Nissan drops company health care . . .
2/6/06, 05:02 PM
#2
Cobra Member
Join Date: September 25, 2004
Posts: 1,470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pretty soon all retiree benefits will be history. Just a sign of the times.
And, I don't mean to sound cold, but, I never quite got why the company should pay for people when they aren't getting any benefit out of them in the first place. Really, how does that benefit the company? And, why should I pay $1,200 - $1,500 per car for some old retired guys?
And, I don't mean to sound cold, but, I never quite got why the company should pay for people when they aren't getting any benefit out of them in the first place. Really, how does that benefit the company? And, why should I pay $1,200 - $1,500 per car for some old retired guys?
2/6/06, 06:22 PM
#3
Legacy TMS Member
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Rampant @ February 6, 2006, 6:05 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Pretty soon all retiree benefits will be history. Just a sign of the times.
And, I don't mean to sound cold, but, I never quite got why the company should pay for people when they aren't getting any benefit out of them in the first place. Really, how does that benefit the company? And, why should I pay $1,200 - $1,500 per car for some old retired guys?
[/b][/quote]
Let me guess...you're not even close to retirement age, are you?
Pretty soon all retiree benefits will be history. Just a sign of the times.
And, I don't mean to sound cold, but, I never quite got why the company should pay for people when they aren't getting any benefit out of them in the first place. Really, how does that benefit the company? And, why should I pay $1,200 - $1,500 per car for some old retired guys?
[/b][/quote]
Let me guess...you're not even close to retirement age, are you?
2/6/06, 06:53 PM
#4
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(TomServo92 @ February 6, 2006, 7:25 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Let me guess...you're not even close to retirement age, are you?
[/b][/quote]
He's probably still living with mommy!
Let me guess...you're not even close to retirement age, are you?
[/b][/quote]
He's probably still living with mommy!
2/6/06, 07:05 PM
#6
Bullitt Member
Join Date: July 8, 2005
Posts: 496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Rampant @ February 6, 2006, 7:05 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Pretty soon all retiree benefits will be history. Just a sign of the times.
And, I don't mean to sound cold, but, I never quite got why the company should pay for people when they aren't getting any benefit out of them in the first place. Really, how does that benefit the company? And, why should I pay $1,200 - $1,500 per car for some old retired guys?
[/b][/quote]
Simple answer--because that was part of their benefits package and you pay now or pay later.
Unless you work at somewhere like McDonalds, you probably have some sort of pay package that includes your salary AND any benefits such as medical or retirement. Most of us when we take a job look at the whole package. You may take a job with less pay, but great benefits. A company will entice people with a nice retirement plan. If they dump the retirement plan, in order to stay competitive, they may have to increase salaries or other benefits or end up with the people that should be working at McDonalds. Then we could all complain about the quality ( if we have jobs to afford a car) instead of the price.
Think about your own benefits. Suppose you have a salary , medical, dental, retirement, and disability. Every one of those things cost. How long would you stay working if one by one they cut those out and you had to foot the bill.
We can send all of the manufacturing, billing, designing, tech support, and whatever other jobs you can think of overseas, that will save money as that will cut wages drastically. If we do that in all sectors and not just automotive we can all be out of work....but the cars will be cheap.
Also, I find the fact that it is only in the US and not in Japan where these cuts are taking place very interesting.
Pretty soon all retiree benefits will be history. Just a sign of the times.
And, I don't mean to sound cold, but, I never quite got why the company should pay for people when they aren't getting any benefit out of them in the first place. Really, how does that benefit the company? And, why should I pay $1,200 - $1,500 per car for some old retired guys?
[/b][/quote]
Simple answer--because that was part of their benefits package and you pay now or pay later.
Unless you work at somewhere like McDonalds, you probably have some sort of pay package that includes your salary AND any benefits such as medical or retirement. Most of us when we take a job look at the whole package. You may take a job with less pay, but great benefits. A company will entice people with a nice retirement plan. If they dump the retirement plan, in order to stay competitive, they may have to increase salaries or other benefits or end up with the people that should be working at McDonalds. Then we could all complain about the quality ( if we have jobs to afford a car) instead of the price.
Think about your own benefits. Suppose you have a salary , medical, dental, retirement, and disability. Every one of those things cost. How long would you stay working if one by one they cut those out and you had to foot the bill.
We can send all of the manufacturing, billing, designing, tech support, and whatever other jobs you can think of overseas, that will save money as that will cut wages drastically. If we do that in all sectors and not just automotive we can all be out of work....but the cars will be cheap.
Also, I find the fact that it is only in the US and not in Japan where these cuts are taking place very interesting.
2/6/06, 07:10 PM
#7
V6 Member
Join Date: November 8, 2005
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Rampant @ February 6, 2006, 7:05 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Pretty soon all retiree benefits will be history. Just a sign of the times.
And, I don't mean to sound cold, but, I never quite got why the company should pay for people when they aren't getting any benefit out of them in the first place. Really, how does that benefit the company? And, why should I pay $1,200 - $1,500 per car for some old retired guys?
[/b][/quote]
I think this person has trouble seeing the big picture. Either an adult trolling for an argument, or a youngster with a mind full of mush
Pretty soon all retiree benefits will be history. Just a sign of the times.
And, I don't mean to sound cold, but, I never quite got why the company should pay for people when they aren't getting any benefit out of them in the first place. Really, how does that benefit the company? And, why should I pay $1,200 - $1,500 per car for some old retired guys?
[/b][/quote]
I think this person has trouble seeing the big picture. Either an adult trolling for an argument, or a youngster with a mind full of mush
2/6/06, 07:14 PM
#8
Cam Tease
Join Date: September 30, 2004
Posts: 1,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about the company adds all of these entitlements/pensions/benefits/whatnot into salaries and PEOPLE LEARN TO SAVE for themselves? Oh wait, we're American. We make a hobby out of living beyond our means.
2/6/06, 09:02 PM
#9
Bullitt Member
Join Date: September 14, 2004
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd like to butt in here. No I don't live with "mommy", NO I'm not close to "retirement age" but I do think I have some valid opinions on this topic. For years our country and most of its companies operated under a Defined Benefit system, which was basically an agreement between and emplyee and employer. This may have been fine when your biggest competiton was the guy in the next county or state, but those days are over, we are a global economy and the days when someone besides yourself will take care of you are over. Our country is coming full circle, back to a time when companies and the government aren't going to be there to pay your bills. If you watch TV its easy to see what happens to the sheep who let other people guarentee their retirement, their retirement account gets emptied, the government spends your social security 30 years before you can get it and you get to spend your golden years sitting in your living room griping about how you were cheated. I do mean to sound cold because its this mentality that is going to cause my generation (the 20's) to have to pay 3/4 of our paycheck to support Baby Boomer social security.
So, in short, Yes I agree with Nissan and any other company for that matter in wanting people to get back to taking responsiblilty for themselves, just like the good old days...
So, in short, Yes I agree with Nissan and any other company for that matter in wanting people to get back to taking responsiblilty for themselves, just like the good old days...
2/6/06, 09:09 PM
#10
Cobra Member
Join Date: September 25, 2004
Posts: 1,470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MY05GT @ February 6, 2006, 8:08 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
Simple answer--because that was part of their benefits package and you pay now or pay later.
Also, I find the fact that it is only in the US and not in Japan where these cuts are taking place very interesting.
[/b][/quote]
I certainly see the "it was promised, so pay up" argument, and I ABSOLUTELY agree with that. In this case, Nissan is giving an anual stiped -- what is wrong with that?
As far as the "not in Japan" thing -- I believe their government helps with subsidizing much, if not all of that, so it isn't on the companies shoulders (a good thing). But, I could be wrong about that.
Now, I am not saying they should abaondon ALL benefits (I think that eventually that unfortunately will happen to the newer employees entering the work force), but rather find a way to deliver on what you promised, yet not give away the farm. Such as Nissan has (stiped instad of facing increasing costs of health care).
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>...I think this person has trouble seeing the big picture.[/b][/quote]
And, as far as the "big picture" -- what other conclusions can you draw when more and more people exit the work force and over time, the company has to pay for more non-working people than working people? A big problem is what I call it. And so does GM.... and Ford.... and much of the Fortune 500. Hence the huge shift to 401k's and "earn your own retirement" philoshophy. Why should it be the companies sole responisbility to pay for you after you have stopped working? (again, if it was part of the original agreement, than the company should honor it, but I don't quite see why that philosohophy should remain in todays highly competitive ecomony).
Want an even bigger picture? How do you think the estimated 50,000 Ford and GM employees who are expected to loose their job feel when part (major emphasis on "part") of the reason they lost their job is because the companies had to pay legacy benefits? Do you think they would feel it is fair?
And for the record, I own my own business, and have to pay for EVERYTHING myself and my employees -- health care, retirement, taxes, everything. So maybe I see a different picture than other people.
Simple answer--because that was part of their benefits package and you pay now or pay later.
Also, I find the fact that it is only in the US and not in Japan where these cuts are taking place very interesting.
[/b][/quote]
I certainly see the "it was promised, so pay up" argument, and I ABSOLUTELY agree with that. In this case, Nissan is giving an anual stiped -- what is wrong with that?
As far as the "not in Japan" thing -- I believe their government helps with subsidizing much, if not all of that, so it isn't on the companies shoulders (a good thing). But, I could be wrong about that.
Now, I am not saying they should abaondon ALL benefits (I think that eventually that unfortunately will happen to the newer employees entering the work force), but rather find a way to deliver on what you promised, yet not give away the farm. Such as Nissan has (stiped instad of facing increasing costs of health care).
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>...I think this person has trouble seeing the big picture.[/b][/quote]
And, as far as the "big picture" -- what other conclusions can you draw when more and more people exit the work force and over time, the company has to pay for more non-working people than working people? A big problem is what I call it. And so does GM.... and Ford.... and much of the Fortune 500. Hence the huge shift to 401k's and "earn your own retirement" philoshophy. Why should it be the companies sole responisbility to pay for you after you have stopped working? (again, if it was part of the original agreement, than the company should honor it, but I don't quite see why that philosohophy should remain in todays highly competitive ecomony).
Want an even bigger picture? How do you think the estimated 50,000 Ford and GM employees who are expected to loose their job feel when part (major emphasis on "part") of the reason they lost their job is because the companies had to pay legacy benefits? Do you think they would feel it is fair?
And for the record, I own my own business, and have to pay for EVERYTHING myself and my employees -- health care, retirement, taxes, everything. So maybe I see a different picture than other people.
2/6/06, 09:40 PM
#11
Umm that's why most companys now are going to a contract out basis or a commission so as they do not have to worry about such things, Yes it is a sign of the times and its going from Gov'ts privatizing as well manufacturing as even auto makers contract it out and through it together , then they don't have to fix or upgrade the Big buck stuff. bla,bla,bla
2/7/06, 05:31 AM
#12
Legacy TMS Member
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AnotherMustangMan @ February 6, 2006, 8:17 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
How about the company adds all of these entitlements/pensions/benefits/whatnot into salaries and PEOPLE LEARN TO SAVE for themselves? Oh wait, we're American. We make a hobby out of living beyond our means.
[/b][/quote]
My employer contributes to a retirement fund but only if the employee participates. They match whatever I put into and if I put in the maximum that I'm allowed, they add an additional 2% on top. So yes, I do save for myself (and that money comes off the top my check) and I also take advantage of what my employer offers.
BTW, I'm not anywhere near retirement but I understand the importance of having something to live on when my working days are over.
How about the company adds all of these entitlements/pensions/benefits/whatnot into salaries and PEOPLE LEARN TO SAVE for themselves? Oh wait, we're American. We make a hobby out of living beyond our means.
[/b][/quote]
My employer contributes to a retirement fund but only if the employee participates. They match whatever I put into and if I put in the maximum that I'm allowed, they add an additional 2% on top. So yes, I do save for myself (and that money comes off the top my check) and I also take advantage of what my employer offers.
BTW, I'm not anywhere near retirement but I understand the importance of having something to live on when my working days are over.
2/8/06, 02:06 PM
#14
Legacy TMS Member
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AnotherMustangMan @ February 8, 2006, 2:50 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I hadn't even thought of matching funds, thats not a bad idea at all. Sort of like the federal government's categorical grant conditions of aid.
[/b][/quote]
It works pretty well. The 2% "bonus" is a very good incentive for workers to put away the max. They also offer free seminars to those approaching retirement age on how to manage the money once you retire and on various investment packages to make the most of it. All in all, it's a pretty good program.
I hadn't even thought of matching funds, thats not a bad idea at all. Sort of like the federal government's categorical grant conditions of aid.
[/b][/quote]
It works pretty well. The 2% "bonus" is a very good incentive for workers to put away the max. They also offer free seminars to those approaching retirement age on how to manage the money once you retire and on various investment packages to make the most of it. All in all, it's a pretty good program.
2/8/06, 03:20 PM
#15
Shelby GT500 Member
401k contribution matching rocks. Nothing like chipping in and then getting "free" money to boot.
And for the record, Japan's government pays for employees health care. That 's why only US workers were dropped, Nissan was never paying for their Japanese employees.
And for the record, Japan's government pays for employees health care. That 's why only US workers were dropped, Nissan was never paying for their Japanese employees.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Antigini-GT/CS
2005-2009 Mustang
5
10/5/15 09:43 AM