http://www.autoblog.com/2011/10/13/u...rike-possible/

Ford's hourly workforce is having a tough time ratifying the tentative agreement struck between the Blue Oval and United Auto Workers union last week, despite that deal being the most generous among those made this year between the Big 3 automakers and their respective unions. For example, Ford workers will receive a $6,000 signing bonus if the contract is ratified, compared to $5,000 for General Motors workers and $3,500 for Chrysler workers. GM was the first to strike a tentative deal with the UAW in September and has already seen its contract ratified, while Chrysler's deal is the most recent with voting expected to begin soon.

Earlier this week, UAW Local 900, a chapter that represents three Ford plants near Detroit, rejected the deal by a narrow margin. Automotive News is now reporting that Ford's Chicago Assembly plant is joining them in rejecting the offer, though this time "overwhelmingly." Chicago Assembly handles production of the Ford Taurus, Lincoln MKS and Ford Explorer. Of the 2,317 workers who voted, 77% cast their ballots against the proposed deal.

At the same time, the UAW is reportedly making it known that, should the tentative agreement not be ratified, the organization will strike. Of the three major U.S. automakers, both General Motors and Chrysler workers lost the right to strike while those companies were restructuring in bankruptcy. Only Ford workers can strike, that company having avoided bankruptcy and its restrictions, and they may do so if the deal is not approved by the majority.

As of this writing, the UAW Ford Department Facebook page reports that 3,256 workers (45.4%) have voted to ratify the contract and 3,915 (54.6%) have voted against. That's a far cry from Ford's 41,000-strong union workforce, and the union has until October 18th to finish voting.

 

Anyone else out there get a signing bonus for continuing to work at your current job?

And they wonder why all factories are moving to China and Mexico.

 

I get a paycheck for continuing to work. Dont expect anything more than that. Happy to have a job where I enjoy the work, colleagues, and clients.

 

Yes...it's called a raise

 

I work on contract, although I'm not a Union employee, and yes I occasionally get up-front compensation (which could be called a "signing bonus") when I sign a new contract. In exchange I have no opportunity for a raise during my contract period, and no job security beyond the end of my contract.
Something, it should be noted, the Union workers haven't gotten for the last few years.

 

It's a B.S. deal. I hope they fight it. No bonus and keep the pay raises. Or just take the cash and don't worry about the future.

 

Let me get this straight... a $6,000 freaking signing bonus for doing your job, in addition to...

"Union workers earn more

Wages and benefits for the average union worker in the private sector totaled $37.85 per hour in September 2010, compared to $26.74 an hour for the typical non-union worker.

Wages and salaries higher for union workers …

In September, the average union worker in the private sector earned $23.19 per hour in wage and salary income, while the average non-union worker earned $19.28 per hour. That’s a union advantage of $3.91 per hour, or $8,133 per year for a full-time, full-year worker.

… But benefits are the biggest union advantage

Benefits, though, are where the biggest union advantage lies. The average union worker in the private sector receives $14.66 per hour toward their benefits package while their non-union counterpart receives only $7.46 per hour.

Retirement and health benefits more widespread for union workers

After years of service, workers deserve a secure retirement. Unfortunately, only 49 percent of non-union workers receive retirement benefits through their employer, through either a traditional pension or a 401(k) account. In stark contrast, 87 percent of union workers have employer-provided retirement benefits.
Only half of non-union workers receive health care benefits through their employer. That compares with 78 percent of union workers.

Union advantage holds across occupations and industries

Blue-collar workers in manufacturing enjoy a substantial advantage from union representation – but so do workers in non-manufacturing settings. In fact, the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ report, “Union Members - 2009,” shows that the union advantage holds across occupations and industries.
For example, union workers in protective service jobs (such as security guards and corrections officers) earn median pay of $992 per week, compared with $611 for non-union workers. The union premium also exists in office and administrative support occupations where union workers earn $782 per week compared to $595 per week for non-union workers."

http://www.uaw.org/node/167

...on top of the other ridiculous benefits they receive, and it's still not enough?! Yeah, I don't have much sympathy for the Union workers, sorry.

Maybe they're just fuming that they have to begin paying for their own divorces and legal counsel.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/201...r-own-divorce/

 

Maybe they are unhappy because there's no provision for them to leave work with pay and hang out at 'occupy/99' events.

Not sure why unions consider themselves part of the 99 though. Their pay & bennies are in another league compared to most in the middle class.

 

They won't be happy till Ford goes bankrupt like GM and Chrylser did.

 

replace them with the few million people looking for a job that have degrees and better skill sets that are working at walmart.

 

Hm. At 37.85, that's 72,000 to turn a few lug nuts. That's assuming 8 hour days, 5 of them, for 48 weeks (for vacation and other days not worked)

Plus the 6 grand, just to keep working.

Plus the benefits, when you're done working.

Yeah. Sounds good. Where do I sign up? Go Union!

/On the other hand, do we like paying more for the same car that was being built 5 years ago?

 

what amount of the mustangs msrp goes to these costs? I heard almost $6,000 and that was a few years ago. I do not want to be paying 1/3 of a mustangs cost to a union and its workers. thats simply to much.

 

This $6k comes with stipulations I'm sure. Isn't the deal $6k and no raises for 5 years? So just one lump raise and that's it.
And you guys are factoring in base pay with benefits added to it. Everyone working should be granted these same benefits. Unfortunately, it looks like it takes a union to secure descent benefits these days. Blame the insurance companies instead.

 

With all due respect unions suck unless you are in a union and getting a sweet deal. That's it. Plain and simple.

With the sheer volume of government agencies and administrations, the available legal system, and unions, why would anyone want to start a business up north?

Then if you try to move you get the NLRB up your ***!

 

With all due respect. Lol. Touché.
Yeah it's not a bad deal for me. The thing is that all surrounding non/union facilities offer the same pay and benefits to keep the unions out. So we are beneficial to not just union facilities. Might not be the most ethical way to look at things but lots of families are doing well around here. That's really all that matters.

 

sounds like they need to open a plant in Louisiana, where unions dont have all that BS power...

 

Nah. We still have the power. But the politicians down here are easily persuaded. We've got a plant in shreveport and from what I hear, those people who work there are worthless. But I'm guessing that's just UAW internal problem. The sad thing is that all unions are viewed to be the same and the UAW is the only one anybody knows anything about. The general public bases all of what they know about unions on the "black sheep" UAW.

 

And Teamsters, and Public Employee unions like SEIU & AFSCME, and AFT Teachers union, etc., etc.....

Typed with my former UAW, Teamster stained fingers...

 

Yeah but the UAW is the one that everyone bases us on. Poor poor Big 3. UAW bleeding them dry. Don't blame bad business decisions and federal fuel economy regulations. Nope, unions fault.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlsCobra

UAW bleeding them dry. Don't blame bad business decisions and federal fuel economy regulations. Nope, unions fault.

But Ford made GREAT business decisions... and ARE being hindered by union demands in the current negotiations.

With GM & Chrysler getting the government teat and wiping out all their debt, that puts Ford fighting/competing with one arm tied behind their back - yet Ford was the responsible one - and continues to be responsible in paying down its (substantial) debt. Does that matter to these u hacks? Nope.

Right?