"Stevie" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill wrote in message
m...
wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
...will last until the union or the government figures out a way to
stop it.

" Ford is also running into resistance from its unionized work
force
as it tries to cut costs further.

Its improving fortunes were the main reason cited by the United
Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting another round of labor
concessions that would have roughly matched concessions that
workers
at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the spring."

The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and its vice president in
charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a statement that the
carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence of the contributions
that Ford workers have made.""

http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay

Why should they cave to demands from management? How about producing
decent products that people want to buy?

--
Nom=de=Plume

They are decent products. But if you are paying some low skilled
laborer excess money, then the decent product is priced out of the
market.

Then, when the contract expires the company should seek to
renegotiate. It takes two parties to make a contract. If there's good
management in place, then the union members will feel better about
consessions.

There's another option. Ford can tell the unions to **** off.

If it were only that simple...

-S


That's a perfectly valid thing to do, as long as you accept the
consequences.



Do you think the automakers would have invested so heavily in robots if
they could get people to *work* at a decent wage without all of the
over-the-top entitlements?

-S


Robots used in car manufacture are *better* than employees. They're also
cheaper in the long run. However, there are some things that humans are
better at. Those positions are becoming fewer and fewer in car manufacture,
certainly. If all workers at a plant could be replaced by robots, the
manufacturer would lock out the union and use robots. There are many
companies that pretty much use robots to a great extent in the manufacture
of their products. They're not just car companies.

Here's an article for you...
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech...15eerobots.htm

--
Nom=de=Plume

"thunder" wrote in message
t...
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:03:13 -0800, Bill McKee wrote:


They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even less, if
the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies and
taxpayers.

Funny, instead of focusing on bottom up, perhaps more focus should be
placed on top down. Toyota's top 37 executives earned a combined $21.6
million. That bum Wagoner's compensation, alone, was $14.4 million. At
Honda, the top 21 executives earned $11.1 million combined. Ford's CEO
Mulally's compensation was $17.7 million in 2008. If the boss thinks
there's that kind of money floating around, why wonder if the working man
wants a piece.

Or, is this just another example of voodoo economics, you know, Reagan's
"tinkle down" economics?

Yes, the **** poor managment of the Big 3 auto companies is famous. And
they are overpaid. But why should the guy on the assembly line with maybe a
GED putting on lugnuts also be overpaid. As I said bad management also. As
to the lower pay of the Japanese. Is true, but is not a true picture of the
pay. They basically have unlimited expense accounts, which mitigates a lot
of personal taxes.

"H the K" wrote in message
...
On 11/5/09 8:48 AM, BAR wrote:
In ,
says...

Bill McKee wrote:
wrote in message
...
"Bill wrote in message
...
wrote in message

Look at what the non union successful car companies are paying and
a
valid market rate is less than that.
Huh? Non union car companies not paying a valid market rate? How do
you
figure that one?

--
Nom=de=Plume

They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even less,
if
the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies and
taxpayers.
So, the non-union car companies pay a valid market rate, which is fine
if
you can convince the workers to get rid of the union. It doesn't
happen
that often, but I have no problem with it per se.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Basically the non union shops pay the workers enough and will build a
plant
somewhere else if they need more capacity if the shop goes union.


The Plum finally took a stool softener. Now for the hard part. Back
peddling.

I think Plum is an agitator sent here to agitate. I don't know why any
of you engage her in conversation, she is just a somewhat polite Harry
Krause.



It's great fun when the right-wing diarrhea here talks about "manners."


And the only thing you know about manners is "Manners the Butler".

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
news

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
...will last until the union or the government figures out
a way to
stop it.

" Ford is also running into resistance from its unionized
work force
as it tries to cut costs further.

Its improving fortunes were the main reason cited by the
United
Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting another round of
labor
concessions that would have roughly matched concessions
that workers
at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the spring."

The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and its vice
president in
charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a statement that
the
carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence of the
contributions
that Ford workers have made.""

http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay


Why should they cave to demands from management? How about
producing decent products that people want to buy?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They are decent products. But if you are paying some low
skilled laborer excess money, then the decent product is
priced out of the market.

Then, when the contract expires the company should seek to
renegotiate. It takes two parties to make a contract. If
there's good management in place, then the union members will
feel better about consessions.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Yup, they should pay the workers what they are worth. A lot
less than they are making. $65 bundled labor cost to install a
lug nut?

Yes. I agree. What, pray tell, are they worth? Who determines
this? You?

--
Nom=de=Plume


The market place. Not the union strong arming the company.
Between the union and **** poor management over the at least 40
years before the crash, there is no way the car companies can
succeed.

Hate to tell you, but a negotiated contract _is_ the market rate.
Looks like Ford is going to do ok and even GM is doing better.
Chrysler I think is on the way out completely.

--
Nom=de=Plume


The artificial market rate. **** Poor management is the reason for
those egregious contracts. American car companies at the time had
80 or 90% of the world market. Why worry about fiscal
responsibility when you could pass on the cost and produce crappy
cars. Now the real market rate is maybe 25% of the negotiated
rate. My daughter bought a used Hyundai station wagon a couple
years ago. 100k warrantee, good car, 70% the price of a comparable
American car. Buy American? Not when it comes with a 42% premium.
For a car with less warrantee.

Please show us the data for the "real" market rate. Yes. ****-poor
management. I agree. Thus, unions came into being.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Look at what the non union successful car companies are paying and a
valid market rate is less than that.

Huh? Non union car companies not paying a valid market rate? How do
you figure that one?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even less,
if the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies and
taxpayers.

So, the non-union car companies pay a valid market rate, which is fine
if you can convince the workers to get rid of the union. It doesn't
happen that often, but I have no problem with it per se.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Basically the non union shops pay the workers enough and will build a
plant somewhere else if they need more capacity if the shop goes union.

Thus they pay the valid market rate. Not sure what you mean by "enough."
Union shops pay a valid market rate also, but with different facts
involved. They will also build a plant somewhere else if they need more
capacity union or no union.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Valid market rate? If the job could financially be outsourced then it will
be. In the 1980's the fully bundled labor costs in a tech factory in
Malaysia was about $3.50 an hour. Why disk drives were assembled overseas,
as the bundled labor cost here was above $35 an hour. Due to government
overspending and excess union contracts we have priced America out of most
manufacturing jobs. Government has added to this. Most government
contracts require "prevailing wages". They mean union wages and not what
the prevailing market rate is.

"Stevie" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill wrote in message
m...

wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
...will last until the union or the government figures out a way
to
stop it.

" Ford is also running into resistance from its unionized work
force
as it tries to cut costs further.

Its improving fortunes were the main reason cited by the United
Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting another round of labor
concessions that would have roughly matched concessions that
workers
at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the spring."

The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and its vice president
in
charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a statement that the
carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence of the contributions
that Ford workers have made.""

http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay


Why should they cave to demands from management? How about
producing
decent products that people want to buy?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They are decent products. But if you are paying some low skilled
laborer
excess money, then the decent product is priced out of the market.

Then, when the contract expires the company should seek to
renegotiate.
It
takes two parties to make a contract. If there's good management in
place,
then the union members will feel better about consessions.


They should be at-will employees, each accountable for their hard work
and
dedication to the product they make and the company that employs them.
Union crap like seniority, and other entitlements, only penalize the
hard
workers. The payroll and overhead of the union organizers would land
right into the pockets of the workers if they had any self respect.
They
are ****ing away millions in dues in order for some to be slackers who
just happened to be on the job a few years earlier than the rest.

-S


I agree. They should be, but since management was so bad for so long,
that's
not going to happen any time soon.

As is the normal practice, they can and should attempt to renegotiate
the
terms. You do believe in negotiation don't you? Or, do you think a lock
out
will work?


In a democratic society of people who can think for themselves, the
negotiation process typically takes place as a one-on-one interview -
not
a wholesale demand for a pay increase without regard for individual
performance. In that case, the slackers win and the motivated lose.

-S


So, you're saying that each individual worker should negotiate with
management about health, safety, employment practices, benefits, etc.?
Talk
about bringing a company to a standstill....

As with the rest of our country, the union members elected their
leadership
for better or worse. This is called a representative democracy.



No. The process should take place like any other non-union company.
Salary is negotiated, the benefits are in the employee manual. There is
already government oversight for safety. If you have ever worked a
non-union job you understand.

-S

Unions have their place. But they have become extortionists. The worst are
the "Public Service Employee unions". A union dealing with a private
company has to weigh income and expenses of the company. Raise the cost of
labor too high, and the company fails. They have done that to a few
companies, and the union threw a party to celebrate. The workers were told
they won, but the workers were no longer workers. Public Service Employee
Unions do not give a crap about costs. They figure government can always
raise taxes to pay them. Prime examples are the Prison Guards in
California. Making 2-3x what a teacher makes. BART the Bay area transit
district. They were going on strike for more money earlier this year.
While ridership was falling because of unemployment, and getting cheaper
drive than take BART. They were not going to give up anything. $58k for a
janitor. And you have inside and outside janitors. And if the area is
clean, they do not go work on the other side. $80k for a train driver.
Plus excessive benefits.

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
news

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
...will last until the union or the government figures out
a way to
stop it.

" Ford is also running into resistance from its unionized
work force
as it tries to cut costs further.

Its improving fortunes were the main reason cited by the
United
Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting another round
of labor
concessions that would have roughly matched concessions
that workers
at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the spring."

The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and its vice
president in
charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a statement
that the
carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence of the
contributions
that Ford workers have made.""

http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay


Why should they cave to demands from management? How about
producing decent products that people want to buy?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They are decent products. But if you are paying some low
skilled laborer excess money, then the decent product is
priced out of the market.

Then, when the contract expires the company should seek to
renegotiate. It takes two parties to make a contract. If
there's good management in place, then the union members will
feel better about consessions.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Yup, they should pay the workers what they are worth. A lot
less than they are making. $65 bundled labor cost to install
a lug nut?

Yes. I agree. What, pray tell, are they worth? Who determines
this? You?

--
Nom=de=Plume


The market place. Not the union strong arming the company.
Between the union and **** poor management over the at least 40
years before the crash, there is no way the car companies can
succeed.

Hate to tell you, but a negotiated contract _is_ the market rate.
Looks like Ford is going to do ok and even GM is doing better.
Chrysler I think is on the way out completely.

--
Nom=de=Plume


The artificial market rate. **** Poor management is the reason
for those egregious contracts. American car companies at the time
had 80 or 90% of the world market. Why worry about fiscal
responsibility when you could pass on the cost and produce crappy
cars. Now the real market rate is maybe 25% of the negotiated
rate. My daughter bought a used Hyundai station wagon a couple
years ago. 100k warrantee, good car, 70% the price of a comparable
American car. Buy American? Not when it comes with a 42%
premium. For a car with less warrantee.

Please show us the data for the "real" market rate. Yes. ****-poor
management. I agree. Thus, unions came into being.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Look at what the non union successful car companies are paying and a
valid market rate is less than that.

Huh? Non union car companies not paying a valid market rate? How do
you figure that one?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even less,
if the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies and
taxpayers.

So, the non-union car companies pay a valid market rate, which is fine
if you can convince the workers to get rid of the union. It doesn't
happen that often, but I have no problem with it per se.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Basically the non union shops pay the workers enough and will build a
plant somewhere else if they need more capacity if the shop goes union.

Thus they pay the valid market rate. Not sure what you mean by "enough."
Union shops pay a valid market rate also, but with different facts
involved. They will also build a plant somewhere else if they need more
capacity union or no union.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Valid market rate? If the job could financially be outsourced then it
will be. In the 1980's the fully bundled labor costs in a tech factory in
Malaysia was about $3.50 an hour. Why disk drives were assembled
overseas, as the bundled labor cost here was above $35 an hour. Due to
government overspending and excess union contracts we have priced America
out of most manufacturing jobs. Government has added to this. Most
government contracts require "prevailing wages". They mean union wages
and not what the prevailing market rate is.



You're the one who keeps mentioning the valid rate, but you don't want to
name it. We can't compete on labor costs with Malaysia. We can compete on
quality and innovation. I don't think we want to be the McDees of disk
drives.

--
Nom=de=Plume

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"thunder" wrote in message
t...
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:03:13 -0800, Bill McKee wrote:


They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even less, if
the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies and
taxpayers.

Funny, instead of focusing on bottom up, perhaps more focus should be
placed on top down. Toyota's top 37 executives earned a combined $21.6
million. That bum Wagoner's compensation, alone, was $14.4 million. At
Honda, the top 21 executives earned $11.1 million combined. Ford's CEO
Mulally's compensation was $17.7 million in 2008. If the boss thinks
there's that kind of money floating around, why wonder if the working man
wants a piece.

Or, is this just another example of voodoo economics, you know, Reagan's
"tinkle down" economics?

Yes, the **** poor managment of the Big 3 auto companies is famous. And
they are overpaid. But why should the guy on the assembly line with maybe
a GED putting on lugnuts also be overpaid. As I said bad management also.
As to the lower pay of the Japanese. Is true, but is not a true picture
of the pay. They basically have unlimited expense accounts, which
mitigates a lot of personal taxes.

How do you determine if s/he is overpaid? What the criteria? Seems to me
either union or non-union it's a negotiation that ends up at the market
rate.

--
Nom=de=Plume

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
news
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
...will last until the union or the government figures
out a way to
stop it.

" Ford is also running into resistance from its unionized
work force
as it tries to cut costs further.

Its improving fortunes were the main reason cited by the
United
Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting another round
of labor
concessions that would have roughly matched concessions
that workers
at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the spring."

The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and its vice
president in
charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a statement
that the
carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence of the
contributions
that Ford workers have made.""

http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay


Why should they cave to demands from management? How about
producing decent products that people want to buy?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They are decent products. But if you are paying some low
skilled laborer excess money, then the decent product is
priced out of the market.

Then, when the contract expires the company should seek to
renegotiate. It takes two parties to make a contract. If
there's good management in place, then the union members
will feel better about consessions.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Yup, they should pay the workers what they are worth. A lot
less than they are making. $65 bundled labor cost to install
a lug nut?

Yes. I agree. What, pray tell, are they worth? Who determines
this? You?

--
Nom=de=Plume


The market place. Not the union strong arming the company.
Between the union and **** poor management over the at least 40
years before the crash, there is no way the car companies can
succeed.

Hate to tell you, but a negotiated contract _is_ the market
rate. Looks like Ford is going to do ok and even GM is doing
better. Chrysler I think is on the way out completely.

--
Nom=de=Plume


The artificial market rate. **** Poor management is the reason
for those egregious contracts. American car companies at the
time had 80 or 90% of the world market. Why worry about fiscal
responsibility when you could pass on the cost and produce crappy
cars. Now the real market rate is maybe 25% of the negotiated
rate. My daughter bought a used Hyundai station wagon a couple
years ago. 100k warrantee, good car, 70% the price of a
comparable American car. Buy American? Not when it comes with a
42% premium. For a car with less warrantee.

Please show us the data for the "real" market rate. Yes. ****-poor
management. I agree. Thus, unions came into being.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Look at what the non union successful car companies are paying and
a valid market rate is less than that.

Huh? Non union car companies not paying a valid market rate? How do
you figure that one?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even less,
if the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies
and taxpayers.

So, the non-union car companies pay a valid market rate, which is fine
if you can convince the workers to get rid of the union. It doesn't
happen that often, but I have no problem with it per se.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Basically the non union shops pay the workers enough and will build a
plant somewhere else if they need more capacity if the shop goes union.

Thus they pay the valid market rate. Not sure what you mean by "enough."
Union shops pay a valid market rate also, but with different facts
involved. They will also build a plant somewhere else if they need more
capacity union or no union.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Valid market rate? If the job could financially be outsourced then it
will be. In the 1980's the fully bundled labor costs in a tech factory
in Malaysia was about $3.50 an hour. Why disk drives were assembled
overseas, as the bundled labor cost here was above $35 an hour. Due to
government overspending and excess union contracts we have priced America
out of most manufacturing jobs. Government has added to this. Most
government contracts require "prevailing wages". They mean union wages
and not what the prevailing market rate is.



You're the one who keeps mentioning the valid rate, but you don't want to
name it. We can't compete on labor costs with Malaysia. We can compete on
quality and innovation. I don't think we want to be the McDees of disk
drives.

--
Nom=de=Plume


We used to compete with Malasia and all the 3rd world countries. But due to
overspending by our government and lots of excess regulations we priced
ourselves out of most markets.

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"thunder" wrote in message
t...
On Wed, 04 Nov 2009 21:03:13 -0800, Bill McKee wrote:


They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even less,
if
the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt companies and
taxpayers.

Funny, instead of focusing on bottom up, perhaps more focus should be
placed on top down. Toyota's top 37 executives earned a combined $21.6
million. That bum Wagoner's compensation, alone, was $14.4 million. At
Honda, the top 21 executives earned $11.1 million combined. Ford's CEO
Mulally's compensation was $17.7 million in 2008. If the boss thinks
there's that kind of money floating around, why wonder if the working
man
wants a piece.

Or, is this just another example of voodoo economics, you know, Reagan's
"tinkle down" economics?

Yes, the **** poor managment of the Big 3 auto companies is famous. And
they are overpaid. But why should the guy on the assembly line with
maybe a GED putting on lugnuts also be overpaid. As I said bad
management also. As to the lower pay of the Japanese. Is true, but is
not a true picture of the pay. They basically have unlimited expense
accounts, which mitigates a lot of personal taxes.

How do you determine if s/he is overpaid? What the criteria? Seems to me
either union or non-union it's a negotiation that ends up at the market
rate.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Compare her wage to what you would have to pay anywhere else including
shipping and time value and you have a valid market wage.

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
news
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
...will last until the union or the government figures
out a way to
stop it.

" Ford is also running into resistance from its
unionized work force
as it tries to cut costs further.

Its improving fortunes were the main reason cited by the
United
Automobile Workers on Monday for rejecting another round
of labor
concessions that would have roughly matched concessions
that workers
at Chrysler and General Motors approved in the spring."

The U.A.W.'s president, Ron Gettelfinger, and its vice
president in
charge of the Ford unit, Bob King, said in a statement
that the
carmaker's third-quarter profit was "evidence of the
contributions
that Ford workers have made.""

http://tinyurl.com/ya4pyay


Why should they cave to demands from management? How
about producing decent products that people want to buy?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They are decent products. But if you are paying some low
skilled laborer excess money, then the decent product is
priced out of the market.

Then, when the contract expires the company should seek to
renegotiate. It takes two parties to make a contract. If
there's good management in place, then the union members
will feel better about consessions.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Yup, they should pay the workers what they are worth. A lot
less than they are making. $65 bundled labor cost to
install a lug nut?

Yes. I agree. What, pray tell, are they worth? Who determines
this? You?

--
Nom=de=Plume


The market place. Not the union strong arming the company.
Between the union and **** poor management over the at least
40 years before the crash, there is no way the car companies
can succeed.

Hate to tell you, but a negotiated contract _is_ the market
rate. Looks like Ford is going to do ok and even GM is doing
better. Chrysler I think is on the way out completely.

--
Nom=de=Plume


The artificial market rate. **** Poor management is the reason
for those egregious contracts. American car companies at the
time had 80 or 90% of the world market. Why worry about fiscal
responsibility when you could pass on the cost and produce
crappy cars. Now the real market rate is maybe 25% of the
negotiated rate. My daughter bought a used Hyundai station wagon
a couple years ago. 100k warrantee, good car, 70% the price of a
comparable American car. Buy American? Not when it comes with
a 42% premium. For a car with less warrantee.

Please show us the data for the "real" market rate. Yes.
****-poor management. I agree. Thus, unions came into being.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Look at what the non union successful car companies are paying and
a valid market rate is less than that.

Huh? Non union car companies not paying a valid market rate? How do
you figure that one?

--
Nom=de=Plume


They pay less, have less onerous work rules, and would pay even
less, if the unions were not getting a bunch from the bankrupt
companies and taxpayers.

So, the non-union car companies pay a valid market rate, which is
fine if you can convince the workers to get rid of the union. It
doesn't happen that often, but I have no problem with it per se.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Basically the non union shops pay the workers enough and will build a
plant somewhere else if they need more capacity if the shop goes
union.

Thus they pay the valid market rate. Not sure what you mean by
"enough." Union shops pay a valid market rate also, but with different
facts involved. They will also build a plant somewhere else if they
need more capacity union or no union.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Valid market rate? If the job could financially be outsourced then it
will be. In the 1980's the fully bundled labor costs in a tech factory
in Malaysia was about $3.50 an hour. Why disk drives were assembled
overseas, as the bundled labor cost here was above $35 an hour. Due to
government overspending and excess union contracts we have priced
America out of most manufacturing jobs. Government has added to this.
Most government contracts require "prevailing wages". They mean union
wages and not what the prevailing market rate is.



You're the one who keeps mentioning the valid rate, but you don't want to
name it. We can't compete on labor costs with Malaysia. We can compete on
quality and innovation. I don't think we want to be the McDees of disk
drives.

--
Nom=de=Plume


We used to compete with Malasia and all the 3rd world countries. But due
to overspending by our government and lots of excess regulations we priced
ourselves out of most markets.

I thought it was the unions' fault.

--
Nom=de=Plume