Jump to content

UAW Demands 46% Pay Hike


Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, akirby said:


What is stupid is one side making unreasonable demands with no recourse.  

 

What is also stupid is why the Union President and all their staff continue drawing significant salaries. When a union goes on strike, the union President and all staff should receive basic strike pay, same as the striking employees.

 

If Fain was making the same strike pay as the workers, I'll suggest he has some incentive to bargain in good faith.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Gurgeh said:

Prius as virtue-signaling has become passe. Tesla is the new "aren't I grand!?" car.

funny you stated that...remember all the Prius drivers that drove everyone nuts with their complete lack of driving prowess/ manners ( ie 65 in the fast lane, 45 in the slow lane, weaving all over the place etc etc ) well seems THOSE very same drivers have now migrated to a car that can do 0-60 in 4 seconds ( Teslas )...I dont know whats worse....once again, steretype, but they are based on consistant frequency....Tesla drivers annoy the CRAP out of me....now they weave all over the place...accelerate insanely into small gaps, cut people off and REFUSE to use turn signals...and like a Rolex watch, every asshole in Newport Beach has one...or two...or...

Edited by Deanh
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

In the case of ongoing negotiations between Ford and UAW, Ford's action yesterday of submitting the same offer to UAW as they did 2 weeks prior represents the "one side making unreasonable demands".

 

Since I highly doubt you are privy to Ford's internal financials and the complete bargaining package presented to the union, you have no way of knowing whether Ford's actions are reasonable or not. If you believe submitting the same offer is unreasonable, I can only assume you may not have negotiated multi-million dollar contracts and have developed a number of BATNA strategies.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Rangers09 said:

 

What is also stupid is why the Union President and all their staff continue drawing significant salaries. When a union goes on strike, the union President and all staff should receive basic strike pay, same as the striking employees.

 

If Fain was making the same strike pay as the workers, I'll suggest he has some incentive to bargain in good faith.


If the UAW only represented the big 3 then you have an argument, but they represent at hundreds of companies across multiple industries, the vast majority of which are not on strike. That is why regardless of your feeling on the matter the E-board still draws a paycheck. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, akirby said:

 

 

I bet those Toyota, Kia, Hyundai, BMW, etc workers at Southern US plants don’t consider $30/hr working for less.

I don't think this is an apples-to-apples comparison. Back in the 90s I worked in the south for Fire/EMS. Wages there were less than what I earned in Michigan, but so was the cost of living.

 

As an example, I could buy a 5 bedroom, 3 bathroom, 2 1/2 car garage house for $150k down south. That same house would sell for $450k+ in Michigan. I could accept the lower wages because everything else cost less. Likewise, I had a family member accept a transfer to a part of the country with significantly higher cost of living. The company increased her wages for this lateral transfer simply for that reason.

 

 The point that I'm trying to make is that it is an unfair and incomplete assessment to compare $30/hour non-union southern wages to $50-60/hour union midwestern wages without factoring in cost of living.

 

With that being said, I am one of the union employees who is beyond fed up with the strategy and tactics. Every day I include in my prayers, a petition for a quick resolution that is fair to both the company and employees in this labor dispute.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hllywd said:

I don't think this is an apples-to-apples comparison. Back in the 90s I worked in the south for Fire/EMS. Wages there were less than what I earned in Michigan, but so was the cost of living.

 

As an example, I could buy a 5 bedroom, 3 bathroom, 2 1/2 car garage house for $150k down south. That same house would sell for $450k+ in Michigan. I could accept the lower wages because everything else cost less. Likewise, I had a family member accept a transfer to a part of the country with significantly higher cost of living. The company increased her wages for this lateral transfer simply for that reason.

 

 The point that I'm trying to make is that it is an unfair and incomplete assessment to compare $30/hour non-union southern wages to $50-60/hour union midwestern wages without factoring in cost of living.

 

With that being said, I am one of the union employees who is beyond fed up with the strategy and tactics. Every day I include in my prayers, a petition for a quick resolution that is fair to both the company and employees in this labor dispute.

So Toyota, Kia , Hyundai BMW etc workers that arent represented by Unions and are paid a lower hourly wage just buy homes in cheaper "hoods" ? or do they just rent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hllywd said:

I don't think this is an apples-to-apples comparison. Back in the 90s I worked in the south for Fire/EMS. Wages there were less than what I earned in Michigan, but so was the cost of living.

 

As an example, I could buy a 5 bedroom, 3 bathroom, 2 1/2 car garage house for $150k down south. That same house would sell for $450k+ in Michigan. I could accept the lower wages because everything else cost less. Likewise, I had a family member accept a transfer to a part of the country with significantly higher cost of living. The company increased her wages for this lateral transfer simply for that reason.

 

 The point that I'm trying to make is that it is an unfair and incomplete assessment to compare $30/hour non-union southern wages to $50-60/hour union midwestern wages without factoring in cost of living.

 

With that being said, I am one of the union employees who is beyond fed up with the strategy and tactics. Every day I include in my prayers, a petition for a quick resolution that is fair to both the company and employees in this labor dispute.


You’re right about the cost of living being cheaper although it’s nowhere near the difference you said.  Even in rural areas a 2300 sf 4 br/2 ba 2 car garage is pushing $350k -  $400k.

 

But that’s also why the workers are happy with their compensation.

 

And it’s also completely irrelevant for 2 reasons.

 

One - Ford’s total current compensation is $65/hr while Toyota and the other transplants are around $55.  These new demands will push Ford’s costs closer to or above $100k/hr.  Even the current difference more than makes up for any difference in cost of living,

 

Two - Ford has to compete on price with Toyota, Kia, Tesla, etc.  Buyers don’t care that Ford’s cost of living is higher nor will they pay extra because of it.  Toyota can sell a vehicle for $35K and make a small profit whereas at the same price Ford loses money.  The margins are not high enough for Ford to just absorb such an increase.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Deanh said:

So Toyota, Kia , Hyundai BMW etc workers that arent represented by Unions and are paid a lower hourly wage just buy homes in cheaper "hoods" ? or do they just rent?


They make almost the same wage ($30/hr) but they don’t get other benefits like free health care - they pay for part of it like every other employee in the US.

And the cost of living in rural southern areas gives them more buying power.  But you also have to realize there is no other jobs in rural areas where an unskilled laborer can make that kind of money with good benefits.  That’s solid middle class and they’re grateful.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


It’s never going to pass a vote so I don’t know why I’m even talking about it. The only way we get a new contract at this point is if it’s forced onto us by a third party. 

Ah, now your arbitration makes sense.  A contract forced onto the membership by an arbitrator.

 

One analyst was claiming the end is near and the strike at KTP was to sell the contract to members.  The union leadership needed to show they did enough to get the best deal.  You seem unconvinced the tactic will work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, akirby said:


The mere fact that they remain employed and have rejected the union says otherwise.  There are no other jobs in those areas that pay that well for unskilled labor.  You act like people have guns to their heads forcing them to work there.

 

And you act like people will remain fat, dumb, and blissfully ignorant to the fact that they are being exploited forever at those non-union plants.

 

We are never going to agree with each others view of the situation, but I am happy to debate it.

Edited by twintornados
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, akirby said:


They make almost the same wage ($30/hr) but they don’t get other benefits like free health care - they pay for part of it like every other employee in the US.

And the cost of living in rural southern areas gives them more buying power.  But you also have to realize there is no other jobs in rural areas where an unskilled laborer can make that kind of money with good benefits.  That’s solid middle class and they’re grateful.

 

This cost of living arguement doesn't apply in a lot of cases.  BMW's plant is in Greenville/Spartanburg SC which is one of the fastest growing areas in the country and is a heck of a lot nicer to live (and more expensive) than places like Flat Rock, Wayne, Woodhaven, Lima, Avon Lake OH, etc.    Not every non-union plant is in the middle of nowhere.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

No and no. Labor relations for a corporation with employees represented by collective bargaining is entirely different from a general partnership with no employees using independent contractors.

 

 


Like usual you refuse to debate the merits of the discussion.  Fortunately for you, you don’t live in California where your independent contractors might be considered employees.  Ultimately you don’t believe they are worth 46% more than you are currently paying because you aren’t being reasonable.  

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

No and no. Labor relations for a corporation with employees represented by collective bargaining is entirely different from a general partnership with no employees using independent contractors.

 

 

And if one of these independent contractors wants a bigger piece of the pie do you give it to him?  No -you tell him to take a hike and get another guy who is fed up with working for a "company" and can be his own boss working for you. 

 

You thrive on someone who dreams of having something of his own..for a while anyway.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, twintornados said:

 

This is what happens when outsiders give opinions of what should be in a contract negotiation...

 

Slapping-himself GIFs - Get the best GIF on GIPHY

Now I’m not on your side on this matter but that was a funny comeback, lol. 

 

42 minutes ago, twintornados said:

 

And you act like people will remain fat, dumb, and blissfully ignorant to the fact that they are being exploited forever at those non-union plants.

 

We are never going to agree with each others view of the situation, but I am happy to debate it.


You act like those people have no free will, which is complete nonsense.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, tbone said:

Like usual you refuse to debate the merits of the discussion. 

 

Like usual, there is nothing to debate in this thread regarding independent contractors, your business, my business, or any other business beyond those involved in the aforementioned negotiations between UAW and the automakers with whom UAW are bargaining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...