Automobile bailout collapses

[Ryan Thunder]

The purpose of a workers' union is to ensure fair treatment for the worker. Fair treatment for these guys would mean they get paid market wages and get to keep their jobs.

Do you really like your habit of being deliberately ignorant? The purpose of a union is to get the best possible treatment for the workers which it represents. Forcing a union to accept "market" wages defeats the entire purpose of a union.

I would think that is the best possible treatment they can get right now. Treatment that would result in them losing their jobs isn't very good treatment, is it?

[bobalot]

Forcing a union to accept "market" wages defeats the entire purpose of a union.

The teachers in my state have seen their real wages fall by 25% over the last few decades. University lecturers have also seen the same declines. I know, once I finish my apprenticeship at the state run company I am at, I could get paid more in the private sector. It's the same with nurses in our health system. All these sectors are facing skill shortages, which is only going to get more acute as the baby boomers retire. Public schools, hospitals and where I work are heavily unionised. When compared to their private counterparts they have worse pay. So you could say, that their wages are below "market" wages. However, I don't see the unions going away anytime soon.

Back to the immediate topic, labor only amounts to about 10% to the cost of the vehicles the automakers manufacture. Blaming the unions (while they do need to shape up) is a load of bullshit. GM and co, built shitty cars. The businesses were poorly managed, and have been poorly managed for decades. The current wages of the workers are not the problem, it's the legacy benefits for retirees that is the real drain on the company.

I don't see why they are getting such a hard time while Wall St is bailed out to the tune of $700 billion fucking dollars. The US is spending $2 billion a week in Iraq, for fucks sake. Spending money to bailout and reform an industry that actually produces tangible exportable goods (Instead of relying on the finance industry which exports a whole lot of bullshit) sounds like a good idea to me.

[Pablo Sanchez]

I would think that is the best possible treatment they can get right now. Treatment that would result in them losing their jobs isn't very good treatment, is it?

A number of things would make this a more forceful argument. Like if management had been the one to ask the workers for cuts, instead of Senate Republicans with an axe to grind. It also would have been good if the wages cut had ever been designed to improve the companies' status, rather than being phrased from the start as a ridiculous demand that unions accept "market wages." Or if somebody was able to show that cutting wages would actually substantively increase the long-term viability of the Big Three instead of just asserting it as given.

But as it is, the argument that you're throwing out is blame-the-victim bullshit. It's not the UAW causing the problem, it's the Senate GOP. The bailout was set to proceed until they stopped it, and the demands addressed to the UAW were designed to deflect the inevitable blame for doing something so short-sighted. The fact that you're convinced by something so transparently obvious ought to be embarrassing.

[Surlethe]

I've been thinking about this, and Pablo (and also Graeme Dice) has an excellent point. While the UAW does, I think, share some blame for the crisis facing GM and Chrysler, in this particular case the package had been negotiated and agreed upon by everyone -- the company management, the labor management, the Democrats, the White House -- except the Senate Republicans. It makes more sense that they're intentionally blaming the UAW and obstructing the bill's passage.

So I'll retract my earlier sentiments: we can debate elsewhere whether unions should exist, but in this case whether asking them to drop wages or not is reasonable is a red herring to whether the bill should have passed.

[Ryan Thunder]

A number of things would make this a more forceful argument. Like if management had been the one to ask the workers for cuts, instead of Senate Republicans with an axe to grind.

I'm not sure why who's asking would change the validity of the question, but since they asked this after everybody else had agreed to their terms already, they can go fuck themselves. (The Republicans, that is.) I had no idea they were being that stupid, else I probably wouldn't have argued that.

[Pablo Sanchez]

I'm not sure why who's asking would change the validity of the question,

My point was that management did not even ask for large cuts in employee wages and benefits beyond what the UAW had already agreed to over the past couple of years. This indicates that they, in a much better position than the 11th-hour GOP roadblock crew to determine what was necessary to save their companies, did not regard it as significant. There's also the way that the demand was phrased; the Republican senators did not say "we need to put worker pay at a level that these companies can survive", they just said "they need to accept the market rate". This suggests that viability was never the point.

Additionally, throughout the days of discussion prior to the bailout's proposal and passage through the House, Republican legislators consistently denigrated the idea of the "Car Czar" by saying that government had no place telling the Big 3 how to run their business. But, surprise, when they're casting about for an excuse to derail the bill, suddenly they feel compelled to dictate management-worker relations.

To me the real question is why the GOP is intentionally dooming automakers to extinction. I think the knee jerk hatred of organized labor is only one element; I've a sneaking suspicion that they're even more afraid of the onerous regulations that would have been imposed on the Big Three (in terms of government oversight, limits on CEO compensation, etc) going into law and becoming a legislative precedent.

[Patrick Degan]

To me the real question is why the GOP is intentionally dooming automakers to extinction. I think the knee jerk hatred of organized labor is only one element; I've a sneaking suspicion that they're even more afraid of the onerous regulations that would have been imposed on the Big Three (in terms of government oversight, limits on CEO compensation, etc) going into law and becoming a legislative precedent.

Oh, I'm sure they'd rather see the economy in ruins rather than permit even the tinest baby-steps toward the dread-spectre of SOCIALISM!

[Ryan Thunder]

My point was that management did not even ask for large cuts in employee wages and benefits beyond what the UAW had already agreed to over the past couple of years. This indicates that they, in a much better position than the 11th-hour GOP roadblock crew to determine what was necessary to save their companies, did not regard it as significant.

Just playing the devil's advocate here: the company might have needed it, but figured it was pointless to ask for it since the Union would throw a fit. Which, admittedly, wouldn't surprise me.

That's not to say that the GOP had those motivations, of course.

[SirNitram]

To me the real question is why the GOP is intentionally dooming automakers to extinction. I think the knee jerk hatred of organized labor is only one element; I've a sneaking suspicion that they're even more afraid of the onerous regulations that would have been imposed on the Big Three (in terms of government oversight, limits on CEO compensation, etc) going into law and becoming a legislative precedent.

Well, here's a link to an apparent memo sent out on the subject by the GOP.. MSNBC Link

From:

Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2008 9:12 AM

To:

Subject: Action Alert -- Auto Bailout



Today at noon, Senators Ensign, Shelby, Coburn and DeMint will hold a press conference in the Senate Radio/TV Gallery. They would appreciate our support through messaging and attending the press conference, if possible. The message they want us to deliver is:

1. This is the democrats first opportunity to payoff organized labor after the election. This is a precursor to card check and other items. Republicans should stand firm and take their first shot against organized labor, instead of taking their first blow from it.

2. This rush to judgment is the same thing that happened with the TARP. Members did not have an opportunity to read or digest the legislation and therefore could not understand the consequences of it. We should not rush to pass this because Detroit says the sky is falling.

The sooner you can have press releases and documents like this in the hands of members and the press, the better. Please contact me if you need additional information. Again, the hardest thing for the democrats to do is get 60 votes. If we can hold the Republicans, we can beat this.

Yes, item one is 'We have to hurt organized labor!'. Childish.