Detroit CEOs fly private jets to Capitol Hill beg-fest

[Thomas Rogers]

Caymen asks:

I see nothing wrong with that. Why/how could you negotiate yourself a better deal than the Union could negotiate. An even better question is why would the company WANT to pay you more than they could pay someone else?

What is wrong with that? Strong-arming is not the answer. Collusion is not the answer.



As a non-union individual I'm likely never to be able to negotiate higher pay than my union counterparts. For one simple reason; because even if I am worth more, the union reps will cry "unfair wages" and then force equality.



Why would a company want to pay someone more than someone else? Because the person is WORTH more.



Pay people what they are worth...not what you are FORCED to pay them in some strong-arm manner.



That's what I say.



But then, I'm confident in my value.



It seems to me that its the mediocre that need to unite to force employers to pay more for their services. The above-average and the stellar don't want such collusion. It takes away from their ability to negotiate and receive the higher pay that they are worth.



TJR

 

[Tom Schindler]

Pay people what they are worth...not what you are FORCED to pay them in some strong-arm manner.

No strong arming is involves. We agree with what is a fair wage and you pay us.



Nothing wrong with that. Many industries operate in the same manner. A guy the does plumbing will get paid $15.00/hr. that is what we pay.



How is that different?



I am sure you can come up with some lame ass explination. Rest assured, you will sould like an idiot.





Tom

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Caymen,



C'mon, you are a smart man.



The strong-arming takes place because for many unionized companies non-union employees simply cannot be hired, or if they are, as you say, they have to be paid the union wage. Therefore, when it comes to contract negotiations the ability to strike is a huge strong-arm.



It is the "collective" that creates the strong arm. I don't understand how you don't get that.



I'm no idiot. Trust me. If you don't see unions as a "strong arm", then once again, you simply aren't being objective.



If unions and the collective bargaining that they create are not some "strong arm", and if unions are so valuable to companies as you say, then why don't unions simply make their membership optional and allow all members to negotiate their own wages. Then unions simply becomes a "tradesman affiliation". Like a "society of auto workers", with membership optional, and having benefits like training seminars, and trading information. Why NOT just do that?



Unions and bad executives have killed the American auto industry.



Free market is the way to go.



TJR

 

[Tom Schindler]

Therefore, when it comes to contract negotiations the ability to strike is a huge strong-arm.

Could everyone quiting their job at one time be a strong arm tactic? How about you not being happy with your job so you quit. Is that a strong arm tactic?



I am sure you will say no, but you know the right answer is yes.

It is the "collective" that creates the strong arm. I don't understand how you don't get that.

The same could be said about you. How can you think that way?

I'm no idiot. Trust me. If you don't see unions as a "strong arm", then once again, you simply aren't being objective.

If you see unions as being a strong arm, you are closed minded.

If unions and the collective bargaining that they create are not some "strong arm", and if unions are so valuable to companies as you say, then why don't unions simply make their membership optional and allow all members to negotiate their own wages.

Because that is not how it works.

Unions and bad executives have killed the American auto industry.

Bad executives are the root of the cause. They make decisions that fit them at all times and collect the spoils when times are bad. We are supposed to care about the company we work fo so we can help these scumbag CEO's get a bigger bonus.

Free market is the way to go.

Tell me all about Ireland.





Tom

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Caymen, you still don't seem to get it. It's the COLLECTIVE that makes the arm strong, and you know that very well, which is why all pro-union folks tout the value of the "brotherhood", and rally against the individual, whether it be a scab, or a non-union member, or a CEO.





How can I think that it is the collective that creates the strong-arm?



Well consider this example:



Say I want to build a home and I want to do the work mostly myself, but due to township regulations and required permits I need to have a licensed plumber, electrician and HVAC person work on the home to do much of the "permit work". The township that I am in is trying to assure full-employement, so it further requires that all trade-professionals that perform permit work must be full-time residents of the township. On the surface that sounds like a nice thing.



However, I soon find that the plumbers, electricians and the HVAC technicians living in my township have all banded together and set their rates 50% higher than their competitors working outside the township.



Result:

So, for me, as the consumer, due really to not fault of my own, I have to pay more for a good (or service) because there is a closed labor pool that is allowed to set their own prices. I have been strong-armed. I would have no choice but to pay the higher-than-market rates.



Analogy:

Now take the example above and change the township to any "unionized company", and change the resident tradesmen to "union members", and the example is exactly like most unions today. Less competition, closed labor pool, colluding together to force their wage.







P.S. Regarding "bad executives being the root cause" of the current auto industry problems, I I would agree that they are ultimately to blame (the buck stops there). However, when executives really can't negotiate pensions and wages on the open market, and they are forced to keep employees they don't need, etc, then there is enough blame to go around.



Yes, there have been CEO excesses, but even the most greedy, fat-cat CEOs abuses are typically a very minute portion of the overall burden that union members have created with inflated wages and pensions...inflated versus what they would have been on the open market.



TJR

 

[Tom Schindler]

TJR,



You don't get it. I did not think you would.



It goes both ways. I can be just as pig headed as you are.





Tom

 

[Thomas Rogers]

Caymen,



I'm not pig-headed.



Show me how unions in the past 20 years have created MORE VALUE for the companies they serve THAN they have BURDEN, and if its genuine, I'll be the first to agree to the value of unions. For the life of me, however, I can't see that value. I see value to the members, but then again, I see value to members of most colluding organizations.





Also, consider this:



Why does it seem that most of the blatant, fat-cat CEO abuses and golden parachute deals are done by the CEOs of unionized companies (which is why you hate CEOs so much)?



Could it be because they know the companies are ultimately going to fail and fall under their own weight and they just want to get "theirs" while they can.





Most people here, and in the "rest of the world" keep saying the same thing. The only real way to SAVE the big 3 is to dump the UAW *and* the executives that have mismanaged things for so long.



TJR

 

[Tom Schindler]

Why does it seem that most of the blatant, fat-cat CEO abuses and golden parachute deals are done by the CEOs of unionized companies (which is why you hate CEOs so much)?

I have three words for you.



1. Tyco

2. Enron

3. Worldcom

Most people here, and in the "rest of the world" keep saying the same thing. The only real way to SAVE the big 3 is to dump the UAW *and* the executives that have mismanaged things for so long.

Why do we think that the media is being fair and balanced with regards to Unions & Business and unbalanced with politics?





Tom

 

[Les]

Why do we think that the media is being fair and balanced with regards to Unions & Business and unbalanced with politics?

Myth vs. Facts



Myth - all politicians follow through on their promises.



Fact - American car manufacturers pay almost double in hourly wages than foreign car manufacturers.

 

[Tom Schindler]

American car manufacturers pay almost double in hourly wages than foreign car manufacturers.

Prove it. I want new data and not data from 3 years ago. A new contract was negotiated that brought the wages in line with the Japanese. Celebrations were made because GM spoke up and said "We can now compete with the Japanese".



It hasn't happened. Why? Because the CEO's would not make the sacrifices they needed to make.





Tom

 

[Les]

Tom, you can bury your head in the sand all you want, but it cost considerably more per hour to build an American car than it does a foreign car.



The bottom line is this, if management doesn't come up with an effective plan, and if the UAW refuses to compromise on post employment healtcare and other issues, many jobs will be lost and the current American car manufacturer will cease to exist in its current form, or maybe any form.

 

[gary s]

guy's give up. don't waste your time,



tom doesn't get it. his world is alot different then most

it's been proven time and time again

 

[Martin]

There seems to be several threads on those Big 3 guys........I say F' em...let them go under. If we bail them out, I'm sure there will be many more who will want the same treatment and we'll just let the gov own everything in the country at our expense.

 

[Thomas Rogers]

DesertFox,



Agreed. Let them go under. Most of the UAW folks working for them are in for a rude awakening. They will find that the gravy train is over and that the new business world judges them on their individual hard work and value they bring to the table and not on their ability to control the situation and extort their employer.



TJR

 

[Tom Schindler]

, but it cost considerably more per hour to build an American car than it does a foreign car.

I have said it once before, I will say it again. PROVE IT!



The Last UAW contract was to help the Big 3. They have not done so. Was it because the CEO's wanted thier cake nd to eat it too?



The contract evened out the playing field.



What is wrong.



Prove what you are saying.





Tom

 

[Bud Williams]

The pilot's union caused Eastern Airlines to fold....DONE.

Frank Lorenzo was a crooked CEO....DONE

BOTH SIDES ARE RIGHT TO A CERTAIN DEGREE...DONE

BOTH SIDES ARE GREEDY...DONE



LET THE BIG 3 FILE BANKRUPTCY....DONE



CAYMEN IF YOU WERE THE CEO OF FORD MOTOR WOULD YOU DEMAND

THE MOST MONEY AS POSSIBLE?....DONE



YOU TAKE CARE OF #1...

Unless you are the CEO of Ben and Jerrys' Ice Cream...

of course they are socialists hippies:lol:

 

[Les]

Tom, you can bury your head in the sand all you want, but it cost considerably more per hour to build an American car than it does a foreign car.

PROVE ME WRONG !!!

 

[Tom Schindler]

CAYMEN IF YOU WERE THE CEO OF FORD MOTOR WOULD YOU DEMAND

THE MOST MONEY AS POSSIBLE?....DONE

As a foreman, I believe I should lead by example. If I am not willing to make sacrifices, I can not expect my subordinates to make them....DONE



Do I want to save the company or am I out for myself? If I am out for myself, should I be able to bash union workers that are just like me?

PROVE ME WRONG !!!

I am not the one that made the empty and incorrect statement. Prove yourself right...didn't think so.





Tom

 

[Les]

I am not the one that made the empty and incorrect statement. Prove yourself right...didn't think so.

You disagree with the obvious, stated and known fact that it cost more per hour to build an American car?

 

[Tom Schindler]

You disagree with the obvious, stated and known fact that it cost more per hour to build an American car?

I refuse to argue with a troll.



Have a nice life.





Tom