“NO DEALS, NO WHEELS!” United Auto Workers (UAW) union members yelled while walking the picket line out front of Ford’s Michigan Assembly Plant, where The Blue Oval builds its Rangers and hot-selling Broncos. “BRING BACK C.O.L.A!” they continued. “NO CONTRACT, NO WORK!” I heard blaring from a megaphone just a few feet from where I stood. “HOW MANY TIERS WE WANT?” a worker yelled, only to be followed by a cry from the rest of the workers who had just started their noon strike-shift: “NO TIERS!” It was a gray, gloomy, temperate day, and the seriousness of the atmosphere was palpable. Thousands of workers were on strike, fighting for higher wages, an end to a “tier-system” that they feel is unfair, and much more. Here’s what it was like talking with those workers.
I’ll begin by saying that I’m really not that well-versed when it comes to labor issues like this one, nor do I view one side as good and one side as bad. To me, this is all a byproduct of a system that aims to maximize shareholder value and remain competitive with non-unionized shops like Tesla and Toyota. As a result of these goals, automakers have incentive to minimize expenses, and one consistent expense is labor. Still, like anyone negotiating a salary for a job only they can work, the UAW is coming to the bargaining table to fight against those tendencies inherent to our system. Is the UAW asking for too much, with its initial 40 percent pay increase (over four years) demand? Some people think so, while others think it’s fair given how much CEO pay has risen in a similar period. I’m not here to tell you what I think, I’m just here to tell you what I learned from union workers at Ford’s Michigan Assembly Plant.
I talked with UAW spokesperson Jim McNeil just outside of the assembly plant. He was extremely gracious, welcoming me and — despite all the yelling and cheering around us — answering my questions with patience.
He mentioned that one of the key things the Union is fighting against is the tier system. He broke it down for me:
- Tier 1: Pre-2007 full-time employees. These folks got a pension and retiree healthcare.
- Tier 2: Post-2007 full-time employees. These folks have to make do with a 401K, not a pension plan. These folks, when hired, don’t reach a top pay bracket for eight years, and could do the same work alongside a more senior peer while being paid significantly less. Most employees, McNeil told me, fall into this Tier 2 bracket, and therefore lack retirement security.
- Tier 3: “Temp” workers. They make $15.78 an hour at Stellantis and $16.20 at Ford, McNeil told me. This is too low, he believes, especially given that “temp” workers could remain “temp” for years. This type of job, McNeil told me, is not secure, and does not include profit sharing.
McNeil also pointed out that, around 2008, when both Chrysler and GM went into bankruptcy and Ford staved it off by smartly getting loans before they became impossible to get, the UAW made significant sacrifices. Now that the Big Three are doing so well financially, the UAW wants a piece of the pie.
View this post on Instagram
I later chatted with another worker, named Marlin, who said about the UAW’s strategy for securing better pay and benefits: “They got the money, but we have the power,” with “they” being automaker leadership. He said the workers aren’t asking for millions, just a living wage, which should be possible given that automakers have been raking in profits by “price-gouging” these last couple of years. Marlin also mentioned the UAW’s desire for cost-of-living adjustments (COLA), as “wages that worked a few years ago just don’t work [today].”
View this post on Instagram
There’s Shawn Fournier, a paint shop worker at Ford’s Michigan Assembly Plant, in the video above. I’d noticed him picketing right there on Michigan Avenue in front of the Bronco/Ranger plant, eliciting hundreds of loud honks from supportive drivers who passed by. He talks about Tier 1 “legacy workers,” and how it took him — an “in-progression” employee — almost a decade to reach the same pay tier as a legacy worker. The end of this system; a cost of living adjustment; and a pay hike in general, especially during this time of relative prosperity for automakers and especially after the UAW’s sacrifices during the bankruptcy era — these are what the UAW is currently fighting for.
As for their statements, here’s what Ford had to say on Thursday:
DEARBORN, Mich., Sept. 14, 2023 – At 8 p.m. this evening at Solidarity House in Detroit, the United Auto Workers presented its first substantive counterproposal to Ford a few hours from the expiration of the current four-year collective bargain agreement.
On the key economic issues that matter most to our UAW-represented employees, Ford has submitted four proposals to the UAW since Aug. 29. The last offer Ford submitted was historically generous, with large wage increases, cost of living adjustments, more paid time off, additional retirement contributions and more.
Unfortunately, the UAW’s counterproposal tonight showed little movement from the union’s initial demands submitted Aug. 3. If implemented, the proposal would more than double Ford’s current UAW-related labor costs, which are already significantly higher than the labor costs of Tesla, Toyota and other foreign-owned automakers in the United States that utilize non-union-represented labor.
The union made clear that unless we agreed to its unsustainable terms, it plans a work stoppage at 11:59 p.m. eastern. Ford has bargained in good faith in an effort to avoid a strike, which could have wide-ranging consequences for our business and the economy. It also impacts the very 57,000 UAW-Ford workers we are trying to reward with this contract. Our hourly employees would take home nearly 60% less on average with UAW strike pay than they would from working. And without vehicles in production, the profit-sharing checks that UAW workers could expect to receive early next year will also be decimated by a significant strike.
Ford remains absolutely committed to reaching an agreement that rewards our employees and protects Ford’s ability to invest in the future as we move through industry-wide transformation.
Here’s GM‘s statement from Friday:
September 15: GM Statement on UAW Strike
The UAW has informed GM that they are on strike at Wentzville Assembly in Missouri as of 11:59 p.m. on Thurs, Sept. 14. We are disappointed by the UAW leadership’s actions, despite the unprecedented economic package GM put on the table, including historic wage increases and manufacturing commitments. We will continue to bargain in good faith with the union to reach an agreement as quickly as possible for the benefit of our team members, customers, suppliers and communities across the U.S. In the meantime, our priority is the safety of our workforce.
And, while I can’t find Stellantis’s official statement on its website, here’s a statement that Reuters posted a few days ago:
“We are extremely disappointed by the UAW leadership’s refusal to engage in a responsible manner to reach a fair agreement in the best interest of our employees, their families and our customers. We immediately put the Company in contingency mode and will take all the appropriate structural decisions to protect our North American operations and the Company.”
It’s an unprecedented strike in which the UAW is simultaneously picketing all three Big Three automakers. And while the strike only affects GM’s Wentzville Colorado/Canyon mid-size truck plant, Stellantis’s Toledo, Ohio Jeep Gladiator/Wrangler plant, and Ford’s Michigan Assembly Ford Ranger/Bronco plant, the UAW could decide to strike at even more locations. And if that continues on long-term, that could be devastating for automakers and workers alike.
Hopefully, there’s a resolution soon.
It seems like these situations are always presented as if one side is right, and the other is wrong.
There are infinite ways to be wrong.
If you ask me – and none of you did – the easiest way to tell if somebody is full of shit without understanding the details of the argument is if you ask them why they’re right and they answer by telling you how the other guy is wrong.
You’ll notice that one side has seen payment raises of 1,460% while the other saw their wages raise by 18% in 4 decades. The side that got obscene and incomprehensible raises did so while running the economy to the ground multiple times and getting bailed out by taxpayers.
There are infinite ways to be wrong for sure. One could argue that it was wrong that governments didn’t even try ot put a stop to this trend. It was wrong that workers did not fight harder. It is extremely wrong that corporations have been spending fortunes on trying to not spend a fortune in better compensation, and it is especially wrong how much they’ve historically invested in dividing workers and controlling unions.
I appreciate the demonstration, thank you.
Since having the name Ivan is one of the infinite ways to be wrong, I feel justified in totally ignoring anything you may have to say.
Rhetoric can be logical, and still fail, Ivan.
Conversely rhetoric can be completely illogical and still gain popular support.
Also, you completely failed at ignoring me.
Only vaguely related: there’s a huge amount of overlap between the folks hating manufacturing unions because they allegedly encourage rampant laziness, and the folks who dismiss criticism of police departments by claiming police violence is only from just a few bad apples (and de facto supporting an extremely strong union that viciously protects their worst members).
Carry on.
Is there really? Or do you just feel that way? I’d love to see data on this.
My feeling is that people who are unconditionally pro-cop hold that view independently of their view on unions. There is no ‘de-facto support’ for the union just because you want cops to be immune from responsibility for their actions.
I also, though, have no data.
Prepare to be astroturfed by shill accounts and bots that are anti union.
Unions are why we have 8 hours work days and weekends. Pay and salaries have not kept up with cost of living. Older employees get fat cat pensions, and younger employees are not getting paid enough, with less retirement and protection in the future.
Again, for reference, the CEO to worker ratio has gone bananas.
https://files.epi.org/uploads/2022CEOPay4-950×950.png
Cut the fat at the top, distribute the wealth to the workers generating the value in production/design/engineering.
If I was a CEO of GM I would feel absolutely ashamed to take home 32 million dollars. There is no way one figurehead is worth that much.
I worked at Milwaukee Tool when they laid off several thousand employees, meanwhile the CEO took at 10 million dollar bonus. Disgusting.
Who would bother to reply to you since you’ve already declared anybody who disagrees with you will be considered an astroturfing bot or shill?
But you are though. And I agree.
Absolutely freaking crazy!!!! The reason the workers don’t get a pension and get a seld-directed 401(k) is BECAUSE THEY WENT ON STRIKE TO DEMAND IT!!!!!!! The unions are looking for total compensation for employees to reach near $200K after only a couple of years of line work. 99.99999% of people have NO CLUE what a CEO does – so don’t think you deserve to be paid like one after drinking your way through high school. Move the plants to El Salvador.
If that was the real problem, why didn’t the factories move decades ago?
Holy made up numbers Batman! The average UAW workers earns $18.54. There aren’t any factory line workers making $96 an hour!
Sure, I don’t know what a CEO does but is it worth $76,712 for every day of the year? LOL
Tongue, meet boot.
Isn’t this a supply vs demand issue? If you ask too much (demand) then the supply of work (factories) might move more and more to lower cost countries, from Mexico, to deeper south, Asia etc. Only with government pressure (tariffs) those factories can come back, but it is an anti-capitalistic mechanism which then gets paid for by the whole of the US.
The subsidies of the gov’d to keep work here is basically coming out of your own pocket.
I’d say really look around where you can add value to products, more so than some slave in a low wage country so you can get what you think you deserve.
Eventually most of the physical jobs WILL be replaced by robots and other machines.
You cannot be complacent and think the big manufacturers and the gov’d is going to provide you work for the rest of your lives AND a pension ; the shift in power from employers vs employees has started , and finished , already decades ago.
You know how much people earned in 1979 ? $15. You know how much they earn now – well we know that. The $15 in 1979 is inflation adjusted but it basically means NOBODY GOT A REAL RAISE in the past 45 years. Think about that.
So why is that ? Because a surplus of labor supply. First the US expanded itself and then later other countries started to sell goods (e.g. Japan), then Korea, now China and production moved out of the US and production costs were lowered (robots etc).
We should raise tariffs on literally everything to become more self sufficient. Also, production overseas rarely has OSHA, workers rights, or environmental protection. A company in the USA has to protect their workforce and the environment, China just dumps contaminants into their rivers. Think globally, but act locally.
We can raise tariffs but do understand that makes a LOT of products more expensive, and it will hurt the people at the bottom end more than those who make 500k a year or more.
If everyone already had a very comfortable life without having to work more than 40 hours a week then sure ; go ahead and ban any foreign (cheap) products but I think we have long passed that station ; there isn’t enough domestic production (capacity and knowledge) to be self sufficient. To reverse that requires a ton of money and .. a ton of PEOPLE. The unemployment rate is low and people are working their ass off.
So where do we get high quality low priced American steel? Or the small micro-chips for the rear right tail light? Or the plastic knobs for your power windows? Or the paint for the car? Or LCD screens for the dashboard?
Nearly 95% of that stuff is coming from outside the US. It has never been produced in the US in the first place. Whole supply chains would have to be reinvented, people recruited, who aren’t there in the first place.
Because the foreign countries have lower wages they can produce lower priced goods and us with our higher GDP per capita can then buy cheap TVs and what not.
Image all that stuff being 3-4-5 times more expensive. The average dude with a 500k salary won’t mind, but the common people would get fked.
Deglobalization is a pipe dream.
That will spur production here, not overseas. Overseas production just benefits the executive class, not the working class. America used to make the best shit in the world when we were not importing it from everywhere else.
Yes, TVs would get more expensive, but the working class would make more money and hopefully be able to afford housing/healthcare/education, all of which are spiraling out of control upwards. Cheap products are not the key to a successful life, home ownership and social mobility are.
I am not sure we have enough people to actually build all those TVs, cars and other things. Even if we would have, there would be a labor shortage quickly. Employees would have more power, would demand higher wages (not unreasonable of course since the actual wage corrected for inflation hasn’t really increase for nearly 4 decades). While THEY would earn a bit more money ; the rest of the US would see those higher prices. The amount of people doing production, that specific production, is marginal compared to the ones who would benefit zero from more domestic production.
Right now domestic produced cars are relatively cheap BECAUSE they have to compete with imported cars -even though those have steep tariffs-. Imagine what would happen with prices if foreign brands would become 25%, 50% more expensive ; I can tell you that Ford and GM would happily increase the prices “because they can” and the local workers wouldn’t see that much more money in their pockets.
My 2 cents of course.
Stellantis doesn’t even pretend to be negotiating. ????
It’s crazy to me that the old contract did not include COLA (I guess everyone got complacent due to many years of low inflation and interest rates?) and that temp workers can be kept indefinitely at that level.
I suppose it’s a PR thing though. Telling everyone you got COLA and limits on temp worker terms isn’t as sexy as saying you got X% raise and Y% profit sharing.
Union workers forget that they work in a world economy. Capital goes where it is best used and most economical. You can see this by the simple fact that at one time they were 1 million Automotive union workers, now there are 150,000 of them and I predict in 10 more years they will only be 50,000
I’m sure the reduction in factory workers has nothing to do with advances in automation or the increased lifespan of automobiles. (7.5 years in 1971 to 11.75 in 2017.)
People who make our durable goods deserve a fair wage and shouldn’t have to spend years as a temp worker.
Furthermore, standard of living is going up around the world. See the labor shortage in Vietnam and China. The irony of the same people who complain about Chinese made stuff wanting more of our stuff made over seas so they can get it cheaper is beyond me.
This is an excellent discussion. I wish any workers would stop comparing their pay to CEO pay. I know for a fact that I could never do the CEO job. Many CEOs can’t do it well either. Good CEOs are likely worth the extra money paid to them. Some need pay and other “encouragements” just to take the jobs. I would rather that UAW workers compare their pay with others that do similar things, How much does a non-union auto worker make? What are the benefits among them? I never got a pension, but my employers put money against matching 401(k) contributions and they grew very well. For any workers, a defined benefit pension would be great, if you were prepared to accept a counterbalancing lower pay check. Plus, there’s never been an adequate guarantee that covers workers entirely when the employer goes bust and all the money is gone. In the long run, we each make a deal for our daily bread. If you are gorgeous and built well, maybe you’re in movies and make a ton of dough. If you speak well and are photogenic, you are a newscaster. If you have 20/20 vision, you become an airline pilot. Some of us will always be on top or on the bottom, but it’s ridiculous to rely on large organizations to mediate our individual situations. They simply cannot deliver the goods. I wish the unions well, but in the U.S. car manufacturing business, they only make up 40% of the workforce. Everyone else is working non-union. There must be something good on that side of the fence, no?
That’s not an unfair point, but generally the comparison is made over time, which is also fair. We were always told a high tide raises all boats, but the CEOs salary have increased at an exponentially higher rate than employees. That’s the complaint.
“a high tide raises all boats” – when I was younger I used to believe this. The older I get, the more I think to myself “it only helps people who can afford boats”.
They’re not asking to be paid the same as the CEO. They’re asking for their pay to increase at the same rate as the executives’ pay. Which is a fair request, by definition.
lmfao. Right. That’s why CEOs can be CEOS of multiple companies at once, right? I’ve been involved in higher up executives and they are only successful because they listen to the people under them. They in no way deserve the compensation they are getting today.
See: history
https://files.epi.org/uploads/2022CEOPay4-950×950.png
But is the CEO job worth $76,712 per day? LOL
I’d take the 401k over the pension. My company had a pension when I started, stopped it a few years in and switched to 401k so I didn’t get grandfathered in. Then went bankrupt and got bought out, the government took over the pension and only up to about $67k, so a lot of long timers lost out big time on that deal.
My main question on this is, at what point is it not sustainable to be able to compete with the Toyotas/VWs/Hyundais of the world? Right here on our own soil other car makes are able to just keep on cranking things out and not have to worry about it their entire staff just walking out.
Sure they have to stay competitive with wages but they also build plants in relatively lower wage areas. So if the cost of living in, I dunno let’s say Alabama, is lower, and the workers can make a good living, buy a house, get a nice truck, put some 35s on it to go mudding on the weekends then would they even care to walk out? As opposed to like where some of these union shops are, it’s a higher cost of living, there’s not much else in the area that pays a competitive wage, but they’re union so the company can’t move the work.
It just seems unsustainable compared to just building where it’s cheap living, pay them ok for the area, things stay fairly copacetic. There are 5 car companies with plants in Alabama, none of them are the “big 3”.
Does a worker in a Tesla Plant make more or less money than one in a GM plant? Is the product better or worse? Are there benefits? Is it a nice place to work? Do people starting off in temp position at a lower rate of pay get screened as potential long term workers as opposed to lazy card punchers? Will a gold plated pension plan bankrupt that company like the city of Detroit? Does a rich union deal help build a better car? Is anything union made better? That’s what I would ask as an employer.
“Most employees, McNeil told me, fall into this Tier 2 bracket, and therefore lack retirement security.”
I would say to McNeil: “Join the club, neither do I nor most workers in the USA”.
Just because the majority of workers in America are being screwed over doesn’t mean that auto workers shouldn’t fight for something better. Everyone should be guaranteed the ability to retire with dignity and not have to be a walmart greeter at 85. All of us should be fighting to have a better system of retirement and compensation for our work.
Fair enough, they/we def have a right to fight for it and maybe their actions will end up helping us all too.
Not sure why a 401k doesn’t count as retirement, and isn’t “security”. OEMs make contributions to employee’s 401k’s, and also do matches. I don’t really see the request to go back to a defined benefit system as practical or likely. In fact a 401k allows you to move companies and take your retirement with you.
My company did away with the pension halfway through my career. I wish they had done the 401k contribution thoughout instead.
401s are by definition only in “beta,” meaning that very few people have actually used them to retire. They are, at this point, only a wish.
A 401k fluctuates with the market. How many people do you know who had to postpone retirement around 2008-2010? I know quite a few who had to do so because their 401k value collapsed when the market did. Now that being said, pensions sometimes get raided by local governments, companies go bankrupt, etc. There’s a very real chance that no one who isn’t already wealthy will be able to ‘retire’ in 30 years, who knows what the future holds! But all things equal, a pension is far more reliable than a 401k which is explicitly tied to a market that regularly goes into recession every 8-10 years or so.
When I started teaching I specifically moved out of Pennsylvania because I didn’t want to join the union. South Carolina has a much worse education system, and it is directly tied to the much lower cost of housing. I declined the pension plan, and continued saving my own money for my own retirement. I would never trust a company or government with my future.
this is an utterly ridiculous comment. I don’t believe any part of it.
As someone that has been teaching in the North for almost 30 years, no one….and I mean no one, chooses to leave the north and head to any state south of Virginia, and absolutely not because of the union.
As such, this comment is anti-union nonsense and you should know you’re being laughed at.
Tens of thousands move out of the North every year, mostly to the South. Statistically, a few of them must be teachers. As an educator, I would have hoped you would be less bigoted and more informed.
Sorry, but it seems like you don’t understand either, at the very least what the word “bigoted” means. Gin up your nonsense elsewhere.
The fact that people leave the north to go south is completely separate from someone that made the absurd claims that the OP did.
It seems like there’s a lot you don’t know, about a lot. Let me know if you need help on this.
big·ot·ed
You demeaned an entire group of people (those who live in the South). BTW, that includes my mother, an English teacher. I can assure you she left Michigan voluntarily.
I could care less about your personal situation. As you didn’t note, your story, assuming it’s true, has zero to do with the OP, who you are strangely taking up for. Unless your mother actually bailed because of unions, which you did not say and therefore is likely not true, it doesn’t apply.
At no time did I demean “the entire south.” If mom was an English teacher, it seems she did a poor job of helping you with reading comprehension. Perhaps she too could not get employment in the north as well, after all.
I will repeat again: no one in education leaves the north and heads south, and certainly not due to the union. People that can’t be hired in a northern state head south, because they see a degree form the north and automatically assume they have been better-educated. Sorry, not sorry…’tis true.
First of all, totally true. I was raised in a fundamentalist family and was taught how evil unions are. Also, as a music teacher I saw programs being cut in an area with a dwindling population and I saw that the union would not fight to keep a program with a new teacher. Now in the south, every time people complain about the low pay or lack of quality school, I try to explain to them that is because we don’t pay (much) for property taxes and don’t have a union. I completely agree financially I would have a much higher income and more workplace protections after 20 years in the system. I made a choice to work 6 jobs in college and go to the school with the full (tuition) ride instead of the one I would have enjoyed attending so I wouldn’t have debt. I opted out of the pension plan and chose a 403(b) so I could control my own future and make my choices. Not everyone decides to do that as a teenager or in their 20s, but I also shouldn’t have to pay for their poor choices and bail out their loans.
I’m thrilled you came back here to reply.
However, everything said above, in the start of this reply, is incorrect. Full stop.
Let’s begin. That second sentence is a disaster for you. Raised in a fundie family…ok, that’s not your fault, and religion has zero to do with this. “Taught how evil unions are.” I’d love to know more about that…but right away, there’s no credibility or fact behind that statement. You don’t even attempt to justify it…because there is no justification for that statement.
Continuing: that next sentence shows just how little you understand about education as a whole. “I saw programs being cut in an area with a dwindling population…” Yep. That’s happening in many areas. This is true. “…and saw that the union would not fight to keep a program with a new teacher.” I’m embarrassed for you that you not only think this is true, but also spent time to put it on a public forum. That’s not what unions do, and this problem happens all around the country, whether there’s a union or not. You are not and never were a unicorn that requires a school district and/or bargaining unit to suspend the way that the entire country works for you and whatever magic you think you have to offer. This also does not work in this fashion anywhere else in the business world. Costs get cut wherever they can, in a way that is best for the students. Period. The union did nothing wrong here in any way shape or form, but your delicate sensibilities appear to have taken a hit, and you ran south instead of trying to find a job in the north. I wonder why you weren’t hirable in a different district with your teaching experience?
You continue with your gibberish by “trying to explain” (and failing, because your arguments suck) why schools aren’t good. Are those two things really what you come up with? Property taxes (likely true…but didja ever think why?) and unions….? If you are saying unions are the problem, but your schools suck and you have no unions….are you seeing the logical disconnect there?
And then we have student loan gibberish? Keep posting your nonsense. I’m happy to be here to slap that silly shit down.
Hopefully you don’t work in education, but let’s clarify some items for all who may read.
Unions (and high property taxes) are primary reasons states/areas with strong education programs are strong. I was stating that when I moved South I have been a proponent for these things. I was stating I was taught to believe Unions were evil, not that I have found that to be true. Just like any school, company, or government, some of the people in it are good, some are incompetent, and some are bad.
As to the reality for arts teachers and unions in contracting districts, the reality is a contract will defend a mediocre teacher with 10 years experience, and can the 3rd year teacher who has been busting their ass. I have had to cut programs I believe in, and lose teachers I value. It’s the reality of the economics, but that doesn’t make it ideal (and I’m far from a special unicorn. More like a dirty mongrel.) As a college student I was willing to read the fine print and see what the reality was in PA, and I was willing and able to move to a place where I wouldn’t have to keep worrying about that reality of contraction and funding being slashed. I wanted to try to improve a system, not just find a way to advantage myself.
“Hopefully you don’t work in education, but let’s clarify some items for all who may read.”
I do indeed work in education. This is why it’s so essential to slap down nonsense like you have continued to post.
“Unions (and high property taxes) are primary reasons states/areas with strong education programs are strong.”
Really interesting modification of your previous writing, but OK. Even I don’t know that I would go this far, but OK.
“I was stating that when I moved South I have been a proponent for these things. I was stating I was taught to believe Unions were evil, not that I have found that to be true. Just like any school, company, or government, some of the people in it are good, some are incompetent, and some are bad.”
Hmmm. OK. So…this is why you didn’t join a union, as per your original post? Interesting. Let’s keep reading!
“As to the reality for arts teachers and unions in contracting districts, the reality is a contract will defend a mediocre teacher with 10 years experience, and can the 3rd year teacher who has been busting their ass.”
Nope, that’s not at all how it works, but for someone who claims to be busting their ass (and, I’ll pretend you were! I can’t claim otherwise!) you should know better. What you’re describing is a failure of your previous administration, and not a failure of the union. If this hypothetical 10-year vet teacher was that bad, where are the evals? Where is the proof that this is the case? Why didn’t the district step in? I assure you that it is not impossible to remove bad teachers, no matter what you’ve heard. There are many ways to do so.
“I have had to cut programs I believe in, and lose teachers I value. It’s the reality of the economics, but that doesn’t make it ideal (and I’m far from a special unicorn. More like a dirty mongrel.)”
I agree completely.
“As a college student I was willing to read the fine print and see what the reality was in PA, and I was willing and able to move to a place where I wouldn’t have to keep worrying about that reality of contraction and funding being slashed.”
So, wait, bub. You were or were not a teacher in your third year that was getting hosed because an older guy/girl was entrenched?
And why again did you decide to move if this is the case? Here we have drifted into fantasy land.
“I wanted to try to improve a system, not just find a way to advantage myself.”
Um….how did you try to do this? By cutting bait and heading south for worse pay and students with a worse education?
My wife is a teacher in upstate (sort of) NY. Since my job went fully remote, we thought about moving to a retirement location early, and lose the tax burden of NY. The pay decrease she would see by moving to the Carolina’s is more than 2x the tax difference, saying nothing of her pension.
This is so true, they have health benefits, vacation time, and most of them have profit sharing. They all seem to forget that if you want to get ahead in this world you have to continually re-educate yourself and get skills. No one is forcing them to stay at these jobs
Not all do, in fact inside some unions the company you work for still decides a lot of this. IBEW’s at one company might get 1 week paid vacation, but no paid sick time. At another company the pay per hour is better, but vacation is not paid and sick time is also not covered. Both have benefits from the union, and the golden health benefits of the union definitely help keep people beholden to the union, but in the end it is not really as simple as re-educate and get a better job. in many cases, especially auto workers, the pay is already so high they have very few alternatives that would not put them on the streets. Even after 4 years of a trade or even a degree, you will start at or below the current wage of most automotive assembly line workers that have been there for 5 years or more. And then of course you have the Gov’t Backed Predatory Lending that pays for the education to now pay for as well.
So you’re saying you want to join a union?
I have 0 desire to join a union but others are free to have the right to do so if they wish.
But you’re willing to accept the positive outcome of their fight?
So the question you need to ask yourself is: Do you want to drag others down to a lower level, or raise everyone to a higher level?
I have 0 desire to join a union but others are free to have the right to do so if they wish.
Question for David. I used to do work around Oakland University and I was told the secretarial staff was part of the UAW union. Did they also walk out due to Solidarity? Im hearing other UAW plants (Mack Trucks) Might be doing that also in Oct.
I can’t speak for the secretarial staff but I can tell you that all hourly STATE GOVERNMENT social services workers are REQUIRED to be part of the F’n UAW. Good luck figuring out how THAT came to be. Oh, and if you are wondering, yes the workers all pay the same dues and NO the UAW doesn’t do jack shit for you if you are state worker and actually need union intervention. <spouse of a former state worker>
I worked at a stage hand, at one venue. It should have been Iatse, we were under Afscme. While I feel that its the right union for office staff, that particular union was horrible and really didnt do anything for the stage hands.
and this happens too much, and it’s a huge and legitimate problem with unions.
So.. UAW workers don’t get a pension, like 99% of the workforce today? You have to rely on a 401K? Oh boo hoo… cry me a river.
This was my take as well. Its sad, but consistent for most.
That’s the take CEOs really hope all workers adopt, because it’s so much easier to control a divided working class.
Maybe so, maybe so.
I agree, but only with that one item. If all of your bosses got 40% raises over the last few years, and you got low single digits, I think you have an valid gripe…
Heaven forbid a group of people fight against getting fucked over like the rest of us are.
They have better wages in benefits than the rest of us so I don’t know who you think is getting f***** over except me when I buy a car that’s overpriced and made in the USA
Is your goal to pull everyone down to your level, or get pulled up to theirs?
I see that you are a sad person who’s mad that you didn’t accomplish anything useful in your life
I understand the sentiment, but I’ve come to realize it isn’t the workers we should be mad at on this one.
I don’t. The sentiment is kind of surreal to me, to be honest. To me it reads like “we’re all being screwed over, why are you fighting against it?” and that is something I cannot comprehend.
The devil’s greatest trick was to convince working stiffs that working stiffs were the enemy.
yeah, it’s kinda mind-blowing seeing all the bootlickers here
It’s a somewhat organised movement that makes itself look bigger because one guy in a basement somewhere can completely derail a whole comment section with a dozen fake accounts. They’re not as many as they make themselves look online.
I do feel sad for the dumbass in a basement somewhere thinking they’re accomplishing anything with those 12 chrome profiles and the energy they devote to shilling for corporations.
I mean… if it’s that bad in the USA, it’s good someone is starting to fight against it, no? Kinda surreal that one looks at that figure and goes “I guess it sucks to be us, hope no one fights to change this unjust status quo”
“My life sucks, so wouldn’t it be better if everyone’s life sucked?”
You just nailed the average republican voter’s motto.
I’m a democrat but yeah for sure I agree w/that
So, you don’t have a nice shiny thing and are mad at other people who have nice shiny things. This is not exactly in line with Autopian thinking, generally, but gotcha.
I’m not mad about it at all.. What I’m saying is, that pensions are a thing of the past, and folks need to get used to that. I’m not anti-union in any way, in fact I am pro-union in most ways. For me, it defies logic to think that you can have a thing that can’t feasibly be funded anymore by any company.
I think it definitely can’t be funded if people aren’t expected to put into it. Too many places cap your contributions. They should be ongoing and permanent…but them’s fighting words. But they definitely can be funded.