weiweishen Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Mr. King's mouth and attitude will cost the UAW a lot of support. He is not what the UAW, or any union, needs at this time. The economy has recovered a little, but not near enough for him to start demanding things like they did in more positive times. Another bad turn in the economy will put the auto companies back in trouble, and this time polling indicates that voters will not allow more bailouts. Members of congress realize this and will not give more to save the companies from their own excess and poor decisions. Bob king said "Alan Mulally is a great CEO, but I don’t think any human being in the world deserves that much money" Link http://www.leftlanenews.com/uaw-chief-ford-ceos-56-5m-award-outrageous.html What Bob king said is exactly what those communism said. In this world, there are thousands of Billionaire whose properties worth much much much more that what Alan was awarded. Bob King should tell them"You do not deserve that much of money." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Bob king said "Alan Mulally is a great CEO, but I don’t think any human being in the world deserves that much money" Link http://www.leftlanenews.com/uaw-chief-ford-ceos-56-5m-award-outrageous.html What Bob king said is exactly what those communism said. In this world, there are thousands of Billionaire whose properties worth much much much more that what Alan was awarded. Bob King should tell them"You do not deserve that much of money." I have listened to many Gettelfinger interviews, and he always seemed to think before he spoke as in choosing his words carefully. King seemed to start that way at least a little, but now speaks largely from emotion and when upset. Not good. He really needs some mentoring from Gettelfinger. The last thing the UAW needs now is leader speaking without thinking carefully first and riling everyone up. He's starting to get scary. With the economy sooooo fragile, now is not the time for a flame thrower leadiing the UAW. Hopefully Ford can wake him up by reminding him and UAW rank and file that they can easily move other plants offshore if they ask the moon. King also wants to organize the new VW plant in TN, and this inflammatory rhetoric only scares prospective workers at that plant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PREMiERdrum Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 My thoughts on the topic... Isn't America wonderful? Not to get too deep into sappy patriotism, but how many other places on earth can you be born into a culture that places no limits on your ultimate success? The American dream, as cliche and romanticized as it may be, is still a very real opportunity: The only thing limiting the amount of prosperity one can amass is their own drive and determination. Since we live in a culture that embraces entrepreneurship and ingenuity, it is very troubling to me to see UAW's chief publicly blast Ford CEO Alan Mulally's pay as being "morally wrong." Before we go any further, let me get one thing straight: I hate discussing union issues. In fact, getting into a union argument lies somewhere between visiting the proctologist and giving a sponge bath to Bea Arthur in the list of things I avoid at all costs. I'm not decidedly anti-union, but I wouldn't label myself as pro-union either. I can argue both sides, but generally try to avoid talking about it at all. Let's hop in the DeLorean and travel back a few years, if we may. The year is 2008. The housing bubble has burst, the Great Recession is in full swing, and the CEO's of Detroit's Big Three were called before Congress, hat in hand, to beg for money and receive their public lashings. The once great American automakers were on the verge of insolvency, bleeding cash, and marching towards bankruptcy. Continued at link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harley Lover Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 IIRC, Bob King did a really good job when he was the UAW's Ford rep. I want to to believe that the quotes we're reading are mostly him speaking to his base, particularly right now since they are having their convention in Detroit. I think it's necessary in his job to tell the people what they want to hear, even though he might very well realize it's wrong. Don't forget he agreed to an additional round of concessions for Ford (which would have made Ford even with the BK concessions granted to GM and Chrysler), but the union membership voted the addtitional concessions down. My point being that King's actions are perhaps wiser and more savvy than his words. I hope he is only shooting off his mouth, because as has been noted ad nauseum here, Ford is not out of the woods, nor is the economy as a whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atvman Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 Why does the UAW completely ignore the fact that salaried workers all took their concessions long before the UAW had too? Do the guys working the line really think they deserve better than the white collared workers? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 (edited) Why does the UAW completely ignore the fact that salaried workers all took their concessions long before the UAW had too? Do the guys working the line really think they deserve better than the white collared workers? Some in the UAW equate 'white collar' with C-level staff, vice presidents, officers of the company, and plant managers... ignoring receptionists, administrative assistants, and the assorted draftsmen, purchasing staff, and other support personnel, not to mention exempt staff that work well over 40 hours a week with no overtime. Edited March 23, 2011 by RichardJensen 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 ...exempt staff that work well over 40 hours a week with no overtime. That can't be right...the line workers are the ONLY ones that work more than 40 hours per week! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aneekr Posted March 23, 2011 Share Posted March 23, 2011 That can't be right...the line workers are the ONLY ones that work more than 40 hours per week! Ya know? And those particular workers were solely responsible for Ford's recovery, of course. :wacko: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted March 24, 2011 Author Share Posted March 24, 2011 (edited) Why does the UAW completely ignore the fact that salaried workers all took their concessions long before the UAW had too? Do the guys working the line really think they deserve better than the white collared workers? Big difference is that while the UAW negotiated those concessions, the "white collar" (aka management level employees) didn't negotiate their concessions....Administration / Executive board just arbitrarily swiped the $$ from their salary schedules. No talk, no deal, just gone....no input either. Why you ask? Because they could and middle management got slammed.... At first blush, everyone in a negotiating unit laughed at the poor saps....but after the laughter wore off came the realization that the labor unions were next. Edited March 24, 2011 by twintornados Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpc655 Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Bob king said "Alan Mulally is a great CEO, but I don’t think any human being in the world deserves that much money" Link http://www.leftlanenews.com/uaw-chief-ford-ceos-56-5m-award-outrageous.html What Bob king said is exactly what those communism said. In this world, there are thousands of Billionaire whose properties worth much much much more that what Alan was awarded. Bob King should tell them"You do not deserve that much of money." typical union misunderstanding of compensation it's not a matter of "deserve" Did he EARN it? Most unbiased would say yes. yes he did. 56 million seems pretty cheap in fact, considering the turnaround. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maislebandit Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Why does the UAW completely ignore the fact that salaried workers all took their concessions long before the UAW had too? Do the guys working the line really think they deserve better than the white collared workers? How long before? Why do people outside the UAW ignore the fact that salaried workers have since got back what they gave up? There was an agreement struck called equity of sacrifice, which the company blatantly disregarded. How well do you remember the last round of concessions that the membership shot down? The one they rushed in there mere days before announcing PROFITS!! Please understand that people eventually become conditioned to the stimulus that they are given. Good or bad. Back to topic. I am a UAW member and I would vote no on this poll. Now, if Mullaly's name was replaced with "the average American CEO", my answer would be a definite YES!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maislebandit Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Ya know? And those particular workers were solely responsible for Ford's recovery, of course. :wacko: Are you saying they had nothing to do with it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 How long before? Why do people outside the UAW ignore the fact that salaried workers have since got back what they gave up? Last time I looked the existing Union members didn't take a paycut that salaried workers did...they gave up benifits and new members came in at a lower rate...much more in tune with the prevaling market rates. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpc655 Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 How long before? Why do people outside the UAW ignore the fact that salaried workers have since got back what they gave up? There was an agreement struck called equity of sacrifice, which the company blatantly disregarded. How well do you remember the last round of concessions that the membership shot down? The one they rushed in there mere days before announcing PROFITS!! Please understand that people eventually become conditioned to the stimulus that they are given. Good or bad. Back to topic. I am a UAW member and I would vote no on this poll. Now, if Mullaly's name was replaced with "the average American CEO", my answer would be a definite YES!!! If the uaw wants to negotiate salary and benefits for the salaried employees, you should organize them and add them to your roles. Otherwise, all these comparisons are worthless. want to get back like the salaried people did? agree to the same terms as salaried people. multiple tier wages. 401k's. contracts at will. etc. etc. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weiweishen Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 My thoughts on the topic... Continued at link "It would be much easier for Ford to move their jobs to another country than it would be for UAW to replace jobs domestically." Ireally doubt if Union people have intelligent to understand this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4d4evr-1 Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 (edited) I voted yes. I believe morally wrong but were earned and deserved. My retirement is dependent on the success of Ford because in 2008 when Mulally announced the plan to shut truck factories and convert to the EU cars and SUV's I thought that was the right plan and invested accordingly. But Bill is responsible for this plan and bringing Alan to Ford and supported him and this plan. Alan and Bill earned these bonuses and since they were planned in 2008 they both certainly deserve them. However, I do not believe that taking this kind of money will do anything positive for Ford Motor Company. Who really needs this kind of money as well as pro football, pro basketball and baseball players. It is just obscene. Edited March 24, 2011 by 4d4evr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 I voted yes. I believe morally wrong but were earned and deserved. My retirement is dependent on the success of Ford because in 2008 when Mulally announced the plan to shut truck factories and convert to the EU cars and SUV's I thought that was the right plan and invested accordingly. But Bill is responsible for this plan and bringing Alan to Ford and supported him and this plan. Alan and Bill earned these bonuses and since they were planned in 2008 they both certainly deserve them. However, I do not believe that taking this kind of money will do anything positive for Ford Motor Company. Who really needs this kind of money as well as pro football, pro basketball and baseball players. It is just obscene. I'm confused. You say "earned and deserved" and then you also say "taking this kind of money". Did they earn it or did they take it? There is a difference. You invested in Ford Motor Company--with retirement gains in mind--and reaped the rewards when Ford's fortunes were reversed under Mulally's leadership. Mulally's compensation came largely from the increase in Ford's share price, and you say the money is taken? I assume you weren't working at Ford in 2008 (or since), and contributed nothing to Ford's turnaround, so did you "take" your gains, too? Are your gains immoral? Since Mulally was working at Ford, are his gains more moral than yours? BTW, it's not that "this kind of money will do anything positive for Ford Motor Company". The positive has already happened, that's what the gains reflected, and under current leadership (hopefully) will continue. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 24, 2011 Share Posted March 24, 2011 Look at it this way - Ford gave Mulally 3.9M shares of stock back in 2008 worth somewhere around $6M. Is $6M too much? Because the stock price increased from $1.43 to $14, that stock is now worth $56M. It didn't cost Ford $56M - it came from the people who bought the stock that was sold. THAT is what happened. Ford did NOT write Mulally a check for $56M. Is it ok that people who bought Ford stock when it was $1.43 and sold it when it was $14 (or $18) made that much money? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Look at it this way - Ford gave Mulally 3.9M shares of stock back in 2008 worth somewhere around $6M. Is $6M too much? Because the stock price increased from $1.43 to $14, that stock is now worth $56M. It didn't cost Ford $56M - it came from the people who bought the stock that was sold. THAT is what happened. Ford did NOT write Mulally a check for $56M. Is it ok that people who bought Ford stock when it was $1.43 and sold it when it was $14 (or $18) made that much money? Or for that matter, made any money at all? Percentage-wise, everyone who bought and then sold the stock at those terms made out like bandits. The only difference is how many shares were transacted. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weiweishen Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Look at it this way - Ford gave Mulally 3.9M shares of stock back in 2008 worth somewhere around $6M. Is $6M too much? Because the stock price increased from $1.43 to $14, that stock is now worth $56M. It didn't cost Ford $56M - it came from the people who bought the stock that was sold. THAT is what happened. Ford did NOT write Mulally a check for $56M. Is it ok that people who bought Ford stock when it was $1.43 and sold it when it was $14 (or $18) made that much money? Exactly. One of my friend was a Ford engineer. He took buyout in 2008 and use the buyout money to buy Ford Stock at $2 and sold it at 18$ this year. Now he has half million. I want Bob King to tell me whether this engineer deserve his half million or not and whether this engineer is morally wrong to excise his stock operation. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maislebandit Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 If the uaw wants to negotiate salary and benefits for the salaried employees, you should organize them and add them to your roles. Otherwise, all these comparisons are worthless. want to get back like the salaried people did? agree to the same terms as salaried people. multiple tier wages. 401k's. contracts at will. etc. etc. Who said the UAW wanted to do that? The comparisons are absolutely comparable. If a company is in financial straits, everyone should take necessary cuts. From the top down. Likewise, in times of prosperity- concessions should be returned equally. Given the fact that there was an actual agreement in the modification for this "equity of sacrifice", it makes it even clearer that it was negotiated in bad faith. What kind of an effect do you think this type of behavior has on the morale and mindset of the hourly people? Let me make something else perfecly clear.....I have no bitterness towards salary getting anything back. They shared in the painful cuts and deserve to be rewarded now that the company can afford to do so. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RPF Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 What kind of an effect do you think this type of behavior has on the morale and mindset of the hourly people? Didn't they get checks that averaged $5000 this year? And they expect sympathy from the average American? What a colossal miscalculation by the UAW and Mr King! Alan sold stock options, he wasn't cut a $56M check by the company. Mr. King or his predecessor could have bought stock in '08 and made this kind of return for his members but they didn't. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maislebandit Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Didn't they get checks that averaged $5000 this year? And they expect sympathy from the average American? What a colossal miscalculation by the UAW and Mr King! Alan sold stock options, he wasn't cut a $56M check by the company. Mr. King or his predecessor could have bought stock in '08 and made this kind of return for his members but they didn't. Yes, they did. You probably know that because it was plastered all over the media intentionally. 5k does not come close to what the rank and file gave up. I don't think union workers are looking for sympathy at all, just a little fairness. Just what does the "average" American have to do with this anyway? Spoon fed by the media, the "average" American is so easily led around. You probably don't know what salary folks got for their share of profit share, do you? Because it was not brainwashed into your head. If you insist on being sheep, it is ok. This is America after all. Rest assured, there is at least one UAW member who won't be passing judgement about you! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 (edited) You probably don't know what salary folks got for their share of profit share, do you? Because it was not brainwashed into your head. Ford says white-collar bonus checks will be based on performance of individuals, departments That's why it can't be said what "salary folks" got. They were judged by individual merit. The other workers were not. If they had, you might find that some received more than others because they deserved more than others. But since they chose to be judged by their lowest common denominator (or put another way, the weakest link in the chain), the individual bonuses (to the blue-collar workers) reflected that. Edited March 25, 2011 by RangerM 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goinbroke2 Posted March 25, 2011 Share Posted March 25, 2011 Quote "The comparisons are absolutely comparable. If a company is in financial straits, everyone should take necessary cuts. From the top down. Likewise, in times of prosperity- concessions should be returned equally. Given the fact that there was an actual agreement in the modification for this "equity of sacrifice", it makes it even clearer that it was negotiated in bad faith. Quote That has got to be the most uninformed, misleaded, stupidest thing I've read in quite a while! "If a company is in financial straits, everyone should take necessary cuts. From the top down." True, when things are going in the crapper, everybody wears it. "Likewise, in times of prosperity- concessions should be returned equally" Also true, however, at ford this is not a time of prosperity, they are coming out of a near fatal hit, anything looks GREAT compared to where they were. Also, to equate Mulally cashing in on his stock options with fords prosperity is ludicrous at best. If someone sold 50 mil worth of stock in a near broke company...that means the company is doing good and should compensate the workers comparibly?? WTF? "Given the fact that there was an actual agreement in the modification for this "equity of sacrifice", it makes it even clearer that it was negotiated in bad faith." Again, stop playing dumb. Agreements were negotiated in good faith and when ford does a bit better they will compensate a bit...oh wait, THEY DID TO THE TUNE OF $5000 PER PERSON!!! My question would be, did Mulally get $5000 too? In other words, any other person at ford could of sold their house or whatever and bought a shitload of stock at $1.10 then sold it at $18.00. ANYBODY! Stop bitching that some did and some didn't! Two issues; 1) Ford got concessions when times were bad and gave a bit back when it got a bit better. 2) A completely SEPERATE issue is that some people cashed in their stock at a higher value than they bought it. The ONLY one being brought in front of the light is the one who had the most, Mulally. What if, Bill Gates had a bunch of ford stock and decided to sell it tomorrow? Would people be on here bitching ford should compensate them another $5000 because there is proof again that ford is doing so good? F^&*ing IDIOTS! 1 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.