Kevbeau Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 The move of bringing down salaries, etc. to be only $4.00 above toyota, etc. will make them more competitive. So maybe I'm misunderstanding you. The "moves" being made bring the gap to the levels we discuss and traditionally it's more than $4/hr (8K/yr)? The reason I say this, is that even at the revised levels, that is still a significant gap unless said workers over some sort of skill set beyond their competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
finknottle Posted December 5, 2008 Author Share Posted December 5, 2008 Let me see if I have this right. We want to spend taxpayer money helpling the big 3 become more competative. That means getting more of the market share. As I've heard explained by pundit after pundit, that also means getting more Americans to buy American. Ok, so let's suppose the big 3 rear up triumphantly and start taking market share back from Nissan and Honda. Doesn't that threaten to put their people here out of work? Won't the loss of US production endanger all the people who make their livings in the supply chain? Will we be spending 2009 figuring out how to give Nissan US and Honda US money so that they can become competative with the big 3? Help me out here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Out here in Fremont , CA Toyota and GM operate a joint plant- NUMMI (New United Motors Manufacturing Inc.) which produces Toyota Corollas and Tacomas and Pontiac Vibes. There may be other joint plants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Let me see if I have this right. We want to spend taxpayer money helpling the big 3 become more competative. That means getting more of the market share. As I've heard explained by pundit after pundit, that also means getting more Americans to buy American. Ok, so let's suppose the big 3 rear up triumphantly and start taking market share back from Nissan and Honda. Doesn't that threaten to put their people here out of work? Won't the loss of US production endanger all the people who make their livings in the supply chain? Will we be spending 2009 figuring out how to give Nissan US and Honda US money so that they can become competative with the big 3? Help me out here... We are just helping them over a tough stretch. Its a win / win for America Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 so what do you think the average UAW worker makes per hour including benefits? Let me guess $73 per hr? If that's the case, please two steps back and come back later on. Already been listed as false. Even today in bail out talks. maybe you can pledge to come back after you learn something about unions. $2000 more per car. I know quite a bit about unions. They are notorious for protecting lazy workers and fighting incentive pay. They are also overprotected by the government, and make our products less competitive. They know they can bend their employer over... and rape them at the negotiation table... because it would cost far more money to hire and train an entirely new workforce. The government coddles them because of their voting influence. In fact, I challenge you to name 5 laws which protect employers' rights..... (I'll be waiting) The current laws create situations where many companies have to cave to every union demand, and the unions are not oblivious to this. The UAW should take a page from the foreign unions and not bite the hand that feeds. The average American union is a relic of a time when they were actually needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fingon Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 So maybe I'm misunderstanding you. The "moves" being made bring the gap to the levels we discuss and traditionally it's more than $4/hr (8K/yr)? The reason I say this, is that even at the revised levels, that is still a significant gap unless said workers over some sort of skill set beyond their competition. The union salaries/benefits are a major cause of this. He is pointing out what their salaries will be in 2010 because of how outrageous they have been in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boomer860 Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 We are just helping them over a tough stretch. Its a win / win for America Right , and change is coming.When do I get my free gas and tv to help me over a tough stretch? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 6, 2008 Share Posted December 6, 2008 We are just helping them over a tough stretch. Its a win / win for America More likely we're helping the economy over a tough stretch by keeping the auto industry afloat. The industry's entire business model is "a tough stretch", it's so outmoded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLflutie7 Posted December 8, 2008 Share Posted December 8, 2008 Not fantasy... Watch what becomes when things start crashing down. I am not fear mongering either. Nobody still has answered the question about why many people in this country hate workers who make an above average wage? Why we begrudge them so much? Afterall, they are the one's actually doing the "work", not control of the "work." It is all about where you put your personal priorities and our nation's priorities... In the few or the many families that want to strive to live better. We seem to be heading down the road towards the few because many in this great land can't get past what their neighbor has over them. Hence: "Conditions on the Bailout." How is that for a tie-in? I am actually, on topic for once. Sad. It's the sick minded greedy people who hate workers who make an above average wage. They probably love Walmart too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted December 8, 2008 Share Posted December 8, 2008 $2000 more per car. I know quite a bit about unions. They are notorious for protecting lazy workers and fighting incentive pay. They are also overprotected by the government, and make our products less competitive. They know they can bend their employer over... and rape them at the negotiation table... because it would cost far more money to hire and train an entirely new workforce. The government coddles them because of their voting influence. In fact, I challenge you to name 5 laws which protect employers' rights..... (I'll be waiting) The current laws create situations where many companies have to cave to every union demand, and the unions are not oblivious to this. The UAW should take a page from the foreign unions and not bite the hand that feeds. The average American union is a relic of a time when they were actually needed. Yes, SOME local union leaders have protected some lazy people here and there. However those instances should not mean that the unions as a whole are full of lazy people. I get awfully tired of hearing this complete nonsense about raping the employer, etc. It's complete BS. All unions have to follow rules set by the DOL. And let's face it the current administration in the DOL is no friend to unions. You say that the average union is a relic. I disagree with that. I have seen many instances where unions help people out. I have also seen companies like Walmart who have broken many labor laws in the past fight against union organization? I wonder why, so that the employer can abuse their workers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts