Jaah

There is much truth in what you say but again I have to point out that the us joe's on the floor been too comfortable with the good fortune we enjoyed for many years and have also grown complacent.

I also believe this but everyone should plan on being out of a job soon, its a very long shot.

I mostly agree with you but we were not in a position to strike for a new model, it would have been a wildcat and Ford could have obtained a court ordered injunction within 48 hrs. Huge fines would have followed and possibly Ford would have just closed us early and stepped up the launch of the new interceptor and by spring of 2010 we would be forgotten about. We missed our chance a few years back, water under the bridge now. If anyone insists on blaming the union perhaps they should look back at the leadership of Buzz and Whitey. Ken and Scott are dealing with a situation that should have been resolved years ago, I think it is much too late now to expect a new interceptor at STAP. Are we a bunch of pussies? Yea, I kind of think we are, we were too complacent for too many years and the time for action just passed us by while we waited for the union leadership to save us. In the end we are just as much to blame as anyone.

I don't hear the Americans whining and crying about STAP either. Your point?

Why did you quote me with this statement? There is nothing in it that explains how we would be better off with the old contract and if you think I was defending our leadership, your wrong.

I don't see how you are more "screwed" with this package than with the old one, maybe you could explain it to me, or did you think Ford would come running back to the table with a better package if we turned it down?

I have been a big proponent of a no vote based on "No Product? No Concessions! Vote No." all along. I voted Yes. You can ridicule me if you like maybe I deserve it but for me it came down to one issue, with STAP closing is the closure language better as is or is it better in the proposal. I agree it was a low move by the CAW to rush this through and it was asked by many to delay the vote but that did not happen and so a choice had to be made. Based on the information I had it was obvious the closure language was better, not great, not even good but just better. I stood with ballot in hand for a long time pondering the ramifications of YES or NO, it was agonizing and in the end I just had to put my faith in the bargaining committee and leadership as I had no other resouce available to me nor the time to find any. Did I make a mistake , maybe. Did I make an informed decision, not really. Am I happy about it, definitely not. To be told there was an agreement Friday at 2:00pm and be handed the highlights Sat at 10:00am and forced decide my future after a short meeting is probably lowest thing I have seen the CAW do in all my years here. Hopefully there will be better times ahead for everyone but it won't be at STAP.

Just came from the ratification meeting and vote. I am sad, angry and depressed. I feel like a dog who has been kicked so many times it just lies their whimpering. I would be surprised if this is voted down. :unsure:

Caw's ratification vote needs to be delayed at least a week or preferably two. A vote requiring STAP workers to decide their future based on a one short meeting is not realistic. Why the rush, give us the details, not just the highlights, and some time to digest and discuss whats being offered. I will be voting NO tomorrow rather than voting YES for something I do not have the time to fully understand.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-b...article1345358/

We tried that last concession vote when OAC turned it down and it did not do us any good. Time for a different approach. Better to go down pounding my chest than without a whimper. Your right about one thing "Ford will only do what it has to do" and concessions will not change that. Now if they offer good packages and something for the other locations I will most certainly support my bargaining committee. Those of us proposing a NO vote are doing so based on what we have been reading and the contract they are trying to push through in the UAW. It would be great to be surprised and be able to cast a YES vote but as I alluded to, myself and many others don't expect it.

WardsAuto.com, Oct 27, 2009 8:00 AM NEW YORK – Stephen Girsky may have been chosen by the Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Assn. to occupy a seat on General Motors Co.’s new board of directors, but his first duty is to stockholders and not the United Auto Workers union, he says. The VEBA administers benefits for retired GM employees covered under the auto maker’s contract with the UAW, which consented to Girsky’s appointment. “(UAW President) Ron Gettelfinger told me my first duty is to the stockholders,” Girsky tells Ward’s during a recent auto industry forum here. The union holds a 39% stake in the new GM.

This will put the international in panic mode. Be prepared for the onslaught of doom and gloom rhetoric to follow. Expect a lot of pressure from them.

I work at STAP and yes we need new product. We have been told we are done in 2011. However I am hoping you accept the contract. Why? Well if Ford does have a replacement for the CV/GM they are holding off an announcement until the UAW settles. If you vote the concessions down they may just use this to sweeten the pot for you. I think Ford is more interested in appeasing the 41000 UAW members than the 7000 CAW members. The savings they get from you accepting the concessions far out weighs any savings they might get from us. My advice VOTE NO.

Ummm..... was it the "peace of mind" sentence that confused you despite the previous two paragraphs saying a YES vote wont save jobs. I do agree in part with you... Vote NO.