Comments on: Bailout Watch 236: UAW “Concessions” Are a Sham

By: heiferdust

heiferdust — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:27:37 +0000

Well, Mr. Gettelfinger certainly showed his fear of any kind of bankruptcy proceeding in his opening remarks to the banking committee. Obviously, he doesn’t want anyone with authority to go in and change contracts, VEBA, jobs bank, or anything else necessary to get Detroit back in business in a sustainable way.

I hope our lawmakers can just do the right thing and get these guys into bankruptcy where they can sort out what really needs to be done to make them viable.

By: jkross22

jkross22 — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 17:05:45 +0000

The UAW has learned from GM how to make it appear that there are actual savings being realized.

My 19 month old can draw more coherent sketches than the UAW can draw up cost savings.

By: Michael Karesh

Michael Karesh — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 16:32:58 +0000

The big one is wage concessions by current workers–and it supposedly was not discussed.

The real sham is thinking that the current contract will have real savings in 2010. It would have, if car sales had kept chugging along. But the lower wages apply only to new hires, and it’s not looking like anyone will be hired to replace the workers everyone expects to retire.

By: Chris Haak

Chris Haak — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 13:28:57 +0000

The concessions from the UAW were true concessions, but they were just an opening stance in negotiations as far as I’m concerned. The same UAW that said two weeks ago that they felt that they had already done enough to help the D3 have now done more. And Ford, GM, and Chrysler are counting on them to give more back.

Considering that these concessions were not bargained – the companies didn’t have to give anything up to get them from the union – I’m sure there will be more going forward, but other ones will have to be bargained for – “OK, we’ll cut wages, if you give us __.”

The UAW clearly chose these two items because they have no impact on the active membership and are therefore most palatable to those members.

By: Geo. Levecque

Geo. Levecque — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 13:19:02 +0000

I note that the Auto workers need the Job Bank to keep up there income when laid off. Here in Canada the Auto workers dont have that but they do have EI or unemployment insurance that pays about the same as does the job bank but it doesn’t last as long, as far as I know.

By: thalter

thalter — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 13:03:28 +0000

I agree – deferring the VEBA contributions just means that the companies continue to fund retiree benefits directly out of their pockets – not much of a “saving” there.

By: br549

br549 — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 12:48:01 +0000

we still don’t know the truth about the “concessions.”

Then, uhm, how do you know they’re a “sham?”