$33.77 per hour

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
Yes, nice when you can get it and at least in times past, when my brother in law worked there, even nicer when you could get an "off the line" job like putting steering columns together or whatever. It paid 8 hours every day but when you completed your list for the day you went home. The best took only around 4.5 hours and pretty much all were gone within 6 hours but all still got paid for 8.

So, if you are paid to run 500 miles, but find enough 'shortcuts' that it's only 450, do you refund the money for the 50 miles you didn't drive?

That was a rhetorical question - here's a real one: do you know why the job your BIL did [like most] was governed by a list of expected achievements per hour/shift, rather than workers doing whatever they could?
It's because MANAGEMENT insists upon it. They worried that workers would slack off and not do enough work, if there were no 'quotas', is why. They hired occupational experts to run time/motion studies on each job, and decide how much was an acceptable output per hour, so that's what workers must abide by. Can you blame them for not wanting to increase the output on days when everything goes well, knowing that if they do, the 'quota' will be increased to reflect it, and on the days when things don't go well [bad parts, no parts, machinery problems, etc, etc, etc] they will be required to explain why they didn't do as much. This I know from personal experience, not just hearing it second or third hand. There were many days when I could have done more than required, but if I did, it would become the expected, and on the days I couldn't do it, I'd be grilled on why not.
Management required the quotas, not the workers, so if it bothers you, at least pin the blame on the right party.

Just curious: Who do you suppose is responsible for the provision of the mailing address on the load info for truck drivers, rather than the shipping address, which is usually on another street altogether? Or the placement of signage [or more accurately, the lack thereof] directing trucks to the truck gate? Or signage that is inadequate [ie "Trucks use Dipstick Street Entry" with no clue as to where that is located, or signs that disappear in the dark, or cannot be read from the cab of a truck on the street, etc, etc, etc?] Hint: it's not the workers or the union behind the stupidity of forcing truck drivers to focus their attention on searching for signs [which may or may not exist, or be readable from the street] instead of the traffic on the busy street around them!
And who schedules just one person to load & unload trucks, knowing there will be 10 or 12 arriving first thing in the morning, every morning? Who decided the whole shipping/receiving crew should take lunch/breaks/mandatory meetings at the same time, leaving no one to load/unload trucks?

Yep: that would be management, every time. And for these brilliant decisions, how much are they getting paid? :confused:
 

zorry

Veteran Expediter
Heck, my brother the tanker driver does that well, or close, in Chicago.

Oh yeah, he probably has to pay $58 dollars a month union dues. :(
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
I suppose the auto worker takes it in the shorts because he/she is the ones we have to deal with all the time.....you know visible target...
 

paullud

Veteran Expediter
I suppose the auto worker takes it in the shorts because he/she is the ones we have to deal with all the time.....you know visible target...

I'm wondering if their health insurance will fall under the "Cadillac plans" that will be taxed extra under Obamacare. Like them or not the UAW has been a major force and it seems that they would have fought for top quality health insurance.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
I suppose the auto worker takes it in the shorts because he/she is the ones we have to deal with all the time.....you know visible target...

Which makes as much sense as vilifying the counter clerk when you have to wait for your fast food, or the store doesn't have your brand of smokes - it's not their fault, but the person responsible [who makes a lot more money] is never exposed to your wrath.
And if you never deal with anyone in any union [though you might be surprised: nurses are often union members], then you don't like them because the powers-that-be blame all kinds of problems on them, like bankruptcy and fiscal incompetence.
Ever wonder why management was so 'generous' to workers regarding pensions & bennies? Ever think they had no choice, considering the example they set with their own compensation packages? How do they say they 'can't afford' it with a straight face, when workers know what management has given themselves?
 

jamom123

Expert Expediter
The average auto worker in the U.S. in 2010 earned $33.77 per hour in salary and benefits. That would be $70,241.60 based on 40 hours a week. Home every night. Sleep in your own bed. Eat at your own dinner table. Shower in your own shower. Adequate pay?

Oh, for those of you, and you know who you are, courtesy of Forbes Magazine website.

Now we know why we pay so d**** much for a piece of crap car THANK YOU UAW.

Sent from my SCH-I510 using EO Forums mobile app
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Sorry Leo..I missed your humor?.....why is it wrong to make a good living? why begrudge a fellow American to have a good life for his/her family?...

It isn't wrong and I don't begrudge anyone a living. I wasn't speaking to or about you at that point, just about the omniscience of some here.
 

LDB

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
The point wasn't who set the quota for steering columns. The point was that while the management might have set the quota, most likely it was the union that arranged for the workers to be allowed to go home once it was met while still being on the clock and being paid for their full 8 hours.

Plan A: Employee is required to produce X amount of output at which point employee is free to leave but will be paid 8 hours.

Plan B: Employee is required to produce X amount of output in 8 hours and must remain at their work station for the full 8 hours, minus whatever authorized breaks/lunch.

I wonder which plan would produce overall higher quality output?
 

zorry

Veteran Expediter
Believe it or not, plan B may be poorer quality.
If a worker must stay at his station all day his mind may wonder, he'll goof off, etc.
let the worker build his quantity of columns that pass quality and get on with his life.
You get good parts, he lives a good life.
It's a win-win.
 

Ragman

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
most likely it was the union and management that agreed for the workers to be allowed to go home once it was met while still being on the clock and being paid for their full 8 hours.
Fixed it for ya.
 

jamom123

Expert Expediter
I believe most unions started out for a good cause, but MOST not all have became a disaster. There are still some good unions.

Sent from my SCH-I510 using EO Forums mobile app
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
The point wasn't who set the quota for steering columns. The point was that while the management might have set the quota, most likely it was the union that arranged for the workers to be allowed to go home once it was met while still being on the clock and being paid for their full 8 hours.

Plan A: Employee is required to produce X amount of output at which point employee is free to leave but will be paid 8 hours.

Plan B: Employee is required to produce X amount of output in 8 hours and must remain at their work station for the full 8 hours, minus whatever authorized breaks/lunch.

I wonder which plan would produce overall higher quality output?

Either, neither, or both - it's irrelevant, when every piece produced must pass quality control inspections before being accepted/credited. Some plants do it one way, some the other - if there were a difference in quality, they'd all do it the same way.

It boggles the mind that you believe the union can just "arrange" bennies, without management's cooperation. The union 'gets' absolutely nothing that management doesn't want to 'give'. Period. The union has no magic power: their most effective weapon is a strike threat, and how scary is that? It hurts them as much as, if not more than, management, and it could easily be for nothing, if management decides to replace the strikers - not like that's never happened, right? The union has nothing not given to them by management, and both sides know that - why don't you get it?!
The union makes a very convenient scapegoat for the dysfunction & incompetent decisions management makes, [like creating an environment where the union was necessary to start with], but the true origin of management/labor disputes is that management too often values profits [their bonuses being tied to them, you know] above anything & everything else.
That so many fall in line with that thinking is just scary, IMO.
 

jamom123

Expert Expediter
What about the union leaders they sure don't do it for thank you letters. Just look at the outrageous union dues.

Sent from my SCH-i705 using EO Forums mobile app
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
On a related note, General Motors just got a new CEO. The previous CEO's base salary was $1.7 million. The new CEO's base salary is $1.6 million. The previous CEO is Dan Akerson. The new CEO is Mary Barra.
 

cheri1122

Veteran Expediter
Driver
What about the union leaders they sure don't do it for thank you letters. Just look at the outrageous union dues.

Sent from my SCH-i705 using EO Forums mobile app

The problem with using the term "the union" is that most everyone associates it with either the Teamsters, or UAW, but there are a lot of much smaller and more effective [and not at all corrupt] unions in this country. Like I said, many nurses are union members, too.
The big guys did get too big and too corrupt, no question about it. But that hardly excuses the attitude that 'unions' are evil, or to blame for every problem encountered by management. That's what they'd like you to think, though, and it's scary how well it has worked.
 

jamom123

Expert Expediter
The problem with using the term "the union" is that most everyone associates it with either the Teamsters, or UAW, but there are a lot of much smaller and more effective [and not at all corrupt] unions in this country. Like I said, many nurses are union members, too.
The big guys did get too big and too corrupt, no question about it. But that hardly excuses the attitude that 'unions' are evil, or to blame for every problem encountered by management. That's what they'd like you to think, though, and it's scary how well it has worked.

Like I said earlier there are still good unions around. Not all are corrupt.

Sent from my SCH-i705 using EO Forums mobile app
 

jaminjim

Veteran Expediter
And some of you wonder why your truck, Sprinter, or automobile cost so much. Hint: it ain't the $33.77 per hour.
 

zorry

Veteran Expediter
I love it when a $35,000 a year worker talks about a guy doing similar work for $70,000 per year paying outrageous union dues.
Dues are typically 1.5-2 hours pay per month.
In my 19 years as a union member it never once seemed to be a problem.
Not at 24 when I bought my first new car. A 77 Mercury Grand Marquis.
Not two years later, at 26, buying my first house. A 5 bedroom, two fireplace builders model, on the golf course of a gated community .
Life was good making $50,000 a year as a M-F company driver in the 70's.

Never thought twice about the outrageous union dues.
And the company prospered with a stable workforce.
 
Last edited:
Top