Workers on a GM assembly plant in Flint. The domestic giant could be targeted first as contract talks come down to the wire - but a strike is barred by law.
Talks between the United Auto Workers Union and Detroit’s three automakers have slowed in recent days even as workers at Ford voted in favor of a strike and UAW officials brushed aside reports it has elected to focus on General Motors as its target as its contracts expire Sept. 14.
Michele Martin, UAW spokeswoman, said in an e-mail the union had not picked a target to focus on yet after several reports surfaced indicating the union had decided to concentrate on GM in a bid to win a contract that could then be used as a pattern for a settlement with Ford and Chrysler.
Meanwhile, negotiations with all three automakers are moving slowly, according to those familiar with the talks. Sources at the three automakers indicated the negotiations are bogging down and in places have not gotten much beyond the subcommittee level.
UAW President Bob King, however, said in a television interview over the weekend he thought the talks were going well. The negotiations involve new contracts covering more than 112,000 workers at General Motors, Ford and Chrysler.
All three companies have stuck to their basic bargaining position that competitive pressure from Asian carmakers means they cannot afford to increase their labor rates in the next contract. “The old model was broken. We can’t go back,” one company official familiar with the talks said recently.
UAW President Bob King said he wants improvements in the new contract to the entry level wage of $14.50 per hour, which leaves new autoworkers making half the $29 per hour, on average, paid to senior workers at all three companies.
GM, the largest of the automakers, apparently has offered to bring more work into its U.S. plants, provided the starting wage remains basically intact.
The UAW board also would like to avoid stumbling into a confrontation at Ford, which could be costly for both sides and damage the union’s efforts to re-tool it image away from its militant past. That’s particularly important for the UAW to meet its long-term goal of organizing the foreign-owned transplants, such as the Honda plant in East Liberty, Ohio and the new Volkswagen factory in Chattanooga, Tennessee.
But workers appear to be pressing their union leaders to take a more militant approach.
Ford workers defiantly rejected a call for more concessions in 2009 and the automaker is not covered by the no-strike clause to which the UAW agreed in exchange for federal assistance for GM and Chrysler. Targeting a company covered by the no-strike rules should make it easier to wrap up the contract with Ford since King and other top union leaders can insist under the union’s long-time strategy of pattern bargaining workers have to accept the settlement reached at GM. But any deal struck at Ford first could be rejected by GM and Chrysler if they think it’s too rich, leaving the final contract terms at both companies to be decided by an arbitrator.
Union negotiators also have some room to sweeten a final settlement at Ford, which rejected federal aid and has made more than $6 billion in profits in the past two years, with a larger “signing bonus,” which is acceptable under the pattern bargaining formula because it doesn’t change the basic wage structure.
My pre-Government Motors Malibu is my last UAW Mobile. Next time I’m going to buy something made in the USA by proud non-union employees…so I guess it’ll have to be Japanese, Korean or German.
LOL…I usually go for the best vehicle and let politics play a minimal role, RN. It’s interesting to consider the government relations with unions in each of the countries you mentioned, never mind the extraordinarily toughness of unions in Korea and Germany. I find it ironic that their workers are so placid here and are increasingly working for less than overseas. Not saying this is a valid argument but one to consider: You are effectively supporting the idea that American autoworkers should and will be second-tier in terms of wages and benefits to those in the key competitive markets. I find that a very funny political position you might have twisted yourself into.
Paul A. Eisenstein
Publisher, TheDetroitBureau.com
Laughing out loud or not, you make valid points. But unfortunately, it is the collusion of the Obama Administration and the UAW that injected “politics” into my decision making. Furthermore…I believe taxpayers have been,and continue to be made “second tier” citizens.
So no “twisting” here Mr. Eisenstein: but without a truly good choice being offered me, I have to go with the lesser of two evils.
Martin L. Thorne
Hi, Martin,
Curiously, the rescue of GM and Chrysler didn’t begin with Obama but Bush II. I can understand some of the concerns and won’t get into a long diatribe or debate over the specifics. But I am sorry, if it comes down to purely an issue over government intervention in troubled car companies and then the involvement of unions well, your position is, frankly, fraught with political astigmatism.
The Korean carmakers really only exist because of extensive “collusion” following the meltdown of a decade ago between business, industry and labor. And the Korean union’s militancy makes the UAW at its most activist seem lame. (An anecdote of some years back, a friend who was then the top GM exec working with Daewoo when they had a partnership together — a decade-some before Daewoo failed and was sold to GM. We were discussing senior-level meetings and he mentioned they always had to end by 10 AM when the weather got warm. Why, I asked. Because, he explained, the unions had so often taken over the boardroom…only to be gassed out…that the very structure of the building was imbued with tear gas that would start to leach out whenever the day got too warm.)
The Germans? Let’s see, IG Mettal not only gets pay and benefits the UAW could only dream of but has significant power on the board of the German carmakers. Try to enact any steps to deal with productivity, plant relocations, etc. Again, far beyond where the UAW could have ever dreamed of.
Oh, and note the ownership stake of the state government in Volkswagen, which has protected that company for decades. And we can go on about the role of Germany in its other companies. Intriguing that the Berlin government failed to offer the same sort of help it has given its domestic-owned makers to Opel when GM asked for assistance.
The Japanese? And you want to talk industry/government cross-pollination?
Ironically, the carmakers from all three countries could be accused of treating U.S. workers as second or even third-class citizens (as they tend to pay more and deliver more in Canada).
ALSO curious…I have not heard the term “Government Motors” used in regards to the MANY billions of dollars provided on a federal, state and local level to help attract companies like Toyota, Hyundai and VW to build plants in the U.S., and notably non-union states. The total dollars may actually now approach what will be lost on the GM and Chrysler bailouts…or higher.
So, basically, what you are arguing is that because the U.S. finally had to take steps to bail out Detroit you will support companies that commit all the same “crimes” that you object to…and then some?
You suggest that by driving down wages to half what was earned before we are preventing Americans from becoming second tier…to Korea? Japan? Germany?
Martin, I understand your concerns, but you are actually only supporting companies that changed the rules to require the sort of things you are protesting, one might argue. Except by switching loyalties you are assisting in the expropriation of profits, etc.
Your automotive politics do, indeed, require significant twisting to validate if one considers the complete, global picture, Martin.
Paul E.
Thank you Paul. Your knowledge of the auto industry certainly dwarfs mine, and you brought up points that most Americans are not aware of, but certainly should be aware of.
Yes Paul, I agree with you. I find it extraordinarily interesting how many Americans have absolutely no knowledge of anything going on outside of America and have no world view. Unfortunately, the rest of the world does not revolve around America, as in the past, and as you say, the unions in other countries, Korea and Germany as you have mentioned and I would also mention Spain, are still a force to be reckoned with, much more than here in the States. I would also mention to RN that just because a car is assembled by a non-union workforce, that does not mean that the parts that make up the car are not built by a lot of unionized suppliers. I’m certain you, Paul, have much better reference to this than I do, but I’m sure a lot of Toyota owners would be surprised to find out that sheet metal for some of their cars comes from AK Steel, very much organized by the UAW in certain locations. I’d also be willing to bet that the dockworker’s unions unload a lot of the “riceburners” as they are shipped into American ports. To RN I would say, you mention something about “proud non-union” employees. Fine. But for myself, speaking as a retired UAW member of long-standing, I’m proud too; I’m proud of the middle-class our union, and others helped to create, and I’m proud of the auto industry that we were a part of for the better part of the 20th Century, and the auto industry that made American transportation the envy of the world during that century. And I’m proud of the wages and benefits that we had and still have, and the transplant operations DON”T, but should. I’m proud of the fact that whatever the Toyota workers are making today, it is because the UAW served as a quasi-union for the folks at Toyota, forcing Toyota management into paying much better wages than they would have otherwise paid in order to keep the UAW out. Of course, no thanks to us from the Toyota workers, just criticism, but that is the way it is. I don’t apologize to ANYONE for this! So go ahead and buy your car from those “proud non-union” folks RN. While you are trying to tear away at the wages and benefits that American workers should be getting, and quite frankly foreign workers ARE getting, our unions will be trying to maintain them. And I don’t know if you’ve noticed, RN, but no matter how low the wages go here in the States (which seems to be to some, evidently including you, a new mecca of third-world manufacturing), the prices of the cars just don’t ever seem to drop, do they?
First, I wish to thank both of you for engaging me. I consider myself fairly educated and certainly do look beyond our borders. But I don’t presume to know everything, so I will read your posts again with an open mind.
And the reference to Bush is correct, and my oversight, since I was looking at our current situation. And therein, I believe my observations are correct, regardless whether other governments or prior Presidents have done the same.
Thank you both.
Thanks, Martin,
As noted, I respect your position but suggest there’s a broader story here.
Paul E.
Thank you RN. I do get frustrated to the point that I probably overindulge myself in replying to posts here and elsewhere, and I know in this economy we are all a bit on edge.I worked over 30 years for GM, and am proud I did so and especially proud of my membership in the UAW, and realize we had a lot of warts, but we did a lot of good things too. Sorry if i went a bit over the top.