Economy Autoworkers Strike

[skysolo]

$110 an hour to stand on an assembly line and put 4 bolts into a headlight every minute is insane. We don't get paid that kind of money to repair those cars when they come into the shop mangled after a wreck.

You pay these people $110 an hour and no one will be able to afford to buy a new car and they'll be out of a job.

This is crab mentality.

People argue that others shouldn't be able to make money instead of why you aren't making the same money. Why should they get paid when I don't.

The American way.

 

[Rob Battisti]

This is crab mentality.

People argue that others shouldn't be able to make money instead of why you aren't making the same money. Why should they get paid when I don't.

The American way.

I think it’s more that if this is passed no one will be able to afford the cars

 

[Richmma80]

Buy Toyota or Honda.

 

[skysolo]

I think it’s more that if this is passed no one will be able to afford the cars

Shouldn't everyone else strike for a raise as well instead of arguing someone else shouldn't have a raise because it may cause the prices of cars to go up more than prices have gone up already because of the greed of management and owners?

Notice that the argument isn't questioning why the CEO makes almost 40 million. The argument is always about worker bees making more money.

 

[Rob Battisti]

Shouldn't everyone else strike for a raise as well instead of arguing someone else shouldn't have a raise because it may cause the prices of cars to go up more than prices have gone up already because of the greed of management and owners?

so just infinite money printing?

 

[Rob Battisti]

Everyone is just arguing with their hearts and not their heads.

You have three options and can only pick 1.

EV development continues on pace to meet the administrations goals.

Autoworkers get their raises.

Both of those options but prices increase into Bolivia to the point the automakers have to shut down due to being non-competitive.

 

[method115]

I think it’s more that if this is passed no one will be able to afford the cars

Sure but they had plenty of money to give the CEO a 40% increase and for stock buy backs which would have paid for the raises they are asking for. There's a reason most people support the unions and it's because we know these companies are lying. I don't believe for one second no one will be able to afford cars if these workers get what they want. That sounds like more corporate PR speak. It's what they always say any time we talk about giving someone raises. No one can afford burgers if we give the workers raises. It's like only the CEO of these companies can get 40-50% raises everyone else has to eat shit.

 

[Rob Battisti]

Sure but they had plenty of money to give the CEO a 40% increase and for stock buy backs which would have paid for the raises they are asking for. There's a reason most people support the unions and it's because we know these companies are lying. I don't believe for one second no one will be able to afford cars if these workers get what they want. That sounds like more corporate PR speak. It's what they always say any time we talk about giving someone raises. No one can afford burgers if we give the workers raises. It's like only the CEO of these companies can get 40-50% raises everyone else has to eat shit.

The CEO raise isn’t close to the cost of the worker raise. Stock buy backs should be prohibitive to companies receiving any government subsidies.

This doesn’t make a difference at all in the situation at hand. It’s just being mad and trying to get even.

 

[cincymma79]

Get what you can get but I just don’t see how this is workable

 

[nostradumbass]

This is crab mentality.

People argue that others shouldn't be able to make money instead of why you aren't making the same money. Why should they get paid when I don't.

The American way.

It's not crab mentality, it's just math. The median pay for employees at GM is already like 15% higher than the country's GDP per capita, so there simply isn't enough money in existence for everyone to get paid what they're demanding.

Of course there is some of the "why should they get paid when I don't" from a lot of people who will now have to pay significantly more for something without having the money for it. Everyone is also a consumer everywhere, but only an employee at one place.

CEO pay for huge companies is certainly higher than it should be, but that's when they have tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of employees under them, so that doesn't really translate quite the same.

Even these CEOs with compensation of like $10 million in salary and benefits and like $10 million in stock awards, that number is very high as a single person's compensation, but when you break it down for each employee, the split comes out to paying each of them like $81,000 for the CEO to make about $400 off of having them there.

You can't really complain about people having the "why should they get paid that much when I don't" attitude when the entire argument is based on an even sillier version of comparing lower level employees to the person at the very top of a graded pay scale all the way up. Even a 40% increase for the CEO is a couple million dollars, while increasing the pay by 40% for the 50,000 employees costs billions of dollars, which of course they could only get by raising prices significantly when the average car payment is already like $725/month.

Even when it's a very high number, the CEO salary is still a very small fraction of what is paid to all the company employees. It would be like increasing the cost of a $50,000 car to $90,000 because the cost of rubber for tires increased 40%. Tires are AN expense for a car, but a pretty minor one that obviously doesn't mean that an increase in tire prices makes the entire car worth an extra $40,000.

 

[Rob Battisti]

It's not crab mentality, it's just math. The median pay for employees at GM is already like 15% higher than the country's GDP per capita, so there simply isn't enough money in existence for everyone to get paid what they're demanding.

Of course there is some of the "why should they get paid when I don't" from a lot of people who will now have to pay significantly more for something without having the money for it.

CEO pay for huge companies is certainly higher than it should be, but that's when they have tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of employees under them, so that doesn't really translate quite the same.

Even these CEOs with compensation of like $10 million in salary and benefits and like $10 million in stock awards, that number is very high as a single person's compensation, but when you break it down for each employee, the split comes out to paying them like $81,000 for the CEO to make about $400 off of having them there.

You can't really complain about people having the "why should they get paid that much when I don't" attitude when the entire argument is based on an even sillier version of comparing lower level employees to the person at the very top of a graded pay scale all the way up. Even a 40% increase for the CEO is a couple million dollars, while increasing the pay by 40% for the 50,000 employees costs billions of dollars, which of course they could only get by raising prices significantly when the average car payment is already like $725/month.

Even when it's a very high number, the CEO salary is still a very small fraction of what is paid to all the company employees. It would be like increasing the cost of a $50,000 car to $90,000 because the cost of rubber for tires increased 40%. Tires are AN expense for a car, but a pretty minor one that obviously doesn't mean that an increase in tire prices makes the entire car with an extra $40,000.

KO

perfect post

 

[skysolo]

It's not crab mentality, it's just math. The median pay for employees at GM is already like 15% higher than the country's GDP per capita, so there simply isn't enough money in existence for everyone to get paid what they're demanding.

Of course there is some of the "why should they get paid when I don't" from a lot of people who will now have to pay significantly more for something without having the money for it. Everyone is also a consumer everywhere, but only an employee at one place.

CEO pay for huge companies is certainly higher than it should be, but that's when they have tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of employees under them, so that doesn't really translate quite the same.

Even these CEOs with compensation of like $10 million in salary and benefits and like $10 million in stock awards, that number is very high as a single person's compensation, but when you break it down for each employee, the split comes out to paying each of them like $81,000 for the CEO to make about $400 off of having them there.

You can't really complain about people having the "why should they get paid that much when I don't" attitude when the entire argument is based on an even sillier version of comparing lower level employees to the person at the very top of a graded pay scale all the way up. Even a 40% increase for the CEO is a couple million dollars, while increasing the pay by 40% for the 50,000 employees costs billions of dollars, which of course they could only get by raising prices significantly when the average car payment is already like $725/month.

Even when it's a very high number, the CEO salary is still a very small fraction of what is paid to all the company employees. It would be like increasing the cost of a $50,000 car to $90,000 because the cost of rubber for tires increased 40%. Tires are AN expense for a car, but a pretty minor one that obviously doesn't mean that an increase in tire prices makes the entire car with an extra $40,000.

Yep. It's simple calculus.

I don't make a lot of money so you shouldn't either. I work hard. I get up early. I want to make $100 an hour. It's not fair.

 

[skysolo]

KO

perfect post

False. It's whiney and the exact crab mentality that I was talking about.

Maybe you guys should strike for better wages instead of complaining about someone else doing so.

 

[Rob Battisti]

False. It's whiney and the exact crab mentality that I was talking about.

Maybe you guys should strike for better wages instead of complaining about someone else doing so.

Lmao 100% straight up no way your read it. I appreciate the tactic as I employ it often.

 

[nostradumbass]

Yep. It's simple calculus.

I don't make a lot of money so you shouldn't either. I work hard. I get up early. I want to make $100 an hour. It's not fair.

Yeah, your position is much more logical than pointing to actual expenses.

The person at the top of a 50,000 person multinational company is a millionaire. Why can't I be a millionaire for dropping out of high school to screw in headlamps? Somebody just print the money so everyone can be a millionaire too! It's just not fair!!

 

[Swiftie]

The 32 hour work week request sounds like a crazy thing to ask for.

 

[pinger]

Everyone is just arguing with their hearts and not their heads.

You have three options and can only pick 1.

EV development continues on pace to meet the administrations goals.

Autoworkers get their raises.

Both of those options but prices increase into Bolivia to the point the automakers have to shut down due to being non-competitive.

What about Chile?

 

[Sinister]

So much corporate boot-licking.

 

[Terry Noonan]

21% seems like a good raise but in negotiation never accept the first offer. Collective bargaining. Let them duke it out.

pls don’t tank my Ford position though.

 

[Rob Battisti]

So much corporate boot-licking.

Are there other options than what I stated?