Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a shareholder this would really put me off. Unions are one of the main reasons we had such a huge American auto crisis just a few years ago. I'm largely anti-union anyways. We should have government enforced guarantees of decent treatment. We shouldn't have a tyranny of the masses demanding ever more pay, benefits, etc until a company is bled dry.
"Unions are one of the main reasons we had such a huge American auto crisis just a few years ago." Or, viewed through another lens: the auto workers' union is the organization that prevented auto workers from being squeezed tighter and tighter without end. If they, the workers, hadn't banded together, the owners and shareholders could keep cutting their wages, could keep failing to uphold their obligations to the wor…
$31 per hour for a non-skilled assembly line worker.
That's $31 per hour + very good benefits.
http://www.npr.org/news/specials/gmvstoyota/
Perhaps we should demand government mandate a $100 per hour salary? I don't know, what's "fair" in your mind? Why not $200 per hour?
The truth is that many of these auto workers make more money than many of the shareholders. It isn't like "the shareholders" are ensconced in castles counting doubloons. These shareholders are teachers, fire fighters, normal people who invest in retirement funds or other retail investments. Sure there are a few rich people investing, but acting like shareholders are some kind of privileged class is disingenuous.
Why should the factory worker have more rights than the old lady living off her General Motors dividends?