GM and CAW reach agreement
Lewenza said the union and the automaker reached the tentative deal around 11 p.m. ET Thursday.
Voting on the agreement by union members is slated for Sunday and Monday.
"We have preserved our wages. We have preserved and secured our pension benefits," said Lewenza. "We have protected most of our core benefits." [...]
Pension issues were one of the major items, with Lewenza saying Friday that the union has agreed to a pension benefit freeze extending through 2015.
He pointed out that the pension plan for the workers is only 39 per cent funded on a windup basis
Union pension official Sym Gill said the pension shortfall is roughly $6.5 billion to $7 billion, adding that the pension is expected to be back on a fully funded basis in 10 years.
And showing who is really leading the bandwagon for concessions:
"I’m hopeful when we look at the deal that all involved have made the difficult decisions necessary to create a viable company," Harper said.
A little about the pension:
CAW news release
Its hard to say without seeing any detail at all. But I'm surprised it wasn't much worse.
If I understand correctly, the governments have agreed that bailout money will go to the pension underfunding. I'd say that's a heck of a lot better than the UAW pension fund getting GM stock for their shortfall. But I could easily be missing something.
The benefits that existing employees get also struck me as being less of a hit than what the UAW accepted- though that is difficult to compare.
Either the CAW was right that the all in hourly labour costs that others were waving around were incorrect, or management made a decision that up to a point how far the union wanted to go in cutting hourly costs was up to them.... because the elephant in the room is not the comparison to Toyota labour costs [which is an abstraction], but the comparison to cost cuts the UAW would agree to. In other words: "if you want to take your chance that your labour costs are OK for when it comes to rounds of factory and line closing decisions... thats up to you."
I've been at a bargaining table with Sym Gill, many years ago. I'm glad he is still on staff, and working on stuff like this.
We have a ratification meeting for our plant this sunday. I expect a similar deal on the pension freeze to stave off the idea of a non-defined pension for new hires.
Our pension plan is over 80% funded at wind up, the pension concessions made by my employer had more to do with current business dogma than it does with any real economic need.
Our negotiations had a lot of language regarding new hires. Whether one agrees with those language issues or not, it's heartening that the company is thinking this way. If they weren't sure they wanted to maintain this location, they wouldn't care too much about new hires, is my thinking.
Well, we ratified with over 80% in favour. Like the G.M. deal, there's a five year freeze on the indexing of the pension. Wage freeze. Co payments on prescription drugs, but capped. Lost semi-private hospitalization. A week's holidays for two years. And everyone stays on a defined pension.
All things considered a pretty crappy contract, but a damned fine one under the current circumstances.
So, this is out of the way. Now, it would be nice if the fine people down at Service Canada started paying us work share. They are approaching, what, six weeks late now.
That's a relief, Tommy, thanks for the report.
I remember "work sharing" from about 15 years ago. We used it to avoid temporary layoffs of junior members by working a 4-day week, with the fifth day partially paid by EI. Same idea?
Yes. It's a pretty successfull program, actually. I think the Obama administration is looking at implementing it in the States.
There were some collective agreements in Canada in the Depression years which had clauses prohibiting layoffs before the workforce had all been reduced to some lower number of hours per week (around 30 maybe, but I'm guessing) - kind of a self-enforced work share but obviously with no relief in those days during the lost hours, no EI, no SUB plans... I question whether there's enough collective spirit today for workers to accept that. Of course, it would require some leadership, yeah right.
What a disaster for the workers, a $15 to $16 dollar an hour wage cut! And that's on top of the previous $7 dollar/hr wage concession. The perpetrators of financial 9/11 in North America are laughing all the way to the bank.
Keep voting Liberal and Tory!! The workers will get more of the same anti-worker agenda from the two old line parties and weak unions.
Ummm, there was no wage cut.
Ummm, there was no previous wage concession.
Workers are so stupid and brain-dead compared to you. Don't they realize that all they have to do is elect the ONDP again, and no more concessions, no more torn-up collective agreements, no more plant closures, heaven on earth? Just like the last time?
What would they do without the few lone prophets in the wilderness repeating the helpful mantras?
They do indeed owe you a debt of gratitude for showing them The Way.
By the way, if you're going to comment on specifics (like so-called "wage concessions") instead of just reiterating the usual mantra, perhaps familiarize yourself with the details. The workers will be lots more impressed with your Solution if they think you know what you're talking about.
The CBC reported:
So altogether the CAW and membership, McGuinty and the Harpers agreed to a $22 dollar wage cut. And that's if the bondholders go along, which they more than likely will not.
Fidel, please don't embarrass yourself by talking about things you (and your CBC) don't comprehend.
I think youve finally lost your mind.
"...wages and pension benefits are protected..."
"...a $15 to $16 reduction in the average per-hour wage..."
They seem to be having it both ways here. And it looks like GM will declare bankruptcy by June 1st, which will trigger new contract negotiations, more concessions...
The fact that you think a worker could have his hourly wage cut by $22 shows that you have no clue what workers earn. Big 3 auto workers earned on average $34.00/hour before this past year's round of concession bargaining started. How much do you think they will earn per hour now, Fidel? $12.00?
I think it's taken out of the total workforce payroll, including benefits. Total concessions equalling $15 or $16 dollars an hour. I dont know what the final average pay cut might look like on every pay cheque. Do you?
I think when youre reduced to being a slavish apologist for the two old line parties, it's time to cash out. Objectivity is absent at that point.
The CAW agreed to concessions that will save $7/hour in total labour costs in the earlier agreement, and another $15/hour now. As Unionist said, there is no wage cut.
And when you brought up the contingency on the bondholders in the other thread on the subject, I pointed out that it is not contingent on what the bondholders do, and that the agreement is designed to stand when there is a bankruptcy filing. Having replied such in less than an hour after your statement, and you making anoter post in the thread also within an hour, one hopes you read it.
"You" being Unionist. And to answer your question, he does know, and already told you: no wage cuts.
By what I've read in news pieces posted by you and Unionist, this negotiation is contingent on GM not declaring chapter bankruptcy.
Take a deep breath and start reading. From the start.
CNN-Money reported yesterday
"Tentative" It's all in the English I guess. They'll be back at it next month squeezing workers for more.
Its not the English.
Its your tendency to read in what you want to see [for who knows what reason].
"Tentative" refers to the agreements with the CAW and the UAW. All agreements are tentative until the union members vote approval. "Tentaive" has nothing to do with the bondholders.
And the other things you highlighted referr to the uncertainty as to how things witll unfold for GM viz the bondholders. The agreements with the UAW and CAW stand regardless of how that shakes out.
And no, they won't be back to the workers next month for more.
But Unionist said in the previous thread:
And Lewenza said that wages and pensions are secured and preserved. So why, in the next breath, are there reports of a $15-16/hr wage cut as reported in the Hamilton Spectator?
Former GM CEO Rick Wagoner took a big wage cut with being forced out and pensioned off at something like $23 million US.
So where is the $15-$16 dollar/hr hit coming from? It has to be realized somewhere?
CAW digs deep for GM pact Wages slashed by another $15-$16/hour
Yes, it is confusing.
And I'm still not sure what you think Jack Layton said unless you misled us as to what you only believed he stated without a direct quote. In that case youre excused...again.
So, there are concessions in the form of reduced benefits amounting to a $15-$16 dollars an hour on top of the previous $7/hr equivalent wage cut. It all depends on where and how they wanted to take the hit. I'm glad we finally straightened out that bit of pro-corporate, pro old line party bafflegab on concessions made by our two old line parties and the CAW on behalf of Canadian workers.
At last, an issue where you speak with some knowledge.
Ken said that you said there were no wage cuts period. That's all that he said you said, which was misleading.
Meanwhile the Japanese and German governments are bailing out car companies similarly but without the anti-worker agenda of demanding their unionized workers take equivalent "wage cuts" of $20 dollars/hr or more.
Keep on votin' Liberal and Tory, autoworkers. As cartoon character Pete Puma used to say to Bugs Bunny, "Gimme me a lotta lumps. A whooole lotta lumps! And on second thought, I'll just help myself" At which point he proceeded to thump himself on the head with a wooden mallet instead of waiting for Bugs Bunny to do it for him. Learned helplessness.
There were no wage cuts. Period. Full stop. Goodbye.
More mealy mouthed rhetoric from a supposed union activist. God help me if I ever become such a dedicated apologist for the old line party stranglehold on power in this country. Poor Canada.
When you run out of arguments (that would be a few years ago), you resort to namecalling. The NDP and Jack Layton cherish support like mine, because it is given wholeheartedly and with full sincerity, along with the criticism that only friends can offer. Your brand is harmful and, I dare say, unappreciated by those who actually care for the future of the party.
Having said that, please go read up on this subject before continuing to embarrass yourself and everyone else here.
And is it a done deal or no deal? I dont think either of you know.
Done deal.
If I was trying as hard as Fidel to prove some convoluted point, I'd probably be confused to.
But go for it if others have honest questions about how some of this works, or the power dynamics involved, what ever.