OK, this union crap is hysterical because it brings out all the usual stereotypical notions.

I worked for 20 years in a non-union workplace for a company that was commonly listed on many of the lists that recognized companies as the Best Places to Work. We had weight rooms, free donuts, volleyball courts, no time clocks, flexible work hours, etc. People worked hard because they felt appreciated and valued. We didn't need a union. The company never had layoffs. And then Bill and Dave died, and things went downhill. The company started taking away many of the benefits, and soon started layoffs. My job soon went to Malaysia.

Now I work in a completely different environment. It is one of the largest employers in the nation, and it's a union shop. It is a constant battle for management to see how much they can get away with, and quite commonly the employees act the same way. The good employees are treated so badly that they HAVE to have a union behind them to minimize the abuse. There is no advantage to trying to excel at the job other than personal work-ethic and self-satisfaction, because you get payed whether you do a good job or not. In fact, I think we often get abused just because management seizes every opportunity to get over on the union when they can just to see what they can get away with.

I get payed much more at my union job, but I would LOVE to be back at my old job making less money and being happy and doing a better job and feeling appreciated.

SO I don't buy the crap about how the unions are what's wrong with American workers in unionized companies. I wish it were true, but I've been on both sides of the fence. I've seen enough to realize that management quite often forces employess to need the protection of a union. I wish it weren't so. I used to believe it wasn't, but now I know better.

In fact, I believe it's because there are comparable jobs in a union shops getting higher wages that non-union employers have to pay higher wages and give better benefits just to compete for employees.

So it's possible that we'd all be working 6 days a week for almost minimum wage if not for the fact that somewhere a union has forced a company to pay more and give things like a 5-day work week and vacation time.

I wish it weren't so.

 

"Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism."
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
- George Washington, First President of the United States

Interesting Thread and sad in so many ways.

 

Good post someone who finally gets it!

 

I don't know where "lowridin packer" gets his statistics on labor, probably same place he learns how Unions work. How can he say that Non Union workers are 30% more efficient ? After reading all these posts, it seems that alot of guys are bitter because they aren't with a good union. I believe that there are many workers that put pride in their quality of work, loyalty to their company, no matter if they are Union or not.

It doesn't make sense to me to spend 10's of millions to build a new plant to save money. It would take many years to see a difference on the bottom line. Maybe if the local municipalities give them TAX breaks, grants, etc. they may save some by moving.

I'm done beating this subject to death, I'll go back to reading something interesting. I wonder what Adam Corolla thinks about HD moving facilities ?

 

I would agree,...you can ask the former employees of the former Caterpillar Plant that used to be down the road from Harley Davidson York too. I seem to remember a long strike there...just before they closed the place down.

 

The York plant is about 30 miles from my house. If they close it down I won't buy anymore Harley products. They already have pissed me off by cutting production so the dealers can continue screw over the buyer. I have a Harley I don't need another. If they play this game there are a lot of other bike manufactures to choose from.

Here is a novel idea, something all other bike manufactures do. Offer incentives. I swear Harley must have the biggest freaking idiots running the show.

 

I am sure the lazy SOB's who make Harley's, work a hell of a lot harder than you or I, or most of the people who post on this message board. I probably wouldn't last a week doing what they do.

 

So they are supposed to keep producing bikes that can't sell , then do incentives? The 1st issue alone would drive profits down or .... OUT and incentives actually cheapen a product for many more model years because consumers will ALWAYS expect incentives , even when times are good.Also keeping production close to actual sales DOES make your used bike worth more on trade in or sale time . The things you want is EXACTLY why the rice bikes have no value once ridden off the lot !

 

That is a bunch of BS about resale value. What they offered me in trade for a 2 year old Deluxe with 12000 miles on it and 5000 in chrome at the Harley Dealership? 9200 dollars!! Which is about half of the new price. When I traded my wifes Suzuki in on a Yamaha I got over 2/3 rds of the amount back and I paid less than MSRP on the Suzukin when I bought it. Plus I got a ton of money off the msrp when I bought the Yamaha for her. Don't believe the bull**** about Harley trade in values.

I paid 10,500 for my Ducati out the door a couple of years ago. I don't know what I could get for it now but I am damn sure i could get more than 5750 for it. The trick to getting the biggest percentage back for a vehicle is to pay as little for it as you can.

As for profits. We are in a recession, I think Harley should be happy just to make a small profit during a bad recession seeing as they made huge profits during the glory days of a few years ago.

 

You paid $18,400 for a new deluxe???? The chrome & tax don't count!