Friday Dec 12, 2008 6:26pm Countdown obtained a new memo that explains the GOP's strategy for blocking a bridge loan to the auto industry: Countdown has obtained a memo entitled "Action Alert - Auto Bailout," and sent Wednesday at 9:12am, to Senate Republicans. The names of the sender(s) and recipient(s) have been redacted in the copy Countdown obtained. The Los Angeles Times reported that it was circulated among Senate Republicans. The brief memo outlines internal political strategy on the bailout, including the view that defeating the bailout represents a "first shot against organized labor." Senate Republicans blocked passage of the bailout late Thursday night, over its insistence on an immediate union pay cut. From: Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 9:12 AM To: Subject: Action Alert -- Auto Bailout Today at noon, Senators Ensign, Shelby, Coburn and DeMint will hold a press conference in the Senate Radio/TV Gallery. They would appreciate our support through messaging and attending the press conference, if possible. The message they want us to deliver is: 1. This is the democrats first opportunity to payoff organized labor after the election. This is a precursor to card check and other items. Republicans should stand firm and take their first shot against organized labor, instead of taking their first blow from it. 2. This rush to judgment is the same thing that happened with the TARP. Members did not have an opportunity to read or digest the legislation and therefore could not understand the consequences of it. We should not rush to pass this because Detroit says the sky is falling. The sooner you can have press releases and documents like this in the hands of members and the press, the better. Please contact me if you need additional information. Again, the hardest thing for the democrats to do is get 60 votes. If we can hold the Republicans, we can beat this. The GOP sent the first shot across the bow of the upcoming Obama administration as they killed the auto rescue plan Thursday night. It never was about trying to help the automakers or the economy, but an effort to crush the working class and punish unions. There are many more people in line to suffer if the Big 3 go out of business, but Shelby and his band of brothers couldn't care less. "Union Busting" is a high priority for these Conservatives fools that have allowed our country to be run into the ground. Can you name anything good that has come out of the eight years of Bush and Conservative dominance? So what is their solution? To take it out on the blue collars of America. If anything this memo should be used as a reminder that the Employee Free Choice Act should be one of Obama's "high priorities" just after he takes office. Check out this video that explains a few things about it.

NEVER VOTE REPUBLICAN AGAIN........NEVER. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Why-AIG-Gets...s-13819339.html Why AIG Gets Billions, GM Gets Scorn Rick Newman Friday December 12, 2008, 1:09 pm EST Yahoo! Buzz Print Let me see if I'm getting this right: AIG, the huge insurance company, has so far gotten $173 billion worth of federal aid, because traders at one small division made bets on exotic securities that were so calamitous they threatened to bring down the whole company. So far, the amount of money the feds have pledged to this one firm equals nearly one-third of the nation's defense budget. General Motors, America's biggest automaker, has asked for a $10 billion federal loan, equal to one-seventeenth of what AIG has gotten - and Congress has said no. There were no rogue traders at GM, and the company's problems have intensified in plain view, over several months, instead of coming from out of nowhere in a single, cataclysmic episode. Make sense? Doesn't to me. So maybe if we look at each company a bit more closely, it will be clearer why the government favors companies like AIG over ones like GM. Is AIG bigger? No. AIG doesn't break out its U.S. employment numbers, but it has 116,000 workers worldwide. Perhaps half of those are U.S. jobs. GM employs 96,000 Americans. Total worldwide employment is 252,000, more than twice AIG's. Are AIG executives humbler? Not really. Here's how CEO pay stacks up: Former AIG CEO Martin Sullivan earned about $14 million in 2007. Total pay over the last three years: About $53 million (including only 9 months in 2005, the year he became CEO). GM CEO Rick Wagoner earned $14.4 million in 2007. Total pay over the last three years: About $30 million. AIG is also offering controversial "retention bonuses," ranging from $92,500 to $4,000,000, to a select group of execs deemed essential to the company's turnaround. Congress has asked questions - but so far shown little outrage. Has AIG had a regime change? Yes. Former Allstate CEO Ed Liddy took over the company in September, replacing Sullivan, who presided over a wipeout in credit-default swaps and other exotic investments. The fresh blood pacified critics somewhat. GM has had no regime change, although key members of Congress have called for that. Wagoner has been running the company since 2000, and the company continues to aggressively defend him. [ Read a defense of Rick Wagoner.] Has AIG presented its turnaround plan to Congress? Not formally. There's only been one Congressional hearing on AIG, and that focused mostly on past practices. No current AIG officials have testified before Congress since the feds got involved. Wagoner has testified before Congress four times since November. And GM has presented a 38-page "viability plan," that's publicly available, showing how it would use government money. [see how the automakers' bailout plans stack up.] Does have AIG have friends in high places? You could say that. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke both support the AIG bailout, and they've steered money to the company without Congressional approval. GM's most important friends in Washington have been the Michigan Congressional delegation, which obviously doesn't have the clout it used to. Paulson has actually argued against using part of the huge $700 billion financial bailout fund to help the automakers, because they can't pass a "viability" test proving they'll stay in business long enough to pay back the loans. But AIG hasn't passed a viability test either, and without federal help there's little doubt it would be in bankruptcy. [Read about better ways to handle a multibillion-dollar bailout.] Does AIG have unionized workers? Few, if any. "RIGHT HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!":angry::angry::angry::angry::angry::angry::angry::angry::angry::angry: GM has a bunch: 64,000. Ah ha! Maybe that explains it. In fact, Senate Republicans who blocked a $10 billion emergency loan for GM and a $4 billion loan for Chrysler said they wouldn't approve a Detroit bailout unless the United Auto Workers made much deeper concessions than they've already offered, essentially giving up any advantages they have over non-unionized workers in other states. So here's one lesson: If you want a government bailout, try to have problems that are too complicated for most people to understand. And make sure your employees are the kind who wear a suit to work every day. Once you've satisfied those two requirements, ask for as much as you want: The coffers are open.

This explains it pretty good. http://bigthreeauto.procon.org/viewadditio...resourceID=2050 The New York Times, in a Dec. 9, 2008 article by David Leonhardt titled "$73 an Hour: Adding It Up," wrote: "The calculations show, accurately enough, that for every hour a unionized worker puts in, one of the Big Three really does spend about $73 on compensation. So the number isn’t made up. But it is the combination of three very different categories. The first category is simply cash payments, which is what many people imagine when they hear the word 'compensation.' It includes wages, overtime and vacation pay, and comes to about $40 an hour. (The numbers vary a bit by company and year. That’s why $73 is sometimes $70 or $77.) The second category is fringe benefits, like health insurance and pensions. These benefits have real value, even if they don’t show up on a weekly paycheck. At the Big Three, the benefits amount to $15 an hour or so. Add the two together, and you get the true hourly compensation of Detroit's unionized work force: roughly $55 an hour. It’s a little more than twice as much as the typical American worker makes, benefits included. The more relevant comparison, though, is probably to Honda’s or Toyota's (nonunionized) workers. They make in the neighborhood of $45 an hour, and most of the gap stems from their less generous benefits. The third category is the cost of benefits for retirees. These are essentially fixed costs that have no relation to how many vehicles the companies make. But they are a real cost, so the companies add them into the mix -- dividing those costs by the total hours of the current work force, to get a figure of $15 or so -- and end up at roughly $70 an hour."

It's the damn legacy cost,period.. Wages are very comparable. http://www.aftermarketnews.com/Item/28594/...s_struggle.aspx The 'union threat effect' Harley Shaiken, a professor at the University of California, Berkeley, who specializes in labor issues, said Toyota's high wages are somewhat expected. "Toyota pays high wages in part to avoid the UAW," Shaiken said, adding that economists would refer to Toyota's high wages as the "union threat effect," meaning companies pay union-comparable wages to fend off organizing efforts and the risk of a strike. "But what Toyota inadvertently shows," he added, "is that you can compete paying higher wages." Assembly workers for Detroit automakers last year remained a bit ahead of Honda's U.S. hourly workers, who made an average $24.25 an hour, or $26.20 with the $4,485 bonus they received. In November, Honda paid bonuses for the 21st consecutive year, the longest streak in U.S. auto history, said Ed Miller, Honda spokesman. Nissan workers are paid $24 an hour in Mississippi and $26 an hour in Tennessee, but company officials would not disclose employee bonuses. Hyundai Motor Co. pays its U.S. production workers less than other automakers. Wages at its Alabama plant start at $14 an hour and grow to $21 an hour after two years on the job, according to a January 2004 company release. Hyundai declined to say whether those wages have increased since then. But the UAW's Casteel, who is working to organize autoworkers in southern states, said the UAW's recruiting strategy of comparing union and nonunion checks doesn't work in less-developed parts of the South. In Alabama and Mississippi, for instance, the U.S. Department of Labor says wages average less than $11 an hour. "If you start looking at where they put these plants, they go out to the most desolate places you've ever been in your life," Casteel, an Alabama native, said of foreign automakers. "And they make sure there are no other competitive wages with any other industry. You'll drive through these piney woods for an hour and all of a sudden you run upon this major manufacturing facility."

Not much you or I can really do. This economy is in the shitter. Will the government bale us out? Such huge costs to insure GM and Ford debt against default indicate the market's assessment of their financial conditions is perilous indeed. Which raises the obvious question in the post-Bear Stearns rescue world: What happens if GM and Ford find themselves out of cash with no sources of financing? How does the Federal Reserve refuse the Detroit car makers when it provided financing for a Wall Street broker-dealer's takeover by the descendant of the Morgan Bank? The widely misquoted statement of former GM Chief Executive Charlie Wilson held that what was good for General Motors was good for the U.S. The precedent of the Chrysler loan guarantees from the federal government nearly three decades ago stands. If JPMorgan Chase got taxpayer backing to take over Bear Stearns, how can GM or Ford be denied? The sad truth about the American economy is that it has shifted from producing things to moving money; in other words, from manufacturing to finance. That's not only true in New York but even in Detroit. The profound consequences of this transition only now are becoming apparent. The whole article is here. http://online.barrons.com/article/SB121428...ns&ru=yahoo