Do they not see that this will have an adverse on all aspect GM & Ford, and not just the "rich CEO's"? Being realistic, if this strike goes on for long there is no way that the companies will be able to stay in business. The companies are alreay in financial trouble how will they be able to absorb more cost, when they have to raise the benefits of an already spoiled American Auto Worker?
2007-09-25 04:48:12 · 10 answers · asked by 3rd parties for REAL CHANGE 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Simply put, the UAW doesn't truly care about helping its people, it only cares about scaring the corporations into giving them what it wants. UAW leaders are already financially set so they don't rightly care what happens to "Joe Line Worker" who is standing out in the rain to picket even though he probably doesn't know why.
I agree, this is going to do nothing but cause more problems. GM should bring forth the scabs!
*on a personal note, many of the plants and buildings that are being picketed are right near my house, so it's pretty interesting to see some of this stuff as it develops.
2007-09-25 04:58:36 · answer #1 · answered by J E 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The strike brings to the forefront outsourcing of jobs, importing of materials to and from other countries respectfully which diminishes our workforce, our ability to maintain standards, and lowers the wages where they are unbelieveably low as there is a cheaper labor market overseas. That is where i believe the impact is, the wages being a smaller portion of the argument.
Unions are not just for pay negotiatons they also help allay the misuse, abuse and discriminatory practices that a great deal of companies, businesses and agencies are incorporating more and more; devaluing people for the sake of a dollar.
The strike will eventually impact the economy from the perspective of the consumer but also the workers as well as they will not have the monies to purchase what they would they have before or to maintain their financial obligations.
i do believe the wage is quite high, yet i also don't feel that actor and pro sports figures should be getting what they are given in salaries either, we have a skewed sense in our country of earnings. Question, the CEO's will their earnings be cut or are there concessions, are there slush funds? Union dues paid throughout the years are more than likely going to cover expenses for a bit. Readjustments will be made as with any career, job or livelihood that is lost.
We have lost sight of what truly should be valued and it is not always dollars and cents.
2007-09-25 05:11:13 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
The blue collar workers are always questioned for the same avarice that is considered just fine for the highest execs who get 3 million in stock as a bonus for a year they have lost money. Without the sitdown strikers of the 1930's there would be not have been a large middle class to buy the cars that made GM rich.
2016-04-06 00:31:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It does not make sense to have a strike in a country that claims to be a developed country. Unionism should be completely abolished in all developed countries of the world. Unions cannot provide jobs. They only incite the workers for higher pays and in return all the consumers become part of this vicious cycle of increased costs and lost sales. They are generally part of the problem rather than being a part of the solution.
Unions belonged to 19th century when there were fewer labour protection measures. There are enough labour laws, standards, codes and judicial system for the protection of the workers in a legal way rather than creating a hooliganism and pressure tack-ticks.
2007-09-25 16:47:54 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
On the news this morning they commented on the strike and the fact that the UAW has lost much of its power in recent years. Whatever the outcome of the negotiations, the UAW is going to have to take over the responsibility for the healthcare of its members. This is a very serious matter and will have very profound implications on the union and on current and former (retired) members.
The point is, the UAW needs to "make a show" for their members that they are fighting for their best interests, because down the road, when the UAW does take over the healthcare, they will need to make the same tough decisions (higher costs / lesser benefits) that all other corporations and employees in America have been forced to make.
2007-09-25 05:10:09 · answer #5 · answered by 2007_Shelby_GT500 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
By this logic all any worker can do is enter a competition to see who will be the lowest paid worker in the world: the winner gets to help their company's shareholders maintain their fortunes at the expense of their own children.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsA10xwqjSw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzqtRJp5ke0&mode=related&search=
2007-09-25 15:11:27 · answer #6 · answered by Rebecca P 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Union officials are only interested in lining their own pockets. Your typical American auto worker seems to only be there for the paycheck.
In order to compete with Japanese and German automakers American designers have to come up with ways to make them cheaper to offset the high wages the typical bolt spinner gets. They've had to spend millions for systems that detect whether a worker has installed all the bolts for Christ sake.
In Germany and Japan autoworker typically earn less but they take PRIDE in their work and it shows. American cars used to be synonymous with quality now they synonymous with junk.
2007-09-25 05:03:13 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
"Spoiled" American Auto Worker? "Raise the benefits"? Are you sure you know what you're talking about?
2007-09-25 05:02:46 · answer #8 · answered by grizzie 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
They will give them low interest loans to buy materials to make signs. They may also send someone with a bullhorn to keep the marchers in step.
2007-09-25 04:54:08 · answer #9 · answered by open4one 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Exactly. Unions have no place in our society anymore.
2007-09-25 04:51:52 · answer #10 · answered by baby1 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋