deflep1 Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Thank you for understanding. I suppose noone really knows how it feels untill you have to go through this b.s. I realize I'm not the first nor probably not the last. During the past 19+ years my heart has gone out to those that have lost their home plant. Yep, I agree the UAW probably could not have saved TCAP. Usually once Ford decides to close a plant, it's history. (Except for the fact that Gettlefinger somehow saved LAP, which put TCAP in the crosshairs). Anyway, I'm not really blaming my union for the closing, I'm just blaming them for my miserable options that are offered. I had hoped that my representatives would have negotiated what Jimmy Settles stated to us 5 years ago: "a soft landing" for employees of a plant closure. I'm sure one way or another things will work out OK. I'll do what's best for my family. But for now, I'll just be pissed off and need to blow some steam. [/quote Mark Fields said there will buyouts offered sometime between January and March for non retirement eligible workers.(company wide) No mention of how much they are giving was said. If you don't want to transfer, then find out from your reps how much the buyout will be and decide if it's right for you. Good luck. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4Real? Posted December 27, 2011 Author Share Posted December 27, 2011 THANK YOU FORD!!! General, this is crazy--even for you--you and me both know Ford would have "given" us nothing. It was because of the UAW we get this time off. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decker Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 General, this is crazy--even for you--you and me both know Ford would have "given" us nothing. It was because of the UAW we get this time off. So let me get this straight, uncertain question mark guy thinks your "crazy", General..... I wonder if four real is trying real hard for a.... IUAW spot? Maybe the Education Department? Decker 1 of the1788 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damagedone37 Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 You might have gotten holidays but at DTP we received SWW cause the weekends aren't considered holidays. Thank you iuaw for negotiated a three crew pattern without looking at things like this for ccrew employees Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReDemption Posted December 28, 2011 Share Posted December 28, 2011 To say that our past leadership (previous Bob and Ron) put all the Holiday language in the contract, you’re wrong, or you could have just forgot about the 2 family days. Then to say that we gained nothing back in the ways of Holidays, you’re correct but why do you think our past leadership put all the Holiday time off in the contract? Let me help you out with this, so we could lose things in time of hardship* other than our wages. *Hardship: Labor downsizing due to lack of sales and market share (the two things that keeps us all employed in Auto). This is how labor contracts go, come on you know this and yet you still come on here bashing the very things you know you we as a Union supported. We the membership voted in the 2nd tier wages – FACT. We the membership voted in the concessions – FACT. We the Union voted in our current National language with all that’s included - FACT. You can come on here all day and say you didn’t vote for these things, but brother your apart of a membership so regardless of your casted vote, we vote as a whole. I’ve seen post after post about the tradesmen being put on line, and I fully understand that they lost wages and I have true empathy for them. But what was the alternative? I hope you, and they all understand the language prior to them being able to be placed on production work, I truly hope you do. I’ll explain why: Had they (trades) not been given the right to be placed on production jobs, then they would have exhausted sub and tap in two years of ILO. As for us at Fords not getting everything back, I’ll ask you a question. What do you think happens to us Ford workers and our plants with our Labor cost being nearly 60 an hour all inclusive and GM along with Chrysler being at or near 52? (Transplants are around 51) For example: had we got COLA back we would be near 61 an hour all inclusive. Up until our last negotiated contract can any of you tell me what direction our workforce numbers were headed with the old labor cost formula? If you’re not going to answer that questions truthfully, then just don’t. These are the facts of the cards that we and our Leadership were dealt in our current times. Here’s another simple Labor fact, we have to build our numbers and with that gain our strength back in contract. That’s just how it works, it being the Labor movement, bottom line. Understand for us to gain jobs in Auto in our current times is the highest cost we as a Union could extract from any one company from the cost of our concessions. We don’t have to agree with everything that’s done, but we all understood that it had to be done. Expressing what we feel is wrong I fully understand, but to come onto a forum and openly bash the good things, that’s just stupid. Jeff Hodges Local 600 Dearborn Stamping & DTP Body Vice President & Bargaining Rep “Hope you all had a wonderful Christmas” 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decker Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 (edited) To say that our past leadership (previous Bob and Ron) put all the Holiday language in the contract, you’re wrong, or you could have just forgot about the 2 family days. Then to say that we gained nothing back in the ways of Holidays, you’re correct but why do you think our past leadership put all the Holiday time off in the contract? Let me help you out with this, so we could lose things in time of hardship* other than our wages. *Hardship: Labor downsizing due to lack of sales and market share (the two things that keeps us all employed in Auto). This is how labor contracts go, come on you know this and yet you still come on here bashing the very things you know you we as a Union supported. We the membership voted in the 2nd tier wages – FACT. We the membership voted in the concessions – FACT. We the Union voted in our current National language with all that’s included - FACT. You can come on here all day and say you didn’t vote for these things, but brother your apart of a membership so regardless of your casted vote, we vote as a whole. I’ve seen post after post about the tradesmen being put on line, and I fully understand that they lost wages and I have true empathy for them. But what was the alternative? I hope you, and they all understand the language prior to them being able to be placed on production work, I truly hope you do. I’ll explain why: Had they (trades) not been given the right to be placed on production jobs, then they would have exhausted sub and tap in two years of ILO. As for us at Fords not getting everything back, I’ll ask you a question. What do you think happens to us Ford workers and our plants with our Labor cost being nearly 60 an hour all inclusive and GM along with Chrysler being at or near 52? (Transplants are around 51) For example: had we got COLA back we would be near 61 an hour all inclusive. Up until our last negotiated contract can any of you tell me what direction our workforce numbers were headed with the old labor cost formula? If you’re not going to answer that questions truthfully, then just don’t. These are the facts of the cards that we and our Leadership were dealt in our current times. Here’s another simple Labor fact, we have to build our numbers and with that gain our strength back in contract. That’s just how it works, it being the Labor movement, bottom line. Understand for us to gain jobs in Auto in our current times is the highest cost we as a Union could extract from any one company from the cost of our concessions. We don’t have to agree with everything that’s done, but we all understood that it had to be done. Expressing what we feel is wrong I fully understand, but to come onto a forum and openly bash the good things, that’s just stupid. Jeff Hodges Local 600 Dearborn Stamping & DTP Body Vice President & Bargaining Rep “Hope you all had a wonderful Christmas” Points well taken, brother Hodges. I can only speak for myself but, I did forget about the two days, 16 hours of paid time off over the next four years. Also you bring up the - Fact, that our Trades members did benefit from the negotiations with their ability to work in production operations. Another point well taken. You bring up some very good issues "hardship" and the loss of "benefits'. I can only wonder why then do you take issue with the comparison of the leadership of our past and that of Ron and Bob. The leadership of the past, looked at building some form of cushion between those that sold and preformed the labor and that of a company that had to purchase the labor to stay in a profitable business. Those leaders not only went into negotiations with the mindset of businessmen but, at one point brother Reuther went on record stating, it is not in good faith to negotiate benefits that neither side can fulfill or have the resources to back up. Believe me brother Hodges, I for one remember the cushion. When the membership was selling 50, 60 or more hours a week of labor to companies that were making profits that were records at the time, our leaders stepped up. I, like so many other members went on an earning spree. Yes, CAP had members working 58 hour weeks, week after week. The leadership stepped up by not asking for a gift from the company but, putting it on the table as a health and safety issue. That benefit won, was something that I and many others never had heard of, Paid Personal Holidays. This benefit was negotiated for and put into place for the membership to receive something (paid time off) in return for the hours of labor the company was receiving. "The Cushion" ....not added too, recently. At this point I believe it will be stated "that was then and this is now".... I`m sure most will see it that way. My point is, I find it hard to except that our leadership finds it so hard to sell the -Facts. Fact - Fords, efficiency rate has surpassed most other manufacturing companies in the world. Fact- Ford, has proven with their own research teams that their labor cost is the lowest it has been in almost 15 years. Fact- Ford has reached the lowest number of UAW employee`s in the last 15 years. Fact- Buying labor cheaper, fewer members working and the total numbers of units and parts manufactured per hour, always increasing. Accomplished by who? In return, we get members working for $14.40 an hour, Trades members getting to work production and 16 hours of paid time off over four years........ Decker 1 of the 1788 David Schoenecker CAP, Local 551 Edited December 29, 2011 by Decker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skilled1 Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 To say that our past leadership (previous Bob and Ron) put all the Holiday language in the contract, you’re wrong, or you could have just forgot about the 2 family days. Then to say that we gained nothing back in the ways of Holidays, you’re correct but why do you think our past leadership put all the Holiday time off in the contract? Let me help you out with this, so we could lose things in time of hardship* other than our wages. *Hardship: Labor downsizing due to lack of sales and market share (the two things that keeps us all employed in Auto). This is how labor contracts go, come on you know this and yet you still come on here bashing the very things you know you we as a Union supported. We the membership voted in the 2nd tier wages – FACT. We the membership voted in the concessions – FACT. We the Union voted in our current National language with all that’s included - FACT. You can come on here all day and say you didn’t vote for these things, but brother your apart of a membership so regardless of your casted vote, we vote as a whole. I’ve seen post after post about the tradesmen being put on line, and I fully understand that they lost wages and I have true empathy for them. But what was the alternative? I hope you, and they all understand the language prior to them being able to be placed on production work, I truly hope you do. I’ll explain why: Had they (trades) not been given the right to be placed on production jobs, then they would have exhausted sub and tap in two years of ILO. As for us at Fords not getting everything back, I’ll ask you a question. What do you think happens to us Ford workers and our plants with our Labor cost being nearly 60 an hour all inclusive and GM along with Chrysler being at or near 52? (Transplants are around 51) For example: had we got COLA back we would be near 61 an hour all inclusive. Up until our last negotiated contract can any of you tell me what direction our workforce numbers were headed with the old labor cost formula? If you’re not going to answer that questions truthfully, then just don’t. These are the facts of the cards that we and our Leadership were dealt in our current times. Here’s another simple Labor fact, we have to build our numbers and with that gain our strength back in contract. That’s just how it works, it being the Labor movement, bottom line. Understand for us to gain jobs in Auto in our current times is the highest cost we as a Union could extract from any one company from the cost of our concessions. We don’t have to agree with everything that’s done, but we all understood that it had to be done. Expressing what we feel is wrong I fully understand, but to come onto a forum and openly bash the good things, that’s just stupid. Jeff Hodges Local 600 Dearborn Stamping & DTP Body Vice President & Bargaining Rep “Hope you all had a wonderful Christmas” _________________________________________________________________________________________ Bravo--- Bravo,,,,,, Brother Hodges 76% of us that voted in favor of this great contract, in the worst economy we have ever witnessed, has financially hurt all Americans over the past 10 years. We get it-------- Some never will Well said and as always keep up the good work, even though you dont directly represent me your vision and understanding of the issues and bargaining prowess is what a great leader possesses............... Thank you for everything you do Skilled in Dearborn 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReDemption Posted December 29, 2011 Share Posted December 29, 2011 Decker, I never said I had an issue with our previous Leadership, but I never agreed with their type of contract politics. Back in 1979 we had over a million members so it’s not very hard to figure out that they were trading jobs for wage and benefit gains in contract. We are no longer able to run with that type of formula for the simple fact that we are nearly extinct thanks to that system of bargaining. Comparing them to our current leadership it’s like comparing an 80’s Taurus with todays. With Ford – GM and Chrysler illusively and ill-responsibly spending money the bargaining table had a much different direction and mind set. Back in the day, most of our leadership didn’t have to understand the same criteria as they do now. No disrespect intended, I’m just saying. Our current Leadership has and had to find ways to plug the bleeding artery in Auto Manufacturing Job loss. Yes we have two tier wages, yes we have tradesmen on production jobs, and yes we took concessions in contract and yes they still had to close some plants. But how did we come to this, and for what reasons? It was and is to keep what little jobs we have current and spin our company’s back into profit. We the membership had to do this, we (we = Union members and leadership) had to step up and do what’s right for us as a whole to survive because those in charge on the company side were incapable of doing so. Yes that’s correct, the blame is not just on our Union Leadership. Our previous CEO’s spent money in stupid ill-advised investments and now we are all paying for it, bottom line. Anyways, Decker you didn’t answer my question. What do you think happens to us UAW Ford workers with a contract that puts us at or near 61 an hour (all inclusive) while our sister companies contractually are at nearly 51 along with the transplants? Tell me how you think that plays out. Thanks for the support Skilled1. I really couldn’t understand why some would bitch about the good things, makes no sense at all. I truly hope that our tradesmen on production jobs get back to their tools as soon as possible. Jeff Hodges UAW Local 600 Dearborn Stamping & DTP Body Vice President & Bargaining Rep 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted December 30, 2011 Share Posted December 30, 2011 Yeah right, I raised my eye bro when I read that compensation was negotiated as a cushion to negotiate away in later times. BS! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decker Posted December 30, 2011 Share Posted December 30, 2011 (edited) Decker, I never said I had an issue with our previous Leadership, but I never agreed with their type of contract politics. Back in 1979 we had over a million members so it’s not very hard to figure out that they were trading jobs for wage and benefit gains in contract. We are no longer able to run with that type of formula for the simple fact that we are nearly extinct thanks to that system of bargaining. Comparing them to our current leadership it’s like comparing an 80’s Taurus with todays. With Ford – GM and Chrysler illusively and ill-responsibly spending money the bargaining table had a much different direction and mind set. Back in the day, most of our leadership didn’t have to understand the same criteria as they do now. No disrespect intended, I’m just saying. Our current Leadership has and had to find ways to plug the bleeding artery in Auto Manufacturing Job loss. Yes we have two tier wages, yes we have tradesmen on production jobs, and yes we took concessions in contract and yes they still had to close some plants. But how did we come to this, and for what reasons? It was and is to keep what little jobs we have current and spin our company’s back into profit. We the membership had to do this, we (we = Union members and leadership) had to step up and do what’s right for us as a whole to survive because those in charge on the company side were incapable of doing so. Yes that’s correct, the blame is not just on our Union Leadership. Our previous CEO’s spent money in stupid ill-advised investments and now we are all paying for it, bottom line. Anyways, Decker you didn’t answer my question. What do you think happens to us UAW Ford workers with a contract that puts us at or near 61 an hour (all inclusive) while our sister companies contractually are at nearly 51 along with the transplants? Tell me how you think that plays out. Thanks for the support Skilled1. I really couldn’t understand why some would bitch about the good things, makes no sense at all. I truly hope that our tradesmen on production jobs get back to their tools as soon as possible. Jeff Hodges UAW Local 600 Dearborn Stamping & DTP Body Vice President & Bargaining Rep Brother Hodges, I would like to step down off my soap box (for a short time) if not to be just a little less judgmental but, also to state I do agree with you on more then a few of your point of interest. My comparisons with the past and present leadership is basically one of trying to point out that, even with their short comings (no disrespect intended) the past leadership seemed to put just a little extra in the contracts (either intended or accidental) so as to have that cushion that we both referred to. This cushion was used while these past leaders were at the helm and the present leaders have used the cushion in our recent past. I, like you, have been becoming more and more aware that we, the membership have pretty much run out of the cushion that has made our falls in the economic fight a little less of a hardship. The cushion, is gone. The membership will be even more aware of this loss, in the future negotiations...... "Unless" With the facts as they are we, the membership have seen and are fully aware that our strength in numbers is all but gone. Yes, the present leaders have less to use as leverage if they (the present leader) look at that as the only strength this labor organization has. I have a firm belief that "strength in numbers" is a thing of the past. It worked (well in some situation) for those leaders in the past but, the present day leaders, of all people should have had a front row seat view of the storm on the horizon. With all due respect, some of the leaders at the helm now, had to be sleeping, not to be some what aware of the path this labor movement was on....? I, like others in the discussion group we have, wonder when our leaders will start looking at the other assets this membership holds. Yes, our numbers are way lower then ever but stop and think of what that means. Ford is producing more completed products with those low numbers then ever before. This alone is a business dream come true. Then realize that Ford has flown the flag high when bragging that Fords quality has risen and continues to climb. Its hard to forget that while productivity and quality are taunted as what Ford has done to survive, we have members that have to work 80 hours to receive what some make in 40. The membership has witnessed "Change" in the way corporate Ford does business. This membership has watched as suppliers and venders have had to "Change". This membership has shouldered "Change" in their everyday life's, along with their work life's. When will the membership of this labor movement see the change accrue within their leadership. "Unless"..... Our Leaders realize that the path we, Leaders-Members-Retirees are on is not "Changed" to fit the present day issues, we the membership-retirees and Leaders (as you put it so well) are traveling into extinction. Numbers, are the "old" tool in their belt. This membership has put many other tools in that belt. I can only hope that our leadership looks at them in a different way, the next time Ford or any other company has the presumption that we the membership are just another expense or unneeded cost. I really find it hard to address your question. Not that I am having a problem understanding. It would be more of a problem with the numbers. I have a little back ground with numbers so, when you ask "what do you think happens to us Ford UAW members with a contract that puts us at or near $61 an hour,(all inclusive) while other companies are at or close to $10 less per hour in their contract liabilities, how I think that would play out?" Let me give it an honest try. In a general business scenario, any business paying more than another like or similar business, for any supplies whether it be cake mix or labor will fall behind in numinous situations, including profit. With that as the general business case, Ford would fall behind paying more to a supplier, the UAW. This falling behind scenario would have Ford looking for options. Some options, reductions in product line, reduction in vender or suppliers cost and the reduction in labor and overhead. With the ultimate option, seeking court protection. The answer that you were seeking, in general, would be Ford reorganizing with the relief coming out of the UAW pockets. NO JOBS-LOW WAGES-REDUCED RETIREMENT BENEFITS and on and on..... I use the general business scenario for a few reasons. $61 per hour? would that include those members making 50% less than others. Would $61 an hour be all inclusive if entry level members were brought up to full pay. Also $61, would that include the cost of retiree and their benefits? And how would that $61 be effected by 401k`s and the reduction of benefits to entry level members. Is the $61 effected by the total separation packages of seniority members? Yes, Ford could and would reorganized at our, the memberships loss. If the company had to push the leadership of the UAW and the leadership could not make a good enough case with the tools they have been given, by there members, then yes..... we lose. Furious, it is common practice in any business to build some form of cushion. The I.U.A.W. is a business, not for profit, but a business all the same. Decker 1 of the 1788 Edited December 30, 2011 by Decker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReDemption Posted December 30, 2011 Share Posted December 30, 2011 Thanks for the reply Decker. With your answer you clearly see the same issue as I do, but for some reason you come off as if you’re against it (it being our survival). If you add the Retiree benefits, parity the 2nd tier, put the Holiday back in, re-instate overtime after 8 hours, put the Christmas bonus back in, re-instate pay increases, your back at the $72 + an hour all inclusive formula. When you’re at the helm of a labor movement in Auto, is this the formula you would use to increase your membership while every other manufacture in Auto would be nearly $20 an hour less for its labor cost as compared to yours? You state that your good with numbers, understood, tell me what math equation you come up with that will increase our membership, keep our companies in business and add everything back in our contract that we gave up in order to do just that. I know that you say that they can find other alternatives to cost saving, but don’t you think they have already done that and continue to? Anyways, to answer your question. The $61 approximation (all inclusive) does not include the 2nd tier entry level working being brought up to parity. Nor does it include retiree benefits (that’s now a VEBA issue). It was just COLA added back. I know that many are concerned with the 2nd tier entry level wages. But I must remind you that we as a membership voted that in. I’m concerned as well but I do understand that we have to survive as whole and not as an individual. I didn’t start at full parity, and I’m sure you didn’t, however it didn’t take me 4 years to reach it. But they (IUAW) did increase the entry level wages with this contract, and if that’s how it has to be done (contract by contract) in order for us all to survive, then I understand it and clearly so did many brothers and sisters because we voted the contract in by a good margin. I have heard many say that the members (2nd tier or LTS’s) are pissed that they make less then 1st tier and that it causes issues on the floor. But I haven’t seen this to be true at all. I have talked with many LTS’s and they are hoping and praying to be hired in. They would love to someday have the chance to become 1st tier, but the bottom line is that they are glad to see them hiring again. I’m not speaking for them all, I’m just telling you what I was told by those I talked with personally. Here’s something I found interesting concerning the entry level issue. I have had many brothers and sisters asking for referrals for their family members to be considered for hire. Seems odd to me that any 1st tier worker would want this if it’s such an issue that their family member would start out at entry level wages, doesn’t it? I would like to get opinions with an idea. I’m very concerned about the viability and longevity of the VEBA. I have submitted a resolution to our current leadership that I feel many, with the same concern, would agree with. I propositioned them to set up a system much like VCAP. But this system would be used for directly offsetting Retiree medical costs (such as scripts, office visits etc) or to directly inject funding into VEBA. Of course this would be a member’s voluntary choice. I say this because I feel that the survival of any structured VEBA will always fall back into current membership hands, what that membership does about it matters most. Understand that we are not the first to try this, but I would like to see us succeed where others have failed. Thanks for the debate, I appreciate opinions and honesty. It’s nice to debate with brothers that don’t make it personal to express them self. Jeff Hodges UAW Local 600 Dearborn Stamping & DTP Body Vice President & Bargaining Rep 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decker Posted December 31, 2011 Share Posted December 31, 2011 (edited) Thanks for the reply Decker. With your answer you clearly see the same issue as I do, but for some reason you come off as if you’re against it (it being our survival). If you add the Retiree benefits, parity the 2nd tier, put the Holiday back in, re-instate overtime after 8 hours, put the Christmas bonus back in, re-instate pay increases, your back at the $72 + an hour all inclusive formula. When you’re at the helm of a labor movement in Auto, is this the formula you would use to increase your membership while every other manufacture in Auto would be nearly $20 an hour less for its labor cost as compared to yours? You state that your good with numbers, understood, tell me what math equation you come up with that will increase our membership, keep our companies in business and add everything back in our contract that we gave up in order to do just that. I know that you say that they can find other alternatives to cost saving, but don’t you think they have already done that and continue to? Anyways, to answer your question. The $61 approximation (all inclusive) does not include the 2nd tier entry level working being brought up to parity. Nor does it include retiree benefits (that’s now a VEBA issue). It was just COLA added back. I know that many are concerned with the 2nd tier entry level wages. But I must remind you that we as a membership voted that in. I’m concerned as well but I do understand that we have to survive as whole and not as an individual. I didn’t start at full parity, and I’m sure you didn’t, however it didn’t take me 4 years to reach it. But they (IUAW) did increase the entry level wages with this contract, and if that’s how it has to be done (contract by contract) in order for us all to survive, then I understand it and clearly so did many brothers and sisters because we voted the contract in by a good margin. I have heard many say that the members (2nd tier or LTS’s) are pissed that they make less then 1st tier and that it causes issues on the floor. But I haven’t seen this to be true at all. I have talked with many LTS’s and they are hoping and praying to be hired in. They would love to someday have the chance to become 1st tier, but the bottom line is that they are glad to see them hiring again. I’m not speaking for them all, I’m just telling you what I was told by those I talked with personally. Here’s something I found interesting concerning the entry level issue. I have had many brothers and sisters asking for referrals for their family members to be considered for hire. Seems odd to me that any 1st tier worker would want this if it’s such an issue that their family member would start out at entry level wages, doesn’t it? I would like to get opinions with an idea. I’m very concerned about the viability and longevity of the VEBA. I have submitted a resolution to our current leadership that I feel many, with the same concern, would agree with. I propositioned them to set up a system much like VCAP. But this system would be used for directly offsetting Retiree medical costs (such as scripts, office visits etc) or to directly inject funding into VEBA. Of course this would be a member’s voluntary choice. I say this because I feel that the survival of any structured VEBA will always fall back into current membership hands, what that membership does about it matters most. Understand that we are not the first to try this, but I would like to see us succeed where others have failed. Thanks for the debate, I appreciate opinions and honesty. It’s nice to debate with brothers that don’t make it personal to express them self. Jeff Hodges UAW Local 600 Dearborn Stamping & DTP Body Vice President & Bargaining Rep Brother Hodges I too, find it much better and more productive to discuss and debate with people that can put forth their points of view and realize that there will always be another side to the coin. My thanks to you also. It is even better when two people reach the point in the discussion where, they realize that each other is not that far away from their own point of view. Over the years I have realize that there are two key ingredients that will put the "F.U." in a discussion faster than most anything else that one can throw at another. (maybe short of talking about someones, Ma`ma) The two ingredients are "lack or poor communication" and "perception". The first is very apparent on the floor of most plants I`ve been in. It has two different phases, "I`m not talking to him", "that's not fair" and the one most in place to completely screw up the communication highway, "I Heard" and "THEY SAID".... The second is much easier to use and sometimes it is in place before any verbal exchange can even start. Perception, is a close runner up in the down fall of discussions and negotiations for anything. All of us at one time or another, have fallen into the grips of perception ..... because the person is this or that, or he or she is or is not and I think the best one, "How would he know what he`s talking about", "hell, look at the long hair and tattoo`s... done... no talkin..... Poor communication is something that I too have a problem with. Making a point, is far harder than coming up with the point. Words, dam things, can be taken in so many ways. Especially here where there are no faces to look at. Printed word, will have the feelings, the reader puts in them. I bring this up (maybe ramble a little to much) to show how we all perceive things at times and then move into a judgmental stage of a discussion. At what point did the clarity happen? We both see the same issues. Both, have similar understanding of the possible changes the organization has to move towards. And we both are on the same team. (I still have my Ron`s Team button and Bob`s Team button, too... not to give the perception I......) The perception of those that were clinking glasses and praising our leaders for a GREAT contract was, in "my" perception, not in good taste when, so many sisters and brothers face the uncertainty brought on by the decisions made in the last negotiations, as hard as they were to make. As for the mathematical formula, for the raising of the members numbers ..... well, let me try to give my perception... There is a saying most book keepers have and that may shed some light on the way we think. "Adapt and Produce", it is used by every business in this world. If you bring a product to market and think your done, good luck. If any supplier of Ford has ever brought in a part, product or service and not had to refine, rework or just plain re dooo, I, for one have never seen, used or heard of that part. With that said, I believe the main supplier of Ford, for whatever reason is very stuck on the numbers game.... for what ever reason, that's another discussion. Numbers, a strength? A power to be reckoned with? Maybe at one point in time. A large membership worked to get what we wanted in the past? Not to often. I mean come on the last "strike" was..... 35 years ago. So, will the perception of power, really help with the issues of today? The IUAW has had to adapt a different way of doing business in its other branches to produce results. Or, are the Aero-Space members going through the same issues? Have the teaching members or RN`s been told that they would be better off if there were more of them? I and I can only speak for me, have not heard other branches going through the problems the Auto branch has been going through, with the cure of those issues being... more members? So no, I don`t believe there is a number or a mathematical formula, that will make Ford consider the IUAW as being a threat to their profit line. I do believe the IUAW could and should consider becoming more of a sales organization and consider the services they sell as being the best in the world. It has been proven by transplants by making their luxury model`s with Americans, yes American made BMW`s, Mercedes Benz`s and numerous other high end units. Lets not forget what we were told for years, "Japan`s workforce is what, better?" I can`t stress it enough, those are American`s in Merrysville, Ohio, Another American workforce making a Japanese products sold around the world. Adapt, the approach or negotiations to the buyer of your product, part or service and you will produce a sale that is fair and equitable to those that supply the product, part or service. Brother Hodges, I will respond to your request for options on the subject of the VEBA at a later time. I do have an option..... bet, you never would have guessed that. You, do have my support in the fight to survive. It may not be perceived at times but, the support is there. Decker 1 of the 1788 Edited December 31, 2011 by Decker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armstrong Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 General, this is crazy--even for you--you and me both know Ford would have "given" us nothing. It was because of the UAW we get this time off. Vote Rebublican and we lose more than wages, benefits and job security,,,,,, We will lose our paid days off. Look at what those Republican Governors have done to Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio !!!! Shows the future of Repubilcan voting, most are too foolish to educate themselves on the harm Republicana does to the workers of this country. 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonunion slug Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 Vote Rebublican and we lose more than wages, benefits and job security,,,,,, We will lose our paid days off. Look at what those Republican Governors have done to Wisconsin, Indiana and Ohio !!!! Shows the future of Repubilcan voting, most are too foolish to educate themselves on the harm Republicana does to the workers of this country. I am not a union member but am not dumb enough to vote Republican. Just because the UAW's presence, I (a lowly salaried employee) gets all the vacation and holidays the UAW negotiates. We also get a similar amount of vacation, too. I compare myself to others my age and they don't come close to the benefits that I get--because of the UAW. 9 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonunion slug Posted January 15, 2012 Share Posted January 15, 2012 (edited) :kissass: Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it and eventually they will believe it Just a thought, you don't make any friends by quoting Adolf Hitler. Edited January 15, 2012 by nonunion slug 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Just a thought, you don't make any friends by quoting Adolf Hitler. Doesn't matter who's qoute it is, that qoute is the pillar for all politics. Once you understand it, and who stands to gain from the lie, you can make your own choices, and you can counteract the lie by reacting the opposite of the way you were expected to. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rouge rat Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 I am not a union member but am not dumb enough to vote Republican. Just because the UAW's presence, I (a lowly salaried employee) gets all the vacation and holidays the UAW negotiates. We also get a similar amount of vacation, too. I compare myself to others my age and they don't come close to the benefits that I get--because of the UAW. Slug, we have many skilled trades who vote Republican. They have their head so far up their own behind they don't know which end is up. They think they are helping themselves while they are screwing themselves and the rest of us. I've talked to many and not one has made a good case as to why any union member should vote Republican ever. Look at Indiana, Ohio, Wisconsin, NJ, Florida, etc. Republicans are trying to kill unions. Even here in Michigan. A union member who votes Republican should be called MORON at best, you can think of a lot worse. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
monkeywrench Posted January 16, 2012 Share Posted January 16, 2012 Doesn't matter who's qoute it is, that qoute is the pillar for all politics. Once you understand it, and who stands to gain from the lie, you can make your own choices, and you can counteract the lie by reacting the opposite of the way you were expected to. LOL, this is as dumb a defense as the Hitler quote. The guy is quoting Hitler in regards to the UAW negotiating days off. There is a connection? That is a Big Lie? So, if the UAW didn't negotiate the Holidays, who did Einstein? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted January 17, 2012 Share Posted January 17, 2012 (edited) LOL, this is as dumb a defense as the Hitler quote. The guy is quoting Hitler in regards to the UAW negotiating days off. There is a connection? That is a Big Lie? So, if the UAW didn't negotiate the Holidays, who did Einstein? Don't make me bash you, it's pathetic to hear a grown man whine. It is part of the communist manifesto, and also the basis for all politics. I was not agreeing/disagreeing with any of his points. All polotics are a matter of selling consensus, and no campaigns I have seen in the plants, or in the government are any different. When candidates say something about their opponents, they employ this theory. It is not the truth that matters, it is what they can get people to believe that is more important to them. This is a very dangerous way to think. Most of the time making the other choices look worse buys you a seat. The UAW does the same thing with their contracts. The highlights tell the positive changes, and the big ones that can't be hidden to get support. For example; the highlights said there was to be a 20 percent cap on low tier employees, but those who didn't read the white pages weren't aware the Rawsonville & Sterling were excluded, and that they were both slated to be entirely low tier. Sorry but that is not 20 percent. They made the lie big, kept it simple, kept repeating it, and it was true in peoples minds while they were in the voting booth. How bout the VEBA, it was sufficient for 80 years. Hmm,underfunded by 47 percent? Made the lie big, kept it simple, kept repeating it, and it was true in the members minds while in the voting booth. Hate to be a bitch, but there are 7 turn coat I-UAW reps reading this thread. Don't be a hater Neil! Edited January 17, 2012 by Furious1Auto 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.