General Cooking (rec.food.cooking) For general food and cooking discussion. Foods of all kinds, food procurement, cooking methods and techniques, eating, etc.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #241 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Ikea

On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 10:43:22 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:

> On 4/26/2015 6:39 PM, jmcquown wrote:
> > I order freshly prepared food to go which I eat at home.

>
>
> Learn to cook, complainer.


Many of us have urged her FOR YEARS to get something for the $800
assessment fee that she has to pay (with or without compensation of
any kind), instead of just flushing it down the drain. I, for one, am
glad she's finally doing it.

--

sf
  #242 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 3:36 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "W. Lohman" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 4/26/2015 5:10 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>
>>> "sf" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 16:09:16 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 4/26/2015 4:02 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>>>> > On 2015-04-26 5:54 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Racist Brits and Aussies seem to do that. Americans are proud of
>>>>> >> their roots, but they have divided their populations into us vs
>>>>> >> them.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Are they? Many of anglo ancestry seem to want to disassociate >
>>>>> themselves
>>>>> > from the nation that spawned an empire that spanned the globe.
>>>>>
>>>>> You mean the 'white guilt" tribe?
>>>>>
>>>>> Yeah well.
>>>>>
>>>>> > Then there is about 10% of the population that are descendants of >
>>>>> slaves who
>>>>> > seem to want to blame their current woes on the institution of
>>>>> slavery,
>>>>> > which went down the tubes 150 years ago... 6 generations.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unsurprisingly that institution produced a multi-generational self
>>>>> esteem deficit.
>>>>>
>>>>> A sad but observable malady still being acted out.
>>>>>
>>>> Slavery is alive and well in the South and being expanded as other
>>>> states adopt "right to work".
>>>
>>> It's alive and well in this whole world! I recently read this book.
>>> Very sad.
>>>
>>> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/052...?ie=UTF8&psc=1
>>>
>>>

>>
>> "Kevin Bales's disturbing story of slavery today reaches from brick
>> kilns in Pakistan and brothels in Thailand to the offices of
>> multinational corporations. "
>>
>> Really?!??
>>
>> I'd love to see some credible examples of these" corporate office
>> slaves..."

>
> Read the book.



Please list a few that you recall.

I'm of no mind to spend my cash on what I perceive to be a biased
advocate text.
  #243 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 3:37 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 16:10:30 -0700, "Julie Bove"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> It's alive and well in this whole world! I recently read this book.
>>> Very
>>> sad.

>>
>> I'm only talking about here.

>
> It's here too. Ever seen any of those sex slave shows on TV? And Lidia
> Bastianch was accused of having a slave as well. I don't know how that
> panned out.



OK, that's plausible and proven, we do have active sex slavery in the US.

It generally involves immigrants, ftmp.

I do not have any indication that corporations are involved, do you?
  #244 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 3:39 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "W. Lohman" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 4/26/2015 5:14 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>
>>> "W. Lohman" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> On 4/26/2015 4:27 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 16:09:16 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/26/2015 4:02 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2015-04-26 5:54 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Racist Brits and Aussies seem to do that. Americans are proud of
>>>>>>>> their roots, but they have divided their populations into us vs
>>>>>>>> them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Are they? Many of anglo ancestry seem to want to disassociate
>>>>>>> themselves
>>>>>>> from the nation that spawned an empire that spanned the globe.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You mean the 'white guilt" tribe?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then there is about 10% of the population that are descendants of
>>>>>>> slaves who
>>>>>>> seem to want to blame their current woes on the institution of
>>>>>>> slavery,
>>>>>>> which went down the tubes 150 years ago... 6 generations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unsurprisingly that institution produced a multi-generational self
>>>>>> esteem deficit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> A sad but observable malady still being acted out.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Slavery is alive and well in the South and being expanded as other
>>>>> states adopt "right to work".
>>>>>
>>>> Nah, choice is _always_ present.
>>>>
>>>> No one owns other folks.
>>>
>>> Some for all intents and purposes, do.

>>
>> Ummm. no.
>>
>>> If the person is working for
>>> them against their will or because they have no other choice in order to
>>> survive, they may not be able to get away.

>>
>> Where?

>
> Right here in this country. People from other countries, usually young,
> single women, apply for a job via an ad. They think they are coming
> here to be a housekeeper or some such thing but are instead kept as sex
> slave. Sometimes they are even sold by their own parents. There have
> been countless shows on TV about this.


Ok.

That aspect does exist, generally amongst immigrants.

>>
>>> Especially if they do not
>>> speak the language in the country where they are, have been brainwashed
>>> to believe they can not escape, have been threatened with death or death
>>> of family should they try to escape, have been beaten or starved from
>>> trying to escape, have people watching them like a hawk, I could go on
>>> and on... No, it's not a super common thing but alas it is more common
>>> than most of us might think.

>>
>> In which nations?

>
> Probably all of them but certainly here.



Agreed.

But not corporations.
  #245 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 3:42 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "jmcquown" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 4/26/2015 5:38 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>> On 2015-04-26 4:52 PM, wrote:
>>>
>>>>> They have decent selection on their menu, but it is unlikely that
>>>>> there
>>>>> is enough that the Bovines could all find something they liked.
>>>>
>>>> Sounds okay for what it is. IIRC, the stores are set up so you have to
>>>> see everything and there's no 'short cuts' to the cashier/exit? That's
>>>> one reason I've only been to an Ikea store *once*
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There is a bit of a problem in the way the stores are set up to lead
>>> your through the entire store. There are shortcuts, but you have to have
>>> been through the store a couple times to figure them out. I have a very
>>> good sense of direction but I appreciate that it could be a serious
>>> problem for most people. I have to say that if you follow the outlined
>>> route you are likely to spend a lot of money because there are so many
>>> things that are too appealing to turn down.
>>>
>>>

>> There is no Ikea around here. But regarding the layout/floor plan I
>> have this to say. If you try to trap me into seeing everything in
>> your store before I can get to the exit, you'll find some really
>> messed up displays. I hate shopping. And when I'm ready to leave, I
>> am ready to leave. Good thing there isn't an Ikea around here. LOL
>> Not that I'd be tempted to go there.

>
> I don't think you'd get far with messing up the displays. The store is
> very crowded with customers and employees.



Very antisocial and borderline criminal intent, eh?

Telling.


  #247 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,041
Default Ikea

On 27/04/2015 11:06 AM, W. Lohman wrote:

>>
>> Read the book.

>
>
> Please list a few that you recall.
>
> I'm of no mind to spend my cash on what I perceive to be a biased
> advocate text.


You mean one that challenges your opinions and prejudices!
--
"It is a truism that almost any sect, cult, or religion
will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the
political power to do so."
Sir Arthur C. Clark



  #248 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 7:26 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2015-04-26 10:31 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>>> Tell me that isn't slavery, being forced to join an organization just to
>>> take a job.

>>
>> I worked in places that had unions but I'd never join one. The members
>> got nothing worth while for their dues. They were good in 1930, but now
>> they are just blood sucking parasites. I would have earned less as a
>> member.

>
>
> I worked in places without unions and I worked in places with unions.
> Working conditions in union shops were much better, and so was the
> money. I suppose we should all be happy that so much of our
> manufacturing is now being done off shore where workers toil for peanuts
> in order for CEOs to justify their multimillion dollar salaries.


Union shops did such a wonderful job with the American auto industry
that it almost went tits up.

Bravo!
  #249 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 8:27 AM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 02:42:26 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
>> I don't think you'd get far with messing up the displays. The store is very
>> crowded with customers and employees.

>
> Employees are few and far between here and when you spot one they're
> busy with customers.
>


The key point is that Jill is so disturbed that she publicly shared her
plan to vandalize a store!
  #250 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,041
Default Ikea

On 27/04/2015 7:26 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2015-04-26 10:31 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>
>>> Tell me that isn't slavery, being forced to join an organization just to
>>> take a job.

>>
>> I worked in places that had unions but I'd never join one. The members
>> got nothing worth while for their dues. They were good in 1930, but now
>> they are just blood sucking parasites. I would have earned less as a
>> member.

>
>
> I worked in places without unions and I worked in places with unions.


My father was forced to join a union back in the 50s when British unions
were particularly militant.
However, their welfare arm really helped out when he was off work with
back trouble.
I am against the NEED for unions!
Graham
--
"It is a truism that almost any sect, cult, or religion
will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the
political power to do so."
Sir Arthur C. Clark





  #251 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 9:20 AM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 02:37:38 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 16:10:30 -0700, "Julie Bove"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's alive and well in this whole world! I recently read this book.
>>>> Very sad.
>>>
>>> I'm only talking about here.

>>
>> It's here too. Ever seen any of those sex slave shows on TV? And Lidia
>> Bastianch was accused of having a slave as well. I don't know how that
>> panned out.

>
> Here means USA. You don't even need to go to the dramatic and quite
> literal level of sexual slavery, which is very real.


It is indeed.

And also thankfully rare.

> Think about it. The CEO of Walmart CEO makes approximately $11,000 an
> HOUR and he was only the 46th highest paid CEO in (2012) America,
> according to Forbes. I call it modern day slavery because while
> average CEO compensation (adjusted for inflation) rose 937% between
> 1978 and 2013, worker compensation remains stagnant at the 2009 level.


Income inequality is not slavery, despite what you choose to call it.

> Right-to-work laws are not designed to improve salaries or benefits
> for the American worker, they are designed to improve company
> profitability. Workers are fearful of being fired (with no recourse)
> at employer whim, they work several minimum wage part time jobs
> equaling 70 hours a week (or more) and are still in need public
> assistance. Unions provided a collective voice for workers in the
> past, but union busting Right-to-Work has taken that balance away.


Unions have also led to longshoremen making $144,00 a year with an
additional $92k in benefits.

Unsustainable.


> In the mean time, voters in Right-to-Work states are so brainwashed by
> right wing propaganda that they continue to vote against their own
> best interests.


I reject being compelled to join ANY group just to obtain work.

I'm not brainwashed, I'm just stubborn and individualistic.




  #252 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Ikea

On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:15:24 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:

> On 4/27/2015 8:27 AM, sf wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 02:42:26 -0700, "Julie Bove"
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> I don't think you'd get far with messing up the displays. The store is very
> >> crowded with customers and employees.

> >
> > Employees are few and far between here and when you spot one they're
> > busy with customers.
> >

>
> The key point is that Jill is so disturbed that she publicly shared her
> plan to vandalize a store!


Shades of Andy in his bread squeezing phase.

--

sf
  #253 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 10:52 AM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 10:27:16 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>
>> On 4/26/2015 5:38 PM, sf wrote:
>>> On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 17:07:01 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/26/2015 4:51 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 16:35:04 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/26/2015 4:27 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Slavery is alive and well in the South and being expanded as other
>>>>>>> states adopt "right to work".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nah, choice is _always_ present.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No one owns other folks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Legalized slavery is the beauty of "right to work" laws.
>>>>>
>>>> Nah, that's just shabby rhetoric.
>>>>
>>>> Some folks don't want to be _compelled_ to pay union dues.
>>>>
>>>> Tell me that isn't slavery, being forced to join an organization just to
>>>> take a job.
>>>
>>> Union busting is the name of the game in right to work states. Let
>>>

>>
>> I reject being compelled to join an organization I would not choose to
>> simply to obtain a job.
>>
>> That is defacto fascism.

>
> Except being "forced to join" is a myth perpetrated by right wingers
> and the "right to be fired at whim" establishment.


Nope, it's a reality.

If I apply for work at a union shop grocer I MUST join the UCFW, period.

Mt only other choice is Wal Mart for non union food worker employnent.

No myth, actual fact.
  #254 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Ikea

On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:13:33 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:

> On 4/27/2015 7:26 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> > On 2015-04-26 10:31 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> >
> >>> Tell me that isn't slavery, being forced to join an organization just to
> >>> take a job.
> >>
> >> I worked in places that had unions but I'd never join one. The members
> >> got nothing worth while for their dues. They were good in 1930, but now
> >> they are just blood sucking parasites. I would have earned less as a
> >> member.

> >
> >
> > I worked in places without unions and I worked in places with unions.
> > Working conditions in union shops were much better, and so was the
> > money. I suppose we should all be happy that so much of our
> > manufacturing is now being done off shore where workers toil for peanuts
> > in order for CEOs to justify their multimillion dollar salaries.

>
> Union shops did such a wonderful job with the American auto industry
> that it almost went tits up.
>


Ah - yes, of course, I see the light now. Unions were single handedly
responsible for the miserable failure of *American* automobile design
(when the same set of American designers were perfectly capable of
designing cars for foreign manufacturers that were well engineered and
looked great), to say nothing of poor quality control. Then there was
their refusal to modernize, insisting on continuing the outdated
practice of one man installing one item on a cars 8 hours a day, which
was the equivalent of you sitting at the computer and hitting one
single solitary key all day long. You're so right. It's all the
unions fault. Those poor executives in the corporate offices were
just victims of a vicious union scheme to destroy the American
automobile industry so union workers could give up decent paying jobs
and live off public assistance. Yeah, that's it. Defend your
Right-to-Work because no one else will!

--

sf
  #255 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,041
Default Ikea

On 27/04/2015 11:13 AM, W. Lohman wrote:
> On 4/27/2015 7:26 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> On 2015-04-26 10:31 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>>>> Tell me that isn't slavery, being forced to join an organization
>>>> just to
>>>> take a job.
>>>
>>> I worked in places that had unions but I'd never join one. The members
>>> got nothing worth while for their dues. They were good in 1930, but now
>>> they are just blood sucking parasites. I would have earned less as a
>>> member.

>>
>>
>> I worked in places without unions and I worked in places with unions.
>> Working conditions in union shops were much better, and so was the
>> money. I suppose we should all be happy that so much of our
>> manufacturing is now being done off shore where workers toil for peanuts
>> in order for CEOs to justify their multimillion dollar salaries.

>
> Union shops did such a wonderful job with the American auto industry
> that it almost went tits up.
>
> Bravo!

Surely most of the blame, if not all of it belongs with the management
that insisted on producing lousy, unreliable vehicles!
Graham

--
"It is a truism that almost any sect, cult, or religion
will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the
political power to do so."
Sir Arthur C. Clark





  #256 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Ikea

On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:16:28 -0600, graham > wrote:

> I am against the NEED for unions!


Aren't we all?

--

sf
  #257 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 10:54 AM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 10:43:22 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>
>> On 4/26/2015 6:39 PM, jmcquown wrote:
>>> I order freshly prepared food to go which I eat at home.

>>
>>
>> Learn to cook, complainer.

>
> Many of us have urged her FOR YEARS to get something for the $800
> assessment fee that she has to pay (with or without compensation of
> any kind), instead of just flushing it down the drain. I, for one, am
> glad she's finally doing it.
>


And complaining all the way.
  #258 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Ikea

On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:23:06 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:

> > In the mean time, voters in Right-to-Work states are so brainwashed by
> > right wing propaganda that they continue to vote against their own
> > best interests.

>
> I reject being compelled to join ANY group just to obtain work.


Which means you've been brainwashed by the wingers.
>
> I'm not brainwashed, I'm just stubborn and individualistic.


Sure. You're also a temporarily embarrassed millionaire.

--

sf
  #259 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 11:12 AM, graham wrote:
> On 27/04/2015 11:06 AM, W. Lohman wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Read the book.

>>
>>
>> Please list a few that you recall.
>>
>> I'm of no mind to spend my cash on what I perceive to be a biased
>> advocate text.

>
> You mean one that challenges your opinions and prejudices!



No, I mean one that is an advocacy tome, not a dispassionate analysis.

I'm perfectly clear that slavery exists in a mostly decentralized form
in sporadic examples here in the USA.

I'm well aware that in China it's almost institutionalized.

I'm not willing to pay my cash to be inculcated that corporations
practice it here in the USA.
  #260 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 11:16 AM, graham wrote:
> On 27/04/2015 7:26 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> On 2015-04-26 10:31 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>
>>>> Tell me that isn't slavery, being forced to join an organization
>>>> just to
>>>> take a job.
>>>
>>> I worked in places that had unions but I'd never join one. The members
>>> got nothing worth while for their dues. They were good in 1930, but now
>>> they are just blood sucking parasites. I would have earned less as a
>>> member.

>>
>>
>> I worked in places without unions and I worked in places with unions.

>
> My father was forced to join a union back in the 50s when British unions
> were particularly militant.
> However, their welfare arm really helped out when he was off work with
> back trouble.
> I am against the NEED for unions!
> Graham


I suspect most all people are too.

And yet there are professions where working conditions lagged so much
that unionization _was_ necessary.

That seems to be less the case today.

Unionization ought not be mainly about jacking wages up.


  #261 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Ikea

On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:45:25 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:

> On 4/27/2015 10:52 AM, sf wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 10:27:16 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
> >
> >> On 4/26/2015 5:38 PM, sf wrote:
> >>> On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 17:07:01 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 4/26/2015 4:51 PM, sf wrote:
> >>>>> On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 16:35:04 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 4/26/2015 4:27 PM, sf wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Slavery is alive and well in the South and being expanded as other
> >>>>>>> states adopt "right to work".
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> Nah, choice is _always_ present.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> No one owns other folks.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Legalized slavery is the beauty of "right to work" laws.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Nah, that's just shabby rhetoric.
> >>>>
> >>>> Some folks don't want to be _compelled_ to pay union dues.
> >>>>
> >>>> Tell me that isn't slavery, being forced to join an organization just to
> >>>> take a job.
> >>>
> >>> Union busting is the name of the game in right to work states. Let
> >>>
> >>
> >> I reject being compelled to join an organization I would not choose to
> >> simply to obtain a job.
> >>
> >> That is defacto fascism.

> >
> > Except being "forced to join" is a myth perpetrated by right wingers
> > and the "right to be fired at whim" establishment.

>
> Nope, it's a reality.
>
> If I apply for work at a union shop grocer I MUST join the UCFW, period.
>
> Mt only other choice is Wal Mart for non union food worker employnent.
>
> No myth, actual fact.


If that's a fact (and I'm not agreeing it is), then why don't you want
to work at Walmart? If you're anti-union, you clearly have a
non-union workplace choice for employment.

--

sf
  #262 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 11:28 AM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:15:24 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>
>> On 4/27/2015 8:27 AM, sf wrote:
>>> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 02:42:26 -0700, "Julie Bove"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't think you'd get far with messing up the displays. The store is very
>>>> crowded with customers and employees.
>>>
>>> Employees are few and far between here and when you spot one they're
>>> busy with customers.
>>>

>>
>> The key point is that Jill is so disturbed that she publicly shared her
>> plan to vandalize a store!

>
> Shades of Andy in his bread squeezing phase.
>


Oh ick!

I thought only kids did that stuff.
  #263 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Ikea

On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:46:34 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:

> On 4/27/2015 10:54 AM, sf wrote:
> > On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 10:43:22 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
> >
> >> On 4/26/2015 6:39 PM, jmcquown wrote:
> >>> I order freshly prepared food to go which I eat at home.
> >>
> >>
> >> Learn to cook, complainer.

> >
> > Many of us have urged her FOR YEARS to get something for the $800
> > assessment fee that she has to pay (with or without compensation of
> > any kind), instead of just flushing it down the drain. I, for one, am
> > glad she's finally doing it.
> >

>
> And complaining all the way.


I don't see her complaining about their food any more than she
complained about it before she started getting something in return for
her money. She simply has more varied opportunities to comment now.
I think it would be great if she Yelped her reviews!

--

sf
  #264 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 11:45 AM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:13:33 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>
>> On 4/27/2015 7:26 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>> On 2015-04-26 10:31 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Tell me that isn't slavery, being forced to join an organization just to
>>>>> take a job.
>>>>
>>>> I worked in places that had unions but I'd never join one. The members
>>>> got nothing worth while for their dues. They were good in 1930, but now
>>>> they are just blood sucking parasites. I would have earned less as a
>>>> member.
>>>
>>>
>>> I worked in places without unions and I worked in places with unions.
>>> Working conditions in union shops were much better, and so was the
>>> money. I suppose we should all be happy that so much of our
>>> manufacturing is now being done off shore where workers toil for peanuts
>>> in order for CEOs to justify their multimillion dollar salaries.

>>
>> Union shops did such a wonderful job with the American auto industry
>> that it almost went tits up.
>>

>
> Ah - yes, of course, I see the light now. Unions were single handedly
> responsible for the miserable failure of *American* automobile design


Design wasn't really a problem,

Job banks and mediocre build quality however were.

> (when the same set of American designers were perfectly capable of
> designing cars for foreign manufacturers that were well engineered and
> looked great), to say nothing of poor quality control.


Ah yes, "poor quality control" = poor union labor practices, thank you.

> Then there was
> their refusal to modernize, insisting on continuing the outdated
> practice of one man installing one item on a cars 8 hours a day, which
> was the equivalent of you sitting at the computer and hitting one
> single solitary key all day long. You're so right.


I am indeed, now it's all about the robots.

I guess we do have slavery in America after all!

> It's all the unions fault.


The UAW and Fanuc?

Mmm hmm...

http://www.uaw-chrysler.com/training...ions111512.pdf

Course Description
This course is intended for all skilled trades personnel that are
responsible for
programming & maintaining the FANUC R-30iA controller.
Learning Outcome
Completion of this course will provide the trainee with the knowledge
and skills required
to operate and maintain the FANUC R-30iA controller.
Major Topics Covered
• Safely start, stop, and shut down the FANUC-30iA robot in local and remote
operation, including safely moving the robot using the teach pendant.

> Those poor executives in the corporate offices were
> just victims of a vicious union scheme to destroy the American
> automobile industry


Nah, they just made it per unit unprofitable compared to Korean cars and
other imports.

Deal.

> so union workers could give up decent paying jobs
> and live off public assistance. Yeah, that's it.


Is that a union-made straw man?

> Defend your Right-to-Work because no one else will!


Defend union slavery, and automaker bailouts.


  #265 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Ikea

On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 12:18:46 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:

> no automaker bailouts.


In that sense, I'm all for the free market - beginning with no bail
out for Wall Street.

--

sf


  #266 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 11:46 AM, graham wrote:
> On 27/04/2015 11:13 AM, W. Lohman wrote:
>> On 4/27/2015 7:26 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
>>> On 2015-04-26 10:31 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Tell me that isn't slavery, being forced to join an organization
>>>>> just to
>>>>> take a job.
>>>>
>>>> I worked in places that had unions but I'd never join one. The members
>>>> got nothing worth while for their dues. They were good in 1930, but
>>>> now
>>>> they are just blood sucking parasites. I would have earned less as a
>>>> member.
>>>
>>>
>>> I worked in places without unions and I worked in places with unions.
>>> Working conditions in union shops were much better, and so was the
>>> money. I suppose we should all be happy that so much of our
>>> manufacturing is now being done off shore where workers toil for peanuts
>>> in order for CEOs to justify their multimillion dollar salaries.

>>
>> Union shops did such a wonderful job with the American auto industry
>> that it almost went tits up.
>>
>> Bravo!

> Surely most of the blame, if not all of it belongs with the management
> that insisted on producing lousy, unreliable vehicles!
> Graham
>



Not the workers sabotaging them?

Remember the old maxim 'never buy a car built on Monday or Friday'?

But it wasn't just lackadaisacal workers that were the rot, the unions
priced us out of competition early on after WW2 and kept it up for
decades until the bankruptcy.

http://workplacechoice.org/2013/07/2...illed-detroit/

Empire of Rust: How the UAW Killed Detroit

The UAW had, like other labor organizations, observed a wartime truce
with captains of industry at the behest of Franklin Roosevelt. But it
lost no time in agitating as soon as the guns fell silent: In November
1945, a mere three months after V-J Day, the union led a 113-day strike
against General Motors known as the Great Postwar Strike, demanding and
securing significant wage increases.

The industry could afford these higher labor costs in the decade
following the war. Factories were bursting; Eisenhower would soon expand
the nations highway system as never before, helping to create Americas
insatiable car culture. According to Pulitzer-nominated historian James
Stuart Olson, €œthere were 25.8 million registered cars in 1945. . . . By
1955 the number of registered automobiles exceeded 52 million.€

Americans became car addicts and Detroit our dealer. In addition to the
Big Three that Americans are familiar with today, back then a variety of
smaller automakers existed to fill Americas growing appetite for the
road, including Bobbi-Kar, the Keller Motor Corporation, and Packard.

The Packard company was founded in Warren, Ohio, in 1899 by brothers
James and William Packard. In 1903, the growing company relocated to
Detroit into facilities designed by legendary industrial architect
Albert Kahn. By the 1920s, Packard had used its Detroit plant €” widely
known as the most advanced of its kind €” to dominate the luxury-car
market in the United States. The 3.5-million-square-foot Packard complex
employed an estimated 36,000 to 40,000 workers at the height of its
production in the 1940s, or roughly 2 percent of the citys entire
population.

REUTHERS ARMY

Riding the explosion of automobiles popularity was the United Auto
Workers. Formed in 1935 by disgruntled members of the American
Federation of Labor, with the help of legendary labor leader Walter
Reuther, the UAW successfully organized General Motors in 1937 after its
infamous 44-day sit-down strike. GM had little choice but to recognize
the UAW €” by the end of January that year more than 125,000 workers had
shut down 50 GM plants. (Crippling a company that employed thousands of
people at the height of the Great Depression, when over 14 percent of
Americans couldnt find work, is surely a triumph of avarice over ethics.)

After the fall of GM, the UAW marched to Chrysler, where it staged a
similarly spectacular coup; in March of that same year, 17,000 workers
went on strike at Chryslers nine Detroit plants. And just like GM,
Chrysler capitulated, agreeing to recognize the UAW and agreeing to a
host of other demands, including a general wage increase and seniority
rights. Ford held out the longest, but inevitably waved the white flag
in 1941.

It had taken the UAW a mere four years to seize and occupy the major
players of the American auto industry.

After the war, automakers competed for the dollars and loyalty of the
returning GIs who were starting their families. In 1949 General Motors
and Ford engaged in a price war, each wanting to get as many Americans
as possible into the habit of buying its brand. Smaller companies like
Packard, which had been in decline since the end of the war, found it
hard to compete, especially given the higher costs and decreased
flexibility that unionization inflicted on them. Unlike the giants,
these small manufacturers operated on a razor-thin profit margin and had
less capacity to absorb the demands that labor leaders made upon them.

As James Arthur Ward relates in his book The Fall of the Packard Motor
Car Company, on June 17, 1948, the UAW led a strike, closing Packards
Detroit plant for half a day. But this wasnt enough for the union
leaders: They also organized a walkout at the Bendix brake plant,
cutting off Packards supply and forcing it to shut down for an entire
week. Later that same year, guards at the UAW-organized Briggs
Manufacturing plant also went on strike, once again cutting off
Packards access to necessary parts, leaving the company no choice but
to shut down for two entire weeks.

In other words, at a crucial time in the companys history, when
returning GIs were driving up demand and its larger competitors were
slashing prices, Packard was sabotaged on multiple fronts by the UAW.

And the blows kept coming. Though Packards financial situation
continued to deteriorate, the UAW led 8,000 workers on strike in August
1950, demanding higher wages and pensions. The strike lasted two weeks,
and Packard had no choice but to make concessions €” concessions that
cost the company an additional $9 million per year, at a time when it
could ill afford such expenditures.

In a desperate attempt to remain financially viable, Packard merged with
Studebaker Corporation in 1954. Even though the new Packard-Studebaker
became the fourth-largest auto company in the nation, this wasnt enough
to save the new entity. In 1956, it shut down its Detroit plant. Packard
was gone for good, and the union had unwittingly killed it.
  #267 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 11:48 AM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:23:06 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>
>>> In the mean time, voters in Right-to-Work states are so brainwashed by
>>> right wing propaganda that they continue to vote against their own
>>> best interests.

>>
>> I reject being compelled to join ANY group just to obtain work.

>
> Which means you've been brainwashed by the wingers.


You seem to have a problem with my thinking for myself.

I analyze and make my own decisions.

I certainly do not take any group's edicts at face value.

>>
>> I'm not brainwashed, I'm just stubborn and individualistic.

>
> Sure. You're also a temporarily embarrassed millionaire.


Um...not sure what that means...can you be more explicit?

  #268 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 61,789
Default Ikea

On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 14:39:20 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

> The two companies I've worked for for the past 30 years have no unions,
> but we treat the people well, pay a fair wage, we give them good
> benefits and a safe working environment.


If more companies were like that, there would be no need to unionize.

--

sf
  #269 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,851
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 11:39 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2015-04-27 10:30 AM, sf wrote:
>
>> There are the people who work in a union shop, let the union improve
>> their working conditions and salary, but don't join - then talk about
>> how great things are without joining a union. Ed's one of those.
>>

>
> I worked with a lot of people like that. They enjoyed the benefits but
> didn't want to do any of the work themselves, or even bother to show up
> for meetings.



This is where I differ. I've often stated, if I lived in the 1930's, Id
probably be a union organizer. The unions did a lot to improve working
conditions, wages, etc. They were needed. They did good many years ago
and maybe still do in a few shops.

My working full time started in the 1960s. If I joined a union, I would
have been held back. I would not let them do the work for me because i
could do it better. I've bee to a couple of meeting where unions tried
to organizes us and walked out scratching my head.

In my entire working career, my wages have always been higher than any
union worker in the place. My benefits have always been better. I've
always had more time off. I've always have more flexible hours.

Tell my why I should give up any of that and have to pay dues? I'm very
capable of taking care of myself and my family and have never been
restricted by a group of people towing the union line and hating the
company.

The two companies I've worked for for the past 30 years have no unions,
but we treat the people well, pay a fair wage, we give them good
benefits and a safe working environment.
  #270 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 12:08 PM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:45:25 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>
>> On 4/27/2015 10:52 AM, sf wrote:
>>> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 10:27:16 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/26/2015 5:38 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 17:07:01 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/26/2015 4:51 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 16:35:04 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 4/26/2015 4:27 PM, sf wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Slavery is alive and well in the South and being expanded as other
>>>>>>>>> states adopt "right to work".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nah, choice is _always_ present.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No one owns other folks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Legalized slavery is the beauty of "right to work" laws.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nah, that's just shabby rhetoric.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Some folks don't want to be _compelled_ to pay union dues.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tell me that isn't slavery, being forced to join an organization just to
>>>>>> take a job.
>>>>>
>>>>> Union busting is the name of the game in right to work states. Let
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I reject being compelled to join an organization I would not choose to
>>>> simply to obtain a job.
>>>>
>>>> That is defacto fascism.
>>>
>>> Except being "forced to join" is a myth perpetrated by right wingers
>>> and the "right to be fired at whim" establishment.

>>
>> Nope, it's a reality.
>>
>> If I apply for work at a union shop grocer I MUST join the UCFW, period.
>>
>> Mt only other choice is Wal Mart for non union food worker employnent.
>>
>> No myth, actual fact.

>
> If that's a fact (and I'm not agreeing it is), then why don't you want
> to work at Walmart?


Actually I prefer not to work at either, I just made an market example.

The same could be said of working for a telco.

If I want to work at Century Link in the field I must join a union.

> If you're anti-union, you clearly have a
> non-union workplace choice for employment.


But not if I want to do field work for telco.

The point is, NO job should be sown up by a union.

As a worker I should be able to get a job at a grocer and opt-out of the
union if I so choose.

It's all about CHOICE!



  #271 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 12:12 PM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:46:34 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>
>> On 4/27/2015 10:54 AM, sf wrote:
>>> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 10:43:22 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 4/26/2015 6:39 PM, jmcquown wrote:
>>>>> I order freshly prepared food to go which I eat at home.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Learn to cook, complainer.
>>>
>>> Many of us have urged her FOR YEARS to get something for the $800
>>> assessment fee that she has to pay (with or without compensation of
>>> any kind), instead of just flushing it down the drain. I, for one, am
>>> glad she's finally doing it.
>>>

>>
>> And complaining all the way.

>
> I don't see her complaining about their food any more than she
> complained about it before she started getting something in return for
> her money.


You're right, the complaining has been pretty constant.

> She simply has more varied opportunities to comment now.


True.

> I think it would be great if she Yelped her reviews!


It would be, she might save future buyersfrom a rude awakening.


  #272 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,041
Default Ikea

On 27/04/2015 12:37 PM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 14:39:20 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>> The two companies I've worked for for the past 30 years have no unions,
>> but we treat the people well, pay a fair wage, we give them good
>> benefits and a safe working environment.

>
> If more companies were like that, there would be no need to unionize.
>

Exactly! *there would be no need to unionize*

--
"It is a truism that almost any sect, cult, or religion
will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the
political power to do so."
Sir Arthur C. Clark



  #273 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,041
Default Ikea

On 27/04/2015 12:18 PM, W. Lohman wrote:
> On 4/27/2015 11:45 AM, sf wrote:



>>>

>>
>> Ah - yes, of course, I see the light now. Unions were single handedly
>> responsible for the miserable failure of *American* automobile design

>
> Design wasn't really a problem,
>
> Job banks and mediocre build quality however were.
>

An engineer explained it to me that where US car companies worked to
a 5 thou precision, Japanese companies worked to 2 thou.
That's company policy, not the workers' fault.
Graham
  #274 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,041
Default Ikea

On 27/04/2015 11:46 AM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 11:16:28 -0600, graham > wrote:
>
>> I am against the NEED for unions!

>
> Aren't we all?
>

Unless you are a fundie xtian Repuglican it seems.

--
"It is a truism that almost any sect, cult, or religion
will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the
political power to do so."
Sir Arthur C. Clark



  #275 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 12:31 PM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 12:18:46 -0600, "W. Lohman" > wrote:
>
>> no automaker bailouts.

>
> In that sense, I'm all for the free market - beginning with no bail
> out for Wall Street.



Sadly that would have rippled through an already shocked economy so
systemically we might never have gotten it back.

Bitter medicine for sure, made necessary by the geniuses (Black and
Sholes) who got a Nobel prize for authoring credit derivatives.

Lord.


  #276 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 12:37 PM, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 14:39:20 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>> The two companies I've worked for for the past 30 years have no unions,
>> but we treat the people well, pay a fair wage, we give them good
>> benefits and a safe working environment.

>
> If more companies were like that, there would be no need to unionize.
>


Many are, look at Google and Apple, for example.
  #277 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 12:39 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 4/27/2015 11:39 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
>> On 2015-04-27 10:30 AM, sf wrote:
>>
>>> There are the people who work in a union shop, let the union improve
>>> their working conditions and salary, but don't join - then talk about
>>> how great things are without joining a union. Ed's one of those.
>>>

>>
>> I worked with a lot of people like that. They enjoyed the benefits but
>> didn't want to do any of the work themselves, or even bother to show up
>> for meetings.

>
>
> This is where I differ. I've often stated, if I lived in the 1930's, Id
> probably be a union organizer. The unions did a lot to improve working
> conditions, wages, etc. They were needed. They did good many years ago
> and maybe still do in a few shops.
>
> My working full time started in the 1960s. If I joined a union, I would
> have been held back. I would not let them do the work for me because i
> could do it better. I've bee to a couple of meeting where unions tried
> to organizes us and walked out scratching my head.
>
> In my entire working career, my wages have always been higher than any
> union worker in the place. My benefits have always been better. I've
> always had more time off. I've always have more flexible hours.
>
> Tell my why I should give up any of that and have to pay dues? I'm very
> capable of taking care of myself and my family and have never been
> restricted by a group of people towing the union line and hating the
> company.
>
> The two companies I've worked for for the past 30 years have no unions,
> but we treat the people well, pay a fair wage, we give them good
> benefits and a safe working environment.



Your story is anecdotal, but whose isn't?

I too think unions were once vital in checks and balances.

I do not believe their relevance today justifies their inflated wage scales.

How can a dock worker justify $144K/year?
  #278 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 12:53 PM, graham wrote:
> On 27/04/2015 12:37 PM, sf wrote:
>> On Mon, 27 Apr 2015 14:39:20 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>
>>> The two companies I've worked for for the past 30 years have no unions,
>>> but we treat the people well, pay a fair wage, we give them good
>>> benefits and a safe working environment.

>>
>> If more companies were like that, there would be no need to unionize.
>>

> Exactly! *there would be no need to unionize*
>


Do auto workers today really NEED to unionize?
  #280 (permalink)   Report Post  
Posted to rec.food.cooking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,007
Default Ikea

On 4/27/2015 12:57 PM, graham wrote:
> On 27/04/2015 12:18 PM, W. Lohman wrote:
>> On 4/27/2015 11:45 AM, sf wrote:

>
>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ah - yes, of course, I see the light now. Unions were single handedly
>>> responsible for the miserable failure of *American* automobile design

>>
>> Design wasn't really a problem,
>>
>> Job banks and mediocre build quality however were.
>>

> An engineer explained it to me that where US car companies worked to
> a 5 thou precision, Japanese companies worked to 2 thou.


The real fact is that unions created close to a $3500/vehicle cost
imbalance vs. non union producct.

> That's company policy, not the workers' fault.
> Graham


Union policy made US cars uncompetitive imports.

That had to change and did, and now:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...8/mbdlhh0yhq0x

Since 2007, the United Auto Workers has agreed to let automakers hire
new workers who forgo traditional retiree health care, equal pay for
equal work, job security and pensions in exchange for jobs that would
have gone to Mexico or Asia. About 13 percent of GM, Ford Motor Co. and
Chrysler Group LLC hourly workers, or 15,155 employees, now are entry level.

The union’s concessions were inconceivable -- and easily rejected by
labor leaders -- just a few years before. Now, as many as half the
workers at the Michigan factory assembling Sonic and Verano sub-compact
cars make less than the $19.10 hourly average U.S. manufacturing wage
and lack traditional union retiree benefits.

The U.S. economic recovery has been built on the shoulders of
autoworkers such as Werner, who left a $9 an hour job at a nursing home
in November to earn $16.78 an hour at GM, and David Ramirez, 39, who
earns $18.41 an hour installing mounting brackets for transmissions at
the same plant. In August 2011, he escaped an $8 an hour job making
doughnuts at Wal-Mart.

Significant Gains

While the rest of the U.S. economy continues to lag, the significance of
the auto industry’s comeback is hard to overstate. Autos contributed 18
percent of the 2.2 percent average rate of growth for gross domestic
product in the recovery that began in the third quarter of 2009 -- when
GM followed Chrysler out of U.S.-backed bankruptcy -- to the second
quarter of 2012, according to data from the Commerce Department.
The U.S. auto industry sold cars in September at a faster rate than in
any month since March 2008, before the failure of Lehman Brothers
Holdings Inc. GM earned $9.19 billion last year. Automakers throughout
the U.S. have been on a binge of hiring that has led to third shifts in
eight states.

“This is the reason we have job growth in the United States,” Kristin
Dziczek, director of the labor and industry group at the Center for
Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Michigan, said in an interview. “I
don’t think we would have seen the new investments and the job growth in
the United States without some movement in labor costs.”

Closing Gap

The compromises will close the labor-cost gap at GM, Ford and Chrysler
factories with those at U.S. plants for Toyota Motor Corp. and Honda
Motor Co., Dziczek said. By 2015, GM’s total cost for wages and benefits
will be about $59 an hour, compared with $56 at Toyota. In 2007, GM
estimated the gap with Toyota at $25 to $30 an hour. Chrysler’s average
hourly labor costs may fall by 2015 to $53, lower than Toyota’s, CAR said.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lunch at Ikea Steve Freides[_2_] General Cooking 8 29-11-2013 10:23 PM
Lunch at Ikea Janet General Cooking 1 26-11-2013 05:56 AM
Eating at IKEA koko General Cooking 39 19-05-2009 12:17 AM
IKEA rules Blair P. Houghton Tea 6 05-01-2006 12:51 AM
Ikea (was Snowed In) Sharon Chilson General Cooking 0 15-12-2005 09:39 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:00 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 FoodBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Food and drink"