Mercury Marine and Unions

JuliaValentine said:
With all respect to your opinion, isn't that management bashing? I do agree that with no productivity there is no profit. That is only one facet of a successful business. With no profit a company is in financial trouble.
Toyota tied Chrysler in productivity in 2008. Toyota is non-union. Honda, Toyota, Hyundai, Nissan and Mercedes are non-union. So will follow the Kia and Volkswagon plants being built now.
None of them are in financial trouble. So, wouldn't that be living proof that management has the ability to succeed in properly managing the workers?
Click to expand...

And here lies the contradiction to the unionization equates to poor product/competitiveness argument, all of those companies with one possible exception (not sure about S Korea) are unionized in their home country. And those unions, and labor related regulatory environment, make anything in the US look insignificant in comparison. And the product made by those unionized efforts is competitive as well as in demand globally.

In my experience working and dealing with the various dockworkers unions in the above countries, as well as the US and others, is not that unions in and of themselves are detrimental to the enterprise. It is the relationship that both management and union representation foster that tends to be the source of problems.


So in response to Mike's question, I would go a step farther and say the sign of good management is the ability to effectively manage the workforce with, or without, the presence of a union.

As for the Mercruiser FDL negotiations, I don't know the details so I can't say who is on first. But I will echo the earlier comments that at this level both sides have a strategy and nobody is being stupid. And lets not forget that we are only seeing the public side of the negotiation which is something that is carefully crafted for the most effective positive impact on the intended audience. For management they are publicly playing to their shareholders, and for the union reps they are playing to the membership, as well as local politicians.

Henry
 
OK.

I just read this thread. Let's bring in a new side to things: Airline Unions. I'm not talking about baggage handlers and gate workers. I'm talking about pilots. If it weren't for our union limiting the number of jobs which can be outsourced to the lowest bidder, you and your family would be at a lot more risk on each and every flight. We have already seen this expansion of minimum wage earning (actually less) pilots bring harm to our nation's air safety record. Took off on wrong runway - 50 dead. Failed to monitor airspeed during iciing - 50 dead. Loss of both engines on takeoff due to birds - 0 dead (the other side of the coin).

If it weren't for our union, we would be working far greater hours than we currently are. United pilots lost the power of their union during recent years. It's not uncommon for their pilots to fly one leg, sit for 1.5 days in a crap-hole hotel, then fly one leg home for a wopping 3 (THREE) hours of pay. A normal pay month is about 80 hours. You have to work a lot of days at that rate to make a check.

It's not just the number of days, but the type of days you have to work that impacts safety. In the airline business, pilots don't make money unless the aircraft is moving. The time between flights, pre-flight planning, walk-around inspections, aircraft programming, boarding, post-flight, rides to hotels - all are unpaid. A domestic pilot on a small-medium aircraft will usually fly 4 - 6 legs a day. When I was doing that, I worked about 12 - 14 hours per day for 5.5 hours pay. You can't do that many days in a month before you are exhausted and unsafe to fly. The union limits those hours and days, but if they didn't, the company would maximize them.

Their are millions of other examples. Too tired to go on.
 
JuliaValentine said:
I forgot to mention that there is not only union bashing on this forum, but at the gates of Honda, Nissan, Toyota, Mercededs, and BMW plants in the US, by the workers of those plants. The unions have set up camp outside the gates and in the town centers to try to rally and recruit the workers. No takers, no interest. That has to say something. I am seeing the same thing starting to happen to the rallying call of the Democrats. Losing interest, losing members. I live in MA. That has to say something. The next election is going to be interesting.
Click to expand...

Honda in Ontario has told the workers we will pay you the same as the union auto workers but don't vote a union in, if you do we will move the plant. The Honda plant has 3 shifts, only one is full time the others part time and contract. They are some times told on a Sunday night that there will be no 3rd shift for a week (and no pay) there is no over time for the full time employees, it goes to the lesser paid employees. With the layoffs and cuts backs of this year there are now more part time and contract employees than full time, soon the whole plant will be contract or part time.

I missed the part where GM, Ford and Chrysler's management agreed to the contracts, yet this is the unions fault. The union cannot say this is what we want and get it without the yes vote by the big 3.

Ken
 
Southpaw II said:
I've worked in 6 different union environments in the last 30 years, and have seen the progression from the "us vs. them" to what it is now...only a left over useless institution. Most agree that unions once had a place and function, about 50 years ago. Today, they are a farce that suck dollars from earnings sorely needed by families. The Feds have put laws in place that weren't there years ago. The unions aren't needed. IMHO, people that keep voting the unions in deserve just what they voted for...just like those that voted in the last Presidential election. Hope this doesn't offend, but to me the question and the answer are pretty simple. If you don't want to work there, leave, and go somewhere else.
Click to expand...
Right on, and I agree. Unions are a sham and useless in this day and age. I see it in the trade show sector at installation/dismantle for shows. Javitts is a perfect example. The unions have such a lock, and the complete lack of respect for people's time and money is so apparent that they are hurting themselves in the long run as people decide not to exhibit at these facilities in search of non-union facilities to have their shows.
Terrible waste.

The right man/woman for the job is long gone in certain sectors.
 
Hampton said:
OK.

I just read this thread. Let's bring in a new side to things: Airline Unions. I'm not talking about baggage handlers and gate workers. I'm talking about pilots.

Their are millions of other examples. Too tired to go on.
Click to expand...

Maybe. That argument sounds an awful lot like the one the NEA uses regarding teachers and "quality" education. That's bunkum and I don't believe that this one is more solid, either.

The airlines get guys to work cheaply for them in the beginning, because those guys know that after several years, they'll have a shot at a lot more money for fewer hours. They are deferring their immediate needs for greater rewards down the line. This is a type of price / wage distortion. Take the union out of the picture and the the entry wages most likely would go up while some of the highest salaries would go down.

Safety isn't related to the price of the worker. Simply paying the newbie more isn't going to make him a better pilot. Piloting skills take a long, long time to develop and mature. The low-time, low wage guys have more accidents because... they are low-time guys. They are flying less capable aircraft with less automation and a higher workload. Where the (older, experienced, union) jet pilot can climb and sit above the weather, these guys are mucking about in bad weather in aircraft that can't get above it or are flying too short of a haul to climb to very high altitudes.

If the airline unions suddenly disappeared and, according you your postulate, the accident rate went up, the first and obvious conclusion would be more government regulation and a rapid drop in passenger miles. No one wants to fly if it's not safe. Vacationers would cut back. Corporations, which have shown in this downturn that they can cut far, far back in business travel would also cut back. They wouldn't want to risk a suit if an employee traveling for business was injured. The airlines aren't that stupid. They're arrogant, but not very stupid and know people can do without flying pretty well and know more government interference won't be helpful.

Now if the government ran the airlines, then a lot more people would be driving.
 
Dam you Gary for starting this thread. You are a master at planting the seeds. I'm onto your game.
 
fc3 said:
1) The airlines get guys to work cheaply for them in the beginning, because those guys know that after several years, they'll have a shot at a lot more money for fewer hours. They are deferring their immediate needs for greater rewards down the line. This is a type of price / wage distortion.

2) Safety isn't related to the price of the worker. Simply paying the newbie more isn't going to make him a better pilot. Piloting skills take a long, long time to develop and mature. The low-time, low wage guys have more accidents because... they are low-time guys. They are flying less capable aircraft with less automation and a higher workload.

3) The airlines aren't that stupid. They're arrogant, but not very stupid and know people can do without flying pretty well and know more government interference won't be helpful.

4) Now if the government ran the airlines, then a lot more people would be driving.
Click to expand...

I'm not good at color coding, so I added numbers to some of your points.

1) This used to be true. Now it isn't. The commuters are growing while the majors continue to shrink. Very few of these guys have a big future. Comair realized that in 2001 when they refused to hire furloughed Delta Pilots in exchange for favorable hiring for their guys at Delta during better times.

2) Paying a guy more does not make him a better pilot. Paying an industry of pilots more attracts a better lot of applicants. Most commuter airlines have reduced the minumums for upgrade to Captain to the minimum allowable by the FAA. Right seaters are coming out of schools directly into the right seat. The airlines have had to start their own academies in order to have enough applicants to fill the seats. Many pilots are quitting the career field after just a few years at $20,000/year with no chance of paying their $60,000 flying training bills.

These guys are not flying less capable aircraft. The RJ fleet is new. The aircraft have all-glass cockpits. They have more automation than the average major air carrier fleet. They climb above the weather. The new pilots can't keep up with them. The Captains are young, and acting as instructors for the First Officers.

3) The airlines are that stupid. Due to low wages, they continue to ground the big boys and replace them with death traps at the rate of 3:1. This has helped fuel the pilot deficit. Lack of military trainees has made it worse. It's just now beginning to show up on government radar, and they are stepping in. Unfortunately, they'll probably come up with stupid patches which make a pilot's life more miserable.

The airlines do not care. Delta didn't kill your family - Skywest, Pinacle, Comair, ASA, Freedom, Frontier, America West and many, many others did. They constantly have bidding wars for the lowest bidding contract connection carrier. They get the pilots to agree to miserably low wages in exchange for the next order of newer regional jets. Bad contract = loss of jet, jobs and a future. The unions limit these practices to the max extent possible.

4) I agree.

Add) There was a time when airline pilots made tons of money and worked very few days per month. Those days are over. If your neighbor tells you that he works 8 days a month for $250,000 per year (or more), either he is lying or is an extremely rare case. Even if he's that rare guy, does he still have a retirement? (No). There are some good jobs still out there for guys that either hit the timing just right or haven't had their carrier steal their benefits through bankruptcy - yet. Even SWA is becoming a legacy with limited growth potential, no pt-to-pt expansion, and therefore no cheap labor/maintenance based on 12% growth. I predicted Kelleher (sp?) would step down when SWA ran out of low cost city pairs with which to cherry pick the icing off the top of the airline cake.

A Continental Captain died 1/2 way across the ocean a couple of months ago. The faa requires 3 crew members, 2 of which may be first officers. Due to commutes and terrible international reserve schedules, international First Officer is an extremely junior category at many airlines. The union requires that the longer legs have a spare Captain (they fly shifts on the planes). The off-duty Captain took over the command. The faa allows the extra crew members to be "Cruise Officers" - guys not even qualified to land the plane. How do you like the union now?

If you think the pay is artificially high, my favorite example is a flight I flew from Miami to Atlanta a couple of years ago. I made $.60 per passenger. The Captain made about $1.00 each. They paid a couple to a few hundred dollars for each seat. I think the company can afford another 10 to 20 cents per seat to ensure a reasonable wage and that the industry attracts higher level applicants, don't you?
 
Last edited:
Hampton said:
I think the company can afford another 10 to 20 cents per seat to ensure a reasonable wage and that the industry attracts higher level applicants, don't you?
Click to expand...

Yes, even if I have to pay $1.00 more for my seat. I'd be willing to pay an added fee, "pilot's premium." To have the best pilots flying my planes.
 
Think I'll just let the other several hundred thousand frequent flyer miles sit and drive where ever the heck I need to go. I don't want to go back to europe anyway.
 
Kameroo said:
Why not chip in a little extra for their pension, too, so they sleep better the night before?
Click to expand...

That may very well be the best investment you'd ever make. Companies went Bankrupt (or will be), pensions were disolved for pennies on the dollar, the major's shrunk post 9/11, and the retirement age for pilots was raised from 60 to 65. This was due to the SWA union pushing hard (they never had a pension, just a match) and companies pushing hard to retain skilled labor, and senior pilots wanting to keep their cushy, high paying jobs for another 5 years while everyone below them stagnated in progression for 5 years (last guy hired has the lowest paying position with the worst schedule an extra 5 years of his life).

End result: New Pilot Mantra - "Fly 'til you Die."

What else can you do? Young guys, while stagnated, have years to make up for the change from a defined benefit plan to a defined contribution (matching) plan. Old guys get to hold the highest paying jobs an extra 5 years. The middle guys, the "Dead Zoners" have to fly 'til they die. They lost 15 - 20 years of theirs career's worth of retirement, and are now starting over with a 401K plan.

Remember, major airline pilots are on average, 37 years old when hired into the major airline. Up until then, they walked away from the military or got paid dog crap in flying for the regional/commuter airlines. If they stayed long enough for a military retirement, they are starting in their mid to late 40's and will be junior their entire careers, but have a small military pension. The lucky ones get hired in their 20's, will be senior their entire careers, have plenty of time to build a nest egg, and are generally the biggest group of whiners you'll ever meet.
 
About how much is a "small military" pension? I know it does not amount to what some of the government police and firemen pensions come to, they are quite high in comparison.
 
AKBASSKING said:
$800 a month......before taxes:smt009
Click to expand...

That completely depends on the type and length of career. Bottom line: At twenty years, you get 50% of the average of your last 3 years anual pay. There are different programs. They have been changing over the years. At 30 years, you get 75% of the base pay.

Base pay doesn't include housing, food allowances, bonuses, hazardous duty pay... Most people will get about 35% of their final check after 20 years, give or take. If you did not serve 20 or more years in a full time position, you don't get anything until you turn age 60, then it begins. It is reduced by a percentage comparing the number of days you worked compared to 20 years times 365 = 7305 days. If you worked 3650 days, then you'll get about 25% of your base pay when you turn 60 years old.

http://www.dfas.mil/militarypay/militarypaytables.html

Most enlisted troops with 20 years will be an E-7, 8, or maybe 9. Most officers will be O-4, 5, or maybe 6. The W- 's are warrant officers and are not as common.

E-7 with 20 4000/mo. E-8 with 20 4500/mo.
O-4 with 20 6700/mo. O-5 with 20 7700/mo.

Assuming that the person served in that pay grade for the last 3 years, then take 1/2 of that to determine the retirement pay. It's not bad at all.
 
Hampton said:
The lucky ones get hired in their 20's, will be senior their entire careers, have plenty of time to build a nest egg, and are generally the biggest group of whiners you'll ever meet.
Click to expand...

Easy dude, hitting close to home on that one... Not a whiner, but grateful.
 
Last edited:
Kameroo said:
Easy dude, hitting close to home on that one... Not a whiner, but grateful.
Click to expand...

Glad to hear it. The ones that are young, senior Captains at my airline are the ones that complain about everything and never buy a round. Too many ex-wives, too much time on their hands, too little effort for so much reward - kind of like the rap stars of the airlines. For me, it's not the end result that means so much. It's the journey getting to that reward, and then getting the reward that I find so, well, rewarding. Just let me finally get that dang reward some day. For me, the reward will be 767 Captain or better while drawing a military retirement. I'm right on schedule, except for the 10-year delay due to 9/11 and the age 65 rule.

Although, I must admit, I was not going to get my military retirement until age 60. Then, after 9/11 and two paycuts, I decided I needed to go back and work extra hard to earn my 20 years active duty before quitting the military permanently and taking it easy with just one full time job. I'm less than a year away from that short term goal now.

Don't worry, I don't judge anyone by their journey. I judge everyone by who they are when we meet. That being said, I would like to meet you some day. I'm sure we could exchange some really great stories.
 
Hampton said:
Don't worry, I don't judge anyone by their journey. I judge everyone by who they are when we meet. That being said, I would like to meet you some day. I'm sure we could exchange some really great stories.
Click to expand...

That would be fun. I was mid-20s when I got on with a major, but it wasn't easy by any stretch. I've been working full-time since 18, don't have a lot of patience for slackers, and I'll always be glad I didn't chase the big money in the mid '90s. Kept the first wife. Bigger boat that way, plus I actually like her.
 
I decided to see if I could find some facts on what this is all about with Mercury and the Union. Here's what I found.

The 850 International Association of Machinist’s union members at Mercury Marine in Fond du Lac Wisconsin are resisting employer demands for cuts mid-contract. On Sunday, they overwhelmingly voted to reject wage and benefits concessions. Mercury Marine is threatening to move production to a non-union Oklahoma plant. The company just signed a new four year contract with the union a year ago, but it wants out of the agreement. Mercury Marine wants lower wages for new hires and cuts in pension benefits. Mercury Marine is the largest maker of boat engines in the world.

Seems they have a current contract and Merc wants to re-negotiate it. Any one want to take a wild guess at what these machinist make an hour? No wonder they voted NO.

Ken
 
Kameroo said:
That would be fun. I was mid-20s when I got on with a major, but it wasn't easy by any stretch. I've been working full-time since 18, don't have a lot of patience for slackers, and I'll always be glad I didn't chase the big money in the mid '90s. Kept the first wife. Bigger boat that way, plus I actually like her.
Click to expand...

You'll always represent the guys that have it made in the airline industry to me. It sounds like you've done it right (wife, life....) Congrats. We each have our own victories and defeats. I am not defeated in the airline industry, but it has had to become second fiddle to me. Soon it will be my only job. I will be making good wages, but only because I kept working two jobs another 5 years (total of 11). All is well in the end. Toast! : )
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
113,238
Messages
1,429,064
Members
61,119
Latest member
KenBoat
Back
Top