Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[FR8TRN]

Well, I'm not a union member, never have been and never will be.  I have worked where unions were present and made the decision not to join.  I've seen union members holler and berate women as they passed thru the lines, but not once was I ever as much as given a bad look, and once I started meeting the women to walk them in, neither were they again.  Guess the cowards wouldn't take a chance with someone that would stand up to them.

Anyways, that said, I think the company did the right thing here.  You wanna threaten strike, fine, stay home.  To top it off when they decide to start production, they should rehire and leave the unions on the street.  Anymore unions are out only for the union employees and increasing membership, the last contract at my company the union got the ability to solicit membership, at the cost of the wage increase for the members....what a joke...and the members just went along with it....a bigger joke.  Companies are tired of paying the high price of unions anymore and honestly, I don't blame them.  Wanna stop seeing our jobs move out of the country??  Get rid of the unions and all their requirements, we might find that the companies are a little nicer to the employees than they are with them in place.  Why offer the world to someone that has a union standing up for them, if the union can't get it for them, to bad.  I can't begin to imagine the time and money wasted in daily arbitration with the unions, and it's not just on an ALL member basis, every meeting where a union rep, the member and a company employee are required is just a waste of resources.  I do know there are literally hundreds of these meetings everyday within my company, because Joe Shmoe thinks he was wronged when he was asked to do overtime.....and next week, he'll be complaining because he wasn't asked....petty BS.

When I moved from associate to management the union members were telling me how much I was gonna be screwed......well, I make more than twice their highest pay scale before my bonus, my 401K matching is higher, my benefits are better, and I have more flexibility than they will EVER see as an associate.  The downside, I can be fired at will, not likely if I'm doing my job.....the union allows the unable members to retain employment, and does nothing for the member that excels.

[MJZ]

Having been a member of two unions for many years , then management and finally starting my own company; I see both sides. Don't want to get on a soap box but for those who really believe in socialism (share the wealth, not the risk or the effort), try Russia or Cuba and see what that will get you.
Yes, lately every year I have to adjust our health plan (deductible and benefits) because I have to compete in a free market or cease to exist. I hear the bitching, while I work twice as many hours as other employee and shoulder all of the risk. All while most years the top employees made more than me or the company. Yep, I made that choice but excuse me while I don't take out the Kleenex.

[CVOJOE]

10:02 AM
Feb 1, 2007 — The following statement was released by Harley-Davidson in response to worker's decision to strike::

Harley-Davidson Motor Company expressed disappointment at the union vote yesterday that rejected a proposed new collective bargaining agreement for employees and authorized a strike at its final assembly operations in York, Pa.
A strike at the facility is expected to occur as early as 12:01 a.m. February 2, when the current contract expires. As a result of the pending strike, production of Touring and Softail motorcycles at Harley-Davidson's operations in York has been suspended.

“We are obviously disappointed by the union's decision,” said Fred Gates, General Manager of Harley-Davidson's operations in York. “The proposed contract was structured to help manage future costs that could be detrimental to our business over the long term,” Gates said. “While Harley-Davidson is a strong company today, we don't want to find ourselves in ten years in the same position that the Detroit auto industry is in now.”

The proposed contract provided for a four percent wage increase in each of the three contract years. [highlight]Two percent of the increase was dependent on the union accepting the Company's salaried health care plan or another plan that would save the Company an equal amount of money. [/highlight]

The Company's union employees in York currently [highlight]pay no premium for health insurance coverage and minimal out of pocket costs. [/highlight] The proposal would have doubled the Company's 401(k) contribution match and would have provided a special monthly retirement supplement for certain employees who retire during the contract period. The proposal also would have instituted a second-tier wage and benefit plan for new employees hired after February 2, 2007. For example, under the two-tier structure, new assembly worker hires would have earned $18.25 per hour in the first year of the contract, compared to $20.78 per hour for current assembly workers in the first year of the contract.

Harley-Davidson production employees in York are represented by International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) Local 175.

Never been Union, but perhaps the time has come for them to start at least sharing in payment of expensive health benefits like the majority of us do. Cutting wages back a bit on new hires is not unusual, but then the MOCO has had another profitable year overall.  [smiley=nixweiss.gif]

[skippy]

Good days work= good pay , benefits are becomeing a thing of the past... Hope they don't go south of the boarder...

[naitram]

my only comment to that is my health care cost for my family went up $100/month this year, i recieved no raise to offset that cost. and co-pays have increased almost every year.

[HogBreath]

Here's my postion on the issue. I've got some VERY close friends on this web site who are PRO-Union. I also have some very close friends on this web site who are against the union. BY Gawd, I'm sticking by my friends!

[jeffj]

My take could the Union picked a worse time to go on Strike?
Burr it will be Cold working outside in those picket lines: Milwaukee, York, Kansas City and where ever else they picket.

In addition this looks like a well planned strike but who it favors right this minute (if there is a favorite) is the MoCo as they need to get their inventories (new scooters) back in line with the demand. Kind of a catch 22 for the union as they have concerns and want things but if the strike plays out similar to the Goodyear 3 month strike that just ended it will actually get inventories in line and the MoCo won't be forcing time off and will not be paying workers during the strike.

Can the union members afford to be out on strike for a long period?
if I remember correctly the Goodyear strike the Union paid it's workers $100 bucks a week but the workers had to man the picket lines (outside) for at least 20 hours a week to earn that $100 bucks. I would guess the average union worker at H-D makes well over $50k a year so that $100 union strike check won't pay to many bills.

I like most don't really have a favorite side but I think the MoCo is A-OK with its union members going out to strike, at this point of the year. To me the Union didn't pick the perfect month to do it and yes I understand there is no perfect month for any strike, I feel for the union members but I don't see them getting a lot of their demands

Good Luck Union members


jeffj

[ultrafxr]

Guys, the days of earning $50k for work that really does not require that much skill level is going away fast.  I remember in the late 60s when RCA had a televesion plant here that closed when they moved production offshore to Taiwan.  Capital and production will go where it is more cost effective, period.  Just look at all the current moco parts and accessories we buy that are made in China.  It would not be giant leap for them to move manufacturing (at York I think it is just assembly) offshore.  Hope they don't do that but unreasonable demands like pay next to nothing for health care just won't cut it anymore.  Look at our big three (and our airlines) and the "legacy" costs they face.  Can't compete.  And don't forget we are paying one helluva premium for these bikes for the moco to earn the profit it does.  And the demographics are not in its favor for this to continue ad infinitum.  My $.02.

[ima29]

I believe some need to do the math. At those wages on a 40 hr. week is about 40k per year. If I'm not mistaken the poverty income level is about 32k/ year for a family of 4 in the US. I agree that concessions should be made for increased health care cost however wage increase or decrease should be relative to middle and especially upper managent. Unions were definitely needed in their birth, management was out of control. I can see both sides, have been on both sides but remain a union/ management employee mainly due to retirement and benefits. I can only state that I am glad I am only  9 months away from retirement and feel for the incomeing class of labor now. It is ironic that we discuss this when all know that soon to come there will be a labor shortage with the retirement of "Baby Boomers" which is already happening in masses. It has only been delayed because of crash in the market a few years back. Corporate needs to take a stance I know but busting the unions will only happen when they agree to house, feed and pay the labor. Have seen this happen and it could happen, look at what has happened in the southwest and west coast. Problem is a vast amount of the labor can not speak english and are not citizens and yes their income is not spent or retained in the states. Is this what we want as avid "Buy American" motorcycle owners. Aloha,

Kelly

[ultrafxr]

I believe some need to do the math. At those wages on a 40 hr. week is about 40k per year. If I'm not mistaken the poverty income level is about 32k/ year for a family of 4 in the US. I agree that concessions should be made for increased health care cost however wage increase or decrease should be relative to middle and especially upper managent. Unions were definitely needed in their birth, management was out of control. I can see both sides, have been on both sides but remain a union/ management employee mainly due to retirement and benefits. I can only state that I am glad I am only  9 months away from retirement and feel for the incomeing class of labor now. It is ironic that we discuss this when all know that soon to come there will be a labor shortage with the retirement of "Baby Boomers" which is already happening in masses. It has only been delayed because of crash in the market a few years back. Corporate needs to take a stance I know but busting the unions will only happen when they agree to house, feed and pay the labor. Have seen this happen and it could happen, look at what has happened in the southwest and west coast. Problem is a vast amount of the labor can not speak english and are not citizens and yes their income is not spent or retained in the states. Is this what we want as avid "Buy American" motorcycle owners. Aloha,

Kelly

I know this is a sensitive issue and appreciate both sides.  Only point I was making is that these assembly jobs do not require extremely high skill levels and pay above average wages.  Current workers at $20.78/hr = $43,222 for full year of 40-hr work weeks. Proposed rate for new hires of $18.25 = $37,960.  This is for first year of contract with increases built in thereafter.  Currently workers pay zero for very generous health benefits and 401(k) contributions.  Here are latest poverty figures from dept of HHS:

2006 HHS Poverty Guidelines
Persons in
Family or Household 48 Contiguous
States and D.C. Alaska Hawaii
1 $ 9,800        $12,250 $11,270
2  13,200          16,500  15,180
3  16,600          20,750  19,090
4  20,000          25,000  23,000
5  23,400          29,250  26,910
6  26,800          33,500  30,820
7  30,200          37,750  34,730
8  33,600          42,000  38,640
For each additional
person, add
3,400                 4,250  3,910

I admit it, I'm spoiled and enjoy all the prosperity I can get and wish only the best for everyone.  Heard on a radio segment recently that even income near the poverty level allows folks to live about like a middle class family lived in the 50s.  Just need to be careful that we don't kill that goose with the golden eggs.  Not making any judgment, just presenting some facts for evaluation.

[Fired00d]

Update - York Daily Record 2/2/07.

 [smiley=pumpkin.gif]
Ride Safe,
Fired00d
 [smiley=fireman.gif]

[Midnight Rider]

I've been on both sides of this issue as well.  That starting wage is probably for a new employee with few, if any, skill sets to bring to the table.  If that beginning job is working on an assembly line doing a repetitive task day in and day out, then that is DAMN good money, by any standards.  Many of the highly skilled craftsmen in this country do not make that kind of wage per hour, at least in my part of the country.

One problem is that these assembly line types of jobs are going away. There must be a relationship between the skill it takes to perform a job and the pay.  Those are compensatory factors in doing a market analysis to set pay ranges for any position/job description.  How much money the company makes, or mid to upper level management pay ranges, has NOTHING to do with how a wage for a particular job SHOULD be set.  The Benefit side of this equation is a part of the employees TOTAL COMPENSATION, and certainly enters into setting an appropriate level of hourly/monthly pay.  When the relationship of skill set/pay rate/benefits get out of a reasonable balance, bad things start to happen over time.  I do NOT agree that the CEO of a company should make 30 million dollars a year, and have a 100 million dollar severance package...that is absurd, and in fact, obscene.  Equally absurd is a factory worker whose job it is to bolt on a piece to an engine or frame,  making 50 or 60 thousand dollars a year.  Could that worker market his/her skill somewhere else for that kind of money?  Absolutely not.  How much money the company is making/not making should have absolutely NOTHING to do with the setting of wages/benefits of their employees.  Should the company treat their employees fairly and equitably...YES.  Should the comapany just continue to pay employees more and more money each year for what would be considered relatively unskilled labor if a comparative analysis was done in the marketplace?  Not necessarily.  Just because "it's always been", does not mean "it's always going to be".  It is dependent on available work force, skill sets available/necessary to perform the job, and the market for those skills. Walk up to 100 people, ask them what they do, and ask them if they think they are paid enough.  At least 80 of them will think they're underpaid.  Throw some more money at them and see how long it makes them happy...not very long at all.  Job satisfaction is NOT tied to how much a person makes.  It is tied to many other factors too complex to go into here.[smiley=soapbox.gif]

[ultrafxr]

I've been on both sides of this issue as well.  That starting wage is probably for a new employee with few, if any, skill sets to bring to the table.  If that beginning job is working on an assembly line doing a repetitive task day in and day out, then that is DAMN good money, by any standards.  Many of the highly skilled craftsmen in this country do not make that kind of wage per hour, at least in my part of the country.

One problem is that these assembly line types of jobs are going away. There must be a relationship between the skill it takes to perform a job and the pay.  Those are compensatory factors in doing a market analysis to set pay ranges for any position/job description.  How much money the company makes, or mid to upper level management pay ranges, has NOTHING to do with how a wage for a particular job SHOULD be set.  The Benefit side of this equation is a part of the employees TOTAL COMPENSATION, and certainly enters into setting an appropriate level of hourly/monthly pay.  When the relationship of skill set/pay rate/benefits get out of a reasonable balance, bad things start to happen over time.  I do NOT agree that the CEO of a company should make 30 million dollars a year, and have a 100 million dollar severance package...that is absurd, and in fact, obscene.  Equally absurd is a factory worker whose job it is to bolt on a piece to an engine or frame,  making 50 or 60 thousand dollars a year.  Could that worker market his/her skill somewhere else for that kind of money?  Absolutely not.  How much money the company is making/not making should have absolutely NOTHING to do with the setting of wages/benefits of their employees.  Should the company treat their employees fairly and equitably...YES.  Should the comapany just continue to pay employees more and more money each year for what would be considered relatively unskilled labor if a comparative analysis was done in the marketplace?  Not necessarily.  Just because "it's always been", does not mean "it's always going to be".  It is dependent on available work force, skill sets available/necessary to perform the job, and the market for those skills. Walk up to 100 people, ask them what they do, and ask them if they think they are paid enough.  At least 80 of them will think they're underpaid.  Throw some more money at them and see how long it makes them happy...not very long at all.  Job satisfaction is NOT tied to how much a person makes.  It is tied to many other factors too complex to go into here.[smiley=soapbox.gif]

Well said Terry, my sentiments exactly crystalized into a coherent statement.  I'm all for everyone making all they can but things must remain in balance.  Again, for comparison, look at what the go along to get along mentaility at the big three automakers have gotten them.  We do NOT want the moco going down that road.

I also agree that some executive compensation packages are utterly obscene and totally indefensible - but not the moco as far as I know.  But even the most egregious example does not ultimately affect the future financial stability of a large company like giving more to the workers than they return in value.  It is the law of large numbers - comparatively little to a very large number will make a huge difference.

[VAZHOG]

Harley on the other hand is doing what every other american corp is doing today to stay in business. CUT COST as best they can. They way do that is Stock the dealers with product- shutdown the plants - and save a LOT of Cash - no unemployment insurance or heathcare or SSI or payroll to payout. That is worth a whole lot of cash per day for HD. ( 11 million)


So the strike is a WIN for HD and a Loser for the employee. HD will still be in business even if they don't make another bike this year or next year in the USA.

[Skippy620]

Reading through the posts on the York Plant strike. In COVJOES post on Feb 1 it states the models effected are Soft Tails and Touring. Is this all Soft Tails and Touring models, or only specific models in each line ?
Thanks