UAW Desparate...
- Thread starter OntarioVanMan
- Start date
greg334
Veteran Expediter
I have a different take on all of this. If it wasn't for the US taxpayer becoming the bank for these three companies, they would not have the power. Because the UAW was first in line for stock and other monies and the citizen had no access at all, I would like to see GM and Chrysler fail and the power of the UAW go with it.
They are going to push more into these companies and cause more problems for those who join. I don't know if the workers want the UAW, they would be smart not to join and maybe create their own.
One very good reason why I won't buy a GM or Chrysler product ever again is because the UAW profited by us, the taxpayer of the US, and we will never see the return of our money as promised by the administration and Bob King. Many don't get that GM cost the country an estimated 23 billion and we will be paying for that for at least two generation.
They are going to push more into these companies and cause more problems for those who join. I don't know if the workers want the UAW, they would be smart not to join and maybe create their own.
One very good reason why I won't buy a GM or Chrysler product ever again is because the UAW profited by us, the taxpayer of the US, and we will never see the return of our money as promised by the administration and Bob King. Many don't get that GM cost the country an estimated 23 billion and we will be paying for that for at least two generation.
Stop the presses.
Maybe 4" but it should be melted by tonight it's been raining.
chefdennis
Veteran Expediter
This ain't your daddy's union anymore..and as the article said, the people in the foreign non union plants have seen job increases while they have watched the union factories lose jobs...
I for one hope the uaw gets their butt's handed to them and the have to fold because they are going broke without taxpayer funds.... then watch all those retired uaw member whine when their benefits cut slashed to minimal....which they reall should be doing now if they really want to safe their butts at all....
I for one hope the uaw gets their butt's handed to them and the have to fold because they are going broke without taxpayer funds.... then watch all those retired uaw member whine when their benefits cut slashed to minimal....which they reall should be doing now if they really want to safe their butts at all....
Unions are anti-freedom. They seek to control the wages of those who are forced to pay homage to them just to be able to work. In a true free society no one would be "forced" to join a union to be able to take a job. Let's hope those workers be pressured now have the courage to stand up to these union thugs. Make no mistake, the unions will resort to intimidation and violence to get their way as they have always done. They are a mini-dictatorship in their own right. They must go.
UncleTed
Not a Member
Honda of America employees vote every six months as to whether or not they want the UAW in. Guess what? They have always voted it down. Evidently the Japanese are fair to American workers or at least fair enough that the masses are happy. The UAW is a dinosaur. When they became part owner in Government Motors and Chrysler they lost all due respect.
cableguymn
Seasoned Expediter
Just remember, when the union folds.. You and I (and JohnQ public) get to pick up the bill for those retirement plans are dumped on the US government.
There is no clean way to fix this problem.
AMonger
Veteran Expediter
And the bigger, more fundamental problem with unions is they use the power of government to force employers to negotiate on the union's terms. It's one thing to insist on being bargained with as a group, but quite another when you use force--goons or government (or do I repeat myself?) -- to force the company to do so and to prevent the company from permanently replacing striking workers (a contradiction in terms, I know).
--
You know the problem with bad cops? They make the other 5% look bad.
The way to handle it is to elect people who are NOT afraid of the unions and will tell them to "STUFF" their pensions. It is a private pension, not a government pension. They can stick it in their ear.
cableguymn
Seasoned Expediter
greg334
Veteran Expediter
We already have, look into the details of the GM bailout. The UAW (Reuther himself to be exact) was told in the 60's to handle the pension because it was a money maker for the union - Hoffa was the one to suggest it several times. Reuther rejected it, placing the burden on the companies.
So with the GM bailout, that was one of the deals made - we get stuck with the pension through different loans and so on and we don't get a thing back.
The best thing we could have done and should have done was let both GM and Chrysler go belly up. Honda and Toyota among others would have stepped in and bought the remains. Throughout the process, GM's management (present and past) with the UAW drove the company saying pretty much the country owed the workers and the people who ran it the safety net for their mistakes.
It's a bit of a double edged sword though. When working for Toyota Canada our raises always happened after one of the Big 3 negotiated a new contract with their workers. Without them to piggyback on I have little confidence that they would have come about.
The pendulum is definitely swinging away from unions/workers, [I was happy to read the quote from the worker who said "We don't need a union to be treated fairly" because that's how it should be] but I can't help wondering: if the unions become nonexistent, will management begin sliding back into the 'Wesayso' model of decision making? I think so [it's human nature, compounded by an oversupply of labor] but if you don't think so, what will prevent it?
What do you mean by "WESAYSO" decision making? Is a company not entitled to run itself as it sees fit?
What do you mean by "WESAYSO" decision making? Is a company not entitled to run itself as it sees fit?
No.
I drove for a company with a WESAYSO attitude. I was told to drive a truck with bad brakes because WESAYSO.
I quit instead. I would not put my life in danger.
Last edited:
What do you mean by "WESAYSO" decision making? Is a company not entitled to run itself as it sees fit?
some companies will cheap out on safety....force workers to work overtime or be fired,,,the old days is what Cheri is referring to...I think.....management can be harsh...
No.
I drove for a company with a WESAYSO attitude. I was told to drive a truck with bad brakes becouse WESAYSO.
I quit instead. I would not put my liike in danger.
yep...drive it or punch your clock OUT....
That's not being harsh. That's being criminal.