Done With Owning Anymore UAW or Unifor Built Vehicles

[rperez817]

17 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Just gonna leave this here

 

Couple more.

 

[mackinaw]

Fuzzy's table may be irrelevant, but the optics are terrible.  All the general public sees are CEO's getting paid outrageous salaries.  

[Len_A]

2 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Just gonna leave this here

Keep in mind the Asians, because they're disclosure laws are completely different, regarding executive compensation, they also, by our standards, hide more than seven figures a year of paid "benefits".

[Len_A]

4 hours ago, twintornados said:

 

GM CEO Mary Barra received a 34% raise...

CEO pay has nothing to do with line worker pay, regardless of how organized labor and politicians like Bernie Sanders try to make a connection. If more competent CEO candidates were in large supply, then salaries would go down. The fact is, there aren't enough candidates, and their effectiveness varies a lot. Even with the lower number of job candidates, it's still easier to fill 100 production openings than I is to find 10 decent CEO candidates. Is what it is. 

[twintornados]

4 hours ago, akirby said:

She’s not an assembly line worker therefore it’s irrelevant.  Each job has a market value and that has nothing to do with how much the owner or the CEO or anyone else makes.  When you hire somebody to paint your house does the price vary depending on how much that company’s owner makes or how much the company made last year?  Of course not.  If you want to share in the profits then become an investor otherwise you’re just a paid laborer competing against other paid laborers for similar jobs.

 

I am an investor

Edited September 16, 2023 by twintornados

[twintornados]

2 hours ago, Len_A said:

CEO pay has nothing to do with line worker pay, regardless of how organized labor and politicians like Bernie Sanders try to make a connection. If more competent CEO candidates were in large supply, then salaries would go down. The fact is, there aren't enough candidates, and their effectiveness varies a lot. Even with the lower number of job candidates, it's still easier to fill 100 production openings than I is to find 10 decent CEO candidates. Is what it is. 

 

Keep fawning over the CEO's...they love it

 

https://nypost.com/2023/08/18/we-stuffed-carlos-ghosn-into-3-ft-box-to-escape-japan-he-owes-us-1m/

 

 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, twintornados said:

 

I am an investor

Then that’s how you get paid.

[twintornados]

13 hours ago, akirby said:

Then that’s how you get paid.

 

I am certainly not setting the investor world on fire with my investments - I own Ford stock as I believe in the company and the values they espouse and have been a die hard Ford fan for decades. I will keep my day job as a department of corrections lieutenant and remain a proud union member and elected representative for my peer lieutenants.  

[Len_A]

23 hours ago, twintornados said:

 

I am certainly not setting the investor world on fire with my investments - I own Ford stock as I believe in the company and the values they espouse and have been a die hard Ford fan for decades. I will keep my day job as a department of corrections lieutenant and remain a proud union member and elected representative for my peer lieutenants.  

I hear you. My wife is a member of the Police Officers Association Of Michigan. Her health insurance is so top notch, it's even better than the UAW health care negotiated Detroit Three health care coverage. I just had a knee replacement in May. Total costs of that, including physical therapy and almost a dozen prescriptions, was north of $49,750. My share? $248. Can't beat collective bargaining. 

 

But that being said, neither court employees like my wife, nor most corrections officers like yourself (for profit prisons notwithstanding), your unions really don't have  to deal with competition. All of the Detroit Three's North American car and truck manufacturing competition is nonunion. Even VW, who at one time was UAW, when they had an assembly plant in Pennsylvania, in the 1980's. Now they're back in the USA, in Tennessee, and they're nonunion. And the customer base needed to support all the automakers, is overwhelming tilted in favor to nonunion, 58% to 42%. That makes this strike very risky, short term and long term, to the Detroit Three's ability to compete. And small share holders like us....we count for shit. The shareholders who matter are the mutual funds, pension funds, and hedge funds. They got the majority of the shares, and they could give a f*ck what you and I think. They will still support the CEO pay packages, and if these UAW negotiations give the workers half of what they are demanding, plan on the stock taking a three to four year hit. Enough big shareholders will see this in a negative light, and reduce their position in each company, to reduce their exposure to the increased risk they see. Twenty three years ago, Wall Street didn't regard GM, Ford and Chrysler as automakers. They regarded them as big pension and healthcare providers that happened to make cars to pay for it all. That is a verifiable fact. We may be heading back there.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Len_A said:

I hear you. My wife is a member of the Police Officers Association Of Michigan. Her health insurance is so top notch, it's even better than the UAW health care negotiated Detroit Three health care coverage. I just had a knee replacement in May. Total costs of that, including physical therapy and almost a dozen prescriptions, was north of $49,750. My share? $248. Can't beat collective bargaining. 

 

But that being said, neither court employees like my wife, nor most corrections officers like yourself (for profit prisons notwithstanding), your unions really don't have  to deal with competition. All of the Detroit Three's North American car and truck manufacturing competition is nonunion. Even VW, who at one time was UAW, when they had an assembly plant in Pennsylvania, in the 1980's. Now they're back in the USA, in Tennessee, and they're nonunion. And the customer base needed to support all the automakers, is overwhelming tilted in favor to nonunion, 58% to 42%. That makes this strike very risky, short term and long term, to the Detroit Three's ability to compete. And small share holders like us....we count for shit. The shareholders who matter are the mutual funds, pension funds, and hedge funds. They got the majority of the shares, and they could give a f*ck what you and I think. They will still support the CEO pay packages, and if these UAW negotiations give the workers half of what they are demanding, plan on the stock taking a three to four year hit. Enough big shareholders will see this in a negative light, and reduce their position in each company, to reduce their exposure to the increased risk they see. Twenty three years ago, Wall Street didn't regard GM, Ford and Chrysler as automakers. They regarded them as big pension and healthcare providers that happened to make cars to pay for it all. That is a verifiable fact. We may be heading back there.

Nailed it.  Health care alone is $30k/yr.  Defined benefit pension would be close to that.  A 4 day work week would force them to hire another shift at every plant or cut production.  Not to mention retiree benefits.  The non union plants don’t have to pay any of that.  It may not seem fair but that’s reality.  You have to be cost competitive or investors will turn their back and there goes the stock price.

 

And if job security means guarantees that no plants will close or nobody will get laid off that’s also a non starter.  There are ways to handle job security that help the workers but still give the company flexibility to control costs and meet market demands.

[fuzzymoomoo]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

And if job security means guarantees that no plants will close or nobody will get laid off that’s also a non starter.

Why not? What’s wrong with giving openings at other plants to displaced workers before hiring new people?  I agree with you on that whole pay laid off workers to work elsewhere thing is ridiculous, I don’t know who other than Shawn Fain thinks that’s a good idea. 

[akirby]

2 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

Why not? What’s wrong with giving openings at other plants to displaced workers before hiring new people?  I agree with you on that whole pay laid off workers to work elsewhere thing is ridiculous, I don’t know who other than Shawn Fain thinks that’s a good idea. 

That’s what I mean - there should be provisions for displaced workers to be employed elsewhere or offer early retirement or at least a generous severance package but if they’re saying you can’t close any plants or lay off anybody then that’s the non starter.

[Len_A]

On 9/18/2023 at 9:18 AM, akirby said:

Nailed it.  Health care alone is $30k/yr.  Defined benefit pension would be close to that.  A 4 day work week would force them to hire another shift at every plant or cut production.  Not to mention retiree benefits.  The non union plants don’t have to pay any of that.  It may not seem fair but that’s reality.  You have to be cost competitive or investors will turn their back and there goes the stock price.

 

And if job security means guarantees that no plants will close or nobody will get laid off that’s also a non starter.  There are ways to handle job security that help the workers but still give the company flexibility to control costs and meet market demands.

Couldn't agree with you more. Thankfully, the ratified contract is no where near anything like that. And as the spouse of a "tiered" court employee, who took six freaking years to reach "tier one" status, I'm glad to be done with tiers. Now time for national legislation, to ban the use of "permatemps" at any other company. Aside from that, companies must have flexibility to respond to market conditions.  Otherwise, like you said, stockholders will flee. Berkshire Hathaway already dumped their entire position in GM stock, citing both the cost of electrification AND this contract.