Both UAW and the big 3 are in a tight spot.

Let’s look at how the previous contract worked out for them. Big 3 is back to profitability. The workers and unions are part of the process making it happen. Left and right the workers are under the pressure to make quality product as cheap as possible. Plus involuntary adjust their schedule to manufacturing slowdowns.

The truth is plain as day — manufacturing volume is in a decline — plants are not running anywhere capacity. The hourly workers end up bearing the brunt of these inconsistencies.

So why doesn’t the big 3 building better vehicles that buyers want representing a solid future and growth ? If the vehicle is crappy or hot, it still takes workers and production time to put it together.

It all comes back to sales and profit, regardless of how the workers were treated. It’s a tough business of complex supply chains which are not ready to face the changing undercurrents of vehicles towards to smarter vehicles. Change dynamics are really hard to do and those companies and workers who do work collaboratively on exciting stuff represents the future. Unfortunately the exciting stuff is taking shape in the next 3yr contract cycle.

Detroit is a long way from significantly increasing the production line up time. Unable to really invest for the future and stuck with too many vehicles in their line up. The shift to suv’s Was a rude awakening. It’s a very slow train crash happening and no matter how many regulations are rolled back, it won’t save the big 3 management or UAW from eventual demise.

So let’s share profit better together and get back to work is what it is all about, and keep on doing same song and dance until the end. Bitter medicine of plant closings of money losing vehicles are inevitable and unfortunately it cuts jobs. It’s going to take some pain for a long term prosperous happy ending. The timing of all of this really sucks because the brexit, China, and global trade has a way of spiraling out of control in the next 1-2years. We can be looking at non-strike related stoppages and it can wipe out any short labor gains in a new deal. Good luck to us all 😐

 

Regardless who contributes, if it actually goes to the needs of striking workers, and not just for some unneeded perks for for the Union bosses (some of which, I might add, are under investigation as it is), it will be been money well-spent.

 

UNIFOR in Canada could (?) be next. Not surprisingly, they are very sympathetic to the strike that is now ongoing in the U.S., and Jerry Dias has warned GM that they could also face a major strike in Canada, particularly the Oshawa plant in Ontario, if the situation in the U.S. is not resolved satisfactorily.

https://www.cp24.com/news/unifor-pre...ored-1.4595991

Estimates in the U.S., BTW, are that GM is losing roughly $100 million a day with the strike. That is going to hurt.

 

Interesting post. A good read and opinion. IMO, the auto unions add quite a bit of cost and complexity to the manufacturing process. The Japan transplants continue on....

 

Suppose that you yourself were an auto worker, and devoted years of your life, while risking things like work-accidents in the plant, explosions (they happen), exposure to potentially harmful effects on the assembly line, repetitive-motion injuries (which happen when the same assembly-line motions, day after day and month after month, cause inflammation, pain, and joint/tissue damage to the human body), and numerous other daily hazards, just to help keep the lines moving. I'm not saying that the company should necessarily give you everything you need or want on a silver platter, but don't you think that they should at least give you a decent living wage, at least some health insurance (or pay for some of the treatment you need), and at least some job security based on seniority if nothing else? In my book, the more you give to them of your life, the more they should give to you in return. No, they don't do that in places like Mexico and China, but that doesn't necessarily make it morally right. Some things, yes, even in business, have to go beyond simple profits and bottom lines.

 

But I am not an auto worker. Your views are outdated. Why can Toyota of Honda workers do it for 30+ years in the US? Are their workers complaining of the issues you put forth

 

If you were, perhaps you might feel differently. The daily plant-hazards I mentioned are still a reality for some workers, although, granted, robots and automation are doing more of the work nowadays.

 

Yes they are. Being non-unionised doesn't make you immune to the repetitive strain injuries Marshall talks about. I have a friend who has just had to retire from Nissan at 50, after 25 years on the line. Both his knees are shot and he's had to have them replaced due to all that time crawling in and out of cars on a moving assembly line. He'll probably need both replaced again in another 15 or so years.

 

So both non union and union workers are complaining. Are the union workers showing less issues? I doubt it. It’s all the same.

 

Well it isn't is it? The Unions are there to ensure that their members, through collective bargaining, get the pensions and healthcare they deserve when their working life comes to an end. You tell me if non-unionised workers get the same protections.

I do think GM is an extraordinarily poorly run company though. Their European operations didn't make any money for 20 years. They sold them to Peugeot Citroen two years ago and now they're delivering $1 billion profit to PSA per annum. And their labour is unionised.

 

Sorry, but if it was that simple, there would be no strike. If one side has all the leverage in any negotiation, then the other side has no choice but to concede. GM must have some leverage; and presumably, it's relocating jobs.

 

but they already do those things. as for job security based on seniority, i say no though. just because you've shown up for a job for a long time, doesn't mean you're any good at it, or have stayed as good as you once were or the job hasn't changed enough that you should go.

anyway, this strike like all the others, is like burning down one's own neighborhood... may make a point but won't ultimately do any good.

 

First, because of GM's previous actions, the neighborhood was already on fire before this strike was called. Second, GM has got a lot more on their hands than just this strike. UNIFOR may call a strike of their own, and an angry public is rejecting the Silverado in droves, which traditionally has been GM's best-selling vehicle. After decades of riding second-fiddle to Ford's F-150, the Silverado has been pushed down into third place, behind Dodge's Ram....although at least some of that is also due to the excellence of the new Ram's engineering. There also appears to be at least some (?) organized consumer resistance to the Blazer, for reasons we have discussed earlier, although it is not as widespread as with the Silverado.

 

I am sure there is research out there covering this topic. Toyota shifts the pensions to the workers, and part of their health care is covered by Toyota till 65. Then Medicare takes over. Canada is different as health care is covered by the province. There should be data at this point regarding legacy Toyota workers who have retired and how they compare to the UAW retirees. Everyone wants more of course. But where is the data that there are all these non union workers being left behind?

 

When a union as large as the UAW goes out on a nationwide strike, it is usually not for a simple or sudden reasons....they need a darn good incentive for it (which they have in this case). This is something that has been in the making for some time, but, for several reasons, really intensified in the last 12-18 months or so.