GM bonuses cut because of child support

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
.net...

"T.J." wrote in message
...
Melvin,

Ive never been here before in my life. Furthermore im not a "him" im a
"her". I think you have the wrong person dumbass.

Well, Mel was right about one thing - you send people personal emails in
attempts to intimidate them off-line.

What?? I dont think ive ever sent anyone an email off line. If I did it
was an accident because I hit reply instead of reply to group. My apologies
if I did.

Thanks for sending me the private email to explain you have a dick.
I havent sent you any emails to explain I have a dick, I have no clue what
the hell you are talking about. If you could please foward the email I sent
that tells you I have a dick????

It's
comforting to know a poster like you has a dick. Like I was really
worried
about your sexuality!

Sorry but I dont think I ever sent anything to you saying im male or that I
have a dick.

Now how about explaining for all of us why you refer to your child's
mother
as "asswipe."

Well considering I am my childs mother, I didnt. I have referred to my sons
father as a deadbeat piece of **** and an asswipe.

"T.J." wrote in message
...
Im not a dickhead. If I buy a car and get behind on my payments it gets
taken away. How about my house, I get behind on my payments then no more
house for me. As teh custodial parent if I dont pay for food my children
starve, I dont get a break from anything and cant fall behind on paying
bills or my children suffer. Grow up and be responsible..

I do know what its like to be down on my luck thank you very much. But i
still supported my children ALONE with no help from anyone else and
certaintly not from their deadbeat asswipe. They were MY FIRST priority.
If I go without food in order for my children to have it then Ill do that.

Dont feed me this crap about someone being down on their luck and not able
to pay support for their children. Its calle d they are too selfish. If
your husband cant support his children he sure the hell shouldnt support
your dead ass.
==
Gawd...Deja Vu!! You don't happen to live near Yuma Arizona do you?
Mel, Bob--Say it ain't so!
==
==

"T.J." wrote in message
...
I fully read the post and was making a general comment about it. I think
corporations should get involved and take action against people who cant
support their children. Even those who were not behind will still get
their
money if they are current in support payments or no longer owe them.

Big deal..get over it.
==
OK, so you didn't accidentally appear to be a moron. My mistake.
==
"gini52" wrote in message
...

"T.J." wrote in message
...
GOOD FOR GM!!!!!

They should take deadbeat's bonuses away from them if they arent
current
on
their child support!!!!
==
Typically people read a post before responding. It's a good strategy.
Otherwise,
a responder can accidentally appear to be a moron.
==
==.

"T.J." wrote
............................

Well considering I am my childs mother, I didnt. I have referred to my
sons
father as a deadbeat piece of **** and an asswipe.
==
In you son's presence?
==
==

"T.J." wrote in message
...


"teachrmama" wrote in message
...
What would you say about a man earning $48,000 per year who pays $650
per
month for one child, faithfully. He loses his job due to layoff, and
can't
find another in his field. So he takes a job for $30,000 and petitions
for
a modification in support. The judge says "No. Get a job at your
previous
rate."

** Not if he was laid off and couldnt find anything else, no I dont.
However, im sure that many of these judges get sick and tired of all the
men
who come in and claim the have a lower paying job as an excuse for
lowering
their support. In my state they use an average of the last three years of
earnings to determine the amount. Not what the highest paying job is.**

Where I am, (and where others in this group are, from what I've read) unless
the laid off person is out of work for a very long time, or spends a very
long time at a lower salary, no modification is permitted. Which means that
arrearages continue to accrue until the judge finally decides that the
former salary is just not coming back. But the NCP is still stuck with all
the arrearages and the penalties and interest. And is labeled "deadbeat" by
the system.

My husband found out a couple of years ago that he has a 13 year old
daughter that he never knew about. He pays child support now--has never
missed a payment, but also has arrearages to pay off. He is labeled as a
deadbeat. Do you think he deserves that label?


Even with a second job, he can only get up to $40,000. He falls
behind in his support because he just can't keep bills paid on this new
salary.

**How can someone who makes $40,000 not be able to make ONE payment of
650.00 for one child??? Dont get defensive im just asking. **

$40,000 gross, not net. I live in a very high cost-of-living area. Out in
the rural area I live in, a one bedroom apt would run you $800 per month.
In the nearby city, it is far higher than that. $40K gross doesn't go very
far. You didn't mention mom not working. Don't you think that she should
be required to contribute financially for her own child, too? Or is it ok
for her to not work? (I'm really trying to discuss this with you--no
put-downs intended)

Is he an asswipe? A deadbeat?



Now, add to it that mom doesn't work. She lives with hubby #2, who
supports
her on his $60,000 per year job. She's not hurting because he isn't
sending
his usual amount. But she fights modification anyway. Who would you
scold
if you could talk to both of them? And why?

**Her new hubbies income doesnt make any difference.**

Legally, no, it doesn't. Morally, mom could simply not fight the
modification, since they are doing ok anyway. But the question is, would
you call that dad a deadbeat?

"T.J." wrote in message
...

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...
If your experience were the sum total of the child support system, TJ,
then
you would be correct. However, there are many experiences beyond yours.
Many men who have been forced out of their children's lives and become
nothing but walking wallets. You need to talk to people on the other
side
of the issue before you make judgements!

**Same to you ... you need to talk to people on the other side of the
issue
before you make judgements or anyone else here does.

I don't see where I made a judgement, TJ.


On the other side of the coin, it is sad but true that some men walk
away
from their children and don't look back. Perhaps those are the ones who
could rightfully be labeled "deadbeats." But the men struggling to keep
up
with ruinous lifestyle support and falling behind through no fault of
their
own do not deserve to be treated as criminals. Nor should those who are
up
to date or even through paying CS have their bonuses garnished "just in
case."

**So what was GM supposed to do? Just give everyone their bonuses and
face
federal charges for not complying?

Perhaps they could keep their records up to date just a bit better.


"T.J." wrote in message
...
Dave you are so full of ****!!!

You know in alot of cases the father doesnt want to be present. They
are
to
wrapped up in their own egos and concerns about their money to even
have
any
concern about their own children.

Child support in my household goes to help pay for my childrens needs.
As
a
matter of fact I have a seperate account that all the child support
goes
into so the money is used soley for my children.

Paying support has everything to do with supporting children, children
dont
raise themselves and pay for their own expenses. The only people who
erradicate men from their childrens lives are the ones who arent
present.
Stop blaming everyone else for the fact men cant grow up and be
responsible.

"Dave" Dave@freedoms-door wrote in message
...
Perhaps you should read the recent statement from Lowell at ANCPR
for
a
little enlightment:

"Paying child support has nothing to do with supporting your
children.
Child support is a policy that is fundamentally flawed, since it is
based
on
the assumption that you can replace a parent with money. Child
support,
then, is not for children. It is for the custodial parent. It is
a
reward
paid to the custodial parent for being successful in cutting you,
the
ncp,
out of your child's life. Child support is a social policy that was
specifically designed to enable single parent households. This has
primarily, in well over 90% of contested cases, meant single mother
households (as the program was designed explicitly to do).
Therefore,
when
ever you hear the term single mother, you are actually hearing,
"fatherless
child". If you are paying child support, you are supporting this
system.
You are saying, with your money, "Yes, this makes sense to me."

The only changes I would make to the above is wherever you see child
support, replace it with "lifestyle child support" and that there is
no
accountability or requirement that it is used for the children.


"T.J." wrote in message
...
GOOD FOR GM!!!!!

They should take deadbeat's bonuses away from them if they arent
current
on
their child support!!!!

TJ
"Dave" Dave@freedoms-door wrote in message
...
It has not been easy always being a buy American car kind of
guy.
But
this
pushes it over the top for me. I will never own another GM
product.

"Angel" wrote in message
...
I think that this is going way to far, Corporations should
keep
their
noses
to them selves. I mean what the hell are NCP supposed to do
live
in
a
freaking box. Regardless if the are paying on time or have
arrears.
I
am
glad that my husband doesn't work for GM. We don't have enough
money
now.
Angel


Published October 17, 2003
Child support cuts GM bonuses
Many workers angry as they weren't past due


By John Schneider
Lansing State Journal


Thousands of GM employees who pay child support in Michigan
and
other
states
found their $3,000 bonuses cut by $900 or withheld entirely
this
week.

Ingham County Friend of the Court Donald Rei-sig called it a
"unilateral
and
premature seizure" by General Motors Corp.

But GM officials say federal law, and the time constraints of
the
labor
contract employees recently ratified - which included the
bonuses -
forced
them to err on the side of excess.

About two-thirds of the money taken from 572 GM workers in
Ingham
County
alone - with the blessing of the state Office of Child
Support -
came
from
people who are current in their payment or no longer under
financial
obligation at all.

"This has to be illegal," said Allen McDaniel, a material
handler
at
the
Lansing Car Assembly plant, who completed his support
obligations
a
year
ago.

His bonus check was $900 short: "How can you take money from
somebody
just
because he might owe something?"

McDaniel said GM officials assured him he would get his money
eventually.

Since Tuesday, when GM employees learned about the 50 percent
shortages -
about $900 in most cases - the Ingham Friend of the Court
office
has
been
swamped by calls from outraged clients.

"People are as irate as hell," said Reisig.

The bonuses - lump-sum wage increases established in the labor
contract
ratified Oct. 6 - started out at $3,000. Most employees took
home
about
$1,800 after taxes.

In the case of employees in Michigan with "active child or
spousal
support
deductions," GM held half the $1,800, as specified by Michigan
law.

That varies from state to state. In Ohio, for example, GM
withheld
the
entire amount.

Federal law requires GM to help county and state officials
enforce
child-support orders through payroll deductions and diverting
lump-sum
payments to cover arrears.

But in the cases of the bonuses distributed this week, GM
(including
Saturn), took 50 percent from all Michigan employees with
active
support
deduction orders, regardless of whether they were behind in
their
payments.

GM spokesman Tom Wickham acknowledged that it was an
"unfortunate
situation." But the terms of the new contract between GM and
the
United
Auto
Workers forced GM payroll officials to use a broad net, he
said.

Bonuses for child-support payers typically are handled like
this:

GM, anticipating the distribution of bonus checks, asks county
or
state
officials to identify support payers behind in their
obligations.
GM
uses
that information to determine which bonuses get diverted.

"Normally, we have 45 days to do this," Wickham said. "In this
case,
the
contract was ratified Oct. 6, and we were contractually
obligated
to
distribute the bonuses this week."

Given that, Wickham said, GM officials decided to deduct 50
percent
from
the
bonuses of all employees with support orders.

As for why employees no longer under court orders got caught
in
the
net,
Wickham said, "We need to update our lists."

GM will start releasing the money as it gets those updated
lists,
Wickham
said. He declined to say when that will happen.

Maureen Sorbet, spokeswoman for the state Family Independence
Agency,
said
GM's action was proper.

"We believe GM was honoring the language and intent of the
agreement
between
the employer and the Office of Child Support," Sorbet said.

Today that office will supply GM with a list of support payers
who
aren't
behind in their payments, she said.

"For anybody not in arrears, the money will be released,"
Sorbet
said.
"As
for how quickly, you'll have to check with GM."

On Thursday, in a blistering letter to GM, Reisig wrote: "Your
payroll
department withheld ... bonus payments, without regard to
whether
or
not
any
support arrearage was owed."

The letter continued: "Your action of prematurely seizing
these
funds
and
holding them, even for a relatively short period of time, does
a
disservice
to your many employees, who both give to you their services,
and
who
diligently pay their child support on behalf of their
children."

Of the 572 GM employees in Ing-ham County who received half
their
bonuses,
191 are behind in their support payments.

"It sucks," said Doug Grace of Lansing, an Assembly plant
worker
who
came
up
$900 short. "I go out of my way to make sure I don't fall
behind."

Contact John Schneider at 377-1175 or .

"T.J." wrote in message
...
"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
.net...

"T.J." wrote in message
...
Melvin,

Ive never been here before in my life. Furthermore im not a "him" im
a
"her". I think you have the wrong person dumbass.

Well, Mel was right about one thing - you send people personal emails in
attempts to intimidate them off-line.

What?? I dont think ive ever sent anyone an email off line. If I did it
was an accident because I hit reply instead of reply to group. My
apologies
if I did.

Now you are a liar. Here is the message content you sent me to my personal
email account when I suggested to Angel you were a really a woman pretending
to be a man.

"Im not a woman pretending to be anything but woman. I wrote the message
like that so no one would get confused about which woman I was talking
about."

Did you send me this message or not?

A good communicator would say, "I am a woman and I am not pretending to be
anything but a woman." Your message is, "I am not a woman." Which is it
Bozo? Suffering from some gender confusion?


Thanks for sending me the private email to explain you have a dick.
I havent sent you any emails to explain I have a dick, I have no clue what
the hell you are talking about. If you could please foward the email I
sent
that tells you I have a dick????

It's
comforting to know a poster like you has a dick. Like I was really
worried
about your sexuality!

Sorry but I dont think I ever sent anything to you saying im male or that
I
have a dick.

Would you like me to post the headers from your email to prove it? What do
the words "I'm not a woman" mean to you?


Now how about explaining for all of us why you refer to your child's
mother
as "asswipe."

Well considering I am my childs mother, I didnt. I have referred to my
sons
father as a deadbeat piece of **** and an asswipe.

So why did you attack "Angel" the way you did and imply you were a male CP
receiving CS? You are not the first to pull that scam here.

"teachrmama" wrote in message
...
Where I am, (and where others in this group are, from what I've read)
unless
the laid off person is out of work for a very long time, or spends a very
long time at a lower salary, no modification is permitted. Which means
that
arrearages continue to accrue until the judge finally decides that the
former salary is just not coming back. But the NCP is still stuck with
all
the arrearages and the penalties and interest. And is labeled "deadbeat"
by
the system.

My husband found out a couple of years ago that he has a 13 year old
daughter that he never knew about. He pays child support now--has never
missed a payment, but also has arrearages to pay off. He is labeled as a
deadbeat. Do you think he deserves that label?

How could he have arrearages to pay off? Did they go all the way back to
the childs birth??? Clarification please.

**How can someone who makes $40,000 not be able to make ONE payment of
650.00 for one child??? Dont get defensive im just asking. **

$40,000 gross, not net. I live in a very high cost-of-living area. Out
in
the rural area I live in, a one bedroom apt would run you $800 per month.
In the nearby city, it is far higher than that. $40K gross doesn't go
very
far. You didn't mention mom not working. Don't you think that she should
be required to contribute financially for her own child, too? Or is it ok
for her to not work? (I'm really trying to discuss this with you--no
put-downs intended)

Dont they take out the child support before taxes and doesnt this person get
to claim it on his taxes??

Well I guess it would depend on the situation, but im assuming that there
are no special circumstances involved then yes she should at least be
computed in at what she can potentially earn. I know that my state does
this unless their is special circumstances involved. She should have at the
very least be computed to make minimum wage

Actually you dont know anything about what happen and why my ex and I got
divorced and why he refused to pay support and refuses to see his children
,but the answer to your question is Nope. As a matter of fact I show my
children my ex's picture constantly and have saved things from when we were
together to give to them as they grow up so they are constantly reminded of
him. I dont however make up excuses as to why he chooses not to see his
children. I dont bring up his neglect to pay child support over the years
either. If they ask me where he is I tell them the truth, " I dont know".
If they ask why he doesnt see them I tell them, "I dont know, you will have
to ask him someday".

"gini52" wrote in message
...

"T.J." wrote
...........................

Well considering I am my childs mother, I didnt. I have referred to my
sons
father as a deadbeat piece of **** and an asswipe.
==
In you son's presence?
==
==

"Bob Whiteside" wrote in message
k.net...
What?? I dont think ive ever sent anyone an email off line. If I did
it
was an accident because I hit reply instead of reply to group. My
apologies
if I did.

Now you are a liar.
How?? I said I DONT THINK ive ever sent anyone an email offline. If I DID
IT WAS AN ACCIDENT because I hit reply instead of reply to group. MY
APOLOGIES IF I DID!!!!

"Im not a woman pretending to be anything but woman. I wrote the message
like that so no one would get confused about which woman I was talking
about."
Did you send me this message or not?

Yes actually I did apparently send it to you instead of the group again I
apologize to you. I apologize to anyone here if I sent you an email
personally as this is a new email program im using and I might have sent
things to you personally rather than on the group. I didnt mean to.


Would you like me to post the headers from your email to prove it? What do
the words "I'm not a woman" mean to you?

Um now I did look back into my sent files, as this is were I discovered I
had sent the email to you personally by mistake. The subject line says
nothing about IM NOT A WOMAN or anything in the header. It says Subject:
Desperate Measures & Other Stuff

So why did you attack "Angel" the way you did and imply you were a male CP
receiving CS? You are not the first to pull that scam here.

I didnt attack her as anything but myself. I suppose she and you and others
chould be confused because my mail comes through as TJ but those are my
intials. Were exactly in my email to her did I say im a MALE CP receiving
CS??

Sorry if you guys make assumptions about who I am and what gender I am. As
far as the comment I made about me not pretending to be anything but a
woman, I made a mistype. Im a mother who doesnt get any child support from
a deadbeat. Simple as that. IS that clear to you all. Again I apologize
if I sent you guys email privately I didnt mean to.