Union Looks to Recover Concessions From Ford

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
14,505
Location
Top of Virginia
FoxNews article link

Quote:
Now that Ford is back in the black, the United Auto Workers union wants to recover the perks it gave up over the past few years as the auto giant teetered on the brink of bankruptcy.

Rhetoric is flaring ahead of negotiations this summer for the UAW's next four-year contract. More than 1,000 delegates from the union are meeting in Detroit this week to strategize for those negotiations.

The talks will encompass labor agreements with the Big Three automakers, but Ford's impressive profits may make the company a target for union representatives looking for a bigger share of the wealth. Union members also have more leverage with Ford, since Ford workers did not agree to the no-strike clause approved by employees at General Motors and Chrysler.

Bill Johnson, who represents workers at a Ford plant in Wayne, Mich., told the Detroit Free Press that if Ford does not restore "everything" to the union, "the membership is going to knock it down."

Of Detroit's Big Three, Ford is doing the best. The company did not have to declare bankruptcy and did not accept a federal government bailout. Last year, the company earned $6.6 billion and it has since awarded millions in bonuses to senior executives.

General Motors recorded a $4.7 billion profit. Chrysler lost money in 2010, though it is expected to turn a profit this year.

Marcey Evans, a Ford spokeswoman, said the company's focus in the negotiations will be on "ensuring that all parts of our business are operating as competitively as possible." She would not comment on what past concessions could be back on the table.

"We have a history of working collaboratively together with the UAW to find solutions to critical issues, and we look forward to our discussions with them later this year," Evans said in an e-mail to FoxNews.com.

UAW President Bob King has said the union will press the automakers for expanded benefits.

"All the sacrifices that our members made to turn these companies around were part of the process that's really led to this amazing turnaround," he told Bloomberg in January, claiming members gave up between $7,000 and $30,000 since 2005. "We want our membership to share in a very meaningful way in the upside of these companies."

The auto union has made a series of concessions over the past several years as the industry's financial woes became increasingly more dire. They agreed to pay higher premiums and higher co-payments for health care in 2005. In the last four-year contract in 2007, they set up a second-tier wage for entry-level workers starting at $14 an hour, or about half the wage for current workers. They also approved several other changes, though union members received a $3,000 bonus in exchange for the agreement.

In 2009, workers went further and agreed to suspend bonuses and cost-of-living increases, among other concessions.

But with executives getting hefty bonuses and union workers now looking for their share, one Michigan economist warned that the industry could be drifting toward the habits that originally made it less competitive against leaner foreign automakers.

"All the bad habits are going to be on the table for restoration," said David Littmann, a senior economist with the Mackinac Center for Public Policy. Though union workers have made concessions, total pay and benefits are still better for American auto workers than their Japanese counterparts -- the average GM worker earns $57 an hour in pay and benefits compared with $51 an hour at Toyota, according to an August estimate Littman cited from the Center for Automotive Research.

Littmann said health care benefits will probably be the biggest provision union negotiators will be after this summer. He said that in light of the epic battle over collective bargaining rights in Wisconsin, UAW representatives may feel obligated to press hard for better benefits.

"They're kind of duty-bound to show clout," he said.

The UAW contract expires in September. A representative for UAW could not be reached by FoxNews.com for comment.

One UAW official told the Free Press that while members want their concessions back, they're also committed to product quality and mindful of job security.
 
1000 delegates? Where's the party?

Two-tiered pay plan.... higher seniority members only thinking about themselves and they sold out the lower seniority new hires!
What happened for equal pay for equal work?

me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me AND ONLY ME is important. That is the the cry of the long term union member.
 
I've been saying this for months. Ford will be the target of the next negotiations, no doubt.

From what I've been reading around here, the big issues will be job security and gaining assembly guarantees for certain plants here in the states.

IMO, Bill Johnson at Wayne needs a reality check..."knock it down"...what a tool!

http://www.freep.com/article/20110322/BU...rd-compensation

http://www.freep.com/article/20110321/BU...dyssey=obinsite

http://www.freep.com/article/20110317/BU...ks-Settles-says

..."UAW Goals for 2011 contract talks...

• Secure product commitments at plants to ensure job security.

• Restore cost-of-living adjustments.

• Restore daily overtime after eight hours -- rather than weekly overtime after 40 hours.

• Restore performance and Christmas bonuses.

• Improve compensation for workers making the entry-level wage or eliminate the second-tier wage altogether.

• Compensate retirees or improve pension plans.

• Improve the profit-sharing formula.

• Create more U.S. jobs at Detroit Three plants.

Detroit Three

• Hold the line on labor costs or further close the wage gap with U.S. plants operated by foreign competitors.

• Change profit-sharing formula to tie it to performance goals, such as quality and productivity, rather than U.S. profits.

• Preserve gains made in prior contracts.

• Offer new products at factories, which will give some job security, in return for meeting goals.
 
Originally Posted By: rshunter
Did anybody really think that anyone but Ford would be the target?


Agreed. How could the UAW ever hope to make any real gains with GM/ChryCo when they have already given them a "no strike" guarantee.
 
Originally Posted By: unDummy
1000 delegates? Where's the party?

Two-tiered pay plan.... higher seniority members only thinking about themselves and they sold out the lower seniority new hires!
What happened for equal pay for equal work?

me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me me AND ONLY ME is important. That is the the cry of the long term union member.



In the airline industry, the lower tier for new hires was know as "B-scale" and caused a great deal of contention in the cockpit between the senior (captains) and junior (first officer) union members. Not a recipe conducive to safety or effectiveness...

And while most of the B-scales were eliminated in the airline industry during the 90's, it continues to be a specter in all labor negotiations. Consider it; the company gets to save money in future labor costs while sowing dissention in the ranks by appealing to member's self interest...how very crafty...
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: meangreen01
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/01/18/report-ford-to-give-out-bonuses-in-2011-but-no-merit-raises/

Ford issuing bonus checks up to $5000 for workers, up from $450 in the previous year.


Clever carrot-and-stick. See, you don't need a union to get you this here bonus check.
wink.gif


As for concessions, I don't see why they didn't negotiate a "sundown" provision where if profits or stock price took off they automatically expired. Maybe letting future negotiations go smoothly isn't in anyone's interest.
 
Union demands over decades were a big part of the problem, added by management greed of course. Let us hope for a reasonable smooth outcome if the unions will let it.
 
I would not be surprised if Bill Johnson gets a phone call from the International union today. He seems to be one of the old school die-hards whom we are all waiting for to retire. His view is not the view of the majority of workers. That's the 1970's union talk there and when the ones who still think that way have retired we will all breath a sigh of relief.

Yes, union members want consessions returned but are not expecting all of them to be returned. We will not be striking because they aren't returned. The UAW has not struck Ford on a national basis since about 1980. They have the best relationship among the Big3. The thought that the union is drooling over the thought of striking is preposterous. It's not good for anybody.

As for the two tier system, can you imagine working somewhere for 20 years and then you are told your wages will be cut in half? What do you do about your home and family now? Multiply that by 130,000 people. What would you do? That's why the two tier system was used. Yes, it has it's problems. The biggest one I see is getting ANYONE to do that work for that wage. GM cannot keep workers at that wage in 2 plants.

Steve
 
I do not think it is going to be the issue that everyone is talking about. Workers at out local plant know what is going on. A good amount will come back, but the days of giving the worker everything is over.


Not many Bills there anyways...
 
Originally Posted By: 1001hobbies
As for the two tier system, can you imagine working somewhere for 20 years and then you are told your wages will be cut in half? What do you do about your home and family now? Multiply that by 130,000 people. What would you do? That's why the two tier system was used. Yes, it has it's problems. The biggest one I see is getting ANYONE to do that work for that wage. GM cannot keep workers at that wage in 2 plants.


I'd be curious to see a source for that. Here in WI a truck manufacturer had a job fair for ~700 jobs. 1700 people showed up. Even with an increase in turnover for the entry level positions I doubt there's a real issue finding people for those jobs. It definately isn't a workers market right now, particularly if you lack education or skilled training.
http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/117061493.html
 
Henry Ford learned 100 years ago that high turnover in the automobile industry was a quality killer. It was one of the key motivators behind his revolutionary wage of a $5 day. He got good people and retained them after training them, and they produced better quality product out the other end.

I agree, plenty of people will take those jobs, but the higher turnover is a real problem in the industry. My proposal would be to raise the tide by concessions at the top end to bring the entry wage closer to $18/Hr. And from there building a stepped scaled pay structure.
 
Originally Posted By: 1001hobbies
The biggest one I see is getting ANYONE to do that work for that wage. GM cannot keep workers at that wage in 2 plants.

Steve


I assume you're taking about the supposed 14.00/hr??

Around here, that's a respectable starting wage, with some not making that for a couple of years in a skilled labor position.

I know if I was in the hunt for a job and happened across a 14.00/hr job to start, I'd be all over it.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Henry Ford learned 100 years ago that high turnover in the automobile industry was a quality killer. It was one of the key motivators behind his revolutionary wage of a $5 day. He got good people and retained them after training them, and they produced better quality product out the other end.

I agree, plenty of people will take those jobs, but the higher turnover is a real problem in the industry.


I doubt Ford had the quality control sytems or assembly apparatus and tools back in the dawn of the assembly line either. Today with all the technology in the tooling, it takes a lot of the needed employee skill out of the equation. Sure, there's definately positions throughout the assembly process that require in depth skill, but many have evolved into routine assembly tasks.


Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
My proposal would be to raise the tide by concessions at the top end to bring the entry wage closer to $18/Hr. And from there building a stepped scaled pay structure.


As mentioned by an above poster that appears to be knowledgeable, it sounds as though higher paid, long termers wouldn't budge much as it would be detrimental to their lifestyle. I don't blame 'em.
 
Completely disagree, if anything skill is at a higher premium today than it was back then. Of course it's always been true that there is a healthy mix of skilled and non skilled jobs in any assembly plant. But in the industry today the average skill level on the plant floor is clearly higher...and the cost and time to train a new hire is much more than in the past.

As for my wage proposal. I guess whats detrimental to those guys making the second tier wage doesn't count. And as our resident skilled tradesman pointed out, those militant top tier me, me, me workers are a dying breed...and not soon enough in my book.
 
Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Completely disagree, if anything skill is at a higher premium today than it was back then.


I've toured assembly plants and seen all the specials on TV. Way back when workers had tools they would need real skill to properly fasten fasteners, line up door panels, fit dashboards, etc. Mostly manual skilled labor.

Today, for example, they have pnumatic air ratchets set to proper torque required- push button till it stops. There's semi-automated articulating arms that position dashboards and body panels that direct the panel in place and sensors/lights to signal the worker the panel is in the right place.

I once worked a factory job and can say that the majority of the time/expense of training new assembly workers is all the HR ish. Safety lectures(videos) that emphasize the obvious ad nauseum, sexual harassment, policies, policies, and more policies. Actual job training was very basic. Watch experienced worker do the job a few days. Then do the job while supervised by said experienced worker a couple more days. On Monday, on your own.
 
Quote:
"All the sacrifices that our members made to turn these companies around were part of the process that's really led to this amazing turnaround,"


So the union is flat out admitting that their previous wages/benefits were a direct part of the car companies' financial problems.

Classic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top