UglyElmo

I can see college basketball season will be even more interesting than usual once these darn foreigners come to our plant with all their heathen basketball ideas! hehe I am also an Illini fan, as well as a Mizzou fan, since I lived in Southern Illinois and St. Louis during my 20's. My wife will be happy to know she now has a few fellow basketball supporters in our lovely city. The only thing I always wondered while living there is; "How the Hell did soccer become so popular there?

I believe the 1850 is used because isn't that the number of hours you would work in one year of 40-hour work weeks (minus holidays and the normal Summer shutdown period)?

Quick question to some of you opposed to the new contract: What would have to be in the contract for you to vote "yes"? From what I can tell from reading your statements, you don't trust Ford to keep its word so no matter the content of the new agreement you would still vote "no". Is this correct, or am I missing something? The Louisville Assembly Plant has yet to vote on this contract, but those I have spoken with seem to think it is a better deal than we had hoped. Given the current state of the economy, the current reputation of unions in this country, and our declining membership, I would think most would be satisfied to hear (even the promise) of new jobs coming back to the U.S. You may think they are false promises (and they might be), but on a national level, if Ford doesn't come across as promised, then public opinion will be on the union's side. However, if we vote this contract down, I imagine Ford UAW members will come off looking like the bunch of selfish, over-paid, lazy workers the media and politicians love to portray us as. Public opinion means more to our future success than some realize. Think long and hard before you decide to draw a line in the sand with your vote. Lastly: Getting back to where we were several years ago, will be a long, slow process. This new contract appears to be a step in the right direction. I thought Ford would play hardball with our healthcare and hourly wage rate, but our union seems to have done a pretty decent job this time around. Unless I hear something to convince me otherwise, I am leaning towards voting "yes" to this contract.

Thanks for the info. I hope they decide to bring it back in the future.

I was curious if it was turned off due to the increased volume of people participating recently or possibly some other reason. I always like to read user's past posts to figure out their bias towards certain subjects. Helps to weed out the trolls.

Ford may not have gained much in the short-term with this renegotiation, but it would have set them up for a big savings (at our expense) come the 2015 contract. I believe this renegotiation was trying to set up a massive two-teared wage system. Why? 1. Ford stated it MAY bring several new products to North America. Our plant LAP, was promised a version of the Kuga in 2011. This would mean quite a few added shifts at several plants and a great number (well over the 20%) of new hires making $14.20 an hour. 2. Over the next 6 years, many other older, higher-waged workers would retire or possibly take another buyout (if it was offered). 3. Now you have more hiring of cheaper new hires, thus increasing the percentage of $14.20 an hour workers to an even higher % of the overall voting UAW force. 4. By the time 2015 rolled around, and with it new contract negotiations, we might possibly have a majority of UAW autoworkers making $14.20 an hour. I am sure after working 6 years at the same jobs as us higher-wage workers, working the harder less-senioritied jobs and shifts, and making 1/2 of what we do, these $14.20 an hour employees would be angry (not at Ford, but at us: It always happens that way for some reason. Rather than thinking they should be making as much as we do, people always seem to think we should make less. Odd way of thinking in my opinion). 5. So, even though Ford and our IUAW reps said the 20% rule would go back into effect for the 2015 contract, this was just smoke and mirrors to placate us into voting "yes" for this past contract. This 20% rule is not set in stone, it was negotiated in a previous contract and could just as easily be given away during the 2015 contract negotiations. More playing with words, using the same tactics our Congressional leaders use to make something sound "like a promise set in stone" when actually they already have figured out a political way of wiggling out of said "promises". 6. Now here we are at the 2015 contract negotiations: Our IUAW reps and Ford tell the majority $14.20 an hour workers (who are tired of working for less than the minority higher-waged workers), that IUAW/FORD feels their pain. They would then use the "Same pay for same work" mantra they abandoned the past 10 years, to convince the $14.20 an hour workers to accept a small pay increase (3% seems to be popular) if they allow Ford to lower the higher-waged employees wages to the new "standard". If this didn't pass then they would offer maybe the return of COLA, etc. . . etc . . until they were finally able to convince them to vote "yes". Now, Ford has a nice new standard of $14.20 an hour from which to hire, instead of the old standard. 7. Given the current value of the $, and an ever-increasing cost for gasoline, natural gas, and everything else in between, you will have an entire Ford workforce making close to poverty-level wages. So much for the blue-collar middle class. Lastly, if Ford managed to equal or do better than Toyota's wage/benefits packages, then Toyota would reduce their employees pay by even more. Then Ford would once again begin negotiating to reduce their labor costs to even lower levels. As stated before. I would rather make a stand now and find myself out of work, rather than find myself out of work at age 55 (what I will be in 2015), or making 1/2 the money and having no rights, with a union which now represents only the working poor. Though I am sure our IUAW leaders are "ok" with that since the increased number of working poor, would probably pay close to what the IUAW currently makes from us higher waged employees. Not a very bright future for 1,000's of us if we let this last contract pass. I would just hope everyone who labeled us as greedy and uneducated would be happy. Especially once they found out the price of auto's weren't reduced, but increased even more, and the local economies (where our plants are located) find themselves in dire need of tax monies to help pay for the increases in healthcare assistance, foodstamps, and other things which our higher salaries helped pay for in past years. I lot of people have forgotten what happens to us, eventually happens to them, unless they are among the top executives at a large corporation, a politician, or one of our elite corporate IUAW leaders.

Much appreciated for the info. and correction Firefly. However, The IUAW hasn't been neutral in elections since the mid 90's, when they made the bad decision to stop supporting Republicans who historically had supported union issues. This alienated the entire Republican Party and turned them into the union-bashing organization they are today. Though if you are speaking of the IUAW remaining neutral in Democratic primaries, you may be right. Though for some reason I thought I remembered an endorsement for Obama, during the primary. OOOPS. Sorry, I reread your post and you DID state the Clinton/Obama race and not the Rep./Dem. races. Guess I better use my prescription glasses benefit (before they take it away). PS: Yup Souljahboy I never thought I would see our IUAW sticking it to us either, which is why I began thinking, why would they do this? and now of all times? This is the only thing, besides in addition pure greed, I could come up with.

Has anyone considered why Gettlefinger would allow Ford to continually break the contracts with no argument from the IUAW now of all times? Here is my take on this. Decide for yourself if it makes sense, since I am not a believer in coincidence: 1. The UAW was the first union to support Obama against Clinton during the Democratic Party elections. Gettlefinger gained much favor with the Obama supporters during this time. 2. Gettlefinger is retiring soon and has been setting himself up as a "company man" for years, as is obvious by the latest events leading up to our NO vote. Why retire now? Especially considering all of his recent efforts to set himself up in his current lucrative position? 3. With him playing both sides of the fence and gaining favor with the automanufacturers, the media, and the Obama administration he is in a unique position. What position is that? 4. Obama is looking for a "Car Czar" to head up the oversight of Chrysler/GM since the govt. bailout. Guess who the leading candidate is for this position? I would gather it is Gettlefinger. You might think everyone would do a double-take; "What? Let a former UAW union leader run Chrysler and GM?" But you have to remember, this is Washington, where everything isn't what it appears. Everyone is on the take or beholden to some corporation or lobby group. Otherwise, one doesn't get to play at the national level politically. Gettlefinger has manuevered everyone into believing he is "understanding" of both sides' issues and is willing to "compromise" (well except for when it comes to him and his IUAW reps' compensation packages). The only compromising done however has been done by the workers (and I also include some well-respected/liked salaried workers in this statement. They were harrassed, fired, forced to retire, and/or had their compensation packages cut . . . though the level 8's and above remaining will more than likely be compensated well after the Nov. 2 Ford financial results are announced.) I always try to look for the reasons people do what they do . . . I think the above explains why Gettlefinger has so readily betrayed the core values of the UAW and its membership. It has nothing to do with "economics", "the global economy", "efficiency" or any of the other overused and cliched catch-phrases used today, but more to do with Gettlefinger further enriching himself at our expense. I would imagine, he has made promises to create positions for a few of his other "supportive" IUAW reps, if he gets the nomination for the Car Czar job. Does this sound plausible to you? I just hope the latest NO vote has put a wrench in his plans. PS: We blue collar workers do not have any representation in Washington. The Republican and Democratic parties both are beholden to those who would continue to take away our rights, our freedoms and our health and financial well-being. Good luck to us all and thanks to those who have shown us support and who realize "what happens to us, will soon happen to them". Those critical of our work and compensation, believe they are better educated and thus immune from such things . . . however, tell them to ask any well-educated IT professional, computer programmer, and customer service tech how much of their highly skilled work is being performed overseas by cheaper labor today. When I voted I was of the opinion I would rather make a stand now, while I am still young enough to find other work if necessary, rather than wait 6 years and have to work 2 jobs to pay for my kids' college educations and to maintain some measure of my family's current life-style.