Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

lets see if biden backs these union demanda,UAW

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by buckeyegator, Sep 14, 2023.

  1. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    27,568
    1,530
    1,968
    Apr 19, 2007
    This is not really true, first of all, American unions and big business did act as partners during the height of the Cold War, thats why the unions purged their most militant members and communist sympathizers and got their reputation for corruption and passivity, there was a sort of labor peace. And I dont think that's true across Europe either, except in highly socially democratic countries like Germany where unions actually have stakes on the board. But they got into that position from being powerful enough to make companies concede that.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    28,495
    11,241
    3,443
    Aug 26, 2008
    That might be their job, but the goal is to maximize union revenue and cast the employer as the enemy by defending even the most egregious employees. There is a reason that only gubmnt and too big to fail industries are unionized, the inefficiency fostered by unions and the related cost is a tax on the country rather than investment. There is a better way.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  3. wgbgator

    wgbgator Premium Member

    27,568
    1,530
    1,968
    Apr 19, 2007
    Straight out of a mandatory management propaganda session
     
  4. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer VIP Member

    14,618
    5,178
    3,213
    Oct 30, 2017
    That's not my experience with our union. And yes, they have duty to defend the most egregious employees. That's inherent in guaranteeing people rights.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. buckeyegator

    buckeyegator Premium Member

    72,974
    1,887
    3,383
    Oct 29, 2007
    gainesville, florida
    calling sally field, sally field please.....
     
  6. G8trGr8t

    G8trGr8t Premium Member

    28,495
    11,241
    3,443
    Aug 26, 2008
    nope, years of experience of having to deal with it on union jobs up north. I wasn't allowed to drive my truck across a field to my dozer. I qualified for a union exemption as a special skill (shaping golf courses) but not as a truck driver because that wasn't a specialty skill in need so the owner had to pay for a full time person to drive me out to the dozer daily and bring me back for lunch and back in at the end of the day or for bathroom breaks when I didn't want to crap int he woods. Jus tone of so many stupid rules that created requirement for more people and kept people with no understanding of a work ethic employed. I can't imagine the banality of the contracts inside production plants and the amount of inherent waste of resources that could be better spent training employees and innovating manufacturing solutions to employee challenges. Nope, keep drop dead fred employed leaning on the broom
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  7. chemgator

    chemgator GC Hall of Fame

    12,269
    1,502
    1,318
    Apr 3, 2007
    A person has a right to a fair hearing, not a free pass. If they did something they should be fired for, let them be fired.

    The UAW has been a disaster for the U.S. Big Three automakers in the last 5-6 decades. There is absolutely no question about that. The U.S. makes some of the lowest quality cars in the world (for companies that can sell in the U.S.), outside of the British and Italians, and eastern Europeans. There are some exceptions of individual vehicles doing well, but they are few and far between. Ford, GM, and Chrysler simply cannot compete with Toyota, Honda, BMW and others (including Kia and Hyundai now), and the unions are a big part of the reason for that. Unreliable employees make unreliable cars. And the UAW helps make sure they are unreliable. They defend the indefensible. This makes sure that the automaker keeps the maximum number of employees on staff, which maximizes the union's take. Things are slightly better since the economic collapse in 2008 and the bailout afterwards (especially for GM, but not so much for Ford). There is no reason that U.S. automakers should be mediocre at producing quality cars. Some of them have been making cars for around 120 years. They should have gotten good at it by now.

    The typical union response to all this is that the decision-making of management is equally if not more responsible for the quality and profitability problems of the automaker. That is an excuse. The decision-making of management is often hamstrung by the unions, or is heavily influenced by the unions. "Will the union strike if we do this?" "Are we allowed to do that?"

    German unions exist primarily to make sure that each and every worker is as well-trained to do his job as he possibly can be. Their unions evolved from trade guilds in the middle ages. American unions exist to extract money and benefits from management. They evolved from a safety-oriented organization whose function disappeared with the advent of OSHA. They negotiate for a bigger slice of the pie during the economic boom times, and then watch the company go bankrupt when the bad times hit. At the time of the 2008 collapse, UAW employees were guaranteed a full pension at age 52, they had extra employees on the payroll playing cards just in case they were needed, and their employee plus spouse deluxe medical insurance cost the employee $22 per month (the original Cadillac plan). All sounds wonderful for the workers, until the lights go out. Then, not so good. The carmaker has no option--either they go along with the union and reduce any hope of profits, or they watch the union go on strike and burn the business down.
     
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 1
  8. gatorpa

    gatorpa GC Hall of Fame

    9,870
    772
    348
    Sep 5, 2010
    East Coast of FL
    Mexico will be cheering this, more plants and production south of the border. Car manufacturers will figure out just how much can be assembled for $5/ hr labor when the bottom line is affected.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer VIP Member

    14,618
    5,178
    3,213
    Oct 30, 2017
    Let them be fired means not giving them the defense they're guaranteed. The answer is no. If they did something wrong, give them the fair hearing, and justify the firing. The idea that unions are bad because they're ensuring employees' rights are upheld isn't going to get you far outside of the pro-management side.
    How long has Boeing been making planes? When you cut corners to cut costs, you make a mediocre product.
    They're correct, though.
    That's not really true. You've only captured part of the story there.
     
  10. chemgator

    chemgator GC Hall of Fame

    12,269
    1,502
    1,318
    Apr 3, 2007
    Why is it that union employees have "rights" that non-union employees don't have? How is that possible?
    It's not just management that is cutting costs. With a union, they are always doing everything they can to extract money from the company, which means increasing costs. This has an impact on a company's ability to make a high-quality product, because management has to cut costs somewhere else (engineering, safety, etc.) to pay for greedy employees. Some of it is greedy management when the company has been around a long time, and management has gotten full of itself, but much of it comes from the union's greed. Plus I would argue that managers of a company with unions should be paid more than non-union company managers.
    Why don't you tell us the rest of the story?
     
  11. gator_lawyer

    gator_lawyer VIP Member

    14,618
    5,178
    3,213
    Oct 30, 2017
    Collective bargaining.
    Boeing has had unionized labor since before World War II. The idea that unions are causing their present issues is ludicrous.
    You mean the part about unions emerging to fight for better wages and employee rights beyond just safer working conditions?
    6 facts about labor union history in the U.S.
    Cordwainers Trial of 1806