Re: not yet

[Bill Watson <wwatson6@xxxxxxx>]

Stop blaming the unions.  Their contracts have two sets of signatures on 
them - union and management.  Union contracts have to approved by two 
sides - union members and company management.  If a company has a union 
agreement they do not like, they have only themselves to blame.  They signed 
on the bottom line.  And have since the 1930`s.

Actually, Japanese firms in the U.S. apparently pay wages comparable to 
unionized companies.  They also offer benefits that may not be on the same 
level as GM or Ford, but their employees to do get some coverage.

The big difference between North American companies and non-North American 
companies lies in the money management hauls in.  About ten years ago a 
survey was done on salaries firms paid their management and how those 
salaries compare with the ran-and-file worker.   In Europe and Asia 
management salaries were about ten times the firms` average workers while in 
North America it was twenty-five times.   And then there were bonuses the 
North American management received.

When Daimler acquired Chrysler in 1998 the white collar workers were 
astounded at the salaries their American counterparts were making.  And the 
higher up you went, the greater the gap between North America and Europe.

And of course bonuses received by various upper management positions must 
not be overlooked.  Image running a company that lost a $1 billion last year 
and getting a bonus of $10 million.   That seems to be pretty much the norm 
these days.

Grossly overpaid executives are not much of an inspiration for anyone down 
the line to take a pay cut.   And the bonuses executives receive when the 
company is losing money and even perhaps on the verge of bankruptcy is just 
plain criminal.

Would you take a 10% pay cut knowing the heads of the company you work for 
were paid millions, plus, even though the firm is running in the red, 
bonuses.

But all this does not excuse American manufacturers for giving the American 
auto market to the Japanese.  They are the ones who decided to put all their 
development dollars into big trucks and SUVs and not cars.  Especially 
smaller vehicles and more fuel efficient vehicles.  Today Chrysler, for 
example, has two car bodies - Sebring/Avenger and 300/Charger.   When the 
Neon was dropped, Chrysler abandoned the small car market.   Now the economy 
is going down and they have only big vehicles that fewer people can afford 
to buy or lease.

And be careful when you slash workers`wages.  Less income means less money 
to spend - on anything.   Fewer cars or trucks, fewer electronic items, 
fewer homes, and so on.  Those outrageous union pay scales have fueled the 
North American markets since WW II.  Now that the union jobs are 
disappearing along with the factories they worked in, there just isn`t the 
money out there to fuel the economy.

Bill
Vancouver, BC


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sean B" <polecat2@xxxxxxxx>
To: <1962to1965mopars@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 11:04 AM
Subject: RE: not yet


> You guys are going to hate me for this, but the biggest problem with the
> Big Three American car companies is the Union.  The Japanese factories
> are Union-free, and are set up in low-tax states, as well.  I just read
> where it costs GM about $1,700.00 per new vehicle it sells to cover
> certain Union costs.  Toyota in America incurs ZERO dollars in this
> regard because of no Unions, and their workers are happy.
>
> BTW, I was a Teamster for years.
>
> Sean


----
Please address private mail -- mail of interest to only one person -- directly to that person.  I.e., send parts/car transactions and negotiations as well as other personal messages only to the intended recipient, not to the Clubhouse public address. This practice will protect your privacy, reduce the total volume of mail and fine tune the content signal to Mopar topic.  Thanks!

'62 to '65 Mopar Clubhouse Discussion Guidelines:
http://www.1962to1965mopar.ornocar.org/mletiq.html.