•  

    Welcome! You are currently logged out of the forum. Some forum content will be hidden from you if you remain logged out. If you want to view all content, please LOG IN!

    If you are not an MOA member, why not take the time to join the club, so you can enjoy posting on the forum, the BMW Owners News magazine, and all of the benefits of membership? If you click here, you have the opportunity to take us for a test ride at our expense. Enter the code 'FORUM25' in the activation code box to try the first year of the MOA on us!

     

Harley may move out of Milwaukee!!

So . . . . .
Unions still have a valid place?
I have to wonder if their time has passed.
It's a delicate subject, I understand and for those who have had the benefit of 20-30 years of unionized labor I could see where they would be adamant about keeping them in place.
It definitely affects the price Joe Average pays for goods and services.

I'm not trolling here. Is it possible to have a rational discussion in this forum without it spiraling into the swirling cesspool of personal attacks and apathy?

Unions will be with us until the day that the AMA (Doctors, not bikers) and the Bar association are disbanded.

As the old saying goes...........
If you shower after work, your union meets at the union hall.
If you shower before work, your union meets at the Country Club.
 
If you've ever seen a modern automated production facility, it's pretty typical, but nothing special. Parts come in at shipping and receiving and get bolted together on the line. If you've lived/worked beyond a desk/computer, it's nothing new.

I just went on the Haas Automation factory tour in Oxnard, CA. I enjoyed it!
 
Unions will be with us until the day that the AMA (Doctors, not bikers) and the Bar association are disbanded.

Difference being, and directly on point to whether manufacturing stays in Wisconsin, I don't HAVE to join the ABA (or more accurately the American Trial Lawyers Association) to practice law. I will agree that as long as Unions are 10 of the top 15 biggest givers of political money their clout will not be threatened.
 
Difference being, and directly on point to whether manufacturing stays in Wisconsin, I don't HAVE to join the ABA (or more accurately the American Trial Lawyers Association) to practice law. I will agree that as long as Unions are 10 of the top 15 biggest givers of political money their clout will not be threatened.

Now it's Political.
donkey.gif
elephant.gif


Thanks.
 
Now it's Political.
No, it isn't. Much of the power of Unions is derived from politics and political action, the pure volume of money pumped in (as well as issues such as the Card Check initiative) is fair evidence of that. Trying to have a discussion involving the power and viability of unions without recognizing or even excluding the very mention of the role of politics would be a fruitless, blind endeavor. The mention was not a discussion of politics or politicians, the site is a well known non-partisan collector and disseminator of data from public filings, and the statement nothing more than a mere recognition of the role of politics in the power of Unions.

That said, I cannot tell whether that was a serious reply or a troll - I guess we'll see.
 
Now it's Political.
---End Quote---
Because you deign it so? ... That said, I cannot tell whether that was a serious reply or a troll - I guess we'll see.

Troll gets tossed around here WAY to much.
Usually when it involves a difference of opinion.
Or old guys trying to be hip on the internets...
Either way...
Enjoy your thread.

-cya-
That means good bye.

-click-
 
Usually when it involves a difference of opinion.

Well you say it's gotten political, I disagree and explained that but you seemed to have missed all that to jump (ironically or appropriately) straight to the "troll" part. In Washington DC we call that a disagreement, I would assume the same is true in Washington State.

Or old guys trying to be hip on the internets...

Hah, it's actually "teh Internets"...

Enjoy your thread.

Not my thread - if you use your mouse to click the "First" link at the bottom right of the page you'll be taken to the first page where you can see it was started by OldHway.

-cya-
That means good bye.

You're right - see, even an old guy can learn new things if you stick with it.
 
Last edited:
Difference being, and directly on point to whether manufacturing stays in Wisconsin, I don't HAVE to join the ABA (or more accurately the American Trial Lawyers Association) to practice law.
Actually, Wisconsin is a 'closed shop' for lawyers, too. You HAVE to join the Wisconsin Bar Association to practice law here.
 

It's interesting, this thread started with a story about HD management wanting 54-million in wage/benefit concessions which raised the possibility of them leaving Milwaukee. At that point, several comments were posted relative to unions and their related influence on Harley, the nation and economy. However, when it's posted that HD management lost more than 106-million (165-million in write downs and counting), there are zero comments.

Apparently, the people on the lower rungs of the economic ladder must be the ones most accountable for the performance of any company, or country.
 
I posted this on a different motorcycle forum site on July 13, 2008!

As far as the MV Agusta venture is concerned, this may be a big trojan horse for Harley and may drag them down! I want to bet that in five years, they sell it again at a loss. In order to keep a brand like MV Agusta successful, they need a completely different set of skills and a philosophy they do not have. It will drain cash from them faster than they can say "potato, potato

I guess I would have lost my bet. It took only 2 years!
 
It's interesting, this thread started with a story about HD management wanting 54-million in wage/benefit concessions which raised the possibility of them leaving Milwaukee. At that point, several comments were posted relative to unions and their related influence on Harley, the nation and economy. However, when it's posted that HD management lost more than 106-million (165-million in write downs and counting), there are zero comments.

Apparently, the people on the lower rungs of the economic ladder must be the ones most accountable for the performance of any company, or country.

That's my point. Management made a bad decision, lost a boat load of money on the deal and none of the executives lost their jobs. The employees are the ones that are being threatened with job loss. But I also think part of this is a strategy to get tax $$ from Wisconsin to "keep the jobs" and stay.
 
I never thought that I would see this...

In the Milwaukee Journal/Sentinel letters to the editor TODAY, a gentlemen wrote in effect---
(paraphrase): Why should I or we be loyal to the H-D brand if they move out of WI? There are lots of other bikes out there.

The times they are a changin'...Dylan
 
Hah, it's actually "teh Internets"...

You've been spending too much time looking at teh LOL kittehs and not enuf time ridin.

Or were you just lampooning a former executive who could not pronounce the word "nuclear"?
 
Armchair Economist

A lot of statements made throughout this thread can be answered by reading, and applying the frame of thought that an economist takes. The above book is an summary that I feel is presented in a fun, understandable way.

In response to corporations being bad, it is hard to argue with the idea that corporations have survived due to their ability to create benefits that exceed their costs. I'm sure anybody who has ever consumed any mass-produced item, such as a BMW motorcycle (and by consumption, I mean either total consumption or enjoyment for a period of time), will appreciate the corporation's ability to pool capital for the purpose of efficiently producing something. None of us could, from scratch, develop an entire motorcycle (both the intellectual and physical bike) in an entire single lifetime.

In regards to the MV Agusta sale, my gut reaction was that the initial purchase was stupid, but I do not know what conditions HD expected. I doubt they made the choice with the intentions of losing money. It may have been a risk that needed to be taken. Due to many factors and apparently poor timing, the risk obviously didn't work out. That is not to say it was definitely stupid from the get-go. And it is not to say that these executives should be punished.

We should NOT punish executives for taking reasonable risks. In order for stockholders, consumers, employees and society as a whole to benefit, risks need to be taken. Usually, they work out and the world sees a benefit.

If a corporation were to punish executives for a risk that didn't work out, the executives' personal interests (maintaining personal wealth) would cause them to NOT want to take risks for the company. This lack of risk-taking does NOT allign with stockholders' intentions of growth, and will not cause a company to maintain its competitive status in an industry. If a company loses that competitive status, that is bad for executives and employees alike. In order to make sure companies take appropriate risks, executives are paid LOTS of money. If executives need to be let go due to a risk that failed, now-former executives are paid LOTS of money. This severance pay is duly noted by the new executives, who then become comfortable taking risks. This executive-severance pay is actually a relatively small cost to ensure that stockholder, executive, employee and consumer interests are alligned.

Sorry for the long response, but I feel many people have not taken the time to understand how the modern world functions in relation to industry and money.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top