Metals & Alloys

A good reply and I rated it as such.

I agree with a lot you have to say. I do believe you have a few details wrong. I am a member of a labor union. I have multiple welding certs and a plumbing license. I make a fairly good wage compared to a regular factory worker. I, however, have been working for a union contractor at a non-union steel mill for about a year now. The guy that sweeps the floor, that is a company employee, makes about the same amount I do. Most make considerably more than what I can make in a year. Most of these employees have little to no skill. Monitor a panel and poke and scratch the metal. The maintence guys stay busy but lack true skills and craftsmanship. The company uses a profit sharing stratagy. If they have something bring the line down, and I am repairing the problem; I will have many important employees breathing down my neck to get them back up to production. Then they will complain that I took to long. I do not think it is a union issue. I think it is unskilled/uneducated workers that are spoiled...reguardless of union affiliation.

Personally, I think a method of co-sourcing of critical materials should be developed. Getting our basic materials would allow our domestic sources to be conserved.

#1:

Very well put!

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

George Santayana in 1905.

#8

There are always two sides to a coin and management at the companies I have worked were more of the problem than the union. Mutual respect is needed and too many managers have let ego out weight good judgement.

The maintenance guys stay busy but lack true skills and craftsmanship.

Again, a management issue. Maintenance is considered overhead and money is rarely spent for maintaining skills and time is not allowed for true craftsmanship because "Production is King". There is always time to "do it over", but not time to do it right.

#7

Throw out the Buy America Act and make a Buy Allied Act, where we are free to outsource to our closest allies, and you have a competitive atmosphere where we are simultaneously decreasing our financial outlay while keeping quality on-par and promoting the economies of our allies.

I agree this is good policy, but being an ocean away could be a problem. Just don't make it the sole supplier. It's only Common Sense!

Now, I work in an atmosphere where even the lowest-paid unionised skilled labor makes more than I do and I'm in a management position.

At least the people you refer to produce something besides reports and graphs. At the end of the day where did the profit come from? A worker or a manager? Both have to exist to make a whole company and rewards could be made fairly.

It's hard for me to understand why the CEO of my (or any) company thinks he is worth 365 times what someone who actually makes the goods which will pay his salary. Not to mention the perks and pensions. The CEO of Textron got $10,000,000.00 added to his pension fund alone last year, plus, close to $20,000,000.00 in salary and bonuses, while the workers and lower management got minuscule raises and less benefits. After a record year, the Bell Helicopter division employees got a barbecue lunch and $0.00 bonus.

Then, you have companies like Haliburton who want to move their headquarters somewhere they will not have to pay their fair share of taxes. Real Patriots eh?

There needs to be some Common Sense in the management of the U.S. and the companies.

It was not only having a domestic supply of stategic materials, but also having a redundant source in case one source is eliminated

As an employee of a military contractor, I can definitively say that the Buy America Act is a classic case of "The road to hell is paved with good intentions".

It severely limits our capacity to provide the Government with a cost-effective end-product. We are literally forced into a market where there is little competition or innovation. While I certainly agree with the previous post that we have to maintain the capacity to produce any necessary material in the US, the unions do nothing but hurt this capacity. The higher the wages, the more the end user has to pay. It's a never-ending cycle. When you throw in a law like the Buy America Act, you are just reinforcing this non-competitive cycle. Throw out the Buy America Act and make a Buy Allied Act, where we are free to outsource to our closest allies, and you have a competitive atmosphere where we are simultaneously decreasing our financial outlay while keeping quality on-par and promoting the economies of our allies. The more money they have, the more money they can spend buying our military seconds...Do you see the advantage here?

Unions started out to protect the labor from unsafe working conditions and sweatshop-like working conditions. They have FAR outdone themselves in getting away from those conditions. Now, I work in an atmosphere where even the lowest-paid unionised skilled labor makes more than I do and I'm in a management position. In the mean while, unions do everything within their power to stifle startups that threaten to compete with them. Couple that with the poor overall atitude present in a lot of Unions, and it's readily obvious that they are more of a problem in today's society than what it's worth. Among others, the Buy America Act and Davis-Bacon Wage laws are two of the most economically harmful laws I can think of for the average American family.

Here's a story about ford Insourcing, reversing the more common trend.

The federal government can use the tax code to discourage outsourcing & promote the expansion of manufacturing. Companies manufacturing & based in the US should receive preferential tax rates!