babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » walking the talk   » labour and consumption   » CAW targets Ford

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: CAW targets Ford
oUtHEre
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8973

posted 08 September 2005 03:19 PM      Profile for oUtHEre     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Ford being the initial target

Wednesday Sept. 14 around noon they will apply more pressure on Chrysler

Is a strike at Chrysler in almost inevitable?

Prescription getting filled in plant…what about privacy??

Strike would hurt GM

Best-case scenario…could be

Get deal with Ford by Wednesday…. ask Chrysler and Gm to agree to same deal

GM signs on

Chrysler says no…still gives a few days till contract expires to mount pressure

Strike or No Strike @ Chrysler they decide to step away from the pack or stand inline

AS iT hAppENs


bloomberg


Ford Picked by Canadian Auto Union as Target in Talks (Update3)
Sept. 8 (Bloomberg) -- Ford Motor Co. was chosen by the Canadian Auto Workers as the target for talks leading up to a Sept. 20 deadline, with the union saying the company offers the best prospect among U.S.-based automakers for an agreement.

Negotiations with Ford will intensify and ``I don't see any reason we can't do this early next week,'' union President Buzz Hargrove said at a news conference today in Toronto. Stacey Allerton Firth, a Ford of Canada vice president, said in an interview that the unit ``welcomes the opportunity to set the pattern'' and is confident of reaching an accord next week.

If talks with Ford are more difficult than expected, the CAW may shift to DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler as the target, Hargrove said. That decision will be made by midday Sept. 14, he said. Members plan to walk off the job at either Ford or Chrysler if no agreement is reached by 11:59 p.m. Sept 20, when the current contracts expire.

The CAW will use the terms of an accord with the target company as the basis for agreements to be bargained during the next month with the other two automakers. Ford, Chrysler and General Motors Corp. are all trying to hold down increases in Canadian labor costs. Hargrove said all the automakers had taken tougher stances than the union initially expected.

The companies are concerned about costs after GM lost $1.39 billion in this year's first half and Ford's earnings slid 31 percent. The union says the automakers' Canadian operations are profitable. The Canadian talks may set the tone for the companies' 2007 contract negotiations in the U.S. with the United Auto Workers union.

``It should not be difficult to agree on the bargaining points,'' said J.P. Morgan Securities analyst Himanshu Patel in a note to investors.

Wages, Health Care

Patel, who attended an analyst meeting in New York yesterday with Hargrove, said a strike isn't likely. The union is looking for wage adjustments to stay competitive with U.S. workers, and in exchange for avoiding co-payments on health insurance would agree to cost-cutting measures such as filling prescriptions at in-plant pharmacies, Patel said.

The union represents 12,460 factory employees at Dearborn, Michigan-based Ford and 11,440 at Auburn Hills, Michigan-based Chrysler. GM, based in Detroit, employs 17,480 CAW members.

The CAW represents workers at factories that make critical vehicles for the companies. Those include Brampton, Ontario, where Chrysler produces the 300 sedan, its best-selling car in the U.S. GM's Oshawa, Ontario, plant is one of four factories that make the Silverado pickup truck, GM's top-selling vehicle in the U.S. In Windsor, Ontario, Ford builds engines for F-Series pickups, the top-selling line of vehicles in the U.S.

General Motors

Negotiations at GM were put ``on the back burner,'' Hargrove said. Delphi Corp., GM's largest supplier, said in August that it may file for bankruptcy unless it gets assistance from the automaker and the United Auto Workers union.

``There is going to be a huge cost burden transferred from Delphi as we now know it'' to GM, Hargrove said. Picking GM as the target would ``almost guarantee you'd have to have a strike,'' he said.

``We will be at General Motors, the only question is when,'' the union leader said. ``They will have to accept'' the same basic terms as the target company, he said.

At Ford, ``the body language has never been throwing down the gauntlet,'' he said. Hargrove said Chrysler has taken a hard line. ``I think a strike is inevitable at Chrysler,'' he said.

GM was the target company in the last talks, in 2002. The union reached agreements with all three companies that year without a strike. Canadian workers haven't struck since a 22-day walkout against GM in 1996.

The 2002 agreement with GM came about five hours before the deadline. The CAW-Ford accord was reached a day ahead of the deadline. Chrysler came close to a walkout, reaching an agreement 25 minutes before the time set by the union for a strike.

To contact the reporter on this story:
Bill Koenig in Southfield, Michigan at [email protected]


From: tORonTo | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 08 September 2005 03:58 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Great timing - last night CTV announced a Ford Company recall of 4 MILLION vehicles in North America - with 200,000 of them in Canada.

Ford: Fix Or Repair Daily


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
scooter
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5548

posted 08 September 2005 05:11 PM      Profile for scooter     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I wonder if GM is better off with a strike and cut their loses for the year.
From: High River | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
oUtHEre
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8973

posted 08 September 2005 06:16 PM      Profile for oUtHEre     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Boom Boom

Why is it you didn’t mention the Toyota recall?

Ford is for the possibility brake fluid could leak through the cruise control's deactivation switch into the system's electrical components, leading to potential corrosion. That could lead to a buildup of electrical current that could cause overheating and a fire. Ford has more vehicles on the road so when ya do the math the recalls will be large.


I thought it was nice of Buzz point out we need to get our cbc workers back to work and how important a public broadcaster is to our country.

aS iT hAPpeNs

[ 08 September 2005: Message edited by: oUtHEre ]


From: tORonTo | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 08 September 2005 06:51 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
There's a Toyota recall? First I've heard of it.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
rasmus
malcontent
Babbler # 621

posted 08 September 2005 07:09 PM      Profile for rasmus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Wow, this is surprising. Ford Canada's plants are operating way under capacity. I wonder what the logic is.
From: Fortune favours the bold | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 08 September 2005 07:20 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I think there's a huge glut of supply on the market. Bring down production might boost demand (and prices) if all the automakers did it.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
oUtHEre
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8973

posted 08 September 2005 07:25 PM      Profile for oUtHEre     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Seems like outsourcing is becoming an issue at Chrysler and GM is reluctant to reward Canadian Employees while US employees are watching on. The auto companies have wanted to outsource paint and body operations first leading to the full outsourcing of vehicle manufacturing. I am under the impression that part of the reason Chrysler backed out of the Windsor Project a few years back was due to outsourcing. This brings us to Ford, although Ford has plans for investment in Oakville I found it concerning that Buzz talked about Chrysler backing out of plans from last contract talks for its Windsor Plans. Is this an indication for news to come?

AS iT haPPenS


From: tORonTo | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
blake 3:17
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10360

posted 08 September 2005 08:00 PM      Profile for blake 3:17     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
from the CAW site:
quote:
CAW’s Hargrove Outlines Bargaining Issues to New York Financial Analysts

September 07, 2005, 10:39 a.m. EST

CAW president Buzz Hargrove and CAW economist Jim Stanford made a presentation to financial analysts in New York City this morning, September 7 at 9:00 a.m. The presentation addressed major issues in the CAW's bargaining with the Big Three automakers and the challenges facing the North American auto industry.

Hargrove and Stanford went to New York today because from time to time the financial community can influence bargaining. The CAW wants to ensure the financial community understands key facts about Canada’s auto industry.

A major goal in this bargaining is to protect Canadian jobs, while protecting the interests of CAW members.

The presentation included the following points:

* Canada is not the U.S. While Canadians depend on the Big Three for our automotive future, the fundamental economic circumstances of our industry are very different.

* The Canadian auto industry is productive, competitive and profitable.

* The Big Three's utilization in Canada is better than Toyota's in North America (about 118 per cent in Canada in 2004, versus 107 per cent for Toyota in North America).

* Our labour costs almost perfectly match the "blended average" for North America -- even at current exchange rates. While the 30 per cent run-up in the dollar has hurt our competitiveness, without doubt, we are still "bang-on."

* Investors better not get their appetites whetted for concessions: they're not needed, and not possible.

The CAW’s presentation can be viewed on the CAW web site at:
www.caw.ca/whatwedo/bargaining /big3automakers/auto05/pdf/CAW _Presentation_to_NYC_Analysts_ Sept05.pdf

The session was hosted by J.P. Morgan Securities.

The CAW's current contracts with the companies expire at midnight on September 20th.


For more information, please visit:
http://www.caw.ca/whatwedo/bargaining/bi
g3automakers/auto05/index.asp



From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged
rasmus
malcontent
Babbler # 621

posted 08 September 2005 08:03 PM      Profile for rasmus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Boom Boom:
I think there's a huge glut of supply on the market. Bring down production might boost demand (and prices) if all the automakers did it.

From this post, I'm not sure you understand how unions work. Normally, they don't start out with a strategy of negotiating job cuts that will target their members (and thus their revenue base).


From: Fortune favours the bold | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
radiorahim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2777

posted 08 September 2005 09:15 PM      Profile for radiorahim     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
If there's one industry the CAW does know, it's the auto industry.

These folks know what they're doing.


From: a Micro$oft-free computer | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 08 September 2005 09:31 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by rasmus raven:

From this post, I'm not sure you understand how unions work. Normally, they don't start out with a strategy of negotiating job cuts that will target their members (and thus their revenue base).


I was trying to predict the company's strategy. In a time of what appears to be an oversupply of product, why would the company want to continue regular production? Wouldn't it make sense to cut back and let demand drive up prices? How does it benefit the car companies and employees to have a glut of product they can't sell?


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
oUtHEre
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8973

posted 13 September 2005 01:43 AM      Profile for oUtHEre     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
tentative agreement to be voted on by membership this weekend

1100 job loses over life of contract....loss of v-6 engine in essex

Wage increases
$.45 year 1
$.30 year 2
$.30 year 3

No signing bonus
1100 job losses in Windsor
Loss of v-6
Foundry phase out of during 2007-2008
New engine will be added to off set job loss by 400-450
Restructuring benefit increases $ 70000 from $ 60000 to eligible retirees
Present employee levels in Oakville are 3640 but will increase to over 4000
If there are not enough people taking the retirement package they will be given preferential hiring at other Ford Canada location
Then voluntary buy out for some junior member who would like to move on.
200 million investments in St Thomas but no word of any Lincoln product during this contract.
Extra sub top up in Oakville will stop January 1 then on to same sub payments as other Ford locations
Dispensing fees at drug stores will be capped to $11 but co pay will remain at $.35
No additional time off
Pension agreement $8 increase to pensions but it will move to 3 year pension agreement as opposed to six years in the past with the CAW
No involuntary lay offs by the end of 08


$ 2000 increases above a-plan price if employees buy Ford vehicles built in North America
$ 1000 off set to car insurance over life of contract for new Ford vehicle


From: tORonTo | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca