Just like it was BEFORE unions in the roaring ’20’s.”

Those are spurious correlations at best.

No direct causality can be proven between the decline in unions and the increase in CEO pay and ‘decrease’ in worker wages.
Just because they appear to happen proportionally at the same time does not mean one caused the other.

I’ll go there.

Get rid of big Government expenditures and controls, and we all be fine, if you work to support yourselves.

Union membership is down to single digits. And, hey, so is wage growth.

Nope, no correlation there. (sarcasm)

I don’t know the specifics of this particular strike, but neither does GoofNuts.

I just know then when unions were strong, wages were up and CEO pay was reasonable. Now that Reagan and the CONs have busted unions for thirty years, wages are down and CEO pay is sky high.

Just like it was BEFORE unions in the roaring ’20’s.

“What’d they do? Move you to crystal palace?”

Nope just another part of Plant 1.

“Ya don’t hire a person to be skilled in one job, compensate them ONLY for that job, and than expect them to perform a half dozen other jobs”

You mean like pay them to run an N/C mill and then expect them to deburr parts or run a drill press while the N/C machine is running. Rather than sit on their but? Oh the horror.

I’ll be the first to admit that management did some stupid things around there, but expecting someone to do something productive while an automated machine is running wasn’t one of them.

Costs:
- 4 weeks of income at current value (assume $50k annualized).
- Reduced goodwill between the two parties (intangible).

Benefits:
- $7/mo (future value starting in 20 years, assuming the average striker is 45 yrs old).
- $9/mo annuity for 3 years.
- Removal of reduced time off for new employees (no impact to current employees).
- Removal of job code changes (intangible).

IRR = 0 IF the employee lives to be 109.

So…when that employee has his 110th birthday, HOT DAMN, he made money.

Ya got that one right.

I hope you are not lying when you say your son reads this blog too.

All will be wondering why you didn’t answer the questions I asked of you.

There are an awful lot of otherwise good folks working in those union jobs that against their better interests vote for Republicans.

I hope they read some of the con posts here.

I hope the cons will keep giving them good reads about just how the Republican party regards them. Thanks cons!

Ya think?

LOL!

V I C T O R Y for the Union though. The Union got rid of JR!

(He did such good work for the Union though, they wanted to keep him on, but somehow, for some strange reason, they didn’t.)

B F D

What’d they do? Move you to crystal palace?

You probably were not there to see how things changed in many areas of plant 1 starting about 2002.

ANY reasonable person would have agreed it was wrong. Ya don’t hire a person to be skilled in one job, compensate them ONLY for that job, and than expect them to perform a half dozen other jobs. You don’t then demand that they do this for weeks at a time without down time. Even if they will do it willingly. Quality suffers. People get hurt.

I don’t know about you? I want my airplanes built by people who know what they are doing and are not pushed to the point of collapse.

Yeah there’s an element of that Rox.

There’s also a good amount of noise from folks who are just assholes by nature.

I was in the Union from the day I hired in until after I quit the factory.

There is more to this victory then just the benefits won. There were no take aways.

Management inside will know that. They are gonna walk on eggshells around the workers for a good while. Scabs have been found out. They’ll find it lonelier on breaks, at lunch,

and when they need someone to get their back.

Figuratively, that long badly functioning company has been rapped on the nose. That will slow them crossing their work force in the near and distant future.

Too bad cons. Ya lost.

TOLD ya!

Won’t the Union let you join them?

Or is it too easy to sit on your tail and blog all day and live off the public dole?

Much better package then Beechcraft, in fact.

If either side gets too greedy that’s a problem – a lose/lose situation in the long-run.

If both sides work together, then there’s no reason for a Union to get in the way.

What’s that Union membership rate down to now, 10%, 9%? Somewhere in there.

I’d sure hate to give up 3 – 5% of my pay to some Union that has become as corrupt as Managment was supposed to be. In that situation, the employee has two bosses both as bad as each other, the Company and the Union. Rah Rah Union!

And to see 3 – 5% of my pay not spent on labor/managment negotiations for my benefit, but for donations to a political party not of my choice, that would be some harsh BS. Rah Rah Union!

What’s that Union done for the American Auto Industry? Got too greedy and bankrupt it! Bye Bye Jobs. Rah Rah Union!

Wishful thinking.

They were already getting the 4% and COLA. They didn’t need to strike for that. Try to think of matching up costs and benefits. :)

Workers lost 4000 during the strike (assuming they didn’t pick up any dinero anywhere else).

In return they got a four percent raise on top of COLA. Assuming his 50K per annum wage, that’s 2K a year just for the 4 percent raise. They lost 4K and negotiated for 6K. Not only that, the COLA if it matches inflation will be another 3-5 percent on top.

They came out way ahead.

These higher wages will circulate through the local economy, instead of getting plowed into more gasoline for some CEO’s motor yacht.

We owe the Machinists a big thank you. This is the economic plan that really works–trickle UP and OUT economics.

If you’re making $50k annualized (a reasonable number), and you give up 4 weeks of pay – that’s about $4000. At $9/month, that’s 444 months.

37 years to break-even. And THAT assumes zero inflation. In real dollars, it’s probably 50 years. I restate my earlier comments about unionites and economics.

Oh wait, there’s that additional $9/mo in healthcare. But that’s only for the next 36 months.

So… let’s call it 48 years to break-even.

Gotta hand it to those union leaders…they’re brilliant.

Not at HBC.

Fact: it takes more than 50% MORE labor hours today to build a Bonanza than it did in 1988. Understandably, there are changes in FAA requirements that result in increased assembly time, and product enhancements also have a similar effect.

I can’t comment with data on other product lines, but this fact remains: productivity has gone down significantly over the past 20 years on just this one product.