Jump to content

UAW prepares strike vote during contract talks with GM

Gorehamj

Recommended Posts

Chadwilliam1 Enthusiast

Chadwilliam1

Posted
Posted

In my experience unions do not use a strike as a threat. It is a last resort for both sides. A lot of issues are handled through the labor board but with out the ability to strike you are powerless. Some contracts have a no strike clause. That is a company union. Then the unions officials are policing for the company and no longer representing the membership.

 

Because of the protection UAW has for the individual they have done a lot in terms of safety for the modern factory. I have a lot of respect for the uaw and how they handle safety. Trust me many people have died in those factory's and a union rep should have no issues involving osha or upper management if it needed.

 

I have worked in non union shops. I would have never called osha or involved upper management with out protection. I did call the labor board on them. I wish the uaw luck in their negotiations. They are a lot of family's relying on a ratified contract.

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply
4x4Hank Enthusiast

4x4Hank

Posted
Posted

I would like to mention something that hasn't been touched on yet. It was mentioned that Unions only represent certain workers and not other workers. Well first, the Union legally is supposed to represent everyone in the bargaining unit. Second, if a member wants to file a grievance, the Union has a legal obligation to represent that worker/member whether they think the member is right or not or whether they have a legitimate grievance or not. Once requested, if the Union does not file a grievance on that member's behalf the member could go to the NLRB and file a Duty of Fair Representation (DFR) claim against the Union and get back pay or monetary damages from the Union. The Union has to walk a thin line at times.

 

So that being said, there may be the appearance to some that the Union only represents certain members but if a member wants to file a grievance or many grievances the Union's hands are tied and they have to follow through even if they know it's wrong.

Chadwilliam1 Enthusiast

Chadwilliam1

Posted
Posted

Right if you are paying dues and your union is not representing you properly. Try to get in touch with somebody in the international first but if that does not work the labor board will gladly go after a union for failing to represent.

calgator73 Senior Enthusiast

calgator73

Posted
Posted

Businesses want cheap labor so they get maximum $ for their products. There is no blackmail involved,same could be said of big business threats of moving the jobs overseas.I don't understand the anti union dislike in America today.

 

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Can't speak for others. I believe unions representing unskilled labor have become too powerful and force companies to be less competitive cost wise with their overseas counterparts.

 

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

4x4Hank Enthusiast

4x4Hank

Posted
Posted

Can't speak for others. I believe unions representing unskilled labor have become too powerful and force companies to be less competitive cost wise with their overseas counterparts.

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

Private sector Unions represent less than 7% of the workforce in the US, the lowest level since WWII. Please explain to me how that equates to something powerful? Germany has a much higher Union density rate with higher wages and they seem to compete in the world market just fine. Of course CEO's make much less and company profits are a smaller percentage of the gross so that could account for something I suppose.

calgator73 Senior Enthusiast

calgator73

Posted
Posted

 

 

Private sector Unions represent less than 7% of the workforce in the US, the lowest level since WWII. Please explain to me how that equates to something powerful? Germany has a much higher Union density rate with higher wages and they seem to compete in the world market just fine. Of course CEO's make much less and company profits are a smaller percentage of the gross so that could account for something I suppose.

Most states with traditionally strong unions have laws that protect them. When an entity with coercive authority protects you, you are powerful. They are powerful economically by abusing the utilization of dues. Good article. http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/02/public_and_private_unions

 

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

4x4Hank Enthusiast

4x4Hank

Posted
Posted

Most states with traditionally strong unions have laws that protect them. When an entity with coercive authority protects you, you are powerful. They are powerful economically by abusing the utilization of dues. Good article. http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2011/02/public_and_private_unions

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

Calgator73-The Economist article was interesting. The comment section even moreso. I couldnt read the WSJ article because I'm not a subscriber (Huff Post and Mother Jones subscriber). I think that one of the problems with the perception of Unions is that people that are not part of them bunch them all together. There are vast differences between industrial, construction, service and public Unions. Construction for instance: there is no job security but you know that up front. Work 15 minutes and it rains, you go home with 15 minutes pay. Too cold for two weeks, you have two weeks without pay. Dont produce to the bosses liking, you most likely get your check and head down the road (likewise, if you dont like where you are working you can pack your tools up and head down the road by your own choice). Wages and benefits are the main reason to belong to a Union in the construction industry along with benefit reciprocity if you decide to travel. There may be more protections of various sorts in other Union segments. Maybe more in the auto industry but I'm not qualified from first hand experience to answer that.
calgator73 Senior Enthusiast

calgator73

Posted
Posted

I think I agree with you. I think that unions are good in that they present a unified front to an employer and sometimes bad when they behave like economic terrorists. In my new job with the faa we are represented by a union if we choose. Not sure if it's worth surrendering ~ 1% gross for what little they do. To me union dues as a % of salary present a weird situation where a union may push for higher salaries merely to ingratiate themselves. Fixed cost would be more fair imo and keep unions honest.

 

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

4x4Hank Enthusiast

4x4Hank

Posted
Posted

I think I agree with you. I think that unions are good in that they present a unified front to an employer and sometimes bad when they behave like economic terrorists. In my new job with the faa we are represented by a union if we choose. Not sure if it's worth surrendering ~ 1% gross for what little they do. To me union dues as a % of salary present a weird situation where a union may push for higher salaries merely to ingratiate themselves. Fixed cost would be more fair imo and keep unions honest.

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

1% is really economical. Aren't you represented whether you pay it or not? We pay 3.5% plus $25 a month.

calgator73 Senior Enthusiast

calgator73

Posted
Posted

Not to my understanding...my concern is that it's scaled to income.

 

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

Chadwilliam1 Enthusiast

Chadwilliam1

Posted
Posted

A percentage is a good way for the union to do it IMO. That way des go up everytime you get a raise.

 

I pay 2 hours pay a month.

calgator73 Senior Enthusiast

calgator73

Posted
Posted

A percentage is a good way for the union to do it IMO. That way des go up everytime you get a raise.

 

I pay 2 hours pay a month.

It is one way to do it but how do you know if the union is truly looking out for your interests or theirs?

 

Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk

Jonny5cam Enthusiast

Jonny5cam

Posted
Posted

The UAW are payed Hourly by GM. GM has the power to lay off its workers when there is no demand.

They are line workers and maintance personal.

 

The ones making the decisions brought down GM, not the low level employees.

 

A lot of ignorance here.

StinkyCheese Senior Enthusiast

StinkyCheese

Posted
Posted

Mine takes 2.5 hours of pay a month to get fatter, not answer the phones, tell each of the stewards something different (when the stewards can even get a hold of anyone), and generally pit everyone against everyone. Useless turds :( Otherwise sure my union is great :-p

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Chuck FB
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I certainly could be wrong but I hear of pickups far newer than that 2007 cutoff which may not be going to the wrecker but are having engine work done and be that a reman engine or new engine or trying to repair the existing engine. Some of it would be design issues as per the cylinder deactivation system that GM has and one of those lifters wiping out the cam and the question of oil changes moving the needle or not on that whole mess, or in the case of Ford pickup engines that have the long timing chains and wearing them out and the roller followers and phasers and some of that certainly goes back to oil change intervals. But in those various cases the truck has all sorts of life left in it and so the unfortunate owner and may be original owner or used market owner that is pouring money into repairs so the truck is not seeing the salvage yard yet but damage is happening by infrequent oil changes. A friends son had bought a 2018 I think it is half ton GM and it had some sort of extended or used dealer warranty on it and of course the lifter issue bites and its rattling and so the dealer had to swallow the bill and was at least 7000.00 and I think they only replaced what they felt they had to replace so yeah, I can see that being a ticking time bomb in the not too distant future. Would frequent oil changes cure all these engineering "marvels", probably not but some engine designs have shown that they do much better if the oil is changed a lot more often then if the manufacturer service claims are followed. New trucks cost so much that there is an incentive to keep the existing truck on the road by repairing. 
    • davester
      Tranmission stays in Low

      By davester · Posted

      get a good code reader, and find out what problems the truck has noticed by reading codes. cheap ones can only get basic engine codes, you may want to get one that can get codes from all the computers in your truck.
    • asilverblazer
      OCI, not when but why?

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      This is sort of my point, salvage yards aren't overflowing with all these 'poorly' maintained trucks - excellent/good/servicable condition otherwise, salvaged only as a result of a bad engine from poor oil change regiment.    In my area, there are no 2007 to newer gm trucks/suvs in any salvage yards. A few are in the 'recyclers' with very obvious reasons for being there - wrecked.
    • asilverblazer
      Stabilitrak conversion to Z71

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      Stabilitrack was a stability control, traction control system, that functioned independently from the transfer case.   Z-71 has nothing to do with the transfer case or differential.   If it does have an AWD system, my memory recalls this being specific to the Denali trim, converting won't be as simple as swapping out mechanical parts like differentials and transfer cases. It will require reprogramming at a minimum. Long story short, not likely worth it.   Pulling a fuse, may disable the AWD system, it might also prevent any other transfer case functions.   However, the AWD case was generally based on the same transfer case you refer to in the 2006 Suburban. If it still has a 4-High and 4-Low where the transfer case locks and splits power 50-50 front to rear, what are you gaining by changing anything? A true-rear wheel drive only, what good will that serve? Not enough to go through the trouble of changing out all the parts.    Generally, all the factory systems will handle a 33" tire and re-gearing. Probably a 35" tire too, if you aren't driving like a caveman. If 35" tires are in the plan...   If you do plan on driving like a caveman or are fully committed to 35" tires, an entire re-think of the build is probably in order. Starting with square one, an IFS front end isn't going to be the best starting point for 35's and caveman driving. 
    • PunchT37
      Oil Consumption

      By PunchT37 · Posted

      1/2 qt over full ain`t gonna hurt $h!t. Most times, a whole qt won`t either. Most have windage trays now. As long as the crank isn`t slapping itself in the oil, it`s not the end of the world.   We used to overfill 1 qt at the track, at race time. Better to have it over full than having the pan sucked dry at 6500 rpm`s.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...