Ford Cuts UAW Wages to $114,000 Per Year

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
B

BLAZER PROPHET

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2008
Messages
18,725
Likes
191
Points
63
Remember recently when I informed y'all about my boss's brother who made just over $100,000 with the UAW in Detroit? Nearly everybody called me a liar and swore up and down no UAW member makes anything approaching that kind of money?

Well, here is a link regarding an agreement that Ford has made with the UAW whereby some workers are taking a pay cut to $114,000 per year.

So for those assholes who swore up & down that no UAW worker ever made anything approaching $100,000, rim my ass- and enjoy it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090311/ts_nm/us_ford
 
maxiep said:
I wasn't one of them.
Click to expand...

I know. You're always a straight up person.

Also, I make this thread mostly in jest. Message boards like this are mostly full of dopey kids and the rest of us have to take that into account.
 
Man, so you're saying I should look for an IAW job, huh?

Meh, I'm an engineer. Forget it. I should learn how to rivet something. Why did I waste 4 years of college time, when I could've been in a union?
 
Skimming the article, I didn't see that . . . but if UAW workers are getting paid 114K/yr, that might help to explain Ford's $14.7 billion net loss for 2008.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
Remember recently when I informed y'all about my boss's brother who made just over $100,000 with the UAW in Detroit? Nearly everybody called me a liar and swore up and down no UAW member makes anything approaching that kind of money?

Well, here is a link regarding an agreement that Ford has made with the UAW whereby some workers are taking a pay cut to $114,000 per year.

So for those assholes who swore up & down that no UAW worker ever made anything approaching $100,000, rim my ass- and enjoy it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090311/ts_nm/us_ford
Click to expand...

I don't see $114,000 in that article anywhere.

And the $55 per hour rate is the total of hourly rate, plus paid time off, plus an estimate of the effective hourly cost of benefits - bonuses, health coverage, pension,etc. . I have no idea how many hours worked per year are used in these computations.

Saying they will earn $55 per hours is not the same as the base hourly rate of pay they earn. There won't be thousands of factory worker W2's for the year that say $100,000+.

And you do realize that factory workers - even in good times - are not paid a weekly or monthly salary like most office workers. They are paid for the hours they work and they often don't get hours.

Anywho, I don't disagree that they have been generally overpaid for what they do, but no need to confuse the issue with misleading info.

Besides, I think two issues have had more of a negative impact of U.S. carmakers than the effective hourly rate of factory workers: 1) Union work rules that make it more difficult to be productive, something that is a big "hidden tax" of some unionized industries; 2) Lavish retirement benefits given to too many workers who are allowed to retire early (retirement based on years worked, not age) or given early retirement during previous company downturns. This is also partly union caused. Non-union shops layoff workers and pay severance. No long-term healthcare liability. They are bought out of any pension vesting. Often there is no vesting or the shop had 401k plan, which the employee takes with them. Union factories don't get off that easy when they have to get rid of workers, and the long-term liabilities piled up on them for retiree healthcare and pension benefits over the last few decades.
 
Last edited:
it's_GO_time said:
Skimming the article, I didn't see that . . . but if UAW workers are getting paid 114K/yr, that might help to explain Ford's $14.7 billion net loss for 2008.
Click to expand...

The 2 main reasons for business in trouble are high business taxes (that just went up) and high union wages and low/poor productivity.
 
Masbee said:
I don't see $114,000 in that article anywhere.

And the $55 per hour rate is the total of hourly rate, plus paid time off, plus an estimate of the effective hourly cost of benefits - bonuses, health coverage, pension,etc. . I have no idea how many hours worked per year are used in these computations.

Saying they will earn $55 per hours is not the same as the base hourly rate of pay they earn. There won't be thousands of factory worker W2's for the year that say $100,000+.

And you do realize that factory workers - even in good times - are not paid a weekly or monthly salary like most office workers. They are paid for the hours they work and they often don't get hours.

Anywho, I don't disagree that they have been generally overpaid for what they do, but no need to confuse the issue with misleading info.

Besides, I think two issues have had more of a negative impact of U.S. carmakers than the effective hourly rate of factory workers: 1) Union work rules that make it more difficult to be productive, something that is a big "hidden tax" of some unionized industries; 2) Lavish retirement benefits given to too many workers who are allowed to retire early (retirement based on years worked, not age) or given early retirement during previous company downturns. This is also partly union caused. Non-union shops layoff workers and pay severance. No long-term healthcare liability. They are bought out of any pension vesting. Often there is no vesting or the shop had 401k plan, which the employee takes with them. Union factories don't get off that easy when they have to get rid of workers, and the long-term liabilities piled up on them for retiree healthcare and pension benefits over the last few decades.
Click to expand...

Start rimming.
 
No, auto workers don't make that much money. Ever heard of urban myth?
 
really, you kinda have to figure in benefits into your salary. if i make 100k with no benefits, or 90k with full benefits for my whole family, the 90k is actually worth more in comparison to buying my own insurance.
 
AgentDrazenPetrovic said:
[internet] $114k a year? that's damn near poverty level! [/internet]
Click to expand...

Au contraire. According to our new Administration, if you make over $75K, you're "rich". It's time to step up, time to chip in, time to be part of the deal...spread the wealth!
 
Last edited:
drexlersdad said:
really, you kinda have to figure in benefits into your salary. if i make 100k with no benefits, or 90k with full benefits for my whole family, the 90k is actually worth more in comparison to buying my own insurance.
Click to expand...

If you make $100k with no benefits, you are an independant contractor - not an employee.
 
BLAZER PROPHET said:
This place is starting to suck. When the mods start playing favorites... :tsktsk:
Click to expand...

You were the one who initiated hostilities by telling Masbee to "start rimming." He said you were crude and ignorant to say such a thing.

You then decided to keep attacking him. Sorry, that's not going to be allowed. If you can't handle disagreement with your views, discussion forums aren't for you.

If you'd like to discuss this further, feel free to PM me or another moderator. There's no point hijacking this thread.
 
Minstrel said:
You were the one who initiated hostilities by telling Masbee to "start rimming." He said you were crude and ignorant to say such a thing.
Click to expand...

Hmmmmmmmmmm............ you have a point there.

But, dammit, I want to be vindicated!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top