...

 JM> Oh but there is one thing I forgot to tell you. This Ford
 JM> plant is in Brazil.

 JM> Yep. And do you know why it is in Brazil? Unions. The UAW
 JM> is opposed to this type of innovative manufacturing. They
 JM> are opposed to innovation that would actually help their
 JM> employer because they stand the risk of losing jobs. And if
 JM> they lose jobs, they lose power.

 Union workers decide if the Unions oppose something, and Union
 workers are worried about jobs, not because the union loses
 power, but because the jobs pay the worker's salaries.

 For decades the companies have proposed various "innovations",
 such as employee involvement etc. The unions went along with
 those changes, but managment sabatoged them. Managers don't want
 to give up any of their power. Remember the 'rope' in Saturn's
 plants? The one where any worker can stop a production line if
 he sees something wrong? The idea being do it right the first
 time. Well, they did away with the 'rope' years ago. Seems it
 did slow down production.

 And just how is it 'innovative' to put subcontractors in the
 factory? If it's that big a deal, build a subcontractor plant
 next door. The fact is, there is nothing the subcontractor can
 do inside the plant that union workers can't do. The only reason
 for subcontractors is to have low paid workers in the plant.

 Well, guess what. A $25/hr regular time wage is right on a
 middle class family wage. Just why do you object to hourly
 workers earning a middle class wage? Remember when, within the
 last couple years, an Asian auto company was opening a factory
 in Mississippi? Or Louisiana, it was a couple years ago. They
 were offering salaries in the $20-$25/hr range, and couldn't
 find enough takers. Of course they didn't want the low quality
 minimum wage earners you find at so many low paid jobs.

 So, how is it salaries that are Detroit's problem, when foreign
 car makers are salary competitive?

 It's pensions and medical care. Foreign car makers have zero
 pension liabilities. So, your only answer to that is American
 workers shouldn't get pensions. Considering that even 401K's
 have to cost in the range of pension investment in order to pay
 at that range, 401k's are not the answer. The only answer is
 nothing at all for worker's retirement, except social security
 which is the only thing they can really count on.

 Oh, and foreign makers don't have to provide medical insurance,
 or, if they do, not as good. So that leaves the American medical
 care industry out on a limb.

 There is no good answer on your side of this question, only a
 choice of disasters.

 JM> Unions, gotta love 'um.

 Yup. Without em you would have few if any benefits, and lower
 wages.


BOB KLAHN bob.klahn{at}sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

... Santa's elves are just a bunch of subordinate Clauses.
 * Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5a