Jeff from PA

Should We Really Bail Out the Big Three Automakers with $73.20 Per Hour Labor?

Obviously you've never worked in one of these places. I have worked in a steel plant and was payed a lot less, while the heads of the company were paid 10's of millions. It is tough work that wears on your body and mind. 65 grand is a good salary that these workers deserve. On that salary they can put their kids through school, pay their horrific medical prices, and retire reasonably. I think that is fair - and to denigrate their work is to have never been in their shoes. I am a teacher and make much less, but I would rather be where I am then in their factories any day.

Think about it: one 10 million dollar CEO = at least 153 employees paid a decent rate.

The, the management staff is probably another 10 million

Why can't we pay the CEO 500,000 a year, the management at 100,000 a year and keep those employees rates fair (so they can live a comfortable life). If we did this, the auto corporations would be able to survive...




On Nov 10 10:11 AM John Pseudonym wrote:

> "The article makes it sound like these people are making 150 grand
> a year, when it is closer to 60 or 70. To me that is a wage they
> deserve"
>
> Well...THERE'S YOUR PROBLEM>>>
>
> $65,000 a year per worker to build cars? That's insane!
>
> If the auto makers were rolling in dough due to the productivity
> of those $6k workers I wouldn't have a problem; but they're NOT!
>
>
> Pay should be cut in half for all employees as a first step and then
> >>>MAYBE>&... a government handout MIGHT be considered.

Should We Really Bail Out the Big Three Automakers with $73.20 Per Hour Labor?

While this is important, I think 2 to 10 times the wages of the average worker is just fine compensation. The 10's of millions of dollars they make (whether they are good at their job or not) not only is unfair, but added up over decades it is a main reason that the companies cannot afford to compete...


On Nov 10 10:19 AM jarco wrote:

> You must be a union auto worker or organizer. You obviously don't
> know what happens at the executive level especially during difficult
> times. Very few have the talents, education, experience to make it
> all come together and preserve the jobs of everyone involved.

>
>
>
> On Nov 10 09:14 AM Herbert Hoover wrote:

Should We Really Bail Out the Big Three Automakers with $73.20 Per Hour Labor?

Yeah, but I hear much more complaining about workers getting 60 grand a year and labor unions, then I do about the CEO's salaries. Maybe if Fox News and Talk radio complained half as much about CEO salaries as they do labor unions, then maybe something would have been done about it along time ago.

What I find amazing is people like my parents (who make 30,000 a year combined) complain about unions and the GM guys that make 60-70 a year because that is what they hear on Fox and Talk Radio. When the CEO's at the top make more than a thousand employees combined - their exorbitant salaries are the real problem, but lets blame the guy that is going to have back problems for the rest of their lives for making a decent wage....

I have studied the history of corporations and find it amazing that just 200 years ago newspapers were filled with opinion pages complaining that their bosses made 3-10 times their wages - saying it is outrageous and something needs to be done.

200 years later we seem resigned with the fact that CEO's make 100 to sometimes 10,000 times the wages of the average worker, and yet it is rarely a topic to be found - instead, let's blame that guy making 60,000 that is able to put his kids through college and retire at a good age...


On Nov 10 10:07 AM Foster J Fezziwig III wrote:

> Why is this being cast as a choice between union busting and exorbitant
> manufacturing salaries.
>
> We all know (or should know) that unions have done immeasurable good
> for the country. But does that mean that everything they do is good?
> Does that mean there can be no imbalance on the other side?
>
> Further, do you think Toyota is exploiting its workers? If yes, where
> are the calls for boycott? If no, how can Detroit be expected to
> compete in a market with such divergent labor costs?
>
> These are the questions, not whether CEOs are overpaid a-holes. (The
> answer to this has been well-established already.)

Should We Really Bail Out the Big Three Automakers with $73.20 Per Hour Labor?

A true free market would be a scary place - police stations run by the highest bidder, schools only for the wealthy, and the disabled left on the side of the road. Nothing is scarier than a completely free market.


On Nov 10 09:48 AM working at ford wrote:

> The hourly rate is less than 30 per and benny cost about 10 grand
> a year. If these companies go away there is no reason for any employer
> to pay above min wage. How many new cars and tv's can you buy an
> min wage. Mc d's pays almost twice min wage to be able to keep there
> unskilled workforce loyal. Get off your high horse and realize that
> all the benny's you now have are as a result of the unions. Not to
> mention workplace safety rule and labor laws that prevent abuses
> that are in the sweat shops of asia. I don't think many of the complainers
> would last long in a true free market.

Should We Really Bail Out the Big Three Automakers with $73.20 Per Hour Labor?

But most of the benefits are outrageously overpriced because of the deregulation of the health and pharmaceutical companies. The article makes it sound like these people are making 150 grand a year, when it is closer to 60 or 70. To me that is a wage they deserve. The cuts should come from the top from the outrageous CEO and management pay. The gap between the average worker and CEO is the greatest it has ever been in world history. Considering you could pay 100-1000 workers on one CEO's pay, if they would have cut their salaries of the last 2 decades, they would have saved billions.

Those guys making 60-70 thousand plus benefits deserve every cent. The CEO's making 10's of millions do not.


On Nov 10 09:42 AM saajjata wrote:

> Legacy costs are not calculated into the hourly rate, they are stated
> in a per vehicle cost. The hourly rate is wages and benefits.

Should We Really Bail Out the Big Three Automakers with $73.20 Per Hour Labor?

Given the fact that the CEO's and higher management makes millions to tens of millions per year, I am more concerned about their pay then those making even 70 dollars an hour (which by the way is not even near what the regular worker makes).

Considering the CEO makes the equivalent of 100-1000 workers, that is the salary I would cut first. Then the upper management that makes 50 times or more what the average worker makes.

I am glad that the guys that get their hands dirty, end up with physical problems from their jobs and sweat each day are making good pay - it is those guys that have the soft hands at the top that should be getting a pay cut.

I find it amazing when people blame the workers and unions for the downfall of the auto industry. When if the CEO's and upper management merely made double or triple the average workers salary over the last 20 years, they would have saved billions.

The problem is the greedy CEO's and upper management, not the workers and unions..

These Insiders Are Buying During This Selloff

Reagan and the Republicans since deregulated Health Care, Banking, and broke many unions. After all, Reagan called medicare evil and said it would lead us to socialism. What are some of the biggest problems right now? Banking and Health Care. My parents salary has decreased, their health care has decreased drastically because of Reagan weakening unions. Reagan's trickle-down economics was great for those on top, but it also created one of the biggest gaps between the rich and poor in modern history.

Besides, that whole taking down the Soviet Union thing - how did he do that? He used Bin Laden and other forces to bankrupt them. Now Bin laden states that his biggest goal is to bankrupt the United states by trapping us in wars - and what have we done? Fallen right into his hands.. We are bankrupting ourselves spending 10 billion a month in Iraq and more money in Afghanistan, not to mention the trillions it will cost to take care of the injured troops for the rest of their lives...

One of the best things we could do is get out of the wars! Not to mention getting our 178 military bases around the world out of other countries!

Where Starbucks Went Wrong

One unfortunate thing was that as much as I hated the new automatic machine, it was a necessary evil. The motion of pulling the espresso shot was causing too many injuries, especially having to do it 6 times for one drink. In my store alone, out of 20 people, 6 at some point had wrist problems that they needed medical treatment for. We would make sure that no one spent more than an hour in a row pulling shots, but I know my wrists were still sore after a shift. So the new machines, although they do take some of the Romance out, were necessary.

The biggest thing that I think took the romance out for me was the drive-thru. It took away Starbucks main commodity - the idea of it being a third place (home, work, Starbucks). When I first started, we were told that was more important than the coffee - how can you keep that atmosphere with a drive thru? Of course, the drive thru was too tempting on the business end - our weekly profits doubled! But, as I could no longer have a conversation with the customer up front because I was talking to someone coming up the drive, I knew that something had changed. In my mind - that was the main failure of Starbucks - it not being a third place anymore.

A second aspect of this was their attempt to charge for wireless service. Why pay for something that you can get at an independent store for free? And what would make a third place better, then it being a third place where you could hop on the internet? Next to the drive-thru, this was their second biggest mistake.

Now, I have moved to a small town, found an amazing local coffee shop and even met my wife there. Now, people may say that the coffee is not as good, but I argue - when was the last time that you had a coffee from Starbucks where the bean had been roasted 24 hours ago? At Starbucks, it is often six months or more - now I have beans no more than 2 or 3 days after roasting, usually within 24 hours - and there is nothing like it.

So, when Starbucks moved into town, i stuck with the local place - especially because they had a drive-thru! I will say, I do respect them as a company a lot - they treat their workers well, good benefits, and do a lot of charity work. But, when i worked for them, I never saw them as a company, now I definitely do... Which is where they went wrong.