Kellogg's Memphis Plant "Lock-out"

reply to post by HanzHenry


My husband is white collar and he doesn't make $28/hr, but he manages up 11 people at a time, most of whom he hired and trained.

Right, but determining what wage is considered "livable" is subjective..

I get the impression that most people with well above minimum wage jobs consider minimum wage a living wage for others.

reply to post by schuyler


BRAVO!!!!

Your entire post is EXACTLY my point.

Kellogg's is already ovrpaying human workers to do the jobs that robots can and WILL do.

Companies are NOT obligated to pay workers any certain amount.

WELL SAID

ketsuko
reply to post by tinner07

 

There are quite a few of us here I imagine who either do jobs that take much more skill and education or know people who have jobs like that who make less than $28/hour. Why should someone with a much easier, less skilled job be making so much more, not counting the costs of any benefits?

I don't make $28/hr and neither do my employees. It takes about a solid year to train my employees to be competent.

reply to post by SubTruth


Yes, and when the HUMAN workers say "STOP!", the ROBOT workers will take their jobs, and be glad to do it.

As another poster stated,ROBOTS:

DO NOT need vacation or sick days
DO NOT have to take off early for sick children
DO NOT get attitudes with customers
DO NOT come in late; leave early
DO NOT get hurt or tired, only to sue the company for injuries down the road

and last but not least

DO NOT take off work for 3 months to have a baby.

It's the reality. Technology will be the death of human employment, but it isn;t bad or evil.

It's called 'convenience'.

Soon, we will be merging with the machine anyway. This is part of our evolution.

roadgravel

Right, but determining what wage is considered "livable" is subjective..

I get the impression that most people with well above minimum wage jobs consider minimum wage a living wage for others.

Again, what's considered to be "living wages" is purely subjective.

For example, if I am a lawyer and my husband is a doctor, we'll want to live around others with similar professions/ salaries, so that means at minimum in a $300k house and better. We need separate (nice) cars and we need to be able to dine out frequently. We'll want to send our children to expensive private schools.

To us, living wages are at minimum $200k each per year.

On the other hand,if I am a single mother of 3, only a high school education, and have a low skill set, I am fine with working in a call center or a retail store making $12.00 per hour (most likely because I'll qualify for subsidies), rent a 3 bdr apartment for about $500.00 per month, and buy a brand new vehicle with my Income Tax refund.

Very do-able, and I wouldn't even complain because I'd be above the poverty line.

See the difference?

The problem is that now the lower class has gotten a taste of upper class customs: lots of food by way of food stamps, nice daycare through subsidized child care,living in the suburbs due to Section 8, and a lump sum of spending money each year by Income Tax refunds. These individuals now feel entitled to live the way they have been "accustomed" to, and are now demanding higher wages to support this.

reply to post by QueenofSpades


I also think reality shows and pop culture flaunt excess and wealth in everyone's faces more than ever before...

$28/hr to make cereal is absurd. It's not a skilled trade. Pay cut, contribute to pension and health care just like the rest of us.

They make some good money. A cut wouldn't be out of the question, and what will probably happen is a compromise somewhere in the middle (as usual).

And since nobody has mentioned it, this entire thread is just

GRRREEEEAAAAAAAAT!!

reply to post by Restricted


Absolutely.

This is akin to the fast food protesters striking to be paid $15.00 per hour to warm up some ready made fast food and hand it to me through a window, both of which a robot can do much quicker.

MystikMushroom
reply to post by QueenofSpades

 

I also think reality shows and pop culture flaunt excess and wealth in everyone's faces more than ever before...

Sure they do.

But it doesn't take away from the fact that low skilled workers should be more reasonable about their salary.

reply to post by QueenofSpades


Auto workers Union did that back in the '80s. They were trying to help out the big 3 auto makers stay afloat from they're stupidity. And yes it was stupid. The big 3 decided to go into the small car making business and had no idea what they were doing or how to do it.

They made cheap bad cars that caught on fire when hit.Consumers were terribly unhappy with the results as you can imagine,and wouldn't buy them. A ton of auto workers took the blame and were laid off,though it was clearly an engineering issue.Those that weren't laid off had to take a pay cut by 1/2 they're previous salary.

Didn't save anyone. Like I was told while I worked at Ford... we are the last of a dying breed. Now, its come down to anyone they hire in now,comes in at a lower rate and stays there. They will have raises,but never be paid as much as the more seniored people. When dealing with companies,its pretty much the same as dealing with your government, don't give up anything! Its much easier to lose it than to get it back. You can ask the company pretty please all you want,but once your benefits are gone,they are gone.

By the way, the management also said that was what happened in the '80s,just in case anyone thinks it was just a union sob story.

QueenofSpades
reply to post by Restricted

 

Absolutely.

This is akin to the fast food protesters striking to be paid $15.00 per hour to warm up some ready made fast food and hand it to me through a window, both of which a robot can do much quicker.

You seem to overlook that you need humans to repair and maintain the robots and they cost a heck of a lot more than 15 bucks an hour. And to the people who are opposed to people making a livable wage do you support your taxes being used to give federal aid to these people so they will be able to have a roof over their head and food to eat? And seeing how people that work at fast food stand a better chance of getting shot during a hold up it wouldn't hurt for their pay to go up a little. How many of these overpaid CEO's are willing to catch a bullet for minimum wage?

Kellogs should shut down the whole factory and move it to a 'right to work' state. I know Indiana workers would love a $22 an hour job with benefits. And since the unions don't have a dictatorship over the workers here they won't end up in the same mess.

reply to post by jjkenobi


They are in a right to work State.

Second line

reply to post by KawRider9


Tennessee is, however, an 'At Will' state. Employers do not have to necessarily have a reason to terminate you.

These workers should be happy that Kellog hasn't terminated them.

reply to post by schuyler


"Kellogg has one choice here: Reduce costs to remain competitive"

Um....NO.
They have many different avenues to pursue to remain competitive. Most companies have received massive tax breaks to employ a certain number over a set period of time. That's just for starters. There are many things they can do to tighten their belts rather than just screaming "unreasonable unions"! and throwing their workforce under the bus.

Re-tooling their product line is one thing, thinning management jobs, looking at advertising budget, different shift schedules to trim overtime...seems to me Kellogs hasn't done everything they could, they are just going after low hanging fruit.
Shame on them!!

I worked in a factory that manufactured tools out of steel. I worked with hot glowing steel in a hot dusty environment in the summer and a cold dusty environment in the winter. I made $9.00/hr. I felt like I was making pretty darned good money. In the factory where I worked, you do not sit back and watch "the machines do the work". The machines work you. You do not work the machine. To me 28 dollars an hour sounds like high wages, but only if they are "watching the machines do the work". If they are working as hard as I did in the tool factory in the 90's, then I say perhaps you could take a little less to show the company you appreciate your job and want to keep it. Make the company CEO also take a pay cut. Perhaps he should take a cut that is equal to the cumulative wage cut accepted by the workers. Also if the workers are to be paying for a portion of their own medical care, then the salaried office staff and CEO should be doing the same.

reply to post by groingrinder


well you sir are a fool... How long did you work there if I may ask?

I wanted to clarify a few things about the Memphis lock out. First all employees of Kellogg's must sign a form before they are hired that states that if they say anything to the media or in public which may or could make the company look bad in the public eye they will be terminated. That is why this lock out is so one sided - the company is stating a lot of the and the locked out employees can't say anything for fear that they may be terminated in the future should the lock out end. I worked for this company and I want to speak out where these workers can't. All four Kellogg's cereal plant in North America work under one Master Contract that has to be voted on by all workers at a four plants. This contract has a clause on the very first page that states: While this agreement is in force the union workers agree to not strike against the company and the company agrees to not "lock out" the union workers. This contract is in effect from 10/1/2013 until 10/1/2015. Kellogg's union members do make $28 an hour and they do enjoy good health insurance. They do not have any vision and very little dental. They also do not have a very good pension plan. The pension plan is why the Memphis plant actual has workers with 53 years of service! I did not and I do not know of any workers there that made $100,000 per year as stated by Kellogg's spokesman except the "skilled" labor such as electrician and boiler operators. Unskilled like myself made 63,000 to 75,000 which is still not a bad wage. However, you work mandatory hours and shifts 21 to 28 days per month without any days off. Kellogg's does not provide sick day pay or personal days and you can not call out sick more than three times in a 12 month period with being disciplined which can and often does lead to termination. Workers do not receive the usual union "perks" that some union member do in that they do not take extended breaks, they do not receive any wage increases outside of a cost of living increase, the do not receive a lot of vacation time like the majority of union workers do - but - Kellogg's has always been more like a "family" to their workers than most companies therefore their workers never asked for any of these things in their contracts. Then in came John Bryant - CEO. Mr. Bryant is not American, nor did he work in the food industry before coming to Kellogg's. Mr. Bryant was an accountant. Mr. Bryant like most CEO's is only worried about the share holder. His refusal to label or remove GMO's from the cereal has led to a lot of boycotting. He has spent millions fighting to keep GMO' in the cereal and to fight the GMO label mandate. This led to lower cereal sales and profits. He has blamed lowered sales on everything but the ongoing boycotts but if you check Kellogg's facebook page you will see that the boycott is leading to the lower revenues. Memphis workers can not negotiate on a contract that cuts hours or wages because they can only negotiate these items under the "Master" which affects all four plants. In September the Memphis plant permanently laid off 70 workers due to lack of work. On October 1 the company told the union they wanted the right to hire casual workers at a $6 per hour lower wage. Now remember they have 70 workers laid off due to lack of work. The company also wants the right to decide what jobs will be full time and what jobs will be "casual". Casual jobs will only work on an "as needed" basis with no set amount of hours or shifts per week. They may work them 20 hours this week and only 8 hours next week. Even if the union could have negotiated on this it would have been a death sentence for the workers because all the company had to do was say that their job was now going to be considered only "casual" and not full time. The company response to this was "trust us". The Memphis plant is the smallest Kellogg's cereal plant in North America and it is also the plant where most of the African Americans for Kellogg's are employed. The company hired a woman that has written books on how to "rid your company of union members" to negotiate in Memphis. This woman by the way has several DUI convictions - remember they dumped Michael Phelps a gold medal Olympian because they stated he was a bad role model for children after he appeared smoking pot - I guess drinking and driving is o.k. for children. The company locked the workers out and told them they did not have a job on 10/22. On this day they also cancelled all their insurance. Now if you worked for Kellogg's and you were fired you kept the insurance for 30 days after your termination. Locked out employees did not receive this same perk. Workers that had not used their vacation before 10/22 were told that they would not be paid their earned vacation - that they had lost their rights to it. There again if you were fired you received all your earned vacation time on your last check. Then, workers that decided that they would go ahead and retire since they were locked out applied for retirement starting in November. This is Feb. and they still have not been granted their retirement - keep in mind like I stated earlier some of these people at this plant have been there for 53 years. Workers have not been allowed to retrieve their personal items from their lockers in the plant nor their personal tools. Say what you may about union workers causing companies to go broke by not allowing them to lower their cost but in this case I don't think that really applies. I do believe that Kellogg's is in the wrong on this one. By the way, these locked out workers are being turned down for all the jobs they are applying for because employers are afraid that if Kellogg's decides to let them back in the will quit their new job. They are really caught in a situation and it is getting worse for them because of the contract they signed stating they would not say anything in public that would damage the reputation of Kellogg.