OK, How 'Bout THIS one Then?

[NismoZ]

It's even about cars and jobs and money and stuff. Not interested in starting a political fight or rant but I think it's important enough to at least mention. Ever heard of Ford? The UAW? Looks to me like war on the horizon. Ford has done quite well, lately and all without any of the bailout help. I suppose the UAW is doing better too with about 17b $ of OUR money. Looks like they want more. From Ford. The union signs being displayed are quite threatening. They want everything back that they gave up...or else, I guess? Seems a shame that an industry coming back from the brink may be pushed right back to it? Can't say I'm surprised. I guess it's just a continuation of conflict after a brief (and hugely expensive) respite.

[nrc]

I think that it's getting off on the wrong foot to be so confrontational about it. That goes for this thread as well as the union attitude.

The union notion that as soon as the company is back in the black it's time to give it all back and then some is part of the problem. Just like American companies, the failure of American Unions is that they are not operating with the long term interests of their company, their industry, or their union in mind.

American workers deserve a competitive wage. The trouble is that historically unions have held auto makers over the barrel during fat times and little or none of that gets given back in lean times.

[racer2c]

I think that it's getting off on the wrong foot to be so confrontational about it. That goes for this thread as well as the union attitude.

The union notion that as soon as the company is back in the black it's time to give it all back and then some is part of the problem. Just like American companies, the failure of American Unions is that they are not operating with the long term interests of their company, their industry, or their union in mind.

American workers deserve a competitive wage. The trouble is that historically unions have held auto makers over the barrel during fat times and little or none of that gets given back in lean times.

well said indeed. :thumbup:

[Indy]

Just like American companies, the failure of American Unions is that they are not operating with the long term interests of their company, their industry, or their union in mind.

And just when have the industry or its companies operated with the interests of the workers in mind? Except when they were forced to. By the unions.

The purpose of the union is to represent the workers. It is management's job to predict, innovate and plan for the long run. In fact, that is the definition of management. The failures of GM and Chrysler are 100% the fault of their management.

[Ankf00]

And just when have the industry or its companies operated with the interests of the workers in mind?
while it is indeed the UAW's job to represent its workers interests, the foreign makes operating in right to work sun belt states are doing just fine w/ worker satisfaction in the absence of UAW organization

beyond that, though, the fact that so many decades of US contract law was thrown out the window in order to grant the UAW a substantial share of Chrysler and GM in place of the legal and proper bondholders of those corporations, the UAW is playing a dangerous game if its resorting to their old tactics so soon. as nrc said, neglecting the long-term health of the company s just as dangerous to the union and its public support as it is to the company itself

[cameraman]

Somebody explain Subaru of Indiana Automotive to me. Indiana is not a right to work state yet there this non-UAW plant sits cranking out 246,139 Legacys, Outbacks, Tribecas and Camrys last year. The UAW has tried many times (and they might be trying yet again) to organize at that plant and it has failed every time. The Subaru employees never had to give back anything, none of them were laid off during the slump and they have good benefits.

So how the hell did Subaru manage that and not go broke?

[KLang]

UAW chief announced in January they are going after the foreign plants this year. Problem is the foreign companies are already paying similar wages and benefits.

[Indy]

So how the hell did Subaru manage that and not go broke?

It's almost like the companies that ended up with unions were the ones where the workers were exploited, and the ones without unions have some sort of enlightened management. Hmmmmmm...

[Andrew Longman]

It's almost like the companies that ended up with unions were the ones where the workers were exploited, and the ones without unions have some sort of enlightened management. Hmmmmmm...Yes, Subaru and Honda didn't shoot workers. Start with that. See: Battle of the Overpass, Ford Motor Co. thugs beat Walter Reuther and other UAW organizers in Dearborn, Michigan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Overpass http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memorial_Day_massacre_of_1937:gomer:


Ford management has been better that the other domestics for years now. And that includes working well with the unions. But IMO still lags many of the transplants in engaging and getting the most out of their people.

Is see this latest salvo from the UAW to be pretty standard posturing for upcoming negotiations. It's just how its done. What's different this time though is a settlement with Ford is not likely to set the bar for negotiations with GM and Chrysler.

[KLang]

The overpass thing was from 1937. Don't see how that is relevant to Subaru.

[Andrew Longman]

The overpass thing was from 1937. Don't see how that is relevant to Subaru.It was a half serious comment, but the culture of the Big Three didn't exactly change overnight from the point where they were assaulting workers.

I can speak more of Honda than Subaru, but the culture demands and expects respect. Everyone in every location, assembly line to finance, labor and management, wears "whites" -- the Honda white jumpsuit. They dine together in the same lunch room. There is a strong emphasis on "honoring proven methods" which emphasize process over position. A good idea is a good idea as long as it makes the car better. And people are rewarded for their ideas by getting points towards discounts on cars -- so long as they help implement them.

A lot of this came from Mr Honda himself, but is also they way Japanese firms tend to operate. (but my experience with Japanese pharmas and a few others has been that Honda is far more practical and less political than the others. I've also seen a change for the worse since Mr Honda died.)

Its not utopia by a long shot, but it is worlds apart from my experiences at the Big Three.

[Indy]

The overpass thing was from 1937. Don't see how that is relevant to Subaru.

It could hardly be more relevant. Those sort of events created the context under which the pre-1980 system of management and labor division was created. The adversarial bluster that we find so offensive is a product of the history of that relationship.

I could go on but I won't. :laugh:

[nrc]

Somebody explain Subaru of Indiana Automotive to me. Indiana is not a right to work state yet there this non-UAW plant sits cranking out 246,139 Legacys, Outbacks, Tribecas and Camrys last year. The UAW has tried many times (and they might be trying yet again) to organize at that plant and it has failed every time. The Subaru employees never had to give back anything, none of them were laid off during the slump and they have good benefits.

So how the hell did Subaru manage that and not go broke?

I can't speak specifically to that case, but in general non-union auto workers receive a much larger percentage of their pay in the form of incentive payments based on the performance of the company. That means that not only are workers paid well when the company is prosperous, but the company has a means of controlling labor costs during down periods other than laying off workers.

[nrc]

It could hardly be more relevant. Those sort of events created the context under which the pre-1980 system of management and labor division was created. The adversarial bluster that we find so offensive is a product of the history of that relationship.

I could go on but I won't. :laugh:

It has very little to do with it. All that occurred before labor laws, safety regulations, and a competitive market for quality labor rendered unions largely unnecessary.

The primary focus of unions today is not the welfare of their members, it's preservation and enrichment of the union. The relationship between union labor and their employers hasn't changed in many cases because it's in the interest of unions to make sure that that it doesn't.

[KLang]

Another article in today's WSJ

Link (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704461304576216781493268262.html?m od=WSJ_auto_LeadStoryCollection) Probably requires subscription


The UAW said it approached foreign auto makers including Toyota Motor Corp., Nissan Motor Co., Honda Motor Co. and Hyundai Motor Co. and offered a set of rules earlier this year that would govern efforts to organize their U.S. workers. Essentially, the union said it would refrain from vilifying management and disrupting the companies' operations if the auto makers would agree not to fire or punish workers who associate with UAW organizers.

So if these companies don't agree to the UAW's 'rules' they can expect the bolded part above? :shakehead

[NismoZ]

I guess it IS all about redistribution of wealth. The only thing that matters is who's wealth gets redistributed!;)

[Indy]

It has very little to do with it. All that occurred before labor laws, safety regulations, and a competitive market for quality labor rendered unions largely unnecessary.

The primary focus of unions today is not the welfare of their members, it's preservation and enrichment of the union. The relationship between union labor and their employers hasn't changed in many cases because it's in the interest of unions to make sure that that it doesn't.

The context provided by our history IS relevant to what is going on today. The Japanese transplants are free to play the good cop BECAUSE unions fought the abuses of the past and succeeded in getting the major problems addressed in law and in our corporate cultures.

And the primary focus of the unions IS the welfare of its members. Do bad actors in the unions do bad things? Of course. Does that make them useless or unnecessary? No.

[NismoZ]

No, not useless and unnecessary (for some) , perhaps just harmful and counterproductive. (for others)