BourbonRunner
Well-Known Member
I disagree with your example entirely. Comparing Henry Ford's era and what was effectively a hand made product on a moving conveyor to today's automated/robotic assembly is a red herring. Everything had to be done by hand in Ford's era- that's why every T was painted black.The benefit isn't from the line moving any faster, the benefit comes from less burnout, less mistakes that need fixed, and a higher quality product. Henry Ford moving to a shorter 40 hour work week didn't make the line move any faster, it increased quality and reduced defects, which then produced more vehicles in the same time frame.
But 4/8s is absurd and is a clear ploy by the UAW to increase its ranks. If a factory runs 4/8s, and maintains a 2 shift work day 5 days per week there are now more shifts for more workers, necessitating a mass hiring. Furthermore, the cost of labor becomes exponentially higher because of the additional workers needed, their health insurance subsidies from the manufacturer, payroll taxes, workman's comp, training, you name it. Union benefits from more dues.
If the factory ran only one shift daily, then 4/10's makes more sense. I loved working 4/10's in kitchens. I had three days off to do with as I pleased- in which I worked two of them.
I'm not trying to demean the value or skill of the workers by saying this but I will ask: what is the comparison between skill levels of a modern UAW assembly line worker vs their predecessors in the 60's, 70's, 80's, 90's? How much more/less skill is required to do a similar job?
I trust your expertise as the automation expert but I question legitimately how much skill is really needed because frankly I just don't know.
Sponsored