What's new
What's new

Starrett goes private

I have never heard of a union contract that prevented moves. pleas state where this happened

Again state where this happened.

Name one

Have you ever worked in a Union plant? or is this some story that you heard 3rd or 4th hand?
Every time the Union bashers start making shit up its always the same thing. "some guy told me" or "Many of them that I've read about"
Having spent 30 years of my life in a union plant. In my plant in the space of six months we went from 4,000+ workers to approximately 1,500
Again site one union contract that says that the Company can't eliminate any jobs.

If you're really that interested, look it up yourself... I'm not big on arguing over the Internet. I've read about it on multiple occasions over the years personally, the last time about a Ford plant that was being updated for changeover to producing an electric vehicle. You've also got at least one guy here giving firsthand experience. Shouldn't be hard to find.
 
Trying to blame Starrett's (and others) hardship on simplistic single factors like labor, product quality (it's too good?! :rolleyes:) or price seems foolishly oversimplified to me. The problem is far more complex, multi factored, and may not be solvable in a climate they were previously successful. History is littered with industries that just become obsolescent and marginalized, or with companies required to pivot so hard they are no longer related to their roots (I'm looking at you Kodak.)

The thing that I find most astonishing (and so American) is how all the keyboard CEO's seem to have already written Starrett off and condemned the apartment complex conversions that are figments of their imagination at this point, blaming what could well turn out to be a white knight investor with the money, plans and will to turn things around. I read these comments in a forum populated by the people most affected, about a company we are all presumed to care about, before any actual negative impact has been identified, and you are fighting each other over the best vantage point to piss on them. Nice work!
 
If you're really that interested, look it up yourself... I'm not big on arguing over the Internet. I've read about it on multiple occasions over the years personally, the last time about a Ford plant that was being updated for changeover to producing an electric vehicle. You've also got at least one guy here giving firsthand experience. Shouldn't be hard to find.
Thanks for admitting you don't know what your talking about.
 
That reminds me of the stokers/firemen the unions required to be on trains decades after they dumped coal and went to diesel.
Firemen were not just "stokers". That position, steam or Diesel, was the apprenticeship to an engineer. Today, 6 months as a conductor and you may be forced to exam for an engineer, ready or not. They aren't really doing conductor work. The conductor was in charge of the train. These modern day "conductors" are really trainmen, setting handbrakes, coupling/uncoupling cars, inspecting the train, etc. Without an FRA licence they have no authority over the operation of the train.
 
Riiiight... 🙄
So how DO you know these things. Are you a union member? I am. Have you ever been a member? How would you feel as a UAW member where a new hire has to work 17 days to make what the CEO makes in one hour? Maybe executive compensation is the problem. After all German, Japanese, and Korean automakers come here and build cars and make money with American labor and executives that make a reasonable wage.
 
So how DO you know these things. Are you a union member? I am. Have you ever been a member? How would you feel as a UAW member where a new hire has to work 17 days to make what the CEO makes in one hour? Maybe executive compensation is the problem. After all German, Japanese, and Korean automakers come here and build cars and make money with American labor and executives that make a reasonable wage.

I'm not sure what any of that has to do with contracts preventing updates to equipment and workflows that might eliminate some jobs... I'm not anti-union, but I *am* anti-ignorant contract clause. Any sensible union member should be also. And I don't think *any* normal worker believes that CEOs are fairly compensated, I'm not sure why you're dragging that one out.
 
How would you feel as a UAW member where a new hire has to work 17 days to make what the CEO makes in one hour? Maybe executive compensation is the problem. After all German, Japanese, and Korean automakers come here and build cars and make money with American labor and executives that make a reasonable
It's really none of your business or the new hire's business what the CEO gets paid. Both of you are just tiny little unimportant clogs in the giant machine that is a fortune 500 auto company. You only deserve to be paid what you can get on the open free market for common labor in your area from any other employer. Is a guy who installs car tires or what ever on an assembly line really have any special skills worth a penny more than a guy who flips burgers? I don't think so.
Why should a company that existed long before you were born and hopefully long after you are dead, pay you or the new hire above fair market local manual labor rates? Do you think the company is your mommy? You bring nothing special to the company. If you can make more doing something else, GO DO IT. The new hire can't make more or elsewere, or the new hire would have accepted a higher paying job at a different company.

You and the new hire are only expected to show up for your shift and do work any 8th grader could be trained to do sticking a part on a vehicle. No matter how good you are at your job you will make no difference in the company's bottom line.

The CEO is expected to make a big difference in the compayy's bottom line. He was hired by the board of directors who have a fiduciary duty to maximize profits for the owners of the company/stock holders. His pay is the business of the company's owners/stockholders. It is not the business of low level employees. The owner/stockholders can vote to pay him what ever they wish. It is their company. Much of his pay is usually based on stock options that are worthless unless he increases the company's stock price. If the CEO is successful, he will make hundreds of millions to billions of dollars profit for the company owners/stock holders.

The auto company does not exist to employ workers. The company exists to make a profit for their owners/stockholders. If they stop making profits they go away and those jobs go away too. The list is long---Packard, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, LaSalle, AMC, Hudson, Tucker,......and on and on and on.

If you want your job to exist you want the board to pay the high price necessary to get and keep the best possible CEO who will make profits to keep the company in business.
 
I have worked in both union and non. I can say, that yes, union contracts do stipulate that workers get replaced with another worker. Union got pissed when the engineers were going to do their own rapid prototyping using 3d printers instead of paying them to make a part out of steel not knowing if it was even going to work.

Superbowl is mostly right, and others have fair points like Ekretz from what I have seen. You don't have to be Bernie Sanders best friend to know for certainty now that the 1% control everything. The world saw 140 NEW billionaires get created last year. Ask yourself how that happened with a bad stock market, inflation, and economies crashing in europe and china. To be fair, one was Taylor Swift.
 
Superbowl is mostly right, and others have fair points like Ekretz from what I have seen. You don't have to be Bernie Sanders best friend to know for certainty now that the 1% control everything. The world saw 140 NEW billionaires get created last year. Ask yourself how that happened with a bad stock market, inflation, and economies crashing in europe and china. To be fair, one was Taylor Swift.
Personally I love the fact that we have thousands of mega-millionairs and billionaires. Money is power. I like power to be spread around. I don't want the government to be all powerful like in a Monarchy, Oligarchy or a Communist system. I want lots and lots of billionaires!

You must have powerful people to help keep a government in check. Kind of like when the Nobles, Dukes, Earls, etc. of England (the billionaires of their day) forced the English King to sign the Magna Carta. The serfs never could have done that back then. Middle and lower income people of today can not control government, they are too busy earning a living. They need the very rich to keep things in check.

These days in our democracy, wealthy people fight each other by giving money for advertising to different parties/politicians who each have different ideas of how the country should be run. Those ads run incessantly just before an election. Then the people (99% made up of middle and lower income) vote on who they want in power. George Soros and his ilk, support the Liberals, and the Koch brothers and their ilk give to the Conservatives. It's actually pretty even. The middle and lower classes do better when there are lots of rich people fighting with each other for both business market share and political power.

Bill Gates, Steven Jobs, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Sam Walton, etc. None of them ever took a penny from me I did not want them to have. I benefited from buying their products. Unlike many, I don't begrudge them their fortunes. They are not saints, but neither am I. In one way or another they all have made my life better.

Look at Elon Musk. Like him or not! Because he has a lot of money and big ideas, he has transformed the market for electric cars. He practically invented the reusable rocket booster and put his Starlink system of 500 satellites in orbit around the world transforming communications in low populated areas. Only a billionaire could do such things on their own. NASA with all their bureaucracy, takes forever to get things done and they are very inefficient because they are part of the government so no single person is responsible for the money they spend.

If not for rich people like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Hancock, Ben Franklin etc. (the billionaires of their time) we would still be a colony of England. If every person had about the same middle class wealth, then no one would have to power to stand up to an oppressive government and we would be forever ruled by a powerful few with no way to topple them.
 
Restrictive union contracts are certainly a big speed bump. At a place I used to work they put in a robot cell to automate some hole drilling and assembly. Only problem was per the union rules they had to still have the same number of guys who used to be doing the work, stand around and monitor the robot. So the company wasted all the money they invested in the robot (although quality did improve). At a rolling mill I used to work at the guys would slow the mills down as soon as a supervisor walked away. The company had no incentive to invest in new machines when they couldn't even get the existing ones to run at full speed. (That site was closed not long after I left)

Regarding other countries, most of the top talent in the US is going into the tech industry where the big bucks are. No 20 year old graduating down the road from Starett at MIT is going to want to go there, they're going to want to go work at Apple/Google/Amazon. Or they are going to want to go work at some exciting startup working on robots or EVTOLs.
unions = GODDAMN JOKE
 
Don't expect the rich to be generous. They didn't get rich by being generous. The money they spend is to acquire more for themselves, not for any benefit to you. If they advocate for lower taxes, it's not to relieve the tax burden on the lower classes.
 
The chart looks like crap. The company hasn't done well for years. They've also abandoned workers when they cancelled pensions in 2016. A lot of the product mix is made offshore. Not to mention that they suspended the dividend years ago.

Companies die a natural death.

The consumer voted with their dollars. Like everyone else...........they chased cheap. It's a tale of the times.

I'd like to know how many people, crying in their beer, are driving Toyotas, and other foreign made cars. And, don't give me the bullshit about foreign companies "making" cars in this country. It's a crap argument.
you might have a leg to stand on if domestic cars could actually hold a candle to japanese and german in terms of build quality and other metrics... go cry wolf somewhere else! the US auto industry brought this on itself.
 
If you're really that interested, look it up yourself... I'm not big on arguing over the Internet. I've read about it on multiple occasions over the years personally, the last time about a Ford plant that was being updated for changeover to producing an electric vehicle. You've also got at least one guy here giving firsthand experience. Shouldn't be hard to find.
he isnt here to enlighten himself to something that he might not have been aware of before, he's only here to try to prove to everyone else that ONLY his point is right.
 
So how DO you know these things. Are you a union member? I am. Have you ever been a member? How would you feel as a UAW member where a new hire has to work 17 days to make what the CEO makes in one hour? Maybe executive compensation is the problem. After all German, Japanese, and Korean automakers come here and build cars and make money with American labor and executives that make a reasonable wage.
it IS possible that CEO pay may be exorbitant (in a lot of scenarios i'd say it is) as well as unions are a fucking drag on society.
 
Personally I love the fact that we have thousands of mega-millionairs and billionaires. Money is power. I like power to be spread around. I don't want the government to be all powerful like in a Monarchy, Oligarchy or a Communist system. I want lots and lots of billionaires!

You must have powerful people to help keep a government in check. Kind of like when the Nobles, Dukes, Earls, etc. of England (the billionaires of their day) forced the English King to sign the Magna Carta. The serfs never could have done that back then. Middle and lower income people of today can not control government, they are too busy earning a living. They need the very rich to keep things in check.

These days in our democracy, wealthy people fight each other by giving money for advertising to different parties/politicians who each have different ideas of how the country should be run. Those ads run incessantly just before an election. Then the people (99% made up of middle and lower income) vote on who they want in power. George Soros and his ilk, support the Liberals, and the Koch brothers and their ilk give to the Conservatives. It's actually pretty even. The middle and lower classes do better when there are lots of rich people fighting with each other for both business market share and political power.

Bill Gates, Steven Jobs, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, Sam Walton, etc. None of them ever took a penny from me I did not want them to have. I benefited from buying their products. Unlike many, I don't begrudge them their fortunes. They are not saints, but neither am I. In one way or another they all have made my life better.

Look at Elon Musk. Like him or not! Because he has a lot of money and big ideas, he has transformed the market for electric cars. He practically invented the reusable rocket booster and put his Starlink system of 500 satellites in orbit around the world transforming communications in low populated areas. Only a billionaire could do such things on their own. NASA with all their bureaucracy, takes forever to get things done and they are very inefficient because they are part of the government so no single person is responsible for the money they spend.

If not for rich people like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Hancock, Ben Franklin etc. (the billionaires of their time) we would still be a colony of England. If every person had about the same middle class wealth, then no one would have to power to stand up to an oppressive government and we would be forever ruled by a powerful few with no way to topple them.
which is why both parties are the same thief dressed in different clothing. this country NEEDS a viable 3rd and even 4th option BADLY!

you're about an order of magnitude off on the number of starlink sats :P
How many Starlink satellites are in orbit? As of March 2024, there are 5,504 Starlink satellites in orbit, of which 5,442 are operational, according to Astronomer Jonathan McDowell who tracks the constellation on his website.

the plebs crying about the riches of people like zuck, gates, musk etc... are absolutely clueless. not a single one of those guys has anywhere NEAR their net worth in actual cash sitting in a bank or bunker somewhere, their net worth comes from the value of shares they hold in their companies. any time either of them sells more than a few % of their shares, the prices for those stocks start tanking. if ANYONE of them tried to sell all their stuff at once, they'd be 100% bankrupt. learn some fucking basic economics!
 
not a single one of those guys has anywhere NEAR their net worth in actual cash sitting in a bank or bunker somewhere,
I guess you don't understand that only a moron has much of their money in actual cash in the bank. Only an imbecile has their money in a bunker.
 
Don't expect the rich to be generous. They didn't get rich by being generous. If they advocate for lower taxes, it's not to relieve the tax burden on the lower classes.
The lower class pay zero Federal Income Tax. They have no tax burden. In fact the bottom 50 %. Did you process that? The bottom FIFTY PERCENT. HALF THE POPULATION. Pay ZERO Federal Income tax. Many get a negative tax. It's called the Earned Income Tax Credit. It's free money from the rest of us to people who pay zero taxes.
 








 
Back
Top