HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Activism » Socialist Progressives (Group) » GM to move all salaried w...

Fri Feb 17, 2012, 04:37 PM

GM to move all salaried workers to 401(k) plans

This was posted in Late Breaking News, but I'd like to keep a copy of these types of posts in our group as well. Many corporations have done away with pension plans in favor of 401ks (with the exception of places like law firms which will offer 401K on top of their pensions). A troubling development that folks are being left to their own devices trying to manage 401ks while owners continue to target Social Security:


GM to move all salaried workers to 401(k) plans

By Bryce G. Hoffman
The Detroit News
February 15, 2012 at 9:27 pm

General Motors has the largest pension obligation of any company in the United States, and the automaker had been hinting for months that it needed to do something to reduce the risk that liability posed to its financial strength.

General Motors Co. is ending traditional pensions for its longtime U.S. salaried employees, but the automaker is softening the blow by giving all salaried workers an extra week of vacation.

All of the company's approximately 26,000 white-collar workers in the United States will now get defined contribution, or 401(k) plans, instead.

Those workers hired after Jan. 1, 2001, were already getting 401(k) plans instead of traditional pensions. Workers hired before that date will not lose the pension benefits they have already accrued, the automaker said.

GM said all U.S. salaried employees will also be getting bonuses tied GM's global performance, though details will not be released until Thursday.

GM also said it will give pay increases to workers with critical skills this year, but said there would be no across-the-board raises...

More here: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20120215/AUTO0103/202150397/GM-move-all-salaried-workers-401-k-plans?odyssey=tab

8 replies, 2478 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 8 replies Author Time Post
Reply GM to move all salaried workers to 401(k) plans (Original post)
TBF Feb 2012 OP
TheMastersNemesis Feb 2012 #1
limpyhobbler Feb 2012 #2
white_wolf Feb 2012 #3
socialist_n_TN Feb 2012 #5
white_wolf Feb 2012 #6
TBF Feb 2012 #7
socialist_n_TN Feb 2012 #8
Starry Messenger Feb 2012 #4

Response to TBF (Original post)

Fri Feb 17, 2012, 04:48 PM

1. 401K Fraud

 

The 401 plan is a massive fraud on workers. For one very few people will ever save enough money for themselves to retire in comfort. The 401K was meant to be a supplement to Social Security and traditional "defined" benefit plans. The GOP wants to take away Social Security and Medicare. So that leaves today's workers virtually nothing when they are old enough to retire.

The 401K give Wall Street to pump these plans of money for fees for decades up to 50 years. It also allows the Wall Street to money pump these plans as the market goes up and down. A weekly donation from you paycheck can disappear the the next morning. And you will have to wait until you are nearly 60 to get any money without penalty. And now we have a corporate philosophy" where workers are discarded by the time they are 45.

The 401K is the biggest "bait and switch" fraud since 1900. The money that would have been put into "defined benefit" plans are being given to CEO's and wealthy investors instead of workers. All CEO's have a golden guaranteed retirement funded by workers.

For the greedy the world is not enough.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TBF (Original post)

Sat Feb 18, 2012, 03:17 AM

2. This is garbage.

It's bad news for GM workers anyway. People ought to be able to live their lives without fearing for how they are going to afford to live when they get old. That means we need a clearly defined benefit plan that we can count on and that will be enough to live off of. People don't have the luxury to hide away alot of extra savings on their own these days. People are too pressed for cash and are lucky to make it to the next paycheck.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TBF (Original post)

Sat Feb 18, 2012, 01:03 PM

3. I'm suprsied the UAW isn't fighting this harder.

Or is GM not unionized? I'm assuming it would be, but with all the union busting, I can never be sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to white_wolf (Reply #3)

Sat Feb 18, 2012, 07:42 PM

5. It's for the salaried workers, NOT the line workers...........

who are the ones represented by the UAW. They can do what they want with management.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialist_n_TN (Reply #5)

Sun Feb 19, 2012, 12:14 AM

6. Well, I guess my next question is...

why aren't the represented by the UAW or some other Union? Aren't they workers as well? I know some are management, but aren't most managers themselves workers or am I wrong here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to white_wolf (Reply #6)

Sun Feb 19, 2012, 10:35 AM

7. They are workers too in my book -

they can be laid off even easier (no union representation) and their salaries may be buying them a middle class lifestyle but it's nothing compared to what the CEO's take home.

It's just another way the very rich are chipping away at all of us - including those who used to be more comfortable. Not anymore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to white_wolf (Reply #6)

Sun Feb 19, 2012, 12:02 PM

8. Don't disagree at all, BUT.........

What you describe is one of the weaknesses of "Trade Unionism". It doesn't promote the entire working class or cross trade solidarity. It's usually just representing one trade. That's why I like the Wobbly model. It DOES cut across trade lines and posit one big union for all. I would assume that middle and line management would be included IF they sided with the workers rather than the bosses.

But that is the problem in a lot of these cases. The ones who are classed as "management" buy into the company line wholeheartedly and DON'T side with the workers and, as Trotsky said, "A worker in the service of the capitalists is not a worker, but instead is a bourgeoisie cop."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TBF (Original post)

Sat Feb 18, 2012, 01:04 PM

4. Totally agreed:

"A troubling development that folks are being left to their own devices trying to manage 401ks while owners continue to target Social Security."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread