|
Ford's success...
"Stevie" wrote in message
... nom=de=plume wrote: "Bill wrote in message m... wrote in message ... "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. -- 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? It should be the open market. Not back-room negotiating by union thugs who suck money from their members. -S Hate to tell you, but it _is_ the open market. See representative democracy vs. management thugs. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Ford's success...
"Stevie" wrote in message
... Jim wrote: nom=de=plume wrote: "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. 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. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Ford's success...
"Stevie" wrote in message
... nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... On Nov 3, 5:40 pm, John wrote: On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:59:08 -0800, "nom=de=plume" wrote: 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? lol lol Ford is producing America's best vehicles. Their corporate leadership has put them into a strong position, not having to take any bailout money. Wonderful! Funny how the union thugs always blame a struggling company on the management, but in this case, the union wants to take credit for management's success. Freakin' union leeches. I thought Ford wasn't struggling? Does the management team build the cars or is that done by the workers? Union management is the most corrupt entity in big business... right behind Chicago politics. It has been in the past. Don't know if union management is now. Let's assume it is. Does that excuse management greed? What about the greed of the union organizers who rely on the dues of hard working people for their income? Do you really think they are in it for the cause? -S I'm unsure. Probably some are for the cause, some are for the money. That's really beside the point. It's still a negotiation that has to take place. It doesn't *have* to take place. Trust me. I've talked to enough union employees to know that the hard working hate it and the slackers love it. -S In today's reality, it does. Talking to some union folk does not a non-negotiation (umm) not make. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Ford's success...
"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. |
Ford's success...
"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 |
Ford's success...
"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. |
Ford's success...
"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 |
Ford's success...
"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. |
Ford's success...
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? |
Ford's success...
Bill McKee wrote:
"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. The management is wising up and learning to deal with the ****-poor unions. |
Ford's success...
Bill McKee wrote:
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" 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. |
Ford's success...
In article ,
says... Bill McKee wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" 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. |
Ford's success...
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." |
Ford's success...
|
Ford's success...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m... "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 |
Ford's success...
"BAR" wrote in message
. .. In article , says... Bill McKee wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" 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. I think that Jim is a jerk. No, a rude jerk. I really don't care what either of you think. If you don't like what I have to say, don't read my posts. That seems to be impossible for either of you. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Ford's success...
On 11/5/09 1:10 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message . .. In inet, says... 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? If the working man has the ability to climb the coproate ladder and earn the fat pay check, good for him. Not everyone has the ability. Jealousy of what someone else has achieved in life is no way to live the rest of yours. Yes, we all dream of being in the NBA also, but the reality is that very few people will be pro athletes and very few will be millionaires. What's your excuse? Bertie Robbins (BAR) barely got out of high school, disdains formal education, joined the marines, and was so competent at that he never not an overseas posting. Now he works at a low level management position at a Washington, D.C., tech company. He thinks he is a rugged individualist. |
Ford's success...
On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 08:48:24 -0500, BAR wrote:
In article , says... Bill McKee wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" 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. The politeness is rapidly disappearing. She's become a regular HK wannabee. -- Loogy says: Conservative = Good Liberal = Bad I agree. John H |
Ford's success...
"John H." wrote in message
... On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 08:48:24 -0500, BAR wrote: In article , says... Bill McKee wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message ... "nom=de=plume" 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. The politeness is rapidly disappearing. She's become a regular HK wannabee. Well, I hope you've plonked me by now. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Ford's success...
On 11/5/09 5:18 PM, nom=de=plume wrote:
"John wrote in message ... On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 08:48:24 -0500, 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. The politeness is rapidly disappearing. She's become a regular HK wannabee. Well, I hope you've plonked me by now. The tribe of Right Wing Lost Boys here cannot tolerate dissent. They're probably discussing you on their secret site. |
Ford's success...
H the K wrote:
On 11/5/09 5:18 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: "John wrote in message ... On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 08:48:24 -0500, 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. The politeness is rapidly disappearing. She's become a regular HK wannabee. Well, I hope you've plonked me by now. The tribe of Right Wing Lost Boys here cannot tolerate dissent. They're probably discussing you on their secret site. I don't think I've seen mention of you or la Plum over there. Sorry to disappoint. Does Karen know you have this thing going on here? She probably wouldn't give a **** anyway. |
Ford's success...
"H the K" wrote in message
m... On 11/5/09 5:18 PM, nom=de=plume wrote: "John wrote in message ... On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 08:48:24 -0500, 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. The politeness is rapidly disappearing. She's become a regular HK wannabee. Well, I hope you've plonked me by now. The tribe of Right Wing Lost Boys here cannot tolerate dissent. They're probably discussing you on their secret site. Is that at Cheney's undisclosed location? I heard it was a 7/11 outside of Cheyenne. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Ford's success...
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 |
Ford's success...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"Bill wrote in message 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. Good employees don't work for businesses and people they don't like. They aren't forced to take a particular job. The unions serve to place those who can't think for themselves. -S |
Ford's success...
nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message ... nom=de=plume wrote: "Bill wrote in message m... wrote in message ... "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. -- 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? It should be the open market. Not back-room negotiating by union thugs who suck money from their members. -S Hate to tell you, but it _is_ the open market. See representative democracy vs. management thugs. "Management" doesn't force an employee to work for them. That seems to be a common thread that is easily ignored. There are other places to work. They could start their own business. A guy at GM isn't required to stay there until retirement. -S |
Ford's success...
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 |
Ford's success...
"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 Look up the word union. The workers empower the union leadership to negotiate on their behalf. That's how it works in a union shop. If you ever worked in a union, you'd know this. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Ford's success...
"Stevie" wrote in message
... nom=de=plume wrote: "Bill wrote in message 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. Good employees don't work for businesses and people they don't like. They aren't forced to take a particular job. The unions serve to place those who can't think for themselves. -S Really? Always? When you're trying to feed your family, you take what you can get. Unions historically serve the workers by negotiating in their best interest. Usually, that's how it works. Sometimes union bosses are corrupt. Sometimes management is reasonable. Sometimes not. -- Nom=de=Plume |
Ford's success...
"Stevie" wrote in message
... nom=de=plume wrote: wrote in message ... nom=de=plume wrote: "Bill wrote in message m... wrote in message ... "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. -- 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? It should be the open market. Not back-room negotiating by union thugs who suck money from their members. -S Hate to tell you, but it _is_ the open market. See representative democracy vs. management thugs. "Management" doesn't force an employee to work for them. That seems to be a common thread that is easily ignored. There are other places to work. They could start their own business. A guy at GM isn't required to stay there until retirement. -S Correct. This is true in a union and non-union company. If there are other places to work, in the current economy, they don't last for very long. A guy at GM is certainly not required to stay until retirement. Were you trying to make a point? If so, what? -- Nom=de=Plume |
Ford's success...
"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 |
Ford's success...
"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. |
Ford's success...
"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". |
Ford's success...
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Bill McKee" wrote in message m... "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. |
Ford's success...
"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. |
Ford's success...
"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 ... "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 |
Ford's success...
"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 |
Ford's success...
"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 ... "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. |
Ford's success...
"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. |
Ford's success...
"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 ... "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 |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:13 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com