[mysterio]

You are excellent at ignoring every point of a post that doesn't support your argument.

1. Are you arguing that workers shouldn't get yearly raises if they stay with a company and do a good job? Or should raises only be given to college educated, non-manufacturing workers?

2. Is it ok to shaft the workers and then split up $500 million among 600 executives?

[Ninian Dryhope]

"You are excellent at ignoring every point of a post that doesn't support your argument."

Thank you.

The bottom line is that $27/hour for unskilled work is an artificially high pay rate. The only reason they were getting this pay rate was because the unions were extorting it from the company. Thanks in no small part to such extortion, the company is now bankrupt. They have killed the goose that laid the golden egg. All your caterwauling is not going to bring the goose back to life. Now they will have to deal with reality.

[RFEngineer]

To your points:

1. Workers (should) get pay and/or raises based on their ability to add value. These guys unfortunately have found that they add no value at $27/hr. A rational manager looks at the bottom line for every employee.

2. 600 executives/$500M is part of the problem, but the UAW aren't executives and don't get to decide how that money gets distributed - whether ill-advised or not - and that's the problem with Unions, so worried about what someone else is getting instead of doing their jobs to the benefit of their employer.