Unions urge Toyota workers to reject reforms

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by b0son

you might want to check with the ABS... your statement isn't close to true.

well my house out in sydneys west has doubled , so has my electricity and water , my car rego , and petrol and tolls , my car prices have stayed the same though and my tv's have come down .
with the money you were on 10 years ago , compared to what your earning today .
would you like to buy my house . go on man ! she's a beauty , and over twice the size as the latest ones in the estate .
if you agree come over and see it , we can sit down and go through your costs and deposit you'll need , and wether you can pay it off in 15 or so years like me .
. i assume your wages have kept pace with inflation right . ?

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

mad . why are you so insistant on blaming unions for everything wrong with our economy and competitiveness .
our houses have gone through the roof in pricing . australian mortgages are growing faster than inflation , essential services are increasing around 7% pa .
and someone like yourself blames union for trying to keep up with inflation .
GET OVER IT MAN . just cause you might of had a bad experience with a union , others have had thier jobs saved by them and not been discriminated against because of unions .
GIVE IT A BREAK . asll you see is unions destroying jobs . never business owners who want to emply people in india for $10 per day .

these very stories only ever become public when a union passes comment on what a company is planning . thats where we need to stop and judge in the 1st place . not the unions reaction !!!

outside of australias wealthiest people ( the top 10% ) who elses children are going to be able to pay for accomodation and bills in this country , weather its an exhorberant mortgage or rent . in todays market as it is now . ( which is being stripped away as it is ) ,.. and we get our own very citizins. saying that we need to lower our living even further . we are already reducing lasnd sizes to 350sq metres and small houses for or people to pay off over thier whole working life . people are now staying at home rather than take a holiday , and starting to live with bad teeth ( even the workers ) . and your answer . give them a knife to stop the suffering

I guess you could say there are pros and cons to unions for the employees. Short term they are great, the employees get more compensation to "make things fair." Long-term, it's bad because companies can no longer compete in countries with very high wages and other costs (Australia, Europe, US) against manufacturing in countries with low wages and other costs (China, Mexico, Thailand). They should have made minimum wage $1M per month years ago and totally wiped out the industry before it even got started. That would have been great for everyone, right? If there's no downside, why stop at a few entitlements? Why not go to town and demand more?

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by chevypower

I guess you could say there are pros and cons to unions for the employees. Short term they are great, the employees get more compensation to "make things fair." Long-term, it's bad because companies can no longer compete in countries with very high wages and other costs (Australia, Europe, US) against manufacturing in countries with low wages and other costs (China, Mexico, Thailand). They should have made minimum wage $1M per month years ago and totally wiped out the industry before it even got started. That would have been great for everyone, right? If there's no downside, why stop at a few entitlements? Why not go to town and demand more?

your implying that a race to the bottom is good , .

where as i say respect our way . but people are giving our way away for thier way . we will never agree on whats a good thing as far as work goes , my friend .

[b0son]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

i assume

maybe you shouldn't assume, and instead, research. and preferably with a sample size greater than one.

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by b0son

maybe you shouldn't assume, and instead, research. and preferably with a sample size greater than one.

well using your views against you . if your doing better than inflation your doing us an injustice , i'm confident that maybe your job should go to cheaper labour overseas . had enough of people like you ripping the rest of us off .
but i suppose in your eyes you are better and mnore skilled than others and deserve more , while others need some taken away .

[b0son]

I get paid what I do because the business is profitable, and growing. where is the logic in granting generous payrises to your workers while you expect your suppliers to barely cover their costs, while demand for your own product is falling, and you cant turn a profit?

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

your implying that a race to the bottom is good , ..

No that would be your inference. I just understand how economics works. Economics has laws just like physics has laws. They are not invented by man, they are natural laws that explain how the universe works. Economics explains how finite resources, such as currency and commodities are exchanged. Economics is no more discriminatory toward the common working man than physics is to fat people. With that said, you have to understand how it works and how to make it work to your advantage, rather than just wish how things worked. If you enforce higher wages, you drive up the costs of doing business. You drive out the players who can't compete, create less competition (fewer jobs), which also causes price increases for two reasons: less competition and higher costs of doing business. That drives up the costs to the consumer who would be lucky to even have a job, which drives up all costs (the cost of living), which is inflation. Then you have to rely more on creditors, which is great for lenders, but not for you. Seriously, just do economics 101, you will start to get it. The only way to improve everyone's standard of living is to allow free market principles. Encourage investment so there are more businesses starting up competing for their piece of the growing pie, competing for human resources, which gives the upper hand to the employees because they can pick and choose who to work for. Consumers have more choices, so anyone trying to be greedy to the consumer or the employee won't make it. The principles of supply and demand are far more powerful than any legislation. If you try to legislate fairness all the time, you always need to keep adding laws the fix the loopholes from the previous ones. That gets too complicated and small businesses can't deal with too many complicated laws, they just don't have the resources. If small businesses can't compete, that's only good for the large "greedy" corporations. It's all supply and demand. Want to drive down the costs of living? Increase the supply of everything except the currency you are purchasing the commodities with (the dollar). This is essentially the same as increasing the value of the dollar. Want to drive up the price of labor (wages)? Increase the demand on human resources (have more businesses trying to hire more people). In order to do that, you have to have an environment that attracts businesses. Right now we're pushing them away by increasing their costs. There is a way you can get what you want, but the same old union approach just doesn't work, it actually hurts you in the long run.

[Bill M]

Originally Posted by chevypower

No that would be your inference. I just understand how economics works. Economics has laws just like physics has laws. They are not invented by man, they are natural laws that explain how the universe works. Economics explains how finite resources, such as currency and commodities are exchanged. Economics is no more discriminatory toward the common working man than physics is to fat people. With that said, you have to understand how it works and how to make it work to your advantage, rather than just wish how things worked. If you enforce higher wages, you drive up the costs of doing business. You drive out the players who can't compete, create less competition (fewer jobs), which also causes price increases for two reasons: less competition and higher costs of doing business. That drives up the costs to the consumer who would be lucky to even have a job, which drives up all costs (the cost of living), which is inflation. Then you have to rely more on creditors, which is great for lenders, but not for you. Seriously, just do economics 101, you will start to get it. The only way to improve everyone's standard of living is to allow free market principles. Encourage investment so there are more businesses starting up competing for their piece of the growing pie, competing for human resources, which gives the upper hand to the employees because they can pick and choose who to work for. Consumers have more choices, so anyone trying to be greedy to the consumer or the employee won't make it. The principles of supply and demand are far more powerful than any legislation. If you try to legislate fairness all the time, you always need to keep adding laws the fix the loopholes from the previous ones. That gets too complicated and small businesses can't deal with too many complicated laws, they just don't have the resources. If small businesses can't compete, that's only good for the large "greedy" corporations. It's all supply and demand. Want to drive down the costs of living? Increase the supply of everything except the currency you are purchasing the commodities with (the dollar). This is essentially the same as increasing the value of the dollar. Want to drive up the price of labor (wages)? Increase the demand on human resources (have more businesses trying to hire more people). In order to do that, you have to have an environment that attracts businesses. Right now we're pushing them away by increasing their costs. There is a way you can get what you want, but the same old union approach just doesn't work, it actually hurts you in the long run.

" Economics has laws just like physics has laws. They are not invented by man, they are natural laws that explain how the universe works."

[fte50]

First you say this .....

Originally Posted by b0son

FYI, in a previous career, I was responsible for the operation of a $1.5mil device, requiring 8 years of training. For that I was paid 20-25% more than an assembly line worker (at award rate).

and then you say this

Originally Posted by b0son

holden employee wages went up at nearly DOUBLE the rate of inflation

Originally Posted by b0son

I'm not talking over the last EBA, I'm talking about the last 21 years! That's 21 years of wages going up by nearly double CPI. That's unsutainable by any definition.
What I'm more curious about though, is why would Holden agree to such terms? Why not just tell them all to flap off and retrain a new award-rate workforce? Was that even an option?

Without going into depths, you get the drift of where im coming from. Hypocrisy at its best.

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by chevypower

No that would be your inference. I just understand how economics works. Economics has laws just like physics has laws. They are not invented by man, they are natural laws that explain how the universe works. Economics explains how finite resources, such as currency and commodities are exchanged. Economics is no more discriminatory toward the common working man than physics is to fat people. With that said, you have to understand how it works and how to make it work to your advantage, rather than just wish how things worked. If you enforce higher wages, you drive up the costs of doing business. You drive out the players who can't compete, create less competition (fewer jobs), which also causes price increases for two reasons: less competition and higher costs of doing business. That drives up the costs to the consumer who would be lucky to even have a job, which drives up all costs (the cost of living), which is inflation. Then you have to rely more on creditors, which is great for lenders, but not for you. Seriously, just do economics 101, you will start to get it. The only way to improve everyone's standard of living is to allow free market principles. Encourage investment so there are more businesses starting up competing for their piece of the growing pie, competing for human resources, which gives the upper hand to the employees because they can pick and choose who to work for. Consumers have more choices, so anyone trying to be greedy to the consumer or the employee won't make it. The principles of supply and demand are far more powerful than any legislation. If you try to legislate fairness all the time, you always need to keep adding laws the fix the loopholes from the previous ones. That gets too complicated and small businesses can't deal with too many complicated laws, they just don't have the resources. If small businesses can't compete, that's only good for the large "greedy" corporations. It's all supply and demand. Want to drive down the costs of living? Increase the supply of everything except the currency you are purchasing the commodities with (the dollar). This is essentially the same as increasing the value of the dollar. Want to drive up the price of labor (wages)? Increase the demand on human resources (have more businesses trying to hire more people). In order to do that, you have to have an environment that attracts businesses. Right now we're pushing them away by increasing their costs. There is a way you can get what you want, but the same old union approach just doesn't work, it actually hurts you in the long run.

oh isee . i get it . kind of like , you can sell drugs and get rich , rob a bank and get rich , if your clever , be in charge of a bank or airlione thats going down and get rich , employ 100's below the poverty line to inflated nations , and get rich , sell something for too much and get rich , be a capatilist exploiter and get rich . or simply over power a nation and get rich .

what have i left out here . the word WORK !!!
I GET THOSE LAWS , THEY ARE JUST LIKE PHYSICS .

" Economics has laws just like physics has laws. They are not invented by man, they are natural laws that explain how the universe works."

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

oh isee . i get it . kind of like , you can sell drugs and get rich , rob a bank and get rich , if your clever , be in charge of a bank or airlione thats going down and get rich , employ 100's below the poverty line to inflated nations , and get rich , sell something for too much and get rich , be a capatilist exploiter and get rich . or simply over power a nation and get rich .

what have i left out here . the word WORK !!!
I GET THOSE LAWS , THEY ARE JUST LIKE PHYSICS .

" Economics has laws just like physics has laws. They are not invented by man, they are natural laws that explain how the universe works."

No, clearly you don't get it. By the way, you are a capitalist, so don't be a hypocrite and criticize capitalism. It was capitalism that produced the car you drive and financed your ability to purchase it. Yes, people made a profit from your consumerism mentality! How evil they must be, but you participated in it willingly, did you not? You just capitalize the safe way like most people, letting someone else take the risk for your guaranteed salary. Now please go and learn about economics before offering more opinions.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

what have i left out here . the word WORK !!!

no. enterprise.

you don't get rich working, you get rich through enterprise. of course, you should be able to be comfortable working, but people seem to want to be increasingly more comfortable for less and less work.

[superyob]

A small ask here; could some of you cool down enough to type your responses in a grammatically correct fashion please? Some of your posts are hard enough to understand without the numerous mistakes...

[fte50]

Originally Posted by b0son

no. enterprise.

you don't get rich working, you get rich through enterprise.

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by superyob

A small ask here; could some of you cool down enough to type your responses in a grammatically correct fashion please? Some of your posts are hard enough to understand without the numerous mistakes...

OK , I'll give it a try on my side of things , but remember your on a car forum , i'm sure there are probably a few cool grammar forums out there that will bring a smile to your dial .
apologies . i know my posts have a lot of grammatical errors .

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by chevypower

No, clearly you don't get it. By the way, you are a capitalist, so don't be a hypocrite and criticize capitalism. It was capitalism that produced the car you drive and financed your ability to purchase it. Yes, people made a profit from your consumerism mentality! How evil they must be, but you participated in it willingly, did you not? You just capitalize the safe way like most people, letting someone else take the risk for your guaranteed salary. Now please go and learn about economics before offering more opinions.

well it really isnt too necessary to learn more about economics when your a hard core unionist . i could equally say to you, do a few studies on union history , and you will quickly learn what LAWS APPLY , when it comes to who has the biggest pockets . i can assure you economics is a small part of it .

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

well it really isnt too necessary to learn more about economics when your a hard core unionist . i could equally say to you, do a few studies on union history , and you will quickly learn what LAWS APPLY , when it comes to who has the biggest pockets . i can assure you economics is a small part of it .

It isn't necessary for fat people to learn about physics either, but they might benefit from knowing why gravity hurts their feet so much more than other people.

[ford man xf]

ahhh old mate gtfpv and his rantings on inflation...are you finally acknowledging that wage rises directly impact inflation? It wasn't that long ago you were to the contrary. You do realise that more disposable income directly means inevitably house prices will go up?
Indeed, you are no doubt enjoying your Union backed payrises

[gtfpv]

Ever heard the saying; ''the man with the longest pockets has the shortest arms! '' ford man xf ?
its a law that goes back way before economics and inflation my friend.

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

Ever heard the saying; ''the man with the longest pockets has the shortest arms! '' ford man xf ?
its a law that goes back way before economics and inflation my friend.

See you don't get it. Economic principles have always existed, we just didn't always know about them. They were not invented, they were just discovered. I'll try to make it easier for you to understand. If there is more of something and fewer people want it, it is worth less. Like air. We have it in abundance and nobody is demanding it because they have so much of it. Therefore 10 cubic feet of air is worth nothing. If something is in limited supply and everyone wants it (like a completely original 1957 Bel Air), it's worth a lot.

Now apply that principle to employees. If workers are in abundance (high unemployment rate) and there is little demand for them (small number of employers hiring), the workers are not worth much, which results in low wages. You cannot change that law! It is what it is. All you can do is manipulate the environment to get it to work in your favor. So to make workers worth more, you have to decrease the supply of unemployed workers and increase the demand by having more companies hiring. The government can do that by trying to attract overseas companies to invest in factories where you are. You do that by offering good incentives to make them want to do it. It has to be cheaper than having factories elsewhere. Then the value of employees will increase naturally. You don't need unions to make that happen!

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by chevypower

See you don't get it. Economic principles have always existed, we just didn't always know about them. They were not invented, they were just discovered. I'll try to make it easier for you to understand. If there is more of something and fewer people want it, it is worth less. Like air. We have it in abundance and nobody is demanding it because they have so much of it. Therefore 10 cubic feet of air is worth nothing. If something is in limited supply and everyone wants it (like a completely original 1957 Bel Air), it's worth a lot.

Now apply that principle to employees. If workers are in abundance (high unemployment rate) and there is little demand for them (small number of employers hiring), the workers are not worth much, which results in low wages. You cannot change that law! It is what it is. All you can do is manipulate the environment to get it to work in your favor. So to make workers worth more, you have to decrease the supply of unemployed workers and increase the demand by having more companies hiring. The government can do that by trying to attract overseas companies to invest in factories where you are. You do that by offering good incentives to make them want to do it. It has to be cheaper than having factories elsewhere. Then the value of employees will increase naturally. You don't need unions to make that happen!

ALL jokes aside chevy power your undermining my intelligence .
Of course i get it .
my 1st reply in this thread #3 whic i will insert here . is the very reason why the union has told the toyata employees not to bargain with them .
it's an un winnable proposal , in which the workers will ultimately lose .
we cannot compete with mass produced cars and wages way below our minimum wages , and currency exchange rates not in our favour .
do you think unionists are that stupid to negotiate a battle already lost ??
it's the people here that blame the union for the down fall of the company that need re educating .
we have a lifestyle that was won by our forefathers with demands that met a certain lifestyle , our other races around the earth somehow got manipulated into a far lesser lifestyle by our elite people , which are smarter and more witted , bullyier and more collective than them the front runners are smarter and harder to beat for the average majority people on every front . however our tendancies are on boith sides of the fence . there is eveil intelligence kind haertedness and bulliness on both sides of the fence which has nothing to do with the highest IQ .
RIGHT NOW , the cleverer more powerfull people are collectively winning . they are gaining power and intelligence , greed and control ( which everyone has in them ) over the lesser people which they had once before .
therefore . my 1st post in this thread remains , and it is why bthe unions told the employees not to negotiate with toyota . as they did with ford and holden . any head kickers who think the union is going to beat these corperates by trying to negotiate less wages with them is perly kidding themsleves .
so you see Chevy power . i do get it .
have a look at post 3 . here .



here we go again . a bunch of managers telling employees . they can and will use cheaper labour overseas to compete and seek more profits for shareholders etc .
tell me something new .
corperates chasing profit and nothing else , and blaming its workers crying poor .
these
threads always start with the title " union " , and finish with a thread lock
and indians / koreans and thias / building out cars , corperates and shareholders making more money than before and more austrailans out of work .
PRETTY MUCH WRAPS IT ALL UP .

WAITS FOR THE USUAL SUSPECTS TO SELL US OUT AND AGREE WITH THE CORPS . LOL .

[superyob]

I realise that this won't appeal to most, but could I suggest to those who enjoy a good read, Emile Zola's novel 'Germinal'. It was written in the 19th century about French mine workers but the same issues exposed in the story are being argued here. I personally am not a strong union supporter but I was singing 'Solidarity for ever' after I finished reading it...

[fte50]

Chevypower, what you say is both right & wrong, just as the union argument is right & wrong.
On your views, we can all (Yanks & Aussies) conclude that we are going backwards from this point on, which we evidently are, but the scariest thought is just how far down we will go. And to top it off, I don't see a healthy climb this side of the century..... not with all the other 3rd world nations enticing the manufacturers.

[ford man xf]

There is already a thread on the Economy (and Union related matters): http://fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=11336809

[BroadyFord]

Fat chance of a happy ending here.

Toyota waits on Federal Court ruling over union pay deal[/SIZE]

http://theage.drive.com.au/toyota-wa...211-2z6ia.html

Toyota, the last car manufacturer standing in Australia, will find out at lunchtime on Thursday if it will be given the chance to put a new pay deal to its 2500-strong Altona workforce - something the car maker has argued is crucial to it staying in the country.

Federal Court Justice Mordy Bromberg will hand down his ruling in a case between Toyota workers and the car maker's management, over whether the company can put to a vote a new enterprise deal that would cut costs at the Altona plant by $17 million.

Toyota on Wednesday learnt that from late 2016 it would be Victoria's only car maker, when both Ford and Holden will cease manufacturing.

A Toyota spokeswoman said the company had been ''saddened to learn'' of General Motors' decision to close Holden's production arm in Australia. This would place ''unprecedented pressure on the local supplier network and our ability to build cars in Australia'', she said.

Advertisement
The company would now work with its suppliers and state and federal governments to see whether it could continue to operate as Australia's sole car maker. In a bid to cut costs and send a signal it was prepared to tackle industrial relations issues, last month Toyota announced it would put to a vote of workers a proposal to alter conditions at its Altona plant.

The move followed Holden putting a vote to its car-making workforce to reduce conditions, a deal that will not happen now.

Toyota is now in a fierce battle with the Australian Manufacturing Workers Union over the attempt to reduce workers' conditions at the plant.

The union's national vehicles division secretary Dave Smith on Wednesday said workers would not ''negotiate with a gun to their head''.

''Toyota is really just trying it on,'' Mr Smith said. ''They have seen workers make flexibility commitments at Holden and they just want a bit of the same.''

Toyota would not comment on the vote it wanted to put to workers, having issued a statement this week saying it was ''disappointed'' with the union, and that a vote against changing their workplace agreement could put an end to Toyota building cars in Australia.

[XW-BAXR6T]

Our economy may go into recession after ford & holden go, i mean this could be the collapse of our entire car manufacturing industry / parts supply industry as toyota may also may leave. hate to sound negative but its reality. i pray for those who have huge mortgages & we may see lots of excess expencive car toys being sold in attempt to manage in a tough climate. Im known to make mistakes, hope i am wrong here now.

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

the cleverer more powerfull people are collectively winning . they are gaining power and intelligence , greed and control ( which everyone has in them

If we had more competition, they would have less power and control, and their greed would not be rewarded or justified. That's what I want. The US, UK, Europe, Australia: when's the last time we created a new car company? China has something like 12 now and on the rise. We're all shrinking the number of car companies we have left. What we're doing isn't working. We should be creating new companies. Oh but we only want "green" companies. China doesn't care about that, they are just creating companies and making products people want and more importantly, can afford to buy. We just want "green" ones and we subsidize those, like Fisker, whose bankruptcy cost the American taxpayer $139M! Who cares if its green if people are not buying them? That's crony capitalism! It makes competition unfair if your competitor is getting a subsidy and you are not. Plus subsidies artificially drives up the price of goods for the consumer, even though the political spin is to make them more affordable. We need to be innovating and creating new companies.

[b0son]

its 3 years away, a lot can happen.

[gtfpv]

Originally Posted by chevypower

If we had more competition, they would have less power and control, and their greed would not be rewarded or justified. That's what I want. The US, UK, Europe, Australia: when's the last time we created a new car company? China has something like 12 now and on the rise. We're all shrinking the number of car companies we have left. What we're doing isn't working. We should be creating new companies. Oh but we only want "green" companies. China doesn't care about that, they are just creating companies and making products people want and more importantly, can afford to buy. We just want "green" ones and we subsidize those, like Fisker, whose bankruptcy cost the American taxpayer $139M! Who cares if its green if people are not buying them? That's crony capitalism! It makes competition unfair if your competitor is getting a subsidy and you are not. Plus subsidies artificially drives up the price of goods for the consumer, even though the political spin is to make them more affordable. We need to be innovating and creating new companies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0WSrr5JaSM

[BroadyFord]

I'm holding out that we can perhaps get a niche manufacturer like Tesla or Geely set up shop here.

Not out of the question.