chrysler responds to caw

[hemiram]

 Statement by John Franciosi, Senior Vice President Employee Relations, Chrysler LLC
 
Auburn Hills, Mich., Mar 27, 2008  -  "Any suggestions from the CAW leadership that Cerberus misled them, and is directing Chrysler to cut its way to profitability are completely inaccurate. The CAW leadership was provided a detailed analysis of the volume related restructuring actions that were required as a result of the declining industry sales and overall economic turmoil. These decisions were finalized by the Chrysler management team, led by Tom LaSorda. We have always maintained transparency with our unions regarding our future plans and will continue to do so going forward."

[dodgerider]

Unions are the reason that the US automakers are getting killed by foreign automakers.  Toyota builds a lot of vehicles here, the vehicles are build better and toyota makes more profit on them.  Why?  Because the unions haven't infested those Toyota plants and cost Toyota tons of money.  The unions had a purpose back in the early 1900s but they don't serve one today.  Get rid of them.

[Mr Anderson]

Unions are the reason that the US automakers are getting killed by foreign automakers.  Toyota builds a lot of vehicles here, the vehicles are build better and toyota makes more profit on them.  Why?  Because the unions haven't infested those Toyota plants and cost Toyota tons of money.  The unions had a purpose back in the early 1900s but they don't serve one today.  Get rid of them.

Unions these days serve as a wall against people underbidding eachother until we're all working for pennies.  I'm a member of the local carpenters union and if it weren't for all of us union guys we'd all be undercutting each other on bids for contracts.  That would lead to us using worse materials and doing shotty work, but the final dollar amount is what sways the customer.  Customer is left with bad work and unhappy and the carpenter is left with less work and not working for a fair wage.

[flint]

That sounds like more of a problem with an abundance of contractors vs a need for them.  If there's a lot of contractors but little work the market would self correct.  Eventually some of them would either move or quit.  It's a harsh reality but that's life.  The unions don't need to be in place to protect workers any more.

[06Hemiman]

I like the idea of unions as a check against giant corporations trying to sh*t all over their employees.  But that kind of thing doesn't happen anymore.  There are enough jobs out there that the companies need to compete for employees.  Unions had their place, but not anymore.

[dodger098]

That sounds like more of a problem with an abundance of contractors vs a need for them.  If there's a lot of contractors but little work the market would self correct.  Eventually some of them would either move or quit.  It's a harsh reality but that's life.  The unions don't need to be in place to protect workers any more.

You need something in place to adjust for the market.  A truely free market would not work because eventually some company would get so big they would own everything.  You need checks against certain practices and other things.  If the contractors all went broke trying to undercut each other the economy of that town would drop as they all filed bankrupcy or left.  In the end the downturn effects the city a lot harder if the union isn't in place because the downturn just gets that much worse. 

[raman noodles]

That sounds like more of a problem with an abundance of contractors vs a need for them.  If there's a lot of contractors but little work the market would self correct.  Eventually some of them would either move or quit.  It's a harsh reality but that's life.  The unions don't need to be in place to protect workers any more.

You need something in place to adjust for the market.  A truely free market would not work because eventually some company would get so big they would own everything.  You need checks against certain practices and other things.  If the contractors all went broke trying to undercut each other the economy of that town would drop as they all filed bankrupcy or left.  In the end the downturn effects the city a lot harder if the union isn't in place because the downturn just gets that much worse. 

While I agree in general, the practice has been for the gov to bail out the rich boys that screw up the company and not the contractors.  This has nothing to do with unions and unions wouldn't work anyways.  The guy running the union just takes a payoff and looks the other way while some of his guys get shafted, the companies they contract to take another payout and pay too much for the construction in the first place.  It's a giant circle jerk between the guys with money and other guys with money leaving the rest of us normal folk to pick up the bill with our taxes.

[flint]

That sounds like more of a problem with an abundance of contractors vs a need for them.  If there's a lot of contractors but little work the market would self correct.  Eventually some of them would either move or quit.  It's a harsh reality but that's life.  The unions don't need to be in place to protect workers any more.

You need something in place to adjust for the market.  A truely free market would not work because eventually some company would get so big they would own everything.  You need checks against certain practices and other things.  If the contractors all went broke trying to undercut each other the economy of that town would drop as they all filed bankrupcy or left.  In the end the downturn effects the city a lot harder if the union isn't in place because the downturn just gets that much worse. 

A truely free market would not work.  But we don't need to worry about the little contractors.  We need to worry about the big guys only looking 5 minutes ahead instead of long term.  When they do that we get people making bad long term decisions but short decisions that make them lots of $$.  Regulate that, unions don't help us regulate the economy, only regulations do.