[meford4u]

CAW reaches tentative restructuring deal with General Motors
TORONTO, March 8 /CNW/ - The CAW reached a tentative restructuring
agreement with General Motors early this morning, after days of round the
clock negotiations. CAW President Ken Lewenza said the tentative deal will
generate substantial cost savings for the company while protecting current
base wage rates and current pensions, and retaining the investment advantage
currently enjoyed by Canadian facilities compared to U.S. plants.
"Our objective coming into these negotiations was to minimize the pain
felt by our members and their families, while ensuring that General Motors was
well positioned to receive government assistance to remain viable," Lewenza
said. "At the same time, we understand that workers didn't cause this crisis,
which was caused by the global financial meltdown and ensuing credit freeze."
The tentative agreement must be approved by a majority of the roughly
10,000 CAW members currently employed by GM in Canada. Those members will vote
on the contract in ratification meetings scheduled this coming Tuesday and
Wednesday in Oshawa, St. Catharines, Windsor, and Woodstock.
Some of the major features of the tentative contract include:

<<
- The existing CAW-GM contract (which was signed last year) is extended
one additional year, to expire in September 2012.

- Base wages are frozen for the remainder of the contract.

- Quarterly cost of living adjustments for wages are suspended until
almost the end of the contract (coming back into effect in June
2012).

- There will be no annual cost of living adjustments to pensions in
this contract.

- Paid time off is reduced by an additional 40 hours per year, on top
of the 40 hour reduction in annual vacation pay already implemented
beginning in 2009.

- An annual $1700 special bonus payment is diverted to help offset the
cost of retiree health care benefits.

- Expenses for union-sponsored programs (including training, child care
facilities, wellness programs, and national coordinators) are reduced
by about one-third.

- Significant changes are made to a range of health and non-wage
benefits, including a new monthly co-pay premium which will collect
$30 per month from active workers and pensioners under 65, and
$15 per month from pensioners over 65 and surviving spouses. Other
health benefits affected by reduced caps or increased co-pays include
dental, long-term care, life insurance, and tuition benefits.

- The agreement is contingent on the company receiving government
financial assistance and recommitting to a proportional Canadian
manufacturing presence (including specific product commitments in
GM's respective plants).
>>

"Together these changes represent a major sacrifice by our active members
and retirees," said Lewenza. "They will reduce active hourly labour costs by
several dollars per hour, reinforcing Canada's investment advantage relative
to U.S. facilities. And they will significantly reduce the company's legacy
costs associated with pension liabilities and retiree health benefits."
"We committed that the CAW would be part of the solution to this crisis,
and we have done just that," Lewenza concluded. "But we fully understand that
the industry will not be secure until governments confirm a financial
assistance package for the industry, and until consumers start buying vehicles
again."
"The sacrifices we've made in this agreement are extensive, and our
active and laid-off members as well as retirees will still face incredible
uncertainty in the months ahead because of the industry's unprecedented
crisis," said Chris Buckley, Chairperson for the CAW-GM Master Bargaining
Committee and President of CAW Local 222 in Oshawa. "Now it's up to government
to use its power to keep the industry alive, and to protect Canada's
proportional share of it."
The CAW will meet with the next auto company later this week.

[meford4u]

The question now begs from all of you, what are you willing to give up to "help" the economy?

Apparently i am willing to give up 80 hours vacation time(we lost 40 in the original contract) pay $30 a month for health care, have my wages frozen for 4 years and have my annual bonus' taken away.

Does anyone remember the CAW fighting the co-pay and changes in the health care system when the Conservatives tried to bring in "for profit" hospitals? Now they think it's alright for their members to co-pay? I don't get that.

The one plus side to this agreement that I have to commend the CAW for listening to the members is the following..............The agreement is contingent on the company receiving government financial assistance.
If Ford doesn't ask for a governement bailout, then none of this affects us. But that begs the question now, why wouldn't they ask for the bailout?

[ZTWsquared]

meford4u,Mar 8 2009, 11:43 AM Wrote:The question now begs from all of you, what are you willing to give up to "help" the economy?

Apparently i am willing to give up 80 hours vacation time(we lost 40 in the original contract) pay $30 a month for health care, have my wages frozen for 4 years and have my annual bonus' taken away.

Does anyone remember the CAW fighting the co-pay and changes in the health care system when the Conservatives tried to bring in "for profit" hospitals?  Now they think it's alright for their members to co-pay?  I don't get that.

The one plus side to this agreement that I have to commend the CAW for listening to the members is the following..............The agreement is contingent on the company receiving government financial assistance.
If Ford doesn't ask for a governement bailout, then none of this affects us.  But that begs the question now, why wouldn't they ask for the bailout?
[right][snapback]282290[/snapback][/right]

I'd certainly be willing to forego those things on your list; but fortunately for the economy I've never had them in my 30 years on the job.

OTOH saying now that "giving up" these things is now a benefit to the economy suggests that when they are in place they are a drag on the economy. Not sure I'd go there if I was you.

[oldeguy]

I've been listening to a talk show all day, while working at my second job, and rhe CAW settlement was a very hot topic. All of the callers let it be known that the CAW didn't give enough back. The callers felt that the Auto workers are overpaid spoiled brats. Fortunately, for me, cause I can see Meford magically reaching through the internet world and grabbing me by the throat, if I agreed, I believe that the Autoworkers deserve to be well compensated. Besides losing jobs already, and with more losses to come, now the union workers are being asked to give back some hard earned compensations to hopefully keep the company going. What has the management side done? As I have stated previously, it isn't the worker's fault that the product they are building is not buyable is it? GM, Ford and Chrysler have made vehicles in the past that are not appealing to the car buyers, and all three didn't adjust to the times, in time, to more fuel efficient vehicles. Ford, is starting to turn it around, or at least seem to have a plan. Chrysler, if they survive, may have some hope, with their rebadged Fiats. GM? who knows.

During this recession/depression, all sorts of people are going to be asked to sacrifice for the "good of the company". But, the perception that autoworkers and if I can add, Government union workers, like me, are overpaid spoiled brats will stay. If I may ask, on a personal side note, may I ask how everyone felt when Bob Rae brought in his Rae Days for Government employees?

[NefCanuck]

oldeguy,

Speaking as government worker I can say that we've already been taking hits long before this current mess exploded on the scene due to decisions by our funder several years ago to try and rationalize our costs

In fact the major push for the last year (before things went to pot) is for a "1% solution" with almost everything funded by Legal Aid Ontario being "asked" to find cost savings and/or efficiencies.

Thing is where I work, most of the costs are only broken down into two categories:

Fixed costs (rent/service contracts for equipment for example)

Personnel costs (Wages/benefits) and I can tell you from personal experience that our benefits have taken a major beating already, with the introduction of co-pays the biggest example (and a major sticking point for me, I don't want to use benefits I have no choice but to use them to remain healthy and able to work)

Considering we're the last line of defense for the most vulnerable in society, I'm at loss to explain this need to slash at us. It's not like our elected representatives want anything to do with these clients... they send them to us! We get chopped at the knees there's no safety net left.

That's enough venting for one night I think...

NefCanuck

[NOS2Go4Me]

All I can say is trust me, a lot of us have given up "enough".

And, realistically speaking, if the cost of the workers wasn't so high, then they wouldn't have to make these concessions now in order to help keep GM afloat.

As far as what I'm "giving up"? A fair chunk of sanity. The size of my networks hasn't gone down, we're still moving forward with big I.T.-related projects here and we're 2 guys short (from 5 to 3) at an international mining contractor with hundreds of mail-enabled employees.

Don't get me wrong, I love my job. I STILL love my job. It's just that sanity has taken a back seat in the last 6 months as layoffs have occurred and workloads have increased numerically and atypically for all that remain here.

Maybe if the unions were more efficient and less of a drag, they'd be less of a bother now. Just saying. :ph34r:

[Flofocus]

ZTWsquared,Mar 8 2009, 07:33 PM Wrote:

meford4u,Mar 8 2009, 11:43 AM Wrote:The question now begs from all of you, what are you willing to give up to "help" the economy?

Apparently i am willing to give up 80 hours vacation time(we lost 40 in the original contract) pay $30 a month for health care, have my wages frozen for 4 years and have my annual bonus' taken away.

Does anyone remember the CAW fighting the co-pay and changes in the health care system when the Conservatives tried to bring in "for profit" hospitals?  Now they think it's alright for their members to co-pay?  I don't get that.

The one plus side to this agreement that I have to commend the CAW for listening to the members is the following..............The agreement is contingent on the company receiving government financial assistance.
If Ford doesn't ask for a governement bailout, then none of this affects us.  But that begs the question now, why wouldn't they ask for the bailout?
[right][snapback]282290[/snapback][/right]

I'd certainly be willing to forego those things on your list; but fortunately for the economy I've never had them in my 30 years on the job.

[right][snapback]282305[/snapback][/right]

WORD! :lol:

I haven't had a raise in over 3 years, lost our employee savings plan, and no more bonuses. I've done enough for the economy. :rolleyes:

Sure you guys lost a lot, but dont act like nobody else is sacrificing their benefits.

[meford4u]

Just a hypothetical question gentlemen, used to raise discussion.

The fact is we already gave up $$$ and vacation time with the last round of our bargaining talks.

Having the government step in and forcibly have our contract re-opened is a major sticking point with many of our members, including myself. Do we now live in the society of Big Brother?

[NOS2Go4Me]

meford4u,Mar 9 2009, 08:39 AM Wrote:Just a hypothetical question gentlemen, used to raise discussion.

The fact is we already gave up $$$ and vacation time with the last round of our bargaining talks.

Having the government step in and forcibly have our contract re-opened is a major sticking point with many of our members, including myself.  Do we now live in the society of Big Brother?
[right][snapback]282343[/snapback][/right]

The union has a fair claim to "Big Brother" themselves, hiding the fact that they don't think their members can choose for themselves behind the paper-thin guise of "solidarity" and "strength in numbers".

What's the difference between an angry mob, Al Capone's mob and the union? The year. They all have about the same population, except for the angry mob. Their membership seems to fluctuate a little more than the other two. They also have the same behaviour and expect the same outcome - their way, their way by force or the highway.

[meford4u]

NOS2Go4Me,Mar 9 2009, 08:43 AM Wrote:

meford4u,Mar 9 2009, 08:39 AM Wrote:Just a hypothetical question gentlemen, used to raise discussion.

The fact is we already gave up $$$ and vacation time with the last round of our bargaining talks.

Having the government step in and forcibly have our contract re-opened is a major sticking point with many of our members, including myself.  Do we now live in the society of Big Brother?
[right][snapback]282343[/snapback][/right]

The union has a fair claim to "Big Brother" themselves, hiding the fact that they don't think their members can choose for themselves behind the paper-thin guise of "solidarity" and "strength in numbers".

What's the difference between an angry mob, Al Capone's mob and the union? The year. They all have about the same population, except for the angry mob. Their membership seems to fluctuate a little more than the other two. They also have the same behaviour and expect the same outcome - their way, their way by force or the highway.
[right][snapback]282344[/snapback][/right]

Holy fawk have you got an old world view of the union.

They give up on almost everything the company asks them for, re-write our contract in the middle of a contract(this isn't the first time) and give away more money to organizations that don't benefit the labour movement or the workers. Our union has become a laughing stock for the workers. If you think we have a "strong" union, then why are we rengotiating in the middle of a contract with a company(Ford) that has clearly stated they don't need government assistance?

Our union has no strength anymore.

And you need to rethink your views of the union movement. It may not be for you(or me for that matter) but they are hardly as strong as they were in the 70's and have become the whipping boy for governments to blame their problems on.

We didn't cause this economic crisis. Greed caused the economic crisis. Banks overlending on savings. Did the government tell the banks in the US to reduce salaries or no bailout? I think not.

[NOS2Go4Me]

Here's the thing: does striking still bring any given company to a halt? Yes. Then, you have a mob mentality. Total expenditures of any nature, in any climate, dictate profitability. It could be the size of your workforce, the wages, the benefits and pensions, your overheads, your supplies and materials. ALL expenditures work against income and the generation of profit.

So, when the union makes those kinds of concessions and their members are still employed... be thankful you have a job. I'm sure you are, but that statement applies to EVERYONE there who was affected and still finds themselves gainfully employed.

The credit crunch has killed everyone because Americans were issuing s*** mortgages to everyone and their dog. Commodity prices have tanked for base metals and may come back some this year.

Ive seen a LOT of base metal mining jobs idled, expansion plans put on hold, proven motherlodes put on maintenance all because of the current economic climate. Lots of folks lost their jobs and lots more made concessions. It wasn't just the CAW that made sacrifices, but they'll have you believe they bled the most of all.

And yes, Bryan... greed got the CAW to the point where they had to be bled a little in order to give GM a chance to live.

As Nate pointed out, he hasn't had a raise in quite a while. I'll simply say I'm "overdue".

Do the CAW members get more than the minimum legislated days off per year? Good. They're ahead of the game. Do they still get dental and supplementary benefits for health care? Good, they're still ahead of the game.

Let's face it, the only reason they didn't strike to protest the proposed changes is because the world at large would have laughed at them - myself included. It's a f***ing recession. You can't keep all your baubles when others are going without.

[oldeguy]

meford4u,Mar 9 2009, 09:39 AM Wrote:Just a hypothetical question gentlemen, used to raise discussion.

The fact is we already gave up $$$ and vacation time with the last round of our bargaining talks.

Having the government step in and forcibly have our contract re-opened is a major sticking point with many of our members, including myself.  Do we now live in the society of Big Brother?
[right][snapback]282343[/snapback][/right]

Yes. Big Brother is here. Welcome to 1984.

[CanadaSVT]

I'll hold off my personal opinions until I get a chance to hear and see all the facts at a ratification meeting.

But, if I was a worker at the St.Thomas Ford plant and not promised a new product after the Panther platform is gone, or an employee at the Windsor Chrysler minivan plants 3rd shift that will be gone by July, or working at GMs truck plant soon to be gone, if I was one of them why would I not vote no?

[darkpuppet]

I hate to say this, but the workers aren't the only bloat in the auto industry.

The American industry is one of the last Old Boy's clubs. They're built on a bloat of management and bureaucracy* that benefit the higher-ups.

Sure, I'm not a big fan of unions, but there are other costs that need to be cut. For example, if GM outsources their entire IT, why do they have 1200+ salaried employees managing their outsourcing partners?

And it's not just IT... there's a lot of infrastructure and people at GM that are just plain redundant. But here's the catch... If the people deciding where to cut the 1000 people are from that IT department.. nobody's going to swing that axe that may be swung at themselves.

For years, the American auto industry has convinced themselves that they are number one and they can only be at the top. Ford, as of recently, seems to be the only one who truly get it. GM is absolutely clueless, and Chrysler, well.. they're just good at making bad decisions.

Until GM drops the single-minded self-preservation tactics of the past, they're doomed. I could easily trim half of GM's management and save the same money they think they're going to save with a new autoworkers agreement.

it's just so stupid.

[Oscar The Grouch]

meford4u,Mar 8 2009, 12:43 PM Wrote:The question now begs from all of you, what are you willing to give up to "help" the economy?
[right][snapback]282290[/snapback][/right]

After being laid off and coming back on a 3 month contract (probationary), here's what I gave up:

- No cost of living increases for the next 3 years
- Vacation trimmed by 80hrs (that's 2 weeks boys and girls).
- Benefits reduction.
- A pay CUT of almost 25%.

That's what I was forced to give up.

What I am willing to give up is buying ANY Ford OEM parts or service as much as possible. My warranty is gone now anyways.

[ZTWsquared]

meford4u,Mar 9 2009, 08:39 AM Wrote:Just a hypothetical question gentlemen, used to raise discussion.

The fact is we already gave up $$$ and vacation time with the last round of our bargaining talks.

Having the government step in and forcibly have our contract re-opened is a major sticking point with many of our members, including myself.  Do we now live in the society of Big Brother?
[right][snapback]282343[/snapback][/right]

But you can't have it both ways Bryan ... either the government "steps in" and gives loans where the credit market won't or it doesn't ... you can call it "big brother" and frankly I'd agree - but the government isn't a bank, and so if they choose to add some stipulations to the loan then so be it - the union had a choice of going along with it or not - bottom line: it was a choice.

The domestic industry has had decades to prepare for a possible recession and I'm not saying it's the unions fault they weren't prepared because my attitude is that the manufacturers agreed to every contract they signed.

But having said that, if the union is all about collectively distributing the wealth amongst it members and retirees when the contracts are good, then it only stands to reason that the pain is shared when the times demand a reduction in benefits.

Frankly I LOL when I read that someone (no offense to anyone here) is asked or forced to "give up" vacation or pension or other benefits ... fawk me: as a self-employed person the only source of these benefits is me and my ability to convince clients to pay me. I'm not saying that unions don't have a valid role in our marketplace ... but in taking a job and more specifically taking a job that includes non-monetary benefits in lieu of pay, those are decisions and choices that each of us have made for ourselves, and to some degree we need to take personal responsibility for them.

I'm not complaining because I chose to be self-employed ... but for reference purposes only let me say that I pay for all my own job training, vacations, retirement plans, health plans, memberships etc etc etc ... if I'm sick and can't work I don't get paid ... if my services aren't needed I don't work and I don't get paid ... I pay into UI but I am not eligible to collect it ... if the market goes south and my clients can't use me, I don't work and I don't get paid and they don't have to give me any notice let alone pay in lieu of notice ... and if my clients go bankrupt before they pay me, I'm SOL because unlike an employee I have no standing as an unsecured creditor.

Is life tough these days as a CAW member? Well I suppose relative to last year the answer is yes ... but relative to anyone else in our society who isn't independantly wealthy, I'd say you've got advantages that many of the rest of us don't and at the worst you may suffer as the rest of us do.

[NOS2Go4Me]

^^ Well said.

Quote:but relative to anyone else in our society who isn't independantly wealthy, I'd say you've got advantages that many of the rest of us don't and at the worst you may suffer as the rest of us do.

QFT. Until a union member is unemployed, their strong-arm, almost militant tactics allow them to enjoy a raft of benefits a LOT of people will never know.

[meford4u]

As a note to NOS. Our last contract took away our right to strike within the contract. We can't walk out/strike during a contract.

FYI.

And Ken...........you chose your life, I chose mine. I only chose to stay at Ford for one reason. Money and benefits. I am equal if not ahead of those that I graduated with. Some, of course are financially ahead of me, but I chose to be where I am because of the stress free environment and the wages I make. Am I lucky? You bet. But its not for everyone.

Would I give up $$$ to keep my job.

Yes.

[ZTWsquared]

meford4u,Mar 9 2009, 08:33 PM Wrote:As a note to NOS.  Our last contract took away our right to strike within the contract.  We can't walk out/strike during a contract.

FYI.

And Ken...........you chose your life, I chose mine.  I only chose to stay at Ford for one reason.  Money and benefits.  I am equal if not ahead of those that I graduated with.  Some, of course are financially ahead of me, but I chose to be where I am because of the stress free environment and the wages I make.  Am I lucky?  You bet.  But its not for everyone.

Would I give up $$$ to keep my job.

Yes.
[right][snapback]282392[/snapback][/right]

I think this is the crux of the matter ... as a consequence of my choice I take on risk and added personal responsibility in return for a high hourly rate and the ability to earn as much as I am capable of ... the consequence of your choice means you are bound by what your union negotiates on your behalf, for good and for bad.

If I'm reading you right, and considering where I am, we've both done well by our choices and BTW I'm okay with the government helping out the auto industry using my tax dollars.

Having said that, I also think that union members who get to keep their job as a result of the government's action should IMO be grateful for the continuance of their job because, as we've both agreed, it was a matter of choice to be in that position in the first place.

[NOS2Go4Me]

meford4u,Mar 9 2009, 08:33 PM Wrote:As a note to NOS.  Our last contract took away our right to strike within the contract.  We can't walk out/strike during a contract.
[right][snapback]282392[/snapback][/right]

That has to be one of the first honourable things I've heard a union member say about a recent contract that I can honestly recall in the last while. So, now at least they work like the rest of us for a change. That's nice to see, especially in these times.

A vivid example to the contrary is the York U scandal that just passed. Demanding a raise is one thing, demanding a raise in the middle of a global recession is something else entirely.

Quote:Having said that, I also think that union members who get to keep their job as a result of the government's action should IMO be grateful for the continuance of their job because, as we've both agreed, it was a matter of choice to be in that position in the first place.

Exactly. Government funds aren't being thrown around like that in the mining sector in general, never mind to the contractors who rely on work from the property / rights holders who generally receive the cash from the government if available. I hope that even just a fraction of the auto workers at all levels realize just what's being done here to save THEIR jobs. The jobs of everyone else down the line that depend on the industry - their jobs in particular aren't safe, not all of them.