Don’t patronize me. I understand the history of union busting. What I don’t understand is why you’ve gone so far as to say today’s OEM’s would use the police to union bust when there has been no evidence of that occurring in this strike, and did not occur during the last strike in 2019 at GM.

United Auto Workers President Shawn Fain has reportedly accused General Motors and Stellantis of “enabling” violence on picket lines

What does this even mean?  The automakers haven’t done anything to violently break up the protests.

I’m totally supportive of the union’s right to strike and I think they deserve what they are asking for.

Maybe I’m overreacting a bit, mostly because they get befuddled by big numbers all the time. And a big splashy number is a useful way to get some attention for the story. But the big number is NOT the story. Such as it is, that’s only in the very last graf, which discusses changes over time.

Bingo. Sure they get paid a lot of money, probably too much but lets not pretend like if you just stop paying them a dime it’ll make any difference to the blue collar worker. It sure makes a good headline though doesn’t it. 

Absolutely. My daughter works in grocery stores (as a baker). She worked at a union store where she was part of a union. It sucked on ice. The Union really didn’t do much for employees.

CEO’s* kid.

I still don’t understand why, in this particular instance, both the president AND the former president feel like they need to “show up” for the striking workers. Trump was staunchly anti worker, and Biden has been wildly inconsistent in his messaging/actions regarding unions.

The problem with this is that executions are like Lays Potato Chips. You can’t stop at one.

UAW has balls. They cant put matching seats in F-150's, put different colored body panels on Broncos or even properly align logos on straight on a 70K Dark Horse. But they want huge pay increases when they put out horrible quality work?

I’m all for helping American workers but not when they put out quality that makes…

Yes. I’m not convinced that a good CEO can make a company... but I know absolutely that a bad one can break one.

To be fair the administration DID pull through on behalf of the railway workers. Just not immediately and with less public fanfare.

If these CEOs worked for free and the money saved was instead split equally among all the employees, then each employee would get something like an additional...twelve dollars a month.

Because a lot of the pay is stock options tied to performance.

I’m guessing you’ve never had a direct report, or worked in manufacturing, or dealt with the financial side of a company with CAPEX assets.

I mean technically, and I hate to do this, the CEO is responsible for all the output at their company. Not that I believe that, but if you are at the top, aren’t you responsible for everything below you? 

Spoiler alert.

If this is true, then why would all these companies continuing to voluntarily over pay their CEO’s when the primary goal of a company is to make money, not give it away? Do you think it’s some grand conspiracy or perhaps the CEO’s are all blackmailing their respective employers? 

32 hours of work for 40 hours of pay says Shawn Fain. 40% increase in pay says Fain.