in the end are UAW workers really going to win?

My company would automate everything if we could. The only reason we don’t are technological hurdles. We’ve been incremental increasing it as the technology has advanced in component automation - both externally and what we’re developing internally.

It has absolutely nothing to do with a financial calculation.

 

I am usually not coming down on the side of labor unions. The auto industry is not exactly rolling in dough in terms of profits, and these types of stikes either lead to more automation faster, or help to degrade these companies financial health.

Having said that I was somewhat surprised by some of the starting wages, which were close to what you’d make in fast food. Also, when you see some of the pay and benefits management and upper end white collar employees get at these companies, it is a bit hypocritical that line workers need to sacrifice due to competitive pressures but apparently management not so much.

 

There are very few textile jobs in the U.S. Most clothing that we wear is made in Mexico or overseas. Translating that to the auto industry would mean that the U.S. would start importing large numbers of cars, or engage in some serious protectionist tariffs. In actuality, more car sales will shift to non-union companies (where the workers make a pretty good living, BTW) in the South. Ford, GM, and Chrysler will be left holding the bag because of their marriage to the UAW.

Robots do not automatically mean better quality than things made by humans. Toyota once took over a GM plant in California, I believe, and the first thing they did was rip out the robotics and re-train the workforce. Quality went up.

 

Hopefully, the next time the Big 3 go bankrupt, they do so in front of a republican president that is willing to rip up the union contracts, and allow the companies to re-locate to states that are tolerant towards non-union companies. Ford and GM are being held hostage by the union culture of the states they manufacture cars in. There is a reason that foreign companies like BMW and Toyota insist on manufacturing in places like South Carolina, Kentucky, and Texas. The unions are not only killing the cost competitiveness of the cars they make ($2500+ adder to every car), but also the quality.

I understand what you are saying, but I would also argue that upper management at a union company should get paid higher than their counterparts at a non-union company. Unfortunately, unions require an extra level of caution for every manager. There are a lot of things you can't say or do with a union that you can with non-union workers. There are a lot of additional procedures and headaches.

The workers' jobs are so well-protected that asking them to do something they don't want to do is nearly impossible. I worked in a union chemical plant a long time ago. I came up with an idea for an operator to look up the list of which relief valves need to be maintained in the current month. It would take less than 5 minutes to print out the list (which is maintained automatically based on when the relief valves were last serviced). Otherwise, the workers have to wait for management to print out the list, and then organize the work. I wrote up a procedure and submitted it to the operators, hoping that one of them would volunteer to sit at a computer for 5 minutes a month. The most vocal union operator pitched a fit, and said it wasn't going to happen. So I re-wrote the procedure from "How to Print Out the PSV List" to "How Not to Print Out the PSV List": "Do not log into the Engineering computer system. Do not enter the chemical plant name..." He went into my boss' office (next door to mine) and was really pissed, waving the procedure at him. My boss just laughed and shook his head. One of the operators (the one that had to organize the maintenance work) volunteered. If he hadn't, it wouldn't have gotten done. By the time I left that job, the operators really liked me and respected me (they did like a good smart-ass response once in a while). But it took a lot of extra effort on my part.

 

Well yeah, not in the US. But worldwide? Tons of textile jobs. And it isn't because of automation.

 

I think the thread is about U.S. jobs, primarily. There is more than one way for a job to go away. It doesn't matter to the worker if he's losing his job to a robot or a worker in another country, it works out the same to his bank account. And I would be very surprised to see a textile worker follow his job overseas and do the same work in Vietnam or Malaysia for what they are paying their employees.

 

GM has averaged around $7 billion in net earnings over the last 5 years. Ford's been a little more up and down, but had $18 billion in net earnings in 2021.

 

In my opinion, the best way for a worker to protect his job and maximize his pay is to do the job better than anyone else can, and occasionally ask around to see if any other company is willing to pay more. Withholding services along with other employees reduces profits, which reduces the ability of the company to pay you more. It's a form of extortion.

In many cases, the company is nervous about committing to long-term pay increases based on short-term increases in profits. What many (non-union) companies do to deal with this is to give out bonuses during good years. The union does not typically want bonuses during the good years; they want more salary every year. Companies do not go bankrupt because of what happens in the good years; they go bankrupt because costs get out of control in the bad years and the customers aren't buying. And unions negotiate salaries only during the good years for this reason.

Unions have driven entire industries to take manufacturing overseas. They also drive costs way up compared to non-union plants. And they drive quality down. The union mentality is to treat management as the enemy, such that only a union rep can talk to management. Quality does not happen without the full unfettered cooperation between workers and management. Every time Ford tries to sell a car against a Toyota vehicle, it is trying to sell a lower quality car at a higher price (+$2500). That's not a good business model for long-term success.

Unions served an important function when the workplace was extremely dangerous and the government was uninterested in regulating workplace safety. There was also no system for injured workers to recover money from the employer for the employer's negligence. That has all changed. Union workers are quick to point out that without the unions a hundred years ago, there would be no workplace safety improvements. And that is true. But that does not justify the union's existence today. Now it is purely about extracting money from the company.

 

US manufacturing unions ..worker versus management, strictly adversarial.

EU manufacturing Unions workers assist management, shares in profits
Total different mind set
US needs to be more like eu unions.

 

I think the unions have gone too far along the path they are on to change their approach to the companies they get their money from. It's multi-generational hatred and co-dependence. Any outsider can see that a divorce is necessary, but they can't, because it's all they know. Workers believe that the unions are the best way to extract money from greedy management, and management dreams of a world without unions so they can take advantage of (or abuse) the workers that have been taking advantage of the system. Too much water under the bridge. You would have to find people who had never worked under a union or been related to someone in a union to join your new unions, and find company managers who haven't spent most of their careers fighting unions.

The main purpose of the EU unions historically was to make sure that all workers were skilled craftsmen in their trades. It had nothing to do with how they were paid. The "unions" were essentially trade guilds, training workers to better their crafts and hone their skills. It would be a massive change compared to what we have.

 

I think sharing in the profit is key - and something that broke in our system around 50 years ago when we started going away from profit sharing and employee owned companies.

 

For the first time ever an OP posts a question where the answer is YES. Yep, the union can win.

GM and the UAW come to tentative agreement | CNN Business

Full details of the deal are not yet known, but its broad terms follow the lines of the deals already announced at Ford and Stellantis, including an immediate 11% raise in the top hourly wage rate, additional pay hikes totaling another 14% during the four-and-a-half years of the contract, as well as a return of the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) meant to protect workers from rising prices. When the COLA and guaranteed pay increases are combined together, they could lift members’ pay more than 30% over the life of the contract.

Less senior workers not already at the top pay scale would get even larger pay increases, perhaps as much as 150%. And temporary workers would be made permanent full-time workers after a few months on the job. There would also be improved retirement benefits for senior workers who have traditional pension plans and larger company contributions to the 401(k) plans of workers hired since 2007.

 

The union didn't win today. GM cancelled production of two mediocre vehicles and laid off 1300 workers, effective Jan. 1. Another 1,000 workers will be transferred to other production facilities to make less mediocre vehicles. Camaro and Bolt will no longer be made in Michigan.

GM to lay off 1,300 workers across two Michigan plants as vehicle production ends

 

The workers would have been laid off regardless of the new UAW contract. GM is completely ending production of the Camaro, it's not just the Michigan plant that will no longer be producing the car, it will no longer be produced anywhere. As far as the Bolt is concerned while production of the current model is ending it will probably be resumed later with a new model. Also the laid off workers will be offered positions at other GM plants.
https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a46146387/chevrolet-camaro-production-ends/
GM stops Chevy Bolt production (for now), lays off 1,314 workers

 

By the way the UAW contract has benefited autoworkers across the board including those employed by nonunion manufacturers.
Automakers with non-union workforce race to bump pay after UAW's record deals

 

That's one of the problems with unions. They produce a lower quality product than non-union plants. It's not that GM hasn't been making cars long enough--they've been making cars longer than Toyota. It's not that GM management does not want to make a quality car--I'm sure they do. The behaviors and attitudes of the union typically do not allow it to happen consistently. The union in most cases believes that management and workers should be enemies. And you do not talk to your enemies. No talk = quality problems. More quality problems = more layoffs. I haven't found any indication that Toyota has had a layoff since 1950.