Mitt Romney's view on the bailout..

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

Not ALL of them...and I can't stress that enough. My father belongs to a local union, and they've simply renewed their contracts, besides adjusting for inflation and tweaking certain programs, for the past I-don't-know-how-long. The UAW is possibly the loudest union in exisitance...and the things they do reflect poorly on "unions" in general. Not all unions are the same as the UAW....

The UAW is too big. They have too many areas with too many interests, and a gung-ho leader. I get that. But they sucked it up; cut wages in half, and shifted the entire healthcare burden to themselves among other 'concessions' (I call them reality-checks) in this last contract. That's why I'm not willing to harp on them right now. They HAVE been responsible in terms of helping the big three to get through this...

Sure, there is always good and bad. But the UAW is bad and have proven to be bad to the people that employ their members. I'm quite certain their members love them. But if they cant allow GM to be competitive in the market, they all loose. This is not the time to dig your heels in if you are the union. In my opinion the Union should consider applying the terms of the new contract immediately and not wait until 2010.

I would say the UAW in recent times, has yet to be responsible in terms of helping the big three. If and when GM can make it to the new contract agreement then I will concede they have helped. Time will tell if they revert to their old ways.

[The_Blur]

Wait a minute. We can post politics as long as we quote a politician.

PM being written and sent.

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by gtahvit

In my opinion the Union should consider applying the terms of the new contract immediatly and not wait until 2010.

Me, too. I believe that was brought up at the hearings...and I want to say the three CEOs agreed with Gettlefinger (sp?) when he said such massive shifts (and they are massive) take time to organize, and setup correctly. Supposedly, they are working as fast as possible to set these things up.

Originally Posted by gtahvit

Time will tell if they revert to their old ways.

Yes it will..............

[BowtieGuy]

More to the point, who cares about Mitt Romney's opinion?

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by gtahvit

Sure, there is always good and bad. But the UAW is bad and have proven to be bad to the people that employ their members. I'm quite certain their members love them. But if they cant allow GM to be competitive in the market, they all loose. This is not the time to dig your heels in if you are the union. In my opinion the Union should consider applying the terms of the new contract immediately and not wait until 2010.

I would say the UAW in recent times, has yet to be responsible in terms of helping the big three. If and when GM can make it to the new contract agreement then I will concede they have helped. Time will tell if they revert to their old ways.

ditto

[BigRigMike]

Originally Posted by gtahvit

Sure, there is always good and bad. But the UAW is bad and have proven to be bad to the people that employ their members.

I think it should also be mentioned that a strong company can stand up better to a union. Caterpillar has a union in Peoria (UAW I think) and during a strike CAT was able to bring in temp workers and dragged negotiations out for a long enough time that the contract was more favorable to CAT.

They make it very well known that the factory will not stop with a strike. About 2 years ago during negotiations a strike was threatened and they sent office workers into the factory to learn what to do. My buddy who is an engineer spent a day learning how to do a job from a union employee in case of a strike.

[playhard67]

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

The UAW is too big. They have too many areas with too many interests, and a gung-ho leader. I get that. But they sucked it up; cut wages in half, and shifted the entire healthcare burden to themselves among other 'concessions' (I call them reality-checks) in this last contract. That's why I'm not willing to harp on them right now. They HAVE been responsible in terms of helping the big three to get through this...

If the UAW was really interested in securing THEIR future, they would make the terms effective immediately. Why wait until 2010?

Perhaps the UAW is waiting to see if the the Big 3 can get a $25B loan. If the Big 3 succeeds in getting the loan, they will continue to wait until 2010 to reduce the wages.

......but, if the UAW sees that congress will not cough up the $$$$, then maybe the UAW will suck it in and make it effective immediately.

Who Knows!

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by The_Blur

Wait a minute. We can post politics as long as we quote a politician.

PM being written and sent.

Originally Posted by BowtieGuy

More to the point, who cares about Mitt Romney's opinion?

Knock it off. Please

There is nothing in this article that has any political sway in it that I can tell. This is related to to topic at hand. If I remove the author's name then you'd have no complaint.

If you do find something overly politically charged let me know and I will remove it from the OP.

So, if you would like to post a Dems opinion feel free to do so. As long as the political party rhetoric is removed or very very subtle.

Back on topic.

[BowtieGuy]

My post had nothing to do with party politics. The fact of the matter is that he is simply another politician who must pander as much as possible. He is no better informed than 80% of politicians about any particular topic, ESPECIALLY the automotive world. Why should we care what any politician has to say about this, unless they are supporters.

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by BowtieGuy

My post had nothing to do with party politics. The fact of the matter is that he is simply another politician who must pander as much as possible. He is no better informed than 80% of politicians about any particular topic, ESPECIALLY the automotive world. Why should we care what any politician has to say about this, unless they are supporters.

Fair point. I've got no problem at all with your assessment.

Thanks for clarifying.

[GTAHVIT]

Originally Posted by BigRigMike

I think it should also be mentioned that a strong company can stand up better to a union. Caterpillar has a union in Peoria (UAW I think) and during a strike CAT was able to bring in temp workers and dragged negotiations out for a long enough time that the contract was more favorable to CAT.

They make it very well known that the factory will not stop with a strike. About 2 years ago during negotiations a strike was threatened and they sent office workers into the factory to learn what to do. My buddy who is an engineer spent a day learning how to do a job from a union employee in case of a strike.

I agree completely.

However GM produces it's products on a much larger scale than CAT. and even a day's lost work is 100's of millions in revenue lost. The Union has GM in a tough spot. GM can't replace employees as fast as they'd need to in order to keep production at the appropriate levels.

Traditionally the UAW has tried to find the balance of putting GM over the edge and being just equitable enough to justify the union's existence. My opinion is they pushed GM too hard, too far, for too long. And now they won't budge on principle alone. Doesn't make sense to me.

[Inspector 17]

Originally Posted by gtahvit

I agree completely.

However GM produces it's products on a much larger scale than CAT. and even a day's lost work is 100's of millions in revenue lost. The Union has GM in a tough spot. GM can't replace employees as fast as they'd need to in order to keep production at the appropriate levels.

Traditionally the UAW has tried to find the balance of putting GM over the edge and being just equitable enough to justify the union's existence. My opinion is they pushed GM too hard, too far, for too long. And now they won't budge on principle alone. Doesn't make sense to me.

Exactly. And the best part is that they are putting themselves out of work and they still don't budge. It's like letting your food spoil because you don't want to admit you need a refridgerator. And in the end, they will complain that their food spoiled and now they are starving. Stupid.

[Supermans]

Originally Posted by camaropete

Exactly. And the best part is that they are putting themselves out of work and they still don't budge. It's like letting your food spoil because you don't want to admit you need a refridgerator. And in the end, they will complain that their food spoiled and now they are starving. Stupid.

Legacy costs need to be changed. It is without a doubt very hard to accept a lower salary and decreased benefits however the alternative is "zero", you end up losing your job and having to resort to getting a job with the competitors in your field while the company you put in this stranglehold goes bankrupt and gets reorganized and or bought out by its competitors in the best case scenario. So camaropete, I 100% agree with you on this analogy.

[dayvedayve]

Here is a reason why the UAW might not be so willing to cut their members pay. I work for the Post Office. During the past years the PO has said how they are losing money. During contract negotiations it really was ramped up. Oh how much longer can we go on while losing money.... We agreed to roughly 1.9% raise for each year for the next five years. No big deal. Less than $10 a paycheck. After the contract negotiations were finished...wham Post Master General Potter (top dog of the PO) agrees to give himself, his VP's, ALL area and district managers a whopping 39% retroactive raise. WTF that puts them at over a $1000 dollars more per pay check. Now they are telling us that we need to do more to save the PO from falling apart. I said I'll gladly give my raise back if The Post Master General and his buds give theirs back first.