Buyout Packages

[level]

Oh, little simple Melanie.

 

Dreams of living the big life, doesn't realise that $150G isn't even a year's wages for some of us.

 

Of course, that's what an educated person gets paid. Not that she'd know.

 

 

I agree partially.

 

The way I see it, the last round of buyouts din't really buy out any tradesmen that were not going within a year anyway. So the 35K was just a bonus handshake they were not expecting. Some of them decided they were going within another year, and rather than work for about double that in take home, they decided to go slightly early. That makes sense when you add it all up, the 35K plus social security (or the supplement) plus the pension - versus- working another year. You would be basically working for free.

 

Now:

 

The next round of buyouts would have to be targeted, to reach deeper. To those that are planning to go in another one to three years from now. This would require additional funds to shore up such retirement plans in order to go early. Don't know how much, but more IMO. I personally felt that a years severance for any salary, production or trades folks would suffice, but the trades did not make out in this manner. So I am not saying they deserve more for any reason other than, they are not planning to go this early for their own personal finance reasons. Therefore to me, it only makes sense to give them more, in order for them to meet their retirement finance plans - That is if you want them to go. Otherwise they'll just say NO. Just my opinion again. This time around though, the "targeting" should help, but I'll play wait and see like the rest of you will also. It's really hard to predict take rates, let alone target groups or classifications that are red-circled to confine the buyouts to the extra manpower. Good luck to all of us on that one.

[paris]

I agree partially.

 

The way I see it, the last round of buyouts din't really buy out any tradesmen that were not going within a year anyway. So the 35K was just a bonus handshake they were not expecting. Some of them decided they were going within another year, and rather than work for about double that in take home, they decided to go slightly early. That makes sense when you add it all up, the 35K plus social security (or the supplement) plus the pension - versus- working another year. You would be basically working for free.

 

Now:

 

The next round of buyouts would have to be targeted, to reach deeper. To those that are planning to go in another one to three years from now. This would require additional funds to shore up such retirement plans in order to go early. Don't know how much, but more IMO. I personally felt that a years severance for any salary, production or trades folks would suffice, but the trades did not make out in this manner. So I am not saying they deserve more for any reason other than, they are not planning to go this early for their own personal finance reasons. Therefore to me, it only makes sense to give them more, in order for them to meet their retirement finance plans - That is if you want them to go. Otherwise they'll just say NO. Just my opinion again. This time around though, the "targeting" should help, but I'll play wait and see like the rest of you will also. It's really hard to predict take rates, let alone target groups or classifications that are red-circled to confine the buyouts to the extra manpower. Good luck to all of us on that one.

Marty would never stoop to something as low as this. Are you kidding me Level? Why do I feel like you are hoping that the trades are targeted for a higher monetary incentive to retire? Are you giving us a little insight into your identity?

Edited November 26, 2007 by paris

[level]

Marty would never stoop to something as low as this. Are you kidding me Level? Why do I feel like you are hoping that the trades are targeted for a higher monetary incentive to retire? Are you giving us a little insight into your identity?

 

ARGHHHHHHH!!!!!

 

I knew when I typed it, that it would be taken wrong by someone. The first response I made was more trades oriented due to the fact that I was responding to a trades oriented remark. Allow me to clarify mey entire postion.

 

Here is my background philosophy.

 

A salary guy gets a package offered. It equals on year severance pay @ 70K. That is what they are offering now right? About a one year severance. If he is retiring, fine, if not he has a year to find other work.

 

A production guy gets offered a package, @ 35K, if he is retiring fine, if not he has about 6 months to find a job. About 7 months pay based on current wages = NOT ENOUGH

 

A Trades guy gets offered a package @ 35K, if he is retiring fine, if not he has about 3 months to find a job. About 3-4 months wages= NOT ENOUGH

 

My point is that this is the second round, which means that the buyouts upcoming are buying out into the future retirements, enticing them to leave even "earlier" than 1 year into the future.

 

That to me, means more money needs to be offered IMO, so it is more on par with the salary seperations. That means trades and production - not salary need more. Is that clearer for you?

Edited November 26, 2007 by level

[paris]

ARGHHHHHHH!!!!!

 

I knew when I typed it, that it would be taken wrong by someone. The first response I made was more trades oriented due to the fact that I was responding to a trades oriented remark. Allow me to clarify mey entire postion.

 

Here is my background philosophy.

 

A salary guy gets a package offered. It equals on year severance pay @ 70K. That is what they are offering now right? About a one year severance. If he is retiring, fine, if not he has a year to find other work.

 

A production guy gets offered a package, @ 35K, if he is retiring fine, if not he has about 6 months to find a job. About 7 months pay based on current wages = NOT ENOUGH

 

A Trades guy gets offered a package @ 35K, if he is retiring fine, if not he has about 3 months to find a job. About 3-4 months wages= NOT ENOUGH

 

My point is that this is the second round, which means that the buyouts upcoming are buying out into the future retirements, enticing them to leave even "earlier" than 1 year into the future.

 

That to me, means more money needs to be offered IMO, so it is more on par with the salary seperations. That means trades and production - not salary need more. Is that clearer for you?

Level,

Why are you hung up on the 35K thing? We will NEVER offer anything more than that; as a gift to those who are already retirement eligible. We will continue to use the special termination of employment incentive packages, to reduce the number of employees as necessary while targeting the younger groups of employees. We can utilize our excess trades in various facilities throughout the country by allowing flowback opportunities. You know this! Sorry 'bout the spellin!

[level]

Level,

Why are you hung up on the 35K thing? We will NEVER offer anything more than that; as a gift to those who are already retirement eligible. We will continue to use the special termination of employment incentive packages, to reduce the number of employees as necessary while targeting the younger groups of employees. We can utilize our excess trades in various facilities throughout the country by allowing flowback opportunities. You know this! Sorry 'bout the spellin!

 

You are an optimist if you are predicting take rate to suffice overage via current package amounts.

 

I watched GM and Chrysler offer trades buyouts in Kokomo and elsewhere, they couldn't get enough, so they kept upping the ante. Their last offer, this National contract is at 70K to increase take rate. The 35K wasn't getting it, and mathematically it still is a better option for the Company, than paying a tradesman two years in JSP at @ $31.00 X 4,160 hours = 128,960.

 

If we don't get a high enough take rate, the option is to give more in order to save some money. That is unless you are happy spending the JSP funds until they run out. I am not!

[paris]

You are an optimist if you are predicting take rate to suffice overage via current package amounts.

 

I watched GM and Chrysler offer trades buyouts in Kokomo and elsewhere, they couldn't get enough, so they kept upping the ante. Their last offer, this National contract is at 70K to increase take rate. The 35K wasn't getting it, and mathematically it still is a better option for the Company, than paying a tradesman two years in JSP at @ $31.00 X 4,160 hours = 128,960.

 

If we don't get a high enough take rate, the option is to give more in order to save some money. That is unless you are happy spending the JSP funds until they run out. I am not!

You wasn't watching very closely Level. Chrysler ended up hiring trades people because they had so many people take their buyout offer. They actually have a fair number of ex-Ford employees working there now. What trade classification are you being paid as? Please don't tell me you are a Pipefitter. I dont seem to be able to get along with them very well.

[eaglette88]

You are an optimist if you are predicting take rate to suffice overage via current package amounts.

 

I watched GM and Chrysler offer trades buyouts in Kokomo and elsewhere, they couldn't get enough, so they kept upping the ante. Their last offer, this National contract is at 70K to increase take rate. The 35K wasn't getting it, and mathematically it still is a better option for the Company, than paying a tradesman two years in JSP at @ $31.00 X 4,160 hours = 128,960.

 

If we don't get a high enough take rate, the option is to give more in order to save some money. That is unless you are happy spending the JSP funds until they run out. I am not!

 

Count on the Skilled Trades buyouts to be more than the previous offers. My 2 cents, I agree with Level. :shades:

[level]

What trade classification are you being paid as?

 

What a clever play on words.

 

Yes I am watching closely. Chrysler doesn't have 1500 trades sitting at ACH that need jobs, as well as several other closing facilities that will need jobs by 2010, plus the current 400 plus in JSP.

 

If you think that the current 35K is going to clean that mess up, then you are sadly mistaken. You didn't even get the required take rate the last offer.

 

My opinion stands, and it is simple logic really. A business case rationale states that anywhere up to 128K would pay off with sooner realized attrition and save JSP funding the difference between whatever amount and two years pay at 40 hours.

[paris]

What a clever play on words.

 

Yes I am watching closely. Chrysler doesn't have 1500 trades sitting at ACH that need jobs, as well as several other closing facilities that will need jobs by 2010, plus the current 400 plus in JSP.

 

If you think that the current 35K is going to clean that mess up, then you are sadly mistaken. You didn't even get the required take rate the last offer.

 

My opinion stands, and it is simple logic really. A business case rationale states that anywhere up to 128K would pay off with sooner realized attrition and save JSP funding the difference between whatever amount and two years pay at 40 hours.

I like your logic but we will likely float the 35K again to specific groups just for the hell of it. Your business case doesn't take into consideration the views of our shareholders or public opinion. They are getting a little weary of what they view as a bunch of already highly paid employees holding the company for ransom in order to recieve additional money to quit or retire. Further, public opinion is frowning on companies for continuing these costly programs. I know this isn't what anyone wants to hear. Remember, these decisions are not made by any one individual. As you know, the union will have very little, if any say in this matter. Quite frankly Level, I would have thought that a good union man would be trying very hard to DISCOURAGE these programs because you are losing good, dues paying members. On the contrary, you are right in the middle of the debate about how much the company will pay to get rid of people. Kinda makes me suspicious of you. :shades:

[unionj]

Anyone ever contemplate that they just close said plants at end of contract and say bye bye and thanks very much? They could right?

[level]

I like your logic but we will likely float the 35K again to specific groups just for the hell of it. Your business case doesn't take into consideration the views of our shareholders or public opinion. They are getting a little weary of what they view as a bunch of already highly paid employees holding the company for ransom in order to recieve additional money to quit or retire. Further, public opinion is frowning on companies for continuing these costly programs. I know this isn't what anyone wants to hear. Remember, these decisions are not made by any one individual. As you know, the union will have very little, if any say in this matter. Quite frankly Level, I would have thought that a good union man would be trying very hard to DISCOURAGE these programs because you are losing good, dues paying members. On the contrary, you are right in the middle of the debate about how much the company will pay to get rid of people. Kinda makes me suspicious of you. :shades:

 

The fact of the matter is - the Union has all of the input, as far as this- If we say you are not making any offers to our people- then you don't make any offers, and you will pay them to sit in the JSP.

 

Now since we have that much authority, don't you think we will have some say?

 

If you say no, then appaently you are lower on the totem pole that you allude to be.

 

Secondly, the Union is not just about dues, which I know a Company person cannot understand it all not "being about money". We are about "people". And it would behoove us, as a Union, to encourage the enhanced buyout of our "close to retirement" people to allow them to go early, so that we have jobs for our ACH members and those whose plants are going to close. All of this being said, we are also concerneed at the cost of these people sitting on their asses, since a loss to Ford is a loss to our future job security. If the Company loses so do we. On top of that the JSP funds are not there to be blown, but have a legitimate purpose that needs to be spent wisely.

 

Sooooooo, again, if it makes monetary business sense to the Company's bottom line, then it makes sense to the shareholders, so you are full of shit about that one.

 

And Fuck "public perception", don't even tell me a Company puke has a handle on this one. If you did, we would be already be recognized for our quality improvements. If you did, we would have designed vehicles that people wanted to buy and not be in this predicament to begin with.

 

You make me laugh, and you question me because I say "save money by buying out those ahead of time who will go in the future to save money and jobs for those who wish to remain", all in order to make this Company survive so we all have jobs?

 

That is called caring for people. Something you Company fucks know nothing about, along with not understanding how to save money.

 

Maybe you are right, and we should keep everyone in the JSP with nowhere to go, deplete the 944 million dollars in it. Deplete the Sub fund, re-activate the GIS and send this Comapny down the shitter so fucks like you can go put in your resumes at MacDonalds.

 

How dare you question my integrity you stupid fuck.

 

[wixommm]

Paris just take off the gloves and leave the ring, you have lost this round. Gee Level no mincing of words with you so I see. Good job.

[level]

Paris just take off the gloves and leave the ring, you have lost this round. Gee Level no mincing of words with you so I see. Good job.

 

Thank you my friend. Although I have differed with paris before, I felt like my credibility was being questioned in a forum of my peers. I don't like that. Although I have a quick temper, I am sincere, even when I say Go fuck yourself I really mean it from the heart. That's the way I roll.

 

Peace Wixommm.

[Captain723]

The fact of the matter is - the Union has all of the input, as far as this- If we say you are not making any offers to our people- then you don't make any offers, and you will pay them to sit in the JSP.

 

Now since we have that much authority, don't you think we will have some say?

 

If you say no, then appaently you are lower on the totem pole that you allude to be.

 

Secondly, the Union is not just about dues, which I know a Company person cannot understand it all not "being about money". We are about "people". And it would behoove us, as a Union, to encourage the enhanced buyout of our "close to retirement" people to allow them to go early, so that we have jobs for our ACH members and those whose plants are going to close. All of this being said, we are also concerneed at the cost of these people sitting on their asses, since a loss to Ford is a loss to our future job security. If the Company loses so do we. On top of that the JSP funds are not there to be blown, but have a legitimate purpose that needs to be spent wisely.

 

Sooooooo, again, if it makes monetary business sense to the Company's bottom line, then it makes sense to the shareholders, so you are full of shit about that one.

 

And Fuck "public perception", don't even tell me a Company puke has a handle on this one. If you did, we would be already be recognized for our quality improvements. If you did, we would have designed vehicles that people wanted to buy and not be in this predicament to begin with.

 

You make me laugh, and you question me because I say "save money by buying out those ahead of time who will go in the future to save money and jobs for those who wish to remain", all in order to make this Company survive so we all have jobs?

 

That is called caring for people. Something you Company fucks know nothing about, along with not understanding how to save money.

 

Maybe you are right, and we should keep everyone in the JSP with nowhere to go, deplete the 944 million dollars in it. Deplete the Sub fund, re-activate the GIS and send this Comapny down the shitter so fucks like you can go put in your resumes at MacDonalds.

 

How dare you question my integrity you stupid fuck.

 

Way to put that salaried fk in his/her place!! This is probably the same Ford salaried FK that drives something other than a ford!!

Hey Paris you just got knocked the fk out!! Now bow down!!

[lep_wrencher]

Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't there a "special" buy-out package for the trades in GM's highlights? I thought I recalled something in there. If so, it may be very possible that Ford will sweeten the pot for the trades.

[level]

Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong, wasn't there a "special" buy-out package for the trades in GM's highlights? I thought I recalled something in there. If so, it may be very possible that Ford will sweeten the pot for the trades.

 

Yes you are correct, both GM and Chrysler. It is pattern, so that is why I expect something similar. The new Ford-UAW language allows for all of the same buyout programs as before - excluding the 140K total buyout, but in the skilled trades and JSP language- it allows for programs to be "expanded" and includes "targeting".

Hey Lep, what is going on with your local contract? Any new news?

[paris]

The fact of the matter is - the Union has all of the input, as far as this- If we say you are not making any offers to our people- then you don't make any offers, and you will pay them to sit in the JSP.

 

Now since we have that much authority, don't you think we will have some say?

 

If you say no, then appaently you are lower on the totem pole that you allude to be.

 

Secondly, the Union is not just about dues, which I know a Company person cannot understand it all not "being about money". We are about "people". And it would behoove us, as a Union, to encourage the enhanced buyout of our "close to retirement" people to allow them to go early, so that we have jobs for our ACH members and those whose plants are going to close. All of this being said, we are also concerneed at the cost of these people sitting on their asses, since a loss to Ford is a loss to our future job security. If the Company loses so do we. On top of that the JSP funds are not there to be blown, but have a legitimate purpose that needs to be spent wisely.

 

Sooooooo, again, if it makes monetary business sense to the Company's bottom line, then it makes sense to the shareholders, so you are full of shit about that one.

 

And Fuck "public perception", don't even tell me a Company puke has a handle on this one. If you did, we would be already be recognized for our quality improvements. If you did, we would have designed vehicles that people wanted to buy and not be in this predicament to begin with.

 

You make me laugh, and you question me because I say "save money by buying out those ahead of time who will go in the future to save money and jobs for those who wish to remain", all in order to make this Company survive so we all have jobs?

 

That is called caring for people. Something you Company fucks know nothing about, along with not understanding how to save money.

 

Maybe you are right, and we should keep everyone in the JSP with nowhere to go, deplete the 944 million dollars in it. Deplete the Sub fund, re-activate the GIS and send this Comapny down the shitter so fucks like you can go put in your resumes at MacDonalds.

 

How dare you question my integrity you stupid fuck.

 

Wow Level!

You are absolutely correct on your first sentence. And, I think you will agree that most of your local union presidents have had major issues with the buyout programs over the last few years. Some have even had to be "convinced" to go along with the wishes of the international union concerning these buyouts. Many of them have seen their membership shrink to the point that they can barely keep the union hall open because of the dues money they no longer recieve. The union CAN make the decision to not cooperate with the company concerning the buyout of their members. However, you have zero input on the amount of any monetary offering that may be made to individual groups.

Now, what I think has happened to you is that way back when you initially started posting on this forum, Furious1Auto went around and spread it all over this site that you were a international rep. I think this kinda went to your head and you are now playing on it. The fact is, we both know better than that, don't we? :shades: I think the amount of money that may be offered to skilled trades is VERY important to you. You want it to be higher than it was previously, so that you can take it this time. Stop the act Level.

[Pipefitter]

You wasn't watching very closely Level. Chrysler ended up hiring trades people because they had so many people take their buyout offer. They actually have a fair number of ex-Ford employees working there now. What trade classification are you being paid as? Please don't tell me you are a Pipefitter. I dont seem to be able to get along with them very well.

 

 

Well that's "one" thing you got right!

Especially this one!

[level]

Wow Level!

You are absolutely correct on your first sentence. And, I think you will agree that most of your local union presidents have had major issues with the buyout programs over the last few years. Some have even had to be "convinced" to go along with the wishes of the international union concerning these buyouts. Many of them have seen their membership shrink to the point that they can barely keep the union hall open because of the dues money they no longer recieve. The union CAN make the decision to not cooperate with the company concerning the buyout of their members. However, you have zero input on the amount of any monetary offering that may be made to individual groups.

Now, what I think has happened to you is that way back when you initially started posting on this forum, Furious1Auto went around and spread it all over this site that you were a international rep. I think this kinda went to your head and you are now playing on it. The fact is, we both know better than that, don't we? :shades: I think the amount of money that may be offered to skilled trades is VERY important to you. You want it to be higher than it was previously, so that you can take it this time. Stop the act Level.

 

No one's "acting" asshole, I would never even consider a buyout - no matter what the amount. I have many good years ahead of me to stick around and fuck with the likes of you.

Just more wishful thinking on your part.

 

I'll quit playing fuck around now, and time will prove one of us right or wrong very shortly here.

 

And once again, I would just like to say to you:

 

[paris]

No one's "acting" asshole, I would never even consider a buyout - no matter what the amount. I have many good years ahead of me to stick around and fuck with the likes of you.

Just more wishful thinking on your part.

 

I'll quit playing fuck around now, and time will prove one of us right or wrong very shortly here.

 

And once again, I would just like to say to you:

 

That's just funny Level.

Edited November 27, 2007 by paris

[paris]

Thank you my friend. Although I have differed with paris before, I felt like my credibility was being questioned in a forum of my peers. I don't like that. Although I have a quick temper, I am sincere, even when I say Go fuck yourself I really mean it from the heart. That's the way I roll.

 

Peace Wixommm.

Edited November 27, 2007 by paris

[Captain723]

No one's "acting" asshole, I would never even consider a buyout - no matter what the amount. I have many good years ahead of me to stick around and fuck with the likes of you.

Just more wishful thinking on your part.

 

I'll quit playing fuck around now, and time will prove one of us right or wrong very shortly here.

 

And once again, I would just like to say to you:

 

Hey Level...don't waste your time with this suckretary!!!!! This sack of sht is low on the totem pole and is just guessing on what may happen!! Another uninformed salaried fk trying to guess the company's next move!

[level]

Hey Level...don't waste your time with this suckretary!!!!! This sack of sht is low on the totem pole and is just guessing on what may happen!! Another uninformed salaried fk trying to guess the company's next move!

 

 

Hey Captain!

 

Yah your right. I never did like the French anyway!

 

Her's a fitting sign for paris!

 

[soon2bout]

I hate to say it but i think the only BUY OUT anyone is gonna get is BYE CAUSE YOUR OUT just regular layoffs !!!!

[gunnut69]

Simply put my management friend, the reason that we are worth more than the previous buyouts were worth, is because Ford wants to get rid of us now. For the most part, most of us have not asked to be bought out, we elected not to take the previous package. The company believes that they need 10K to 13K more employees to leave. Originally FORD put the buyouts on the table to coax people into leaving. It wasn't a good enough deal for some, so they declined to apply for the buyout package.

 

Now, as Ford is so used to telling us, we are in a tough market. It's supply and demand that determines the value of things. We are a commodity that Ford 'contracted' for a wage and benefit package. Previously, Ford determined that they no longer needed all of the commodity that they had, so they offered a monetary buyout to their 'contracted' employees. They simply put a value that they deemed fair, on the employee's contract, in order to buy out some of those employee's contracts. We all saw this during the last round of buyouts. Some chose to accept Ford's offer and accepted it as a fair value for their contract. In this new contract, Ford has again set a monetary value (though we don't know what that value is yet) on the 10K to 13K employees that they want to get rid of under this new employee contract. Because the people who are still under contract with Ford didn't believe that what Ford offered for their contract in the last round of buyouts was adequate, obviously the value of their contracts must be worth more to them. Business dictates that Ford will have to offer more money to the remaining contracted employees in order to entice them to accept the buyout offer and relinquish their employment given them under their new contract. Otherwise why would they accept a buyout now? The specter of not knowing what their next contract will say is gone. THAT IS WHAT MAKES THEM WORTH MORE MONEY THAN THOSE PREVIOUSLY BOUGHT OUT BY FORD. THESE EMPLOYEES ARE UNDER (or will be under) A LEGAL CONTRACT THAT FORD HAS NEGOTIATED WITH THEM. They have the right under that contract to decide whether they want to be bought out or take a chance at what Ford will do next. It is a gamble for some, but it is their right under contract to take that gamble. That's why they call it doing business. JUST ONE MORE THING, I HAVE FOUND THAT JUST BECAUSE A COMPANY HAS THE ABILITY TO DO SOMETHING, THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY SHOULD ALWAYS DO IT. THEY SHOULD LEAD BY EXAMPLE OR THEY WILL FIND THAT THEY SET AN EXAMPLE THAT THEY CAN'T LEAD!!!

 

 

ok,well as i read this post and others,even though they are old,let me say a few things.while i understand what this post is meant to say,and it does make a point,since our new contract is worse than the old one with stagnant wages and some give backs then by this posts logic the buyout offer will be LESS than before.

 

its not a matter of how much we are worth,if it was they would be paying us to stay,not leave

 

its a matter of how much ford is willing to pay to get us out. the more they offer the longer it takes them to realize a savings from it.that is unless we are immediately replaced by new hires,then the savings are immediate as well as ongoing.