Congress has authority to regulate interstate commerce.  A company setting wages for its employees does not rightly fall under this authority, notwithstanding the incredible abuse of that clause that the Supreme Court has allowed over the years.

The issue goes directly to the ever increasing socialist mentality and its encroachment on our society.

?

Well comrad  turn in your gear.

If not for the coal mines where would your pappy have worked?

I get it he was forced to be a coal miner.

Once a union is in, it's sole purpose is to perpetuate its own existence.  Every. Single. Employer that's tried to play nice-nice is driven out of business because the bosses have to keep justifying their wages at the expense of workers' dues.  So they concoct ridiculous stories about how much money the company is 'really' making & blow every little incident out of proportion, in order to create a combative working environment.

If I turn a screwdriver as an engineer I can cause a goddam international incident if some hourly fuck spots me, shouting "he's takin' our jerbs!"  Instead, I'm supposed to wait until they find someone who's not already busy, and isn't on their break, to come over and bill an hour's time for a 30 second job.  And I'll probably end up doing it myself anyway, just to make sure it's done right; as long as he's getting paid, Bubba doesn't care.

Unions are best when they are incredibly weak.  Unions were conceived and created by the socialist movement (then called the Progressive movement) and are a staple of leftist bureaucracy.  They have been continuously managed & directed by leftist interests, even to the extreme of being international communist fronts.

Even in the olden days of isolated company towns, striking was a very poor way to accomplish what was needed.  It was a half-step removed from simply rioting & killing the owners.  Today, we have easy & cheap transport and effortless communication; no one is getting away with paying in company script, or paying half the going rate, or chaining workers to the radiator.  It's over.  The only purpose of unions now is to negotiate raises, and when you are paying a couple percent in wages a year to a group of leftist political hacks, in the hopes they squeeze another couple percent above *that* from your employer...you're just being greedy.  Willing to pay 3% in dues for a 6% wage instead of a 3% raise (or just applying for new jobs periodically to get a much larger bump), without any regard for the fact that extra 3% has to come from somewhere.  But the union boss tells me "they're hiding all sorts of profits from you guys; you gotta let me ask for more!"

They work for and support a money mill for the democratic party. There's no churching that up.

Who are we to decide how much management is allowed to make?  Anyone who wants to be management is free to start their own company.  Most won't, but will continue bitching about "the man" keeping them down while "the man" provides them with a job by doing what they are either unwilling or unable to do themselves.

<---- Not management because I don't want to deal with the headaches.

No, that arrangement was part of the scam.  The magic beans stock shares were requested so cash would be available to...the union Democrat pass-through.  At the time, I remember analysts saying it was basically the government brokering a partial default just so the union wouldn't have to sacrifice along with all the creditors.  The union which had largely contributed to the cashflow problem and crushing bureaucracy of GM in the first place.

Thank you, I will put this to good use.

I was referencing Article 1, Section 8 listing the 35 enumerated powers.

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

As I said, I'm no Constitutional scholar but would not the labor practices of a company engaged in selling vehicles in all 50 states and the US Territories qualify as engaging in interstate commerce?

I'm not trying to be a smart ass...I just don't know the answer.

I’m not going to look up the reg or cases but Obama changed the NLRB regs.

Here from NLRB regarding unionized workers “right to strike:”
https://www.nlrb.gov/strikes

And here, from one of many labor law sites you can find by googling “firing striking union employees:”
Sec. 7. [§ 157.] Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and shall also have the right to refrain from any or all of such activities except to the extent that such right may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment as authorized in section 8(a)(3) [section 158(a)(3) of this title].

UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES

Sec. 8. [§ 158.] (a) [Unfair labor practices by employer] It shall be an unfair labor practice for an employer--

(1) to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in section 7 [section 157 of this title];

——————————————

Striking, if organized properly, falls under sections 7's “concerted, protected activity” clause of section 7 — and in section 8(1), the employer will be committing an unfair labor practice if they interfere with the rights guaranteed in section 7

So, if they fired workers en masse, they would be committing an unfair labor practice, which is against what is permissible according to the NLRA.

I support policemen and women, but not necessarily police unions.

Then do it.  Quit making excuses and go out and earn more money.

You might make $15/hr at Walmart.  Eventually.   Your benefits will suck, your hours will suck, and your retirement will suck.  And, unlike the cushy job at GM, Walmart can fire your ass at a moments notice, for any reason.

Federal law and regs trump state law. If a company in a right to work state is unionized even non union employees can be forced to pay union dues, and to be represented by a union.

Only the actual selling across state lines is interstate commerce.  Employing people to build cars is not itself interstate commerce regardless of where the cars eventually get shipped.  Once we depart from defining interstate commerce as only the actual transactions that cross state lines we open the door to allowing Congress to regulate anything it pleases, since everything we do can have some indirect impact on interstate commerce.  Hence the idiotic Supreme Court ruling that a farmer growing grain to feed to his own livestock was subject to federal restrictions because by growing his own grain, he didn't have to buy it on the interstate market and therefore influenced prices on that market.  That clearly was not the intent of the people who wrote the constitution.  By giving the Congress authority over commerce among the several states, the writers of the constitution intended to prevent states from engaging in trade wars with each other by levying tarrifs on each other's goods or banning them outright.  Those kinds of things had been going on under the Articles of Confederation and were weakening the nation as a whole.

GM was chosen by the UAW this time around (and has been in the past too) to be the UAW whipping boy.

Read up on unionizing a company. The short version is the union can lie and cheat and the company’s hands are tied.

Not fire them...   Lock them out.   Two different situations.

Cat didn't fire all the striking workers, it replaced them with temp labor and management.  Totally legal, even under Obama's administration.  The strike went on and off for 9 years .

It offered positions back to anybody willing to cross the picket line.   Totally legal.

Anybody left after 9 years got to come back under the new contract which fucked the UAW over.   They signed the contract, because there was nobody left to support the strike.

They are indefinite. Ending only when the company goes belly up, is able to decertify a union via vote or an agreement is reached. [So long as the strike is “lawful.” Read the previously posted citation to labor striking rights for a definition of a lawful strike]

A little Wobblies anybody?

His job would have been automated but for union negotiated work “rules.”

Thank you.

The 60 day notice is to close a factory or the whole company.

Now you did it. Think of all the grievances and appeals Attached File
when someone is warned, and the chaos when they go on strike!

That's not the half of it. Both the Teamsters and Bakers Unions were striking at Hostess.
The Teamsters sat down with to negotiate with Hostess and gave Hostess their demands. Hostess told them the company was serious trouble and couldn't meet their demands. Teamsters called bullshit but Hostess showed them books. Teamsters called off their strike.
The Teamsters tried to tell the Bakers that Hostess was in trouble. Bakers refused to end their strike and work with the Company to save jobs.
Hostess shut down, Bakers had struck a knife in their "union brother's" back. They joined them on unemployment line but those baker sure did show those fatcats at Hostess.

Of course, the heads of Unions never lost any sleep over their "brothers and sisters " being on unemployment, but they never do.

Yea, that’s a real alternative, right?

I wonder how much Wagoner earned when he destroyed the largest company in the world?

That’s the federal gov’t and unions!

“Lawfully” striking employees, as defined by NRLB, have a right to be re-hired under NLRB regulations.

GM cannot fire strikers.

GM cannot dump the union. Only a vote of employees in unionized positions can decertify a union.

A distant relative worked at a GM parts distribution center.  My dad and grandmother both told stories of her complaining prior to a strike at her plant in the late 1980s.  Her complaint, you ask?  She only made $16/hour to tape boxes shut.. Literally her only job was to run a tape gun over a box that someone else packed, someone else pushed down the belt, and someone else would take from her and load on to a truck.  That $16/hour did not include her benefits.  This was when minimum wage was $3.35/hour.  I don't want to know what a union box taper makes these days.

Back in the 1920s my gramps built oil derricks in Texas and New Mexico. He was strongly against his small company being unionized. He was attacked on a train by 3 or 4 Wobblies when they figured out who he was. In the ensuing struggle he dumped one of them out a door in between the cars onto the tracks where he was run over by the train. Supposedly the others backed off after that. Fuck the Wobblies.

Yes, shutting down a refinery or a mine or a chemical plant is easy to do. Just turn the switch off, call in a few uhauls, and move. Duh.

*LIKE*

There was a post awhile back that pointed out the pay disparities. GM pays about $15/hr more in total compensation than the average for foreign owned companies US plants.

Because unions suck and cost businesses way to much money.  People in unions think they are necessary because they don't want to compete for a job.
Plenty of people in non union positions make plenty of money because they are motivated to do a good job because if they don't, they get fired. Businesses aren't in business to give people jobs. Jobs are a side effect of running a business.  
People in unions especially the UAW need to realize, GM could just move shop to China or India completely and then everyone is out of a job.
Or they can just close up factories in Union areas and open more places in right to work states and simply fire anyone that tries to unionize.  All the while, they'll just automate more.  
UAW people do simple repetitive tasks that anyone can be trained to do.  The only people in the whole operation that could be considered Craftsmen would be the ones that hand build engines for specialty vehicles.

The hell you say. The company can lock them out, hire replacements and then go before the NLRB an show they negotiated in good faith. If the NLRB rules in the company's favor the replacements can become permanent. Union be Gone

ETA; not likely to happen in Michigan but it happened in Tennessee

The only person here that said anything about firing strikers is you.

They have a contact, it will expire at a set date. They don't have to sign it again.

It has been done many times (especially in my industry).

Not quite. As I wrote, federal laws and regs trump state laws.

Unions under NLRB regs can for e non-union employees working for unionized companies in “union positions” to pay union dues. The non-union employee can seek reimbursement for the portion of dues attributed to political activity by the union, but not for that portion attributable to collective bargaining expenses. The union gets to do the expense breakdown....

If they were smart they'd get rid of the union asap.

You are missing the benefits. Average GM hourly pay is $63/hr including benefits.

If any of the company’s product are sold interstate, or raw materials bought interstate... let alone international sales or purchases...

And all the union people who don't build anything but the "dues' keep them in nice houses and cars.
Wich brings the price of goods. Maybe a car higher for me and you.

We pay more to support people who don't do shit
To make the product.

UAW has stated openly that they are striking for "a bigger slice of the pie".  They also threw in "seniority for temporary employees", in order to gain their support since GM has taken to using a shitload of them.

Fuck them.

I dunno about GM, but BMW rotates their line workers every 2hr to a different station so their work doesn’t get repetitive.

Let’s face facts, the Union wants more workers paid more so the Union can get more members and more money... If they were complaining about shit work conditions, I would agree. They are also using this to force Ford and Fiat in the future.

Unions were good when the work conditions were shit and the companies took advantage of their workers, we have laws in regards to those... Unions are just greedy interest groups that in many cases let employees get away with shit they should be reprimanded for. How much does the heads of these unions get paid vs. their members?

What a rip off for primitive basic labor.

GM should invest more in automation.

As someone else posted, this is much more akin to cutting someone's femoral artery, then holding a gun to their head and negotiating a price for the tourniquet.  It's bullying and hostage taking of the worst kind.  Nothing even close to "negotiation in good faith".

Probably 16.87

The job must be really easy (and thus low value) if they can just keep pulling in new people off the street and plugging them in.

Sounds like the job has the right price tag attached to it.

When they have trouble coming up with people to do the work, they will raise the wage.  It's what happens in a free market.