PDA

View Full Version : Tenn. Volkswagen Vote Major Setback for UAW



Julie
15 Feb 14,, 23:11
Just 87 votes at the Volkswagen plant in Tennessee separated the United Auto Workers union from what would have been its first successful organization of workers at a foreign automaker in the South.

Instead of celebrating a potential watershed moment for labor politics in the region, UAW supporters were left crestfallen by the 712-626 vote against union representation in the election that ended Friday night.

The result stunned many labor experts who expected a UAW win because Volkswagen tacitly endorsed the union and even allowed organizers into the Chattanooga factory to make sales pitches.

The loss is a major setback for the UAW's effort to make inroads in the growing South, where foreign automakers have 14 assembly plants, eight built in the past decade, said Kristin Dziczek, director of the labor and industry group at the Center for Automotive Research, an industry think tank in Michigan.

"If this was going to work anywhere, this is where it was going to work," she said of the Volkswagen vote.

Organizing a Southern plant is so crucial to the union that UAW President Bob King told workers in a speech that the union has no long-term future without it. The loss means the union remains largely quarantined with the Detroit Three in the Midwest and Northeast.

Many viewed VW as the union's best chance to gain a crucial foothold in the South because other automakers have not been as welcoming as Volkswagen. Labor interests make up half of the supervisory board at VW in Germany, and they questioned why the Chattanooga plant is the company's only major factory worldwide without formal worker representation.

VW wanted a German-style "works council" in Chattanooga to give employees a say over working conditions. The company says U.S. law won't allow it without an independent union.

In Chattanooga, the union faced stern opposition from Republican politicians who warned that a UAW victory would chase away other automakers who might come to the region.

Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee was the most vocal opponent, saying that he was told that VW would soon announce plans to build a new SUV in Chattanooga if workers rejected the union. That was later denied by a VW executive, who said the union vote had no bearing on expansion decisions. Other state politicians threatened to cut off state incentives for the plant to expand if the union was approved.

After 53 percent of the workers voted against his union, King said he was outraged at what he called "outside interference" in the election. He wouldn't rule out challenging the outcome with the National Labor Relations Board.

"It's never happened in this country before that the U.S. senator, the governor, the leader of the House, the legislature here, threatened the company with no incentives, threatened workers with a loss of product," King said. "We'll look at all our options in the next few days."

The union could contend that Corker and other local politicians were in collusion with VW and tried to frighten workers into thinking the SUV would be built in Mexico if they voted for the union, said Gary Chaison, a labor relations professor at Clark University in Worcester, Mass.

But Chaison said it will be difficult to tie the politicians to the company, which remained neutral throughout the voting process.

"It's the employer that has real power," he said.

The loss put a spotlight on the union's major difficulty in the South: signing up people who have no history with organized labor and are fearful of being the first in the area to join, Chaison said.

Dziczek said the union may have to change its tactics in future organizing efforts, because King's strategy of the union and company working together to help each other did not work.

Republican Gov. Bill Haslam said through a spokesman that he was pleased with the vote and "looks forward to working with the company on future growth in Tennessee."

Corker echoed that sentiment in a release issued after the vote.

"Needless to say, I am thrilled for the employees at Volkswagen and for our community and its future," he said.

Tenn. Volkswagen Vote Major Setback for UAW

Julie
15 Feb 14,, 23:14
The UAW has really screwed up the automobile industry up North, now they want to do it in the South. Unions are out-dated and need to disappear. We have Federal laws now that protect workers.

Workers at this Tennessee plant already have an above-average starting wage, and a good relationship with their company, why pay a middle man?

I say the UAW is getting desperate. What do you think?

bonehead
16 Feb 14,, 19:50
The UAW has really screwed up the automobile industry up North, now they want to do it in the South. Unions are out-dated and need to disappear. We have Federal laws now that protect workers.

Workers at this Tennessee plant already have an above-average starting wage, and a good relationship with their company, why pay a middle man?

I say the UAW is getting desperate. What do you think?

We know how quickly federal laws can change due to outside interests i.e. lobbying and corporate America has all the money. It all depends on who controls congress and the White house. UAW is only one of hundreds if not thousands of unions across the country. They are all run differently so to point to one and put the guilt on all is not honest. When their work goes to the South of course the UAW are going to follow. UAW had/has many faults but when you look at the big picture they had a lot of help with the demise of the auto industry in the North. The high paying UAW jobs propped up areas like Detroit for decades even though it was a shit hole all those years. If you want to talk desperate you don't have to look any farther than Corker with his lies and intimidation tactics before and during the vote.



Why pay the middle man? My dues gave me access to the best trade training available. In wages alone I got back 5X what I paid in dues. I also got healthcare and a damned good retirement. Education for upgrading my skills is dirt cheap. I would never have gotten TABB certified otherwise. My next goal is getting a total building energy audit cert. I am being taught by leaders in the industry who are willing to work around my schedule. It is nice to know someone has my back when I have a beef with the company. I am getting one hell of a return on my dues. Lastly I get a say in how each and every penny of my dues are spent.

Julie
16 Feb 14,, 23:56
Good for you bonehead. I am really glad it worked out for you. However, so I am told that some things aren't the same for one than another geographically.

It is common knowledge that the South has long been the most anti-union region, and we have our reasons for it. ``The Southern worker is an impatient figure when it comes to paying dues to a union, wants to see swift and spectacular results, and is likely to fall away if he doesn't get them,'' wrote journalist Wilbur Cash in a 1941 book called ``The Mind of the South.''

We also have right-to-work laws, which give workers the privilege of not joining the union even if the company is organized. Once a union gets their claws into your state, they are never happy. Then they want to make it mandatory for every worker to have to pay dues and join the union. Southerners take great pride in having that choice.

This particular plant in Tennessee, has average above-wage salary at $19.50 an hour, benefits, and that is above-par pay for cost of living in the South. The only reason workers at that plant entertained a union was to have a work counsel and by law the company has to be unionized to have a work counsel.

Corker was not telling lies, he was stating the truth, as ugly as it may seem to some people, and I respect his honesty. You take care of your own here, you don't pay somebody to come in and do it for you.

astralis
17 Feb 14,, 00:15
i don't get it. if Corker was "not telling lies", then was the VW executive telling lies about VW's own economic decisions/policy? VW -wanted- an union at the plant. that's what makes this case so distinctive.

bonehead
17 Feb 14,, 00:46
Good for you bonehead. I am really glad it worked out for you. However, so I am told that some things aren't the same for one than another geographically.

It is common knowledge that the South has long been the most anti-union region, and we have our reasons for it. ``The Southern worker is an impatient figure when it comes to paying dues to a union, wants to see swift and spectacular results, and is likely to fall away if he doesn't get them,'' wrote journalist Wilbur Cash in a 1941 book called ``The Mind of the South.''

We also have right-to-work laws, which give workers the privilege of not joining the union even if the company is organized. Once a union gets their claws into your state, they are never happy. Then they want to make it mandatory for every worker to have to pay dues and join the union. Southerners take great pride in having that choice.

This particular plant in Tennessee, has average above-wage salary at $19.50 an hour, benefits, and that is above-par pay for cost of living in the South. The only reason workers at that plant entertained a union was to have a work counsel and by law the company has to be unionized to have a work counsel.

Corker was not telling lies, he was stating the truth, as ugly as it may seem to some people, and I respect his honesty. You take care of your own here, you don't pay somebody to come in and do it for you.

The southern perception is not entirely correct. Even in a heavily unionized state one can choose to work for non union companies and thus not pay dues but they are cutting their pay and benefits even more. They do have that choice. The only exception I know of would be public unions. In my trade dues are about 50.00 a week when you are working but your paycheck is about 300.00 more a week (straight 40 hours) than those who chose not to join a union and pay dues. That is typical across the board for construction trades.

Corker did lie. He said that the vote will make or break VW's plans on bringing another line in. VW called him out as a liar and whats worse is that he said it during the vote to sway votes. You do have to wonder that if the company is ambivalent about having a union why someone like Corker was so active against it. As a U.S. senator, it really was not his business. Still the voters opted not to join and their vote should be respected.

Julie
17 Feb 14,, 02:04
i don't get it. if Corker was "not telling lies", then was the VW executive telling lies about VW's own economic decisions/policy? VW -wanted- an union at the plant. that's what makes this case so distinctive.Do you think it was a coincidence that the foreign car companies chose the anti-union South as a plant location?

With that said, this is how the UAW snaked their way in that caused VW to become "neutral" and wanted a Union. They entered into a "Neutrality Agreement" before the vote:

UAW'S Secret Sellout at VW - No to Uninformed Auto Workers (http://www.no2uaw.com/uaws-secret-sellout-at-vw.html)

On Februaryt 8, anti-union workers held a meeting and gave out fliers about a clause in a Neutrality Agreement negotiated between Volkswagen and the UAW before the election, establishing a principle of “maintaining and where possible enhancing the cost advantages and other competitive advantages” that Volkswagen enjoys over its competitors. In other words, keeping wages and benefits from getting too high relative to General Motors, Ford and Chrysler. Anti-union workers calculated that would take $3 per hour off their current pay, and they spread the word about it at that meeting and the fence-sitters voted against the union.

Julie
17 Feb 14,, 02:17
The southern perception is not entirely correct. Even in a heavily unionized state one can choose to work for non union companies and thus not pay dues but they are cutting their pay and benefits even more. They do have that choice. The only exception I know of would be public unions. In my trade dues are about 50.00 a week when you are working but your paycheck is about 300.00 more a week (straight 40 hours) than those who chose not to join a union and pay dues. That is typical across the board for construction trades.

Corker did lie. He said that the vote will make or break VW's plans on bringing another line in. VW called him out as a liar and whats worse is that he said it during the vote to sway votes. You do have to wonder that if the company is ambivalent about having a union why someone like Corker was so active against it. As a U.S. senator, it really was not his business. Still the voters opted not to join and their vote should be respected.

Here is a handout that was given out by anti-union workers prior to the vote:


TOP 10 REASONS WHY VW TEAM MEMBERS SHOULD VOTE NO TO THE UAW
As we head to the polls this week, we’d like to share with you ten simple reasons why all VW Team Members should vote NO to the UAW.

Even though Tennessee is a “Right-to-Work” state, the UAW cut a back-room “neutrality deal” (the Election Agreement) behind our backs that affects all of us--even those who may never join the union.
If you do not plan on joining the UAW (and not pay union dues), the UAW will know who you are and you should expect continual harassment until you either join and pay…or leave.
Not voting is just like voting for the UAW. The outcome will be based only on those that show up to vote. It is a secret ballot, so make sure you vote and please vote NO. (Even if you signed a union authorization card, you can still vote NO.)
We are already among the highest paid in the region and, when compared to UAW-represented employees at the Detroit Three with the same length of service, VW Team Members make more. The UAW organizers are implying that we will get more money with the UAW, when they have already (secretly) agreed to cost containment behind our backs.
The UAW bait and switch promise of delegating its responsibilities as “exclusive bargaining representative” by establishing a Works Council at VW would likely violate both the National Labor Relations Act, as well as the UAW’s own International Constitution. This will eventually leave us with the UAW, but no Works Council.
The election is not a vote for or against the Works Council; it is a vote for or against the UAW.
The UAW is increasing union dues by 25% to fund a strike against Detroit automakers. The UAW will use our money to fund their strike after years of irresponsible spending (e.g., the UAW golf course and Las Vegas conventions). Remember, about half of the money you pay to the UAW will be sent directly to the union in Detroit.
The UAW wanted to unionize us without an election. When that failed, behind closed doors, they got VW to agree to a 9-day “ambush” election, giving UAW organizers dispatched from Detroit access to our plant.
After being publicly exposed for making implied promises, the UAW’s Gary Casteel has already begun backpedaling, stating “the union has never promised better wages and benefits.”
The UAW has worked to silence our voices and had VW put a “gag order” on our supervisors and managers who are not allowed to share their personal opinions or views with us. Is this the UAW’s idea of Democracy?

Another Reason to Vote NO: The UAW spends tens of millions of dollars electing politicians who want to disarm law-abiding Americans through gun control.

Fellow VW Team Members, we ask that you examine the
real facts about the UAW and that you vote NO to the UAW.

bonehead
17 Feb 14,, 03:37
Here is a handout that was given out by anti-union workers prior to the vote:

So what propaganda did the pro union people put out?

Julie
17 Feb 14,, 04:05
So what propaganda did the pro union people put out?All I know is they were attempting to sell something that wasn't bought.

I really do not understand why they would invade the South at a plant that has excellent pay and benefits, as well as working conditions. The only reason I know is that the UAW needs a money flow to fight their battles in Detroit.

bonehead
17 Feb 14,, 05:23
All I know is they were attempting to sell something that wasn't bought.

I really do not understand why they would invade the South at a plant that has excellent pay and benefits, as well as working conditions. The only reason I know is that the UAW needs a money flow to fight their battles in Detroit.

Julie. It is the "United Auto Workers" union. It is their job to organize as many auto workers as they can no matter where they work in the country. VW is union friendly so it made sense to try there. Since the vote was close in a vehemently anti union area it was a good effort by the UAW.

Doktor
17 Feb 14,, 06:46
Let me see if I follow what you guys say here.

If I work the same job within the same employer I would get a higher pay if I am with the union?
We didn't have this in the best years of socialism.

Moreover, my father was not a member of the Communist Party. When one day he found out they were charging membership fees from his paychecks, he got his money back without being laid off or being bullied.

chakos
17 Feb 14,, 06:58
$19.50 per hour is considered excellent pay and benefits in the states?

Christ that's $2 per hour above our bare minimum wage and well below the award for production line workers.

Julie
17 Feb 14,, 14:43
$19.50 per hour is considered excellent pay and benefits in the states?

Christ that's $2 per hour above our bare minimum wage and well below the award for production line workers.Please note that the minimum wage here in the US is I believe $7.25, in which Obama just signed an Order requiring Federal Contract workers to receive a minium of $10.00/hr. I own a small business, and my starting wage is $12.00/hr. with no experience.

The $19.50/hr. at the VW plant is an average base pay wage.

astralis
17 Feb 14,, 15:11
julie,


Do you think it was a coincidence that the foreign car companies chose the anti-union South as a plant location?

sure...but that still doesn't get at why you take Corker's word over a VW executive when the subject is VW business strategy. especially when VW has no incentive to lie about it.

bonehead
17 Feb 14,, 17:32
$19.50 per hour is considered excellent pay and benefits in the states?

Christ that's $2 per hour above our bare minimum wage and well below the award for production line workers.

No its not. There has ben a huge shift from $20.00 plus jobs to just above min wage jobs as our manufacturing base crumbled and many jobs were replaced by retail so relatively speaking $19.50 is good for the southern states. Thats not a living wage in other Parts of the country.

bonehead
17 Feb 14,, 17:42
Let me see if I follow what you guys say here.

If I work the same job within the same employer I would get a higher pay if I am with the union?
We didn't have this in the best years of socialism.

Moreover, my father was not a member of the Communist Party. When one day he found out they were charging membership fees from his paychecks, he got his money back without being laid off or being bullied.

Strength in numbers and having a contract is what gives most union members an advantage. When the union and a company negotiates a contract the union represents hundreds if not tens of thousands of workers. Without its just you and the boss. So paying dues gives back a much better paycheck and benefits the other guys usually are not getting. Also the union negotiated contract is only the Minimum. You are still free to personally negotiate more than the contract per your job skills.

tbm3fan
17 Feb 14,, 20:19
Please note that the minimum wage here in the US is I believe $7.25, in which Obama just signed an Order requiring Federal Contract workers to receive a minium of $10.00/hr. I own a small business, and my starting wage is $12.00/hr. with no experience.

The $19.50/hr. at the VW plant is an average base pay wage.

No kidding especially if you take the UAW wage of say 25 years ago and extrapolate it out to today. Then the $19.50 looks like a big pay cut meanwhile all other prices surge ahead such as water, power, gas, taxes, food among a few. They once talked about the dumbing down of America because of educational issues. Well this is the dumbing down of the American economy. Less pay means less consumer spending of things outside of those six items I mentioned. I personally see it all the time as people put off needed care because of the lack of money especially those in the lower middle income range. I see no joy in bringing down our economic lifestyle to the level of other nations on the way up. Large socioeconomic upheavals are never pleasant especially when you talk about takeaways compared to the past like my parents.

Julie
17 Feb 14,, 23:01
julie, sure...but that still doesn't get at why you take Corker's word over a VW executive when the subject is VW business strategy. especially when VW has no incentive to lie about it.You must have not read those documents I gave a link to.

VW situated in the South because of the incentives, low taxes, and NO unions. The UAW attempted to organized those workers in Tennessee OUTSIDE of the plant, initially, but it wasn't working. THAT is when the UAW contacted VW and negotiated a "Neutral Agreement" which THEN allowed UAW members inside the plant to organize the workers.

The workers at the VW plant do not have any higher base pay wages than in Detroit. They have excellent working conditions, and a great relationship with their company. The UAW said they could not guarantee the workers more pay and benefits that they were getting now. Of course not, the Neutral Agreement caps their wages !!! This is what the anti-union workers were screaming about. Why get a union? To pay them dues to do what? Drive a wedge between us and our employer that we do not have a problem with at the time?

Come on....

Julie
17 Feb 14,, 23:09
No kidding especially if you take the UAW wage of say 25 years ago and extrapolate it out to today. Then the $19.50 looks like a big pay cut meanwhile all other prices surge ahead such as water, power, gas, taxes, food among a few. They once talked about the dumbing down of America because of educational issues. Well this is the dumbing down of the American economy. Less pay means less consumer spending of things outside of those six items I mentioned. I personally see it all the time as people put off needed care because of the lack of money especially those in the lower middle income range. I see no joy in bringing down our economic lifestyle to the level of other nations on the way up. Large socioeconomic upheavals are never pleasant especially when you talk about takeaways compared to the past like my parents.You live in California, right? Your cost of living is sky-high compared to where I am. My state tax is .06%. What is yours? I pay $15-16.00 per hour for experience. Lead men get paid 50% of the net job because they make more money that way, sometimes it averages to $20-$25.00/hour depending how long it takes them, but they well earn it and deserve it.

My workers wear my company shirts and represent my company. I show them the numbers and negotiate each and every job with them. The last thing I would want is for a union coming in being a mediator and a divider between me and my men. That would cause problems.

Doktor
17 Feb 14,, 23:38
Strength in numbers and having a contract is what gives most union members an advantage. When the union and a company negotiates a contract the union represents hundreds if not tens of thousands of workers. Without its just you and the boss. So paying dues gives back a much better paycheck and benefits the other guys usually are not getting. Also the union negotiated contract is only the Minimum. You are still free to personally negotiate more than the contract per your job skills.

I understand free market and all that, but if in my company I pay different salaries to two different people doing the same job, I am in trouble.

Julie
17 Feb 14,, 23:52
I understand free market and all that, but if in my company I pay different salaries to two different people doing the same job, I am in trouble.What about someone who has worked at the company 7 years making x amount of dollars, then a just-hire comes in starting at the same rate of pay as the one that has been working there 7 years, earning raises?

Doktor
18 Feb 14,, 00:01
What about someone who has worked at the company 7 years making x amount of dollars, then a just-hire comes in starting at the same rate of pay as the one that has been working there 7 years, earning raises?

We have it all sorted by law, for each year you get a % raise. But the base is the same.

Essentially if they do the same job and have same productivity, the pay should be the same. At least the base. You can award loyalty, but not slacking.

Stitch
18 Feb 14,, 02:01
You live in California, right? Your cost of living is sky-high compared to where I am. My state tax is .06%. What is yours?

Yeah, second only to Hawai'i; our state tax is around 7.625%, depending upon what legislation is enacted at any given time.

Captain Worley
18 Feb 14,, 18:05
$19.50 per hour is considered excellent pay and benefits in the states?

Christ that's $2 per hour above our bare minimum wage and well below the award for production line workers.

Didn't Holden and Toyota both recently announce they were ceasing production there?

bonehead
18 Feb 14,, 18:13
I understand free market and all that, but if in my company I pay different salaries to two different people doing the same job, I am in trouble.

That is very common in the business sector. You can have a whole floor full of office workers and they all could get paid different rates. Not everyone is good at storming into the boss's office and demanding a raise and a retirement.

bonehead
18 Feb 14,, 18:22
My workers wear my company shirts and represent my company. I show them the numbers and negotiate each and every job with them. The last thing I would want is for a union coming in being a mediator and a divider between me and my men. That would cause problems.

Many unions are not dividers. Say for instance you have 50 employees. Do you really want to have that conversation 50 times a year or once every few years? Secondly when someone goes to the boss to ask for a raise and gets berated by the boss or lied to, what does that do to the employer/employer relationship? Having a contract negotiated by a third party eliminates a lot of animosity. Honestly, a union isn't needed in the few places where management/labor relations are good but for each one of those there are dozens of places where labor is being taken advantage of.

Doktor
18 Feb 14,, 20:08
That is very common in the business sector. You can have a whole floor full of office workers and they all could get paid different rates. Not everyone is good at storming into the boss's office and demanding a raise and a retirement.

Why should I pay someone more if the other guys is doing the same job for less?

bonehead
18 Feb 14,, 20:42
Why should I pay someone more if the other guys is doing the same job for less?

Often times it is the other way around. Those that get paid less should be getting more but are too lazy/scared/ignorant to ask for it and the boss/owner isn't going to volunteer anything because what he doesn't pay in wages he gets to keep for himself. The old divide and conquer ploy. Management uses it all the time. They say things like "work harder than the other guy and you get a bonus". Next thing you know employees are volunteering to work on the weekends just to get a leg up on the guy across the hall.

Illegals are willing to work for less and employers are more than happy to accommodate. Sometimes doing the same job doesn't tell the whole story. You also have to do the job well. Say you are erecting a 10 story building. Do you want it hacked up or do you want everything to look like a professional did it and pay less in maintenance and utility bills down the road. You have to look at total value instead of lowest bid. Many companies from all sectors make the mistake of going cheap but they forget that those cheap employees are the face of the company and when they end up making mistakes which makes the whole company look bad and costs customers/money in the long run.

Doktor
18 Feb 14,, 20:57
Often times it is the other way around. Those that get paid less should be getting more but are too lazy/scared/ignorant to ask for it and the boss/owner isn't going to volunteer anything because what he doesn't pay in wages he gets to keep for himself. The old divide and conquer ploy. Management uses it all the time. They say things like "work harder than the other guy and you get a bonus". Next thing you know employees are volunteering to work on the weekends just to get a leg up on the guy across the hall.
Yep because we all know how someone working 60 hours a week contributes a lot to the company. :ironic:


Illegals are willing to work for less and employers are more than happy to accommodate. Sometimes doing the same job doesn't tell the whole story. You also have to do the job well. Say you are erecting a 10 story building. Do you want it hacked up or do you want everything to look like a professional did it and pay less in maintenance and utility bills down the road. You have to look at total value instead of lowest bid. Many companies from all sectors make the mistake of going cheap but they forget that those cheap employees are the face of the company and when they end up making mistakes which makes the whole company look bad and costs customers/money in the long run.

Illegals pose a risk if you get caught hiring them. At least here. Not only illegals, but any unregistered worker.

WRT the rest of what you said, I emphasized "same work". The employer should have metrics to measure the job well done and award the workers according to it.

Sure I would pay more to the more productive worker, but would also discourage them to work more then 44 hours a week. I would want them to stay and contribute to the company, not to the doctors.

zraver
19 Feb 14,, 03:34
i don't get it. if Corker was "not telling lies", then was the VW executive telling lies about VW's own economic decisions/policy? VW -wanted- an union at the plant. that's what makes this case so distinctive.

VW has a workers council at every plant but that one, and the unions/ workers have 1/3 of the seats on the board. VW was under a lot of pressure to bring the Tenn plant into compliance but couldn't under US law unless the US workers wanted to.

astralis
19 Feb 14,, 05:02
z,


VW was under a lot of pressure to bring the Tenn plant into compliance

so the question is, if VW has this everywhere else per their own policies, and was "under a lot of pressure" to bring about a worker's council there...why would, per Corker, they suddenly be interested in opening a plant there if there WERE no worker's council?

Triple C
19 Feb 14,, 11:00
Julie,

Your link goes directly to the anti-union faction that is involved in an election. How'd you feel if I post links from Obama's White House dot org and pose it as reliable information? Like others, I am confused. Nevertheless, interesting.

Julie
19 Feb 14,, 14:48
Julie,

Your link goes directly to the anti-union faction that is involved in an election. How'd you feel if I post links from Obama's White House dot org and pose it as reliable information? Like others, I am confused. Nevertheless, interesting.omg really TC?

What I posted is THE issue here...why the Union was voted out...you know, the winning arguments that the anti-union workers used to vote the union out.

As far as Obama, this was none of his business, nor the business of the politicians, and both should have kept their noses out of it, as well as their comments to themselves, as far as I'm concerned.

Triple C
19 Feb 14,, 17:13
Julie,

What I mean is that the anti-UAW PR website's presentation of facts is very likely to be partisan, as one would expect from the dueling PR offices. Are they implying that workers can expect VW to raise wages to levels higher than the cap in the absence of union presence? You argue that unions ruined auto industry in the north. Conceding that for the moment, wasn't the cause presumably that the unions demanded unreasonable wages from employers?

I am not understanding the argument. There is a negotiated pact between UAW and VW that is unpopular, I got that. But how does that prove Corker's assertion that VW would not open a production line if UAW wins?

bonehead
19 Feb 14,, 18:13
omg really TC?

What I posted is THE issue here...why the Union was voted out...you know, the winning arguments that the anti-union workers used to vote the union out.

As far as Obama, this was none of his business, nor the business of the politicians, and both should have kept their noses out of it, as well as their comments to themselves, as far as I'm concerned.

So you are saying there should be another vote without Grover Norquists and Corkers involvement?

GVChamp
22 Feb 14,, 18:46
Why should I pay someone more if the other guys is doing the same job for less?

This is not how American unions work. Many unions have bargained in a two-tier wage structure, most notably the UAW and Caterpillar. If you were a young man hired after 2006, you took a substantial pay cut, because "market conditions."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/20/business/20wages.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/25/an-argument-against-a-two-tier-pay-system/

The times, they are a-changin'. This is de facto truth for Gen Yrs in the corporate world, to which our response has been to jump ship as quickly as possible for a pay increase that dwarves the below COL adjustments we get. To the business whining about loyalty, go f' yourself and the horse you rode in on, and lrn2cptlsm.

tbm3fan
23 Feb 14,, 05:29
So you are saying there should be another vote without Grover Norquists and Corkers involvement?

There could be. While the UAW, by law, has to wait a year another union does not have to and could step right in for a vote. Apparently VW wasn't happy with the political interference and a spokesperson said that they may have to look into why would they want to open their next plant in the south.

bonehead
23 Feb 14,, 19:28
As long as VW and the union, and a large percentage of workers want another vote I don't see why not.

Kind of ironic the south is fighting it so hard. If they really believed how bad unions are they should have allowed it and let the UAW hang itself. Also under the "right to work for less" laws, the workers could have still worked there but choose not to pay dues. The union would still have to be accountable for them and represent them. What better way to bankrupt the union. I also wonder if it was anyone but the UAW there would have been so much resistance. The UAW being the poster boy for all that is bad with unions and all.