UAW Strike - Tentative Deal Reached - Pending Vote

[Fuzzy1975]

This is what most people miss with celebrating union 'wins' They are almost always short term wins followed by mass labor cuts overall. Workers get a few more dollars now followed by no dollars at all in a few years. The Suits win.

Personally, I don't think vehicles made outside should be allowed to be shipped in without massive add-on taxes designed to punish the companies for moving production off shore. If the numbers show a $10,000 per vehicle savings over what it would cost to build here, impose a $20,000 per vehicle import fee.

Then you will limit the manufacturer to only sell in their market. But you know this already...

By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) — The nation's business economists think President Donald Trump's trade war with China will contribute to a sharp slowdown in economic growth this year and next, raising concerns about a possible recession starting late next year.

The latest survey by a panel of 51 forecasters with the National Association for Business Economics shows they expect growth, as measured by the gross domestic product, to slow to 2.3% this year from 2.9% in 2018. The new forecast marks a downgrade from the 2.6% estimate for 2019 economic growth that the NABE panel had made in June.

For 2020, the forecasters expect GDP growth to fall to 1.8%. They see little likelihood of a recession over the next 12 months but expect the risk to increase by late next year.

Gregory Daco, chief U.S. economist at Oxford Economics, said the forecasting panel turned more pessimistic over the summer, with 80% of the economists now saying the risks are pointed to the downside.

"The rise in protectionism, pervasive trade policy uncertainty and slower global growth are considered key downside risks," Daco said.

https://www.usnews.com/news/us/articles/2019-10-07/business-economists-foresee-slowdown-in-us-growth

 

[Dribble]

And I haven't seen anything in any of the articles that does anything about the C-Suite salaries and compensation.

Not sure a Union...has the right to negotiate those. It is an issue. But not something the Union can demand

 

[Dribble]

Then you will limit the manufacturer to only sell in their market. But you know this already...

So?

What is more important? The wellbeing of American workers? Or the wellbeing of large companies? Where is the line in the sand?

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

‘The early adopters have adopted’: US carmakers slow their EV growth plans​

Consumer appetite for battery-powered cars and trucks has fallen short of industry expectations

https://www.ft.com/content/80d79220-612f-4c01-93b7-1d1a846e4b6d

 

[jaF0]

Then you will limit the manufacturer to only sell in their market. But you know this already...

The point is about offshoring to 'save money' by not paying union salaries. If you are an American company and your history is making and selling products in the US, then you suddenly decide to make products offshore but continue to sell them here to 'save money' on labor, you should not be able to benefit from that.

Mattel shut down several US plants putting workers out of jobs, then shipped their products back to the US at higher prices to the consumer. I'm not aware they were penalized for that at all. I'd have prevented them from shipping those products back without somehow compensating the workers they fired.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

So?

What is more important? The wellbeing of American workers? Or the wellbeing of large companies? Where is the line in the sand?

Most "foreign" makers such as Toyota have plants in the US. They employ Americans. That is the line. You want to sell in our market,you make a percentage (70% in the case of Toyota) of those vehicles in that market.

You guys want to rip that up? Talk about biting your nose off to spite your face.

 

[jaF0]

That isn't what I'm talking about.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

The point is about offshoring to 'save money' by not paying union salaries. If you are an American company and your history is making and selling products in the US, then you suddenly decide to make products offshore but continue to sell them here to 'save money' on labor, you should not be able to benefit from that.

Most "foreign" makers such as Toyota have plants in the US. They employ Americans. That is the line. You want to sell in our market,you make a percentage (70% in the case of Toyota) of those vehicles in that market.

You guys want to rip that up? Talk about biting your nose off to spite your face.

Mattel shut down several US plants putting workers out of jobs, then shipped their products back to the US at higher prices to the consumer. I'm not aware they were penalized for that at all. I'd have prevented them from shipping those products back without somehow compensating the workers they fired.

You were not talking abut Mattel. Don't move the goal posts.

 

[ll74]

More on the deal. Haven't seen the final union vote occur yet. Huge win for workers and another big win for unions on general.

https://apnews.com/article/general-...s-uaw-strike-34f6f0d7ca32a671783594722b20fb24

 

[jaF0]

You were not talking abut Mattel. Don't move the goal posts.

I'm talking about traditionally US companies suddenly dumping US workers and facilities to manufacture elsewhere but ship back here for sales. Mattel, Briggs and Stratton, GM, Chrylser, Ford, or whoever. Traditionally foreign companies like Honda and Toyota not included.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

I'm talking about traditionally US companies suddenly dumping US workers and facilities to manufacture elsewhere but ship back here for sales. Mattel, Briggs and Stratton, GM, Chrylser, Ford, or whoever. Traditionally foreign companies like Honda and Toyota not included.

Then take that up with GM (et el) since they are not a foreign manufacturer, import rules don't apply. So if you want to slap a $20,000 dollar tariff on a domestic manufacturer, go ahead and try and sell that. ( I am not aware,outside NAFTA 2 that occurs with GM, Ford or Chrylser)

 

[Dribble]

Then take that up with GM (et el) since they are not a foreign manufacturer, import rules don't apply. So if you want to slap a $20,000 dollar tariff on a domestic manufacturer, go ahead and try and sell that. ( I am not aware,outside NAFTA 2 that occurs with GM, Ford or Chrylser)

You should learn to read better before coming to the adult table

 

[Sean Renaud]

Then take that up with GM (et el) since they are not a foreign manufacturer, import rules don't apply. So if you want to slap a $20,000 dollar tariff on a domestic manufacturer, go ahead and try and sell that. ( I am not aware,outside NAFTA 2 that occurs with GM, Ford or Chrylser)

The point being made is that putting your HQ in San Francisco but doing all of your actual manufacturing overseas with cheap labor should count as an import. The exact same way you putting your HQ and one dude and a rotatation of swimsuit models to the Caymens for tax purposes even though you do 80% of your business in the US is bullshit.

 

[jaF0]

Then take that up with GM (et el) since they are not a foreign manufacturer, import rules don't apply. So if you want to slap a $20,000 dollar tariff on a domestic manufacturer, go ahead and try and sell that.

No. So they should not be able to move manufacturing offshore and sell here. If they want ot make and sell cars in Mexico, fine. No problem.

But to shut plants down here and put US workers out of a job, then ship made in Mexico cars back here and sell in the same dealerships that used to sell the US made product all the while keeping the corporate offices here should not be allowed without compensation to the US workers they dumped.

 

[Dribble]

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/... parent,liabilities, taxation, and governance.

In case people don't know...Toyota of America is a subsidiary. That however...does not eliminate their tax liability to the country where that subsidiary exists. It isn't a surprise subsidiary nonunion companies build plants where they do...in right to work States where they can pay 1/4 of the hourly wage. Sorry...I don't sympathize with this mentality

 

[Fuzzy1975]

The point being made is that putting your HQ in San Francisco but doing all of your actual manufacturing overseas with cheap labor should count as an import.

Then take that up with the Government. Putting a "tariff" on a domestic owned product, outside of NAFTA 2 is where you are trying to move. I have yet to see anything that shows GM etc is actually doing this.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

You should learn to read better before coming to the adult table

Really? You can do better than school yard insults Dribble. Maybe point out the errors of my post for a start.

 

[Dribble]

Really? You can do better than school yard insults Dribble. Maybe point out the errors of my post for a start.

I read his post. Twice. No where did I read what you claim he said. I thought he was quite clear. But you wanted to take it elsewhere.

Companies...big companies...those that used to be the backbone of this country...are moving jobs away from the US. Why? To increase the dividends of a few. Is that the kind of country we want? People living paycheck to paycheck?

It is a mentality.

 

[Dribble]

70.6% of all GM vehicles are made from non-US components. Shall we look at the trend over the last 20 years?

Now...this is more than Ford. But we can look at their trend too.

That is what this strike was for. And the fact all auto manufacturers hire temporary workers...use them until they have to either hire them...or they do what they do...lay them off and hire more Temp workers. The Union workers felt this was unfair. So they fought for them.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

I read his post. Twice. No where did I read what you claim he said. I thought he was quite clear. But you wanted to take it elsewhere.

Where did I take it "elsewhere"? I showed the reality of it, and note he deflected it to other companies, I was and am only using automobile companies.

Companies...big companies...those that used to be the backbone of this country...are moving jobs away from the US.

The regulations (laws passed )that make that possible, the catalysis is to the capitalistic economic model we follow.

It is a mentality.

It's corporate profit taking, but still it has nothing to do with adding tariffs, which is what I seem to get from his original post. US manufactures don't need to pay extra for offshore products they ship back to the US. Those are the laws, so don't ask for tariffs on those "items" demand for the laws to be changed.

 

[butters]

Most "foreign" makers such as Toyota have plants in the US. They employ Americans. That is the line. You want to sell in our market,you make a percentage (70% in the case of Toyota) of those vehicles in that market.

You guys want to rip that up? Talk about biting your nose off to spite your face.

Toyota immediately raises non-union workers' wages after UAW deal

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...1&cvid=606fb6f8cb884ab9ac936256c460ec11&ei=27

benefits the workers, but more an attempt to take the wind out of the sails of Fain who has plans on organising the non-union workers along with the unionites in 2028, to take on 'the big 6' which includes Toyota. If Toyota can keep their workers happy, Fain has no traction.

I'm all for unions, but more than that i'm for workers being paid fairly, getting health coverage and paid sick leave/holiday time/mat-pat baby time/safe working conditions and so on.

 

[ll74]

Toyota immediately raises non-union workers' wages after UAW deal

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...1&cvid=606fb6f8cb884ab9ac936256c460ec11&ei=27

benefits the workers, but more an attempt to take the wind out of the sails of Fain who has plans on organising the non-union workers along with the unionites in 2028, to take on 'the big 6' which includes Toyota. If Toyota can keep their workers happy, Fain has no traction.

I'm all for unions, but more than that i'm for workers being paid fairly, getting health coverage and paid sick leave/holiday time/mat-pat baby time/safe working conditions and so on.

This is actually a reason to support unions. Non union workers benefit

 

[butters]

(Reuters) -Chrysler-parent Stellantis has agreed to build a new $3.2 billion battery plant and invest $1.5 billion in a new mid-size truck factory in Illinois under its tentative labor agreement, the United Auto Workers union said on Thursday.

UAW President Shawn Fain disclosed new details of the labor deal that includes a 25% pay hike, better retirement benefits and other significant improvements and runs through April 2028 after union leaders agreed earlier on Thursday to send the deal to members for a ratification vote that will take about two weeks.

Stellantis @$19B investment plans include:

reopening the Belvidere, Illinois assembly plant, to produce 80,000 to 100,000 mid-size trucks annually in 2027 and the $3.2 billion battery plant in 2028.

$1.5 billion— Toledo Jeep operations, including building an EV Jeep Wrangler in 2028.

$3.5 billion in three Michigan assembly plants, including EV versions

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...1&cvid=3f3643f0fc5946ac9df76b1cb248be00&ei=21

 

[butters]

they're offering $50,00 buyouts from '24 thru '26 in order to save money by having the long higher-ranking workers leave making it possible to hire cheaper staff who'd start out on the lower wages.

converting 3,200 temps to full time workers in the first year, with others after that gaining full-time status after 9 months service.

 

[butters]

(Bloomberg) -- The United Auto Workers’ president says there could be a nasty fight ahead to organize workers at Ford Motor Co.’s jointly-owned electric battery plants, after the company declined to join its competitors in agreeing to ease the unionization process.

“Stellantis and GM agreeing to these terms, in effect buys them labor peace as we move forward,” UAW head Shawn Fain said in an interview with Bloomberg News Thursday. At Ford, in contrast, he said, “that could get ugly.”

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/com...1&cvid=9b994599bb8a4b82adbc56792938f2b6&ei=12

New employees at the joint ventures will get 75% of the pay rates in the master agreement, the UAW president said, but the union will aim to eliminate that gap when it renegotiates the deal in 2028. “The key thing was getting it under the master,” he said.

Ford has said it will allow its hourly workers to transfer into its wholly owned electric truck assembly plant under construction in Tennessee and the battery plant it has planned in Marshall, Michigan, which it paused while negotiations unfolded.

Ford plans to stall the construction of a second battery plant in Kentucky, citing a drop in demand for EVs as its reason for cutting $12B off its planned expenditure, but i'm seeing it as more a move for leverage against unionization, to be honest.