GM owner UAW negtiated $5k signing bonuses WITH ITSELF, will impose same on Ford

The pattern for as long as I can remember here in the Detroit area is that the UAW negotiates a contract with one of the big-3, and then imposes that contract on the other two. The difference this go around is that the UAW owns GM. In that regard, they've 'negotiated' a contract with themselves, including $5,000 'signing bonuses' to the rank and file at taxpayer expense (I'll get to that part in a moment), and I'm sure will proceed to simply copy that onto their competitor Ford. From the AP: GM, UAW agree on profit-sharing in new contract

The United Auto Workers union won $5,000 signing bonuses and the possibility of sweeter profit-sharing checks as part of a new four-year contract with General Motors Co., two people briefed on the talks said Saturday.

The deal, which was reached late Friday, also includes a $2- to $3-per-hour pay raise for entry-level workers over the life of the contract and guarantees more union jobs, the people said.

The other side of this turd sandwich is that 100% of GM profit are really US taxpayer bailout dollars. GM makes no real profit. It only looks that way on paper because of an Obama mind trick. There's in fact a backdoor bailout that the media continues to refuse to cover: Government Motors, Dems, Obama celebrate first quarter profits made up entirely of backdoor taxpayer bailout that the press still refuses to report. I'll summarize the backdoor bailout in two prior posts:

• Bailout: GM only earned a 'profit' on paper because of $45 billion backdoor taxpayer bailout that the establishment MSM isn't reporting
• Detroit News spews Obama propaganda: Feds to recoup $36 billion in bailout money, fail to mention GM receiving $45 billion tax furlough

That's right - neither Chrysler nor GM pay taxes. They are exempt for several years costing taxpayers at least $42 billion. That was a decision Obama made (the regime gave any 'private' company a tax exemption if they drank the kool-aid and took TARP money). Forget that Obama doesn't even have the power to do so:Shocker: Obama had no authority to waive GM taxes, did it anyway via executive fiat. Ford gets no such privileged treatment, pays its taxes and still has to compete on the open market with both. For someone who gives lip service to "leveling the playing field" Obama tilted it severely for political points. And with the non-curious, lazy media at his back, he gets headlines like the above and it's based on news that is misleading at best, and outright false at worse. Including the tax breaks, how much will the total loss be to US taxpayers? This much: Government to LOSE $85 Billion on Government Motors, Obama calls it a success...  The original bailout was $80 billion. Put up $80 billion, end up losing $85 billion. Only in the world of the federal government is that called a success. And now after siphoning tens of billions of taxpayer dollars, the UAW is giving itself a signing bonus that is into the hundreds of millions, again 100% at taxpayer expense.

If the US Justice Department were worth its salt (its not), they would file racketeering charges against the UAW for this absurdity of negotiating with itself to impose a contract onto Ford.

UPDATE: Via Instapundit:

MICKEY KAUS: Why Not Pay Back Taxpayers First? “I’m sure there are sophisticated arguments for why the UAW members shouldn’t pay back the taxpayers who bailed their employer out of bankruptcy before they negotiate a deal that gives them each a $5,000 bonus. I just can’t think of them right now. … Just from a PR standpoint, repaying the debt would seem like a good idea. . . . It’s one thing to give workers power to negotiate above-market wages through collective bargaining–hey, let them squeeze the bosses for all the bosses can bear. It’s another thing when they squeeze more than the bosses can bear, the bosses go broke, and ordinary citizens, many poorer than UAW members, have to make up the difference. After that, why let the UAW continue to extract Wagner Act wages as if nothing happened?”

The only point Kaus misses is that the workers and the bosses are one and the same in this case. They have literally negotiated with themselves more taxpayer loot!

UPDATE #2: Via The Detroit Free Press: UAW to release details of GM deal Tuesday; analyst calls pact partial victory for both sides. Both sides? The UAW sits on both! There are no two sides!!!

Video: The Obama-GM 2012 Campaign Ad - 'Just Fix It.'

This was a great catch over at SharpElbows. Love the slight modification in pointing out the blank check to fix an utterly broken system actually not worth fixing. It's not an Obama campaign ad, it's a metaphor for liberalism, social security, Medicare, and pretty much everything Obama:

And Adam made the mods over football yesterday. Thumbs up to that!

UPDATE: Speaking of metaphors, what's up with this?: McCotter promises a free lunch on Social Security

Leave it to U.S. Rep. Thaddeus McCotter to promise a free lunch on Social Security.

The Republican from Livonia who's running for president has scheduled a Monday noon session at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., where he will reveal how he would stabilize or save Social Security without raising taxes or cutting benefits -- a promise that sounds like a free lunch for taxpayers.

In this case, McCotter is offering a free lunch for people who show up to hear his plan, which is endorsed by Social Security expert Peter Ferrera as "the largest single reduction in government spending in the history of mankind," according to a McCotter press release.

Shocker: GM, Chryler owner UAW leans toward Ford strike, "GM, Chrysler emerging as favorites to finish UAW contract talks first"

How exactly is this not racketeering? Obama gave the UAW a big chunk of ownership in GM and Chrysler at taxpayer expense, and now that same UAW is muscling GM and Chrysler competitor Ford Motor Company: UAW leans toward Ford strike

The United Auto Workers union has a strong mandate to strike Ford Motor Co. if an acceptable new labor agreement is not reached when the current contract expires Sept. 14.

Locals representing about 41,000 hourly Ford workers were asked to complete their votes by Friday. Locals are reporting 97 percent or higher of the membership has authorized UAW leadership to strike if necessary.

...Ford is the only Detroit automaker the UAW can strike. General Motors Co. and Chrysler Group LLC have no-strike clauses from bankruptcy restructuring.

How could they strike GM and Chrysler anyway since they are part owners? Would the UAW strike against the UAW? Of course not. Ford is in essence getting punished for not putting themselves into Obama's, and the UAW's, hands.  Speaking of:

Bargaining with GM and Chrysler is pacing ahead of Ford, with teams working weekends and big issues on the table. The expectation is the larger GM will set terms that Chrysler will be expected to meet. Ford teams are working long days, but talks are not expected to intensify until after the Labor Day weekend.

So the UAW is essentially negotiating with itself via GM and Chrysler,and whatever they come up with will simply be imposed on Ford. Um - how is that not racketeering? Also, from The Detroit Free Press: GM, Chrysler emerging as favorites to finish UAW contract talks first. Shocked as hell, no?

Media Bias Headline Of The Day: "Cheney Opposed Decision to Save GM"

From David Shepardson of The Detroit News Washington Bureau, the liberal media bias headline of the day: Cheney Opposed Decision to Save GM. The decision didn't "save GM." It simply bailout out the UAW. The piece starts out just as the headline suggests:

Former Vice President Dick Cheney says he opposed the decision to save General Motors Corp. from collapse in December 2008.

The bailout didn't save GM from collapse. These people are either ignorant of what bankruptcy is, or simply think we're too stupid to know the difference between bankruptcy and collapse. Speaking of, remember when the bailout of GM and Chrysler was advertised as the necessary remedy to keep the autos from going bankrupt? The result was that they took all those billions of taxpayers dollars... and went bankrupt. The only difference was that they had to go through bankruptcy proceedings with the 800-ound government gorilla on their backs. And the gorilla liked to pick winners and losers. UAW the winner, bondholders the losers.

But a funny thing happened in the runup to bankruptcy. The narrative changed from the bailout saving the autos from bankruptcy to saving the autos from liquidation. It was and is a false narrative. Without the bailout, GM and Chrysler would have gone through bankruptcy proceedings, would have shed their bad debt, and more importantly their unsustainable union contract, and come out a stronger, more competitive company. Instead, the yoke of the union contract is still around their necks thanks to Obama, and any progress that GM and Chrysler have made is in spite of, not because of the bailout. Fortunately for both companies, they have competent engineers pioneering better products. I've seen many of them come and go through my courses.

So shame on David Shepardson for what appears t be naked liberal bias in what is supposed to be a news piece.

By the way, I would be remiss in not pointing out what liberals claim is a success story: Treasury hikes estimate of auto bailout losses to $14.3B. Actually, the loss is far more than that because the $14.3 billion number ignores the backdoor bailout that the media continues to refuse to cover: Government Motors, Dems, Obama celebrate first quarter profits made up entirely of backdoor taxpayer bailout that the press still refuses to report. I'll summarize the backdoor bailout in two prior posts:

• Bailout: GM only earned a 'profit' on paper because of $45 billion backdoor taxpayer bailout that the establishment MSM isn't reporting


• Detroit News spews Obama propaganda: Feds to recoup $36 billion in bailout money, fail to mention GM receiving $45 billion tax furlough

That's right - neither Chrysler nor GM pay taxes. They are exempt for several years costing taxpayers at least $42 billion. That was a decision Obama made (the regime gave any 'private' company a tax exemption if they drank the kool-aid and took TARP money). Ford gets no such privileged treatment, pays its taxes and still has to compete on the open market with both. For someone who gives lip service to "leveling the playing field" Obama tilted it severely to political points. And with the non-curious, lazy media at his back, he gets headlines like the above and it's based on news that is misleading at best, and outright false at worse. Including the tax breaks, how much will the total loss be to US taxpayers? This much: Government to LOSE $85 Billion on Government Motors, Obama calls it a success...  The original bailout was $80 billion. Put up $80 billion, end up losing $85 billion. Only in the world of the federal government is that called a success.
More GM news via Instapundit:

BROKEN PROMISE: General Motors Again Ripping Off Americans: Warranties Edition.

And related auto industry news here in the D: Pelosi aide defends $35K congressional tab for Detroit auto show. Compared to the deficit, and the $5 trillion in new debt under Pelosi, $35k is just a speck of dirt on a drop in a really big well.