Ford's hourly workforce is having a tough time ratifying the tentative agreement struck between the Blue Oval and United Auto Workers union last week, despite that deal being the most generous among those made this year between the Big 3 automakers and their respective unions. For example, Ford workers will receive a $6,000 signing bonus if the contract is ratified, compared to $5,000 for General Motors workers and $3,500 for Chrysler workers. GM was the first to strike a tentative deal with the UAW in September and has already seen its contract ratified, while Chrysler's deal is the most recent with voting expected to begin soon.

Earlier this week, UAW Local 900, a chapter that represents three Ford plants near Detroit, rejected the deal by a narrow margin. Automotive News is now reporting that Ford's Chicago Assembly plant is joining them in rejecting the offer, though this time "overwhelmingly." Chicago Assembly handles production of the Ford Taurus, Lincoln MKS and Ford Explorer. Of the 2,317 workers who voted, 77% cast their ballots against the proposed deal.

At the same time, the UAW is reportedly making it known that, should the tentative agreement not be ratified, the organization will strike. Of the three major U.S. automakers, both General Motors and Chrysler workers lost the right to strike while those companies were restructuring in bankruptcy. Only Ford workers can strike, that company having avoided bankruptcy and its restrictions, and they may do so if the deal is not approved by the majority.

As of this writing, the UAW Ford Department Facebook page reports that 3,256 workers (45.4) have voted against. That's a far cry from Ford's 41,000-strong union workforce, and the union has until October 18th to finish voting.


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 155 Comments
      kevsflanagan
      • 3 Years Ago
      Wow.. talk about bunch of greedy bastards. So if I'm reading this right they are getting a bigger signing bonus than their other UAW breathren and these guys at this plant at least believe its not good enough? You'd think that the UAW would be attempting to have these hold outs agree to it seeing as their other members are getting less from the other automakers.
        TelegramSam
        • 3 Years Ago
        @kevsflanagan
        Are you a communist or something? Should all people of a profession earn exactly the same amount? Why can't employees of different companies bargain for different deals? Also, what is greedy about the middle class salary and benefits being discussed here?
          kevsflanagan
          • 3 Years Ago
          @TelegramSam
          Well considering if they were getting substancially less then I'd agree with you. They are getting more out of Ford than fellow UAW members that work for GM and Chrysler. That is pretty much being greedy is it not? I'm not decrying the middle class since I am part of it. What I am against is selfish greed that only furthers their own personal greed and not that of everyone. When you have millions out of work,and millions more who either have no health care or are paying at times 1/3 of their weekly paycheck for said healthcare.
      David H
      • 3 Years Ago
      Sounds like payback via the UAW for not taking the force fed government bailout... Fire them all... hire those of us who are out of work, are non-union, and are happily to take the job at a reasonable rate, with advancement tied to effort and achievement, as opposed to threats, demands and coercion.
      webd727
      • 3 Years Ago
      So getting $6k just for showing up, plus another $5k at least in profit sharing just for showing up, along with your $20+ an hour for doing 1/10th the work of a non union worker doesn't make you happy? Close the plants and fire every one of the lazy SOBs. Let Hyundai and Nissan take over the plants and hire Americans that believe workers should get paid based on merit instead of just showing up.
        TelegramSam
        • 3 Years Ago
        @webd727
        Both Hyundai and Nissan hire only Union employees in there own home countries.
          789dm
          • 3 Years Ago
          @TelegramSam
          But they know better and start producing car in USA because if they kept importing cars from their own country then they also could ended up like US car companies that went bankrupt because of union.
      Soichiro
      • 3 Years Ago
      No good deed goes unpunished - Ford makes it through without going bankrupt and is worse off in this situation because of it.
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
      Independence76
      • 3 Years Ago
      This is ridiculous. The American economy is hurting, people are desperate for jobs, but these guys apart of unions only care about ******* up as much cash as possible. Talk about being thankful of your position.... -_-
      SheldonRoss
      • 3 Years Ago
      Move production to Mexico. The Fusion is built there, and it's been the highest rated Ford midsize in years. If I were in charge one of the big three, I would plan out a strategy to slow move away from all Union centric areas.
      AntBee
      • 3 Years Ago
      What a bunch of maroons!
      benzaholic
      • 3 Years Ago
      It would be useful to get some valid information on WHY those sites are rejecting the deal. This article highlights the signing bonus difference, but I would guess the rejections are based more on the plans for what will be built where. Even that stinks, because I seem to remember the deal announcements mentioning that several production projects would be moved back into the US under this deal. It just better not be about something like the loss of free legal representation or the loss of some kind of Jobs Bank program. If so, good luck finding those kinds of benefits if they go to work in some other industry. Like mine (tech/software). As to those commenters who say, "If they strike, Fire them!" The whole point of laws allowing collective bargaining is to block companies from pulling that kind of move. Granted, the unions may be about to abuse that power, and I'm not sure how to correct that, but allowing companies to fire striking union members shifts the balance of power even further into our corporate overlords' hands. They could offer Walmart levels of pay and benefits, and with 10% unemployment, they'd come awfully close to getting away with that. (Of course, they would then learn that those levels of compensation do not produce employees who care about their work, but that's further into this than I care to think about.)
        TelegramSam
        • 3 Years Ago
        @benzaholic
        When executives earn well over 100x that of the average employees, it is very hard to say the UAW is abusing their power. With that kind of pay structure one was to wonder how much power the union even has to compared to the executives.
      Thor
      • 3 Years Ago
      OK...someone who knows more than I do please explain this to me: I highly doubt that Ford likes the UAW. I understand that moving a plant might be cost prohibitive (at least in the short term...I'm sure they would recover their losses in a decade or two), but what is stopping them from issuing an ultimatum to their workforce saying either leave the union or lose your job? Is there some legal action the UAW could take that would put Ford in a world of hurt?
        Schira
        • 3 Years Ago
        @Thor
        With the current cost structure, these companies will never do it.It is only advantageous for the companies to have the union. Where else can you control thousands for four years at once with a single agreement with predetermined cost? Probably in the past union members had an advantage, but now it is the employers. The general vibe here tell you the other way.... also the corporate media. Dig deeper and you will get to know the facts.
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        MrWhopee
        • 3 Years Ago
        That's what I would do if I were Alan Mulaly. Ford did not take the bailout, so they're not 'on the hook' to provide American jobs. If the company goes down because of it, who cares? I'll still be well paid, and I'll use the bankrupcy to get rid of all the union workers, like GM and Chrysler should've done but can't because it takes the bailout money.
        tdavis3760
        • 3 Years Ago
        A lot of hot air, a waste of time to read you bull ****. You try working on the assembly line ten hours a day ,on your feet all day, and then tell me what cushey jobs auto workers have. You wouldn't last ten minutes you pompos ass!
      • 3 Years Ago
      [blocked]
        Tiberius1701
        • 3 Years Ago
        Now that you have opened your yip...go back to your basement or the local "Occupy (enter location here)" event. Wait...mom sez the trash needs to go out.
        • 3 Years Ago
        [blocked]
          nightkap2
          • 3 Years Ago
          Oh shut up Loser!! The crap that comes out of your mouth is so freaking ignorant!! You are a LOSER!
          • 3 Years Ago
          [blocked]
        Dean Hammond
        • 3 Years Ago
        Hey Matt, whos more important, Aln Mullally or Alex Rodriguez.....?
          • 3 Years Ago
          @Dean Hammond
          [blocked]
        mustsvt
        • 3 Years Ago
        Without their "greedy CEO" these ignorant tools wouldn't even have a Ford Motor Company around to try and destroy. Go occupy Wall Street or something you communist.
        adam1keith1980
        • 3 Years Ago
        This guy sounds like a regular on CBC.ca
    • Load More Comments