Do auto workers really make more than $70 per hour?

Discussion in 'Economy' started by midcan5, Dec 14, 2008.

  1. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    10,795
    Thanks Received:
    2,367
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +3,310
    "No. That figure is derived from what the auto companies pay in wages, health, retirement and other benefits, and includes the cost of providing benefits to retirees."

    ....

    "As for whether Toyota workers earn more than employees of U.S. domestic automakers: In 2006, at Toyota's Georgetown, Ky., plant, workers averaged more in base pay and bonuses than UAW members at Ford, General Motors and Daimler Chrylser, according to the Detroit Free Press. The difference was due to profit-sharing bonuses; Detroit's workers aren't getting many of those these days because, well, there's really nothing to share. The transplants don't give out much data, however, so it's hard to tell if this pattern is continuing or even if it applied to all Toyota plants in 2006.

    A final note on all this: Labor costs only account for about 10 percent of the cost of producing a vehicle. And it's not the cost of American cars that people complain about; they're already often thousands of dollars less than their Japanese counterparts. Whatever changes may be made in the carmakers' labor agreements, we're convinced, and the recent hearings show, that there are much bigger problems in Detroit."

    FactCheck.org: Do auto workers really make more than $70 per hour?
     
  2. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,833
    Thanks Received:
    4,503
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,113
    that figure was total cost to the company per worker. no one ever implied it was their hourly rate
     
  3. Paulie
    Offline

    Paulie Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    31,623
    Thanks Received:
    4,860
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +15,535
    Nope, but that certainly hasn't stopped the liberals from claiming it anyway.
     
  4. Ravi
    Offline

    Ravi Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    81,432
    Thanks Received:
    12,698
    Trophy Points:
    2,205
    Location:
    Hating Hatters
    Ratings:
    +29,887
    Are you joking? Read through the threads on this forum, almost all the right wingers have implied just that.
     
  5. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    10,795
    Thanks Received:
    2,367
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +3,310
    And you woke up, what 15 minutes ago, from a rip van winkle sleep?

    Republicans dislike anyone making a decent salary or having equal rights for that matter.

    "No, this defeat had little to do with fiduciary integrity. Rather, the Republicans’ torpedoing of this proposal was done because they despise labor unions. They despise everything unions stand for. Southern Republicans despise organized labor for the same reason Southern Republicans despised the civil rights legislation of the 1960s—because it interferes with their “right to choose.”"

    David Macaray: Killing the Auto Bailout
     
  6. Paulie
    Offline

    Paulie Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    31,623
    Thanks Received:
    4,860
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +15,535
    You ought to point some out. I only remember the ones I was involved in, where the few righties who WERE participating were arguing that the entire package consisting of $70/hr was too much. We all included the fact that some of it is benefits. If these automakers are going to survive, the people doing the labor are going to have to be willing to trim some of that $70. Be it pension, retirement package, wages, whatever.

    It's been the lefties who have been putting the words in the mouths of the righties, from what I've seen. I went through the whole thing with Red Dawn a couple weeks ago, where he CONTINUALLY claimed I was implying $70 was all wages, even regardess of the fact that I continually corrected him throughout the discussion. It was like I wasn't even saying it, he was oblivious.
     
  7. oreo
    Offline

    oreo Gold Member Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    12,492
    Thanks Received:
    1,964
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    rocky mountains
    Ratings:
    +4,175

    Toyota workers--"non-union" by the way actually make $2.00 more per hr. that workers at the UAW.

    THE PROBLEM: The union--& management made an agreement that retirees of the auto industry would retire with 80% of their final salary. Along with this add in health care benefits, & everything else, & that's how they come up with the $70.00 per hr. "COST PER EMPLOYEE."

    BTW--Toyota is still making money--right here in the U.S.

    Sometimes unions can kill the industry that put the food on their tables. This is a very good example of that.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2008
  8. Skull Pilot
    Offline

    Skull Pilot Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2007
    Messages:
    31,833
    Thanks Received:
    4,503
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +10,113
    show me where I ever said the 70 dollar an hour figure was an hourly rate. you can't because I never did.

    And the hourly rate per say was never the issue. the issue is total cost of labor.

    And the total cost of labor for American auto workers is a major reason why even though GM and Toyota sold about the same number of cars in 2007 that GM lost over 35 billion dollars and Toyota made a 17 billion dollar profit.

    I am not a republican so your comments about them mean little to me . I am however a libertarian and believe anyone has a right to earn whatever they can as long as the market supports it.

    GM has not been a profitable company and is not making enough revenue to support its current model. I as a tax payer should not be forced by the government to prop up such a company.

    GM has two options, change its business model to one that can be supported by its revenue which means filing for bankruptcy and restructuring or going out of business.

    Option 3, forcing tax payers to buy into or lend money to a failing company is not only unethical it is unconstitutional.
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2008
  9. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,618
    No, they don't.


    That numbber is just more anti-worker BS the obsequious toadies of the rich here like to whine about.
     
  10. Paulie
    Offline

    Paulie Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2007
    Messages:
    31,623
    Thanks Received:
    4,860
    Trophy Points:
    1,130
    Ratings:
    +15,535
    Ed, no one claimed it was all wages.

    I haven't yet seen anyone cite a post where someone claimed the UAW members were making a total of $70/hr in wages.

    Several of us have stated that number, referring to it merely as the PACKAGE the workers receive.

    None of this, though, changes the fact that the number needs to be trimmed, wherever possible.

    Everyone ought to be willing to take a little cut to save their careers.
     

Share This Page