Ford US Union Vote

imugli · 08-03-2009, 10:16 AM

One for our US posters, if I may...

I read here that the vote on the concessions Ford wants is fairly tight at the moment.

Can you guys give your point of view as to why you think this is?

Is it a case of Ford being better off than GM and Chrysler, therefore the locals don't think they need the concessions, or are there other reasons?

It seems to me the Union has 2 options, much like the ones they had with GM and Chrysler - approve the changes and keep their jobs, with some layoffs probably being inevitable, or have Ford go for a bailout as well and start talking up a chapter 11, in which case everyone loses?

Can you guys please provide some education on this?

Ohio XB · 11-03-2009, 02:37 AM

I believe the reason the vote was so close is because of the number of old school workers that are still at Ford. Some of them know they have to give up stuff and are ready to do what it takes. Others look at it as giving back what was hard faught for over the last 30-40 years, and in many cases that is exactly what it is. Many of those old timers are not ready to give that up. Many of them went on strike back in the 60's and 70's for what is being given up and they sacrificed back then. There are also some issues with the doors that have been opened for further erroding of benefits or work rules based on the language in the amendments.

I would believe most of the younger workers (16 years and less) would be more open to this. They did not sacrifice for what was given up. It was already here.

Steve

imugli · 11-03-2009, 01:00 PM

Thanks for that, Steve.

I see it eventually got through - 59% I read somewhere? Closer than I would have though, but a step in the right direction from what my (distant) eyes can glean...

**Luke Plaizier** · 11-03-2009, 10:25 PM

And the race to the bottom continues....

Lukeyson

Ohio XB · 12-03-2009, 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luke Plaizier

And the race to the bottom continues....

Lukeyson

That is exactly right. I made another long post about that exact notion right here....

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showpos...&postcount=153

Other than suspending the cost of living allowance our hourly wage was not changed. Other compensation was given up and there were some other changes, but Ford being able to fund the VEBA with stock instead of cash was probably the most significant issue of the whole thing.

I thought the amendments would have been approved by a higher percent as well.

Steve

Wretched · 12-03-2009, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Ford-UAW deal cuts wages to $55 an hour

DETROIT (Reuters) – Ford Motor Co expects operating savings of $500 million per year from an agreement with the United Auto Workers that will push hourly wage rates into the "ballpark" of foreign-based rivals, the company said on Wednesday.

The agreement trims average wages and benefits for UAW hourly workers to about $55 per hour this year, while the U.S. operations of foreign-based automakers -- or what executives call "transplants" -- pay workers on average $48 to $49 per hour, Ford said.

The agreement with the UAW, which workers ratified earlier in March, allows Ford to suspend some performance and bonus payments, reduce overtime costs and cut a paid holiday, as well as restructure funding of a union retiree healthcare trust.

Joe Hinrichs, Ford's global head of manufacturing, said the savings from the operating agreement and restructuring of the funding of the trust, the Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Association, are "critical to our future competitiveness."

"This gets us to within the ballpark of where the transplants are," Hinrichs said in a conference call with analysts and reporters.
"Over the next couple of years with the buyouts and with the ability to leverage some of the other tools that are now in this agreement, we think we can get there within the next couple of years on parity with the transplants," he said.

The annual savings could exceed $500 million if industry conditions allowed Ford to exercise all of the changes in the agreement, Hinrichs said.
Ford has about 42,000 hourly workers covered by the contract. About half of the annual savings would come from the elimination of performance bonuses and the Christmas bonus and the suspension of cost of living increases.

Ford restructured payments into the VEBA, including the option to contribute about half in company stock, to conserve cash. The plan to make payments in stock requires shareholder approval at the Ford annual meeting this year.

Ford, which posted a record $14.7 billion net loss for 2008, has said it believes it has adequate liquidity to operate through the economic downturn without seeking emergency U.S. government loans.
The agreement with the UAW effectively puts Ford's U.S. hourly wage rates in line with the cuts cross-town rivals General Motors Corp and Chrysler LLC have been negotiating with the union under their government bailouts.

Chrysler, about 80 percent controlled by Cerberus Capital Management LP, and GM have received $17.4 billion of emergency government loans and have requested billions more in emergency loans to complete restructurings.

GM and Chrysler also have reached tentative agreements with the UAW on labor issues, but have withheld details until talks are completed on the funding of their healthcare trusts.

Wages and benefits in the GM UAW agreement are patterned on the Ford contract, but the contracts differ in other areas such as employee placement and company-specific details, UAW Vice President Cal Rapson said in a letter to members on Monday.

"It appears that the agreement essentially meets the terms set forth by the U.S. Treasury loan (to GM)," KeyBanc Capital Markets analyst Brett Hoselton said in a note to clients.

"If correct, we believe this is a significant milestone and investors should now turn their attention to negotiations with the bondholders," Hoselton said.

Ford has announced salaried job cuts and executive pay reductions and last week launched an effort to reduce $25.8 billion of automotive debt by up to 40 percent through conversion of debt to equity and tender offers.
Ford also has agreed to offer buyouts to UAW-represented workers from April 1 through May 22. Ford has offered buyouts previously to hourly workers and the offers will be lower than those in the past due to the current economic conditions.

Ford plans to consolidate assembly work between adjacent Michigan Truck and Wayne Assembly plants near Detroit. The automaker is converting its Michigan Truck plant to build the European-designed 2010 Ford Focus small car.

The Wayne facility will continue to perform stamping and some body work and the consolidation is not expected to result in job cuts from the Wayne facility.

Ford shares were up 9 cents, or 4.9 percent, at $1.94 on the New York Stock Exchange late in the trading session.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090311/ts_nm/us_ford

bob^ · 12-03-2009, 09:52 PM

Is it better to give up something and keep the company afloat? or is it better to stick by your guns and let a company go under?

It's tough times and sacrifices have to be made... I'd rather be in a job, even if it takes a small pay cut for a while, than to have no job at all.

XplodE · 12-03-2009, 10:25 PM

So true bob, if only some workers in Aus would do the same the manufacturing industry in Australia might still exist... Well it still dose but not for long the way things are going!

MITCHAY · 12-03-2009, 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob^

Is it better to give up something and keep the company afloat? or is it better to stick by your guns and let a company go under?

It's tough times and sacrifices have to be made... I'd rather be in a job, even if it takes a small pay cut for a while, than to have no job at all.

Especially since there is so much unemployment over there. Saw the queues on the news and they are massive, I couldn't believe it.

Bill M · 13-03-2009, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob^

Is it better to give up something and keep the company afloat? or is it better to stick by your guns and let a company go under?

It's tough times and sacrifices have to be made... I'd rather be in a job, even if it takes a small pay cut for a while, than to have no job at all.

For that to work you have to be able to trust the management. Having lost lots of superannuation & pay to bent employers that is a BIG ask. Sure, I would take a wage cut to keep workmates in employment but not everyone feels the same. It would only work if there was transparency and a willingness by all to participate.
Bill.

Ohio XB · 13-03-2009, 11:39 PM

To illustrate the closeness in compensation between Ford and the transplant companies here is the appendix that Ford turned into congress outlining hourly employee compensation this past December...

I still don't know what "All Other" is.

Anyways, you can see that the VEBA negotiated in the 2007 contract, that takes affect January 1, 2010, greatly reduces hourly total compensation to $58/hr. (a figure I still cannot add up to with what we are paid, must be whatever "other" is)

We (employees) were informed by Ford that the agreement that we just approved is worth another $5 per hour. This takes the current hourly labor costs down to $53/hr, only $4 per hour more than the transplants.

As sales pick up and Ford begins to hire more people again at the new rate of $14/hr actual hourly wage the cost for labor will drop another $5/hr which will equal $48/hr and that is right there with the transplants........until they start dropping their pay.

As far as I am concerned the Senators that want to see the Big3 fail because they have foreign auto makers in their States (real patriotic Americans, eh?) have nothing to complain about on this issue anymore.

Also know that we here at Ford are expecting the company to be back again with more concession requests, perhaps in 6 months.

Steve

bob^ · 14-03-2009, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill M

For that to work you have to be able to trust the management. Having lost lots of superannuation & pay to bent employers that is a BIG ask. Sure, I would take a wage cut to keep workmates in employment but not everyone feels the same. It would only work if there was transparency and a willingness by all to participate.
Bill.

I agree 100%. I would want it all back - eventually. But the biggest issue there is trust with your employer to give it back when the business is "good" again.

Bill M · 14-03-2009, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob^

I agree 100%. I would want it all back - eventually. But the biggest issue there is trust with your employer to give it back when the business is "good" again.

Agreed.

imugli · 14-03-2009, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Is it better to give up something and keep the company afloat? or is it better to stick by your guns and let a company go under?

It's tough times and sacrifices have to be made... I'd rather be in a job, even if it takes a small pay cut for a while, than to have no job at all.

I was talking last night to a guy who works for an auto supplier here in Melbourne.

Union voted 3 requests for reduced hours down.

Company sacked 170 people, some of whom are 55 years old +, have never done anything else and will never find work again.

That worked out well.