UNION POWER: UAW gets 55% of Chrysler

[Uncleal]

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=al89RU9gWof8&refer=home

Does Ron Gettelfinger head of the UAW, fly in a Private Jet :biglol:

[Foggy]

More power to the UAW! :thumbs up:

[anthony_chri]

Why don't we just put UAW and Fiat in concrete shoes and drop them in the river. Will they save Chrysler or sink with it?

[Blue Devil]

At least I don't have to worry about buying a GM car or truck...

****ing Socialist bastards.

Bond holder's get $0.10 on the dollar, ...and in bankruptcy court they would have gotten full value payments.

UAW owned what, ...10%, ...and gets 50% of the common stock.

The sooner these wads go under, ...the better.

[MaskRider]

Sounds like a great big unadulterated cluster f__k. The company is definitely doomed.

:dead:

I have little sympathy for the UAW but in a sense they are bondholders, too. GM's pension fund obligations to the UAW are legal debts, too- just like a bond. That stock the UAW are getting along with the IOU aren't worth the paper they are printed on. Junk.

[von Bek]

Bond holder's get $0.10 on the dollar, ...and in bankruptcy court they would have gotten full value payments.

You surely do not understand the meaning of the word Bankrupt. Bankrupt means there is no money so in a bankruptcy court, Bond holders would get some proportion of whatever was left, if anything. The situation has nothing to do with socialists. It was caused by shareholders demanding unsustainable dividends rather than ploughing money back in to the future of the business.

It was an unsustainable situation and what you see now is the vultures picking over the bones.

[MaskRider]

Your so right. This is 21st Century Capitalism American Style. The shareholders- the esteemed capitalists- brought this on themselves. Bunch of greedy, shortsighted babies who now want everyone but them to suffer the consequences of their horrible business decisions.

[Willy]

I totally agree with the shortsightedness in maximizing profits and not putting money back into the business. I'm just surprised that the whole mess took so long to collapse on 'em.

So if the UAW is now a majority owner of Chrysler, wouldn't that be a conflict of interest?

[RickN]

Nope the UAW is just as shortsighted and interested in maximizing their profits as the old bunch.

[Burning Beard]

I'm kind of curious about the what the UAW is willing to pay their workers in wages and benefits when they also have to worry about their corporate profits.

Beard

[MaskRider]

They won't have to worry about either for long, believe me.

[RickN]

I agree Mask, they will be down the tubes in no time. I know for a fact that no body in my family will buy a Chrysler with the UAW having a controlling interest.

[Snuffy]

I never had any intentions of owning a Chrysler ... so its no fur off my hide.

[RAF_Slingblade]

I'm sorry.some one please explain to me how share holders are responsible?

It's the unions in my opinion. Negotiating unsustainable benefits have ruined the company.....share holders? You must be joking.

Please, please, explain that chestnut to me.

[Uncleal]

The next contract negotiating session, promises to be truely humourous.

The UAW on both sides of the fence. :biglol:

[Blue Devil]

You surely do not understand the meaning of the word Bankrupt.

Well, ...One of us doesn't...

When a business is unable to service its debt or pay its creditors, the business or its creditors can file with a federal bankruptcy court for protection under either Chapter 7 or Chapter 11.

Chapter 7, Title 11, United States Code (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapter_7,_Title_11,_United_States_Code)


Fully-secured creditors, such as collateralized bondholders or mortgage lenders, have a legally-enforceable right to the collateral securing their loans or to the equivalent value, a right which cannot be defeated by bankruptcy. A creditor is fully secured if the value of the collateral for its loan to the debtor equals or exceeds the amount of the debt.


Chapter 11, Title 11, United States Code (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chapter_11,_Title_11,_United_States_Code)


If the business's debts exceed its assets, the bankruptcy restructuring results in the company's owners being left with nothing; instead, the owners' rights and interests are ended and the company's creditors are left with ownership of the newly reorganized company.


...it should have been restructured DiP (Ch.11), ...or broken up and sold (Ch.7).

The legal mechanisms are in place and are used every day.


Taking Tax-payer dollars to shore-up a sinking private company, ...and then give it to the unions, ...while circumventing the courts, ...and the creditors...?

****ing Socialist ****, ...any way you slice it.

IF the greedy Capitalists (the stupid, unsuccessful ones) ran the company into the ground, ...throw six (6) feet of dirt over it, ...and move on.

If you want to build cars in the US, ...go work at the Honda plant.

It is NOT my responsibility to see that some overpaid lug-nut touquer's in-laws have strait teeth, ...or that their union thug steward has the prime tee-times at the country club.

Capitalism means make a profit, ...or get the hell out of the way so a better business plan can make a profit.

Socialists just don't get it.

Taking O.P.M. (other people's money) is not the same as profit, ...even though it buys just as many red stars to sew onto your clothes.

It produces nothing, ...but POVERTY.

[Blue Devil]

The next contract negotiating session, promises to be truely humourous.

The UAW on both sides of the fence. :biglol:

Yeah, ...I'll be laughing...

The UAW will demand that ALL worker compensation be put back into the contract, ...at the expense of the share-holders.

Then, ...they will write-off the business loss, ...and then get another infusion of Tax-Payer cash to maintain solvency.

The wads probably won't sell three(3) cars a year.

[Hans Jaeger]

From the tone of most of the posts here, you'd think the workers got a freebie. But...


The United Auto Workers union’s retiree health-care fund will own 55 percent of Chrysler LLC in exchange for cutting in half the automaker’s $10.6 billion cash obligation to the trust

In accounting circles, that's real money.

And did you note...


“With employees effectively sharing the risks, this could play to the advantage of the ailing company,” said Howard Wheeldon, a senior strategist at BGC Partners LP in London. The UAW role, if confirmed, may be the only “feasible way of moving forward,” he added.

If there had been no union over the years, the company would very likely be in the same bind, only some get-rich-quick investors would have walked away with buckets of money and allowed the company to fail, and tens of thousands of good jobs in the company and its contracted suppliers to evaporate.


Separately yesterday, General Motors Corp. said it will be at least half owned by the U.S. government under a plan to slash its debt and cut dealer ranks nearly in half.

Maybe you gents would rather have the gov't own a company than the workers who work for it. :laugh:

Funny how, in some minds, workers who have a steady and relatively secure job, and who make good wages and benefits because of a union, are classed about the same as communists.

[Blue Devil]

Maybe you gents would rather have the gov't own a company than the workers who work for it. :laugh:

No, ...that would be GM.



Funny how, in some minds, workers who have a steady and relatively secure job, and who make good wages and benefits because of a union, are classed about the same as communists.

Well Hans, ...there's hope for you yet.

IF the UAW wants to start a car company, ...say UAWful Motors, ...raise private capital and lines of credit, ...and compete in an open market, ...more power to'em.

But they aren't doing that, ...are they...?

They are swapping economic dead weight that sunk the company, ...for an ownership stake that they did not risk investments in to acquire, ...and the Tax-Payers have to re-float the boat...

...while That One and his band of fairy thieves, ...through government corporate involvement and market interference, ... drill holes in the boat, ...to let the water out.

Look at Honda, ...or Mazda's business model.

They make cars here too, ...ya know.


My first choice, ...and my last hope, ...is Ford.

[Willy]

Looks like all bets are off now on Chrysler. Seems the banks that they owed aren't budging and bankruptcy is imminent.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/elections/2009/04/30/chapter-filing-imminent-chrysler/

Never been much on Chrysler products (did like Jeeps before Chrysler took over American Motors), but I do hate to see any US automaker go under.

[Hans Jaeger]

They {UAW Chysler} are swapping economic dead weight that sunk the company, ...for an ownership stake that they did not risk investments in to acquire

I don't think they were looking for an ownership stake; they were looking for a way out of the mess.



Look at Honda, ...or Mazda's business model.
They make cars here too, ...ya know.


They entered the market with a different perspective. Time for others to change. And they are changing, reluctantly, both in a corporate sense and a union sense.


My first choice, ...and my last hope, ...is Ford.

Those are UAW workers as well. With very similar contracts.

So what sunk GM and Chrysler?

Maybe it was poor corporate decisions rather than a negotiated pension plan.

[Willy]

What I really hate to see is one company have a monopoly on the domestic auto market. I've owned a few Fords (new & used) and they've never been my first choice for a car or truck.

[RickN]

Hans Ford has the better union deal and as far as Chrysler, Obama has already agreed that the taxpayer will pick up the tab on the pension plan.

Chrysler and GM can go under as far as I am concerned and someone new will take their place. The UAW can go to he77.

[Foggy]

Appears sour grapes because of not being able to acquire a good union job with good pay and benefits.

BTW - ask workers working for those "progressive" Jap and Korean car factories what they think of their working conditions? Those plants are built in rural areas and get huge corporate tax abatements. The area standards of living are well doped out before the first hole is dug for the factory. They want rural workers who will jump at any employment - the Wall-Mart social engineering model.

A worker can be fired for ANY reason without any regress or compensation. No seniority rules, mandatory overtime and constant time studies make the work force a young workforce. Can't keep up - out the door. Get sick with something longer than a couple weeks recovery - out the door. Sexual harassement can be a problem - make a complaint - out the door. Even heard muttering the word "union" during a break - out the door.

The work pace shows not many workers in their 50's. And the wage schedule is such to make anything near (never par) a UAW take home check - forego voluntary out of pocket medical insurance and any 401 plans.

BTW - I've never been a UAW member. And there are problems with UAW contracts - but no corporation will ever settle a labor contract that they cannot fulfill or perceive to fulfill for the length of the contract. But they like to blame a union for all their financial woes when times are tough - standard operating procedure in shifting blame.

I live in a GM city plus a military/industrial complex. Many of my associates are retired UAW workers and GM management. I also know a few younger people working in the Honda plants out in the rural areas of the state. The Japanese plant workers can be so paranoid about talking labor unions their only sentiment is to their own family. They fear a loose word in public will lose their livelihood - it is almost Soviet like. They have to keep up a happy face but are well aware of better pay and benefits for the same labor of a unionized work force.

Like I said, sour grapes in this thread.

[Blue Devil]

Appears sour grapes because of not being able to acquire a good union job with good pay and benefits.

Ahhh, ...no.

Worked union for years, ...great apprenticeship program, ...their best feature.

Then THEY tell you when you can, ...and can't work.

You can't even go out and find you own job.

Screw that.

I left and started my own company.


The sour grapes is that the Fed and the Tax-Payers are involved, ...and the bankruptcy courts are not, ...and they are giving the assets to the Unions, ...not the workers.


I don't have to pay scale, ...and profit share, ...but I do.

...I also run off any job satisfaction grumbling or union whine, ...and have closed up shop on occasion. (the crew usually solves that problem internally)

Don't like it here...?

...Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

I have found that over the years, ...the bitchers and whiners are also the low producers. (as well as the thieves and slip-falls)

We have safety meetings every week, ...and a beer every pay day, ...and they tell me what they think, ...to my face.

And I respect them and their concerns, ...as they are also my concerns.


It's a profit deal...

...We work hard and risk all for it...

...no OPM or Socialism required. (or tolerated)


Spread the wealth around...

**** That One.

[bzhyoyo]

shame about Chrysler: I thought about buying a second-hand PT cruiser (love that look!) but balked at the problems of reliability that certain parts had according to the press.

[Foggy]

Ahhh, ...no.

Worked union for years, ...great apprenticeship program, ...their best feature.

Then THEY tell you when you can, ...and can't work.

You can't even go out and find you own job.

Screw that.
-----------------------------
Different work environments - sounds like a "hiring hall" union.
-----------------------------
...the bitchers and whiners are also the low producers. (as well as the thieves and slip-falls)
----------------------------
Right on about bitchers - 15% of the SAME workforce create 85% of the grievances in a union shop. There are union administrative ways to handle the deadbeats.
----------------------------


We have safety meetings every week, ...and a beer every pay day, ...and they tell me what they think, ...to my face.

And I respect them and their concerns, ...as they are also my concerns.

-----------------------------
Except for the beer - large unionized corporations do the same with their task teams. And there are usually union reps appointed to every task team in every business division. The large progressive unions and corporations (not many left) work hand in hand for productivity, safety and fairness in downsizing situations.
--------------------------------

It's a profit deal...

--------------------------------

Same for all capitalistic businesses

--------------------------------

Spread the wealth around...

**** That One.

Right on with Obama's spreading the wealth. I've been lucky to have a full career with one of the largest corporations with a high tech progressive union and collective bargaining agreements. I retired with an excellent pension and one of the best retirement medical/prescription plans for me and my spouse. I worked hard and earned every bit of it. Obama's spreading the wealth could put my medical plan in jeopardy - it would be like forcing me to take Medicare early. And when I do have to take Medicare - my healthcare will take a big nosedive as my current plan (by law) will be null and void. I can spend a bunch out of pocket money for Medicare Part B but then we'd be eating Ramon Noodles everyday and just making enough to pay real estate taxes, insurance of all types, gas and the occasional movie. And my present health precludes me from starting work again - not even a Wal-Mart greeter or a security guard. But my wife is still working her ass off.

We would still be considered elite in Obama's Chicago neighborhoods (we own a house and a new car) - so any letters to this congress and the White House would be laughed at.

[Hans Jaeger]

A union by its very nature has to have rules about who does what, seniority, bidding on jobs, etc. For large workplaces, or large locals covered by a contract, it just has to be done because there is no better way to organize work and keep the things that a union provides – like better pay and benefits, job security that augments as you get older (and it’s harder to find other work if you’re let go), and so on. It is by no means a perfect system but nor is letting a large company simply dictate everything.

In smaller more “personalized” workplaces, other things can certainly work in the absence of a union, particularly if the workers are working at jobs which are in reasonable demand and they can move to another employer if the working conditions, pay and/or benefits are better. An employer is not just altruistic in such a situation; it makes good business sense for him to keep his employees contented.

Business people first and foremost look to the bottom line. I’ve never met a small businessman who doesn’t want to maximize his profit. Some do it wisely, some think they can run a sweatshop. The same goes for large companies, only they have even more scope for treating workers poorly because they can outsource to real sweatshops in locales where people are absolutely desperate for a job, any job.

I think you hit many nails on the head in your Post # 24, Foggy, re: corporations/unions and how the Japanese were able to finesse their way into American (and Canadian) car production.

I think some people work on the automatic premise that unions get too much for their members, rather than looking at the balance that the union/corporate dance creates. Case in point - Walmart is a hugely profitable corporation. Could they still make a healthy profit even if their workers had better pay and benefits? I would bet they could.

Would the Japanese car makers pull out of North America if they were told that no matter where they moved in the USA or Canada they would have a unionized work force? I would bet they wouldn't, especially if governments did their part in making sure they understood that the preferment that they've enjoyed so far can't continue in the same form forever. The host country, especially in the large North American car market, has some cards it can play; the Japanese simply can't afford to pick up their marbles and go home if those cards are played right.

[RickN]

Appears sour grapes because of not being able to acquire a good union job with good pay and benefits.

I worked Union jobs twice in my life, both times I quit because of the BS handed down by the unions. The money was great but some of the rules were nuts.

[Hans Jaeger]

And I remember that when I worked for the International Nickel Co. (INCO) in their Crean Hill Mine, where I was on "motor crew" (battery-electric tram), and we were pulling ore out of a stope chute on the 1200 Level, I was able to refuse to work there because of unsafe conditions (overhead rock bolts holding the chute frame were pulling out because of the repeated pressure and pounding over time from falling ore). It was my status as a member of the union that allowed me to do so, without repercussions.

When the frame was fixed, I and my crew went back to work there.