The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

I'm certain everyone is aware of the UAW union strike currently affecting General Motors. Over 70,000 UAW workers are on strike over "differences" regarding retirement benefits. It is reported that the UAW strike may also soon affect Ford Motor Company and Chrysler Corporation.

In my neck of the woods, Dresser-Rand Corporation currently has several hundred local union employees who have been walking the outside of their fence for several weeks now.

My question is: Would you rather belong to a union and have no job at the decision of someone other than yourself, or would you rather be non-union and have a job? Shouldn't UAW employees be more concerned about earning a living until they reach retirement than worrying about retirement benefits for employees who have already retired? And, would anyone be willing to walk off the job and strike for this?

Should we feel sympathy for people who walk off a job when others simply can't get anyone to hire them? Paying Union Dues so your union can cause you to be unemployed. I just don't understand it. If anyone can offer an explanation or an opinion it would be great.

If anyone can offer an explanation or an opinion it would be great.

I certainly can't. There was a time when Unions served a real purpose. Now, they are nothing more than businesses that parasitize workers paychecks, while convincing the workers they are providing them a necessary service.

"Solidarity": I wonder how many UAW execs are living on those $200/week strike wages.

They are actually saying that this is largely about job security... curious... there are a number of GM plants that were already looking pretty fringy in terms of their viability... I'm sure that this brilliant strike helps (stated with all the sarcasm I can muster). Job security... "I want job security... so, what I will do is go on strike, to further destabilize my already struggling company... yeah, that'll help..." Freaking brilliant.

Spread to Ford and Chrysler? Even more brilliant!

Your thoughts are my thoughts. In addition, I would think that walking off a job would cause an employee to lose seniority, benefits, and the retirement package. If a person walks out of any normal job, they are either listed as not re-hireable or they will start over at the bottom.

GSPODS wrote:My question is: Would you rather belong to a union and have no job at the decision of someone other than yourself, or would you rather be non-union and have a job?

Or more precisely, would you rather be union and have your company do everything in its power to outsource, offshore or automate your job to avoid overpaying you or non-union and rely on your ability and skills to have a job?

Or how bout as a customer, would you rather pay for products that are driven to be produced offshore by a union that demanded artificially high wages increasing prices to uncompetitive levels backed by the power of government, or products produced by companies making decisions based on the competitive marketplace rather then an artificial uncompetitive labor force?

As a member of the UAW Local 3520, let me offer this about retirement packages. The reason current employees are willing to strike for retired members is a simple one, so simple you may not understand unless you have been through contract negotiations. We have to make decisions for them as we would want made for us because the day shall come when a new batch of people will hopefully be standing up for our rights. Our contract expired March 31st and for some time it looked like we were going to strike, but luckily things changed at the very end and we are all still happily employed. The problem is not the unions, the problem is companies that care more about profit margins than the people who work for them. We already have one plant open in Mexico and another being built set to open in 2010. They say it they have no intentions of shutting our plant down...bullsh*t. The whole NAFTA situation has killed Detroit and will soon kill us as well. For the record, in the event of a strike, you do not lose seniority. In our case, the 20% of the plant too damn cheap to pay their dues but still get all the same benefits, are locked out during the strike w/o strike pay or unemployment. The $200 a week strike pay is misleading. It is based on number of hours on picket line. You may only be needed a couple of hours and get like $20-$40. So evryone is not getting the full amount.

LOSTHOG wrote:As a member of the UAW Local 3520, let me offer this about retirement packages. The reason current employees are willing to strike for retired members is a simple one, so simple you may not understand unless you have been through contract negotiations. We have to make decisions for them as we would want made for us because the day shall come when a new batch of people will hopefully be standing up for our rights. Our contract expired March 31st and for some time it looked like we were going to strike, but luckily things changed at the very end and we are all still happily employed. The problem is not the unions, the problem is companies that care more about profit margins than the people who work for them. We already have one plant open in Mexico and another being built set to open in 2010. They say it they have no intentions of shutting our plant down...bullsh*t. The whole NAFTA situation has killed Detroit and will soon kill us as well. For the record, in the event of a strike, you do not lose seniority. In our case, the 20% of the plant too damn cheap to pay their dues but still get all the same benefits, are locked out during the strike w/o strike pay or unemployment. The $200 a week strike pay is misleading. It is based on number of hours on picket line. You may only be needed a couple of hours and get like $20-$40. So evryone is not getting the full amount.

So, do you see any conflict in this statement? "the problem is companies that care more about profit margins than the people who work for them."

Companies have to satisfy customers, workers, management, debt holders, stockholders, suppliers, and so on while swallowing enough idiotic government regulations created by inept, unaccountable politicians to choke a cow. all while making a profit or guess what, they will go out of business and you will not have a job or future workers to strike for you.

Union leaders sell labor that it's just about greedy management. Strike, get paid what you're "worth." If you were "worth" what your corrupt UAW management said you wouldn't need government "protection" to strike. I am not pro-management, I am pro-freedom. Government involvement is not freedom.

The UAW has done far more to destroy Michigan's economy then NAFTA. And no, I'm not just blaming the UAW, they are just the worst.

I can tell you this much. The plant I work at opened in 1988 and was non-union until 2004. One day the newly assigned president of our company shows up and says we are having financial problems with our company. Therefore, we are docking your pay $1.50 an hour and your insurance is going up 60-70%. Also our copays and deductibles are doubling. We had no choice but to take it. At the end of the year after he had saved our company from certain destruction, he rewarded himself with a five million bonus. That's when our plant got organized. Our profit from last year was $920 million. This year with the new EPA standards the price of our vehicle went up an average of $15,000 per. Will we still get our 3% raise even with a down year; yes. Did we get a bonus for the $920 million profit year; no. We worked 34 six day weeks to meet the companies demands. That leaves one day to rest and try to spend time with family. So its absurd to think that a company that is union is going to be less profitable. The same downturn we are currently experiencing is happening to our industries non union plants as well as hours. We have the advantage of a higher market share. When we renewed our contract this past spring money was not the issue. It was settled first day of negotiations. The problem was 31 safety issues that were not resolved on the first contract that the company wanted to roll over to the new contract. I agree that the UAW is a bad union to represent a company. I personally was hoping we would have gotten the Teamsters. Now we are stuck with UAW. Even if we vote them out of our plant, we cannot seek other representation. One last thing, our Local cannot call for a strike. It has to be approved by District and then International. To get International UAW approval, something had to be really be screwed up in GM.

LOSTHOG wrote:I can tell you this much. The plant I work at opened in 1988 and was non-union until 2004. One day the newly assigned president of our company shows up and says we are having financial problems with our company. Therefore, we are docking your pay $1.50 an hour and your insurance is going up 60-70%. Also our copays and deductibles are doubling. We had no choice but to take it. At the end of the year after he had saved our company from certain destruction, he rewarded himself with a five million bonus. That's when our plant got organized. Our profit from last year was $920 million. This year with the new EPA standards the price of our vehicle went up an average of $15,000 per. Will we still get our 3% raise even with a down year; yes. Did we get a bonus for the $920 million profit year; no. We worked 34 six day weeks to meet the companies demands. That leaves one day to rest and try to spend time with family. So its absurd to think that a company that is union is going to be less profitable. The same downturn we are currently experiencing is happening to our industries non union plants as well as hours. We have the advantage of a higher market share. When we renewed our contract this past spring money was not the issue. It was settled first day of negotiations. The problem was 31 safety issues that were not resolved on the first contract that the company wanted to roll over to the new contract. I agree that the UAW is a bad union to represent a company. I personally was hoping we would have gotten the Teamsters. Now we are stuck with UAW. Even if we vote them out of our plant, we cannot seek other representation. One last thing, our Local cannot call for a strike. It has to be approved by District and then International. To get International UAW approval, something had to be really be screwed up in GM.

Employees are an asset and companies compete for good ones. Unions are the ones who exploit workers by convincing them that evil companies can do whatever they want and workers have to be protected. It is unions that turn workers into commodities where talent doesn't get you ahead, seniority does. While management and union leadership both drive limos, management must provide a product to a customer base. Union's product is your fear and union dues.

And BTW, managers can't award themselves bonuses. The board does that. A board that if they don't run a company to make a profit will go out of business.

If you are a good worker, freedom is your friend. If you are inept and wait only for the whistle to blow, then Unions and government are. That is until they put your company completely out of business or drive operations offshore.

KazooSkinsFan wrote:
Employees are an asset and companies compete for good ones. Unions are the ones who exploit workers by convincing them that evil companies can do whatever they want and workers have to be protected. It is unions that turn workers into commodities where talent doesn't get you ahead, seniority does. While management and union leadership both drive limos, management must provide a product to a customer base. Union's product is your fear and union dues.

And BTW, managers can't award themselves bonuses. The board does that. A board that if they don't run a company to make a profit will go out of business.

If you are a good worker, freedom is your friend. If you are inept and wait only for the whistle to blow, then Unions and government are. That is until they put your company completely out of business or drive operations offshore.

Obviously you are in management because anyone who gets paid by the hour can't possibly be as naive as you are. First of all, it wasn't a manager, it was the president of the company who got the 5 million dollar bonus and yes the whole friggin executive board also got nearly a million each. If you mean talent will get you ahead as in talent at kissing ass, you are correct. In the real world seniority rules. For the higher profile jobs, the employee still has to take a test, go through and interview process, and then is voted in by a board of plant supervisors and union reps. Now for your last statement about if you are a good worker freedom is your friend, if you suck the union is. Again, you know nothing of which you speak. I worked with this company 9 years before our plant was union and now another 4 since it became organized. Productivity is up, profit is up, and morale is up. It's nice to know that I can go to work and not worry if my supervisor had a fight with his wife. It's nice to know that when a job is posted that I won't be passed over because I didn't go to the same high school as the plant manager. By your comments you are in management and anti union. My guess is you are one of the bosses that the union is there to protect us from. Thank god for the UAW

LOSTHOG wrote:Obviously you are in management because anyone who gets paid by the hour can't possibly be as naive as you are. First of all, it wasn't a manager, it was the president of the company who got the 5 million dollar bonus and yes the whole friggin executive board also got nearly a million each. If you mean talent will get you ahead as in talent at kissing ass, you are correct. In the real world seniority rules. For the higher profile jobs, the employee still has to take a test, go through and interview process, and then is voted in by a board of plant supervisors and union reps. Now for your last statement about if you are a good worker freedom is your friend, if you suck the union is. Again, you know nothing of which you speak. I worked with this company 9 years before our plant was union and now another 4 since it became organized. Productivity is up, profit is up, and morale is up. It's nice to know that I can go to work and not worry if my supervisor had a fight with his wife. It's nice to know that when a job is posted that I won't be passed over because I didn't go to the same high school as the plant manager. By your comments you are in management and anti union. My guess is you are one of the bosses that the union is there to protect us from. Thank god for the UAW

Interesting, so to be pro-freedom is to be in management, so management is pro-freedom? That is quite a complement you pay management. I am for the free market. You should be able to put the screws to management as long as you do it with your market power and not the weight of government as the UAW does. They should be able to put the screws to you as well again as long as it's with their market power and not the weight of government. And government hoses us all when they bail out companies. Those are the uncompetitive companies that should have died.

So, I am not saying YOUR company is well run or was, I have no idea. But what it comes down to is whether you believe quality workers matter. If yes:

- Well run companies will recognize that and pay and treat quality employees well.

- Poorly run companies won't and will go out of business because they can't compete with companies that do.

- The companies that survive will offer you better jobs at higher wages for that reason.

You can rationalize support of the limousine lizards running the UAW who delude you into acting in their interest all you want. If you believe in yourself and your abilities, free markets will serve you best.

If you do not believe in yourself and your abilities, the limousine lizards will serve you best in the short run, but in the long run free markets will in fact serve you best as your job will be gone eventually anyway. The only constant is change. You only thrive by embracing change. And if you dont' there will be a bunch of liars to take advantage of you.

In terms of how companies operate, your post is just wrong.

I am very much anti-union.

I worked for a company with union. Three guys approached me and put me on the spot to join. I was young and wasn’t completely sure about unions.

They threw all kinds of crap at me to get me to join. The said they stand up for us, and even will help me get another job if it ever came down to it.

Let me explain the job a little here. This is a company that makes coaxial cable. Which as we all know was once a big business that now with digital cable and High def, that business is much smaller than it was.

My uncle had worked there for 30 some years. They once had as many as 3000 workers in our plant.

Now, here is what I did. I stood beside a machine that put the cable on a reel. Once the counter was up to like 1000ft, I then stopped the machine. Cut the cable, changed out the reel and started over. No education needed. At the time minimum wage was $5.75. I was doing what seemed to be a $6 or $7 hr job but getting paid $25 hr to do it. Also, full free health insurance for me, my wife and kids. WoW, I was blown away and living the high life.

At the time I was hired they had around 2000 workers. As business dropped the company wanted to cut pay and cut benefits.

Long story short, now even my uncle who been there 30 years didn't have enough seniority to keep his job. When I was there they were building a plant in Mexico, and they said It was a very small plant and would not effect us. They said this was to keep up with demand, not to close the plant.

Right now the plant has less than 300 workers.

I have to wonder how much the Mexican workers get paid. Well, at least they have a job now right? I live southern Virginia, and we have one of the worst unemployment rates in the nation.

Most of us non-union members agree, we would rather have taken the pay cuts, and kept the job.

I also wonder how many of those 1500 workers would still have a job vs still being unemployed now. And how much profit the company would have now, if we all got paid like $7 hr, and less benefits. Take that savings times 2000 workers. Dang. I mean there is still a place for coaxial cable, just smaller demands, and the cable is cheaper.

I paid my union dues for nothing; the union didn't do anything for us. And the layoffs came so quickly they didn't strike. As if it would have made a difference.

Let me tell you, I see the purpose of the union, but the union can be just as greedy as the company owners. And let me tell you, I've had many jobs. Some union, and non-union, and some non-union with greedy owners and some non-union with not so greedy owners.

The for the companys with greedy owners the union can help. But who's to stop the union when the union itself gets greedy??? And the followers of the union are blind followers. They have no idea how much their demands will hurt the company. They don’t’ know the big picture.

If the owners are true good businessmen they do see the need to take care of employees and those companies tend to last.

BnGhog wrote:I am very much anti-union.

I worked for a company with union. Three guys approached me and put me on the spot to join. I was young and wasn’t completely sure about unions.

They threw all kinds of crap at me to get me to join. The said they stand up for us, and even will help me get another job if it ever came down to it.

Let me explain the job a little here. This is a company that makes coaxial cable. Which as we all know was once a big business that now with digital cable and High def, that business is much smaller than it was.

My uncle had worked there for 30 some years. They once had as many as 3000 workers in our plant.

Now, here is what I did. I stood beside a machine that put the cable on a reel. Once the counter was up to like 1000ft, I then stopped the machine. Cut the cable, changed out the reel and started over. No education needed. At the time minimum wage was $5.75. I was doing what seemed to be a $6 or $7 hr job but getting paid $25 hr to do it. Also, full free health insurance for me, my wife and kids. WoW, I was blown away and living the high life.

At the time I was hired they had around 2000 workers. As business dropped the company wanted to cut pay and cut benefits.

Long story short, now even my uncle who been there 30 years didn't have enough seniority to keep his job. When I was there they were building a plant in Mexico, and they said It was a very small plant and would not effect us. They said this was to keep up with demand, not to close the plant.

Right now the plant has less than 300 workers.

I have to wonder how much the Mexican workers get paid. Well, at least they have a job now right? I live southern Virginia, and we have one of the worst unemployment rates in the nation.

Most of us non-union members agree, we would rather have taken the pay cuts, and kept the job.

I also wonder how many of those 1500 workers would still have a job vs still being unemployed now. And how much profit the company would have now, if we all got paid like $7 hr, and less benefits. Take that savings times 2000 workers. Dang. I mean there is still a place for coaxial cable, just smaller demands, and the cable is cheaper.

I paid my union dues for nothing; the union didn't do anything for us. And the layoffs came so quickly they didn't strike. As if it would have made a difference.

Let me tell you, I see the purpose of the union, but the union can be just as greedy as the company owners. And let me tell you, I've had many jobs. Some union, and non-union, and some non-union with greedy owners and some non-union with not so greedy owners.

The for the companys with greedy owners the union can help. But who's to stop the union when the union itself gets greedy??? And the followers of the union are blind followers. They have no idea how much their demands will hurt the company. They don’t’ know the big picture.

If the owners are true good businessmen they do see the need to take care of employees and those companies tend to last.

You certainly get it. Government tying the hands of management makes them move all feasible operations overseas. Where are the jobs in that?

Do you know the only ships you can take between US cities without a foreign stop are in Hawaii? It's because if a ship travels from US port to US port government forces unionization. So, no jobs, they all fly foreign flags and go directly from US ports to foreign ports.

Of course the clueless socialist schleps will point to how greedy management just wants more profit. The fiends.

Well, what has happened to steel, car makers, electronics makers in the US? They are withering or dying. US companies do not just make more evil money for shareholders, they go under.

Either way the result is the same. Government interference in the free markets costs jobs in the US. As you say you'd rather have kept the job and taken a pay cut. Unfortunately that's not just up to you and the company you work for. It's up to your union, who may sell you out because they don't want other management of other companies to think they will deal. And all has to be agreed to under the onus of government rules.

I have mixed feelings on unions, but Kazoo, you are way off base equating government interference with unionization. Goverment has always sided with corporations over labor.

JSPB22 wrote:I have mixed feelings on unions, but Kazoo, you are way off base equating government interference with unionization. Goverment has always sided with corporations over labor.

Um....OK. There is a point where reality is so ignored in posting blind partisan ideology there is no point. This post can't even see that line in the rear view mirror.