Ford is gearing up for contract talks

[lackanookey]

http://www.detnews.com/article/20110507/AUTO01/105070350/1148/auto01/Wage-gap-with-nonunion--foreign-rivals-is-$8-an-hour--Ford-says

[Spring]

http://www.detnews.com/article/20110507/AUTO01/105070350/1148/auto01/Wage-gap-with-nonunion--foreign-rivals-is-$8-an-hour--Ford-says

 

 

Welcome to the race to the bottom!

[elnash]

This article does not mention the pay differences between the CEO and top management and the foreign companies. They seem to leave that part out. Let’s start from the top and align their pay with the foreign companies first.

[Pumpmaster]

This article does not mention the pay differences between the CEO and top management and the foreign companies. They seem to leave that part out. Let’s start from the top and align their pay with the foreign companies first.

 

+1!

[TANGO4224]

+1!

[/quote=

 

+2 Save your money, I see a strike coming.

[fordd]

What would we be striking over? We have no say in the salary of the CEO nor should we. They are the ones that pay us, not the other way around.

 

Strike over wages? Please, we make more than most college grads with most of the workforce having a high school diploma or in some cases less education than that. All the goodwill that Ford and the UAW gained from not taking the bailout would be forgotten instantly.

 

Strike over work rules? The fexibility in work rules are what helps keep costs down and our wages up.

 

Do not take my post as saying that I fully support all of the sacrifces we have made but seriously with unemployment at 9%, a record number of Americans on food stamps and government aid, how many people would be sympathetic to a workforce that makes $28 an hour and saying they are underpaid. We need to secure more jobs (yes, even at the entry level). How manyof our plants are underutilized. Livonia, Romeo, AAI, Ohio assy and probably one or two others I am not thinking of. So yea, lets strike over wages and givebacks when we need plants filled up with work. Let us not be that short sighted. The old days are gone, whether a strike happens or not.

Edited May 7, 2011 by fordd

[lovelincolns]

What would we be striking over? We have no say in the salary of the CEO nor should we. They are the ones that pay us, not the other way around.

 

Strike over wages? Please, we make more than most college grads with most of the workforce having a high school diploma or in some cases less education than that. All the goodwill that Ford and the UAW gained from not taking the bailout would be forgotten instantly.

 

Strike over work rules? The fexibility in work rules are what helps keep costs down and our wages up.

 

Do not take my post as saying that I fully support all of the sacrifces we have made but seriously with unemployment at 9%, a record number of Americans on food stamps and government aid, how many people would be sympathetic to a workforce that makes $28 an hour and saying they are underpaid. We need to secure more jobs (yes, even at the entry level). How manyof our plants are underutilized. Livonia, Romeo, AAI, Ohio assy and probably one or two others I am not thinking of. So yea, lets strike over wages and givebacks when we need plants filled up with work. Let us not be that short sighted. The old days are gone, whether a strike happens or not.

I seriously do not think a strike will occur for reasons mentioned. Ford has done pretty well over the past two years with the difference and there is no reason that cannot continue. There are many ways to make up the labor cost difference, which is minimal anyway. Being more innovative, better styling, lower material costs due to volume, etc. I'm sure employees for all the various sectors in the U.S. do not make exactly what their counterparts in competitive companies make nor is the most profitable always the one with the smallest labor cost per hour. As hard as it will be, if it can be accomplished at all, the UAW needs to redouble their efforts to unionize transplants that are not. I agree that the difference between $75/hr (if that is a true number) and $50 might be insurmountable but $58 and $50 certainly is not.

[mbabbitt]

I seriously do not think a strike will occur for reasons mentioned. Ford has done pretty well over the past two years with the difference and there is no reason that cannot continue. There are many ways to make up the labor cost difference, which is minimal anyway. Being more innovative, better styling, lower material costs due to volume, etc. I'm sure employees for all the various sectors in the U.S. do not make exactly what their counterparts in competitive companies make nor is the most profitable always the one with the smallest labor cost per hour. As hard as it will be, if it can be accomplished at all, the UAW needs to redouble their efforts to unionize transplants that are not. I agree that the difference between $75/hr (if that is a true number) and $50 might be insurmountable but $58 and $50 certainly is not.

 

 

i just read were google takes care of there worker's with great pay, bonus's and health care. for there 2 billion dollar year profit and what does ford do want to do bend us over

[fordd]

i just read were google takes care of there worker's with great pay, bonus's and health care. for there 2 billion dollar year profit and what does ford do want to do bend us over

 

 

 

Google also has some highly skilled employees. Are you as highly skilled as some google employees? If so, what are you doing working in a factory? If you notice, the higher up the food chain you are, better pay usually follows.

 

 

Ford does take care of you. We have great health benefits, a 401k plan AND a pension and damn good pay. Stop the pity party about how we are so beaten down. Even with all the givebacks we are still ahead of the game in my opinion.

Edited May 8, 2011 by fordd

[Maislebandit]

Google also has some highly skilled employees. Are you as highly skilled as some google employees? If so, what are you doing working in a factory? If you notice, the higher up the food chain you are, better pay usually follows.

 

 

Ford does take care of you. We have great health benefits, a 401k plan AND a pension and damn good pay. Stop the pity party about how we are so beaten down. Even with all the givebacks we are still ahead of the game in my opinion.

 

Are you suggesting there is no skills involved with making a factory run? What plant are you at?

 

By your reasoning, a Google employee could walk into any of our plants and show us how to run our operations better, right? Hard to compare skills that are worlds apart.

[FANTASTICFORD]

i just read were google takes care of there worker's with great pay, bonus's and health care. for there 2 billion dollar year profit and what does ford do want to do bend us over

 

 

I agree, excellent company from everything I read and heard. I believe in prosperity for all hard working people, college grad or not. CEOs, corporations and executives reap from substantial and outrageous salaries, bonuses and profit sharing while workers benefits and salaries shed, I call that GREED.

[fordd]

Are you suggesting there is no skills involved with making a factory run? What plant are you at?

 

By your reasoning, a Google employee could walk into any of our plants and show us how to run our operations better, right? Hard to compare skills that are worlds apart.

 

 

 

That is not what I am saying. Someone that possess the skills to work at Google are more in demand than the skills to work in a factory and they get paid what the market dictates. A person that works at Google cannot walk into a factory and do our jobs any more than one of us could walk into Google and do their jobs. I did not start the comparison, was only replying to the person who did.

 

The plant I work at is irrelevant, I have worked for Ford and been member of the UAW for 14 years and that is all you need to know.

[Maislebandit]

That is not what I am saying. Someone that possess the skills to work at Google are more in demand than the skills to work in a factory and they get paid what the market dictates. A person that works at Google cannot walk into a factory and do our jobs any more than one of us could walk into Google and do their jobs. I did not start the comparison, was only replying to the person who did.

 

The plant I work at is irrelevant, I have worked for Ford and been member of the UAW for 14 years and that is all you need to know.

 

 

You stated "if you are that skilled, what are you doing in a factory?" I take this as you suggesting that no skill sets are required for factory work.

 

"Demand" is cyclical to many companies. If demand increased w/ automakers and internet companies declined, would that make the autoworkers somehow more skilled than the internet companies? I don't think so.

 

BTW, I don't "need" to know any of your information. I simply was curious as to which plant in the Ford system would give you the impression that "skills" were not needed.

[whereswaldo]

http://www.detnews.c...hour--Ford-says

 

Screw him. I also believed in equity of sacrifice. Bill and Alan got theirs back as well as many managers. We already stuck it to our retirees(us one day) and now they are worried about a 10% diff in wage costs ? Sorry I dont buy the 2-3 an hour for profit sharing. Someone said labor on avg car is about 10%. OF $25K focus , thats $2500. If we make 10% more that say, Honda, do the math....a couple hundred per car. Material and engineering costs are by far a bigger share of the pie. I dont want more , I just want some of what I gave up....back.

[whereswaldo]

This article does not mention the pay differences between the CEO and top management and the foreign companies. They seem to leave that part out. Let's start from the top and align their pay with the foreign companies first.

 

There is an excellent start........

[robert77]

Two problems here, First off Ford is contradicting itself: "In a speech in New York last October, Chief Financial Officer Lewis Booth said the automaker's labor costs were "close to being fully competitive." He said Ford's labor costs would drop to $50 an hour, from $55, once the automaker hires new workers, who can be paid half what senior workers make." Sounds like they already have their solution to me, already been agreed upon in the previous contract. Also, "Profit sharing has been added to the amount and the $5,000 adds about $2 an hour to our labor costs," Evans said. "Without that, our labor costs are closer to $56 an hour." Now the workers are being told they've put the company at a disadvantage because they've MADE THE COMPANY A PROFIT!!!!!!!! WOW!!!!!!

Edited May 8, 2011 by robert77

[pmooret]

What would we be striking over? We have no say in the salary of the CEO nor should we. They are the ones that pay us, not the other way around.

 

Strike over wages? Please, we make more than most college grads with most of the workforce having a high school diploma or in some cases less education than that. All the goodwill that Ford and the UAW gained from not taking the bailout would be forgotten instantly.

 

Strike over work rules? The fexibility in work rules are what helps keep costs down and our wages up.

 

Do not take my post as saying that I fully support all of the sacrifces we have made but seriously with unemployment at 9%, a record number of Americans on food stamps and government aid, how many people would be sympathetic to a workforce that makes $28 an hour and saying they are underpaid. We need to secure more jobs (yes, even at the entry level). How manyof our plants are underutilized. Livonia, Romeo, AAI, Ohio assy and probably one or two others I am not thinking of. So yea, lets strike over wages and givebacks when we need plants filled up with work. Let us not be that short sighted. The old days are gone, whether a strike happens or not.

 

What difference does it make whether or not people are sympathetic to our workforce? THEY DON'T VOTE ON OUR CONTRACT.

 

Also, we may not have a say in the salaries of CEO's but that could change. We got our foot in the door with the equity of sacrafice clause.

 

Someone figured out Alan Mulally's salary, bonuses, stock options, etc. he makes $227,000 a day, most of which probably came from our COA give backs.

 

Also, why is it that Ford Motor Co. always list our benefits as part of our hourly salary. I have never seen any other manufacturing company do that. Lots of companies provide insurance yet it is not figured into their pay.

 

They will look silly crying wolf at contract time since all of their finances are published almost daily in the media.

If anybody wants to give Alan Mulally more money they can mail it to him. I'd like to make what I made (plus raises) on the last contract. Anything less than that is a NO vote.

[Len_A]

This article does not mention the pay differences between the CEO and top management and the foreign companies. They seem to leave that part out. Let's start from the top and align their pay with the foreign companies first.

Good fucking luck figuring out the pay at many, if not most, foreign companies. The European companies pay their CEO's comparable to what American CEO's get, plus many perks that don't, under European stock exchange and taxation rules, don't have to be reported as income, and the Asians, especially the Japanese don't include any of the perks as compensation, including, but not limited to, luxury primary housing, vacation homes, private school tuition for their kids, chauffeur driven transportation to work (you think Japanese CEO's are going to pack Tokyo's subway cars like sardines??), and so on.

 

Yea, so go ahead...try to make a comparison. Talk about an exercise in futility.

Edited May 9, 2011 by Len_A

[Len_A]

What difference does it make whether or not people are sympathetic to our workforce? THEY DON'T VOTE ON OUR CONTRACT.

 

Also, we may not have a say in the salaries of CEO's but that could change. We got our foot in the door with the equity of sacrafice clause.

 

Someone figured out Alan Mulally's salary, bonuses, stock options, etc. he makes $227,000 a day, most of which probably came from our COA give backs.

 

Also, why is it that Ford Motor Co. always list our benefits as part of our hourly salary. I have never seen any other manufacturing company do that. Lots of companies provide insurance yet it is not figured into their pay.

 

They will look silly crying wolf at contract time since all of their finances are published almost daily in the media.

If anybody wants to give Alan Mulally more money they can mail it to him. I'd like to make what I made (plus raises) on the last contract. Anything less than that is a NO vote.

It's called "If they aren't sympathetic, they can always go buy someone else's car, especially nonunion made Toyota, Hyundai, Honda, etc". And the same assholes not only don't care what Alan Mulally's salary, bonuses, stock options, etc., they think he's a hero, and if you bothered to read something other than each others posts on BOF, you'd see that a lot of them claim the UAW, and by extension the rank-and-file, actual own and run two of the Detroit auto companies (namely GM & Chrysler), hate the very air you breath, and are looking for an excuse to not only buy something other than Ford, but justify that attitude by bitching about what they call your greed. And you will lose a PR war with them, because there's a hell of a lot more of "them" than there are of "you". Deal with it.

 

So go ahead, and vote "no"...talk about cutting off your own nose to spite your face. Real intelligent. Not.

Edited May 9, 2011 by Len_A

[jm2607]

It's called "If they aren't sympathetic, they can always go buy someone else's car, especially nonunion made Toyota, Hyundai, Honda, etc". And the same assholes not only don't care what Alan Mulally's salary, bonuses, stock options, etc., they think he's a hero, and if you bothered to read something other than each others posts on BOF, you'd see that a lot of them claim the UAW, and by extension the rank-and-file, actual own and run two of the Detroit auto companies (namely GM & Chrysler), hate the very air you breath, and are looking for an excuse to not only buy something other than Ford, but justify that attitude by bitching about what they call your greed. And you will lose a PR war with them, because there's a hell of a lot more of "them" than there are of "you". Deal with it.

 

So go ahead, and vote "no"...talk about cutting off your own nose to spite your face. Real intelligent. Not.

Contract talks around the corner--and Len A is back on here. Imagine that. How you doing Len?

[pmooret]

LEN A, I have voted on probably eight contracts and rarely vote yes and guess what; I still have a pretty face!!!

 

Mulally is my hero too but he's still overpaid. There comes a time when a person has served their useful purpose and his time is now. He restructured the company to get them profitable, surely someone else can now oversee the plan. The company gave him all the rope he needed to turn this company around and I look for him to end up hanging his self with it, we've seen this before.

[Len_A]

Contract talks around the corner--and Len A is back on here. Imagine that. How you doing Len?

Alive & breathing, thanks for asking.

[Len_A]

LEN A, I have voted on probably eight contracts and rarely vote yes and guess what; I still have a pretty face!!!

 

Mulally is my hero too but he's still overpaid. There comes a time when a person has served their useful purpose and his time is now. He restructured the company to get them profitable, surely someone else can now oversee the plan. The company gave him all the rope he needed to turn this company around and I look for him to end up hanging his self with it, we've seen this before.

You sound like my Dad - in over 40 years with Ford before he retired, I don't think he ever voted "yes" on a single contract.

 

I agree - I think almost all CEO's are overpaid, but we peons at the bottom have no say. Hell, even as stockholders, we have no say, because the big institutional stockholders (the college endowment funds, the mutual funds, other pension funds including those belonging to other unions, etc), all those idiots keep voting to allow these ridiculous executive compensation packages. The problem with reining in executive compensation is as simple as supply & demand - there's a hell of a lot more people in our economic class that will line up for blocks just to get a crack at a $15 an hour job, than there are qualified people at the top ranks, that can be trusted to call the shots as CEO. It sucks, but it's reality.

 

It's all bluster from the UAW leadership, to gripe about CEO pay right before a contract. Tieing rank-and-file compensation to executive compensation? Never going to happen. Do I think Ford should approach the contracts with their hand out? No. Do I think the previous cuts should all be restored? Nope - too many asshole wanna be industry experts (read that as Toyota sycophants) that begrudgingly admire Ford, because Ford not only didn't take any federal loans, but because technically, the UAW VEBA doesn't own a piece of Ford. In fact, the UAW Ford VEBA sold what ever Ford stock warrants they held, but these jackasses hate the UAW (and the rank-and-file) so fucking much, they can't wait until what they see as the union/rank-and-file greed, over Ford's profits, to supposedly come out and tank Ford. I couldn't put an exact figure on it, but there's a healthy percentage of Ford's recent (last 18 months to 2 years) increase in car sales that's happened because Ford is seen as too smart and well run to end up like GM & Chrysler. That said, there's still a good percentage of middle to upper middle class, well educated people in the business community that still won't touch any product made by Ford, because, you guessed, they hate unions to the point of buying a nonunion made Toyota/Honda/Nissan/etc POS.

 

And what scary about these bastards is how influential they can be with some car buyers. One group of jackasses, while the Chrysler, and then the GM, bankruptcies were going through, went to the point of posting on Wall Street Journal, MarketWatch, New York Times, Fortune, and I can't remember how many other web sites, how people need to support Southern made, nonunion cars & trucks, to, and I remember these words precisely, "discredit union made Detroit junk". It was upsetting to see how many people posted back in agreement with these twits, and how anyone who spoke up on Ford's behalf, as well as GM & Chrysler, got shouted down. I have to admit, I gave up. Uncle. One voice against that many just doesn't work. And I've met way too many business people in Michigan and else where in the Midwest, who need a healthy Detroit based auto industry for their businesses to survive, that agree with these assholes.

 

So, and this is just my opinion, continuing the current contract isn't such a bad idea. Short term gain, for long term bad PR just doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Especially when a good percentage of supposedly "critical thinking" car buyers are more upset about blue collar wages and benefits, and turn a blind eye to ridiculous executive compensation. Until a good percentage of the public turns around, on their own, and starts agreeing with UAW members and their families, about the inequity between blue collar incomes and executive pay, publicly arguing over it doesn't make a lot sense and won't result in anything good.

[dwford]

Google also has some highly skilled employees. Are you as highly skilled as some google employees? If so, what are you doing working in a factory? If you notice, the higher up the food chain you are, better pay usually follows.

 

 

Ford does take care of you. We have great health benefits, a 401k plan AND a pension and damn good pay. Stop the pity party about how we are so beaten down. Even with all the givebacks we are still ahead of the game in my opinion.

 

 

It's not a difference in skill that lets Google give such generous benefits - most people couldn't do factory work. Google has much higher profit margins because the have very low overhead. Their cost of producing their product IS the wages - there aren't any parts to buy, just imagination of the brains of the people they pay to work there. It is almost pure profit, unlike the auto industry where there is labor expense, cost of materials, transportation costs, etc..

[lapsergio]

Here's an update from my friend Grimace...

 

Detroit News March 30th 2009

“We are competitive now,” Mulally told The Detroit News in an interview Friday. “The downturn is a temporary thing. We just have to make it through it.” Sources told The Detroit News that the UAW concessions alone will save Ford a good chunk of change, as the new deal lowers Ford’s labor costs below $50 an hour, on par with foreign competition.

 

Bloomberg News April 1, 2011Ford Motor Co. (F) raised Chief Executive Officer Alan Mulally’s compensation 48 percent to $26.5 million for 2010. Mulally received $1.4 million in salary, $9.45 million in bonus and $15.7 million in stock, option awards and other pay, Dearborn, Michigan-based Ford said today in a filing. Ford last month gave Mulally $56.5 million in stock and Bill Ford $42.4 million as a reward for the automaker’s turnaround. “Alan Mulally is a great CEO, but I don’t think any human being in the world deserves that much money,” Bob King (UAW President) said March 22 of Mulally’s $56.5 million stock award. “It’s outrageous.”

 

Bloomberg News April 1, 2011

United Auto Workers President Bob King will negotiate new contracts this year with Ford, General Motors Co. (GM) and Chrysler Group LLC. While the agreements don’t expire until September, King has said workers must be rewarded for the $7,000 to $30,000 in concessions they each gave up since 2005 to help the automakers survive.

 

Seattle Weekly April 11, 2011

With the era of CEO "sacrifice" officially over and the UAW heading into new contract negotiations, union president Bob King is taking a different tone. He calls the Ford chief's momentous pay increase "morally wrong."

 

Detroit News May 6, 2011

Ford Motor Co., set to enter contract talks with the United Auto Workers, said its U.S. labor costs are now $8 an hour higher than the mostly nonunion U.S. factories of foreign automakers such as Hyundai Motor Co.

Ford, on a website it posted last month, said it pays about $58 an hour in wages and benefits to its 40,600 U.S. hourly workers, $3 more than the automaker said last year.

 

This a run-up stab at the contract talks, they'll be back pedaling and crying foul until it's settled, then release a report to the media afterwards about how well it went for them in order to make the share-holders happy.

 

Read more: http://scottrlap.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=general&action=display&thread=9919#ixzz1LwUk7D2T