We’re All Union Members Now
Did you get your card? Are you planning to vote in the upcoming steward election? What — you didn’t know you are a member of the UAW?
Yes, the UAW. The Unwise Auto Workers. The union that helped crash the storied American automobile industry in which many of them were employed. Thanks to the Democratic Congress’ auto bailout legislation — the “government meddles in private industry” legislation — American taxpayers are now the proud majority owners of General Motors.
But while Americans may think our government bailed out an auto company, Congress is more accurately responsible for the bailout of a union. From Timothy P. Carneya, writing in the Washington Examiner:
The union’s $1.98 million to Democratic candidates last cycle (not counting the $4.87 million in independent expenditures to elect Obama president) is more than any PAC spent on Republicans.
Obama, who has never held a private sector job, sought to save the workers and unions which supported him.
We can add our ownership of GM to our stakes in Chrysler, selected banks, and other corporations, all of which Obama claimed were “too big to fail” — a slogan that defines our time of descent towards socialism. You may not have considered owning these auto companies in your 401(k), but you own them now and bear the pain of their losses. They seem to be bad investments, much like the $7 billion of bailout funding that Chrysler will not repay U.S. taxpayers — a revelation that was buried deep within Chrysler’s bankruptcy filing but confirmed by the Obama administration. All of this because the American industry responsible for creating the assembly line and producing the Model T has not been able to adapt, while foreign manufacturers do quite well building their vehicles right here in the United States.
Prior to the downturn, foreign manufacturers employed 113,000 American citizens, compared to 239,000 employed by the domestic auto industry. But the Big Three’s hourly labor costs have been 65 percent higher than those of foreign competitors.
How is that possible?
In 2005, upwards of 12,000 UAW “workers” were paid — stay in your chairs — not to work. The Big Three and their suppliers paid billions to keep downsized UAW members on the payroll as part of a UAW contract.
One UAW member, Ken Pool, said he would show up to work and then do crossword puzzles. He earned more than $31 an hour, plus benefits.
One of the darker puzzles about wingnuttiness in our holy Homeland™ is the sustained marketability of the union-bashin’ product.
Naturally Uncle Scrooge and Daddy Warbucks and the rest of the employin’ classes have nothin’ good to say about uppity lowers who confront their predestined betters head-on. But why should anybody outside the charmed circle of economic OnePercenters give a hoot one way or the other?
Neocomrade B. Littlefield seems to be only a hired hand (“Republican strategist”) himself. Yet I daresay he gets a real spiritual kick out of bad-mouthin’ so-called “union thugs” and deplorin’ the very existence of such a shockin’ abomination as the Black Lake Golf Club.
Amateur social-scientizing gets one only so far hereabouts. It is not too difficult to work out why there should be no Old Euro _solidarność_ here in the _Heimatland Gottes_, but the further degeneration from neutrality and even-handedness to contemptuous hostility remains a puzzle.
Happy days.
JHM dba “Nongolfer,”
I feel your pain. All those mean republicans, hard-hearted conservatives and troglodyte libertarians fail to appreciate all your hard work. You worked and some rich guy took all the profits, leaving poor you with just a pittance for your labors. Perhaps if you wrote a letter to Karl Marx, he’d see your point of view, “Workers unite!”
On the other hand, maybe you should try running a business for which you’ll depend for your own income. Maybe then you’ll understand why the higher ups that balance costs and revenues without benefit of union stewardship to protect them wish to participate at a higher rate than protected, “I’m on break” workers.
Maybe not.
Remember that the unions are a government-sponsored monopoly, and that their takings from employer and customers are, in effect, unfunded mandates.
How could anyone expect for a company to remain profitable when people who are no longer needed to do their part in producing a vehicle are actually paid to just show up and not do anything productive. It does not take a genius to know that this will only cost both the consumer but also the profit margin of the company and is not sustainable. Not to mention pensions that also raise costs to the company. The unions did not make real concessions and in doing so killed the company that provided their livelihood.
Nothing like an attack on a caricature of the opposition to win an argument, JHM.
Next time try and throw in some neocon references, or go after the Jooooos, and then you’ll have a real winner of a comment!
#1 JHM:
“Naturally Uncle Scrooge and Daddy Warbucks and the rest of the employin’ classes have nothin’ good to say about uppity lowers who confront their predestined betters head-on.”
Is that what you think a union does? What history book are you stuck in? The days of John L. Lewis and Walter Reuther are long,long gone friend.
The fact is that modern unions are little more than employment agencies for the industries that contract with them. And the union is run for the benefit of the Union leadership and the trustees of the various pension and welfare schemes.
Shall we examine how much the President and Executive level of AFSCME or SEIU or UAW make?
It’s available at the Department of labor’s website…LM-2 forms.
If a fellow was paid $31.00 to do crossword puzzles all day, you can bet safe money that the union plans saw at least that much for his man-day of “labor”. That’s the “vigorish” that having an organized workplace costs you.
Did it escape your attention how the UAW was out front agitating for the bailout…and what was the result? GM closes factories in the USA and Canada, but keeps it plants in Mexico open.
There is no functional difference at all between Corporate management and Labor managment.
It’s all about exploiting the wage-earner and screwing the customer.
JHM – Trouble is, some of those predestined GM OnePercenters started out on the line as, eh, well, “union thugs” and had the misfortune of crossin’ the line (so to speak) an becomin’ well – Daddy Warbucks. Matter of fact, that was occurrin’ all over the Heimatland Gottes. But now there’s a new fairness comin’ to town an’ a new Uncle Non-Scrooge who’s mandated a ceiling over at the plant that blocks out the sun’s rays and casts a dark shadow over the uppity ones. (Though this new Uncle Non-Scrooge is Himself the Workers Light). Heck, you may want to bump your head on that ceiling someday – and see if the sun’s still shinin’ bright – but from the sounds of it – probably not. Trouble is the “union thugs” are now predestined to be well – “union thugs”. Trouble is some of us “uppity lowers” who reside outside your circle of friends don’t want to buy your “People’s Car”. Trouble is, some of us saw old Chief Pontiac as a symbol of defiance and bravery and we put our money where our mouth was – into GM muscle. Trouble is the Car Crusher has come to God’s Country.
Trouble is I’ve got to work today so my Uppity Lowers can still provide put food on the table.
Peace
After literally forcing one of the greatest of all American companies down the rathole of bankruptcy and abject dependent on handouts, the best you can come up with, “Nongolfer,” is name-calling and obscure references to 1940′s-era cartoons?
Why do you expect “even-handedness” after the damage you and your “comrades” (no Neocomrade needed here) have done to GM and Chrysler? The most ironic thing is that, sooner or later, the workers that you purport to defend are left worse off than the workers at a non-union Toyota plant in Kentucky. Quite the success, there, bub – you’ve got all the room in the *world* to call Mr. Littlefield a wingnut, eh?
Let me summarize: “Unions with hardworking citizens organized in pursuit of fairness” = reasonable. “Unions engaged in thuggery in pursuit of cushy, no-work jobs at taxpayer expense” = stupid and destructive. Guess which one pops to mind when we read screeds like the one scrawled by Nongolfer?
JHM – what?
Did someone say something about a free round of golf? I’ve got my clubs in the back of my Honda Odyssey right now.
Ah! But we’re also shareholders (King Fraud said!)….so what I want to know is, how do I reach the broker who can sell my shares?
1.JHM knows lots of big words and is apparently leery about 1:1 competition with his peers in the workplace. His party has been promising (and waiting for) “happy days” for at least 60 years.
I knew unions were a ripoff 50 years before common sense conservatives were being called “wingnuts”. Of course, being called names IS helpful in that it helps us to understand our opponents.
One of the big problems the left will always have with conservative Americans is that we know who we are. They always have to check with somebody else about their own identity.
Same old tired tirade. Blame the unions, blame Obama, and whine about how much it costs to clean up the mess, forgetting who made it in the first place.
GM and Chrysler did not do a good job of building vehicles that appeal to Americans. This cannot be laid at the feet of the UAW or Obama. Management simply failed to prepare adequately for the future, and now the companies must pay the price for their shortsightedness. Blaming line-workers for the failures of the white-collar folks is par for the course, but most people can see through this transparent attempt to blame the victim.
I won’t claim to be pleased that the USA has spent so much to bail out these companies – I would have been happy with immediate nationalization and reorganization – but even blaming Obama for the bailout would be disingenuous – after all, it was under Bush that this whole bailout mess started, and he left the difficult work for his successor.
I understand that from your perspective all opportunities to bash unions are good, and should not be neglected, but I feel that honesty is more important.
Peace.
DS
Actually, you got it completely backward – we’re all unwitting stockholders in an enterprise run by the union. We’re going to get wiped out. The retires and current employees will continue to get their payments, long after Chevrolet and Cadillac join Studebaker and Nash in the history books of Americana.
Like Archie Bunker said: “gee, our old LaSalle ran great”…
And just to make some trolls’ heads explode, who was the only president in US history to belong to a union?
BTW, I’m withdrawn in good standing from the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, and Warehousemen, and the Musicians Union. What are the trolls’ union credentials?
Oh. Barber’s union. Never mind.
Since only someone really interested would wade through this stuff, here’s the 2008 Department of Labor LM-2 filed by the UAW:
http://kcerds.dol-esa.gov/query/orgReport.do
Scroll down to section 11 and you’ll see that Mr. G is knocking down about 175k a year in total comps.
The other officers of the union are all above 125k a year.
Section 12 has Employees of the Union, (as opposed to rank and file), compensation…some of them ain’t doin too badly either.
Now keep in mind that this is only for the UAW’s American branch…these bozos might get chunks of dough from their branches in Canada and Mexico
If you’re a rank and file member of a union, take a traipse through the DoL’s search engine and sniff out your own crew, I can almost guarantee that you’ll find affiliates that you’ve never heard of and locals that nobody belongs to, and all of them pony up into the big kitty at the headquarters level in one way or another.
I came to a realization and got mad, then very depressed. Barry O is a much smarter man than I thought.
http://animal-farm.us/change/we-are-all-socialists-now-part-ii-454
Government ownership of GM and Chrysler is fraught with conflicts of interest and waste. The only way for any responsible American to respond is to boycotte GM and Chrysler until the Government divests of its stock. Not buying a Chevy has the be the easiest and most effective way to protest the government. A successful boycotte will bring the UAW to extinction and embarrass all those proactive socialists in Washington. These bureaucratic yahoos will soon discover that a Yale law degree is poor preparation to run a factory. Toyota will eat them alive… and we can have fun watching.
http://www.modchipman.com/images/1736.jpg
If we, the American taxpayers, now own majority holdings in GM and Chrysler, then I have a solution. There are dealers across the nation that have already paid their cost to get stock. Many of these dealers are going broke and being forced out of business. On the other hand, the increase in corn ethanol is making many of us with older paid off cars wary because of the many stories about how ethanol is killing off old cars. We the taxpayers “own” these companies. But we can’t afford to buy our own products. So instead of sinking billions more in GM and Chrysler, how about the feds give the money in the form of a gift card to the amount of maybe $10K toward the price of a new car. This avoids the taxpayers having to pay twice. This makes it where the dealers closing can at least get rid of their stock and pay of their creditors. And it makes it where the taxpayers get something back for a change.
Although our tax money is being used to infuse the dead GM & Chrysler, the UAW possesses complete control of the car companies & President Obama is the CEO. President Obama will ultimately control GM & Chrysler. It’s all one huge prid pro quo & cronyism.
I find it ironic President Obama, community organizer, wants to control every USA private company, yet he himself has never run his own private business. The man is a megalomaniac given his narcissism.
GM & Chrysler will continue to bleed red instead of going into the black thanks to the Federal Government’s intervention via the corrupt Democrats, President Obama, & the UAW.
I seem to remember that Obama had jobs in the private sector, when he was just out of college. It’s a part of his life he doesn’t highlight in “Dreams from my Father”, only briefly mentioning the whole period. He had a job somewhere in the financial sector (I think) and supposedly had risen far enough to have a secretary. He also had a white girlfriend, with whom he broke up because he “didn’t feel comfortable” with her family. No mention of any racism on their part (this is true throughout the book, as far as I remember) but racial consciousness without any prompting, on his, is of course his main theme.
As to whose fault it is that American auto companies are falling apart: can’t anyone accept that it’s *everyone’s* fault. It seems if you think that the corporate idiots who ran General Motors are responsible, you must then think the Union blameless, and vice versa. In actual point of fact, neither group did anything to support the company, and when the economy went south so did its sales. If the corporate guys are so incompetent, then why is it that all the successful companies in America are in right-to-work states? If you answer that this is because they’re run by more competent executives, then the question becomes: Why did those more competent executives go to such lengths to avoid the unions? I think that question answers itself. Why would you pay more for less work? You’d have to be an idiot (or a GM executive) to think that a good idea.
One sidenote: when our brilliant government minds decided the public should own GM, and the executive branch’s people began huddling with GM’s top executives every evening, one of the first subjects of discussion was no doubt which plants to close. I bet the one at the top of the government’s list is the Saturn plant in Spring Hill. TN is a right to work state, and the existence of the plant has long stuck in the UAW’s craw.
UAW agrees to suspend GM job banks on Feb 2
by Jonathon Ramsey on Jan 28th 2009 at 3:22PM
The UAW idled Chrysler’s jobs bank earlier this week, and as of February 2, the UAW and General Motors will shut down the job bank it also maintains for its workers. GM is paying the 1,600 workers currently in the system 85% of their on-the-job wages. As of February 3, they will receive a measure of supplemental pay from GM and can apply for unemployment, the total of which should come to 72% of their former pay. The move potentially leaves Ford’s jobs bank as the only one left running, but Ford has yet to comment on its status.
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/01/28/uaw-agrees-to-suspend-gm-job-banks-on-feb-2/
UAW agrees to suspend GM job banks on Feb 2
by Jonathon Ramsey on Jan 28th 2009 at 3:22PM
The UAW idled Chrysler’s jobs bank earlier this week, and as of February 2, the UAW and General Motors will shut down the job bank it also maintains for its workers. GM is paying the 1,600 workers currently in the system 85% of their on-the-job wages. As of February 3, they will receive a measure of supplemental pay from GM and can apply for unemployment, the total of which should come to 72% of their former pay. The move potentially leaves Ford’s jobs bank as the only one left running, but Ford has yet to comment on its status.
David N, the source for American car companies’ stagnation is right at the heart of the union, the UAW. A true bankruptcy would have canceled the UAW contracts & given life to GM; however, since the government is part of the equation, the Democrats empowered the UAW since the unions give millions to Democrats every election to retain the power they are losing in the private sector. This is not a shot in the arm, but an addict dying from a drug overdose. The unions are dying anyway since they cannot compete with non-union companies. Non-union companies provide better product & superior service. The unions are only looking out for themselves.
GOVERNMENT & UNIONS CANNOT SAVE GM
Only the free market can recreate private sector companies.
http://greensrealworld.blogspot.com/2009/06/finally-europe-getting-it-right.html
One of the best things about JHM’s argument, such as it is, is that he neglects to recognize how the arrangement with foreign car companies is much loved by almost everyone – the foreign companies, the domestic workers who put their time in there (and often reject union idiocy) and the consumer. The only ones who hate it are the labor monopolists and fellow travelers.
But more to the point is the foolishness by which JHM and others like him equate unions with workers. Or unions with the poor. The fact is that unions exist to protect the jobs of those in the union. NOT to expand jobs to people who have not been so blessed. It’s a cartel. One effect of a cartel is to drive down prices for those unwilling or unable to play.
Black South Africans were notoriously locked out of jobs by white unionists. In the U.S. unions variously controlled by Irish, Italians, Poles and others effectively locked out other ethnicities.
Given any population of workers and a “natural” turnover and hiring rate, you can see pretty easily that the presence of a union will likely drive down wages throughout the rest of the market. If Company A, under non-union conditions, hires on 200 employees per year out of a given population, but under union conditions is only able to hire on 100 employees per year (due to the added labor costs that are the purpose of a union), what happens to the net 100 workers? They compete in the rest of the market for jobs. You now have a surplus of 100 workers. What happens to compensation? The union guys do well. Which is why they’ll sometimes act with thuggish violence to protect their loot. But everyone else – including the poor “scab” who just wants to work – will do worse.
So the question is, given JHM’s love of unions, why he hates minorities and poor, non-union workers so much.
Turnabout…
P.S. It’s been shown over and over that born wealthy tend to be liberal. Self-made wealthy tend to be economically conservative/libertarian. They have an adult’s appreciation for the mechanism that got them there.
David S: Shabby, dude. Sorry.
But this: “GM and Chrysler did not do a good job of building vehicles that appeal to Americans. This cannot be laid at the feet of the UAW or Obama.”
is rich. Really? How about quality scores? I don’t know about you, but having all the cheap plastic parts break or squeak because the company had to cut material costs to make up for slacker union wage costs is not appealing to me. If American cars are getting good scores for quality and reliability these days, that’s news, because they’ve been awful for decades. The Koreans beat them to the 10-year warranty. Why? Because the Koreans were confident they could do it, and the Americans were confident they had better start pretending.
You don’t think any of that had to do with the culture of entitlement that is part and parcel to the purpose of a union?
Nobody said The Obama built awful GM cars. Nobody even suggested he knew which end of a wrench was the business end. But then, if he doesn’t know a damned thing about building cars, why is he arrogating to himself the right to decide the fate and operations of car companies?
Don’t feed us this “all that’s bad is Bush’s fault, and all that’s good is Obama’s” nonsense. (Yes, that’s what it is.)
Bush didn’t build lousy cars at Chrysler either, and even if he’s “to blame” (he isn’t, but let’s just go with it) that tells us absolutely nothing about Obama’s decisions. Christ, it’s like we’re talking foreign policy here, where nobody does anything in the world according to their own lights, but merely as a reaction to the evils of America and/or Bush. Obama’s a grownup. He’s the Word Made Flesh. He’s fully capable of realizing that if you find yourself in a hole you don’t grab the biggest shovel made by man and pretend that coming out on the side of China is a solution.
Right on.. The funniest part of this is when people try to argue against the points you just made here they don’t have a response. They just use terms like, “rich capitalists” and assume that all the people with money and own these companies are Republicans that are just being mean to the poor.
@28. Amos:
The union doesn’t decide to make a cheap car, or a large car – that’s the management. Union wages are not the cause of cheap plastic parts, despite your strained logic. Wages at UAW plants are not that different from any other north american car plants. The problem goes back decades to a period when GM absolutely dominated the motor vehicle industry worldwide, but failed to plan for the eventual competition that savaged their market share.
Rather than scramble to catch up on the engineering side, Detroit played accounting games and fought emissions laws, while banking on the long term success of plainly unsustainable vehicle sales. If the management teams at GM and Chrysler had been worth their salaries, both companies would be in much better shape. There is no way that any reasonable person can assign blame to the line workers for the massive failure of leadership.
If US car companies had built a reliable car that matched Japanese vehicle quality thirty years ago, there would be no need to mistakenly blame the unions for the bailout. Corporate greed and short-sightedness is the ultimate cause.
Peace.
DS