Working People and Good Jobs are the Foundation of Our Economy, Not the Problem

Get ready for corporate America's favorite game: blame the victim. As pundits address the various reasons for the American auto industry's problems a frequent target won't be bloated CEO salaries, a lack of executive accountability or a flawed business plan. The target will be the men and women who go to work every day doing the best job they can.

Just last week, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman gratuitously blamed the United Auto Workers union for the auto industry's current state three times in his column without a hint of evidence behind his allegations. As the bailout debate continues, there will be many more examples to come.

This blame the victim concept is inaccurate and goes against the basic foundation of the American Dream.

First, critics of autoworkers - or construction workers, public service workers or any number of other employees who have sometimes managed to join together and win decent wages and benefits - fail to mention that workers have been taking it on the chin and making sacrifices for years. At the Big Three automakers, workers have already taken significant wage and benefit cuts in their last two contracts negotiated in 2005 and 2007. By the end of the current contract, the gap in labor costs between union and non-union U.S. auto companies will be nearly eliminated. At the same time, studies continue to show that union represented workers, both in the auto industry and in general, are more productive, more efficient and have superior health and safety records.

But even more disturbing than the inaccuracy of the attacks against working people is the premise on which they are based - that in order to survive, workers in Detroit and everywhere must match their wages and benefits to workers who make less and labor under worse conditions.

The American Dream is about upward mobility through middle class jobs, not an economic race to the bottom. Middle class jobs built our country by allowing one generation to work hard, support a family and give their kids opportunities they never had themselves. And those jobs were based on good wages and benefits that improved over time to meet the demands and costs of a modern society.

We are told huge corporate salaries and multi-million dollar bonuses are necessary because these lofty incentives drive the innovation and entrepreneurial spirit behind a free-market economy. But when that same free market economy allows workers to negotiate for wages and benefits that match their skills and production, they ludicrously get the blame for ruining an entire industry.

As the union representing the men and women who build America, we hear the same thing in the construction industry. Anti-union groups complain about prevailing wage jobs that pay the workers responsible for building our roads, bridges, mass-transit and energy systems in the highest skilled positions as much as $40 an hour. That's a good, family-supporting job. But it's less than what a typical corporate CEO literally makes in 10 seconds - despite being in part responsible for our current economic crisis and now lining up for billion-dollar handouts.

Everyone will have to make sacrifices before our economy turns around. Working people have already made more sacrifices than most. But we cannot go backwards, lowering standards and degrading the foundation of the American Dream. Working people and good jobs built our economy and they are the key to our economic recovery.

Comments

[Shevalier]

Michaele you have been complaining that the autoworkers have not refuted the mendacious $70.00 per hour talking point spouted by a bloviating right wingers. Well I found it for you:
http://www.uaw.org/auto/11_25_08auto2.cfm
Using google and taking about five seconds, I found it.
The UAW is refuting it, I guess the right wing and mainstream press aren't interested in truth, just their own ideology.

[Michale32086]

OK, so the cost of retirees is figured into the $70 per hour.. That's what has been put forth.

But, isn't the cost of retirees figured into LABOR COSTS?

Of course it is...

So, since that IS a labor cost, it is reasonable to lump it in with all the other LABOR COSTS...

And the UAW already concedes that the $28 per hour is a STRAIGHT TIME rate. That doesn't include double time, over time, holiday pay and the like..

So, even if you deduct the retiree pay, add the $10-$20 of actual benefits pay, PLUS the overtime, etc etc, you STILL get within $10-$15 of the $70...

So, if you wish, I will be HAPPY to concede that the average pay of the Union Workers is $55-$60 per hour...

That's still high, ESPECIALLY when you consider the ludicrous and wasteful Jobs Bank program..

However, all that is completely irrelevant to my overall point.

And THAT point is, the Unions DO share responsibility for the mess the company is in...

If you dispute that, then THAT is the discussion we should be having.

If you DON'T dispute that, then we are in complete agreement..

Michale.....

[BlueGreen55]

Reply back with the link to your rant about high executive and professional pay and maybe you'll get an ear or two. Until then, re-read the original post above.

It is a cinch that any UAW worker is worth more than some analyst/broker selling/shuffling worthless paper and making 6-7 figures per year. How many of THEM are there? And how many are getting a completely free ride off of you and me via the rescues totaling $4.5 trillion and counting? Are unions perfect - no. Are union workers perfect - no. But as the writer notes above, the union worker of today is more effecient and works safer than others. Because of this, they DESERVE higher pay because they EARNED it.

I am for the rescue of the auto companies because the alternative is just as bad as it was for letting AIG or Citi fail. Millions will lose their jobs and it will cost you and me even more then a resue would. As mentioned above the UAW has given back in 2005 and 2007 and will probably be willing to give even more, but to say they are more than 10-20% of the problem is not borne out by the fact of Mangement's poor strategic planning and poor financial planning leading to no cash available and few products the American public will buy compared to other manufacturers.

[kissy kai]

YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT ALL YOU KNOW IS WHAT THE RIGHTWING REPUB ARE TELLING YOU.

[AJT]

Well, I am not a union worker and I have benefits too. I have a 401K that my employer contributes to. I have medical benefits. Until recently the people who have retired from my comapny had a pension and medical benefits. No one here is in a union. Benefits are not the problem, the companies were supposed to put aside the promised pension money and they did not, that is a huge problem. Benefits are not a union thing, they are a general employment thing. Pensions, and retiement medical benefits, have been common inside and outside of unions. Companies make promises when they need labor, the fact that they do not prepare for it when they promise it is a management problem.

By fhe way, why is it OK for a corporation (consisting of many many stock holders) to use one set of people to negotiate wages and benefits (collective bargaining) and unions(consisting of many many workers) are reviled for using one set of people to negotiate wages and benefits(collective bargaining)?

[Pearlswan]

The reason they give you benefits is so you won't unionize your labor. So, it is unions that get you your benefits indirectly. They also raise your wages do to competition. So, we all enjoy the benefits of organized labor, even if we don't have a union in our workplace. If you don't believe me, read the history of the labor movement and find out for yourself.

[Biffmeister]

Right on.

[Careysub]

The role of worker compensation, including retirees, in the current auto industry crisis can be judged by a few simple calculations.

The higher compensation costs of workers for GM is said to add $1500 to each U.S. vehicle sold, on average. GM sells 4 million vehicles a year in the U.S., so this cumulative 'penalty' is $6 billion a year.

If the U.S. government were to decide to help GM by taking all of this higher compensation cost off the table to restore its competitiveness it would cost $6 billion each year.

The amount of money the GM is asking for just for an operating bridge "loan" for the next few months is $12 billion.

In other words - the red ink GM is running is many times larger than the entire "UAW penalty" and if this were magically (or governmentally) swept away, it would be a mere drop in the bucket in GM's current troubles.

Revising the UAW compensation structure is an essential as part of the radical reorganization the Big three require (everyone else in this economy is taking hits, UAW workers cannot expect to escape scot free) but it actually only a small part of the problem.

[MCTSilverlakeCA]

As a Sr. Calif Worker's Comp Expert Claims Consultant and past Supervisor/Manager of Fraud Units I've been privy to much information at both levels - In my experience Union Workers' DO get paid much more than skilled workers' who are NON Unionized and their Benefits are often very unrealistic compared to Non-Unionized companies, but so do the Executives.

Union Worker's and Unionized Company Executives both seem to have an "attitude" that they should continue to get these wages even if the company goes broke in the process.

Unions drive up the cost of Benefits like Full Medical Coverage for Life, Overly High Wages for basically typical skilled labor paid at 1/3rd that amount in other industries, and Company paid Cafeteria's so their employee's won't have to bring their lunch to work, etc... Executive Employee's also add to this with their own Outrageously Unrealistic Salaries and Perks -- and BOTH classes of Employee's can only exist in an environment where the Public is the Financial Fall Guy -- and in today's Economic Reality -- they only both add to the downfall of the companies they work for.

The problem is that both are so accustomed to getting these outrageously high benefits that they now believe they are entitled to them - and both will push a company to the brink with their demands... and in today's Economy - the company ...fails. And then, both sides point fingers at the other and say " it's your fault we're failing" - and both

[AnneOlivia]

It seems to me that blaming the union for the financial troubles of the automakers is like blaming the children of a family for a family's economic troubles.

The parents make the decisions about the allocation of funds and budgeting, and the kids live with the consequences.

It's not a perfect analogy, but it's what I keep thinking. The union and the efforts of their members certainly have more of an impact on the over-all economic health of the company than the kids of a family do, but the union and union member do not ultimately decide how to budget and spend, so how is it their fault that the automakers are failing?

[Michale32086]

Again, no one is blaming the Unions exclusively..

There is enough blame to go around..

The Unions are simply trying to play the victim to avoid admitting to their responsibility..

Does ANYONE here... ANYONE at all.... feel that the Unions are COMPLETELY blameless???

A simple YES or NO will suffice...

Michale.....

[Maverick 39]

NO! The unions are 35% of the problem. Their giving unions a bad name all over if you ask me. The UAW just keeps pushing and pushing GM for more and more until GM has nothing left to do with what their suppose to be doing and that's make "GREEN" cars. Meanwhile, You got piss poor CEO management just sitting back and collecting what they can. The big 3 were bailed out a few years ago with some $77 billion and all they kept building was SUV's and pick-up trucks.

[Pearlswan]

Yes.

[LeftRight]

Here:

http://www.uaw.org/barg/07fact/fact02.php

This one in particular sticks out:

Why is the figure cited as hourly labor costs by the companies so much higher than the wage rates?

In addition to regular hourly pay, the labor cost figures cited by the companies include other expenses associated with having a person on payroll. This includes overtime, shift premiums and the costs of negotiated benefits such as holidays, vacations, health care, pensions and education and training. It also includes statutory costs, which employers are required to pay by law, such as federal contributions for Social Security and Medicare, and state payments to workers’ compensation and unemployment insurance funds. [b]The highest figures sometimes cited also include the benefit costs of retirees who are no longer on the payroll.[/b]

Check out between the [b]and [/b] You will see what I am talking about!

[Michale32086]

I see what you are talking about..

But, that simply proves my point..

"In 2006 a typical UAW-represented assembler at GM earned $27.81 per hour of straight-time labor. A typical UAW-represented skilled-trades worker at GM earned $32.32 per hour of straight-time labor."

These seems to dispute your claim that GM just took the number of employees, including the ones who make millions a year.. These are not "UAW represented" employees, so they cannot be included in the figuring..

The point you make about the retiree costs are not relevant, as they ARE labor costs and they WERE acquired by the UAW..

Also note that the figures quoted ($27.81 and $32.32) represent STRAIGHT TIME wages and does NOT include overtime, double time, holiday pay, etc etc..

SO.... If one were to take into account ALL wages (overtime, double time, etc etc) PLUS benefits for ALL employees and retired, which IS Labor costs, then it's entirely possible, even likely that such a figure WOULD reach the $70 p/h quoted..

Remember, I am using the figures quoted DIRECTLY from the UAW and not from GM..

Given this new information, it's obvious why we are not seeing any disputes of the $70 p/h claim from the UAW...

Because apparently, it's a pretty accurate claim...

Michale.....

[LeftRight]

Wow.... Michale complains that I'm not presenting any truth, and therefore what management claims MUST stand. Then I present him with proof, and he claims that what management said must stand!

Michale, it's NOT a labor cost if it's not incurred directly by your CURRENT labor force! That means that labor costs are wages, payroll taxes, health insurance (if any), life insurance (if any), pensions for the current force (if any), matching of current workforce 401(k)(if any) etc.... Paying into the pension plan to cover RETIRED workers is NOT a labor cost. It is simple overhead, life the lighting in the plant. You cannot operate without it, but it's NOT a labor cost!

[LeftRight]

And by the way, Michale, I would LOVE to see you actually try to debunk my numbers based on something more than an industry trying to break its contracts! Because that's what GM/Ford/Chrysler are trying to do. They know that if they can just get their workers down to slave wages then they will be able to pocket all the money for themselves!!! Therefore it's in their best interests to CLAIM that they are paying their workers $70/hr, in spite of ALL logic pointing out the fallacy of that claim! A claim which you seem to believe like it was written in the bible in God's own handwriting! A claim which I have shown to be unlikely in the extreme, and the ONLY argument that you've been able to come up with is, "Well, I haven't seen the other side's numbers, so they don't exist, so the ONLY numbers that count are the one's that the company has presented!"

[Michale32086]

No, the only numbers that count are the only numbers out there..

Let me ask you something. Honestly... Rationally... Logically..

If those numbers ARE NOT valid, why isn't the UAW screaming to high heaven, disputing them??

Obviously, the UAW and their proponents are not shy about getting their message out there. One only has to see the few daily commentaries here on HuffPo to realize that.

And in ALL those commentaries not ONE BIT, not ONE IOTA of evidence to dispute those numbers have been forthcoming from the UAW...

WHY???

Why is that???

Michale.....

[kingmiller]

The fact is that the GOP and some well ensconced Democrats are taking to this Financial Crises as an opportunity to break the unions. Sadly, politics plays even in Dire Straits. If these were any other times, a $25B bridge loan would be just another investment by the banks. But these are not ordinary times, and we can not allow the automakers to fail. Auto workers have been making concessions for over a decade, to be more competitive with overseas operations, and are on the verge of something real here. With proper government and consumer prodding, the new American car will be jazzy, get 50 mpg and be able to compete at price point. Let's not squander this opportunity to make all of this happen simply because the automakers of the past are slow to catch on. Weneed them for jobs, we need them for defense, and we need them for identity!

[Michale32086]

The unions trying to play the victims here won't win a place in the hearts of the American taxpayer.

They Unions should man up, admit their responsibility in the matter and press on..

Michale.....

[Michale32086]

@LeftRight

}}}}}
It sure looks to me like your numbers are bunk!
{{{{{

Key words there being "looks like"..

Don't you think that, if the GM numbers WERE bunk, that the UAW would be putting out contradictory evidence six ways from Sunday??

The fact that there is NO CONTRADICTORY EVIDENCE from the UAW lends strong credence to the GM numbers.

It's simple logic....

I am more than willing to entertain the notion that the GM numbers are highly inflated..

But, I am not going to do so, based SOLELY on what it "looks like" to you...

If you want to dispute the GM claims, the GM "talking points" (as you say) then you are going to have to find some UAW talking points of your own..

Because nothing else will suffice..

Michale......

[LeftRight]

Just go look at their website. As I said, I took EVERYTHING that my company or I contribute, I DOUBLED it to allow for the UAW having a better contract, and it STILL came out less.

And one more point, have you considered that the UAW isn't ALLOWED to present such information? Maybe the company doesn't give them the specifics either, and the union certainly isn't going to ask to publish information about the workers specific renumeration......

[Michale32086]

A possibility, but unlikely.

If the UAW was prevented from giving out the specific, you can bet that the UAW would be stating so loudly and clearly..

Something to the effect of, "Those figures are tragically off base and utterly wrong, but our Union contract prevents us from putting out the REAL numbers."

The fact that the UAW is quiet as church mice with regards to these wage claims certainly lends credence to the validity of the numbers claimed..

Again, a logical conclusion, logically arrived at..

Michale......

[Michale32086]

@LeftRight

}}}}
The information is ONLY from GM, and then repeated by right wing "news" media. Go out and find it yourself!
{{{{

And where is the contradicting information from the UAW??

It doesn't exist..

Ergo, in lieu of any contradicting information or evidence, the information from GM stands...

What is so hard to understand about that???

Michale......

[Michale32086]

@LeftRight

}}}}
But the Unions have NOT been evading responsibility. That's the REASON that they now have a two tier system.
{{{{

That was in response to an EARLIER issue.. A year or two ago...

What's their response to the CURRENT crisis?? Their claim that it's not their fault and the stance that they will not make any concessions..

Sounds like they are evading responsibility to me...

}}}}
On the other hand, the CEO is still pulling down more than $1600/hr!
}}}}

Yes and that is pathetic as well...

And if any HuffPo commentator posts a commentary defending that practice, you can bet your bottom dollar that I will be all over them like stink on rice... Or is that like white on carp?? Something like that.

The point is, no one is defending the excesses of the CEOs, that I have seen.. Yet MANY commentators are defending the excesses of the Unions...

Again, one of those pesky facts...

Michale.....

[LeftRight]

"That was in response to an EARLIER issue.. A year or two ago..."

Yeah, and WHAT did the management do since then???? Why don't THEY make the first move?

"What's their response to the CURRENT crisis?? Their claim that it's not their fault and the stance that they will not make any concessions.."

And they NEVER said that they would refuse to make concessions. They simply stated that *IF* management made no concessions then they didn't see how they could AFFORD to make any more concessions!

"The point is, no one is defending the excesses of the CEOs, that I have seen.. Yet MANY commentators are defending the excesses of the Unions..."

I'm not defending them, nor are very many other people. I'm simply pointing out the errors that you are claiming as fact. That's not a defense of the union, that's a defense of the TRUTH!!!

"Again, one of those pesky facts..."

PLEASE, go ahead and present some of those, I would LOVE to see what they look like!!

[Michale32086]

The problem is, you are disputing the evidence, not with evidence of your own, but rather, with your opinions...

It's not much of a dispute, if you cannot back up your claims with nothing more than your opinion...

Michale.....

[nightrain37]

the problem is management's short term thinking.these are the same a-holes that stick on bumper sticker (Support the Troops) but won't give them there jobs back after returning from war. Even if we had national health care, CEO's would then find a way to take more money than what they are already taking. It comes back to greed and the fact that we want everything now. Patience is no longer a virtue and manager's only concern is the bottom line. No ever mentions the fact that there are unions in Japan, government health care, and Japanese managements belief is employees first, company second, country, stockholders, then management (shocking right). No saying that they are perfect but the priorities are different. Its every man for himself in the good times, and government save me when things go south here. The race to the bottom line and the cheapest labor eventually is going to tear us down. Do you think China is going ship jobs out of China. NOTTTT!!!!!

[Michale32086]

@LeftRight

}}}}
I don't have them. However, since I know that they aren't THAT much more generous than my own company, I will go so far as to take my figures, and DOUBLE them, which STILL results in only around $54/hr, or a number ALMOST EXACTLY what Toyota and Honda are paying!
{{{{

Well, as I said in a different commentary on a different subject,

"Well, right now Mac outranks your gut."
-Jeff Daniels, SPEED

If you don't have any info directly from the UAW, then the info from GM will have to stand..

Michale.....

[LeftRight]

Not true! Just because the specific info is not available does NOT mean that erroneous info from another source is valid! Before John Kerry answered the Swiftboaters the ONLY information out there was that he was almost a traitor. Never mind the FACT that he wasn't!!!!!

Michale, I don't know if you remember an old computer term.... It's called GIGO.... It stands for Garbage In, Garbage Out, and it basically means that if you put bad information into a computer, you will get bad information out. The information that you have is bad information.

[Michale32086]

But you cannot PROVE that it's "bad information"..

That's my only point..

All you have is YOUR OPINION..

On the other side, there is the same information, reported from a multitude of different sources, all saying the same thing..

So, unless you can point to contradicting information, beyond your opinion, then the information stands..

I don't understand why this is such a hard concept..

Simply because you don't LIKE the info, doesn't make the info invalid..

Michale.....

[Michale32086]

@LeftRight

}}}}
wow........ I'm not gonna even make the point that's fighting its way out now....... I'll just say that's as impressive as using right wing talking points to "prove" that the UAW is getting $70/hr....
{{{{{

Then find some UAW talking points, or ANY UAW information, that disputes the $70 p/h claim...

Until you do, the claims stands...

Michale.....

[LeftRight]

Until you come back with some REAL information yourself, your claim FAILS!!! Just because the one person talking loudest has information doesn't mean that the information is CORRECT!!!!

[Michale32086]

The information is from GM and is reported by multiple entities..

Contrast that with ZERO conflicting information from the UAW and what is the logical and rational conclusion??

Michale.....

[Mavin1620]

UAW workers take home about $28/hr. This is actually a bit low in the scheme of things for skilled, although about the national average. Figure the annual salary on 2010 work hours a year. Add in about $1000/mo for health insurance. Add in FICA, FUTA, and a slew of other taxes, plus the cost of under-funded, mis-funded retirement funds, some of which have been depleted by the Wall Street meltdown, and you have $45 additional dollars per labor hour that employers have to pay that do not go into their workers' pockets. The tally that I recently read did not include the cost of the Human Resources department, the cost of calculating and paying the wages, or the finance fees.

Beware when multi-millionaire pundits tell you that someone is overpaid.

[toypiano]

Exactly. Well said. .

Bypassing the anti-worker repub tro//.

[Plank]

Some of the UAW/CAW plants (e.g. Oshawa, Toronto) are the most productive in the world. The notion that the big three are not competitive is non-sense. You don't get the "car of the year" awards 2 years in a row by accident. There's a perception in this country, that japanese manufacturers can do no wrong.
toyota recalls more cars than they sold:
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/182700/toyota_recalls_more_cars_than_they.html?cat=9
http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2006-05-31-toyota_x.htm

As for fuel efficiency, consider that the 2-mode hybrid Yukon gets the same MPG as the camry. The Pontiac G5, Chevy Cobalt get 37 MPG highway better that the toyota corolla and the Honda Civic. For the 2009 Model Year, GM leads the industry with 20 models in North America that achieve 30 or more highway miles per gallon, based on 2009 EPA estimates.

By all means, keep bashing the domestic auto industry and buy foreign cars. Just don't complain when you don't know the facts.

[Michale32086]

Less than EIGHT PERCENT of GM's models get over 30mpg..

LESS THAN EIGHT PERCENT...

Compare that with over 40% of Toyota and Honda models...

If GM et al are so competitive and solid, why are they begging to be bailed out world-wide???

Michale.....

[Plank]

GM makes 93 vehicles if you include commercial vehicles and SAAB. Take those out and the percentage is more like 33%. As I said, know your facts before throwing numbers like that.
The auto industry is not asking for a bailout. This is a bridge loan to make up for the lack of
available credit during these difficult economic times.