As of today, Democrats have officially KILLED the Big Three.

As of today, the Big Three have officially been KILLED by the Democrats.

Congressman Dingell, a fierce proponent of the Automotive Industry has been replaced by radical environmentalist, Oil/Gas industry hater Henry Waxman from San Francisco Ca. San Fran. Where cars are not cars unless they are built by BMW, Mercedes, or SAAB.
http://www.freep.com/article/20081121/NEWS07/811210325/1009

THE AUTO INDUSTRY AND UAW HAVE BEEN DELT A HUGE BLOW.
Henry Waxman on Energy & Oil
You MUST read Waxman's quotes on the Auto industry and Gas industry.
http://www.ontheissues.org/CA/Henry_Waxman_Energy_+_Oil.htm

Waxman on Energy & Oil.
Voted YES on tax incentives for energy production and conservation. (May 2008)
Voted YES on tax incentives for renewable energy. (Feb 2008)
Voted YES on investing in homegrown biofuel. (Aug 2007)
Voted YES on criminalizing oil cartels like OPEC. (May 2007)
Voted YES on removing oil & gas exploration subsidies. (Jan 2007)
Voted YES on keeping moratorium on drilling for oil offshore. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on scheduling permitting for new oil refinieries. (Jun 2006)
Voted NO on authorizing construction of new oil refineries. (Oct 2005)
Voted NO on passage of the Bush Administration national energy policy. (Jun 2004)
Voted NO on implementing Bush-Cheney national energy policy. (Nov 2003)
Voted YES on raising CAFE standards; incentives for alternative fuels. (Aug 2001)
Voted YES on prohibiting oil drilling & development in ANWR. (Aug 2001)
Regulate wholesale electricity & gas prices. (Mar 2001)
Preserve Alaska's ANWR instead of drilling it. (Feb 2001)
Establish greenhouse gas tradeable allowances. (Feb 2005)
Rated 100% by the CAF, indicating support for energy independence. (Dec 2006)
Let states define stricter-than-federal emission standards. (Jan 2008)
http://www.ontheissues.org/CA/Henry_Waxman.htm

No votes yet

Uhmm... I think it may have been the Big Three that killed the Big Three.

on the unions killing the big three

serves their greedy asses right

yep, nothing like job security.

I saw a report tonight on the news on how there are Japanese automakers opening plants in America right now, mostly in southern states where unions aren't as prevalent.

They said their workers are making $44 an hour compared to GMs $73. Yeah its less money but their companies are opening plants not closing them. Yeah getting a thirty dollar an hour pay cut would suck but it seems to me that anyone in their right mind would rather make $44 an hour then lose their job and be making a big fat $0 an hour.

I might argue that anyone who fiercely protected the Auto industry over the past 10-15 years wasn't doing them any good. In fact, probably helped to put the nails in the coffin by enabling the Big Three to continue down an antiquated road that was destined to end in obsolescence. The writing had been on the wall for years about where it was important to be investing in R&D and design.

Libs, I'm amazed by your view of California. Not quite sure what it's based on, but it isn't reality. Sure there are areas like the Bay Area and LA, which have their own vibes. But a lot of California is agriculture, or logging and rural up north. Or smaller communities dotting the coast.

all that money the unions spent on the Democratic campaigns instead of putting it back into the benefits of it's members now doesn't look like money that well spent.

MikeyA

MikeyA

As of today, the Big Three have officially been KILLED by the Democrats.

We can only hope so. Me, I'm writing this up as a suicide.

Mad Jack
Mad Jack's Shack

Ohiokat said "They said their workers are making $44 an hour compared to GMs $73. Yeah its less money but their companies are opening plants not closing them. Yeah getting a thirty dollar an hour pay cut would suck but it seems to me that anyone in their right mind would rather make $44 an hour then lose their job and be making a big fat $0 an hour.: ------------ SHOW the proof that GM workers make that kind of money. My husband's been at Chrysler for 30 years, his brother was at GM & his brother in law at Ford for nearly as long & none of them make that kind of money.

...is responsible for. If the company pays a sizeable amount toward health insurance that bumps the hourly wage up, if it contributes a sizeable portion to wage insurance, and if it contributes to the retirement plan. So even if the employee only has a "gross" income of $35.00 an hour, the benefits add quite a bit to his wage. That is where these figures come from, not just his income before taxes.

Old South End Broadway

I was just posting what was reported on the news program I happened to catch a part of. Its the one (and I'm sorry that I cannot directly link the source as I don't recall which program it was) that stated that workers in the non union plants were making $44 compared to $73. I was just giving my opinion based on that report.

Graph based on these numbers, including total compensation like healthcare, retirement, pensions, etc obtained from the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf

 

 

Article about the gross overpayment of unskilled union hacks that could be replaced by a robot that won't cry about a raise, healthcare and days off. http://seekingalpha.com/article/105061-should-we-really-bail-out-the-big...

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

Kind of gave up trying to slap you down, because everything you say is pretty much bullshit, but since it's late and I'm cranky I'll give you the smack down for old time’s sakes.

The $73 the right wing nut jobs keep spewing out of there vomit covered mouths is just plain wrong. I know it helps you support your conclusion and facts are meaningless, but sometimes I just have to call a lie a lie…

Auto workers make around $28 an hour plus benefits. The $73 an hour is the total cost for labor past and present retired and not retired divided by total number of actual hours worked.

http://www.record-eagle.com/business/local_story_325095030.html

But GM, which negotiated the four-year deal that serves as a template for UAW deals with Chrysler and Ford, says its total hourly labor costs dropped 6 percent this year from pre-contract levels, from $73.26 in 2006 to around $69 per hour. The new cost includes laborers' wages of $29.78 per hour, plus benefits, pensions and the cost of providing health care to more than 432,000 GM retirees, GM spokesman Tony Sapienza said.

The total cost will drop to $62 per hour in 2010 when the linchpin of the contract -- a UAW administered trust fund -- starts paying retiree health care costs.

Seriously… we all have friends and family working at the Jeep, Power Train and Chrysler transmission plant in Perrysburg. None of them make anywhere near $70 per hour, even with benefits… just ask them.

Now have your parents give you an extra dose of medicine and go back to hitting on guys in WOW…

It's obvious that you cannot read or do your own math. You must be one of those uneducated Union hacks that can be replaced by a robot.

 

I noticed in your cute little personal interest story about your friends "who don't make close to $73.00 an hour" that you forgot to add in the negotiated UAW costs for retired UAW workers, the negotiated costs for the retired union hacks multi-billion dollar healthcare bank administered by the UAW, the mandatory government charges like unemployment insurance, workers comp, the added in costs for the Union "Job Banks" etc etc.

Here, for everyone not willing or able to run the numbers themselves, is the negotiated UAW contract with Chrysler in 2007.

http://chryslerlabortalks07.com/Economic_Data.rtf

And FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, do you see the chart on this page supplied by THE UAW?

 

Competitive Labor Cost Comparison

2006 Average Labor Costs — UAW represented (per hour worked)

DaimlerChrysler $75.86

Ford                 $70.51

General Motors $73.26

 

U.S. Japanese Transplants Labor Cost Comparison

2005 Average Labor Costs

 *Honda $42.95

 *Nissan $41.97

 *Toyota $47.60

 

 And to verify the overpayment of uneducated union hack retards like yourself, I once again refer you to the document from the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, page 22.

 


Series


Total compen-sation


Wages and salaries


Benefit costs


Total


Paid leave


Supple-mental pay


Insurance


Retire-ment and savings


Legally required benefits


All workers, goods-producing industries1 ...


Cost per hour worked


$31.58


$21.09


$10.49


$1.98


$1.31


$2.88


$1.45

$2.87

Union ................................................................


39.49


23.66


15.83


2.36


1.76


4.92


3.11

3.68

All workers, service-providing industries2 ..


25.59


18.38


7.21


1.73


0.71


1.85


0.83

2.09

Union ...................................TOTAL $76.76/hr


34.54


21.93


12.61


2.90


0.94


3.84


2.06

2.87

 

How the table works (for people like Sensor who cannot add numbers) you add up the numbers on each row. The cells in each row are the costs PER HOUR broken out of the total.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ecec.pdf

 

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

Benefits $34.54/ hr.=21.93 wages + 12.61 total benefits ( $2.90 paid leave + $.94 supplemental pay + $3.84 insurance + $2.06 retirement & savings + $2.07 legally required benefits) page 22. Must be manager; can't read a spread sheet.

Old South End Broadway

Because, according to your statement 12.61 total benefits = ( $2.90 paid leave + $.94 supplemental pay + $3.84 insurance + $2.06 retirement & savings + $2.07 legally required benefits)

 

Had you bothered to check before posting your ignorance for all to see, you would have noticed that ($2.90 paid leave + $.94 supplemental pay + $3.84 insurance + $2.06 retirement & savings + $2.07 legally required benefits) adds up to $11.81 not $12.61 Therefore you obviously have no idea how to add. So if you can't add, then it is obvious that you can't read a spreadsheet which makes your statement total and complete crap.

 

Now once again I direct you to the UAW bragging about how they ripped off Chrysler http://chryslerlabortalks07.com/Economic_Data.rtf

Payroll and Employment Data
2006 2005 2004 2003
Average number of U.S. employees (Hourly & Salaried)
    (in thousands) 65.9 68.3 71.4 76.4
UAW National Agreements
Average number hourly and salaried employees
(in thousands) 47.5 50 52.9 56.8
Average number of hourly employees (in thousands) 42.9 45.1 47.8 51.6
Total hourly paid payroll (in millions) $2,897 $3,129 $3,442 $3,632
Average total hourly labor costs $75.86 $68.71 $63.81 $57.99
Average weekly hours worked 35.5 38.3 40.6 41.2

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a
socialist.

I copied wrongly. It should have been 2.87 instead of 2.07, which would have added to $12.61. I guess I am qualified for management, also.

Now as to the UAW bragging. Does the information include only workers that are part of the union, or does it also include all employees (including CEOs)? Was this report generated jointly with the Big 3 (I notice that it came from an outside source), or did it come only from within the UAW?

Old South End Broadway

...appears to be Scott Anderson, of ICON Creative Technologies Group in Ann Arbor. I am betting he is a Big 3 shill. He also appears with information about http://wardsauto.com, an automotive industry newsletter.

Old South End Broadway

http://chryslerlabortalks07.com/index.html. On that page click "Media Briefing Book, and then "Economic Facts", and a .pdf will load with the information that you've allowed to be buried in the .rtf file.

Old South End Broadway

...you linked to the .rtf file rather than the .pdf file. That's interesting.

Old South End Broadway

...BLS link provided. When I tried to search using "automobile" or "automotive" no information could be obtained. Of course, we should be able to take the esteemed professor's word for it that he did the math correctly (even though a search found no reference for the $73.20 figure cited). Just another accurate factoid from the Right.

Old South End Broadway

...workers. This is the link, http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Assembly_Line_Worker,_Automotive.... You will note that Ohio is far behind other states for an hourly wage.

Old South End Broadway

...below, http://seekingalpha.com/article/105061-should-we-really-bail-out-the-big..., from Mark J. Perry, an "economist" you will find that the figure of $73.20 an hour is cited from a "scholarly" article in USA Today.

Old South End Broadway

OldSouthEndBrdy just mistranscribed one of the numbers from the spreadsheet. Legally required benefits should have been 2.87, not 2.07, which does indeed add up to the $12.61 total for benefits, as shown on the spreadsheet you provided. Had you checked for intent instead of just blowing smoke, tossing around insults and trying to use 2nd grade logic to refute the point, your arguments may have more credibility. Statements like:

Therefore you obviously have no idea how to add. So if you can't add, then it is obvious that you can't read a spreadsheet which makes your statement total and complete crap.

...are really more about your ability to construct and rebut an argument than anything else.

The first graph you provided is deliberately misleading. Of course the $73/hour represents the labor costs currently associated with every hour worked, not union member compensation, two very different quantities. The very chart you provided by the BLS refutes the points you were trying to make about overpaid union hacks. Big Three autoworkers are not paid that much more than their foreign company counterparts, and that gap is dwindling. Not fast enough, I'd say, and more concessions will be needed, but there is so much hyperbole that blames the union for the problems with the Big Three, and it is a whole-institution, systemic failure that has lead to this.

Just read an interesting point in an article that I didn't think about. One issue facing the US automakers is the sheer number of retirees they have in their system. You're looking at (gosh, decades, a century?) years of company history for each company, and they are paying for so many retireee benefits per working individual. Japanese automakers in the US do not have the HR history in our country to even have to worry about it (I saw one estimate that Toyota US has only about 1,000 retirees on their books).

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.