The Gray Lady Bitchslaps Auto Workers
The New York Times lead story is U.A.W. Makes Concessions to Help Automakers. The article is pretty aptly titled because the NYT chose to focus entirely on the evil UAW parasites that are sucking the poor, helpless automakers dry through ludicrous demands such as job security and pension/health care payments.
The Big Three claim their industry is tanking not because of their refusal to change their big, heavy, gas-guzzling car designs, but because evil workers are demanding their contractually promised benefits. The Big Three are failing not because the rest of the world is building fuel-efficient cars, but because the UAW demands that CEOs pay their salaries between the time their jobs get shipped to Mexico, and they find new sources of employment.
You see, all the blame can (and should) be pinned on the workers. At least, that's what the Big Three claim, and the NYT seems to agree, which explains why so many horrifying facts are splayed across the Gray Lady's pages without examination, analysis, or comment from workers themselves.
Ford's chief executive, Alan R. Mulally, said in an interview Wednesday that Detroit needed the union's help to speed its transformation, particularly in replacing current workers with entry-level employees who will be making $14 an hour in wages under the terms of the 2007 labor agreement.
That's a pay cut of almost half for the Big Three. In addition, union members aren't guaranteed their old job security or health benefits. Now that they've made concession after concession, there are still no strings attached to the automakers to stop them from closing their plants and shipping jobs to Mexico after everything has been said and done.
The UAW's president, Ron Gettelfinger, has slowly cut the strings from the UAW's parachute, and now hundreds of thousands of workers will plummet toward the Earth because a handful of corporate executives figured out it's easier to suspend worker pension plans than trim their own fat salaries.
However, the sin of abusing poor autoworkers can be shared with the media that refuses to focus on them.
The NYT did not interview one UAW worker. The NYT did not interview one person who will lose their health care coverage through this new deal, which is tantamount to the automakers putting a giant boot up the ass of the UAW.
Other media made the effort to balance the story and interview actual workers affected by these gross policy decisions. Mlive.com, an on-line Michigan news website, interviewed Michigan workers who stand to lose their health coverage under changing auto industry policies.
With General Motors Corp.'s stock tanking and the automaker possibly running out of cash before the end of the year, 73-year-old Kenneth Rathje and other retirees posed questions about pensions and health benefits.
UAW Local 668 president Matthew Ebenhoeh has spent part of last week in Detroit, learning where General Motors is headed.Industry analysts speculate that GM could file for bankruptcy to seek protection from its creditors. Several hundred retirees wanted Ebenhoeh to tell them the consequences.
"My job is to make sure my membership is safe," Ebenhoeh said. "I don't want to see anybody lose anything."
Rathje retired from Grey Iron in 1995 after a 40-plus-year career that included a stint as a labor liaison, aiding workers on layoff with new jobs or training. Losing his pension would cost him about $12,000 per year; his insurance much more.
Seems fairly painless, right? It's fine to explain the corporate side of a story, but any reputable media source should then step back and offer the counter-argument, where the workers and poor people live.
It's obvious why these types of stories tend to be so one-sided. Poor autoworkers can't buy New York Times advertising space and subscriptions.
Follow Allison Kilkenny on Twitter: www.twitter.com/allisonkilkenny
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The average wage of a UAW worker is close to $30 an hour, according to GM. That doesn't include benefits. If a worker works 40 hours a week, 50 weeks a year, that amounts to a salary of roughly 60,000. According to their union, the average salary of a teacher in the United States is 51,000. Just about 100% of teachers have bachelor degrees, and 35% have graduate degrees (according to a program aired on PBS in 1998) I have to say that this really isn't fair. The auto workers really should make more concessions in terms of wage cuts.
The big 3's problems are simple. The Big 3 promised generous wages and benefits to employees, and the Union didn't complain, even as the companies lost market share and made bad cars.
These 3 companies made very very very bad cars for DECADES. And, surprise surprise, their workers and shareholders are screwed. That's how it works. You have to make a decent product to survive. The Big 3 only got serious about quality 10 years ago.
The irony of the failing NYT spreading false tales of unionized workers of the failing Big 3 making $73 an hour when the NYT pays its unionized workers well, including health care & pension coverage to retirees is apparent. The NYT, GM, Ford & Chrysler will be dead as functioning enterprises by 2012. What will history say of the NYT as a news source?
All of these enterprises are failing because of sub-par managment, years of sub-par managment. How much does a unionized NYT employee make per hour? It may be found that the NYT & the Big 3 have similar pay rates for unionized employees just as all 4 enterprises have wretched quality executives.
He may have been referring to regulations like proper and sufficient funding of pensions.
What are the real issues surrounding the dire circumstances that the US automakers face at this juncture? Did these issues develop recently, or are these concerns a consequence based on negligent disregard displayed by the actions of corporate management? The fact is that the dilemmas that the automakers are facing today are a directly attributable to the blatant abuse of managerial power. That, coupled with a complete lack of a competence, and an attitude and an aura of arrogance that is a part of a series of transgressions is the real culprit behind the demise of the Big 3 auto manufacturers. For decades, GM, Ford, and Chrysler have watched on the sidelines as Toyota and Honda applied Dr. Demming’s model of efficiency and quality to manufacture and construct a viable and competitive product.
A contravention in the protocols and policies that have characterized the Big 3 as lazy, apathetic, fat cats who care more about “getting-over” rather than getting ahead was necessary long before the catastrophic events that have occurred over the past twelve months. And let’s not forget the lack of oversight and regulation that the Federal Government has failed to execute. The fact is that appropriate measures of oversight and regulation, when properly instituted, can serve as an agent of progress toward the ends of advancement and growth has been visibly missing. This is exactly what happens in a parasitic environment of “capitalism” where deregulation runs rampant, and the indefatigable, persistent quest for bailouts immediately follow.
What goes government regulation have to do with the Big 3 making such small margins on cars and continually losing market share in the domestic market? Deregulation BTW, which gained momentum in the 1970s, increased competition and resulted in lower prices and more choices for consumers. In most industries, deregulations was a very good thing for consumers.
Looks like we've conjured up the ghost of Ronnie Reagan here. Thanks for the de-reg input Gipper.
BTW.... there might be a whole bunch of supremely screwed and supremely pissed ex-ENRON employees out there who would love to share their thoughts about how well deregulation works in a REAL world.
I say that those folks who work the line who receive their pensions. To hell with CEO's and their overblown pay.
Whoa, does this mean I can use "bitchslap" now and not get censored?
no.
The author doesn't seem to realize that the Big 3 make small margins on cars because of their high legacy costs. If they relied on low margin fuel efficient vehicles alone, they'd be out of business already.
The big three knew these legacy cost would exist when they negotiated these contracts. But instead of putting money aside to pay for them executive paid their selves outrageous salaries and retirement bonuses. The mistake made by the union workers was thinking about their long term future instead of taking the money and running during good times like management did.
Any excess in executive salaries and bonus is absolutely minimal relative to the massive legacy costs. Do you realize that there are 450,000 GM retirees that still get checks every month? Isn't it sad that the future success of GM depends on how many retirees die each year?
You mean the costs that add around $2400/car? The ones that are DWARFED by the executive compensation packages?
Even if you think executive compensation (for the group of 8-10 or so executives) for GM (for example) should be half per year than what it has been, you're talking about an annual savings of perhaps $40 million this year, a number that is absolutely miniscule relative to the huge legacy costs.
Those workers and retirees should just get in their jets, fly to Washington and give a piece of their minds.
This is strictly a management problem, give the American consumer what they really want, extremely safe cars that do not pollute our environment and get over 100 miles per gallon.
Instead they promoted gas guzzlers and lobbied to do away with CAFE standards and got tax breaks for people driving tanks that get 10 miles per gallon.
Labor costs are just a small part of the Detroit Three Stooges, they had no foresight and quality control and service took a back seat to profits first.
Sure we have to save this manufacturing base, but they need oversight from someone like Ralph Nader in conjunction with green engineering.
The taxpayers have given billions of dollars to financial institutions so just have the car companies get a loan from them.
Bloated management salaries and bonuses, tens of millions spent to fight auto improvements, poor decisions. And still the workers are being made the fall guy for upper level incompetence. There is no guarantee the Big 3 won't ship every job out of the country after the bailout. And there is no guarantee they'll keep ANY promise they make after they get the bailout money. And after they get the money, they can do anything they want with NO consequences because we'll NEVER get that money back.
Do people know how to do math. OK, lets blame it all on the big salaries of the auto executive. The CEO of GM makes $20M and lets assumes all the top executives combined make $200M. GM makes around 3M cars a year which means they cost $66 per car. The labor cost of American car is calculated to be at a $1500 cost disadvantage to Honda and Toyota. So based on this math, how would reducing the executive pay make American cars any cheaper. Math is truth.
Yeah, well, the CEOs of The Japanese Big 3 (Toyota, Honda and Nissan) make CONSIDERABLY less than their American counterparts, yet the Japanese CEOs seem to manage (in more way than one!) very well on their lesser compensation.
Plus the tax breaks the southern states give in addition to right to work (union busting) laws.
Why didn't the big three move to the south instead of overseas?
Bad management decisions.
Goverment had to bail out banks because they were accomplice in creating this mess by relaxing banking rules banks lobbied so much. European goverments bailed out their banks and they did not created this problem. We can not exist without sound banking system. If bank approves the mortgage it should guarantee it til its payed off. But not make a quick commission and sell it off to pension fund in Iceland.
I do not consider assembly worker a skilled worker. He is just a labourer. Electrician, carpenter or car mechanic is skilled worker. $29 for filling transmission with oil or installing tire on the hub is bit too much for skill required.
I do not see how giving $34 mil to big three will make people buy cars. Why I should buy chevy or ford for sake of saving other people standard of life. Do UAW workers think about other people when they fill up their shopping carts in Wal-Mart? They just want to stretch their dollars as far as they can.
I know people with Bmw and Mercedes with endless trips to repair shops. It is not quality why people do not buy big 3 made cars. People buy big 3 cars because they need transportation. People buy german cars because they want them.
Here is my predictions:
Chrysler will be sold to China, for pennies on the Dollar, and they will then have the cash backing to out sell the other 2 of the Big 3! GM and Ford will battle each other with Ford winning only to lose market share to Chrysler, who will flood the market with very small fuel efficient autos that are also sold in China!
UNLESS
The UAW gets a number of Board seats and the bailout money to then become the "owner" of Chrysler!
Congress should allow the UAW to buy Chrysler and control the Board, UAW/Chrysler would then lead the American recovery of "our" auto industry...
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
