UAW is coming after Rivian

[KingTodd]

I am very leary of the UAW trying to unionize any EV producing auto manufacturer.

The UAW hasn't hidden the fact that they consider EV's a threat. Now EV's aren't a threat, but rather the future for the auto industry, but they require fewer manufacturing workers, and therefore EV"s are a threat to Unions.

How can the UAW want the best for a workforce that makes the products that reduce the number of union members?

Sponsored

 

[MGA]

It seems that after max. 10 years most manufacturing jobs will be under threat of AI powered robots, etc.

 

[teartags]

It seems that after max. 10 years most manufacturing jobs will be under threat of AI powered robots, etc.

And then there will be Robot Unions for everyone to complain about.

 

[dadamb]

How can you make a decision when you dont even know what kind of benefits those that are in normal can get with union negotiations? That just sounds like a biased take since you don't have all the information to compare with.

They cant shut down normal. The Georgia plant will be too busy making the R2 line. As long as Rivian keeps the R1 line intact, the normal factory will stay. They dont have the resources to just build another factory somewhere else just because they dont want the possibility of their employees joining a union. That sounds like a childish response. Makes no sense financially.

So you think the R1’s will be selling enough to keep normal open? Especially when a cheaper version is out? Come on you know better. My last day at rivian was last Friday 11/24/23so it’s not like I don’t know what is going on there. I worked under the UAW at cat and they are worthless. Keep the lazy people lazy and employed, milking money. With Rivian they won’t have the extra cash to handle a union contract like the big 3 do. So yes I could see Rivian packing up and closing the doors in normal. If it meant they would go broke. Also I’ve seen the plans for Georgia and from the looks it’s more than capable to handle all versions of the R’s and the EDV’s

 

[husky337]

How on Earth can UAW go after Rivian and not just kill the company? They haven't made a *penny* in profit yet

I get the idea after Rivian hits full steam, but man let the company do it's thing it's just trying to survive..

 

[Donald Stanfield]

How on Earth can UAW go after Rivian and not just kill the company? They haven't made a *penny* in profit yet

I get the idea after Rivian hits full steam, but man let the company do it's thing it's just trying to survive..

That would be valid if the Union cared about the health of the company or the sustainability of their demands. They don't care at all.

 

[HopefullyR1S]

FWIW; for my wife and I the biggest “con” on the list when deciding to buy a R1S was they are not union made.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

FWIW; for my wife and I the biggest “con” on the list when deciding to buy a R1S was they are not union made.

Its crazy how we prioritize stuff. The fact that the UAW wasn't involved in my R1 was solidly in the pro column for me.

 

[RivRyan]

If they want more they can do something that generates more profit. Tons of jobs pay better, and generate profit for the economy to a greater extent. Simply holding your hand out doesn't mean you deserve more money, the market determines that.



The relevance, since you missed it, is Union bosses are corrupt thugs who are worse than the big greedy capitalists you think take too much money. The big evil people running the companies are making the decisions and setting the company direction up to generate profit which creates a product and all those jobs.

Union bosses take way more than their constituency yet they don't produce anything themselves. Union bosses are the definition of the upper class privilege yet pro Union folks turn a blind eye to their corruption.

I can see the relevance of your question about union pay to this thread, but I too couldn't figure out why you asked it in reply to that particular guy's comment.

Unions are part of the market. It's up to employers to treat people well enough they don't feel the need to band together to solidify their position in the market. I've seen how unions can muck up HR and protect bad employees as signaling to other members. But I also see how our economy has changed to give the upper class a much bigger share. Taylor Swift is a great entertainer, and businesswoman. But her vast income and dominance is mostly about changes in the entertainment market rather than her particular talent. She'd have merely been Cher or Madonna in times past. The market is more centralized and those who make it to the center receive far more.

Elon, with his parents' money and his undoubted intelligence, would likely have become a wealthy man if he'd come of age in 1950, but not nearly so wealthy as today, because the economy was flatter then.

Working people have the right to do what they need to in order to change the macro conditions that have made that happen.

Still, as the owner of a small business (which I sold last year), I'm very happy my employees never felt so oppressed that they decided to form a union.

 

[Donald Stanfield]

I can see the relevance of your question about union pay to this thread, but I too couldn't figure out why you asked it in reply to that particular guy's comment.

Unions are part of the market. It's up to employers to treat people well enough they don't feel the need to band together to solidify their position in the market. I've seen how unions can muck up HR and protect bad employees as signaling to other members. But I also see how our economy has changed to give the upper class a much bigger share. Taylor Swift is a great entertainer, and businesswoman. But her vast income and dominance is mostly about changes in the entertainment market rather than her particular talent. She'd have merely been Cher or Madonna in times past. The market is more centralized and those who make it to the center receive far more.

Elon, with his parents' money and his undoubted intelligence, would likely have become a wealthy man if he'd come of age in 1950, but not nearly so wealthy as today, because the economy was flatter then.

Working people have the right to do what they need to in order to change the macro conditions that have made that happen.

Still, as the owner of a small business (which I sold last year), I'm very happy my employees never felt so oppressed that they decided to form a union.

Standards of living have raised for EVERYONE since 1950. Im not sure the relevance of that. Unions lie and give kickbacks to politicians to secure their place in the market and as such they are anything but free market forces.

You don't get to hide behind unions being just part of the market when employees of union shops have no choice but to join the Union. In fact free choice, like right to work, is seen always as the death of a Union and that should tell you something. Not enough of these so called oppressed employees would willing retain union membership to sustain the Union if given a choice to leave.

 

[HopefullyR1S]

Its crazy how we prioritize stuff. The fact that the UAW wasn't involved in my R1 was solidly in the pro column for me.

It is; union and USA made are always top of the list for sure.

 

[HopefullyR1S]

Standards of living have raised for EVERYONE since 1950. Im not sure the relevance of that. Unions lie and give kickbacks to politicians to secure their place in the market and as such they are anything but free market forces.

You don't get to hide behind unions being just part of the market when employees of union shops have no choice but to join the Union. In fact free choice, like right to work, is seen always as the death of a Union and that should tell you something. Not enough of these so called oppressed employees would willing retain union membership to sustain the Union if given a choice to leave.

cool story

 

[PBRAZ]

Fact: It's easy to just call something a myth because you aren't willing to understand or absorb all of the nuance of the situation.

Fact: it's easy to have an opinion without zero facts to back it up. Try using your words.

 

[PBRAZ]

The margin on cars is pretty low already, and there are foreign competitors with much lower costs of production than here. Unless we make some pretty aggressive tariffs on foreign products these goods set the pricing benchmark. Therefore your myth 3 isn't really a myth but a reality of where pricing is now.

As to your myth 2, again the same factor matters. These car companies don't exist in a vacuum. They live among nonunion competitors, so if the union-made car is 2k dollars more than the nonunion car is for no additional generated value, they will lose market share to nonunion companies. When they sell fewer cars, their profit decreases because the profit margin per car is small. Auto companies make money on volume; look at the Rivian ramp, which is predicated on increased production. As production has increased, the loss per vehicle has decreased but hasn't yet gone away as production isn't enough.

There are fixed overheads based on staffing and distribution networks for auto companies to exist, which are considerable costs. You have to employ all sorts of people, from engineers to accountants, who don't make cars but have important jobs to keep your company running. These people are overhead expenses, and their salaries must come from that low-margin vehicle. Especially today, with the high ass interest rates, people cannot afford new cars as is, and sales are down.

Giving these people the raises they are asking for puts the companies in question at a real risk for not being profitable. Especially companies like Rivian who are already struggling to reach profitability. The last thing they need is a union, it will kill their company.

Someone correct me but the accountants and engineers are at corporate, earning fixed salaries, and thus aren't UAW members. They are part of fixed overhead, which is a considerable cost, but again, not affected by rises in plant wages.

Not making a comment for or against unions by the way, just pointing out the reality that when it comes to car building, hourly plant wages do not materially move the needle. The cost of materials to build the vehicle however, does.

Also keep in mind that even if a car is $2000 more than its competitor, that won't discourage a potential sale. Another fact is 80% of all new car purchases are financed, with the rest being leased (cash purchases are rare). At the end of the day it's the monthly payment that matters most to car purchasers, and $2000 over the course of the loan or lease is inconsequential.

 

[SANZC02]

Someone correct me but the accountants and engineers are at corporate, earning fixed salaries, and thus aren't UAW members. They are part of fixed overhead, which is a considerable cost, but again, not affected by rises in plant wages.

Not making a comment for or against unions by the way, just pointing out the reality that when it comes to car building, hourly plant wages do not materially move the needle. The cost of materials to build the vehicle however, does.

Also keep in mind that even if a car is $2000 more than its competitor, that won't discourage a potential sale. Another fact is 80% of all new car purchases are financed, with the rest being leased (cash purchases are rare). At the end of the day it's the monthly payment that matters most to car purchasers, and $2000 over the course of the loan or lease is inconsequential.

That monthly payment thing is a joke and bad dealers use it to oversell vehicles and get people into more vehicle than they want or need.

Back when I was getting loans for cars I would never shop at a dealer that would only talk monthly payment. The better trustworthy dealers would talk vehicle price.

I find real estate agents will do the same thing, it was always hard to find agents that would show me what I want and not what they could get me into.

Sponsored