Yesterday, I posted a dairy about the right way to bailout the auto industry. I have no issue with those people who disagree with the basic premise that we should bailout the companies. But, in other places where I posted this and generally out there in the ether, there was a shocking level of ignorance, disinformation and disturbing attitudes about the UAW, its members and, generally, about unions. Let me try to set the record straight, though I know that readers here are probably hip to these arguments.
There seems like a self-hatred phenomena running amok in America that goes something like this: those "highly-paid" UAW members have life too good and are the reason the auto industry is tanking. For the good of America, they should take it in the chin and give up that "gold-plated" life style.
Answers:
- If you believe in the standard of living promoted by the Waltons, not Ma and Pa Walton, but the Waltons of Bentonville, then, sure–a Wal-Mart wage of $10-an-hour, pathetic health care and no pensions is a blueprint for the future. You and your children can live that life. I’m not on board.
- Here is what the so-called "highly-paid" UAW worker gets. An assembler earns an average of $20-an-hour, a skilled trades worker earns about $32-an-hour. And they get health care coverage and pensions. The pension, by the way, is about $35,000-a-year IF you worked a full 30 years. But, if you retired early–which many workers did because that work is a whole lot harder than typing away at a keyboard and spewing invective–the pension is about $20,000-a-year.
Again, that looks "generous" by today’s standards. But, pause a moment and think: is that the standard of living we consider "gold-plated"? That people should have health care, a pension and a very modest income when they work and an even more modest income when they retire?
- There is also the right-wing meme that is shocking to hear from people who call themselves "Democrats"–UAW workers are lazy and unproductive. I’m going to guess that a total of ZERO people who regurgitate that nonsense have spent ANY time in an assembly plant. You are simply, shamefully, repeating the same right-wing nonsense that attacks government workers. Actually, auto plants–like the rest of the workforce–have been extremely productive but that productivity doesn’t translate into sales, or wages, for reasons that are entirely separate from how hard the workers sweat.
- I guess you have gotten your wish, in one sense: UAW workers have already given up a lot over the years to pay for the mistakes of the auto executives and our broader national policies (mainly, our stupid trade policies). The Big Three have eliminated tens of thousands of jobs, pushing out people with buy-outs of about $140,000–taken because the other threat was not having a job at all–so now those folks can put in an application for a job at Wal-Mart. The deals struck with the auto companies last year introduced a lower-wage tier for newer workers. To replace those workers, Ford, for example, is offering starting wages at $14-an-hour. Yes, that’s higher than a Wal-Mart wage. Terrific.
Or take this example: The UAW had to strike American Axle because the company wanted to cut wages to $10-an-hour. After an 87-day strike, the company was successful–cutting the wage to really a poverty-level wage or forcing people to take a buy-out. Oh, the CEO, Richard Dauch: his salary and bonuses equaled $30,957,693. That’s not including stock options that bring him millions more.
- This is also about race. I’m going to guess that most of the people who are attacking union workers are white. Why? Because African-Americans wouldn’t do so. They know that they are being hurt most by the decline in manufacturing–and the elimination of union jobs, as I pointed out here.
- The UAW actually tried to save the industry from its poor management in last year’s negotiations by agreeing to take on the responsibility of managing the health care liabilities. The union agreed–I would argue, at great risk–to set up voluntary employees beneficiary associations (VEBAs) to manage the health care funds. The companies were supposed to transfer billions of dollars to those funds. That ain’t happening now.
- Fact is the auto companies are competing against companies based in countries that have national health care systems. The UAW has consistently argued and pushed for–going back to Walter Reuther–for universal health care. And the auto industry stood shoulder-to-shoulder with the Chamber of Commerce and opposed such a system. That isn’t the fault of the UAW.
I guess how you see this problem is partly a function of your world view. The auto industry in the U.S. is actually adding jobs. The problem is, in my opinion, that those jobs are NON-UNION and are being added in the South, mainly at the "transplant" companies i.e., Japanese and German manufacturers. I don’t think that non-union jobs at low labor costs and substandard pensions are a good think for the future of this country, and the world. But that is precisely what people are essentially arguing for when they rant against the "gold-plated" UAW living standards.
I see union jobs as not just a pocketbook issue but a justice issue–and I don’t think that people who attack UAW workers quite see how they are also attacking minorities and women, who benefit in particular from union jobs. You can repeat the right-wing meme about lazy workers, but the facts show that isn’t true. The UAW, and other unions, are the main reason people are not in poverty (it ain’t the minimum wage, which is a poverty-level wage).
Some people trot out the argument that, well, that’s life in the "free market" and "a global economy". To which I reply:
- The "free market" has really worked out great, hasn’t it? Airline de-regulation, savings and loan debacle (which seems like ancient history), the technology bubble implosion and now the newest grand experience, the financial crisis of 2008, which, oh, thank you "free market", wiped out trillions of dollars in value–devastating millions of people who put their faith in the "free market" and now are looking at a pretty frightening retirement.
- Globalization isn’t a natural phenomena. It’s about rules that we set. Right now, those rules are simply about one thing: finding the lowest wage possible. Those rules are often set by dumb trade deals but, yes, they are often set by the "free market". But, guess what? We have the right to change those rules, to set minimum global standards about wages and rights. Is that an easy task? Nope.
But, I’m sorry. I don’t accept the alternative: a non-union world where the glorious "free market" defines the future for our country and the rest of the world. And I don’t believe most people do, either.
