No way!
My recollection is that the salaries at the unionized U.S. plants are more like $50/hour, whereas the Japanese and European mfgs who are building in the U.S. are paying around $35/hour.
However, that is not the real issue. The U.S. companies have ALREADY negotiated a dual wage scale, whereby newly hired employees make essentially the equivalent of what the non-US companies are paying, and only the older (grandfathered) employees make the $50 rate.
What is killing the US companies are the legacy payments for retirees (pension and medical costs). This nut doesn't exist for the non-US companies since 1) they only built their plants recently and probably don't have very many retirees, and 2) they didn't negotiate gold-plated retirement benefits to begin with.
Don't get me started, but I believe the former managers of these companies deliberately offered up premium retirement benefits to the union, rather than pay increases. The reason? Retirement benefits would hit down the road and be someone else's problem. In the meantime profitability under their watch remained high - and, hence, so did their compensation.
(BTW, this is not only true for the auto companies, but our local goverments (city/state) have done the same thing. Policeman, firemen, etc. can typically retire after 20 years on the job and receive about 67% of their pre-retirement pay. (Mind you, these are typically people in their early 40's!!) And if they stay another 10 years (still only in their early 50's), they retire with FULL pay.
Anyway, it's possible that the number your brother is citng is the "full labor cost" to companies like GM/Ford. In other words salary, benefits, PLUS the cost of their retirement plans calculated back to a "per hour worked" basis. I'm not sure about that, but that would be more credible.
There certainly aren't any auto workers making $300k a year.