Volkswagen the UAW and the GOP surprise!

Yesterday I read this article which tells us Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) exercised his rights to free speech by making misleading statements to the press and hence the voters of Tennessee.

Corker's chief of staff told The Huffington Post that the senator didn't interfere in the election; he was simply exercising free speech.

In a brief statement after the votes were tallied, Corker said he was "thrilled for the employees at Volkswagen and for our community and its future."

While most Americans appreciate our freedom of speech we realize there are moral standards that should be observed while exorcising our right, i.e. thou shall not lie. While most times these lies are accepted as SOP other times they can become a real problem as we see when Volkswagen replies to the UAW vote.

Volkswagen’s top labor representative threatened today to try to block further investments by the German carmaker in the U.S. South if its workers there are not unionized, Reuters reported today. “I can imagine fairly well that another VW factory in the United States, provided that one more should still be set up there, does not necessarily have to be assigned to the South again,” said Bernd Osterloh, a member of VW’s powerful supervisory board and head of VW’s works council. Osterloh, who is also on VW’s supervisory board, added, “If co-determination isn’t guaranteed in the first place, we as workers will hardly be able to vote in favor” of new production facilities in Southern American states.

source

The sad fact is our politicians make an art of lying to the people and seldom does it hurt there reelection.

reply to post by AlaskanDad


I think this is the first time I have seen an issue with people not unionizing.


Several states have pending legislation with regards to right to work. To be honest I would be torqued if I had to pay union dues even though I am not a member of the union.

Xcathdra
reply to post by AlaskanDad

 

I think this is the first time I have seen an issue with people not unionizing.


Several states have pending legislation with regards to right to work. To be honest I would be torqued if I had to pay union dues even though I am not a member of the union.

While the OP was not on unionization but politicians using the pretext of free speech to propagate lies I will respect your opinion on the situation with right to work for less states. Though I was wondering what union jobs you have had and which unions you have been a member of, just to confirm your knowledge of unions.

reply to post by AlaskanDad


So, let me get this straight.

We have a Senator saying employees might have a brighter future if they vote down a union at a foreign owned Volkswagen plant in the U.S.

Then the employees vote down the union.

Then we have a "Labor Representative" from Volkswagen saying that they would try to block further investments by the German carmaker in the U.S. South if workers are not in a union.

Is the "Labor Representative" from Volkswagen a "Company" lawyer? or is he a "Union" rep?

I think the "VW Labor Representative" is probably a Union rep.

In which case, perhaps the best thing for an American Automaker to do is open two plants in Tennessee and increase sales through vigorous advertising and pricing.

Let VW go down then.

It looks like the "statements" from VW are not actually from VW and sound more like a Left Wing slant ?

Very confusing.

What am I missing ??

Noting that both sources are Left Wing in general ?? (MSNBC, HuffPost)

reply to post by xuenchen

We have a Senator saying employees might have a brighter future if they vote down a union at a foreign owned Volkswagen plant in the U.S.

No Senator Corker said:

"I've had conversations today and based on those am assured that should the workers vote against the UAW, Volkswagen will announce in the coming weeks that it will manufacture its new mid-size SUV here in Chattanooga," Corker said.

If the senator had worded his statement as you did I would not have considered it a lie or even a misstatement, rather it would have been a cleverly worded statement.

One more comment.

Unions lose money when they lose elections.

Perhaps this is just a standard finger pointing, blaming game sour puss sour grapes effort to save face somehow.

Looks like the UAW blew it bigtime this time. And now they have to *answer* to their counterparts in Europe.

reply to post by AlaskanDad


Well that makes it a bit clearer.

I was focusing on the first paragraph of the MSNBC article, and on the secondary link to another MSNBC article that has a quote from a State Senator.

State Senator Bo Watson, who represents a suburb of Chattanooga, warned on Monday that if VW’s workers voted to embrace the U.A.W., the Republican-controlled Legislature might vote against approving future incentives to help the plant expand…. A loss of such incentives, industry analysts say, could persuade Volkswagen to award production of a new S.U.V. to its plant in Mexico instead of to the Chattanooga plant, which currently assembles the Passat.

other MSNBC article

AlaskanDad
reply to post by xuenchen

 

No Senator Corker said:

"I've had conversations today and based on those am assured that should the workers vote against the UAW, Volkswagen will announce in the coming weeks that it will manufacture its new mid-size SUV here in Chattanooga," Corker said.

If the senator had worded his statement as you did I would not have considered it a lie or even a misstatement, rather it would have been a cleverly worded statement.

In other words, the senator talked to VW Management, but the VW statement came from what amounts to a union representative. German terminology is a bit different than ours, but the fact is this "representative" is one of a "worker's council" that is more or less supported by VW because of the political climate there.

It's pretty much like the senator asking the head of Ford if Ford will build a plant under "X" conditions and the President of Ford says, "Yes," then a guy from the UAW gets up and says, "No, they won't."

And for that you say the Senator is lying? Nonsense.

reply to post by xuenchen


I find it interesting that I wrote a OP about lying politicians and yet every reply has been on the union vs non union which was not the topic I wrote my post about, if you read the OP you will see I never touched on the decision only the lie.

I wish every politician that had the gall to lie to the people was held responsible be it Obama, Christie, Corker, dems, reps or independent!

Edit: I see two post showed up since I wrote my response (my slow internet apologies), many thanks for those post that were on the topic of my OP, also thanks to xuenchen for pointing out State Senator Bo Watson's statement as it does add to the confusion.

So OP is saying the Senator is evil for saying something anti-union and the poor, honorable union in a victim here. Give me a break, unions bully, threaten and lie with the best of them, and go beyond that with physical assaults. Check the major news headline yesterday in Philly. The Steel Workers Union chief, one of the most powerful in Philly, a big union city, arrested by Feds for allegedly organizing, funding and supporting beatings of non-union workers putting bids on jobs in competition with their union. The beatings, which are on tape, are by union leaders themselves, not hired guns, and they even called themselves the THUGS as a nic-name.

Unions operate to make money and use intimidation and threats to stay in power. They lose jobs, bankrupt cities and government, protect incompetent employees who deserve to be fired, make products more costly, and operate purely out of self-interest over the welfare of the general community. Unions were needed in the early stages of industrialization, and are needed today in certain risky jobs like police, fireman, miners, but not in many other places and never in government.

OP, sell your pro-union UAW hype somewhere else, as if it wasn't the workers themselves who figures the UAW was bad for Detroit so why would they want it in TN. Unions are making cities near bankrupt across the country. How do you know the Senator wasn't right, if he is right there is no lie, you define it as a lie based on your view that the workers would be better off with a union, that is your lie !

AlaskanDad
reply to post by xuenchen

 

I find it interesting that I wrote a OP about lying politicians and yet every reply has been on the union vs non union which was not the topic I wrote my post about, if you read the OP you will see I never touched on the decision only the lie.

I wish every politician that had the gall to lie to the people was held responsible be it Obama, Christie, Corker, dems, reps or independent!

Again, I was trying to clear up the confusion.

If the issue is in fact a lying politician, then we need to interpret the "Lie" and who is saying it is a "Lie".

I think there is a possibility that the "Lie" is being *Defined* and *Amplified* by "opposing" forces.

Can you clarify any further?

I'm all in favor of exposing lies by politicians.

This is not a pro vs anti union battle.

What does VW want? A Works Council.
What does VW employees in Tennessee want? A Works Council.
What are the requirements for said Works Council? A union.
What do VW employees not want? To join the UAW union.

They will either create a separate union, or find another way around the legalities, but there is no real issue between VW and VW employees.

There is an issue between VW employees and one particular union.

retsdeeps1
So OP is saying the Senator is evil for saying something anti-union and the poor, honorable union in a victim here. Give me a break, unions bully, threaten and lie with the best of them, and go beyond that with physical assaults. Check the major news headline yesterday in Philly. The Steel Workers Union chief, one of the most powerful in Philly, a big union city, arrested by Feds for allegedly organizing, funding and supporting beatings of non-union workers putting bids on jobs in competition with their union. The beatings, which are on tape, are by union leaders themselves, not hired guns, and they even called themselves the THUGS as a nic-name.

Unions operate to make money and use intimidation and threats to stay in power. They lose jobs, bankrupt cities and government, protect incompetent employees who deserve to be fired, make products more costly, and operate purely out of self-interest over the welfare of the general community. Unions were needed in the early stages of industrialization, and are needed today in certain risky jobs like police, fireman, miners, but not in many other places and never in government.

OP, sell your pro-union UAW hype somewhere else, as if it wasn't the workers themselves who figures the UAW was bad for Detroit so why would they want it in TN. Unions are making cities near bankrupt across the country. How do you know the Senator wasn't right, if he is right there is no lie, you define it as a lie based on that the workers would be better off with a union, that was his lie- no, its your lie !

edit on 19-2-2014 by retsdeeps1 because: (no reason given)

No OP thinks politicians of both parties should be held accountable for what they say as well as what they do. I was actually hoping it would turn into a thread on political lies rather than union vs non union.

Does freedom of speech give our elected officials the right to lie???

xuenchen

AlaskanDad
reply to post by xuenchen

 

I find it interesting that I wrote a OP about lying politicians and yet every reply has been on the union vs non union which was not the topic I wrote my post about, if you read the OP you will see I never touched on the decision only the lie.

I wish every politician that had the gall to lie to the people was held responsible be it Obama, Christie, Corker, dems, reps or independent!

Again, I was trying to clear up the confusion.

If the issue is in fact a lying politician, then we need to interpret the "Lie" and who is saying it is a "Lie".

I think there is a possibility that the "Lie" is being *Defined* and *Amplified* by "opposing" forces.

Can you clarify any further?

I'm all in favor of exposing lies by politicians.

Yes both sides will twist and turn the facts, just like slick willie (bill clinton) lied his ass of when he said a bj was not sex. Somehow we the people need to change the system so the dishonest are punished, imho

The current system just divides the people and it seldom represents them.

Up next: Corker reveals that there are 205 known Communists working in the factory.

I do not see the lie you are talking about in the first post? Can you highlight the lie? Nevermind I just read the article. It appears to be standard procedure for politicians. I would not expect anything less.

reply to post by AlaskanDad


Re: Politicians lying- well most are lawyers and that profession, in my opinion, sanctifies and institutionalizes lying. I do not think our Funding Fathers who authored the Constitution meant to make lying a court protected right. Defense lawyers too often just have no ethics and look at any lie they can sell and use to make money for their clients or themselves, in both civil and criminal courts. Fake Workmen's Comp scams are growing out of control, up 30% recently, are more workers being injured all of a sudden- no, more lying. Too many sleezy lawyers teach their clients how to "game" the system, using fabricated and exaggerated injuries to get free long term income. And the lawyers get 20% of the income employees get from faked injuries. I know of a guy who sneezed 3 years ago and hasn't worked since, true story. With the real victim being a company that pays 100% of the cost of this, the income to the faking worker, the worker's legal fees, the company's own legal costs and the resulting increased insurance costs. Another reason companies move overseas and we lose jobs. And this sleezy system is protected by judges. Trial Lawyers are big donors to the Demo. party, they want it to stay this way to protect a system that has no penalties for lying in court- none and benefits them but harms all of us. Really, its legal organized crime- you see those adds on TV all the time.

How about a law that prohibits any politician or lawyer from lying. Three strikes, (found lying 3 times) you lose your right to hold office or practice law. Yes hard to prove, but still, why not try, the consequences of not trying to curb lying is that it is out of control- make things up with impunity an great harm to all- rewarding lying.

retsdeeps1
reply to post by AlaskanDad

 

Re: Politicians lying- well most are lawyers and that profession, in my opinion, sanctifies and institutionalizes lying. I do not think our Funding Fathers who authored the Constitution meant to make lying a court protected right. Defense lawyers too often just have no ethics and look at any lie they can sell and use to make money for their clients or themselves, in both civil and criminal courts. Fake Workmen's Comp scams are growing out of control, up 30% recently, are more workers being injured all of a sudden- no, more lying. Too many sleezy lawyers teach their clients how to "game" the system, using fabricated and exaggerated injuries to get free long term income. And the lawyers get 20% of the income employees get from faked injuries. I know of a guy who sneezed 3 years ago and hasn't worked since, true story. With the real victim being a company that pays 100% of the cost of this, the income to the faking worker, the worker's legal fees, the company's own legal costs and the resulting increased insurance costs. Another reason companies move overseas and we lose jobs. And this sleezy system is protected by judges. Trial Lawyers are big donors to the Demo. party, they want it to stay this way to protect a system that has no penalties for lying in court- none and benefits them but harms all of us. Really, its legal organized crime- you see those adds on TV all the time.

How about a law that prohibits any politician or lawyer from lying. Three strikes, (found lying 3 times) you lose your right to hold office or practice law. Yes hard to prove, but still, why not try, the consequences of not trying to curb lying is that it is out of control- make things up with impunity an great harm to all- rewarding lying.

edit on 19-2-2014 by retsdeeps1 because: (no reason given)

Thank you for the time and energy you put into your reply! I think that our future may depend on removing the liars from the system. IMHO our current system is motivated by greed, banksters, politicians and so many others do not care who or what they hurt as long as they profit for it, CEO get fined for breaking laws but profits are high so they get bonuses!

I would add we are ruled by fear, just look at Posse Comitatus and you will see police kill citizens on a regular basis with impunity, our lawmakers want us living in fear.

PS to everyone that took time to reply Many Thanks.
In hindsight I wish I had left GOP out of tittle the and used the word politician in its place, my bad.

I will work to on my wording to make my OP points clear and more easily understood in my future posts.

reply to post by retsdeeps1

retsdeeps1
Give me a break, unions bully, threaten and lie with the best of them, and go beyond that with physical assaults.[...]
Unions operate to make money and use intimidation and threats to stay in power. They lose jobs, bankrupt cities and government, protect incompetent employees who deserve to be fired, make products more costly, and operate purely out of self-interest over the welfare of the general community.
Unions were needed in the early stages of industrialization, and are needed today in certain risky jobs like police, fireman, miners, but not in many other places and never in government.

Maybe this is true for your US unions, but it's not at all how unions are supposed to work and certainly not how they work here in Germany. (Maybe that's the underlying reason for this misunderstanding)
Unions here are more more "professional" and more under public scrutiny, and can't afford any criminal behaviour.
They have to function properly in order to secure good working conditions and wages for the workers, and in return they help to provide a highly trained and motivated workforce for their respective sector of work.
This concept works pretty successful here. I can't see why you would say that there is no need for it anymore.

DP