• derf82@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    117
    ·
    10 months ago

    For anyone that wants to say 21% is a ton, remember this is over the 4 year contract. This is the equivalent of 5% a year. Also, the last 3 years alone, there has been 18% inflation, and the last contract just didn’t keep up with that.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      65
      ·
      10 months ago

      This trend of news outlets reporting multi year raises as just “x%” is infuriating and very good manipulation on the part of the CEOs. They know most people won’t read on to see the difference.

      • TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        10 months ago

        It’s not a trend. It’s a calculated tactic to split the ignorant people who dont pay attention from the working class who do. They hear “21% raise?! I’d give my left nut for that! Fuck these greedy fucks!” and not realize it’s over the life of the contract.

    • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      10 months ago

      And IIRC this is after making a bunch of concessions during the previous contract negotiation where they forgoed pay raises which was only supposed to be a temporary measure. This was nearly a decade ago.

      • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        When the automakers were facing bankruptcy. The unions just want back the benefits they had before.

        • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          10 months ago

          Yep it seems like when times are tough, these companies want to claw back whatever money they can. When times are good, these companies want to claw back whatever money they can.

        • snooggums@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          10 months ago

          And they aren’t even asking to have the companies make up for all that they lost either, just getting back on track.

  • RapidcreekOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    73
    ·
    10 months ago

    "United Auto Workers president Shawn Fain said Sunday that the union is rejecting an offer from one of the Big Three automakers for a 21% wage increase as autoworkers for Ford, General Motors and Chrysler parent company Stellantis went on strike Friday,” CBS News reports.

    "The union has asked for 40% pay increases to match the average pay increases of the CEOs1

    For context - the 21% number would not be any immediate raise - it would be cumulative over a 3+ year period.And it would come after an extended period when wages have fallen behind living costs, and after the UAW gave up wages and benefits to keep Detroit afloat when it was struggling.

    The story quotes Fain with this: "“First off, labor costs are about 5% of the cost of the vehicle. They could double our wages and not raise the price of the vehicles and still make billions in profits. It’s a choice. And the fact that they want to compare it to how pitiful Tesla pays their workers and other companies pay their workers — that’s what this whole argument is about. Workers in this country got to decide if they want a better life for themselves, instead of scraping to get by paycheck to paycheck, while everybody else walks away with the loot.”

  • Sentient Loom@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    10 months ago

    I almost commented by saying that a 21% pay increase is HUGE. Then I read the article and found the 40% pay increase for CEOs. That’s so fucking insane.

    • treefrog@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      10 months ago

      CEO wages aside.

      21% barely matches current inflation and this increase would be over multiple years. During this period, inflation should go up, unless we hit a major recession.

      In other words, 21% isn’t even a raise in actual spending power compared to pre-pandemic wages.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      10 months ago

      It’s intentional phrasing to get the initial reaction you had. Most people will not continue reading.

  • phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    10 months ago

    “over 4 years”. That is a tiny tiny super important detail to leave out as that number barely matches current inflation

  • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    10 months ago

    Can we edit titles to better reflect the info or is it strictly to match the article? 5.25% raises per year is definitely different than a “21% pay hike”.

  • sin_free_for_00_days@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    10 months ago

    I remember when I worked for a Union and our members were a little split on the 8% raise we were offered. I reminded them that over the terms of the last contract, inflation had risen over 10% and that 8% was still a pay cut.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    10 months ago

    The UAW holds all the cards here. They can’t make new cars without a trained labor force and they don’t have the time or the money to train a new one. So the auto industry might think about playing ball.

  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’m skeptical of his so-called “stand-up strike” model, but when he says things like this I start having hope again. Hell yes!