danehilby

Funny I keep reading in these forums that TheEagle claims there are four or more people with that name. I went into the forums membership area and there is ONE & only ONE person registered under the pseudonum TheEagle. Either someone was stupid enuf to give out his/hers password or this person has TOO MANY PERSONALITIES!!!!

AGIAN and AGAIN and AGAIN I tell you, everything has to do with the FACT that UAW VEBA owns 17.5% of GM and a whopping 67% of Chrysler. THEY NO LONGER REPRESENT THE COMMON WORKER, THEY REPRESENT VEBA!!!! By the way, anyone have the answer to what happens to all that VEBA money if OBAMACARE passes? Does it go to GOV, to the retirees, to us, to the IUAW????

Ditto on the last one listed here. I would add COLA back in in case we come out of recession & inflation goes thru roof. FULL disclosure on how much we already pay for our own health coverage

Then I am assuming that you agree with me: the UAW cannot possibly be fairly representing the active worker as long as they are putting the VEBA account as their FIRST PRIORITY!!! Perhaps it is time the UAW leadership step aside and let some outside entity represent us until the VEBA matter and its' ownership in both Chrysler & GM is sold out. How about the TEAMSTERS, IAM, or some other union. By the way, I am also assuming that by "stock" you mean assets. As far as I know, there are no stock issues for both GM & Chrysler. Needed to make that clear for all.

THAT DOES NOT MEAN I AND MY BROTHERS/SISTERS OF THE UNION SHOULD PAY FOR THEIR MISTAKE!!!! The IUWA must sell out their portion of both Chrysler & GM and start representing US, not the fatal error of owning such large portions of these companies. THEY CAN NOT SERVE 2 ENTITIES FAIRLY!!!! They are going to represent one and screw the other, or they are going to represent the other to the demise of the one. Please tell me differently!!!! If I may quote the Bible, "No one can slave for 2 masters; for he will hate the one and love the other or he will stick to the one and despise the other!!!!" (Matt 6:24 if you're interested). OOOPS, I guess I did in the paragraph above.

Good Jaah, now you're getting to the heart of the matter. IUAW is deliberately trying to keep our wages down because the UAW VEBA now stands to lose more money by paying us wages. For instance, if we (all workers of the big 3) were to get a $2 raise, the UAW would get an extra $4 from us each month, but (if your 39% holds true, I read at Wikipedia it's 18% for GM, 67% for Chrysler) UAW VEBA would lose 39% of every $2 of hourly wage paid. So, they (UWA VEBA at GM) would gain $48 per year in dues, but lose $1600 a year in profits (their 39% of the wages paid to each worker). UAW VEBA would lose approximately $2680 a year in profits for each worker at Chrysler (their 67% of the wages paid). They screwed up BIG TIME when they decided to go to the VEBA for retirees and they are trying to force us to pay for it.

Do you realize how much you contribute to your own health care as it is? In the '82 contract there was a $0.25 cent deferral, per hour, to your heath care. ATS(At Todays Standards) that equals 57 cents. In the '93 contr we gave up $0.24, ATS that is 34 cents. In 2005, we gave up 17 cents of COLA raise at the time & 2 cents per COLA raise for the next 16 raises (til they took it from us this spring). Also, in 2005, they took our next 3% raise to defer to our health care coverage (worked out to be 96 cents for me as a tradesman). Last, but not least by a LONG RUN, came the 3% Performance Bonus we were to get this last September ( approx $2,500 for me). Add that all up ($2.36 per hour x 2500 hrs this past year, plus the $2500 performance bonus) I paid $8,400 toward my own health care in the past year. Excuse me if I have missed any deferrals, guys. How much have you given up??? And not one measly "Thank You" from the company Instead it's, "Let us bleed you some more!!!!"

You are NO stephen hawkings!! If, by chance, all 3 could get a $2 raise in 2011, then the UAW would get less then a $1,000,000 in new dues from all workers (F,CH,GM) However, if the $2 raise was given (not sure, but let's assume CH 30,000 employees, F 40,000 & GM 50,000), then the wages paid by CH & GM to blue collar employees would come to approx $320,000,000. Since IUAW VEBA owns 67% of CH & 17.5% of GM, that would be $115,400,000 (or thereabouts) in profits lost to wages.

Well, stoupy, ever consider that most likely Gentlefinger will be retired before the 2011 contract? He had been expected to retire by now. Why do you think lacky King will be in his place when Gentlefinger is gone? I believe the rest of the crew down there at IUAW may see through the lacky!!!

Captain723 Super Zip Another train of thought to go along with my last comment: Again, keeping UAW-Ford wages down will keep UAW-GM & UAW-Chrys wages down. Since UAW-VEBA owns over 67% of Chrys & more than 17.5% of GM, if you can't see that keeping all wages & benefits down, maybe you need to update your beany-cap power!!!

Well, Captain723, looks like the pot calling the kettle black! First, Ford is financing it's VEBA Commitment by issuing & selling large portions of stock, driving the price of your Ford stock down. You say the UAW can't profit by these Ford concessions? If UAW-Ford workers concede, then in six years all 3 will be fighting for increases to their wages set at today's standard. However, if the UAW-Ford workers can keep their wages increasing in the next contract, GM & Chrys will probably regain theirs in six years (think Chrys in the 80"s). Therefore, IT DOES profit the UAW to keep UAW-Ford wages & benefits down. Apparently YOU got your education on-line at the University of Self-Thought

Doesn't the UAW now own large portions of GM & Chrys because of the VEBA Commitments? If they can keep Wages & Benefits at lower costs in all of Big 3, will they not profit from this? Can someone enlighten me on this?

Is it only the company asking for this?? Remember, because of the bankruptcy of Chrys & GM, the UAW owns large protions of these companies due to the VEBA Commitment. If UAW-FORD has the right to strike for wages when the cost of living skyrockets when we come out of this recession, in six years UAW-Chrys & UAW-GM will want their wages increase back up to UAW-FORD levels (remember UAW-Chrys in the mid 80's). In other words, because of the amount of ownership the UAW has over these companies, THEY stand to make money by all of these concessions and any other concessions they can negotiate in later years.

Way to go Sheldon Road. I am voting NO. Did it dawn on anyone who stands to gain if this passes? If wages at all three (GM, CHR, FORD) stay as is, if other concession are made? Because of the VEBA Commitment, who owns a large share of Chrys & GM??

Are the rumors true that Bob King releaved one of the Election Committee at one of these votes so HE could oversee the voting???? I heard it was WAP but I am not sure. Was told by someone here at the Van Dyke Plant that it was his relative that was replaced by King. Someone please verify!!

Eagle, here we go again. I am young enuf to have been laid off in 79' from FORD and not be recalled until 90', living 8 years under the poverty level. While laid off I received a BBA in Accouting. With a working knowledge of financial matters, I know what can happen during recessions (lived thru several), lived where unemployment was over 30%. I clearly see that FORD is in a good financial shape and understand that the 2011 prediction of profitability are probably over exagerations. Profitability will most likely come early next year, probably 2nd quarter and FoMoCo will not look back for a very long time. Why? Because they finally have someone in control that understands that the market nowadays revolves around QUALITY. But remember this, the man in charge has made enuf money the past couple of years to pay each one of us the $600 "Perfromance Bonus" we are going to get (did you forget taxes?) out of his own pocket. Another thing you should know & or remember is that in the early 80's workers gave up $0.25 (some old geezers swear it was $1.25) for our own health coverage and again during the 93-96 contract we gave up another $0.24 for our coverage. Compounding the inflation rate for those years up to 2009, it works out that we are paying about $0.90 an hour for our own health care. But you never see that in any writings anywhere. Please ask yourself, "Why?". Using a 40 hour work week for 52 weeks, we are paying about $1870 a year. That is right, I do my homework!

Well Eagle, you may be out of your house before you are out of your job. If inflation takes off within the next six years like it did in the early 90's, the late 70's or God Forbid, like it did during & after WWI, many people could be looking at VERY HARD TIMES ahead. You'll be begging FORD to build you a Shanty Town like the likes of what people have in Mexico City, India, or many other poor parts of the world.

Get your head out of the sand, 900ranger. It was less than a year ago when Mulally told a Congressional Committee who asked HIM to give concessions, "No, I'm good where I'm at!" You can be sure that if inflation takes off in the next few years that he will get raises to compensate. The average yearly inflation rate in the U.S. since it became a nation is 3%. Compound that annually for six years, it comes out to 19.4%. What cost a $1 at the beginning of year one would cost $1.20 at the end of six years. During and after the recession of the early 90"s, inflation crept up 30%, during the late 70's inflation flamed up 70% in six measly years and shortly after WWI inflation skyrocketed 100% in six years. What cost $1 in 1915 cost $2 in 1920. Now maybe you still live with Mommy & Daddy that you don't have to worry about such a thing happening, but me and my family do have to worry. If inflation takes off after this recession is over, many of us could lose our car, our house, perhaps even most of our belongings. In other words, my vote is a NO vote. Before you vote YES you better make sure you aren't getting kicked out of your free room & board at your parents.