Union Work Rules

[National Limited]

I have heard many comments regarding the need to change union work rules. I've never seen a list of what rules are archaic and need to be changed. In a perfect world what union work rules would change on Amtrak and why would they need to be changed?

 

[jmbgeg]

I have heard many comments regarding the need to change union work rules. I've never seen a list of what rules are archaic and need to be changed. In a perfect world what union work rules would change on Amtrak and why would they need to be changed?

I am not anti-union, but believe that some of the work rules (scope of duties) need to be more flexible and that the embedded costs above wages, taxes and benefits, need to be better measured vs. the non-union sector.

 

[GG-1]

I have heard many comments regarding the need to change union work rules. I've never seen a list of what rules are archaic and need to be changed. In a perfect world what union work rules would change on Amtrak and why would they need to be changed?

I am not anti-union, but believe that some of the work rules (scope of duties) need to be more flexible and that the embedded costs above wages, taxes and benefits, need to be better measured vs. the non-union sector.

Aloha

While I am Pro-Union, It is not fare to compare, or measure, with the "non-union sector". What needs to change is Management needs to be forthright with their needs in the negotiations, and the Union must really look at the benefits/cost of compromising. In an honest negotiations session it is a two way affair among equals. In my opinion way to often one side dominates the other and also the attitude that Employees are a "Liability" needs to change to an "Asset"

 

[jmbgeg]

I have heard many comments regarding the need to change union work rules. I've never seen a list of what rules are archaic and need to be changed. In a perfect world what union work rules would change on Amtrak and why would they need to be changed?

I am not anti-union, but believe that some of the work rules (scope of duties) need to be more flexible and that the embedded costs above wages, taxes and benefits, need to be better measured vs. the non-union sector.

Aloha

While I am Pro-Union, It is not fare to compare, or measure, with the "non-union sector". What needs to change is Management needs to be forthright with their needs in the negotiations, and the Union must really look at the benefits/cost of compromising. In an honest negotiations session it is a two way affair among equals. In my opinion way to often one side dominates the other and also the attitude that Employees are a "Liability" needs to change to an "Asset"

Noted.

 

[Mark]

What exactly should they change? Less pay? Less crew members on each train? Remember the "get rid of the Assistant Conductor move" played by management not too long ago. I can remember when every coach had its own Attendant, (now some are responsible for two or even three coaches), and the Diners were fully staffed. I have seen Sleeping Car Attendants already helping out in the Diners when the trains are full.

It has been my experience that Railroad management, (Amtrak appears to be no exception), typically has little or no idea what the people actually doing the work at track level go through day to day and for the most part do not care. Contract negotiations break down just about every time because the Management wants everything for nothing. Even when times are good. The Unions, (in Railroading), have been fighting a delaying action since the early 90s. They have been just trying to keep what was negotiated for and that's all. Usually it goes like this: A little bit more pay, (hopefully in line with inflation), here versus one big perk gone there. Freight trains used to have 5 people operating them now they have 2. "So sorry, technology ok, but that's not enough we want 1 person or better yet we want nobody up there operating 10,000 ft and millions of tons of train. By the way we still show huge profits but you guys have to pay for health care now." Don't get hurt, the latest game is to fire first and ask questions later. It is truly an unbelievable industry. So again what exactly should change?

 

[amtrakwolverine]

how about the ability for Amtrak to fire employees who do nothing but spend the whole trip doing nothing but sitting around with their thumb up their ass(sleeping car attendants are famous for this along with some dining car staff). also get ride of a-hole employees who treat you like its your fault the train is 5 minutes late or its your fault that they actually have to lift a finger and work for their supper.

 

[GG-1]

how about the ability for Amtrak to fire employees who do nothing but spend the whole trip doing nothing but sitting around with their thumb up their ass(sleeping car attendants are famous for this along with some dining car staff). also get ride of a-hole employees who treat you like its your fault the train is 5 minutes late or its your fault that they actually have to lift a finger and work for there supper.

Aloha amtrakwolverine

I think you are being a bit hard here. If proper documentation of this kind of performance takes place, The union would concur with management. Way to often the fair procedure is not followed. This is also why most of us here encourage riders to report both the bad, and good workers by writing Amtrak Customer Service

 

[Mark]

how about the ability for Amtrak to fire employees who do nothing but spend the whole trip doing nothing but sitting around with there thumb up there ass(sleeping car attendants are famous for this along with some dining car staff). also get ride of a-hole employees who treat you like its your fault the train is 5 minutes late or its your fault that they actually have to lift a finger and work for there supper.

Agreed, shouldn't be a problem if Amtrak Management got off their buts and actually rode the trains they are supposedly in-charge of. Document, document, document and anybody, Union or not can be fired. Problem is most management isn't willing to invest the time or effort as long as their paycheck keeps rolling in. Unions aren't these impenetrable fortresses that many people believe they are. It takes work, (and nobody likes being the bad guy or gal), to get a so called "dirt-bag" fired and all organizations have them both at the high and low ends. Believe me there are Union members who have cheered, (covertly), when certain individuals were fired.

 

[MikeM]

how about the ability for Amtrak to fire employees who do nothing but spend the whole trip doing nothing but sitting around with their thumb up their ass(sleeping car attendants are famous for this along with some dining car staff). also get ride of a-hole employees who treat you like its your fault the train is 5 minutes late or its your fault that they actually have to lift a finger and work for their supper.

I actually have some pity for sleeping car attendants. Consider what it must be like to have to make up umpteen beds every morning and evening, keep the shower and bathrooms clean, and help folks get their luggage up and down stairs. I've seen a few who deserve to be tied to the tracks, but many more who are really trying hard to make things right for the passengers.

 

[AlanB]

how about the ability for Amtrak to fire employees who do nothing but spend the whole trip doing nothing but sitting around with there thumb up there ass(sleeping car attendants are famous for this along with some dining car staff). also get ride of a-hole employees who treat you like its your fault the train is 5 minutes late or its your fault that they actually have to lift a finger and work for there supper.

Agreed, shouldn't be a problem if Amtrak Management got off their buts and actually rode the trains they are supposedly in-charge of. Document, document, document and anybody, Union or not can be fired. Problem is most management isn't willing to invest the time or effort as long as their paycheck keeps rolling in. Unions aren't these impenetrable fortresses that many people believe they are. It takes work, (and nobody likes being the bad guy or gal), to get a so called "dirt-bag" fired and all organizations have them both at the high and low ends. Believe me there are Union members who have cheered, (covertly), when certain individuals were fired.

I'm not going to tell people who it is, so please don't bother asking or sending me your guesses, as I won't respond.

However, one of our long time members here who has for years given freely of his own personal time, was for a number of years one of those managers that you speak of. We know that he gave freely of his own time, as we can track when he posts from home vs. his office at Amtrak. He's now retired from Amtrak, something that I and those few who do know who he is consider to be a great loss to Amtrak.

His heart must sink so low everytime he reads comments like the above.

This is a man who was indeed out doing his job, which at one point did require him to ride those trains. Later he was responsible for several managers whose jobs were to be the riders on those trains. I've no doubt that he made quite sure that they were taking those rides. Prior to his recent retirement he was a Senior Director at Amtrak, reporting directly to a VP that I have the utmost respect for as his accomplishments during his tenure at Amtrak have been major.

This man came here to help answer questions that other's couldn't answer on his own time; not on Amtrak's dime. That's how dedicated to trying to put out a good product he was. Yes, I'm sure if I asked him to do so, he could name a few managers that need to be fired. But to lump him and other hard working managers all into one group has to be hurtful to him.

So I ask all to remember that be they managers or union workers, that there are both good and bad people in both groups and that we please avoid broad, sweeping comments.

Thanks!

 

[AlanB]

One contract change that I know would help Amtrak tremendously would be to get the rest of the company on a similar contract to the Auto Train. One reason that the Auto Train does better in the numbers is that craft lines don't exist, or at least don't exist to the level that they do at the rest of Amtrak. This requires many extras to be hired and paid, so as to cover all jobs.

On the AT, an employee could be working today's run south and tomorrow's north as a sleeping car attendant. On Tuesday they could be working in the dining car as a waiter. Amtrak does not have this flexibility any place else and could really use it. It's not a change that would unduly hurt or penalize the workers if phased in slowly, and yet it would save Amtrak some big bucks.

 

[Mark]

One contract change that I know would help Amtrak tremendously would be to get the rest of the company on a similar contract to the Auto Train. One reason that the Auto Train does better in the numbers is that craft lines don't exist, or at least don't exist to the level that they do at the rest of Amtrak. This requires many extras to be hired and paid, so as to cover all jobs.
On the AT, an employee could be working today's run south and tomorrow's north as a sleeping car attendant. On Tuesday they could be working in the dining car as a waiter. Amtrak does not have this flexibility any place else and could really use it. It's not a change that would unduly hurt or penalize the workers if phased in slowly, and yet it would save Amtrak some big bucks.

I certainly don't mean to offend in anyway anybody who participates in this forum. I am so very glad I found this site, the information to be found here is simply priceless. I am also, as many of us are, a huge Amtrak fan and have logged many, many miles but the title to the thread is Union Work Rules. Why is does this country's problems always seem to land in the unions lap? I agree that there are good and bad on both sides and believe I alluded to that fact so-

I would be interested to know how the employees on the AT feel about this system as compared to how the rest of the system. Why is it just that train? Do they get incentive pay to essentially be an Auto Train Extra Board? One of the few remaining perks of being a Union Employee is seniority. Being able to hold what job you want based on how long one has (hopefully), faithfully served a given organization Amtrak or otherwise. If someone with high seniority prefers to be a Sleeping Car Attendant for whatever reason then I feel that they should be entitled to do so. That is railroading. The good goes to the old and the young get well, the crap.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

how about the ability for Amtrak to fire employees who do nothing but spend the whole trip doing nothing but sitting around with there thumb up there ass(sleeping car attendants are famous for this along with some dining car staff). also get ride of a-hole employees who treat you like its your fault the train is 5 minutes late or its your fault that they actually have to lift a finger and work for there supper.

Agreed, shouldn't be a problem if Amtrak Management got off their buts and actually rode the trains they are supposedly in-charge of. Document, document, document and anybody, Union or not can be fired. Problem is most management isn't willing to invest the time or effort as long as their paycheck keeps rolling in. Unions aren't these impenetrable fortresses that many people believe they are. It takes work, (and nobody likes being the bad guy or gal), to get a so called "dirt-bag" fired and all organizations have them both at the high and low ends. Believe me there are Union members who have cheered, (covertly), when certain individuals were fired.

I'm not going to tell people who it is, so please don't bother asking or sending me your guesses, as I won't respond.

However, one of our long time members here who has for years given freely of his own personal time, was for a number of years one of those managers that you speak of. We know that he gave freely of his own time, as we can track when he posts from home vs. his office at Amtrak. He's now retired from Amtrak, something that I and those few who do know who he is consider to be a great loss to Amtrak.

His heart must sink so low everytime he reads comments like the above.

This is a man who was indeed out doing his job, which at one point did require him to ride those trains. Later he was responsible for several managers whose jobs were to be the riders on those trains. I've no doubt that he made quite sure that they were taking those rides. Prior to his recent retirement he was a Senior Director at Amtrak, reporting directly to a VP that I have the utmost respect for as his accomplishments during his tenure at Amtrak have been major.

This man came here to help answer questions that other's couldn't answer on his own time; not on Amtrak's dime. That's how dedicated to trying to put out a good product he was. Yes, I'm sure if I asked him to do so, he could name a few managers that need to be fired. But to lump him and other hard working managers all into one group has to be hurtful to him.

So I ask all to remember that be they managers or union workers, that there are both good and bad people in both groups and that we please avoid broad, sweeping comments.

Thanks!

1. I have no problem with sleeper attendants who are doing their best and just cannot keep up with demand etc due to someone called in sick and they have to work two cars or they had to do a double shift or overly demanding passengers fine. as long as they're trying their best. What i or anyone don't like are those sleeper attendants or LSA's who do nothing but sit around with there thumb stuck up their butt. Like dining cars that are full and you got one person taking the food bringing the food greeting the pax in the diner seating them while the LSA or whoever sits around and does nothing to help cause they're too busy sitting around reading a magazine or surfing the web.

2. while reporting helps amtrak needs to re-start having managers ride the trains undercover and report what goes on. once employees start getting fired or suspended then other employees might take notice that if they don't shape up they could be the next to get canned union or not. I want to enjoy the trip not be at the mercy of some A-hole conductor who thinks the train should be run like a prison or just cause he's got power means he/she gets to abuse the passengers.

while i may have been harsh its not far from the truth about some employees. why else do we have a trip from hell thread that keeps getting bumped up.

 

[AlanB]

I would be interested to know how the employees on the AT feel about this system as compared to how the rest of the system. Why is it just that train? Do they get incentive pay to essentially be an Auto Train Extra Board? One of the few remaining perks of being a Union Employee is seniority. Being able to hold what job you want based on how long one has (hopefully), faithfully served a given organization Amtrak or otherwise. If someone with high seniority prefers to be a Sleeping Car Attendant for whatever reason then I feel that they should be entitled to do so. That is railroading. The good goes to the old and the young get well, the crap.

Mark,

While I freely admit that it is more of a guess on my part, I have little actual knowledge, I'd say that most of the employees like it. Some of the best workers to be found at Amtrak, work the Auto Train. Happy workers provide better customer service. I know that jobs on the AT are in demand, so again there must be a draw for them. Perhaps that draw is that they work pretty regular and don't find themselves sitting at home by the phone waiting for the call to come to work.

As for why it is just that train, the Auto Train was not part of the original Amtrak system. It was run privately for many years and continued being privately run for several years after the formation of Amtrak. When the company running the AT went belly up, Amtrak decided to try and run the train. Because of that, Amtrak was able to dictate better terms for Amtrak, failure to find enough employees to agree to those terms would have seen Amtrak simply not running the train. Amtrak was to an extent, in the driver's seat this time.

 

[railiner]

Now if you want to see what real productivity can be like.... there is an airline (perhaps JetBlue?), that trains its terminal employees to be certified flight attendants. One day they may work a flight, next day sell tickets, next day load baggage, next day clean the aircraft. Only the highest specialized crafts (pilots and mechanics), are apart from this.

 

[Dutchrailnut]

Now if you want to see what real productivity can be like.... there is an airline (perhaps JetBlue?), that trains its terminal employees to be certified flight attendants. One day they may work a flight, next day sell tickets, next day load baggage, next day clean the aircraft. Only the highest specialized crafts (pilots and mechanics), are apart from this.

It can be done on railroads too, its not union rules, but the contract the railroad and union negotiate.

contracts can be changed but only if other concesions are made.

to change a rule in contract will require to change something to compensate, another holiday, or more money, or other concesions.

 

[rrdude]

What exactly should they change? Less pay? Less crew members on each train? Freight trains used to have 5 people operating them now they have 2. "So sorry, technology ok, but that's not enough we want 1 person or better yet we want nobody up there operating 10,000 ft and millions of tons of train. By the way we still show huge profits but you guys have to pay for health care now." Don't get hurt, the latest game is to fire first and ask questions later. It is truly an unbelievable industry. So again what exactly should change?

So what are you advocating, that freight railroads still have five people? If companies don't embrace, and utilize technology, their competition (in this case trucking) will eat them alive.

It's a "pendulum thing" on my view. Unions are necessary, to keep check on management. And vice verca. UAW almost destroyed this country's main, big manufacturing base. Same for railroad unions. Then things change a little in favor of management, and the pendulum swings back towards the center.

Of course the best mix is having union representation, I mean REAL representation, on the board. But too many companies do that in "name only". Unless the US Govt is going to further regulate our many industries and companies, unions are necessary.

And I am about as "anti-union" as they come. As a kid, forced to join the "Dining Car, Something-Something" union while employed at Amtrak. Jobs at Ford Motor, forced to join the local UAW. Yuck. If the union and the company don't have the same goal of a profitable, growing company, then you have trouble.

 

[daveyb99]

As mentioned before, and despite the fact you describe these as "union work rules", AMTRAK management AGREED to these conditions.

So when you see someone 'just sitting around who should be fired', maybe you should think 'why did management agree to such lax work rules that would allow someone to just sit around'.

The other side of this issue is the fact that union AMTRAK employees went without a contract for 5-plus years. During that time, no raises, no improvement in conditions, increase health care costs, and overall increases in cost of living. That situation will sour anyone. An agreement was finalized a few years back, but only at the direction of the President of the United States.

For the record, I am a union member of 22+ years. I have negotiated agreements with management. I wanted the sky, they wanted to give zero --- but we came to an agreement we both could live with. Call it 'union work rules' if you must, but it is an agreement to working conditions that contains a signature of both parties.

 

[AlanB]

As mentioned before, and despite the fact you describe these as "union work rules", AMTRAK management AGREED to these conditions.So when you see someone 'just sitting around who should be fired', maybe you should think 'why did management agree to such lax work rules that would allow someone to just sit around'.

Actually most of the more onerous rules that Amtrak would like to get rid of were rules that Amtrak inherited from the freight RR's and they've never been able to get those rules changed. And they have tried, but the one or two times that they tried, from what I know the union either refused to discuss them or the concessions that they wanted for the changes were worse than the status quo.

The other side of this issue is the fact that union AMTRAK employees went without a contract for 5-plus years. During that time, no raises, no improvement in conditions, increase health care costs, and overall increases in cost of living. That situation will sour anyone. An agreement was finalized a few years back, but only at the direction of the President of the United States.

To be fair, the workers did get small Cost Of Living Adjustments (COLA) increases to their salaries during that period. Additionally, one benefit that many didn't consider is the fact that most union workers have had to actually start contributing to their health plans & retirement plans over the past 5 years. Amtrak workers continued with out that issue, getting fully company paid benefits, which in and of itself could almost be considered a salary increase.

That said, I want to be clear that I'm not advocating that the workers should have gone 5 years, some actually went longer 8 IIRC, without a contract. That's not fair to anyone and it's not how the system is supposed to work.

 

[EB_OBS]

I work the Empire Builder with both Seattle and Chicago crews. In the past three years, Seattle has fired about 15 employees and Chicago has fired 2 employees that used to work the EB. I've asked other employees who've been here much longer than me to name any number of employees they could recall who had been fired in the previous ten years before that. Most could only think of maybe one or two. So, in my observations and experience there has been some improvement in terminating unsatisfactory employees. I can also think of a 1/2 dozen or more employees who've been disqualified from crafts as well.

 

[Big Iron]

how about the ability for Amtrak to fire employees who do nothing but spend the whole trip doing nothing but sitting around with there thumb up there ass(sleeping car attendants are famous for this along with some dining car staff). also get ride of a-hole employees who treat you like its your fault the train is 5 minutes late or its your fault that they actually have to lift a finger and work for there supper.

Agreed, shouldn't be a problem if Amtrak Management got off their buts and actually rode the trains they are supposedly in-charge of. Document, document, document and anybody, Union or not can be fired. Problem is most management isn't willing to invest the time or effort as long as their paycheck keeps rolling in. Unions aren't these impenetrable fortresses that many people believe they are. It takes work, (and nobody likes being the bad guy or gal), to get a so called "dirt-bag" fired and all organizations have them both at the high and low ends. Believe me there are Union members who have cheered, (covertly), when certain individuals were fired.

I'm in sales for a publically traded, non-union company. Personality aside, rude or otherwise, it takes 9 months to fire an under-performing sales rep. It's faily easy to document as we have sales goals, if you don't meet them over a 9 month period........goodbye. I know nothing of Amtrak's disciplinary procedures but I would expect many on this forum would agree that 9 months, union employee or not, is a long time.

I'd love to see the rude/lazy SCA, coach attendant, LSA, etc. summarily fired for poor service but all employees should be given the opportunity, and proper training from Management, to succeed.

Again, I know nothing of the details of Amtrak employees union contract, my "perception" is that it would be more costly to fire a longer term union employee due to negotiated severance and other benefits due upon dismissal than a non-union employee. This could lead to a bad employee being kept on for cost rather than performance reasons........but I may be completely wrong so I welcome any insight on the subject.

 

[PetalumaLoco]

I work the Empire Builder with both Seattle and Chicago crews. In the past three years, Seattle has fired about 15 employees and Chicago has fired 2 employees that used to work the EB. I've asked other employees who've been here much longer than me to name any number of employees they could recall who had been fired in the previous ten years before that. Most could only think of maybe one or two. So, in my observations and experience there has been some improvement in terminating unsatisfactory employees. I can also think of a 1/2 dozen or more employees who've been disqualified from crafts as well.

See this related article; Performance improvement program pays off, Amtrak says

 

[Mark]

What exactly should they change? Less pay? Less crew members on each train? Freight trains used to have 5 people operating them now they have 2. "So sorry, technology ok, but that's not enough we want 1 person or better yet we want nobody up there operating 10,000 ft and millions of tons of train. By the way we still show huge profits but you guys have to pay for health care now." Don't get hurt, the latest game is to fire first and ask questions later. It is truly an unbelievable industry. So again what exactly should change?

So what are you advocating, that freight railroads still have five people? If companies don't embrace, and utilize technology, their competition (in this case trucking) will eat them alive.

It's a "pendulum thing" on my view. Unions are necessary, to keep check on management. And vice verca. UAW almost destroyed this country's main, big manufacturing base. Same for railroad unions. Then things change a little in favor of management, and the pendulum swings back towards the center.

Of course the best mix is having union representation, I mean REAL representation, on the board. But too many companies do that in "name only". Unless the US Govt is going to further regulate our many industries and companies, unions are necessary.

And I am about as "anti-union" as they come. As a kid, forced to join the "Dining Car, Something-Something" union while employed at Amtrak. Jobs at Ford Motor, forced to join the local UAW. Yuck. If the union and the company don't have the same goal of a profitable, growing company, then you have trouble.

Ahhhh no. I'm not advocating a return to five person crews but if you've never walked from the head end of a freight train with an 80 or so lb knuckle hoping that that is in fact the problem when the train went into emergency, well then you just haven't lived life to its fullest in railroading. The point is it would be nice to have someone on the hind end to walk the other half of that 100+ car train but "technology" replaced the guys in the caboose and for that matter the caboose. What technology did not replace is that when there is a problem en-route half the crew means double the time just to find out what went wrong. Think about that the next time you're on Amtrak sitting behind that broken down freight in single track territory. The Freights saved a few bucks so you can sit while that one guy walks.

I don't know anything about UAW, (I seriously doubt they almost destroyed our manufacturing base on their own), but I have sat on both sides of the fence so I do know a thing or two about Management and Unions. I'm not really a fan of either if one comes right down to it but my experience has been that management typically plays dirtier pool. If management treated employees with respect and paid them what they are really worth the Unions would go away by themselves. I'm not suggesting that the Unions are the end all be all and I agree with most of your post but believe me the RRs would in fact cut their Unionized workers pay in half immediately, today if they thought they could get away with it. RR unions can't even strike legally, without some huge complicated process involving the Government, cooling off periods, etc. So how much power do they really have? Not all that much.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

UAW almost destroyed this country's main, big manufacturing base.

This is simply not true. The UAW played a part, sure. But look at some of the total garbage that came out of Detroit in the 70s and 80s. The Chevy Vega? With its rot-prone body (no galvanization at all is unheard of, even back then. The Soviet Lada was better assembled!) and its iron-head, aluminum block engine, it had engine problems up the wazoo. General automotive wisdom is if you have aluminum in the block, the head must be aluminum, too. Iron block with aluminum head is ok, the other way around is stupid. This was accepted wisdom when the Vega was introduced, and it was still introduced that way. The union had nothing to do with it.

They build crummy cars that often weren't exactly what customers wanted. Want a better example of just how crappy GM in particular was? GM engineered a front drive midsizer for the 1979 model year known as the X-car. It was... adequate for its time, to be fair. They re-engineered it for the mid 80s, and it was known as the A-body cars. Just so you know what I'm talking about, Chevy Celebrity, Pontiac 6000, Oldsmobile Cutlass Ciera, Buick Century. For the 1990 model year, GM lengthened the platform and put in a simple Strut independant rear suspension.

They were then known as the GM-10 platform cars. The A-body remained in production for five more years. The GM-10s were the Chevy Lumina, Pontiac Grand Prix, Oldsmobile Cutlass Surpreme, and Buick Regal. For 1998, some much needed structural bracing was added to the cars, but their general dimensions were unchanged and many compromises were made to adapt the now 19 year old platform to modern standards. It was rechristened once again with this modification, as the W-cars. They were the Pontiac Grand Prix, the Oldsmobile Intrigue, the Buick Century, and the Buick Regal. A long-wheelbase model was also produced for the 2000 model year as the Cheverolet Impala.

For the 2005 model year, the platform had what (I hope) is its last revision. The Grand Prix stayed on the old platform, and Oldsmobile (who, honestly, had the most promising version of the W-car) It required a massive re-engineering of sheetmetal stampings to produce modern sheetmetal that would fasten to the almost 30 year old platforms hardpoints. The cars produced were the Buick LaCrosse and a restyled Chevy Impala. The Impala is still in production.

When it is replaced for the 2012 model year, the platform will be 35 years old. And remember- until 2010 model year, the Buick used a V6 known by various names, lastmost the 3800. It was introduced in the Buick Special of 1961. 48 years old.

Now lets compare this to Honda of the 80s and 90s. Their Accord, the car that could closest be compared to the GM mid-sizers mentioned above, was replaced, consistently, every 4 years. Completely new, from the ground up, with new engines, and ground breaking technology. And through all this, Honda managed to maintain amazingly high reliability ratings, as well as a perception amongst its customers that they were bullet proof. I assume they are. You find more Accords from the 80s then you do GM X/A/10 cars, and a lot more of them were produced.

The American automakers killed themselves with greed, cheapness, and general ineptitude as much as with bad unions.

 

[National Limited]

My original intention in beginning this thread was to learn what "work rules" had been identified as anachronistic and were legitimate issues to resolve. The tired excuses of the problems being either all management or all union really are not assisting me in understanding what work rules are anachronistic. The problems in the workplace are caused by BOTH management and union and will continue to be so until the human element is eliminated from both. There are certainly egregious examples of union extremism focusing solely on job protection and management extremism focusing solely on the bottom line (or profit) but there must be examples of absurd work rules that a dispassionate observation would identify as something that needs to be addressed. Would anyone be willing to identify some issues that either have been addressed or things that need to be addressed that would fit under the "work rules" category without bringing in the emotional union/management baggage?