Jason

Ok, so first off I had a bad day and am in a bad mood. Second, my first hand experience with unions has not been good at all. It was enough that I went above the stewards at my center to file a complaint. I think they had their place, but after seeing how far they have gone, and the self centered thought that the union stewards have in our area make think they are no longer needed in 99% of the cases.


Now onto the subject from my understanding, which may be limited and wrong, if so feel free to enlighten me.

A franchise is something a person buys. They buy a right to sell a product. They pay a fee up front and there is usually a monthly to yearly due. The yearly dues help pay for advertising, and help generate money for the parent company. The only cost the parent company has to pay for is the accountants/book keepers to keep track of inventory and dues from the franchise.

Unions. Again, this is a skewed view, from working in one. They protect the lazy, and the poor me types. They demand high wages and benefits for jobs that require very little education. Their main job seems to be cause the company hardship. They may say it is to help their fellow "brother" out, but if it causes problems for the company, and they can get money out of it, they will throw their "brother" under the buss.

So now the automakers are saying they are loosing too much money. So the government steps in and gives them a bunch of money. Well they still cannot seem to handle the money properly. Automaker wants to cut wages of its employees. Government steps in and says no, you cannot do that, leave the union alone. Close franchises instead. So instead of cutting the pay of someone who makes double digits for sweeping the floor with (if you are lucky) a high school diploma. So you close a franchise who pays the company dues. The franchise is forced to close. It does not matter if they are successful or not. They can employee 10 employees or 100. All them are now out of work. The parent company no longer gets its money. The reason according to the government: too much competition. Franchises have to compete with each other, and sell the cars for too little profit. (again, drop the union wage, increase the profit) Ok, so now there is less competition to sell a car. So you may make more money on a car. However, you just cut the amount of people who can afford the car. The guy working at McDonalds with 8 kids living in a $300k house collecting government food stamps can no longer to afford a new car few years. Now you are selling less cars. Making less profits. And you are still losing money. Time for another bail out? How long would this cycle last?

Am I wrong in this thought? How can you justify the pay of a union worker? Do you really think they can compete on a global market like this? And before you blame American Auto makers CEO's. Yes they had a part to play in this. They did not adapt. Well, I think Ford did. Ford was said to be on the same level for quality as Toyota. Speaking of Toyota, they were bailed out recently too by Japan. But that is another story, just like the Employee Free Choice Act.

That being said. As I said, its been a long day, and I'm off for another beer.