![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Tim" <jmeth111 (AT) yahoo (DOT) ca> wrote in message news:c4e98$494d081b$cef8ac46$10280 (AT) TEKSAVVY (DOT) COM... So basically, this $70/hour number is including the health care costs of twice as many retires and their families as there are current workers. Plus the amount that the auto companies are currently paying in pensions for twice the amount of retirees as there are current employees. Of course they aren't paying the pensions of current employees now. I doubt that is correct. Generally pension costs are accrued for current employees and put into a trust, so they are not paying pension costs for those already retired, but they are paying into the pension fund trust for those who are currently working. However, one problem is that if the pension fund suffers investment losses, then GM would have to make up the difference. Conversely if the fund is doing better than expected in its investments, the company can reduce or skip contributions. But apparently the GM pension fund is doing OK because of its conservative investment strategy (probably bonds), and GM says it does not plan to add any money to the fund for the next three or four years. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/25/business/25auto.html The health care cost for retirees is more complicated, and you can read about it in the above article. Note that anyone over 62 is eligible for Medicare, but the GM health care plan is way over the top compared to what most retired Americans have available to them. |
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
I have no idea what "fair" is when it comes to wages. Wages are based on supply and demand. If fairness is comparing UAW wages to others who do similar labor, then UAW workers would be making a lot less. |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
"Fair" to me would be a wage that would allow a family to have the basic necessities, and a few perks, without going so deeply into debt that they'd never get out. |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
"SC Tom" <s... (AT) tom (DOT) net> wrote in message *"Fair" to me would be a wage that would allow a family to have the basic necessities, and a few perks, without going so deeply into debt that they'd never get out. I sort of agree, but some skill and responsibility should go with that. *The Federal minimum wage is a joke, but dishwasher should not make as much asa skilled machinist or doctor. |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
"SC Tom" <s... (AT) tom (DOT) net> wrote in message "Fair" to me would be a wage that would allow a family to have the basic necessities, and a few perks, without going so deeply into debt that they'd never get out. I sort of agree, but some skill and responsibility should go with that. The Federal minimum wage is a joke, but dishwasher should not make as much as a skilled machinist or doctor. |
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
"SC Tom" <sc (AT) tom (DOT) net> wrote in message "Fair" to me would be a wage that would allow a family to have the basic necessities, and a few perks, without going so deeply into debt that they'd never get out. I sort of agree, but some skill and responsibility should go with that. The Federal minimum wage is a joke, but dishwasher should not make as much as a skilled machinist or doctor. |
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
On 20 Dec, 21:01, Tim <jmeth... (AT) yahoo (DOT) ca> wrote: Mark A wrote: "Tim" <jmeth... (AT) yahoo (DOT) ca> wrote in message news:e40bd$494d5560$cef8ac46$24595 (AT) TEKSAVVY (DOT) COM... Trade unions just make the equation one employer negotiator, one employee negotiator. What could be fairer? Union negotiation of pay negates the reality that some people are better employees than others in terms of productivity and quality of work, and that they should be paid more. When you have a union that negotiates pay based on seniority, then there is no incentive for an employee to work harder or improve the quality of their work. I thought trained monkeys could do these jobs. They do |
#8
| |||
| |||
|
|
The trouble is, for every 1000 GM cars, there are far more fall-outs than per 1000 Toyotas. The parts last longer on a whole. So, Toyota is putting the money into better parts. And enough profit so they don't have to go running to the government with their hands out. |
#9
| |||
| |||
|
|
Pension plans and healthcare plans are two different animals. * What was said about the pension plan is basically correct but GMs healthcare plan is a current business expense. GM is self-insured and thus is eligible for Medicare reimbursement for each retiree that is 65 or over. * * Every retiree MUST sign up for Medicare at age 65, opt for, and pay for Part B out of their SS check. "Mark A" <some... (AT) someone (DOT) com> wrote in message news:2J83l.10420$dc4.8265 (AT) bignews2 (DOT) bellsouth.net... "Tim" <jmeth... (AT) yahoo (DOT) ca> wrote in message news:c4e98$494d081b$cef8ac46$10280 (AT) TEKSAVVY (DOT) COM... So basically, this $70/hour number is including the health care costs of twice as many retires and their families as there are current workers. Plus the amount that the auto companies are currently paying in pensions for twice the amount of retirees as there are current employees. Of course they aren't paying the pensions of current employees now. I doubt that is correct. Generally pension costs are accrued for current employees and put into a trust, so they are not paying pension costs for those already retired, but they are paying into the pension fund trust for those who are currently working. However, one problem is that if the pension fund suffers investment losses, then GM would have to make up the difference. Conversely if the fund is doing better than expected in its investments, the company can reduce or skip contributions. But apparently the GM pension fund is doing OK because of its conservative investment strategy (probably bonds), and GM says it does not plan to add any money to the fund for the next three or four years. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/25/business/25auto.html The health care cost for retirees is more complicated, and you can read about it in the above article. Note that anyone over 62 is eligible for Medicare, but the GM health care plan is way over the top compared to what most retired Americans have available to them.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |