BTV to SHV Transferee Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Hello All, I am a retiree from the Sharonville Transmission Plant. I have read the new modifications. I have had the whole thing explained to me. I couldnt make it to the Local meeting on Wednesday, but from what I'm told only about 250 between 3 shifts bothered to show up. (250 out of 1600) First of all, the VEBA wasnt touched and I thank the IUAW for that. Jan 1, 2010, I'll then be on VEBA! YES, In March of this year, the INTL gave up COLA, but that was going to be lost anyway because of the math equation used for COLA and the actual cost of living had gone down by $.99, COLA was at $1.03 with a $.05 defferment to VEBA anyway, so you wasnt getting COLA. But COLA has been suspendid and if the cost of living goes back up, you will be missing COLA, at least until Sept 2011. YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended JSP (GEN). YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended ETAP YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended NVRAP for those on layoff (although that has been re-implemented) YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended the Day after Easter holiday YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended the Christmas Bonus YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended any and all profit sharing bonus's YES, in March the INTL agreement saved the company $500 million a year with the above cuts. Yes, in March the INTL did get TAP for those on ILO and the company did comeback to the INTL to take it back and the INTL told them NO! I was alot concerened about the 'No Strike' clause. That 'No Strike' clause, if you actually read it says that the UAW wont strike over wage IMPROVEMENTS or gains or raises, whatever you want to call it. The UAW can strike if the company tries to reduce wages. This is a one time thing also in 2011, this wont carried be over to 2015. If the UAW asks for a 4% raise and the company counter offers a 1% raise and neither can agree then off to the arbitrator. The arbitrator looks at the offer the company has made at 1% and at the request of 4% that the UAW has made. You will get at least the 1% because that is where the arbitrator has to start. The arbitrator then has to decide if anything above the 1% is awarded to the UAW. In this current modification, show me anywhere it takes money out of your pocket? Show me anywhere it takes jobs away? Some stuff in this agreement, Ford CAN NOT say publicly about because of other vendor contracts would be violated and early next year, those contracts end and Ford will be making those vendor parts back in Ford facilities, where they belong! Money was taken from you in March, but not this time! Read it, then read it again! Go to your meetings and ask the questions, dont let those here on BON make a decision for you. There are those that are stuck in 1965 and they refuse to catch up to the modern times! Romeo, Lima, Cleveland, Sharonville, OHAP, Louisville and several former ACH plants in SE Michigan really, really will be the victors here (possibly Sandusky too) if this passes. Up to 8400 new hires are predicted between late 2010 and 2015! In Sept 2015, the bottom 20% of new hires will stay at that level, the others will bump into the top level! So if they hire 8400, then only the bottom 2100 will be on 2nd tier and the other 6300 will bump into the top tier! I would love to have any plant have a 2nd tier wage problem! That means everyone is back to work! For those not liking the 2nd tier, you need to look at alot of other Union contracts, over 70% have a 2-tier wage system, just ask any that work in the steel mills! If I could vote, I'd give it a YES! Btv to Shv Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichiganTruck_Mafia Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 If I could vote, I'd give it a YES Thankfully, you can't vote. :happy feet: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twincam Harley Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 In regard to your hypothetical scenario of our asking for a 4% raise and the company offering 1%, what if the company offered a 10% wage reduction. Then it goes to arbitration and the judge looks at the contract that states we have to remain competitive with our U.S. competitors including thew transplants. Judge says 10% WAGE REDUCTION. CASE CLOSED! Why would we want to even risk that? Why would we want to give up the right to strike for anything? We don't lose anything with this modification you say? What about the giving the company the right to hire as many entry level employees as they want instead of 20%? What about they have their wages frozen for 6 years? Isn't that "we" losing, since "WE" are the UAW? Like the previous poster said, I am glad you can't vote. Don't worry though, you're great VEBA isn't being touched so that makes you happy and good with this, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WTFisgoingonhere Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) Hello All, I am a retiree from the Sharonville Transmission Plant. I have read the new modifications. I have had the whole thing explained to me. I couldnt make it to the Local meeting on Wednesday, but from what I'm told only about 250 between 3 shifts bothered to show up. (250 out of 1600) First of all, the VEBA wasnt touched and I thank the IUAW for that. Jan 1, 2010, I'll then be on VEBA! YES, In March of this year, the INTL gave up COLA, but that was going to be lost anyway because of the math equation used for COLA and the actual cost of living had gone down by $.99, COLA was at $1.03 with a $.05 defferment to VEBA anyway, so you wasnt getting COLA. But COLA has been suspendid and if the cost of living goes back up, you will be missing COLA, at least until Sept 2011. YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended JSP (GEN). YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended ETAP YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended NVRAP for those on layoff (although that has been re-implemented) YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended the Day after Easter holiday YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended the Christmas Bonus YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended any and all profit sharing bonus's YES, in March the INTL agreement saved the company $500 million a year with the above cuts. Yes, in March the INTL did get TAP for those on ILO and the company did comeback to the INTL to take it back and the INTL told them NO! I was alot concerened about the 'No Strike' clause. That 'No Strike' clause, if you actually read it says that the UAW wont strike over wage IMPROVEMENTS or gains or raises, whatever you want to call it. The UAW can strike if the company tries to reduce wages. This is a one time thing also in 2011, this wont carried be over to 2015. If the UAW asks for a 4% raise and the company counter offers a 1% raise and neither can agree then off to the arbitrator. The arbitrator looks at the offer the company has made at 1% and at the request of 4% that the UAW has made. You will get at least the 1% because that is where the arbitrator has to start. The arbitrator then has to decide if anything above the 1% is awarded to the UAW. In this current modification, show me anywhere it takes money out of your pocket? Show me anywhere it takes jobs away? Some stuff in this agreement, Ford CAN NOT say publicly about because of other vendor contracts would be violated and early next year, those contracts end and Ford will be making those vendor parts back in Ford facilities, where they belong! Money was taken from you in March, but not this time! Read it, then read it again! Go to your meetings and ask the questions, dont let those here on BON make a decision for you. There are those that are stuck in 1965 and they refuse to catch up to the modern times! Romeo, Lima, Cleveland, Sharonville, OHAP, Louisville and several former ACH plants in SE Michigan really, really will be the victors here (possibly Sandusky too) if this passes. Up to 8400 new hires are predicted between late 2010 and 2015! In Sept 2015, the bottom 20% of new hires will stay at that level, the others will bump into the top level! So if they hire 8400, then only the bottom 2100 will be on 2nd tier and the other 6300 will bump into the top tier! I would love to have any plant have a 2nd tier wage problem! That means everyone is back to work! For those not liking the 2nd tier, you need to look at alot of other Union contracts, over 70% have a 2-tier wage system, just ask any that work in the steel mills! If I could vote, I'd give it a YES! Btv to Shv MICKEY,tell us all about your uaw history if your retired I say retarted but tell us about the battle of the overpass what was that for? The right to strike right, that alone kills it for me. why do you think they want this in there? theres a reason it,s like baseball arbitration in 2011 the company and union will disagree on wages we may want 1% raise they will want 10% decrease then it goes to arbitration now witch way do you think it,s going to go.You say all on BON are living in 1965 the supposed time you were a ford worker you dissapoint me that you lost your drive for whats right but you got yours so be happy you got it.Now your other 3 personalities are young low seniority scared bitches who need to man up. :happy feet: Edited October 22, 2009 by WTFisgoingonhere Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichiganTruck_Mafia Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Don't worry though, you're great VEBA isn't being touched so that makes you happy and good with this, right? Yeah, that's what it's all about. He gets the same pay/benefits for sitting on his ass, so to hell with those that still have to work for a living. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feegsit Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Thankfully, you can't vote. :happy feet: AMEN, brother! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sun3 Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 AMEN, brother! Everyone on this site always has very derogatory comments about the ones who have retired and I don't get it! They are the ones who blazed the trail for us and we don't show them any respect??? Remember, God willing you will be retired one day and we should be protecting all the retirees rights because they will be our rights soon. The knowledge of the retirees is also very important, we should all be smart enough to sort through the b.s. by now. Most of us have parents who helped us get our jobs, remember them when you cut down retirees! As for the contract 'no strike' clause, I always thought you could stirke for health and safety and the union always found a way to do that when they were really fighting for something else. Until I get a chance to see for myself without someones elses opinion, I will not decide on my vote and you shouldn't either. Check it out on paper, not from your teammates mouth, make an informative and intelligent vote--as we always should. Also, the comment about the retiree having an opinion and sitting on their ass--they earned that remember, and one day you hopefully will have earned it too! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MichiganTruck_Mafia Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Also, the comment about the retiree having an opinion and sitting on their ass--they earned that remember, and one day you hopefully will have earned it too! Of course they earned it. But if they think that the active employees are going to sacrifice themselves to keep the retirees from giving up anything, they're crazy. This union clearly isn't united, and it's turned into every man for himself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skeptic Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Of course they earned it. But if they think that the active employees are going to sacrifice themselves to keep the retirees from giving up anything, they're crazy. This union clearly isn't united, and it's turned into every man for himself. Thank You I agree .Also if retiree thinks this is a good deal senility has set in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trimdingman Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Thank You I agree .Also if retiree thinks this is a good deal senility has set in. New hires have seen the senior workers sell them out so that they were able to keep their "top tier" wages and benefits. Now the shoe is on the other foot. Soon, as the senior workers retire, it will be the second tier workers in the majority and calling the shots. Many of them will have moved up to the top tier, but the years they spent working for low wages will not be forgotten. When double digit inflation comes back in the near future, and it will, and the retirees see their buying power sinking like a rock because their pensions are frozen, what is going to happen? Are the current workers going to turn the other cheek and sacrifice some of their gains to help the retirees? They will find reasons not to; for instance, they will say that the retirees should have invested their buy-out money, or they don't need as much as younger workers raising a family. The mean-spirited workers will just say let's screw them like they screwed us. The high probability of a "Weimar Republic" style period of hyperinflation should put your COLA front and centre in any negotiations. I can remember a time of high inflation when COLA was sacred. Without it, we would have lost much of our buying power. There is no difference between a wage cut and inflation without a wage increase. They are the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Yeah, that's what it's all about. He gets the same pay/benefits for sitting on his ass, so to hell with those that still have to work for a living. I wouldn't attack him for drawing what he earned, however just because the retirement benies weren't mentioned in the agreement doesn't mean that there is not a change coming! The I-UAW doesn't need membership approval to modify the retiree's coverage levels! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dale143 Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Hello All, I am a retiree from the Sharonville Transmission Plant. I have read the new modifications. I have had the whole thing explained to me. I couldnt make it to the Local meeting on Wednesday, but from what I'm told only about 250 between 3 shifts bothered to show up. (250 out of 1600) First of all, the VEBA wasnt touched and I thank the IUAW for that. Jan 1, 2010, I'll then be on VEBA! YES, In March of this year, the INTL gave up COLA, but that was going to be lost anyway because of the math equation used for COLA and the actual cost of living had gone down by $.99, COLA was at $1.03 with a $.05 defferment to VEBA anyway, so you wasnt getting COLA. But COLA has been suspendid and if the cost of living goes back up, you will be missing COLA, at least until Sept 2011. YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended JSP (GEN). YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended ETAP YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended NVRAP for those on layoff (although that has been re-implemented) YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended the Day after Easter holiday YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended the Christmas Bonus YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended any and all profit sharing bonus's YES, in March the INTL agreement saved the company $500 million a year with the above cuts. Yes, in March the INTL did get TAP for those on ILO and the company did comeback to the INTL to take it back and the INTL told them NO! I was alot concerened about the 'No Strike' clause. That 'No Strike' clause, if you actually read it says that the UAW wont strike over wage IMPROVEMENTS or gains or raises, whatever you want to call it. The UAW can strike if the company tries to reduce wages. This is a one time thing also in 2011, this wont carried be over to 2015. If the UAW asks for a 4% raise and the company counter offers a 1% raise and neither can agree then off to the arbitrator. The arbitrator looks at the offer the company has made at 1% and at the request of 4% that the UAW has made. You will get at least the 1% because that is where the arbitrator has to start. The arbitrator then has to decide if anything above the 1% is awarded to the UAW. In this current modification, show me anywhere it takes money out of your pocket? Show me anywhere it takes jobs away? Some stuff in this agreement, Ford CAN NOT say publicly about because of other vendor contracts would be violated and early next year, those contracts end and Ford will be making those vendor parts back in Ford facilities, where they belong! Money was taken from you in March, but not this time! Read it, then read it again! Go to your meetings and ask the questions, dont let those here on BON make a decision for you. There are those that are stuck in 1965 and they refuse to catch up to the modern times! Romeo, Lima, Cleveland, Sharonville, OHAP, Louisville and several former ACH plants in SE Michigan really, really will be the victors here (possibly Sandusky too) if this passes. Up to 8400 new hires are predicted between late 2010 and 2015! In Sept 2015, the bottom 20% of new hires will stay at that level, the others will bump into the top level! So if they hire 8400, then only the bottom 2100 will be on 2nd tier and the other 6300 will bump into the top tier! I would love to have any plant have a 2nd tier wage problem! That means everyone is back to work! For those not liking the 2nd tier, you need to look at alot of other Union contracts, over 70% have a 2-tier wage system, just ask any that work in the steel mills! If I could vote, I'd give it a YES! Btv to Shv Then let them make an announcement today that they are going to recall the uaw to Michigan and rewrite the offer in 100% clear language with absolutely no confusing debatable wording. So there is absolutely no doubt in our minds that this is a good deal for the membership. Then we can clear our minds and go in and vote on something that is clear and not misleading. No more of this interpretation bull pitting the membership against one another. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sun3 Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 New hires have seen the senior workers sell them out so that they were able to keep their "top tier" wages and benefits. Now the shoe is on the other foot. Soon, as the senior workers retire, it will be the second tier workers in the majority and calling the shots. Many of them will have moved up to the top tier, but the years they spent working for low wages will not be forgotten. When double digit inflation comes back in the near future, and it will, and the retirees see their buying power sinking like a rock because their pensions are frozen, what is going to happen? Are the current workers going to turn the other cheek and sacrifice some of their gains to help the retirees? They will find reasons not to; for instance, they will say that the retirees should have invested their buy-out money, or they don't need as much as younger workers raising a family. The mean-spirited workers will just say let's screw them like they screwed us. The high probability of a "Weimar Republic" style period of hyperinflation should put your COLA front and centre in any negotiations. I can remember a time of high inflation when COLA was sacred. Without it, we would have lost much of our buying power. There is no difference between a wage cut and inflation without a wage increase. They are the same. The retirees cannot vote on anything so why are you blaming them for wages--two tiered or cuts? I really feel sorry for you, you don't see the forest for the trees and hopefully speak for a minority of UAW members. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Romeo400member Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Hello All, I am a retiree from the Sharonville Transmission Plant. I have read the new modifications. I have had the whole thing explained to me. I couldnt make it to the Local meeting on Wednesday, but from what I'm told only about 250 between 3 shifts bothered to show up. (250 out of 1600) First of all, the VEBA wasnt touched and I thank the IUAW for that. Jan 1, 2010, I'll then be on VEBA! YES, In March of this year, the INTL gave up COLA, but that was going to be lost anyway because of the math equation used for COLA and the actual cost of living had gone down by $.99, COLA was at $1.03 with a $.05 defferment to VEBA anyway, so you wasnt getting COLA. But COLA has been suspendid and if the cost of living goes back up, you will be missing COLA, at least until Sept 2011. YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended JSP (GEN). YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended ETAP YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended NVRAP for those on layoff (although that has been re-implemented) YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended the Day after Easter holiday YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended the Christmas Bonus YES, in March of this year the INTL suspended any and all profit sharing bonus's YES, in March the INTL agreement saved the company $500 million a year with the above cuts. Yes, in March the INTL did get TAP for those on ILO and the company did comeback to the INTL to take it back and the INTL told them NO! I was alot concerened about the 'No Strike' clause. That 'No Strike' clause, if you actually read it says that the UAW wont strike over wage IMPROVEMENTS or gains or raises, whatever you want to call it. The UAW can strike if the company tries to reduce wages. This is a one time thing also in 2011, this wont carried be over to 2015. If the UAW asks for a 4% raise and the company counter offers a 1% raise and neither can agree then off to the arbitrator. The arbitrator looks at the offer the company has made at 1% and at the request of 4% that the UAW has made. You will get at least the 1% because that is where the arbitrator has to start. The arbitrator then has to decide if anything above the 1% is awarded to the UAW. In this current modification, show me anywhere it takes money out of your pocket? Show me anywhere it takes jobs away? Some stuff in this agreement, Ford CAN NOT say publicly about because of other vendor contracts would be violated and early next year, those contracts end and Ford will be making those vendor parts back in Ford facilities, where they belong! Money was taken from you in March, but not this time! Read it, then read it again! Go to your meetings and ask the questions, dont let those here on BON make a decision for you. There are those that are stuck in 1965 and they refuse to catch up to the modern times! Romeo, Lima, Cleveland, Sharonville, OHAP, Louisville and several former ACH plants in SE Michigan really, really will be the victors here (possibly Sandusky too) if this passes. Up to 8400 new hires are predicted between late 2010 and 2015! In Sept 2015, the bottom 20% of new hires will stay at that level, the others will bump into the top level! So if they hire 8400, then only the bottom 2100 will be on 2nd tier and the other 6300 will bump into the top tier! I would love to have any plant have a 2nd tier wage problem! That means everyone is back to work! For those not liking the 2nd tier, you need to look at alot of other Union contracts, over 70% have a 2-tier wage system, just ask any that work in the steel mills! If I could vote, I'd give it a YES! Btv to Shv Are you a salary retiree? Because you sure sound like it. Romeo didn't get new work! I don't know where people are getting this from.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duanesz Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Are you a salary retiree? Because you sure sound like it. Romeo didn't get new work! I don't know where people are getting this from.... Be Very quiet we cant speak to loudly "you are getting a new engine but we just cant tell you what it is right now" Its all a joke maybe if you vote yes we will get you a new engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hosh Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 The retirees cannot vote on anything so why are you blaming them for wages--two tiered or cuts? I really feel sorry for you, you don't see the forest for the trees and hopefully speak for a minority of UAW members. Don't worry, Trims from north of the border. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1993Stang Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Everyone on this site always has very derogatory comments about the ones who have retired and I don't get it! They are the ones who blazed the trail for us and we don't show them any respect??? Remember, God willing you will be retired one day and we should be protecting all the retirees rights because they will be our rights soon. The knowledge of the retirees is also very important, we should all be smart enough to sort through the b.s. by now. Most of us have parents who helped us get our jobs, remember them when you cut down retirees! As for the contract 'no strike' clause, I always thought you could stirke for health and safety and the union always found a way to do that when they were really fighting for something else. Until I get a chance to see for myself without someones elses opinion, I will not decide on my vote and you shouldn't either. Check it out on paper, not from your teammates mouth, make an informative and intelligent vote--as we always should. Also, the comment about the retiree having an opinion and sitting on their ass--they earned that remember, and one day you hopefully will have earned it too! Sun, my father started in 1965 and personally knows Bob but I'm sure he would not agree to give up what people died for to help the future generations. This retiree continues to point out how much has been lost in the past and although I appreciate that retirees did not lose anything because my father is one, he would definitely not be o.k. with giving up on anyone who is working there ass off now and having any concessions whether it be now or before. Don't you understand that once you give, they will continue to ask and this sets up a distrust among members and a weakness among all that are involved. If the company is in such dire straights : 1st, no one would be getting hired, 2nd, the company would of asked for a hand out, 3rd, promises of new product would not even be mentioned at all, 4th, buyouts to reduce full paid employees to be replaced by less paid employees would be on the table. The reduction in the amount of your co-workers that you no longer see should be evidence that the company is saving money. Your protection should be for those that have been retired but the respect should go both ways for those that are left working they butts off for a better tomorrow and for the future generations that follow. Hats off to the Local 600 members who respect my previous family members who fought on that bridge so you could have what you have today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
228electrician Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 My vote no is because there is nothing in writing to ensure the second tier workers have their own contract, without this being in concrete, contract time in 2015 could be the end to pensions, and all non skilled workers could be reduced to $20 an hour. Just think, no cap on how many second tier workers that they can hire untill 2015 when they come to us with an extension of the no cap, or actually offer these guys a raise from $15.80 an hour, to $20.00 an hour, but the hook is that both tiers be combined and the non skilled per hour would be $20. With production increasing, we could be on a hiring binge just like what happened in the early 90's when we emerged from that recession, and that second tier could actually out number the rest of us ( how many workers do we have now and how many is needed to run productionback in the year 2000) and without a totally seperate contract in concrete, they will vote for their raise and vote you pension, and pay away!!!! Just think, this could be a way of reducing your pay, with out a buy down and it will look like you wanted it!!!! Before you reply and say that this cannot happen, what is in place to make sure this does not? in writing, not what you have heard!!! American axle with out buy downs,,, its coming. And these second tier workers will vote down your current pension (since they do not get one) and give back veba for you if they get a $1.00 raise, and you can bet on that!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sun3 Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Sun, my father started in 1965 and personally knows Bob but I'm sure he would not agree to give up what people died for to help the future generations. This retiree continues to point out how much has been lost in the past and although I appreciate that retirees did not lose anything because my father is one, he would definitely not be o.k. with giving up on anyone who is working there ass off now and having any concessions whether it be now or before. Don't you understand that once you give, they will continue to ask and this sets up a distrust among members and a weakness among all that are involved. If the company is in such dire straights : 1st, no one would be getting hired, 2nd, the company would of asked for a hand out, 3rd, promises of new product would not even be mentioned at all, 4th, buyouts to reduce full paid employees to be replaced by less paid employees would be on the table. The reduction in the amount of your co-workers that you no longer see should be evidence that the company is saving money. Your protection should be for those that have been retired but the respect should go both ways for those that are left working they butts off for a better tomorrow and for the future generations that follow. Hats off to the Local 600 members who respect my previous family members who fought on that bridge so you could have what you have today. I agree with you, maybe we misunderstood each other. I know that once you give back you never recoup and I don't want to give back anything. I was just commenting on people frequently saying things about retirees and I don't like it. I hate the two tier pay and find it causes problems on the floor also. It is hard to have mutual respect when you work for completely different money and benefits. I wish the members would unite and fight not fight amongst themselves--retired or working. We have to walk a very fine line because the union has the toughest battle of it's existence right now. In fighting will take us down. I just know that the union will not give up the right to strike--they will keep enough language in there to get it done if needed. That is why I want to see it all before I vote. You make a lot of valid points that I agree with and I hope you share them with your teammates. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sun3 Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 My vote no is because there is nothing in writing to ensure the second tier workers have their own contract, without this being in concrete, contract time in 2015 could be the end to pensions, and all non skilled workers could be reduced to $20 an hour. Just think, no cap on how many second tier workers that they can hire untill 2015 when they come to us with an extension of the no cap, or actually offer these guys a raise from $15.80 an hour, to $20.00 an hour, but the hook is that both tiers be combined and the non skilled per hour would be $20. With production increasing, we could be on a hiring binge just like what happened in the early 90's when we emerged from that recession, and that second tier could actually out number the rest of us ( how many workers do we have now and how many is needed to run productionback in the year 2000) and without a totally seperate contract in concrete, they will vote for their raise and vote you pension, and pay away!!!! Just think, this could be a way of reducing your pay, with out a buy down and it will look like you wanted it!!!! Before you reply and say that this cannot happen, what is in place to make sure this does not? in writing, not what you have heard!!! American axle with out buy downs,,, its coming. And these second tier workers will vote down your current pension (since they do not get one) and give back veba for you if they get a $1.00 raise, and you can bet on that!! You make some valid points but the main problem I see is a devided work force--period! the union needs to find a way to protect what we have and avoid losing it because of this devision. Without forethought we will be doomed soon--you are right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seniority Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 (edited) What the hell ,good, is an agreement if you keep changing it? My plant doesn't even have a local agreement yet either. Sorry leadership on the company and union side (assuming there are even sides anymore). I'm voting NO! Edited October 22, 2009 by Seniority Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 You make some valid points but the main problem I see is a devided work force--period! the union needs to find a way to protect what we have and avoid losing it because of this devision. Without forethought we will be doomed soon--you are right That is where you are wrong, the workforce is united is saying enough is enough! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BTV to SHV Transferee Posted October 22, 2009 Author Share Posted October 22, 2009 Then let them make an announcement today that they are going to recall the uaw to Michigan and rewrite the offer in 100% clear language with absolutely no confusing debatable wording. So there is absolutely no doubt in our minds that this is a good deal for the membership. Then we can clear our minds and go in and vote on something that is clear and not misleading. No more of this interpretation bull pitting the membership against one another. Now I can agree with Dale143 about this! It does need to be clear and ambiguous language! Btv to Shv Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Now I can agree with Dale143 about this! It does need to be clear and ambiguous language! Btv to Shv Yeah and minus a no-strike provision, and during the regularly scheduled negotiations! 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.