GM Auto Strike (drugs, layoffs, dollars, economy)

[TriMT7]

Originally Posted by Rggr

These workers obviously have skills. They are free to go somewhere else and make more money if they choose. If people leave because the wages are bad, then companies figure out that they need to raise wages. These workers could also open their own garages or body shops if they wanted, but they're choosing to try to hold the employer hostage.

Um, no, the company would simply ship off what remains of American labor and manufacturing to Mexico or China like you KNOW it wants to already but-for the Unions.

So much for "Made in America!"

[Mike from back east]

Originally Posted by TriMT7

Um, no, the company would simply ship off what remains of American labor and manufacturing to Mexico or China like you KNOW it wants to already but-for the Unions. So much for "Made in America!"

True. The low-wage nations you mention don't require employers to provide healthcare or pensions or workmens' comp insurance or OSHA safeguards or paid vacations or any other bennies that most of us enjoy to some extent. More benefits are disappearing here too as the globalization tidal wave brings everyone down to the lowest common denominator, i.e., grinding poverty for everyone but those making our laws and handing tax refunds to their wealthy backers.

[Rggr]

Originally Posted by TriMT7

Um, no, the company would simply ship off what remains of American labor and manufacturing to Mexico or China like you KNOW it wants to already but-for the Unions.

So much for "Made in America!"

There will always be shifts in the workforce. That is a reality. The people that complained last year about their jobs being outsourced in whatever industry they were in are the same people now looking for inexpensive cars, and companies are trying to provide them or face going into bankruptcy. If the demand for people to build cars is diminishing in the US, those people may need to think about where to apply those skills such as repairing them. When my car breaks, I don't want to send it to China or Japan, I look for a local guy that's good.

[silas777]

Originally Posted by fishmonger

It's relevant because it'd be interesting to know what "slice of the pie" the workers are getting, compared to the higher-ups. $28 an hour with benefits sounds pretty average, middle-class to me (especially in the higher-cost-of-living northeast), although I could be wrong. It's not like they're making huge six figure salaries... do you have a problem with workers getting a decent, livable wage? Could the higher-ups cut costs just as well by forsaking their next yacht/mansion/whatever as they could by making workers forsake their pensions/healthcare/jobs? I don't know the answer. Do you?

fish, please, you just hit the nail on the head again! what "slice of the pie" they are getting is irrelevant, where in these united states of America is it written that workers are ENTITLED to a certain percentage of their employers PIE! Maybe they should move down to beautiful Kentucky where the cost of living is low, and see what Toyota is paying they seem to be doing pretty well!

[fishmonger]

Originally Posted by silas777

fish, please, you just hit the nail on the head again! what "slice of the pie" they are getting is irrelevant, where in these united states of America is it written that workers are ENTITLED to a certain percentage of their employers PIE! Maybe they should move down to beautiful Kentucky where the cost of living is low, and see what Toyota is paying they seem to be doing pretty well!

All of them? It's not like there's an infinite amount of auto related jobs available.

[burdell]

Originally Posted by Mike from back east

True. The low-wage nations you mention don't require employers to provide healthcare or pensions .

Nor does the US.

[burdell]

Originally Posted by silas777

I cant justify that and am not trying to ,what I am saying is it has nothing to do with what UAW workers are making, again lets see how well paid UAW workers are for what they do compared to the rest of the so called middle class in this country. Bringing the corporate execs into the discussion is typical democrat, union, hate the rich, class envy, it is not relevant to what the workers are being compensated for!

I don't hate anybody, it saps too much energy and accomplishes nothing.

I just don't believe the issue can be reduced to an us versus them situation no matter who is the 'us' and who is the 'them'. They all had a little hand in producing the current situation.

Trying to place all the blame on labor/unions is just not fair. The companies cry that they're being innundated by health care costs for retirees. That may be true but those costs were agreed to years ago by highly paid execs who apparently lacked the foresight to project into the furture or just didn't care, after all, they'd be retired when those bills came due. They're at least as much to blame as anyone else.

[Greatday]

Originally Posted by Mike from back east

... don't require employers to provide healthcare or pensions or paid vacations or any other bennies that most of us enjoy to some extent.

Nor does the US require such things

[Greatday]

IMO, some of the reasons for the shifts of manufactuering is, employees / workers, often represented by Unions, may have "priced" themselves right out of a job -

Something had to give

[burdell]

Originally Posted by Greatday

IMO, some of the reasons for the shifts of manufactuering is, employees / workers, often represented by Unions, may have "priced" themselves right out of a job -

Something had to give

One of the reasons Henry Ford was so successful was that he paid his laborers then unheard of wages even before any unionization of his company. He believed his workers should be able to afford the products they built.

Sure it's a bit simplistic for the current time but he did spread some of the profits amongst the workers, not just grab what he could and run off into the sunset.