Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is rather strange since none of the contract details were released by either side as of the day after the strike was settled. The good news is it was settled.
The unions know the Times sides with them, so I have little doubt they leaked it. Between the signing bonus and first year raise, Cat ended up with about a 7% cost increase (I'd estimate 70k minimum with OT is the norm at 26/hr regular time) for the better paid employees over 6 years.
At $26 per hour, they are , no doubt, far above Fair Market Value. Now if their voluntary attrition were to surpass the overall market, they would have adjusted too much in the other direction.
If they are crazy enough to vote it down, I do not blame the company should they choose to move on from this workforce. Now if they are truly worth a hefty raise from their present $26, the market will give it to them. So neither side should fear.
11.9 percent operating profit in qtr 2 2012 makes that article stupid. Many corps, including my employer who is privately held, far surpass that percentage.
They do need to realign their cost structure with other corps.
Story in todays WSJ, (sorry no link) compensation for CEO Douglass Oberhelman rose 60% last year to $16.9M, the 5 top executives got a raise of 7%, these are the people telling the workers making $26/hr to take a 6 year wage freeze? That's what I like leadership by example.
Additionally they had record profits, this is exactly what is happening in many companies, huge disparity.
EXACTLY. If a company is struggling financially or otherwise trying to trim expenses, wage cuts need to be TOP DOWN. The company I worked for when the economy went in the tank in early 2009 hit hard times- they were a good family owned business, so when the time came to cut salaries to keep from having to lay anyone off, they started at the top- senior team members took something like a 50% pay cut, and only after finding that this wasn't enough did they move on and do across the board pay cuts for everyone else (ranging from 10%- 15%, depending on pay level). THAT is the way to do it.
EXACTLY. If a company is struggling financially or otherwise trying to trim expenses, wage cuts need to be TOP DOWN. The company I worked for when the economy went in the tank in early 2009 hit hard times- they were a good family owned business, so when the time came to cut salaries to keep from having to lay anyone off, they started at the top- senior team members took something like a 50% pay cut, and only after finding that this wasn't enough did they move on and do across the board pay cuts for everyone else (ranging from 10%- 15%, depending on pay level). THAT is the way to do it.
Tell them to move to Fairfield, Iowa and they'll get the best workers available for $26 an hour for the next five years. I really don't give a rat's tail what the top executives make, that's a hell of a lot more than most people around here get paid.
There was a company near here whose labor contract was up. The company wanted to freeze wages and cut a few minor bennies; the union told the workers not to accept because nobody would cross the lines to work for what they were offering. Bad move. The company locked out the union workers and was back in operation in less than a day because there are plenty of people around here who felt blessed to be able to work for what the union dudes thought was insulting.
And before anyone says it, NOBODY who crosses a picket line to provide a better life for his or her family should be considered a "scab."
+1......Unions have gotten to be "bullies" and will bleed a company dry if they are allowed to!
$26 an hour is over 50K a year to assemble machine parts......not rocket science folks!
EXACTLY. If a company is struggling financially or otherwise trying to trim expenses, wage cuts need to be TOP DOWN. The company I worked for when the economy went in the tank in early 2009 hit hard times- they were a good family owned business, so when the time came to cut salaries to keep from having to lay anyone off, they started at the top- senior team members took something like a 50% pay cut, and only after finding that this wasn't enough did they move on and do across the board pay cuts for everyone else (ranging from 10%- 15%, depending on pay level). THAT is the way to do it.
Unions have gotten to be "bullies" and will bleed a company dry if they are allowed to!
Yes, many have become 'bullies" by default.
It seems that the only people that will run for union offices , until recently, are the less desirable types since those people that would do a great job don't want to get involved in union business. Old school unionism at it's worst.
Today, however, that is changing for the better. Since the old school union people are getting older , dying, or retiring people with better education are now getting involved to govern union business. The change to a "business" is slow in coming but it is coming since the rank and file , also better educated than their fathers, are starting to see that unions must be more active in the day to day business of those they represent.
As far as what the public sees today ,sadly, it's still the old school meat heads that make all the noise giving those that just quietly picket and protest peacefully a bad name.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.