You wanted cheaper prices, right?

[jeepingib]

Once again, bias is showing. CEO is right to negotiate, unions are "drawing a gun". It's genuinely hilarious that in all of these UAW threads, CEOs are defended for their pay and the union is vilified every time.

If agreeing to demands meant unprofitability, that's on management for capitulating. A figurative gun was never held to the big three. Just like when the usual idiots on here complain about prices, no gun was ever held to their head. What makes your statement even funnier is the companies knew for years this strike was coming

The UAW members are doing just fine. Actually, they're probably doing pretty good knowing how much envy there is out there. Maybe the engineers should've collectively bargained. Considering their higher education, one would think they understood the 'simple economics' of companies being able to relinquish non-unionized employees nearly at will.

My bias is showing? Just how deeply is Shawn Fain down your throat? I'm not defending CEO pay. Show me where I have. But labor costs have skyrocketed with this new contract, and sales are down. The market doesn't support keeping things the way they are. Where would you cut costs in order to stay profitable if you were running things?

Sponsored

 

[CT_LFC]

I hope the Big Three auto makers all pull up shop and produce their products in other countries. I blame a lot of the increase in auto prices, and lack of quality squarely on the UAW.

slowly but surely it will get there. With every cycle of contract negotiations where they ask for more to do less, and do a mediocre job at what they actually do, the long-term outlook is pretty easy to see.

 

[Strommen95]

My bias is showing? Just how deeply is Shawn Fain down your throat? I'm not defending CEO pay. Show me where I have. But labor costs have skyrocketed with this new contract, and sales are down. The market doesn't support keeping things the way they are. Where would you cut costs in order to stay profitable if you were running things?

Shawn Fain himself has nothing to do with any post I've made in this thread. By ignoring CEO pay and vilifying the UAW for leveraging their position, you justified CEO pay. I asked a simple question and you went straight to attacking the union. Their contract was finished, there was no gun drawn on anybody.

To be clear, I don't have an issue with CEO pay despite the poor optics it provides. I do have issue with taking a blind eye to it while criticizing the masses for trying to do their best, too. While none of your posts may have directly supported CEO pay, there have been many(in all of the UAW related threads) that have done so but vilified the UAW for doing the same. It's an extremely hypocritical position to take. "You are what you're paid" is suddenly thrown out the door when we're talking union members.

Are you able to provide a source that definitively shows The Big Three is incapable of supporting the wage increases they agreed to going forward? I'm not suggesting you're wrong, I won't pretend to know the exact financials of any automotive company. Although, I admittedly doubt they can't support it after all of the profit they made in the 3 COVID years. I just think it's funny that independent sources and forum members know better than The Big Three themselves. I would think that the executives, whom were said to be a rare breed in the last thread that could run a massive company and deserve the millions they receive in compensation, would understand how crippling this new contract apparently would be.

For all of the talk that the union is incompetent, it's funny to think that those executives whom aren't unionized, agreed to a contract that apparently will cripple their companies. What's worse, that they knew or didn't know how "bad" this would be for them?

 

[MountainRigged]

Yeah if you think this will result in lower prices, you're crazy. Moves like this will translate to higher profit margins, that's about it.

Random but I actually saw you recently on the road and just realized by your Jeep name.

 

[BetOnBlack]

I'd agree, but only if 3 generations of "hard work" prior had led to some semblance of generational wealth in this country for the common man, and it hadn't produced some of the dumbest, poorest, most dependent, and most violent people who face fewer choices than ever.

I don't sympathize with "hard working martyrdom". Just because someone spent way too much time at work doesn't mean they have a right to criticize others who don't see either the philosophical or economical value in that. Some jobs more than others.

Yeah, I can see spending 80+ hours per week in a residency program to be a surgeon. The outcome looks like making $450k/year and having the time and resources to live a very meaningful life through work. That person likely wanted to become a surgeon. How many people want to become a Manufacturing Specialist II , graveyard shift?

Spending 80 hours per week digging in a coal mine? Driving a truck? Bolting dashboards to a firewall? You're starting to lose me on the on this idea that people need to throw their best years away to work, unless they love doing it and would continue doing it if they were offered a better job that paid a lot more.

You earn what you are worth. End of story. Don't want to work long hours, you won't earn much. We are turning into Europe. Lazy workers that demand high pay, lots of vacation, absolute refusal to do above the bare minimum.
Then complain that everything is so expensive. Because businesses have to have 3 people playing grab ass to get done what one person could do but the people that could do it have jobs that pay them well so they don't leave.
I don't want to be political but the situation we are in with a lot of the younger people can be squarely placed at the feet of academia and the almost total takeover of it by people that hate America. To their credit, they are getting the outcomes they wanted.

Let’s say I hire a $300/hr consultant to work for me for 6 months. Not uncommon in my industry. They are hired on contracts

At the end of the contract, I need them to continue working for me.

Except, now their rate is $350/hr going forward.

What are my choices as an employer, and what are their choices as contract labor?

Do they have to continue working for me? Absolutely not.

If I need them to continue working for me, do I have to pay the new rate unless I want to find someone else? Absolutely yes, unless I can negotiate other value. What if this contract firm provides other essential services and severing that relationship would have ripple effects throughout the organization? Can I just stop using them? Yes, I can, at my own risk.

Some of you absolutely do not understand the nature of union and other labor contracts.

No, we fully understand the nature of labor contracts. We believe no one should be forced by threat to be employed or forced to employ someone.
What a lot of people that are pro union don't comprehend is that businesses aren't in business to employ people. They are in business to make profit for their share holders. IF that means paying less wages, then that's what they will do. There is a balancing point though and a good business manager understands this and you pay good producing workers to keep them. You fire the ones that don't produce. Unless you are stuck with a union where you can't get rid of the problem people without spending more money than just telling the union to put them on broom pushing duty but still making the same salary.
I deal with union workers in several European and canadian manufacturing facilities daily, and it's maddening having to deal with the mindset of these people. These are the kind of people that will let a building burn and people die because it's not in their "contract" that they have to call the fire department.
They will do the absolute minimum required, but expect the business to bend over backwards to accommodate them and give them special perks.
Thankfully I have support staff there that isn't union and they don't have this mindset. And guess what, they are paid way better than the union workers because of it.

 

[rcadden]

Random but I actually saw you recently on the road and just realized by your Jeep name.

Haha, that's both funny and creepy - hopefully I waved!

 

[MountainRigged]

Haha, that's both funny and creepy - hopefully I waved!

Somewhere around burleson where I live, but was also down towards Austin this weekend.

Think you were somewhere ahead of me but I said look kiddo it's a blue one and then caught a brief glimpse of the name. Or at least, some blue jeep that looked nice and had a different name on the hood lol!

 

[Deleted User 38384]

How long you think until we get a:

***ATTENTION: NO POLITICS***

...header?

 

[rcadden]

Somewhere around burleson where I live, but was also down towards Austin this weekend.

Think you were somewhere ahead of me but I said look kiddo it's a blue one and then caught a brief glimpse of the name. Or at least, some blue jeep that looked nice and had a different name on the hood lol!

Ah, wasn't me then - we were up in Asheville, NC this weekend with the Jeep parked snugly in our garage in Weatherford. But yes, the blue jeeps look nice.

Cheers!

 

[jeepingib]

Shawn Fain himself has nothing to do with any post I've made in this thread. By ignoring CEO pay and vilifying the UAW for leveraging their position, you justified CEO pay. I asked a simple question and you went straight to attacking the union. Their contract was finished, there was no gun drawn on anybody.

To be clear, I don't have an issue with CEO pay despite the poor optics it provides. I do have issue with taking a blind eye to it while criticizing the masses for trying to do their best, too. While none of your posts may have directly supported CEO pay, there have been many(in all of the UAW related threads) that have done so but vilified the UAW for doing the same. It's an extremely hypocritical position to take. "You are what you're paid" is suddenly thrown out the door when we're talking union members.

Are you able to provide a source that definitively shows The Big Three is incapable of supporting the wage increases they agreed to going forward? I'm not suggesting you're wrong, I won't pretend to know the exact financials of any automotive company. Although, I admittedly doubt they can't support it after all of the profit they made in the 3 COVID years. I just think it's funny that independent sources and forum members know better than The Big Three themselves. I would think that the executives, whom were said to be a rare breed in the last thread that could run a massive company and deserve the millions they receive in compensation, would understand how crippling this new contract apparently would be.

For all of the talk that the union is incompetent, it's funny to think that those executives whom aren't unionized, agreed to a contract that apparently will cripple their companies. What's worse, that they knew or didn't know how "bad" this would be for them?

We have been discussing the cause of work being moved away from UAW controlled areas to outside the country. That directly relates to the labor cost of UAW workers. It does not have anything to do with the pay of the CEO. Trying to draw comparisons and shift the discussion in that direction doesn't change the core concept that started this topic. Besides the fact that CEO pay is not near the cost to the company by comparison.

The big 3 absolutely did know that it was going to be this bad, and that is why they offered realistic compromise on pay and benefits before the contract ended. Mr. Fain and his group rejected those proposals which may have kept more of these jobs in the US if foresight would have been his ally. Instead they have been forced into a contract that suited no one. Yes the workers make more, until they no longer have a job to work at.

And the automakers have been talking about this for years, but it fell on deaf ears. The cost of developing new technologies to meet emissions whether it's electric, hybrid, cleaner combustion, alternative fuels, etc. The profit margin is very tight right now.

I'm sad to see these jobs leave the US. I want our industry to be able to thrive and be dominant. But this was something that was bound to happen at some point.

 

[NWJeepr]

You earn what you are worth. End of story. Don't want to work long hours, you won't earn much. We are turning into Europe. Lazy workers that demand high pay, lots of vacation, absolute refusal to do above the bare minimum.
Then complain that everything is so expensive. Because businesses have to have 3 people playing grab ass to get done what one person could do but the people that could do it have jobs that pay them well so they don't leave.
I don't want to be political but the situation we are in with a lot of the younger people can be squarely placed at the feet of academia and the almost total takeover of it by people that hate America. To their credit, they are getting the outcomes they wanted.

No, we fully understand the nature of labor contracts. We believe no one should be forced by threat to be employed or forced to employ someone.
What a lot of people that are pro union don't comprehend is that businesses aren't in business to employ people. They are in business to make profit for their share holders. IF that means paying less wages, then that's what they will do. There is a balancing point though and a good business manager understands this and you pay good producing workers to keep them. You fire the ones that don't produce. Unless you are stuck with a union where you can't get rid of the problem people without spending more money than just telling the union to put them on broom pushing duty but still making the same salary.
I deal with union workers in several European and canadian manufacturing facilities daily, and it's maddening having to deal with the mindset of these people. These are the kind of people that will let a building burn and people die because it's not in their "contract" that they have to call the fire department.
They will do the absolute minimum required, but expect the business to bend over backwards to accommodate them and give them special perks.
Thankfully I have support staff there that isn't union and they don't have this mindset. And guess what, they are paid way better than the union workers because of it.

I work in a profession where “worth” is irrelevant to the number of hours worked, unless there is zero engagement at all. Worth is measured in terms of contribution and accomplishment. How that translates to labor hours is variable. Some people provide more meaningful contributions and work more efficiently or have ideas that lead to huge accomplishments. That idea may not even appear during work hours.

That is very different from a production shop where “contribution” is number of widgets produced, etc.

Many of those industries earn their unions and their union relationships IMHO.

 

[jeepingib]

How long you think until we get a:

***ATTENTION: NO POLITICS***

...header?

Makes one wonder how much difference there is between politics and economics.

 

[TheRaven]

So much wrong there, but it's just so far off topic, so I'll leave it with this...

You are confusing the conveniences of technology with the ability to provide the fundamentals of Maslow's hierarchy. The middle class is shrinking and the barrier to entry into that class has never been higher, every single measure has shown this trend for years, it's not even debatable at this point.


https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0912/which-income-class-are-you.aspx#:~:text=The Pew Research Center defines,to the U.S. Census Bureau.

So you concede (that's what you do when you dismiss an argument and say things like "so much wrong but I don't have time for this").

I'm very familiar with Maslow's hierarchy. It parallels the point i've been making all along. Thanks to the tech we have easy access to now, the hierarchy of needs is far easier to achieve than its ever been. People just have the wrong idea about what their needs are...they need to stop using the bar created by social media and the American corporate marketing machine.

I want to make clear that i'm absolutely NOT trying to say that the cost of houses, cars, etc, is not absolutely unexcuseable...no I fully agree that that phenomenon is ridiculous. What I am saying is that cost isn't everything, and whining about previous generations is just whining. Stop whining and get out there and get to work, and you'll find that it's really not that hard...it's different, definitely very different than what it looked like for your parents, but it's not that hard.

 

[PeatedWhisky]

So you concede (that's what you do when you dismiss an argument and say things like "so much wrong but I don't have time for this").

I'm very familiar with Maslow's hierarchy. It parallels the point i've been making all along. Thanks to the tech we have easy access to now, the hierarchy of needs is far easier to achieve than its ever been. People just have the wrong idea about what their needs are...they need to stop using the bar created by social media and the American corporate marketing machine.

I want to make clear that i'm absolutely NOT trying to say that the cost of houses, cars, etc, is not absolutely unexcuseable...no I fully agree that that phenomenon is ridiculous. What I am saying is that cost isn't everything, and whining about previous generations is just whining. Stop whining and get out there and get to work, and you'll find that it's really not that hard...it's different, definitely very different than what it looked like for your parents, but it's not that hard.

You're convinced that securing shelter is easier (or as easy as it has been) because of technological advancements, while also acknowledging that's it's much more expensive relative to income, than it has ever been. To me, that's obvious cognitive dissonance, but it doesn't matter because I don't think either of us is moving their position.

This isn't about me or you, but if you want to win on the internet, then sure, I concede.

 

[Wbino]

You earn what you are worth. End of story. Don't want to work long hours, you won't earn much. We are turning into Europe. Lazy workers that demand high pay, lots of vacation, absolute refusal to do above the bare minimum.
Then complain that everything is so expensive. Because businesses have to have 3 people playing grab ass to get done what one person could do but the people that could do it have jobs that pay them well so they don't leave.
I don't want to be political but the situation we are in with a lot of the younger people can be squarely placed at the feet of academia and the almost total takeover of it by people that hate America. To their credit, they are getting the outcomes they wanted.

No, we fully understand the nature of labor contracts. We believe no one should be forced by threat to be employed or forced to employ someone.
What a lot of people that are pro union don't comprehend is that businesses aren't in business to employ people. They are in business to make profit for their share holders. IF that means paying less wages, then that's what they will do. There is a balancing point though and a good business manager understands this and you pay good producing workers to keep them. You fire the ones that don't produce. Unless you are stuck with a union where you can't get rid of the problem people without spending more money than just telling the union to put them on broom pushing duty but still making the same salary.
I deal with union workers in several European and canadian manufacturing facilities daily, and it's maddening having to deal with the mindset of these people. These are the kind of people that will let a building burn and people die because it's not in their "contract" that they have to call the fire department.
They will do the absolute minimum required, but expect the business to bend over backwards to accommodate them and give them special perks.
Thankfully I have support staff there that isn't union and they don't have this mindset. And guess what, they are paid way better than the union workers because of it.

I retired at 55 from my union, it allows me to enjoy my grandchildren while I can still run after them.
That's winning.

Sponsored