John Deere strike imminent?

[Althetuna]

Not saying it is strictly a union issue. Just saying the UAW is sticking with what they know, representation and contract negotiations, and leaving benefit administration to people whose area of expertise is in that field.

Understood. The union could easily hire a third party to administer their program but In guessing you're correct and both parties have agreed its more cost efficient to have JD run the program.

Personally, I'd prefer to have my union operate the program.

 

[Althetuna]

Wow, take out UAW dues and they don’t make ****. Workers are getting raw dogged by Deere and the UAW. Sorry, if in the current labor market if these workers are remotely skilled, if UAW is charging dues and getting them $20 an hour, they are a complete failure and completely exploiting these workers.

Take wage rates with a grain of salt. Need to understand if the values given are strictly wages or total package.

 

[jmax71]

Wow, take out UAW dues and they don’t make ****. Workers are getting raw dogged by Deere and the UAW. Sorry, if in the current labor market if these workers are remotely skilled, if UAW is charging dues and getting them $20 an hour, they are a complete failure and completely exploiting these workers.

Tell me what their monthly dues are.

 

[AuH2O]

Tell me what their monthly dues are.

1.44% at 10,000 workers averaging 50,000 per year equals = $7m per year to negotiate a 6 year deal that people think is ridiculous. You can’t say these people are really skilled and being exploited without pointing out the complete failure of the UAW to do their job.

 

[CYEATHAWK]

Thread re: JD and the strike.

EDIT: NM, @Cyched was quicker.

Mr. Jonah "class warfare" Furman. Who gives a F what the CEO is pulling down. They do away with the CEO position that is not in any way going to benefit the production worker. You want to go on strike to bargain for better pay and benefits......fine. But not because of this "get the man" BS.

 

[Turn2]

Mr. Jonah "class warfare" Furman. Who gives a F what the CEO is pulling down. They do away with the CEO position that is not in any way going to benefit the production worker. You want to go on strike to bargain for better pay and benefits......fine. But not because of this "get the man" BS.

This isn't a one off. This is a phenomenon that is on the verge of rocking the country.

 

[jmax71]

1.44% at 10,000 workers averaging 50,000 per year equals = $7m per year to negotiate a 6 year deal that people think is ridiculous. You can’t say these people are really skilled and being exploited without pointing out the complete failure of the UAW to do their job.

I can see by your use of a % that you really don’t know what the dues rates are and you had to rely on projecting out some random figures from a google search in your UAW bashing.
A point of information though: Part of all dues goes into the UAW Strike Fund. While these guys are on strike they will receive a weekly benefit but more importantly the strike fund will pay continuation premiums for their healthcare so that won’t be
disrupted so they aren’t a total failure as you are trying to paint them.

 

[Sigmapolis]

My bad on missing your references on real returns but again I'd like to point out the numbers you are using are an educated guess and nothing more.

You are forgiven. But your unyielding faith in the "full faith and credit" of U.S. bonds is no less an educated guess than mine. Uncle Sam tends to pay his bills and the market tends to have solid returns in the long term. Both of these facts are true and assuming they will remain true is a supposition on your part and my part, as well.

We are using evidence of equal merit.

We can have better outcomes for those on the lower end of the income scale by indexing to retirement income and/or increasing the cap on payroll tax.

Neither of these (means testing or increasing the tax cap) do anything to better investment returns for poor workers forced to participate in the program. It does help the fiscal stability of an underfunded program, yes, but it does nothing to improve the returns or the retirement benefits of the poorest workers out there.

Finally, after a cursory search, I found instances of political influence in the Federal Retirement Thrift and the Canadian Penetion Plans. (See below)

Look I'm not completely close-minded regarding getting more aggressive with SS investment but with the already close relationship between business and goverment, I'm very skeptical about a plan that makes that relationship even closer by having the government directly own 7% (by your calulation) of the 500 largest US based companies.

Any plan would have to include almost complete autonomy from the federal goverment, thorough oversight via Congressional and third party audits, and strict regulatory enforcement.

The Federal Reserve has more or less what you describe (making monetary policy with only minimal influence and oversight from Congress and the executive branch) and has its tendrils extremely deep in our financial system and increasingly in equity markets. The federal government is "in the market" through Railroad Retirement and the retirement system for federal employees, and so are the state pension funds.

Your concerns about the "independence" of the system are fair, but that did not prevent the creation of a slew of precedents like the Fed, existing federal/state pension programs, and those of our international peers. These are problems to manage, but if the Canadians and Japanese can do it, I think we could.

* * *​

I put together a little model giving the Social Security trust fund 2% than historical DJIA returns.

The 2% "penalty" is to account for this being net of the meager but present returns Social Security did return over time and for whatever higher operational costs would come from investing in the market instead of bonds.

It looks like this --



The main conclusions are --

2020 trust fund value without DJIA returns = $2.9 trillion
2020 trust fund value with DJIA returns minus 2% = $8.9 trillion
So we end up with approximately $6 trillion more in balance

That's a little more than 3x what we actually have right now.

The 2020 trust fund as it is has $8,826 per American in it. "Mine" has $27,018.

SS has the following unfunded obligations --



$6.0 trillion puts a nice dent in the $13.2 trillion unfunded through 2092 even before assuming the $6.0 trillion would continue accruing value from the market for the next 70 years. I could prove this mathematically for you if you wanted me to, but just "feeling" it would say my way has the program funded to at least 2100.

The current way is going to go broke in the 2030s or even the late 2020s and lead to some significant and painful tax increases on current workers to pay for the retirement of generally rich and white Boomers.

Love your system as much as you want, but we'd be in a much better spot right now with mine. I can pay what is promised without raising taxes beyond the 12.4% of our incomes already taken away from us.

 

[mramseyISU]

This is not true at all. There are robotics in the welding department but a lot of it is manual. For example the frame is not tack welding. It is done both manually and robotics depending on how deep the weld needs to be and location of the welds. You don’t just let chimps tack weld frames. The integrity of the whole damn machines could be in jeopardy.

This is not the case at the Ankeny plant. The assembly line is very low tech. It looks nothing like what you would see at gm or Ford. It’s straight manual labor. Parts are still hoisted by workers, torques are done by humans, bolts and nuts are done manually. parts are scanned by assemblers and delivered by tug drivers. This is the sprayer line ( one of Deere’s more profitable machine). It’s building 40, the newest building at the John Deere Des Moines Work. Anybody can set up a tour(I don’t recommend right now. Lol) and you’ll see what I’m talking about

I always forget how far behind Des Moines Works is compared to Waterloo and Harvester. Then again a common thing I hear around PEC and TCAO is nobody gives a **** about sprayers. Guess that’s not just on the engineering side of things.

 

[jmax71]

I always forget how far behind Des Moines Works is compared to Waterloo and Harvester. Then again a common thing I hear around PEC and TCAO is nobody gives a **** about sprayers. Guess that’s not just on the engineering side of things.

Those Waterloo guys always have thought they were a cut above the other places because they made tractors. I would put up Sprayer market share and profitability against most product line around the chain.
One more thing: Waterloo and Dubuque guys all say they work at “Deere’s“. The rest of us work at Deere.

 

[mramseyISU]

Th

Those Waterloo guys always have thought they were a cut above the other places because they made tractors. I would put up Sprayer market share and profitability against most product line around the chain.
One more thing: Waterloo and Dubuque guys all say the work at “Deere’s“. The rest of us work at Deere.

I actually did a couple model year sprayer cab programs and have a soft spot for them. I’m always amazed at how good the sprayer guys are at pulling parts out of the catalog for everything except the spraying part to get such a good machine. When we’d wrap up our meetings my counterpart in Des Moines would always close with “Remember sprayers are people too”.

The “Deeres” thing drives me nuts for no rational reason.

 

[Papajets]

You are forgiven. But your unyielding faith in the "full faith and credit" of U.S. bonds is no less an educated guess than mine. Uncle Sam tends to pay his bills and the market tends to have solid returns in the long term. Both of these facts are true and assuming they will remain true is a supposition on your part and my part, as well.

We are using evidence of equal merit.



Neither of these (means testing or increasing the tax cap) do anything to better investment returns for poor workers forced to participate in the program. It does help the fiscal stability of an underfunded program, yes, but it does nothing to improve the returns or the retirement benefits of the poorest workers out there.



The Federal Reserve has more or less what you describe (making monetary policy with only minimal influence and oversight from Congress and the executive branch) and has its tendrils extremely deep in our financial system and increasingly in equity markets. The federal government is "in the market" through Railroad Retirement and the retirement system for federal employees, and so are the state pension funds.

Your concerns about the "independence" of the system are fair, but that did not prevent the creation of a slew of precedents like the Fed, existing federal/state pension programs, and those of our international peers. These are problems to manage, but if the Canadians and Japanese can do it, I think we could.

* * *​

I put together a little model giving the Social Security trust fund 2% than historical DJIA returns.

The 2% "penalty" is to account for this being net of the meager but present returns Social Security did return over time and for whatever higher operational costs would come from investing in the market instead of bonds.

It looks like this --

View attachment 90904

The main conclusions are --

2020 trust fund value without DJIA returns = $2.9 trillion
2020 trust fund value with DJIA returns minus 2% = $8.9 trillion
So we end up with approximately $6 trillion more in balance

That's a little more than 3x what we actually have right now.

The 2020 trust fund as it is has $8,826 per American in it. "Mine" has $27,018.

SS has the following unfunded obligations --

View attachment 90905

$6.0 trillion puts a nice dent in the $13.2 trillion unfunded through 2092 even before assuming the $6.0 trillion would continue accruing value from the market for the next 70 years. I could prove this mathematically for you if you wanted me to, but just "feeling" it would say my way has the program funded to at least 2100.

The current way is going to go broke in the 2030s or even the late 2020s and lead to some significant and painful tax increases on current workers to pay for the retirement of generally rich and white Boomers.

Love your system as much as you want, but we'd be in a much better spot right now with mine. I can pay what is promised without raising taxes beyond the 12.4% of our incomes already taken away from us.

The lack of the general public understanding the "rule of 72" and the power of compounding is astonishing and frankly seems intentional. We are fools for not having the ability to place part of SS in the market.

 

[jmax71]

I actually did a couple model year sprayer cab programs and have a soft spot for them. I’m always amazed at how good the sprayer guys are at pulling parts out of the catalog for everything except the spraying part to get such a good machine. When we’d wrap up our meetings my counterpart in Des Moines would always close with “Remember sprayers are people too”.

The “Deeres” thing drives me nuts for no rational reason.

I loved giving my friends from Waterloo and Dubuque crap about that. It’s just automatic for them.

 

[JP4CY]

I always love the counter of "who cares" by someone who obviously cares.

 

[keepngoal]

Crappy corporations survive because employees keep choosing to work for them. Workers have all the power as a corporation can not make anything without employees.

HC is too big of a chip that corps hold over employees. Remove that chip… real progress in workers “power” emerges. Until then, corps will have he most power.

 

[Sigmapolis]

HC is too big of a chip that corps hold over employees. Remove that chip… real progress in workers “power” emerges. Until then, corps will have he most power.

Unions (who negotiate those "Cadillac plans" for their members) are the main constituency holding us in the employer-based system. They don't want those Cadillac plans to be taxable for their membership.

That is, a class of customers -- unionized workers -- is why the system isn't going anywhere.

Not some sort of vague "the corporations!" notion.

Trust me, if major corporations could clear the cost of ESHI off their books, they'd be tickled pink.

 

[isucy86]

Social Security isn't meant to be an investment, its meant to be insurance. Even if you gave the money to the people to invest, many would choose not to, then be destitute when they retire, which is a drag on the economy and society.

Just raise the SS age, raise the maximum income you pay for it and means test the benefits.

Social Security is insurance because it guarantees income. But it differs from auto, life, disability or many other traditional types of insurance that spread risk.

SS might NOT have been created to be an investment vehicle, but in reality it should be treated as such to be actuarily sound. The government is taking 6.2% of just about every working American's salary and requires employers match 6.2%. Think about it, 12.4% of almost every Americans wages are turned over to the SSA.

Also it is a false argument that in lieu of FICA Taxes, the alternative is to give the money to Americans to invest or spend at will. At a high level there would be 2 options:

• Have the Federal Government actually put FICA taxes in a LOCK BOX. Each person's and their employer's FICA taxes would be placed in that individual's SS account. The individual could then designate their SS monies in Federal Government investments. Those investments could range in risk from US Govt Treasuries to Stock Index Funds. Most people would invest in a blend of stocks & bonds. Americans can easily track their SS account balance and projected monthly retirement income.
• Allow Americans to have their FICA taxes automatically placed in private investment accounts with Schwab, Fidelity, etc. But those monies can only be invested in vehicles approved by the Federal Govt. For example index funds, high grade corporate bonds, high grade government bonds, etc.

It's popular for some politicians to be critical of the stock market, but my bet is 90% of all Congress People have significant investments in the stock market.

 

[Althetuna]

Unions (who negotiate those "Cadillac plans" for their members) are the main constituency holding us in the employer-based system. They don't want those Cadillac plans to be taxable for their membership.

That is, a class of customers -- unionized workers -- is why the system isn't going anywhere.

Not some sort of vague "the corporations!" notion.

Trust me, if major corporations could clear the cost of ESHI off their books, they'd be tickled pink.

No doubt unions prefer their plans but the idea they are holding up major reform of the system isn't correct. Lobbying efforts by the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries dwarf that of organized labor.

Big Pharma, insurers, hospitals team up to kill Medicare for All

A partnership of pharmaceutical, insurance and hospital interests are teaming up to defeat the Medicare for All single-payer health care measure.

www.opensecrets.org

Health Lobbying Profile

$704,966,431 total was spent lobbying in the Health economic sector in 2021. See the details.

www.opensecrets.org

Insurance Lobbying

See lobbying totals by Insurance industries/interest groups for every election cycle from 1998 to 2024, along with top lobbying clients in 2022.

www.opensecrets.org

Labor Lobbying

See lobbying totals by Labor industries/interest groups for every election cycle from 1998 to 2024, along with top lobbying clients in 2022.

www.opensecrets.org

 

[Rabbuk]

HC is too big of a chip that corps hold over employees. Remove that chip… real progress in workers “power” emerges. Until then, corps will have he most power.

Yep the prospect of having a prolonged hospital stay or needing knee surgery or something keeps a ton of people in miserable working conditions. Making healthcare not linked to employment would be the largest step forward for workers in this country since like the very early 1900s.

 

[Sigmapolis]

No doubt unions prefer their plans but the idea they are holding up major reform of the system isn't correct. Lobbying efforts by the healthcare and pharmaceutical industries dwarf that of organized labor.

Big Pharma, insurers, hospitals team up to kill Medicare for All

A partnership of pharmaceutical, insurance and hospital interests are teaming up to defeat the Medicare for All single-payer health care measure.

www.opensecrets.org

Health Lobbying Profile

$704,966,431 total was spent lobbying in the Health economic sector in 2021. See the details.

www.opensecrets.org

Insurance Lobbying

See lobbying totals by Insurance industries/interest groups for every election cycle from 1998 to 2024, along with top lobbying clients in 2022.

www.opensecrets.org

Labor Lobbying

See lobbying totals by Labor industries/interest groups for every election cycle from 1998 to 2024, along with top lobbying clients in 2022.

www.opensecrets.org

I don't disagree with you those sectors are massive on the lobbying front.

What are they lobbying for, though?

Various privileges and sinecures, sure, but is the preservation of the ESI system one of them?

I could see the end of ESI being to their benefit -- selling to individuals instead of to pools of thousands of workers represented through their employers would give the insurance companies more leverage.

One of the big worries when the ACA passed was that employers would "dump" their workers onto the exchanges and pay a relatively small penalty for it. Insurance companies were giddy -- it was their idea! -- because then they'd have more customers buying on individual markets instead of through larger pooled buys.

All of which was great for them. Remember, the insurance companies wrote ACA.