There is a lot of bogus propaganda being put out there by the unions and the mass media with regards of the hourly wage of union workers as well as the hourly compensation of union workers as well as the hourly cost to the Big 3 companies of the union workers.

When all is said and done, from what I have read, there is a $10/hour gap between the compensation paid to the union workers (salary + benefits) compared to what the foreign companies pay their workers. Most of that $10 is in the benefits packages union members get. The foreign companies don’t pay benefits as high as the unions.

However, the cost to the Big 3 companies for each union member is much, much greater, and that is where the Big 3 are having major trouble competing financially with the foreign companies. Because the Big 3 have such a large retired force compared to the foreign companies, if one takes the amount of money each company must pay its employees — both active and retired – and divides by the active workforce, that is where the Big 3 end up paying $70+/hour per active worker compared to the foreign companies who are only paying about half that.

There is just no way to compete with that kind of cost/revenue discrepancy.

Either the benefits packages need to come down or the packages to the retirees must come down.

The last numbers that I saw were stated to be around $45/hour (salary + benefits) for the foreign company workers vs $55/hour (salary + benefits) for the UAW workers. And then the additional $15/hour/worker to cover the cost of retirees’ packages.

Something needs to give. The Big 3 cannot continue to compete when their pay gap is around $25/hour/active worker.

Also, upon talking to a coworker of mine who came to our job from previously being in the UAW, he said that the way the union works is based on entitlement, seniority and time in with the union, not based on merit. Also, no matter what, workers who bust their butts to do their jobs to the best of their ability are rewarded the same as those who slack off and screw off. And there is no incentive for anyone to do any better, because UAW workers are only rewarded based on time in with the union, not merit. They also won’t fire people based on lack of production.

To put it simply, the problem is that the union could care less about the Big 3 and could care less about their product. Their focus is only on making the most money and getting the most benefits, no matter the consequences and no matter whether they are getting results or not. It’s much like the Teacher’s Unions which are run the same way. No matter their performance and the performance of their kids, they don’t care, they simply want more money, more pay and more benefits.

At one time the unions served a good purpose, to stop companies from treating their employees poorly. But now, the unions have become so wrought with power and greed, that the pendulum of corruption has swung entirely the opposite way and the unions are ruining things.

We need to get back to a system of merit, not a system of entitlement. Workers should be rewarded for good work and punished — even fired — for lack of production and poor work. Until that happens, the Big 3 are going to continue to fail to compete with the foreign companies.

Yes you are.

“Mikey” has already wasted enough time presenting FACTS which meatpie finds it convenient to ignore. “Mikey” has better things to do than argue with a fool who is simply trying to prop up the union bosses and prolong the agony of their workers.

Believe it or not, among wingnuts the fact-free assertion is considered a very high quality “argument”.

Wade: It’s far easier for poor diminished meatpie to go flinging around that LIAR label than it is for him to engage in an intellectually honest discussion of the problem here.

Now that President Bush has offered a big three a bailout (which reminds me… did we hear any praise from meatpie when Bush did that?) the problem will be held over until next year when Obama and the Dems can use billions more in taxpayer funds to shelter big union bosses from any accountability for the mess THEY made.

False. The cost of retiree pensions and health care cannot be included in the compensation received by currently active autoworkers because it is not paid to currently active autoworkers.

It’s a simple concept — so simple, in fact, that Mikey and his merry band of fellow liars prefer to pretend it does not exist at all. The claim made by Kudlow and others, and echoed by Mikey and the liars’ club here at Flopping Asshats, was that “Average compensation for the Detroit little three is $72.31″. That is quite simply false, because it includes benefits not paid to the workers now building cars.

The total costs of labor, including health benefits and pensions to retirees, may well average out to more than $70 per hour worked by current workers. But to claim that current workers are compensated to the tune of $70+ per hour is flatly and blatantly dishonest.

“BTW, meathead… yes, they “averaged” Toyota’s cost per employee hourly the same way…”

Irrelevant. The claim was not that “cost per employee hourly” was $70+ dollars per hour. The claim was that UAW workers are compensated at a rate of $70+ dollars per hour. That claim is a lie.

“The hourly figure does *NOT* include current retiree’s benefits…”

False. It is already well documented that this figure does, in fact, include the benefits paid to current retirees. It is also worth noting that the Heritage Foundation’s analysis are based largely on estimates — not actual costs — provided by auto companies in “fact books” issued during contract negotiations. Laughably, the Heritage Foundation can provide no documentation whatsoever for the claim that the benefits figure for Ford do not include retiree benefits — merely the alleged verbal confirmation from an unnamed Ford employee.

Further, the original claim made by the Heritage Foundation was that “UAW workers earn $75 an hour in wages and benefits“. Note the subtle change in this claim — now it’s “UAW Workers Actually Cost the Big Three Automakers $70 an Hour”. Why the change? Because it is now painfully obvious that this “cost” is simply an artifact of accounting, and does not represent anything near to the reality of how autoworkers are actually compensated for their labor. This is a consequence of FAS 106, an accounting method that requires companies to “employers must replace pay-as-you-go accounting with accrual accounting. That is, their balance sheets must show the expected cost of providing retiree health and welfare benefits for all employees and retirees eligible to receive such benefits, currently or in the future.”

Oops. The costs reported by the automakers in their SEC filings, in accordance with FAS 106, includes “benefits for all employees and retirees eligible to receive such benefits“. That pretty much settles the matter: the figures being touted by the Heritage Foundation and other far right pundits, derived as they are solely from information supplied by the automakers, are indeed padded with benefits for current retirees — but we are supposed to ignore this fact, and pretend that it’s those greedy workers gobbling up all the cash.

The willingness of the wingnuts to believe any lie fed to them by the right-wing noise machine is legendary. I thank my fellow commenters for again confirming their exceptional gullibility.

This is all a distraction, just like the democrats trotting out the information about the foreign auto companies getting tax credits, failing to mention the big 3 get them too for various reasons. With 52% of the union auto workers NOT wanting a bail out, seems like all this isn’t playing yet in Peoria, but it probably will eventually if they keep up the misinformation campaign.

The TNR article the union bot is posting is not accurate. The hourly figure does *NOT* include current retiree’s benefits, it includes *FUTURE* retirement benefits for those who are presently working.

_____________________________________________________________

Earned Benefits

The remaining $33.58 an hour of hourly labor costs that GM reports–46 percent of total compensation–was paid as benefits. These benefits include[5]:

Hospital, surgical, and prescription drug benefits;
Dental and vision benefits;
Group life insurance;
Disability benefits;
Supplemental Unemployment Benefits (SUB);
Pension payments to workers pensions accounts to be paid out at retirement;
Unemployment compensation; and
Payroll taxes (employer’s share).

These benefits cost the Detroit automakers significant amounts of money. Critics contend that these benefit figures include the cost of providing retirement and health benefits to currently retired workers, not just benefits for current workers. Since there are more retired than active employees this makes it appear that GM employees earn far more than they actually do.*******************************

This contention contradicts the plain meaning of what the automakers have reported in SEC filings and in their public statements and would be contrary to generally accepted accounting principles.**************************

Under the accounting rules established by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, the Detroit automakers must report their liability for future benefits as they accrue.[6] The hourly benefits figure includes payments into defined benefit pension plans to provide future pensions to current workers. It also includes the estimated costs of future retirement health benefits that current workers earn today.****************************

Chrysler, for example, reports paying $20.14 an hour in health costs for its hourly employees. That figure includes the estimated cost of their health benefits in retirement, calculated according to Financial Accounting Standard 106.[7] The government does not allow Chrysler to promise to pay tens of thousands of dollars in health benefits in the future without reporting that cost on its balance sheets today.

***************Excludes Legacy Costs***********************

The hourly benefit figures the Detroit automakers report covers the cost of current and future benefits earned by actively working employees. It does not include the cost of paying health benefits and pensions to current retirees.*********************

Before they requested a bailout, the Big Three automakers specifically explained that their labor cost figures do not include the cost of past work. General Motors states in its filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission that:

GM maintains hourly and salaried benefit plans that provide postretirement medical, dental, vision, and life insurance to most U.S. and Canadian retirees and eligible dependents. The cost of such benefits is recognized in the consolidated financial statements during the period employees provide service to GM.[8]

In other words, GM records the expense for retiree benefits when workers earn the benefits, not years later when they collect their benefits. In less technical language, Ford explains that their total average hourly labor costs include:

(1) All the dollars paid to employees, (2) the cost of contractual benefits for employees, and (3) the cost of statutory payments, such as Social Security and Workers’ Compensation–all calculated on the basis of hours worked by employees.[9]

Average hourly costs include the costs of wages and benefits (current and future) to employees divided by the number of hours worked by those same employees. It does not include the benefits paid to retirees.[10] This is in accord with standard accounting principles that require the Big Three to report their costs as they occur. Labor costs are the costs to the Detroit automakers of employing its current workers, not paying former workers for services performed decades ago.

Retirement Benefits Alone Cost $31 an Hour

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/wm2162.cfm

Next Meatpie will be telling us Obama had no contact whatsover with Blagojevitch.

But then what can you do with the “it all depends on what the meaning of “is”… is” mentality that permeates this country. And that’s the game meathead is playing.

*otherwise known as facts.

i.e. again from before this was on your political radar…. from Oct 2007 this Reuters article

The average UAW-represented GM assembly line worker makes just under $28 (U.S.) per hour now before health-care and other benefits that take total hourly labour costs to $73, the auto maker has said.

By contrast, Toyota’s average hourly cost for workers at its U.S. plants was under $48 per hour including benefits.

Just because you don’t do your homework, I do, bozo. So perhaps you should corral your collegian testosterone, and consider adding to your reading repertoire.

GM reports their costs specifically at $69 per hour per employee. That one includes the retirees pensions. While it’s true the workers (i.e. Toyota vs Ford) receive approximately the same hourly wage, the overall costs to the companies is not even close. Most is due to UAW, benefits and pensions to retirees… other reasons include the more moderized factory methods of assembly. But that’s only GM. All are bouncing between the $70-$80 per hr with the benefits and pensions.

Now I realize that you don’t want to include the costs of the retiree pensions since it messes up your tidy little perception. But that’s a cost to the company, and contributes to the P&L bottom line. So play your little numbers game, and quote your sources who parse for partisan purposes. Too bad that doesn’t help the corporations who are still in the red for reality… even while you sit smugly by and say “that’ don’t count! No fair!” Duh wuh…

These high hourly costs for the American auto manufacturers isn’t even a new story except to the brain dead like you. This was being reported even last year when the auto makers were doing battle with the UAW.

A year before that, it appeared on places like back in 2006 on Tom Paine as being $80 per hour per employee with benefits.

Not far back enough? How about in 2004? Hadn’t even begun to be a glint in your partisan eyeball back then, I bet. Too busy with frat parties to pay attention to what was predictably coming down the pike? Or perhaps you were still in high school then.

While you place your entire education portfolio of the auto financial status in the less than able hands of TNR, Missy and I both have relatives in the business. We’ve also both been around long enough to turn your hide over and tan it for your insolence, you pompous and arrogant cyberblowhard. But that’s another story.

My now deceased uncles were executives in Detroil with the auto industry. So I combine both multiple source quotes of their costs, combine it with personal experience… as does Missy… to come to conclusions.

And you? No doubt too busy playing beer pong with your buds to compile any research of substance other than where to buy a cheaper batch of replacement ping pong balls.

**************

Correction… let’s not give Yale a bad name for meathead. Apparently he’s a user of others’ proxy accounts. In other words, an arrogant geek with a ‘tude.