ANTAUS Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 LINK-Detroit News Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 LINK-Detroit News I'm sorry, but IMO, anyone working for the big 3 (or just about any company) who goes on strike now doesn't deserve to have a job. There are so many people out of work who would love to be in that employee's position, they should be allowed to step in and take over for the on-strike employee. A job is not a right...it is a privilege, and people now just don't realize it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nvsked Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 (edited) I'm sorry, but IMO, anyone working for the big 3 (or just about any company) who goes on strike now doesn't deserve to have a job. There are so many people out of work who would love to be in that employee's position, they should be allowed to step in and take over for the on-strike employee. A job is not a right...it is a privilege, and people now just don't realize it. You could volunteer to give up your job to one of those deserving souls, assuming you're a Ford worker or you are working ................................................................................ ............................................................................. Let me rephrase my statement for those who have taken it out of context. The ultimate act of sympathy for all those people out of work would be to volunteer to give up their job in favor of a more deserving soul. So please don't aim your conscience at union people, (people on strike) because of the perceived bias you appear to have toward union affiliation. Based on the statement above, any demand place on a human in the name of a job is ok because of the privilege bestowed upon that human by the company. If your asked to put yourself in danger consider it a privilege, your lucky to have a job...yeah okay. And if you don't think these situations occur then you obviously never worked inside a manufacturing plant. Edited January 10, 2009 by nvsked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
navlys32 Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Are there laws that stop the big 3 from bringing in scab workers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 You could volunteer to give up your job to one of those deserving souls, assuming you're a Ford worker or you are working He's not the one threatening strike. Why should he volunteer to give up his job? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark270 Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 He's not the one threatening strike. Why should he volunteer to give up his job? no one is 'threatening' a strike, this just makes the union, more powerful...if we do strike, loans are gone... also there is a no strike clause in the '07 contract. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonj80 Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Are there laws that stop the big 3 from bringing in scab workers? No, they -- UAW would sue saying the company didn't barging in good faith and such, which would take years in the courts to figure out. Are you really going to wait years to find a job and even when you come back you might not come back for what you wanted anyways you might get the first offer the company put down. Members in the past have gone after Scab workers and such, but I have a feeling that some (30%-40%)would cross the picket line. When your family isn't eating and you're going to lose your house it makes you have different priorities. Especially for those that think they are carrying the work for lazy workers. It would end up being settled by the courts 3 years from now. Look at Caterpillar in the 80's. Unions are largely outdated today, Union's used to have huge advantage because members always stuck together. One union went on strike the other wouldn’t cross the line. Well now you're a Union Trucker and GM is on strike you cant be forced to cross the picket line, but if GM is running and you don't -- another trucker will to feed his family. Unions members would only buy union made products and shop at unionized stores, now most don't even care. Unions had a lot of power when they would stick together, but now union members stab each other in the back every day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grbeck Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Much ado about nothing...if anything, both sides want to look like they are bargaining while waiting until Obama takes office, in the hope that he will work to change the terms of the "loan" agreement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 no one is 'threatening' a strike, this just makes the union, more powerful...if we do strike, loans are gone... It makes the unions weaker -- if you do strike, all your jobs are gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 It makes the unions weaker -- if you do strike, all your jobs are gone. You'd be amazed how many union folks don't understand that, or think it's better to show solidarity and lose their jobs than to give in to the company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lquidspine Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 (edited) You'd be amazed how many union folks don't understand that, or think it's better to show solidarity and lose their jobs than to give in to the company. Strike is always a possibility. I am not saying the UAW will or that it is even being talked about, contrary to what you think most realize strike now means death to GM and Chrysler. No one wants to not have a job, but lets be honest if it means we make WalMart wages then why would we not ? At that point job or no job the majority of workers would have to file bankruptcy anyway so what would it matter ? Besides I would argue that the UAW has been "giving in to the company" since 2005 to keep the D3 viable, so why would we now stop negotiating in good faith ? Edited January 9, 2009 by lquidspine Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snooter Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 we lost our dodge dealer (munganast dodge) here last week and this is a good size suburb next to st louis..then today it was announced they were again a dodge dealer...what the hell?..so i walk into my yoda dealership for the free coffee and donuts (yoda dealers give ya free shit like that) thinking of maybe getting a new dodge ram...well i leave and low and behold i came on here and find the bastards in detroit wanna strike...ok thats well and good but i say just shut em all down...the idea of striking at this time is just plain stupid.....oh well...i can still get free donuts and coffee from the yoda guys....the logic out there at this time is truly amazing..simply amazing (yum..yoda donuts are fresh and good) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Greene Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 (edited) A threatened strike would erode any support from the public that is left. I heard Obama say on TV....GM and Chrysler had better take this life line from the Bush administration seriously. He didn't sound too interested in modifying the terms. If I were the Union, I would not count on the Obama administration to be any easier to deal with than Bush and company. Even if they did support him sorta. Edited January 9, 2009 by Ralph Greene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 i came on here and find the bastards in detroit wanna strike... Nobody in the Union has even suggested a strike. This is just the newspapers reporting that there is anti-strike language in the bailout fine print. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 A threatened strike would erode any support from the public that is left. Nobody has threatened a strike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark270 Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 (edited) It makes the unions weaker -- if you do strike, all your jobs are gone. no, it does not, it's a catch 22, if we or gm strike, then the COMPANY has to pay back the loans.... it actually makes two sides work more together, to not have a 'nuclear' option.... you can still strike, if need be. AND did you catch this ? there is no strike language in the '07 contract.... SO ? Edited January 9, 2009 by dark271 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 Nobody has threatened a strike. Exactly, the UAW's name is being blackened after they accepted cancellation of Jobs bank and big concessions in VEBA transfers. GM wants to renegotiate because they can't manage their company. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 9, 2009 Share Posted January 9, 2009 striking now, or even in the near future would show a similar intelligence level as OJ in vegas...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplesituations Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 there is no strike coming, just journalism guesstimationg on what could happen when there hasn't even been a discussion of a strike, most people will read the headlines and just twist this out of control, again, spectacular journalism Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildosvt Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 there is no strike coming, just journalism guesstimationg on what could happen when there hasn't even been a discussion of a strike, most people will read the headlines and just twist this out of control, again, spectacular journalism I have to 2nd this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 He's not the one threatening strike. Why should he volunteer to give up his job? Kinda what I was thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 No one wants to not have a job, but lets be honest if it means we make WalMart wages then why would we not ? Ford isn't stupid enough to make such a demand because even if it won all of the workers would quit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nvsked Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 (edited) He's not the one threatening strike. Why should he volunteer to give up his job? Nobody is threatening a strike.Nobody is threatening a strike.Nobody is threatening a strike.Nobody is threatening a strike.Nobody is threatening a strike.Nobody is threatening a strike.Nobody is threatening a strike.Nobody is threatening a strike.Nobody is threatening a strike.Nobody is threatening a strike. Edited January 10, 2009 by nvsked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suv_guy_19 Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 Nobody is threatening a strike. So what you're saying is, you're planning to strike? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nvsked Posted January 10, 2009 Share Posted January 10, 2009 It makes the unions weaker -- if you do strike, all your jobs are gone. Wishful thinking or your physic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.