VW Union Vote

[indian82]

I thought this was interesting. Sounds like a statement that even workers realize that maybe the unions over step their bounds. I know that this is Tennessee, but even so, it's the workers saying that they don't want unions coming in and jeopardizing what they have by asking for too much.

It's a balancing act, but if there is an open dialogue between the workers at the plant and the mgmt, they may not need an outside bureaucracy adding to the complexity and politics. Hopefully, it sends a good message to all companies (esp manufacturers) that if they take care of their employers properly they can keep out unions that may have motives different than just the benefits of the workers.

www.cnn.com/2014/02/14/us/tennessee-vw-union-vote/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

[indian82]

Surprised this received no comments....

[SaintsFan]

Not much to comment other than... Unions are another necessary evil if you will. It is not rocket science that pay and benefits have stagnated or declined for the last 30+ years for millions of middle class jobs at an identical declining curve of Union membership. Membership nationally is like 11%... and yet people still attempt to find reasons to blame Unions for the decline in wages and benefits and jobs. That 11% number is proof that it has been nothing to do with Unions and everything to do with profit at all costs. Makes no difference Union or no Union if some third world worker is willing to do your job for a bowl of rice. And do that job in an unprotected work environment. That job ... Unionized or not.... is gone ... for the profit and nothing to do with Unions.

Americans cant give up enough pay and benefits to keep the job... and still have any sort of quality of life. The corporate world has used the third world as a weapon to wage war against the middle class. Very funny to watch the most economically powerful country revert and now emulate third world business models. This wont end well.

[indian82]

Feb 16, 2014 6:53:13 GMT -5 SaintsFan said:

Not much to comment other than... Unions are another necessary evil if you will. It is not rocket science that pay and benefits have stagnated or declined for the last 30+ years for millions of middle class jobs at an identical declining curve of Union membership. Membership nationally is like 11%... and yet people still attempt to find reasons to blame Unions for the decline in wages and benefits and jobs. That 11% number is proof that it has been nothing to do with Unions and everything to do with profit at all costs. Makes no difference Union or no Union if some third world worker is willing to do your job for a bowl of rice. And do that job in an unprotected work environment. That job ... Unionized or not.... is gone ... for the profit and nothing to do with Unions.

Americans cant give up enough pay and benefits to keep the job... and still have any sort of quality of life. The corporate world has used the third world as a weapon to wage war against the middle class. Very funny to watch the most economically powerful country revert and now emulate third world business models. This wont end well.

There's a bunch of topics in your response, so I will try to break it down and respond accordingly.

1. Income/Benefits over the last 30 years. I haven't searched for benefit info, but as far as median income, I don't think that it's true that it has declined or even stagnated over the last 30 years. The figures in the link below (from the Census Bureau although from an independent web site) do not bear that out. Since 1967 those figues have steadily increased (in adjusted figures for inflation) with significant blips ups (1998-2202 .net boom) and downs (recessions in 79-82, 90-94 & 2007-today). So, regardless of what I found for union membership (I agree it has probably gone down), I don't think I'll be able to find any correlation.

Ooops - Here's the link:

www.davemanuel.com/median-household-income.php

2. Without searching, I'll say again that union bureaucracy and hard stances has contributed in a lot of manufacturing going overseas and the deterioration of Detroit and the auto industry. Obviously, corp leaders have a role in that as well since their job is to maximize profits for the stock holders. This is another sticky situation as many of the pensions and 401Ks many of us count on are dependent on those stocks rising.

3. War on the Middle Class - I think this is a volatile phrase and it is used from both the left and right. From your perspective, I don't disagree that the 'system' favors those with wealth and I have come across some stats saying the income of the 1% is growing faster than the rest of the population. I don't think conservatives can deny that. I think the question becomes 'How can we as a nation assist their growth so that it benefits everybody (trickle down)'?

On the other side of the 'war on the middle class' is the growing entitlement and welfare state. And again, for whatever reason, I think this is undeniable as well. I believe the growing debt/deficit comes into play as well. From this side, we need to provide assistance to those truly in need and encourage opportunity and incentive for people to improve their own lot.

This is where I firmly believe we need a leader who can bridge the 2 sides. This partisanship (and the growing debt we are leaving for our children) is what I see to be what will ultimately be how it does not end well.

[indian82]

And to go back to the main point of this thread here. It seems like the Tennessee vote not to unionize is a message that the unions, as we historically have known them, is not how we forge ahead. (And from what I hear, VW did not go on a hard-nosed mission to keep them out). They served a valuable use at one time, but have grown bloated and self-serving. We have seen in the not-too-distant past where unions were more apt to lose jobs rather than negotiate in good faith (not to say that mgmt always does). Will they adapt? Hopefully, we see the future where companies realize the benefit of investing in American workers and treating them fairly while employees look to negotiate for the greater good. But we need sensible heads on both sides. I see a pattern.

[SaintsFan]

Feb 16, 2014 10:12:44 GMT -5 indian82 said:

Feb 16, 2014 6:53:13 GMT -5 SaintsFan said:

Not much to comment other than... Unions are another necessary evil if you will. It is not rocket science that pay and benefits have stagnated or declined for the last 30+ years for millions of middle class jobs at an identical declining curve of Union membership. Membership nationally is like 11%... and yet people still attempt to find reasons to blame Unions for the decline in wages and benefits and jobs. That 11% number is proof that it has been nothing to do with Unions and everything to do with profit at all costs. Makes no difference Union or no Union if some third world worker is willing to do your job for a bowl of rice. And do that job in an unprotected work environment. That job ... Unionized or not.... is gone ... for the profit and nothing to do with Unions.

Americans cant give up enough pay and benefits to keep the job... and still have any sort of quality of life. The corporate world has used the third world as a weapon to wage war against the middle class. Very funny to watch the most economically powerful country revert and now emulate third world business models. This wont end well.

There's a bunch of topics in your response, so I will try to break it down and respond accordingly.

1. Income/Benefits over the last 30 years. I haven't searched for benefit info, but as far as median income, I don't think that it's true that it has declined or even stagnated over the last 30 years. The figures in the link below (from the Census Bureau although from an independent web site) do not bear that out. Since 1967 those figues have steadily increased (in adjusted figures for inflation) with significant blips ups (1998-2202 .net boom) and downs (recessions in 79-82, 90-94 & 2007-today). So, regardless of what I found for union membership (I agree it has probably gone down), I don't think I'll be able to find any correlation.

Ooops - Here's the link:

www.davemanuel.com/median-household-income.php

2. Without searching, I'll say again that union bureaucracy and hard stances has contributed in a lot of manufacturing going overseas and the deterioration of Detroit and the auto industry. Obviously, corp leaders have a role in that as well since their job is to maximize profits for the stock holders. This is another sticky situation as many of the pensions and 401Ks many of us count on are dependent on those stocks rising.

3. War on the Middle Class - I think this is a volatile phrase and it is used from both the left and right. From your perspective, I don't disagree that the 'system' favors those with wealth and I have come across some stats saying the income of the 1% is growing faster than the rest of the population. I don't think conservatives can deny that. I think the question becomes 'How can we as a nation assist their growth so that it benefits everybody (trickle down)'?

On the other side of the 'war on the middle class' is the growing entitlement and welfare state. And again, for whatever reason, I think this is undeniable as well. I believe the growing debt/deficit comes into play as well. From this side, we need to provide assistance to those truly in need and encourage opportunity and incentive for people to improve their own lot.

This is where I firmly believe we need a leader who can bridge the 2 sides. This partisanship (and the growing debt we are leaving for our children) is what I see to be what will ultimately be how it does not end well.

Adjusted for inflation we can go back to 1989 average is the same.

I don't believe in trickle down. It doesn't and hasn't worked.

Leader won't mask a damn bit of difference. Policies are bought and paid for.

Regarding the war on the middle class. The entitlement class is growing because of greed at the top. They continue to find new and inventive ways to bleed another dollar of profit...most of which in recent years is done by erosion of wages and benefits

[indian82]

The last 3 statements are debatable and probably neither of us will change any minds.

Re: the first statement, like I said, pattern is that income always increasing except for the known recessions and we have always more than recovered until 2007 where income was at its highest ever and we then we entered the current recession. That's how Obama got elected. We have not come out of this yet and in fact, it's continued to go down and it's the least since '94. Up to Obama to bring it back. 5+ years now - no longer Bush's fault.

[SaintsFan]

Feb 16, 2014 11:39:26 GMT -5 indian82 said:

The last 3 statements are debatable and probably neither of us will change any minds.

Re: the first statement, like I said, pattern is that income always increasing except for the known recessions and we have always more than recovered until 2007 where income was at its highest ever and we then we entered the current recession. That's how Obama got elected. We have not come out of this yet and in fact, it's continued to go down and it's the least since '94. Up to Obama to bring it back. 5+ years now - no longer Bush's fault.

Not true. Data is available that proves when adjusted for inflation income today is almost to the dollar the same as 1989. That isn't debatable

[indian82]

Feb 16, 2014 19:56:01 GMT -5 SaintsFan said:

Feb 16, 2014 11:39:26 GMT -5 indian82 said:

The last 3 statements are debatable and probably neither of us will change any minds.

Re: the first statement, like I said, pattern is that income always increasing except for the known recessions and we have always more than recovered until 2007 where income was at its highest ever and we then we entered the current recession. That's how Obama got elected. We have not come out of this yet and in fact, it's continued to go down and it's the least since '94. Up to Obama to bring it back. 5+ years now - no longer Bush's fault.

Not true. Data is available that proves when adjusted for inflation income today is almost to the dollar the same as 1989. That isn't debatable

Put it out there so it can be discussed.

[gorvy]

The recently released PEW center report confirms that non for individuals who do not have bachelors degrees age 25-32, the income has been declining, adjusted for inflation. See the third chart down-- "Rising Earnings Disparity between those with and without a college degree". The income has declined more than 10% for those without a bachelor's degree while income is rising for those with a 4 year degree. Overall income is flat since 1979 (7th chart). The fourth chart shows that the poverty level has doubled overall compared to 1979.

www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/02/11/the-rising-cost-of-not-going-to-college/

[indian82]

Maybe I misunderstood. Did you mean the data I already put out? If so, there are normal fluctuations and that 1990 was the start of a mini-recession (resulting in Clinton's election). We came out of that by '95 by which time the income had more than recovered. It generally went on an increase until 2007, from which we are still struggling to recover. Not an economist, but there are normal fluctuations up and down, and there is a general trend upward in the income until 2007. It's this last 6 years that we are concerned about. That isn't debatable either.

I agree that the 2012 figures are analogous to the '89 figures, I already stated that. It was the 2008 figures that got Obama elected, which he acknowledged and said he would reverse which we are still waiting. You're hanging your hat on the recession that started in 2008. And no evidence at all that any of these figures are a result of declining union membership.

[indian82]

Feb 16, 2014 21:22:15 GMT -5 gorvy said:

The recently released PEW center report confirms that non for individuals who do not have bachelors degrees age 25-32, the income has been declining, adjusted for inflation. See the third chart down-- "Rising Earnings Disparity between those with and without a college degree". The income has declined more than 10% for those without a bachelor's degree while income is rising for those with a 4 year degree. Overall income is flat since 1979 (7th chart). The fourth chart shows that the poverty level has doubled overall compared to 1979.

www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/02/11/the-rising-cost-of-not-going-to-college/

Not to discount this, but this entire report is strictly for the 25-32 age group analyzing the value of a college degree. It reinforces what most of us probably already believed and even more so these days; ie, the growing income discrepancy between college grads and those w/out. We do have to do something about that as a nation. That is, provide more creative (not necessarily traditional) educational and/or job opportunities for young adults who don't go to college. That is particularly challenging in a highly technological world and in our country that has lost manufacturing jobs for whatever reason (which is why I am encouraged by the new auto plants in places like Tennessee).

The poverty level chart you point to is also disturbing, but again I think it highlights the difference between college and non-college educated young adults. Yes, the overall numbers in 2013 have doubled since '79, but that is slightly inflated due to the HS #'s - they more than tripled! If you look at the numbers from 1995, however, the college pov lev numbers were the same as the '79 levels while HS more than doubled. This means a couple things to me: 1. College is crucial for your income and 2. The 2013 numbers further illustrate the impact the current recession has meant for the 25-32 age group. Waiting 5+ years to be pulled out of this recession.

[gorvy]

I think you have to ask why is college so importan -- not just college but the completion of a 4 year bachelor degree --- the answer is what I posted earlier-- there are more and more people competing for fewer and fewer non technical jobs due to technological advancements and longer living people. This is a structural problem that will not simply go away -- which is why you are still waiting.

[indian82]

Feb 16, 2014 22:31:30 GMT -5 gorvy said:

I think you have to ask why is college so importan -- not just college but the completion of a 4 year bachelor degree --- the answer is what I posted earlier-- there are more and more people competing for fewer and fewer non technical jobs due to technological advancements and longer living people. This is a structural problem that will not simply go away -- which is why you are still waiting.

I agree 100%. That's why I said we have to do what we can to get more manufacturing jobs somehow, like the VW auto plant, thus how we got going on this thread. We have to get more investing here, somehow. Companies are not bringing their money in due to taxes, not a liberal talking point, I know. Also, I know tariffs are controversial, but what can we do to get other countries to market our goods. Can we market U.S. quality?

We also need to get creative with our educational system for those kids for whom college is not an option for some reason. Better technical or trade programs. But yes, we are seeing the technology advancements come back to hurt the less educated. I think we are in agreement.

[SaintsFan]

Feb 16, 2014 23:00:04 GMT -5 indian82 said:

Feb 16, 2014 22:31:30 GMT -5 gorvy said:

I think you have to ask why is college so importan -- not just college but the completion of a 4 year bachelor degree --- the answer is what I posted earlier-- there are more and more people competing for fewer and fewer non technical jobs due to technological advancements and longer living people. This is a structural problem that will not simply go away -- which is why you are still waiting.

I agree 100%. That's why I said we have to do what we can to get more manufacturing jobs somehow, like the VW auto plant, thus how we got going on this thread. We have to get more investing here, somehow. Companies are not bringing their money in due to taxes, not a liberal talking point, I know. Also, I know tariffs are controversial, but what can we do to get other countries to market our goods. Can we market U.S. quality?

We also need to get creative with our educational system for those kids for whom college is not an option for some reason. Better technical or trade programs. But yes, we are seeing the technology advancements come back to hurt the less educated. I think we are in agreement.

How do you compete with third world essentially slave labor for manufacturing. You don't