b, 21Looks like I made the wrong choice in going to college when I could be pulling in nearly 60K a year working in an auto plant.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1b, 21b, 21Transformational UAW Deal? Accept Professors' Pay b, 21b, 21 b, 21According to Forbes:b, 21b, 21Labor cost per hour, wages and benefits for hourly workers, 2006.b, 21b, 21Ford: $70.51 ($141,020 per year)b, 21b, 21GM: $73.26 ($146,520 per year)b, 21b, 21Chrysler: $75.86 ($151,720 per year)b, 21b, 21Toyota, Honda, Nissan (in U.S.): $48.00 ($96,000 per year)b, 21b, 21According to AAUP and IES, the average annual compensation for a college professor in 2006 was $92,973 (average salary nationally of $73,207 + 27% benefits). b, 21b, 21Bottom Line: b1The average UAW worker with a high school degree earns 57.6% more compensation than the average university professor with a Ph.D. (see graph above, click to enlarge), and 52.6% more than the average worker at Toyota, Honda or Nissan./b1b, 21b, 21a href="http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/07/uaw-pricing-themselves-out-of-market.html" target="_blank"1http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2007/07/uaw-pricing-themselves-out-of-market.html/a1
b, 21They're just shit companies and have been for years. If they were just three basically sound companies who were being dragged down by the general downturn id still oppose the bailout but I would at least have some sympathy for it. The writing has been on the wall for these dudes a long time.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1b, 21b, 21I completely and utterly agree.
b, 21Labor cost per hour, wages and benefits for hourly workers, 2006.
b, 21
b, 21Ford: $70.51 ($141,020 per year)
b, 21
b, 21GM: $73.26 ($146,520 per year)
b, 21
b, 21Chrysler: $75.86 ($151,720 per year)
b, 21
b, 21Toyota, Honda, Nissan (in U.S.): $48.00 ($96,000 per year)
b, 21
b, 21According to AAUP and IES, the average annual compensation for a college professor in 2006 was $92,973 (average salary nationally of $73,207 + 27% benefits).
b, 21
b, 21Bottom Line:
b1The average UAW worker with a high school degree earns 57.6% more compensation than the average university professor with a Ph.D. (see graph above, click to enlarge), and 52.6% more than the average worker at Toyota, Honda or Nissan.
font class="post"1b, 21b, 21ok. these extraordinary "hourly" wages that the big three pay their workers are driven up by the fact that a large portion of each company's worker's expenditure go towards retired worker's pensions. When you consider that Toyota, Honda, and Nissan never started producing cars in the states until the 1980s, and thus most of their initial work force is still working, the disparity in worker expenditure between them and the big three isn't all that great. But whatever. F*ck Detroit. What the hell has Detroit ever given anyone on this board?
b, 21 What the hell has Detroit ever given anyone on this board?
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1b, 21b, 21Detroit gave me one of these back in 1968. Turn this schitt up to. b, 21My red shows.b, 21b, 21 img src="object width="425" height="344"1param name="movie" value=""1/param1param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"1/param1param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"1/param1embed src="" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"1/embed1
b, 21They should have canned the Auto industry and spent the $25B on severance packages for the workers who had no fault in the garbage administration of that industry.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1b, 21b, 21couldn't have said it better
Rock,b, 21b, 21The UAW in their last contract agreed to a two wage system. Most new hires are getting around $19/hour. Second, the pay of the workers has almost NOTHING to do with why the U.S. car companies are in trouble. The problem with the workers are the pension plans that they get, not their wages. The owners of the U.S. car companies have been f*cking up for 20 years+, blaming the workers is a red herring.
People are missing the point when they talk about the unions impact on labor costs. It is not so much wage demands as work rules. The limitations of what any one worker will do means more workers have to be employed. The result is that toyota produces about 80 cars for every production worker whilst a company like gm produces about 40 something cars for every production worker. So roughly GM has to employ two workers to get the same productivity that toyota get from one worker.
Hey DrWu, I think you convinced me to check out that book. img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/beerbang.gif" alt="" 21 for the img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/know.gif" alt="" 21
Academic work you say...it must be! There's a copy at the school liberry, tho that's not saying much. So it's safe to say you were making friends and influencing people at a young age?
b, 21The UAW in their last contract agreed to a two wage system. Most new hires are getting around $19/hour. Second, the pay of the workers has almost NOTHING to do with why the U.S. car companies are in trouble. The problem with the workers are the pension plans that they get, not their wages. The owners of the U.S. car companies have been f*cking up for 20 years+, blaming the workers is a red herring.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1b, 21b, 21No question that the brunt of the problem is a stubborn corporation and antiquated business model....however, to absolve the UAW totally would be blind foolishnesss.b, 21b, 21Read what Pepperdine Economics Professor George Reisman has written on the subject and if you walk away still claiming "red herring" I'd have to question your bias.
Rock my point is even if the big three used non-union workers they'd still be fucked. You come into each one of these car threads and only talk about the unions. They were not the reason why these companies are in the hole. Hence my red herring comment. Missing the forest for the trees.
b, 21Rock my point is even if the big three used non-union workers they'd still be fucked. You come into each one of these car threads and only talk about the unions. They were not the reason why these companies are in the hole. Hence my red herring comment. Missing the forest for the trees.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1b, 21b, 21I try to talk about what others don't....what fun is it coming here and piling on to the obvious.....I contest that if the Auto Industry rights their ship but still has to deal with UAW contracts, they will not match their non-union competitors level of success......I don't see how this can be argued.b, 21b, 21In my line of work I try to initiate change and progress because I am loyal to my company.....and in turn my company has been loyal to me.....Auto Workers are loyal to their union and see the "company" as adverserial more often than not....this in itself is a problem.b, 21b, 21Did you read the Reisman stuff??
On George Reisman, I found his blog and he sounds like either a libertarian or is very conservative. Either way he's biased against any unions or collective bargaining as an afront to individual liberty and the right of businesses to profit, so he's going to blame the unions no matter what from the get go.b, 21b, 21Me from a 11/20/08 post:b, 21b, 21/font1
font class="small"1Quote:
/font1
h, 21
b, 21From what I've read the problem with the workers is the pensions that the U.S. auto makers cut with the workers. The U.S. companies cut long term pension plans with the unions, this despite decline in sales for U.S. companies that had been going on for years. The Japanese companies that opened up factories in the U.S. set up pay as you go systems where the companies contributed to workers when they were on the job. When that person stopped working for whatever reason, no more contributions by the Japanese company compared to the U.S. ones that still had that pension fund to take care of in the future regardless.
b, 21
b, 21With regards to the cars U.S. auto makers are producing, they continued to make models that were declining in sales. Expeditions and Explorers have seen massive drop in sales for several years now for example. At the same time, sales of mid-size to smaller Japanese cars have been booming with their lower costs and better fuel efficiency.
b, 21
b, 21Japanese companies are also way ahead in selling cars to emerging markets like China, India and South America compared to U.S. companies.
b, 21
b, 21U.S. auto makers also buy more expensive parts from U.S. suppliers, while China is boosting its auto parts for much cheaper prices.
b, 21
b, 21In terms of business model, U.S. companies didn't take the foreign competition seriously, especially when foreign companies began opening up more and more plants in the U.S. in the 1990s. As the U.S. market became more competitive, the U.S. companies continued to act like they had before without adapting.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1b, 21b, 21Besides the pensions, how were the unions responsible for these decisions?b, 21b, 21Making models that don't sell? b, 21b, 21Not making fuel efficient cars? b, 21b, 21Not selling to emerging markets? b, 21b, 21Buying more expensive parts? b, 21b, 21Not adapting to changes in competition?
In my experience, unions are fusking poison. They are a great idea as an idea to scare companies into making humanitarian concessions and that's it. They fusking suck in reality and are terrible overall for the company, productivity and work ethic.
b, 21In my experience, unions are fusking poison. They are a great idea as an idea to scare companies into making humanitarian concessions and that's it. They fusking suck in reality and are terrible overall for the company, productivity and work ethic.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1b, 21b, 21Bingo.....too many idealists live in the theoretical.b, 21b, 21Motown....I agree and have stated that the brunt of the problem lies with an antiquated business model and stubborn corporate leadership.b, 21b, 21The fact that you can't recognize the problems(or ANY problem) the UAW brings to this party is pretty mind boggling.
Also, the UAW refuses to give up some perks to their jobs and/or wage decreases while their company has a good chance to go under. If that's not illogical, I don't know what is. I understand it sets a bad precedent, but the companies are fighting for their survival.
I heard and read something today about the UAW union comprising only 10% of the big three's total cost. I can't call the UAW the problem if that's the case.b, 21b, 21But $20 an hour for being an unskilled worker seems completely unfair to me. Therein lies my problem.
b, 21In my experience, unions are fusking poison. They are a great idea as an idea to scare companies into making humanitarian concessions and that's it. They fusking suck in reality and are terrible overall for the company, productivity and work ethic.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1
b, 21
b, 21Bingo.....too many idealists live in the theoretical.
b, 21
b, 21Motown....I agree and have stated that the brunt of the problem lies with an antiquated business model and stubborn corporate leadership.
b, 21
b, 21The fact that you can't recognize the problems(or ANY problem) the UAW brings to this party is pretty mind boggling.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1b, 21b, 21Talk about talking to a rock. I have not said that the UAW does not cause any problems, what I have been saying over and over is that with no union, all of the major problems with the three big car companies will continue: the types of cars they make, the inability to adapt to new competition, the lack of sales in foreign markets, their purchasing of parts. They get rid of the union, they're just going to be making cheaper cars that no one wants. Wow victory for Rock. The car companies still go under, but Rock is happy because the evil UAW is gone. b, 21b, 21The real problem in this conversation is that you have an axe to grind. Hence my comment about missing the forest for the trees.
b, 21In my experience, unions are fusking poison. They are a great idea as an idea to scare companies into making humanitarian concessions and that's it. They fusking suck in reality and are terrible overall for the company, productivity and work ethic.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1
b, 21
b, 21Bingo.....too many idealists live in the theoretical.
b, 21
b, 21Motown....I agree and have stated that the brunt of the problem lies with an antiquated business model and stubborn corporate leadership.
b, 21
b, 21The fact that you can't recognize the problems(or ANY problem) the UAW brings to this party is pretty mind boggling.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1
b, 21
b, 21Talk about talking to a rock. I have not said that the UAW does not cause any problems, what I have been saying over and over is that with no union, all of the major problems with the three big car companies will continue: the types of cars they make, the inability to adapt to new competition, the lack of sales in foreign markets, their purchasing of parts. They get rid of the union, they're just going to be making cheaper cars that no one wants. Wow victory for Rock. The car companies still go under, but Rock is happy because the evil UAW is gone.
b, 21
b, 21The real problem in this conversation is that you have an axe to grind. Hence my comment about missing the forest for the trees.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1b, 21b, 21If I think the UAW shares in the accountability of the current auto industry mess I must "have an axe to grind".b, 21b, 21And an Economist who recognizes the UAW's shortcomings must be i1"either a libertarian or is very conservative. Either way he's biased against any unions" [/i] b, 21b, 21b, 21b, 21As a teacher who I assume is a union member I can appreciate your stance.b, 21b, 21Otherwise.....not so much.b, 21b, 21I personally don't care if the "evil UAW" exists or not....I'm just calling it like I see it.
b, 21I personally don't care if the "evil UAW" exists or not....I'm just calling it like I see it.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1b, 21b, 21No, you're not.b, 21b, 21You've made it well known on this website through your previous posts, not necessarily the ones in this thread, your antipathy towards unions. I think people would give you more credit if you came out and said you are philosophically opposed to unions, but you're trying to tag a larger portion of responsibility for the fall of the big three on the UAW than the facts bear out.
b, 21I personally don't care if the "evil UAW" exists or not....I'm just calling it like I see it.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1
b, 21
b, 21No, you're not.
b, 21
b, 21You've made it well known on this website through your previous posts, not necessarily the ones in this thread, your antipathy towards unions. I think people would give you more credit if you came out and said you are philosophically opposed to unions, but you're trying to tag a larger portion of responsibility for the fall of the big three on the UAW than the facts bear out.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1b, 21b, 21I am philosophically opposed to unions.b, 21b, 21So according to your calculations, when I state that the BRUNT of the problem lies with the way the "Big Three" have been run, but that the UAW is also part of the problem. Just how much of a "larger portion of responsibility" does that work out to be??b, 21b, 21I also have no vested interest in the survival of the UAW, but I do believe that it will be beneficial to the U.S. auto industry if it was dissolved.b, 21b, 21Is that subtle and forthright enough for you?b, 21b, 21Now you can state your bias as a union member.
b, 21I personally don't care if the "evil UAW" exists or not....I'm just calling it like I see it.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1
b, 21
b, 21No, you're not.
b, 21
b, 21You've made it well known on this website through your previous posts, not necessarily the ones in this thread, your antipathy towards unions. I think people would give you more credit if you came out and said you are philosophically opposed to unions, but you're trying to tag a larger portion of responsibility for the fall of the big three on the UAW than the facts bear out.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1
b, 21
b, 21I am philosophically opposed to unions.
b, 21
b, 21So according to your calculations, when I state that the BRUNT of the problem lies with the way the "Big Three" have been run, but that the UAW is also part of the problem. Just how much of a "larger portion of responsibility" does that work out to be??
b, 21
b, 21I also have no vested interest in the survival of the UAW, but I do believe that it will be beneficial to the U.S. auto industry if it was dissolved.
b, 21
b, 21Is that subtle and forthright enough for you?
b, 21
b, 21Now you can state your bias as a union member.
b, 21
b, 21
h, 21
font class="post"1b, 21b, 21Fair enough.b, 21b, 21I could honestly give a shit about unions.
Also, the UAW refuses to give up some perks to their jobs and/or wage decreases while their company has a good chance to go under. If that's not illogical, I don't know what is[/b]. I understand it sets a bad precedent, but the companies are fighting for their survival. b, 21b, 21h, 21
font class="post"1b, 21IF the workers had any say in the production techniques, usage of parts, marketing, or management of resources then I'd agree. But they don't. They go to work and do what they're told. How are the decisions of management and investors their fault at all?b, 21b, 21I'm pretty sure a floor shop worker could say a lot about ways to make production more efficient, however, they are usually terrified of efficiency removing their job. Give them a stake in the company and this may change.b, 21b, 21Furthermore, the points about why they are failing as a result of expensive parts, fuel efficiency, consumer confidence, etc. are EXACTLY why they are failing.b, 21b, 21Everyone knows their mid-90s Toyota Carolla is solid as a mid-90s wu album, but their Ford is going burn out like Iron Flag.
Comments