Strike Expanded to Parts Distribution

[bleda2002]

“Throwing more money at the fundamental issues never works.” is a bit of an odd fit in this case, since we’re not taking about public policies and public expenditures. We’re taking about wages. So by this logic, is there never a justification for any wage increases? You said something earlier about keeping up with inflation. That’s the point, wages since the 1970’s haven’t kept up with inflation. The notion wage increases cause inflation is describing the wage/price spiral, but that’s not a guaranteed or even common result of wage increases. Historically they’ve been short lived. There’s a lot of research on this.

As far as the wealth of the top .1% This is where I think some nuance comes into play. I agree that the wealth of the Waltons isn’t the issue per se. Their wealth and the wealth of any of these large holders of stock is an artifact of a problem of the system. In the US market p/b and p/e values are radically skewed. In other words company stocks are radically overvalued. This isn’t the case in other stock markets. But this isn’t new, it’s following a trend and this trend basically benefits and to some extent creates these billionaires. I understand the point that says “well their wealth is just an artifact of these stock prices, inflated or not.” I’ve said this myself. The obsession over Elon Musks status as the world’s richest man annoys me because his wealth is purely a function of Tesla’s share price. On one level it doesn’t matter.

However, stock valuations, whether inflated or not don’t occur in a vacuum. Elon Musk is actually a great example of this. The concern is that both structures in the economy and behaviors of the part of these companies and these large stock holders that result in these valuations and their resulting net worths is the problem. I’m taking about behavior that’s not just bad for workers but bad for the long term viability of these companies.

So in this sense these peoples worth does matter. It matters because of the behaviors companies are engaging in to create this worth. This isn’t organic growth. The least worst growth that’s now common practice is growth by acquisition. This concentrates market share and kills competition. But these companies also engage in stock buybacks which only serve these large investors at the expense of internal investment, R&D, etc. Prior to 2000 stock buybacks were uncommon. Most CEO and investors frowned upon them, because they’re fundamentally an artificial boost of value. They distort the normal mechanisms of the market. But stock buybacks have exploded to the almost singular benefit of large holders of corporate stock.

Rather than innovate they put constant downward pressure consumers in both diminishing customer service, choice (through monopolies) and quality. There’s a reason comic book movies are ubiquitous to the extent that they cannibalize new IPs. They’re high yield and low risk. You see this same type of behavior across lots of markets. Large investment banks have started buying up first post 08’ foreclosures and then rental properties to gain monopolistic control of the market and then sitting on empty properties to drive up prices. Again, like film industry this is legal, but it’s bad for consumers and bad for the country. It’s all a function of boosting share prices. They outsource jobs, and they put downward pressure on wages. All of this is a function of “maximizing shareholder value” as well.

Increasingly they engage in borderline or explicitly fraudulent or illegal behavior. There are myriad examples of this. Entire books are written on the explosive growth of the “scam economy” And as they grow bigger they introduce systemic risk into the economy. Simultaneously their behavior frequently becomes more risky and their fundamentals become shakier. The 2008 financial collapse is a perfect example of this. The private equity and leveraged buyout industry is a good example of this to. The crypto industry. Fraud, grift, manipulation, shell games are all considered just another business opportunity. All of it is designed to maximize the stock valuation often for short term gains by CEOs and predatory institutional investors who don’t care about the long term viability of the company let alone their employees. And in many cases if and when these companies collapse it’s employees and tax payers holding the tab.

So yes, the individual net worth of members of the Walton family or Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos or Larry Fink or Mortimer J. Buckley or Charles Koch or Mark Zuckerberg any number of industry leaders and billionaires isn’t the important point. It’s the behaviors of the companies they control that are designed to maximize their wealth and the wealth of other top shareholders that’s the problem. And while I’m not suggesting some silver bullet to solve this, there’s a distinct set of changes in policies and behaviors that have occurred over the last 50 years in the courts, the SEC, corporate governance and congress that have allowed these companies to behave in ways engineered to shift wealth to the top .1% that are detrimental to not only workers but the public at large and the environment. To deny this is to deny reality.

I don't debate that at the high level companies are acting reckless. The whole stock market has turned in to a shell game, especially as retirement has been tied to 401ks and more money gets funneled in to it. The nuance here though is that money is out of day to day circulation and has a much smaller impact on the average person's day to day life. Again bill gates wealth isn't why someone's rent is high or their milk is twice as much. There is effect there by company action but it's mostly the amount of money in circulation that's causing it.

Back to wages though, if there was no inflation there would be no need for wage increases except because a certain trade was now higher valued. The price wage and wage price spirals do occur, usually in conjunction with a large influx of currency in to the system. This last major bout is super charged by the stimulus which basically proved that more money in the hands of the worker equals more demand and more inflation. Now that the market has priced in much of that money, inflation is still high due to a number of reasons, including the price wage spiral. Eventually the spiral always breaks due to some other outside action or event (war, easing of scarcity, cultural shift) but left unchecked it would continue. More money in circulation, more demand, higher prices.

Should wages keep up with inflation? Yes. Does the workers wage need to be tied to the .01%s wealth? Not really since if the wage is keeping up with inflation the quality of life should be maintained.

Sponsored

 

[ZoMojave]

They had me right up to the "work for 32 hours and get paid for 40 hours" demand.

Come on, man. All the rest make sense. But not that.

As stated, "just a bargaining chip". It will quickly go away when the offers get better.

 

[KC_H]

All they are doing is pushing american buyers to Japanese vehicles.

The "US" manufacturers did that to themselves.

My wife has driven Toyota vehicles for more than 30 years and it is time to purchase a new vehicle. This time she is going with a Honda Pilot, the turbo 4 in the Toyota highlanders is a non starter.

When I asked if she wanted to go look at the Jeeps (Grand Cherokee), she could't contain her belly laugh.

The very short back story is, right after we were married we purchased a Chevrolet sedan for her. Junk was a kind description for the car, GM fought us every step of the way trying to get it fixed, the dealer even threatened my job.

My present Jeep is the only "US" vehicle that we have owned in over 30 years and will be the last...

 

[jeepers29]

The "US" manufacturers did that to themselves.

My wife has driven Toyota vehicles for more than 30 years and it is time to purchase a new vehicle. This time she is going with a Honda Pilot, the turbo 4 in the Toyota highlanders is a non starter.

When I asked if she wanted to go look at the Jeeps (Grand Cherokee), she could't contain her belly laugh.

The very short back story is, right after we were married we purchased a Chevrolet sedan for her. Junk was a kind description for the car, GM fought us every step of the way trying to get it fixed, the dealer even threatened my job.

My present Jeep is the only "US" vehicle that we have owned in over 30 years and will be the last...
[/QU
We are the same. Once the jeeps e own are done, it will be Japanese cars or us. I support the US when I can but people bitching because they only make $30/hour for doing an unskilled labor does not get my support.

 

[redriderjf87]

One could argue the automakers already did that and are in the "find out" stage.

I think that's definitely true for the UAW.

 

[Phishs]

I really wish they wouldn't have opened the strike at the Toledo plant. I think they need to go to another plant and get the Toledo one back up and running!

Also, with all the layoffs that are starting to add up I would think that's not beneficial for the UAW for their members to lose their jobs because of the strike.

 

[Deleted member 57233]

Also, with all the layoffs that are starting to add up I would think that's not beneficial for the UAW for their members to lose their jobs because of the strike.

Short term suffering for long term gains. They will get their jobs back and a raise after the strike is over. In the meantime, they get unemployment checks and some time off.

 

[Aj58]

I guess in the end I’m really curious to see if jeeps going to pass these increased costs to the consumer. I think we al know the answer here but I’m hoping they do the right thing.

 

[Phishs]

Short term suffering for long term gains. They will get their jobs back and a raise after the strike is over. In the meantime, they get unemployment checks and some time off.

I just selfishly wished they would've picked literally ANY other plant but it makes sense to go with the Wrangler plant for what they are trying to achieve.

Also, I hope all the layoffs get their jobs back but I am sure there is no guarantee of that...unless there is in the new agreement.

 

[Phishs]

I guess in the end I’m really curious to see if jeeps going to pass these increased costs to the consumer. I think we al know the answer here but I’m hoping they do the right thing.

I am hoping that they are seeing a reality check right now having to give 10% off just to get the Gladiators off the lot. They are doing this while not able to make any new ones as well.

 

[sharpsicle]

Back to wages though, if there was no inflation there would be no need for wage increases except because a certain trade was now higher valued.

This is an extremely important part that keeps getting overlooked.

Higher-skilled work demands higher-pay. I think everyone can agree with this. However, the inverse is also true. As work becomes less skilled, the pay becomes less competitive. Why? Because you have a larger pool of potential workers that can do the job since the skill required is lower. You don't need to pay to retain the best workers anymore, you can easily replace them. Increases in automation and poka-yoke manufacturing methods are some of the ways this could potentially happen. And guess what automotive manufacturers are investing in? These exact things.

And before anyone complains that they're just doing this to get rich at the expense of workers, remember that you are driving this need just as much as anything else. Every time you complain about how something is assembled wrong, built inconsistently, doesn't match right, fits like crap. You are making the case for automation and poka-yoke. You, the consumer, are a real driving force behind this. I'm not saying I necessarily like it, but I recognize it's a reality that cannot be avoided.

What comes from this is that I don't need the knowledge of an engineer or the skills of a welder to install a body panel, so why would I demand to pay them relative to an engineer or welder's pay? Or a CEO's compensation package? Same concept here in this discussion. As the skill requirement to complete the work drops, so does the competitive nature of the pay. And if I make that body panel even easier to install, I now can have more people who can do the work. Skilled workers need to adapt their skillsets to remain relevant. That has nothing to do with CEOs.

I hate to say it, but automotive manufacturing is becoming less of a true trade. And a big reason for this is because of the demands of the consumer. The compensation of the workers is going to start to reflect that, and if they don't adapt, they'll see it first-hand.

 

[sharpsicle]

Short term suffering for long term gains. They will get their jobs back and a raise after the strike is over. In the meantime, they get unemployment checks and some time off.

Workers who strike do not get unemployment benefits. The UAW will pay them a measly $500 a week for striking, less than half of the average worker's normal pay. And unlike actual unemployment, they can't search for other work in the industry because of the strike.

A strike is likely the most stressful 'time off' they'll ever have.

 

[Deleted member 57233]

Workers who strike do not get unemployment benefits. The UAW will pay them a measly $500 a week for striking. A strike is likely the most stressful 'time off' they'll ever have.

We were talking about the workers Stellantis laid off because the striking workers jammed up the supply chain.

However, the inverse is also true. As work becomes less skilled, the pay becomes less competitive. Why? Because you have a larger pool of potential workers that can do the job since the skill required is lower.

And with college enrollment tanking while trades enrollment is skyrocketing, the trades will be taking a hit in 5ish years as the pool of workers grows. The biggest driver for the current high pay in the trades is the worker shortage, won't last forever.

 

[chesafreak]

We were talking about the workers Stellantis laid off because the striking workers jammed up the supply chain.


And with college enrollment tanking while trades enrollment is skyrocketing, the trades will be taking a hit in 5ish years as the pool of workers grows. The biggest driver for the current high pay in the trades is the worker shortage, won't last forever.

Have mixed feeling here. College is expensive and is on a whole nother bull shit issue I have with it. What is crazy is that what I am seeing on this pay scale actually rivals what a tradesman and top range a foreman would make in my area. Not to say what they do isn't demanding work either but really I dont imagine it takes much knowledge like a mechanic/tradesman skillset does.

What they are asking for would put them at what my wife a 15 year RN makes which just seems off to me.

I do agree with sharpsicle that really all I see out of this is a quicker push to automation. The cost for computer learning and robotics is only going down from here.

 

[Deleted member 57233]

What they are asking for would put them at what my wife a 15 year RN makes which just seems off to me.

RNs are criminally underpaid, and are striking now as well.

And comparing to tradesman and foreman wages across areas is kinda useless. Tradesmen and foremen here in Idaho make 1/2 what they do next door in Oregon.

Sponsored