- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Ford CEO, “We’re not paying people $300,000 to work four days a week.”
Posted on 9/17/23 at 10:36 am to 4cubbies
Posted on 9/17/23 at 10:36 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Their argument is essentially “If I can’t have a pension, no one can!”
No, it is because they are expensive, inefficient and they don't work.
This post was edited on 9/17/23 at 10:44 am
1
Posted on 9/17/23 at 10:41 am to TDTOM
You act like you are personally responsible for funding these pensions.
This post was edited on 9/17/23 at 10:42 am
Posted on 9/17/23 at 10:42 am to 4cubbies
quote:
Wouldn’t it make more sense to invest half of that to pay out future pensions?
quote:
G.M. acknowledged in its most recent annual report that from 1993 to 2007 it spent $103 billion “to fund legacy pensions and retiree health care — an average of about $7 billion a year — a dramatic competitive and cash-flow disadvantage.” During those 15 years, G.M
That has even less of an impact than if her money was given to employees.
Posted on 9/17/23 at 10:43 am to 4cubbies
quote:
You act like you are personally responsible for funding these pensions.
Who do you think bails out underfunded pensions? You are making 100% emotional arguments.
This post was edited on 9/17/23 at 10:44 am
Posted on 9/17/23 at 10:45 am to TDTOM
quote:
You are making 100% emotional arguments.
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:01 am to TDTOM
And what emotional arguments are those? Please quote me.
This post was edited on 9/17/23 at 11:01 am
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:08 am to 4cubbies
quote:
And what emotional arguments are those? Please quote me.
quote:
Their argument is essentially “If I can’t have a pension, no one can!”
quote:
Priorities. Maybe some c-suite execs don’t need to earn $21 million in a single year while their average employee earns $75,000.
quote:
I sure wish I was as smart as you brilliant men.
Just to name a few.
This post was edited on 9/17/23 at 11:48 am
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:14 am to bhtigerfan
Robots and AI will work for a lot less.
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:15 am to Samso
quote:
He’s probably talking about fully loaded cost. Salary+bonus+benefits+etc
Probably overtime as well because the union rules will likely say “30 hour work week plus no increase in staffing.” IOW, 10 hrs a week overtime minimum for the same production.
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:18 am to teke184
The Big 3 automakers need to grow some balls and move all their plants and HQs to non-union states.
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:21 am to Message Board User
There may be limits as to doing that considering existing contracts and that Biden currently controls the NLRB.
Whether the NLRB is actually able to do anything about it is another matter because, IIRC, he illegally put members onto the board to have a quorum after some members’ terms expired and he couldn’t get replacements through the Senate, and it put every decision made by them into legal limbo.
Whether the NLRB is actually able to do anything about it is another matter because, IIRC, he illegally put members onto the board to have a quorum after some members’ terms expired and he couldn’t get replacements through the Senate, and it put every decision made by them into legal limbo.
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:27 am to teke184
quote:
There may be limits as to doing that considering existing contracts and that Biden currently controls the NLRB.
Maybe that is something the USSC should look into.
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:29 am to teke184
quote:
There may be limits as to doing that considering existing contracts and that Biden currently controls the NLRB.
Whether the NLRB is actually able to do anything about it is another matter because, IIRC, he illegally put members onto the board to have a quorum after some members’ terms expired and he couldn’t get replacements through the Senate, and it put every decision made by them into legal limbo.
You probably right - I'm sure there would probably be a shite-ton of red tape if the Big 3 wanted to do away with unions.
In general, I agreed with the purpose of unions back early 20th century when people were dying by horrible working conditions and there was child labor and all that shite.
But the issues confronting unions back then (when unions became a thing) bear no resemblence to the issues of today.
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:31 am to TDTOM
Should be, IMHO, but Roberts is a pussy.
Boeing was threatened some years back for opening a plant in South Carolina, despite not shutting down other plants in unionized states, because the unions got pissed that the company expanded elsewhere instead of being further beholden to them.
Boeing was threatened some years back for opening a plant in South Carolina, despite not shutting down other plants in unionized states, because the unions got pissed that the company expanded elsewhere instead of being further beholden to them.
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:32 am to bhtigerfan
It would be ballsy but if just one of these CEO's took a hardline stance and said "frick it. All of you are fired. We're terminating the union contract. If you want your job back, you can come work here open-shop style like everybody else..."
I think this whole charade would completely fall apart.
I think this whole charade would completely fall apart.
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:32 am to teke184
quote:
Boeing was threatened some years back for opening a plant in South Carolina, despite not shutting down other plants in unionized states, because the unions got pissed that the company expanded elsewhere instead of being further beholden to them.
I remember that.
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:40 am to TDTOM
it’s emotional to notice jealousy. But your hysteria over a private company possibly not being able to pay for their employees retirement is totally rational. I sure wish I was as smart as you brilliant men.
This post was edited on 9/17/23 at 11:41 am
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:41 am to Herooftheday
quote:
Good for them. I can't believe all the bleeding hearts around here for these big businesses
How many 401k plans have died/GM stock in them. Corporations are in business to make money, not support the workers. The good companies do both……
But how hard is the job, sure you lose experience if you go non-union, but they can build the same quality cars south of the border for much cheaper cost
New car prices are beginning price many out of the market. A minor increase would make it worse, and a return to the old pension system with either crash to companies or require another government. bailout oat tax payers expense
All for a cola raise but not what they are asking for…..
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:45 am to 4cubbies
quote:
But your hysteria over a private company possibly not being able to pay for their employees retirement is totally rational.
Except it has already happened in the past, so maybe my "hysteria" is warranted. By the way, GM is not a private company.
quote:
I sure wish I was as smart as you brilliant men.
More emotional drivel. I am sure you are special in your own unique way.
This post was edited on 9/17/23 at 11:48 am
Posted on 9/17/23 at 11:48 am to TDTOM
quote:
By the way, GM is not a private company.
Correct. They have been significantly owned by the US since 2008 and Obama used that control to have them financially attack donors for the opposition / preserve his own donors when shutting down dealer networks.
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News