United Auto Workers strike and how it would affect the economy!

[+ augustus]

19 hours ago, Marc in Calif said:

A very deceptive chart.  Why is the trend from 1990-2005 supposed to be the Rule, while the flattening out after that is supposed to be the deviation that needs correcting with a 40% pay rise?  What is the trend from 1940, 1950, 1960, 1970, etc.?  Are the profit-sharing checks or enhanced benefits taken in account? (No). 

[handiacefailure]

1 hour ago, augustus said:

A very deceptive chart.  Why is the trend from 1990-2005 supposed to be the Rule, while the flattening out after that is supposed to be the deviation that needs correcting with a 40% pay rise?  What is the trend from 1940, 1950, 1960, 1970, etc.?  Are the profit-sharing checks or enhanced benefits taken in account? (No). 

Good point.   Just their 100% paid insurance and pension and retiree health insurance is a huge part of their compensation but I don't think a lot of the autoworkers realize how expensive those benefits are.   

[handiacefailure]

1 hour ago, Luv2play said:

I bought my first Japanese car in 1975. Their quality and prices were super competitive. It was a Nissan 280Z. I kept that car until 1991 and I sold it to a kid who promptly wrapped it around a fence post.

Later the Koreans came on the scene and the Asian producers expanded into larger sedans, SUVs and trucks. My longest lasting car is one I still have, a 2000 Mercedes. 130,000 miles on her and will probably outlast me.

I bought a used Camry my final year in college and was nervous because it had 70K miles   I was told that was barely breaking the car in and I kept it for five years and had almost 140K miles on it when I traded it in.   Only issue I had was the brake cylindar and there was some kind of recall on it so the dealershp was able to get it pushed through on the recall.

I made the mistake of buying a dodge omni one time because I was in a financial situation and wanted to save money.   Worse mistake ever.   That car was always breaking down.   

[Marc in Calif]

1 hour ago, augustus said:

A very deceptive chart.  Why is the trend from 1990-2005 supposed to be the Rule, while the flattening out after that is supposed to be the deviation that needs correcting with a 40% pay rise?  What is the trend from 1940, 1950, 1960, 1970, etc.?  Are the profit-sharing checks or enhanced benefits taken in account? (No). 

You say "flattening out." Economists would say "decline." 

Why didn't you mention auto company profits and salaries/benefits paid to CEOs/execs? Could it be that overall CEO pay at the Big Three companies rose 40% from 2013 to 2022 while average worker pay decreased? Would that spoil your narrative? 

[marylander1940]

2 hours ago, augustus said:

A very deceptive chart.  Why is the trend from 1990-2005 supposed to be the Rule, while the flattening out after that is supposed to be the deviation that needs correcting with a 40% pay rise?  What is the trend from 1940, 1950, 1960, 1970, etc.?  Are the profit-sharing checks or enhanced benefits taken in account? (No). 

Asking for a 40% pay rise is a way to get a 10% or 15% pay rise. Negotiations 101. 

[marylander1940]

1 hour ago, Marc in Calif said:

You say "flattening out." Economists would say "decline." 

Why didn't you mention auto company profits and salaries/benefits paid to CEOs/execs? Could it be that overall CEO pay at the Big Three companies rose 40% from 2013 to 2022 while average worker pay decreased? Would that spoil your narrative? 

Populism or antielite sentiment goes on and off according to convenience... 

Sky-high CEO pay is in focus as workers everywhere are demanding higher wages

WWW.NPR.ORG

---

As autoworkers' real wages fall, top executives at the Big Three carmakers continue to earn tens of millions of dollars each year — hundreds of times more than the...

Mary Barra in 1 day makes as much as most of her workers in 1 year....

[Marc in Calif]

19 minutes ago, marylander1940 said:

Populism or antielite sentiment goes on and off according to convenience... 

Mary Barra in 1 day makes as much as most of her workers in 1 year....

Most of today's so-called populists are pro-elite. They're pulling for Mary Barra and her cohorts to keep pulling ahead!

[marylander1940]

51 minutes ago, Marc in Calif said:

Most of today's so-called populists are pro-elite. They're pulling for Mary Barra and her cohorts to keep pulling ahead!

They can also turn on Mary Barra and call her "nasty woman", ugly , fat, prude, etc. if she ever criticizes the wrong person.

'Their elite" that allegedly has their back.... As long as other gets screwed everything's fine with them. Trolling is the end not the just the means. 

Edited September 17, 2023 by marylander1940

[Luv2play]

4 hours ago, augustus said:

A very deceptive chart.  Why is the trend from 1990-2005 supposed to be the Rule, while the flattening out after that is supposed to be the deviation that needs correcting with a 40% pay rise?  What is the trend from 1940, 1950, 1960, 1970, etc.?  Are the profit-sharing checks or enhanced benefits taken in account? (No). 

I have lived through most of these decades although only the latter half of the 1940's as an infant. In each of them except for the 70's workers pay increased significantly.

The 40s followed a decade of depression and the war powered workers wages and everyone had a job. The 50s were low inflation and post war expansion where a union job guaranteed a house in the new suburbs, a car in the garage and annual vacations. The 60s were still low inflation and two cars in the garage. The 70s we hit stagflation and high oil prices. 

And so on. It was only in the 80s when a new economic orthodoxy was introduced and trickle down economics  prevailed. From that point on workers and unions started to come under pressure and gradually lost ground. 

The 90s though were good times and it almost appeared that the US National debt would be retired. Sadly that came to an end with wars being waged across the middle east. 

Edited September 18, 2023 by Luv2play

[+ augustus]

The UAW just rejected a 21% pay offer.   This strike is going to flop for the same reason the Hollywood strikes are flopping: Nobody wants to buy their products.  A $80,000 pickup truck is just as unaffordable as a $20 movie ticket.  Everything's unraveling, and we're entering the era of "smash and grab."   The flash mob robberies in California and New York are metaphors for what's happening to our whole society.   Everybody is grabbing what they can and running for the exits.

[+ augustus]

9 hours ago, handiacefailure said:

Just their 100% paid insurance and pension and retiree health insurance is a huge part of their compensation but I don't think a lot of the autoworkers realize how expensive those benefits are.   

Agreed.  Just look at many of them on the picket line.  Many display physiques which have to tax the company’s budget for health insurance benefits. 

[+ augustus]

The striking workers can’t sell new cars to Americans that are remotely affordable.  Do they really think demanding outrageous wage increases will help them sell product or generate buzz from the public?  At some point no one will buy their products or support their business.  A stripped Dodge Ram is minimum 70K! Then they will look to the taxpayers for a bailout like in 2008-2009.  

[+ augustus]

Irony bonus: EVs can't and won't move the needle on climate change one single iota, this was all a feel-good exercise for the wokester elites. Little do the poor dupes at the UAW and elsewhere know.  

Consumers have the choice to buy vehicles from non-union producers with lower prices and better value and not buy vehicles from UAW factories.  People can barely afford groceries and now this nonsense!  

[Becket]

We act as if car makers charge 50k and up for vehicles just to roll around in obscene profits. But look what they put in cars now. A car is a computer system on wheels. We all want cars that obey voice commands, pick up high resolution internet, steer themselves, start instantly when we sit down in the seat, drive perfectly, roll precisely, stop themselves to avoid an accident. We want them with fancy cameras, fabulous sound systems, clean running engines, and self controlled this and that. All that jazzy technology ain't cheap. We want cars that practically drive themselves just so we can go clap clap to "We Will Rock You" without touching braking, steering, or accelerating. I hate the price of cars as well. I got a price for a new mid size, middle of the road american vehicle that would have cost me upwards of $700 a month. I could have vomited. But if I wanted all that fancy stuff they are going to make me pay for it. GM ain't covering my note. Vehicles are so damn expensive because we consumers demand all the tech. Want a cheaper car? Grab something from the 70's with no A/C and "three in the tree."  YIKES!!!!

[BSR]

On 9/16/2023 at 5:25 PM, Marc in Calif said:

Given that their inflation-adjusted wages have decreased in the last 30 years, with a particularly sharp decrease since 2002-03, I can see why the autoworkers are striking.  Once you start making $45/hour, $90,000/year, you base your finances (like how much house you can afford) on that salary.  When that earning power declines over time, uh oh.  That said, my sympathy for the autoworkers is limited.

Yes, the monotony and repetition of assembly-line work make it a difficult and challenging job (my uncle was a CAW worker for decades).  But the job requires only a high school diploma but does not require extensive training (compared to the long apprenticeships for plumbers or electricians, for example).

The autoworkers already get healthcare and retirement benefits that most blue-collar workers can only dream about on top of a salary of around $65,000 (eyeballing it from that chart).  And they still want 21% more??  Given the requirements of the job, who else in America has it as good as the autoworkers do?

I have no idea how this strike will play out.  I don't think management can simply hire nonunion replacement workers or relocate factories to right-to-work states because were that an option, they would have done so decades ago.  At the same time, I doubt the market will bear such high labor costs given the competition from nonunion manufacturers.  I just have this terrible feeling that the eventual outcome will be one in which nobody comes out a winner.

[+ augustus]

17 minutes ago, BSR said:

Given that their inflation-adjusted wages have decreased in the last 30 years, with a particularly sharp decrease since 2002-03, I can see why the autoworkers are striking.

It is not as bad as it appears.  They have been getting profit sharing checks for years since then.  The average profit sharing check for a GM worker in 2022 was $12,750.  For every $1 billion in profits GM makes, they give the workers $1,000.  In 2022, GM made about $13 billion.  Stellantis paid out $14,670 per worker in profit sharing in for 2022.   This is on top of their wages and other benefits.  That chart is extremely misleading and doesn't tell the full story. 

Edited September 18, 2023 by augustus

[Marc in Calif]

5 hours ago, augustus said:

It is not as bad as it appears.  They [ONLY SOME] have been getting profit sharing checks for years since then.  The average profit sharing check for a GM worker in 2022 was $12,750.  For every $1 billion in profits GM makes, they give the workers $1,000. 

Ford's profit-sharing checks vary based on hours worked by a permanent full-time employee during the year. While Ford employs an estimated 56,000 hourly workers, not all hourly workers qualify for profit sharing, Ford noted.

 Ford does not provide a plant-specific breakdown of how many workers are eligible for its payments....

[handiacefailure]

I'd love to know how much the UAW has in the strike fund to keep paying these people.   And I wouldn't be surprised with like the last strike at GM, if the auto companies stop paying the health insurance premiums which will have to be absorbed by the strike fund as well.

 

[Guest]

I don't know the details of how much these auto companies are making, and what raises the executives have been getting, in relationship to the workers. Just hearing on the news of the UAW workers' salaries and benefits vs those of their competitors (Tesla, Japanese workers), I would have to wonder how the big 3 could remain competitive. That being said, if the executives have been giving themselves huge pay raises, it's no wonder their workers aren't happy. 

[marylander1940]

20 hours ago, augustus said:

The UAW just rejected a 21% pay offer. 

do you always take the first offer? Not even a week of strike and they're already offering that much? Is not like it's about to flop. 

[BSR]

10 hours ago, Unicorn said:

I don't know the details of how much these auto companies are making, and what raises the executives have been getting, in relationship to the workers. Just hearing on the news of the UAW workers' salaries and benefits vs those of their competitors (Tesla, Japanese workers), I would have to wonder how the big 3 could remain competitive. That being said, if the executives have been giving themselves huge pay raises, it's no wonder their workers aren't happy. 

I doubt executive pay increases sparked this strike.  The Big 3 automakers' profit forecasts have dimmed because they have had to invest heavily and are budgeting to invest even more in the development of battery electric vehicles.  While consumers are buying more EVs, supply is outpacing demand.  Combine the automakers' less than rosey financial outlook with the political environment -- a staunchly pro-union President facing reelection in 14 months (not trying to make this a political discussion, just stating facts) -- and union bosses saw the automakers at their most vulnerable.

[mike carey]

1 minute ago, BSR said:

I doubt executive pay increases sparked this strike.  The Big 3 automakers' profit forecasts have dimmed because they have had to invest heavily and are budgeting to invest even more in the development of battery electric vehicles.  While consumers are buying more EVs, supply is outpacing demand.  Combine the automakers' less than rosey financial outlook with the political environment -- a staunchly pro-union President facing reelection in 14 months (not trying to make this a political discussion, just stating facts) -- and union bosses saw the automakers at their most vulnerable.

Agree on the role of executive remuneration. Neither workers nor customers much care about it as long as management is broadly looking after them. Indeed in recent history in this country, where a company AGM recording a 25% vote against the remuneration report two years running invokes a statutorily mandated spill of the board, it as been shareholders who have paid more attention to executive remuneration than anyone else.

Compare that to the last few weeks in Qantas, where both customers and staff think management has stiffed them, talk has been about little else other than executive pay and bonuses (mainly of their omnipresent CEO). It has not stopped with his planned resignation being ignominiously rushed forward by two months with calls for his bonuses to be clawed back, and for the Chairman the board to follow him out the door for enabling him.

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, mike carey said:

... it as been shareholders who have paid more attention to executive remuneration than anyone else...

Really? Although the bulk of my money is in mutual funds and ETF's, I do own a number of stocks, and have done so for over 40 years. I've yet to see a shareholder vote not go the way the board wants it to go. When shareholders are asked about BOD remuneration, it's always been advisory votes. My understanding is that BOD compensation has consistently outpaced inflation. There's little to rein in on their greediness. 

[mike carey]

13 hours ago, Unicorn said:

Really? Although the bulk of my money is in mutual funds and ETF's, I do own a number of stocks, and have done so for over 40 years. I've yet to see a shareholder vote not go the way the board wants it to go. When shareholders are asked about BOD remuneration, it's always been advisory votes. My understanding is that BOD compensation has consistently outpaced inflation. There's little to rein in on their greediness. 

Did you read the whole post? Doesn't seem so. An advisory vote is more attention than anyone outside the shareholders pays in most cases. 25% no votes are not common here but they are no longer a surprise, and no company wants a second strike and being forced to spill the board. And big pension funds are known to vote down remuneration reports.

[marylander1940]

OP note: a tentative agreement has been reached! 25% pay increase!  

 

UAW members begin voting on Ford deal that initiated Detroit auto strike’s end

WWW.CLICKONDETROIT.COM

---

Members of the United Auto Workers union on Wednesday began voting on a tentative contract agreement with Ford Motor Company that suspended...