Jump to content

UAW Strike / Absurd Executive Compensation discussion


horn4life

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, animaltobacco11 said:

You'd just get companies shifting to paying dividends, if buybacks weren't allowed (which we are seeing this year, btw). Investors/Shareholders want a return on their capital. What is the point in investing in something that won't increase in value? Why would you want to invest your money into a company that does not return any profit, by way of stock buy back which helps stock price go up, or paying a dividend?

If you argue that you invest in the stock for long term growth, rather than a short or medium term return, how is that defined and quantified? 

I think what you don't like is the market economy and America's flavor of capitalism, but TINA. There truly isn't.

 

6 hours ago, Captainant said:

You're completely missing the point, Chrispy. 

 

These companies claim they can't pay their workers because they don't have enough money to pay them AND keep their business afloat. That's a fucking lie. They did have enough money, but they chose to enrich themselves instead of pay their workers and fund the businesses. And you're right - I don't like this flavor of oligarchical capitalism.

Stock buyback is a tax avoidance scheme too.  Dividends come with a tax bill.  Unrealized gains because the stock price went up do not get taxed.  Allows the share holders to time the taxable event to their benefit like when they recognize a loss on something else.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, animaltobacco11 said:

Unions are much stronger today than they were 5-7 years ago. What are you talking about?

Biden just dispatched his top people in support of UAW today. Biden's administrative is super pro-union and that has trickled down.

Not commenting on if that is a good or bad thing, just saying you are wrong. Unions have turned the corner of public perception and are getting "trendy" again. Just ask Starbucks and Amazon.

https://uaw.org/walter-reuther-quote-collection/

BEFORE:

fordarchivephoto520x335.jpg

AFTER:

reutherfrankenstein.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Neonmoon said:

Aren’t these the same companies that the American People bailed out years ago?

EDITOR'S PICKS
NOVEMBER 19, 20084:56 PMUPDATED 15 YEARS AGO

Auto execs' private flights to Washington draw ire

By Karey Wutkowski

4 MIN READ

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Memo to U.S. companies seeking a bailout: When visiting Congress to ask for money, leave the private jets at home.

Chief executives from General Motors Corp, Ford Motor Co, and Chrysler LLC pleaded on Wednesday for $25 billion in federal assistance to help pay their suppliers, workers and other expenses at a time when car sales have plunged along with a souring economy.

But skeptical lawmakers blasted them for flying private jets to Washington and failing to make personal sacrifices in exchange for federal assistance.

“It’s almost like seeing a guy show up at the soup kitchen in a high hat and tuxedo,” said Rep. Gary Ackerman, a Democrat from New York.

“Couldn’t you have downgraded to first class or something, or jet-pooled or something to get here?” Ackerman asked the executives at a hearing held by the U.S. House Financial Services Committee.

Even Democrats who said they were sympathetic to the automakers’ plight expressed frustration that the executives used private jets while professing ruthless cost-cutting measures.

“I don’t know how I go back to my constituents and say the auto industry has changed if they own private jets which are not only expensive to own, expensive to operate and expensive to fly here, rather than to have flown commercial,” said Rep. Brad Sherman, a California Democrat.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cross post:

Elon Musk Watching the Auto Strike

article cover

 

While everyone is focused on who will blink first in the labor standoff between Detroit’s car manufacturers and its unionized workers, one person is already being declared a winner—Elon Musk.

Tesla’s CEO was already enjoying a major cost advantage over his competitors thanks to more streamlined production processes and lower wages for his nonunionized workforce. Now that UAW employees are on strike and likely to see increased wages no matter how this labor dispute ends, Tesla’s edge in that area will only grow.

Tesla’s labor costs average $45 an hour, compared to GM, Stellantis, and Ford’s estimated $66 an hour, per the WSJ.

And if the UAW gets the dramatic pay bumps it initially sought, labor costs for Detroit’s Big Three would swell to $136 an hour, according to Wells Fargo.

This year, Tesla has used that cost advantage to slash its car prices in a bid to maintain its commanding market share in electric vehicles. So far, that strategy has paid off: Despite the price cuts, Tesla’s Q2 profits rose 20%.

UAW President Shawn Fain has brushed off comments that his labor action would only solidify Tesla’s dominance in the EV market. “Our concern is working-class people need their share of economic justice in this world,” he told CNBC last week.

So, what could slow Tesla’s roll? It’s possible that the UAW strike, if successful at securing higher wages, could galvanize Tesla workers to unionize at Musk’s factories. But the UAW tried and failed to do this in 2017 and 2018.

https://www.morningbrew.com/daily/stories/2023/09/17/elon-musk-emerges-as-winner-of-the-auto-strike?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/18/2023 at 12:44 PM, animaltobacco11 said:

Tesla’s labor costs average $45 an hour, compared to GM, Stellantis, and Ford’s estimated $66 an hour, per the WSJ.

And if the UAW gets the dramatic pay bumps it initially sought, labor costs for Detroit’s Big Three would swell to $136 an hour, according to Wells Fargo.

 

$136 hr.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a hard time sympathizing with their high labor costs when the executives and board and shareholders have been enriching themselves to the tune of tens of billions over the last few years. It's almost like the execs were just eating someone else's lunch because there was nobody around to stop them.

 

I have no doubt that the final agreement will be nowhere near the initial demands - you always ask for the moon on the first pass of a negotiation with an antagonistic opposition. Otherwise you'd be compromising yourself into a worse position than you started with

  • Hook 'Em 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

I wonder how much it bothers the UAW (and specifically Shaun Fain) that the news of the past 2 weeks has pretty much kept the strike out of the news. It barely makes the local news, and I am just over an hour from the GM & Ford HQ and there are 2 plants in our community that are on strike. I do see there is another weekly update today at 4pm, which I'd guess means no new strike targets, as they have announced those in that past at a 10am presser for noon walkouts.

Sidenote: it is fun to drive past the pickets and honk, then watch them get all excited for the "support". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

UAW expands strike to GM SUV plant in Texas.  Yesterday expanded to Ram Truck plant.

GM says strike will cost 200 million a week next year.

 

This is not good.

For whom? I haven't read much of the thread, so I don't know your stand on the union and this strike. 

Of course, the period when there is a strike is not "good" for anyone. The outcome is all that matters.

My question is unprejudiced, Incredulity. How do you stand? 

Transparency: I'm pro-union generally. I certainly am in this case. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not good for the economy.

I lean less favorable to unions, but accept their place in the economy/society.  

 

In this instance I think Fain is belligerent.  Both sides are getting very dug in so I am not sure what the thing is that is going to get them to agree to a contract. 

Maybe tomorrow the Big 3 rolls over and agrees to UAW demands, it sure doesn't look like it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

Not good for the economy.

I lean less favorable to unions, but accept their place in the economy/society.  

 

In this instance I think Fain is belligerent.  Both sides are getting very dug in so I am not sure what the thing is that is going to get them to agree to a contract. 

Maybe tomorrow the Big 3 rolls over and agrees to UAW demands, it sure doesn't look like it.

Big 3 is dug in because they don't have the money to pay for the worker's demands - BECAUSE THEY GAVE IT TO THEIR SHAREHOLDERS THROUGH BUYBACKS!

 

They're gonna have to face some pain, and management needs to remember that they need workers to make profits

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Captainant said:

management needs to remember that they need workers to make profits

and workers need paychecks

and dealers need cars to sell

and steel producers need orders for steel....on and on and on.

 

This thing will become an economy wide issue in the not too distant future.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Incredulity said:

Not good for the economy.

I lean less favorable to unions, but accept their place in the economy/society.  

 

In this instance I think Fain is belligerent.  Both sides are getting very dug in so I am not sure what the thing is that is going to get them to agree to a contract. 

Maybe tomorrow the Big 3 rolls over and agrees to UAW demands, it sure doesn't look like it.

Thanks for answering!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

This thing will become an economy wide issue in the not too distant future.

It already is an economy wide issue that businesses are funneling so much of their capital to their shareholders rather than into sustaining their business

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, gyroprotagonist said:

yeah, it's not fair to only view a worker's strike in the lens of 'is this good for the economy?' but not view all the other things corps do that are 100% 'good for the corp'  and only good for the economy if you believe in trickle down economics.  But it's been a neat trick that large corps have gotten to paint the workers as the bogeyman in most cases just wanting to damage fabric of America with their demands.

Yes. Over the decades since Reagan was elected, there has been a steady effort to paint unions, lawyers, the press, and your congressperson as agents of evil. These are the only tools the little guy has against the great powers. A huge number of white little guys have learned to hate them.

It's expanded to where being called a social justice warrior is a terrible thing. Also, where being called "woke" to things like Me, Too and BLM is de facto bad.

It's like developing a hatred for your own immune system.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/24/2023 at 8:08 AM, Incredulity said:

Maybe tomorrow the Big 3 rolls over and agrees to UAW demands, it sure doesn't look like it.

Missed it by a day. Lol

reports UAW and Ford have agreed 

25% over 4 years.  Front loaded plus COLA.  Still needs approval from UAW members 

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

Fuck them. My absolute favorite thing is laying those lazy motherfuckers off at the end of each project. Hit the hall, fucking leaches. 

nice combo of piece of shit and full of shit. shoulda gone for the trifecta and sprinkled in some racism. we know you wanted to.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, fattyflattie said:

Fuck them. My absolute favorite thing is laying those lazy motherfuckers off at the end of each project. Hit the hall, fucking leaches. 

where does the hate come from?  WTF do you care how much someone else makes?  please don't come back with "it raises the cost for everyone on cars".  That could be said for just about every industry and we pretty much know that corps are not going to pass on ANY savings to the consumer, but just use any declines in worker salary for profit boosting and stock buy backs.  Mfgs have milked the fuck out of 'supply chain' crisis and greedlflation to raise prices and keep them there.  

  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

where does the hate come from?  WTF do you care how much someone else makes?  please don't come back with "it raises the cost for everyone on cars".  That could be said for just about every industry and we pretty much know that corps are not going to pass on ANY savings to the consumer, but just use any declines in worker salary for profit boosting and stock buy backs.  Mfgs have milked the fuck out of 'supply chain' crisis and greedlflation to raise prices and keep them there.  
  
He wishes he made 100/hr
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Chewbacca said:
52 minutes ago, gyroprotagonist said:
where does the hate come from?  WTF do you care how much someone else makes?  please don't come back with "it raises the cost for everyone on cars".  That could be said for just about every industry and we pretty much know that corps are not going to pass on ANY savings to the consumer, but just use any declines in worker salary for profit boosting and stock buy backs.  Mfgs have milked the fuck out of 'supply chain' crisis and greedlflation to raise prices and keep them there.  
  

He wishes he made 100/hr

 

He pulled himself up by the bootstraps and doesn't see this as them doing the same. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gyroprotagonist said:

  please don't come back with "it raises the cost for everyone on cars".  That could be said for just about every industry and we pretty much know that corps are not going to pass on ANY savings to the consumer, but just use any declines in worker salary for profit boosting and stock buy backs.

To maintain the current business model the business will have to in some combination:

1.) raise prices

2.) increase productivity/efficiency

 

The UAW got what they could get and good for them.  It puts Ford at a greater cost disadvantage to the foreign owned/US production/non-union manufacturers.  Unless Ford can sell the product for more or divine a game changing manufacturing efficiency they will be less profitable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, BeardIP said:

I'm poor, so...uh...$100/hour?

Raising-hand GIFs - Get the best GIF on GIPHY

UPS turned me down. Say, how does one go about getting into a union and getting into one of these jobs anyways? Do you have to know someone who sponsors you like a social club or fraternity?

For the IBEW you have to apply, take a test, and then pass a panel interview. If you're accepted, you have to complete a five year apprenticeship program while you are working. You learn the basics in the apprenticeship program for free! (wiring, circuits, pipe bending - hard as fuck) and you fine tune those skills and develop specialties on the job. 

It's not easy at all, but there's a reason why IBEW are the best electricians and the ones you want wiring hospitals and schools. It's hard for the fatty's to see that

  • Hook 'Em 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

For the IBEW you have to apply, take a test, and then pass a panel interview. If you're accepted, you have to complete a five year apprenticeship program while you are working. You learn the basics in the apprenticeship program for free! (wiring, circuits, pipe bending - hard as fuck) and you fine tune those skills and develop specialties on the job. 

It's not easy at all, but there's a reason why IBEW are the best electricians and the ones you want wiring hospitals and schools. It's hard for the fatty's to see that

They’d rather our infrastructure, plumbing, electricity, etc look like post-war Iraq if it means not having to pay people more so some people get more profits 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Incredulity said:

To maintain the current business model the business will have to in some combination:

1.) raise prices

2.) increase productivity/efficiency

 

The UAW got what they could get and good for them.  It puts Ford at a greater cost disadvantage to the foreign owned/US production/non-union manufacturers.  Unless Ford can sell the product for more or divine a game changing manufacturing efficiency they will be less profitable.

right, but the 'current business model' started with Uncle Sam bailing out the automakers and having the workers acquiesce to lower or capped wages.  The automakers said thanks, then went on about the much mentioned stock buybacks etc.. to the tune of $25B of gross profit (Ford's #) this year.  So yes, if you pick this specific point in time and change nothing else, having to pay higher wages somewhat changes the equation for Ford, but it's not like they are teetering on the brink of going in the red and this in the tipping point that will doom them.  we only seem to care about keeping capitalism and free markets real when it benefits corporations.  

again, it's a neat trick that seemingly unaffected Americans white-knight big corporations and feel sympathy about them having to pay their employees more (who are subsequently demonized as lazy and not worth the wages).  Like how a lot of Americans vote to give ultra wealthy tax breaks and against giving needy people 'handouts' or health insurance.  Let's make America great again by going back to the 70's tax policies that saw the top bracket pay something like 80%.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chewbacca said:
4 hours ago, gyroprotagonist said:
where does the hate come from?  WTF do you care how much someone else makes?  please don't come back with "it raises the cost for everyone on cars".  That could be said for just about every industry and we pretty much know that corps are not going to pass on ANY savings to the consumer, but just use any declines in worker salary for profit boosting and stock buy backs.  Mfgs have milked the fuck out of 'supply chain' crisis and greedlflation to raise prices and keep them there.  
  

He wishes he made 100/hr

I do. I used to bill out for a lot more than that, but no mas. Now I babysit guys that babysit fuckstick union hands for a living.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, gyroprotagonist said:

where does the hate come from?  WTF do you care how much someone else makes?  please don't come back with "it raises the cost for everyone on cars".  That could be said for just about every industry and we pretty much know that corps are not going to pass on ANY savings to the consumer, but just use any declines in worker salary for profit boosting and stock buy backs.  Mfgs have milked the fuck out of 'supply chain' crisis and greedlflation to raise prices and keep them there.  

  

I'm happy when people are paid what they are worth.  Why do I dislike unions?  I work for a union shop. Our management, of course, is not union. 

I can only speak to heavy highway, PLCA, and welders unions, but almost to the rule the union employees are lazier, hilariously entitled, and overall just fucking dickheads. They don't care about your company (leave you in a bind in an instant) or its success, they don't care about their quality of work because it's an act of congress to be replaced, and in general are the types of people that NEED someone to make sure they have a good job because they'd never survive on their own merits.   There was a time and a place for them, we are long past that. 

The BA's spend ALOT of energy trying to take money out of my pocket, damage the equity I have in my company, and generally make my life worse.  Turnabout is no longer fair play?  I would and now rely on my men to return that favor with fervor.  Afterall, you live by the agreement, you die by the agreement. 

So we'll continue to pay 100k for a well equipped pickup truck, and some guy with a GED will get 135/hr to push a button so a robot can move it down the assembly line.  And we will like it because if they didn't have that given to them, I can only assume these fucking leaches would be on welfare, taking their blood from there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

They don't care about your company (leave you in a bind in an instant) or its success, they don't care about their quality of work because it's an act of congress to be replaced, and in general are the types of people that NEED someone to make sure they have a good job because they'd never survive on their own merits.

experienced this a ton.  extremely frustrating when you need to get shit done right, on time, on budget.

3 hours ago, Doc Sam Beckett said:

but there's a reason why IBEW are the best electricians and the ones you want wiring hospitals and schools.

LOL.  IBEW gets the hospital and school work because of political connections.  There are some absolute donkeys in the IBEW, just like any other organization.  The quality of the shop is way more important than if they do or do not use IBEW electricians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...