Auto Strike

[james t kirk]

Huh? My understanding is that Toyota/Honda provide just as much as GM to keep the unions out. Not the other way around.

Pretty much.

The Japanese plants don't have a pension plan though (if my understanding is correct). I've been told that they set up each employee with an RRSP account that they contribute to (as does the employee). It's the one big difference.

One thing I do know that no company today wants to be on the hook for a pension that they could end up paying a guy every month for for 40 years. They'd rather just go the RRSP route and if you chew through the money, too bad for you.

Most bigger companies are operating this way today. Too much "obligation" otherwise.

 

[james t kirk]

I've read that Canadian auto plants (Oshawa for example) are just as efficient as US plants. It's the subsidies that US states pay that makes them more attractive (but which, in turn, is offset by Canadian universal health care that reduces employer costs).

According to my engineering buddy at Ford, the Ford plant here in Ontario is one of THEE most efficient plants that Ford has.

The problem isn't efficiency, it's just the sheer cost of doing business in Canada where the entire supply chain and distribution chain costs MORE than in the USA. Gasoline costs more, minimum wage is more, cost of living is more, taxes are more, everything is MORE in Canada. The end result is that the Canadian plants, despite having a good workforce (according to my friend, in the USA, they have to use pictograms to train workers how to assemble cars because people simply can't read) and efficient plants, it's still way more expensive to produce cars in Canada.

But then again, we pay about 25% more for cars than Americans do.

 

[FAST]

Pretty much.

The Japanese plants don't have a pension plan though (if my understanding is correct). I've been told that they set up each employee with an RRSP account that they contribute to (as does the employee). It's the one big difference.

One thing I do know that no company today wants to be on the hook for a pension that they could end up paying a guy every month for for 40 years. They'd rather just go the RRSP route and if you chew through the money, too bad for you.

Most bigger companies are operating this way today. Too much "obligation" otherwise.

The GM union pension plan, was pretty much the sole cause of the GM bankruptcy, more people on the pension, than actual workers.

But if you have the unrealistic concept of,..."too big to fail,...no demands too big",...guess what.

FAST

 

[SkyRider]

One thing I do know that no company today wants to be on the hook for a pension that they could end up paying a guy every month for for 40 years. They'd rather just go the RRSP route and if you chew through the money, too bad for you.

I spoke to a senior partner at a "Big 6" accounting firm a few years ago. They financially assist staff employees in contributions to their RRSP. They also made the assumptions that accountants should be able to properly manage their money.

The partners do not have a pension plan. The assumption is that they earn enough during their active years to provide their own retirement funds. HOWEVER, he said that the firm does maintain a "slush fund" in case a former partner needs financial help. The optics is not good when former senior partner John Doe is seen on the corner of Bay/King begging for spare change.

Ok, back to our struggling auto and postal workers.

The Japanese plants may be current cost competitive but they are not burdened with the legacy costs of keeping retired workers in the style to which they have been accustomed.

It's the same legacy costs that prevented Air Canada from being able to compete with startup Westjet.

 

[Ref]

EI have spent quite a bit of time in both unionized, and none union, big difference, and attitude.FAST

Huge difference. Being able to weed out bad attitudes and having the ability to promote on performance have a dramatic impact on running a business.

 

[Ref]

I've been told that they set up each employee with an RRSP account that they contribute to (as does the employee). It's the one big difference.

One thing I do know that no company today wants to be on the hook for a pension that they could end up paying a guy every month for for 40 years. They'd rather just go the RRSP route and if you chew through the money, too bad for you.

Most bigger companies are operating this way today. Too much "obligation" otherwise.

I currently work at a company that has a DB and a DC plan.

Aside from the challenges of the DB plan mentioned by Kirk, at my organization there is a difference in the performance of workers in the DB plan. A lot of them are lifers and do just enough to keep from getting fired. They are not looking for positions outside the company simply because the pension plan is too rich to give up. Personally, you cannot blame someone in that position, we all look out for # 1, but their motivation and attitude can be challenging from a management perspective. The problem they face if they are let go is being able to thrive in an environment where effort is required. It is difficult for a lot of people to change their work effort/ethic after years of being complacent.

Retirement and pensions are a tough subject for many people to discuss or even plan for. Hell, even I should be doing more, but how much do you sacrifice in enjoying today for retirement tomorrow?

At least with an RPP or an RRSP plan you force the employee to take some responsibility and accountability towards their retirement.

 

[fuji]

Companies shouldn't be allowed to manage their own pensions. They should be managed by independent financial companies that are subject to capital controls to ensure the pensions remain solvent

This would also allow employees to take their pension from one employer to another.

These independent pensions could be DB, DC, or just RRSPs. Whatever form they take it's better if the employer isn't managing it

 

[FAST]

Companies shouldn't be allowed to manage their own pensions. They should be managed by independent financial companies that are subject to capital controls to ensure the pensions remain solvent

This would also allow employees to take their pension from one employer to another.

These independent pensions could be DB, DC, or just RRSPs. Whatever form they take it's better if the employer isn't managing it

It has NOTHING to do with,..."Companies shouldn't be allowed to manage their own pensions".

Unions demanded that their employer be responsible for every union members retirement..

So if you want it changed, talk to the unions, both private, and public, everybody would be happy, except the unions of coarse.

FAST

 

[Ref]

Companies shouldn't be allowed to manage their own pensions. They should be managed by independent financial companies that are subject to capital controls to ensure the pensions remain solvent

This would also allow employees to take their pension from one employer to another.

These independent pensions could be DB, DC, or just RRSPs. Whatever form they take it's better if the employer isn't managing it

LOL!!!

Do a little research on the topic and then comment on your own thread.

 

[fuji]

LOL!!!

Do a little research on the topic and then comment on your own thread.

Hopefully you work for a company with a secure future. Like a department store, travel agency, or book store. That way you can rest easy knowing your pension will be there for you in thirty years.

What could go wrong?

 

[james t kirk]

At my previous employ (massive corporation), our group benefits including an rrsp was all through SunLife.

I was not impressed at all with Sun life for their RRSP. It was basically they offer you several of your mutual funds to pick from for your money and that was it. There was absolutely no guidance or advice or a human being to talk to. Everything was done self directed and on line. You never could figure out how the investment was performing because the balance may have been going up, but you were also contributing so who knew if the balance was going up because of the fund performing or your contribution.

Only when I left massive corporation could I pull my money out of SunLife and then they phoned me. First and only time.

The one thing you need to be mindful of with these companies like Sun Life and Manu Life that offer this kind of thing is that there is always the possibility that they go broke and your money is gone. Not to be discounted.

 

[SkyRider]

The one thing you need to be mindful of with these companies like Sun Life and Manu Life that offer this kind of thing is that there is always the possibility that they go broke and your money is gone.

Isn't your RRSP money segregated?

Query: Did any clients lose their money when Confederation Life went broke?

 

[bazokajoe]

Basically people need to cover their own ass.Just because you have a DB or DC plan at work you should also be putting money away on your own.Too many people get screwed over when the companies they work for go under or just pick up and move.

 

[FAST]

LOL!!!

Do a little research on the topic and then comment on your own thread.

Yep, pretty much dead on, but we are used to this here.

FAST

 

[SkyRider]

Too many people get screwed over when the companies they work for go under or just pick up and move.

I think retirees at GM and NORTEL took a haircut on their DB pensions.

 

[261252]

They might try concessions to keep plants in Canada.

I know someone who is a auto worker with a lot of seniority and he makes six figures with overtime and does fuck all as a shipper. He brags about a bottle in his office and is fat lazy know it all who just bought a racehorse. I worked at the racetrack as a groom as a summer job and he asked me for advice and I strongly advised him against it but he is too know it all to listen and went down to the Little Brown Jug and bought a horse in a claim race. He showed me the pedigree and asked me what I thought. I thought the question was a little too late to ask.

 

[dirkd101]

Yeah, I think this will just hasten GM's departure from Canada. GM will probably re-locate to Mexico.

I tend to agree with this line of thinking.

 

[rhuarc29]

The results in favour of a strike were 99 per cent among workers at Fiat Chrysler, 98.9 per cent at Ford and 97.1 per cent at GM, Unifor said Sunday.

Uh, anyone else find those figures highly suspicious? You don't get that kind of support for anything! Sounds like coercion, as in you-will-be-forced-from-the-union-unless-you-follow-our-directive-and-strike kind of coercion.

 

[rhuarc29]

Companies shouldn't be allowed to manage their own pensions. They should be managed by independent financial companies that are subject to capital controls to ensure the pensions remain solvent

If it's a mandatory pension plan, then yes, agreed.

If only our governments had independent financial companies keeping them solvent.

 

[t.o.leafs.fan]

Uh, anyone else find those figures highly suspicious? You don't get that kind of support for anything! Sounds like coercion, as in you-will-be-forced-from-the-union-unless-you-follow-our-directive-and-strike kind of coercion.

Those numbers are typical of strike votes. I've never heard of a strike vote that was less than 90%