|
|
Post by machination on Nov 17, 2015 8:46:42 GMT -5
1. if you think this deal creates more tiers, you are either ignorant or lying. Please read pages 210A-212A and then see who is ignorant. I mean that in the best possible way. Lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified. These people are Ford workers in a Ford plant making less money. Aren't those the characteristics of a second tier? Characteristics? Haven't the workers in the parts plants ALWAYS made less than the workers in assembly plants? Welcome to 1950! I'd be ROFL right now if other people's ignorance didn't have the potential to be so destructive. Oh, I almost forgot. I read pages 210A-212A. As per your request, you sir are ignorant. |
|
|
|
Post by Ex-metalman on Nov 17, 2015 10:13:28 GMT -5
We all hired in and it took 3 yrs to reach top pay?Dont understand the different contact thing?1995,1999 were contract years and it took 3 yrs for top pay during a 4 yr contract? Jesus Christ. 1995 WAS NOT a contract year. They were 3 year contracts back then. 1993, 1996, then with the 1999 one it changed to 4 years, next was 2003, 2007, then 2011, now 2015. I hired in in 1995 at 70% of top pay. Remember how that worked? Of course not people. Too many folks, even back then, never bothered to read their own contract book and just whined about bs that they didn't even make an effort to understand. WE were at 70% pay, which at my hire date was $12.56/hour. Every six months you went up to the next higher 5% slot. The contract expired ONE year after I hired in, and guess what? They continued the same incremental increases for new hires. I got to top pay after 3 years. This is part of the problem, a very big part of the problem. There are some very vocal people on this board who SIMPLY DONT EVEN KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. Sorry. By all means if they renege on the 8 year deal for newer workers in 2019, I WILL vote no on the 2019 agreement. For once your right about the dates..They were 3 year agreements then switched to 4 yr..But my opinion stands 8 yrs is to long and when we hired in or reached top pay THERE WASNT ANY TIER SHIT..NO |
|
|
|
Post by Fordsux on Nov 17, 2015 10:36:25 GMT -5
Talk about getting off the subject where's the vote totals
|
|
|
|
Post by lap65 on Nov 17, 2015 10:42:37 GMT -5
Talk about getting off the subject where's the vote totals We won't get any more till tonight or tomorrow, no one voted yesterday |
|
|
|
Post by entitlednewhire on Nov 17, 2015 10:53:03 GMT -5
got my no vote...
|
|
|
|
Post by ScottR@KTP on Nov 17, 2015 15:23:18 GMT -5
We all hired in and it took 3 yrs to reach top pay?Dont understand the different contact thing?1995,1999 were contract years and it took 3 yrs for top pay during a 4 yr contract? It was 18 months when I hired in... Became 3 years after that... 8 years is ridiculous. |
|
|
|
Post by Ex-metalman on Nov 17, 2015 15:31:14 GMT -5
We all hired in and it took 3 yrs to reach top pay?Dont understand the different contact thing?1995,1999 were contract years and it took 3 yrs for top pay during a 4 yr contract? It was 18 months when I hired in... Became 3 years after that... 8 years is ridiculous. I know I made a mistake..I do remember when the contracts went from 3 to 4 year deals...Mach set me straight..lol..Yea it's almost unbelievable,?But hey I'm at top pay I shouldn't even care about how long it takes a person right?Or wrong?Which is the union way I wonder?You get a deer? |
|
|
|
Post by ScottR@KTP on Nov 17, 2015 15:32:32 GMT -5
I was only referring to time to reach full pay... Hopefully mach won't respond and say I'm wrong.  |
|
|
|
Post by Ex-metalman on Nov 17, 2015 15:33:45 GMT -5
I was only referring to time to reach full pay... Hopefully mach won't respond and say I'm wrong. He will..lol |
|
|
|
Post by entitlednewhire on Nov 17, 2015 15:35:50 GMT -5
ty for giving a shit i know alot of people who dont....
|
|
|
|
Post by machination on Nov 17, 2015 15:43:52 GMT -5
I was only referring to time to reach full pay... Hopefully mach won't respond and say I'm wrong. He will..lol Scott you are absolutely correct. The 18 month time frame increased to 3 years starting with the 1993 contract, so anyone hiring in prior to the ratification of the 1993 contract got to top pay in 18 months. I hired in in 1995 and got to top pay in 3 years. And I couldn't agree more that the 8 year time-frame is absolute bullshit. I very, very much hope that 4 years from now the union will be able to get that time frame lowered so these folks don't have to wait 4 more years. This is a possibility. And if the 2019 contract tries to stop the in-progression people where they are, effectively preventing them from reaching top pay, as some people fear, I will NOT vote for it. |
|
|
|
Post by entitlednewhire on Nov 17, 2015 16:03:49 GMT -5
we are just some dumbfuck dropouts that dont deserve a raise.....if you agree with that vote yes
|
|
|
|
Post by machination on Nov 17, 2015 16:31:43 GMT -5
we are just some dumbfuck dropouts that dont deserve a raise.....if you agree with that vote yes That's a real bullshit assessment, sorry. And I'm pretty sure you are going to get a raise... |
|
|
|
Post by justaworker on Nov 17, 2015 16:57:30 GMT -5
we are just some dumbfuck dropouts that dont deserve a raise.....if you agree with that vote yes That's a real bullshit assessment, sorry. And I'm pretty sure you are going to get a raise... you would have to be a dumbass high school dropout to not understand that your pay increasing almost $10 per hour over five years is a raise. |
|
|
|
Post by ragtop69 on Nov 17, 2015 17:37:42 GMT -5
Just curious, what plants are voting today?
|
|
|
|
Post by ibossjekler on Nov 17, 2015 18:13:41 GMT -5
Please read pages 210A-212A and then see who is ignorant. I mean that in the best possible way. Lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified. These people are Ford workers in a Ford plant making less money. Aren't those the characteristics of a second tier? Characteristics? Haven't the workers in the parts plants ALWAYS made less than the workers in assembly plants? Welcome to 1950! I'd be ROFL right now if other people's ignorance didn't have the potential to be so destructive. Oh, I almost forgot. I read pages 210A-212A. As per your request, you sir are ignorant. That is BS because over 60% of people at Sterling axle make full tier 1 wages, that is because they are Ford workers and everyone used to vote on the same raises for everyone because they knew what solidarity meant. |
|
|
|
Post by trim4life on Nov 17, 2015 18:47:28 GMT -5
It's awesome at the amount of union brother's and sister's voting today at both plants.
|
|
|
|
Post by raws2ktp on Nov 18, 2015 0:34:17 GMT -5
I worked in a parts plant in the 90s and made the same as those in assembly plants. I'm not sure how it was in the 50s though...
Maybe shed some light on why you believe 210A-212A doesn't create another tier.
|
|
|
|
Post by mazroth on Nov 18, 2015 18:08:11 GMT -5
I realize all the concessions aren't coming back, what I proposed isn't even close to all of them, I was just thinking out loud. As far as the 8 year thing, it isnt as much it happening after the 2nd contract that bothers me as it is just the fact that I think they should do it sooner, the sooner we're all in the same boat, the stronger we become. i totally, 100% agree. i really wish it was sooner than 8 years. but, just them being on the path to traditional wages means that when making long term contract decisions we are essentially equal. We are not equal...and even under this contract, there is two tiers. I have concerns for my pension. And tier 2 employees are different in this area. Until we both get a pension, there is still two tiers. |
|
|
|
Post by justaworker on Nov 18, 2015 18:15:10 GMT -5
i totally, 100% agree. i really wish it was sooner than 8 years. but, just them being on the path to traditional wages means that when making long term contract decisions we are essentially equal. We are not equal...and even under this contract, there is two tiers. I have concerns for my pension. And tier 2 employees are different in this area. Until we both get a pension, there is still two tiers. Pensions are over. And, their 401k deal is better than our pension. Would you like for me to explain that to you? |
|
|
|
Post by ibossjekler on Nov 18, 2015 19:06:02 GMT -5
We are not equal...and even under this contract, there is two tiers. I have concerns for my pension. And tier 2 employees are different in this area. Until we both get a pension, there is still two tiers. Pensions are over. And, their 401k deal is better than our pension. Would you like for me to explain that to you? 401k is not always better than a pension. A pension is funded by the company and can show you a set amount that will be paid out to you. A 401k is 100% dependent on the stock market,alot of people lost a lot of money in their 401k because of the recession. Did you lose half of your pension payout amount because of the recession? |
|
|
|
Post by blackbird66 on Nov 18, 2015 19:13:37 GMT -5
We are not equal...and even under this contract, there is two tiers. I have concerns for my pension. And tier 2 employees are different in this area. Until we both get a pension, there is still two tiers. Pensions are over. And, their 401k deal is better than our pension. Would you like for me to explain that to you? Sorry to but in, but I'd love to know how a non insured gamble like a 401k is better than an actual pension. As I understand the company invest money to fund the pension. How well those investments do determine how much the company pays out of profit toward my pension check. In a 401k I invest money, that I may, or may not make money on. If Fords investments go sour, they're still obligated to pay a pre determined benefit. If my investments go sour, then I'm just SOL. What am I missing? |
|
|
|
Post by blackbird66 on Nov 18, 2015 19:53:34 GMT -5
Also
It seems to me if making more money investing your self is so easy, and a simple majority of us have the ability to perform so well on our investments then why would a company as big as FoMoCo want to unload that onto us so badly? Is not the reason that our pension benefits are so expensive due to the fact that the "pros" have after all these decades proven that such investing is not paying off so well?
|
|
|
|
Post by justaworker on Nov 18, 2015 20:03:21 GMT -5
Glad to contribute. I am going to use really conservative numbers so that you all can't accuse me of manipulating it in that way.
Let's start with our pension, lets assume $3,500 per month. Some will get more, some less. But 35 is a fair estimate. Of course, that's minus social security. So in my case, Ford should pay out $1,800 and ssa will give me $1,700. If we can somewhat agree on that, let's move on to our newer people.
They get 6.4% contributed + 1per hour (up to 40). Assuming an average pay of just $25 per hour over 30 years, and never working any overtime, and using an average gain of 8% per year (that's a very low rate)... After 30 years they have $612,000 of ford's money. At that point, they take out 10% per year and live off $61,000 per year, plus still have the $1,800 per month ssi check. That $612,000 continues to earn interest and rebuild itself while you are taking it out. Then, you die and since that money is yours your family gets it.
It's an absolute no brainer.
|
|
|
|
Post by justaworker on Nov 18, 2015 20:14:36 GMT -5
Also It seems to me if making more money investing your self is so easy, and a simple majority of us have the ability to perform so well on our investments then why would a company as big as FoMoCo want to unload that onto us so badly? Is not the reason that our pension benefits are so expensive due to the fact that the "pros" have after all these decades proven that such investing is not paying off so well? Because corporations and investors don't want to deal with long term legacy costs. When you're done with them, they want to be done with you. We've seen them shed retiree health care, and within the next few years they will try to buy out the pensions of those of us currently working. |
|
|
|
Post by ibossjekler on Nov 18, 2015 20:32:46 GMT -5
Glad to contribute. I am going to use really conservative numbers so that you all can't accuse me of manipulating it in that way. Let's start with our pension, lets assume $3,500 per month. Some will get more, some less. But 35 is a fair estimate. Of course, that's minus social security. So in my case, Ford should pay out $1,800 and ssa will give me $1,700. If we can somewhat agree on that, let's move on to our newer people. They get 6.4% contributed + 1per hour (up to 40). Assuming an average pay of just $25 per hour over 30 years, and never working any overtime, and using an average gain of 8% per year (that's a very low rate)... After 30 years they have $612,000 of ford's money. At that point, they take out 10% per year and live off $61,000 per year, plus still have the $1,800 per month ssi check. That $612,000 continues to earn interest and rebuild itself while you are taking it out. Then, you die and since that money is yours your family gets it. It's an absolute no brainer. And like in 2008 when the stock market just about crashed and your 600,000 becomes 300,000 cut that pay in half. This happened to alot of people. Just about the whole nation actually. That is the reason a lot of people that were supposed to retire did not because they had their retirement in a 401k. This also left people in jobs that should have gone to new hires. This is one of the big reasons for job shortages even now. The pensions are still obligated to pay out the same amount that you were promised. |
|
|
|
Post by justaworker on Nov 18, 2015 20:43:19 GMT -5
It fell in 2008,rebounded nicely don't you think? I tell you want, give me your money that ford contributes, and I will give you my pension.
|
|
|
|
Post by thisplacesux on Nov 18, 2015 20:48:09 GMT -5
Rebounded into a great big bond bubble. When it pops this time (and it will) it'll hurt 10x worse. Hope everyone is prepared. That's why I'm trying to get mine RIGHT NOW!!! not 4-8 years down the road. This may be a 3rd world country by then!
|
|
|
|
Post by justaworker on Nov 18, 2015 20:59:54 GMT -5
If it gets that bad, then ford goes under. Then where is our pension??? We can speculate all we want, but it's just math.
|
|
|
|
Post by blackbird66 on Nov 18, 2015 21:14:25 GMT -5
Glad to contribute. I am going to use really conservative numbers so that you all can't accuse me of manipulating it in that way. Let's start with our pension, lets assume $3,500 per month. Some will get more, some less. But 35 is a fair estimate. Of course, that's minus social security. So in my case, Ford should pay out $1,800 and ssa will give me $1,700. If we can somewhat agree on that, let's move on to our newer people. They get 6.4% contributed + 1per hour (up to 40). Assuming an average pay of just $25 per hour over 30 years, and never working any overtime, and using an average gain of 8% per year (that's a very low rate)... After 30 years they have $612,000 of ford's money. At that point, they take out 10% per year and live off $61,000 per year, plus still have the $1,800 per month ssi check. That $612,000 continues to earn interest and rebuild itself while you are taking it out. Then, you die and since that money is yours your family gets it. It's an absolute no brainer. I see problems with that, but time won't allow me to elaborate on this post, however I have not earned an average of 8% over the last 20 years in my TESPHE. Not saying some don't, but if it's that easy then why wouldn't ford just follow the scenario you gave, and reap the rewards? Now 612,000 in 30 years will be considerably less than today. My pension is based off my salary t the time I retire and not what I was paid 30 years ago. If you put a % in over the life of employment then that will raise as your salary goes up, but that just shows that the basic example you cited is not that basic. Pensions are past because historically the investments have not produced the returns needed to fund them. Ford wants to unload the expense. If your investments don't pan out, then you have know one to pass the cost on to. One is a sure thing The other is a gamble |
|
