Comments on: What the Speaker Knows http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/12/03/what-the-speaker-knows/ The unbearable lightness of Lex. Enjoy! Mon, 22 Mar 2010 12:32:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Ron http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/12/03/what-the-speaker-knows/comment-page-1/#comment-292188 Ron Fri, 05 Dec 2008 13:06:50 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=6475#comment-292188 Curtis, good point. Equally important is the qualitative aspect,thought impossible to pin down to any degree of exactitude. Honda and Toyota did not get to where they are totally on cost. The gentleman who made the point about if you've not been on the production floor you cannot understand the 19th centuary mentality of the UAW is exactly right. Curtis, good point. Equally important is the qualitative aspect,thought impossible to pin down to any degree of exactitude.

Honda and Toyota did not get to where they are totally on cost.

The gentleman who made the point about if you’ve not been on the production floor you cannot understand the 19th centuary mentality of the UAW is exactly right.

]]> By: Curtis http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/12/03/what-the-speaker-knows/comment-page-1/#comment-292123 Curtis Fri, 05 Dec 2008 10:38:51 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=6475#comment-292123 What a bunch of morons. When discussing labor costs you MUST contrast burdened labor hours. You do not compare pay scales, you compare the burdened rate that industry charges for employee hours. Even the ever stupid USG knows that and applies it. If it costs the company $70/hour or even $49/hour to pay a worker what is the burdened rate? In a union firm it is probably 6 to 1. In other words, for every $70/hour/worker the overhead and whatnot works outs to $200/hour. Unfortunately, the burdened rate for UAW plants is closer to $1000/hour. What a bunch of morons. When discussing labor costs you MUST contrast burdened labor hours. You do not compare pay scales, you compare the burdened rate that industry charges for employee hours. Even the ever stupid USG knows that and applies it.

If it costs the company $70/hour or even $49/hour to pay a worker what is the burdened rate? In a union firm it is probably 6 to 1. In other words, for every $70/hour/worker the overhead and whatnot works outs to $200/hour. Unfortunately, the burdened rate for UAW plants is closer to $1000/hour.

]]> By: Ron http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/12/03/what-the-speaker-knows/comment-page-1/#comment-292071 Ron Fri, 05 Dec 2008 08:29:45 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=6475#comment-292071 Flit lives in an alternate universe. When I was with GM, the UAW members would fight to get laid off as it meant a two year paid vacation and a guaranteed job when they came back. I've personally seen UAW workers sabotage a line on Friday (to get off early), be fired by GM management, then be forced by the UAW to be hired back in on Monday. No harm, n0 foul. So, no, I do not care one whit about the auto industry. Use Chapter 11 to get straight, or disappear. In any event, keep the heck out of my pocket. BYW, I am on my fourth Camry and it runs as well as it did when I bought it 8 years ago (119,00 miles). I'd like to upgrade, but that is ego talking, not need. Flit lives in an alternate universe. When I was with GM, the UAW members would fight to get laid off as it meant a two year paid vacation and a guaranteed job when they came back.

I’ve personally seen UAW workers sabotage a line on Friday (to get off early), be fired by GM management, then be forced by the UAW to be hired back in on Monday. No harm, n0 foul.

So, no, I do not care one whit about the auto industry. Use Chapter 11 to get straight, or disappear. In any event, keep the heck out of my pocket.

BYW, I am on my fourth Camry and it runs as well as it did when I bought it 8 years ago (119,00 miles). I’d like to upgrade, but that is ego talking, not need.

]]> By: Scott http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/12/03/what-the-speaker-knows/comment-page-1/#comment-291853 Scott Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:07:41 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=6475#comment-291853 What flit's numbers are able to avoid is "non-cash compensation". If UAW members can be paid for non working for two years at 95% of their previous pay ("job bank"), that money has to come from somewhere. It is like the employer's unemployment insurance contribution -- worker never sees it until they are paid it. But it has a direct cost per employee. Just like the seventeen paid holidays (you have seventeen holidays? I don't) that are on top of the 17.5 days of vacation. Throw in tuition assistance, legal services plan, disablity coverage -- all of those have a variable cost that has to be apportioned to each labor hour. So, in 2006, each labor hour cost Chrysler $75.86 -- Salary -- $29.15 (or 38%), Health Care --- $20.14 (27%) and all of these other costs -- $26.57 (35%) That $75.86/hr. direct labor cost isn't what a worker sees in their paycheck, but a cost nonetheless. I also laugh when the "if we had universal health care....." canard gets dragged out. We have universal health care for all UAW retirees over 65 -- it is called Medicare, and it isn't good enough for these pampered annuitants. Unless it was made illegal to have supplemental insurance, you can depend upon the UAW striking for as good a coverage as they have today. What flit’s numbers are able to avoid is “non-cash compensation”. If UAW members can be paid for non working for two years at 95% of their previous pay (“job bank”), that money has to come from somewhere. It is like the employer’s unemployment insurance contribution — worker never sees it until they are paid it. But it has a direct cost per employee. Just like the seventeen paid holidays (you have seventeen holidays? I don’t) that are on top of the 17.5 days of vacation. Throw in tuition assistance, legal services plan, disablity coverage — all of those have a variable cost that has to be apportioned to each labor hour. So, in 2006, each labor hour cost Chrysler $75.86 — Salary — $29.15 (or 38%), Health Care — $20.14 (27%) and all of these other costs — $26.57 (35%) That $75.86/hr. direct labor cost isn’t what a worker sees in their paycheck, but a cost nonetheless.

I also laugh when the “if we had universal health care…..” canard gets dragged out. We have universal health care for all UAW retirees over 65 — it is called Medicare, and it isn’t good enough for these pampered annuitants. Unless it was made illegal to have supplemental insurance, you can depend upon the UAW striking for as good a coverage as they have today.

]]> By: Lee http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/12/03/what-the-speaker-knows/comment-page-1/#comment-291842 Lee Thu, 04 Dec 2008 23:46:33 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=6475#comment-291842 Bottom line is this: if they don't lighten up their stance, instead of being United Auto Workers, they'll be United in the Unemployment Line. So, not much more to it than that. They can't compete with the Asian auto makers, no matter where your loyalties/love lies. "Hey face, shutup, or no nose for you." Bottom line is this: if they don’t lighten up their stance, instead of being United Auto Workers, they’ll be United in the Unemployment Line. So, not much more to it than that. They can’t compete with the Asian auto makers, no matter where your loyalties/love lies.
“Hey face, shutup, or no nose for you.”

]]> By: Flatlander http://www.neptunuslex.com/2008/12/03/what-the-speaker-knows/comment-page-1/#comment-291827 Flatlander Thu, 04 Dec 2008 23:31:25 +0000 http://www.neptunuslex.com/?p=6475#comment-291827 I suggest that to understand the total costs to Big 3 of the unions you talk to anyone who has actually worked on the floor there. The work rules are no ridiculously inflexible that the hourly wage costs are only the tip of the iceberg. If it takes GM three people to do the work of one at Toyota (and Toyota gets more efficient every year) then the wages are the least of their problem. The UAW is all about job guarantees and rigidity and doing the least amount of work possible for the most pay. That is directly at odds with the culture needed to be a successful manufacturer in the modern world.\ Take 'em out and shoot 'em and let a new GM rise from the ashes... I suggest that to understand the total costs to Big 3 of the unions you talk to anyone who has actually worked on the floor there.

The work rules are no ridiculously inflexible that the hourly wage costs are only the tip of the iceberg. If it takes GM three people to do the work of one at Toyota (and Toyota gets more efficient every year) then the wages are the least of their problem. The UAW is all about job guarantees and rigidity and doing the least amount of work possible for the most pay. That is directly at odds with the culture needed to be a successful manufacturer in the modern world.\

Take ‘em out and shoot ‘em and let a new GM rise from the ashes…

]]>