jesse
@ December 12, 2008


----------
5
After spending over $300 billion dollars to bail out banks with absolutely nothing to show for it, the US government, specifically the Senate, has decided that we do not have $15 billion to loan to the American auto companies to keep them from failing.  Talks failed last night when the United Auto Workers union would not agree to an immediate reduction in union wages.  Republican Senators wanted union workers to accept wages commensurate with those paid to non-union workers in other US auto plants, which would amount to a reduction of approximately $10 per hour (inclusive of benefits).  UAW and Democrats countered that the auto companies should honor the current contracts, but they would accept the proposed wage reduction when those contracts ended in 2011.

This proved to be a deal breaker.

For some perspective, consider: despite the hand-wringing about the cost of high wages and benefits to current and retired workers, labor costs account for approximately 10% of the cost of a union built car.  In other words: UAW members could volunteer to work on the assembly lines for free, and the car companies would still need the bailout.

What we have here, then, is some good old-fashioned union busting.  And, I have to admit, Republicans have the UAW by the balls: either tear up your current contract right now, and along with it any ability you have to ever enforce a contract with your employers again, or your employers will likely end up out of business. 

$300 billion to the companies that made the bad investments and caused the problem to begin with.  These companies did not have to give any meaningful concessions.  But the auto companies, who employ people who actually make a product and helped build the middle class in America, get nothing unless the union completely forfeits all its contractual rights.

Does this make anyone else kind of mad?

----------

Whoops I didn't see this one while I was writing my own. Here are some fun things that may make you even more mad though!

1. The worst-case scenario for job losses is 2.7 million jobs, which includes (shoddy) modeling of the spiral effect: UAW workers don't visit 7-11 for coffee every morning, so they go under, then those employees don't shop at K-Mart so they cut back.

2. Obviously, the listed reason for the Republican's obstructure just isn't credible. They got everything they wanted (Democrats caved on efficiency standards, stockowners took a huge hit, the UAW agreed to major cutbacks). Arguing about the date of the cutbacks taking effect is something that happens in negotiations, it's simply not a legitimately unsolvable issue.

3. Why then? Well, the South (where Republican Senators are primarily congregated) has lots of nonunionized foreign auto plants that would benefit from the Big 3 going under. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's Kentucky, for example, hosts the largest U.S. Toyota plant. They get to break a union and help their state out. And only at cost to the Rust Belt states that keep not voting for Republicans anyway!

Pssshh, the more the merrier. Everyone should take the opportunity to say how pissed off they are about this.


Yes I think the car industry deserves a bailout. Of course, that's after I get mine. I always think private industry should be rewarded for screwing up.

And as for the unions, of course, you're right. It's always good to pay for one guy holding the screwdriver while the other one turns it and the third guy keeps his thumb up his ass just in case.

Unions have their problems, but they also help increase wages for all workers, including non-union workers. If non-UAW car plants didn't have to compete on wages with the union plants, then they could reduce what they pay their own workers.

But the union agreed to a pay cut. The only disagreement was on the timing - but Republicans were not interested in coming to an agreement, they were only interested in breaking the unions because unions vote for Democrats.


Yeah ok Jesse - blah, blah, blah, blah

Leave a comment