I think it's insane that they're STRIKING over "job security" -- seems to me that the last thing you'd want to do is add further financial stress to a company that's struggling to maintain the benefits the union has demanded while competing in a vicious market.
Just because you think you're entitled to a well-paying job with generous benefits, doesn't mean a company can afford to do business that way. Job security is the last thing this kind of action is going to get them.
2007-09-24 07:25:12
·
answer #1
·
answered by . 4
·
2⤊
0⤋
Each day they are on strike, GM loses money and the UAW knows eventually GM will come around. But to remain profitable while meeting the UAW's demands GM will have to shutter some more domestic plants and move that work off shore. Apparently the UAW membership doesn't mind losing the jobs because they always vote in favor of these types of contracts. As long as a majority of the voters believe they will qualify for retirement before they get a pink slip, it will keep going like this.
Basically the US auto industry (management and labor) thinks short term and the others think long term. So who do you think the consumer believes makes the better car? Obviously that's a no-brainer.
2007-09-24 07:29:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Necromancer 3
·
4⤊
0⤋
they at the instant are not extraordinarily shiny, and is the reason why they paintings for the UAW -- that's probably the only place they could get a job, seeing as you do no longer even want a extreme college degree to paintings for the UAW. the subject is the rhetoric you pay attention from the mainstream liberal media, which portrays the executives on the massive 3 simply by fact the main evil, grasping people in the international. on the flipside, they thoroughly overlook appropriate to the reality that a beginning line-worker for the UAW makes over thrice the minimum salary for doing a job a experienced monkey can do. If unions have been outlawed the following day, GM and Ford could desire to hearth each union worker and replace them interior ninety days with people who could paintings for appreciably much less money, do a miles better pastime, and could be grateful to HAVE a job. i do no longer basically like the assumption of the yank vehicle makers going under simply by fact I stay in Michigan and issues are undesirable sufficient here, yet one stable ingredient that could come out of that's the union workers could be interior the unemployment lines the place they belong.
2016-10-09 18:37:49
·
answer #3
·
answered by miceli 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
At what level are you going to put 80,000 plus employees on profit sharing?
-- Their main issue is around retirement benefits (for those that are already retired) and some sort of job stability. As more plants close and wages go lower GM is still paying bonus compensation to cooperate workers and it does not funnel down to the front lines.
-- The automotive industry is complex business and your one or two sentences of this is what I would do if I ran GM falls way short of any kind of solution.
-- Also, what makes you think the union has "sub-par" performers if you have never worked in or around a union?
2007-09-24 07:21:11
·
answer #4
·
answered by Rob 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
the UAW is asking GM for an additional 60 billion to fund the VEBA. this strike would need to cost GM 30 billion before they come back to the table, so GM can wait out the UAW.
I think I know a company hiring for manual labor $15/hr, no questions asked
2007-09-24 14:30:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by mike c 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
point taken...as an ex sheetmetal union man I have seen the non-union shops rise in equivelence or better than union ones......call a union shop for an estimate then, call a non-union shop and compare.....both do quality work but, the prices are so very different........good luck
2007-09-24 07:19:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
0⤋
GM will use this to crush the union and put 1000's of workers out of a job, thanks to immature not thinking people
2007-09-24 07:17:48
·
answer #7
·
answered by god knows and sees else Yahoo 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
you have made your point
2007-09-24 07:16:35
·
answer #8
·
answered by vanessa 6
·
3⤊
1⤋