Chrysler.........

[tao]

If they are reinstated with full back pay and no loss of seniority, then they have retroactively prevented the firing from having taken effect.

In fact, if you've read the grievance procedures you'd know that the firing technically does not take effect if the union files a grievance until after the grievance has been resolved, so, technically, their firing has not yet taken effect. They are sort of in 'limbo'. The reason for this has to do with the way EI, CPP and things like health benefits and pensions work. If the union wins the case, it will be as if the firing never happened for all legal purposes.

So, in effect they will have prevented the firing from happening, for all legal purposes.

holy fuck ... jj just drove the needle for the spin 'o' meter off the scale with this abortion of a post ...

no i haven't read the marine workers contract and i doubt you have either. (otherwise you probably would not have originally said the courts would be involved in a grievance.)

they are not in limbo, the 3 people on the bridge at the time of the accident were fired.

The BC Ferry and Marine Workers' Union has confirmed that the three people on the bridge the night the Queen of the North sank have been fired.

The Union's Dave Badior confirms second officer Kevin Hilton, fourth officer Karl Lilgert and helmswoman Karen Bricker were let go nearly two weeks ago.

Badior says the Union will be appealing the firings, "That's standard, we grieve every termination."

Link

 

[BC visitor]

I think there are several possibilities for Chrysler. First, I think nothing much at least until late fall, after the Detroit 3 close another cycle of collective bargaining with the UAW. I'm sure this was the price of gaining the UAW support for the deal.

Then, I see 2 major possibilities. First, they try to make a go of the company. Chrysler has "gone dark" from a share holder perspective. This can be a good thing. With a product developement cycle of 2-3 years and a retail life span of 4-5 years, it can be very hard to always have to answer to shareholders every quarter. Going private can give the company the ability to change perspectives from short term returns to long term survival.

Or...

They can butcher it like the fat pig it is; carve it up & sell it to the highest bidder. Jeep is a good brand, and I'm sure someone will pay good money for the name. Companies like China's Chery would love access to a US dealer base like Chrysler has. It would allow quick entry into the US market. The US auto industry has a glut of capacity. Shuttering Chrysler as a company would bring capacity closer inline with sales demand.

Just my opinion...

 

[metoo113]

You obviously haven't been paying attention to many of the court cases over the last several years.

Go do some reading and see if you still think that the union won't win.

I'm only taking it from personal experience. I have ran or owned several companies and have never had a problem firing people, union or not. If you have the incidents documented and you are firing the worker for cause, then it will not be a problem. There are always court cases where something stupid occurs but this is not the norm. If the employee is always late, stealing from you, being violent in the work place etc you will have no problem getting rid of them.

 

[n00b]

I had a friend who worked in the oakville ford plant. He told me stories like where his co-worker was caught smoking weed on the job and the company fired him. Next week he was back working because the union got him his job back or when the manager asked him to move and empty skid from one zone to another..which was like 10 feet. He said no because union rules is he cannot move cargo from one zone to an other..some other guy had to do it.

The easy way out for the big 3 is to file for brankruptcy and dissolve the union. I believe this was stated long time ago but the big 3 refused to go bankrupt to maintin an image they have of the company.

 

[sdw]

ditto!!!




i can't remember ... but some of the fella's on here identified her as ms. reon kadena.

Here she is:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reon_Kadena

The entire video is here: http://www.reonkadena.com/videos/

 

[LaCreme]

Here she is:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reon_Kadena

The entire video is here: http://www.reonkadena.com/videos/

dude that japonease gal is a pure cutie.


she have nice everything simply .
nice tits, nice butt, nice face, nice body ,nice style..

 

[looking4alady]

Yes, it will be interesting what happens to Chrysler.....

They can't be the only ones that are hurting that bad, because I recall hearing that Ford lost 12 billion last year (I don't know where GM's numbers are sitting).

Given that information, what is the current ranking of automakers in Canada (based on sales)? Was it not previously:
1. GM
2. Ford
3. Chrysler
4. The rest ?

Would anybody know the current ranking? I hear conflicting reports that Toyota is now number 1 ?? Can anybody provide the ranking for the top 5.

 

[jjinvan]

Yes, it will be interesting what happens to Chrysler.....

They can't be the only ones that are hurting that bad, because I recall hearing that Ford lost 12 billion last year (I don't know where GM's numbers are sitting).

Given that information, what is the current ranking of automakers in Canada (based on sales)? Was it not previously:
1. GM
2. Ford
3. Chrysler
4. The rest ?

Would anybody know the current ranking? I hear conflicting reports that Toyota is now number 1 ?? Can anybody provide the ranking for the top 5.

How would you define the ranking 'in Canada' ? Sales or production (domestic production only or all production?)?

 

[jjinvan]

I think there are several possibilities for Chrysler. First, I think nothing much at least until late fall, after the Detroit 3 close another cycle of collective bargaining with the UAW. I'm sure this was the price of gaining the UAW support for the deal.

Then, I see 2 major possibilities. First, they try to make a go of the company. Chrysler has "gone dark" from a share holder perspective. This can be a good thing. With a product developement cycle of 2-3 years and a retail life span of 4-5 years, it can be very hard to always have to answer to shareholders every quarter. Going private can give the company the ability to change perspectives from short term returns to long term survival.

Or...

They can butcher it like the fat pig it is; carve it up & sell it to the highest bidder. Jeep is a good brand, and I'm sure someone will pay good money for the name. Companies like China's Chery would love access to a US dealer base like Chrysler has. It would allow quick entry into the US market. The US auto industry has a glut of capacity. Shuttering Chrysler as a company would bring capacity closer inline with sales demand.

Just my opinion...

I am reasonably sure that they will carve up the pieces and the union will be SOL.

The reason they got it so cheap was because of the ongoing obligations and contracts with the union. No other car maker would touch it because they can't afford to piss off UAW or their own workers will retaliate in their own plants. Cerebus doesn't care if they piss off UAW if they are going to carve up the company and sell it off because they don't plan to stay in the car manufacturing business anyway.

Alternately, they could draw up all the plans to do that, and then sit down with the union and tell them that unless they accept major concessions, they'll be SOL. This usually doesn't work (Look at all the bankrupcies where the unions didn't back down, Air Canada anyone?)

Cerebus is in the business of investing money, not making cars. If they carve it up and sell it off they will have more money in their coffers to move on to their next target (thought by many to be BCE Inc). If Daimler, who is in the business of making cars, gave up on Chrysler and basically gave it away for nothing, what are the odds that an investment firm thinks they can do better?

 

[jjinvan]

I'm only taking it from personal experience. I have ran or owned several companies and have never had a problem firing people, union or not. If you have the incidents documented and you are firing the worker for cause, then it will not be a problem. There are always court cases where something stupid occurs but this is not the norm. If the employee is always late, stealing from you, being violent in the work place etc you will have no problem getting rid of them.

Civil servants and crown corporations are a whole different story.

I've seen hospital employees go to jail for stealing narcotics from the hospital and then be reinstated with no loss of seniority when they get out of jail after the union grieves their firing, and then they do it over again and the same thing happens (the most I've seen is 3 times, and that one is still in jail, we'll see what happens when they get out).

 

[Talon71]

I work in the medical field too. I have seen some one fired for just not being a very good worker. And he was never allowed back. Heard stories of another person stealing drugs ... was fired. Never allowed back. I guess you are unique JJ.

 

[mick_eight]

Civil servants and crown corporations are a whole different story.

I've seen hospital employees go to jail for stealing narcotics from the hospital and then be reinstated with no loss of seniority when they get out of jail after the union grieves their firing, and then they do it over again and the same thing happens (the most I've seen is 3 times, and that one is still in jail, we'll see what happens when they get out).

JJ under BC laws the union has to represent the worker weather they agree with the firing or not.
Some unions would love to get rid of some members. Just like I'm sure you would like to see some of your drug taking peers be gone but can't. Nobody likes a rat

 

[jjinvan]

I work in the medical field too. I have seen some one fired for just not being a very good worker. And he was never allowed back. Heard stories of another person stealing drugs ... was fired. Never allowed back. I guess you are unique JJ.

And they were union? Was it in BC?

Remember that a lot of the staff at hospitals now aren't union and/or don't work for the government anymore.

 

[jjinvan]

JJ under BC laws the union has to represent the worker weather they agree with the firing or not.
Some unions would love to get rid of some members. Just like I'm sure you would like to see some of your drug taking peers be gone but can't. Nobody likes a rat

Yep, it's the BC labour laws that are a disaster, the thing is, it was union lobby groups that got them the way they are.

 

[looking4alady]

I would rate ranking by SALES...somebody can produce lots of cars, but if you don't sell them, it doesn't matter how many produce.

 

[wolverine]

If I was running one of the Big 3 automakers, I would completely streamline everything. I would eliminate all the redundant marques - I mean, are there any real differences between Chevy and Pontiac anymore, between Dodge and Chrysler, or between Ford and Mercury?

I suppose what was really disappointing was that everyone kinda hoped that Mercedes will introduce some better quality to Chrysler's cars.

 

[metoo113]

Civil servants and crown corporations are a whole different story.

I've seen hospital employees go to jail for stealing narcotics from the hospital and then be reinstated with no loss of seniority when they get out of jail after the union grieves their firing, and then they do it over again and the same thing happens (the most I've seen is 3 times, and that one is still in jail, we'll see what happens when they get out).

I've went on a few dates with a women who worked for Canada Post. She was caught stealing and was fired. The union didn't even grieve it. The proof was unquestionable and the union didn't want to be seen as supporting theft. I see no reason why a union would want to support someone who steals but stranger things have happened.

 

[georgebushmoron]

I heard that Nissan is now after the remnants of Chrysler through Cerebrus Capital. It'll be a good move if they can fire management and the slack grunt labor force.

 

[jjinvan]

I would rate ranking by SALES...somebody can produce lots of cars, but if you don't sell them, it doesn't matter how many produce.

Sales within Canada or total sales? Sales by number of cars or by dollar value?

I guess what's confusing is the idea of a canadian ranking as opposed to just a ranking.

 

[jjinvan]

I've went on a few dates with a women who worked for Canada Post. She was caught stealing and was fired. The union didn't even grieve it. The proof was unquestionable and the union didn't want to be seen as supporting theft. I see no reason why a union would want to support someone who steals but stranger things have happened.

Generally the only way to fire a union employee is if they are convicted of a crime (like theft or assault).

And, if they can somehow blame their crime on a 'disability' (such as drug addiction or alcoholism in BC, where those behaviour choices are considered a disability by law) then they can't be fired for it.

So, if a nurse steals drugs and sells them, but isn't taking them herself and she gets caught and convicted, then she can be fired. But if she's an addict and is stealing them for herself, I have yet to see one get fired and I have seen a LOT of cases.