Unions and Modern Car Building

[laborsmith]

The 1.4 used in the Sonic is assembled in Flint, MI.

This engine was developed in Europe and the non-North American ones are assembled there, in Austria, I believe.

As to union-management relations, I generally had a good working relationship with management although I tend to be somewhat adversarial. Those persons in management I could not work with also had difficulty working with their peers.

Laborsmith

 

[LS1notFOUND]

my 5 speed is from Austria and the 1.8L is from Korea I think from the sticker.

 

[laborsmith]

And my 6-speed manual is also from Austria.
I wonder where the automatic is assembled?

Laborsmith

 

[LS1notFOUND]

And my 6-speed manual is also from Austria.
I wonder where the automatic is assembled?

Laborsmith

Next time I'm by the dealership I'll take a peak at the window stickers and see.

My money is on Getrag making the manuals as I believe they produce a whole lot of transmissions in Austria.

 

[Supertuner]

A little late to the post. I am glad that the majority of the vehicles made by the Big 3 are union made. GM, Ford, and Chrysler provide good paying jobs to its union members. What is wrong with someone who wants to earn a living assembling vehicles? Shouldn't that person be able to afford the very products they are producing? Henry Ford thought so... A company is only as good as the products and services it offers. A company will not survive without sound management also. To blame the union worker this day and age is short-sighted at the very least.

 

[Sonny@bnr]

It's not the worker it's the leaders. Gm pays to much legacy cost on its vehicles it builds

 

[laborsmith]

Sonny, I know you are in a right to work for less state, but come on, man, look at how many retirees contribute to Florida's economy because of those legacy costs?

And if I recall correctly, the UAW has taken responsibility for the medical aspect of those legacy costs.

GM Management did prove to be less adept at running the company then an outside observer would expect, and I believe that contributed more to GM's financial woes than legacy costs.


Laborsmith

 

[Sonny@bnr]

I wouldn't say I'm biased, but I work for a company who is half unionized and the other half isn't. And lemme tell you the union side is very lazy and I have to pick up all there slack. And when they don't do there job they don't get in trouble.
I just feel like back in the day people where in unions and proud to work.
Now I feel like a union is just a way to not work and get paid. :-/
Gm has its problems and the union is one of them.
I hate going down this route because I want gm to do so well but somehow they mess it up.
At least there putting out cars I like now but there still not up to par with allot of cars. And the union is one reason why it's hard for gm to compete.

 

[laborsmith]

I am biased. Anyone using a handle such as laborsmith is putting out their position before the first word is read.

Before I retired, I actively engaged in the labor relations process wherever I worked and during over 90% of my employee career I held positions that would be "grievance chairperson" although never with that title. Most of the employees I represented were good employees. Every time I represented, I defended the rights of the employee avoiding making a distinction between good and bad as best I could. That is the duty of fair representation and I took pride in being considered the go to guy for those situations.

I believe the American work force is preponderantly "good" and one of the reasons I so believe is it remains amongst the most productive, if not the most productive, of any workforce worldwide.

That said, I recognize there are faults to be found in the movement. There is a tendency to be adversarial (I am guilty although I always tried to do better) and the whole law regarding organizing is fundamentally flawed to the extent it barely serves anyone's needs, labor or management.

Perhaps there are some good employes among those organized at your work place but the less stellar grab most of the notice. If so, your work place sounds pretty normal to me, whether there is a union presence or not.


Laborsmith

 

[Sonny@bnr]

thanks for being so civil and honest labor

 

[furygoat]

The biggest problem I have with my union is that they back Obama. Other than that I work my butt off and do everything to try and keep the company competitive. FYI I am in united steelworkers and employed for B.F Goodrich. Sure there are some lazy people. There are lazy people everywhere though. I don't necessarily think that unions are the best thing in the world but I don't appreciate the sentiment that we are all sorry, worthless, and get paid to sit around. That's no more the case than it is anywhere. I know plenty of people who sit in offices all day and browse the Internet watching YouTube until time to go home. So...

 

[laborsmith]

I would guess that among other reasons a labor organization backs a candidate is they find such a candidate's thinking aligns with theirs. Obama, for example, makes statements that he considers government can have a positive impact on the life of a citizen and by extension a labor organization could have a positive impact on the life of a member.

I am retired now, but during the majority of my working life I was either a public employee or employed by an agency partially funded by state and feder al funds. (I am a social worker, and not relevant, but earned my degree as a social worker from the University of Michigan.)

So when a labor organization chooses to support a candidate, the choice is usually made based on self interest, hopefully their interest as a union and the member's interest are the same (or, to use the language of a social worker, congruent) and generally it is.

I do not know about the steel workers, but AFSCME is quite limited on the amount of dues that can be spent on political campaigning, therefore has a whole panoply of fund raising efforts to which many although not most of its members contribute. These funds are separate from dues income and the accounting is strictly adhered to. The law for public employee involvement in election campaigns is long standing, well settled, and fully enforced.

Laborsmith

 

[SSpeckerwood]

i love my sonic... its even black like the owner of GM.

 

[furygoat]

I would guess that among other reasons a labor organization backs a candidate is they find such a candidate's thinking aligns with theirs. Obama, for example, makes statements that he considers government can have a positive impact on the life of a citizen and by extension a labor organization could have a positive impact on the life of a member.

I am retired now, but during the majority of my working life I was either a public employee or employed by an agency partially funded by state and feder al funds. (I am a social worker, and not relevant, but earned my degree as a social worker from the University of Michigan.)

So when a labor organization chooses to support a candidate, the choice is usually made based on self interest, hopefully their interest as a union and the member's interest are the same (or, to use the language of a social worker, congruent) and generally it is.

I do not know about the steel workers, but AFSCME is quite limited on the amount of dues that can be spent on political campaigning, therefore has a whole panoply of fund raising efforts to which many although not most of its members contribute. These funds are separate from dues income and the accounting is strictly adhered to. The law for public employee involvement in election campaigns is long standing, well settled, and fully enforced.

Laborsmith

They back Obama because there once was a time when Democrats really were for blue collar workers. Obviously now all they are for is making Americans as dependant on them as possible by way of social programs catering to the laziest percentage of the population. They will continue to back whatever democratic candidate is running for office no matter who the candidate is. When it all comes down to it they give money to the candidate in hopes of getting something in return once he is in office. Personally I don't like giving them my union dues but I don't have much choice. I just don't appreciate being labled lazy even though I work hard and pay taxes. The lazy ones are the "99%" that sit on their asses with their hands out begging for scraps from the government. Clearly this is just my opinion though.

 

[laborsmith]

That said, what are your real thoughts about the union?

Laborsmith

 

[mitdr774]

As a member of a Union (IBEW L.U. 58) and having worked in several auto plants for retooling, Orion assembly included, I would have to say that the majority of workers do show up and put in an honest days work. You get the slug here and there, but for the most part everyone does their job as they are supposed to.

I get paid good money for what I do. I appreciate that fact. That being said, its also very easy to have a major accident or death with my line of work. Some of the pay is due to the risk and knowledge needed to safely perform the job. Unfortunately you cant cure stupid, and some of that exists in others. 277V does not feel nice.

 

[PeteSkids]

I agree with furygoat, there are lazy asses in any work place. That being said, I'm no expert by any means but I just wanted to say that I feel unions have just about outlived there usefulness. Sure, they were greatly needed when kids were working in factories loosing digest, limbs and lives, and fat cat business owners weren't paying workers jack monkey squat. But times and laws have changed. If you get hurt on the job now you can file for workers comp and if your working a risky job, odds are your company has a whole slue of laws that they are required to heed to in order to keep employees safe. Also, there is this thing called minimum wage. I got by just fine when I was earning it. I busted my ass and got a few raises to get where I am just like the next guy. (been with the company 14 years and am just started making $15 an hour. not as much as most of my friends my age but it pays the bills.) However and IMHO, the only reason unions are still around, other than to require dues, is to provide support to workers that are having legal trouble when companies fail to follow safety requirements, try to refuse workers comp and to help keep people employed. So they are still needed to an extent. Unfortunately, those aforementioned "lazy asses" that take advantage of the unions get all the attention and give all the other hard working union workers a bad rep. And remember, it's the lazy asses that want something for nothing everywhere that ruin it for everyone else.

sorry, that turned out a little longer than I intended.

 

[laborsmith]

Bumped for Incendiary.

And yes, I was a piece of work, but the people paying dues were happy with my performance, not so much so the management people and the union bosses.

Laborsmith

 

[2012LTZ]

I think both sides share the guilt, but I don't go for the comment by Supertuner that everybody liked.
Just because you build something doesn't mean you should be able to afford it. That's just silly.
Also, Henry Ford was brutal to his work force and was one of the reasons collective bargaining got more popluar.
He was also chummy with Adolf Hitler.

 

[felix]

Have you guys seen the video GM out out about the Orion plant making the Sonic? In the video people are assembling our cars in rolled up sweat pants and t shirts. They look like they are in their pajamas. I would bet that someone in the union somewhere along the way said "we don't like uniforms, we should be allowed to wear whatever we want to work" and now you have people showing up to work in pajamas. It's a joke. Unions go too far.
I'm a Navy veteran (machinist Mate 3rd class) and I'm a nurse. I work for the veterans hospital. I'm in a nurses union. From my own point of view I see that unions protect the lazy. People that should've had their nurses license taken away from them years ago, are virtually untouchable because they have tenure. They treat the patients (mostly WWII vets) like animals. Completely unsympathetic and rude. But it'll take an act of God to fire them because they have union backing.
After years and years of renegotiating the nurses contact with the veterans hospital, I now have 12 sick days a year. And it's use them or lose them so we are basically encouraged to call in sick once a month. Someone has to cover the shift so another nurse will get paid overtime to cover my sick call and I'll still get paid for the day. This happens to many times to count. Unions have turned this place into a money pit. But what do they care, veterans affairs is flipping the bill and in an election year no politician in their right mind is going to cut funding for the veterans affairs. WAY TO GO UNIONS.

I will race any mini van on the streets....