Quote:
Originally Posted by Muscle Master
But why does UAW exist at all, can't they make the cars in america only, or is that to costly
|
yes, it is too expensive and a logistical nightmare as well. And some countries have laws that say if you sell more than XXXXX units, you have to build some cars there as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Muscle Master
^ To gator ...Seriously If they really care about the survival and success of GM/Chrysler, they would of took the cut no questions asked.... Iread over half of them making $70 dollars an hour with only H.S. diplomas living in $400,000 homes, they make me sick ....
|
How is it that so few people actually listen to this:
ASSEMBLY LINE WORKERS DO NOT MAKE $70 AN HOUR
that number is the total labour cost which includes hourly pay, benefits, and retiree pension and benefits. Line workers make between $14 and $28 +benefits -union fees. Benefits and pension contributions add $25/hr or so. Retirees add roughly $20/hr to the cost of every hourly employee. So the solution is painfully obvious: get rid of the health care plan and fall back onto the awsome universal health care system that . . . oh wait, nevermind. And tell all the retirees that after putting in 35 years of work into a company, they aren't going to be getting their pension cheques. And every hourly worker should get $10/hr. That would save GM billions every month. Then again, nobody could afford to buy a new car off that. Oh well. Thats what they get for working for a company who agreed to share its sucess with its workers 70 years ago.
The basics for the agreements with the UAW are older than most of the members here, including myself. The UAW itself is older than nearly everyone in the auto industry, certainly older than any of their careers. And the reality is, it will be very difficult to make any quick cost reductions. The VEBA agreement was signed in 2007 and comes into effect in 2010.
On fair trade vs free trade, f*** free trade. Mirror the trade policies of trade partners. If they leave their market open, open up to them. But if they make it difficult, find someone more co-operative. This is the macro economics that government should be working on, not asking "who wants a bailout . . . ". And do something to get consumers spending, because consumers spending = corporate revenue = a stop to the hemorrhaging of job loss. If someone is worried about losing their job, they won't be buying a new car.
I don't even know if all that makes sense anymore. I've re-written it so many times in the last half hour I can't think straight.