As a condition of loan, UAW cannot strike against General Motors

[Omaha Steve]

Source: Free Press

By Justin Hyde

WASHINGTON – The UAW and its local unions are barred from striking General Motors Corp. as long as GM has loans from the federal government, according to the agreement GM signed with the Bush administration last month.

The U.S. Treasury set myriad conditions on GM as part of the plan to loan the company $13.4 billion for survival. Those terms had not been fully disclosed until GM filed the documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

As part of the loan, the U.S. Treasury defined several conditions that would trigger a default, including that “any labor union or collective bargaining unit shall engage in a strike or other work stoppage.” If the loans are in default, the Treasury has the power to call them back immediately and force GM into bankruptcy.

The deal requires the UAW to accept by Feb. 17 a plan to lower wages and benefits for workers to match those of employees at foreign-owned U.S. plants by Dec. 31. It also requires the union to take two-thirds of the money its due for a retiree health-care trust fund in company stock rather than cash or company debt.


Read more: http://www.freep.com/article/20090108/BUSINESS01/90108111/As+a+condition+of+loan++UAW+cannot+strike+against+General+Motors

---

Would somebody please post the story from last week about how much faster a UAW car or truck is produced than non UAW plants in the USA or Japan.

[LisaM]

1. Holy shit. So what incentive does GM have to pay back the loans at all?

I'll see if I can track down the article.

[Veritas_et_Aequitas]

2. Wtf?

Seriously, :wtf:

[LisaM]

3. Steve, is this what you were looking for?

Apparently the source is the Harbour Report.


http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070801/BUSINESS01/708010420

[Omaha Steve]

4. YES!!!

Thank you. I meant to save it. You know how that goes when your attention gets diverted.

[LisaM]

5. I know, you're trying to save the UAW and promote equal pay for women all at once

We've got your back!

[sarcasmo]

6. Am I right saying that this a union crushing move? The union has lost the power to strike

which is one of the unions biggest power plays.

[awoke_in_2003]

15. That's what I have thought all along...

congress gave away billions to bank and investment firms, no questions asked. But they make demands on GM and Chrysler, such as UAW workers being brought to the level of Toyota USA workers. They want to deliver the death blow to unions in this country, and the UAW is one of the biggest.

[LiberalFighter]

21. Thanks for asking about that report. I am just now faxing it to my former UAW plant.

So they have the ammo to rebut that crap.

[bread_and_roses]

7. The never-ending quest of the Free-Marketeers - bust the unions

...drive us all into serfdom.

[mac56]

8. Am I missing something?

The way I read this, the UAW is not barred from striking. Rather, if they were to strike, it would void GM's agreement with Treasury and force GM to file bankruptcy.

Doesn't this actually strengthen UAW's hand, and increase GM's risk from a UAW strike somewhat? An added incentive to play fair with UAW?

I'm no expert. I really want to understand.

[AZ Criminal JD]

12. Weakens UAW

If GM goes into bankruptcy it does not have to honor any contracts with the union. A federal bankruptcy judge could completely re-write union contracts. That is why the UAW is so desperate for federal aid.

[mac56]

39. I understand that now.

To me it looks like "mutually assured destruction" for both GM and UAW.

[xxqqqzme]

9. can't this wait another 12 days when

union busting will not be a top priority?

[AZ Criminal JD]

26. Name one person in the incoming Obama administration who opposed this.

[Still Sensible]

10. In any event, c'mon

yes we support unions and understand the common GOP desire to weaken and/or eliminate them. Having said that, the UAW wanted to see the government step in and help their employers... you can't ask the government to allow a union to strike while the relief is ongoing and bring the companies to their knees. All I see here is that as long as the taxpayers have money at risk, the union can't compound the problem... unless they want to bankrupt the company, in which case go back to point one--the union wanted the government to step in.

On the other hand, I am not happy that this occasion has been used to lower wages and benefits. With the help of some southern GOP senators who have foreign automaker plants in their states, these changes make the overall plan harder to swallow. Jury is out on the company stock for retirement benefits, but given the current stock prices it's a hell of an incentive for everyone to make this work.

[Omaha Steve]

11. What strings did Wall St. get?

OOPS. That wasn't a LOAN. It was a gift. So was AIG. Get my drift. I know what your saying, but treating the workers so bad saying reduce pay and benefits to non union shops. Union workers make more BECAUSE they are union.

The BIG trouble lies with management.

[LiberalFighter]

22. I would like to see AIG, Wall Street and others receive at minimum a 17% reduction in their wages.

I would challenge anyone that thinks the autoworkers should accept the pay and benefits cut to take the same percentage in their own. If the shoe was on their own foot they would be resisting the reduction in pay too.


Hopefully, someone makes the same challenge to Senator Anybody But American Autoworker Shelby from Alabama to receive the same pay as state senators do in his home state. From what I could determine Alabama legislators receive $10 per diem each day of work.

[Still Sensible]

30. I don't disagree at all

[Turbineguy]

13. To me (retired Union Member)

this is a two edged sword. Management had better work at keeping the UAW happy. But the UAW could be blamed for bankrupting the company. It's probably a good thing overall.

[cascadiance]

14. So did the company ALSO commit to not doing layoffs in a similar restriction?

That would seem to make the restrictions even if they were. Of course they'd never sign anything like that. But then again, I would hope at some point unions aren't forced into agreements like this too.

[LiberalFighter]

24. They don't consider management to be a cost. Management is considered an asset.

They got the first syllable right.

[cascadiance]

41. So if that's the case, why don't they get rid of ALL of their costs (labor)

and just see how "valuable" those "assets" are with noone to do THEIR work for them!

[LiberalFighter]

43. Some of them would be stupid enough to do that.

[whistle]

16. W O W ! ! ! ! What would Walter Ruther and George Meany have said and done about that

...when they were presidents of the CIO and AFL unions?

[LiberalFighter]

23. Take the Treasury Secretary and Bush out to the woodshed.

And considering the weather leaving them out there after dousing them with water.

[whistle]

34. Yes that would have worked with Meany and Ruther looking them straight in their eyes

...and saying, "Do this shit again and you'll be minus your balls and pricks fellas".

Then they would have gone back to their respective Union Halls and announced, "We strike at mid-night!".

[LiberalFighter]

37. Reuther would had taken over the White House and Treasury building and

have a "Sit-Down Strike".

[skyounkin]

17. Never mind about the CEO pay

though- that'll stay nice and high.

[merwin]

18. Doesn't say anywhere that they can't strike... They can and they should if GM throws bullshit.

This puts the UAW in an interesting position OVER GM right now... being that if they do strike GM will default. That gives them a bit of bargaining power, provided they use it properly.

[LiberalFighter]

25. Maybe this is the time to mobilize our retirees to strike on their behalf.

[AZ Criminal JD]

27. Zero bargaining power and the UAW knows it.

If GM defaults the bankruptcy courts take over. They would completely re-write the union contracts. The UAW knows this.

[OhioChick]

19. How can so many stipulations be put on a "loan?"

The way I'm understanding this is if agreed upon, the UAW will be useless.
Am I understanding this correctly?

[cosmik debris]

20. "Gettelfinger said the union would not reopen its labor contracts."

There is no way that an agreement between GM and the Treasury Dept. can deprive a union of its right to strike.

The union and the company have a binding contract and the NLRB can enforce it.

If the union refuses to reopen the contract the company has to live up to its end of the bargain.

The way I see it, GM MUST come with hat in hand to the Democratic administration to ask for help and refinancing. They are not going to get that help if they are in the process of screwing 50,000 United Auto Workers.

[AZ Criminal JD]

28. Bankruptcy courts over rule the NLRB

NLRB has no effect in bankruptcy and a federal bankruptcy judge would re-write the UAW contract.

[cosmik debris]

31. But they are not in bankruptcy.

And the only way to avoid bankruptcy is get the help of the Democrats in Congress.

And you can't get the help of the Democrats in Congress if you are in violation of your union contracts.

Are you saying that bankruptcy is inevitable?

[unkachuck]

29. "...according to the agreement GM signed with the Bush administration last month."

....it's not for GM to decide, when or if the UAW strikes....

....this blanket condition should be rejected as unAmerican Union-Busting repug garbage and a hazard to the American people....this abuse of labor and the American people is occuring while wall street and banking are paying themselves dividends, bonus' and purchasing competitors with our money without any restrictions....what rights are GM bond holders giving up?

....since the repugs and our corporate controlled fascist media would love to see GM in bankruptcy, the UAW should agree 'not to strike' only for increased pay or benefits during the loan period....things like working conditions, job descriptions, health and safety issues should always remain 'strikable' issues....membership safety would be put at risk to do otherwise....

....destroying Americans for the sake of a loan is something membership and the American people should not tolerate....

[buckrogers1965]

32. Did the UAW agree to any of this?

I fail to see how the government and GM can put conditions on a third party that was not involved in the deal.

[w4rma]

33. As long as there is a Democratic President then none of this will matter. (nt)

[MaineDem]

38. That was what I just asked my husband

I think things will change with a new Administration. I hope.

[Romulox]

35. If I were Goettelfinger, I would strike and FORCE Obama to take responsibility for breaking the UAW.

Let's see how far this pandering to the right crap goes, Mr. President-Elect. :hi:

[Justice]

36. I read it differently: UAW can strike, still has the power to strike; strike triggers a default

No one took away the UAW POWER to strike - it can still strike. A strike triggers a default.

I understand the points about it not being a good situation - but it was not a good situation before the government loans.

[DainBramaged]

40. Detroit 3 automakers erasing productivity gap, Harbour Report says, although costs are still high

http://www.mlive.com/business/index.ssf/2008/06/harbour_report_detroit_3_erasi.html

Detroit automakers -- and Chrysler in particular -- nearly erased the North American productivity gap with their Asian rivals in 2007 thanks to worker buyouts, leaner plants and other improvements, but they still make less money per vehicle because of higher costs, according to the Harbour Report on manufacturing released Thursday.
Toyota Motor Corp. and Chrysler LLC led the industry in productivity, with each averaging 30.37 hours to fully assemble a vehicle. That was a 7.7 percent improvement for Chrysler from 2006, but a 1.5 percent drop for Toyota.

Toyota's inefficiencies were largely due to the rapid shift away from trucks and sport utilities as gas prices rose, according to Ron Harbour, a partner in the automotive consulting firm Oliver Wyman whose father began producing the annual Harbour Report in 1994.

Honda Motor Co., General Motors Corp., Nissan Motor Co., Ford Motor Co. followed Toyota and Chrysler, with a productivity gap of no more than 3.5 hours, down from a gap of as much as eight hours five years ago. Hyundai Motor Co., whose Montgomery, Ala., plant was participating in the report for the first time, had the lowest productivity rate of 35.10 hours per vehicle.

GM, Ford and Chrysler are in the midst of significant restructurings that have included 35 plant closures and the buyouts of more than 89,000 manufacturing workers since 2005. GM said this week it will close four North American plants by 2010, and Ford recently announced production cuts and layoffs because of a steep drop in SUV and truck sales.

Harbour said the Detroit Three's ability to improve productivity under those circumstances has been impressive and will help them as competition grows fiercer and consumers move to smaller, less profitable vehicles. Harbour said automakers have to sell as many as 10 small cars to squeeze the same profits they can get from one truck or SUV.

"It's almost like Rocky. They're in the fight of their lives, but at least they're going into this fight as fit, from a manufacturing standpoint, as they've ever been," Harbour told the Automotive Press Association in Detroit. "That part is the bright spot."

[Winterblues]

42. So retirees now have to accept GM stock in place of retirement pay?

Stock that has plumeted seventy percent this year alone....They promised those workers that put in thirty years that they would have a retirement fund. Now because of Republicans that want to bust the Union those retired workers now have to accept stock instead of retirement pay...I truly can not understand how Republicans sleep at night.

[KamaAina]

44. So let me see if I've got this straight. Bankruptcy would have been bad because...

...it would have given GM and the others an easy way to bust the unions.

So we gave them this instead. :eyes: