Are Ford Employees Really Ford Enthusiast?

[Biker16]

"In one voice We say ONE FORD!"

 

Catchy phrase...

 

 

And Biker16... I know you are a Ford enthusiast.... You buy new Ford products every few years and I'm sure you have a boatload of Ford stock. Without a doubt... you really do believe and live "We say, ONE FORD!"

 

 

BTW...

I'm not sure what your point is? Do you think I am underpaid?

 

Most likely you are underpaid.

 

I was in the military, for a time, ( long story) the pay sucked, you could make alot more as a contractor doing the same job. For people in uniform it is more than a job, you can and don't get that type of buy in the civilian world. I know I hired and fired people, I have bought in to numerous flavor of the month corporate plans, I did my job very well, I was paid decently for doing it. In the end it was not enough, you can't pay someone minimum wage and expect an excessive amount of loyalty in return, espcially if that person had 0 chance of promotion or improved wages, effectively you are hiring a temporay worker, until they can find a better job elsewhere.

 

You are underpaid because you derived an additional reward for doing your job other than money. most self employed people are underpaid because they feel having their own business is more important than being paid more money to do the same thing by someone else.

 

my annoyance with this thread is that you infer that non enthusiasts are not as good as an enthusiasts at making cars. have you ever visisted an automotive assembly plant? I suggest you do, because what people love about cars is not really expressed in how a line worker does his or her job. It is better expressed by the engineer, or designers of the vehicle. this is where most mistakes, and recalls happen this where quality is most easy to control, this is where the performance of car is determined. the line worker is doing a task, in some plants like MAP up to 78 times an hour up to 10 hours per day. There is nothing to be enthusiastic about, other than to simply have a job. how many are truly enthusiastic about that?

[fordmantpw]

Nor are workers required to accept the pay that a company offers them, they have the right to collectively bargain for pay and benefits. If the workers does not like the pay they all can refuse to work. There is a basic inequality where WE BELIEVE we should accept what we are given or that the employers should hold all the leverage in negotiations with workers, both are not true.

 

If you don't like it and don't want to accept the pay or bennies, then leave! Why is that so damn difficult for people to grasp?

 

And I thought refusing to work was the same as quitting, or risking getting fired for not showing up?

 

are you saying is that collective bargaining is wrong and that it should be every worker for themselves?

 

That's the way it should be. I was always taught to look out for yourself, because nobody else is going to. The only person who can better yourself is you! I don't need collective bargaining to tell me what I think is right for me.

 

As the demand for workers goes up, or the supply of workers goes down, the wages will increase. On the contrary, as the supply of workers goes up, or the demand for workers goes down, then wages go down. Simple economics.

[fordmantpw]

There is nothing to be enthusiastic about, other than to simply have a job. how many are truly enthusiastic about that?

 

 

With 9% unemployment, ~91% of the people in this country should be!

[Ford Jellymoulds]

No, absolutely not seen to many UK documentaries on TV with Ford workers on the subject. They still look on old skool Fords with great reverence, fondness & respect and pride of having worked on them though. Football West Ham United enthusiasts, Yes.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4QLRYZokE0&feature=related

 

 

Nice Mk2 Cortina in the video though.

Edited October 20, 2011 by Ford Jellymoulds

[mettech]

Most likely you are underpaid.

 

I was in the military, for a time, ( long story) the pay sucked, you could make alot more as a contractor doing the same job. For people in uniform it is more than a job, you can and don't get that type of buy in the civilian world. I know I hired and fired people, I have bought in to numerous flavor of the month corporate plans, I did my job very well, I was paid decently for doing it. In the end it was not enough, you can't pay someone minimum wage and expect an excessive amount of loyalty in return, espcially if that person had 0 chance of promotion or improved wages, effectively you are hiring a temporay worker, until they can find a better job elsewhere.

 

You are underpaid because you derived an additional reward for doing your job other than money. most self employed people are underpaid because they feel having their own business is more important than being paid more money to do the same thing by someone else.

 

my annoyance with this thread is that you infer that non enthusiasts are not as good as an enthusiasts at making cars. have you ever visisted an automotive assembly plant? I suggest you do, because what people love about cars is not really expressed in how a line worker does his or her job. It is better expressed by the engineer, or designers of the vehicle. this is where most mistakes, and recalls happen this where quality is most easy to control, this is where the performance of car is determined. the line worker is doing a task, in some plants like MAP up to 78 times an hour up to 10 hours per day. There is nothing to be enthusiastic about, other than to simply have a job. how many are truly enthusiastic about that?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9B0IyPlqY8

[mettech]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRLVcmqfJeQ&feature=related

[akirby]

Nor are workers required to accept the pay that a company offers them, they have the right to collectively bargain for pay and benefits. If the workers does not like the pay they all can refuse to work. There is a basic inequality where WE BELIEVE we should accept what we are given or that the employers should hold all the leverage in negotiations with workers, both are not true.

 

are you saying is that collective bargaining is wrong and that it should be every worker for themselves?

 

I have no problem with collective bargaining or negotiating. But here are the 2 key differences:

 

I do not feel I am entitled to any portion of my company's profits (or losses). If my employer decides to offer a profit-sharing plan as part of my compensation that's fine. If they don't that's also fine. It's just one form of compensation. I expect to be paid based on my expertise and accomplishments regardless of the company's financial position. But I also respect the right of the company to change my compensation, withhold raises, withhold bonuses, etc. if business needs dictate. If I don't feel the business need is justified or I'm not happy with the terms then I have the right to quit and go work elsewhere. Or I can stay and accept the changes. It's my choice.

 

But the one thing I would never do is go on strike. Threatening to strike or actually striking is nothing more than extortion - trying to force the company to meet your terms. If you don't like the company's final offer then go somewhere else and let the company hire people who do like the terms.

 

Employers have just as much right to control their labor costs as the workers do to control their household budget.

 

Let's say you're paying someone $100/month to cut your grass which is the going rate for all lawn services. You've had the same lawn service for 3 years with no complaints. One day the lawn service mgr says "I noticed you bought a brand new Explorer. You must be making a lot of money. We're going to have to start charging you $150/month and if you don't give it to us then we're going to sit in front of your house and prevent any other lawn service from working on your lawn."

 

What would you do?

[fordmantpw]

I have no problem with collective bargaining or negotiating. But here are the 2 key differences:

 

I do not feel I am entitled to any portion of my company's profits (or losses). If my employer decides to offer a profit-sharing plan as part of my compensation that's fine. If they don't that's also fine. It's just one form of compensation. I expect to be paid based on my expertise and accomplishments regardless of the company's financial position. But I also respect the right of the company to change my compensation, withhold raises, withhold bonuses, etc. if business needs dictate. If I don't feel the business need is justified or I'm not happy with the terms then I have the right to quit and go work elsewhere. Or I can stay and accept the changes. It's my choice.

 

But the one thing I would never do is go on strike. Threatening to strike or actually striking is nothing more than extortion - trying to force the company to meet your terms. If you don't like the company's final offer then go somewhere else and let the company hire people who do like the terms.

 

Employers have just as much right to control their labor costs as the workers do to control their household budget.

 

Let's say you're paying someone $100/month to cut your grass which is the going rate for all lawn services. You've had the same lawn service for 3 years with no complaints. One day the lawn service mgr says "I noticed you bought a brand new Explorer. You must be making a lot of money. We're going to have to start charging you $150/month and if you don't give it to us then we're going to sit in front of your house and prevent any other lawn service from working on your lawn."

 

What would you do?

 

But anyone can cut grass...not just anyone can do "my" job...

[Joe771476]

Every one of those cars in the Ford employee lots should be a Ford Motor Company product! I wonder what the percentage actually is. And then compare that to the percentage of Toyota products at the Toyota plants. Back in the 60's when the Panasonic products came out, everybody had to save a lousy $20, so that's what they bought. Trouble was, even the people who made the American brands such as GE, Westinghouse, Philco bought the Panasonic products! Then one day they went to work and found the doors locked! MORONS! Essentially that's what happened with the Big 3. Only Ford's intelligence and your taxes saved the Big 3!

[NickF1011]

Every one of those cars in the Ford employee lots should be a Ford Motor Company product! I wonder what the percentage actually is. And then compare that to the percentage of Toyota products at the Toyota plants. Back in the 60's when the Panasonic products came out, everybody had to save a lousy $20, so that's what they bought. Trouble was, even the people who made the American brands such as GE, Westinghouse, Philco bought the Panasonic products! Then one day they went to work and found the doors locked! MORONS! Essentially that's what happened with the Big 3. Only Ford's intelligence and your taxes saved the Big 3!

 

If I worked at Ford in the 80's I probably wouldn't have bought one either. They were garbage. Mostly through no fault of the assembly line workers either. They were just horribly engineered products. Are you saying Ford's employees should have spent their hard-earned money on sub-standard product just for the sake of "company pride"? That's silly.

[silvrsvt]

If I worked at Ford in the 80's I probably wouldn't have bought one either. They were garbage. Mostly through no fault of the assembly line workers either. They were just horribly engineered products.

 

I have mixed feelings on this..but for the most part, most cars from 1972 till 1985 sucked really badly, no matter who made them.

 

Since 1979, my family has bought 18 different Ford products and only 2 of them where true POS...my parents 89 Taurus Wagon and my 02 SVT Focus. The 1982 Escort wagon was dangerously underpowered (like most I4 of the era), and couple other cars had mechanical issues that weren't bad either. Then again we've had cars that have been more or less flawless too...

 

 

[NickF1011]

I have mixed feelings on this..but for the most part, most cars from 1972 till 1985 sucked really badly, no matter who made them.

 

Since 1979, my family has bought 18 different Ford products and only 2 of them where true POS...my parents 89 Taurus Wagon and my 02 SVT Focus. The 1982 Escort wagon was dangerously underpowered (like most I4 of the era), and couple other cars had mechanical issues that weren't bad either. Then again we've had cars that have been more or less flawless too...

 

You can disagree if you want, but there was a reason that the transplants were able to grab a foothold, and it certainly wasn't because of their awesome styling.

[silvrsvt]

You can disagree if you want, but there was a reason that the transplants were able to grab a foothold, and it certainly wasn't because of their awesome styling.

 

No I agree that GM, Chrysler and Ford to a lesser extent made crappy cars back then....

[dennisw]

Wow, I guess since you can't complain about the contract anymore, you've decided to insult & paint with the broadest brush every ford hourly worker. You are not aquainted with the majority of

the hourly workforce at Ford Motor Company & yet, you look for just about anything to talk loads of BS about people you don't f%$#*ing know.

 

I cannot begin to understand how the MODS allow this constant defaming of a whole group of people. You're talking about my family & friends, who are huge Ford enthusiasts & don't have to

come to BON to talk about Ford. They talk Ford at home & work everyday, it's a part of their EVERYDAY life!

 

You're a Ford enthusiast ? Great & I thank you for your purchase & support for the company who helps to provide for my family but you demean yourself & insult me & my own when

you talk in ignorance about the people you don't know.

 

I said most not all, you must not be one of them. I know many Ford employees and have driven by the parking lots many times, my comment is accurate. Sorry if it hurts.

[aneekr]

Let's say you're paying someone $100/month to cut your grass which is the going rate for all lawn services. You've had the same lawn service for 3 years with no complaints. One day the lawn service mgr says "I noticed you bought a brand new Explorer. You must be making a lot of money. We're going to have to start charging you $150/month and if you don't give it to us then we're going to sit in front of your house and prevent any other lawn service from working on your lawn."

 

What would you do?

1.) Sell the Ford Explorer.

2.) Get one of these to handle lawn mowing:

3.) ...and a few of these to help fend off interlopers:

[Pioneer]

I see the UAW bashing was moved to this thread since the first one was closed.

 

Of course, we all knew it was going to happen. All you have to do is look at who started the thread. No wonder nobody comes here anymore.

[BrewfanGRB]

But anyone can cut grass...not just anyone can do "my" job...

 

Maybe. If the average lawn service is charging $100/mo, a homeowner might be willing to pay more for a well-recommended lawn service---or one that uses green-friendlier methods--or whatever the homeonwer places value on. It's just like any worker. The neighbor's pot-smoking 18 year old CAN cut grass, but he assuredly cannot do it as well, as reliably, etc as a professional lawn service owned by a guy with 20 years experience who is well-recommended. I might pay the neighbor kid 20 bucks in a pinch...but I'd rather pay the pro 50 bucks knowing he'll be there every week and leave my place looking good.

 

It just doesn't give the neighbor kid the right to camp out in my yard and run off the pro that I hired, just because the kid wants 30 bucks instead.

Edited October 21, 2011 by BrewfanGRB

[fordmantpw]

Maybe. If the average lawn service is charging $100/mo, a homeowner might be willing to pay more for a well-recommended lawn service---or one that uses green-friendlier methods--or whatever the homeonwer places value on. It's just like any worker. The neighbor's pot-smoking 18 year old CAN cut grass, but he assuredly cannot do it as well, as reliably, etc as a professional lawn service owned by a guy with 20 years experience who is well-recommended. I might pay the neighbor kid 20 bucks in a pinch...but I'd rather pay the pro 50 bucks knowing he'll be there every week and leave my place looking good.

 

It just doesn't give the neighbor kid the right to camp out in my yard and run off the pro that I hired, just because the kid wants 30 bucks instead.

 

Oh, I agree with you. Mine was just a play on the thought that SOME workers feel they deserve their pay because they don't feel anyone else can come in and do the job just as well as they can.

[Biker16]

I have no problem with collective bargaining or negotiating. But here are the 2 key differences:

 

I do not feel I am entitled to any portion of my company's profits (or losses). If my employer decides to offer a profit-sharing plan as part of my compensation that's fine. If they don't that's also fine. It's just one form of compensation. I expect to be paid based on my expertise and accomplishments regardless of the company's financial position. But I also respect the right of the company to change my compensation, withhold raises, withhold bonuses, etc. if business needs dictate. If I don't feel the business need is justified or I'm not happy with the terms then I have the right to quit and go work elsewhere. Or I can stay and accept the changes. It's my choice.

 

But the one thing I would never do is go on strike. Threatening to strike or actually striking is nothing more than extortion - trying to force the company to meet your terms. If you don't like the company's final offer then go somewhere else and let the company hire people who do like the terms.

 

Employers have just as much right to control their labor costs as the workers do to control their household budget.

 

Let's say you're paying someone $100/month to cut your grass which is the going rate for all lawn services. You've had the same lawn service for 3 years with no complaints. One day the lawn service mgr says "I noticed you bought a brand new Explorer. You must be making a lot of money. We're going to have to start charging you $150/month and if you don't give it to us then we're going to sit in front of your house and prevent any other lawn service from working on your lawn."

 

What would you do?

 

 

What if teh company decided to let go of 30,000 other workers, cut your pay, and closed your plant all in the span of 5 years, all the while telling you that they needed these concessions in order to stay in business? then a few years later they are making record profits due to no small part to your sacrifices, now behave like a drunken sailor reinstating dividends and handing out bonuses, while pleading poor when they talk about reinstating some of the "temporary" Concessions that were made?

 

The issues is not about how much they made it is about what they promised, vs what was actually done. Promises were made and some were broken, union or not in a employer/employee relationship not honoring commitments, is a very bad thing.

 

If someone offered you 150 dollars to cut their lawn would you turn it down?

[Biker16]

posted by itsmeuaw

 

Wall Street is tickled with this tentative agreement. Ford is rolling in profits. We don’t

get the concessions back? Management got theirs! We voted NO in 2009 to keep

the right to strike. But you wouldn’t know it from this contract...

 Walton Hills Stamping & Twin Cities

Assembly will close. Alternative Work Schedules (AWS).

They can make you work straight

time on Saturdays & Sundays,

4-10’s etc. No COLA

Legal Services Plan Terminated

VEBA inadequately funded

No pension increase for retirees.“Manufacturing Work Groups”

Mixing of Production & Skilled

Trades work.Outsourcing will continue &

increase.Lost break time not restored.

Time & a half after 8 hours of a

regular shift is not restored.

The Tier 2 will grow, increasing the

likelihood that we will all be Tier 2

eventually

 

[RichardJensen]

Time and a half after 8 hours regardless of whether OT is warranted over the pay period and time and a half for weekend pay are ridiculous benefits. Unions shouldn't be crying because they're gone. Maybe the UAW could've gotten a shift diff for weekend work, but that money would've come out of another pile somewhere else.

 

As far as the VEBA goes, that's the UAW's responsibility now. Ford has fully funded it, and if it's fallen short, that's on the UAW not Ford.

 

No pension increases for retirees. That's fair. Although, I'm sure the UAW could've gotten that, if they weren't so bent on getting as much money as possible for those currently employed.

 

No COLA: Again, I refer to the $16k in guaranteed bonuses, plus BOB KING'S remarks in favor of greater profit sharing as opposed to increased pay

 

Mixing of production and skilled: Again, those artificial distinctions don't exist outside the union milieu.

 

Lost break time not restored. That's fair. Although, once again, I'm sure that time could've been restored, at the sacrifice of some of the $16k in guaranteed bonuses over the next 4 years.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And the legal benefit? Losing the legal services benefit? Cry me a river. I get that assembly is lousy work, and I don't begrudge generous pay packages for hourly workers, but there comes a point when stuff just seems idiotic.

 

Like when UAW members ignore the fact that white collar retirees have had their health benefits terminated, and bellyache because they no longer get some glorified version of PPS (which costs like $100/year!)

Edited October 21, 2011 by RichardJensen

[BrewfanGRB]

There's that damn COLA again. And really, biker...you REALLY struggle to understand why there's so much public pushback toward the UAW? Why is it so damned difficult to understand if the membership had gotten their precious COLA, they wouldn't have gotten 16 THOUSAND in bonuses over 4 years?

 

Losing the "per day OT" does suck...but welcome to the REAL WORLD. The law only requires non-exempt employees be paid OT for 40 hours WORKED per week. The non-exempt employees at my job love this when they have Labor Day as PTO and put in "OT" to help with work on the days after the holiday, but don't get OT pay for it--because it's not hours WORKED. Or try being me: I'm a salaried employee--but my presence is still monitored (but I'll admit not strictly by my manager) for lunch time, breaks and time I arrive. But, the work to be done has to be done--if it takes more time to do it, I have to put it in and I don't compensated for it at all. Yeah--try that on for size--those white collars you love to rail against? Working 50 hour weeks and getting paid for 40. Really unbelievable.

Edited October 21, 2011 by BrewfanGRB

[Biker16]

There's that damn COLA again. And really, biker...you REALLY struggle to understand why there's so much public pushback toward the UAW? Why is it so damned difficult to understand if the membership had gotten their precious COLA, they wouldn't have gotten 16 THOUSAND in bonuses over 4 years?

 

Losing the "per day OT" does suck...but welcome to the REAL WORLD. The law only requires non-exempt employees be paid OT for 40 hours WORKED per week. The non-exempt employees at my job love this when they have Labor Day as PTO and put in "OT" to help with work on the days after the holiday, but don't get OT pay for it--because it's not hours WORKED. Or try being me: I'm a salaried employee--but my presence is still monitored (but I'll admit not strictly by my manager) for lunch time, breaks and time I arrive. But, the work to be done has to be done--if it takes more time to do it, I have to put it in and I don't compensated for it at all. Yeah--try that on for size--those white collars you love to rail against? Working 50 hour weeks and getting paid for 40. Really unbelievable.

 

 

Social Security benefits to increase 3.6%

 

Goddam, throw grandma from the train.

 

Fuck grandma and her damn COLA.

 

This a negotiated outcome. that is up to $16,000 not guaranteed 16,000 dollars. put it this way Give up a COLA increase over 4 years and some restitution for the sacrifices of the past 4 years.

 

 

Will inflation gobble gains in UAW contracts with automakers?

For a quick look, let's use round numbers. If someone makes $50,000 a year, then a $1,000 lump sum at GM could cover 2% inflation. A $1,500 lump sum at Ford would cover 3% inflation.

 

Car companies, of course, are attempting to control costs. UAW contracts had cost-of-living increases in the past, but inflation-driven pay bumps were halted to get carmakers back on the road to recovery.

Edited October 22, 2011 by Biker16

[RichardJensen]

The $16k is guaranteed. Profit sharing is over and above this amount.

[RichardJensen]

And guess who sold out UAW members looking for reinstated COLA:

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304778304576375882628653982.html

 

The United Auto Workers union is open to discussing wider use of profit-sharing plans instead of fixed pay increases for its members, a key shift as the union nears contract talks with Detroit auto makers.