Ford to move production of Focus/Cmax out of Michigan.

[hangemhigh]

That's not true either. Union membership had dropped 50% in the last 30 years. The economy, for the most part, has remained strong. Research has found that unions help their members, but greatly impact consumers in a negative way. This mentality again falls into the 1950's mentality of things. The global economy is so dramatically different.

Tell me then, where's the fairness in one guy on the line making $30/hr, and the newer making $16/hr, with the new tiered pay plans? How can a grown man feed his family on $16/hr.? This is where the middle-class is being obliterated. I'd say your notion is more along the lines of a 1920's mentality. It's ok if I've tripled my pay, but screw the other folks.....Unions came along to protect the workers from unreasonable hours and working conditions, and also help them achieve a reasonable lifestyle. History 101, Mr Economist.

 

[Stalker]

I don't think there's as much of a quality gap between the companies. It seems everyone stopped caring about the quality gap in about 2010, so my guess is US and Foreign are on equal footing. I don't know that union vs non union plays into that. That's more on the engineering side and supplier side of things. Yes, the guy putting the bolt on can do it half-assed but that's an anomaly than the norm. the computers do pretty much everything now. The cost of the vehicle is a complex formula and cost of labor obviously plays into it. Tariffs, incentives (US automakers far and above give more incentives), and strength of the dollar also play into it. It's not as simple as doing a cost analysis and saying 'whelp, they cost the same, the unions aren't hurting anything'.

 

[AutoRoc]

Tell me then, where's the fairness in one guy on the line making $30/hr, and the newer making $16/hr, with the new tiered pay plans? How can a grown man feed his family on $16/hr.? This is where the middle-class is being obliterated. I'd say your notion is more along the lines of a 1920's mentality. It's ok if I've tripled my pay, but screw the other folks.....Unions came along to protect the workers from unreasonable hours and working conditions, and also help them achieve a reasonable lifestyle. History 101, Mr Economist.

That is some fast food logic right there... dont blame a company because you had kids and want to drive the newest product off the line (with generous company discount i might add).

 

[raroz28]

Non-Union = better quality. Not really. And if non-union companies are building cars for less money, why don't they pass the savings on to the consumer? Those cars cost every bit as much as union-built cars. Regardless of where they are built

these companies invest a fortune in quality control.

 

[Tin]

Tell me then, where's the fairness in one guy on the line making $30/hr, and the newer making $16/hr, with the new tiered pay plans? How can a grown man feed his family on $16/hr.? This is where the middle-class is being obliterated. I'd say your notion is more along the lines of a 1920's mentality. It's ok if I've tripled my pay, but screw the other folks.....Unions came along to protect the workers from unreasonable hours and working conditions, and also help them achieve a reasonable lifestyle. History 101, Mr Economist.

The United States has the lowest union membership out of all OCED countries, at 10.8%. The U.S. ranks below many OCED countries in terms of Human Development Index and World Happiness Index. Being employed by a place whose general membership was composed primarily of union members, I have watched hundreds of people lose well paying jobs to 3rd world countries and have to take a job doing more work for 1/2 their old wages or worse. I have also watched many skilled trades people lose their jobs, only to wind up doing seasonal contract work for much less pay and no benefits. Those skilled trades guys went from making $20+ per hour down to $12 to $15 per hour. Mind you, these are people in industrial trades, your machinists, robotics, tool makers, die setters, etc. These guys used to make great livings, and now they constantly shit themselves because they don't know where their next nickel is coming from once the contract is up.

 

[Stalker]

Tell me then, where's the fairness in one guy on the line making $30/hr, and the newer making $16/hr, with the new tiered pay plans? How can a grown man feed his family on $16/hr.? This is where the middle-class is being obliterated. I'd say your notion is more along the lines of a 1920's mentality. It's ok if I've tripled my pay, but screw the other folks.....Unions came along to protect the workers from unreasonable hours and working conditions, and also help them achieve a reasonable lifestyle. History 101, Mr Economist.

So you're argument in favor of the unions is that the unions have decimated the starting pay? Perhaps you should stick to defending the police who shoot random people. I shouldn't have to explain what my statement about my income means, but then again, you do defend cops who shoot random people. My triple income proves that a free market to negotiate your own worth is far more valuable than a market where your worth is dictated to you. The only people who should be in favor of the latter are people who have no skills or ethics to sell themself on.

Income inequality is much larger than the union. The estimated affect of unions on wage income is 5%. then again, if they are cutting wages in half, I'm not sure why people are defending them. if anything, again, they are holding people back. I can't find any data that shows what non union workers make starting. I highly doubt it's less. Someone please articulate exactly what it is that unions give you over non-union shops.

 

[Tin]

So you're argument in favor of the unions is that the unions have decimated the starting pay?

How did unions decimate starting pay? Unskilled labor pays shit regardless if it's union or not if you eliminate auto workers and their suppliers from the equation. It's the apprentices and journeymen that make the good money. A new hire in unskilled labor, regardless if it's union or not, doesn't earn decent money outside of the auto industry. Go ask anybody that works at Meijer, Kroger, or trims trees for DTE.

 

[Stalker]

the starting pay was part of the 2007/8 deals where they dramatically reduced the starting pay of new hires. The argument you're stating was part of the justification. Just pointing out that for someone advocating unions, he's doing a poor job of it.

 

[mikesfastss]

The United States has the lowest union membership out of all OCED countries, at 10.8%. The U.S. ranks below many OCED countries in terms of Human Development Index and World Happiness Index. Being employed by a place whose general membership was composed primarily of union members, I have watched hundreds of people lose well paying jobs to 3rd world countries and have to take a job doing more work for 1/2 their old wages or worse. I have also watched many skilled trades people lose their jobs, only to wind up doing seasonal contract work for much less pay and no benefits. Those skilled trades guys went from making $20+ per hour down to $12 to $15 per hour. Mind you, these are people in industrial trades, your machinists, robotics, tool makers, die setters, etc. These guys used to make great livings, and now they constantly shit themselves because they don't know where their next nickel is coming from once the contract is up.

these people lost thier jobs because of corporate greed not because the workers made a fair wage.

 

[Tin]

the starting pay was part of the 2007/8 deals where they dramatically reduced the starting pay of new hires. The argument you're stating was part of the justification. Just pointing out that for someone advocating unions, he's doing a poor job of it.

People having money to spend is the elephant in the room. When people have money to buy goods and services outside of necessities, the economy does better. It doesn't take much but to look at the data between 1932 and 2001. Look at America before NAFTA was passed, union membership was up, less people on government assistance, people had more money coming in, people were spending more money, savers were earning more interest, and the economy was doing much better. Between NAFTA, union busting, and the repeal of Glass-Steagall, the middle class has shrunken down a good bit the last 20 years. There's no reason why the richest country in the world should relegate it's largest group of people to food assistance, housing assistance, and other handouts. Corporate welfare is destroying us and making people vote against their own best interests.

 

[hangemhigh]

I was about to say the same thing, but I was trying to find a way to dumb it down for the few that don't get it.....

 

[mikesfastss]

Can a non union person tell me how the union has effected their life in a negative way? Better yet what business is it of yours what i make and what the union does with my dues money? The argument that people should have the option dosent apply now with r.t.w, and not to mention there are plenty of non union jobs that they can apply for.

 

[mikesfastss]

People having money to spend is the elephant in the room. When people have money to buy goods and services outside of necessities, the economy does better. It doesn't take much but to look at the data between 1932 and 2001. Look at America before NAFTA was passed, union membership was up, less people on government assistance, people had more money coming in, people were spending more money, savers were earning more interest, and the economy was doing much better. Between NAFTA, union busting, and the repeal of Glass-Steagall, the middle class has shrunken down a good bit the last 20 years. There's no reason why the richest country in the world should relegate it's largest group of people to food assistance, housing assistance, and other handouts. Corporate welfare is destroying us and making people vote against their own best interests.

its ok if workers need to sign up for aid as long as it dont cut into upper mngmts pockets.

 

[Stalker]

People having money to spend is the elephant in the room. When people have money to buy goods and services outside of necessities, the economy does better. It doesn't take much but to look at the data between 1932 and 2001. Look at America before NAFTA was passed, union membership was up, less people on government assistance, people had more money coming in, people were spending more money, savers were earning more interest, and the economy was doing much better. Between NAFTA, union busting, and the repeal of Glass-Steagall, the middle class has shrunken down a good bit the last 20 years. There's no reason why the richest country in the world should relegate it's largest group of people to food assistance, housing assistance, and other handouts. Corporate welfare is destroying us and making people vote against their own best interests.

Income inequality is a different subject and as already shown, unions have a negative impact on overall consumers. The unions themselves (workers, not the union bosses per say) benefit, but the rest of the economy suffers. Government interjection into business is what is definitely driving inequality. TPP/NAFTA etc... are to blame. but the usefulness and merit of unions is long gone.

 

[Stalker]

its ok if workers need to sign up for aid as long as it dont cut into upper mngmts pockets.

I don't disagree with this sentiment but again, show me what advantage a union worker has over a non union worker. Do they get laid off less? In 2008, the non union workers in the south took less layoffs. Do they make more? Data seems to indicate pay is on par as are benefits. So what advantage dose it give? It means a worker can't be let go if they have seniority. Why is this a benefit? If you're new and driven to work hard and do things better, you're at a disadvantage and creativity as a whole is held back. The work force is artificially controlled to keep wages up. This impacts others for outside the walls of the plants. As for how unions impact people outside of the union? It's not about what you make. most people won't care or if they do it's a moot point. Unions are a monopoly who are explicitly allowed to exist outside of antitrust laws. They are heavily involved in law making and lobbying. It's funny that the people that pro-union people hate the most are the ones running the union.

 

[WhiteHawk]

I think the workers should make good money when the company is doing well. I am just sick of the UAW taking credit when things are going well and saying it wasn't their fault when things are going bad.

The two tier wage is the first sign of a union losing power. The UAW has built itself up way beyond what the labor market will support in terms of wages and benefits. So when contract time comes around, what leverage do they have? When literally nobody in the UAW (working for the big 3) can go get a better job, leverage is lost. The only way to get an increase is to sell the future employees out - which is exactly what happened anad how they now have two tier wages. Nobody took a pay cut - those people at the low wage have all been hired since the contract was negotiated.

And newsflash - life's not fair! This applies to the workplace sometimes too.

-Geoff

 

[Tin]

I think the workers should make good money when the company is doing well. I am just sick of the UAW taking credit when things are going well and saying it wasn't their fault when things are going bad.

I agree. Both UAW and non-UAW workers should share in the blame and glory both, because at the end of the day, both are working as a team towards the same goal. You either sail together or sink together.

 

[scotto]

Personally, I think that unions are out dated in their thinking and protecting workers that deserve to be let go, but NAFTA is the larger problem with jobs moving. If there were larger trade tarriffs with Mexico, the Big 3 wouldn't move all jobs there to save on operating costs.

 

[Tin]

If there were larger trade tarriffs with Mexico, the Big 3 wouldn't move all jobs there to save on operating costs.

Neither would Apple, Dell, Motorola, Cisco, DeWalt, Goodyear, BF Goodrich, Harley Davidson, IBM, Intel, John Deere, and Nike. There is far more than that. We have lost 4 million jobs due to the passage of NAFTA. TPP and TTIP will just add to those lost jobs.

 

[moneypit]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rkgx1C_S6ls