Ford Gives Finger to America and American Employees

Chuck Reynolds wrote:

> Cars built at Honda plants in Ohio are not unionized plants and they
> produce superior cars. Their wages and working environment parallel
> those of unionized plants.
>
> Unions are a thing of the distant past, they should be dissolved.

Union membership should be a capital offense.

Sam Buckland wrote:

> Union membership should be a capital offense.

Already is. Burns through capital at an unbelievable rate.


--
Requiescas in pace o email Two identifying characteristics
of System Administrators:
Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Infallibility, and the ability to
learn from their mistakes.
Eppure si rinfresca

On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 21:33:51 -0400, Sam Buckland >
wrote:

>Chuck Reynolds wrote:
>
>> Cars built at Honda plants in Ohio are not unionized plants and they
>> produce superior cars. Their wages and working environment parallel
>> those of unionized plants.

And they're that way because that's what it takes to keep people from
organizing into a union.

If there were no possibility of having a union, those car plants would be
paying the same as they pay when they're built in Mexico or China - a few
dollars a day.

On 2008-06-03, Sam Buckland > wrote:
> Chuck Reynolds wrote:
>
>> Cars built at Honda plants in Ohio are not unionized plants and they
>> produce superior cars. Their wages and working environment parallel
>> those of unionized plants.
>>
>> Unions are a thing of the distant past, they should be dissolved.
>
> Union membership should be a capital offense.

Unions once served a purpose, to counter horrible working conditions
that resulted from an over supply of labor. Being free association
there is nothing wrong with the concept of unions.

However unions became too powerful and demanded and got things that
were bound to kill the golden goose sooner or later. In doing so they
lost the respect of the people at large. Soon they will kill themselves
once they destroy the US automakers.

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 01:54:23 GMT, Dave Head > wrote:

>On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 21:33:51 -0400, Sam Buckland >
>wrote:
>
>>Chuck Reynolds wrote:
>>
>>> Cars built at Honda plants in Ohio are not unionized plants and they
>>> produce superior cars. Their wages and working environment parallel
>>> those of unionized plants.
>
>And they're that way because that's what it takes to keep people from
>organizing into a union.
>
>If there were no possibility of having a union, those car plants would be
>paying the same as they pay when they're built in Mexico or China - a few
>dollars a day.

Once a union gets into a working environment, it is like getting stage
four cancer, death is imminent.

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 04:07:55 GMT, Jefferey Drake >
wrote:

>On 02 Jun 2008, Dave Head > posted some
:
>
>> On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 21:33:51 -0400, Sam Buckland
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>Chuck Reynolds wrote:
>>>
>>>> Cars built at Honda plants in Ohio are not unionized plants and they
>>>> produce superior cars. Their wages and working environment parallel
>>>> those of unionized plants.
>>
>> And they're that way because that's what it takes to keep people from
>> organizing into a union.
>>
>> If there were no possibility of having a union, those car plants would
>> be paying the same as they pay when they're built in Mexico or China -
>> a few dollars a day.
>
>Deservedly so. It doesn't take any special skills to assemble a car.

Interesting attitude on wages there. Do you believe, then, that our scientists
and engineers should make edge-of-poverty wages just because scientists and
engineers in India and Russia will work for that? You want the people that sit
at consoles at NASA for spaceflights to go home to a housetrailer in a rusty
pickup truck and try to save enough money to actually eat meat once every 2
weeks or so? Do you believe that CEO's, then, should make the rest of the
money, maybe 100's of millions a year, while the rest of the country goes
without health care and any of the other amenities of middle class living?
Where are you coming from, really?

On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 01:08:48 -0400, Roger Hamilton >
wrote:

>On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 01:54:23 GMT, Dave Head > wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 21:33:51 -0400, Sam Buckland >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Chuck Reynolds wrote:
>>>
>>>> Cars built at Honda plants in Ohio are not unionized plants and they
>>>> produce superior cars. Their wages and working environment parallel
>>>> those of unionized plants.
>>
>>And they're that way because that's what it takes to keep people from
>>organizing into a union.
>>
>>If there were no possibility of having a union, those car plants would be
>>paying the same as they pay when they're built in Mexico or China - a few
>>dollars a day.
>
>Once a union gets into a working environment, it is like getting stage
>four cancer, death is imminent.

And without unions, you see what happens by looking at the software industry -
routine 80 hour workweeks, falling wages, generally poor working conditions,
etc.

Who do you think should be enjoying prosperity within the USA, if anyone?

On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 23:55:47 -0500, Brent P
> wrote:

>On 2008-06-03, Sam Buckland > wrote:
>> Chuck Reynolds wrote:
>>
>>> Cars built at Honda plants in Ohio are not unionized plants and they
>>> produce superior cars. Their wages and working environment parallel
>>> those of unionized plants.
>>>
>>> Unions are a thing of the distant past, they should be dissolved.
>>
>> Union membership should be a capital offense.
>
>Unions once served a purpose, to counter horrible working conditions
>that resulted from an over supply of labor.

Doesn't have to involve an oversupply of labor - look what happens to software
development folks - 80 hour workweeks as a routine thing, falling wages, etc.
This ain't a fun place to be any more.

> Being free association
>there is nothing wrong with the concept of unions.
>
>However unions became too powerful and demanded and got things that
>were bound to kill the golden goose sooner or later. In doing so they
>lost the respect of the people at large. Soon they will kill themselves
>once they destroy the US automakers.

The US automakers would be doing just fine if it weren't for the income tax
structure. While other countries subsidize their manufacturing, such as the
european aircraft builder Airbus, the US Government taxes American industry at
the 2nd highest rate on the planet. That is going to kill automaking in this
country, not unions. Tax something, and you get less of it.
>
>
>
>

"Dave Head" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 04:07:55 GMT, Jefferey Drake
> >
> wrote:
>
>>On 02 Jun 2008, Dave Head > posted some
m:
>>
>>> On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 21:33:51 -0400, Sam Buckland
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>Chuck Reynolds wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Cars built at Honda plants in Ohio are not unionized plants and they
>>>>> produce superior cars. Their wages and working environment parallel
>>>>> those of unionized plants.
>>>
>>> And they're that way because that's what it takes to keep people from
>>> organizing into a union.
>>>
>>> If there were no possibility of having a union, those car plants would
>>> be paying the same as they pay when they're built in Mexico or China -
>>> a few dollars a day.
>>
>>Deservedly so. It doesn't take any special skills to assemble a car.
>
> Interesting attitude on wages there. Do you believe, then, that our
> scientists
> and engineers should make edge-of-poverty wages just because scientists
> and
> engineers in India and Russia will work for that?

Kind of a straw man. India has had such incredible skilled wage inflation
over the last few years that the major system integrators are no longer to
able to significantly undercut the US companies. TCS, Wipro, Infosys, and
all the rest have been saying straight up for two years now that their price
advantage doesn't persist past 2010.

But, let's get back to talking about assembly line jobs that don't require
college degrees. It doesn't matter what you "believe" regarding what's right
and wrong, here. We're talking reality. Pay the GM US employee more than the
Chinese and the Chinese will build the same car cheaper; and thus, the
Chinese car will sell many more units than the GM, ultimately forcing GM to
cut output and layoff workers.

> You want the people that sit
> at consoles at NASA for spaceflights to go home to a housetrailer in a
> rusty
> pickup truck and try to save enough money to actually eat meat once every
> 2
> weeks or so?

I don't "want" it either way. I want the job to be done properly at the
lowest cost to the taxpayer. NASA is a space program, not a public works
program.

> Do you believe that CEO's, then, should make the rest of the
> money, maybe 100's of millions a year, while the rest of the country goes
> without health care and any of the other amenities of middle class living?
> Where are you coming from, really?

Let's be straight up, he CEO pay is abhorrently high. BUT, having said
that, pull the annual report of whatever major corporation you dislike, add
up the "abhorrent" amount of the CEO pay package (you can add in the
abhorrent pay of all the other C-level execs, too), and divide that "total
abhorrent amount" by the number of employees. You'll find that removing the
"aborrent" pay translates to around 10 cents an hour to the employees.

One of the times I went though this exercise was when Eisner took home about
90 Mil in the mid-90's when Disney was laying people off. Even that
incredible bloated salary divided down to about sixteen cents an hour to the
Disney employees. Make no mistake about it, CxO pay is absurd, bad for
morale, and says loads about the people who cash those checks; but let's not
kid ourselves and think that capping their pay (like that could ever work)
will translate to higher salaries to the employees. It doesn't.

JG

"Dave Head" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 01:08:48 -0400, Roger Hamilton >
> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 01:54:23 GMT, Dave Head > wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 02 Jun 2008 21:33:51 -0400, Sam Buckland
>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>Chuck Reynolds wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Cars built at Honda plants in Ohio are not unionized plants and they
>>>>> produce superior cars. Their wages and working environment parallel
>>>>> those of unionized plants.
>>>
>>>And they're that way because that's what it takes to keep people from
>>>organizing into a union.
>>>
>>>If there were no possibility of having a union, those car plants would be
>>>paying the same as they pay when they're built in Mexico or China - a few
>>>dollars a day.
>>
>>Once a union gets into a working environment, it is like getting stage
>>four cancer, death is imminent.
>
> And without unions, you see what happens by looking at the software
> industry -
> routine 80 hour workweeks, falling wages, generally poor working
> conditions,
> etc.

I have no idea where you work, but it sounds like you need another job. We
have thousands of developers who are still getting raises, 40-50 hour work
weeks based on need, and do so in nice offices. I can't tell you that some
development functions haven't moved to India, but not everything that you
CAN move makes sense to do so.


> Who do you think should be enjoying prosperity within the USA, if anyone?

Anybody willing to work hard, understanding that wage is relative to
experience, education, and aptitude.

JG