• Sign Up! To view all forums and unlock additional cool features

    Welcome to the #1 Fiesta ST Forum and Fiesta ST community dedicated to Fiesta ST owners and enthusiasts. Register for an account, it's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the Fiesta ST Forum today!


Union Strikes - Ford Contract Negotiations

Intuit

3000 Post Club
Messages
3,659
Likes
2,262
Location
South West Ohio
#1
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/detroit-three-automakers-enter-final-hours-avoid-wider-uaw-strike-2023-09-22/
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/23/business/uaw-strike-ford-general-motors-stellantis.html

It's encouraging to see Ford take the lead on this... even though I've never managed to purchase a Ford product that was actually assembled here. (because they were cars)

Question is, how will the CEOs choose to maintain their profit margins... aka CEO bonuses...
 


Last edited:

jmrtsus

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,523
Likes
1,158
Location
Ooltewah
#4
Last I heard the UAW has lost their minds.....30 something % pay raise over a few years with annual COLA, 32 hour work week but paid for 40. If Ford agrees to that my next car will be non-union car!
 


gtx3076

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,181
Likes
1,374
Location
US
#5
It's about time a union fought for something more than a sweetheart deal, that's what happens when leadership is run by real union workers, not the business men that management would prefer to deal with.

There's plenty of meat on that bone, and it's time to raise the standard of living.
 


OP
Intuit

Intuit

3000 Post Club
Messages
3,659
Likes
2,262
Location
South West Ohio
Thread Starter #6
Last I heard the UAW has lost their minds.....30 something % pay raise over a few years with annual COLA, 32 hour work week but paid for 40. If Ford agrees to that my next car will be non-union car!
That was my initial thought as well, until I thought more about it. Generally when people negotiate or haggle we start out higher in anticipation of ending up some place lower. I suspect this was their (clever) way of calling attention to the fact that this sort of practice has unfortunately been going on with upper management for quite some time. If one of the upper management took 21 million annually, the company could employ some 300+ workers at around 60k for what that one person took. Incentivizations are another component to the problem. Every time they figure out a way to make the company more annual profit, (often by shipping jobs across various borders,) they get to keep a tidy portion of that profit. It's not just Ford, but upper management for companies in general. It'll be interesting to see what the upper managements of these companies do to offset the increases in order to bring profits (aka their bonuses) back inline. Nothing wrong with profits, incentives or pay gaps but there is such a thing as abuse and the ridiculously large and ever widening pay gaps might well be evidence of such abuse? I'm open to other perspectives.
 


dhminer

2000 Post Club
Messages
2,206
Likes
2,644
Location
Burlington, NC, USA
#7
Pay rates (up to and including the CEO) can only be what the market will bear. Competition in consumer driven markets is a beautiful thing.

No company is going to tell its shareholders “sorry guys, guess it looks like we lost this one so don’t expect any dividends for a few years and our stock price is likely going to drop.” It won’t happen at a publicly traded company. If the UAW gets what they want, prices will be passed on to us - the consumer. If you want to pay more for a car with no additional value, that’s fine but I will not be doing so.

The other option, which I suspect will be the one that comes to fruition, is that the total % of COGS spent on direct labor will not change - aka less jobs at higher pay.
 


gtx3076

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,181
Likes
1,374
Location
US
#8
All nonsense. When the UAW took a pay and benefits cuts in 2008 did that keep car and truck prices low? What is their excuse for jacking up prices when the union has been on their old contract? I guarantee you if they abolished all the union workers or even shipped the factories over seas the prices would still rise. Why would they drop? To be nice? Have you seen the loan durations? 84 months and climbing.

It wasn't always like this, the social contract is broken and I think a lot of people forget that 30% of the US used to be in a union, a single income could afford a house,health care was affordable, we had a 91% marginal tax rate and college used to be tuition free. Many in the older generations benefited greatly from these, and good for them, but now that they're cutting the checks, they've refused to acknowledge that we don't live in that world anymore. A 1 bedroom 1 bath apartment in Texas is easily $1,500, if you need make 3 times in a month to qualify for a lease you need to be making $25 an hour, and good luck if you are trying to make it with a family.
 


dhminer

2000 Post Club
Messages
2,206
Likes
2,644
Location
Burlington, NC, USA
#9
All nonsense. When the UAW took a pay and benefits cuts in 2008 did that keep car and truck prices low? What is their excuse for jacking up prices when the union has been on their old contract? I guarantee you if they abolished all the union workers or even shipped the factories over seas the prices would still rise. Why would they drop? To be nice? Have you seen the loan durations? 84 months and climbing.

It wasn't always like this, the social contract is broken and I think a lot of people forget that 30% of the US used to be in a union, a single income could afford a house,health care was affordable, we had a 91% marginal tax rate and college used to be tuition free. Many in the older generations benefited greatly from these, and good for them, but now that they're cutting the checks, they've refused to acknowledge that we don't live in that world anymore. A 1 bedroom 1 bath apartment in Texas is easily $1,500, if you need make 3 times in a month to qualify for a lease you need to be making $25 an hour, and good luck if you are trying to make it with a family.
Direct labor is a very small portion of their cost structure. Material cost drives cost more than anything, but global commodity markets are largely out of their control meaning they have to control costs where they can - labor, both direct and indirect. I’m required to deliver ~7% annual direct labor productivity just to offset inflationary pressure so we can keep prices low for our customers. That means more volume or less people. It’s no different at the big 3.

In addition to material inflation, they’re jacking up prices, in part, to offset the massive losses that FJB is forcing on them with regulation. Ford is expecting to lose $3B on EVs this year.
 


gtx3076

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,181
Likes
1,374
Location
US
#10
Direct labor is a very small portion of their cost structure. Material cost drives cost more than anything, but global commodity markets are largely out of their control meaning they have to control costs where they can - labor, both direct and indirect. I’m required to deliver ~7% annual direct labor productivity just to offset inflationary pressure so we can keep prices low for our customers. That means more volume or less people. It’s no different at the big 3.

In addition to material inflation, they’re jacking up prices, in part, to offset the massive losses that FJB is forcing on them with regulation. Ford is expecting to lose $3B on EVs this year.
I don't know what you do for a living but my guess the big 3 are not your industry peers, more likely than not, you didn't profit $21,000,000,000 in the past 6 months (on top of the $250,000,000,000 from the past decade), if you did, then I understand why you sympathize with them instead of the employees.

Small business owners don't have that kind of cushion, resources, or the leverage these big companies have. Somehow they've convinced working class business owners and underpaid middle managers that the CEO's of these large corporations are their peers.

They have no incentive to "keep prices low", that's why they keep extending the loan durations, and affordable vehicles like the Maverick are far and few between.
 


dhminer

2000 Post Club
Messages
2,206
Likes
2,644
Location
Burlington, NC, USA
#11
I don't know what you do for a living but my guess the big 3 are not your industry peers, more likely than not, you didn't profit $21,000,000,000 in the past 6 months (on top of the $250,000,000,000 from the past decade), if you did, then I understand why you sympathize with them instead of the employees.

Small business owners don't have that kind of cushion, resources, or the leverage these big companies have. Somehow they've convinced working class business owners and underpaid middle managers that the CEO's of these large corporations are their peers.

They have no incentive to "keep prices low", that's why they keep extending the loan durations, and affordable vehicles like the Maverick are far and few between.
Industry peers, no. You’re correct there. I work for a significantly larger company than any of them.

A couple of thoughts:
- The CEOs don’t set their own pay. The board incentivizes them to maximize shareholder value and rewards them handsomely when they succeed. They often have minimal guaranteed salaries.
- You also have to look at how the profits are spent. Generally speaking, most are reinvested into the company, used to purchase their own stock, or distributed to shareholders as dividends.
- I’m not sure why there is such a vendetta against high paid executives but not against pro athletes, musicians, actors, etc. Good CEOs deliver far more value to the world than any of these by providing goods, services, and gainful employment to millions of people. I am happy to see our CEO make many millions. He’s making my pockets fat as a shareholder, so I’d say he’s earned it. Maybe buy stock in some of these record profit making companies so the CEOs can make you some money too? Just a thought.
 


gtx3076

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,181
Likes
1,374
Location
US
#13
Industry peers, no. You’re correct there. I work for a significantly larger company than any of them.

A couple of thoughts:
- The CEOs don’t set their own pay. The board incentivizes them to maximize shareholder value and rewards them handsomely when they succeed. They often have minimal guaranteed salaries.
- You also have to look at how the profits are spent. Generally speaking, most are reinvested into the company, used to purchase their own stock, or distributed to shareholders as dividends.
- I’m not sure why there is such a vendetta against high paid executives but not against pro athletes, musicians, actors, etc. Good CEOs deliver far more value to the world than any of these by providing goods, services, and gainful employment to millions of people. I am happy to see our CEO make many millions. He’s making my pockets fat as a shareholder, so I’d say he’s earned it. Maybe buy stock in some of these record profit making companies so the CEOs can make you some money too? Just a thought.
Frankly, they can afford to pay more, and the union would be stupid to waste the opportunity. This could have been settled quietly, the unions offer wasn’t a secret. Their compensation along with the company profits is public knowledge and when the union made concessions in ‘08 in good faith they expected the sentiment to be returned. I’d rather 10 of my blue collar neighbors make 25k more, work a shorter week, secure a pension, have energy to invest in their communities than a 1,000 shareholders getting a bigger return on their “passive” income, all day everyday. There’s no good reason why blue collars in America shouldn’t have a better standard of living.
 


dhminer

2000 Post Club
Messages
2,206
Likes
2,644
Location
Burlington, NC, USA
#14
Frankly, they can afford to pay more, and the union would be stupid to waste the opportunity. This could have been settled quietly, the unions offer wasn’t a secret. Their compensation along with the company profits is public knowledge and when the union made concessions in ‘08 in good faith they expected the sentiment to be returned. I’d rather 10 of my blue collar neighbors make 25k more, work a shorter week, secure a pension, have energy to invest in their communities than a 1,000 shareholders getting a bigger return on their “passive” income, all day everyday. There’s no good reason why blue collars in America shouldn’t have a better standard of living.
I agree with what you’ve said about people making “fair” wages. Reality is, corporate finance (and open market economies in general) doesn’t work that way for the reasons I’ve outlined above and more. Fair is what the market will bear before your job gets shipped overseas. If they pay too much more, they’ll be fired for diluting margins and hurting stock prices and be forced to chase cheap labor and/or automation like nearly every other industry. To break this paradigm, you’d have to convince the owners of Ford’s, for example, 40 million common shares that they’re investing in a good cause, not a profit making opportunity. That’s charity work though, not investment. Just look at the textile industry. In just 10 years, almost a million jobs were offshored because of cost pressure. What were once thriving towns are now places with massive poverty and crime.

Moral of the story - fairness isn’t always fair. The world economy changes and we can either change with it or become obsolete.
 


Last edited:

jmrtsus

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,523
Likes
1,158
Location
Ooltewah
#16
That was my initial thought as well, until I thought more about it. Generally when people negotiate or haggle we start out higher in anticipation of ending up some place lower. I suspect this was their (clever) way of calling attention to the fact that this sort of practice has unfortunately been going on with upper management for quite some time. If one of the upper management took 21 million annually, the company could employ some 300+ workers at around 60k for what that one person took. Incentivizations are another component to the problem. Every time they figure out a way to make the company more annual profit, (often by shipping jobs across various borders,) they get to keep a tidy portion of that profit. It's not just Ford, but upper management for companies in general. It'll be interesting to see what the upper managements of these companies do to offset the increases in order to bring profits (aka their bonuses) back inline. Nothing wrong with profits, incentives or pay gaps but there is such a thing as abuse and the ridiculously large and ever widening pay gaps might well be evidence of such abuse? I'm open to other perspectives.
A very long post for those interested in some of the numbers in the Ford/UAW story.

Intuit; Their is no $60K union employees, $112K average for wages and benefits. Not sure who "they" getting the profits other than the people that invested their money in Ford stocks. profit sharing is offered at many jobs even for hourly employees and bonuses are almost a required feature of upper level manage agreements. Without a return on their investment stockholders will dump the stock and the increases in costs will be crazy due to credit rating drops on lower stock prices. It will cost Ford much more on the interest on the credit needed to operate. An NFL player just signed a 5 year, $55 million dollar a year deal or $3.25 million a game..............all salaries are getting crazy but to get top people that is what the market calls for. 15% of a new union built car is wages and benefits, dump the union and reduce our car prices. A new Mustang GT/CS like my wifes 2019 is $17,000 more in just 4 years. No way we would now pay over $64K for that car and it will go even higher after this contract. Hell you can get a really nice Shelby GT350 for that price, just saw an ad in Hemmings for a 1 owner 12K mile '17 for $60k asking price. So if we want a new Mustang after this contract it will be a used Shelby.

Dollars and Sense

The UAW wants a 4 day work week and paid for 5, that alone is a 20% raise, add the 30% increase that is a 50% increase in wages, stupid in my mind. Fords avg. cost for each hourly employee is currently $112,000 and will go up again with a new contract. Over $6 billion a year currently. On the other hand average salaried employees get $96,000 and cost Ford $2.7 billion a year, keep in mind Ford also has about 60,000 retired employees at an average of $147, 000 an additional $8.8 billion added to labor costs. That is almost $15 billion in labor costs per year. Many salaried folks are college grads and make less than the guy that puts "4 bolts on a car as is come by", no advanced education and almost an unskilled job. My Ford assembly plant retired uncle used to make us laugh at his statement of "4 bolts a car then 3 minutes talking with the guys and then 4 more bolts". In other words he worked about 15 minute an hour or 2 hours a day and with his pension and 401K he made more after he retired than working; same thing today, retired employees cost Ford more than current employees. Auto union workers are already making more the the salaried employees, and some think we should cut the lower earning wages to supplement the union workers, LOL! Any salaried cuts will be at the hiring level not current employees and not exec's. So lets not hurt the lowest paid folks to add to the pockets of the highest paid employee group. The union companies are at a $9.00 an hour disadvantage in just wages not counting benefits compared to non-union cars. Add benefits and that is probably closer to $15.00 and hour. I wish the big 3 would get together and walk away from the UAW and bring car prices down. I was Union, my wife retired with 45 years with a Union job but the UAW has ALWAYS made very high pay and benefits are now out of control and will price themselves out of jobs. I see more Mexican assembly plants and robots in Fords future. Ok with me, I love my Mexican made FiST.

BTW, out of curiosity I did some research on the subject and the numbers above are from reliable sources on the internet, almost all news to me. I would have bet the engineers and programmers would be higher paid than assembly line workers and lost. Then I thought how dangerous the job may be and found many other industries have higher accident rates and are not earning close to what UAW workers get and are not compensate as highly as UAW worker out from injuries. I believe the UAW has always been over compensated but has exceeded its worth to the big 3.
 


gtx3076

1000 Post Club
Messages
1,181
Likes
1,374
Location
US
#17
I agree with what you’ve said about people making “fair” wages. Reality is, corporate finance (and open market economies in general) doesn’t work that way for the reasons I’ve outlined above and more. Fair is what the market will bear before your job gets shipped overseas. If they pay too much more, they’ll be fired for diluting margins and hurting stock prices and be forced to chase cheap labor and/or automation like nearly every other industry. To break this paradigm, you’d have to convince the owners of Ford’s, for example, 40 million common shares that they’re investing in a good cause, not a profit making opportunity. That’s charity work though, not investment. Just look at the textile industry. In just 10 years, almost a million jobs were offshored because of cost pressure. What were once thriving towns are now places with massive poverty and crime.

Moral of the story - fairness isn’t always fair. The world economy changes and we can either change with it or become obsolete.
I never said fair, and almost never will. “Fair” wages don’t exist, people make what they settle for and no more.
 


dhminer

2000 Post Club
Messages
2,206
Likes
2,644
Location
Burlington, NC, USA
#18
A very long post for those interested in some of the numbers in the Ford/UAW story.

Intuit; Their is no $60K union employees, $112K average for wages and benefits. Not sure who "they" getting the profits other than the people that invested their money in Ford stocks. profit sharing is offered at many jobs even for hourly employees and bonuses are almost a required feature of upper level manage agreements. Without a return on their investment stockholders will dump the stock and the increases in costs will be crazy due to credit rating drops on lower stock prices. It will cost Ford much more on the interest on the credit needed to operate. An NFL player just signed a 5 year, $55 million dollar a year deal or $3.25 million a game..............all salaries are getting crazy but to get top people that is what the market calls for. 15% of a new union built car is wages and benefits, dump the union and reduce our car prices. A new Mustang GT/CS like my wifes 2019 is $17,000 more in just 4 years. No way we would now pay over $64K for that car and it will go even higher after this contract. Hell you can get a really nice Shelby GT350 for that price, just saw an ad in Hemmings for a 1 owner 12K mile '17 for $60k asking price. So if we want a new Mustang after this contract it will be a used Shelby.

Dollars and Sense

The UAW wants a 4 day work week and paid for 5, that alone is a 20% raise, add the 30% increase that is a 50% increase in wages, stupid in my mind. Fords avg. cost for each hourly employee is currently $112,000 and will go up again with a new contract. Over $6 billion a year currently. On the other hand average salaried employees get $96,000 and cost Ford $2.7 billion a year, keep in mind Ford also has about 60,000 retired employees at an average of $147, 000 an additional $8.8 billion added to labor costs. That is almost $15 billion in labor costs per year. Many salaried folks are college grads and make less than the guy that puts "4 bolts on a car as is come by", no advanced education and almost an unskilled job. My Ford assembly plant retired uncle used to make us laugh at his statement of "4 bolts a car then 3 minutes talking with the guys and then 4 more bolts". In other words he worked about 15 minute an hour or 2 hours a day and with his pension and 401K he made more after he retired than working; same thing today, retired employees cost Ford more than current employees. Auto union workers are already making more the the salaried employees, and some think we should cut the lower earning wages to supplement the union workers, LOL! Any salaried cuts will be at the hiring level not current employees and not exec's. So lets not hurt the lowest paid folks to add to the pockets of the highest paid employee group. The union companies are at a $9.00 an hour disadvantage in just wages not counting benefits compared to non-union cars. Add benefits and that is probably closer to $15.00 and hour. I wish the big 3 would get together and walk away from the UAW and bring car prices down. I was Union, my wife retired with 45 years with a Union job but the UAW has ALWAYS made very high pay and benefits are now out of control and will price themselves out of jobs. I see more Mexican assembly plants and robots in Fords future. Ok with me, I love my Mexican made FiST.

BTW, out of curiosity I did some research on the subject and the numbers above are from reliable sources on the internet, almost all news to me. I would have bet the engineers and programmers would be higher paid than assembly line workers and lost. Then I thought how dangerous the job may be and found many other industries have higher accident rates and are not earning close to what UAW workers get and are not compensate as highly as UAW worker out from injuries. I believe the UAW has always been over compensated but has exceeded its worth to the big 3.
As soon as Chinese cars hit the US market, the UAW is toast. Massive tariffs are their only hope.
 


Last edited:
OP
Intuit

Intuit

3000 Post Club
Messages
3,659
Likes
2,262
Location
South West Ohio
Thread Starter #19
As soon as Chinese cars hit the US market, the UAW is toast. Massive tariffs are their only hope.
If the 2008-2012 administration had agreed to what their opposition had wanted, (no bailouts,) they'd already have been Chinese bought. 😄 (never mind where many of the components are made) Nobody other than (part of) govt wanted to fund/invest at that point.
There are smarter alternatives to tariffs. Here's a conversation regarding them - https://www.npr.org/2018/06/21/622361914/why-alternatives-to-tariffs-can-be-more-effective

A very long post for those interested in some of the numbers in the Ford/UAW story.

Intuit; Their is no $60K union employees, $112K average for wages and benefits. Not sure who "they" getting the profits other than the people that invested their money in Ford stocks. profit sharing is offered at many jobs even for hourly employees and bonuses are almost a required feature of upper level manage agreements. Without a return on their investment stockholders will dump the stock and the increases in costs will be crazy due to credit rating drops on lower stock prices. It will cost Ford much more on the interest on the credit needed to operate. An NFL player just signed a 5 year, $55 million dollar a year deal or $3.25 million a game..............all salaries are getting crazy but to get top people that is what the market calls for. 15% of a new union built car is wages and benefits, dump the union and reduce our car prices. A new Mustang GT/CS like my wifes 2019 is $17,000 more in just 4 years. No way we would now pay over $64K for that car and it will go even higher after this contract. Hell you can get a really nice Shelby GT350 for that price, just saw an ad in Hemmings for a 1 owner 12K mile '17 for $60k asking price. So if we want a new Mustang after this contract it will be a used Shelby.

Dollars and Sense

The UAW wants a 4 day work week and paid for 5, that alone is a 20% raise, add the 30% increase that is a 50% increase in wages, stupid in my mind. Fords avg. cost for each hourly employee is currently $112,000 and will go up again with a new contract. Over $6 billion a year currently. On the other hand average salaried employees get $96,000 and cost Ford $2.7 billion a year, keep in mind Ford also has about 60,000 retired employees at an average of $147, 000 an additional $8.8 billion added to labor costs. That is almost $15 billion in labor costs per year. Many salaried folks are college grads and make less than the guy that puts "4 bolts on a car as is come by", no advanced education and almost an unskilled job. My Ford assembly plant retired uncle used to make us laugh at his statement of "4 bolts a car then 3 minutes talking with the guys and then 4 more bolts". In other words he worked about 15 minute an hour or 2 hours a day and with his pension and 401K he made more after he retired than working; same thing today, retired employees cost Ford more than current employees. Auto union workers are already making more the the salaried employees, and some think we should cut the lower earning wages to supplement the union workers, LOL! Any salaried cuts will be at the hiring level not current employees and not exec's. So lets not hurt the lowest paid folks to add to the pockets of the highest paid employee group. The union companies are at a $9.00 an hour disadvantage in just wages not counting benefits compared to non-union cars. Add benefits and that is probably closer to $15.00 and hour. I wish the big 3 would get together and walk away from the UAW and bring car prices down. I was Union, my wife retired with 45 years with a Union job but the UAW has ALWAYS made very high pay and benefits are now out of control and will price themselves out of jobs. I see more Mexican assembly plants and robots in Fords future. Ok with me, I love my Mexican made FiST.

BTW, out of curiosity I did some research on the subject and the numbers above are from reliable sources on the internet, almost all news to me. I would have bet the engineers and programmers would be higher paid than assembly line workers and lost. Then I thought how dangerous the job may be and found many other industries have higher accident rates and are not earning close to what UAW workers get and are not compensate as highly as UAW worker out from injuries. I believe the UAW has always been over compensated but has exceeded its worth to the big 3.
Wweeyyelll, you say "none" but quote "average". Keep in mind one or a few top earners can easily skew an "average". Whether we go by 60k or 120k, 150 employees versus 300+, the point is still the same. It's a team sport. Their secretaries handle much of their duties, including some of the consultation and decision making. It's just funny when the next hundred+ combined workers' earnings are deemed "inflationary" while the top earners are explained as "market value". CEO bonuses are designed to incentivize better "performance" but performance is simply code for profit. If profits are tanking, I don't see a CEO (top or not) getting over and above the normal contracted bonus. Indeed prices have been getting beyond crazy but understand that this has been the case before recent proposed wage and salary increases.

1695783184541.png
 


Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
nachodaddy Fiesta ST Discussions 8
J Mid Atlantic Fiesta ST Owners 3

Similar threads



Top