Bob King Elected UAW President

[ReDemption]

Len, Ford UAW workers voted down the last attempted contractual modifications (concessions). So what the hell are you talking about when you say we have to seek a binding arbitrator until 2015? Not all of the big 3 has to, so where’s the pattern there?

 

Also, speaking of pattern bargaining, it’s been broken since 1979. Chrysler had to seek a Government loan to stay afloat. Their UAW workers (our brothers and sisters) took concessions and the UAW workers at Ford and GM said “NOPE” pattern broken!

 

When have any of you seen a decrease in new car prices when we UAW floor workers of the big 3 took concessions? The only thing that matters to the top brass is how much they need to make off UAW workers backs. In 1980 top Big 3 CEO’s salarys were 22 times the amount of the floor workers pay, now they make 434 times what we do. So where and when does it stop? How much is enough? I’ll tell you, when we workers are reduced to minimum wage with no benefits and then top CEO’s will make 1500 times the amount that we workers do. But even then you still won’t see a drop in the price of new cars and trucks.

 

Want to sell more cars, lower the price, duh! Want to have more manufacturing plants in the states, give more tax breaks for things such as, worker health care costs, liability costs, state property tax, building tax, shipping tax, direct tax breaks for shipping out of the states. If you think these things are far fetched, they are all done by our manufacturing foreign competitor countries. Even Governmental manufacturing bailouts are only new to the US. What happend to our IUAW asking for these types of things when they (big 3) had there hands out for bail out money?

[Len_A]

Len, Ford UAW workers voted down the last attempted contractual modifications (concessions). So what the hell are you talking about when you say we have to seek a binding arbitrator until 2015? Not all of the big 3 has to, so where's the pattern there?

 

Also, speaking of pattern bargaining, it's been broken since 1979. Chrysler had to seek a Government loan to stay afloat. Their UAW workers (our brothers and sisters) took concessions and the UAW workers at Ford and GM said "NOPE" pattern broken!

 

When have any of you seen a decrease in new car prices when we UAW floor workers of the big 3 took concessions? The only thing that matters to the top brass is how much they need to make off UAW workers backs. In 1980 top Big 3 CEO's salarys were 22 times the amount of the floor workers pay, now they make 434 times what we do. So where and when does it stop? How much is enough? I'll tell you, when we workers are reduced to minimum wage with no benefits and then top CEO's will make 1500 times the amount that we workers do. But even then you still won't see a drop in the price of new cars and trucks.

 

Want to sell more cars, lower the price, duh! Want to have more manufacturing plants in the states, give more tax breaks for things such as, worker health care costs, liability costs, state property tax, building tax, shipping tax, direct tax breaks for shipping out of the states. If you think these things are far fetched, they are all done by our manufacturing foreign competitor countries. Even Governmental manufacturing bailouts are only new to the US. What happend to our IUAW asking for these types of things when they (big 3) had there hands out for bail out money?

Did I say Ford has to submit to binding arbitration? Go back & reread what I posted - I said GM and Chrysler has to submit to binding arbitration, and I posted that because others are calling for a strike against Ford as a way of somehow helping the UAW members at GM and Chrysler. I'm pointing out that strategy can't help them because of their binding arbitration clause.

 

Yes, in 1980 the UAW departments at Ford & GM said "no" to Chrysler concessions. They did ratify concessions, at GM & Ford, in 1982, so go check your union history. So much for the pattern's been broken since 1979.

 

No, you haven't seen car prices drop with pay cuts and other concessions, but you have seen profitability for Ford improve. That said, I can't find fault with last October's rejection of more concessions. The 2007 contract was reopened, what, four or five times since it's original ratification?

 

Lowering car prices will sell more cars, but you can't go back to either using incentives or cutting selling price below the break even point. Businesses don't survive that. They can't.

 

As obscenely high as executive compensation is, a big part of the reason they can get away with it is supply and demand - there's more places they can go, to start a bidding war, for their "services" (the quotation marks are my attempt at sarcasm). It's an ugly truth, but not only American, but Canadian and European executive compensation has become ridiculously high, almost paralleling the growth in the number of Tier One & Tier Two suppliers. You pointed out the executive compensation in 1980. Well in 1980, the Detroit Three made most of the parts that went into every car & truck. Since 1980, what have we lost - foundry work outsourced, almost all internal powertrain compenents (compared to 1980) outsourced, tool & die work outsourced, almost every interior component (instrument panels & consoles, carpet, headliner, package tray trim, door trim panels, HVAC controls, most entertainment system components, etc) all outsourced, small parts stampings outsourced, most plastic trim outsourced. Compared to 1980, the only thing the Detroit car makers do now is assemble cars, trucks and powertrains from parts made by someone else. Lots of "someone else".

 

Each parts company has a President, VP's, including some Executive VP's, boards of directors in many cases. All of that puts upward pressure on executive compensation, because the pool of job candidates for those positions isn't appreciably bigger today than it was in 1980.

 

What's happened to blue collar wages since then? Well, all the jobs that got outsourced had their pay & benefits cut - didn't see it slow down the increase in car prices, did we, let alone a price cut. And now most, if not all, of the physically easier non-production jobs that were bid on by seniority have been outsourced, right inside the plants. My Dad retired from Dearborn Stamping in 1999, and he still can't comprehend how this is being done, but it is being done, isn't it?

 

You know why they can get away with this crap? Supply & demand. Because if every UAW member pissed off at these developments were to, over the next year or two years, quit or retire, not only at Ford, but GM & Chrysler too, you would have 200, 300, or more applicants, per fucking opening, swamp the companies, more than happy to take $14 a fucking hour. How many applicants did Chrysler get, to fill 1000 openings at Jefferson Assembly, for the 2011 Grand Cherokee? All of them at $14 an hour, until 2015. And I'll repeat what I posted - they're stuck with binding arbitration.

 

You're not, but don't fool yourself into thinking Ford is going to knuckle under and go uncompetitive against GM, Chrysler & the transplants. And if Ford is forced to, what are the ramifications competitively? The GM/Chrysler bail out binding arbitration just adds to the competitive pressure Ford faces from the transplants. And no, the GM/Chrysler exec pay restrictions don't have the same effect on Ford executive compensation. It's seems unfair, but GM & Chrysler execs are getting boatloads of stock that they get to make money on when the IPO's come through, to make up for their pay restrictions. And the bailout agreements that forced wage growth restrictions on UAW rank & file, lift the restrictions from the execs when the loans are supposedly paid off and the government shares of ownership (stock) gets dumped, er, I mean sold.

That should tell you how much "help" labor actually got from the political left, that supposed to be labor's ally.

Do I approve of this? No, but I'm not blind and narrow minded enough to ignore reality. UAW has, especially last year, taken a fucking beating, and outside of the UAW, everyone seems to approve of the beating. Some jack-holes actually are still carrying an anti UAW chip on their shoulders and don't think the beating went far enough, and some of these jerks are members of other unions, and are my neighbors right here in the Detroit 'burbs. Too many jack-holes to count.

[Grim Reaper]

Did I say Ford has to submit to binding arbitration? Go back & reread what I posted - I said GM and Chrysler has to submit to binding arbitration, and I posted that because others are calling for a strike against Ford as a way of somehow helping the UAW members at GM and Chrysler. I'm pointing out that strategy can't help them because of their binding arbitration clause.

 

Yes, in 1980 the UAW departments at Ford & GM said "no" to Chrysler concessions. They did ratify concessions, at GM & Ford, in 1982, so go check your union history. So much for the pattern's been broken since 1979.

 

No, you haven't seen car prices drop with pay cuts and other concessions, but you have seen profitability for Ford improve. That said, I can't find fault with last October's rejection of more concessions. The 2007 contract was reopened, what, four or five times since it's original ratification?

 

Lowering car prices will sell more cars, but you can't go back to either using incentives or cutting selling price below the break even point. Businesses don't survive that. They can't.

 

As obscenely high as executive compensation is, a big part of the reason they can get away with it is supply and demand - there's more places they can go, to start a bidding war, for their "services" (the quotation marks are my attempt at sarcasm). It's an ugly truth, but not only American, but Canadian and European executive compensation has become ridiculously high, almost paralleling the growth in the number of Tier One & Tier Two suppliers. You pointed out the executive compensation in 1980. Well in 1980, the Detroit Three made most of the parts that went into every car & truck. Since 1980, what have we lost - foundry work outsourced, almost all internal powertrain compenents (compared to 1980) outsourced, tool & die work outsourced, almost every interior component (instrument panels & consoles, carpet, headliner, package tray trim, door trim panels, HVAC controls, most entertainment system components, etc) all outsourced, small parts stampings outsourced, most plastic trim outsourced. Compared to 1980, the only thing the Detroit car makers do now is assemble cars, trucks and powertrains from parts made by someone else. Lots of "someone else".

 

Each parts company has a President, VP's, including some Executive VP's, boards of directors in many cases. All of that puts upward pressure on executive compensation, because the pool of job candidates for those positions isn't appreciably bigger today than it was in 1980.

 

What's happened to blue collar wages since then? Well, all the jobs that got outsourced had their pay & benefits cut - didn't see it slow down the increase in car prices, did we, let alone a price cut. And now most, if not all, of the physically easier non-production jobs that were bid on by seniority have been outsourced, right inside the plants. My Dad retired from Dearborn Stamping in 1999, and he still can't comprehend how this is being done, but it is being done, isn't it?

 

You know why they can get away with this crap? Supply & demand. Because if every UAW member pissed off at these developments were to, over the next year or two years, quit or retire, not only at Ford, but GM & Chrysler too, you would have 200, 300, or more applicants, per fucking opening, swamp the companies, more than happy to take $14 a fucking hour. How many applicants did Chrysler get, to fill 1000 openings at Jefferson Assembly, for the 2011 Grand Cherokee? All of them at $14 an hour, until 2015. And I'll repeat what I posted - they're stuck with binding arbitration.

 

You're not, but don't fool yourself into thinking Ford is going to knuckle under and go uncompetitive against GM, Chrysler & the transplants. And if Ford is forced to, what are the ramifications competitively? The GM/Chrysler bail out binding arbitration just adds to the competitive pressure Ford faces from the transplants. And no, the GM/Chrysler exec pay restrictions don't have the same effect on Ford executive compensation. It's seems unfair, but GM & Chrysler execs are getting boatloads of stock that they get to make money on when the IPO's come through, to make up for their pay restrictions. And the bailout agreements that forced wage growth restrictions on UAW rank & file, lift the restrictions from the execs when the loans are supposedly paid off and the government shares of ownership (stock) gets dumped, er, I mean sold.

That should tell you how much "help" labor actually got from the political left, that supposed to be labor's ally.

Do I approve of this? No, but I'm not blind and narrow minded enough to ignore reality. UAW has, especially last year, taken a fucking beating, and outside of the UAW, everyone seems to approve of the beating. Some jack-holes actually are still carrying an anti UAW chip on their shoulders and don't think the beating went far enough, and some of these jerks are members of other unions, and are my neighbors right here in the Detroit 'burbs. Too many jack-holes to count.

 

To strike would be fruitless unless it was over job security. If the UAW strikes over wages we could be locked out with replacement scabs which could be a very, very long time. The auto manufacturing competition is so tight $ 1.00 per hour difference in labor costs is a make or break wage difference. The company cant be uncompetative with other manufacturing.

 

Our only hope to see any wage or benefit increase is to organize all transplants.

 

So our future depends organizing.............

[The Problem Child]

To strike would be fruitless unless it was over job security. If the UAW strikes over wages we could be locked out with replacement scabs which could be a very, very long time. The auto manufacturing competition is so tight $ 1.00 per hour difference in labor costs is a make or break wage difference. The company cant be uncompetative with other manufacturing.

 

Our only hope to see any wage or benefit increase is to organize all transplants.

 

So our future depends organizing.............

 

I hope Bob King strikes Ford soon. We work for a company that has no respect for us or our contract. A strike will be the only way we get back the concessions we gave up. Don't forget the supervisor you work for got back his pay raise. KCAP & OHIO still don't have a product commitment yet. These are some of the reason we gave up the concessions. I do believe Bob King will be good for our Union, but want to see him get the egg off his face and kick Ford's ass. If the International will ever find there backbone it must be now, waiting till next September will be to late. Louisville don't feel as safe as you think, and DTP your dumbass hero "Gary " hurt your plant more than you know. Remember you heard it hear first SAVE YOUR PENNIES WELL WILL BE HOLDING PICKET SIGNS SOON :fan: :fan:

[skeptic]

To strike would be fruitless unless it was over job security. If the UAW strikes over wages we could be locked out with replacement scabs which could be a very, very long time. The auto manufacturing competition is so tight $ 1.00 per hour difference in labor costs is a make or break wage difference. The company cant be uncompetative with other manufacturing.

 

Our only hope to see any wage or benefit increase is to organize all transplants.

 

So our future depends organizing.............

Why would the transplants join the UAW.So they could negotiate worthless contracts that are constantly reopened to the disadvantage of the workers.Or should they join the UAW to make Fourteen dollars per hour.Or should they join the UAW so they can throw their money away on union dues.The UAW will not organize the transplants they have nothing to offer.Bob King was crying last week about how unfair it was that Toyota closed its joint venture plant in California and cost the jobs of UAW workers.I did not hear King cry when Chrysler,GM, and Ford closed numerous plant s with UAW workers over the last decade costing hundreds of thousands of jobs.Go organize the casinos Mr.King it's your only hope.Casino workers are familiar with the odds the UAW is a bad bet it's a company union.

Edited June 28, 2010 by skeptic

[ReDemption]

The wage and benefit concessions made to the Chrysler Corporation in October 1979 were pushed through by the UAW leadership as a sign of good faith to Chrysler's bankers and an incentive to Congress to pass the Chrysler Loan Guarantee Act. A six-month wage freeze, the surrender of six paid holidays, and the deferment of pension increases were resolution to solve Chrysler's financial problems. But the bankers and President Carter was not yet committed to the plan, and congressmen outside the Rust Belt states were wondering how all this would look in the 1980 elections. The concessions agreement was more a political act than an economic one.

The consequences of this political act, however, were profoundly economic. One of the largest, most powerful industrial unions in the US had demonstrated that wage and benefit bargaining was not a one-way street. Congress got the message right away. In January 1980 it made passage of the bill contingent on further concessions. The UAW accepted the loss of seventeen paid holidays and the continued delay of all pay raises for Chrysler’s hourly workers. A year later, Lee Iacocca asked the union for additional concessions package worth $673 million. The Federal Loan Guarantee Board backed Iacocca. These concessions ... put Chrysler workers about $3 an hour behind workers at Ford and GM, introducing an economic element in Big Three bargaining. The pattern, established decades earlier, was broken.

Neither this fact nor the economic logic of breaking the pattern lost on the other automakers. A Ford spokesman told the Detroit Press, "You can bet we're watching Chrysler's efforts with a good deal of interest. We haven't done it [ask for concessions] yet, but we'll see happens on this go-around with Chrysler." GM Chairman Roger Smith was even more to the point: "You cannot have a two-tier industry." In other words, Chrysler now had a competitive advantage. In February, Business Week carried an article entitled "Pleas for Wage Relief Flood into the UAW." In the first nine months of 1981 the UAW's Research Department assessed seventy-five requests for concessions. The union's early plea that the Chrysler case was exceptional went out the window.

The pressure mounted on the UAW all through 1981, and in December the International Executive Board reversed its previous refusal to reopen the Ford and GM contracts. In February 1982 the UAW agreed to sweeping concessions at Ford. All paid personal holidays (a shorter work time program initiated in 1976 to help create jobs) were ended. The 3% annual improvement factor, first negotiated in 1948, was dropped, and three COLA [cost of living adjustments] and all pension increases were deferred. The deal was estimated to be worth $1 billion to Ford. In April GM got the same agreement, saving $3 billion over twenty-nine months.... This did not put an end to the out reached arm of Ford’s and GM Chairman’s. They, in 1984 contract negotiations pushed for parity with Chrysler’s automotive contractual wage and benefit advantages.

 

Len, I think we got off on the wrong foot. I did re-read your post and you said; “Striking Ford, in order to help GM & Chrysler rank & File, won't help anyone. They're stuck with the terms of their contracts until 2015”. Mere misunderstanding I took this statement as all 3 and I apologize my friend. You might take the stance that pattern bargaining was broken later then 1979, but I feel this was beginning to its demise and to me that’s its time line start in history. So I guess we will agree to disagree.

[ReDemption]

Argument got the better of me. Please remove any copied replied posts.

 

Thanks

Edited June 28, 2010 by ReDemption

[Grim Reaper]

Len, just so you understand where I'm coming from. Below is a letter I put out on my shop floor concerning the last attempted mods.

 

Dear Brothers and Sisters

 

I, Jeff Hodges, was told that I had to put out a flyer supporting this contract modification proposal. That without it I’ll be removed from my Union position. My position as a pm planner will never change my opinion and if removed because of it, I fully understand.

 

I cannot and do not support these modifications. I will not tell you how to vote, nor have I ever. I believe that you’re all grown men and women and should vote off your personal convictions not someone else’s.

 

My reasons:

• I can not support the binding arbitrator language.

• I will not ever agree to give up our right to strike.

• I do not support the 2nd tier wage agreement. We earn every penny we’re paid regardless of when hired.

• I don’t support the mechanical tradesmen language of being reduced to teams at the other plants. This means more lost jobs and fewer apprenticeships.

• I have issues with contracts listing words like “Such As”, “May”, or “Possible”. They are language intent trump words.

• I don’t believe they are being truthful with product life cycle guarantees. Product guarantees are dictated by product sales and can be amended at any time for lack of.

• I don’t agree to accepting concessions when our company is gaining market share, opening plants in other countries, stock value rising, and posting 2 quarters of profitability with a forecasted 3rd quarter profit.

 

You’ll hear that this modification is only pattern bargaining and that it has always worked for the Union. That’s not entirely true. Pattern bargaining is only as strong as its weakest link. These attempted modifications prove my point.

 

I understand that my opinion might upset some people, the truth often does, but I’m of the belief that we still live in a democracy and we have that right. Thank you for reading this, and I hope you understand my position.

 

Sincerely

Jeff Hodges

UAW Local 3000

 

 

You have mechanical teams at AAI.

 

Are you saying that the mechanical teams at AAI reduced jobs and apprenticeships???

 

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Grimshaw

[Hawk00]

Did I say Ford has to submit to binding arbitration? Go back & reread what I posted - I said GM and Chrysler has to submit to binding arbitration, and I posted that because others are calling for a strike against Ford as a way of somehow helping the UAW members at GM and Chrysler. I'm pointing out that strategy can't help them because of their binding arbitration clause.

 

Yes, in 1980 the UAW departments at Ford & GM said "no" to Chrysler concessions. They did ratify concessions, at GM & Ford, in 1982, so go check your union history. So much for the pattern's been broken since 1979.

 

No, you haven't seen car prices drop with pay cuts and other concessions, but you have seen profitability for Ford improve. That said, I can't find fault with last October's rejection of more concessions. The 2007 contract was reopened, what, four or five times since it's original ratification?

 

Lowering car prices will sell more cars, but you can't go back to either using incentives or cutting selling price below the break even point. Businesses don't survive that. They can't.

 

As obscenely high as executive compensation is, a big part of the reason they can get away with it is supply and demand - there's more places they can go, to start a bidding war, for their "services" (the quotation marks are my attempt at sarcasm). It's an ugly truth, but not only American, but Canadian and European executive compensation has become ridiculously high, almost paralleling the growth in the number of Tier One & Tier Two suppliers. You pointed out the executive compensation in 1980. Well in 1980, the Detroit Three made most of the parts that went into every car & truck. Since 1980, what have we lost - foundry work outsourced, almost all internal powertrain compenents (compared to 1980) outsourced, tool & die work outsourced, almost every interior component (instrument panels & consoles, carpet, headliner, package tray trim, door trim panels, HVAC controls, most entertainment system components, etc) all outsourced, small parts stampings outsourced, most plastic trim outsourced. Compared to 1980, the only thing the Detroit car makers do now is assemble cars, trucks and powertrains from parts made by someone else. Lots of "someone else".

 

Each parts company has a President, VP's, including some Executive VP's, boards of directors in many cases. All of that puts upward pressure on executive compensation, because the pool of job candidates for those positions isn't appreciably bigger today than it was in 1980.

 

What's happened to blue collar wages since then? Well, all the jobs that got outsourced had their pay & benefits cut - didn't see it slow down the increase in car prices, did we, let alone a price cut. And now most, if not all, of the physically easier non-production jobs that were bid on by seniority have been outsourced, right inside the plants. My Dad retired from Dearborn Stamping in 1999, and he still can't comprehend how this is being done, but it is being done, isn't it?

 

You know why they can get away with this crap? Supply & demand. Because if every UAW member pissed off at these developments were to, over the next year or two years, quit or retire, not only at Ford, but GM & Chrysler too, you would have 200, 300, or more applicants, per fucking opening, swamp the companies, more than happy to take $14 a fucking hour. How many applicants did Chrysler get, to fill 1000 openings at Jefferson Assembly, for the 2011 Grand Cherokee? All of them at $14 an hour, until 2015. And I'll repeat what I posted - they're stuck with binding arbitration.

 

You're not, but don't fool yourself into thinking Ford is going to knuckle under and go uncompetitive against GM, Chrysler & the transplants. And if Ford is forced to, what are the ramifications competitively? The GM/Chrysler bail out binding arbitration just adds to the competitive pressure Ford faces from the transplants. And no, the GM/Chrysler exec pay restrictions don't have the same effect on Ford executive compensation. It's seems unfair, but GM & Chrysler execs are getting boatloads of stock that they get to make money on when the IPO's come through, to make up for their pay restrictions. And the bailout agreements that forced wage growth restrictions on UAW rank & file, lift the restrictions from the execs when the loans are supposedly paid off and the government shares of ownership (stock) gets dumped, er, I mean sold.

That should tell you how much "help" labor actually got from the political left, that supposed to be labor's ally.

Do I approve of this? No, but I'm not blind and narrow minded enough to ignore reality. UAW has, especially last year, taken a fucking beating, and outside of the UAW, everyone seems to approve of the beating. Some jack-holes actually are still carrying an anti UAW chip on their shoulders and don't think the beating went far enough, and some of these jerks are members of other unions, and are my neighbors right here in the Detroit 'burbs. Too many jack-holes to count.

 

 

Len, you may be good at debating but it sounds like you have a lack of experience on the floor. Talk to your Father about it. I'm willing to wager he was an honest hard working person who got up at 5:30 every morning, rolled up his sleaves and got to work to provide for his family. So do we Len, and the jobs are far bussier and harder than in your dad's day. And as you acknowledged there are no easy jobs at the end of the road due to outsourcing.

 

We work hard and build quality veheciles because the survival of the company depends on it. Yet we get shit on by the media and your buddies in the Ford motor co. discussion area always. constantly. Do you see the irony in unproductive white collar types spending their day surfing the net crapping on productive people who are hard at work on the line? Do you really not see why this attitude makes people want to dig in their heels and say enough is enough?

[buster6969]

Then you don't understand how binding arbitration works. There is no reason to believe the arbitrator is going to take into consideration any Ford UAW increases. The whole reason that language is in the loan agreements is that the political party in power, during the GM & Chrysler bankruptcies, had the majority of their leadership agreeing with the opposing party, that the Detroit Three hourly pay structure was uncompetitive and out of line with what everyone else pays.

 

And you're wrong about the transplants throwing money at their employees, to keep the UAW out. They're no longer afraid of the UAW or any part of organized labor. GM & Chrysler concessions last year took care of that. I'm too fucking tired to Google it now, but there were several articles last May, after the GM contract was ratified, where Toyota, Honda & Nissan let it "leak" out that they were no longer going to pay competively with Detroit/UAW wages/benefits, but rather will start paying according to " prevailing local rates". You can bet when Toyota moves Corolla production to the new Mississipi plant - the one they mothballed last year - that $12 to $14 an hour is going to be good enough in Canton, Mississipi, not just to start, but indefinately. You can also bet that VW isn't going to pay competitively, with Detroit, in their Tennessee plant, when it starts up, either.

 

And I predict a very chilly reception for the UAW organizers working the transplants. I hope I'm wrong, but I'm dead certain I'm right. Trying to organize the transplants is a long shot.

Actually VW has one of the highest percentage of Unionized plants and welcomed the UAW when coming to NA!

[buster6969]

Len, just so you understand where I'm coming from. Below is a letter I put out on my shop floor concerning the last attempted mods.

 

Dear Brothers and Sisters

 

I, Jeff Hodges, was told that I had to put out a flyer supporting this contract modification proposal. That without it I’ll be removed from my Union position. My position as a pm planner will never change my opinion and if removed because of it, I fully understand.

 

I cannot and do not support these modifications. I will not tell you how to vote, nor have I ever. I believe that you’re all grown men and women and should vote off your personal convictions not someone else’s.

 

My reasons:

• I can not support the binding arbitrator language.

• I will not ever agree to give up our right to strike.

• I do not support the 2nd tier wage agreement. We earn every penny we’re paid regardless of when hired.

• I don’t support the mechanical tradesmen language of being reduced to teams at the other plants. This means more lost jobs and fewer apprenticeships.

• I have issues with contracts listing words like “Such As”, “May”, or “Possible”. They are language intent trump words.

• I don’t believe they are being truthful with product life cycle guarantees. Product guarantees are dictated by product sales and can be amended at any time for lack of.

• I don’t agree to accepting concessions when our company is gaining market share, opening plants in other countries, stock value rising, and posting 2 quarters of profitability with a forecasted 3rd quarter profit.

 

You’ll hear that this modification is only pattern bargaining and that it has always worked for the Union. That’s not entirely true. Pattern bargaining is only as strong as its weakest link. These attempted modifications prove my point.

 

I understand that my opinion might upset some people, the truth often does, but I’m of the belief that we still live in a democracy and we have that right. Thank you for reading this, and I hope you understand my position.

 

Sincerely

Jeff Hodges

UAW Local 3000

That is a bold move telling everyone you don't support a modification that has already been voted down! Welcome to 2010!

[ReDemption]

That is a bold move telling everyone you don't support a modification that has already been voted down! Welcome to 2010!

 

It wasnt any kind of bold move. It was up before the vote and on the floor before the vote.

But your correct brother, its 2010 and time to move on.

 

Could you do the same for me and remove it from your reply.

 

Thanks

[Grim Reaper]

It wasnt any kind of bold move. It was up before the vote and on the floor before the vote.

But your correct brother, its 2010 and time to move on.

 

Could you do the same for me and remove it from your reply.

 

Thanks

 

Jeff,

 

You have mechanical teams at AAI.

 

Are you saying that the mechanical teams at AAI reduced jobs and apprenticeships???

 

The reason I ask is maybe your mechanical team structure is better than what GM and Chrysler got stuck with (everybody being 1 trade). I believe your mechanical teams still have the seperate trades and apprenticeship.

 

Do you feel the mechanical teams at AAI is better than the GM and Chrysler situation?

 

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Grimshaw

[ReDemption]

Grimshaw, at AAI we have MSOG, TSOG, ESOG and LSOG’s. Our Mechanical group will perform work including but not limited to: Layout, fabricate, build, re-build, form, erect, construct, frame, manufacture, assemble, secure, burn, weld, install, calibrate, maintain, and repair any equipment, systems, facilities, parts, machinery, apparatus, tools, hydraulics, pneumatics, pumps, gear reducers, compressors, conveyors, platforms, transversers, cylinders, piping systems and components, plumbing systems and components, tool calibrations and repair, lubrication systems, HVAC systems, welding systems, painting systems, fans, blowers, pulleys, belts, gates, guards, posts, roof repairs, core drilling, locks, signs, fire protections systems, air supply houses, battery watering for powered industrial equipment.

 

The mechanical group will be relative to aspects of mechanical trades such as: Pipe fitter – Plumber – Machine repair – Millwright – Carpenter and Welder

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

With the 2009 modification proposal they intended to launch this type of system at other plants. Lines of demarcation would be dropped, reducing the need for the amount of tradesmen needed to perform each trade demarcation. However they did say that with ratifying the modification any reduced tradesmen, the reduced tradesmen could be put on PO work maintaining their respective trades wage. They said that this was to entice the company to put the tradesman performing PO work back into the trades.

 

I don’t believe that for one minute, I believe that it was to entice retirement. This also would reduce the amount of tradesmen needed and if you reduce the amount of SOG’s you reduce the amount of needed apprentices now and in the future.

 

Hope this helps.

[oldenuff2knowbetter]

:blah: :bowdown: :blah: BAY RUM LUCKY TIGER BUTCH WAX CRACKER JACKS SHOE SHINE JAWBREAKER MAGAZINE RACKS

[Grim Reaper]

Grimshaw, at AAI we have MSOG, TSOG, ESOG and LSOG’s. Our Mechanical group will perform work including but not limited to: Layout, fabricate, build, re-build, form, erect, construct, frame, manufacture, assemble, secure, burn, weld, install, calibrate, maintain, and repair any equipment, systems, facilities, parts, machinery, apparatus, tools, hydraulics, pneumatics, pumps, gear reducers, compressors, conveyors, platforms, transversers, cylinders, piping systems and components, plumbing systems and components, tool calibrations and repair, lubrication systems, HVAC systems, welding systems, painting systems, fans, blowers, pulleys, belts, gates, guards, posts, roof repairs, core drilling, locks, signs, fire protections systems, air supply houses, battery watering for powered industrial equipment.

 

The mechanical group will be relative to aspects of mechanical trades such as: Pipe fitter – Plumber – Machine repair – Millwright – Carpenter and Welder

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

With the 2009 modification proposal they intended to launch this type of system at other plants. Lines of demarcation would be dropped, reducing the need for the amount of tradesmen needed to perform each trade demarcation. However they did say that with ratifying the modification any reduced tradesmen, the reduced tradesmen could be put on PO work maintaining their respective trades wage. They said that this was to entice the company to put the tradesman performing PO work back into the trades.

 

I don’t believe that for one minute, I believe that it was to entice retirement. This also would reduce the amount of tradesmen needed and if you reduce the amount of SOG’s you reduce the amount of needed apprentices now and in the future.

 

Hope this helps.

 

 

 

 

Do your trades still have their seperate trade in name and are there lines of demarcation?

 

Do your apprentices follow a traditional apprenticeship?

[ReDemption]

Yes Grim, our apprentices still go through traditional training programs. When graduated from apprentice training they will be placed into one of the following – MSOG, TSOG, ESOG and LSOG with there applicable trade SO. There are no lines of demarcation within each SOG at AAI.

 

Hope this helps