Tier2 Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Indeed. I've been talking with friends that are still there. They're just as frustrated as I am. Why is it so hard to understand that you don't know anything because FORD MOTOR COMPANY wants it that way. Regardless of what you think the union don't know shit about layoffs and dates until the company wants them to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Why is it so hard to understand that you don't know anything because FORD MOTOR COMPANY wants it that way. Regardless of what you think the union don't know shit about layoffs and dates until the company wants them to. Didn't I tell you to mind your own business? How about you stop shit stirring and blatantly making shit up then come talk to me about what may or may not be happening. What do you care anyway? It has no effect on you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
focusfrank Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Why is it so hard to understand that you don't know anything because FORD MOTOR COMPANY wants it that way. Regardless of what you think the union don't know shit about layoffs and dates until the company wants them to. We have been kept in the dark from the time they announced the shift was being eliminated. As soon as it was announced (which most of us found out by hearing it on the local news instead of by the union) there wasn't a union rep to be found or seen. They all of a sudden stopped coming around, you would be lucky to see them once or twice a week. now that the shift has been eliminated and those tier 2's who are still there who didn't make the final cut which now that cut off date has changed from April 9th to I hear some time into March you now see union reps around but they still don't say much at all. Everything you hear about when the next round of layoffs are going to be is all heard through rumors, the latest I've heard is that Sept 12th is the lay off date for the tier 2's. They must know something, I find it hard to believe they don't, you even ask them about the current status of the contract talks and they say they don't even know anything about that. You can bet when the time comes when people can opt out of paying union dues you will see them on a daily basis, and will be full of info and probably some free t-shirts at that. I think the tier 2's that are left there who didn't make the cut are all hoping to get transferred to another plant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RougeWelder Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) Meh. Henry Ford paid a record wage in 1914 of $5 a day. The UAW was founded in 1935, That kind of puts a hole in your theory that the UAW is solely responsible for our wages. Actually in recent years past my wages and benefits have gone backwards with UAW representation and bargaining. During the same time period the UAW gave themselves a raise and increased dues. Everyone else must do more with less pay and benefits so why not the people supposedly working for us, the membership ? Paying union dues is on par with paying for insurance. Its when you actually have a claim you find out how good or bad your coverage really is. Having a right to work or opt out option might make some deadbeat UAW people take notice but I doubt it. To think that a large company will voluntarily do something good for their employee's due to the kindness of their hearts is so very naive. Whether it be in the early 1900's or now. Work conditions were horrendous when they offered the $5 a day pay. Most think Ford offered that pay so the people who made his product could afford to buy a vehicle which would increase total sales which would increase profits. Sounds logical, right? WRONG. Read this article for the facts behind the $5/day pay and why it was offered. http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/03/04/the-story-of-henry-fords-5-a-day-wages-its-not-what-you-think/ The fact that Ford hired 52,000 men in 1913 to keep a workforce of only 14,000 properly staffed tells it all. Large corporations don't give two shits if their workforce is happy or makes enough $$$ to live above poverty. They will ONLY pay what they must to keep the workforce working. As far as our buying power decreasing over the past few years from stagnate wages and other things we gave up was strictly due to the collapsed economy created by republican policies which threatened our companies survival. It falls on corporate greed that we have not been rewarded for our sacrifice once that threat had passed. Edited August 21, 2015 by RougeWelder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
focusfrank Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 To think that a large company will voluntarily do something good for their employee's due to the kindness of their hearts is so very naive. Whether it be in the early 1900's or now. Work conditions were horrendous when they offered the $5 a day pay. Most think Ford offered that pay so the people who made his product could afford to buy a vehicle which would increase total sales which would increase profits. Sounds logical, right? WRONG. Read this article for the facts behind the $5/day pay and why it was offered. http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/03/04/the-story-of-henry-fords-5-a-day-wages-its-not-what-you-think/ The fact that Ford hired 52,000 men in 1913 to keep a workforce of only 14,000 properly staffed tells it all. Large corporations don't give two shits if their workforce is happy or makes enough $$$ to live above poverty. They will ONLY pay what they must to keep the workforce working. As far as our buying power decreasing over the past few years from stagnate wages and other things we gave up was strictly due to the collapsed economy created by republican policies which threatened our companies survival. It falls on corporate greed that we have not been rewarded for our sacrifice once that threat had passed. Republican policies?? Clinton is responsible for NAFTA and Obama signed a similar trade agreement with Europe... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RougeWelder Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) Wow where is captain obvious when you need him? You do realize that 90 percent of the people that work are not in a union and they do let them go to the bathroom and have a fan. WTF Whiny over paid lazy crybabies shut up with the they fire everyone, don't let them go piss and overwork them to death bullshit! You must work in a third world country with a bunch of child slave laborers you idiot no sweat shops here. Such a drama queen. WTF???? REALLY WTF???? This is your reasoning why we can get by without a union??? You have to be kidding me. FYI....the majority of that 90% do not make a liveable wage, receive no health benefits, have no safety rules other than Federal labor laws which are routinely broken or sidestepped. And just to let you know how very wrong you are, I have experienced the non-union shop. Asking for a frickin fan cause it is hot and stuffy in the shop would get you nothing but laughter and ridicule. You would be harassed by everyone from management down to the janitor until you couldn't stand it anymore. I personally witnessed a timid man on the line who asked to go to the bathroom and was denied, crap in his pants. He worked the final 4 hrs. of his shift, soiled and extremely embarrassed cause he was threatened to be fired if he left his job. NO BULL.....he then became the target of relentless insults from everyone for the next 3 days until he quit. Edited August 21, 2015 by RougeWelder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RougeWelder Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 (edited) Republican policies?? Clinton is responsible for NAFTA and Obama signed a similar trade agreement with Europe... Trade policies were not responsible for the financial collapse of our economy in 2007. For you to come back at me with that ridiculous reason shows your knee-jerk response and fundamental understanding of the financial crisis that threatened the very existence of Ford and the U.S. economy to be non-existent. Here is a little something to educate you on the concept of reality http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/ROHO/projects/debt/financialcrisis.html The banking failures this article speaks of was the result of deregulation of the banking industry by george w. bush somewhere in his previous 7 yrs. as president. He catered to the banks for $$$ and power. Unfortunately for him, it all exploded before he could get out of office and place the blame elsewhere. Edited August 21, 2015 by RougeWelder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RougeWelder Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Man...I have to get off this thread. There is so much stupidity here I can't stand it anymore and I am tired of explaining the facts to enlighten the ignorant. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
focusfrank Posted August 21, 2015 Share Posted August 21, 2015 Man...I have to get off this thread. There is so much stupidity here I can't stand it anymore and I am tired of explaining the facts to enlighten the ignorant. Are you going to try and say NAFTA helped us in anyway?? We gained nothing from it.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RougeWelder Posted August 22, 2015 Share Posted August 22, 2015 (edited) Are you going to try and say NAFTA helped us in anyway?? We gained nothing from it.. No I am not. I disagree with all trade agreements that put the U.S. at a disadvantage. My post which you responded to was in reference to the cause of the economic meltdown and the republican blame to it's origin. For you to link my comment about the 2007 economic recession caused by republican de-regulation of the banking industry to decades old trade agreements is apples vs oranges. How in the world did you get the idea that I was for NAFTA from the post you responded to??? edited approx. 8:30pm Ok, after doing some research, I admit I was wrong to place the blame of the 2007 financial collapse solely on republican policies. The housing bubble was the result of "reduced" lending standards over the years of the Clinton and Bush administrations. With that said, I would still like to know how in the world you got the idea I was for NAFTA or even thought trade policies were to blame for the 2007 recession. Edited August 22, 2015 by RougeWelder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptObvious Posted August 22, 2015 Share Posted August 22, 2015 No I am not. I disagree with all trade agreements that put the U.S. at a disadvantage. My post which you responded to was in reference to the cause of the economic meltdown and the republican blame to it's origin. For you to link my comment about the 2007 economic recession caused by republican de-regulation of the banking industry to decades old trade agreements is apples vs oranges. How in the world did you get the idea that I was for NAFTA from the post you responded to??? Obviously...lets talk ancient history too....greeks got slammed in 1142 BC GET A CLUE NO ONE GIVES A RATTS ASS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drphil Posted August 22, 2015 Share Posted August 22, 2015 Yeah crybabies. Own it! Adolf and Captain obvious are right nobody cares what you think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cal50 Posted August 22, 2015 Share Posted August 22, 2015 (edited) I personally witnessed a timid man on the line who asked to go to the bathroom and was denied, crap in his pants. He worked the final 4 hrs. of his shift, soiled and extremely embarrassed cause he was threatened to be fired if he left his job. NO BULL.....he then became the target of relentless insults from everyone for the next 3 days until he quit. That guy was an idiot, if true. Workplace rules still apply for harassment and intimidation, union or non-union. I am a tradesman and worked at non-union shops and two corporations / two different unions. They basically run the same (union shops). The non-union shops do not float the BS and door knob employees unions do. The union protects the dead weight and their own staffing more than the rank & file IMHO. Personally I do not trust the company OR the union and lately the company has far more credibility which is pretty sad. Edited August 22, 2015 by cal50 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted August 22, 2015 Share Posted August 22, 2015 No I am not. I disagree with all trade agreements that put the U.S. at a disadvantage. My post which you responded to was in reference to the cause of the economic meltdown and the republican blame to it's origin. For you to link my comment about the 2007 economic recession caused by republican de-regulation of the banking industry to decades old trade agreements is apples vs oranges. How in the world did you get the idea that I was for NAFTA from the post you responded to??? edited approx. 8:30pm Ok, after doing some research, I admit I was wrong to place the blame of the 2007 financial collapse solely on republican policies. The housing bubble was the result of "reduced" lending standards over the years of the Clinton and Bush administrations. With that said, I would still like to know how in the world you got the idea I was for NAFTA or even thought trade policies were to blame for the 2007 recession. Look into the Federal Reserve for more answers if that's what you seek, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted August 22, 2015 Share Posted August 22, 2015 No I am not. I disagree with all trade agreements that put the U.S. at a disadvantage. My post which you responded to was in reference to the cause of the economic meltdown and the republican blame to it's origin. For you to link my comment about the 2007 economic recession caused by republican de-regulation of the banking industry to decades old trade agreements is apples vs oranges. How in the world did you get the idea that I was for NAFTA from the post you responded to??? edited approx. 8:30pm Ok, after doing some research, I admit I was wrong to place the blame of the 2007 financial collapse solely on republican policies. The housing bubble was the result of "reduced" lending standards over the years of the Clinton and Bush administrations. With that said, I would still like to know how in the world you got the idea I was for NAFTA or even thought trade policies were to blame for the 2007 recession. Look into the Federal Reserve for more answers if that's what you seek, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fmccap Posted August 22, 2015 Share Posted August 22, 2015 No I am not. I disagree with all trade agreements that put the U.S. at a disadvantage. My post which you responded to was in reference to the cause of the economic meltdown and the republican blame to it's origin. For you to link my comment about the 2007 economic recession caused by republican de-regulation of the banking industry to decades old trade agreements is apples vs oranges. How in the world did you get the idea that I was for NAFTA from the post you responded to??? edited approx. 8:30pm Ok, after doing some research, I admit I was wrong to place the blame of the 2007 financial collapse solely on republican policies. The housing bubble was the result of "reduced" lending standards over the years of the Clinton and Bush administrations. With that said, I would still like to know how in the world you got the idea I was for NAFTA or even thought trade policies were to blame for the 2007 recession. Look into the Federal Reserve for more answers if that's what you seek, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted August 22, 2015 Share Posted August 22, 2015 The union protects the dead weight and their own staffing more than the rank & file IMHO. Personally I do trust the company OR the union and lately the company has far more credibility which is pretty sad. X2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drphil Posted August 22, 2015 Share Posted August 22, 2015 Obviously Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr hinkyDink Posted August 22, 2015 Share Posted August 22, 2015 Obviously hey chairmen sprinkle here. from lima super duper command. the lima contract is done and we are all going on layoff soon. i outsourced 1234 jobs, starting sept 1st. its cheaper to get uaw dues from 10 dollar and hour ppl and they are happy come to work workers. so FYI all trades are layed off too, cause i dont see a need for them! we dont need no stinking trades! or production workers! remember i hate all people! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlecountry Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 American workers who refused to 'eat shit' are the reason we have it better than workers in third world nations. Who refused, we eat it everyday Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
littlecountry Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 hey chairmen sprinkle here. from lima super duper command. the lima contract is done and we are all going on layoff soon. i outsourced 1234 jobs, starting sept 1st. its cheaper to get uaw dues from 10 dollar and hour ppl and they are happy come to work workers. so FYI all trades are layed off too, cause i dont see a need for them! we dont need no stinking trades! or production workers! remember i hate all people! If you don't have skilled trades, who is going to keep the card game going? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nmsford Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 If you don't have skilled trades, who is going to keep the card game going? Production team leaders Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jumpercable Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 And local union officers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr hinkyDink Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 If you don't have skilled trades, who is going to keep the card game going? yo! we dont need em! contract workers! , and we can pay less, cause they dumb and ugly! and lets not forget stupid prod workers. even less pay! ppl will line up for 7.25 an hour! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decker Posted August 23, 2015 Share Posted August 23, 2015 (edited) So let me get this straight, Adolph....Mr. hinkydink???You were promised an appointed position or something, you didn't get the job....You bitched and complain to your Union rep's about not getting the appointed job, they felt sorry for you and contacted your chairman. After some negotiations, you didn't get the job.....You being a literary genius on blue oval news, won't get you the job....Just a suggestion Adolph, give your doctor a call, he's bound to have a few free samples of the little blue pill. (I know... that's how I get mine, right?) Take a few an go get that dam chairman and show him why you should have that appointed position or whatever you didn't get. Make your chairman a believer in any position you want to put him in...OMG did I just float off into the RED.....? Well, maybe just real dark yellow Give the board a break..... yours isn't the only plant with the in-bread personal political gain agenda. It's almost everywhere Adolph or dinkyhink...??Decker Edited August 23, 2015 by Decker 2 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.