GM Strike

My Dad used to work for a utility company and I remember him telling me about when he attended a training course for a day in Houston and during a morning break the men went to a break room. When entering the room he was told the non union break room was down the hall. What he noticed in the union break room was a table full of pastries, Houston Chronicle news papers at every table, juice, bottle water and soda on ice and coffee dispensers full of coffee. When he entered the non union break room there was a coffee maker which they made coffee themselves and a vending machine.

JIMNLIN wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:

JIMNLIN wrote:
Yeah this is a issue in all unions as unions are smart enough to know which party will support unions/members and which party and their supporters want to do away with them.

Reading this thread is a good example of that.

How does it help US jobs of we have open borders for workers from foreign countries, more free trade agreements, and lower tariffs on countries we already have huge trade discrepancies with? These are policies of certain political party that most unions support and will have a negative impact on US jobs. It may seem that they look like they support unions by what they say, but some of their actions and policies prove otherwise.

Unions protect members in many ways such as seniority protection programs...health care programs....retirement programs...on the job training programs....wage protection programs....others benificail to the employee.
Political parties have their own agenda which generally back the company or back the employee.

Companies spend millions every year on anti union programs and supporting political canadates that will fight for them when they reach Washington or the state capitals.

Unions also spend millions every year and during elections supporting politicals that will fight for them.

Threads like this will not change anyones opinions on politics or unions.
Everyone is biased. So happens I'm biased for the american worker that belongs to a union or the american non union worker.

1. None of that answered my question about how it help US jobs if we have open borders for workers from foreign countries, more free trade agreements, and lower tariffs on countries we already have huge trade discrepancies with? Sometimes people are focused on short term entitlement promises that they lose sight of the long term.

2. I understand that you are influenced by union propaganda. I was too at one point. But some of what they say is not reality. Some of it is scare tactics to keep the "us versus them" status quo which keeps them relevant. They have to create this false fear that the company and politicians are out to get you and they are your only savior to keep them in business and profitable. If much of these scare tactics were true, then you would see it in states and factories that do not have a union.

I am not saying that there are not bad companies out there. There are good in bad with everything as I said earlier. Companies, government, political parties, and even unions have their bad apples . There is also good in all those things so this notion the union propagates that all companies and politicians on the opposite side are bad and out to get you while only the union and politicians on their favorite are the good ones here to protect you is just pure poffy ****. The facts just do not support this, and I have been on both sides of the card and both sides of the collar.

free radical wrote:

Bert Ackerman wrote:
I think Mary Barra is hot.

Maybe so,too bad she has NO clue what kind of cars are popular and what people want

For example can anyone say this concept rear wheel drive Buick wouldnt sell?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buick_Avista

Why not make beautiful cars like that?

Definetly a nice looking car. Give customers the option of a pure electric drive train and hit an emerging market.

Bert Ackerman wrote:
I think Mary Barra is hot.

Maybe so,too bad she has NO clue what kind of cars are popular and what people want

For example can anyone say this concept rear wheel drive Buick wouldnt sell?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buick_Avista

Why not make beautiful cars like that?

ShinerBock wrote:

JIMNLIN wrote:
Yeah this is a issue in all unions as unions are smart enough to know which party will support unions/members and which party and their supporters want to do away with them.

Reading this thread is a good example of that.

How does it help US jobs of we have open borders for workers from foreign countries, more free trade agreements, and lower tariffs on countries we already have huge trade discrepancies with? These are policies of certain political party that most unions support and will have a negative impact on US jobs. It may seem that they look like they support unions by what they say, but some of their actions and policies prove otherwise.

Unions protect members in many ways such as seniority protection programs...health care programs....retirement programs...on the job training programs....wage protection programs....others benificail to the employee.
Political parties have their own agenda which generally back the company or back the employee.

Companies spend millions every year on anti union programs and supporting political canadates that will fight for them when they reach Washington or the state capitals.

Unions also spend millions every year and during elections supporting politicals that will fight for them.

Threads like this will not change anyones opinions on politics or unions.
Everyone is biased. So happens I'm biased for the american worker that belongs to a union or the american non union worker.

The worst top 2 unions are in Washington D.C.

danrclem wrote:
There is a two tier wage system and temporary workers because the union gave it their blessing.

GM workers getting higher wages and benefits will probably result in less sales for GM because the prices of their vehicles will have to be higher. The unions are political entities and maybe they want to help trigger a recession for obvious political reasons.

You may be correct but if IRC, at least in the past, manufacturers take turns at negotiations and the new contract laid the terms of negotiations with the other two. If so, most of what is agreed upon by GM will also affect the other 2 local issues aside. Thus eventually the additional cost to GM will also become additional costs to the other 2?

mich800 wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:

JIMNLIN wrote:
Yeah this is a issue in all unions as unions are smart enough to know which party will support unions/members and which party and their supporters want to do away with them.

Reading this thread is a good example of that.

How does it help US jobs of we have open borders for workers from foreign countries, more free trade agreements, and lower tariffs on countries we already have huge trade discrepancies with? These are policies of certain political party that most unions support and will have a negative impact on US jobs. It may seem that they look like they support unions by what they say, but some of their actions and policies prove otherwise.

Unfortunately, people often conflate how union members may vote or feel with how the top up administrators spend the unions cash to push a candidate or party. These are not mutually exclusive. Just because you belong to a union does not mean you are required to have a specific political view or social/economic priority. This is one way a union can fail their constituents as they unilaterally utilize their dues in a way that may not conform with a specific members desires.

I have no dog in this fight. But the amount of money that unions spend politically, generally to one party, is staggering. tens of millions,
There is something terribly wrong with the system if the unions are donating huge sums of money to causes its members do not support.

ShinerBock wrote:

JIMNLIN wrote:
Yeah this is a issue in all unions as unions are smart enough to know which party will support unions/members and which party and their supporters want to do away with them.

Reading this thread is a good example of that.

How does it help US jobs of we have open borders for workers from foreign countries, more free trade agreements, and lower tariffs on countries we already have huge trade discrepancies with? These are policies of certain political party that most unions support and will have a negative impact on US jobs. It may seem that they look like they support unions by what they say, but some of their actions and policies prove otherwise.

Unfortunately, people often conflate how union members may vote or feel with how the top up administrators spend the unions cash to push a candidate or party. These are not mutually exclusive. Just because you belong to a union does not mean you are required to have a specific political view or social/economic priority. This is one way a union can fail their constituents as they unilaterally utilize their dues in a way that may not conform with a specific members desires.

JIMNLIN wrote:
Yeah this is a issue in all unions as unions are smart enough to know which party will support unions/members and which party and their supporters want to do away with them.

Reading this thread is a good example of that.

From what I have seen, going back decades no party has done much if anything to support unions or working people. But most people are to wrapped up in how many touchdowns in each of the innings than what the politicians are doing. They can vote against your interest time after time, but next election you can't look at what the record is, make your choice based on ads, if you bother to vote at all.