Looks like a strike for Auto workers is likely in Fall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrat here and I support strikes but this seems greedy

Greedy? They are woefully underpaid when you look at what companies are brining in. Asking for COLA is not greedy.

Oh please, they're trying to extort more than a COLA. Be honest.

They want 46% pay increases. They want to get rid of 401ks and have guaranteed pensions. They want healthcare for retirees. They want additional 'inflation' compensation. It will make any company bankrupt.

Bring on the EVs please.

Then maybe the CEO should align his own compensation with what the business can withstand. You can’t award yourself massive benefits while crying poor about giving anything to others who also generate profit for the company. Sounds to me like the CEO needs to be a true leader and voluntarily match the 20% that is being offered to labor. Then get labor to agree to a fair deal without double standards.

You really, really suck at math.

If you cut $28M in salary from the CEO, how's that going to affect GM's profitability?

It is meaningless because it is a drop in the bucket of total revenue. Contrast that to the extortion racket the Union has going - they'll add BILLIONS with a B in more costs to the companies. That will have 1000000000% more impact on the health of the company than the CEO's compensation. Again, the CEO doesn't set their own compensation, the board and shareholders do, but you're too stupid to understand that.

How will slashing executive pay affect profitability? Let me ask you how profitable the company will be without workers? That’s your answer. The workers want fairness.

If you keep paying executives in ways that are not fair to the workers then the workers will stop working. Talk about stupid.

Again, you suck at math.

GM's yearly profit was $22B for the twelve months ending in June 30th, 2023. Let's say we go nuclear and cut the CEO's salary by $28M (she currently makes $29M).

Wow, congrats you increased GM's profit by $28M/$22B = 0.1%.

Contrast that to increasing the cost of labor by $10B. $10B/$22B will mean a 50% loss in entire profits for GM.

You really suck at math and powers of 10. CEO compensation is a drop in the bucket in total cost for companies like GM etc. while labor costs are 100-1000 fold more.

You other mistake is assuming union labor is even needed. If I'm CEO, you can bet your ass I'd rather eat short term losses and automate the crap out of their jobs than permanently saddle my company with insurmountable debt loads and labor costs that will make my company insolvent. I'd also be heavily moving towards EVs, which were in the plans anyways, because they require 40% less labor to produce. I'd also be looking at ways to get rid of all union labor as much as possible either by bringing in foreigners, cutting hours so everyone is temp or part time, or simply moving as much production as possible to Mexico. It'd be a combination of all of the above to get rid over ridiculously expensive labor killing the company.

We’ll see where we are in 30 days. Oh by the way, just to send you into more of a tizzy and make your veins pop out a little more, other unions are watching this very very very closely. We’ll see if they join in or not.

Say hello to USMCA. Send all of the production to Mexico and import the card back. There won't even be tarriffs if everything is done in Mexico, lol.

Gee, not hard to figure out....pay US workers $40/h + pensions + healthcare + inflation increases + retirement health OR just pay some Mexican workers $16/h with none of the above liabilities.


Ship it all to Mexico.

[Anonymous]

Workers are finally seeing how Democrat elites want to disappear cars for average Americans. The workers are demanding long range job security, which of course can’t happen.

The writing is on the wall...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrat here and I support strikes but this seems greedy

Greedy? They are woefully underpaid when you look at what companies are brining in. Asking for COLA is not greedy.

Oh please, they're trying to extort more than a COLA. Be honest.

They want 46% pay increases. They want to get rid of 401ks and have guaranteed pensions. They want healthcare for retirees. They want additional 'inflation' compensation. It will make any company bankrupt.

Bring on the EVs please.

Then maybe the CEO should align his own compensation with what the business can withstand. You can’t award yourself massive benefits while crying poor about giving anything to others who also generate profit for the company. Sounds to me like the CEO needs to be a true leader and voluntarily match the 20% that is being offered to labor. Then get labor to agree to a fair deal without double standards.

You really, really suck at math.

If you cut $28M in salary from the CEO, how's that going to affect GM's profitability?

It is meaningless because it is a drop in the bucket of total revenue. Contrast that to the extortion racket the Union has going - they'll add BILLIONS with a B in more costs to the companies. That will have 1000000000% more impact on the health of the company than the CEO's compensation. Again, the CEO doesn't set their own compensation, the board and shareholders do, but you're too stupid to understand that.

How will slashing executive pay affect profitability? Let me ask you how profitable the company will be without workers? That’s your answer. The workers want fairness.

If you keep paying executives in ways that are not fair to the workers then the workers will stop working. Talk about stupid.

Again, you suck at math.

GM's yearly profit was $22B for the twelve months ending in June 30th, 2023. Let's say we go nuclear and cut the CEO's salary by $28M (she currently makes $29M).

Wow, congrats you increased GM's profit by $28M/$22B = 0.1%.

Contrast that to increasing the cost of labor by $10B. $10B/$22B will mean a 50% loss in entire profits for GM.

You really suck at math and powers of 10. CEO compensation is a drop in the bucket in total cost for companies like GM etc. while labor costs are 100-1000 fold more.

You other mistake is assuming union labor is even needed. If I'm CEO, you can bet your ass I'd rather eat short term losses and automate the crap out of their jobs than permanently saddle my company with insurmountable debt loads and labor costs that will make my company insolvent. I'd also be heavily moving towards EVs, which were in the plans anyways, because they require 40% less labor to produce. I'd also be looking at ways to get rid of all union labor as much as possible either by bringing in foreigners, cutting hours so everyone is temp or part time, or simply moving as much production as possible to Mexico. It'd be a combination of all of the above to get rid over ridiculously expensive labor killing the company.

We’ll see where we are in 30 days. Oh by the way, just to send you into more of a tizzy and make your veins pop out a little more, other unions are watching this very very very closely. We’ll see if they join in or not.

Say hello to USMCA. Send all of the production to Mexico and import the card back. There won't even be tarriffs if everything is done in Mexico, lol.

Gee, not hard to figure out....pay US workers $40/h + pensions + healthcare + inflation increases + retirement health OR just pay some Mexican workers $16/h with none of the above liabilities.


Ship it all to Mexico.

Awwww. Poor baby! Upset you don’t have a labor class to exploit? Take it back to the RNC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The CEO of Toyota makes $6 million.

CEO of GM $28 million.

Is the CEO of GM really adding quadruple the value of the CEO of Toyota? Come on, CEO pay in this country is absurd.

I support UAW all the way. Hold the line!

Agree. But workers want long range job security. They learned what’s going on at the World Economic Forum. No more auto workers will be needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrat here and I support strikes but this seems greedy

Greedy? They are woefully underpaid when you look at what companies are brining in. Asking for COLA is not greedy.

Oh please, they're trying to extort more than a COLA. Be honest.

They want 46% pay increases. They want to get rid of 401ks and have guaranteed pensions. They want healthcare for retirees. They want additional 'inflation' compensation. It will make any company bankrupt.

Bring on the EVs please.

Then maybe the CEO should align his own compensation with what the business can withstand. You can’t award yourself massive benefits while crying poor about giving anything to others who also generate profit for the company. Sounds to me like the CEO needs to be a true leader and voluntarily match the 20% that is being offered to labor. Then get labor to agree to a fair deal without double standards.

You really, really suck at math.

If you cut $28M in salary from the CEO, how's that going to affect GM's profitability?

It is meaningless because it is a drop in the bucket of total revenue. Contrast that to the extortion racket the Union has going - they'll add BILLIONS with a B in more costs to the companies. That will have 1000000000% more impact on the health of the company than the CEO's compensation. Again, the CEO doesn't set their own compensation, the board and shareholders do, but you're too stupid to understand that.

How will slashing executive pay affect profitability? Let me ask you how profitable the company will be without workers? That’s your answer. The workers want fairness.

If you keep paying executives in ways that are not fair to the workers then the workers will stop working. Talk about stupid.

Again, you suck at math.

GM's yearly profit was $22B for the twelve months ending in June 30th, 2023. Let's say we go nuclear and cut the CEO's salary by $28M (she currently makes $29M).

Wow, congrats you increased GM's profit by $28M/$22B = 0.1%.

Contrast that to increasing the cost of labor by $10B. $10B/$22B will mean a 50% loss in entire profits for GM.

You really suck at math and powers of 10. CEO compensation is a drop in the bucket in total cost for companies like GM etc. while labor costs are 100-1000 fold more.

You other mistake is assuming union labor is even needed. If I'm CEO, you can bet your ass I'd rather eat short term losses and automate the crap out of their jobs than permanently saddle my company with insurmountable debt loads and labor costs that will make my company insolvent. I'd also be heavily moving towards EVs, which were in the plans anyways, because they require 40% less labor to produce. I'd also be looking at ways to get rid of all union labor as much as possible either by bringing in foreigners, cutting hours so everyone is temp or part time, or simply moving as much production as possible to Mexico. It'd be a combination of all of the above to get rid over ridiculously expensive labor killing the company.

We’ll see where we are in 30 days. Oh by the way, just to send you into more of a tizzy and make your veins pop out a little more, other unions are watching this very very very closely. We’ll see if they join in or not.

Say hello to USMCA. Send all of the production to Mexico and import the card back. There won't even be tarriffs if everything is done in Mexico, lol.

Gee, not hard to figure out....pay US workers $40/h + pensions + healthcare + inflation increases + retirement health OR just pay some Mexican workers $16/h with none of the above liabilities.


Ship it all to Mexico.

Awwww. Poor baby! Upset you don’t have a labor class to exploit? Take it back to the RNC.

Lol, the biggest babies will be Democrats when they finally get the EVs they want. Companies can cut 40% of labor when we switch to EVs! Hahaha no overpaid workers and their pensions and cushy retirement benefits when you no longer need to manufacture engines, drive shafts, etc. because all modern cars will be are batteries on wheels. Law of unintended consequences:

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/autos/electric-vehicles-pose-real-risk-autoworkers-halving-number-people-required-n1060426

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrat here and I support strikes but this seems greedy

Greedy? They are woefully underpaid when you look at what companies are brining in. Asking for COLA is not greedy.

Oh please, they're trying to extort more than a COLA. Be honest.

They want 46% pay increases. They want to get rid of 401ks and have guaranteed pensions. They want healthcare for retirees. They want additional 'inflation' compensation. It will make any company bankrupt.

Bring on the EVs please.

Then maybe the CEO should align his own compensation with what the business can withstand. You can’t award yourself massive benefits while crying poor about giving anything to others who also generate profit for the company. Sounds to me like the CEO needs to be a true leader and voluntarily match the 20% that is being offered to labor. Then get labor to agree to a fair deal without double standards.

You really, really suck at math.

If you cut $28M in salary from the CEO, how's that going to affect GM's profitability?

It is meaningless because it is a drop in the bucket of total revenue. Contrast that to the extortion racket the Union has going - they'll add BILLIONS with a B in more costs to the companies. That will have 1000000000% more impact on the health of the company than the CEO's compensation. Again, the CEO doesn't set their own compensation, the board and shareholders do, but you're too stupid to understand that.

How will slashing executive pay affect profitability? Let me ask you how profitable the company will be without workers? That’s your answer. The workers want fairness.

If you keep paying executives in ways that are not fair to the workers then the workers will stop working. Talk about stupid.

Again, you suck at math.

GM's yearly profit was $22B for the twelve months ending in June 30th, 2023. Let's say we go nuclear and cut the CEO's salary by $28M (she currently makes $29M).

Wow, congrats you increased GM's profit by $28M/$22B = 0.1%.

Contrast that to increasing the cost of labor by $10B. $10B/$22B will mean a 50% loss in entire profits for GM.

You really suck at math and powers of 10. CEO compensation is a drop in the bucket in total cost for companies like GM etc. while labor costs are 100-1000 fold more.

You other mistake is assuming union labor is even needed. If I'm CEO, you can bet your ass I'd rather eat short term losses and automate the crap out of their jobs than permanently saddle my company with insurmountable debt loads and labor costs that will make my company insolvent. I'd also be heavily moving towards EVs, which were in the plans anyways, because they require 40% less labor to produce. I'd also be looking at ways to get rid of all union labor as much as possible either by bringing in foreigners, cutting hours so everyone is temp or part time, or simply moving as much production as possible to Mexico. It'd be a combination of all of the above to get rid over ridiculously expensive labor killing the company.

We’ll see where we are in 30 days. Oh by the way, just to send you into more of a tizzy and make your veins pop out a little more, other unions are watching this very very very closely. We’ll see if they join in or not.

Say hello to USMCA. Send all of the production to Mexico and import the card back. There won't even be tarriffs if everything is done in Mexico, lol.

Gee, not hard to figure out....pay US workers $40/h + pensions + healthcare + inflation increases + retirement health OR just pay some Mexican workers $16/h with none of the above liabilities.


Ship it all to Mexico.

Awwww. Poor baby! Upset you don’t have a labor class to exploit? Take it back to the RNC.

Labor class exploit?

The UAW wants a 46% increase and a 32 hours a week instead of 40. Plus, a new pension system. Get real.

Trucks just jumped from 40K to 65K in the past couple of years before this strike ever happened.

[Anonymous]

Cory Doctorow's recent piece on the resurgence of the labor movement is really good:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/14/prop-22-never-again/

Here is a bit of it:

"When liberals called the shot in the progressive coalition, they scolded leftists not to speak of class, but rather to focus on identity – to be intersectionalists.

That was a trick. There's no incompatibility between caring about class and caring about gender, race and sexual orientation. Those fast food workers who are about to get a 30% wage-hike in California? Overwhelmingly Black or brown, overwhelmingly female.

The liberal version of intersectionalism observes a world run by 150 rich white men and resolves to replace half of them with women, queers and people of color. The leftist version seeks to abolish the system altogether. The leftist version of intersectionalism cares about bias and discrimination not just because of how it makes people *feel,* but because of how it makes them *live.* It cares about wages, housing, vacations, child care – the things you can't get because of your identity."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cory Doctorow's recent piece on the resurgence of the labor movement is really good:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/14/prop-22-never-again/

Here is a bit of it:

"When liberals called the shot in the progressive coalition, they scolded leftists not to speak of class, but rather to focus on identity – to be intersectionalists.

That was a trick. There's no incompatibility between caring about class and caring about gender, race and sexual orientation. Those fast food workers who are about to get a 30% wage-hike in California? Overwhelmingly Black or brown, overwhelmingly female.

The liberal version of intersectionalism observes a world run by 150 rich white men and resolves to replace half of them with women, queers and people of color. The leftist version seeks to abolish the system altogether. The leftist version of intersectionalism cares about bias and discrimination not just because of how it makes people *feel,* but because of how it makes them *live.* It cares about wages, housing, vacations, child care – the things you can't get because of your identity."

Bravo!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Workers are finally seeing how Democrat elites want to disappear cars for average Americans. The workers are demanding long range job security, which of course can’t happen.

The writing is on the wall...

???? The democrats are the ones supporting the striking workers for better wages. What the heck are you talking about?

[Anonymous]

Well now...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrat here and I support strikes but this seems greedy

Greedy? They are woefully underpaid when you look at what companies are brining in. Asking for COLA is not greedy.

Oh please, they're trying to extort more than a COLA. Be honest.

They want 46% pay increases. They want to get rid of 401ks and have guaranteed pensions. They want healthcare for retirees. They want additional 'inflation' compensation. It will make any company bankrupt.

Bring on the EVs please.

Then maybe the CEO should align his own compensation with what the business can withstand. You can’t award yourself massive benefits while crying poor about giving anything to others who also generate profit for the company. Sounds to me like the CEO needs to be a true leader and voluntarily match the 20% that is being offered to labor. Then get labor to agree to a fair deal without double standards.

You really, really suck at math.

If you cut $28M in salary from the CEO, how's that going to affect GM's profitability?

It is meaningless because it is a drop in the bucket of total revenue. Contrast that to the extortion racket the Union has going - they'll add BILLIONS with a B in more costs to the companies. That will have 1000000000% more impact on the health of the company than the CEO's compensation. Again, the CEO doesn't set their own compensation, the board and shareholders do, but you're too stupid to understand that.

How will slashing executive pay affect profitability? Let me ask you how profitable the company will be without workers? That’s your answer. The workers want fairness.

If you keep paying executives in ways that are not fair to the workers then the workers will stop working. Talk about stupid.

Again, you suck at math.

GM's yearly profit was $22B for the twelve months ending in June 30th, 2023. Let's say we go nuclear and cut the CEO's salary by $28M (she currently makes $29M).

Wow, congrats you increased GM's profit by $28M/$22B = 0.1%.

Contrast that to increasing the cost of labor by $10B. $10B/$22B will mean a 50% loss in entire profits for GM.

You really suck at math and powers of 10. CEO compensation is a drop in the bucket in total cost for companies like GM etc. while labor costs are 100-1000 fold more.

You other mistake is assuming union labor is even needed. If I'm CEO, you can bet your ass I'd rather eat short term losses and automate the crap out of their jobs than permanently saddle my company with insurmountable debt loads and labor costs that will make my company insolvent. I'd also be heavily moving towards EVs, which were in the plans anyways, because they require 40% less labor to produce. I'd also be looking at ways to get rid of all union labor as much as possible either by bringing in foreigners, cutting hours so everyone is temp or part time, or simply moving as much production as possible to Mexico. It'd be a combination of all of the above to get rid over ridiculously expensive labor killing the company.

We’ll see where we are in 30 days. Oh by the way, just to send you into more of a tizzy and make your veins pop out a little more, other unions are watching this very very very closely. We’ll see if they join in or not.

Say hello to USMCA. Send all of the production to Mexico and import the card back. There won't even be tarriffs if everything is done in Mexico, lol.

Gee, not hard to figure out....pay US workers $40/h + pensions + healthcare + inflation increases + retirement health OR just pay some Mexican workers $16/h with none of the above liabilities.


Ship it all to Mexico.

Awwww. Poor baby! Upset you don’t have a labor class to exploit? Take it back to the RNC.

Lol, the biggest babies will be Democrats when they finally get the EVs they want. Companies can cut 40% of labor when we switch to EVs! Hahaha no overpaid workers and their pensions and cushy retirement benefits when you no longer need to manufacture engines, drive shafts, etc. because all modern cars will be are batteries on wheels. Law of unintended consequences:

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/autos/electric-vehicles-pose-real-risk-autoworkers-halving-number-people-required-n1060426

Ha ha! Those losers! Try to feed your family now suckers!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrat here and I support strikes but this seems greedy

Greedy? They are woefully underpaid when you look at what companies are brining in. Asking for COLA is not greedy.

Oh please, they're trying to extort more than a COLA. Be honest.

They want 46% pay increases. They want to get rid of 401ks and have guaranteed pensions. They want healthcare for retirees. They want additional 'inflation' compensation. It will make any company bankrupt.

Bring on the EVs please.

Then maybe the CEO should align his own compensation with what the business can withstand. You can’t award yourself massive benefits while crying poor about giving anything to others who also generate profit for the company. Sounds to me like the CEO needs to be a true leader and voluntarily match the 20% that is being offered to labor. Then get labor to agree to a fair deal without double standards.

You really, really suck at math.

If you cut $28M in salary from the CEO, how's that going to affect GM's profitability?

It is meaningless because it is a drop in the bucket of total revenue. Contrast that to the extortion racket the Union has going - they'll add BILLIONS with a B in more costs to the companies. That will have 1000000000% more impact on the health of the company than the CEO's compensation. Again, the CEO doesn't set their own compensation, the board and shareholders do, but you're too stupid to understand that.

How will slashing executive pay affect profitability? Let me ask you how profitable the company will be without workers? That’s your answer. The workers want fairness.

If you keep paying executives in ways that are not fair to the workers then the workers will stop working. Talk about stupid.

Again, you suck at math.

GM's yearly profit was $22B for the twelve months ending in June 30th, 2023. Let's say we go nuclear and cut the CEO's salary by $28M (she currently makes $29M).

Wow, congrats you increased GM's profit by $28M/$22B = 0.1%.

Contrast that to increasing the cost of labor by $10B. $10B/$22B will mean a 50% loss in entire profits for GM.

You really suck at math and powers of 10. CEO compensation is a drop in the bucket in total cost for companies like GM etc. while labor costs are 100-1000 fold more.

You other mistake is assuming union labor is even needed. If I'm CEO, you can bet your ass I'd rather eat short term losses and automate the crap out of their jobs than permanently saddle my company with insurmountable debt loads and labor costs that will make my company insolvent. I'd also be heavily moving towards EVs, which were in the plans anyways, because they require 40% less labor to produce. I'd also be looking at ways to get rid of all union labor as much as possible either by bringing in foreigners, cutting hours so everyone is temp or part time, or simply moving as much production as possible to Mexico. It'd be a combination of all of the above to get rid over ridiculously expensive labor killing the company.

We’ll see where we are in 30 days. Oh by the way, just to send you into more of a tizzy and make your veins pop out a little more, other unions are watching this very very very closely. We’ll see if they join in or not.

Say hello to USMCA. Send all of the production to Mexico and import the card back. There won't even be tarriffs if everything is done in Mexico, lol.

Gee, not hard to figure out....pay US workers $40/h + pensions + healthcare + inflation increases + retirement health OR just pay some Mexican workers $16/h with none of the above liabilities.


Ship it all to Mexico.

Awwww. Poor baby! Upset you don’t have a labor class to exploit? Take it back to the RNC.

Labor class exploit?

The UAW wants a 46% increase and a 32 hours a week instead of 40. Plus, a new pension system. Get real.

Trucks just jumped from 40K to 65K in the past couple of years before this strike ever happened.

Yes it’s exploitation when you secure a 40% raise for yourself while refusing to do the same for your workers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrat here and I support strikes but this seems greedy

Greedy? They are woefully underpaid when you look at what companies are brining in. Asking for COLA is not greedy.

Oh please, they're trying to extort more than a COLA. Be honest.

They want 46% pay increases. They want to get rid of 401ks and have guaranteed pensions. They want healthcare for retirees. They want additional 'inflation' compensation. It will make any company bankrupt.

Bring on the EVs please.

Then maybe the CEO should align his own compensation with what the business can withstand. You can’t award yourself massive benefits while crying poor about giving anything to others who also generate profit for the company. Sounds to me like the CEO needs to be a true leader and voluntarily match the 20% that is being offered to labor. Then get labor to agree to a fair deal without double standards.

You really, really suck at math.

If you cut $28M in salary from the CEO, how's that going to affect GM's profitability?

It is meaningless because it is a drop in the bucket of total revenue. Contrast that to the extortion racket the Union has going - they'll add BILLIONS with a B in more costs to the companies. That will have 1000000000% more impact on the health of the company than the CEO's compensation. Again, the CEO doesn't set their own compensation, the board and shareholders do, but you're too stupid to understand that.

How will slashing executive pay affect profitability? Let me ask you how profitable the company will be without workers? That’s your answer. The workers want fairness.

If you keep paying executives in ways that are not fair to the workers then the workers will stop working. Talk about stupid.

Again, you suck at math.

GM's yearly profit was $22B for the twelve months ending in June 30th, 2023. Let's say we go nuclear and cut the CEO's salary by $28M (she currently makes $29M).

Wow, congrats you increased GM's profit by $28M/$22B = 0.1%.

Contrast that to increasing the cost of labor by $10B. $10B/$22B will mean a 50% loss in entire profits for GM.

You really suck at math and powers of 10. CEO compensation is a drop in the bucket in total cost for companies like GM etc. while labor costs are 100-1000 fold more.

You other mistake is assuming union labor is even needed. If I'm CEO, you can bet your ass I'd rather eat short term losses and automate the crap out of their jobs than permanently saddle my company with insurmountable debt loads and labor costs that will make my company insolvent. I'd also be heavily moving towards EVs, which were in the plans anyways, because they require 40% less labor to produce. I'd also be looking at ways to get rid of all union labor as much as possible either by bringing in foreigners, cutting hours so everyone is temp or part time, or simply moving as much production as possible to Mexico. It'd be a combination of all of the above to get rid over ridiculously expensive labor killing the company.

We’ll see where we are in 30 days. Oh by the way, just to send you into more of a tizzy and make your veins pop out a little more, other unions are watching this very very very closely. We’ll see if they join in or not.

Say hello to USMCA. Send all of the production to Mexico and import the card back. There won't even be tarriffs if everything is done in Mexico, lol.

Gee, not hard to figure out....pay US workers $40/h + pensions + healthcare + inflation increases + retirement health OR just pay some Mexican workers $16/h with none of the above liabilities.


Ship it all to Mexico.

Awwww. Poor baby! Upset you don’t have a labor class to exploit? Take it back to the RNC.

Labor class exploit?

The UAW wants a 46% increase and a 32 hours a week instead of 40. Plus, a new pension system. Get real.

Trucks just jumped from 40K to 65K in the past couple of years before this strike ever happened.

Yes it’s exploitation when you secure a 40% raise for yourself while refusing to do the same for your workers.

Name a CEO that gives themselves a 40% raise.

You are clueless with how publicly traded companies are run.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrat here and I support strikes but this seems greedy

Greedy? They are woefully underpaid when you look at what companies are brining in. Asking for COLA is not greedy.

Oh please, they're trying to extort more than a COLA. Be honest.

They want 46% pay increases. They want to get rid of 401ks and have guaranteed pensions. They want healthcare for retirees. They want additional 'inflation' compensation. It will make any company bankrupt.

Bring on the EVs please.

Then maybe the CEO should align his own compensation with what the business can withstand. You can’t award yourself massive benefits while crying poor about giving anything to others who also generate profit for the company. Sounds to me like the CEO needs to be a true leader and voluntarily match the 20% that is being offered to labor. Then get labor to agree to a fair deal without double standards.

You really, really suck at math.

If you cut $28M in salary from the CEO, how's that going to affect GM's profitability?

It is meaningless because it is a drop in the bucket of total revenue. Contrast that to the extortion racket the Union has going - they'll add BILLIONS with a B in more costs to the companies. That will have 1000000000% more impact on the health of the company than the CEO's compensation. Again, the CEO doesn't set their own compensation, the board and shareholders do, but you're too stupid to understand that.

How will slashing executive pay affect profitability? Let me ask you how profitable the company will be without workers? That’s your answer. The workers want fairness.

If you keep paying executives in ways that are not fair to the workers then the workers will stop working. Talk about stupid.

Again, you suck at math.

GM's yearly profit was $22B for the twelve months ending in June 30th, 2023. Let's say we go nuclear and cut the CEO's salary by $28M (she currently makes $29M).

Wow, congrats you increased GM's profit by $28M/$22B = 0.1%.

Contrast that to increasing the cost of labor by $10B. $10B/$22B will mean a 50% loss in entire profits for GM.

You really suck at math and powers of 10. CEO compensation is a drop in the bucket in total cost for companies like GM etc. while labor costs are 100-1000 fold more.

You other mistake is assuming union labor is even needed. If I'm CEO, you can bet your ass I'd rather eat short term losses and automate the crap out of their jobs than permanently saddle my company with insurmountable debt loads and labor costs that will make my company insolvent. I'd also be heavily moving towards EVs, which were in the plans anyways, because they require 40% less labor to produce. I'd also be looking at ways to get rid of all union labor as much as possible either by bringing in foreigners, cutting hours so everyone is temp or part time, or simply moving as much production as possible to Mexico. It'd be a combination of all of the above to get rid over ridiculously expensive labor killing the company.

We’ll see where we are in 30 days. Oh by the way, just to send you into more of a tizzy and make your veins pop out a little more, other unions are watching this very very very closely. We’ll see if they join in or not.

Say hello to USMCA. Send all of the production to Mexico and import the card back. There won't even be tarriffs if everything is done in Mexico, lol.

Gee, not hard to figure out....pay US workers $40/h + pensions + healthcare + inflation increases + retirement health OR just pay some Mexican workers $16/h with none of the above liabilities.


Ship it all to Mexico.

Awwww. Poor baby! Upset you don’t have a labor class to exploit? Take it back to the RNC.

Labor class exploit?

The UAW wants a 46% increase and a 32 hours a week instead of 40. Plus, a new pension system. Get real.

Trucks just jumped from 40K to 65K in the past couple of years before this strike ever happened.

Yes it’s exploitation when you secure a 40% raise for yourself while refusing to do the same for your workers.

Name a CEO that gives themselves a 40% raise.

You are clueless with how publicly traded companies are run.

Red herring semantic games all you got? Let me know when you are arguing in good faith.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrat here and I support strikes but this seems greedy

Greedy? They are woefully underpaid when you look at what companies are brining in. Asking for COLA is not greedy.

Oh please, they're trying to extort more than a COLA. Be honest.

They want 46% pay increases. They want to get rid of 401ks and have guaranteed pensions. They want healthcare for retirees. They want additional 'inflation' compensation. It will make any company bankrupt.

Bring on the EVs please.

Then maybe the CEO should align his own compensation with what the business can withstand. You can’t award yourself massive benefits while crying poor about giving anything to others who also generate profit for the company. Sounds to me like the CEO needs to be a true leader and voluntarily match the 20% that is being offered to labor. Then get labor to agree to a fair deal without double standards.

You really, really suck at math.

If you cut $28M in salary from the CEO, how's that going to affect GM's profitability?

It is meaningless because it is a drop in the bucket of total revenue. Contrast that to the extortion racket the Union has going - they'll add BILLIONS with a B in more costs to the companies. That will have 1000000000% more impact on the health of the company than the CEO's compensation. Again, the CEO doesn't set their own compensation, the board and shareholders do, but you're too stupid to understand that.

How will slashing executive pay affect profitability? Let me ask you how profitable the company will be without workers? That’s your answer. The workers want fairness.

If you keep paying executives in ways that are not fair to the workers then the workers will stop working. Talk about stupid.

Again, you suck at math.

GM's yearly profit was $22B for the twelve months ending in June 30th, 2023. Let's say we go nuclear and cut the CEO's salary by $28M (she currently makes $29M).

Wow, congrats you increased GM's profit by $28M/$22B = 0.1%.

Contrast that to increasing the cost of labor by $10B. $10B/$22B will mean a 50% loss in entire profits for GM.

You really suck at math and powers of 10. CEO compensation is a drop in the bucket in total cost for companies like GM etc. while labor costs are 100-1000 fold more.

You other mistake is assuming union labor is even needed. If I'm CEO, you can bet your ass I'd rather eat short term losses and automate the crap out of their jobs than permanently saddle my company with insurmountable debt loads and labor costs that will make my company insolvent. I'd also be heavily moving towards EVs, which were in the plans anyways, because they require 40% less labor to produce. I'd also be looking at ways to get rid of all union labor as much as possible either by bringing in foreigners, cutting hours so everyone is temp or part time, or simply moving as much production as possible to Mexico. It'd be a combination of all of the above to get rid over ridiculously expensive labor killing the company.

We’ll see where we are in 30 days. Oh by the way, just to send you into more of a tizzy and make your veins pop out a little more, other unions are watching this very very very closely. We’ll see if they join in or not.

Say hello to USMCA. Send all of the production to Mexico and import the card back. There won't even be tarriffs if everything is done in Mexico, lol.

Gee, not hard to figure out....pay US workers $40/h + pensions + healthcare + inflation increases + retirement health OR just pay some Mexican workers $16/h with none of the above liabilities.


Ship it all to Mexico.

Awwww. Poor baby! Upset you don’t have a labor class to exploit? Take it back to the RNC.

Labor class exploit?

The UAW wants a 46% increase and a 32 hours a week instead of 40. Plus, a new pension system. Get real.

Trucks just jumped from 40K to 65K in the past couple of years before this strike ever happened.

Yes it’s exploitation when you secure a 40% raise for yourself while refusing to do the same for your workers.

Name a CEO that gives themselves a 40% raise.

You are clueless with how publicly traded companies are run.

Red herring semantic games all you got? Let me know when you are arguing in good faith.

Let me know when you understand business 101, the structure of a publicly traded company, and the basics of a corporate charter.