OB_ohio

Razoredge is the only one in this discussion who doesn’t have tunnel vision. The unions are still a wage-stabilizing factor in the US economy. Some say, “Well look at the transplants. They are non-union and pay competitive wages. There is no doubt they would continue to pay competitive wages if the UAW wages where halved. The wages they paid would be competitive with those halved wages. Salaried workers wouldn’t fare much better. Why would GM pay a salaried first line supervisor $75-100K a year (including overtime) is those who report to them are only making $20K? They wouldn’t. And if GM isn’t paying high salaries, why would Ford, DCX, Honda, Nissan, Toyota, etc? Answer: they wouldn’t either. There would likely be a downward pressure on wages across the board, starting with OEMs, moving to Tier 1 suppliers, then Tier 2, and so forth. Soon, the accounting firm you just hired into pays you $10 an hour. Why not, where else are you going to go? It’s market economics just like you guys are arguing for. Unions are not socialist. They are operating on the labor market. Fortunately, they have a monopoly on a chunk of the market and can demand higher prices. If they weren’t there, there would be no positive wage pressure. First of all, Vetteman is way off, but he sure does know how to propagate a myth. A direct labor line worker doesn’t make $90-100K a year, even factoring in their solid benefit packages. (I worked in a GM assembly plant as a maintenance supervisor (non-union) for years and know what they make). A starting employee makes less than $15 an hour, while a soon to retire one maybe makes $28. That’s $30K to $56K a year. Add overtime (you try being on your feet on concrete floors for 12 hours a day working- it’s no treat) to keep up with demand (if there is any) and those might be up to $40K-$60K. That’s a fine salary coming out of high school. A skilled tradesman who’s been around for 20 years might make $100K working 7-12s, but does he have a life? And he’s be training for years through apprenticeships, etc. Who do people think are the customers for the businesses they work for? There is not a vast, faceless purchasing class that keeps the economy going. It is your neighbor who has disposable income to buy a boat because he works in a food manufacturing plant. In turn, the janitor at the boat plant can take his wife out to eat at the restaurant that your brother works at during the summer. The restaurant can buy food from the food manufacturer. It’s a cycle that only ends when A) all our disposable income is sent overseas buying foreign goods, or B) we have no disposable income due to our “global” salaries which allow us to eek out a living. Why do people assume that by slowly eliminating the middleclass that “America” will be more competitive and prosperous. Manufacturing touches every aspect of the US economy. Instead of bitching about how good other guys have it, why don’t more people demand improved wages and benefits? Why are a lot of people resigned to hand over the profits to the corporations (and their majority un-middleclass stockholders), only to wait by the table for scraps to fall? People who think that corporations are going to look after them are foolish and in for a surprise.