UAW to own 55% of Chrysler after restructuring

Discussion in 'Economics' started by turkeyneck, Apr 28, 2009.

  1. They will own 55% of something still worth nothing
     
  2. At least no one gets layoff. :D
     
  3. It also said that under the agreement, workers will no longer get most of their pay if they are laid off. Instead, they will get supplemental pay from the company equal to 50 percent of their gross base pay.

    These guys, the union, just don't get it. They now get 85% of their base + unemployment benefits. Under the new agreement they'll get 50% + unemployment. That won't get it.
    I have been very outspoken about the obvious double standard between the bank bailouts and the auto workers, but this is bullshit. A company can't stay in business that has to give what amounts to paid vacations to employees that are on lay off. These dopes are going to end up losing everything. If this is their idea of a viable solution it's time to shut them down. Any more bailout money is just throwing good money after bad.
     
  4. Daal

    Daal

    You see, according to the government employees only deserve good treatment to the extend they belong to a union. If Citi got reestructured and their traders were owned billions in bonuses they would be left with nothing, if they had an union who contributed politically they would be the largest shareholders
     
  5. This is a good microcosm example of why democracies fail.

    The idiots votes themselves the gold, then the Country goes bankrupt.

    There's no reason to think Chrysler's UAW "Management" won't do the same thing.

    Its actually pretty funny!
     
  6. poyayan

    poyayan

    Interesting thing is. The gov is afraid of people not buying a car from a BK company.

    Now, which one is worse. That

    Or a car build by a company 55% owned by Union and the rest by the gov.

    Personally, I rather buy something from a BK company that is likely to be bought by some PE after declaring BK.
     
  7. toc

    toc

    Company owned by the unions does not meet the free market principles. Both C and GM are doomed sooner or later.
     
  8. bettles

    bettles

    Let me play devil's advocate here. Doesn't ownership by "the union" really mean the members of the union - i.e. the employees? If so, isn't this similar to employee incentives and profit-sharing given to employees by some companies? If the employees own stock in the company, it is in their best interests to work hard and keep costs down to ensure that the company does well. Whereas now they do not have that incentive, since their salary is the same regardless how the company does. So I think this is a good sign for GM.

    Bettles
     
  9. then share profits, of which, there are none. why? because the union is an organism leeching off the host. the companies job is to deliver profits to its shareholders. to its employees to offer a safe working condition and a fair wage. in todays market - plenty of people would screw bolts on for 12$-15$ an hour. so the innefficiency will continue to rot the company and in a good world the union guys will eventually face reality. bondholders are getting 10 cents on the dollar and union gets 55% of the company. what is wrong with this picture??
     
    #10     Apr 29, 2009