Since we're talking about union inefficiency... a large company here in Vancouver has a software shop. As with all software shops, there's an IT department. I currently work with someone that worked in the software department. This is his story, but it's stuck with me.

He got a new PC at work and didn't like where they placed it (he wanted it on the desk, they put it under). So he requested a move and the IT Department sat on it for a few weeks, so he got fed up and moved it himself.

A few days later, the IT guys (yes plural) showed up to do the move. One guy to physically move the machine, a second guy to plug in all the connectors (yes, I'm serious). When they saw that the PC had been moved without them doing it, they shut down the entire floor and made all employees leave the area; they weren't allowed back in until IT performed a check of all hardware, locations etc on the floor of the building. Additionally (of course) they complained to their boss, and it went up the chain to the union head. It turned into a big deal about how the non-unionized software guys are taking jobs from the unionized IT guys. In the end the guy quit because of how ridiculous it was.

When someone talks about unions I shudder because I can just imagine this sort of crap going on in the auto industry also.

 

Actually, the smaller shops are more like socialist shops. Everyone pulls together for the good of everyone: That's socialism.

The union shop you describe is more like actual capitalism: everyone looking out for themselves.

[qipte]Businesses should not be responsible for paying welfare to unqualified or lazy workers. It's also bad for morale when hard workers see lazy slobs doing nothing all day and getting away with it day after day. Trim the fat.[/QUOTE]

1. Businesses don't knowingly hire unqualified workers.
2. Businesses pay pensions (not welfare) to those who have served a very long time & retired.
3. Lazy slobs have a tendancy not to move up and remain in a lowly position till they eventially get fired. Management has goals, and other people in the shop get tired of pulling the weight of someone that doesn't put out the effort.

I've worked with unions as well. As a group, they are a pain in the *** sometimes with specific rules and the occasional whiner, but I have never seen or heard from anyone who actually has union working for them any of the stereotypes you're mentioning.

1973 to 1975 & 1979 to 1981.

The difference is that the UAW is very much aware that their very existance is on the line. The last 2 labor contracts have been shockingly liberal with compromises and short of any other way of putting it, "give backs". Layoffs are easier, closing a factory is easier, wages for starting workers is much lower, retirement for starting and mid grade workers is different, healthcare is no longer specifically the burden of the auto industry. There's plenty other examples.

However, all this is moot with regards with where GM (and the rest of the auto industry) finds itself today. 10 years ago, Ford had enough money in their banks to nearly buy up GM. Chrysler had almost more money than they could spend. GM (by GM standards) was doing very well. That was under far worse union rules and pay scales than it is today. What's different? Over reliance on Trucks and SUVs while abandoning the car market.

I've been saying since early this decade that it was a dangerous idea that left it venerable. I've also been ranting about it the past number of months. Now it seems that someone else came to that conclusion as well:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/26/bu...0motors&st=cse

Short of it is that it's fashionable and easy to blame the unions for every ill in the auto industry. But it's a lie unless you realize that the bigger share of the blame lies with the decision makers who led US automakers to all but abandon the car market and all but put all resources into the truck market.

 

It's been going on in the auto industry for YEARS!!!! The original idea behind
a union is LONG gone. They are now so harmful to the auto industry and so
many people are blind(willingly and unwillingly) to this fact. I have family in
the auto industry and it makes me sick when I hear day in and day out the
crap that goes on. Don't get me wrong it's not the only problem, not by a long shot, but a significant
one still.

 

oh..BS...my brother just bought 2 new silverados for the business and a new yukon for the family....3 months after the yukon was bought pulling out of the garage the yukon gave an indication of not being happy....huge oil puddle right there on the garage floor....lukily under warrantty and just a bad seal...did it worry me...no...i had oil dry still around from my harley days in the 80's...far as big 3 being of any significance..no...236Kish is all they employee...(.6%) of GDP..compare to small business which employees roughly 67million people and is one-third of GDP.....thats puts detroit north in perspective..if they go under the effect overall will not be felt by the average guy...heck dealerships will only close down the location affected and move the workers to the foreign owned dealership as they will double in size..reality is they just dont matter anymore....do i care about those workers..yes..but what can they really do in detroit north until they finally unload the historical entitlements....are there smart people at detroit north...sure..it will be interesting to see if they want all the baggage that will come with pelosi offering the monies and then forcing kalifornia EPA, CAFE requirements on them....last time i checked even charlie rangall was fighting for detroit north not to be mandated into those atrocious policies

 

With a Democratic congress and president, this will not happen. Put it out of your mind and forget it, because the lynchpin to this "bailout" deal will be saving well-paying union jobs.

 

At least make your drivel easy to read. Its just an incoherant thought separated by periods.

 

I'm here to tell you that there are incredible numbers of cutbacks -- from people to expenses to things such as shutting off the escalators in buildings as soon as most employees leave the building......

 

'Booting the union" solves very little.
Think about this: what happens to an area, such as Lordstown/Youngstown/Warren Ohio when you do that? The workers for GM and suppliers make less money - they very well may lose their homes - less money in the local economy..............

The REAL problem is that we need to level the playing field.

I'm not going to go into it one more time other than to say "you want to play in the U.S.? -- then you must get rid of your tarriffs/protectionist/trade-restriction policies........simple as that.

Someone on another thread posted "it's time to think of 'us' instead of 'me' ..." and I think that's one of the wisest things I've seen posted in some time.

 

I agree right up to the point that no one is going to bail me out if I suddenly decide I don't want to pay my mortgage or that I didn't understand English when it said variable or ARM. I have no problem helping people who can't help themselves but a BIG problem with helping those who won't help themselves or who got themselves into a situation they had to have known was potentially bad.

And I do agree that "booting" the union is not the answer; slowly transforming the union to more resemble private industry pay scales is the approach they've been using in my area as American Axle and others have closed facilities and offered buyouts. You can only raise import tariffs so much before it comes back to haunt you on the other end...

 

holy crap! i just looked at their stock report. thats freaking awful.

hope you guys dont plan on cashing in that warranty

 

This is a great point that may be lost amongst this thread, but a basic definition of inflation is the devaluing of the dollar (things don't go up in price when it comes to inflation, the dollar is worth less and thus will buy less). The more money in circulation the less the dollar is worth. So when the government dumps 1 trillion dollars into circulation in the form of bailouts (which actually comes out of thin air, so don't think of it as tax dollars) it would have a affect on inflation, how much I dont know cause I'm not sure how much is in circulation. Another way to think of it is that money is created out of debt so every dollar that is lent out puts another dollar into circulation thus raising inflation.
Now where it gets confusing is with interest, If money is created out of debt it is impossible to ever get rid of debt because of the interest that is charged on loans. bankruptcies are built into the financial system because by charging interest on loans there is no way to pay of loans. Lets say we start out with no debt, so the government goes to the federal reserve and say we need 1 trillion dollars so 1 trillion dollars is dumped into circulation in the form of loans and to use a round number 10% is charged on these loans, how can you pay back 1.1 trillion if there is only 1 trillion in circulation, you can't. so it trickles down and some poor bugger has to claim bankruptcy. Well now it is big businesses claiming bankruptcy so they are getting bailed out in the form of these huge loans which are impossible to pay back which down the line creates more bankruptcies and also raises inflation even higher.

Sorry if it seemed like a rant or didn't make any sense for some, but these bailouts scare me. I don't have an answer though, allowing things to take their course would just crush the economy forget crippling it.

 

News flash:

Inflation is not an issue, nor is it important.

First, in a growing economy, there is ALWAYS inflation. Whether it's 2% or 10%.

Second, inflation is just as easily caused by the falling value of that country's currency as it is by rising cost of a major commodity (fod or fuel).

Third, there is no real inflationary pressure on the US economy now that fuel prices have collasped and the value of other countries currencies is dipping at a relatively quick pace next to the US dollar. Yes, borrowing is bound to go up and I suspect "printing" money (not exacly how it's done today, but it is the same principal) is also in the equasion but confidence drived the dollar just as much as other factors, and confidence of a US recovery seems to be pretty good.

Fourth... and the most important thing to remember is this:

[b][u]IT'S DEFLATION that's extremnely dangerous to ANY economy and the hardest economic problem to control!

We know how to control inflation. Ratchet up intrest rates to cool buying and call it a day. Deflation is another story. Once it starts, there's little that can be done. Deflation is essentially what got us into the depression. Demand collapses, people are thrown out of work, demand collapses even more. As a result, prices for goods and services are pushed down to a point where the price for a good dips below the price to make it and companies go under. Wages plunge because there's a larger available workforce, and the rich-poor gap expands at a high rate.

In the 1930s, this was kept in check with (and this will gag alot of you) a income tax surcharge on the wealthy. It jumped the maximum tax rate from 23% to 63% then raised it again to 79% in 1935, and then in 1942 (wartime) the maximum tax rate was raised to 94%!

It dropped to 91% in 1945, 84% in 1950, jumped back to 92% in 1951, dropped to 84% in 1964 when the Kennedy tax cut dropped it to 70%.

The Reagan tax cut of '81 dropped the maximum tax rate from 70% to 50%

Throughout the 80s, various middle class deductions were repealed while at the same time the maximum tax rate dropped to 33%, going back up to 39% in '93. Today, the maximum tax rate is 35%. The lowest of any first world nations.

As a group, we've become kneejerk parinoid to the words "inflation" and "taxes". There's more than a few crazies on this board who think that the government runs on air and that in times of financial meltdowns the answer is drop taxes, reduce spending, and get the government out of the way. If that track had taken place during the depression, the United States of America would not be around to defeat Hitler, let alone today.

During wartime, it's mandatory that the US find ways of funding it. During the Civil War, and income tax was instituted. During World War 1, the Income tax was revised and wound up a part of the constitution. During WW2, the maximum tax rate went to 94%. The Korean War & the Cold War nuclear development and arming was fueled by maximun tax rates of over 90%.

No tax increase was done when we ran Vietnam and it eventually resulted in inflation and recession. The Saudis covered the expense of the 1st Iraq War and the US prospered after a economic hicup. The 2nd Iraq War has been run essentially unfunded, and we're paying the price today.

There are no free rides. The US government's income is a shadow of what it once was. We have dirt low taxes. So low that China is buying us out and controling policy. Inflation has no effect on any working person in the US as long as income keeps pace or exceeds the rate of inflation.

The real dangers are Deflation, Underfunded government. But the worse by far is a population that's so uneducated and so intellectually unintrested in actually taking the time and finding out facts that they'd rather parrot what some shrill says or is far more intrested in carrying some imaginary conservative or liberal banner and espouse ideas that would exasberate problems or even collaspe the United States' economy.

Blaming unions is dumb. Griping what GM obviously should have done over the years (I'm including myself on this item) doesn't matter. Complaining that people making over a quarter million per year will see their taxes return to 1990s levels is retarded if you aren't making over a quarter million per year, and when you look at not only what those people used to pay in taxes historically, but what they'd pay in other 1st world nations seems like whining.

Federal expendatures go ballistic when the economy goes down. Money goes out to the unemployed, various state agencies, and troubled businesses while money coming in as taxes plunges. That can be answered in 3 ways: Increased taxes, increased borrowing (most likely from China), or increase the amount of money in circulation (lowering the value of money and risking increased inflation). Pumping money to fix the problem as fast as possible is the best answer to minimize those 3 actions.

The issue here is simply getting loans. Loans to buy cars & homes, run businesses. Things that create the need for production and work. We get the money flowing, we get the economy moving.

If we don't, we're in deep doodoo.

 

gunionM - Very well put.

Regardless of what the news networks or uniformed "Me centered" people are parroting, this recession is all about a very steady loss of jobs we as a country have sustained over the last ten years.

We need GM, Ford, Chrysler, and every one of the good paying jobs they create.

 

Since when for probably 99% of working people has income kept pace with inflation.

Borrowing more and more is what got us into this problem in the first place please explain how it will get us out.

 

No, lending money to "risky" people and to people who just flat out ignored "variable or ARM" is what got us into this mess.