Union vs Non-Union wages

[RichardJensen]

So do you really think saying that the cost to build a car for a worker is 73 or 81 or whatever when the spin is the union worker to the media? These companies are spinning this into poor us look what the workforce is doing to us when THEY still make more than all of us talking about it on this thread combined. WAKE UP they are F'n us not them.

I think the whole debate is about as useful as arguing over whether the sky would look better if it were lime green. There's nothing you can do about it. 'Shut up already' is my short take on the entire debate.

[sparks will fly]

I think the whole debate is about as useful as arguing over whether the sky would look better if it were lime green. There's nothing you can do about it. 'Shut up already' is my short take on the entire debate.

 

Ok i'll shut up when everyboby quits blaming the union wage for all the troubles of Ford, isn't that the name of the thread?

[mettech]

Yes. Until somebody shows me some kind of report from one of the Auto manufacturers, instead of people just throwing numbers out, yes. It's an outright lie, and so is that 300 to 1200% figure you just regurgetated. You are part of the problem, not the solution.

 

And, if it is because of legacy costs, we are back to square one which you will not even mention. It is not the unions fault, but the companies for underfunding the pension plans. They wasted money on Jaguar, Land Rover, Kwik-Fit, Astin Martin, instead of investing in their future liabilities. Liabilities, I might add, that they agreed to, and the import workers are also granted.

 

Pioneer:

 

So... do you state that it is not the UAW fault AT ALL for the high wages/overhead? :shrug:

 

I have posted data about the cost of hourly wages from General Motors, Harbour Consulting and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission as you requested.

 

Now you show me if the data is a lie? :fan:

[RichardJensen]

Ok i'll shut up when everyboby quits blaming the union wage for all the troubles of Ford, isn't that the name of the thread?

What? I'm saying the 'blame the union' people should shut up already. The situation is what it is, and all the argle-bargle in the world isn't going to change it.

[grbeck]

So do you really think saying that the cost to build a car for a worker is 73 or 81 or whatever when the spin is the union worker to the media? These companies are spinning this into poor us look what the workforce is doing to us when THEY still make more than all of us talking about it on this thread combined. WAKE UP they are F'n us not them.

 

The problem isn't whether the figure is $73 per hour, or $81 per hour. The problem is how much higher is the figure for GM and Ford than it is for the transplants.

 

If the transplants pay $5, $10 or even $15 less per hour - that is a competitive handicap that GM and Ford must overcome, either through higher productivity or buy charging more for the product (the route that the European marques have taken in this country, but they can get away with it thanks to their greater prestige).

 

And, yes, the debate does matter. Review the history of Studebaker after 1946 to learn firsthand how uncompetitive labor costs can cripple and ultimately kill an automobile company. Often, wages out of line with industry standards can be a sign of poor management (although workers are quite happy to take them when offered).

 

For the record, I don't care if UAW members make $200 an hour, if the companies can afford it. But that is the key phrase - if the companies can afford it.

[ZanatWork]

Ok i'll shut up when everyboby quits blaming the union wage for all the troubles of Ford, isn't that the name of the thread?

 

 

Errrr...nothing in the title suggests that "all" of Ford's problems are union-related, wage-related, or from any one source. This is about one aspect.

 

I'll happily stand by my experiences that unions are:

 

1. featherbedded to hell and back with redundancies that drive up costs, and

 

2. known to, in recent years, be willing to strangle their industries to the point where they define "biting the hand that feeds".

 

I deal with union people in music studios constantly. My complaints with many of them are identical to those of other people in other industries: why are we paying for a person or people that essentially do nothing?

 

Workers that work should be paid. Workers that work hard and stand out at their position should be rewarded and/or promoted. Workers that are attatched to a contract and do notihng or next to nothing are ridiculous.

[RichardJensen]

And, yes, the debate does matter.

I think debating how to overcome that discrepancy is valid.

 

Blaming the unions is a waste of time, especially since white collar costs are as high.

 

Further, I don't see the situation as that dire. Ford has continued to sustain a higher R&D budget than Toyota, while simultaneously paying these outsize legacy costs.

 

The real issue at Ford, I think, is accountability. The more I look at the failure of the first restructuring, the more I realize that while costs were addressed, accountability was not. PD still operated in a vacuum, and while Ford has indulged in pure R&D more than any other car company, I believe that they have not fully maximized the potential of their pure R&D spending either. Especially in environmental and sustainable manufacturing methods and technologies.

[mettech]

I think debating how to overcome that discrepancy is valid.

 

Blaming the unions is a waste of time, especially since white collar costs are as high.

 

Further, I don't see the situation as that dire. Ford has continued to sustain a higher R&D budget than Toyota, while simultaneously paying these outsize legacy costs.

 

The real issue at Ford, I think, is accountability. The more I look at the failure of the first restructuring, the more I realize that while costs were addressed, accountability was not. PD still operated in a vacuum, and while Ford has indulged in pure R&D more than any other car company, I believe that they have not fully maximized the potential of their pure R&D spending either. Especially in environmental and sustainable manufacturing methods and technologies.

 

"....In the last half of 2003, Toyota Motor Corp. became the second largest global automotive manufacturer, surpassing Ford Motor Co. and now second only to General Motors. Toyota accomplished this feat while spending only about two-thirds of what GM ($6.5 billion) and Ford ($6.3 billion) each spend annually on R&D.

"....

 

GM and Ford R&D cost

 

Does anyone know if the cost for R&D is correct?

[RichardJensen]

There may be some accounting differences, and 2003 was a lean year for Ford R&D spending.

 

However, Ford in 2004 & 2005 spent more on R&D than GM.

 

Also, Toyota unlike Ford & GM, (cultural difference, probably) doesn't engage in as much pure research. Ford, being an oldline industrial company (like AT&T was, and Xerox was, and the way IBM still is) invests heavily in pure R&D (stuff with a very long lead time to production). Some may question the validity of these pursuits, but hey, Bell Labs gave us the transistor, PARC gave us the GUI, and IBM gave us computer chips, so they do serve a purpose.

[sparks will fly]

The problem isn't whether the figure is $73 per hour, or $81 per hour. The problem is how much higher is the figure for GM and Ford than it is for the transplants.

 

If the transplants pay $5, $10 or even $15 less per hour - that is a competitive handicap that GM and Ford must overcome, either through higher productivity or buy charging more for the product (the route that the European marques have taken in this country, but they can get away with it thanks to their greater prestige).

 

And, yes, the debate does matter. Review the history of Studebaker after 1946 to learn firsthand how uncompetitive labor costs can cripple and ultimately kill an automobile company. Often, wages out of line with industry standards can be a sign of poor management (although workers are quite happy to take them when offered).

 

For the record, I don't care if UAW members make $200 an hour, if the companies can afford it. But that is the key phrase - if the companies can afford it.

 

What Richard is telling you that they claim the price is for the hourly when really it is for all employee's. So you keep comparing apples to oranges.

[mettech]

Pioneer:

 

So... do you state that it is not the UAW fault AT ALL for the high wages/overhead? :shrug:

 

I have posted data about the cost of hourly wages from General Motors, Harbour Consulting and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission as you requested.

 

Now you show me if the data is a lie? :fan:

 

Hey Pioneer... Were are you...

[NJSteve3]

What Richard is telling you that they claim the price is for the hourly when really it is for all employee's. So you keep comparing apples to oranges.

 

The chances are, the white collar folks are overpaid relative to their white collar counterparts at Toyota, Honda, etc. I'm sure that a lengthy discussion about management dollars wasted would be interesting. And clearly, as has been stated many times, the current wage/ benefit albatross was agreed to by those same managers.

 

That said - would you, and your peers, be willing to work for the same wage package as your counterparts at Toyota, Honda, etc. transplant factories? Ford's competitive disadvantage, at least partially, could be solved by the "right" answer.

[sparks will fly]

The chances are, the white collar folks are overpaid relative to their white collar counterparts at Toyota, Honda, etc. I'm sure that a lengthy discussion about management dollars wasted would be interesting. And clearly, as has been stated many times, the current wage/ benefit albatross was agreed to by those same managers.

 

That said - would you, and your peers, be willing to work for the same wage package as your counterparts at Toyota, Honda, etc. transplant factories? Ford's competitive disadvantage, at least partially, could be solved by the "right" answer.

 

Concidering that we are close to the same wage then yes I would. Now do you want to add that I would like to see my department run correctly cover people off with overtime and actually fix problems on the weekend with overtime pay, then I am definatly in. I wonder how are counterparts handle PM's and breakdowns? I wonder if they keep parts in hand to keep things in running order? Then I wonder IF the management in maintanence actullay know how to run it. If you say yes to these then maybe Ford need to change more than I.

[NJSteve3]

Concidering that we are close to the same wage then yes I would. Now do you want to add that I would like to see my department run correctly cover people off with overtime and actually fix problems on the weekend with overtime pay, then I am definatly in. I wonder how are counterparts handle PM's and breakdowns? I wonder if they keep parts in hand to keep things in running order? Then I wonder IF the management in maintanence actullay know how to run it. If you say yes to these then maybe Ford need to change more than I.

 

I hope that the rank and file folks and the managers can work together to reach the ideal solution for all - best wishes - Steve

[mettech]

The chances are, the white collar folks are overpaid relative to their white collar counterparts at Toyota, Honda, etc. I'm sure that a lengthy discussion about management dollars wasted would be interesting. And clearly, as has been stated many times, the current wage/ benefit albatross was agreed to by those same managers.

 

That said - would you, and your peers, be willing to work for the same wage package as your counterparts at Toyota, Honda, etc. transplant factories? Ford's competitive disadvantage, at least partially, could be solved by the "right" answer.

 

Does the white collar workforce get overtime pay? I may be wrong, but I thought a few years ago Ford cut a lot of positions and reduced the pay in the white collar force.

 

To help with this issue, if the white collar workforce would take a 11% cut in pay and benifits, board members would take a 30% cut in pay and benifits, would the UAW be willing to cut their pay and benifits by 5% and no overtime pay? Also, there would be no pay or benifit increase for four years, only stock options for everyone. However, bonuses would still be in affect as current contract allows.

 

 

 

What Richard is telling you that they claim the price is for the hourly when really it is for all employee's. So you keep comparing apples to oranges.

 

 

Who is "they"?

[grbeck]

What Richard is telling you that they claim the price is for the hourly when really it is for all employee's. So you keep comparing apples to oranges.

 

It is well established that the total compensation package for GM and Ford blue-collar employees is more expensive than the compensation package for comparable employees at the transplants. Don't get hung up on a dollar amount (i.e., whether GM and Ford UAW members make $73 an hour, or $81 an hour). That's just a distraction. Whatever the final figure is for GM and Ford, it is higher than the comparable figure for the transplant operations.

 

I have also read that the white-collar employees at GM and Ford fare better than their transplant counterparts. Please note, however, that GM and Ford have taken steps to reduce white-collar compensation, including co-payments for medical benefits.

 

Labor costs are higher for GM and Ford than they are for the transplants, and it is easier for GM and Ford to cut white-collar labor costs than it is for them to cut blue-collar labor costs. These are well-established facts.

[mettech]

It is well established that the total compensation package for GM and Ford blue-collar employees is more expensive than the compensation package for comparable employees at the transplants. Don't get hung up on a dollar amount (i.e., whether GM and Ford UAW members make $73 an hour, or $81 an hour). That's just a distraction. Whatever the final figure is for GM and Ford, it is higher than the comparable figure for the transplant operations.

 

I have also read that the white-collar employees at GM and Ford fare better than their transplant counterparts. Please note, however, that GM and Ford have taken steps to reduce white-collar compensation, including co-payments for medical benefits.

 

Labor costs are higher for GM and Ford than they are for the transplants, and it is easier for GM and Ford to cut white-collar labor costs than it is for them to cut blue-collar labor costs. These are well-established facts.

 

Sooo.... What do you do? If it cost company A 15% more to produce a product than company B, what do you cut?

[grbeck]

Sooo.... What do you do? If it cost company A 15% more to produce a product than company B, what do you cut?

 

I'm just trying to make the point that the gap DOES exist, and the entire debate over whether UAW members are compensated at the rate of $73 per hour or $81 per hour is a distraction.

 

I'll let Ford's new CEO figure out the details of what must be done to address that competitive disadvantage. He has his work cut out for him, that's for sure...

[sparks will fly]

Does the white collar workforce get overtime pay? I may be wrong, but I thought a few years ago Ford cut a lot of positions and reduced the pay in the white collar force.

 

To help with this issue, if the white collar workforce would take a 11% cut in pay and benifits, board members would take a 30% cut in pay and benifits, would the UAW be willing to cut their pay and benifits by 5% and no overtime pay? Also, there would be no pay or benifit increase for four years, only stock options for everyone. However, bonuses would still be in affect as current contract allows.

Who is "they"?

 

Up to a point yes the white collar workforce at Ford still gets overtime (GSR's). they cut the amount but if the line in the plant runs 10 hours they get 10 hours (even if they are there 12).

 

They, them, those guys you know......

[mettech]

Sorry. Didn't see this post in the flood of new posts.

 

I don't think it's all the companies fault, but it's not totally on the UAW. Personally, the data you posted means nothing to me. Look at THIS thread I started. This proves that all those figures are wrong, and shows exactly what the cost of each employee per hour is, and it's nowhere near the regurgetated numbers people throw around.

 

I fully agree with you that the major part of the problem is the company, and not the UAW. However, what has the UAW offered the company to help it out of the current problems? That is not team work. A team member should ALWAYS ask, "What can I do to help out more."

 

Granted, the union has given some concessions, only after the company has asked for them.

 

You may not like the dollar figure, but that is what GM says it is. That is what an independent consulting firm says it is. AND that is what the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing showed. Before posting their numbers, they must be certified by an accountant before filed!!!!!

 

I have nothing against what a person should be able to make. Hell…I’m sure that my total hourly wage cost would be in that $81.00/ hour ballpark too. My family and I pay nothing for any type of medical, and I’m 100% covered. Some of my pay is tax free…I have 30 days of vacation + holidays (most of the time). I am vested with a retirement after 20 years.

 

My point is, the UAW should help the team, not drag it down.

[willie715]

That $81 dollar an hour figure is an outright lie. I dare anybody to prove it correct, because you can't. Just another example of uninformed people making an unintelligent decision.

 

Your exactly right, sounds he or she is some of the suck asses that we have at work that believe anything our poor excuse for bosses tell them. That price is roughly what they charge other departments for the various jobs we do. Just a company number. If thats the case ill save the company 21 dollars an hour and they can pay me 60 bucks and hour and ill get my own insurance and they can keep the pension. This guy is full of shit.

 

Sooo.... What do you do? If it cost company A 15% more to produce a product than company B, what do you cut?

 

 

Get some nice designs and sell 30 percent more cars. Toyotas been around alot longer then the last ten years. There payroll has always been cheaper, why were we so much better then? Better cars, thats why. Then we coasted and coasted until guess what? They caught us and then surpassed us. I forget the exact number but Bikl for himself even said labor was only like 12 percent the cost of building a car.

[mettech]

Health care concessions, allowing them to close plants, new COA/MOA's at most Ford locations, and letting the company buyout employees. Sounds like the UAW is going above and beyond. That doesn't even take into account the stuff we will lose come next contract.

 

The UAW did not have to agree to anything in the middle of a contract.

 

Well then... Don't make any concessions.

 

Reality of life is, no body, no company, no family owes anyone anything. All interaction is nothing more than a temporary mutual contract, good only for as long as both sides can or want to abide by it. You can not force a company to pay you if they have no money, and the company can not force anyone to work for them if they refuse.

 

Nothing is forever… unless it’s change…. The old ways are gone… You can either make changes, or be surprised when changes happens.

 

The people that make the changes are the ones that survive. The people that are surprised…just fade away.

 

Everyone with GM, Ford and the UAW must become more integrated before it’s too late.

The all three can not survie anyother two years like it is now.

[sparks will fly]

Well then... Don't make any concessions.

 

Reality of life is, no body, no company, no family owes anyone anything. All interaction is nothing more than a temporary mutual contract, good only for as long as both sides can or want to abide by it. You can not force a company to pay you if they have no money, and the company can not force anyone to work for them if they refuse.

 

Nothing is forever… unless it’s change…. The old ways are gone… You can either make changes, or be surprised when changes happens.

 

The people that make the changes are the ones that survive. The people that are surprised…just fade away.

 

Everyone with GM, Ford and the UAW must become more integrated before it’s too late.

The all three can not survie anyother two years like it is now.

 

They CAN survive another 2 years and should, THEY (you know them, those guys) the companies wanted the longer contracts in the '90's, from 3 to 4 years. Now they have them they should stick to them instead of telling you the average outsider looking in that they can't do it unless WE, the union, help them out. When the dust settles and everything is cut and dry THE ONLY ONES THAT GET HURT IS THE ONES THAT WORK THE MOST.

[mettech]

Your exactly right, sounds he or she is some of the suck asses that we have at work that believe anything our poor excuse for bosses tell them. That price is roughly what they charge other departments for the various jobs we do. Just a company number. If thats the case ill save the company 21 dollars an hour and they can pay me 60 bucks and hour and ill get my own insurance and they can keep the pension. This guy is full of shit.

Get some nice designs and sell 30 percent more cars. Toyotas been around alot longer then the last ten years. There payroll has always been cheaper, why were we so much better then? Better cars, thats why. Then we coasted and coasted until guess what? They caught us and then surpassed us. I forget the exact number but Bikl for himself even said labor was only like 12 percent the cost of building a car.

 

lol You have got to be kidding....

 

Do your homework in history and econ about the topic you note. Please back-up your statements with documented data and/or referances.

 

Pioneer and I may not agree, but good God man.. At least we can show referances.

 

P.S. ..."Your exactly right, sounds he or she is some of the suck asses that we have at work that believe anything our poor excuse for bosses tell them..."

 

If that statement is directed to me.... I am a NCO with 24 years in the USAF/ANG. My education back ground is in Meteorology (1984) and Organizational Management (1997).

[mettech]

.....allowing them to close plants, new COA/MOA's at most Ford locations, and letting the company buyout employees. Sounds like the UAW is going above and beyond. That doesn't even take into account the stuff we will lose come next contract.

 

The UAW did not have to agree to anything in the middle of a contract.

 

 

You have got to be joking... What rights does a labor force have that can force a company to keep a plant open? That's like me telling DoD don't close the base that I'm station at even though it's no longer needed. lol...

 

People have to move to the location were the jobs are..

 

"...allowing them to close".... With that type of mentality and logic, we would still be riding horses to work everyday instead of driving cars.. No.... that type of logic forces a company to pay a labor force when it's not working...I think the UAW gives this a name... "Banked Employee.... Smart... real smart... The worse thing you can do to someone is to make them... non-productive...