Justabubba - Excellant points, and I agree with most of what you have to say. While I am finding it hard to swallow at this point because of that, I think you have valid points.

However - if the company needs to make changes to become more competative is that possible with the Union?

__________________

Liberals believe it is okay to kill babies, but not terrorists.

democrats believe it is okay to taser a 10 year old if this stance will get their guy elected.

Companies that realize what the market demand is will follow for a profit. I cordially congratulate the foreign auto makers for delivering a disruption to this corporate monopoly. The American auto makers will change or die. (I'll also add that I have a Toyota).

__________________
.

"It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a 'dismal science.' But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.

--Murray Rothbard

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skinny. A liberal is just a libertarian who hasn't studied economics.

Halleluya, Mastequila!- I give you a little positive feedback ,right here ,for acknowledging arguments that don't fall into your ideological profile.

as a union official i had the good fortune to work for a very wise manager (for a while; after he completed his doctorate in public policy, they moved him laterally). while our organization nationally was in disarray, and there was NO trust by and between the Union and management, he was able to turn around an office which had been mismanged for over a decade, and i believe he did it with the Union's help.
he recognized that no one knew how to do our day to day activities better than the employees assigned to perform those functions. he wanted to know what was needed or what needed to be eliminated to allow each employee to perform better. he was performance/outcomes driven, and allowed each staff member to determine what appraoch they would use to attain those outcomes.
in our organization, year-end bonuses were a sore subject. headquarters took the bulk of the allocated bonus money for itself. regional offices dipped in heavily. whatever was left went to the field staff. there management took most of it and occasionally allowed a few crumbs to the favorite rank & file employees. we initiated the world series plan. half of the bonus money available to our shop was allocated to the world series plan. every employee who received an average or better rating received an EQUAL slice of the world series pie; the bat boy and the super star got the same amount. the remaining bonus money was distributed based on whether one received above average or outstanding. a flat amount, whether low graded or high ranked annual salary, based entirely on year end achievement.
one of the objectives was to promote interdivisional activity. normally, many employees would not go out of their way to assist another division. however, when their evaluation - and bonus prospects - were in some degree based on an ability to document interdivisional activity, the degree by which we worked as a cohesive team surged.
this fellow recognized that the best money our organization spent was bonus money. after paying an average annual salary above $60,000 the enhanced outcomes realized by a $600 to $1,200 bonus was extremely cost effective.
so, yes, when you have management and the Union working together, recognizing that both are looking for the same thing - a better operating organization - it does facilitate a more competitive entity. that was certainly our experience compared to our counterparts who were still focused on top down management, where routine, not outcome, was the focus. where the distribution of bonuses remained backwards and based on loyalty rather than merit the rank and file had no incentive to perform at a higher - or even high - level.

when that wise manager, who worked with the Union in partnership (it was definately NOT co-management) was transferred, they stuck in a political hire who proceeded to undo the good work of his predecessor. over time, the teamwork dissolved as did the office's performance compared to our cohort - we became "average" again

i have no knowledge about the current situation in detroit. from time to time it appears that the Union sees the writing on the wall and has allowed buyouts to reduce the workforce, recognizing that "Health care costs alone total more than $1,500 per car manufactured by Detroit".
http://www.forbes.com/columnists/200...?partner=links
that does not even include retirement and the other required social security, medicare, unemployment and workmans' comp costs. so, maybe the union is starting to recognize that a good contract with a bankrupt employer is not a very good deal for the workers - or the Union

that above cited article included this comment which responds to your question:
so, it would seem, with enlightened management AND union the competitive outcomes would be positive. if that is not the reality, then probably not

__________________

Quote:

"I like to watch the news, because I don't like people very much and when you watch the news ... if you ever had an idea that people were really terrible, you could watch the news and know that you're right."

Frank Zappa