The negotiations were based on a plan advanced by Corker, the most junior member of the Banking Committee. His proposal sought to reduce the wages and benefits of union workers by requiring the automakers' total labor costs to be "on par" with Honda and Toyota.The UAW is content to wait until the new Congress and see if they can get what they want without having to make concessions on wages and benefits. But if they think that the Big Three can continue to be competitive with Toyota and Honda while paying so much more per hour, they are seriously deluded. They'd rather shoot for the moon without regard for the continued viability of their employers. They'd rather hold firm on their inordinate payouts rather than take cuts and help preserve the companies for the long term.
The two sides agreed to most other issues, including those requiring automakers to reduce their debt obligations by at least two-thirds through an equity swap with bondholders. Payouts to workers who are laid off or temporarily furloughed would have been terminated.
Ford, unlike General Motors and Chrysler, has said it does not need bridge loans at this point and would not need to agree to those conditions.
But no agreement could be reached on the wage reductions. "It sounds like UAW blew up the deal," Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) said afterward.
I wonder if the public, having learned a whole lot more this month about how union contracts have served to damage American automakers, will be less supportive of the other big union desire from the Democrats - card check which would remove the secret ballots from workers deciding on whether or not to unionize their workplaces. I wonder if other workers worrying about their own jobs will have much sympathy for those obdurate UAW workers who earn so much more than the average worker but weren't willing to take a "haircut" as Nancy Pelosi said everyone had to do.
7 comments:
"His proposal sought to reduce the wages and benefits of union workers by requiring the automakers' total labor costs to be "on par" with Honda and Toyota."
Honda and Toyota have government organized health care for their workers in their home country. And they don't have decades of pensioners to provide health care for.
If we paid the same amount for health care as Canada, G.M. would have accumulated an additional $22 billion in profits over the last decade. That would be the savings if General Motor's health care expenditures were in line with expenses in Canada (i.e. about 50% lower).
It's high time Americans had the same level of care - single payer health care with the insurance pool organized on a national basis.
It's high time Americans had the same level of care
Ah, the truth will out. Bill would like to see the quality and accessibility of healthcare to Americans reduced. Thank you for being so frank, Bill.
Slightly O/T-But since when does Congress not pass a bill then turn around and go home while asking pretty please for the president to do something. Congress make talk a good battle when it comes to taming the so-called Imperial Presidency but still seems anxious for the president to act extralegally as long as they get their month off.
The figures on health care spending for 2007, according to the OECD, was $5,170 for Canada and $7,026 for the US. Claiming that the US spends 50% more must be derived from New Math.
.
Why do the blue collars have to make wage concessions, in the face of media lies about them making $70/hr, when the white collars of wall street were never even asked to do so?
This is state-on-state warfare, where southern states gave up millions in incentives for foreign car companies to take over our country.
If the UAW has to give consessions yet again, then let the forgeign companies in the south give pay back their incentives. To be really fair, make the states of the south pay those incentives to the real American car companies for workers' healthcare.
stormny,
Are you suggesting that southern taxpayers should subsidize the non-competitive pay of northern auto workers? So in effect you are saying that southern take home pay should be further reduced through taxation in order to keep UAW members employed? Now that's progressive!
Biddle,
You said, "And they don't have decades of pensioners to provide health care for."
Are you suggesting a Kevorkian solution for GM's legacy health care issue? I hope not but I do see that you are suggesting that we should cover Big Three health care overhead through corporate welfare via socialized medicine and that's suicide too.
Equtuss -- there are something like 40 million Americans with no health care. You don't get any worse care than that. You might be doing fine; spare a thought for those fellow Americans who weren't born prosperous white and middle class.
A nationally-organized approach to health care is the right approach. GOPs are desperate to deny it to Americans, because they know it will make the Democrats very popular. Very cynical.
Post a Comment