Are Unions done?

Forum Sponsor
afong56 said:
and at the same time, do we criticize corporations when they blackmail governments and make demands in order to keep plants or attract factories? are the wealthy immune from comment when in the midst of this 'economic turmoil' their real salaries and compensation are growing far beyond the average and the pace of negligible inflation? and how about the sectors that are reporting record profits during this turmoil? i'm not talking about slapping a crippling tax burden on businesses and the super wealthy, but c'mon, record profits?

why is it that we so glibly accept belt-tightening and bearing the costs of economic turmoil by the workers, but not by those who are far more capable of absorbing it?
Click to expand...

Belt-tightening is exactly what Cat is doing. What retarded decision maker would continue to operate the London facility when it's losing money and they can do the same work in Indiana and pay 40% less for labour and not have to deal with unions?

Let's say you agreed to have a landscape company mow your lawn for $100/mo for 2011. Now in 2012 you have found another landscape company that will do the same job for $60/mo. Which one would you pick?
 
Unions have served there time, and that time is done IMHO. I get the idea that a guy putting a screw into a hole (overly simplified I know) wants to make $28.50 an hour, and a city worker wants to be guaranteed no chance of layoff, no possibility of discipline for non performance and a good pension.
We created a decades of workers with no personal responsibility, they live beyond there means, invest nothing for retirement thinking the mothership will provide.
The union mentality is a disease.

What the worker bees never seem to understand is the guy driving the mothership getting a $379,000. salary + bonuses is more ambitious and possibly better educated and maybe a bit smarter, that's why he's there. If he can post record profits, its because he's doing his job. Its no accident when a business does well, and if moving the factory to a location where workers will take less salary, show up every day, and the state will offer incentives, that's business management.
 
A common sentiment in many replies is about expectations from all sides. Investors expect double digit returns on investments. Workers expect increased buying power, cost of living plus a raise in pay. The government wants to cut services but raise taxes.

What are reasonable expectations today?

If someone ges to work after basic high school, getting a job in a factory, driving a truck, stocking shelves etc should he expect a detached house, cottage, six weeks vacation, nice car and lots of toys and retirement 55? His union says yes.

If a person spends another five years of his life working through an apprentiship program what should he expect?

If a person spends 10+ years and a ton of money becoming a doctor, what then should he expect?

If any of the above end up with a bit of spare coin should they expect a double digit return on investment?

The most sustainable economy is one where everyone is frugal, eats at home, walks to work, lives in a small house, wears generic clothing and sits around the kitchen in the evening listening to grampa tell stories about the good old days. That wipes out the restaurant, automotive, clothing and entertainment industries.
 
crankcall said:
Unions have served there time, and that time is done IMHO. I get the idea that a guy putting a screw into a hole (overly simplified I know) wants to make $28.50 an hour, and a city worker wants to be guaranteed no chance of layoff, no possibility of discipline for non performance and a good pension.
We created a decades of workers with no personal responsibility, they live beyond there means, invest nothing for retirement thinking the mothership will provide.
The union mentality is a disease.

What the worker bees never seem to understand is the guy driving the mothership getting a $379,000. salary + bonuses is more ambitious and possibly better educated and maybe a bit smarter, that's why he's there. If he can post record profits, its because he's doing his job. Its no accident when a business does well, and if moving the factory to a location where workers will take less salary, show up every day, and the state will offer incentives, that's business management.
Click to expand...

Cut their wages and it brings everyone down.

What we dont need is more $15 an hour jobs. It effects us all.
 
Brian P said:
I am not sure if Indiana has changed to right-to-work yet, but I know there was discussion about it. This may also have something to do with VW opting for Tennessee (right to work) as opposed to Indiana, who were also interested in getting that plant.
Click to expand...

Union officials and other observers expect a new Progress Rail plant in Muncie, Ind., to be the beneficiary. The closing was announced 36 hours after Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels signed so-called right-to-work legislation, which makes it more difficult for unions to organize.
 
01cbr said:
Cut their wages and it brings everyone down.

What we dont need is more $15 an hour jobs. It effects us all.
Click to expand...

And now in London we have 700 brand new $0/hr jobs. How'd that work out?

1) EMD-London was losing money. The CAW and its members knew this.

2) Cat has a facility in Indiana ready to take on the work load with reduced wages and no union. The CAW and its members knew this.

3) Cat has a realistic obligation to its shareholders to make money. If a stand-alone subsidiary is losing money there is no reasonable justification for continuing to operate as-as and lose more money. The CAW and its members knew this.

4) The collective bargaining agreement at EMD was extended for 6 months in the summer. During that time the CAW was supposed to come up with a counter offer that would help EMD-London become profitable again. They did not come up with any counter-offer.

5) EMD gave their offer to the CAW. Likely one that meas this is what it's going to take for us get back into the black. If we can't make money, we're done.

6) Instead of accepting the offer with reduced wages and looking for better employment thereafter, the CAW chose to refuse the offer to show that they can't be bullied around. Well.. they called Cat's bluff and lost.

I work quite near the EMD-London facility and there has been a lot of discussion about it. Everyone I've talked to has basically been in agreement that when the union refused the new deal and got locked out EMD-London would never open again. Everyone knew what would happen if they refused the deal.. and they refused it all the same.

I guess pride is more important than putting food on the table.
 
Last edited:
OpenGambit said:
the public, and the largest institutional investors in Canada are....
Pension funds!!!
Click to expand...

You need to take it a step further ... they are the largest institutional investors in the World not only in Canada.
 
caboose483 said:
Belt-tightening is exactly what Cat is doing. What retarded decision maker would continue to operate the London facility when it's losing money and they can do the same work in Indiana and pay 40% less for labour and not have to deal with unions?

Let's say you agreed to have a landscape company mow your lawn for $100/mo for 2011. Now in 2012 you have found another landscape company that will do the same job for $60/mo. Which one would you pick?
Click to expand...

hey, how about actually commenting on what i wrote? where do i suggest that companies losing money should continue to do so?

i'm speaking of the corporations that extract multi-million dollar tax breaks or flat-out taxpayers giveaways in the form of grants in order to stay in ontario. that is corporate blackmail. i'm talking about the sectors that are recording record profits in the midst of 'economic turmoil', and about the 0.1% whose real earnings are growing exponentially in the other direction of the salaries that the middle/working/working poor are earning.

do they just get a nod and a pass, while everyone else has to suck it up? apparently so.
 
When a company brings hundreds or thousands of jobs into the country/province then yes they should be encouraged or rewarded for doing so. Its not just canada doing this, there is a slew of countries out there begging these companies to open up shop in their backyard.
 
afong56 said:
hey, how about actually commenting on what i wrote? where do i suggest that companies losing money should continue to do so?

i'm speaking of the corporations that extract multi-million dollar tax breaks or flat-out taxpayers giveaways in the form of grants in order to stay in ontario. that is corporate blackmail. i'm talking about the sectors that are recording record profits in the midst of 'economic turmoil', and about the 0.1% whose real earnings are growing exponentially in the other direction of the salaries that the middle/working/working poor are earning.

do they just get a nod and a pass, while everyone else has to suck it up? apparently so.
Click to expand...

My apologies. I thought we were discussing Cat and EMD.
 
afong56 said:
hey, how about actually commenting on what i wrote? where do i suggest that companies losing money should continue to do so?
Click to expand...


Let the sematics begin!


I'll pull up a chair. This is always..........humourous.
 
caboose483 said:
Why would the media only report Cat's earnings and leave out the fact that EMD is losing money?
Click to expand...

When a CAT spokeperson was interviewed on the topic he refused to say whether that particular operation was making money or losing money. Since it would be in the company's interest to present it as a money-losing operation, we can only draw one conclusion - despite the fact that the workers were being paid a living wage, the division was still making money.

We are pretty quick to say "our workers' rights are protected by law, we don't need unions because of that." Well, guess what.. If an unskilled worker cannot make a living by working 1 job, he has to work 2 jobs. That's 16 hours a day, one of the big issues for the labor movement (8-8-8 ). Many will say "well, he should have got an education." OK, let's say you need to have a university degree and a white collar job in order to make a living.. Who's gonna pick up your garbage, make your sandwiches and work the cash register if they can't survive on that money?

Why do we respond with "don't be jealous of his success" when we discuss the increasing power of the billionaires and them making even more billions, but we call the working stiff who wants to make a living and nothing more, greedy? Back in the 70's, blue collar workers were paid the same (adjusted for inflation) and companies were still making money. White collar workers were making more. Many blue collar professions had strong collective bargaining protection and maintained their salaries on the par or only lost a little. Those of us not protected by unions lost so much over the last couple of decades that we're jealous of them. I'd say that collective bargaining works, works too well, and needs to be attacked in the media because of that.
 
01cbr said:
Neither is a good situation.

Personally I haven't heard complaints lately about no jobs. Its been no decent paying jobs.
Click to expand...

I've got customers that can't find enough good skilled workers. Tool and die, machinists, welders, etc. (If you fit that criteria and are good and are looking for work, PM me.)

VW had 85,000 applicants for 2,000 assembly-line jobs at $15 - $19 per hour in Chattanooga. They just announced that they're going to increase production at that plant and will be hiring some more. But they have no shortage of (relatively unskilled) applicants.

The practices of unions over the last few decades has distorted the pay expectations for unskilled trades and has essentially removed the incentive to learn a trade. Consequently ... too many unskilled workers, and too many people with higher educations that are unsuitable for getting a real job (while rendering them "overqualified") and meanwhile, can't find enough skilled trades.

It really does not help that the modern consumer generally buys the cheapest they can find, even if it's made overseas in a sweat shop. Reality is, if you're unskilled, that's who you are competing with.
 
FiReSTaRT said:
When a CAT spokeperson was interviewed on the topic he refused to say whether that particular operation was making money or losing money. Since it would be in the company's interest to present it as a money-losing operation, we can only draw one conclusion - despite the fact that the workers were being paid a living wage, the division was still making money.
Click to expand...

Jim Dugan, another Cat spokesperson, is quoted saying EMD lost $16 million last year. Your assumption is incorrect.
 
Brian P said:
VW had 85,000 applicants for 2,000 assembly-line jobs at $15 - $19 per hour in Chattanooga. They just announced that they're going to increase production at that plant and will be hiring some more. But they have no shortage of (relatively unskilled) applicants.

The practices of unions over the last few decades has distorted the pay expectations for unskilled trades and has essentially removed the incentive to learn a trade.

It really does not help that the modern consumer generally buys the cheapest they can find, even if it's made overseas in a sweat shop. Reality is, if you're unskilled, that's who you are competing with.
Click to expand...

The reason they are able to find so many workers willing to work for starvation wages is that through the use of outsourcing, they've reduced the number of jobs on the local market, thus lowering the salaries for everyone.

What you're calling "unrealistic expectations" are living wages that they've always been making. It's just that we've all allowed for the overall wages to drop down to an unsustainable level. We see someone making a living wage with which a person only has to spend half of his career working in order to own a home, as "greedy and overpaid."

Yes, the modern consumer is an idiot, but the trend started in the 1980's. In any case we have been too stupid to vote with our wallets and pressure the governments to impose tariffs on goods produced by slave labor overseas. Instead of working on fixing that, we're attacking the few left over people that are still making living wages even though they don't have 3 post-secondary degrees.

With that being said, I see many highly educated people barely eeking out a living even doing the work they were trained in, in healthy industries simply because they don't have collective bargaining protection and the unemployment lines are getting longer and longer. In any case, what incentives would the bus drivers, garbage collectors and landscapers have to do their jobs if they can't make a living? We need to start with a premise that 40 hours = a living and then reward education and experience accordingly.
 
+1 to Caboose's posts in general

But yeah. open borders and mobile capital with immobile labour forces are going to result in a decrease of wages for unskilled trades for manufacturing sectors. The industrialized economies must get into the business of making things that require technical expertise in order to compete.
It is also important to note that NA and europe is actually producing more than ever before ( due to mechanization even though the % of work force in those industries have shrunk)

Like it or not, China actually has the labour force expertise on NA in terms of textiles and technology manufacturing, its the 2nd reason why those jobs are not coming back.. Why the hell would you pay more for someone who isn't as skilled? PS. China is no longer the cheapest place to manufacture, but companies stay there why? expertise and direct investment.

I don't think that this affects garbage men/landscapers etc as much because they are actually service industries and can't be outsourced. Unioning for these types of services are alive and well.
 
Last edited:
FiReSTaRT said:
What you're calling "unrealistic expectations" are living wages that they've always been making.
Click to expand...

Always? It used to be a one-car, one television, and a house with 1200 to 1300 sq ft was the norm. Driving through many parts of the GTA, average house sizes are double that now, 2, 3, or more cars in the driveway, big TVs and computers in every room too.

What you call "starvation wages" wouldn't be so much that if people weren't living so rich to begin with surrounded by what used to be considered the luxuries of the very well off.
Forum Sponsor
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom