Well, it's progress ...

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/...m.html?ref=rss

Now let's just hope that the company can hold together long enough to make it through this 3.5 year contract term!!!

The union votes on this Tuesday & Wednesday.

 

This is not something that I'd say to my peers on the shop floor but what the hell is this supposed to accomplish? I mean I haven't seen all the details yet but the savings would seem minimal.

I guess every little bit help.

 

This deal was not made to save GM substantial amounts of money. It was made only to try to qualify GM Canada for billions of dollars of loans from the governments of Canada and Ontario.

 

Agreed. I think it's just a drop in the bucket . At least they were able to come to SOME sort of agreement, and do it relatively quickly at that!

Now let's just hope that the corporate/money/gov't side of things pans out .

 

Yes it seems kind of paltry, but I dunno, everyone seems to want to climb on the 'bash the union guys' bandwagon and it's a little crazy. I'm not pro union or anything like that and yes, GM has to reduce it's expenses, but these benefits weren't gained all at once, it took years. Expecting it to all go away overnight and everything to be OK is being stupidly naive. It's almost a mob mentality without any reason - just stick it to these guys who have been fortunate enough to collect an enviable wage package.

Union posturing aside, OK, perhaps these guys (and girls) receive an outlandish and overly generous wage and benefits package but they get it and have been getting it for some time - heck, I wouldn't hesitate to sign up for it and I don't think I'd be alone. I'm pretty sure that some of the most anti-union/anti-GM/anti-domestic auto people out there, would be right there in line with me. Yeah maybe they'd hate it and all, but they'd be there.

How many of us would honestly be content to allow someone to strip away a good portion of your income? If you're living at a particular level then your lifestyle reflects that level and sudden drastic changes can be devastating. I'm talking seriously altering the standard of living of a fairly significant portion of the populace and this can have detrimental affects on the larger population and econoomic well-being of a state or province. IMHO,there will be an economic impact equatable in lost revenue for the economy since these individuals will have less disposable income to spend/be taxed on. Everyone will be poorer. I read an article that says, according to analysts, GM needs to reduce the amount of real (wages+benefits et al) hourly wages by as much as $20 per hour, that's some serious coin to suddenly have ripped out of your wallet right there!

Anyway, I'm not really sure where I'm going with this, but I think this is a side of the situation that no one has really considered, or at least given voice to.

GM isn't really where it is because of what it pays its people. It's legacy costs for retirees, it's past and present corporate confusion and blunders, it's mediocre product and cookie cutter cars sold with a discount mentality, it's complacency and organizational bureaucracy and continuous reorganizations yielding nothing. It's a marketing approach that says our cars aren't as good as the Asian, but they are cheaper and have more options - sheesh, the list goes on and on.

On the other hand, if GM disappears, there'll be fallout as well. There really aren't any winners here.

 

What is the point of the UAW today? I undrestand 30-40+ years ago they fought for worker's rights but now the government covers employees rights. I see the UAW and other unions as crutches to their own industries.

If GM fails the UAW is jobless. If GM goes bankrupt and is bought the UAW is jobless. This might be what the auto industry needs to start from a clean slate, no?

 

Honestly... a union is no different than any of the various societies and associations out there (which despite thier name, are nothing more than unions). They all serve the same purpose which is to benefit thier members by regulating pay, benefits, people practicing the trade, ect.

 

Not just CAW... now all of the UAW has reached a deal with GM, similar to the significant just ratified at Ford....

http://www.freep.com/article/2009031...s+to+Ford+pact

(I figured I'd like to be one of the tiny few who still post GOOD news here )

 

It would seem that Chrysler agrees with you (and is showing a lot more intestinal fortitude than GM)

http://www.reuters.com/article/priva...43738020090311

Good for Chrysler. This isn't the time for business as usual; this is the time to actually fix the problems and not just put lipstick on a pig.

 

Lewenza says that as far as the CAW is concerned they're not breaking from pattern negotiations and they expect Chrysler to fall in line with the the deal struck with GM.

It will be interesting to see who blinks first.

Will Chrysler walk away from Canada? They assemble the LX cars and minivans here (as well as the VW Routan version of their minivans) - so would it be as easy as shuttering their plants and walking away? I think there would potentially be a period of rather unpleasant pain for the company.

 

Apparently GM's labour agreement saves only about $7 on the $75/hour total cost, which would still leave them $10 - $15/hour higher than the Japanese manufacturers. Whereas in the US the gap is supposedly much smaller. So there's a lot of money at stake here. I think the auto manufacturers are getting fed up with the CAW's resistance to change, versus the much more accommodating attitude of the UAW. So I don't think Chrysler is bluffing, I really think they would go. Also Chrysler is not likely to be around by the end of the year in its present form, so they can be a little more ballsy in terms of getting the deals they need, if not for themselves, then to make themselves more attractive to a potential buyer.

 

Ford has also joined Chrysler in bashing the GM-CAW deal.

http://www.freep.com/article/2009031...ng+GM-CAW+deal

 

I don't believe ANY of the math on this issue anymore. According to the CAW economist, costs here were $68/hr before exchange rate factoring in the lower Cdn$ and the savings from having free healthcare.

The task force in the US recently said that assembling vehicles in Canada made it a $1000 CHEAPER to assemble cars in Canada because of free health care. This came from US politicians.

The Japanese autoworkers have a 401k type plan and have had profit sharing so it makes it virtualy impossible to compare the CAW's wages VS. the competition.

Why is there so much discrepancy on the true cost to manufacture here? I'm guessing it's because no one really knows.

It was said BY GM that labour costs were 7% of the vehicles and that after VEBA it would lower it to 5%.

I'm just sick of all this talk, none of the math adds up.

 

CAW's resistance to change? Do you work for any of the big 3 or do you only read what comes out in the media?

How do you explain that CAW members vote 87% for these concessions but in the US, UAW members voted %57.

GM wanted GMS.....they got it.
GM closes the truck plant........no strike, only a peaceful demonstration.
Countless work rule changes to enhance productivity without ANY fuss whatsoever.