18 ms·

Unions locked in benefits in industries that were being, and continue to be, mismanaged by completely clueless and yet highly paid executives. Good for the unio

by logjam 18y ago

Unions locked in benefits in industries that were being, and continue to be, mismanaged by completely clueless and yet highly paid executives. Good for the unions. Hint: "dehumanizing" was not the word you were looking for, there. Curious that you didn't point to the billions of dollars "extracted" on salaries, benefits, and golden parachutes for executives who have mismanaged that industry into ruin over decades. And here's another hint: "free market" effects and "competition" take a toll on real live human beings. It's not some abstract little academic and mathematical simulation of "efficiency". When businesses screw up, people suffer. Workers who may not have the savings and golden parachutes and the perks and a ton of resources to fall back on have to somehow continue to put food on the table, pay mortgages, and buy braces for their kids teeth. The efficiency and good work of American labor has never been in doubt. The same cannot be said for the intelligence and ethics of business owners.

gojomo 18y ago
Good for the unions. Yes, good for them -- while it lasted. But since they, like the executives, chose short-term comfort rather than enduring competitiveness, the profits they split with those executives are long gone. Both the auto executives and auto laborers now need to find other gainful employment, like the rest of us. Maybe some will find work in a reorganized domestic auto industry -- but we don't owe them that, and we shouldn't shut our eyes to how they both reached this reckoning.
DaniFong 18y ago
I support the policies of the big 3 and the UAW together as much as I support the policies of the paramilitary and rebel guerrillas of Colombia, or the militaristic policies of Israel and the PLA. Not at all. Dehumanizing is exactly the word I meant. The lure of safe income was used to render incapable and irrelevant a great many human beings. Now they are scarcely fit for work. What now? "I felt like I was useless -- like I was put out to pasture," he said. "It's just like how they treated the veterans. During the war, we were heroes. When we came back ..." We are all party to stupid choices that these industrial behemoths have made. But laying blame won't solve all the problems. We need to specifically confront and dismantle the practices, organizations, and mindsets that lead us into this mess.
- time_management 18y ago
  The lure of safe income was used to render incapable and irrelevant a great many human beings. Now they are scarcely fit for work. What now? Board positions!
  - ojbyrne 18y ago
    And that's exactly it. Some people are rendered as "labor" and others are rendered as "management", and their paths diverge significantly after age 40, not based on competence, but on social connections.
    - Elepsis 18y ago
      I would argue that your social connections are very much based on your competence (albeit in an often different skillset).
      - time_management 18y ago
        The kinds of social connections that result in F-500 CEOship are not acquired, but inherited or (in rare cases) purchased.
time_management 18y ago
I generally agree with you, but it's a huge loss to society that thousands of people are being paid to play cards and watch videos all day. It is better for the world for it to be that than for them to be unemployed, though. The "steal all the lifeboats" mentality shown by most of the dogshit passing for corporate executives is much worse than any "job bank", of course.
jmatt 18y ago
mismanaged by completely clueless and yet highly paid executives Not all management is necessarily clueless and incompetent. Alan Mulally was a brilliant engineer and manager at Boeing ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Mulally http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Mulally ). He was recruited to come in and essentially fix Ford. He doesn't need to work. He is already a multimillionaire from working at Boeing. The reason management is well paid is because you need a way to motivate the very small group of managers that are qualified for the job. If you are worth millions - why would you ever take a job that pays one dollar a year and makes the entire world hate you? Well because if they do pull this off - the stock will recover and everyone will make a lot of money. And management could be credited with saving the industry. I know this is hard to imagine but every executive manager I have known worries about their employees and how their decisions effect the community and world they live in. I've known a number of engineers who have been laid off, including myself and it almost always comes out as a huge improvement to the individual. Anytime you leave a failing company and enter a company which is hiring it's likely to be a big big improvement. The real question, assuming it's unavoidable with a democratic congress and president incoming, is how do we make sure the US tax payer doesn't get screwed. We shouldn't be giving ANYTHING away. I agree with you there. I've worked for a number of big businesses and know some upper management personally. I've also worked two union jobs and come from a town that was/is mostly union labor. I can tell you that the unions of today that I saw are corrupt. Management is rarely corrupt - but since managers have greater influence it gets far more media attention. I don't know and can't think of the last time I've heard anyone that I respect say anything positive about unions. This is coming from someone who lived within 20 miles of a Chrysler plant for the majority of my life. The responsibility to fix the current situation lies with management. The blame lies with unions and the management of the past. The efficiency and good work of American labor has never been in doubt. Unfortunately this is in doubt. Unions do not recognize efficiency or good work. I agree most employers recognize this, but Unions prevent it. Ask any above average teacher, police officer or UPS employee. (And for the record - yes this is entirely my opinion - I don't claim otherwise. My conclusions are my own and at best anecdotal++, but none the less they are still my conclusions)
- DaniFong 18y ago
  Thank you for your perspective.

by logjam 18y ago

gojomo 18y ago

Good for the unions. Yes, good for them -- while it lasted. But since they, like the executives, chose short-term comfort rather than enduring competitiveness, the profits they split with those executives are long gone. Both the auto executives and auto laborers now need to find other gainful employment, like the rest of us. Maybe some will find work in a reorganized domestic auto industry -- but we don't owe them that, and we shouldn't shut our eyes to how they both reached this reckoning.

DaniFong 18y ago

I support the policies of the big 3 and the UAW together as much as I support the policies of the paramilitary and rebel guerrillas of Colombia, or the militaristic policies of Israel and the PLA. Not at all. Dehumanizing is exactly the word I meant. The lure of safe income was used to render incapable and irrelevant a great many human beings. Now they are scarcely fit for work. What now? "I felt like I was useless -- like I was put out to pasture," he said. "It's just like how they treated the veterans. During the war, we were heroes. When we came back ..." We are all party to stupid choices that these industrial behemoths have made. But laying blame won't solve all the problems. We need to specifically confront and dismantle the practices, organizations, and mindsets that lead us into this mess.

time_management 18y ago
The lure of safe income was used to render incapable and irrelevant a great many human beings. Now they are scarcely fit for work. What now? Board positions!
- ojbyrne 18y ago
  And that's exactly it. Some people are rendered as "labor" and others are rendered as "management", and their paths diverge significantly after age 40, not based on competence, but on social connections.
  - Elepsis 18y ago
    I would argue that your social connections are very much based on your competence (albeit in an often different skillset).
    - time_management 18y ago
      The kinds of social connections that result in F-500 CEOship are not acquired, but inherited or (in rare cases) purchased.

time_management 18y ago

I generally agree with you, but it's a huge loss to society that thousands of people are being paid to play cards and watch videos all day. It is better for the world for it to be that than for them to be unemployed, though. The "steal all the lifeboats" mentality shown by most of the dogshit passing for corporate executives is much worse than any "job bank", of course.

jmatt 18y ago

mismanaged by completely clueless and yet highly paid executives Not all management is necessarily clueless and incompetent. Alan Mulally was a brilliant engineer and manager at Boeing ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Mulally http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Mulally ). He was recruited to come in and essentially fix Ford. He doesn't need to work. He is already a multimillionaire from working at Boeing. The reason management is well paid is because you need a way to motivate the very small group of managers that are qualified for the job. If you are worth millions - why would you ever take a job that pays one dollar a year and makes the entire world hate you? Well because if they do pull this off - the stock will recover and everyone will make a lot of money. And management could be credited with saving the industry. I know this is hard to imagine but every executive manager I have known worries about their employees and how their decisions effect the community and world they live in. I've known a number of engineers who have been laid off, including myself and it almost always comes out as a huge improvement to the individual. Anytime you leave a failing company and enter a company which is hiring it's likely to be a big big improvement. The real question, assuming it's unavoidable with a democratic congress and president incoming, is how do we make sure the US tax payer doesn't get screwed. We shouldn't be giving ANYTHING away. I agree with you there. I've worked for a number of big businesses and know some upper management personally. I've also worked two union jobs and come from a town that was/is mostly union labor. I can tell you that the unions of today that I saw are corrupt. Management is rarely corrupt - but since managers have greater influence it gets far more media attention. I don't know and can't think of the last time I've heard anyone that I respect say anything positive about unions. This is coming from someone who lived within 20 miles of a Chrysler plant for the majority of my life. The responsibility to fix the current situation lies with management. The blame lies with unions and the management of the past. The efficiency and good work of American labor has never been in doubt. Unfortunately this is in doubt. Unions do not recognize efficiency or good work. I agree most employers recognize this, but Unions prevent it. Ask any above average teacher, police officer or UPS employee. (And for the record - yes this is entirely my opinion - I don't claim otherwise. My conclusions are my own and at best anecdotal++, but none the less they are still my conclusions)

DaniFong 18y ago
Thank you for your perspective.