Indianapolis auto workers drive UAW executives out of meeting

[boomerang]

From the World Socialist Web Site

Indianapolis auto workers drive UAW executives out of meeting

Workers at a General Motors stamping plant in Indianapolis, Indiana chased United Auto Workers executives out of a union meeting Sunday, after the UAW demanded workers accept a contract that would cut their wages in half.

As soon as three UAW International representatives took the podium, they were met with boos and shouts of opposition from many of the 631 workers currently employed at the plant. The officials, attempting to speak at the only informational meeting on the proposed contract changes, were forced out within minutes of taking the floor.

The incident once again exposes the immense class divide between workers and union officials, who are working actively with the auto companies to drive down wages and eliminate benefits.

So, now that the UAW owns a large portion of GM, it appears they've realized (if the article is to be believed) that the wage and benefits packages they've bargained for through the years are a drag on the corporation. Really interesting times we live in. The angle of the workers turning against the organization that purports to represent them is of course priceless.

I'd like to see the spin on this from another source, but I'm too lazy to search for it.

 

[glenn1]

From the World Socialist Web Site

Indianapolis auto workers drive UAW executives out of meeting



So, now that the UAW owns a large portion of GM, it appears they've realized (if the article is to be believed) that the wage and benefits packages they've bargained for through the years are a drag on the corporation. Really interesting times we live in. The angle of the workers turning against the organization that purports to represent them is of course priceless.

I'd like to see the spin on this from another source, but I'm too lazy to search for it.

Want to place any bets on the over/under for the inevitable follow-up post: "GM closes Indianapolis plant, laying off 631 shortly after workers vote against new contract."

 

[IndyColtsFan]

From the World Socialist Web Site

Indianapolis auto workers drive UAW executives out of meeting



So, now that the UAW owns a large portion of GM, it appears they've realized (if the article is to be believed) that the wage and benefits packages they've bargained for through the years are a drag on the corporation. Really interesting times we live in. The angle of the workers turning against the organization that purports to represent them is of course priceless.

I'd like to see the spin on this from another source, but I'm too lazy to search for it.

Hmmm, I think that plant might be the one that is located down the street from where I work. Here is at least one article from indystar.com:

http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=20108160324

 

[manimal]

Saw that in the local paper as well. A few members at our church work there and they were recently talking about how GM would fold because the plant was one of the few left that did what they do... Guess GM will call their bluff..

 

[Slew Foot]

In other news, GM takes US taxpayers money and opens a plant in Mexico.

 

[Ns1]

it would appear that the plant isn't going to be making GM cars at all, but is instead going to be converted to a metal stamping co??? (if the deal went through, but it didn't)

so instead of half wages everyone's going home.


"

Indiana Commerce Secretary Mitch Roob said he was completely surprised by local General Motors workers' refusal to vote on a proposed contract by JD Norman Industries, a decision that appears to set up the plant for certain closure in September 2011.

GM is trying to sell the plant to JD Norman, based in Addison, Ill., but hasn't received much cooperation from United Auto Workers Local 23, which represents 631 workers at the plant. Union members voted 384-22 on May 26 not to open contract negotiations with Norman, which would pay a lower hourly wage, and—workers believed at the time—wipe out their GM retirement eligibility.

Despite the initial vote, higher-level UAW officials continued to work with JD Norman and GM to come up with a proposal the rank-and-file might accept. Norman is expected to become a GM supplier.

"I’m extremely disappointed that the employees were not given an opportunity to vote," Roob said Monday morning. "The real losers," he said, are the "thousands who will never have the opportunity to work at this facility."

Members of Local 23 shouted down the union's international representatives at a Sunday afternoon meeting to learn about the proposal. The meeting ended abruptly, and plans to hold a vote Monday were canceled.

General Motors Corp. had been planning to close the plant next year unless it is sold. JD Norman emerged as a potential buyer this spring, but the company said it needed wage and benefit cuts to make the deal work. Under the proposal, base pay would drop from $29 per hour to $15.50.

It's unclear whether JD Norman will now walk away from the deal. Michael Young, project director at economic development organization Develop Indy, said he's still awaiting word from JD Norman about its next step. Young said, he was “very surprised and disappointed” at the workers' decision.

Sunday's proposal was the result of negotiations by higher-level union representatives, who also wanted to keep the jobs in Indianapolis. The second-round offer included bonuses of $35,000 for GM workers who agreed to quit or retire and work for JD Norman for at least two years. Those who wanted to stay with GM and preserve their rights to transfer to another GM factory could do so.

Roob said he now expects Indianapolis officials will start working on a reuse plan, which may take four or five years.

"It's hard to see a silver lining in this cloud today," he said.
"

 

[IndyColtsFan]

it would appear that the plant isn't going to be making GM cars at all, but is instead going to be converted to a metal stamping co??? (if the deal went through, but it didn't)

so instead of half wages everyone's going home.


"

Indiana Commerce Secretary Mitch Roob said he was completely surprised by local General Motors workers' refusal to vote on a proposed contract by JD Norman Industries, a decision that appears to set up the plant for certain closure in September 2011.

GM is trying to sell the plant to JD Norman, based in Addison, Ill., but hasn't received much cooperation from United Auto Workers Local 23, which represents 631 workers at the plant. Union members voted 384-22 on May 26 not to open contract negotiations with Norman, which would pay a lower hourly wage, and—workers believed at the time—wipe out their GM retirement eligibility.

Despite the initial vote, higher-level UAW officials continued to work with JD Norman and GM to come up with a proposal the rank-and-file might accept. Norman is expected to become a GM supplier.

"I’m extremely disappointed that the employees were not given an opportunity to vote," Roob said Monday morning. "The real losers," he said, are the "thousands who will never have the opportunity to work at this facility."

Members of Local 23 shouted down the union's international representatives at a Sunday afternoon meeting to learn about the proposal. The meeting ended abruptly, and plans to hold a vote Monday were canceled.

General Motors Corp. had been planning to close the plant next year unless it is sold. JD Norman emerged as a potential buyer this spring, but the company said it needed wage and benefit cuts to make the deal work. Under the proposal, base pay would drop from $29 per hour to $15.50.

It's unclear whether JD Norman will now walk away from the deal. Michael Young, project director at economic development organization Develop Indy, said he's still awaiting word from JD Norman about its next step. Young said, he was “very surprised and disappointed” at the workers' decision.

Sunday's proposal was the result of negotiations by higher-level union representatives, who also wanted to keep the jobs in Indianapolis. The second-round offer included bonuses of $35,000 for GM workers who agreed to quit or retire and work for JD Norman for at least two years. Those who wanted to stay with GM and preserve their rights to transfer to another GM factory could do so.

Roob said he now expects Indianapolis officials will start working on a reuse plan, which may take four or five years.

"It's hard to see a silver lining in this cloud today," he said.
"

Off topic rant: Mitch Roob is an incompetent douche.

Back to your normally scheduled thread.

 

[Lemon law]

As a person in the market for a new car, I stand four square for the concept that both Union and management work for auto companies without salary or compensation of any kind. No salary, no benefits, but I might think that we could spring perhaps for a token dollar a year.

It is so in my and your public interest.

So I have written, so shall it be done. That way Labor and management will achieve equal parity with no bothersome inequalities.

 

[Double Trouble]

Hey, the workers will get what they want. They refuse to take a pay cut to more reasonable levels... now they will take a 100% pay cut. Good thinking, idiots. I guess $0 per hour in their mind is better than $15 per hour.

 

[pcgeek11]

OK you can have slightly better than one half of your pay and keep a job

OR

We will close the plant and you will get nothing.


Hmmmm. Tough choice here.

 

[Lemon law]

Hey, the workers will get what they want. They refuse to take a pay cut to more reasonable levels... now they will take a 100% pay cut. Good thinking, idiots. I guess $0 per hour in their mind is better than $15 per hour.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But yes, if management screws labor they think they will get a pay raise, but no workers equals no out put and management gets no pay either.

 

[charrison]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But yes, if management screws labor they think they will get a pay raise, but no workers equals no out put and management gets no pay either.

And if labor costs are too high, there is no profit. So everyone loses again.

 

[Lemon law]

And if labor costs are too high, there is no profit. So everyone loses again.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Silly Charrison, it used to be worker compensation that drove up the prices of cars, and now its management compensation that drives up the prices of cars.

Have you looked at the salaries of CEO's lately, even the most incompetent ones get bazziolions when their ass get fired. And so does lower level management.

Next time, try to bark up the right tree to find the real parasites.

 

[charrison]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Silly Charrison, it used to be worker compensation that drove up the prices of cars, and now its management compensation that drives up the prices of cars.

Have you looked at the salaries of CEO's lately, even the most incompetent ones get bazziolions when their ass get fired. And so does lower level management.

Next time, try to bark up the right tree to find the real parasites.

Is it? Care to show proof that management costs are the problem?

 

[Double Trouble]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Silly Charrison, it used to be worker compensation that drove up the prices of cars, and now its management compensation that drives up the prices of cars.

Have you looked at the salaries of CEO's lately, even the most incompetent ones get bazziolions when their ass get fired. And so does lower level management.

Next time, try to bark up the right tree to find the real parasites.

Even if executive pay is disproportionate and out of control (which it often is), given the number of executives versus other workers, usually the amount of salary associated with the execs doesn't make a dent in the total labor costs.

Also, regardless of who's screwing who in terms of labor / management, these idiots are effectively saying "I'd rather not work than get paid at least $15 per hour for doing menial work that likely doesn't require any advanced education". In this economy, that doesn't seem like a very smart view.

 

[boomerang]

LOL at all you tough guys advocating people vote for a 50% reduction in their wages. Sure, they're between a rock and a hard place but, how many of you could survive in your current home with a permanent pay cut like this? Those living in your mom's basement need not reply. For the rest, come up with something better than "sell your house and move" too. If you're not aware of current conditions in the real estate market, you may want to brush up on that some. I've not touched on the second largest expense for many here which could be transportation or tuition costs for their kids. So keep that in mind.

Here's another factor to consider. How many people in this country will it take to voluntarily take a permanent 50% cut in wages before it ripples out to affect you? How long before your employer will decide those kind of cuts are becoming the norm and that they would really make a big impact on his bottom line? One that he finds irresistible and one easily accomplished with a slew of at will employees.

 

[charrison]

LOL at all you tough guys advocating people vote for a 50% reduction in their wages. Sure, they're between a rock and a hard place but, how many of you could survive in your current home with a permanent pay cut like this? Those living in your mom's basement need not reply. For the rest, come up with something better than "sell your house and move" too. If you're not aware of current conditions in the real estate market, you may want to brush up on that some. I've not touched on the second largest expense for many here which could be transportation or tuition costs for their kids. So keep that in mind.

Here's another factor to consider. How many people in this country will it take to voluntarily take a permanent 50% cut in wages before it ripples out to affect you? How long before your employer will decide those kind of cuts are becoming the norm and that they would really make a big impact on his bottom line? One that he finds irresistible and one easily accomplished with a slew of at will employees.

Even less could take 100% cut. If the plant does not make money, no one has a job.

 

[PokerGuy]

LOL at all you tough guys advocating people vote for a 50% reduction in their wages. Sure, they're between a rock and a hard place but, how many of you could survive in your current home with a permanent pay cut like this? Those living in your mom's basement need not reply. For the rest, come up with something better than "sell your house and move" too. If you're not aware of current conditions in the real estate market, you may want to brush up on that some. I've not touched on the second largest expense for many here which could be transportation or tuition costs for their kids. So keep that in mind.

Here's another factor to consider. How many people in this country will it take to voluntarily take a permanent 50% cut in wages before it ripples out to affect you? How long before your employer will decide those kind of cuts are becoming the norm and that they would really make a big impact on his bottom line? One that he finds irresistible and one easily accomplished with a slew of at will employees.

That's all fine and dandy, but a 50 percent cut is better than a 100 percent cut. Me thinks these folks probably don't have great alternatives lined up in that area of Indiana right about now, it's not like there are high paying jobs for factory workers just waiting to be filled, especially in flyover country.

What someone can or can't afford in terms of a salary cut is not relevant to the company. The company is trying to stay in business, and given current expense levels can't do it.

 

[waggy]

hmm wonder if the union would strike to protest this (like they would ohh 10 years ago) my my how times change.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But yes, if management screws labor they think they will get a pay raise, but no workers equals no out put and management gets no pay either.

GM is perfectly willing to close the plant, so it isn't as if these guys refusing to take a pay cut will hurt them. GM is trying to do the right thing here and sell the plant to save jobs. The people interested in buying the plant have said that the wages need to be cut. It is sad and unfortunate, but $16/hr is better than $0/hr. The workers are gambling that GM is bluffing or that the Governor will mediate something more favorable, and those are both losing propositions for them.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Silly Charrison, it used to be worker compensation that drove up the prices of cars, and now its management compensation that drives up the prices of cars.

Have you looked at the salaries of CEO's lately, even the most incompetent ones get bazziolions when their ass get fired. And so does lower level management.

Next time, try to bark up the right tree to find the real parasites.

While management salaries are out of control, you are dead wrong that the majority of the overhead cost of a car is related to management salaries. Please post proof if you have it.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

LOL at all you tough guys advocating people vote for a 50% reduction in their wages. Sure, they're between a rock and a hard place but, how many of you could survive in your current home with a permanent pay cut like this?

You can't, but GM is serious and will close the plant if they can't sell. I'd advise them to vote for it and then look for employment elsewhere. It really does boil down to either $16/hr or $0/hr. Some money is better than none so I'd take what I could get and then bide my time until I could find something else. I believe I also read in the Indy Star that GM is offering these guys transfers to other plants as well. If that's the case, they have options as presumably, they'd keep their existing salary.

Those living in your mom's basement need not reply. For the rest, come up with something better than "sell your house and move" too. If you're not aware of current conditions in the real estate market, you may want to brush up on that some. I've not touched on the second largest expense for many here which could be transportation or tuition costs for their kids. So keep that in mind.

"Sell your house and move" is a bit drastic. If I were in the position, I'd take the $16/hr and then try like hell to find another position. Or if GM is offering transfers, transfer. Yes, it sucks, but that is life and in this economy, you have to do what you have to do.

Here's another factor to consider. How many people in this country will it take to voluntarily take a permanent 50% cut in wages before it ripples out to affect you? How long before your employer will decide those kind of cuts are becoming the norm and that they would really make a big impact on his bottom line? One that he finds irresistible and one easily accomplished with a slew of at will employees.

That is an inevitable consequence of global labor arbitrage. We have our spineless, selfish, and incompetent politicians and their pocket padders to thank for that. They sold us up the river.

 

[Orignal Earl]

I would take the lay off, collect unemployment, and look for another job

 

[IndyColtsFan]

I would take the lay off, collect unemployment, and look for another job

I wonder how unemployment would compare to their reduced salary + benefits. Does anyone know?

As someone else said, the problem with these guys is that they may not have the skills to step into another position with comparable pay without massive retraining. So, if GM is offering them transfers to other plants, that is probably their best option. They'd have to move, but what else can you do? Many of those guys are going to be working for less than what they make now if they quit and apply for other jobs.

 

[brencat]

LOL at all you tough guys advocating people vote for a 50% reduction in their wages.

Here's another factor to consider. How many people in this country will it take to voluntarily take a permanent 50% cut in wages before it ripples out to affect you? How long before your employer will decide those kind of cuts are becoming the norm and that they would really make a big impact on his bottom line? One that he finds irresistible and one easily accomplished with a slew of at will employees.

Agreed. I'd rather know I have a year to look for another job (plant closure in Sept 2011), rather than have my salary reset 50% lower, which will then make it extremely difficult for me to secure my current level of pay or higher at my next job. Taking a step back in pay is almost always a bad move if you have some savings or flexibility or time to look for alternatives.