Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe Wicked
I read it the same way Ron did. That the hourly rate was $70 and they wanted to cut it back, and cut benefits, so I did not think that the pay rate was including benefits. If they are rolling the cost of company nurse, etc... in then I can see where a $14 cut can be more of a cut than before.
Please also keep in mind that even if your competitors are in a foreign country, they are still your competitors. If you charge more for the same product, your product really has to be superior in every way, and there is still a limit. I work in the telecommunications industry (cell phones), and our competitors are all either completely foreign or (as we are) a foreign company with a US company as a subsidiary to handle US operations, with the exception of Motorola. Motorola now is for sale. They are folding. Qualcomm did the same when I worked for them, they sold to Kyocera. The reality is the US company has to compete with the foreign company. In our case, they use top quality materials, but the manufacturing (based in Korea) costs are very low due to very low labor costs. This keeps the Top Tier phones priced in the same range as Motorola's Mid Tier phones. Hard to compete with that, when your labor costs are 3 times your competitor.
|
Joe,
I understand what you're saying. I just think there is another side of the coin here. I think it was vague on purpose.
The $70 figure was released by the company:
"In a statement, the Detroit-based company said the union had "singled out" the supplier by refusing to allow it to cut hourly labor
costs that are three times higher than its rivals at over $70 per hour."
So my saying "
On the other hand, if the $70/hour figure was released by the American Axle company, you can pretty well figure they tacked on everything they could think of to inflate the appearance of high "labor costs"...." refers this "$70 of what" may be purposely vague to mislead. It just makes sense they would spin it best they could, so I'm assuming, perhaps incorrectly, they did.
Then:
Whereas the cut-in-half scenario was from an employee:
"Carl Jackson, a 13-year American Axle veteran, said union negotiators told rank-and-file members the
company had been unbudging in demands for pay cuts that would cut compensation in half for many workers."
And the stated $14 cut from the union:
"The United Auto Workers said the strike had begun at 12:01 ET on Tuesday. Talks broke off Monday with major issues unresolved,
including demands for wage cuts of up to $14 per hour, the union said".
The two preceding paragraphs lead me to believe the paid wages are lower than $70/hr.
I surely admit it doen't look too good for the UAW. We can already see that some rivals are at least UAW (implied American?):
"American Axle said the union was in effect singling the company out for
demanding wages and benefits about
equal to those that rivals now have under their own UAW agreements."
I have to say it seems the end result may be a lockout and the next thing across the picket line could be flatbed trailers large enough to transport Mazak equipment. UAW has a lot of b@lls. It's better to strike over something that can't easily be moved, like a railroad.
'Course that's illegal. Probably cause it can't be moved.
I wouldn't mind government restrictions and protective tariffs on some things. Like Motorola
not being allowed to die over imports. Motorola was a great company. Where will we get our military electronics during the next war? Walmart?
...