SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Assembly Line

METRO POLICY NOVEMBER 21, 2008

Assembly Line

BY JONATHAN COHN

If you've been following the auto industry's crisis, then you've probably read or heard a lot about overpaid American autoworkers--in particular, the fact that the average hourly employee of the Big Three makes $70 per hour.

That's an awful lot of money. Seventy dollars an hour in wages works out to almost $150,000 a year in gross income, if you assume a forty-hour work week. Is it any wonder the Big Three are in trouble? And with auto workers making so much, why should taxpayers--many of whom make far less--finance a plan to bail them out?

Well, here's one reason: The figure is wildly misleading. 

Let's start with the fact that it's not $70 per hour in wages. According to Kristin Dziczek of the Center for Automative Research--who was my primary source for the figures you are about to read--average wages for workers at Chrysler, Ford, and General Motors were just $28 per hour as of 2007. That works out to a little less than $60,000 a year in gross income--hardly outrageous, particularly when you consider the physical demands of automobile assembly work and the skills most workers must acquire over the course of their careers.

More important, and contrary to what you may have heard, the wages aren't that much bigger than what Honda, Toyota, and other foreign manufacturers pay employees in their U.S. factories. While we can't be sure precisely how much those workers make, because the companies don't make the information public, the best estimates suggests the corresponding 2007 figure for these "transplants"--as the foreign-owned factories are known--was somewhere between $20 and $26 per hour, and most likely around $24 or $25. That would put average worker's annual salary at $52,000 a year.

So the "wage gap," per se, has been a lot smaller than you've heard. And this is no accident. If the transplants paid their employees far less than what the Big Three pay their unionized workers, the United Auto Workers would have a much better shot of organizing the transplants' factories. Those factories remain non-unionized and management very much wants to keep it that way.

 

But then what's the source of that $70 hourly figure? It didn't come out of thin air. Analysts came up with it by including the cost of all employer-provided benefits--namely, health insurance and pensions--and then dividing by the number of workers. The result, they found, was that benefits for Big Three cost about $42 per hour, per employee. Add that to the wages--again, $28 per hour--and you get the $70 figure. Voila.

Except ... notice something weird about this calculation? It's not as if each active worker is getting health benefits and pensions worth $42 per hour. That would come to nearly twice his or her wages. (Talk about gold-plated coverage!) Instead, each active worker is getting benefits equal only to a fraction of that--probably around $10 per hour, according to estimates from the International Motor Vehicle Program. The number only gets to $70 an hour if you include the cost of benefits for retirees--in other words, the cost of benefits for other people. One of the few people to grasp this was Portfolio.com's Felix Salmon. As he noted yesterday, the claim that workers are getting $70 an hour in compensation is just "not true."

Of course, the cost of benefits for those retirees--you may have heard people refer to them as "legacy costs"--do represent an extra cost burden that only the Big Three shoulder. And, yes, it makes it difficult for the Big Three to compete with foreign-owned automakers that don't have to pay the same costs. But don't forget why those costs are so high. While the transplants don't offer the same kind of benefits that the Big Three do, the main reason for their present cost advantage is that they just don't have many retirees.

The first foreign-owned plants didn't start up here until the 1980s; many of the existing ones came well after that. As of a year ago, Toyota's entire U.S. operation had less than 1,000 retirees. Compare that to a company like General Motors, which has been around for more than a century and which supports literally hundreds of thousands of former workers and spouses. As you might expect, many of these have the sorts of advanced medical problems you expect from people to develop in old age. And, it should go without saying, those conditions cost a ton of money to treat.

To be sure, we've known about these demographics for a while. Management and labor in Detroit should have figured out a solution it long ago. But while the Big Three were late in addressing this problem, they did address it eventually

Notice how, in this article, I've constantly referred to 2007 figures? There's a good reason. In 2007, the Big Three signed a breakthrough contract with the United Auto Workers (UAW) designed, once and for all, to eliminate the compensation gap between domestic and foreign automakers in the U.S.

The agreement sought to do so, first, by creating a private trust for financing future retiree benefits--effectively removing that burden from the companies' books. The auto companies agreed to deposit start-up money in the fund; after that, however, it would be up to the unions to manage the money. And it was widely understood that, given the realities of investment returns and health care economics, over time retiree health benefits would likely become less generous.

In addition, management and labor agreed to change health benefits for all workers, active or retired, so that the coverage looked more like the policies most people have today, complete with co-payments and deductibles. The new UAW agreement also changed the salary structure, by creating a two-tiered wage system. Under this new arrangement, the salary scale for newly hired workers would be lower than the salary scale for existing workers.

 

One can debate the propriety and wisdom of these steps; two-tiered wage structures, in particular, raise various ethical concerns. But one thing is certain: It was a radical change that promised to make Detroit far more competitive. If carried out as planned, by 2010--the final year of this existing contract--total compensation for the average UAW worker would actually be less than total compensation for the average non-unionized worker at a transplant factory. The only problem is that it will be several years before these gains show up on the bottom line--years the industry probably won't have if it doesn't get financial assistance from the government.

Make no mistake: The argument over a proposed rescue package is complicated, in no small part because over the years both management and labor made some truly awful decisions while postponing the inevitable reckoning with economic reality. And even if the government does provide money, it's a tough call whether restructuring should proceed with or without a formal bankruptcy filing. Either way, yet more downsizing is inevitable.

But the next time you hear somebody say the unions have to make serious salary and benefit concessions, keep in mind that they already have--enough to keep the companies competitive, if only they can survive this crisis.

Jonathan Cohn is a senior editor at The New Republic.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 117 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

117 comments

I still don't see how moving the health care retirement liabilities to a trust makes the automakers more competitive, if their competition lack such. If such liabilities really total $42/hr, and you must fund the trust, removing the liabilities from the balance sheet is just an accounting maneuver. A DIP reorganization would fix this. The government can provide a guarantee of DIP financing in return for equity. The unions can give up on keeping all those retirees happy, and cut those costs. The effectively shifts the retirement costs to the taxpayer, but lowers them as well. Social security and medicare were designed for just this situation. The same goes for the white collar retirees, and the golden parachutes, and the excessive executive salaries, and the coroprate jets. Toss them all out, and you have a competitive business, and if you then focus on building fuel-efficient, plug-in hybrids, rather than gas guzzlers, you have created a viable business. Consumers won't trust buying a GM car now because they fear bankruptcy...after a chapter reorg, they will buy with confidence.

- Sensible Centrist

November 21, 2008 at 9:43am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

True, Toyota, BMW, etc. don't have many US-based retirees. But these companies have been around a long time, and they have many retirees in their home countries. Yet I wager their total costs are not as high. Why? Those companies didn't accept unrealistic pension obligations and didn't work against UHC there (in fact, they support it -- even in Canada!). Also, I have to say, the two-tiered structure seems to me the worst of all possible worlds. Does the union really expect loyalty from these new employees who bust their asses for $14/hr so some retiree in Arizona doesn't have to make co-payments when he goes to the doctor? Moreover, does the retiree (who, let's be honest, may figure he doesn't have that many years left) have any great incentive to cut back his benefits to prevent layoffs of current employees? It would be one thing if that new employee thought that he could eventually rise to the well-compensated group of employees (indeed, this is how most seniority systems remain stable), but the whole premise of the two-tiered structure is that won't happen. There seems a profoundly inequitable generational divide here. I am a great supporter of collective bargaining, but because retirees are so much more numerous than current employees -- and especially the new low-tier employees -- the inclusion of UAW retirees in decision-making is distorting a rational restructuring of costs and benefits. So what to do? Sadly, they have to go into bankruptcy and dump the legacy costs onto the government (i.e., the pension guaranty board). They need to tear up the old collective bargaining agreements and enter into new ones with existing employees. The agreements will feature lower (for the rest of us, standard) health benefits and defined contribution retirement benefits. Current employees with significant seniority and vested benefits will have to accept a transition to these new structures. Retirees will see significant cutbacks in their benefits; before they complain, they should talk to the laid off worker with three young kids. Of course, the UAW should only accept this along with: shareholders getting wiped out, bondholders taking a haircut, management taking a big haircut in salaries (UAW should demand a maximum compensation ratio for executives in any new CBA, something like 40:1 to the lowest paid worker), and, ideally, the UAW DC pensions getting a stake in the new entity as compensation for what they are giving up.

- paddynoons

November 21, 2008 at 11:18am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"The unions can give up on keeping all those retirees happy, and cut those costs." Sensible Centrist, you seem to be suggesting that the UAW agree the the Big 3 would no longer have to fund retiree health care or provide them a pension. Is this what you're suggesting? That UAW and the Big 3 say to retired autoworkers, "Sorry, but we're going to have to eliminate your health care and income, good luck"? SS and Medicare are minimum safety nets, there were not designed so that companies could abdicate their responsibilities to their workers. Retired autoworkers earned much more than that. This is that very last thing we should be encouraging struggling corporations to do. You realize that retired autoworkers are actual people, right? They are not just numbers on a balance sheet. To casually suggest destroying their lives is breathtaking. To equate that idea with denying executives some perks is something else.

- dave3544

November 21, 2008 at 12:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It's not just an accounting change - if you move the funds to a separate entity and then do not contribute further to that fund, that not only takes current liability off your books, it takes future liability as well. That said, I agree with you about a DIP reorg.

- inthewoods

November 21, 2008 at 12:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Interesting. I read this exact same article on another site about 3 days ago, but failed to bookmark it, and found this one while looking for it. My father worked at GM, and had a base-rate of $45/hour. He worked nights, so got a 50% premium on that. Working Saturdays was another 50%, and working Sundays was 100% premium (time and a half, and double time). Working holidays was worth triple time. One time, my dad worked on a holiday that fell on a Sunday, and received double-triple-time. Over $200 per hour. My father's job at GM was to keep track of a clipboard that had a list of all the hand tools, and who had checked them out. Anyone who doesn't say that GM pays every single person they employ WAY too much, all the way from the bottom straight to the CEO (and ESPECIALLY the people on the board, because obviously they have no idea how to run a business), is retarded. I thank GM for the very rich lifestyle that I grew up with, but the UAW and it's workers are pretty much blind retards.

- Eric

November 21, 2008 at 1:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Something tells me "Sensible Centrist" wouldn't be quite so sensible or centrist if he had worked 30 years under a contract that promised him certain things in return for his services, and only after retirement was he told that now that all the services have been rendered, the agreement is no longer operative.

- Dennis Doubleday

November 21, 2008 at 1:25pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

another area that drives the costs up are factory maintenance workers. I ran a project at a GM factory repairing roofs and to bring in outside contractors (roofing specialist's) the plant maintenance staff had to be at 150% capacity regardless of if they had anything to do. So: for us to bring in outside contractors the maintenance staff came in for an extra 20 hours a week @ time and a half and watched TV (I saw it). They were pulling in over a $100k in the middle of Indiana/Ohio. Because this is the contract that UAW negotiated with GM. I've heard this is common through GM, et al. multiply by every plant drives the costs up.

- worked at a GM plant

November 21, 2008 at 1:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

No, the point was a one-time payment to the trust that removed the legacy benefits issue. Its a huge difference because existing workers pay for prior workers shortages in pension funds (which have been a real problem because of rapidly rising medical expenses and longer lifetimes). Each new worker will also have some, much smaller, payment to the trust. But pension liability is removed from the books, and the program moves from defined benefits to defined contribution, like most of us have. I'm glad you summarized this Jonathan, I still have serious reservations about a bailout (as I did for the banks), and I had heard much of this anecdotally, but good to have it all in one place.

- DBH

November 21, 2008 at 3:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"The first foreign-owned plants didn't start up here until the 1980s." Then you continue: "Compare that to a company like General Motors, which has been around for more than a century and which supports literally hundreds of thousands of former workers and spouses." Assuming that the average life span for an automotive production worker is 80 and that the average age of retirement is 60 we can conclude that legacy costs cover former employees for twenty years; that places us in 1988. What does it matter if GM has been building cars for well over a century? Most of the former workers are dead. Also, if the transplants make $25/hr and the big-3 make $28/hr the conservative $3/hr difference adds up: $3/hr * 8hr/day * 250business-days/year * 74,000 GM employees (which is more than twice as large as Toyota) = $4.4Million (and that's a very conservative figure) before adding in legacy costs. No wonder it costs $1500 more to build a Chevy car.

- Drew

November 21, 2008 at 4:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jon, thanks for starting this discussion. You are correct that the $ 70/hour figure is misleading, but you are missing a few things. First, there is a reason that the Auto Companies pay so much, hourly pay sucks. While an Autoworker makes $ 70 an hour when he works, they almost never make a full year at that wage. Typcially they get a month or two off a year. While their direct wage is closer to $ 25/hour, it is income protection that pays them when the factory is shut down. Kind of like a teacher who defers some pay to the summer to get a regular pay check year round. The next point is the insane costs of Health & Pension Benefits. Everyone beleives that you set aside a little money for retirment and 40 years later the company has your retirement checks. Truth is that employer defined benefits are expensive to manage, especially in a down market. Who makes up the shortfalls? The Company. Take the accounting rules for health care with 8-10% increases every year and the required funds grow exponentially. Government requirements on minimum funding makes it even more difficult. Lastly there are work rules and general welfare. Auto work is a drudgery. It is really hard to get to work every day, and hard not to get injured in repetitve motions and heavy lifting. As a consequence absences and other unscheuduled time-off requires back-up workers who need to be paid. What's interesting is that the journalists are so removed from Hourly Pay that they can't identify with normal workers. You don't forget a short paycheck and a trip to the unemployment office. You don't forget a day off for absences and a light paycheck. But today's college boys & girls have never been through this. If Toyota provided an honest accounting of their hourly rates to their texas truck plant employees, those workers were paid for not working for 3 months. This would take their hourly rate up by 33% for standard accounting procedures. But Toyota won't own up to this, they will claim their people were working while the factory was shut down and this was normal business. Normal until GM is gone. There is a reason they pay $ 70 /hour, it so the workers come back after a month or two off.

- CRS9TNR

November 21, 2008 at 8:58pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When it comes to a bail-out however there is something a little problematic in expecting those who have lost a significant amount of their retirement and who pay out the nose for or do not have health insurance contribute to the retirement funds and health insurance of others. There has to be some way to mitigate that, making the workers suffer some as others who are suffering as much and more save their jobs. The other problem is the crappy over priced cars.

- olivia

November 22, 2008 at 2:35am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It doesn't matter who is getting the money -- a new employee or an old employee -- the bottom line is that the Big Three ARE burning cash on labor at a rate of $70 per hour. These types of calculations are routinely done in Managerial Accounting and are not a political trick against unions as you make them out to be. Future benefits may have been moved to an outside trust, but this will only have an affect once the current crop of retirees dies. Until then, it's still $70 per hour. Bailing out failed institutions sets a bad precedent. You work hard and do right, good. You do wrong and fail, no problem - here's money to keep you going. This is a disturbing trend in our society. People can't fail anymore. Students are no longer allowed to get Fs in courses and every player gets a trophy. Everyone must be winner nowadays, it seems. But the world doesn't work this way. We've forgotten that it's when we fail that we learn our finest lessons, and that failure is a prerequisite for success. The Big Three must go bankrupt. They'll be rebuilt bigger and better than anyone can now dream of.

- Accountant

November 22, 2008 at 2:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I write as someone who was a young lawyer representing a half billion of foreign debt during the Chrysler bailout. Ringside seat. I also wrote the plan for what turned out to be a successful Chap 11 reorganization in the trucking industry. The disconnect here is the idea that the US can bailout Detroit. It cannot. There is no plausible amount of money that the US can give the auto companies that will enable them to avoid Chap 11. They will simply have lost a bunch of taxpayer money before they go under. The only chance for Detroit is to file Chap 11 sooner rather than later, shuck off existing liabilities, and downsize/mothball aggressively. To that end, the US should be willing to provide DiP financing. As well, we constantly lose track of the difference between bailing out the business and bailing out the existing claimholders, creditors and shareholders. We have good reason to rescue the former and no reason to rescue the latter. But the beggar want us to be confused so that their investment will be made good. Not our problem. What the US should do is announce that the automobile industry will definitively not be liquidated BUT that no public money is going to end up being used either to pay existing claimants or legacy claims and then let Detroit decide whether to file.

- roidubouloi

November 22, 2008 at 7:32am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

bravo.....................well put

- sue

November 22, 2008 at 9:38am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Whether or not you believe unions are valuable or detrimental to business, the fact is workers are always on the losing end of the bargaining table. I do not understand why it is so wrong for workers, teachers, policeman, etc. to be paid fairly for their services. Pay them well and we may end up with a smarter, more dedicated work force. Instead, articles such as this make it sound as though auto workers don't deserve to be paid well. You are right that 60k a year is a decent salary for skilled labor, but why is there no mention of the "decent" salary of the CEO? Why is not an issue that two of the three CEO's of the big 3 are paid $17 million and $21 million per year? Anyone ever consider that maybe, just maybe this unbelievable sum has something to do with the failure of their companies? And, don't give me that tired old yarn about, "well, it's only paper money". Because it still has to be paid, doesn't it? I also don't understand why the media can't see past it's own incompetence long enough to be objective about such things as a big three auto manufacturer "giving up" two of it's five private corporate jets. This hollow and completely irrelevant "gesture" says nothing ... But, when two of the three big 3 CEO's have the self-important audacity to tell congress (when asked whether they would give up their salaries for $1 compensation as a down payment on a bailout) are "happy where they are at" ... Everyone should be screaming for their heads.

- Paul

November 22, 2008 at 10:54am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is insane. Of course you must add up the total cost of labor and average that by the number of employees that work for the company in order to price out the cost of the widget, in this case a car. Follow along if you can; First there is the cash compensation: straight-time pay, cost of living allowance (COLA), night-shift premiums, overtime premiums, holiday and vacation pay. Then you add the benefit and government required programs: group-life insurance, disability benefits, and supplemental unemployment benefits (SUB), job security (JOBS), pensions, unemployment compensation, social security taxes, and hospital, surgical, prescription drug, dental, and vision Care Benefits. See? Do you think Ford and GM price their cars based on the actual labor costs of the specific workers who built each car in question? That would work well, on one car lot a new Ford Explorer would cost $30,000 and the same car, same features, across town would cost someone $50,000.

- politcs

November 22, 2008 at 10:57am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Mr Cohn starts out to debunk the myth of $70/hr autoworker. And then after reading to the last paragraph, I'm left with the conclusion that, indeed, personnel costs per autoworker hour is $70. The initial setup of autoworkers making $70/hr is the usual dodge of a strawman argument. If GM currently incurs additional costs for retired workers, those costs must be presented as current personnel costs. Another way to view this would be that prior years' personnel costs, while now-retired workers were then active workers, were understated. In order to determine the true historical personnel costs, the current year's additional costs for retired workers must be reflected as current year personnel costs. It's really not complicated, unless you want to confuse the issue.

- ejjr

November 22, 2008 at 11:05am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Here's my problem with that number: I'm college educated, and I don't make anything close to that, nor do most of my friends. I can't imagine any industry would be competitive if they were paying those kind of costs on top of salary and benefits. It's clear that the American auto industry is being taken to the cleaners by the UAW, who is going to have to give something up, either for newer workers or for older ones. Something has to give somewhere.

- Monkey Business

November 22, 2008 at 12:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

In theory you're absolutely correct. In practice the fund managing UAW retiree benefits (the VEBA) is under-funded. It will almost certainly run out of money before most UAW members see a dime in benefits. So people demanding the UAW throw it's retirees under the bus are a little behind the times. The union already has. It had no choice -- the NLRB ruled unions can only strike over issues relating to current employees, and strikes are the coercive weapon a union has.

- Nick Benjamin

November 22, 2008 at 12:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

They still make a lot more than teachers! They are either way over paid for a non-professional position or teachers are WAY underpaid!!!!

- justhinking

November 22, 2008 at 1:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yeah I know that I'm young, but I still see that a bailout from the government to an industry that is failing miserably is like putting a quarter in a candy machine that is all nice and pretty and doesn't offer up the candy when you turn the knob. I WANT to see the auto industry succeed, with newer more efficient cars, that is. I dont want to hear stupid complaints about a company that can't afford to pay their people and wah wah , "we need help" when they are still making cars that are hurting the environment! If they had any sensible freaking inventors, analysts, etc.. earlier in the ball game maybe they could have realized, hmm, you know gas is a non renewable resource the way that we're making it, and hmm, ya know maybe, just maybe we should think about changing our cars to some other alternative for the future. But just now are they thinking about putting that stuff out there? Makes me sick, and I know I don't have all the numbers and the facts of the 'big three' but I see what I see as a consumer and they ain't moving forward fast enough, no wonder they are losing to foreign cars!! ya think?!

- Practical Environmentalist

November 22, 2008 at 2:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I am a 30 year Ford Motor Co retiree.I believe after giving the auto maker thirty years of my life entitles me to a secure financial future.When Ford closed the Atlanta plant and the five other plants that closed, they also cut benefits and salaries about half.They turned over the health benefits to the Union.I think the working men and women have give up enough. Now it is time for the big executives to cut their pay, health benefits,and corprate jets.I for one say you cann't beat a good true AMERICAN Ford car or truck.I think we need to keep the AMERICAN car companies alive.When they are gone the UNITED STATES will be like a foreign country.WE are slowly selling out to these foreign countries.It is time to put AMERICAN jobs back in AMERICA,and put AMERICANS back to work.

- Gary Mealor

November 22, 2008 at 2:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If workers don't really make such an excessive amount, then they shouldn't be worried about a Chapter 11 restructuring. We all know that the auto workers are grossly overpaid including their ridiculous benefit packages. These companies were horribly managed and sucked dry by greedy union workers, they deserve whatever they get.

- Bob

November 22, 2008 at 2:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

A good article and a good comment. Lest people forget, if we completely eliminate these fairly well paying manufacturing jobs, we will also eliminate alot of consumer buying power. Good paying jobs are in everyone's best interest. Folks employed in menial jobs paying less than $15.00 an hour don't make good consumers. Unfortunately this seems to be the largest job growth category in our country. So, when we claim to be creating jobs in this country we need to ask what kind of jobs?

- D Charles

November 22, 2008 at 3:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Personally, I agree that re-organization with government assistance is the solution. That way government funds can be overseen and spent only under specific conditions. Some of these conditions need to be set forth as such: 1. disband the union, since there is currently a surplus of product, fire all the workers right now. Those who sincerely want a job can have one with a wage that is based on the workers skill set, not on the union's riduculously overpaid contracts. Even if it took them 3 months to re-hire and recruit new talent to replace the disgruntled union workers who were too proud to work for 15-20 dollars/hour. It would save billions in the future. 2. Use goverment funds to fully automate production. The money invested would dramatically cut labor cost. 3. Offer goverment assistance only under the stipulation that all executives would face a salary cap of 1 million/year and no bonuses could be paid unless the company made profit. At that point bonuses could be paid but it would be limited to 2% of the total profits, 1.5% to be paid in bonuses to the lower emplyees and .5 ercent to be sharder amongst the execs. 4. Require that all production facilities must reside in the U.S. until such time as all government supplied funds have been paid in full with interest. If the american taxpayer is going to save this industry, then only the american taxpayer should have a right to work within it. If so much as a single job is outsourced beyond U.S. borders then the company becomes property of the government and is to be auctioned to the highest bidder.The executives responsible for authorizing the outsourcing are to be charged with treason and prosecuted appropriately. The American automobile industry is part of our heritage and our culture and is worth saving however, they like most corporations are only concerned with lining their own pockets. I myself am tired of being screwed over by the companies and would insist that any loan of my tax dollars will come at a stiff price and iron fist management.

- James

November 22, 2008 at 3:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is just one facet of the cost is for the Big 3. For example, GM has a much larger number of platforms to support than Toyota or Honda. Thus higher R&D cost to maintain and improve platforms. GM has far too many dealers which entails huge inventory costs including parts. It also means lower sales channel efficiency as each dealer sells far fewer units. I would also suspect that GM's executive costs are much higher than both Japanese and German auto companies. These are big structural issues that unless addressed will all contribute to their ultimate demise.

- Bill B

November 22, 2008 at 3:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The problem i see is that many people who would buy cars make between ten and twenty dollars an hour and should have some sort of union also. workers over the last thirty years and especially the last eight years have seen a drop in their purchashing power while the top elite have gone from muti-millionaires to billionaires-the top 400 in wealth have as much money as half of our entire work force-think about that and you see why workers want colective bargaining and should not take their wages for granted but bargin for wages the way executives bargin for their wages!

- Keith Hooper

November 22, 2008 at 3:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Shifting retirees to the tax payers good?? I don't think so. These people spent30+ years making money for the big 3 ( GM had billions of $$ as of last year) and things looked good for the future with the restructured contract. The the banking industry dropped the ball and ther tax payer had to bail them out. So give 700 bil to the richest of the rich but let the last major american manufacturing industry of any kind in the US dissaper. 3+ million jobs lost when it disappears = depression. And will you buy a car from a company in bankrupcy. The taxpayers need to buy voting shres in the big 3 for uor bailout $$. And then some good decisions may get made.

- Detroit Transplant

November 22, 2008 at 3:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

true i only make 10 a hours and im tyring to keep warm if my heat gose out ill be in the cold ..ide love a rase but i bet you can guess i work for one of the tight wad we use to get a christmas bonus but no more ..i was counting on the bonus to replace my gass pack with a new one ...bobby28091at yahoo

- bob ferguson

November 22, 2008 at 4:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How would you feel if you worked at a company that promised healthcare and pension at retirement and then did'nt deliver? I spent the better part of my working life at General Motors. I stayed there because of these benifits. Now most of you out there want to kick me to the curb with nothing.

- David Wilmot

November 22, 2008 at 4:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Not so fast. Let's take your figure of $10. per hour for benefits. If we add that to the $60k per year salary, that brings the compensation package above $80k per year. It's still not princely, but it stacks up pretty well against the rest of us. And what about the remainder of that $42. per hour the auto companies spend for retiree benefits? It means that an auto worker can look forward to retirement benefits that most workers don't get. My wife and I both work - I am self employed. Our only retirement plan is what we can save during our working years. Our health insurance is tied to my wife's job. When she retires, it is gone. Stated differently, when we retire we get nothing. It would be very nice to know that all the time we have been working, someone were putting away $32. per hour for us. Unsaid in the article are the ways in which the highly unionized workforce hampers flexibility. The classic example of this being that a regular worker can't change a lightbulb but has to call an electrician to do it. That is why non-union companies are willing to pay wages and benefits that are comparable or even higher than those paid in union shops. The onerous union work rules are more destructive to profitability than higher wages or benefits. All of that being said, I think brain-dead management has a lot more to do with killing the auto industry. But labor played a big part, too.

-

November 22, 2008 at 4:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

mr.sensible centrist must certainly be a recipient of what they once called old money or more commonly known as family money, to be talking out of his ass this way

- preston goodbody

November 22, 2008 at 4:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Auto companies are saving everything 70 dollars is crazy i worked for almost 20 years i never seen 70 workers now are paying more for their insurence and working less hours new hire come in at 10 dollars and parts made over seas plants being built over seas and non-uion plants exsist here in the USA thats is crazy uion and company are the same ford and uaw bullshit the uion should be a lone force fighting for wages and rights!!!!!!

- freddie

November 22, 2008 at 4:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

mr. sensible centrist. and thanksgiving turkey, have one thing in common: there both stuffed full of shit! my guess is you have never been in a factory in your life, and i'll bet your a college grad that was taught by brainwashed foreign professor's at a high class college, with the tuition paid by good old dad. i'll even bet you joined an ivy league fraternity as well. i'll even bet you could run this country yourself, maybe even on $42 an hour.

- charles spencer sr. uaw retiree

November 22, 2008 at 5:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The transplants DO NOT have the liability PERIOD! To the unsensible! centrist. The workers in ALL the negotiations over ALL these years voted for and expected what was promised. To give me ...well that was then and this is now is abhorrent. "The unions can give up on keeping those retirees happy"?? You're logic..oh sorry the LACK thereof is astounding. Your parachute award should go to the great folks at AIG whom we BAILED!!

- jsbenincasa

November 22, 2008 at 5:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

My dad only makes $30/hr & he has worked there 35 years. It's funny how they can bail out the white collar morons but not the blue collar ones. Funny & sad.

- xyz

November 22, 2008 at 6:18pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Mr Cohn, I njust wanted to thank you for an even handed and enlightening article. I'm on the far right on this issue, being a white collar worker outside the industry who has never had the type of benefits these people get. Two other pressing issues not addressed here are "work rules" that stifle innovation, and the "jobs bank" that keeps 15,000 idled GM autoworkers on full pay for up to two years, costing the company $6 million a week. I believe the work rules issue is actually a bigger headache for manufacturers than wages. In fact I think work rules and the inability to fire poor workers are the primary reason most of the American public hate unions in all industries. You can only get hired if you have friends there, and once in, you'd have to kill someone to get fired, unless of course you're a member of the dockworkers union, last year they objected to the barring of felony murderers from US ports and won against Homeland Security.

- Dave C

November 22, 2008 at 6:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

How come it was OK to bail out a bunch of New York bankers and insurance bozos, but manufacturing workers in the midwest are told to go to hell? How big would GM or Ford have to be to be "too big to fail?"

- Henry Ford

November 22, 2008 at 6:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

ok thats nice to hear. thank goodnes you all still have jobs. there are people who do not have one at all. last was posted 1.5 million, so i blame it on bush and everyone else who alowed compnes to send jobs elsewhere and then give them tax brakes. Any company that moved out of the u.s.a. should be barred. from selling or dealing with united states.

- thomas

November 22, 2008 at 8:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I find it most interesting to see such wage "claims" to be reported as the "Normal"... Maybe they are in certain places. I have worked all my life to achieve "ASE Master Level" and BMW level 4 status that brings not much(!) in Oregon. If you include all the normal costs associated with the employement of your employes I'm sure the cost factor goes up. Not that they will actually show/tell us those actual figures! I barely make a living at a job that requires several thousand dollars worth of "personal" hand tools just to get an entry level job... never mind the years of schooling/experience. If the powers that be were truly concerned with the health/welfare of the masses... they would reqiure automotive technicians to be at least "certified" to work on your BRAKES, ENGINES, etc. for you and your fellow commuters to have reasonably safe vehicles to drive!!! But they do not seem to want to pay for safety or have to tell anyone else that they have to pay for it either! In the meantiime, just be satisfied that the minuim wage guy at the fast oil change is going to be able to know enough about the HIGH TECH vehicle that you are driving to save your life by telling you what IS GOING TO GO WRONG BEFORE TI HAPPENS!!!!!!!

- Rand

November 22, 2008 at 8:40pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I still have yet to see anything about all the money given to special interest groups that many of us don't support. Like Planned Parenthood and the alternative lifestyle agenda. Many people boycotted these businesses because of thier outrageous donations to these organizations. And they're losing money because of that. So why should I have to bail them out when I made the decision to boycott myself. This unnerves me when they should be learning from their mistakes. If they had the money the donated they wouldn't be as bad off and many people who boycotted them would have been buying from them. I agree with Sensible... REORGANIZE... get your obligations in order. Quit the rediculous spending that all Americans have had to cut back on. Rethink your donations to organizations not respected by the majority of your consumers. Focus on fuel-efficient and hybrid cars. The buyers will reappear once they get their act together.

- outraged

November 22, 2008 at 8:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

let the big 3 go under an lets start from scratch hey the big 3 didnt mind putting tucker under back in the days now let tucker have his turn an let them pay the price cause as i see it we pay enough in taxes now let say its time to cut are loses an let them sink besides their not the only car maker around it dont matter what car are truck i drive

-

November 22, 2008 at 8:51pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Finally someone who is getting the truth out. The way the media has been depicting assembly line workers has made be very upset. My father worked for GM for 39 years and retired two years ago. He made $22 an hour when he left. Far from the $70 an hour that the media is telling everyone. I wish my father made $70 an hour then he could have paid for my sister and I to go to college. Instead we paid our own way. I also would like to see some of those reporters/analysts stand for 8 hours a day with two 15 minute breaks and a half hour for lunch. They would not survive.

- Tammy B.

November 22, 2008 at 8:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

FYI Ford and GM retiree salary workers over the age of 65 will lose their health benefits as of January 2009. They will have to use Medicare.

- Tammy B

November 22, 2008 at 9:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is a great article in respects to showing how overinflated either the press, or the big three themselves, have stated that their employees wages are. I am confused as to why the big three have gotten themselves in this financial bind all of a sudden. I saw on tv that these excutives flew on private planes to capitol hill to ask for handouts. Perhaps the big three automakers should cut back on their executive pay and bonuses before asking for handouts. Well, the big three could do away with all the costly pensions. There are several local industries here that have either cut all pension plans, or drastically cut back on what they pay for the health and pension benefits for local retirees. I'm not saying that it's right to do this, just that it is done. What they did here was sell the company, and or change the names of them, and that was a way for the companies to get out from under abiding by the old binding contracts they had with retirees.

- blue collar worker from IL

November 22, 2008 at 9:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

if industry suddenly stopped paying insurance co's for each employee,,and,, instead,pay doctors,clinics and hospitals,for an individuals medical needs,,when they need it,,seems to me a wise move,,why pay insurance for those in no need for medical treatment,,oh I see,,some day the might,,AND IF YOU HADN'T PAID THE INSURANCE CO..YOU COULD PAY THE DR. BILL

- Creighdon

November 22, 2008 at 10:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If the big 3 produced the automobile that their men are able to produce, ie: ballanced and blueprinted engines that last 300 k miles they would not be in the situation that the production of second class merchandise has put them. When the unions prohibit the loading of box cars that usually take three hours, from being done in 8 hours because they are 10 minutes late, they have generated their own problems and need to live with them.

- Robert Hayden

November 22, 2008 at 10:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I dont see why the Taxpayers should bail out any business, you say government but its Taxes and inflation that pay for it.What is the incentive for a business to make a profit when if they fail Uncle Sam will pay his bills ? What about the millions of small business owners whos companies fail ? Bail them out also ? .Hell bail me out Ive lost nearly 80% of my IRA in less than a year. Its a known fact that Big Business pay proportionately less Tax than the average Joe. Look at PGE in Oregon before Enron bought them they paid 10 dollars income tax in the 90s on millions of dollars of revenue. So far 9 banks got bailed out , who was bank #10 that got the Finger and why ? What about the first bailout of AIG when they threw a half a million dollar soiree and gave all of us the finger ,then they got more ???Its all catty wampus right now. Did the banks actually lose money ? I thought home loans were insured by Fany and Freddy in case of default ? I and many others like me lost our IRAs if we had REITS which had the best track record of any investment available at least in my Vanguard account. This whole ball game was planned long ago to happen like it is happening and who is suffering from this so called crisis ?This is a war on the average American. Thank God I am not 65 I would have nothing to live on now. Hopefully it will come back in the next 10 years so maybe I can at least afford a Big Mac when I retire. Dont expect help for Average Joe with the people B. Hussein Obama has picked to run the Finances they are the ones who engineered this mess. Lets get to the real questions and that is why did Building 7 at WTC fall down ?Why are we in Iraq protecting Halliburton interests when most all of the alleged Hijackers were Saudis ? Why is Cheney believed when he says he stepped down from Halliburton ? Why did they move to Dubai ?Was it to avoid taxes ? Why was Halliburton allowed to collect tax money for serving military lunches they didnt serve to anyone and for that matter why are they serving lunches to the Army anyway ?What happened to all the Mess Seargents ? Why can I buy a pair of Designer bifocal prescription glasses in China for 80 bucks when the Bargain frame ones in the States cost me 500 ? Half of which is paid by my insurance ??And the one that actually iritates me most is why are our American Colleges filled with Illiterate Athletes who go to school for free while the intelligent students pay there own way for the most part. And last but not last how did America sit back and let Department of Homeland Security get involved in so many programs that have nothing to do with stopping terrorists ? Remember the grandfather from Oregon in May 2007 that got a fine of 55,300 bucks without due process from DOHS for bringing back some cheap replica watches that cost him 14 bucks overseas ? Who are the real terrorists in America today ? Obviously its not Bin Laden and his cronies . Was Sadaam an Al Queda ? Why has America forgotten that Bin was a CIA operative who delivered guns and money from the USA to defeat Russia in the Afghan- Russian war that was fought over where an oil pipeline was to be layed to benefit Saudis and the Big Oil companies ? America has gone to Hell in a handbasket and this is only the beginning.

- Mike Dillon

November 22, 2008 at 10:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

No one mentions what the union dues cost each worker. They don't pay a fixed amount but pay a percentage so that continues to rise. It appears the union has control of retirement funds so that insures the union is playing fast and loose with that money. I am a retired union worker(Teamsters) and I wouldn't trust those people as far as I could throw them.

- Dave Smith

November 22, 2008 at 10:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I dont see why the Taxpayers should bail out any business, you say government but its Taxes and inflation that pay for it.What is the incentive for a business to make a profit when if they fail Uncle Sam will pay his bills ? What about the millions of small business owners whos companies fail ? Bail them out also ? .Hell bail me out Ive lost nearly 80% of my IRA in less than a year. Its a known fact that Big Business pay proportionately less Tax than the average Joe. Look at PGE in Oregon before Enron bought them they paid 10 dollars income tax in the 90s on millions of dollars of revenue. So far 9 banks got bailed out , who was bank #10 that got the Finger and why ? What about the first bailout of AIG when they threw a half a million dollar soiree and gave all of us the finger ,then they got more ???Its all catty wampus right now. Did the banks actually lose money ? I thought home loans were insured by Fany and Freddy in case of default ? I and many others like me lost our IRAs if we had REITS which had the best track record of any investment available at least in my Vanguard account. This whole ball game was planned long ago to happen like it is happening and who is suffering from this so called crisis ?This is a war on the average American. Thank God I am not 65 I would have nothing to live on now. Hopefully it will come back in the next 10 years so maybe I can at least afford a Big Mac when I retire. Dont expect help for Average Joe with the people B. Hussein Obama has picked to run the Finances they are the ones who engineered this mess. Lets get to the real questions and that is why did Building 7 at WTC fall down ?Why are we in Iraq protecting Halliburton interests when most all of the alleged Hijackers were Saudis ? Why is Cheney believed when he says he stepped down from Halliburton ? Why did they move to Dubai ?Was it to avoid taxes ? Why was Halliburton allowed to collect tax money for serving military lunches they didnt serve to anyone and for that matter why are they serving lunches to the Army anyway ?What happened to all the Mess Seargents ? Why can I buy a pair of Designer bifocal prescription glasses in China for 80 bucks when the Bargain frame ones in the States cost me 500 ? Half of which is paid by my insurance ??And the one that actually iritates me most is why are our American Colleges filled with Illiterate Athletes who go to school for free while the intelligent students pay there own way for the most part. And last but not last how did America sit back and let Department of Homeland Security get involved in so many programs that have nothing to do with stopping terrorists ? Remember the grandfather from Oregon in May 2007 that got a fine of 55,300 bucks without due process from DOHS for bringing back some cheap replica watches that cost him 14 bucks overseas ? Who are the real terrorists in America today ? Obviously its not Bin Laden and his cronies . Was Sadaam an Al Queda ? Why has America forgotten that Bin was a CIA operative who delivered guns and money from the USA to defeat Russia in the Afghan- Russian war that was fought over where an oil pipeline was to be layed to benefit Saudis and the Big Oil companies ? America has gone to Hell in a handbasket and this is only the beginning.

- Mike Dillon

November 22, 2008 at 11:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Since when did American car buyers want to buy tiny, unsafe, ugly, Foreign plug in cars? GM is, unlike the Japanese car makers, creating transformative vehicles with ethanol, propane, electric hybrid and hydrogen technology intead of just electric, and cutting waste, weight, and pollution while increasing gas milage in all of their vehicles. Part of the current problem is the consumer. There is somehow something considered wrong with buying an American car if you are under 40. The Full Size Buick sedan is rated as high in quality as a Lexus (at thousands less), and is MORE fuel efficient than a comparable Lexas,Toyota Avalon or Camry, but people don't know or care. They have been lead to believe the Japanese cars are better and until that mindset changes, the American car companies are in big trouble. BUY AMERICAN!!

- Barbara

November 22, 2008 at 11:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

As a UAW worker l am retired now l did not make &70.00 a hour please get the facts straight. Being a single mother raiseing two children l work hard.We had to take alots off of mangement.But l made it two operations on my hands car accident broken arm six pens in my ankle over loaded jobs l love GM an my union.I don't see why they can't bail GM out so we can get the economic back together because if they then what about the retire do you all care? I am praying for this country.

- Big moma

November 22, 2008 at 11:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

With overhead, make that $95/hr.

- mr.ed

November 23, 2008 at 10:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The cost of the American health care system is clearly affecting the competitiveness of the big three. I wonder about the economic impact of socialized medicine, a much more equitable way to spend the 'bail-out' money than funding corporate interest, as the US spends more per person on health care than any other nation.

- Concerned Canadian

November 23, 2008 at 10:15am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This article very conveniently if not deliberately misses the point. Each hour of UAW of labor is costing them $70. To ignore the money being spent on retirees is to ignore are very real cost of labor. Nice job. Odds are most people reading this article won't absorb anything beyond the headline.

- Mike

November 23, 2008 at 10:27am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Surely you did better research, Mr. Cohn, than simply to regurgitate Center for Auto Research (CAR)'s poorly disguised PR missive? Did it perhaps occur to you that CAR was a pro-Detroit? And you had the gall to admit that was your source! Amazing! This is the equivalent of CAR saying, "yes, but it's a $25Billion LOAN, not a bail-out." The point is that Detroit is saddled with absurd amounts of union-drive concessions, some in the form of benefits, to retired and active employees/ relatives/friends/family/neighbors, regardless of how one parses it. The trust fund that you wrote about requires SIGNIFICANT contributions from GM, ~$47Billion (number seems to keep changing)--much to be funded by 2011. Take a look at free cash flow, stock, cash, access to capital from GM and explain how this is going to happen. (One wonders where all this money is going that they are asking for. How could $25B tie them over to 2011?) All these obligations makes the Detroit 3 less competitive. Further, just because you have the UAW concessions to a trust fund doesn't change the fact that the unios are still there, still enforcing strange and restrictive labor rules. Please let's see some better, more insightful, sceptical thinking next time. It's writing like this that makes us liberals just as easy a target as the right.

- Jimmy Frend

November 23, 2008 at 10:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Look at the compensation of the big three CEO's instead of what the American worker makes, nuff said!

- Boldrdash

November 23, 2008 at 11:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Not sure I get your point - the company still has to pay $70 an hour. So current employees get the same wages...good for them - point is their future benefits are greater. It's only a timing issue, but auto manufacturers still OWE $70/hr. Why don't you compare current wages AND future benefits (retirement, pension etc)of the unionized vs non-unionized? Oh, maybe that's why the US auto manufacturers aren't competitive from a margins perspective!

- Rimsky

November 23, 2008 at 11:48am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The point of the redistribution of retiree health fund was for the automaker not having to fund all of it. I don't have the exact figure but I believe say GM only has to fund 30 billion out of the estimated 50 billion needed for retiree health care. While it may be considered an "accounting maneuver" it will in the end save the corporation 20 billion dollars. The supposed benefit for the UAW is they now have direct control of members retiree health care and do not have to worry about what the corporation will do in the future.The problem now of course is can GM even fund their portion at the moment. It's been said it will take to 2011 to receive any benefit from the deal. Obviously they may not make it that far.

- Dave V.

November 23, 2008 at 12:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Do the homework and discover that in 2007, GM did create a trust for retiree benefits, and it is funded. It takes effect in 2010. This is the part of the story about restructuring that lazy media and Washington politics didn't get last week. Resturucturing has gone on. The issue is hand is that 30% of the US sales have gone away, because customers have lost access to credit for car purchases or leases due to the banking system collapse. That loss of cash revenue has created a cash flow crisis in this industry. All car companies are hurting big time. The US compaies are most exposed to loss of US sales. This is the issue.

- Fact Check

November 23, 2008 at 1:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Thank-you for printing the non-spinned version of our hard-working auto-workers. This is simply anti-union talk. If Reagan & Company had not allowed corporations to dip into those so-called pension plans to begin with, you would not have this problem today. People accepted a lower wages in return for being taken care of in their golden years. But like Bethlehem Steel, people who were entitled and promised $3,500/month pensions were forced to accept $1,600/month ones from the Federal Government (i.e. you and me the taxpayer). Republicans and pro-big-business people are masters at spinning information (usually by omitting information to distort the true picture). Seems they are doing just that here. Good piece. Thank-you for finally pointing this out (I was getting tired of hearing the $70+ number).

- Marcia

November 23, 2008 at 2:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If the auto companies are in such good shape, as Mr. Cohn so persistently maintains, why do they 1) need a $25 billion loan package to get their act together and 2) why isn't that package, not available to their competitors, sufficient to satisfy their customers and creditors? In fact, American automakers are caught in a deadly trap. Detroit makes SUVs because they can't make enough profit off small cars to cover the massive pension and health care benefits they owe to retired UAW members. "Blue-collar" Democrats won't support a bailout that would reduce UAW retirement benefits. Environmental Democrats won't support a bailout that won't force the Big Three to stop making SUVs and start making the "smart" 50 mpg cars of the environmentalists' dreams. The simple fact, which Mr. Cohn, and many other liberals, won't admit, is that GM, Ford, and Chrysler need to go through Chapter 11. Any government aid package should enable Chapter 11, not avoid it.

- Alan Vanneman

November 23, 2008 at 10:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The health care trust was started by the company but will be administered by the UAW, and if the trust is not sufficient to cover medical expenses, the UAW will have to pump additional money into the trust or reduce benefits. So it is not an accounting maneuver, it is providing a one time payment and letting the UAW deal with health care costs in the future.

- Ginger

November 24, 2008 at 7:17am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I remember telling my dad when I was 11 years old that the UAW contracts wouldn't work back in the late 70's early 80's. I was 11 and I saw this. It was real easy to figure out that the promises would raise the price of a product to a point it wouldn't sell. That day has arrived. The generation that began the age of selfishness began the impending doom of the american auto industry and banking and others. I learned my lessons from my grandfather in a boat hours and hours summer after summer fishin. That was the greatest generation we have seen thus far. Will it be generation x that fixes things or will it be our kids who do it. One thing is certain. President Obama knows the lessons of the greatest generation. I for one hope beyond hope he's the man we think he is and works to bring an age back when people had common sense and actual respect and love for their fellow man. I love my parents. But they sure didn't practice what they preach. And that generation has brought us to where we are now. How many elections have we heard that we shouldn't leave this mess to our kids. But out of your own selfishness that's exactly what you did. I'll probably spend the rest of my life fxing this mess. Maybe my son, your grandson, will have enough time to enjoy life after he finishes fixing what I didn't have enough time to finish. Sorry if My writing skills are lacking. Hopefully I got my point across. thanks for the time.

- Rick Freezy

November 24, 2008 at 10:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't doubt your math, however I know for a fact that there is a guy that works at the gm plant in Dayton, Ohio who makes 70 bucks and hour to due one job four times a day. Also, the reason that the foreign companies can pay hire wages is that only half of their work force is actually employeed by them. I have a friend who used to work for Toyota, only he was a contract employee. If Toyota needed to make cuts they cut the contract employees, not regular Toyota employees. This is where the foreign companies get off better than the big three. The big three due to Union issues cannot sub-contract employment.

- Jay Spencer

November 24, 2008 at 11:17am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

In re: to Eric above. Sorry-There are no $45.00 base rates at any UAW plant. Maximum base rate for a Skilled Electrician is about $33.00 Night shift premium is 5% (10% for midnights) Saturday pay is indeed 1.5x and Sunday & Holidays are 2x. However, you cannot double dip-if a holiday falls on a Sunday (personally, I've never run across this in 20yrs) you would get the 2x and paid 8hrs. for the holiday, not double triple time. Not sure exactly why your Dad would lie to you, but these are the facts.

- pfit

November 24, 2008 at 12:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The point of this guys article is that their is alot of anger towards GM workers because people heard they made $70 an hour. That isn't true. The costs to the company might be that but that worker is going home on avg with $28/h. That's a pretty huge difference.

- Shawn

November 24, 2008 at 5:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You forgot to mention they're also including the employer's share of FICA taxes in the number, what the NYT described as what "the average worker was paid".

- buermann

November 24, 2008 at 8:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Responding to post 5 by Eric. Dude, you just don't know what you are talking about. You better have another talk with your Dad. I am skilled trades at GM and my base pay is $33 if your dad was running a tool room he was not making $45. Second shift premium is 5% NOT 50% as you stated. Saturday is time and 1/2 and Sunday is double but that is no different for any factory job. Holidays are triple but not triple PLUS double if they fall on a Sunday as you stated. Just triple PERIOD. Get your facts strait. To top it off we don't work holidays any more and haven't in the past 5 years, since the 2003 contract. In the past 2 years Sunday work is very rare and not many Saturdays either. You need to have another talk with your dad because if he told you what you posted he lied to you.

- missileman

November 25, 2008 at 7:20am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I worked for GM for 30 years. NOBODY had a wage rate of 45 an hour. The highest paid employee was a tool and die maker and he made just a few cents more than an electrician, which I was. That rate was 30.50 an hour when I retired in 2007. It was a good living, but not always. When I first started things were tough, and the wages weren't all that good. We had some rough times raising 3 kids on the one income. The only people I knew who had it good were the couples who both worked there, and worked as much overtime as they could. Up until about a decade ago, the plant I worked in had the highest per capita rate of cancer for a given population (15,000 at the high point in 1978) of any municipality or county in the midwest. There is a very distorted image of the autoworker being promulgated in the media today. If anyone thinks the retirees have it so good, come on over to my 2-bdrm, 50 yr old house on a dirt road in Belleville, MI, and take a look at my lifestyle, and ask me how it feels to be worried every day whether you'll be pushing a shopping cart around in your so-called golden years.

- Steve

November 26, 2008 at 11:09am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

A couple of things: First, how about relieving companies of all tax/health/retirement costs. Companies shouldn't "pay" those, because a company doesn't actually pay them. Those cost end up embedded in the cost of product passed on to the consumer. By making the employer pay them, it simply makes those costs less visible to everyone. Here is how it should work: A company pays cash to its employees. Period. No tax deductions, 401k, medicare, SS or anything. Just cash. Each employee is then responsible for choosing their own health care, retirement plan, paying their own taxes, etc. That way, everyone knows exactly how much they are "worth" and how much everything truly cost. You don't purchase healthcare and you get sick or hurt, too bad for you. You don't fund a retirement account and can't afford to retire, too bad for you. PERSONAL ACCOUNTABILITY. Second, CEO pay: CEO pay is out of line, and shareholders should be outraged. Unfortunately most shareholders own through a mutual fund, etc, and don't vote. On the other hand, if you personally are not happy with a CEO's pay, buy a controlling interest in the company and boot the board and him. What a company chooses to pay any of its workers should solely be up to the owners of the company. A company is private entity that someone invested time and money to create, therefore they should have all of the say as to how that company is run. If you don't like it, work for a different company. The true value of you as a worker is what another company would be willing to pay you for your skills. If you can not find an equivalent job at another company, then you are probably over paid and you should just shut your mouth and do your work. Oh, and I'm an elitist. Party in high school and not go to college? You should be poor, unless you have changed and found a way to create value. Party in college and get an easy, worthless lib. arts degree? You should be poor. If you own a car and a tv, you are not poor! Basically, it all comes down to whether or not you add value or wealth to the economy. Engineers create things, this add value/wealth. Teachers teach others how to add value. Doctors heal, value. Lawyers, nope. Accountants, can but generally nope. Politicians, nope. Blue-collar workers doing a job that a machine or foreigner could do, nope. High tech. machinist, yep. Value=good. No value=bad. Deal with it.

- Trav

November 26, 2008 at 12:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What planet are you from? How would you like to put thirty years service where you work?Pay into a retirement plan ,and have someone tell you after you retire you cann't have it. you would not like that I bet.hope you are not that dumb.

- Gary Mealor

November 26, 2008 at 12:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I've heard the refrain, "We took lower wages in exchange for better retirement benefits" many times. It's always make me chuckle, because in my blue-collar family, UAW wages were the best available to any unionized worker, certainly better than my dad's URW contracts and uncles' Teamsters contracts provided. The corollary to that refrain is that the alternative was wages higher still, in the past, with lower retirement benefits today. If those UAW wages had been that much higher back then, I wonder if there would have been envy sufficient to erode solidarity. I always thought relying on someone's promise was foolish; the autoworkers who believed the company and union would take care of them at age 55, after working 30 years, for a likely 20 years of retirement (think about that 30:20 ratio for a moment) were starry-eyed brides who believed in "till death parts us" despite the availability of no-fault divorce! Silly, indeed. How much better off today's retirees would be today (and the Big 3 as well) if they HAD taken the cash back then and bought Savings Bonds (this is long before the IRA and 401(k) came along) or tossed it in an FDIC-insured facility. Come hell or high water, the future troubles of the Big 3 wouldn't bother them after they retired. That is as it should be. Of course, that is the modern trend: Defined-contribution retirement plans. Hindsight is 20-20, but that we have largely moved on from defined-benefit plans (which rely on the promises of others) does indicate that the earlier model was unsustainable over periods longer than a generation or two. Two of my employers have gone bankrupt, one in Chapter 7 another in 11. Both times, you can be sure I was damn glad my retirement savings were in MY hands in a 401(k) and an IRA, and not in theirs.

- Christopher Bieda

November 27, 2008 at 10:42pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The difference between the financial bailout and a GM-Ford bailout is that the government is likely to get most or all the financial bailout back. The auto guys will just be back next year, asking for more.

- elwin9

November 28, 2008 at 1:08am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Is it relevant than an older more experienced and higher paid workforce should easily produce a superior product and they don't?

- United States of Victimhood

November 30, 2008 at 4:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Is it relevant that shareholders lost trillions of dollars of equity in the recent past including and labor has lost nothing?

- United States of Victimhood

November 30, 2008 at 4:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Is it relevant that using the author's methodology for cost accounting means current workers are actually paid well over $100/hr? Since the deferred legacy costs of the current labor force will obviously be significantly higher?

- United States of Victimhood

November 30, 2008 at 5:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Picky point. $70 per hour is not almost $150k per year. A typical man year is 1880 hours or less depending on a workers paid holiday & vacation allowance. By that same token $26 per hour isn't anywhere near to $52k a year either.

- nfstern

December 1, 2008 at 12:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Folks have REALLY missed the point here. EVERY other country you want to compare "legacy" costs or retiree benefits aren't in the same boat as we are. EVERY other one of these countries have healthcare provided by the countries they live in. Not only aren't they in the same boat, they're not floating in the same ocean.

- Bopper

December 1, 2008 at 11:25am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I notice that Alabama gets $1.66 from the federal government for every $1.00 it contributes; while Michigan contributes more than it gets back. Yet the senator from Alabama has the gall to tell the auto industry to go screw itself when it asks for help in dealing with the fallout from Bush’s failed rightwing economic polices that the senator from Alabama helped enable. We should take all the money we send to these mooches in states like Alabama that have a long history of getting more than they contribute and send it to Detroit instead. And tell these mooches that they need to restructure their states before they see any extra $. Maybe if their citizens had Unions and made a decent wage they wouldn’t need to mooch. Call Roger Kerson – PR Dir. UAW @ (313) 926-5000 and point out the above and tell the UAW it needs to get on the offensive regarding this issue.

- Kuni

December 1, 2008 at 12:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I read all the comments! My opinion is that the writers need to get thier facts before shooting off thier mouths. A retired Skilled trades employee 1992 My wage hourly $18,85 That was a good wage. When I started working at GM 1945 I Made $0.76 an hour when we finally got pad for christmas day you had to work the day before and day after to get pay. if on saturday or Sunday NO PAY ! Insurance! When it was won in negotiations employee payed half. Insurance companies paid dividends, Congress passed law that dividends had to be devided to employess for thier half. Company said they would pay full cost. Now you figure. Where do you think wages would be in America without Unions. Look in other countries like China, South America ETC. Look before Unions then you will see why thier is unions today.

- Kenneth Reel

December 1, 2008 at 6:02pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't think people understand that there are very few if any fully funded retirement plans, they should be by law but they are not. Most are in the 30% funded bracket, which mean they are carrying a 70% debt which must be applied to every new car produce until the debt is paid. Salary is just one part of the equation. The main reason the "Big Three's" cannot build the cars that American wants is because there is not enough profit in small cars. I believe the SUV's had $8000 profit in each vehicel. The "Big Three" without major chances will never be able to compete against companies with $200-$500 in overhead per car when their overhead is $2000-$3000. Of course the Unions will continue to ask for more every few years. Let them die from their own greed, I'm sure some body will fill the void. I also noticed in reading a lot of response on this web site that the "Bush Bashers" are still at it. It has always been up to the individual in American to take care of himself. Wages are based on experience, education, williness to relocate, and hard work. If people choose to acquire debt beyond what they can pay, and choose to live beyond their means and can't get the type of job that will support this, it their own fault. I am personally totally debt free, have a consiserable saving account, have no college education, did not inherient any money, put two children through college, don't drive a new car and own a home and a farm. No magic involved, just common sense, hard work, and stayed focused on my goals and not those of my neighbors. The common denominator is not various presidents that have and will come and go but you. Think about.....

- TimeforaChange

December 1, 2008 at 7:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Please remember that the retiree's have medicare and social security and are responsible for their only well being. They should have the knowledge to know that almost all retirement plans are not fully funded and there is no law that states that they have to be (thank your congress for another loop hole). Most retirment plans are about 30-40% funded, why I'm not sure. Maybe if people lived within their means they would be better off. They blame CEO, presidents, unions, competion, it goes on and on. Think about it.....

- TimeforaChange

December 1, 2008 at 8:07pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You probably didn't know that the Union requires 20% over manning to cover sick outs and other emergencies and vacations. I would love to see the study that.

- TimeforaChange

December 1, 2008 at 8:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Did you also know that the Unions took over the retirement plan from the corporation. That's like letting the fox watch the chickens. Also did you know that most retirement plans in American are not fully funded, most are about 30%, where is congress when you need them.

- TimeforaChange

December 1, 2008 at 8:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Show me one American car that gets 40 miles per gallon. I am presently working in Germany and drive a 1993 Seat that has for 15 years gotten 39 miles per gallon. Wake up it's not only retirement plans, wages, paying people not to work, medical plans that are far above the norm. The Big 3 have no clue what the public wants any more. If they can't see that $150 dollar a barrel means that the public needs better gas mileage cars, then they should go under. I asure you that whatever fills their void will be better for America.

- TimeforaChange

December 1, 2008 at 8:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Your not the sharpest tool in the shed. You probably don't even know that almost all pension funds are not fully funded, I think that most are in 30-40% range. Take care of yourself and you would have to rely on promises made by, who was it, the corporations or was it the unions. You can't lie to yourself, think about it.....

- TimeforaChange

December 1, 2008 at 8:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Remember what President Regan did to the Air Traffic Controllers. He called their bluff and things are better for it now.......

- TimeforaChange

December 1, 2008 at 8:30pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I just want everyone to remember how President Regan delt with the Air Traffic Controllers threats. It would be nice to mention at this point to check their retirement plan, there is no law that makes American corporations fund retirement plans 100%. I believe that most are funded at the 30-40% level, why I haven't a clue. I would suggest to everyone a couple of basic rules for these difficult economical times. These are simple rules, live within your means to generate income (if you don't have an education you better save some money), stay out of debt if possible and if not pay if off like it was cancer (this is a rule learned young, hope you did), if you have debt you can be held hostage at any time by many people, think about it. I learned these lessons and they have served me well. Oh yea I almost forgot take responsibility for your economic plite in life good or bad, it one thing you can control. Jo the plumber had some work to do before buying the company

- Butch

December 1, 2008 at 8:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm surprised that no one mention the cost of over manning required by the Union. The Big 3 are required to over man by 20% to cover sick, family, vacation, training and other reason to miss work. I'm not sure where that shows up on the books but you can bet in is the the price of the car.

- TimeforaChange

December 1, 2008 at 8:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Those retirement benefits are supposed to be pre-funded but the company shorted the pension funds through creative accounting to boost the bottom line and boost executive bonuses. Those costs are attributale to mismanagement and not the current workers. To the right wing troll whose dad "made" over $200.00 per hour, go troll somewhere else, nobody believes you. For those who talk about pension costs for foreign workers being lower, well thats because their governments support their retirees and provide healthcare. So I guess you will support higher taxes for national benefits. Jonathan, thanks for enlightening some of these people, ignore the trolls.

- Progressive Patriot

December 1, 2008 at 10:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This entire debate and thread simply highlights everything that has gone wrong with unionization. Once upon a time, unions were organizing for safer work environments, eight hour days, and other goals that required a unified voice in order to facilitate change. However, unions as we know them today are nothing more than an outdated parasite on our economy.

- Infinite Logic

December 3, 2008 at 5:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

THANK YOU! I am sooo tired of people believing that we make that much money, you did an excellent job explaining the truth to people.

- Skeeter

December 4, 2008 at 7:22am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Wow, you sound like a spoiled brat, what does your father think of you shooting your mouth off like you know what you are talking about. Third shift premium is 10% WHAT SHIFT DID HE WORK?? LOL Why didn't you apply for a job if it's so great?

- Skeeter

December 4, 2008 at 7:26am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

We have contract supervisors

- Skeeter

December 4, 2008 at 7:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is all bullshit. These mindless workers should all be making an hourly wage far less than even 28/hr. I would say somewhere between 10 to 15/hr. Take it or leave it. If we did this maybe, just maybe, people would become focused on education as a means of becoming a productive member of this society. As things currently are, we encouage our young people, in places like Detroit, to just get past High School, hide behind a union and live a life without the ability to form a coherant sentence with more than three or four words(one of them, no doubt, the F-Bomb). Get a clue you morons!

- Ed

December 5, 2008 at 12:45am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Seriously? SERIOUSLY? You are suggesting that GM should just stop paying healthcare costs...something they promised to do all 30-38 years of a workers years of service to the company...and lets not forget that some of the HIGH wages they ar paid are going into a fund to help pay for those retirees all those 30 some years of service. And where in the hell do you get the idea that there are no co-pays on medical services or perscriptions??? Check it out man...you dont even have your facts straight. Lets, instead of dumping on the workers that actually put parts on the automobile as it goes down the line, and look at management that wastes so much money in scrap material...in allowing the union to employee workers off the street to do meanial jobs which have nothing at all to do with putting parts on the automobile in the "friends and family" debacle that runs rampent in auto plants all over the Big 3. I could go on and on but I have actual work to do because my healthcare costs, as a GM workers spouse, is being cut to 20%. Smile and have a good day.

- khoney9956

December 6, 2008 at 1:06am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

1.) Japan has universal health insurance, with elderly people fully covered by the government. Japanese car workers do not have to negotiate future health coverage. No one will lose coverage because of catastrophic illness or a spouse losing employment. 2.) Company pensions should never depend upon the continued existence of the company. They should always be in a separate trust, neither administered solely by management appointees nor investing heavily in company stock.

- brampton

December 11, 2008 at 11:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I simply cannot believe that anyone would believe that they are owed something because they 'gave 30 years of their life' to a corporation. They did this by choice. That same corporation gave them a steady paycheck for 30 years. If that individual chooses not to save for retirement and believe the promises of corrupt union leaders, don't whine to government for a bailout!

- cincee

December 12, 2008 at 12:29am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

there are ahost of things the big 3 can do to get out of this mess. for starters, chrysler should get near zero unless its mother company steps up and coughs up its own money first. for the other 2, i mean come on, any other retailer makes significant cut backs when they are in trouble, why is only now that they are talking about closing dealerships,cutting back on staff and wages? Where is the mass sell off of its stock to get a money flow rolling? I've seen schools sell off parcels of their land( ie; school playgrounds etc) to investors,real estate guys etc because they needed money to stay afloat.My own company has been hurting for a while now and we have slowly scaled back eevrything from purchasing new stock for next year to staff to the type of paper we use in our printers! The feds shouldnt be doing a darn thing for these guys unless they can prove they are willing and able to pull their heads out of the sand and realise they have responsiblities too. Where is their plan of re-capitalisation , re-payment to the feds,profitability?

- catmann3200

December 12, 2008 at 5:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

What a lot of ugly, uncaring people who are writing in to this forum with half-truths and hate mongering. All like mad dogs turning onto each other and so willing to throw their brothers to the wolves. Shameful. Do unto others...

- Virginia

December 12, 2008 at 6:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

$45. per hour base rate? You sir have no idea what you are talking about. I retired in 1998 from GM. There is no job at GM today let alone X number of years ago that paid that kind of money. If you don't have facts it's best you say nothing. Bill In PA

- Bill in PA

December 13, 2008 at 10:51am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Your honesty if real is impressive. If you really want to see some outrageous rates check out a few "Prevailing Wage" rates in a few States. Jersey would be a good start.

- Fredo

December 13, 2008 at 3:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Your honesty if real is impressive. If you really want to see some outrageous rates check out a few "Prevailing Wage" rates in a few States. Jersey would be a good start.

- Fredo

December 13, 2008 at 3:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Your honesty if real is impressive. If you really want to see some outrageous rates check out a few "Prevailing Wage" rates in a few States. Jersey would be a good start.

- Fredo

December 13, 2008 at 3:50pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I received the e-mail that autoworkers were getting about $70/hr and found it so incredulous that I figured it had to be yet another classic case of union bashing, therefore I didn't forward it nor did I respond to the person who forwarded it to me. Later after she thought about it and did some research she came across this article which she forwarded to me and presumably everyone else she had previously e-mailed. It amazes me that any finger of blame would be pointed at the unionized workers. It seems to me that any health and retirement benefits the workers would receive were negotiated with the company and agreed upon as reasonable by both parties and therefore should be honored. As far as a pension fund being looked after by either 'corrupt unions or corrupt company managers' is incredulous to me. Yes, they really should be administered by a separate trust, and monitored by the government. As far as the degenerate comments made about people who didn't get an education deserving to live in poverty...since when should hard working people deserve to live in poverty? How does a hard working person not have any worth? Not everyone is born into circumstances that supports secondary education. Not every person is mentally geared for that either. Where would we be if everyone got an education and refused to get their hands dirty or put in a hard day of physical labour. Should those people who do the dirty work be looked down upon or valued less? Personally, I don't think so. I have often thought that people who bash unions are jealous because they aren't able to negotiate good working terms for themselves. Why don't they join the union if they are so hard done by with their wages, health care and retirement funds?! Let's just say for the sake of argument that unionized autoworkers actually did make $70/hr. As much as a university professor or some other 'educated' person. Why don't those educated people quit their job and go and become a unionized autoworker? I'll tell you why, they wouldn't want to do that type of work for any wage.

- Calgary, Alberta

December 13, 2008 at 8:09pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

No we aren't looking to kick you to the curb. However you are saying "I gave 30 years of MY life to GM, now YOU need to pay me". You made good money and I honestly believe that GM should pay you. Expecting the rest of us, who have school loans and are still fighting to get by with 17 bucks an hour to foot the bill is selfish.

- Tundra

December 15, 2008 at 4:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It is our collective curse TO BE A BUNCH OF GREEDY GOOD FOR NOTHINGS. It is obvious that everyone wants to keep their jobs. It seems the common thread in all postings is to blame a group of people. The UAW blames the Executives, the Executives blame the UAW, the majority of the Public blames both. These attitudes of blaming everyone else are a typical American failure. A failing American bussines and its workers typically affix the blame before fixing the problem. There's your problem. If you haven't ensured your own survival, financial or otherwise, then that's your fault. Entitle, Enshmitle give me a break, it is a sad thing but no one cares for you except yourself and as a member of the general public I don't want to give anyone anything but what I'm required to by law. I take that back, I did give all of you one thing and that is the protection of your rights and freedoms as stated in the constitution. Nobody gives me a hand, I don't whine and cry, I don't blame anyone, I step up to the plate and take what I can get and I don't feel entilted to anything. So quit crying, poor me, you did it to yourselves.

- Not Greedy

December 19, 2008 at 2:16pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Why don't those educated people quit their job and go and become a unionized autoworker? I'll tell you why, they wouldn't want to do that type of work for any wage." Would you? *If* you were one of the "privileged" you describe, those who were able or geared to get a post-secondary education, would you be in a hurry to leave that kind of job for a factory job? I completely agree that people who work traditional blue-collar jobs deserve good pay as much as anybody else, especially if that was what was promised by the company they went to work for. But that doesn't mean that people work factory job are somehow intrinsically more (or less) virtuous than anyone else. They found the best job they could, just like everyone else does, and no one's ever in a hurry to give that up. I don't blame auto workers or their unions for trying to get the best working conditions and compensation they can. I'm no expert, but it seems to me that in most cases unions negotiate the kinds of deals they get based on what they see the companies earning. In the "good old days", the big 3 almost had a monopoly on domestic auto sales, and hence were making very big bucks. What they didn't see was that not lasting, and hence they negotiated themselves into an untenable situation when things got worse for them. Still, it's their responsibility to make good on the promises they made to their workers, and going forward, to set up realistic compensation and benefits packages. And as for buying American, I'm happy to, when an American product gives me everything I'm looking for in terms of value, dependability, style, etc. I'm not suggesting American products can't do this, but when I'm car shopping I'm looking for certain things and the company that delivers wins my business. It's called market competition and it's as American as apple pie.

- Nestor

December 19, 2008 at 4:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This reply is being made after reading the comments that Eric made about his father receiving a base wage of $45/hour straight time while employed at GM. You are either full of crap or your father filled you with all of the BS you are spreading today. I'm not sure which one.I will bet money that if you would ask your father to see his social security earnings records (received yearly)that you will find your figures (in your comment letter)and the wages earned on those statement (DON'T ADD UP) I was employed at GM for over 34 years as a skilled tradesman not a clipboard tracker (what ever that is)and never earned $45 straight time not even close.Your father received a contractual amount of 5% extra per hour for 2nd shift hours usually 3p.m.-11-p.m. and 10% for third shift hours not the 50% you stated. Did you even read what you wrote???? I will also inform you that your father did receive holiday pay as millions do and he would receive that if he worked the holiday or not so don't count it twice.He would also receive time and one half for hours over eight hours and Saturdays.Double time for hours worked on Sunday and any contractual holidays. I'm not sure when (the year)he worked but if it was in the past couple of years his base rate was most likely $26.-$28.00 per hour. I can't confrim the exact amount but I am very close on my figures. If you would take the above figures, there is know way your father could ever earn (double triple)what ever that is. Again did you even read what you wrote??? Your statement is without any facts sir and a complete lie.People like you are the same type that started the $70.00 per/hour bull that GM workers are suppose to earn.Are you sure your father didn't earn $70.00 and not $45.00 per hour? Then he would have earned over $400.00 an hour not the $200.00 you suggested.$400.00 sounds like a lot more (almost DOUBLE TRIPLE TIME)!!

- Posted by Ed S. (ATTN) Eric

January 4, 2009 at 7:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The real problem is they're not adding the additional benefits the employees get once retired. If they get pension and healthcare benefits then to determine the true compensation and cost to ford or gm you have to factor in this potential. if i have a job that pays $37/hour plus benefits worth say $18 and hour and no pension or retirement healthcare benefits then the difference between what i cost the company in the long run and someone with the same compensation plus retirement benefits typical of the auto industry the potential to cost the company a million or 2 in retrirement benefit is huge.

- josh

January 30, 2009 at 7:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

It is nice to see an article with some truthful facts and figures for a change. I only wish I had read this earlier as the past few months has been frustrating. The contempt people now seem to have with auto workers is unjustified in my (front line) opinion. We are regularly depicted in most articles as uneducated monkeys that have basically blackmailed our empolyers into outrageous wages and benefits. Are we, the workers, responsible for the troubles our employers are facing now? It has nothing to do with the economic crisis we are ALL facing now, right? It has nothing to do with poor product development, right? It has nothing to do with the lavish expense accounts, relocating expenses, car and gas and milage allowances (I could go on) that have been milked by everyone from the company's Jr sales rep throught to upper mgmt over the years, right? Golden handshakes? No? Well then it must be the workers that put together the products they sell! Do you think any of the Big 3 would actually say "Hey, wait a second Nation, there are many reasons we are having trouble right now, don't pick on the little guy." I don't think so. Throw a starving dog a bone and just try to get it away from him! Looking to beg, borrow, and save money at this time... they will latch onto any cost saving idea that is presented and light a match to fuel public opinion. The worker, in this case, is tied to the stake. Thanks for seeing the big picture everyone... So yes, from what I hear, I'm raking in the big bucks! Really would like to know where they are! Could use them. I do own a house( I would not dare say I am not more fortunate than others...that would just be ignorant). It is an older home and I try to do one upgrade per year. I plan to live here forever. I hope to have it paid off by 2025. I pay my utilities on time and in full. I am saving airmiles (just like many others) for a really good trip. For vacation now, I mostly go camping in the summer, just to get away from it all. The last time I bought clothes was running shoes and jeans for work, 2 months ago. Where is my champagne and caviar???? Hello???? Ya, no. So considering the ammount of money we make, how little schooling is involved, free ride, we must be just laughing at everyone else who has a "real job" right? Even with the ammount we make, some people are still quiting, many want to. Surprised? I'm not. I almost walked away last year. I stayed because I have too much time invested (time wise, I am getting old). I don't want to start over. I might have to, and if it comes to that, I will. I made a plan. I must play it out. Like it or not public, I personally can say I have earned every dollar. For many, the most dangerous part of their day is the drive to and from work. Material handling is a different animal. The worst part of my day starts when I walk through that door. In the last ten years (just for me)... 1) Back injury...thought I would get this one out of the way because most people think that people just fake them. Not me. Holy hell! The physio therapist two days after my injury said he could visibly see the muscles in my lower back spasm when I lifted my foot 1 inch off the ground. Really? Try faking that! For 6 weeks I was off work. For the next 8 months I paid a chiro (out of my own pocket) 3 times a week because the benifits had dried up (oh ya, our great bennifits) just so it didn't hurt to bend over and fill my water bottle. Minor relapses occured (not resulting in any time off, just discomfort, pain, Advil, for me) over the next 2 years. 2)Separated ribs (I believe it is actually a tear to the muscle tissue between the ribs, but that's what they call it). Felt like what I imagine I knife would feel like, piercing me in that spot, when the pain hit. Any action could bring it on. Could be just a regualr breath, a bend, a reach. I didn't know what not to do. Chiro every day. Off 4 days 3)Shoulder injury...heard a "pop" and felt a strange sensation. Hurt , but what ever. Shake it off and continue on. Didn't think much of it. It wasn't like the "oh god help me know!" or anything like that. But as the day went on, it grew, and grew, and got numb and I reported it. Long story short (cause this is long enough already lol ) I had torn my bicep tendon. Doctor visit, to therapist visit to specialist visit, to therapist visit. Oh so much fun. Bursitis took it's toll. Tendenosis too. Constant cramping from neck to shoulder. I went through atleast 12 Advil a day and it still didn't help. I must mention, in the whole TWO YEARS that this took place, I was still at work. Full time, doing my job. I had a great supervisor then and with modified equiptment, I could do regular work. I could only work with my left arm (I could not even open a industrial door towards me with my right, or lift my arm higher than shoulder level, but we made it work!). I was about to be written off as perminently disabled when I told them I had made an apointment with another specialist for a second opinion. "Oh! Well, we'll look again too". I had the surgery within 3 months! 5 years after injury,2 years after healing from surg, I can now swim again, I can throw a ball again....ya disabled my ass! Hurts still? Sure sometimes, but nowhere close to what it was! 4) I've needed stiches 3 times. Longest is 8 only outside...TG. Scrapes, bruises. Whatever. Everyday thing. Clean em up, patch um, move on. So, am I a careless worker? Cluts? No. I am actually hyper saftey conscience. Things are just that way where I work. Just in the last ten years, not mentioning strains, sprains, etc..I'll talk bones and surgeries only, cause let's face it...really can't fake those. In my small plant alone: surg.. 3 back...disc 1 neck...disc 6 shoulders Broken bones.. 2 ankles 3 wrist 1 shattered elbow (needed pins) Stitches...didn't keep count... No way to over that period of time. Nicks, scrapes and bruises...hey, just part of the job. Sprains? Oh ya, big. No one can prove those...tissue injuries. Wow, not bad hey? Consider this. Ten years ago, my plant had 108 workers. Today, we have 72. You do the math. That's just us...small. One of our sister plants, less that a month ago, had a casualty. We all use equiptment...anything can happen. I hope it never happens to us, but it might...and we have to watch for it every day, constantly. I believe we all have a lot of challenges to face right now. It really doesn't matter what piece of paper you have that you can frame and hang on your wall. (Don't get me wrong, I do respect education as long as you use it...I know of way too many that don't). Simple analogy: We all are a house of cards. Every one wants to be on top. If the one on top falls...what ever, someone will take his place, and be happy to. Take a card out from the bottom and what happens? Fantastic planning as always, cut from the bottom up to weaken the structure. Sure, there have been huge cuts all around (white and blue) over the last few years. How did we get where we are? Might be time for the people at the top to start looking at the ones below! One layer at a time...from the top down... Oh...duh...sorry, sorry, what do I know? I just one of those um, simple, uneducated autoworkers. "Supervisor sir who makes %15 more than I do (not kidding) um...do you really get paid that much to watch me work and enter my timesheet? Now that's criminal.

- Tracee-current auto worker

February 6, 2009 at 5:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Listen, as guy who worked on an assembly line packing fish to put myself thru school to running printing presses, while going thru school, to being a road salesman and provided many millions of dollars of income for the people in the factory, to putting my house up for collateral to start my own business and providing employment for my people working 70-80 hours per week myself, sometimes not paying myself in order to make payroll. Yes, I did put money in to investments, now mostly wiped out, I am so sick of these UAW workers crying about entitlements and the companies asking for billions in bailouts after so many years getting all the Big Bucks providing overpriced, shoddily built products. If the industry can't cut it get out of the kitchen. Believe me I don't believe any of these Big Three workers or their management ever worked as hard, without guarantees as most entrepeneurs. Let em eat cake.

- William E. Carroll

February 27, 2009 at 12:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jonathan, I don't think anyone actually ever said that the US automakers pay assembly line people $70/hour. The analysts have been pretty clear that this includes the handsome retirement and health care packages that these workers get. In any case, your logic is flawed. What matters is not what the labor costs are per active or active + retired employee, what matters is cost per car. You can slice and dice the data all you want, but if you have higher costs per car than your competitors then you are not going to win in the marketplace. The fact that such a high proportion of these costs is due to retirees actually makes the case more dire for the U.S. automakers and highlights why past restructurings have not gone far enough. Retiree costs represent fixed costs and thus are much more difficult (impossible?) to extract. Therefore the automakers have been forced to continue higher levels of production than they ideally would. Each car produced produces a small contribution margin towards the total fixed costs of the company, and with incredibly high fixed costs, you need to produce a lot of cars.

- Dave

May 7, 2009 at 3:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

i am a heavy equipment mechanic and i do most of my work on site. i usually work weekends and holidays, i payed for my own tools with the wage my company pays me, i also went to school and pay mortgage on a house in a nice city with the wage my company pays me. i make way less than the average union worker. am i striking and crying like a baby? hell no! i will take free will and low pay over being a fat, lazy and ignorant union sleeper. you don't know anything you waste of DNA. you union guys need to get off your asses and either move to Canada or build a brick wall around the city of Detroit and never come out. you have killed this country and the really shity part is you make more than me but i fix your fuck ups in the field with less. choke on your caviar frenchy!

- confused

May 29, 2009 at 11:33pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

i am with you mr carroll

- marc

May 29, 2009 at 11:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

umm..... you do quit lieing your not a union steward

- marc

May 29, 2009 at 11:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close