While I agree we are all employed at the discretion of our employers, hard work still cuts into profits. If I give 29 years and 350 days of my life to a company where I work my butt off…isn’t it a sad thing to know that they can lay me off to screw me out of retirement? My loyalty means very, very little to number crunchers (aka bean counters). Bad press is the only weapon many employees have.

Did you all read about the employees at Toyota being laid off after being injured on the job? How’s that for company commitment? I really shouldn’t blame Toyota though…if that’s what our government does to injured soldiers (or non-combat military), why should I hold the bar higher for Toyota? Oh yeah…the company makes millions of dollars in profits.

Why is it that share holders demand 20% return on their investment each year? This is called greed. Some of the things the UAW has done is downright idiotic. Good intentions, perhaps. Horrible implementation.

The more our society and business revolves around generating money for shareholders, the more we’ll see employees get screwed over. Period.

I think it is implicit in many of the writings here that a lot of the posters somehow feel that they are immune to the march of Globalization. Either that, or they’re true idealists who don’t find any problem in the fact that they may be destined to be priced out of a job by someone in India or China . . . willing to elevate the principals of Capitalism even above their own well being. Not me, man.

Unless you’re a plumber or a truck driver, I’m afraid you are not immune at all. Lawyers, doctors, accountants, consultants, journalists . . . ANY job — knowledge based or otherwise — can be done more cheaply (and perhaps better) by someone, somewhere. So why do you glorify and exhalt the unavoidable march downward? Why glorify the fact that the typical US citizen is being pulled down to the level of the masses in ‘Third World’ countries?

Let’s face it . . . most people in this country are or at least begin as ‘wage slaves’. The story of a poor man with nothing who bootstraps himself into a success from the get-go is becoming more and more mythological. Where do you get the capital to start that small business? Not from thin air, I’m sure. You either get it as a legacy/inheritance, or you borrow it, or you earn it via other means (i.e., a wage-paying job). Many here are arguing to essentially eliminate the third option, since even earning a living wage will become less and less possible . . . let alone saving to start a small business.

So we’re back to feudal state where the genetically lucky inherit wealth and can continue to make more wealth, and the rest of the world are serfs. At the mercy of the royalty of the monied class, or the money-lenders (basically the same, I would say).

How is that good?

If you got your start via legacy, and plan to pass that on to your children, then lucky you. But if you got your start by working for a wage (or by lunching off the wages made by your parents), then why suddenly is it right to deny that opportunity to the children of others?

I’m afraid I see a common theme run through the typical commentaries posted in the threads here . . . essentially all can be boiled down to the belief in self above all others.

“the other guy makes too much money for what he does . . . ”
“what they need to do is dump the pension and health care liabilities . . .”
“choice B is better than choice A, so I’m buying it . . . I don’t care who suffers from collateral damage . . .”
“I had a bad experience so I hope they go out of business . . . that’ll show’em . . .”
“if ‘the man’ is screwing you, you’re free to take a walk . . . hope you have a big enough bank account to pay the mortgage for a while . . .”

It’s sad, really .. .

This is BIG news. Could you please provide an external source for that?. I though that slavery was abolished in the USA in the 1860s…

LIE: “If you don’t like it you can leave”
Wrong. When people leave jobs and they don’t have proper skills…[]…is not profitable to quit and look for another job. For many, it is devastating in this age of high housing prices.

OK, Sir. It is “financially devastating” and “unprofitable” to leave a job, but it can be done.

If it is unprofitable to leave a job, that worker is in the best job for him, so he has nothing to complaint about, just as me in me 50-60 hours a week, no holidays, no health care benefits (happy) self-employment.

And Toyota has no blame on the housing market.

A union allows workers to collectively bargain for a good wage for their work done and if that contract is broken, they can collectively take that labor away from the company with a strike. The company should serve the people and not solely be making profits for itself, a non human entity.

The only cancer around here is the anti-union mentality which holds onto myths that serve as the intellectual foundation for eliminating unions eventually and widen the already increasing gap between rich and poor in the U.S.

MYTH: “Lazy worker”
There’s no way you can be lazy when the assembly line is moving. You have to finish the car within the alloted amount of time because the next car is coming. How do you suppose they make so many cars? By being lazy?

MYTH: “Easy job that pays very well”
Auto assembly is a very difficult job. Out of 700 people who apply for the job of auto assembly, usually only 30 or so gets hired. There are several tests that prospective workers must pass if they want to work inside of an auto plant. If you fail any of them, they will not hire you. And once you’re hired, the hell begins. You’ll be working faster than you thought was humanly possible. The first month, you WILL lose weight because of the constant work. If you’re stuck doing the more difficult jobs, your heartrate is firmly within the aerobic zone. Imagine doing aerobics for 8-9 hours a day 5-6 days a week. Every part of your body hurts. Your hands swell up and you have to ice them down. If its bad enough, you can barely grab a cup. Eventually, some people’s hands just lock up. And you’re eating food constantly so you’re having a bowel movement 4 times a day; yet, you still lose weight. Over time, the repetitive work wears out joints and virtually all of the workers will eventually be injured permanently. Even though it it hurts, the bolts have to still be torqued correctly, paint lookin’ perfect and enough cars built to meet the demand. Many of you reading this would not qualify to do the job and a small percentage will literally die from a heart attack from the constant and heavy workload. And for all that work you expect people to put up with being paid a little more than minimum wage?

And no, the workers do not have a huge wage and lavish benefits. the workers in the UAW Toyota plant in California make the median income in that area of the country. If one is a single income household, that family will not be able to afford to buy a home in that area of the country. Their income is far from lavish and they struggle to save and make it.

MYTH: “auto workers should make wages in line with other jobs”
No. There will always be downward pressure on wages from corporations simply because labor on the income statement is simply an “expense”….. an “expense” to be minimized. If a grade school teacher is not making as much as an auto worker, then the teachers union should bargain for a better contract. If the Starbucks barista is not making a living wage doing skilled work, they should organize a union and negotiate a contract that will give them better pay for their hard work. Lower paid workers should RAISE they pay to the level of a UAW auto worker, not the other way around.

MYTH: “non union workers don’t complain”
Of course they don’t. they don’t have a contract so if they do complain, they will get fired, so they just shut the hell up and when management asks them to bend over, they smile & ask “how far?”

MYTH: “If there’s a safety problem, you don’t need the UAW cuz you got OSHA”
In reality, they’ll just fire you if you report a safety hazard. That way, the others will shut up knowing they can get fired too.

MYTH: “Profits should be held above all else cuz everything will work itself out”
Corporate entities are only there to make a profit and the workers are all expenses on the income statement meant to be minimized. Workers need protection from the corporations’ need to constantly minimize or eliminate the cost of labor.

MYTH: “There is no slave labor in the U.S.”
As a matter of fact, there IS slave labor in Florida with farm workers being paid $20 a week and being kept from quitting their job with threats to their lives.

MYTH: “Unions lower productivity”
Riddle me this?…. how does the Toyota plant in California crank out the best selling Corolla and Tacoma year after year with UAW labor and with the best in reliability??

LIE: “If you don’t like it you can leave”
Wrong. When people leave jobs and they don’t have proper skills, they won;’t necessarily have the money to further their education and will have to accept the first thing that they find so they can put food on the table. They don’t really have a choice. It takes 1 month for every $10k in yearly salary to find a job. During that time, you are not making an income and losing out. It is not profitable to quit and look for another job. For many, it is devastating in this age of high housing prices. The job market is not an efficient market as their is always downward pressure on wages from corporations seeking to ELIMINATE their labor costs.

Well, you are right, sir. I meant that Corporations do not have a will of their own, just as cars do not choose destinations or have s: Only drivers.

Corporations are legally prevented from doing ‘altruistic’ things (such as being ‘green’) if it is not in the financial interests of the shareholders.

And this is a good thing to protect shareholders´ interests. Plase read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Company for a 1919 precedent for that rule. Old Henry Ford tried to be “altruistic” selling cars. Michigan Supreme Court said No.

Thus I reiterate my statement . . . they are legally obligated to crush you if it means a bigger profit.

You are wrong. If they really would try to (really) “crush” you you could go for a job elsewhere. AFAIK there´s no slavery in the USA.

And please don’t start with the fawning over those godly folks who risk their ‘capital’.

Why not?. The “fawning” you are talking about is the truth.

Again, I say that’s all well and good if you are an altruist.

Thanks to Ayn Rand and to my own efforts I am not: I am a (proud) Rational Egoist.

But in reality, most of these people really ‘risk’ nothing . . . a net worth of $2BN versus $1.5BN is not really a ‘risk’, in my opinion.

You are wrong: Please inform yourself about, lets say, the history of Nash-Kelvinator, PanAm, Pullman, American Motors and RCA.

Corporations fall, especially mismanaged corporations.

It has been upheld in US courts that shareholders can sue a corporation if it’s shown that they are not acting in a way as to maximize profits. Corporations are legally prevented from doing ‘altruistic’ things (such as being ‘green’) if it is not in the financial interests of the shareholders. Any ‘green’ company, or any company that uses its resources to support AIDS research, or any type of charitable idea only does so because of the goodwill they generate, i.e., the positive publicity that will ultimately contribute to the bottom line.

Thus I reiterate my statement . . . they are legally obligated to crush you if it means a bigger profit.

If you own a small business, you are not so obligated. You can do as you please. Think of your business if you had a large loan from the local mob, and they called the shots for you . . . whatever let you pay the vig was mandatory. That’s a better picture of a corporation.

And please don’t start with the fawning over those godly folks who risk their ‘capital’. Again, I say that’s all well and good if you are an altruist. But in reality, most of these people really ‘risk’ nothing . . . a net worth of $2BN versus $1.5BN is not really a ‘risk’, in my opinion.

We live in a wonderful age where in reality many if not most people could contribute enough to society to live a comfortable life without breaking their backs or dropping dead by 50. But instead, we’ve decided it’s better to concentrate just about all of the benefits on a very slim few who are lucky enough to have either accumulated a huge amount of capital, or risen to the absolute top of a corporation. Screw the rest, they’re expendible.

And yes, I meant to say ‘lucky’.

Compare that to Japanese makers, where there are lots of engineers within the exec ranks. This is especially true of Honda, which is almost entirely run by engineers, and Toyota. Nissan used to be run by engineers, but ever since the Renault tie-up, bean counters (cost cutters) have reigned supreme.

It’s interesting then that of all the Big 3 CEOs, Mulally seems to have the greatest urgency. I also truly believe he has the best chance to turn around the company he is running.

Yes indeed.

Another area where people make errors is in thinking that money is wealth. Money is just a claim ticket on produced wealth. Money can be viewed two ways:

1. A tool of production.
2. A tool of consumption.

Some people “destroy” capital with consumption and end up with nothing…State Lottery winners.

Some people create wealth with their capital and end up very rich…Warren Buffet.

Before we just parrot the Public School/Politician/Labor Union/TV/Newspaper party line of “Corporations are bad” and “employers are evil”, become self-employed and discover for yourself how difficult it is to grow a business…And good luck with hiring “employees”…You will need it. One error in judgement in hiring people with “adult/virtuous character” could destroy you financially and you may even end up in a Governement’s rape cage for the crime of, um, child abuse :)

Here is a good read on the subject of wealth production. You start to appreciate evil corporations.

http://www.theadvocates.org/freeman/9605read.html

One of the brilliant things about the US is that people are free to live anywhere they like without the need to ask permission. If you live in an impoverished area with few job opportunities you are free to pull up stakes and go where the work is. The vast majority of the inhabitants of the USofA owe their current location to this fact. Either you moved where you are by choice or your ancestors did.

Unions count of the victim mentality of members to keep their charade going. Refuse to think of yourself as a victim and suddenly you will want nothing to do with union membership.

In the 1950s Toyota had a major showdown with the Japanese unions. Basically the company won and has been growing like gangbusters ever since. GM and the UAW had a showdown in the 1970s. The UAW won that one and GM has been loosing ground ever since. You cannot grow a business when the labor side of the equation is committed to reduced productivity. Labor productivity is defined as the ratio of work completed to man hours paid for. The UAW has been committed to the lowest productivity they can get away with forever. The ultimate foolishness is the jobs bank, where by definition productivity = ZERO. Toyota will never let itself be held hostage by a labor group which is fundamentally committed to lower productivity than would be possible without them involved. Just isn’t going to happen. There are plenty of places Toyota can build cars, and the car buying public of the US isn’t going to vote for congresscritters who try to take away their now beloved Toyotas & Hondas. Just try to slap duties or quotas on automobile imports and see how far you get. Heck, the environmentalists alone would put any such effort into the grave. In the 1970s when auto pollution standards started getting serious every US based maker went to Washington and said that the proposed rules would put them out of business and cost the consumer a fortune. Honda pissed everyone off by saying, no problem, we can do it. Detroit has had negative credibility with the environmental activist community ever since while Honda remains the darling. Toyota’s Prius single handedly got them into the Green Good Guys club as well. GM gets no credibility for it’s massive spending on alternative vehicles because the really cool stuff is always just around the next corner, but never in hand.

The Democrats strongholds in the midwest and New England might go for sanctions against imported vehicles, but California never will and the Democrats can’t win anything on a national scale without California. Even that California teachers union members mostly drive Japanese nameplate vehicles. Solidarity, eh ? Californians gave the 2.5 up for dead years ago, at least for cars. Trucks are a different story, but the truck fad is over and the truck market is shrinking rapidly back to those who really need them, which is about 1/2 of what it was at the peak.

The individuals managing a company (not “the Company”, which is a fictitious entity) should be able to offer work conditions to prospective employees, and the prospective employees should be free to accept or reject those conditions. No more , no less.

I HAVE a life, and it is not my job. I actually like other things as well.

Sir: I am very happy you have such a rich life, full of different interests and things to do.

…but you are not going to be self-employed with that kind of thinking, so you depend on other person´s capital for your work, and those persons owe you nothing: They will make you an offer, you are free to accept or to decline the offer.

…and those other persons want a fair return for the capital they are risking creating your job. If they do not get that fair return, they will invest somewhere else (v.gr. in China), or, simply, they will spend their money (i.e., they will destroy their capital on those “other things” you cited).

The reason that there are a lot of job applicants at these plants is because the areas are still underserved.

“Underserved” by other persons´capital. Other persons (in this case, Toyota Managers) choose those locations to invest their capital because there were no Unions on sight.

Add the Unions to the equation and maybe they will opt to move production to Mexico. It´s their property, they have a right to do so.

It is unfair that they got fired, it is morally wrong.

What is unfair and morally wrong is to limit the use of other person´s property.

With all due respect, let me ask you some questions: Is it unfair if you stop going to a restaurant?. If you stop shopping in a given mall?. If you stop going to this or that chiropractor or dentist?. If you stop buying this or that brand of cars?.

You “fired” those business when you stopped using their services. You are and you should be free to do so. The same with employers.

I worked at a union shop as “management”, even tho i was doing alot of the work that the trades were supposed to be doing. Except that the trades would not do it because it was too dangerous for them to do, so I got to do it. I could not complain, I had no recourse because I was not in the union; no one would stand up for me. If i had been in the union, I might still be working there. Pity. I contacted OSHA to complain about it, when my boss found out that I did that, he fired me. The End. God bless the Sacred Company!

In most other civilized countries, people actually work to live, not live to work, as apparently most of the other posters here do. I will not work 80 – 90 hours a week, work ethic be damned. I HAVE a life, and it is not my job. I actually like other things as well.

The large problem with at-will employment is that it treats the employees like cattle. Employees are not encouraged to do their best, if it can be shown that it apparently does not matter, as the fired employees found out. It is unfair that they got fired, it is morally wrong. If Toyota does not know that, its no better then sending Irish immigrants in to the mines before the miners, to see it was safe. If they came back alive, it was safe to send the real employees down there.

The reason that Toyota built the plants where they are, is they are historically very poor areas, therefore the locals would not complain much if the company mistreated them. Now the company is mistreating them, a few brave souls are coming forward to tell their pieces. The reason that there are a lot of job applicants at these plants is because the areas are still underserved. That does not give the employer carte blanche to mistreat the employees.

I am especially saddened by those here who think that the company should be able to do whatever they want to, and the employees must simply put up with it. Instead of standing up for the plight of the employees, they proudly wear the malicious grin of the company. Sigh.

Will Toyota then move elsewhere if people complain about them? Is it our place to baby face these monstrous corporate entities, tickle their little bellies and try to keep them happy? They will move if they want to – there is pity little manufacturing here anyway. And its NOT because of the unions – it’s because Americans simply cannot live on the wages that make starving pacific rim islanders happy.

SO what do we do? Go back to pre Dickinsonian England, every man for himself? Should we exploit our children? Others exploit theirs! I suppose, if the company says they want do, posters here will willingly drag their kids there, saying “Buck up, ya little snot. The company says it’s OK, and I believe them”.

Landcrusher: Johnson makes an interesting point. If Toyota is mostly run by engineers, how about the 2.5?

Rick Wagoner (GM): Bachelor's degree in economics from Duke University and an MBA from Harvard Business School; has worked exclusively for GM in their financial offices before becoming CFO, then CEO.

Alan Mulally (Ford): Bachelor of Science and Master of Science degrees in aeronautical and astronautical engineering from the University of Kansas, and a Master's degree in Management (S.M.) as a Sloan Fellow from the MIT Sloan School of Management; worked as an engineer and project manager at Boeing and worked his way up to Executive VP before moving to Ford.

Tommy LaSorda (Chrysler Group): Dual degree (Bachelor of Arts and a Bachelor of Commerce) and MBA from the University of Windsor; began with GM, working chiefly in manufacturing, before moving to Chrysler Group as Senior VP; became COO in 2004 and CEO in 2006.

You are wrong. Please read http://jim.com/econ/chap20p1.html

Increased productivity is the key to better work conditions, and Unions decrease productivity.

Yet many here suggest we all throw our fates to the benevolent whims of a corporation . . . every man for himself, against the behemoth.

Look at the history of corporations, from Ford to Apple to Amazon.com. All corporations start as some individual(s) endeavour in a garage or a kitchen. Try it yourself. If you can. Good luck.

…and please do not forget that the “behemots” eventually fall. Take a look a this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Defunct_companies_by_country …you can spend several days taking lessons from the articles linked here.

I’m really curious as to the economic/career status of some of the posters here.

I am self-employed (with no PITA employees). I own my own small business: I work 50-60 hours a week, no holidays, some Saturdays working here and happy as a lark.

The funniest day to work is May 1st. I am working while I hear the Unions freelunchers “celebrating” the “day of the work” at the street…

Spanishguy, I think we can appreciate the difference between a workforce reduction because times on the company are tough and they have too many mouths to feed, and what a company like Circuit City is doing by laying off experienced workers so they can hire cheaper replacements….

If those “cheaper replacements” can do the same job that the “experienced workers” are doing, that business is doing the right thing, just as you (I suppose) look for the best price when you go shopping. Wage is only a special kind of price: The price for labour. Do you compare prices when you go shopping?. Employers do, if they want to be employers in the future.

but what’s to say your job won’t go byebye because the bosses think they’re paying you too much, even though you’re one of their top employees?

I am self employed, I have no boss: I am my boss in my own small business, and what a merciless boss you are to yourself when the ship you are helming is your own property.

And yes, my job can go byebye anytime: Uncertainty is the price of being alive. The difference being my own boss is that I am the one deciding if I have to pull the plug.

I own two companies, started from working from my home and grown since then. Again, if the employees their situation, and complain, like in Detroit, band together, get the financing and start your own car company, see how long they would last as business owners.

I agree with you 100%. And congratulations for your successful business career: More men like you are needed in this planet.

if you don’t like the job, you find something else to do.

If the Toyota work environment is so bad, why do thousands of Americans stand in line to fill out applications to work there when a new plant is built?

A person has a choice where they work, if they do not like it, leave.

This postings show the key of the issue: Free choice.

The idea of a 40 hour work week is so foreign to me it’s hard to even imagine.

Uh. Here in Europe the freelunchers are asking for 35 hours a week (with no wage reduction!!!)

http://www.google.es/search?hl=es&q=%22por+las+35+horas%22&btnG=Buscar+con+Google&meta=,

Some public servants (damn on them) are actually getting this sinecure…and the fools moan and groan when miriads (and I said miriads) of factories relocate from Spain to Eastern Europe, Morocco or Asia. Fools.

Some SEAT production had been moved outside Spain. Catalonian workers are overpaid, and Union rules make the work conditions too rigid. The result: VW moved some SEAT production to Eslovaquia (our own Mexico: Eslovaquian wages are a fifth of Catalonian wages)
http://www.lavanguardia.es/premium/publica/publica?COMPID=51256675367&ID_PAGINA=22780&ID_FORMATO=9&PARTICION=91&SUBORDRE=3

http://motor.terra.es/motor/articulo/html/mot12801.htm

My message to Toyota: If the UAW cancer metastasizes to any Toyota facality, apply surgery, merciless, fast and irreversible surgery: Cut wood on sight, before the whole tree is rotten.

I think you’re jumping to conclusions here.

Sloppy record keeping and short sighted damage control? Sounds like GM not Toyota. Refresh my memory … which company again is being investigated by the SEC?

Regardless of this incident, Toyota’s record keeping and damage control both are very good.

The amount of Toyota workers that showed up to this meeting I can count on one hand. Out of the thousands of workers at the Georgetown plant, not more than 5 showed up. Doesn’t that tell you something?

I dunno, like perhaps Toyota employees have no reason to join the UAW because they are happy with their jobs? Last year, Toyota employees on average got paid more than the average UAW worker. But let’s not argue about statistics shall we?

The UAW tried before to organize a meeting at Georgetown, and then just as now, almost nobody from the Toyota plant showed up.

Officially, only *one* Toyota executive is worried about the labour costs, which is Sudo who happens to be an accountant. No other Toyota execs have officially stated they are worried about US labor costs. Let us not forget that most of Toyota’s senior management are in fact engineers, not accountants.

The last word on the evil of corporations is that the UAW is itself a corporation, battling other corporations, when perhaps a more concerted effort might have been better for the collective. Is there an economics student reading? GM & UAW compose the classic 2 sided prisoners dilema – both sides have incentive to screw the other, when both sides would be collectively better off if they could collaborate.

Finally, on the 80hour week that someone else mentioned – this has been a major boon to surgery residents – most were working over a hundred hours per week before that. The average general surgeon (fully licensed), for the record, works 65-70 hours per week, and does not get weekends and holidays off. So, like someone else said, if you don’t like the job, you find something else to do.