UAW overwhelmingly vote to strike

[Lord Tammerlain]

When companies go bankrupt due to unyielding union demands you should blame the loss of jobs on the unions, not on corporate officers.

The corporate officers are paid to ensure the long term success of the company. Part of that includes setting affordable compensation rates. If they fail to do so, the blame falls on them in their inability to do their job.

 

[ludin]

Or here's an idea, a company that a.erican tax payers bailed out and would not exist who just got millions in tax cuts can pay American workers a fair wage...

You obviously do not know what you are talking about yet again.

PS define a living wage while you are at it. my company can't cut checks marked living wage on them.
the bank requires numbers.

the average UAW person earns anywhere from 16-38 bucks an hour depending on when and how long they
have been employed. that doesn't include benefits and other compensation.

Please actually do some research before making incorrect statements.

 

[ludin]

I think capitalists, who sell things (in this case labor) should try to achieve the highest profit they can (compensation for their labor), if that involves hiring an agent to negotiate on their behalf so be it.

Your labor is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. There comes a point where you simply price yourself out of the market. If i am not willing to pay it then guess what.
your labor isn't worth what you are asking.

I am not a socialist who thinks people should sell things at anything lower than the maximum they can get, for the greater good. I am not for people being altruistically making less profit so that a different group can make more.

Sorry again your labor is only worth what someone is willing to pay. If no one is willing to pay what you are wanting then well you are asking too much.

Now that being said, smart capitalists do not want to kill the source of their profit either, and would want to ensure that source can remain operational for a long time

Someone should tell the UAW that.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Your labor is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. There comes a point where you simply price yourself out of the market. If i am not willing to pay it then guess what.
your labor isn't worth what you are asking.

That is exactly what I was saying, the capitalists should maximize what they can get. If it is $15 or $20/hr then work to get that amount. Any less and you are not being a good capitalist

Sorry again your labor is only worth what someone is willing to pay. If no one is willing to pay what you are wanting then well you are asking too much.

Again exactly what I was saying

Someone should tell the UAW that.

Americans and American organizations are far to short term orientated to look into the long term effects of policies and or contracts. That would include the UAW. There are some exceptions of course

 

[ludin]

That is exactly what I was saying, the capitalists should maximize what they can get. If it is $15 or $20/hr then work to get that amount. Any less and you are not being a good capitalist

Again exactly what I was saying

Americans and American organizations are far to short term orientated to look into the long term effects of policies and or contracts. That would include the UAW. There are some exceptions of course

i checked the pay scale for employee's depending on when you started and how long you have worked there is between 16-38 dollars an hour
plus benefits.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

i checked the pay scale for employee's depending on when you started and how long you have worked there is between 16-38 dollars an hour
plus benefits.

That is what they are getting now, they may or may not be able to get more

 

[Neomalthusian]

[h=1]Auto union workers overwhelmingly vote to authorize strikes at GM, Ford, Fiat Chrysler[/h]

UAW overwhelmingly votes to authorize strikes at GM, Ford, Fiat Chrysler
Points

• United Auto Workers members overwhelmingly voted to give union leaders authorization to strike during contract negotiations this year with General Motors, Ford Motor and Fiat Chrysler, if needed.
• About 96% of union members at each of the automakers supported the authorization for a strike. That’s slightly down from negotiations four years ago.
• The vote does not mean there will or will not be a strike. It simply gives union leaders authorization to call for a strike, if deemed necessary.

DETROIT – United Auto Workers members overwhelmingly granted union leaders authorization to strike during contract negotiations this year with General Motors, Ford Motor and Fiat Chrysler, if needed.
The union on Tuesday announced about 96% of members at each of the automakers supported the action.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The auto industry is already being hit by repeated tweets from Trump and uncertainties as a result of this trade war. Talks have broken down and it looks like there will be a strike anytime in the next 6-8 weeks.

This vote for a strike is mere posturing. The union guy in the article even basically says so. He calls the strike vote "a tool in the toolbelt" when sitting across the table from management. What usually happens is they hold this preemptive vote to authorize a strike, but it's often a bluff. Sometimes they have to hold another vote to strike to get a second chance to agree to actually go on strike or not.

They also usually lie about why they're going on strike. If they're striking because they're unhappy with the compensation they're being offered, it's an economic strike. The problem for union workers with economic strikes is federal law allows employers to permanently replace those workers. So what do unions do? They make up a reason to file an "unfair labor practice," usually by alleging the employer "refused to bargain in good faith," and then call their strike an "unfair labor practice strike." Under federal law, ULP strikers cannot be permanently replaced. Workers often will not agree to risk their careers to go on strike, so unions have to concoct some dishonest excuse for conducting strikes even when the real reason is money and the strike is really an economic strike.

 

[ludin]

That is what they are getting now, they may or may not be able to get more

that will be up to the company to decide.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

that will be up to the company to decide.

Yes it will, they have the responsibility to determine what the maximum they can live with, and to try to pay the minimum they possibly can. As a shareholder of Ford, I want them to pay employees the least they possibly can.

 

[Neomalthusian]

So the right thinks our brave police officers and firefighters are greedy. :thumbs:

Everyone is inherently greedy when they're negotiating a price for what they're selling. Most people will ask for the highest price they can so long as they're not pushing up the risk that they'll chase away all their customers.

Natural market forces keep that greed in check, because usually the buyer of what you're selling can choose to buy it from someone else who doesn't demand as much as you might demand if you could get away with it.

Cartels seek to prohibit sellers from being allowed to look elsewhere for what they're buying, so that they can demand prices they wouldn't otherwise be able to demand. To effectively prohibit sellers from being allowed to entertain other offers usually requires the assistance of governments and their laws and court systems. This core feature of cartels is what makes labor unions literal cartels.

 

[Drawdown]

that will be up to the company to decide.

Not always. Sometimes unions negotiate a seniority differential so that older workers make out better than younger workers. Happened in the airlines. Happened with the rubber workers.

 

[roughdraft274]

Auto union workers overwhelmingly vote to authorize strikes at GM, Ford, Fiat Chrysler



UAW overwhelmingly votes to authorize strikes at GM, Ford, Fiat Chrysler
Points

• United Auto Workers members overwhelmingly voted to give union leaders authorization to strike during contract negotiations this year with General Motors, Ford Motor and Fiat Chrysler, if needed.
• About 96% of union members at each of the automakers supported the authorization for a strike. That’s slightly down from negotiations four years ago.
• The vote does not mean there will or will not be a strike. It simply gives union leaders authorization to call for a strike, if deemed necessary.

DETROIT – United Auto Workers members overwhelmingly granted union leaders authorization to strike during contract negotiations this year with General Motors, Ford Motor and Fiat Chrysler, if needed.
The union on Tuesday announced about 96% of members at each of the automakers supported the action.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The auto industry is already being hit by repeated tweets from Trump and uncertainties as a result of this trade war. Talks have broken down and it looks like there will be a strike anytime in the next 6-8 weeks.

Voting to authorize a person to initiate a strike should it be necessary and "voting to strike" are wildly different things. Why on earth would union workers want union leadership to go in and negotiate with their hands behind their backs? This vote doesn't mean at all that anyone wants a strike.

 

[Waddy]

That would definitely be the outcome without unions, however when unions and corporations work together for the good of the company rather than fight each other as they do, say in Germany, everyone benefits.

When corporate greed takes over, you get strikes...

And when union greed takes over you get strikes. As posted earlier, each of those companies pays workers over $100,000 per year in wages and benefits. Compared to other factory jobs, that is more than fair.

 

[marke]

Blame the workers. Got it. Great Republican campaign slogan for 2020. :thumbs:

Commie logic: Company meets outrageous union demands but finds itself unable to stay in business due to lack of profits. Blame the corporate officers because they are rich, greedy and oppressive. Don't blame uncompetitive labor concessions for the critical loss of corporate income because that would be a right wing suggestion and we 'know' all right wing ideas are bad.

 

[marke]

I think capitalists, who sell things (in this case labor) should try to achieve the highest profit they can (compensation for their labor), if that involves hiring an agent to negotiate on their behalf so be it.

I am not a socialist who thinks people should sell things at anything lower than the maximum they can get, for the greater good. I am not for people being altruistically making less profit so that a different group can make more.

Now that being said, smart capitalists do not want to kill the source of their profit either, and would want to ensure that source can remain operational for a long time

Many companies have gone bankrupt because union concessions made the companies unsustainable.

 

[marke]

The corporate officers are paid to ensure the long term success of the company. Part of that includes setting affordable compensation rates. If they fail to do so, the blame falls on them in their inability to do their job.

Unions don't give a damn whether corporate officers can find a way to meet union demands and simultaneously stay in business.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Unions don't give a damn whether corporate officers can find a way to meet union demands and simultaneously stay in business.

That is not their job, it is the corporate officers job to do that

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Many companies have gone bankrupt because union concessions made the companies unsustainable.

Then the corporate officers failed in that they did not hold firm and paid to much for what was being offered

 

[Master Debator]

Commie logic: Company meets outrageous union demands but finds itself unable to stay in business due to lack of profits. Blame the corporate officers because they are rich, greedy and oppressive. Don't blame uncompetitive labor concessions for the critical loss of corporate income because that would be a right wing suggestion and we 'know' all right wing ideas are bad.

I thought negotiating for the best wage you could get was a right wing idea... :shrug:

Or does that only apply to wealthy CEOs?

 

[MTAtech]

How much do they make per hour?
How much does the Chinese worker earn per hour?
It’s no wonder these companies want to move their operations overseas.

Trump should do what Clinton started, open up our markets to China, without restrictions or tariffs while China keeps their markets closed to us.

How far the Republican Party has strayed from what they used to believe in. Below is from the 1953 Republican platform:

The protection of the right of workers to organize into unions and to bargain collectively is the firm and permanent policy of the Eisenhower Administration. In 1954, 1955 and again in 1956, President Eisenhower recommended constructive amendments to this Act.

 

[marke]

The corporate officers are paid to ensure the long term success of the company. Part of that includes setting affordable compensation rates. If they fail to do so, the blame falls on them in their inability to do their job.

No corporate officer can do miracles. If costs of materials and labor exceeds the amount that can be made by selling the product or services then the company will go bankrupt.

 

[marke]

Yes it will, they have the responsibility to determine what the maximum they can live with, and to try to pay the minimum they possibly can. As a shareholder of Ford, I want them to pay employees the least they possibly can.

Of course good businessmen do not needlessly overpay their employees. In America labor is sold to companies on a competitive basis, which is a good thing. Those workers who work the hardest, are the most reliable and who accumulate valuable experience will fare better on the competitive market.

 

[marke]

I thought negotiating for the best wage you could get was a right wing idea... :shrug:

Or does that only apply to wealthy CEOs?

Workers are wise to compete for the best jobs at the best wages by being good workers, dependable, reliable, and well-trained.

 

[marke]

How far the Republican Party has strayed from what they used to believe in. Below is from the 1953 Republican platform:

Unions tend to gravitate towards democrats and communists. There are factors involved in unions which are detrimental to free enterprise.

 

[Neomalthusian]

Voting to authorize a person to initiate a strike should it be necessary and "voting to strike" are wildly different things.

They are not "wildly" different, any more than threatening to punch someone and actually punching someone are "wildly different." Both (the threat and the follow through) are fairly closely related, and go hand-in-hand.

In the case of voting to authorize a strike, the union official quoted in the article called the strike authorization vote a "tool in the toolbelt" to wield against management. They're all a part of unions' threat to deprive the employer of labor when they're not getting their way in negotiations.

Why on earth would union workers want union leadership to go in and negotiate with their hands behind their backs? This vote doesn't mean at all that anyone wants a strike.

Well of course not. Most people who make threats want the threat to be effective at coercing another person. Rarely does someone actually want to have to follow through with a threat. They want the mere threat to do the trick.

Strikes are unpaid. Some people find them cringeworthy, embarrassing, humiliating, and so forth. A few dyed-in-the-wool unionists actually like going on strike, sacrificed wages notwithstanding. A lot of people who don't go that far in their devotion to unions actually feel pretty negatively about them, if they're being honest.