Do Auto Workers Really Make More Than $70 Per Hour?

[Psychoblues]

Really good read and sheds actual light on the propaganda being spread by a bunch of ignorant anti-American worker idiots!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you're into numbers crunching just a little and actual fact checking information being given to you I suggest this site as trustworthy.

December 11, 2008

Q: Do auto workers really make more than $70 per hour?
How much does a UAW member make at a domestic auto plant? Various sites have cited the figure at an average of seventy-three dollars an hour (The Heritage Foundation). Keith Olbermann says that the figure is actually at twenty-eight before benefits, which only add ten dollars to the amount. Other sources indicate that Toyota workers (who are not unionized) made more last year after profit sharing was calculated. So clear it up for us. What's the real bottom line?

A: No. That figure is derived from what the auto companies pay in wages, health, retirement and other benefits, and includes the cost of providing benefits to retirees.
A report from the conservative Heritage Foundation, opposing the auto industry bailout, said that members of the United Auto Workers union "earn $75 an hour in wages and benefits – almost triple the earnings of the average private sector worker." Later in the report, it's phrased this way: "The vast majority of UAW workers in Detroit today still earn $75 an hour."

That figure has caught hold with some conservatives, and it seeps into media coverage from time to time as well. A few examples: At a Nov. 19 House Financial Services Committee hearing on a possible bailout for the auto industry, Alabama Republican Rep. Spencer Bachus said, "Even with recent changes, the average hourly wage at General Motors is still $75 an hour. ..." Two of his GOP colleagues on the panel made similar statements. And in a Nov. 18 column in the New York Times, business reporter Andrew Ross Sorkin wrote, "At GM, as of 2007, the average worker was paid about $70 an hour, including health care and pension costs."

The problem is, that's just not true. The automakers say that the average wage earned by its unionized workers is about $29 per hour. So how does that climb to more than $70? Add in benefits: life insurance, health care, pension and so on. But not just the benefits that the current workers actually receive – after all, it's pretty rare for the value of a benefits package to add up to more than wages paid, even with a really, really good health plan in place. What's causing the number to balloon is the cost of providing benefits to tens of thousands of retired auto workers and their surviving spouses.

The automakers arrived at the $70+ figure by adding up all the costs associated with providing wages and benefits to current and retired workers and dividing the total by the number of hours worked by current employees......................................... ........

Much, Much More: http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/do_auto_workers_really_make_more_than.html

You will find plenty of footnotes, links, sources, etc. there to verify their information and they are welcome to any information that you might have that could further clarify or dispel anything they have to say on this or any other subject of which they have chosen to address. I have said this before and I will now say it again. They are interested in facts, not what you think, so be forewarned at least on that accord. I will also say that they have disappointed me often but I don't argue with them or their sources. Extensive back checking reveals to me they are fair and trustworthy.

Can I offer anyone a cool one to enjoy as you read and contemplate?!????!?!?!?!?!?!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[crin63]

My opinion of the UAW is based solely on personal experience. I would fire all of them and hire off the streets. Some of them might be worth rehiring but as a whole they give unions a bad name. I'm a 28 year union member and the UAW is the most shameful group of employees I have ever seen. They could train monkeys to do many of the jobs these people do.

A couple of things not factored into the report is the intentional break downs cause by UAW members to punish automakers for whatever perceived wrong they have endured for the day. All the employees go home with full pay for the day while the intentional breakdowns are repaired. They also get 90% of their pay during layoffs while plants are being upgraded so they use reverse seniority to decide who will work.

Have a cold sarsparilly on me.

[Psychoblues]

I've negotiated a number of Union contracts in my life, CR, and I can honestly tell you that I have never had anything to do with or even heard of one like you intimate your present personal knowledge of. Having been a union member yourself for all those years I would assume you are in complete knowledge of the truly bad raps the unions get by idiots that know no better.

Do you have any links to information verifying what you say here? Did you even bother to read the article posted about what auto workers really make or do you have any comment about that?!?!?!?!??!??!

Thanks for the saspirilly!!!!!!!!!!!!!! But as you might surmise, I'm already about 10 deep into a 12 pack of Busch!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[crin63]

No Links. I worked at GM Van Nuys, CA for almost a year as a contractor and I worked at GM Southgate, CA for about a month. Both plants have closed and moved to the midwest I believe. We were in I think 7 weeks and out 2 weeks. The day we walked onto the property the maintenance dept. would file a grievance so after 7 weeks GM would boot us out to end the grievance. After about 2 weeks the grievance was ended and GM would bring us back in.

I saw firsthand the intentional breakdowns, the UAW employees sleeping through the night in cardboard boxes and I was there during a layoff period for them. I watched while 1 guy on each side of each car that came through put 2 screws into the dash and the one guy of my side complained all day about his job.

I know the bad rap unions get but allot of them deserve it. I ran work for 20 years and I insisted that me and my men performed at a professional level. As union members we were making about $10-$12 an hour more than non-union guys doing similar work plus we got another $10-$12 an hour in benefits they didn't get. I insisted we do the job faster, better and act like the professional craftsmen we were since customers were paying more for us.

I ran crews of union Ironworkers, Pipefitters, Electricians and Millwrights. I was threatened by the Pipefitter Business Manager one time with a lawsuit for expecting to much out of his guys. Pipefitters were on par with UAW in my opinion. They expected 5 men to weld up one pipe joint. 1 guy to weld, 1 guy to grind, 1 guy to fit the pieces, 1 guy to tack up the parts and 1 guy on fire watch while they were welding on a concrete slab with no flammables in the area.

I'll take a cold plain old iced tea if you have one.

[Psychoblues]

Sounds to me, CR, like most of what you were going through on the GM sites were incompetence's on the parts of management. I never saw a grievance or heard of one by anyone because management "expected too much of the guys" or any other description similar to that. And I have never seen or heard of people making $10 to $12 an hour more than their non-union counterparts. Union contracts are generally negotiated on prevailing wage and benefit considerations. Perhaps you could share with me some information that would indicate otherwise in the cases that you mention?!??!?!?!?!?!?

Just recently I was a Security Shift Manager. Very much non-union and I personally fired 5 people in 3 years for sleeping on the job. I think, especially at night, the occurrence is widespread and certainly not due to any union participation or not.

Iced tea comin' your way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Missileman]

The differential between union and non-union wages is huge.

http://www.stateofworkingamerica.org/swa06-03-wages_unions-excerpt.pdf


Table 3.33 shows the union wage premium—the degree to which union wages exceed
non-union wages—by type of pay (benefits or wages) for all workers (useful occupational
breakdowns are no longer available) in 2005. The union premium is larger for
total compensation (43.7%) than for wages alone (28.1%), reflecting the fact that unionized
workers are provided insurance and pension benefits that are more than double those
of non-union workers.

Now, let's hear some more argument about how the Big 3 aren't automatically at a disadvantage to non-union, foreign car manufacturers who have 30% or more less HR overhead.

[Binky]

I know a man who spent four years in college and then still took a class now and then while working skilled trades in GM. He builds the robots used in the plants.

While "a monkey" could do many jobs there, it certainly couldn't do his, not with the training he has had to have.

And the more I hear people complaining about the wages these people make, the more I'm convinced they are jealious they aren't making as much themselves or have the benefits they have. As the saying goes, "me thinks you doth protest too much."

[crin63]

I know a man who spent four years in college and then still took a class now and then while working skilled trades in GM. He builds the robots used in the plants.

While "a monkey" could do many jobs there, it certainly couldn't do his, not with the training he has had to have.

And the more I hear people complaining about the wages these people make, the more I'm convinced they are jealious they aren't making as much themselves or have the benefits they have. As the saying goes, "me thinks you doth protest too much."

No jealously here. I just think they are the cause of why allot of people don't like unions. The UAW opened my eyes to what I did not ever want to be and I didn't say there were no skilled people.

[Nukeman]

I know a man who spent four years in college and then still took a class now and then while working skilled trades in GM. He builds the robots used in the plants.

While "a monkey" could do many jobs there, it certainly couldn't do his, not with the training he has had to have.

And the more I hear people complaining about the wages these people make, the more I'm convinced they are jealious they aren't making as much themselves or have the benefits they have. As the saying goes, "me thinks you doth protest too much."BIG difference between the line guys and the "skilled trades", the skill trades make SIGNIFICANTLY more money.... and are higher trained.... enough said..

[namvet]

my brother in law works in a GM plant. he gets around 60 an hour.

[5stringJeff]

While the statement "union workers earn $75 per hour" amy be false, the statement "every union employee costs GM $75 per hour" is true. And, since the auto companies, not the union or union workers, are the ones at the edge of bankruptcy, their labor costs are the relevant issue. So, I will continue to use the figure of $75/hr as the cost of labor for the Detroit auto companies, even though employees "only" get $55/hr.

[Nukeman]

While the statement "union workers earn $75 per hour" amy be false, the statement "every union employee costs GM $75 per hour" is true. And, since the auto companies, not the union or union workers, are the ones at the edge of bankruptcy, their labor costs are the relevant issue. So, I will continue to use the figure of $75/hr as the cost of labor for the Detroit auto companies, even though employees "only" get $55/hr.
I have been attempting to figure out HOW MANY people actually work for the big 3.

for simplicity sake lets just say 600,000 so if we split that into 3 shifts of 200,000 each. that means for the shift we will be paying out 15,000,000.00 for each and EVERY 8 hour shift in the big 3 so that actually comes to 45,000,000.00 dollars EVERY FREAKING DAY.

I understand that the "worker" doesn't recieve that much money but when you calculate all the bene's and retirement accounts it is one hell of a lot of money.

If they want to save just 5 million a day that only comes to 9% drop in bene's. Not that much! If they only payed 9% more out of pocket for their health isurance they would save the company 1,685,000,000.00 a year..... Of course this is assuming they work 337 days a year which MOST plants do this takes into account the 4 weeks they are shut down for retooling...


lets see that number again 1,685,000,000.00 dollars

[Psychoblues]

The fact remains that the average auto worker does not make "$70 per hour" as is implicated by those that would have you believe it. Considering governmental subsidies and governmental provided benefits by other governments and countries the American auto worker is quite competitive wage wise and is top notch production wise.

The current propensity of foreign manufacturers relocating many of their plants to the US while we send our own overseas is astounding, IMHO. Blaming unions for it is also astounding, IMHO.

The companies negotiate the contracts and use every economic model imaginable to justify and maintain their positions. The union leadership does likewise and eventually both agree on a package. The executives continue to experience enormous wage and compensation packages while the average auto worker has seen his own decline year after year. At some point fairness has got to be considered. Rewarding incompetence on the part of labor or management is simply not a responsible practice, also IMHO.

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Nukeman]

The fact remains that the average auto worker does not make "$70 per hour" as is implicated by those that would have you believe it. Considering governmental subsidies and governmental provided benefits by other governments and countries the American auto worker is quite competitive wage wise and is top notch production wise.

The current propensity of foreign manufacturers relocating many of their plants to the US while we send our own overseas is astounding, IMHO. Blaming unions for it is also astounding, IMHO.

The companies negotiate the contracts and use every economic model imaginable to justify and maintain their positions. The union leadership does likewise and eventually both agree on a package. The executives continue to experience enormous wage and compensation packages while the average auto worker has seen his own decline year after year. At some point fairness has got to be considered. Rewarding incompetence on the part of labor or management is simply not a responsible practice, also IMHO.

:beer::cheers2::beer:

PsychobluesKind of hard not to "agree" since the union has the company by the short hairs. If you don't give us what we want we will strike. Lets see concede or lose money by closing the company due to strike...

[Psychoblues]

You like repeating urban myths, don't you, nm?



Kind of hard not to "agree" since the union has the company by the short hairs. If you don't give us what we want we will strike. Lets see concede or lose money by closing the company due to strike...

All contracts require the principals to be signatories to the provisions set forth. No responsible union or management teams that I have ever done business with or even heard of would negotiate themselves out of business. What we have here is irresponsible business management with which the unions had no part of.

But, you can keep hating American workers if you'd like. I will continue to respect them.

Sasperilly?!?!??!?!?!?!?!??!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[actsnoblemartin]

you would agree, the big 3 are in trouble and must change how they do business thought?

I heard an expert say, it would take 75-125 billion and this was a real expert, not a fox news, or msnbc expert, but an economist

your thoughts good sir.


You like repeating urban myths, don't you, nm?




All contracts require the principals to be signatories to the provisions set forth. No responsible union or management teams that I have ever done business with or even heard of would negotiate themselves out of business. What we have here is irresponsible business management with which the unions had no part of.

But, you can keep hating American workers if you'd like. I will continue to respect them.

Sasperilly?!?!??!?!?!?!?!??!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Psychoblues]

I could write a book about the things that I think concerning the US badged auto manufacturing dilemma.




you would agree, the big 3 are in trouble and must change how they do business thought?

I heard an expert say, it would take 75-125 billion and this was a real expert, not a fox news, or msnbc expert, but an economist

your thoughts good sir.

Simply put, however, I completely fault management for the financial and product misfires. Blaming the workforce for things they had no control over or responsibilities for is for shallow minded idiots and marketing genuises that simply hate American workers and their abilities to provide as reasonable standard of living for themselves and their families as they can.

I sure as hell don't need some jerk that just drew a $20 million dollar bonus on top of his $45 million dollar salary to tell me it's my $25 an hour job for poor productivity standards that he set or poor product comparisons with more savvy competitors that is causing his industry to fail. The good American workers deserve their day in the sun and they will get it if I have anything to say or do with it. I'm just sick and tired of the millionaires blaming their problems on people like me that work our hearts out to do the best we can with what are are given to work with. Millionaires blaming those that made them millionaires for their own (millionaire's) failures to properly design and market is just a bit like the twilight zone series, isn't it?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

I hope that clears up just a little of what you seem to be concerned with, marteen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cool one??!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[actsnoblemartin]

I agree with you, after carefully reading this post.

It simply made a lot of sense, and ill take a bottle water please.

The american worker should not be blamed for the incompetence of the big three not making a good product


I could write a book about the things that I think concerning the US badged auto manufacturing dilemma.





Simply put, however, I completely fault management for the financial and product misfires. Blaming the workforce for things they had no control over or responsibilities for is for shallow minded idiots and marketing genuises that simply hate American workers and their abilities to provide as reasonable standard of living for themselves and their families as they can.

I sure as hell don't need some jerk that just drew a $20 million dollar bonus on top of his $45 million dollar salary to tell me it's my $25 an hour job for poor productivity standards that he set or poor product comparisons with more savvy competitors that is causing his industry to fail. The good American workers deserve their day in the sun and they will get it if I have anything to say or do with it. I'm just sick and tired of the millionaires blaming their problems on people like me that work our hearts out to do the best we can with what are are given to work with. Millionaires blaming those that made them millionaires for their own (millionaire's) failures to properly design and market is just a bit like the twilight zone series, isn't it?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

I hope that clears up just a little of what you seem to be concerned with, marteen!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cool one??!??!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Psychoblues]

Actually, marteen, I am one that believes that they do make a reasonably good product. I think the product mix is bad and has been bad for some time and other maunufacturers have recognised this and avoided that particular pitfall. In addition, other (foreign) manufacturers don't play on a level playing field for a variety of reasons none of which pertain to the compensation packages of the average American worker. But, that's another book.



I agree with you, after carefully reading this post.

It simply made a lot of sense, and ill take a bottle water please.

The american worker should not be blamed for the incompetence of the big three not making a good product

Ice Cold bottled Spring H20 comin' up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thanks for the juice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Missileman]

The fact remains that the average auto worker does not make "$70 per hour" as is implicated by those that would have you believe it. Considering governmental subsidies and governmental provided benefits by other governments and countries the American auto worker is quite competitive wage wise and is top notch production wise.

The current propensity of foreign manufacturers relocating many of their plants to the US while we send our own overseas is astounding, IMHO. Blaming unions for it is also astounding, IMHO.

The companies negotiate the contracts and use every economic model imaginable to justify and maintain their positions. The union leadership does likewise and eventually both agree on a package. The executives continue to experience enormous wage and compensation packages while the average auto worker has seen his own decline year after year. At some point fairness has got to be considered. Rewarding incompetence on the part of labor or management is simply not a responsible practice, also IMHO.

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

$70 or $50 or $40...you wanna quibble over the amount yet totally ignore the fact that whatever the figure, UAW workers cost their company at least 30% more than non-union. Now figure out how much that 30% has cost the Big 3 over the past 5 years, 10 years, even 20 years.

[Psychoblues]

There is just way too much ignorance in what you say for me to want to deal with comprehensively, mm.



$70 or $50 or $40...you wanna quibble over the amount yet totally ignore the fact that whatever the figure, UAW workers cost their company at least 30% more than non-union. Now figure out how much that 30% has cost the Big 3 over the past 5 years, 10 years, even 20 years.

Get yourself an education. Even a poor one will beat what you have already.

Can I get you some more stupid juice?!?????!?!?!?!?!????!?!?!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Missileman]

There is just way too much ignorance in what you say for me to want to deal with comprehensively, mm.




Get yourself an education. Even a poor one will beat what you have already.

Can I get you some more stupid juice?!?????!?!?!?!?!????!?!?!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

I've already posted the proof of my statement in this thread, dumbass. As usual though, the best you can muster is a drunken verbal stagger.

[Yurt]

The fact remains that the average auto worker does not make "$70 per hour" as is implicated by those that would have you believe it. Considering governmental subsidies and governmental provided benefits by other governments and countries the American auto worker is quite competitive wage wise and is top notch production wise.

The current propensity of foreign manufacturers relocating many of their plants to the US while we send our own overseas is astounding, IMHO. Blaming unions for it is also astounding, IMHO.

The companies negotiate the contracts and use every economic model imaginable to justify and maintain their positions. The union leadership does likewise and eventually both agree on a package. The executives continue to experience enormous wage and compensation packages while the average auto worker has seen his own decline year after year. At some point fairness has got to be considered. Rewarding incompetence on the part of labor or management is simply not a responsible practice, also IMHO.

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

bullcowpie....jeff said it right, it costs the company that amount per hour, it does not cost foreign companies that amount per hour because foreign companies are not held hostage by the mob, i mean union. just because some people may have mistakenly said they earn $75/hr does not take away from the truth that they cost the company that much an hour. so your "in fact" is entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, unless you really want to join the discussion solely to make a meaningless point.

[Psychoblues]

I trust what the article in the OP says, yuk.



bullcowpie....jeff said it right, it costs the company that amount per hour, it does not cost foreign companies that amount per hour because foreign companies are not held hostage by the mob, i mean union. just because some people may have mistakenly said they earn $75/hr does not take away from the truth that they cost the company that much an hour. so your "in fact" is entirely irrelevant to the discussion at hand, unless you really want to join the discussion solely to make a meaningless point.

Do you want to discuss what is being said in that article or are you more concerned with making your own meaningless points?!???!???!?!?!?!??!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Binky]

$70 or $50 or $40...you wanna quibble over the amount yet totally ignore the fact that whatever the figure, UAW workers cost their company at least 30% more than non-union. Now figure out how much that 30% has cost the Big 3 over the past 5 years, 10 years, even 20 years.


Hey, How about the million dollar bonuses and jets these company heads get? That's got to add up to a sure fire pretty penny. Stop putting all the blame on the UAW. Try tossing it in the direction of the company heads, for a change.

[Psychoblues]

Don't expect any reply from mm about any of that, Binky.



Hey, How about the million dollar bonuses and jets these company heads get? That's got to add up to a sure fire pretty penny. Stop putting all the blame on the UAW. Try tossing it in the direction of the company heads, for a change.

The sacrilege and hypocrisies are astounding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[crin63]

I'm not saying all UAW people are bad but I would still fire all the UAW people and hire off the streets. Continue to pay pensions or buy out their pensions based on years of service. I would also give them an opportunity to re-apply for a position in the plant but not as a UAW member. If they try to unionize again, fire them all again with no possibility of re-hire. The good workers will rise to the top and then weed out the chaff.

No more stewards running interference for worthless or lazy people. I've seen it happen too many times in too many union plants and on too many union job sites.

I can also see cutting back on some executives and salaries until the companies are viable again.

[Missileman]

Hey, How about the million dollar bonuses and jets these company heads get? That's got to add up to a sure fire pretty penny. Stop putting all the blame on the UAW. Try tossing it in the direction of the company heads, for a change.

First of all, I haven't said that the UAW is the only party at fault here. I could go on for hours about the excesses doled out to CEOs in corporate America. To deny that 30% higher personnel costs negatively affects the Big 3's ability to compete is to deny reality.

[Missileman]

Don't expect any reply from mm about any of that, Binky.




The sacrilege and hypocrisies are astounding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

I notice you shut your drunken pie hole when confronted by the figures from the unions themselves. Or maybe you'd like to argue that the unions are lying and don't claim 30% higher wages than their non-union counterparts

[5stringJeff]

Hey, How about the million dollar bonuses and jets these company heads get? That's got to add up to a sure fire pretty penny. Stop putting all the blame on the UAW. Try tossing it in the direction of the company heads, for a change.

Good executives are worth millions, because they are responsible for making decisions about the company, its direction, its operations, etc. The union workers are responsible for their piece of the puzzle: putting a few pieces on a car once every few minutes, then taking a half-hour union-mandated break. The executives are responsible to figure out everything the company does: how long to run the manufacturing lines, who/where the cars need to be sold, logistics, payroll, HR, supply chain, marketing, etc. That takes work.

[Binky]

Originally Posted by Missileman
$70 or $50 or $40...you wanna quibble over the amount yet totally ignore the fact that whatever the figure, UAW workers cost their company at least 30% more than non-union. Now figure out how much that 30% has cost the Big 3 over the past 5 years, 10 years, even 20 years.



That leaves 70% which is made up of executive and other management that made very bad decisions. My point exactly. When you blame one group of individual you have to throw blame at the other as well.

[Missileman]

Originally Posted by Missileman
$70 or $50 or $40...you wanna quibble over the amount yet totally ignore the fact that whatever the figure, UAW workers cost their company at least 30% more than non-union. Now figure out how much that 30% has cost the Big 3 over the past 5 years, 10 years, even 20 years.



That leaves 70% which is made up of executive and other management that made very bad decisions. My point exactly. When you blame one group of individual you have to throw blame at the other as well.

Uh, what 70% are you talking about?

[Binky]

Uh, what 70% are you talking about?


What I meant was, if UAW members cause the company at least 30% then that leaves management etc. causing the rest, which is 70%. The workers only do what they are told to do. There's poor planning here that ends up with huge losses coming from both sides of the aisle.

[Missileman]

What I meant was, if UAW members cause the company at least 30% then that leaves management etc. causing the rest, which is 70%. The workers only do what they are told to do. There's poor planning here that ends up with huge losses coming from both sides of the aisle.

I think you misunderstand the issue. There is no "problem" where 30% is labor and 70% is management. The problem is that companies with union factories have to shell out 30% more in labor costs. Their competitors can use that differential to sell cars for lower prices or for R&D. No matter how you slice it, the union factories are at a disadvantage.

[Psychoblues]

The data that even pretends to represent a 30% disparity between union and non union wage/benefit packages is poisoned on it's premise, mm.



I think you misunderstand the issue. There is no "problem" where 30% is labor and 70% is management. The problem is that companies with union factories have to shell out 30% more in labor costs. Their competitors can use that differential to sell cars for lower prices or for R&D. No matter how you slice it, the union factories are at a disadvantage.

That is not and never has been the way unions operate. Unions represent a fair package as indicated in prevailing circumstances and criterion. They don't pull numbers out of a hat and then demand they be met.

Silly, you!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues

[Binky]

BIG difference between the line guys and the "skilled trades", the skill trades make SIGNIFICANTLY more money.... and are higher trained.... enough said..


This particular man who is skilled trades, in actual hard cash, makes $33 per hour before the bennies; retirement monies, medical, dental and cost of living are added in. GM has led the public to believe that their workers make $72-$75 per hour because they are feeding the bullpucky that its labor is the most costly factor in making their vehicles. The average worker that is an assembly person and not a new hire makes $28 per hour. New hires are making $14 per hour.

And the Japanese companies guarantee their workers a job for life. None of the foreign auto companies are in the UAW. And fyi, since they haven't been in America all that long, they haven't the retirees yet to worry about carrying.

Anyway, now that we are on the subject of union workers, why is it that plumbers get paid close to $100 an hour to crawl under a sink with their hairy butt cracks hanging out to fix a leaky pipe? How come no one bitches about that?

[Missileman]

The data that even pretends to represent a 30% disparity between union and non union wage/benefit packages is poisoned on it's premise, mm.




That is not and never has been the way unions operate. Unions represent a fair package as indicated in prevailing circumstances and criterion. They don't pull numbers out of a hat and then demand they be met.

Silly, you!!!!!!!!!!

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Psychoblues


Ya know, if the data wasn't coming from the unions themselves (did you not check out the link I posted?), you might be on to something. As it is, as in most cases, your post is useless.

[Psychoblues]

Linking to bullshit does not exonerate you from expectation of truth, mm.



Ya know, if the data wasn't coming from the unions themselves (did you not check out the link I posted?), you might be on to something. As it is, as in most cases, your post is useless.


The 70+ bucks an hour for autoworkers is bullshit and you know it. Please stick to the truth or admit your bias and accept your defeat.

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Pshchoblues

[red states rule]

When you add it all up they do make $70/hr


December 8, 2008
UAW Workers Actually Cost the Big Three Automakers $70 an Hour
by James Sherk
WebMemo #2162
The United Auto Workers (UAW) wants Congress to bail out General Motors, Ford, and Chrysler to prevent their undergoing restructuring in bankruptcy proceedings. In bankruptcy, a judge could order union contracts to be renegotiated to reflect competitive realities. Many analysts have objected that hourly autoworkers at the Big Three are some of the most highly paid workers in America, costing the Big Three over $70 an hour in wages and current and future benefits. All taxpayers should not be taxed to preserve the affluence of a few.

Some observers argue that UAW members do not actually earn this much.[1] They argue this figure includes the cost of benefits paid to current retirees as well as wages and benefits paid to current workers and that the actual hourly earnings of current UAW members are much lower. This is a mistaken interpretation of the financial data released by the Detroit automakers.

Cash Compensation

Chart 1 shows the average hourly compensation for UAW workers and the average compensation for all private sector workers. These figures are based upon calculations by the Detroit automakers themselves as published in SEC filings, their annual reports, and other materials. According to briefing materials prepared by General Motors, "The total of both cash compensation and benefits provided to GM hourly workers in 2006 amounted to approximately $73.26 per active hour worked."


UAW workers are highly paid, but not all this compensation comes as cash wages. Breaking the $73.26 figure down, General Motors reports that it pays base wages of roughly $30 an hour. At the end of December 2006, the average vehicle assembler at GM earned $28.02 an hour; the average machine repair electrician earned $32.43.[2]

Other provisions raise cash earnings above this base pay. For example, workers at Ford earn 10 percent premium payments for taking midnight shifts and double time for overtime hours worked on Sundays.[3]

Autoworkers put in substantial overtime hours at higher rates, raising earnings above their base pay. GM reported that its average hourly employee worked 315 overtime hours in 2006. Including all monetary payments--base wages, shift premiums, overtime pay, as well as vacation and holiday pay--GM reported an average hourly pay of $39.68 an hour in 2006.[4] About 54 percent of the average UAW employee at GM's earnings came in cash in 2006.

http://www.heritage.org/research/economy/wm2162.cfm

[Missileman]

Linking to bullshit does not exonerate you from expectation of truth, mm.





The 70+ bucks an hour for autoworkers is bullshit and you know it. Please stick to the truth or admit your bias and accept your defeat.

:laugh2::laugh2::laugh2:

:beer::cheers2::beer:

Pshchoblues

I didn't post that UAW workers make $70. Put down the beer bottle and pay attention. I posted a link, FROM THE UNIONS THEMSELVES, where THEY claim their workers make 30% more than non-union.

Have anything else, Rummy, or are you done?