• Heratiki@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Playing devil’s advocate but what would be the point in working if you got paid similarly by just striking? A worker’s strike is a gamble and always has been. In this instance the workers do not have the upper hand because demand for domestic made vehicles has plummeted and automation is nearly capable of replacing the workers.

    Another thing I don’t understand is this isn’t unemployment. This is chosen by the worker and the union and so it’s not unemployment but refusal to work.

    • insomniac
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The other side of the argument is how can you get away with exploiting your workers if they have the option of striking comfortably?

      • DeathsEmbrace@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Never forget history too, people died for this shit only for it to become a reality during this time period.

      • Heratiki@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Then what of all those who wouldn’t get unemployment when they’re laid off because a union decided to strike for more favorable conditions.

        I had typed out this HUGE rant about how it would hurt Ford’s bottom line severely to give into the UAW strike demands. So I did some research to help my stance. I was wrong. Year over year, for the past 3 years, Ford Motor has shown an increase of at least 9% gross profit. Ford could very easily afford to cut into some of the more than $24 billion dollar gross profit to give into the 40% raise the UAW are requesting. I’d be willing to bet GM and others involved are in nearly the same boat.

        Edit: That being said their net profit has taken a steep dive in the last few years so I’d assume there is some cooking of the books going on.

        • jasory@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Without looking at the numbers, gross profit is before expenditures, so it’s not like Ford has 24 billion in surplus money.

          “I assume that there is some cooking of the books”

          Or maybe there is stronger competition and profit margins have fallen?

          • Heratiki@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Their net profits have fallen considerably since 2021 but that can be attributed to the chip shortage. I chose gross profit because you take the 40% increase for the 57,000 hourly ford employees making on average $19/hr and you’d end up reducing their gross profit by $900 million. That’s a large amount of money but in general would only be around 25% of their net profit (going off pre COVID numbers) annually. Those same workers would then be able to afford the vehicles they’re building day in and day out. As it stands $19 an hour is just $39,520 a year which means it’s not likely they can afford a new car that they themselves are building.

            Edit: Looks like their heaviest expenditures lately were factory overhauls for redesigned F-150 pickups thus causing their net profit losses.

        • Filthmontane@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          A number that isn’t taken into account is GM spent $3.4 billion in stock buybacks in the last 12 months. They count this as operating expenses even though it only serves to artificially inflate their share prices so they can pay dividends to shareholders. A truly unnecessary expense that could be used for workers.