Chrysler Auto Workers Busted ! ! !

www.myfoxdetroit.com...

Everyone is complaining about these guys. Come on man!! Id much rather see these guys drinking some CHEAP beer and smoking some (most likely low quality) you know what, than using our bailout money to hop on thier private jets and fly to Thailand for a 'kiddie tour'.

Fox News has sunk to a new low. There are so many other things to spend time and money on than to harass an obviously culturally diverse group of American workers taking a break.

Id like to see the expense account of reporter that 'busted' these guys. Heck, his suit probably cost more than all of the beer and smoke multiplied a couple times over.

I saw the report you linked to (I believe) on one of the major network news shows last week. I have to say that, honestly, I'd fire the guys if they worked for me.

Wait... With all that bailout money from the taxpayers, they kinda do.

In any economy any fool knows you don't get lit on your lunchbreak. In this economy, in that industry??? It should have been a no brainer.

This is possibly the worst post I have ever read on ATS. Seriously??

reply to post by Hefficide


I understand , and agree. The point Im trying to make is that if this reporter would use the same fervor in going after some REAL fraudulent waste and abuse, some real progress might actually be made.

The reporter is kind of acting like a cop, 'busting' these guys, right? If he wants to 'bust' someone, why not go after the big fish? Probably because he knows he cant and is afraid to take the chance. Its just a job security and ratings thing for him, at the expense of the little guy.

That said..I DO NOT want my new car built by a buzzed up good ole boy, but is this really worthy of national attention?

Originally posted by jjkenobi
This is possibly the worst post I have ever read on ATS. Seriously??

Then you obviously havent read any of my other posts.

Youd find it gets MUCH worse than this.


Best...Worst....Semantics my friend, semantics

Here we go...

Step right up ladies and gents to cast your stones!

First one to nail a worker gets a teddy bear.

Come one, come all and cast a stone at the slobbish auto worker drinking a beer and smokin some bud.

Don't go down town to cast them at the Lawyers and Judges enjoying their "Executive Lunch".
No need to travel as far as the Executive Lounge of the Chryler builder with its fully stocked bar.
Don't look in the CEO's office for his business Brandy.

No, step right up to knock out the little guy.

Sheesh, can we not see the set up and double standards anymore? Turn us against each other yet again, watch the Bum fight!

I know, I know, it isn't safe. Safety safety safety... Wonder how long this has been going on and the massive death toll wrought upon their fellow workers by their irresponsible behavior.
Oh the humanity! Surely the blood fills the isles of the factory!

Throw your stones folks, get your teddy bear. Once they are sufficiently pummeled, Lets hang em high! Leave their corpses rotting in the trees, to serve as a lesson to the next Man who dares to lighten his load in the Masters fields.

Think, don't be told what to think.

With Love,

Your Brother

The OP has its point.

No, it's not OK to do what these workers appear to be doing, on company time. This will get you fired in every single place of employment.

However,

to tie this to "bailout" is just a low-blow tactics on Fox's part. If you worked in any organization that has a few thousand employees, and have taken courses in management (and I have), you will know that a fraction of the workforce is bound to have problems like this, just by sheer numbers.

This explains why the hood ornament on my Grand Cherokee was upside down
Seriously, anyone criticizing these guys - have you ever worked in an assembly plant? Do you have any idea how boring assembly work can be? It's mind numbing robotic work, doing the same thing over and over again. Day after day, week after week. I can sympathize with the workers in this case.
That said, I suppose they don't have mandatory drug or alcohol testing. The UAW probably supports this position. Why? Because the execs didn't want to get busted either
I don't care for this type of "reporting". It's unfair to pick on people from one employer. I'd bet some folks from the very news channel that did this piece do the same thing, either at lunch or after work.
I'd hate to see these guys lose their jobs because they cannot find any that pay nearly as good if they can find any jobs at all. There was nothing in their work performance that would require their dismissal.
What people do on their own time is their own business as far as I'm concerned.
So, some auto workers catch a little buzz while the company accepts a taxpayer bailout - what about the fat cats at Goldman-Sachs? Who's watching them? I've read stories of their coke-snorting parties with prostitutes a plenty. Nobody is on their asses about it.
Let's pick on the workers, especially union workers. Workers don't need any protections, right?
I think Detroiters should boycott that TV station for acting like some kind of activist group.
Sad story. I'm sure there are wives and children that will suffer.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals
This explains why the hood ornament on my Grand Cherokee was upside down

Seriously, anyone criticizing these guys - have you ever worked in an assembly plant? Do you have any idea how boring assembly work can be? It's mind numbing robotic work, doing the same thing over and over again. Day after day, week after week.

Not an assembly plant. But I did operate a CTL (cut to length) line in a sheet metal processing facility plant for many years and happily reported subordinates on two different occasions for being intoxicated. In an environment with moving machinery, hydraulics, and the like, intoxicated people tend to either get themselves, or others, hurt or killed.

I had to pull one such coworker out of a set of hydraulic rollers, which had flattened his entire arm, to the shoulder, to a 3/4 of an inch thickness.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals

I can sympathize with the workers in this case.

But if you, or a loved one had to work in the proximity of an impaired coworker, would you be so quick to defent the lunchtime buzz?

Originally posted by Asktheanimals

That said, I suppose they don't have mandatory drug or alcohol testing. The UAW probably supports this position. Why? Because the execs didn't want to get busted either

I'm no fan of the UAW, though I've never worked for them. But if they don't require substance abuse testing, they certainly should. I mean the guy at the drive through window of your local McDonalds is subject to it, and all he operates is a cash register and a headset.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals

I don't care for this type of "reporting". It's unfair to pick on people from one employer. I'd bet some folks from the very news channel that did this piece do the same thing, either at lunch or after work.

I do see your point, but again, I doubt a reporter surfing the web is as likely to harm themselves or others as is somebody operating high powered machinery.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals

I'd hate to see these guys lose their jobs because they cannot find any that pay nearly as good if they can find any jobs at all. There was nothing in their work performance that would require their dismissal.

I can't imagine that they did not sign a contract stating that they would not drink on the job or use drugs. These things are grounds for dismissal for just about every employee in America.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals

What people do on their own time is their own business as far as I'm concerned.
So, some auto workers catch a little buzz while the company accepts a taxpayer bailout - what about the fat cats at Goldman-Sachs? Who's watching them? I've read stories of their coke-snorting parties with prostitutes a plenty. Nobody is on their asses about it.

Give the Goldman-Sachs guy anything more powerful than an I-Pad and OSHA, as well as most other people would be very unhappy with his choices as well.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals

Let's pick on the workers, especially union workers. Workers don't need any protections, right?

Workers need protection. I absolutely agree. One form of those protections is that we have the right not to have a drunk person operating heavy machinery in our vicinity.

Originally posted by Asktheanimals

I think Detroiters should boycott that TV station for acting like some kind of activist group.
Sad story. I'm sure there are wives and children that will suffer.

If the wives and kids do suffer it is because their husbands and fathers knowingly and willingly violated their employment contracts.

There are reasons for zero tolerance policies in most jobs. Heavy machinery is one field where this makes perfect sense to me. Dangerous things require people to be unimpaired and sharp.

What is the big deal?

Hell, they should run for office, they would fit right in.

the factorys or any other such facilitys insurance policy states that they wont pay a dime if your under the influence while operating heavy machinery or on the factory owned area.

its self neglect and intentionaly self inflicted

loose your arm sue your self

The very house each and every one of you live in, a majority of it from the foundation to the paint on the walls was built by people who were more than likely a little bit stoned and maybe had a beer or two for lunch. Deal with it. Most guys work better with a little stress relief.

When I was doing construction, most of the guys I worked with couldn't work for # sober, but get a joint and a couple beers in em and they'd do the best damn job you've ever seen. Just because some reefer and beer might inhibit YOUR motor skills a bit, doesn't mean it effects everyone the same way. Most hard workers I know work best with a happy head.

3 things . They were not on company property , Lunchtime is not on the clock and they were all white so what was the agenda ?

Originally posted by mikellmikell
they were all white so what was the agenda ?

Please observe video at the 52 and 53 second mark and get back to me.

Originally posted by havenvideo
The very house each and every one of you live in, a majority of it from the foundation to the paint on the walls was built by people who were more than likely a little bit stoned and maybe had a beer or two for lunch. Deal with it. Most guys work better with a little stress relief.

When I was doing construction, most of the guys I worked with couldn't work for # sober, but get a joint and a couple beers in em and they'd do the best damn job you've ever seen. Just because some reefer and beer might inhibit YOUR motor skills a bit, doesn't mean it effects everyone the same way. Most hard workers I know work best with a happy head.

edit on 27-9-2010 by havenvideo because: because I felt like it

yes , but who pays the bills if something goes bonkers ?

you
your foreman
the company
or
the insurance comapny

lets take the same scenario at a steel foundry where one wrong pour can cost you 2-4 €/$ millions

who pays for the mess

you
your foreman
the company
or
the insurance company

First of all, this was a local news station in Detroit that broke the story after they received a tip from another worker in this plant.

Sure, these guys were off the clock but they used extremely poor judgment given the nature of the work that they do. An error on the line could lead to major problems down the road. It does not take long for the snowball effect to get going in a situation like this. Lets just hope one of these guys isn't a quality assurance inspector.

Drinking 1 or 2 quarts of beer that fast on an empty stomach can certainly hit you. Add a little weed and it only gets worse.

Poor judgment!! bottom line. They will only get suspended anyway. Their union will insulate them and make the case to rationalize their behavior.

Yes, executives have fancy lunches. But, the executives aren't operating machinery that could harm themselves or someone else.

Lots of odd posts here. I worked, regrettably, in a factory environment when I was much younger. The majority of people I worked with deserved to be there, they had little ambition and generally struggled to get their pants on in the morning. I left for a different life and realize as well that the world needs all types of different workers. That said regardless of whether these idiots were off the clock, they were pounding the sauce back pretty good. As others have indicated there are insurance matters not to mention HUGE risks to their personal safety and those of others they work with. The argument that their work is boring and monotonous is weak. That's their job, don't like it then quit.

I wonder how people would re-act if these guys were say pilots or brain surgeons. Fire them all, there are LOTS of good folks who would gladly take the drudgery and pay

brill

Big deal you know how many other workers drink on the break or what ever. I worked at a company where the managment would meet at the local strip bar at lunch and get tanked. People have been doing it for years. So what these auto workers have rights and one of them is not to be fired indiscrimently. Don't forget it's also a Fox affilate that did the report.

Not to mention this same reporter did a report a few weeks ago about cars being broken into at a local courthouse. He watched cars being broken into while doing nothing about it. Then asked the people when they noticed the thefts how they felt about it? If it would have been me I would have socked him in the face for watching it and not doing anything to prevent it.

Its just media sensationalism to get the masses riled up.

reply to post by Hefficide


Heff, I can agree with you that people who are badly intoxicated can be dangerous. What was not proven was whether these guys were intoxicated or somehow dysfunctional because of drugs and alcohol.
I have worked many jobs that were dangerous both in factories, warehouses and freight hauling. Some were boring beyond pale and I probably wouldve gone bananas were it not for the occasional lunchtime indulgence (sans the beer). Some jobs I knew were too dangerous to take any chances at so I would not do certain things.
Let's put it this way - these guys have been doing this kind of stuff for 40 years now - leaving at lunch in attempted mental recreation, if there were actual safety issues at play it would've shown up by now?
Believe it or not, most people are smart about their own personal safety and do not willingly relinquish control of such.
Why do people have such a hard time trusting others?
Until someone proves they are a hazard to me or others I have no issue with what they do,
That is my understanding of the American way - freedom for all if they commit no crimes against others.
If safety were all that important to our lawmakers, then alcohol would be illegal and weed wouldn't be.
But logic never was a major player in our political processes.
And yes, drunk people can dangerous anywhere they go.