• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Unions

The unions need leaders when the companies are big. What do you expect a guy who represents 10,000 people or 50,000 people to make?

Do some take advantage? Absolutely, but no more than corporate executives take advantage.

I don't see the same people who complain about unions complaining about golden parachutes or CEOs maknig much more in the US than they ever have or their equals make in any other country.

You don't see CEOs taking pay cuts when their companies lose money.
 
Sure you do. Most CEOs are paid heavily through bonuses and stock options. If the company tanks, those aspects of compensation go down or disappear altogether.
 
They still make millions in salary and other things. They shoudl take the same percentage or even larger in claw backs they ask rank and file to take.
 
In terms of percentage of total compensation, their reduction is usually a much larger percentage.
 
Its crazy to see what unionized subcontractors charge for construction. Labor is 2 to 3 times more in the north with unions than what it costs in the southern states. I really don't see how the economics of housing works with labor costs that high.

There was a story in the NY Times a few weeks ago about a pre-fab highrise building going up in Brooklyn, due in part to union labor costs. Its going to be interesting to see if the unions will be able to successfully fight this type of construction because the wages for construction in a warehouse are so much less than in the field. The ripple effect is going to be interesting...

Prefabricated Tower May Rise at Brooklyn’s Atlantic Yards
By CHARLES V. BAGLI

In a bid to cut costs at his star-crossed Atlantic Yards project in Brooklyn, the developer Bruce C. Ratner is pursuing plans to erect the world’s tallest prefabricated steel structure, a 34-story tower that would fulfill his obligation to start building affordable housing at the site.

The prefabricated, or modular, method he would use, which is untested at that height, could cut construction costs in half by saving time and requiring substantially fewer and cheaper workers. And the large number of buildings planned for the $4.9 billion Atlantic Yards — 16 in all, not including the Nets arena now under construction — could also make it economical for the company to run its own modular factory, where walls, ceilings, floors, plumbing and even bathrooms and kitchens could be installed in prefabricated steel-frame boxes.

The 34-story building, with roughly 400 apartments, would comprise more than 900 modules that would be hauled to Atlantic Yards, lifted into place by crane and bolted together at the corner of Flatbush Avenue and Dean Street, next to the arena.

Mr. Ratner’s development company, Forest City Ratner, has been investigating modular construction for a year, but has kept its plans secret. MaryAnne Gilmartin, executive vice president of Forest City Ratner, confirmed Wednesday that the company was seriously considering the modular method, although, she added, no final decision had been made.

The company has also continued to design a conventional tower. Forest City hired Ove Arup & Partners, a prominent engineering firm, for the modular work, while SHoP Architects is working on designs for both types of buildings. The developer has also recently directed real estate brokers to scout for sites in Long Island City, Queens, that would be large enough to accommodate the modular factory.

“The company is interested in modular, high-rise construction in an urban setting,” Ms. Gilmartin said. “It’s driven by cost and efficiencies.”

But it would also infuriate the construction workers who were Mr. Ratner’s most ardent supporters during years of stormy community meetings, where they drowned out neighborhood opponents with chants of, “Jobs, jobs, jobs.”

“This is something that could be of great consequence to the building trades,” said Gary La Barbera, president of the Building and Construction Trades Council of Greater New York, an umbrella group for the construction unions. “We have never been supportive of prefab buildings, for obvious reasons.” After several years of delays, Forest City is under considerable pressure because of the difficulty in obtaining financing for the building and the weak real estate market. Work on the arena began a year ago. The developer has delayed the start date for the 34-story building, the first of the 16 planned for Atlantic Yards, several times. He now says he hopes to begin by the end of the year.

Under an agreement with the state, Forest City must begin excavation by May 2013, or pay up to $5 million in penalties for every year it falls behind.

Affordable-housing advocates, who supported Atlantic Yards because at least 30 percent of the more than 6,000 apartments would be reserved for low-, moderate- and middle-income tenants, have been pressuring the company to start building. But Rafael E. Cestero, the city’s commissioner of housing preservation and development, who had already set aside $14 million to subsidize 150 units in the first building, declined Mr. Ratner’s recent request for an additional $10 million in subsidies.

In pursuit of cutting construction costs, Mr. Ratner and Ms. Gilmartin recently traveled to Europe to talk to builders involved with what is currently the world’s tallest modular building: a 25-story dormitory in Wolverhampton, England, that was built last year in less than 12 months.

Mr. Ratner has also become captivated by a YouTube video depicting the assembly of the 15-story Ark Hotel in China in a matter of days.

Modular buildings are not new to New York City. The School Construction Authority has used the technology to build classrooms. Capsys, a modular builder at the Brooklyn Navy Yard, has built steel-frame, prefabricated housing up to seven stories tall in Clinton Hill and East New York, Brooklyn, and on Long Island.

Whether taller modular buildings can be built to withstand intense wind shear and seismic forces, while retaining cost savings, is another question, because the higher a structure is built, the more bracing it would require.

“At a smaller scale, prefab buildings have proven to be more efficient, more sustainable and less expensive,” said Thomas Hanrahan, dean of Pratt Institute’s School of Architecture. “The taller the building, the logistical and structural issues become much more complex.”

Tony Sclafani, a spokesman for the Department of Buildings, said city rules did not prohibit Forest City Ratner from using modular construction on the building. “There’s nothing standing in the way of a prefab building as long as they follow our regulations,” he said.

If it is feasible, Mr. Hanrahan and Ms. Gilmartin of Forest City said that Atlantic Yards is an ideal site because it is large enough for cranes to maneuver. “Industrialized and modular construction is an idea whose time has come,” said the architect James Garrison, who worked briefly on the project.

Modular construction saves time because the building components can be put together at the same time the foundation is being dug, and because the factory is indoors, weather is not a problem. Materials can be bought in greater bulk and stored on-site. More of the work is done horizontally, on the factory floor, rather than vertically, saving the time it would normally take for all the plumbers, carpenters, electricians and others to move up and down the structure every day.

But it is the labor savings that are suddenly worrying some union officials, who were repeatedly asked by Forest City to mobilize their members for years of raucous community meetings.

The state and the city agreed to provide $300 million in direct subsidies for Atlantic Yards, in part, because Forest City insisted that the project would generate “upwards of 17,000 union construction jobs.”

Not to worry, Ms. Gilmartin said, “We’re a union shop, and we build union.”

But under current wage scales, union workers earn less in a factory than they do on-site. A carpenter earns $85 an hour in wages and benefits on-site, but only $35 an hour in a factory.

And while modular construction employs a large number of carpenters, iron workers, who earn as much as $93.88 an hour in pay and benefits, could lose a lot of jobs.

One construction professional, who was familiar with Forest City Ratner’s plans but requested anonymity because he did not want to anger the company, said, “The incentive is to move as much work as possible to the factory from the field.”
 
There's an irony in this. HYe's trying to cut workers but still demanding more government subsidies for his project.

He wants to be more profitable and on corporate welfare.
 
No doubt that this developer is pulling a bait and switch--especially if he never hinted that they would be factory construction jobs.

Its going to be a new reality, however, that developers are going to find creative ways to build these buildings in the future to avoid $90/hr labor--especially if they are going to have to provide "affordable" housing.

Where will it go? If the unions catch up and readjust the wage scales, can the developer build the components in other states and just truck them in? Will the state and municipal laws catch up to prevent this? As someone who works for a developer and manages the construction of multi-family, I am fascinated by this--both on the feasibility and the "creative" solution side.
 
Of course they will catch up. just like GM did.

Peoepl always have to catch up with technology and bitch about doing so.

A likely solution is to build the prefab factories closer to the cities and pay them a bit more while cutting the wages of the onsite people.

While I do see how prefab housing can work for modest sized buildings, when you get to the taller ones there seems a lot of hurdles to overcome.

How do you move something that big down city streets? Construction companies don't have the right to stop other commerce for its benefits.

Unless they want to pay the businesses for lost revenue and operating expenses.
 
To get the bailout the unions had to come into better competition with their pay and benefits.

By the way how do that workout?
 
GM should have been allowed to go bankrupt. We all lost money on that deal.
 
No we haven't When the IPO goes through we will have gotten most of it back in equity.

Plus having over 2M out of work would have cost us much, much more than the investment we made in GM that is paying off.

My bad, the GOP was agisnt it. So pinocha say it was terrible. He can't think for himself.
 
How is there value to the government in equity of a company that can't survive without government funds? That is like me owning a company that does not turn a profit, so I have to pull money from my savings each month to float it, and then me claiming that I'm in a positive position because the company has cash value.
 
How is there value to the government in equity of a company that can't survive without government funds? That is like me owning a company that does not turn a profit, so I have to pull money from my savings each month to float it, and then me claiming that I'm in a positive position because the company has cash value.

It's apparent you don't understand business.

When starting or restarting a business capital is necessary. In the GM case, it was government money. In some cases it's from private investors. Money is money. It doesn't matter where it originates.

Then the business starts into the production mode or restarts. After taking product to market, they hopefully make a profit. GM made huge profits in 2010that they wouldn't have made with the government capital.

Once they are strong footing they can make a public offering. This allows those who invested to cash out their initial investment.

That's what is happening with GM.

Johnny, you should put your partisan hat away and take a basic buinsess course. It might help your posts.
 
Ford didn't want GM to go out of business. It would have harmed them. Many computer parts are produced by the same companies. Many other parts are also produced by combined fabricators.

The problem you have is something Obama did worked.
 
It's apparent you don't understand business.

When starting or restarting a business capital is necessary. In the GM case, it was government money. In some cases it's from private investors. Money is money. It doesn't matter where it originates.

Then the business starts into the production mode or restarts. After taking product to market, they hopefully make a profit. GM made huge profits in 2010that they wouldn't have made with the government capital.

Once they are strong footing they can make a public offering. This allows those who invested to cash out their initial investment.

That's what is happening with GM.

Johnny, you should put your partisan hat away and take a basic buinsess course. It might help your posts.

I'll make a point of returning my degree to Calloway tomorrow. From the perspective of the investor, it most certainly does matter where the money comes from. If I invest my life savings in a company I own, it may show a great balance sheet to a third party because of my investment. However, from my perspective, if I moved that money from a more sound vehicle to make the investment, and the company is going to run out of steam unless I continue to constantly infuse more cash at a higher percentage than the company's profits, then my investment (from my perspective as the investor) was poor.

The issue is not whether GM would have or would not have made 2010 profits without government capital, the answer to that is pretty clear. The issue is whether it can continue to make profits at a pace that exceeds its need for more government cash. Given their history, that seems highly unlikely.
 
There is nearly one hundred years of proof that GM will continue to make profits. They had one blip and now have turned it around.

Your position is entirely that you detest anything and everything which can remotely be tied to Obama. Regardless of how successful something becomes you try to find a way to make it negative if Obama is involved.

I'm new and I can see that very easily.
 
No, there is about 70 years of GM making legit profits that would outpace continued government investment. Then there is about 30 years following a change in the global market in which competitors came not hamstrung by union contracts and retirement plans, during which GM endured a steady tailspin in product quality and competitiveness, ultimately resulting in complete natural insolvency. I've seen nothing to indicate that the root causes of that tailspin (the unions) have changed to the extent needed to overcome their faults to generate a return high enough to outpace the needed government cash infusion in the long run.

I don't detest Obama. I'll give him credit for good maneuvers in Libya, certain social issues, and Michelle's fight against childhood obesity. However, when it comes to business and economics, Obama is, in no uncertain terms, an absolute unqualified fucking moron. Every single economic/business decision he has made has crashed and burned relative to the other decisions that could/should have been made. And at a time when economics is the key issue for the country, both short term and long term, he is a disaster as president and is sinking our battleship. If he could hop in his DeLorean and trade places with Clinton, he would have been a great president during Clinton's terms because the economy was generally sailing of its own accord and he could focus on other issues. But, at this point in time, there is nobody worse we could have running the show.
 
And now GM is turned around. GM has added over 50,000 jobs rather than losing 1-2M if they had followed your idea.

Let's see losing over 1M jobs and destroying many towns or adding 50,000 jobs and creating billions in profits. Which is the better choice for our economy?

I would choosing not to make billions and putting over a million more people out of work would be the decision of an absolutely unqualified, partisan moron.

You despise the fact that Obama's efforts with GM have worked better than anyone expected.
 
Back
Top