Unions: Whats your take on them?
03-17-2009, 10:57 AM
#1
åhhhhh
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 7,992
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unions: Whats your take on them?
http://680news.com/more.jsp?content=...17_133758_5620
with unions costing companies so much money, almost to the brink of bankruptcy, whats your stance towards them?
Chrysler already working behind the scenes to pull out of Canada, sources say
The Canadian Press Toronto | Tuesday, March 17th, 2009 1:40 pm Toronto - Sources familiar with Chrysler's plans said the automaker has already begun work behind the scenes to pull its operations out of Canada if it can't reach an agreement with the Canadian Auto Workers by the end of the month.
Chrysler Canada has said it needs to cut its labour costs by approximately $20 an hour to be competitive with foreign automakers such as Toyota.
Currently, the company estimates its all-in hourly labour costswhich include wages, benefits and legacy costs such as pensions -- to be approximately $76. To be competitive with Toyota plants operating in Canada, it says it needs to reduce those costs to $57 an hour.
Chrysler president Tom LaSorda told a Parliamentary committee last week that the company may not be able to continue operating in Canada if it can't reduce its labour costs enough to be competitive.
A source familiar with Chrysler's labour objectives said the company has already started considering "alternative locations with more competitive cost structures" for its Canadian operations, which include employ about 10,000 hourly workers at assembly plants in Brampton, Ont., and Windsor, Ont., and a casting plant in Toronto.
CAW president Ken Lewenza has said there is no way the union will give more to Chrysler than it gave to General Motors Canada in negotiations earlier this month.
Chrysler estimated the agreement with GM, which was ratified by CAW members last week, cuts that company's labour costs by approximately $7 an hour -- an amount LaSorda characterized as "unacceptable."
The source said Chrysler Canada believes it can achieve its cost reduction goals without cutting base wages. Instead, the company will look at cutting benefits such as paid time off, unemployment assistance and overtime premiums.
When CAW benefits are compared to those of the United Auto Workers in the U.S., there is plenty of wiggle room, the source said.
For example, CAW employees receive a maximum of six weeks vacation time, while UAW employees only receive five, and CAW workers also receive substantially more break time per shift than their American counterparts.
The source said Chrysler would also consider moving to a two-tier wage structure like that used at its plants in the United States, cutting benefits for retirees and possibly developing a union-administered benefits trust, as well as scrapping other benefits like the company's tuition assistance plan for dependants.
Chrysler Canada must submit a finalized restructuring plan, including a new labour contract, to the federal and Ontario governments by the end of March in order to receive the roughly $2.3-billion (U.S.) in aid it has requested.
The company has said that if it can't reach an agreement with the CAW it won't receive government aid, thus forcing it to close its Canadian operations.
The Canadian Press Toronto | Tuesday, March 17th, 2009 1:40 pm Toronto - Sources familiar with Chrysler's plans said the automaker has already begun work behind the scenes to pull its operations out of Canada if it can't reach an agreement with the Canadian Auto Workers by the end of the month.
Chrysler Canada has said it needs to cut its labour costs by approximately $20 an hour to be competitive with foreign automakers such as Toyota.
Currently, the company estimates its all-in hourly labour costswhich include wages, benefits and legacy costs such as pensions -- to be approximately $76. To be competitive with Toyota plants operating in Canada, it says it needs to reduce those costs to $57 an hour.
Chrysler president Tom LaSorda told a Parliamentary committee last week that the company may not be able to continue operating in Canada if it can't reduce its labour costs enough to be competitive.
A source familiar with Chrysler's labour objectives said the company has already started considering "alternative locations with more competitive cost structures" for its Canadian operations, which include employ about 10,000 hourly workers at assembly plants in Brampton, Ont., and Windsor, Ont., and a casting plant in Toronto.
CAW president Ken Lewenza has said there is no way the union will give more to Chrysler than it gave to General Motors Canada in negotiations earlier this month.
Chrysler estimated the agreement with GM, which was ratified by CAW members last week, cuts that company's labour costs by approximately $7 an hour -- an amount LaSorda characterized as "unacceptable."
The source said Chrysler Canada believes it can achieve its cost reduction goals without cutting base wages. Instead, the company will look at cutting benefits such as paid time off, unemployment assistance and overtime premiums.
When CAW benefits are compared to those of the United Auto Workers in the U.S., there is plenty of wiggle room, the source said.
For example, CAW employees receive a maximum of six weeks vacation time, while UAW employees only receive five, and CAW workers also receive substantially more break time per shift than their American counterparts.
The source said Chrysler would also consider moving to a two-tier wage structure like that used at its plants in the United States, cutting benefits for retirees and possibly developing a union-administered benefits trust, as well as scrapping other benefits like the company's tuition assistance plan for dependants.
Chrysler Canada must submit a finalized restructuring plan, including a new labour contract, to the federal and Ontario governments by the end of March in order to receive the roughly $2.3-billion (U.S.) in aid it has requested.
The company has said that if it can't reach an agreement with the CAW it won't receive government aid, thus forcing it to close its Canadian operations.
04-01-2009, 04:31 PM
#2
it's my D in a B
It makes me wonder if they realize that the choices are limited. Would you rather have a cushy, high-benefit, high-pay job for a few months and then have your company tank? Or would you rather take a significant pay/benefit cut to help your company survive? The latter makes more sense (duh), and a lot of these people have pay and benefits that put a teacher or other public servant's pay to shame.
I agree with the right to organize and form unions... without that, we would still have millions of people busting their ass 14 hours a day for $5. But I do think the auto unions have taken it way too far. You don't deserve $35/hr + full medical + 80% pension for turning a fucking wrench. Sorry.
I agree with the right to organize and form unions... without that, we would still have millions of people busting their ass 14 hours a day for $5. But I do think the auto unions have taken it way too far. You don't deserve $35/hr + full medical + 80% pension for turning a fucking wrench. Sorry.
