Filed under: Chrysler, LLC., Ford, GM, UAW/Unions
UAW expects Ford, Chrysler to follow suit with contracts
Pattern bargaining was established 60 years ago as a way of making sure no one auto company would get the leg up over its competition. Ron Gettelfinger and the UAW are planning on this year's negotiations to be no different than past agreements, which means Chrysler and Ford will likely follow GM's lead. The contract GM and the UAW pushed through seems to address the cost competitiveness issue that dogged the Detroit automakers for so long, but Ford and Chrysler still have to give it their thumbs up. There will likely be some differences in the contract, however, since all three companies are different, and have unique challenges. The contract GM signed included a VEBA, which transfers control of retiree health care to the UAW, in exchange for a check that amounts to about 70-percent of the total liability. In GM's case it will be over $30 billion, but for Ford and Chrysler, the amount will be substantially less. For the sake of interesting news and putting labor negotiations back to the rear of our conscious, lets all hope that contract talks are well behind us in short order, and that there are no problems (read, strikes) for Ford and Chrysler.
[Source: Automotive News - Sub. Req.]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Kumar 11:34AM (9/27/2007)
So, how long was chrysler left hanging out to dry 2 years ago when the uaw renegotiated healthcare costs (I think it was that at least). We all know how well that worked out for Chrysler, with the UAW holding off because they were making soooo much money at the time, over-producing cars that were soon to be under-selling.
Reply
Avinash machado 11:34AM (9/27/2007)
Daimler seems to have bailed out just in time. Imagine if they still owned Chrysler today? Wonder how the negotiations with UAW would have gone?
Reply
Lithous 11:37AM (9/27/2007)
So, I just wonder if the import fanboys will ignore that GM had to pay (aka spend aka come up with aka let go of) $30BILLION to help fund the health care agreement and act as if GM has no health care burden "anymore" so it shouldn't be an excuse anymore. I can see it now, "there is no health care disadvantage for them anymore".
Sure, they only had to give the UAW about 3 years worth of Toyota size profits to have no health care burden "anymore". It is all about the truth TheLiesAboutCars will be demanding that there is no health care difference anymore (no $30BILLION plus interest (unless they pay in all cash), oh no)
Reply
Avinash machado 11:46AM (9/27/2007)
Yes, Farago seems to have quite a Anti-GM stance. Sadly many take his editorials quite seriously.
Lithous 11:49AM (9/27/2007)
If you want to see TheLiesAboutCars then check this hypocracy out...
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=5453&cp=1#comment-74738
See how long that post lasts since the truth is all they care about! Anyway, the point is that TheLiesAboutCars expects GM which is in hundreds of billions in debt to not skimp EVER!!!!!!! Yet, we have to hear about pathetic, "we can't afford nice pictures" crap. Farrago, when GM's customers want something you are all over them for not delivering. DO YOU UNDERSTAND YOUR CUSTOMERS WANT MORE AND YOU ARE NOT DELIVERING? AND IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS IT IS SO MUCH CHEAPER AND EASIER THAN WHAT YOU EXPECT FROM GM.
Any day of the week and twice on Sunday, baby. Oh yeah, remember GM's fake hybrids, well, everyone else seem to think they exist, oh but wait, that "vaporware" hybrid is already in close to a thousand buses and probably in hundreds on the road when you guys were dissing.
Your readers must be on drugs. One on that same article about Car and Driver stated how cheap their trinkets were that they were selling. Did that same guy notice the "bicycle" license plate looking logo you put on your crap? Geez.
Just like Moore, it is all about making money not the Truth.
And to boot, TheLiesAboutCars forbids name calling yet Farrago calls GM execs idiots and alike in many posts. I can see how name calling is so wrong to them.
sovyanz 12:13PM (9/27/2007)
Lithous , this may shock you, but most people dont care what it takes to get a car out of the factory, as long as the car meets their desired requirements.
Reply
Lithous 12:21PM (9/27/2007)
Yes, because most people are so self absorbed now-a-days that they don't care if their coutry falls apart or anything. I wasn't even born when Kennedy did his "Ask not" speech but I think how funny it would be for a President to do it now. The President would be laughed at essentially.
Remember not too long ago Portugal was a superpower. Yup. Not anymore. People can care about what they want but until they understand things they will always just be more a part of the problem than the solution.
Lithous 12:29PM (9/27/2007)
sovyanz,
The main problem with your understanding of what I am about is that it is one thing not to care about GM's hurtles, etc. but it is another thing to in essence change minds of those who do care for reason which are no different than those which make one imperfect.
Do you understand that? Probably not. How many happy Chevy owners start thinking Chevy is so bad MOSTLY because of people (who are themselves imperfect in so many ways) pointing out why Chevy is imperfect?
It is one thing to dislike. It is another to beat down a company that has given so much to America just so you can make (or attempt in their case) money.
You don't like GM, Ford or Chrysler (then buy what you want but shut up and move on) I don't mean "shut up" in a gov't censorship ("Lithous doesn't believe in free speech") sort of way but in a "why hurt the home team, take it upon yourself to hold back sometimes" sort of way.
gholland 1:53PM (9/27/2007)
"The UAW wants auto makers to keep pushing for nationalized health care, while auto makers want some of their money back if such legislation passes" -WSJ online
My heart longs to support GM or Ford, but if the you UAW is pushing this, then I will personally vow to NEVER purchase a UAW made product again. In fact, I may go door-to-door with a petition signing up as many as possible to make the same vow.
Reply
Artie43 3:11PM (9/27/2007)
Litous, seems like sombody sure rattled your cage today. Farago is a pretty straight shooter and has been known to criticize all manufacturers. The reason he has so much to say about GM is that they provide such rich fodder for criticism. Between the management and the UAW you have a play with a complete set of bad actors. And to believe that these characters still have any outside following is just an indication as to how far the country has fallen. These bad actors have consistently surrendered market share to the imports and seem completely incapable of mounting any offense. What will they do now that 'labor/retiree costs' have been solved? They said this about Delphi when it was spun off what 8 years ago and GM still had to bail them out. A little advice: Don't believe much that GM says. It is all PR and spin, by the spin experts.
Reply
Lithous 1:21AM (9/28/2007)
"Farago is a pretty straight shooter and has been known to criticize all manufacturers."
Ha ha. Criticize is such a cute word. Hell, once in a while my wife criticizes me. But never has she set up a death watch for me. I.e. big difference.
"The reason he has so much to say about GM is that they provide such rich fodder for criticism."
Yeah, a ton of companies do, also. But did you get my point that Farrago provides much fodder? But that doesn't seem to matter. No, his followers are too blinded by GM, Ford and Chrysler hate to see how Mickey Mouse TheLiesAboutCars really is.
"Between the management and the UAW you have a play with a complete set of bad actors."
Yes, and Farrago with his 10 different directions for his website in 2 years, Mickey Mouse trinkets for sale, re-using his only home run feature from another website for which he worked, banning name calling while name calling, etcetera doesn't make the star of his show a bad actor? The guy most likely gets more hits to his advertisers by accident than on purpose. I.e. any company willing to advertise on his site is stupid. He probably thanks his lucky stars for sites like google who pay people for nothing (as in google ads) just because they (google) have so much money.
"And to believe that these characters still have any outside following is just an indication as to how far the country has fallen."
I will say this, my only kudos to the union is the FACT that their existence has kept auto manufacturing in the U.S. If that is a follower then so be it. As far as GM management, I think they could have taken far easier ways out to force bankruptcy and to be making cars in China right now but they haven't pulled that card yet. Now, if understanding that makes me a follower then so be it.
"These bad actors have consistently surrendered market share to the imports and seem completely incapable of mounting any offense."
Lutz and Wagoner inherited a lot of the problems. Motorola surrender massive share of the cell phone market. Kodak, etcetera. Name a company attacked by the Japanese full-on that didn't surrender huge share? Microsoft is a great example (in the opposite direction). XBox 360 took market share from Sony but look at the hardware failures of the 360, looks like terrible reliability isn't as important to gamers (or maybe in the next gen game boxes will you see MS most of their share)
"What will they do now that 'labor/retiree costs' have been solved?"
Gee, you missed my original point completely and PROVED it COMPLETELY and you are a Farrago fan, I couldn't have paid you to do better. The problem hasn't been "solved". GM has to come up with $30 Billion while they are $300Billion in debt. Thank you for proving my point Farrago lover.
"They said this about Delphi when it was spun off what 8 years ago and GM still had to bail them out."
I don't think anyone stated the problem is solved, just that paying $30Billion now is the lesser of evils.
"A little advice: Don't believe much that GM says. It is all PR and spin, by the spin experts."
No, you don't believe such spin from such an obvious spinner like Farrago. He demands time frames and plan dates from GM execs for their turn around but ask him when GM is going to go bankrupt (you know, the DW series) to the week, month or even year and he won't tell you. Now that is the truth.
Think about it. He has a death watch going and all he is doing is calling things has he sees them when he sees them. No time frame. Sounds like what he is claiming of GM execs. It's OK, there is still time for you to understand the truth. On a clear day DeLorean saw a too heavy, under-powered sports car. Everybody is an armchair quarterback. The problem is that they all claim to be Payton Mannings and they are actually insert_your_worst_qb_here. Farrago sure is a sooth seer the way he could clearly see a company $300 Billion in debt and losing market share possibly as a candidate for a death watch. Wow, Liberace gay? I didn't see that one coming. I.e. can he be a little more precise with such a vague prediction that could easily go either way just because of the odds. Now if he was an outsider to Enron and predicted that before anyone else then that might have shown some sort of ESP.
Gee, America is in huge debt, test scores going down, no one has a clear plan on how to change that. Hmm, when is he going to do an America DW? Seems like the same variables.
sykerocker 9:05AM (9/28/2007)
As someone who has recently been banned from Farago's website I'm finding the current thread fascinating. How does one get banned from TTAC? Easy. I did one too many "flames" which is another way of saying I mentioned that the editorial policy was blatantly anti-big 3, and contained an attitude of "no matter what you do, it's not good enough, and you're expected to fail".
No nasty language, no angry tone, actually anything I said could have been said in church during Easter Sunday mass without horrifying anyone (might have gotten me some odd looks for being off topic, though).
Flaming at TTAC is defined as publicly disagreeing with Farago's editorial attitude that all American car companies are invariably headed towards bankruptcy, no matter what they try.
Reply