Workers win and UAW loses

I find it hard to believe anybody would place any credence in the Huffington Post, especially when they are quoting somebody who is apparently biased.

It's because he's biased that we should believe him. Bernd Osterloh is not some random scrub picked up off the street he's the Chairman of the Works Committee of Volkswagon for most of the last decade. Sure there are a few fish further up the chain than him but I'm inclined to believe he wants what's best for his company.

I guess we can wait a couple of weeks and see if this was taken entirely out of proportion or something similar.
 
Originally Posted by Ulaven_Demorte View Post

I manage a union shop


Yeah, and I'm an astronaut. :rolleyes:
 
I find it hard to believe anybody would place any credence in the Huffington Post, especially when they are quoting somebody who is apparently biased.

Really? So all of those posts by your compadres from that source aren't creditable? Which means that any and all opinions formed using that data are suspect or down right wrong? Really? Nice of you to admit that.

And your comment "apparently bias" needs more then your opinion to sway me. I pay little attention to an Ishmael (foisting opinion off as fact or refusing to substantiate a supposed fact with verifiable sources) so you're going to have to prove it. Otherwise your statement means squat.

Comshaw
 
Honda and Toyota have work counsels and are non-union. VW should ask then how to run their plant. :cool:

If I'm not mistaken VW has done very well they way they do business. Why change a winning formula?


Comshaw
 

If I'm not mistaken VW has done very well they way they do business. Why change a winning formula?


Comshaw

Why have workers pay for something they do not need, the Union. The UAW gave up on Honda, admitting they had nothing to offer that Honda didn't.
 
I find it hard to believe anybody would place any credence in the Huffington Post, especially when they are quoting somebody who is apparently biased.


Really? So all of those posts by your compadres from that source aren't creditable? Which means that any and all opinions formed using that data are suspect or down right wrong? Really? Nice of you to admit that.

And your comment "apparently bias" needs more then your opinion to sway me. I pay little attention to an Ishmael (foisting opinion off as fact or refusing to substantiate a supposed fact with verifiable sources) so you're going to have to prove it. Otherwise your statement means squat.

Comshaw


I rest my case.


Comshaw
 
Why have workers pay for something they do not need, the Union. The UAW gave up on Honda, admitting they had nothing to offer that Honda didn't.

Please provide a source and supporting facts for that claim.


Comshaw
 
Please provide a source and supporting facts for that claim.


Comshaw

Throughout the past 30 years, the UAW has argued that its representation of workers at Detroit companies benefited those at foreign companies in the United States, which are known as transplants. Indeed, in the initial round of factories opened by Honda, Toyota and Nissan in the mid-South, workers earned wages at or close to rates for veteran workers. This high pay was seen as a crucial weapon in the companies’ ability to keep out the UAW, despite efforts to organize the factories.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/micheli...-helping-detroit-did-the-uaw-lose-its-future/
 
Back
Top