flyingswoosh Wrote:is this even about liking unions or not? shouldn't americans always be in favor of casting their votes without intimidation or peer pressure?

Point taken swoosh.

Machiavelli Wrote:Actually Torch,

I see some of your points. Unions have their good qualities and bad. I keep seeing the figure that in 1980 a CEO made on average 23 times more than the average salary of the company. Now that number is in the the thousands. I believe in strengthening the middle class. I believe Unions are the best for doing this. I know they have their warts, but......... they are what made this country great.

CEO salaries and benefits are drops in the bucket to big business. No big company has ever gone under because of CEO and executive salaries -

In very very general terms, it takes a myriad of skills to run a business. It takes one good skill to work on an assembly line.

CEO manages:
* Shareholder return
* Business direction
* Business strategy
* Marketing direction
* Investments
* Human capital
* And on
* And on
* And on

The Union assembly line worker manages:
* Their assembly position.

So why would you pay the assembly line worker a comparable salary (in terms of %) to a CEO? Who is really making the hard decisions?

And most importantly, if a company's CEO is not well compensated, they leave. Sometimes for the competition. Which may mean the Union guy loses his yob because the competition gets that much better, and sells that much more.

But you already know this, don't you?

Lord Stanley Wrote:

Machiavelli Wrote:Actually Torch,

I see some of your points. Unions have their good qualities and bad. I keep seeing the figure that in 1980 a CEO made on average 23 times more than the average salary of the company. Now that number is in the the thousands. I believe in strengthening the middle class. I believe Unions are the best for doing this. I know they have their warts, but......... they are what made this country great.

CEO salaries and benefits are drops in the bucket to big business. No big company has ever gone under because of CEO and executive salaries -

In very very general terms, it takes a myriad of skills to run a business. It takes one good skill to work on an assembly line.

CEO manages:
* Shareholder return
* Business direction
* Business strategy
* Marketing direction
* Investments
* Human capital
* And on
* And on
* And on

The Union assembly line worker manages:
* Their assembly position.

So why would you pay the assembly line worker a comparable salary (in terms of %) to a CEO? Who is really making the hard decisions?

And most importantly, if a company's CEO is not well compensated, they leave. Sometimes for the competition. Which may mean the Union guy loses his yob because the competition gets that much better, and sells that much more.

But you already know this, don't you?

I actually believe that Executive salaries are a huge problem for US businesses.
A few years ago GM declared a $99K profit one quarter (essentially all from OnStar) and I thought, "Wow, some execs are making more than the entire company."
And managing shareholder's expectations may actually be in contrast to the long-term health and success of a company.
So, while the executives' salaries may not have destroyed companies, I believe they can be a significant deteriment; and it does seem quite unfair when those execs bear little consequence when a company goes under.

However, I haven't figured out any workable solution to that issue, but I am quite certain that unions are not it.

Lord Stanley Wrote:CEO salaries and benefits are drops in the bucket to big business. No big company has ever gone under because of CEO and executive salaries -

In very very general terms, it takes a myriad of skills to run a business. It takes one good skill to work on an assembly line.

CEO manages:
* Shareholder return
* Business direction
* Business strategy
* Marketing direction
* Investments
* Human capital
* And on
* And on
* And on

The Union assembly line worker manages:
* Their assembly position.

So why would you pay the assembly line worker a comparable salary (in terms of %) to a CEO? Who is really making the hard decisions?

And most importantly, if a company's CEO is not well compensated, they leave. Sometimes for the competition. Which may mean the Union guy loses his yob because the competition gets that much better, and sells that much more.

But you already know this, don't you?

Um wrong. It would be different if a CEO did his job individually like the worker on the line, but a CEO is really a rubber stamp for decisions that have been made by hi leadership team. How Presidents, Vice Presidents, and Asst Vice Presidents and so on and so on assist a CEO with his "job', while the line worker and lower level employees are the ones sweating in the trenches.

uhmump95 Wrote:Um wrong. It would be different if a CEO did his job individually like the worker on the line, but a CEO is really a rubber stamp for decisions that have been made by hi leadership team. How Presidents, Vice Presidents, and Asst Vice Presidents and so on and so on assist a CEO with his "job', while the line worker and lower level employees are the ones sweating in the trenches.

Are you under the assumption that those jobs belong to the people? Those jobs belong to the company. The CEO is put in place by the stockholders, the ones who have a vested interest IN the company. No, it's not the damn same.

Machiavelli Wrote:Why do you care. If you don't believe in unions step up and say it. It's not like somebody will burn your house down or kill your dog. It's not the thirties anymore.

You obviously have never worked in a union shop...I've seen intimidation,harassment and physical violence against non- union workers. I worked in mgmt. in a union shop for 9 years..I know what i'm talking about. The reason most of the workers end up joining was to stop the constant harassment by the union goon squad in the shop.

Machiavelli Wrote:Actually Torch,

I see some of your points. Unions have their good qualities and bad. I keep seeing the figure that in 1980 a CEO made on average 23 times more than the average salary of the company. Now that number is in the the thousands. I believe in strengthening the middle class. I believe Unions are the best for doing this. I know they have their warts, but......... they are what made this country great.

Have you seen the state of GM, Ford or Chrysler lately? They can't afford to pay someone $25/hour to sweep the floors and be competitive. On top of that the people who are actually doing the sweeping are so damn lazy that the automaker has to get something automated to get the job done right. So, not only are they paying someone $25/hour to do a sub-par job, they have to bring in technology to help the lazy ass keep up with his non-Big 3 counterpart. Double whammy.

I agree that 30-50 years ago labor unions had there place in helping workers not get trampled, but they are outdated and unnecessary, just like affirmative action laws.

The CEO's and management are the problems with the Big 3. Design a car that people want to buy and the shift left in American politics will help too. National health care helps the big 3 in a big way. Their competitors have nationalized health care in their home countries.

Machiavelli Wrote:The CEO's and management are the problems with the Big 3. Design a car that people want to buy

Several years ago I posted an article by Wash Post writer Warren Brown, on how the UAW opposed building smaller, fuel-efficient cars in the US.
Brown is nowhere close to being on the political right, and he was forced to concede that these to factions on the political left were very much at odds with each other, and the UAW was hurting itself, and the country, with its stance.

I doubt if you can find it here, since those archives are typically gone (the thread was simply entitled 'Cars'. Motown Bronco added some typically sound insight, since he knows that industry very well. Similarly Schadenfreud's defense of unions was typically inconsistent and illogical, and thus quite humorous) and it's tough to find on the web since the Post charges to look at their archives. However, if you really want to understand this topic you can do the research and learn for yourself.

The facts don't support your support for unions. I know this isn't popular for teachers; I still remember how the labor movement was taught by my 8th grade teachers. Most people choose a position then try to find details to support it. True thinkers take an honest assessment of all the facts, then decide.

Quote:National health care helps the big 3 in a big way. Their competitors have nationalized health care in their home countries.

Their competitors seem to be doing just fine in non-union shops in KY, TN, SC, etc, despite no nationalized health care.

I agree, Torch. The unions are in Honda and Toyota plants around the US, yet they are doing fine. I think that goes back to Mach. said above, design a car that people want to buy.

Honda pays $25 for the guy to sweep the floor, so does Toyota. The difference is that their cars are more respected (it is taking a while for the big 3 to change their reputation) therefore people will pay a little more for their product. Hell, look at Hyundai, they have the most automated plant in the US down in Alabama. Maybe if the big 3 had stuck to their guns and invested in more automation instead of caving every time the unions wanted something we wouldn't have this problem right now.

Unions are part of the problem, no doubt, but the management that just wanted to hit their short term bonuses are just as much to blame.

i think it'd be hard not to apportion some blame to the management of the big 3

mlb Wrote:I agree, Torch. The unions are in Honda and Toyota plants around the US, yet they are doing fine. I think that goes back to Mach. said above, design a car that people want to buy.

Honda pays $25 for the guy to sweep the floor, so does Toyota. The difference is that their cars are more respected (it is taking a while for the big 3 to change their reputation) therefore people will pay a little more for their product. Hell, look at Hyundai, they have the most automated plant in the US down in Alabama. Maybe if the big 3 had stuck to their guns and invested in more automation instead of caving every time the unions wanted something we wouldn't have this problem right now.

Unions are part of the problem, no doubt, but the management that just wanted to hit their short term bonuses are just as much to blame.

I doubt that Honda and Toyota are paying janitors $25/hour, but even if they are, I know for a fact that 5 years ago the Big 3's hourly EE cost was 40% higher than their Japanese counterparts.

I am fine with splitting the blame 50/50 with the UAW and upper management at the Big 3, but at the end of the day the Big 3 will not survive with UAW running things. They are just too stupid to understand that they are killing themselves to get 5 more years of the gravy train.

Machiavelli Wrote:The CEO's and management are the problems with the Big 3. Design a car that people want to buy and the shift left in American politics will help too. National health care helps the big 3 in a big way. Their competitors have nationalized health care in their home countries.

How does a shift away from the right help the auto manufacturers? It will help the unions. It's the lefts position to make big business pay more taxes and expand benefits to employees. From the view of an executive or stockholder that stuff only adds to the pain.

blah Wrote:I doubt that Honda and Toyota are paying janitors $25/hour, but even if they are, I know for a fact that 5 years ago the Big 3's hourly EE cost was 40% higher than their Japanese counterparts.

I am fine with splitting the blame 50/50 with the UAW and upper management at the Big 3, but at the end of the day the Big 3 will not survive with UAW running things. They are just too stupid to understand that they are killing themselves to get 5 more years of the gravy train.

Honda and Toyota are not bogged down with the huge retirement costs that the Big 3 are. That is where they were saving their 40%.

mlb Wrote:

blah Wrote:I doubt that Honda and Toyota are paying janitors $25/hour, but even if they are, I know for a fact that 5 years ago the Big 3's hourly EE cost was 40% higher than their Japanese counterparts.

I am fine with splitting the blame 50/50 with the UAW and upper management at the Big 3, but at the end of the day the Big 3 will not survive with UAW running things. They are just too stupid to understand that they are killing themselves to get 5 more years of the gravy train.

Honda and Toyota are not bogged down with the huge retirement costs that the Big 3 are. That is where they were saving their 40%.

I agree, but who drove those huge retirement costs and pensions????

Oh yeah it was the UAW. The same reason that they get paid time off between Christmas and New Years as well as Election Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, and who could forget, Veteran's Day (the UAW knows this one more affectionately as Deer Hunter's holiday).

blah, my point is that eventually Honda and Toyota will have those costs as well, making them much more cost competitive with the big 3.

mlb Wrote:blah, my point is that eventually Honda and Toyota will have those costs as well, making them much more cost competitive with the big 3.

While I agree that Honda & Toyota will eventually see increased retirement and pension costs, I'm not sure it will ever get to the level of the American Automakers.

I think where the Big 3 really failed was with their allowing the full retirement at 30 years service or some combination of years & age.
I think that it is the norm for many autoworkers to be in their early or mid fifties to have full retirement. That "extra" 10 years of retirement benefits between 55 & 65 adds up to a huge cost. I don't know if Honda & Toyota workers will be able to retire at 55 or not.