Why I think the UAW is right

[Simon says]

Originally Posted by Buick61

I can't help it if you incorrectly interpret something I say.

I said it passionalty, sure, but the reasoning was based in business.

Arguing that "They have their cake and want to eat it too" doesn't sound to business like to me. But who knows? Maybe that is the reason why these companies are in the shape they are in.

Again, why would Ford have to suffer for maximizing the perception of a competitive advantage they have over their domestic competitors? Isn't the facts of their financial shape and what is at risk what ought to be considered? Any other consideration would be . . . emotional I guess.

If I am misinterpreting you, would you care to say how. Thanks.

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by 2002 Caddy

If the UAW leadership can't see that Ford is hanging on by a thread then they are either stupid or delusional.

UAW has been blind for decades. They can't see beyond their greed.

What UAW will do is call for an independent analysis of Ford's books.... just like they did with GM and Chrysler.... And without a press release or anything else, will cave in.

because guess what... anyone with 2 eyes and a basic understanding of finance will see Ford, no matter how well they seem to be doing, remains hanging by a thread.

Ford fights the public perception that they aren't gonna go bankrupt because they didn't ask for bailout funds. By doing so, Ford doesn't have the stigma of being "bankrupt" in the public's eyes. The public sees Ford as a going concern, and have no problems buying Ford products. That's just good marketing.
On the flip side, anyone who wants to dig deeper will see Ford is still one very sick company that is doing everything it can to stay alive.

If UAW stupidly calls for an independent analysis of Ford, they're going to look like one very stupid union.

[Simon says]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

If UAW stupidly calls for an independent analysis of Ford, they're going to look like one very stupid union.

Yes but . . . does one more stripe in the tiger's coat really matters?

And in general term I sympathize with the unions and their plight. But this time the UAW is really acting against their best interest and I can't really think for a good reason to justify them.

[fp115]

Originally Posted by 2002 Caddy

Exactly,

Its called "MAD" Mutually Assured Destruction... if the UAW strikes Ford... Ford is likely DEAD in North America... What are all of the UAW members going to do then? How many Walmart greeters are needed in Detroit?

If the UAW leadership can't see that Ford is hanging on by a thread then they are either stupid or delusional.

Not that I don't agree with that, but when you bargain, the moment you show signs of weakness is when you give up things you never wanted to.

Ford needs the workers much more than those workers need their jobs, hence why the unions have no problem rejecting the new contracts. UAW leadership, like most of the bondholders will only agree to things that affect them tomorrow, not in a month from now.

[2002 Caddy]

Originally Posted by fp115

Ford needs the workers much more than those workers need their jobs.

On that point we differ, what is the unemployment rate in Detroit again?
Hint, it is the worst in the nation... and hovers around 30%.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theworldnew...bs-to-289.html

If Ford collapses these people will have absolutely nothing else to do other then watch daytime TV.

[fp115]

Originally Posted by 2002 Caddy

On that point we differ, what is the unemployment rate in Detroit again?
Hint, it is the worst in the nation... and hovers around 30%.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theworldnew...bs-to-289.html

If Ford collapses these people will have absolutely nothing else to do other then watch daytime TV.

I don't mean that in theory.... Take part in any bargaining and negotiation and you will understand the meaning. It doesn't mean that you can fire all those employees and they will be fine. It means that the loss would be much greater to Ford than it is to the workers. If Ford would refuse anything but their own deals, it would cost them billions of dollars.

UAW workers would rather see the work expand in the US and not lose anything, even if it means the business cannot afford it. At this point, Ford can only make empty threats, the UAW can actually do something. Everyone knows Ford could not say "we will remove all production in the US and move it elsewhere". Not only would that take years to accomplish, it would cost billions of dollars. So the workers know that Ford needs them, pretty badly too.

[2002 Caddy]

Originally Posted by fp115

I don't mean that in theory.... Take part in any bargaining and negotiation and you will understand the meaning.

I'm regularly involved in collective bargaining at my firm... I can add that all it takes is one senior union executive with **** for brains and all heck will break loose.

I think at Ford UAW they have at least one or two of those.

Last fall we were in a nasty negotiation just like this one, we opened the books to the union and they were still hell bent... Took a strike vote and the whole 9 yards... We sat down, informed them that they would BK the company and that all of the executive would leave with pensions intact, under beautiful golden parachutes...

Although no-one said it, it was like that Dirty Harry line, "Do you feel lucky punk? Well do ya?"

The union blinked and fired their negotiator and actually got a very generous settlement... But this was an "All in move" by management. Both a strike or capitulation would have killed the company.

Ford needs to make the same move.

[johnnyl321]

do you think that if we go to a social healthcare system, that would help the UAW in their next round of contract negotiations? mainly because their employers won't have to provide them with healthcare...it'll be like Canada.

[fp115]

Originally Posted by 2002 Caddy

I'm regularly involved in collective bargaining at my firm... I can add that all it takes is one senior union executive with **** for brains and all heck will break loose.

I think at Ford UAW they have at least one or two of those.

Last fall we were in a nasty negotiation just like this one, we opened the books to the union and they were still hell bent... Took a strike vote and the whole 9 yards... We sat down, informed them that they would BK the company and that all of the executive would leave with pensions intact, under beautiful golden parachutes...

Although no-one said it, it was like that Dirty Harry line, "Do you feel lucky punk? Well do ya?"

The union blinked and fired their negotiator and actually got a very generous settlement... But this was an "All in move" by management. Both a strike or capitulation would have killed the company.

Ford needs to make the same move.

Its stupid, I know. Until I actually took courses on this, the entire union vs corporations made no sense to me. I really didn't understand why the unions would rather see the company crash and burn than give up a few bucks from your pay.

I can't comment on your experience, but I have been in some CAW and UAW meetings and you can clearly tell who has the power at the table. If you would have gone again when bankruptcy was imminent, you could see how it shifted.

Although I think it is stupid and childish to keep this game of muscle flexing to see who would balk at what. But sadly I agree with the tactics deployed. As a union boss, you are held accountable for thousands of workers and have to hold on to the image of power. I beg for the day that some legislation is passed that gives unions much less power than they do today. It would greatly help if such negotiations could be interests based instead of power/rights based.

[mgescuro]

Originally Posted by johnnyl321

do you think that if we go to a social healthcare system, that would help the UAW in their next round of contract negotiations? mainly because their employers won't have to provide them with healthcare...it'll be like Canada.

NOPE!!!

If you look at every single version of the Universal Healthcare option that is floating around Washington DC these days, UAW workers would NOT be eligible for the so-called "public option."

1) They have a job that provides healthcare.
2) Companies won't be allowed to terminate healthcare plans.

That's something most Americans don't get yet.... because it isn't covered in the media significantly.

[Simon says]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

NOPE!!!

If you look at every single version of the Universal Healthcare option that is floating around Washington DC these days, UAW workers would NOT be eligible for the so-called "public option."

1) They have a job that provides healthcare.
2) Companies won't be allowed to terminate healthcare plans.

That's something most Americans don't get yet.... because it isn't covered in the media significantly.

Thank you for saying it so clearly, unbiasedly and eloquently.

[AMERICA 123]

Originally Posted by Simon says

What is flat-out, cold-hearted, business, is the fact that they need those concessions too, regardless of how the other two obtained them.

Yes, you are advocating to punish Ford for its success. Yes, its a purely emotional argument and yes, I think its a very contradictory theory.

Ford's current US labor contract - the one they agreed to in 2007 - and then was modified heavily in February 2009 that they now wish to alter yet again compares how exactly - compared to whom - and where ?

_________

Lets get real for a minute.

The only real 'possible' concern this deals with in practical terms is versus GM and Chrysler in regards to the US.

- and just what specifically is that potentional difference - that needs to be dealt with ?

[lam]

Originally Posted by mgescuro

NOPE!!!

If you look at every single version of the Universal Healthcare option that is floating around Washington DC these days, UAW workers would NOT be eligible for the so-called "public option."

1) They have a job that provides healthcare.
2) Companies won't be allowed to terminate healthcare plans.

That's something most Americans don't get yet.... because it isn't covered in the media significantly.

For GM,Ford and Chrysler, VEBA comes into effect on January 1.
Ford will make more money, while GM North America will return to profitability as the healthcare liability swift from the compaines to the trust on January 1.

[Simon says]

Originally Posted by AMERICA 123

Ford's current US labor contract - the one they agreed to in 2007 that they now wish to alter compares how exactly - compared to whom - and where ?

There are two basic provisions that Ford was hoping to achieve. One was the ability to freeze the salaries of new hires and the other one was restricting the right to strike. Those are two concessions that the now private and very Italian Chrysler and the new GM obtained during the bankruptcy process as a reward to their failure.

By not granting the same concessions to Ford, the UAW is punishing Ford for its continued effort to improve its business and to estabilize the company

Originally Posted by AMERICA 123

Lets get real for a minute.

The only real 'possible' concern this deals with in practical terms is versus GM and Chrysler in regards to the US.

Duh! Aren't they negotiating with the UAW? the UAW is a US only union . . .

Originally Posted by AMERICA 123

- and just what specifically is that potentional difference - that needs to be dealt with ?

Read above . . .

[sigma]

Someone better have a good reason why their CEO is making $30 million a year and gets a private jet, the company posts a $1 Billion profit and management still comes to the unions looking for concessions.

These guys have seen half their friends and neighbors laid off. They've seen their pay cut in half. They've seen their work rules trashed to save the company. And you wonder why they are resistant to another round of concessions while management is raking in the dough and the company is rolling in profits.