General discussion

  • Creator
  • #2194171

    What does it say with $19/hr is considered low wage?


    by jdclyde ·

    GM is in the middle of a huge buy-out. What are they buying? A reasonably priced work force.

    Why is it the price of an import is less than the domestics? The average wage for a line worker is $81 an hour. How many of you working professionals that have YEARS more training and education, are making that much?

    A front page story in the Detroit Free Press goes on about THOUSANDS lining up for these “low paying jobs”. sorry, but most shop workers I know make between $8 and $12 an hour, so this is NOT low pay.

    It is no wonder the big three are having problems.

All Comments

  • Author
    • #3111965

      JD, this is proof…

      by tig2 ·

      In reply to What does it say with $19/hr is considered low wage?

      that I am in the wrong profession!

      I think that GM has bigger problems than this, however. The fact that they haven’t remained economically viable, in my opinion, is proof that a complete re-structure should be considered. Someone is doing something wrong.

      Ford on the other hand has been doing some meaningful cost cutting. Jury is still out as to whether it will work.

      Incidentally, the GM situation is analogous to the NWA re-structure. The idiot that ran NWA for some time managed to insure that his negotiating power with the Union was completely gone by givine $5M bonuses to four of the top tier executives. Then he went to thee union and pled poor. Oddly, they didn’t believe him. Wonder why. I think that GM had a similar experience.

      • #3111934

        GM has lots of problems

        by jamesrl ·

        In reply to JD, this is proof…

        During the last set of announcements, GM announced that one of its two Oshawa plants would be phased out in 2 years. This despite the fact that a) that plant has the highest productivity in any GM plant and b)the plant places in the top three consistently in terms of quality of ANY manufacturer (japanese included) in North America and c) the labour costs in the plant are lower than the plants in the US.

        Seems to me, that just doesn’t make sense from a business perspective.

        The figure that keeps going around is that GM’s cost structure is roughly $1300 higher on a new car than Japanese manufacturer making cars in North America, because of higher benefits paid to “older” employees.

        But people in Michigan can complain about their government too. When Japanese companies were first looking at building plants in North America, they approached Michigan where they were not made welcome by state officials. So they went to other US states and Canada.


        • #3111917

          Not the State

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to GM has lots of problems

          The UNION chased the jobs away.

          The Union “workers” would rather there not be a job than to have a non-union job around.

          I am so sick up the hypocrits in the UAW. They will drive around with their “Buy Union” bumperstickers, but funny that I see them parked at WALMART instead of Meijers. Meijers is union, Borgmart is ANTI-union.

          I also mentioned about a month ago when I was in Dearborn and drove by Ford. There was a nice white pickup, with black spray paint all over it, saying “scab”.

          In all to many cases now, union = criminal.

    • #3111962

      Another case of unions gone bad.

      by faradhi ·

      In reply to What does it say with $19/hr is considered low wage?

      The american auto manufacturers are really being hampered by labor unions.

      Most imports are not actually imported. They are made here in the states. The factories are non union factories in the south. They provide wages to non skilled workers that are impressive when considering the cost of living.

      • #3111915

        But of course!

        by tonythetiger ·

        In reply to Another case of unions gone bad.

        The higher wages a union can negotiate, the higher dues they can demand 🙂

        • #3113645

          Unions Serve A Purpose

          by yobtaf ·

          In reply to But of course!

          It’s easy to blame the unions for the problems of the US auto
          industry but GM, for instance, created their own down fall.

          When they were the biggest most powerful corporation in the
          world, they had the opportunity to do a lot of things to stay on
          top. But the Japanese came along with a better, cheaper product
          and their cars are still more dependable and less expensive to

          When you’re on top unions are not a problem. I worked for
          Disney, which is a union shop, for ten years, and it was part of
          their past success. The union members were happy because they
          weren’t abused by the management. The company had to
          actually think out how they should do things in advance because
          if they didn’t it would cost them money.

          Disney’s current problems have nothing to do with the unions
          but everything to do with bad corporate decisions (like GM).

          If employees don’t demand certain basic benefits, they might
          might as well move to China because a lot of corporations like
          Walmart certainly don’t give them the benefits willingly. Unions,
          at least in concept, do that work for them.

          Sorry to be on the soap box but this is a complex issue. Unions,
          like all human institutions, are subject to corruption, but in a
          political environment where corporations a more important then
          people, unions are more important then ever. However, there is
          no way that the US can compete with the cost advantages of
          manufacturing in the East and to suggest that we willingly
          become a third world country is not an option.

          Let’s see how this all shakes out.

        • #3168384


          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Unions Serve A Purpose

          One can cut down 30 trees per shift, another can cut down 40. Union says they must be paid the same. Why shouldn’t the guy who can cut down 40 just decide to slack off?

        • #3167168

          he HAS to

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Lumberjacks

          or the union boys will come down on him.

          The idea of promotions based on senority are also counter productive. That is why lower manangement in the union shops is so horrible, take the senority not the best workers.

        • #3167169

          cheaper product

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Unions Serve A Purpose

          you have Toyota making vehicles here in the US, so they have the same costs of business as the big three. How is it the employees are MORE satisfied with their jobs AND they can put out a high quality vehicle that is less expensive?

          Unions bloat wages and hinder productivity. The Unions are only good for the lazy workers that would not be able to hang onto their job any other way. When you have three people standing around because they need one specific union guy to replace a part that any moron could do, you are driving up costs stupidly.

          There are more reasons NOT to have a union than there are reasons to have a union. In a union, you get yelled at by the old timers for working too fast more than you get yelled at by the company for not working fast enough. Been there, heard that. Never again do I plan to work Union.

        • #3167153

          Labour Costs for Japanese auto workers

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to cheaper product

          One of the differences in labour costs for big three versus Japanese plants in North America is around both the unionization and the age of the workforce.

          The big three have an older workforce, who get more benefits, and have higher wages due to time on the job. Their benefits costs to the employer are also much higher because we use more health care, drug plans etc as we age. Even in Canada, where most medical is covered (not drugs or dental), the benefits costs are higher.

          As a result, the Japanese manufacturers can make cars competitively, even if they have to ship engines from Japan. A Toyota Matrix built in Cambridge Ontario with the same options as a Pontiac Vibe built in the US, will cost me in Canada less(no duties on cars made in North America). The parts are the same, same drivetrain, some differences in trim. Presumably roughly the same amount of time to build. The difference is that the Toyota plant is non union, has been running for ten years, so a younger cheaper, healthier more productive worksforce.

          Time will even some of it out. But the union aspect does make it more expensive.

          Toyota must be doing something right they are building a huge new plant vritually doubling their manufacturing in Ontario.


        • #3167106

          How did you form that conclusion?

          by maxwell edison ·

          In reply to Labour Costs for Japanese auto workers

          Do you know for sure that the average age of the Japanese auto worker is lower than their U.S. counterpart, or is that just a factopinguess?

          Please see my message below asking for various comparisons, and then throw in the average age of the auto worker. I’d like to know for sure. And since you made the comment, perhaps you can support it.

        • #3167032

          I might suggest

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to How did you form that conclusion?

          Its your factopinguess that I am factopinguessing (is that a word?).

          And I am only talking about Canadian/American autoworkers in plants in North America owend by Japanese manufacturers. Since the oldest of these plants is about 20 years old, and many are newer, it follows that they would not have the same average age as plants which have been open for many decades longer. But as I suggest time will change that.

          Article about the benefits costs of GM workers and retirees. The cost of health care is more than the cost of steel, in terms of the per vehicle cost.

          Don’t take my word, ask the GM spokesperson:
          “GM has offered a sweeping package of buyouts, ranging from $70,000 to $140,000, to more than 125,000 unionized factory workers in a bid to reduce costly benefits for an aging work force.”

          “Saying the auto industry’s problems were more serious than ever, Gettelfinger called for reform of U.S. health-care policy. The current system imposed an unfair burden on the traditional Big Three auto makers and their aging workforce compared with their Asian and European rivals.”

          “GM/Delphi already has 2.5 pensioners for every active worker and 60 percent of UAW members in that firm will be eligible to retire within 5 years; each car and truck sold by the Big Three carries $900-$1,900 in legacy costs, and that?s before rebates running in the thousands.

          “The auto makers’ costs for prescription benefits are also rising 10 percent to 18 percent a year, the companies said.”

          “The three auto makers’ benefits costs are particularly high partly because their work forces are relatively old — the average age ranges from 43 at DaimlerChrysler to 48 at G.M. After hiring few workers the last quarter of a century, the three unionized auto makers also have as many retirees as active workers.”

          “It seems to be the nature of the medical business right now, everybody’s looking at skyrocketing drug costs,” said Thomas P. Groom, the director of human resources at the Nissan Motor Manufacturing Corporation U.S.A. in Smyrna, Tenn. But the foreign auto makers have few retirees so far, and their work forces are still fairly young, so their costs for each active worker are much lower.”

          Is that enough?


        • #3167087

          They WANTED to build in Michigan

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Labour Costs for Japanese auto workers

          but the UNIONS decided it was better for THEM to have unemployed people in the state than to have non-union automotive jobs.

          Can’t imagine why we lead the nation in unemployement…..

          I also would be interested in knowing the average age of toyota worker vs union. Of course depending on the window you look at this can be slanted one way or the other. When they did the major plant closings and layoffs, the younger workers were the ones to go DISPITE being potentially the better employees, because it is all senority. Now with the buyouts, the average age for GM will do a big dip.

        • #3166941

          Agreed, That Unions in concept are not bad

          by faradhi ·

          In reply to Unions Serve A Purpose

          How Unions are run now are. My father who is a postal employee discusses the abuses of Unionized employees.

          There are those who wish to throw the baby out with the bath water. Some Unions (most or all, if you wish) do hinder some (again most or all if you wish) corporations competiveness. So the answer from some is, “Union X and Y are corrupt, Lets outlaw all unions.” That attitiude to me is like cutting off a leg because there is a cut on the toe. (Or in this case multiple cuts.)

          So, I agree with you that Unions do serve a purpose. I still say GM is a case where unions have gone bad.

        • #3166927

          Time and place

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Agreed, That Unions in concept are not bad

          Back in the days of monopoly capitalism, when we had no minimum wage, no workplace safety laws, before we had a free and fair labour market, unions had a purpose.

          But we now have a pretty free labour market, labour mobility is improved, and we have workplace safety legislation that protects us (yes nanny state to some). So what is the purpose of the union other than simply to gouge more money out of a company (and collect union dues from the hard work of others)?

          I might suggest that in places like China, where there are oppressive working conditions, and no few protections, there might be a place for unions. But the government there won’t allow a real union. Hitler killed unions as well.


        • #3166897

          And that is the point James

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Time and place

          The day that the Union did anything positive for America/Canida is long past.

          Grab that baby out of the water, and then dump the pan out. It is starting to stink.

        • #3167442


          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Time and place

          I agree are needed less and less every year. They USED to have a worthwhile purpose but with higher starting wages, opportunities and internal growth, they are just not needed now.

          I do know a few people however, who work as teamsters in packaging or shipping centers (Puro FedEx and a c ouiple of Canadian companies too. They are unmotivated but hard working. They don’t have teh social and people skills to advance normally through a career environment. As suchm they end up working hard, learning proprietary skills and then get stiffed for pay. the union ensures they see advancement as their abilities and responsibilities grow and guides their career for them.

          As someone who has seen both sides of teh fence I agree, they are relly ol dhat now but there still is a place where labru is taken for granted and unions are actually still good in those areas.

        • #2599372

          throw out the baby

          by mikiel ·

          In reply to Agreed, That Unions in concept are not bad

          I?ll have to disagree with faradhi. Maybe it?s my libertarian bias.

          I?m certainly in favor of allowing employees to voluntarily get together and demand better pay, benefits, etc. But unions FORCE an employee to join (and pay dues and such).

          If you demand more pay/benefits and the employer could get someone of your skills for the same or less money ? well it?s your decision to leave or not. The employer will just fill your job with someone who thinks the pay and benefits are appropriate. It?s supply and demand. If the pay and benefits were so terrible, the employer wouldn?t be able to replace you.

          But unions force the employer to either raise the employee pay/benefits or go out of business. Without the capitalistic ability to hire new workers and set salaries at a rate the company can afford, the company can?t effectively stay in business. (especially if they have to compete with companies that aren?t burdened by a union) Management has no means of being fiscally responsible and keeping afloat since it has no control over its expenses.

          I agree with JamesRL that unions did serve a purpose in the U.S.?s past but, with federal labor laws, unions are no longer needed for employee protection.

          I?d be interested in hearing about some of the abuses the ?good? unions are saving their employees from. (And if scabs would be willing to tolerate those ?abuses? for the offered pay/benefits, then I’ll suspect they aren?t abuses at all.)

    • #3111954

      GM vs Friedman

      by onbliss ·

      In reply to What does it say with $19/hr is considered low wage?

      I interesting & amusingly watch the Thomas Friedman vs GM ongoing saga.

    • #3111946

      That $80.00

      by oz_media ·

      In reply to What does it say with $19/hr is considered low wage?

      From what I have seen, the $80 you are referring to includes benefits and $45.00 in shares.

      The last set of layoffs saw them not getting a good deal at all, less than $100K for 10yr+ employees, no pension or retirement, and they were getting the better deal of the bunch.

      The $80/hr is how much they are paid in gross value not the hourly wages.

      I make just over $36.00/hr but TECHNICALLY I make over $70/hr because of the bonuses, shares, free trips and crap they sling at me to keep me happy.
      It’s not really cash in hand though. Which is what I believe the $80 line worker figure would be also.

      • #3111938

        Just giving the information I have

        by jdclyde ·

        In reply to That $80.00

        They had a chart showing costs. True, these new employees will not have the benifits as they are part time, so this does make sence.

        [b]But does $45/hr make sence for unskilled labor?[/b]

        And I am also going to bet that YOU are making almost double what half the TR members make. It is more than I do, and I got pretty lucky for my area.

        A few years back when they had the manditory seven day work weeks, my father-in-law was paying more in payroll taxes each week than I MADE in a week before taxes.

        Sure, top execs are getting way over compensated, but that doesn’t change the fact that the reason cars are so over priced is because the labor was over priced. And then WHO was it that got the killer employee discounts? The only people that HAD the money to pay full price.

        • #3111925

          Steel and Car

          by onbliss ·

          In reply to Just giving the information I have

          BBC had a news segment on the hardships of Japanese car makers on account of Steel shortage and other issues surrounding the Steel scenario worldwide.

        • #3111919

          One reason why

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Steel and Car

          The japanese car makers manufacture in North America as well, where steel, and the energy required to make it, is cheaper.

          Japan has no oil, and little left in terms of raw materials like iron.


        • #3111806

          IN the same sense

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Just giving the information I have

          First of all, no I am not minimizing how these unions have created waaaay over paid employees. Yes, they are skilled labourers after much time, but only with the same repetetive tasks they face each day, its not like they are general mechanics or technicians.

          As far as my pay, as I said, that consists of many things. I earn a good income as I bring a lot to the table. I am also a mechanic, great sideline. I also get residuals on the artists I work with. I also get paid for search engine optimixation. I also get paid from graphic design and promotional design, IPO’s etc.

          So whlie it seems I make a lot of money, there’s a lot involved in making that money and most of it means I have no time for myself. But somehow I manage to squeeze in the free spirited, party guy too.

          My point was that, though it was most likely a typo, $81/hr that was mentioned was most likely not an hourly, cash salary but may have included many other union benefits that equal $81/hr, again I agree very high and not very believable.

          As for $19/hr, well that’s a different story. The Alberta oil sands hire at such high wages that businesses in southern Alberta, that even convenience store clerks, gas station attendants and fast food workers are in such need they are offering in excess of $16/hr in most cases, and STILL can’t find staff!!!

          I know the avereage grunt labour job around Vancouver pays between $16-$20/hr, the latter after very short experience, non union even.

          Unions were all supported and bragged about as teh building blocks of America, Americans takign care of the working American labourer. American UNION MADE automobiles were something to boast about and they all had special Union stickers in teh windows. Many opposed it, generally the more educated/skilled workers (as we see happening here) but ‘the American labourer’ was always supported more.

          The big Unions will survive many mroe decades I’m afraid, but then again, the average non-union job pays pretty good too now.

      • #3111847

        Doesn’t matter whether it’s cash or not,

        by tonythetiger ·

        In reply to That $80.00

        it is [b]still[/b] part of the cost of the car.

        • #3111803

          My point was

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Doesn’t matter whether it’s cash or not,

          Even IF it ws $81/hr, which I doubt as it is probably a lot less, it does not mean they get paid that, just that it costs the company the equivalent of $81/hr per employee.

          I amn sure you woul dbe shocked as hell if you found out how much the company spends to have you there each hour, the average (and I mean SO SO)telemarketer costs the company over $36.00/hr to have on staff.

          For a union worker to cost $81 is not so extreme, yes they are overpaid, but that’s the same union most Americans have always supported for decades, “American made and union built!”.

      • #3111260

        Listen Up! $81/hr is TOTAL LABOR BURDEN

        by colonel panijk ·

        In reply to That $80.00

        That $81 (or whatever) covers wage/salary, payroll taxes, sick days, vacation days, medical insurance, pension costs, union dues, (re)education, and whatever other bennies they get. It’s not uncommon in any line of business to have the total labor burden 2x to 3x the outright wages. That may or may not count support personnel (secretaries, computer operators), office/plant floor space, and other overhead. It definitely does not include the cost of components for the car. So, an auto worker may be seeing a paycheck for $26/hr or something, but it’s costing their employer $81/hr.

        • #3111242

          THANK YOU, Colonel Panijk

          by btljooz ·

          In reply to Listen Up! $81/hr is TOTAL LABOR BURDEN

          You are one of only TWO in here to get it right and YOU are the one who was the most exact!!!

          I know what you say to be true because I live right smack dab between the Ford Plant (to my east) and the GM Plant (to my west) here in KC. In addition to those, Harley is to my north. I know and have known, personally, people who have worked and do work for these plants. They co-oborate the point(s) you have made.

          Edit starts here:

          In addition to knowing employees of these plants I, myself, have worked within the auto(selling) industry. The company I worked for is the largest Dealer Auction company in the US. Both Ford and GM are their ‘bread and butter’ clients.

        • #3167453

          Thats not what I said…

          by oz_media ·

          In reply to Listen Up! $81/hr is TOTAL LABOR BURDEN

          Hang on, yes it is. Were you posting in response to me or others? I agreed that the figure is the total cost of employment, not an hourly wage.

      • #3210479

        You make $36/hr in Port Hardy as a

        by gregh ·

        In reply to That $80.00

        PC Technician? Is it a case of supply and demand?

    • #3111944

      Ok, I have read the post multiple times

      by j.lupo ·

      In reply to What does it say with $19/hr is considered low wage?

      and I am not getting it. is the $81/hr a real number or did you mean $18/hr????? The title says $19/hr. So I am confused.


      • #3111937

        I think it is a mistake

        by oz_media ·

        In reply to Ok, I have read the post multiple times

        Either that or a gross as I have explained above.

        $18/hr, students in fast food restaurants and gas stations in southern Alberta are making that these days, and they STILL can’t find staff to work as the wages are too low.

        • #3111910

          canadian Money?

          by beilstwh ·

          In reply to I think it is a mistake

          18 canadian dollars an hour works out to be about 10 dollars an hour US, which works out to 20800 US dollars per year, which after canadian taxes doesn’t leave the employee with a very good living wage. You can live on it, but not very well if you have a family.

        • #3111883

          Your math sucks, plus…..

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to canadian Money?

          At its lowest point – about ten years ago, the Canadian Dollar was worth 62 cents American, which would make $11.16 an hour US. But that was 10 years ago.

          More recently the Canadian dollar has been up to 92 cents US and that would make it more like $16.50 an hour, which would work out to $34,500 a year.

          The tax rate for someone in that bracket (up to 35,000 a year) would be 21% combined Federal and Provincial Income tax. That does not include unemployment insurance or Canada penion plan contributions. It also doesn’t include a personal exemption for the first $8,377 (personal) or higher for those with family. Health care premiums are paid for by employers.

          And of course the cost of living in Canada is lower than in the US generally – Toronto is cheaper than Chicago or Boston (Montreal is really inexpensive due to housing costs). A study I saw from 2000 says that if you live in Chicago on $40,000 US you only need $29,000 US to live the same lifestyle in Toronto.Study by Runzheimer International – a US based firm BTW.

          Another study I found showed that a “food basket” containing 39 items was $612 USD in New York, $521 in Chicago, $498 in LA and $340 USD in Toronto. Same study, average 3 bedroom apartment in Chicago was $2350 US per month and in Toronto it was $1270 USD per month.

          In short, apples and oranges. $19 Canadian an hour is a pretty good wage, especially in a smaller centre.


        • #3111881

          You haven’t been paying attention

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to canadian Money?

          the conversion rate is NO WHERE near that anymore!

          $19.00 CAD equals $16.9236 in REAL money. That is $35,214.40. Sure, after taxes it is THEN only 10K, but you know what they say, location location location. 😀

      • #3111926

        not a mistake

        by jdclyde ·

        In reply to Ok, I have read the post multiple times

        A chart shows current costs, so as OZ pointed out, that would include benifits most likely. The $81 is the current cost per hour, the new employees that are lining up by the thousands will be making $19 with no benifits.

        $19 an hour is considered a good wage around here.

        I will check to see if the free press has an on-line version of the story.

        • #3111914

          Good wage here too.

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to not a mistake

          I don’t know any job in southern Ontario that pays that to unskilled labour. You might make that after 6 months in construction, when you move from unskilled to a trainee type position.

          My brother studied for 6 months to get a certificate as a Personal Care worker so that he could work as an aide in nursing homes. He started at $12 an hour and is now making $15.

          Entry level warehouse jobs here start at $10 – $12 an hour, if you can lift 45 lbs. When I was unemployed I looked seriously at those as it paid much better than unemployment insurance. But I decided if I was desparate I would get a fork lift certificate – one day of training and $12 – $14 an hour. Where I live there are many warehouse operations and it would be easy to find work.

          $19 an hour Canadian is good money. I would bet thats about what Toyota and Honda pay their starting non-unionized employees. Both companies are rapidly expanding in Ontario.


        • #3111909

          $19 an hour is considered a good wage around here

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to not a mistake

          Here too. In fact it’s only been in the last 8 or so years that I have exceeded that.

          Ironically my daughter just quit a sales job at Sears and went to waitressing. She now makes almost twice as much money (some nights $300 just in tips).

        • #3111891

          Thanks JD

          by j.lupo ·

          In reply to not a mistake

          I appreciate that. I was shocked by the $81, I don’t even make anywhere near that including benefits and “healthcare” (cough, cough).

        • #3111829


          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Thanks JD

          What’s a few bucks here or there? The business just passes it along to the consumer. Hey, I know! Let’s just raise minimum wage to $200 an hour. The consumer will gladly pay for it. Then everybody will be out of poverty, right?


        • #3111823


          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Hey,

          Everyone knows it would take at least $225. :p

        • #3111801

          Didn’t you hear about inflation….

          by j.lupo ·

          In reply to No

          It is $225 for the probation period and then $350 after that with quarterly increases of $50 🙂

        • #3111802

          Not quite sure how to take your statement adunlap.

          by j.lupo ·

          In reply to Hey,

          My comment was about JD clarifying what I read since I wasn’t sure about the numbers. Given what I do for a living, I am well under the market number that is used in negotiations for salary, but that was my choice for other reasons.

          I was just thinking that if they really did get $81/hr then I was definitely in the wrong line of business…I work too hard for what I earn and the value I provide to the company. Again, my choice there, but it was just a statement of shock in context to the original post.

        • #3113371

          Take it

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Not quite sure how to take your statement adunlap.

          as a little light-hearted humor of the sarcastic variety 🙂

        • #3113190

          Thanks – sometimes I have to ask…

          by j.lupo ·

          In reply to Take it

          😉 I have a really dry sense of humor and so I find it better when I am not certain if someone is teasing/joking to ask politely. (blush)

    • #3111278

      How about the pay/benefits of those CEOs?

      by rsager ·

      In reply to What does it say with $19/hr is considered low wage?

      Granted the point you make is understandable but how about the CEOs of these companies. The boards of “good old boys and gals” vote themselves unbelieveable pay raises and stock options (much like our Congress) all the time. Can one person justify $450 million dollars a year salary and stock options? I think not!

      • #3111263

        Maybe you can’t

        by jdclyde ·

        In reply to How about the pay/benefits of those CEOs?

        but if you were to make the kind of money FOR a company that some execs do, you would be worth it.

        FYI, GM is doing major cuts all the way up the food chain, not just the working grunts.

        Your petty jealousy blinds you it seems. That our just out of high school and haven’t learned anything about business yet.

        Are you going to say B. Gates doesn’t deserve the major coin he has?

        • #3113675

          Easy JD – there are reasons to be

          by j.lupo ·

          In reply to Maybe you can’t

          skeptical after all we hear all about ENRON and cases like that, but we hear very little about the Execs that actually do cut their pay or do something positive to help the company and the “grunts”.

          I would love to hear more about what companies are doing at the upper echelons to earn their pay. I remember reading an article (a few years ago now) about the CEO of I think it was CISCO and how he took a salary of $1.00 each year for 3 years to help keep his employees employed. The article was about being the odd one out and trying to set new standards that others wouldn’t follow.

          I don’t remember all the details as it was several years ago now, but if we started publicizing those kinds of efforts maybe, just maybe, we would see a shift in view towards the corporate world. Please note, I don’t mean to say that they should do this in all cases. Obviously if the company is doing well so should the people who made that possible.

        • #3168222

          Not to be nosy, but :)

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Easy JD – there are reasons to be

          “I would love to hear more about what companies are doing at the upper echelons to earn their pay.”

          With the exception of government employees and office holders, of course, what right grants one person knowledge of what someone else does for a living or what he makes doing it?

        • #3167174

          talk about over paid

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to Not to be nosy, but :)

          “government employees and office holders”

          over paid and underworked. And lets talk benifits….

        • #3167074

          I resemble that remark :)

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to talk about over paid

          but I’m one of the good ones.

          “over paid”

          Quite true.

          “and underworked.”

          Well, they’re trying to change that… by increasing the amount of paperwork I have to do to show that I’m doing what I do. Their goal is to increase the percentage of time spent reporting stuff from the current 62% to 82% 🙂

        • #3166905

          And how many

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to I resemble that remark :)

          people in this line of work are THERE because they would never survive in a corporate world? Probably a higher percentage than you would like to admit to.

          Been there, seen that, bought the cookware.

        • #3167704

          How many

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to I resemble that remark :)

          One is too many!

        • #3166973

          I don’t understand your question – sorry

          by j.lupo ·

          In reply to Not to be nosy, but :)

          I am not sure what you want to know. All I am saying is we here about how horrible the top people are and how much they get paid. What I would like to hear are more like the one I mentioned in my post. Stories where they are doing things to make the company stronger, they are talking the talk AND walking the walk of their beliefs.

          It is refershing when I hear what a company is doing that improves this world. Part of how we learn is by others examples (at least for me since I don’t know everything, and can’t learn it all from books and my own experiences), if we don’t hear about it, we can’t learn anything.

        • #3167705

          You hear

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to I don’t understand your question – sorry

          because people have this obscene fascination for knowing other people’s personal business. We called it ‘Jonesing’ when I was a kid (Kind of a take off of ‘keeping up with the Joneses’). People who did it were insanely jealous of others’ possessions or accomplishments. Usually to their own detriment, which they, of course, blamed on the object of their Jonesing.

        • #3167365

          Ah – thanks

          by j.lupo ·

          In reply to You hear

          doesn’t apply to what I was talking about, but I understand what you are saying.

      • #3168381


        by tonythetiger ·

        In reply to How about the pay/benefits of those CEOs?

        I don’t think the board would give them such an amount if they didn’t think he was making them more than that.

      • #3167122

        This is an easy thing to complain about. . . . .

        by maxwell edison ·

        In reply to How about the pay/benefits of those CEOs?

        …and on the surface it might even seem to be a legitimate complaint. However, the huge pay of a few corporate officers isn’t indicative of the average pay of the majority of corporate officers. Sure, I’d like to be in that kind of pay range, but most of them are in the six figures, not the seven, eight or nine figures. My guess is that the average pay of an NBA player is a lot higher than the average pay of CEOs. (Wanna’ make a wager?) If you want to list the specifics, please do so, and name names; but don’t make general charges that make it appear it’s common-place, because it’s not.

        Moreover, considering the huge corporations, like General Motors, it’s insignificant in the overall scheme of things — pennies per share of stock and/or per vehicle sold, if even that. The CEO salary could be zero, and neither price would be effected, nor would the wages of the employees.

        Overly generous employee retirement, medical, or salary benefits for hundreds of thousands of workers is another story. In the case of GM, United Airlines, and other huge corporations, not only have you, the consumer, been paying for those overly-generous employment packages, as those costs become part of the sales price, but when the corporation goes bankrupt because of it, you, the taxpayer, run the risk of having to pay that tab as well when you (we) bail out those generous retirement packages they have.

        By the way, did you see the new thread started by a former auto worker who was looking to get into IT? He was saying that he had plenty of money, and that money wasn’t an issue. Is money an issue with you? Will money be an issue with you when you’re 55? Why isn’t it with him? He better kiss your butt and say thanks, because you made it possible when you bought those vehicles he made. And now he’s looking for free advice from you! Why do you begrudge a corporate officer whose salary might seem high on the surface, but is insignificant to you, but you appear to give a free pass to those whose overall salary package DOES have an impact on you? I just don’t get it.

        A challenge to the “corporate greed” crowd (and you know who you are)

        Do a side-by-side comparison of the following for General Motors and Toyota:

        1. Average price of their vehicles.

        2. Quality of their vehicles (define quality however yours like).

        3. Average wage of their auto-workers.

        4. Retirement benefits of their auto-workers.

        5. Other benefits of their auto-workers.

        6. Annual corporate profit (of loss).

        7. Compensation for the respective corporate officers.

        8. Sales performance (in number of units sold), and in profit per unit.

        9. Stock price performance.

        And when you’re finished comparing these numbers, tell us again why General Motors Corporation is guilty of your “corporate greed” charges.

        • #3166913


          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to This is an easy thing to complain about. . . . .

          Take what the CEO makes, subtract from it whatever you think is a reasonable salary, and divide by the number of employees who they think aren’t making enough money to see how paltry it really is.

    • #3168380

      The other problem

      by tonythetiger ·

      In reply to What does it say with $19/hr is considered low wage?

      If you raise wages so that the lowest are making as much as the middle, the former middle will be the new low, and then [b]they’ll[/b] be demanding more. Then the old middle will be making as much as the upper and then [b]they’ll[/b] be demanding more. The consumer gets screwed again. Trickle up, anyone?

    • #3167469

      Burns me up.

      by kuki_cat ·

      In reply to What does it say with $19/hr is considered low wage?

      I’m a network administrator full time and 4 years of college. I earn $24.00 and hour.

      In Los Angeles, CA. Illegal Aliens are paid $19.00 an hour for house cleaning and for yard work like mowing lawns they are paid $32.00 an hour what’s worse is the employers can’t fine enough Illegal Aliens.

      I’m going to learn spanglish and start mowing lawns.

      • #3167451


        by oz_media ·

        In reply to Burns me up.

        Learn how ot increase your current paycheque, learn how to hire an demployer instead of applying for jobs and learn how to dictate your income.

        I did it in IT (without the 4 years of college), and many other lines of work now, I have also taught a course on how to get your dream job.

        If you are looking for career/salary change, peer mail me, I can at least get you started and provide some resources to keep you on track.

        It’s just a matter of learning how to sell your skills and differentiating yourself by not applying to ads but cold calling potential employer choices instead.

        • #3167367

          So when is the

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to OR

          book deal going through?

          Quickest way to make a million is to sell a book telling people how to make a million.

        • #3167356

          That’s right JD and……

          by faradhi ·

          In reply to So when is the

          for the low low price of $29.99, you too can make millions.

          But Wait… There is more.
          If you act now, you get the accompanying DVD and workbook for FREE!!! That’s a $50 value you get for free by acting now.

          SO don’t wait. Get the riches you deserve!!!

        • #3167337

          Ah, but don’t forget

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to That’s right JD and……

          $69.99 shipping and handling.

          [b]Satisfaction guarenteed or you money back![/b] [i](less shipping and handling costs)

          And now, limited to the first 25,000 callers, you can get the [b]amazing[/b] ginsu knife! You can cut a CAN in half! Remember the other day when you needed to cut that can in half and couldn’t do it? Well, fret no more!

        • #3167320

          I bought one of those not long after they came out.

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to Ah, but don’t forget

          It [b]still[/b] cuts cans in half!

        • #3167294

          I have removed an exhaust system from a buick, cut off bolts etc.

          by x-marcap ·

          In reply to Ah, but don’t forget

          I use it like a reciprocating saw. It can then co through the dishwasher, and cut tomatoes. best tool I ever bought…

        • #3167323


          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to So when is the

          Leave a recording telling people to get their own 900 number 🙂

        • #3167306

          About Oz

          by onbliss ·

          In reply to So when is the

          As I mentioned elsewhere, I associate Oz with Optimism (atleast Career wise). I am not surprised that he has taught a course on getting a dream job. Ever since I have been reading TR, I have always seen Oz telling to move on and equip ourselves better and get the next good job.

          One gets the feeling, from him, that there are plenty of jobs around, and it is a matter of applying one’s mind and being dedicated towards what we want.

          I wish I had such a great attitude and motivational skills. It also reminds me of an episode in “Everybody Loves Raymond”, where there is a guy who looks up on Frank for his tough and straight talk, but his sons (Ray and Robert) look it as being just unsupportive.

          So now we know Max is going to write a book in the future, (and maybe blog if NeverBusted has his way :-), and now Oz is probably going to write one too. Plenty of talent at TR, eh? 🙂

          Edite: emoticons

    • #3210388

      It’s royalty, didn’t you know?

      by georgeou ·

      In reply to What does it say with $19/hr is considered low wage?

      Longshoreman get about $130K a year for highschool grads. Good luck getting in though, it’s a royalty and you need good connections. And no I don’t make $81/hour. I doubt most of us in IT do.

    • #3210386

      German and Japanese car makers are opening US plants without unions

      by georgeou ·

      In reply to What does it say with $19/hr is considered low wage?

      The foreign companies like German and Japanese companies come in and are opening all these plants in the USA in other states of course where they won’t complain about $10/hour starting wage. If this keeps up, the US automakers will be gone.

      • #3211692

        Not so simple

        by jamesrl ·

        In reply to German and Japanese car makers are opening US plants without unions

        Japanese companies (Toyota and Honda) are opening new plants and expanding existing plants in Ontario. They aren’t union. But they don’t pay poorly, it is pretty much what the same workers would earn at a Big 3 plant. They don’t have any any problems recruiting either.


        • #3209981

          No way are they paying the same

          by georgeou ·

          In reply to Not so simple

          Entry level positions are well under $20/hour. They certainly don’t pay them $60/hour or more like the US auto companies.

        • #3209967

          Apples and oranges

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to No way are they paying the same

          I can tell you that in Ontario at least, the starting wages are pretty close. The starting wage is above $20 at both the Honda and Toyota plants and about $25 at Chrysler. But the Honda and Toyota plants are 60 miles from Toronto in a much less expensive place to live.

          $60 an hour – do you have a cite for that? If thats all in including benefits I’d buy it, but not in hourly wage. Don’t forget that big three workers are typically longer on the job and therefore have higher wages from that position as well, as I mentioned in another post.


        • #3209933

          Look at the root post

          by georgeou ·

          In reply to Apples and oranges

          The total wage is more than $80/hour. This is similar to the $130K US dollars a year that LongShoreman make. Most of us in IT aren’t even close to that unless you’re at the upper end of the food chain. The average American makes about $40K a year. Someone just out of highschool is lucky to make $10 in many most places here.

        • #3209757

          And if you read the subsequent posts

          by jamesrl ·

          In reply to Look at the root post

          You will see that they aren’t paid $80 an hour, that number is the cost to the company and includes medical, penion and other benefits.

          In my financial calcs, we usually calculate the total labour costs as a multiplier of the base wage rate. For example in my budgeting we usually calculate the actual cost of a employee as 1.43 x their wage cost. So someone makeing $20 an hour would actually cost over $28 when you add up their benefits. Some places its less, some more. My guess is that GM, with an aging workforce and union sponsored very rich benefit plans, its higher, by a significant factor.


        • #3209744

          Crazy medical plans

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to And if you read the subsequent posts

          Where they walk in and have no co-pay or anything in most cases.

          Many companies are getting away from this type of plan because if you have nothing coming out of your pocket, it doesn’t MATTER how much it costs. This “let the insurance pay for it and give me the best” attitude is why medical is so out of control in the US.

          In every other aspect of our lives, we comparison shop. Why is medical different? Do you pay the price on the list everytime you buy a computer, or do you try to leverage a deal?

        • #3209670

          JD – we shouldn’t have to take those risks with

          by j.lupo ·

          In reply to And if you read the subsequent posts

          our health. Why should i have to hunt a fair price for [b]HEALTHCARE[\b]? I am not saying companies can’t offer choices with a certain amount of contribution by employees to cover costs, but I shouldn’t have to hunt for decent healthcare. In fact, it is nearly impossible to get individual coverage in my state for healthcare. You have to get group insurance. If you are unemployed or your company doesn’t have a plan, you are just not covered, so it is out of pocket.

          Do you know how bad it gets? I have had healthcoverage, but my new company insists that I was pre-existing condition so they won’t pay for my doctor visit for a cold. Insurance companies find reasons to play doctor. I should be able to go to any respectable liscensed doctor and get quality care – not insurance controlled care. I pay premiums so I should be covered not told why they won’t pay.

          Am I making sense? I don’t disagree that we should shop around for a plan, but they are all basically the same. You pay, we don’t cover you.

        • #3211028

          Missed my point

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to And if you read the subsequent posts

          it is the health CARE that we should be concerned with.

          Is there a generic drug available?

          Does this Doctor charge more because of where his office is?

          Do you really need every test and procedure?

          When I was young, I had my tonsels out because it was just the thing to do. Nothing wrong with them, they just took them out as more the rule than the exception at that time.

          Is the Doctor getting any kickbacks for perscribing one drug over the other, even though they do the same thing?

          When there isn’t anything coming out of your pocket, it doesn’t MATTER how much it costs. GM was picking up the tab for this cover-all insureance and passing the price off to US, in the form of higher priced cars.

          Then they DARE whine about people that buy “imports” that are made in the US and have just as much of the parts made here as the GM cars?

          Was that clearer? If people CARED how much healthcare costs, then the insurance would not be so high. Right now no one cares what it costs, so the prices can rise unchecked.

          We are paying the price for that blind stupidity now.

        • #3211017

          JD – easy there buddy

          by j.lupo ·

          In reply to And if you read the subsequent posts

          First, yes you were loud and clear the second time. I wasn’t arguing, I was stating an opinion calmly. I know the written word is useless with me cause it always seems like I am arguing with someone.

          At any rate, I don’t disagree that consumers need to be aware of the costs. I also didn’t disagree about them having to contribute to the costs. I just don’t like seeing insurance companies making medical decisions. I also said respectible certified doctor.

          I don’t think the point of “covered healthcare” has anything to do with the costs. I think it has more to do with marketing and things like that. When I was young, they didn’t advertise drugs on TV for asthma, diabedes, etc. Now they do. My doctor told me that patients come in asking for a specific drug they saw on TV.

          What is wrong with that picture. Drug companies now compete by using marketing techniques. Insurance companies try to control costs, Doctors try to practice medicine and make some sort of profit (instead of “do no harm”).

          It is a frustrating situation. Consumers need to be aware and participate yes, but Healthcare should not mean going without because you can’t pay the premiums for the “crappy” stuff that doesn’t even pay for an office visit.

          Gas prices are an example of they can do it because NObody wants to stand up and say enough. We all just except it as this is the way it is.

        • #3210962

          You’ll find

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to And if you read the subsequent posts

          that none of this costs the company anything. It is included in the cost of their product, thus is paid for by the consumer. It’s hidden from most people’s view. That is one of the reasons prices are out of control (not entirely unlike the tax situation!).

          Personally I think that companies should be BANNED from providing health insurance for their employees. Instead, give the employee the money that would be paid and let the employee buy his own.

          Prices would quickly drop and service would improve once the insurance companies had to start competing for customers!

          I also dislike the tiered approach. Single and family. Why should a couple with no children pay the same for insurance as a couple with six children? All health insurance should be priced ‘per covered person’.

        • #3210961

          A good one

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to And if you read the subsequent posts

          I’ve discovered that some medicines cost less than the prescription plan’s deductible. So you’ll excuse me if I go against the plan’s required mail in service and just pay out of pocket for those medicines when required.

        • #3210958

          I was VERY disappointed

          by jdclyde ·

          In reply to And if you read the subsequent posts

          to find when the EX-wife dropped off of my insurance, MY costs didn’t go down a friggen penny!

          I agree that it should be on a “per person” basis, as the bigger family COSTS more.

        • #3210947

          Insurance companies

          by tonythetiger ·

          In reply to And if you read the subsequent posts

          Are essentially getting the best of both worlds. The theory is to split the risk among all customers, but they violate that principle when they exclude pre-existing conditions.

          It’s even worse with car insurance. Have an accident and your rates go up. Have someone with no insurance hit you, and your rates go up, and then since there are more claims within “your coverage group”, the whole group’s rates go up.

          Most insurance is nothing more than back-door socialism.

        • #2599353

          To Tony the Tiger ?Insurance companies?

          by mikiel ·

          In reply to And if you read the subsequent posts

          To Tony the Tiger ?Insurance companies?:

          I agree! It does seem that insurance companies have a large role to play in escalating medical costs.

          I may have to disagree however with the car insurance companies. They don?t seem to work the same way as medical insurance companies.
          Some people will fix a car without filing a claim to avoid their rates going up (showing that the cost to fix a car hasn?t gone up exorbitantly due to car insurance companies ? it?s still sometimes affordable out-of-pocket).
          They might also forgo fixing the car if they think the price (or the rise in insurance premium) isn?t worth it (showing that the user is affected by and makes decisions based on the cost of the repair ? fewer charges for unneeded and minor issues keep everyone?s insurance rates down).

          I think a bad driver should pay more for insurance based on his driving record. He?s drawing more money from the shared pool of money. (Maybe if an individual surgeon?s malpractice insurance premium varied depending on claims against him we?d see this factor in medical costs go do…)

          Car insurance seems to be very objectively priced. Young people have more accidents so they pay more. Women have fewer accidents so they pay less. It?s so beautifully and refreshingly non-PC!

          Your rates shouldn?t go up if someone else hits you ? insurance or not. The ?no-fault? approach some states take to car insurance has shown to be more expensive to consumers.

          (However, I can?t say it?d be a good idea to apply these same principles to medical insurance. Perhaps I?m not as libertarian as I think I am.)

          ?Most insurance is nothing more than back-door socialism.?
          But at least with cars (in most states) it?s voluntary socialism.

      • #3211543

        Did you pull that figure out of the air?

        by faradhi ·

        In reply to German and Japanese car makers are opening US plants without unions

        The workers in plant in Tennessee make considerably more than $10/hr. They start at almost double. Combine that with the low cost of living in the areas they do build the plants and the autoworkers are living quite comfortably.

    • #2888562

      Nice Article.

      by taylorjamer11 ·

      In reply to What does it say with $19/hr is considered low wage?

      Job Description for Mechanic Technician I

      Constructs, maintains, and tests mechanical equipment, machinery, and components. Identifies parts for replacement and machines that need new cheap auto parts and places orders as necessary. Requires a high school diploma or its equivalent. May be required to complete an apprenticeship and/or formal training in area of specialty. May require 0-2 years of experience in the field or in a related area. Has knowledge of commonly-used concepts, practices, and procedures within a particular field. Relies on instructions and pre-established guidelines to perform the functions of the job. Works under immediate supervision. Primary job functions do not typically require exercising independent judgment. Typically reports to a supervisor or manager.

Viewing 10 reply threads