Idiot unions in Toronto

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Dion

Yes they are. You can't sell a vehicle for less than what it cost to make it. Try running a business and selling your products below cost and see how long you'd last. You'd be bankrupt in no time at all.

That is exactly what the Big 3 have had to do, thanks to the unions. It costs them more to make a car than they can sell it at. Market forces dictate what they can charge for a car. The same market forces should dictate how much an assembly line drone should be paid, however thanks to the unions, What should be a $20-25 an hour job, including all benefits, costs the big three three times that.

The failure of the big three automakers is the fault of both management and the unions. Reviving them is the responsibility of both. Unless the unions cut back on their own greed, they are going to send hundreds of thousands of people into welfare.

And frankly, if the rank and file aren't smart enough to realize that, they deserve to be there.

Same with the garbage workers. They aren't worth their demands. Find a way to fire them all and hire new staff.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by Frequitude

Sure you can. Which has led to...

Which they are.



It's exactly like the false arguement that the salary cap was going to bring ticket prices down. Ticket prices are set by supply and demand in the market. The salary cap merely made the business more viable.

The unions have not driven up the price of vehicles, they have (among other things, of course), assisted in making the American auto industry unviable.

It depends on how you choose to look at it. Unions haven't necessarily driven up the sticker price that a consumer pays for a vehicle, but they've obviously increased the labor costs of producing those vehicles. So it becomes a question of a decreased/negative margin or an inferior product, and it seems that the latter has been chosen.

So while you may not be paying an extra $2000 for a GM you're probably getting $2000 less in terms of quality.

[Thunderball]

One thing you have to give unions credit for though. They are really good at coercing governments to defend their industry, or to refrain from attacking it. When you see what Stelmach idiocy has done to the Oilpatch, and what it threatens to do to the toothless healthcare sector... you really pine for an effective lobby group like the CAW.

On the other hand, its going to be funny as hell watching the lunatics (Unions and Governments) run the asylums (GM & Chrysler). I wonder if the CAW/UAW are going to have the guts to get efficient when its their own money on the line.

[GreenTeaFrapp]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

That is exactly what the Big 3 have had to do, thanks to the unions. It costs them more to make a car than they can sell it at. Market forces dictate what they can charge for a car. The same market forces should dictate how much an assembly line drone should be paid, however thanks to the unions, What should be a $20-25 an hour job, including all benefits, costs the big three three times that.

If the domestic car companies can't make money at the current union wages, why did they agree to them in the first place? Why wouldn't they just hang tight like the NHL owners did during the lockout?

The failure of the big three automakers is the fault of both management and the unions. Reviving them is the responsibility of both. Unless the unions cut back on their own greed, they are going to send hundreds of thousands of people into welfare.

Why should the unions worry about greed? Didn't you ever watch Wall Street with Michael Douglas? Greed is good. It's what drives capitalism. The auto makers need to be the ones who refuse to pay out wages that make their business nonviable.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

That is exactly what the Big 3 have had to do, thanks to the unions. It costs them more to make a car than they can sell it at. Market forces dictate what they can charge for a car. The same market forces should dictate how much an assembly line drone should be paid, however thanks to the unions, What should be a $20-25 an hour job, including all benefits, costs the big three three times that.

You might want to read what Moose posted.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

When you see what Stelmach idiocy has done to the Oilpatch, and what it threatens to do to the toothless healthcare sector... you really pine for an effective lobby group like the CAW.

quoted for 100% mis truth.

I love my mom, but an LPN with a 12 month course + paid upgrading courses should not be able to make $90+/hour in overtime.

Doctors, Nurses, Low Paid Nurses are anything but toothless and they always play the patient safety sympathy card.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

quoted for 100% mis truth.

I love my mom, but an LPN with a 12 month course + paid upgrading courses should not be able to make $90+/hour in overtime.

Doctors, Nurses, Low Paid Nurses are anything but toothless and they always play the patient safety sympathy card.

It isn't right, but the governments brilliant counter move of hiring freezes and cutting positions is plain wrong, and that's where the union is toothless.

Perhaps incompetent is a better way to put it.

[Reggie Dunlop]

The idea of Brian Burke being surrounded by even more stinky garbage makes me smile.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

At least the Corporate Fat Cats for the most part drive companies forward, they don't plunder them pirate style like unions do.

The Top Salaries in NYC:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_219207.html

They're coming out on top, even in a down market. This week Crains released its "Fortunate 100," a ranking of the New York City area's highest-paid executives at publicly-held companies. Though pay for these high-flying execs was down 36.7 percent last year on average, the Big Apple's most prominent CEOs are still bringing in millions.

There are some familiar names here, including the heads of several companies that have received billions in TARP funds. The top paid TARP executive is Goldman's Lloyd Blankfein, who received a pay package worth $42.9 million, according to Crain's.

Crains calculated its rankings by examining SEC filings, salary agreements and other documents. Their figures include base salary, stock options, perks and other forms of compensation.

In a year during which billions were spent on government bailouts, the larger question is, of course, whether or not these CEOs earned their paychecks. Which Wall Street big wig is most deserving of his paycheck?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by GreenTeaFrapp

If the domestic car companies can't make money at the current union wages, why did they agree to them in the first place? Why wouldn't they just hang tight like the NHL owners did during the lockout?

Unions have the same access to financial records. Why can't they be realistic with thier demands?

[Bertuzzied]

Unions are needed for 1950 post war Poland and Chinese coal miners.
Thats it. Please leave this earth.

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

It isn't right, but the governments brilliant counter move of hiring freezes and cutting positions is plain wrong, and that's where the union is toothless.

Perhaps incompetent is a better way to put it.

What do you mean. What is a governemtn supposed to do to stop the balooning costs of the health care system. Do you see alot of doctors or nurses leaving Alberta because of its abhorrent conditions. No because they have a very sweet deal up here. Heck, the gov cuts trans gender surger fro the budget and the Herlad has a front page story on it, thats how crazy the health care debate has got.

The more nurses you hire the bigger the union gets and the more powerful.

The Superboard is one step in getting rid of un needed hospitals in cities within 50km of Calgary/Red Deer/Edmonton etc and replacing them with ambulance/air ambulance service. Then those employees from those closed down locations can be moved to more efficient locations.

The next step is allowing private services to contract out for public services. Example you open a clinic that handles broken legs or whatever, you cannot accept patients off the street, only via registered alberta doctor referral - that way its not against the canada health act. You pay Nurses to work an 9-5 shift, that way you can lower the pay as you wont get stuck with the overtime game that is played out now.

[Dion]

I spent 20 years working in a union enviroment. The greed and self entitlement was appauling. They had no touch with reality.

I'm glad i don't work in that enviroment anymore.

[GreenTeaFrapp]

Originally Posted by Dion

Unions have the same access to financial records. Why can't they be realistic with thier demands?

Who says they aren't realistic with their demands? The union's job isn't to maximize corporate profits, it is to maximize employee compensation. If corporate management agrees to pay them more then makes the company financially viable, it is the fault of the high paid executives not the union.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by GreenTeaFrapp

Who says they aren't realistic with their demands? The union's job isn't to maximize corporate profits, it is to maximize employee compensation. If corporate management agrees to pay them more then makes the company financially viable, it is the fault of the high paid executives not the union.

But then going by logic, when the company falters shouldn't it be the job of the union to aid in the survival of the company for the good of the job.

So with the example of the Toronto Strike, when the government said that there was no fricken way that they could afford to pay the benefits packages to incoming employees, shouldn't the union then as a partner in the interest of keeping these jobs stepped up and worked on a consessions package?

Instead of going on strke?

[Dion]

Originally Posted by GreenTeaFrapp

Who says they aren't realistic with their demands? The union's job isn't to maximize corporate profits, it is to maximize employee compensation. If corporate management agrees to pay them more then makes the company financially viable, it is the fault of the high paid executives not the union.

Unions can bring companies to thier knees and sometimes put them out of business with thier excessive demands. There was 3 Safeway stores in Thunder Bay some years ago that closed it's doors due to excessive union demands.

http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2002/0...way020606.html

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Dion

You might want to read what Moose posted.

Moose's argument does not challenge the fact that union auto workers are massively overpaid. Rather, I could expand on his point to argue that the union itself bears responsibility for the inferior quality, and therefore failure, of the big 3. Their greed is killing themselves.

[GreenTeaFrapp]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

But then going by logic, when the company falters shouldn't it be the job of the union to aid in the survival of the company for the good of the job.

So with the example of the Toronto Strike, when the government said that there was no fricken way that they could afford to pay the benefits packages to incoming employees, shouldn't the union then as a partner in the interest of keeping these jobs stepped up and worked on a consessions package?

Instead of going on strke?

You know how you can tell when a politician is lying? His lips are moving.

If the union is asking for too much money, the city government could say, "we're no longer in the garbage collection business, here's how much you're going to save on your tax bill annually but you're going to have to hire a private business to pick up your garbage".

I don't have a lot of sympathy for city governments since most of them seem to be run by the dregs of the politician barrel.

[Dion]

Originally Posted by GreenTeaFrapp

If the union is asking for too much money, the city government could say, "we're no longer in the garbage collection business, here's how much you're going to save on your tax bill annually but you're going to have to hire a private business to pick up your garbage".

And when govt and companies bring in replacement workers to do the job unions won't do they cry foul. It's okay for unions to prevent companies from doing thier business but it's not okay for the companies to hire replacement workers. Hypocrisy at it's finest.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

What do you mean. What is a governemtn supposed to do to stop the balooning costs of the health care system. Do you see alot of doctors or nurses leaving Alberta because of its abhorrent conditions. No because they have a very sweet deal up here. Heck, the gov cuts trans gender surger fro the budget and the Herlad has a front page story on it, thats how crazy the health care debate has got.

The more nurses you hire the bigger the union gets and the more powerful.

The Superboard is one step in getting rid of un needed hospitals in cities within 50km of Calgary/Red Deer/Edmonton etc and replacing them with ambulance/air ambulance service. Then those employees from those closed down locations can be moved to more efficient locations.

The next step is allowing private services to contract out for public services. Example you open a clinic that handles broken legs or whatever, you cannot accept patients off the street, only via registered alberta doctor referral - that way its not against the canada health act. You pay Nurses to work an 9-5 shift, that way you can lower the pay as you wont get stuck with the overtime game that is played out now.

Well firstly, while privatization is really a win/win situation for all involved (except senior RNs), its not what they're going to do, as they appear intent on the 90s route of position cutting. They don't have the balls for privatization, the brains to differentiate it from the US system, and they don't have the cash to support it (especially when they lose their Canada Health Act funding due to reason #2). What you suggest is a good idea for sure, but I don't see them having the aptitude to pull it off. All the "superboard" has done so far is increase administration costs.

Second, they have to sit down with the unions and deal with the seniority BS. Top end nurses making $45/hr shouldn't be able to snag all the holiday/weekend time that balloon their salary to upwards of $95/hr. Instead of having two younger RNs working at $40/hr each with OT, they have one old union pro working at $90/hr. Efficiency isn't cutting positions, its cutting costs. While the health boards are good at screwing new nurses around, ie: mixing 50hr work weeks with 35hr work weeks and calling it a 40hr average rotation to prevent OT pay, they are really lousy at making that work for the senior staff, and they are the primary money drain.

Do you know why Alberta has the highest paid medical staff in the country? I'm sure you do seeing as your mom is an LPN. In an attempt to "cut costs" in the 1990s, they cut a pile of positions, which scared a lot of health professionals into early retirement or to the waiting arms of another province/US state. In order to combat this, they had to authorize significant pay raises to lure them back. What they are risking is the exact same thing. Hiring freezes and position cuts mean more health professionals taking their chances elsewhere, and when we're in a serious bind, another pay hike/incentive plan will be needed to bring them back, hence another cost overrun.