Could easily avoid this by paying workers properly.
but that could hurt the poor shareholders
deleted by creator
Combining pay with benefits as a single dollar amount is gibberish.
Why don’t you list the actual hourly wage they’re asking for?
deleted by creator
The automakers combine benefits with wages to make the number seem much larger than it actually is, so the workers sound greedy.
Their current wages are around $20/hr. Calling that “$60/hr with benefits” is beyond misleading , it’s fucking disgusting. You can’t pay rent with benefits, fuck off.
deleted by creator
Don’t tone police me honey 🙄 when you side with the bosses you become my enemy. Don’t be surprised when I treat you like one.
The demand is to increase the top hourly rate to $47 per hour - so use that number, not the numbers fed to you by the industry. That’s what wages should be if they had kept up with productivity and inflation over the past several decades.
deleted by creator
Because the combined number is how much they’re costing the company.
How many billions did each of those companies make last year?
Keep pushing and the jobs get relocated completely. This latest push is the union signing the death warrant for the area.
Relocated to where? You know they would have to build a new factory and train new employees, right? Who’s going to make all the cars until then?
General Motors currently operates 4 production facilities in Mexico, as does Ford.
Stellantis has 7.
You’re right, it’ll take some time to shift completely, but this sort of push by the union is the kind of catalyst that can light a fire under execs to get it done.
What’s cheaper, what the union is asking for or the cost of moving production? When those lines cross on the graph, the union is fucked.
I agree, that is what the oligarchy will try to do, so sending key manufacturing jobs overseas should be illegal and punished with seizure of assets and ownership of the plants redistributed to the workers.
They’re the source of all the company’s profits.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
“benefits” is doing so much heavy lifting and contains so much bullshit there.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
And?
You should celebrate average people getting paid more, not complaining about it
We don’t need CEOs who do basically nothing getting paid tens/hundreds of millions a year
deleted by creator
Either you added a zero or forgot a decimal
deleted by creator
Less than the ceos make by far and they aren’t doing near the actual work
deleted by creator
These laborers are the only reason the company has profits or products, I don’t get your point. They should get their share of the pie no matter what the dollar amount is.
Also, counting the cost of benefits isn’t a fair comparison, you can’t pay rent or buy bread with dental insurance.
deleted by creator
These auto makers made $32 billion in profit last year! Just stop. UAW isn’t asking for anything outrageous
deleted by creator
Past performance? What about the past concessions UAM made to keep the doors open for the manufacturers during the great recession? Those companies promised to return them but never did?
deleted by creator
The bottom line is this workers made the company record money. Bottom line is the CEOs, executives, and stake holders have themselves 40% raises so why not the workers? And those concessions by the workers were not made during the pandemic. They were made during the 2008 great recession. The auto makers are not going to go broke because the workers demands. That’s just a lie.
deleted by creator
People disagreeing with you is not toxic.
deleted by creator
Just because your opponent is big doesn’t mean they’re going to win. This is an example of taking advantage of their size. They can’t move quickly, so they tried to guess.
This union is run by some smart people. They didn’t strike all at once so they can rachet up the pain in the future.
“Strike preparation and contingency planning is part of our normal process in a contract negotiation year — as a responsible business we have to do that,” a spokesperson told In These Times. “They made it very clear that a strike was possible and we did everything we needed to do to protect the business.”
Hmm. If only there was another way to protect the business.
A strike means the business has already failed shareholders. The business is inevitably going to make a new agreement with the union anyway, they should have done that before the strike stops the work, tanking profitability to near zero.
I wish the shareholders would hold them accountable since that’s all these companies seem to care about. Strikes are 100% avoidable by the company. It is lost profit with no gain for them. They are failing their fiduciary duty and shareholders should make that clear.
Totally agree. Maybe I needed a /s? ;)
I don’t know shit, but I would think the workers know exactly what factories are making preparations (by watching them happen). Further, they know exactly what the build process is, due to doing it.
I wonder if the union can rotate the workers on strike.
Unions can rotate strikes, it would be a form of workshare. Although that word is loosely defined so it could mean two people doing one job halftime like we saw during the pandemic. Anyway, rotation depends on how the previous collective bargaining agreement was written and if the owners are willing to allow it. Most often business owners will just shutter the doors rather than deal with that bullshit but it’s possible.
