UAW is at it again, this time it's chrysler

[1fastredsc]

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/10/10/uaw-chrysler-strike-is-on/

As said in the article, it looks like chrysler's problem of an over stocked inventory might work in their favor.

[pwd72s]

Damn! I was waiting for these to come out...

[NICKG]

yea..but chrysler has NO shareholder to please, they can sell off the companies and turn a nice profit...I hope they break the uaw

[Cdnone1]

I like how they are not going to target the plants that are already idle from lack of need or sales of their product. ie; nobodies buying their cars.
Seems like a great time to hold a gun to ownerships head
steve

[cashflyer]

Nobody's going to break the UAW because nobody in the corporate world has the spine to stand up and say "enough is enough."

[JeremyD]

Now would be the time to bring in replacement workers - bet you could fill up a plant with $13 an hour workers. Bus them across the picket lines... or wait until their inventory dries up -THEN start talking to em.

Stupid -

[lendaddy]

Originally Posted by NICKG

yea..but chrysler has NO shareholder to please, they can sell off the companies and turn a nice profit...I hope they break the uaw

I made this point here today, they are in a unique position.

[Superman]

Originally Posted by NICKG

yea..but chrysler has NO shareholder to please, they can sell off the companies and turn a nice profit...I hope they break the uaw

Tell me more about this. I assumed that Chrysler is a publicly-traded company. Are they employee-owned?

[lendaddy]

The majority share is owned by a private investment group.

[CurtEgerer]

http://www.cerberuscapital.com/profiles/chrysler.html

Yes, it should be interesting to see how this plays out. The novelty of owning Chrysler may still be too strong for Cerberus to play hardball. Yet.

[Superman]

So....Chrysler is not employee-owned? The reason I ask is because it would be interesting if those union members were shareholders.

Assuming they are not, here we have the regular vultures here urging management to "do the right thing" and run the union reps out of the room with a cattle prod. Then round up busloads of new workers and run those busses through the picket lines. Show those union thugs who's boss.

That's not likely to happen. You see, the executives that are in the business of dealing with labor unions and running large international manufacturing companies.....those guys are not nearly as smart as you guys are.

And if they were to follow your advice, you'd learn why they usually don't.

[lendaddy]

Originally Posted by Superman

So....Chrysler is not employee-owned? The reason I ask is because it would be interesting if those union members were shareholders.

Assuming they are not, here we have the regular vultures here urging management to "do the right thing" and run the union reps out of the room with a cattle prod. Then round up busloads of new workers and run those busses through the picket lines. Show those union thugs who's boss.

That's not likely to happen. You see, the executives that are in the business of dealing with labor unions and running large international manufacturing companies.....those guys are not nearly as smart as you guys are.

And if they were to follow your advice, you'd learn why they usually don't.

It's not because those employees can't be replaced with competent substitutes at a lower rate, it's the sympathetic striking that would prevent it. Thuggery if you will.

[CurtEgerer]

No, it's owned by Cerberus 100%. They have no shareholders, only vaults full of money and ruthless business managers who excel at cutting fat For some reason, they think they can turn an auto company around. I'm doubtful, but I'll bet they'll leave a LOT of blood on the floor before they're finished ......

[Porsche-O-Phile]

And what exactly would be wrong with breaking the union?

Let the free market do its magic. For once. We'll see once and for all what "fair salary" is for what those workers do. Which would be a VERY useful piece of information for the auto industry as a whole to have.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

Word just in - strike is apparently over after six hours.

It'll be interesting to hear which side pussied out.

[Superman]

Okay. It's not that I don't get it. The company has the right, and opportunity, to dismiss all those workers. You'd prefer that the workers not have the right to strike, boycott, whatever. How 'bout if the workers had the right to strike, but the company was denied the right to dismiss them? Inequitable? Yeah. Now let's go back to a company that has the right to dismiss everyone, and the Everyone who lacks the right to strike or boycott? You'd prefer that? Sure you would. But the trouble is, those worker are Americans. Citizens. Voters. If it's all about corporations, and not about those workers/Americans/citizens/voters......then that last group will probably clarify their preference at the next election. See how this works? I know a lot of you guys would be pleased if it were all about corporations. But it's not. Corporations are in the driver's seat in Washington DC, but in the voting booth it's up to people/workers/humans. And I'm okay with that. I do not believe that the road to happiness goes through Exxon. Or Enron. Or Chrysler. Chrysler is a tool. For citizens. Not even investors. Americans. When Chrysler ceases to promote the security and happiness of citizens, then it can fall into the fire as far as I am concerned. It's ALL about people. And those union workers.....those are people.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I've worked in an "at will" state for the last ten years and I haven't had any problems.

I go to work and if I do a good job, I get a paycheck and the right to come back tomorrow. That seems fair enough to me. I'm fine with that. I expect nothing else from an employer. My worth and my value is in what I bring to the table. If I'm worth something, I'll be asked back. If not, I won't.

Why is this not fair?

[1fastredsc]

Originally Posted by Porsche-O-Phile

Word just in - strike is apparently over after six hours.

It'll be interesting to hear which side pussied out.

Apparently it's a phony call from forbes about the strike being over.

http://www.autoblog.com/2007/10/10/forbes-reports-uaw-chrysler-strike-is-over-but-its-not/

[cairns]

Oh please Supe just stop with the whiney liberal humans are people too damn the corporations George Soros garbage.

"Corporations are in the Driver's seat in Washington DC?"

I'd say that when you look at the campaign contributions unions and trial lawyers are doing most of the driving. And where do you think the Union's management gets the money to make all those contributions? Do you think the "workers" (what a stupid communist description) have a say in where that money goes?

Who do you think makes up corporations? Primates? Warlords? Who are the shareholders that want to invest their $ in a successful corporation so they can provide for themselves and their families? Evil Republican Aliens?

You don't get it. So don't pretend you do.

The sooner the big three "break" the union stranglehold and employ a competitive responsible work force the sooner we'll have a competitive industry again.

Or we can just go the way of the UK and watch unions demand their members out of a job- and our country out of an automotive industry (except for BMW/Toyota/Honda/Mercedes all of whom seem to do just fine in our country without the protection of a union).

Have ye been made redundant? Ooooh so sorry. How long do ye git to keep the flat? It's that damned Thatcher ye know- she doesn't care a twit about us poor working sods.

[Superman]

Good luck with that, Cairns. As I said, if only those auto company executives were as smart as you guys.