UAW Demands 46% Pay Hike

[Oac98]

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

You still think raises are the key issue…. Like I said in the other thread, stop believing everything thing you read in the media. 

That’s what I’m trying to tell some people on here, there are more issues than just wages here. 

[fuzzymoomoo]

1 hour ago, mackinaw said:

And it was Fain who stiffed both Bill Ford and Farley last Tuesday when they both went to meet with the union to present their latest proposal. 

What difference does that make? Shawn Fain is not the lead negotiator, Chuck Browning is. I wasn’t a fan of Fain calling out John Tavares for being absent either, works both ways.

[fuzzymoomoo]

2 hours ago, akirby said:

There are other things the union can ask for like more days off, more job security (to a point)  - things the company can provide while remaining cost competitive.  Good unions do this.  Bad unions call great wages “poverty level” and make insane demands that are 100% out of touch with reality and convince their members to die on the sword, which is exactly what will happen here one way or the other.

I hate this argument. My pay hasn’t changed in 2 years and yet I suddenly find myself struggling to pay bills. I haven’t made any major purchases in the last 3 years and yet I suddenly find myself picking and choosing which bills to pay late on a month to month basis. But go ahead, keep telling us we don’t deserve a bigger cut of the pie.
 

It’s not us who’s out of touch, it’s you older generation folks who had it so good for so long and were able to sock away money. This is why I couldn’t care less whether or not the retirees get a cut of this new contract. I’m tired of hearing them brag about their second homes and buying motorhomes and other luxuries when those of us who are newer to the working world (~15 years or less) only fall further and further behind. 

It’s hard to swallow a 20% raise over the life of a 4 year contract, especially when we see other companies agreeing to 30 or 40 percent (sometimes more in the case of UPS). Again, this isn’t the hill the union is choosing to die on though. It’s mostly job security concerns, especially with Stellantis. 

[silvrsvt]

31 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

It’s not us who’s out of touch, it’s you older generation folks who had it so good for so long and were able to sock away money. This is why I couldn’t care less whether or not the retirees get a cut of this new contract. I’m tired of hearing them brag about their second homes and buying motorhomes and other luxuries when those of us who are newer to the working world (~15 years or less) only fall further and further behind. 

It’s hard to swallow a 20% raise over the life of a 4 year contract, especially when we see other companies agreeing to 30 or 40 percent (sometimes more in the case of UPS). Again, this isn’t the hill the union is choosing to die on though. It’s mostly job security concerns, especially with Stellantis. 

 

Fuzzy, trying to find a diplomatic way of putting this-the pay thing sucks, but it is just not you that are quote unquote suffering....when you start blaming older people (who where most likely in similar situation you where in at your age) for what is happening to you, that is just sour grapes. My old man is retired (early retirement at that too..so he is not getting all he should have gotten either) from Ford for almost 20 years and they don't have a second home nor do they go on a lot of trip or do extraneous things. But at least he was able to retire without worrying about finding a job at 62. 

 

I know people who have master level degrees with certifications that are barely making 55K a year with almost 20 years of experience in the field. 

[Maislebandit]

21 hours ago, akirby said:

Are the older workers willing to give up some of their pay to help out the newer workers?  They were created to help the company control labor costs without affecting the older workers.

Lol. Having the lower tier since the late 2000s is the leverage and excuse that has been used to deny legacy workers any type of raise that even remotely would’ve kept up with inflation. 
Older workers gave back a negotiated raise. They also agreed to suspend cola. I’d say the older workers have been greatly affected. 
Decades later with the reaping of the benefits of these concessions, record profits, exorbitant raises, perks for upper management and you want older workers to give up already stagnated pay to help out newer workers. That’s rich. ?

[akirby]

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

It’s not us who’s out of touch, it’s you older generation folks who had it so good for so long and were able to sock away money. This is why I couldn’t care less whether or not the retirees get a cut of this new contract. I’m tired of hearing them brag about their second homes and buying motorhomes and other luxuries when those of us who are newer to the working world (~15 years or less) only fall further and further behind. 

This is exactly the problem.  Those old UAW contracts were WAY higher than the market because there was no other competition.  What you’re seeing now is the inevitable adjustment in light of non union free market competition.  It was a great gig while it lasted but now it’s back to reality.

 

Of course you deserve raises for inflation, but if you choose to live by contracts then you’re stuck with what you negotiate.  Blame the union for not getting cola.  They took other stuff instead like profit sharing bonuses.  
 

I understand not wanting to give up things you have but you also have to be realistic.  What other companies pay and what CEOs make are irrelevant.  
 

That said I’m going to try to stop repeating myself.

 

[fuzzymoomoo]

7 minutes ago, akirby said:

Of course you deserve raises for inflation, but if you choose to live by contracts then you’re stuck with what you negotiate.  Blame the union for not getting cola.  They took other stuff instead like profit sharing bonuses.  

And that’s the hill to die on 

[fuzzymoomoo]

53 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

I know people who have master level degrees with certifications that are barely making 55K a year with almost 20 years of experience in the field. 

They should be asking for more too. 

[akirby]

48 minutes ago, Maislebandit said:

Lol. Having the lower tier since the late 2000s is the leverage and excuse that has been used to deny legacy workers any type of raise that even remotely would’ve kept up with inflation. 
Older workers gave back a negotiated raise. They also agreed to suspend cola. I’d say the older workers have been greatly affected. 
Decades later with the reaping of the benefits of these concessions, record profits, exorbitant raises, perks for upper management and you want older workers to give up already stagnated pay to help out newer workers. That’s rich. ?

I want workers to be paid a fair market wage for their work, not some overinflated wage based on decades of extortion made possible by a closed market.

[silvrsvt]

16 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

They should be asking for more too. 

its what the market sets

 

take a look at social workers-they have lots of education but are lucky to make 30-40k a year (the last time I heard someone talk about it)

[Maislebandit]

15 minutes ago, akirby said:

I want workers to be paid a fair market wage for their work, not some overinflated wage based on decades of extortion made possible by a closed market.

You can call collective bargaining whatever you’d like, I think extortion is a bit extreme.
The lowest common denominator shouldn’t dictate what a fair wage is. 
Is it really a closed market or is just that UAW are the ones that have blazed the trail? Foreign companies, suppliers and down the line set wages based on what the UAW garners for the membership. 
If they accepted lower wages to match foreign autoworkers you can bet the foreign autoworkers drop their pay accordingly and so on down the food chain. 

[Rangers09]

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

I hate this argument. My pay hasn’t changed in 2 years and yet I suddenly find myself struggling to pay bills. I haven’t made any major purchases in the last 3 years and yet I suddenly find myself picking and choosing which bills to pay late on a month to month basis. But go ahead, keep telling us we don’t deserve a bigger cut of the pie.
 

It’s not us who’s out of touch, it’s you older generation folks who had it so good for so long and were able to sock away money. This is why I couldn’t care less whether or not the retirees get a cut of this new contract. I’m tired of hearing them brag about their second homes and buying motorhomes and other luxuries when those of us who are newer to the working world (~15 years or less) only fall further and further behind. 

It’s hard to swallow a 20% raise over the life of a 4 year contract, especially when we see other companies agreeing to 30 or 40 percent (sometimes more in the case of UPS). Again, this isn’t the hill the union is choosing to die on though. It’s mostly job security concerns, especially with Stellantis. 

 

I have no desire to enter the discussions on the current collective agreement impasse, but do take exception to your generalisation that us older folk (pensioners) had it so good for so long.

 

Quite frankly, in our experience and those of many of our friends, that couldn't be further from the truth. Yes, we now have a comfortable lifestyle, but that was earned from attending continuing education, much hard work while DW and I were younger, a frugal lifestyle while rearing kids, building pensions and smart investing. When completing my Masters, I left home about 06:00 heading to college (which I paid) for about 7 hrs, then off to work an 8 - 9 hr afternoon shift, getting home between 23:59 and 01:00. Back out again at 06:00 to do it over again. Did this for about 5 months, but yes, I really did have it easy.

 

These days, I just smile when younger folk complain about the recent mortgage rate increases, which have increased to over 5%, possibly some are even paying 7%. Wow, in 1982 our mortgage was 21% and remained > 10% for about 8 - 10 yrs, but yes, we had it easy. I can't even boast of having a huge salary, as many of my senior officers, who were all union members made more money than I did, when adding their overtime, shift differentials and other various adds available under their collective agreement.

[fuzzymoomoo]

44 minutes ago, Rangers09 said:

Wow, in 1982 our mortgage was 21% and remained > 10% for about 8 - 10 yrs, but yes, we had it easy.

That’s not a fair comparison when the average price of a house in 1982 was less than $100k. I believe if I’m not mistaken it was around $88k.

 

It’s $450k today and with the institutional investors coming in and buying everything in sight it won’t be going down any time soon, if ever. 

[fuzzymoomoo]

Let me make something clear here, a 20% raise over 4 years actually does sound great to me, especially if it’s front loaded over the first 2 years. I’ve been kind of playing devils advocate a little bit. What my biggest wish is for the return of COLA, and at a little bit of a better formula than what it was in 08 when it was suspended. I haven’t verified this myself but I’ve had a few people in the know tell me that had that formula still been in effect under the 2019 contract it would have been and extra $3/hr or so and that wouldn’t have really made up for the massive inflation we saw over the last 2 years. 
 

My bigger concern is why a journeyman electrician only makes $4 more than production. That’s absurd on its face. 

Edited September 17, 2023 by fuzzymoomoo

[silvrsvt]

16 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

My bigger concern is why a journeyman electrician only makes $4 more than production. That’s absurd on its face. 

 

How much does a union journeyman electrician in Michigan make not working for an automaker?

[fuzzymoomoo]

35 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

How much does a union journeyman electrician in Michigan make not working for an automaker?

Im not entirely sure. I know of guys who previously worked in construction and took a pay cut to come to Ford. 

[AGR]

5 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Like this loyal stockholder, customer has to listen to my pals rag me on recalls while Farley wants to pour money down the Formula One rabbit hole.

 

I don't like all the recalls, but I am a big racing fan too. I'm looking forward to Ford's F1 return.

Edited September 17, 2023 by AGR

[akirby]

2 hours ago, Maislebandit said:

You can call collective bargaining whatever you’d like, I think extortion is a bit extreme.
The lowest common denominator shouldn’t dictate what a fair wage is. 
Is it really a closed market or is just that UAW are the ones that have blazed the trail? Foreign companies, suppliers and down the line set wages based on what the UAW garners for the membership. 
If they accepted lower wages to match foreign autoworkers you can bet the foreign autoworkers drop their pay accordingly and so on down the food chain. 

It was a closed market prior to the 80s when Detroit controlled almost 100% of the market.  So as long as the big three all overpaid the same amount it was fair competition.  That’s when compensation skyrocketed far above the rest of the market.   
 

What happens in Detroit won’t affect what Tesla or Toyota or Kia or any others pay their people because those jobs are market based already.

 

The reason this is a pointless debate is you and most other union members believe workers are due more pay if the company makes more Money or the CEO gets a big raise.  While I and most non union folks believe that it’s up to the company to decide how they compensate you and if you don’t like it you go find a different job.  This naturally sets the market rates.  And your pay is determined by your job and your skill and experience and has nothing whatsoever to do with company profits or CEO pay.

[Maislebandit]

41 minutes ago, akirby said:

It was a closed market prior to the 80s when Detroit controlled almost 100% of the market.  So as long as the big three all overpaid the same amount it was fair competition.  That’s when compensation skyrocketed far above the rest of the market.   
 

What happens in Detroit won’t affect what Tesla or Toyota or Kia or any others pay their people because those jobs are market based already.

 

The reason this is a pointless debate is you and most other union members believe workers are due more pay if the company makes more Money or the CEO gets a big raise.  While I and most non union folks believe that it’s up to the company to decide how they compensate you and if you don’t like it you go find a different job.  This naturally sets the market rates.  And your pay is determined by your job and your skill and experience and has nothing whatsoever to do with company profits or CEO pay.

How can they control 100% of the market and skyrocket above the rest of it at the same time?

It’s my contention is that the big 3 is what suppliers and manufacturing in general have historically based their pay scale on and the transplants did the same when they arrived on scene. 
I agree worker pay and CEO pay are nothing to do with each other directly but a bell weather that should be a constant ballpark X times the amount. When CEO pay outpaced a line workers pay  by some %1000 in the past 4 decades, there an obvious imbalance. 

I don’t know why you feel this is a pointless debate. It’s literally what the whole thread is about. You contribute to it then say you’re done and it’s not worth it. 
Just because you, me and some others may be unmovable on the subject, it doesn’t mean that others including non contributors won’t be subject to differing viewpoints. 
 

[Maislebandit]

2 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

How much does a union journeyman electrician in Michigan make not working for an automaker?

I don’t know exact current scale numbers, but I can tell you that the big 3 trades were very close to being on par 20 some years ago and the gap has widened since with the big 3 lagging behind. 

[silvrsvt]

10 minutes ago, Maislebandit said:

I don’t know exact current scale numbers, but I can tell you that the big 3 trades were very close to being on par 20 some years ago and the gap has widened since with the big 3 lagging behind. 

 

Well you could look at this way-if you can become skilled trades, you can always move on to another job that pays better after you finish your apprenticeship. I know there are alot of other things to weight also, but that is an option.  

[rperez817]

3 hours ago, Maislebandit said:

Is it really a closed market or is just that UAW are the ones that have blazed the trail? Foreign companies, suppliers and down the line set wages based on what the UAW garners for the membership. 

 

UAW often sets the benchmark. When Toyota opened TMMTX in San Antonio about 20 years ago, it took into account wage rates at UAW represented automotive assembly plants in Texas, most notably GM's Arlington Assembly, in addition to data for the labor market in greater San Antonio generally.   

[akirby]

17 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

 

UAW often sets the benchmark. When Toyota opened TMMTX in San Antonio about 20 years ago, it took into account wage rates at UAW represented automotive assembly plants in Texas, most notably GM's Arlington Assembly, in addition to data for the labor market in greater San Antonio generally.   

Of course they took into account the local labor market because that’s who they compete with for workers.  Had nothing to do with the UAW.

[rperez817]

6 minutes ago, akirby said:

Had nothing to do with the UAW.

 

Toyota absolutely took UAW wage rates into account. Toyota itself didn't mention that explicitly at its grand opening event, but economists interviewed in several news reports at the time of TMMTX's opening confirmed it. This goes back to what Maislebandit said (which is correct): Foreign companies, suppliers and down the line set wages based on what the UAW garners for the membership. Not just in Texas but throughout the U.S.

[akirby]

38 minutes ago, Maislebandit said:

How can they control 100% of the market and skyrocket above the rest of it at the same time?

Wages skyrocketed.  Do you really not understand that the big 3 had virtually no import competition in the 50s 60s and 70s or are you just trolling?  The UAW demanded higher and higher wages by threatening to strike (and striking) and the big 3 gave in because as long as all 3 paid the same then nobody had an advantage.  Then the imports come in paying market and higher wages but far below Detroit and in the 90s and 2000s the big 3 are caught in a huge cost disadvantage and 2 went bankrupt and Ford came really close.  
 

You can’t compete with other companies if their costs are significantly lower than yours.