UAW Pushes To Organize Kentucky Toyota Plant

UAW Pushes To Organize Kentucky Toyota Plant
Dissident workers at the Toyota plant here gather at the Best Western Georgetown on Wednesdays between shifts to shape a battle plan. The workers are angry at conditions at this flagship Toyota site, where the best-selling Camry is built.

The United Auto Workers has launched a big new push to organize the plant, trying to capitalize on fears of lower pay, outsourcing of jobs and on Toyota's treatment of injured workers. The stakes for the UAW intensified this month as a private-equity firm agreed to buy Chrysler, raising fears that the union will be unable to block cuts in jobs and benefits at a privately owned automaker.

The Chrysler deal has underscored the UAW's diminished clout as membership has shrunk along with jobs at the Detroit automakers. The UAW has never succeeded in organizing a foreign auto assembly plant in the United States, but Toyota's emergence as the world's largest automaker has added urgency to this effort. The UAW will begin new contract negotiations this summer without any workers from Toyota.


Read Article

kpaxxkpaxx - 5/29/2007 10:26:09 AM
+2 Boost
Toyota is starting to look a lot like GM...?


EnnNorakEnnNorak - 5/29/2007 10:44:19 AM
+3 Boost
If UAW succeeds, Toyota will probably nix any expansion plans they may have in the U.S. and other foreign manufacturers may think twice before establishing manufacturing capacity in territories under UAW influence. It is very dangerous to ignore history -- just look at what aggressive labor negotiations did to the traditional big 3.


EL34EL34 - 5/29/2007 10:46:21 AM
+3 Boost
I boycott all products made by Unions.

Let them starve!


CrunkieBrewsterCrunkieBrewster - 5/29/2007 11:24:59 AM
-2 Boost
Really? So you don't use ANY products with steel made by the unions such as the United Steelworkers union? You can't, tell me you don't use any of the other products/services that members of unions such as the Steelworkers union help produce? I don't see where its possible to boycott products made by unions, that is a retarded statement.

FYI, they're not just associated with steel, union members work in industries that produce plastics, other metals, oil, etc.


CrunkieBrewsterCrunkieBrewster - 5/29/2007 11:25:50 AM
0 Boost
http://www.uswa.org/usw/program/content/index.php


EL34EL34 - 5/29/2007 11:36:04 AM
+2 Boost
If something is made by union workers I can't find an alternative, then I'll buy it, but I do not support todays unions.

I boycott them!


CrunkieBrewsterCrunkieBrewster - 5/29/2007 11:56:52 AM
+2 Boost
I can see why you would boycott unions; as I think a lot of unions are crooks. However, I think the real issue is ... If companies would treat their employee's fairly and ethically in regards to raises, benefits, OT, etc, etc ... then there would be no need for unions. Most companies don't ... so maybe you should boycott the companies that don't treat the employee's right that are the cause of the unions.


Threepoint1415926Threepoint1415926 - 5/29/2007 3:49:33 PM
+2 Boost
Dont give me that employee treatment crap. If the employees worked like they should, then there would be reason to pay them more. As it stands, the same or better quality work can be got in other countries for pennies on the dollar. Union workers should feel privileged that they have jobs at all. Perhaps they should start to show that they're worth better pay.


CrunkieBrewsterCrunkieBrewster - 5/29/2007 6:32:33 PM
0 Boost
Threepoint1415926, you're a moron. You don't think these people who are union members work hard? Who do you think loads your packages in 90 degree weather into Hot UPS trucks? Union workers do, you can't tell me loading packages (large and small) for 8 hours a day in the Summer isn't working hard. Large companies will take advantage of their employee's any chance they get, thats why there are unions ... not because people don't work hard. How would you like work 30 years in a factory or any job, and one day the company announces they're getting rid of your pension because its costing the company too much money. Now you've lost 50% or more of your retirement, and there is nothing you can do about. People join unions because they don't want things like that to happen to them. Don't try to pull, oh companies don't do that ... if they didn't there would be no need for things like the Pension Protection Act.

http://www.dol.gov/EBSA/pensionreform.html


Threepoint1415926Threepoint1415926 - 5/31/2007 7:49:40 PM
+2 Boost
I'm such a moron in fact that I decided not to work in a factory for 30 years and instead get a math degree which provides me an opportunity to work a job which cant be exported for pennies on the dollar. Absolutely nothing says that a company should look out for anything other than profits. Unions are not profitable and the work that union labor does can be had for CHEAP! Unions dont exist to protect jobs, if they did, then the companies these union employees worked for wouldn't be going out of business, paying for overly high wages in the world market and heath care for life plans that are costing billions. It's this kind of crap that helps puts companies out of business and lots of UAW members are going to learn this the hard way. If these guys know what's best for them, they'll gladly except lower pay and cut pensions to keep their job or loose everything. Speaking of, pensions are FREE money and anyone who's a MORON enough to depend on the good word of a corporation to give them FREE money for doing nothing after they leave is just nuts! I sure as hell believe a big company will leave its employees out on their ass should they deem it cost effective. Every person on the planet should believe so. Hence, employees should show their worth and give a good financial reason for their employment instead of complaining that they get paid better than every other worker in the world.


middlemanmiddleman - 5/29/2007 12:01:49 PM
+3 Boost
This is good news for Big 3, if the UAW succeeded then they are all in the same boat (same UAW problems). I don't like modern Unions at all, they served their purpose. Years ago with lax labor laws they were good but since labor laws are very good now (it's bloody hard to fire anyone nowadays unless they are temp) there is no need for UNIONs. Now they are just a lazy bunch of asses, just go to any DMV, SSI offices or trade shows and u will know what it's like.


kart1kart1 - 5/29/2007 11:47:23 PM
+1 Boost
It may even the playing field for the big 3, but it doesn't help the American labor market as it may turn production away from the US, again.


gsh23gsh23 - 5/29/2007 3:36:25 PM
+3 Boost
man i hate going to the DMV...they should be paid by commission, then we'll see how many people are being served a day!


cdokecdoke - 5/29/2007 6:56:25 PM
+1 Boost
Crunkie Brewster and EL34 bring up a good point through their conversation. The U.S. steel industry and the U.S. Steelworkers Union could be used as an analogy and warning.

The U.S. steel industry is an unmitigated failure. In 2002 George Bush signed into law, in accordance with WTO rules, immense and broad protectionsit measures and partial subsidies for the U.S. steel industry. The reason was simple: the whole U.S. steel industry was going to tank- Japan could produce and ship steel here cheaper than we could even produce it domestically. The USW and associated legacy costs were the primary reason for that situation evolving.

I am afraid that if the automotive industry does not get the UAW under control and that entire situation fixed: they will face a similar fate.

As far as USW and the oil industry: I know of nobody in the oil industry who is in a union at all. When a company will pay someone who has little education, but knows what they are doing and has a special skill $150,000 / year to do that, you don't need a union. Why?" because it is an absolute meritocracy.

A union is fundamentally established to protect the mediocrity of those in it. They are borne of the fear of workers that their mediocre job, which many could do, is not safe. So, they group together and there are some ancillary uses, but a union is designed to destroy all true meritocracy.

I admit that I loathe unions, of course it does not help that the book I am reading is by F. A. Hayek.


CrunkieBrewsterCrunkieBrewster - 5/29/2007 7:11:33 PM
+1 Boost
I agree with your statements. I don't support unions, nor am I part of a union. However, in some cases they warrant their existence. So I guess you could say, they have their pro's and con's.

As far as union in the oil industry ... from the USW site ...

*The USW represents over 30,000 oil workers in the United States, Canada, and the Caribbean, including 4,300 at BP’s refineries in Carson, California; Toledo, Ohio; Whiting, Indiana and Texas City, Texas.






cdokecdoke - 5/29/2007 7:30:56 PM
+1 Boost
I did not know about the USW and BP. That is interesting. I will say that when I think of "oil industry" I default to thinking upstream which is where all of the people I really know are. Refining is a downstream process and those of us on the upstream side do get paid better.

Significantly better in fact. I think I remember Exxon hiring Bachelor's Ddegree Chemical Engineers here for around $60,000 / year, while Petroleum Engineers which are upstream start at around $80,000 / year as I recall. I admit my school is not average. In fact, my department, the Department of Petroleum Engineering, a year ago set a national record for hihgest average starting salaries ever for a 4 year degree. It may not be MIT, but it isn't called "The Harvard of Engineering" for nothing. Most people hav probably never even heard of it. That was a bit off topic...

I understand what you are saying, thanks for the info.


Anti_BangleAnti_Bangle - 5/29/2007 7:56:54 PM
+1 Boost
UAW is parasitic.


Copyright 2026 AutoSpies.com, LLC