Jump to content

Vote Totals for Ktp/Lap......add them to the total

Ktp1989

By Ktp1989
in Ford Employee Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

bigredogre

bigredogre

Posted
Posted

40000 + members subtract no votes and 80% cant be wrong

and i do like the high voter counts i am seeing at all the locals,the international did 1 thing and that was wake up the members. :happy feet: :happy feet: :happy feet: :happy feet: :happy feet:

ron should be happy at the concern the rank and file has about this

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zest33

zest33

Posted
Posted
ToLets all re3mebertal votes-4120

 

Yes votes-655

 

No votes-3465

WE just took a 1 minute per hr. cut in PAY ...8 min. a day 40 min. a week works out to 4 full days of production we wil all work this yr compared to previous yrs for the same pay. But the real kicker is how our union leadership stressed the point that our hourly rate would not be touched.... that way our union dues remain the same but our pay goes down all the same. More frustating to me is our leaders try and tell us this is a WIN WIN situation for us if we pass it. Sounds to me that maybe our union leaders proposed it to Ford and not the other way around. Make no mistake about it ... the only reason Ford ask for the non strike clause for wage increases is because they no the large quarterly profits are coming and they dont want give us any more money even though the profits will be enormous. One last thing Id like everyonr to think about Thru all the extremely profitable years at Ford...were we ever able to reopen the CONTRACT... NOWAY we were under a contract. I dont blame the company one bit for asking and threatening what they may or may not do ... that is their job. What I am asking for...no demanding for is that our leadership stop telling us how wonderful each of these new agreements are . WHEN WILL OUR LEADERSHIP FINALLY SAY NO

Link to comment
Share on other sites
4thoseabout2rock

4thoseabout2rock

Posted
Posted
WE just took a 1 minute per hr. cut in PAY ...8 min. a day 40 min. a week works out to 4 full days of production we wil all work this yr compared to previous yrs for the same pay. But the real kicker is how our union leadership stressed the point that our hourly rate would not be touched.... that way our union dues remain the same but our pay goes down all the same. More frustating to me is our leaders try and tell us this is a WIN WIN situation for us if we pass it. Sounds to me that maybe our union leaders proposed it to Ford and not the other way around. Make no mistake about it ... the only reason Ford ask for the non strike clause for wage increases is because they no the large quarterly profits are coming and they dont want give us any more money even though the profits will be enormous. One last thing Id like everyonr to think about Thru all the extremely profitable years at Ford...were we ever able to reopen the CONTRACT... NOWAY we were under a contract. I dont blame the company one bit for asking and threatening what they may or may not do ... that is their job. What I am asking for...no demanding for is that our leadership stop telling us how wonderful each of these new agreements are . WHEN WILL OUR LEADERSHIP FINALLY SAY NO

AMEN, well put, im SICK of them reopening our 2007 contract,

LEAVE IT THE FUCLK AONE UNTIL 2011 ASSHOLES!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
UglyElmo

UglyElmo

Posted
Posted (edited)

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.

Edited by UglyElmo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SOULJABOY

SOULJABOY

Posted
Posted
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.

 

I can't see this happening however, I never thought our union leaders would ever try to put the big cock up our ass either. As they say on Myth Buster's "this myth is plausible."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Firefly

Firefly

Posted
Posted
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?

 

I'm not disagreeing with your theory, but only wanting to point out that the UAW stayed neutral in the Clinton/Obama race; and that Mr Gettelfinger is following tradition in retiring after this term because of the UAW age requirements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cecilmeyer

cecilmeyer

Posted
Posted
WE just took a 1 minute per hr. cut in PAY ...8 min. a day 40 min. a week works out to 4 full days of production we wil all work this yr compared to previous yrs for the same pay. But the real kicker is how our union leadership stressed the point that our hourly rate would not be touched.... that way our union dues remain the same but our pay goes down all the same. More frustating to me is our leaders try and tell us this is a WIN WIN situation for us if we pass it. Sounds to me that maybe our union leaders proposed it to Ford and not the other way around. Make no mistake about it ... the only reason Ford ask for the non strike clause for wage increases is because they no the large quarterly profits are coming and they dont want give us any more money even though the profits will be enormous. One last thing Id like everyonr to think about Thru all the extremely profitable years at Ford...were we ever able to reopen the CONTRACT... NOWAY we were under a contract. I dont blame the company one bit for asking and threatening what they may or may not do ... that is their job. What I am asking for...no demanding for is that our leadership stop telling us how wonderful each of these new agreements are . WHEN WILL OUR LEADERSHIP FINALLY SAY NO
I agree with everything you wrote except for the following."You don't blame the company for asking or threatening".Sorry But they are to blame for being such greedy bastards.Nowhere is it written law that you have to mistreat your workers are be greedy beyond measure!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
UglyElmo

UglyElmo

Posted
Posted (edited)
I'm not disagreeing with your theory, but only wanting to point out that the UAW stayed neutral in the Clinton/Obama race; and that Mr Gettelfinger is following tradition in retiring after this term because of the UAW age requirements.

 

 

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.

Edited by UglyElmo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
danehilby

danehilby

Posted
Posted (edited)
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:

 

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.

 

GETTLEFINGER IS A COMPANY MAN AS IT IS!!! UAW VEBA OWNS 17.5% OF GM AND 67% OF CHRYSLER.

 

THAT IS WHAT THESE NEGOTIATIONS WERE ALL ABOUT.

 

FOR EVERY $1000 A GM WORKER IS PAID, UAW-VEBA LOSES 17.5 PER CENT OF THAT IN PROFITS; FOR EVERY $1000 A CHRYSLER WORKER IS PAID, UAW-VEBA LOSES 67% IN PROFITS (notice I did not say NET profits)!!!

 

IF FORD WORKERS GET A PAY INCREASE, EVENTUALLY GM & CHRYSLER WORKERS WILL FOLLOW SUIT AND, THEREFORE, THOSE TWO COMPANIES WILL LOSE PROFITS FOR EVERY PAY INCREASE. THEREFORE, UAW-VEBA LOSES MONEY FOR EVERY PAY INCREASE!!

 

ALSO, IF THE UAW COULD KEEP A FORD WORKER WAGES DOWN, IT WOULD DRIVE UP THE PRICE OF STOCK. STOCK IS HOW FORD IS RAISING CAPITAL TO PAY OFF UAW -VEBA

 

THERE IS A CONNECTION ALL THE WAY!!!!!

 

GETTLEFINGER, KING, AND THE TWO AT TOP OF UAW-GM & UAW-CHRYSLER NO LONGER WORK FOR US, THEY WORK FOR THE COMPANIES AND UAW-VEBA!!!!

Edited by danehilby
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SOULJABOY

SOULJABOY

Posted
Posted
I'm not disagreeing with your theory, but only wanting to point out that the UAW stayed neutral in the Clinton/Obama race; and that Mr Gettelfinger is following tradition in retiring after this term because of the UAW age requirements.

 

I am sorry but I was under the impression that the only reason he was retireing was because of the fact that no other leader stayed past the age 63. I didn't realize they had a age requiement for this position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...