Why are Unions good for America?

Question

How The UAW Sent The Big Three's Jobs Overseas
Very few businesses that are inflexible survive. And, the UAW may be called a union, but it is a business. And, for years it did well. The Reuther years. The UAW got its members pay packages, healthcare, and retirement deals that were the envy of the balance of organized labor.
The first writing on the wall that the Big Three could not support huge labor costs indefinitely came in 1973 during the Arab oil embargo. Fuel efficient cars became important, and from that point on were a permanent part of the US auto sales landscape. The Japanese manufacturers had their foothold.
Gas guzzlers got a reprieve as fuel prices dropped and stayed down through much of the 1980s and 1990s, but it was clear to the oil and car companies that cheap gas had seen its day. The demand for oil was too high and the supply of easy-to-drill oil was dropping.
As circumstances continued to benefit the maker of smaller cars, Toyota's revenue rose from $114.1 billion in 2002 to $186.7 billion in 2006. Over the same period, GM's revenue went from $186.7 billion to $192.6 billion.
The UAW did not let up in its demands for better wages and benefits. By 2003, the retirement and healthcare burden per vehicle sold in North America was $1,360 for GM and $180 for Toyota.
And, expensive gas returned with a vengeance. As the Japanese gained market share because their cars were viewed as better built, high fuel prices hit the US car makers with a second punch. Between 2000 and mid-2005, 100,000 hourly workers were dropped from the Big Three work force. The job cuts continued into 2006, as Ford (F) and GM (GM) bought out ten of thousands of workers.
Could all of the jobs have been saved? Perhaps not. But, labor cost disadvantages dropped GM and Ford to the brink of insolvency and the UAW has allowed tens of thousand of jobs to be eliminated or moved overseas.
Some level of flexibility on the part of the union would have helped the car companies. The union argument is that concessions would drive up profits, but, if there are no profits, the logic is academic. Making better cars and introducing new models might also have been a by-product of lower labor costs. It is harder to spend money on quality control when there is little money to spend.
The UAW made a huge amount of money for its members for several decades, but it is currently in the process of putting most of them out of jobs.
Blame the management of the car companies for not being better prepared for the environment that helped Toyota? Yes. Blame the UAW as well.

Answer 1

Obviously your not a Union Member. Usually when someone is ignorant of something, they tend to be against it. Trying to hold Unions accountable for the Big Three's troubles on one hand and not comprehending the overall problem where it is actually based in the other isn't the cause or solution to this problem.

Unions aren't responsible for enacting the Trade Policies that allowed the major parts suppliers to move their companies to third world nations.
http://economyincrisis.org/
Unions aren't responsible for the repealment of tariffs on goods that were created to level the playing field between the manufacturers of goods at home and abroad.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/13/AR2006121301850.html
Unions aren't responsible for the growing health care costs that cut into the profit margin per unit.

Unions aren't responsible for the lack of hindsight in the market for fuel efficient vehicles from management.

Unions aren't the players involved with keeping fuel standards low to keep up the demand for oil.

Trying to tie unionism to the failed policies of the Conservative agenda and it's overwhelming influence from the Corporate Machine is absurd.

Currently Bush is threatening to veto legislation that enacts the recommendations of the 09/11 Commission just because there's a provision that allows the Airport Screeners to unionize and enjoy the same protections that other Federal employees are privy too.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/28/terror/main2522894.shtml?source=RSSattr=Politics_2522894

The Republicans contention that unionization will somehow affect the preparedness of the screeners is just ridiculous. Bush and the Republicans are anti-union through and through. Any organized force in labor that will allow it's members to achieve upward social mobility is seen as a threat to their power.

Just how committed to protecting American's from terrorism
are Bush and the Republicans that they can't allow simple worker's rights legislation to enforce it?

Answer 2

Union had a place in America back in the depression, but their usefulness has long since expired. The unions of today, just hold a company hostage for uncompetitive wages and work for unqualified people. The very idea of striving to do better at your job is gone in a union environment as there is no benefit for worker a to do better than worker b as they will both be paid the same regardless.
With the big three auto companies the unions used a tactic of plant shutdown to win contract provisions knowing full well that the auto company would be loosing 20-30 million dollars a day. Do you really blame the management?

Answer 3

Tell me how industry is doing! I assume they are keeping you in jobs!

The biggest problem with unions are the people who are in them, and all the nice little union busting laws!

I think the top 1% made more in last years tax cut than all the unions combined!

Labor didn't drop them int insolvency! Their lack of foresight and shoddy manufacturing did! They thought they could pass any old piece of crap and America would buy it! They used to have no choice, now they do!

And companies could care less about you. They would drop you on the streets in a heartbeat if they could get it done cheaper somewhere else!

And most of the stuff they make now is nothing more than pure junk!

Answer 4

the auto industry does not represent all of America. GM, Ford and Chrysler make inferior automobiles than Japanese automakers. Toyota pays the same amount of wages as GM and Ford pays their workers. Americans are tired of driving gas-hog SUVs that GM and Ford constantly make. Toyota has made hybrids which are top sellers....that's why Toyota sells more. Upper management is to blame, not unions.

Answer 5

I worked for a number of NON-union toolrooms as tool and diemaker, they all went overseas and laid off everyone (got out of that trade). Doesn't matter if you are unionized or not, these people will go wherever they can make the most profit, which is overseas.

Answer 6

Without Unions we'd have conditions that approximate the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory--the 1911 tragedy that kicked off the Union Movement in the first place. Look at places like Wal-Mart and it's business practices and we see clearly why Unions are a necessity.

Answer 7

yes, labor unions can do damage,
but corps are more dangerous, when power gets centralized it always hurts the group for the good of a few.

I think the car companies are swindlers anyway, they purposefully build cars that last a duration to sell more cars.... this is their own fault toyota is crushing them,,,, they last twice as long,,,,,

people believing unions are bad for us are the same people watching fox, wanting reinforcents to believe in their dying worldviews......... propoganda.....

Answer 8

They equalize the power that big business has in the labor market. If labor could organize ALL countries, then labor would have the value it deserves.

Answer 9

No one believes that unions are any good any more, that is why companies relocate to states that have no unions are better able to compete and survive.

Answer 10

Unions out of control.