GM Mirrors Social Security

[SoulWinner]

"The Boston Globe's Jeff Jacoby summarized GM's dilemma in a column titled "GM's Health Care Problem -- and Ours," which appeared Thursday, June 16.<br /><br />Jacoby wrote, "GM will spend more than $5.6 billion this year on health coverage for 1.1 million people -- a population greater than Rhode Island's -- yet of that number, only 160,000 or so are current employees: The great majority are retirees and their families. And with GM planning to shed 25,000 jobs through attrition over the next three years, its already lopsided ratio of 2.6 retirees per active employee is only going to get worse."<br /><br />America's big companies could have seen this problem coming at least 16 years ago. They were warned.<br /><br /><br />IN 1989, ONE OF THE BIG CONTROVERSIES in business concerned a rule change proposed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, the governing body of the accounting industry. The rule, designated FASB 106 (and pronounced FAZ-bee one-oh-six), required accrual accounting of retiree health-care benefits.<br /><br />In other words, companies would have to project a cost for health-care benefits for their retirees over a certain amortization period and write that amount, reduced to a yearly obligation, into their ledgers right now as red ink. Until the FASB proposal, companies had simply been negotiating those benefits, then paying them on as "as you go" basis, which inaccuracy in bookkeeping FASB saw the need to correct.<br /><br />Dire predictions were made about the effect of implementing the rule, which would reduce companies' bottom lines by an amount that everybody knew was big -- but nobody knew exactly how big. Wild guesses came forth about the total amount of value that might be shed by American corporations: $400 billion, $1 trillion. Some people thought the stock market would suffer a disastrous hit."

 

[DJ]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

A company guilty of bending to the whims/wants/threats of a tyrannical union.<br /><br />Ther union had /has the upper hand here. They can break the company by refusing to bend and/or shutting them down with a strike. The company is in a no win situation.

 

[SpinnerBait_Nut]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

But the unions are such a good thing, yea right.

 

[PW2]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

GM's biggest problem with their pensions came from investment losses.<br /><br />DJ, I don't understand. Do you think all these retirees should lose their health benefits?<br /><br />All of GM's problems could have been fixed if they would make quality vehicles at a price people wanted to pay.

 

[pjc]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

to DJ and SBN, do you really believe, assuming that your posts are rational, that a Labor Unions goal would be to "shut down" their employer, thus killing the Members source of income? Come on guys! Were you to understand how Union folks are paid via a "strike" or shutdown, you would appreciate that the Labor Unions desire to avoid conflicts such as these. <br /><br />Please, posted opinions such as SBNs are not supported by fact, but merely emotional, specially the grrrr face emoticons.

 

[pjc]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

and dern it!!! this crop of Union Bashing strikes as very similar to old school mindless logic that was prevalent in that Blacks were criminals, Mexicans stole cars, and the huge "pool" of stereotypical" mindless beliefs that people held and still do hold.

 

[demsvmejm]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

PW2 and pjc, you have to realize, ANYTHING that impedes big business' total and absolute power against it's employees is totally intolerable to the Republican Party and it's myopic minions. And this irrational aversion is not supported by fact, just emotion and because the red party is against labor, anything that could possibly benefit labor is to be fought with total disregard for common sense.<br /><br />So essentially, the union scored a big benefit for their members and GM is forced to pay this cost of doing business. The reason the ratio of retirees to employees is so high is simply the attrition. GM moved away from actual employees in favor of using temp agencies in the 90’s. The temp agencies were cheaper than the union employees were. This was wise business, even though the temp employees had little or no benefits, and relatively very low wages. So this distortion of the of the facts is for inducing sympathy for big business in an attempt to allow big business to shirk it’s responsibilities.<br /><br />A little background for my position and opinion here, I have never been an union employee. My wife is a union employee. I sat listening to my wife’ uncle and two cousins talking. They are all union employees; one’s a union welder and the other two work in similar union positions. What a bunch of babies they are. They would whine about this, cry about that. I sat thinking to myself that I would like to have a paid vacation, let alone some of the obscure “benefits” they were whining were insufficient. My father-in-law worked union for the local county road commission. He retired at 56(?), with full pension because the union succeeded in getting a clause added to the contract that stated if your age and years of service equaled 75 you could retire. So now we have to pay all those early retirees and[/] their replacements for the next 5, 10, or more years. No wonder our roads are in such poor shape. So you can see, I have little or no good to say for my exposure to the union. The union employees I know are a bunch of crybabies. And the UNION made them that way. This is true only about the unions I know facts about. I’m sure it’s true about other unions too, but I would not assert such as a generality.

 

[pjc]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

good post Dave. And the reason I say that is that you are reflecting a first hand experience of your views due to your interaction with represented people. I do believe that many who have a negative view of Organized Labor merely speak from a position of here say. Their opinions or beliefs are formed via what they have read in media content or from folks who are repeating a biased opinion due to like here say.<br /><br />Regarding retirement at 56 for the road workers, some labor contracts have a negotiated language that provides thirty years service and then are eligible for full retirement benefits as provided within the Labor Agreement.<br /><br />An example, a large portion of the United States Educators are represented via a Labor Contract (Union) and are eligible for retirement benefits at 55 or earlier, but a large portion of folks ignore that and choose to beat up on those who are employed in the manufacturing sector AND represented by Labor Unions.<br /><br />Several months ago I posted my Pro Organized Labor positions, as I am a Represented Person. Some took exception to my stance. Good enough.<br /><br />A later threads topic was in regards to the advantages of IRS Small Business Tax Deductions and how folks stood to benefit from the codes to supplement their personal lifestyles. A portion of posters positions was that these tax deductions in their favor were favorable. <br /><br />I posted that this was in reality tax cheating and soundly dismissed. Then, later a topic was posted regarding how terrible it is that those on Government Assistance are thieves because they are taking advantage of circumstances that by law are provided by the SS or Welfare Benefits. Hypocritical position IMO.<br /><br />To close, we all have our positions as to what is honorable, legal, moral, or how we view our integrity as to being Citizens of the United States. While one may justify writting off his cocktail tab, another will do the same with his Union dues.

 

[snapperbait]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

I bet real money that the union bashers would'nt turn down the pay raises and benefits that trickle down to them, from a unions "tyranny"....

 

[DJ]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

pjc,<br /><br />I work with organized labor everyday. The mantra is: "how can I NOT do it" as opposed to "just do it".<br /><br /><br />No, I do not think those retirees should lose their benefits. They may have to bend though. Some is better than ZERO. Unions DON'T understand that. Yes, they will torpedo the company for their own "short term" benefit. I've seen it first hand.<br /><br />Quality is really not an issue. Economics is. A GM car cost $1,500.00+, right from the get go, more than an import or transplant. That money is directly related to benefits costs. That doesn't even take into account litigation reserves which is just about as much. But, that's another problem/topic.<br /><br />One must remember that there are just as many salaried (non union) employees at GM as there are union members. For the most part, those salaried employees get only a "representative sample" of the benefits that the unions get. However, the union calls ALL the shots.

 

[pjc]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

fair enough DJ. <br /><br />A point though is that your perspective is from your experience with those Represented folks you interact with, just as mine is from fellow Represented folks that I interact with. Perhaps this may bias our opinions?......don't know. <br /><br />I do know that a substantial portion of my co-workers are of the "just do it, and do it the best possible" work ethic. Sure, there are a minority who simply do as required just to get by.<br /><br />An aside, maybe in our future Walmart will offer Chinese import autos! No worries about Union Labor then hey!

 

[SoulWinner]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

Hmmmm....jobs leaving the country, especially in manufacturing. Why? Cheaper labor overseas. Unions continually pushing for higher pay and more benefits for their members here in the US. Yep, drawing any conclusions that unions aren't good is definitely flawed logic. You guys wouldn't know a "FACT" if it fell out of the sky and landed on your doorstep.

 

[DJ]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

SW wrote;<br /><br />

Yep, drawing any conclusions that unions aren't good is definitely flawed logic. You guys wouldn't know a "FACT" if it fell out of the sky and landed on your doorstep.<br />

So, fellow "brother in Christ", what ARE the facts? Crucify me.

 

[DJ]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

pjc,<br /><br />I may have been harsh, but, I don't like BS.<br /><br />My views were formed early, in my early working years.<br /><br />I won a summer job (by scholastic achievement) with a government agency. ALL of the employees, at that location, were union, except me.<br /><br />Following, is how the typical day went. Starting time is supposed to be 7:30 AM to 4:30 PM.<br /><br />The "crew" UNION, would show up at 7:30, "group up" and "go for coffee/breakfast" until about 9:00 AM. They would arrive at their assigned jobsites about 9:30. They would work, taking at least a one hour lunch (half hour approved) and then be back at the shop at 4:30., for a beer. All told, they worked a five hour day.<br /><br />I was always taught that, "no man will become sucessful working eight hours a day".<br /><br />I was on the site, driving time completed, by 7:00 AM and didn't leave until after 5:00. With all that, my machinery was "checked out", fueled and I was "on it" well before 7:30.<br /><br />For the four months that I worked there, I got threats, sugared fuel, and a general disdain. That's where I "swore off" union membership-foverver.<br /><br />Being a young man, I was confused. I thought the harder I worked, the better I would be treated-WRONG! I was told, on numerous occasions, to "cool it". "Your personal health may be at risk here."<br /><br />I saw blantant acts of theivery that could not be dealt with. The union had blatant theives that were "untouchable". Personally, I percieve: Sick time is NOT for re-roofing your house. I consider "time" as a commodity-too.<br /><br />That stint is what drives my distate/distrust. Not to mention the political moves, by the leadership. But, that's another topic.<br /><br />Is all lost-NO. Many unions, including the UAW are looking at all these issues. IMHO, their looking has gone on long enough, it's time for action. In all fairness, my experioence was bad, to say the least. The UAW has made outstanding strides in improving quality, etc. Domestic assembly plants are the marvel of the industry, that's why the implants copy them, right down to the urinals.<br /><br />The union is going to have to ask for some concessions. They can use the "implants" as exmamples. The luxury that the implants (no union) have is that they can "pull out" (mass firings) at ANY time. The "domestics" CAN'T! <br /><br />But, we, US citizens, don't care.<br /><br />Something has to break here.

 

[PW2]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

DJ,<br /><br />I am somewhat sympathetic with your point of view, having worked virtually my whole career on the management side of union shops, including a pulp mill, whose union members are the equal of any union in terms of whining and crying and abuse of the system, only exceeded perhaps by lonshoremen.<br /><br />However, I think you are picking the wrong villain in all of this. It is my experience that every percieved union problem is really a management problem at its core. I have worked with a union for years and years--but we have clear, realistic rules--we follow them, and demand the union members follow them as well--I have never had a problem with firing someone who deserves it, and have virtually never lost a grievance.<br />It is because we document everything we do, we enforce rules and maintain acceptable standards of performance--in short, we are professionals.<br /><br />And while we have had our disagreements, it is my experience that most people want to do a good job, if given the opportunity, and those few that don't want to do a good job will remove themselves with their actions if it is handled properly.

 

[pjc]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

A HUGE THANK YOU PW2!!!!!!!<br /><br />My position EXACTLY that management has a responsibility to manage the workforce within the constraints of a Labor Agreement Contract. <br /><br />That is how unproductive employees are corrected or removed. And that is exactly what MANAGEMENT is PAID to do. If management does not perform thusly, management is JUST as culpable as a slacker employee, and should be corrected or removed as well.

 

[demsvmejm]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

DJ, your example is all too familiar to me. My son's mother's father (NOT my FIL) works for the local municipality. I respect this man highly. He is a member of the union and has the same complaint as you did. Work starts at 7:30. Most guys show up at 7:30, them change into uniform, get coffee, talk in their little groups, and finally start "working" at 8:15-8:30. And they are back in "the barn" by 3:00, to go home at 4:00. But as PW2 and pjc pointed out it is a management issue. From my son's grandpa's telling it the one manager is totally drunk by lunch, sometimes coming it at 7:30 halfway there. The rest are apathetic. Like when he needed to source paint for a project, he was forced to DRIVE to the five or six local paint stores and get estimates, not call and request faxes. Then he could only purchase one gallon at a time and a max of two gallons a day for his 7 gallon project. The location was 30-35 mins. one way from the paint store. I can understand rules to prevent theft, but these were ridiculous. It's mismanagement. And this mismanagement invites/induces abuse and apathy among the ranks of labor. If they are working for an idiot, and are constantly being forced to endure stupidity in the completion of their jobs any "work-ethic" quickly erodes. I am not anti-union, but from what I have seen, I am glad I am not a union worker. On the other hand, a little further North from me is Northern Michigan Hospital which is nearing the end (?) of the longest nurses strike in the nation's history. The hospital board refuses to acknowledge or deal with the nurses union, and has tried every tactic it could to maintain it's absolute control. And in this situation it was all about control with the board. The nurses wanted more say in patient care, lower nurse to patient ratios, better pay and shorter hours. The last two may seem wrong, but the nurses were subject to long hours that they contributed to fatigue and propensity to errors. The only publicized demand that was not in the interest of patient care(doing the best quality work possible) was the wage issue. They weren't even asking for better benefits. The hospital offered it's "Best, and final" (really it’s only) offer to the union with a deadline that was less than a week away to accept. The hospital has done everything to undermine the union it could. It's all about power, the hospital board has it and the board will destroy the hospital to keep it. Again, a management issue.

 

[NYMINUTE]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

GM has controlled too much for too long. This is like the Yankees being humbled. I have no sympathy for GM. They are a very arogant company. As a supplier to them for many years, I was a victim of their NAFTA committment, as well as their unforgiving attitude to suppliers when the chips were down. Screw GM's Upper Management, plenty of other vehicles out there. I am sad for their employees, they deserve better.

 

[DJ]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

I am sad for their employees, they deserve better.<br />

But, in the long run, to he!! with them too. Right?

 

[Realgun]

Re: GM Mirrors Social Security

I understand where the unions had a real impact but in the new modern era of today I think they are just there for the union reps and such.<br /><br />GM has a real problem on their hands and I think they need to start addressing it. The retired workers should get their benefits but the workers now should be more realistic. There is no pension plan at the new car sites only the 401K and a match, BTW Ford got rid of their match for non-union workers as of July 1. They should have realistic healthcare benefits not lifetime/and no out of pocket. <br /><br />Honestly if they want to compete they will really need to cut costs. Labor is just 1 of those but for Ford/GM/Chrysler they need to be more like what real people get.<br /><br />I would also say the same thing goes for the Government workers too.<br /><br />I hate to say this but if I need a new vehicle then I will be just as happy to get a Foreign model as not its probably cheaper too.