Topic: Will GM be better off without Rick?

[Flinter]

I bet most of the members here who work for an employer, small or big, would tell you the same. In the non-unionized workspace, the rules are different. We have nothing to give up, because we don't take anything for granted.

Exactly. It seems a bit outlandish that the CAW members are complaining about "giving back" a portion of a total wage&benefit package that most average blue collar Canadians would consider an excellant remuneration.

When you start to think of all the oil patch drillers, the oil sands construction workers, the forestery workers, the pulp mill workers, the miners, the construction workers, ad infinitum who no longer even have a job, the plaintive whimpering of the CAW seems totally out of place. Ignorant, even.

There are also the retail clerks, the telemarketers, the salesmen at auto dealerships, etc etc who have been told not to come to work tomorrow.  The poor CAW's problems seem to be insignificant, compared to that.

There is a recession (depression?) on that exceeds anything in past number of decades. There is loss of jobs and financial suffering out there. There are families with no employment, no savings, and not much hope in the short run. People's private pensions and RRSPs have been decimated.

Agreed. I can certainly empathize with autoworkers worried about losing their jobs or benefits. However, I would encourage them to take a look around for a little perspective. Most Canadians live in a much different reality.

[tpl]

Why should we be singled out to give back more then anybody else? How about all you folks in your trades or professions give back at least $25.00 perhour and see if you like it as maybe then you just might understand.

@Barrie

I work for a US based global company (about 50,000 employees worldwide). At my company, we don't get paid if we don't work. We work by the employer's rules not by somebody else’s rules (e.g. union). We get performance evaluation and the eventual raise is accordingly not a given. We get bonuses according to the company’s results not as a given. We can be fired if we do not perform our jobs as required. We are subject to termination if our service is no longer needed. WHILE EMPLOYED, we get benefits, but we also contribute to the premium some good portion, we get pension benefits, but we also contribute in order to get some company match. We do not get any perks. If the company requires cutting our pay to stay in business, it can do it at any time. If you don't like it, you are free to go.
There is no such thing as job for life, health benefits for life, guaranteed pay, guaranteed raise and bonus, etc.
I bet most of the members here who work for an employer, small or big, would tell you the same. In the non-unionized workspace, the rules are different. We have nothing to give up, because we don't take anything for granted.

I pay taxes, and a lot of them, and I would not like my tax money to support non-viable private businesses just because the employees of these companies think that they have the right to have a job and to receive a given amount of pay and benefits, regardless of how their company performs.

I worked for a CANADIAN owned and based public company with a mere 10,000 employees ("members" !)   Just the same but without the pension plan.  We could be told to use up vacation if there were no billable assignments. ( To be fair it happened rarely)  They hired and fired as required by the business.

[toolatecrew]

Why should we be singled out to give back more then anybody else?

I'm going to prove this wrong. I'm going to support it with links to credible sources. If you cannot provide links to credible sources that disprove me we will consider you wrong. That's the way it works. Ready GO!

In order to GIVE BACK you must HAVE it first.

Under terms of the tentative deal between GM and the CAW, the current collective agreement will be extended by one year to September 2012, base wages are frozen for the remainder of the contract

No workers got an increase check in their hands and then handed them back. You can't give back money you didn't receive. NO GIVE BACK If your BASE WAGES are higher than average, wages are frozen and the average wage does not go up you have not done any more than anyone else. You still are better off than the average worker. Get it? 

and cost of living adjustments are suspended until June 2012 for active workers and retirees.

No cost of living checks were received and given back. You cannot GIVE BACK what you do not have.

an annual $1,700 bonus payment is diverted to help offset the cost of retiree health care benefits and expenses for union-sponsored programs are reduced by a third.

An future bonus payment can't be given back until received. Even if it were it was not "taken" that $ was still provided for the benefit of the employees it is still paid out by GM it simply gets put into a different employee pot. If GM still pays it out how can it be "given back'?

There are also changes in a range of health and non-wage benefits, including a co-payments of $30 for active workers and pensioners under 65 and $15 for retirees over 65.

Future copayment is not giving back. You don't have it NOW. You can't give it back.

I'm not going to provide a link (because privacy does not allow it)but my Co Pay rate is much higher than $30 and has been for several years. Going from a 0$ contribution  to 30$is simply not "More" than the average worker.

They simply are not being penalized "more" than anyone else. I can't be any more clear  about that. The idea that CAW workers are being asked to give up more than ANYONE else (or even a more than a minority) is a bald faced fabrication

“Overall, I think it’s a good deal for the CAW because it doesn’t touch hourly rates and current pensions,” Faria said. “[bold]But I don’t know of any other industry in which workers make no contributions to their pensions[/bold] and this is a significant cost issue for the automakers.

NO OTHER INDUSTRY has it so good. NO OTHER INDUSTRY continues to have it so good.

here is the link http://www.windsorstar.com/Health/deal+will+probably+satisfy+feds+Analyst/1371118/story.html

Just to be upfront links allow people to read the ENTIRE article. To see EVERYTHING that was said. It prevents people from "accidently" positing partial quotes or editing out large parts of stories that contradict their point of view. I'm sure you would never INTENTIONALLY quote wrong or misleading information but a link prevents you from "accdentally" doing so. I know you don't want to be "wrong" so a link is such a simple easy way to prevent it I'm sure it won't be much effort.

Remember the rules. NO LINK NO CREDIBILITY.

[carcrazy]

Remember the rules. NO LINK NO CREDIBILITY.

LOL... It's not a union approved rule so it doesn't count. 

[toolatecrew]

Remember the rules. NO LINK NO CREDIBILITY.

LOL... It's not a union approved rule so it doesn't count. 

Maybe he could provide a link to the union rules? ;-)