Just hours after threatening to strike at one or more GM plants, the UAW and the General have agreed on two-tier wages for certain job types. The move to clarify which jobs were "non-core" at the national level came as local UAWs were threatening to strike because they felt GM was asking for too many lower-paid positions at their plants. The more regimented deal identifies 16,000 positions that will soon be paid $14 per hour, which will save GM up to a half-billion dollars per year. It will take years to fill all of those positions because GM has to entice existing workers to retire before they can be replaced.
[Source: Detroit News]
New KITT Attack Mode revealed at Comic Con
London 2008: Honda OSM concept roadster says, "Cheerio!"
London 2008: Lotus unveils the Evora
2010 Chevy Camaro - Official Details and Images
2010 Chevy Camaro - LIVE from the reveal
First Drive: Maserati Quattroporte S in Europe
First Drive: 2008 MINI Cooper S JCW
In the Autoblog Garage:2009 Nissan GT-R
North American Exclusive First Drive: Alfa MiTo
First Drive: 2009 Kia Borrego
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
elprogramer @ Apr 5th 2008 3:59PM
General Motors likes to threaten individual plants with closure to garner more concessions. The International stepped in and rightly negotiated directly with the corporate office to end the whipsawing.
If there are genuine cost cutting concerns, they can be applied equally across the workforce and not bullied on a factory by factory basis.
Whitie @ Apr 5th 2008 4:11PM
That's exactly the attitude that is running your union and US automakers into the ditch. Put down that "Getlefinger for President" sign and pick up the Wall Street Journal. You need a reality check.
quagmire @ Apr 5th 2008 4:21PM
One of the plants in dispute is the Delta-Township plant. GM would never close that plant since it just opened.......
elprogramer @ Apr 5th 2008 4:36PM
I've seen the company spend millions renovating plants only to close them a year later.
Anyway, Whitie, why exactly do I need a "reality check"?
3cubed minus 3squared plus1 @ Apr 5th 2008 5:09PM
As a college student, I wouldn't mind making 14$ an hour ;)
Jeff Banks @ Apr 5th 2008 6:05PM
Seriously, I can barely find a job that breaks $10/hour in crap retail jobs in SoCal. One reason why education is so important now.
MajorGeek @ Apr 5th 2008 5:44PM
Elprogramer, it helps to read the article.
"GM and the UAW have reached an agreement to clarify items related to the 2007 national labor agreement including the specific number of non-core job assignments at each facility," GM spokesman Dan Flores said."
National contract covering multiple facilities.
Frankly GM was smart in how they did this. I must say I do, as always, love the hypocrisy in that the current workers did not get hurt, but 16,000 future workers will make a living on half of what they did. They don't care about their future "brothers" as long as their own asses were saved. Years ago, the union I was in did the same thing. Really quite brilliant on GM's part.
elprogramer @ Apr 5th 2008 6:17PM
I did read the article, but apparently I know more about the situation than you. The National Agreement provided a base, but the details are left to be hammered out by the individual locals as what constitutes the "second-tier" (there were hundreds of employee classifications, but those are getting merged, depending on the history of the site).
General Motors will approach each individual facility make them bid for the possibility of work (as opposed to being closed) and show them what they want and how other facilities rank in the company's satisfaction (in regards to work rules). This is advantageous for General Motors to engage in such behavior, but it causes undue stress among the workforce.
The International stepped in and helped negotiate the rules evenly, between those facilities, so the company could get what they wanted and the workers could be assured they were being negotiating in confidence.
Personally, I do see your point in regards to hypocrisy, and I agree with it. But, I can see why things were done the way they were.
First off all, new employees can make the "full" wages, but only if they are employed in a facility where their competitors make similar wages (like an assembly plant, because Toyota and Honda have to pay similar wages to keep the UAW out), but in smaller components facilities (which General Motors has/had many of, such as parts, engines, axles, stamping facilities), the prevailing wages for such services is significantly lower. The UAW had no choice but to acquiesce, because they have no power to force the company to continue producing anything, and they could've easily gone with a third party supplier.
I enjoy this new contract. It saves union jobs and keeps production inside the company (which lowers cost and improves quality if done right).
MajorGeek @ Apr 5th 2008 6:23PM
No argument on this:
"I enjoy this new contract. It saves union jobs and keeps production inside the company (which lowers cost and improves quality if done right)."
I did not see the details you gave in the article, you seem to be well versed, so I will assume it is true and thanks for clarifying. Bit suprising a newspaper out of Detroit would not give more details, unless they did so previously and just skimmed over it now. Thanks again!
elprogramer @ Apr 5th 2008 7:38PM
There is a large amount of internal dialogue that remains closed off from the public (or the rest of the work force), both for the purposes of propaganda and distrust from the other side/public.
Rocketboy @ Apr 6th 2008 10:39AM
Union Jobs > All other jobs?
Union Jobs > Keeping Company Competitive?
Union Jobs > Reality?
Apu @ Apr 5th 2008 6:14PM
That's another $500 million saved to put into top executives' pockets.
elprogramer @ Apr 5th 2008 6:18PM
Considering how well the turnaround is going and the horror that GM faced just a few years ago...
I think they deserve it.
oby @ Apr 5th 2008 7:44PM
"Considering how well the turnaround is going and the horror that GM faced just a few years ago..."
It's nothing to the horror thats waiting in the wings for GM.
This horror has a name: Chapter 11.
JohnAngelo @ Apr 5th 2008 8:55PM
GM and the other domestic OEMs really can't afford the UAW.
The Unions display all the same shortsightedness that they accuse the manufacturer of having.
Sure, sure, sure: if the company designed a car people will buy, the UAW can assemble it affordably.
But, if by some chance, the market runs to a competitors product, the UAW understands that plants close..., right?
No they don't; their workers are ENTITLED to jobs for life, whether they make anything or not.
With the dollar worth so little, foreign brands may be able to afford the UAW.
Export the units and let the European, Chinese or wherever customer pay for the UAW, right??!!
Many working Americans don't sympathize because the circumstances are nuts.
Lots of Toyota, Honda and Nissan cars are assembled in the US, and Americans buy them in droves, and there's no UAW.
Is there a link?
John Starnes @ Apr 5th 2008 9:20PM
I wonder what kind of wage concessions that CEOs will agree to so as to pitch in their fair share? Don't they rake in tens of millions annually, each? Raise a family on $14 an hour these days? Disparities like these is what gave rise to unions in the first place....raw exploitation of the workers by the already-super-wealthy.
Rocketboy @ Apr 6th 2008 10:42AM
$14 an hour is still more than many SKILLED workers make.
The executives that you complain about get paid that much because they are highly skilled people. Any of them could do line work given the same amount of on the job training that the line workers get. But if you put a line worker in the board room, everyone would be looking for a new job in a month.
John Starnes @ Apr 6th 2008 1:41PM
Another huge discrepancy is that if one of those $14 an hour workers does a poor job, they get fired....a CEO making millions already can tank a company badly (like Nardelli at Home Depot) but instead of being tossed out, they get EXTRA millions....no incentive at all to do their job well other than pride and ego.
Steve B. @ Apr 6th 2008 2:29PM
$14/hour? That's around $29K per year, assuming that one doesn't take a single vacation and works a solid 40 hours/week.
Sure, one might be able to scrape by, but that's not the kind of money that one can support a family on, unless both parents work.
Just for comparison sake, the lowliest enlisted military member, if married, would bring in $32 grand per year. The lowliest NCO is pulling upwards of $45 grand. A more seasoned NCO, 15 years into his career, is going to be pulling in $65 grand and up.
Not that I'm in any way comparing menial factory work to volunteering for national defense, but damn! $14/hour is lower than the oft quoted "poor military family"
stratojet @ Apr 5th 2008 10:16PM
The agreement is designed to avoid a direct confrontation with the UAW. It is the proof that the brothers do think about themselves only. The so-so-solidarity is a thing of the 1960.
In 2008 we have the proof why their benefits are so exagerated; just look at American Axle. They are ready to bury the hand that feeds them. This is the way business has been conducted with the unions for decades.
Unions only do something when their back is against the wall. Any worker in a plant knows that they are overpaid for skill required to do a factory job . This is why they do not leave; the market around them would never ever employ them at this price.
Profit is a sin for the UAW . They live in a socialist world that ceased to exist many years ago. Ask yourself this question: if you open a Car dealer or a small automotive business, would you survive, let alone prosper with a cohort of UAW workers , total package, $130.000.00 a year?