UAW On Strike

[foszoe]

I find the links to the numbers and provide them.

Yeah but your link was for every Ford employee not just Union.

 

[Leo]

So if I agree that there’s nothing wrong with the UAW trying to get higher wages then do you agree there’s nothing wrong with with the auto companies firing these people and hiring non-union workers at the market rate?

With the exception that every one of those companies signed contracts that they want to deal with the union rather than negotiate with workers. IN a car plant, say they screw up your payroll and did not pay you for the time they forced you to work overtime. You cannot go to payroll clerk and get it fixed. You have to file a grievance with the union, and they may be able to get you paid. In my case I lost that $700 when a whole stack of grievances were dismissed during contract negotiations.

How many times in the last 30 years have we heard the companies whine about retirement costs ? THEY signed those contracts in the 1960's and chose not to put the money in savings for all those years. Of course each year they set new records for administrative bonuses. Then the workforce aged out and they got caught with empty accounts, but spun it that the company was the victim and the workers were the villians.

 

[Leo]

For many reasons, the market has been soft pretty much since biden was installed. The Fed interest rate that went up AFTER the prices went crazy was killing sales for at least a year.

I am pretty sure all the companies have at least 100 days of inventory in storage, that is probably why the CEO's are dragging their feet. Some of the Jeep models are 300 to 500 day inventory. They are probably begging for the strike to go long. At this point the things will be rusty before they even get to a dealer.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Temps...
Same crap other businesses do, stringing along contract folks.

Oh, its to double check, make sure theyre worth hiring full time LOL

I know of nonunion businesses that hire through temp workers. One at least is very easy to get hired on as a permanent worker. Be there at least 90 calendar days (might be 60) and have decent attendance. That's it. Do that and you are hired on permanent. But they have had people who've worked there over a year and are still temps.

 

[STAGE 2]

With the exception that every one of those companies signed contracts that they want to deal with the union rather than negotiate with workers. IN a car plant, say they screw up your payroll and did not pay you for the time they forced you to work overtime. You cannot go to payroll clerk and get it fixed. You have to file a grievance with the union, and they may be able to get you paid. In my case I lost that $700 when a whole stack of grievances were dismissed during contract negotiations.

How many times in the last 30 years have we heard the companies whine about retirement costs ? THEY signed those contracts in the 1960's and chose not to put the money in savings for all those years. Of course each year they set new records for administrative bonuses. Then the workforce aged out and they got caught with empty accounts, but spun it that the company was the victim and the workers were the villians.

If a contract was signed, it should be honored. Period. Union or not. However correct me if I’m wrong but the current contract has now expired and everyone is negotiating over a new contract. So we’re back to where I said. You guys can ask for the moon and the companies can hire others who are willing to work for the market rate right?

 

[KLB]

I know of nonunion businesses that hire through temp workers. One at least is very easy to get hired on as a permanent worker. Be there at least 90 calendar days (might be 60) and have decent attendance. That's it. Do that and you are hired on permanent. But they have had people who've worked there over a year and are still temps.

At least some of our plants do. I don't know about the transition to actual employee, but since all we hear about is how hard it is to get people I am betting it isn't hard.

 

[Shadow01]

That’s perfectly fine, but it should work both ways shouldn’t it? You can ask for what ever you like and the company should be able to either hire you or tell you to pound sand. Right?

They had that opportunity when the initial bargaining agreement was signed by the company to cover the rules both sides would abide by. If hiring replacements was not in that agreement, then no they can’t fire and hire.

 

[Shadow01]

So if I agree that there’s nothing wrong with the UAW trying to get higher wages then do you agree there’s nothing wrong with with the auto companies firing these people and hiring non-union workers at the market rate?

Only if that was part of the initial rules agreement when they became a union shop. Both sides have a set of rules that they both agreed to.

 

[Shadow01]

If a contract was signed, it should be honored. Period. Union or not. However correct me if I’m wrong but the current contract has now expired and everyone is negotiating over a new contract. So we’re back to where I said. You guys can ask for the moon and the companies can hire others who are willing to work for the market rate right?

No, the initial agreement had rules that both sides agreed to go by when in negotiations of contracts. One is that when a contract ends workers can keep working under the terms of the old contract if the company does not lock them out or the union strikes. Lockouts is the same as a layoff and allow every worker to get unemployment. Most companies would rather you keep working than pay the unemployment costs for you to stay home while they negotiate the new contract. Typically they have a clause where the union and company have to negotiate in good faith. At some point if the union is not negotiating in good faith the company can file with a court to allow replacement, but that has rarely ever happened. There are benefits to companies being a union shop. some unions provide the pensions and healthcare for their members. That’s a cost removed from the company.

 

[bobzilla]

Yeah but your link was for every Ford employee not just Union.

And if we are talking about labor cost per vehicle you have to count all employees. You can’t cherry pick to make yourself look good

 

[Timjoebillybob]

They had that opportunity when the initial bargaining agreement was signed by the company to cover the rules both sides would abide by. If hiring replacements was not in that agreement, then no they can’t fire and hire.

You do know that companies are prohibited by law from firing workers who try to unionize right? And also those who go on strike?

So no the companies did not have that opportunity.

Hell companies have been fined serious cash for closing a plant/store when either a union tried to come in or one was already in place.

 

[KLB]

Most companies would rather you keep working than pay the unemployment costs for you to stay home while they negotiate the new contract.

What unemployment costs? Those are paid by the government. Businesses pay the tax when workers are working.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

With the exception that every one of those companies signed contracts that they want to deal with the union rather than negotiate with workers. IN a car plant, say they screw up your payroll and did not pay you for the time they forced you to work overtime. You cannot go to payroll clerk and get it fixed. You have to file a grievance with the union, and they may be able to get you paid. In my case I lost that $700 when a whole stack of grievances were dismissed during contract negotiations.

Didn't the employees want that as well? After all they are the ones who voted to unionize, and to accept the contract. Didn't the workers also have to vote in favor of the contract that dismissed the grievances as well?

What unemployment costs? Those are paid by the government. Businesses pay the tax when workers are working.

In IN at least if an employee is fired unfairly or I believe loses hrs/job through no fault of their own the company is directly on the hook for unemployment payments, or at least a portion of them. The amount the company pays for unemployment insurance is also directly tied to the number of claimant that company has had.

 

[Creedmoor]

At least some of our plants do. I don't know about the transition to actual employee, but since all we hear about is how hard it is to get people I am betting it isn't hard.

My girl did contract HR and UAW Contract work at Marion up until a year or so ago.
A few here know her, chubby Irish, no ******** girl.
GM HR goes to great lenghts to bring employess onboard at GM.
The hardest rolls to fill at The Skilled Trades Apprentice open positions.
Great Trades, Great education,Great Pay, butt
What young person wants to take a job that you will be on 3rd shift most likely the next 20 years.

 

[KLB]

In IN at least if an employee is fired unfairly or I believe loses hrs/job through no fault of their own the company is directly on the hook for unemployment payments, or at least a portion of them.

You think a company has to pay unemployment if they have layoffs?

The amount the company pays for unemployment insurance is also directly tied to the number of claimant that company has had.

True. Still not paying costs while the employees are staying home.

Most companies just prefer to actually operate rather than lock out their employees and not operate.

 

[Creedmoor]

Didn't the employees want that as well? After all they are the ones who voted to unionize, and to accept the contract. Didn't the workers also have to vote in favor of the contract that dismissed the grievances as well?


In IN at least if an employee is fired unfairly or I believe loses hrs/job through no fault of their own the company is directly on the hook for unemployment payments. The amount the company pays for unemployment insurance is also directly tied to the number of claimant that company has had.

Some Unions the employee is a company employee working under a Union Contract.
Like the UAW.

What unemployment costs? Those are paid by the government. Businesses pay the tax when workers are working.

Employeers have different unemployment ratings. They pay the state for the unemployment an employee recieves.
The more on ones unemployment rolls, the companies cost goes up.
.

 

[KLB]

Employeers have different unemployment ratings. They pay the state for the unemployment an employee recieves.
The more on ones unemployment rolls, the companies cost goes up.

No. They pay the state a tax on wages earned by employees.

That tax can go up if a company has a lot of employees that file for unemployment.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

You think a company has to pay unemployment if they have layoffs?


True. Still not paying costs while the employees are staying home.

Most companies just prefer to actually operate rather than lock out their employees and not operate.

Quite possible I was wrong about the first. But still their taxes going up as a result of the lockout is costs related to the lockout. And I will agree that most would rather keep operating rather than do a lockout.

Some Unions the employee is a company employee working under a Union Contract.
Like the UAW.

Yes I know. Those are the type I was referring to. And the type I am most familiar with.

 

[bwframe]

 

[bwframe]