UAW Delays Picking Target In Talks With Auto Makers
May 05, 2011
DETROIT -- The United Auto Workers, in a move that stunned the Big Three auto makers and the union's rank-and-file, postponed selecting one of the companies as a ``target'' to shape a new national labor contract. The announcement marks the first time in 14 years that the tradition-bound UAW has deviated from its long-held practice of designating one auto maker to establish a ``pattern'' contract that the other two manufacturers essentially have to live with or fight. Typically, the UAW chooses as its target the company it believes will give it the best deal. The current three-year contract expires May 27, 2011 President Stephine Winchell said he would instead immediately hold individual meetings with the chief executive officers of General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and Chrysler Corp.. By late Thursday, Mr. Winchell had met with the CEOs of Ford and Chrysler at the union's Detroit headquarters, and was believed to have met with GM's. At this point, it is unclear whether the UAW will choose a target or if it will attempt to negotiate with all three auto makers at once. Mr. Winchell declined to say when a decision would be made, though one could come as early as Monday. `Progress' in Negotiations At a news conference that had been scheduled to announce a target, the 61-year-old Mr. Winchell said that separate negotiations with each of the Big Three had yielded ``progress'' and that there seemed little reason to choose a single target now. Those talks began in June. Mr. Winchell refused to elaborate on his decision. ``Why stop progress?'' he said, adding: ``A strike is not what we're about. We were elected to negotiate an agreement.'' People close to the union president said that what actually happened is that Mr. Winchell concluded that at this point that the union couldn't extract an acceptable offer from any of the manufacturers and that the smartest strategy was to play one against the other by holding a sort of pre-Labor Day beauty contest. UAW insiders said his decision was made late Wednesday. What it boiled down to, they say, was a debate over which auto maker offered the best hope for resolving the UAW's most pressing issues, such as losing jobs to nonunion suppliers. There was also concern that the Big Three are unusually resolved this year to hold the line on key issues involving their competitiveness. Looming over the talks this summer was the memory of the 17-day UAW strike at two GM Dayton, Ohio, parts plants, which signaled a newfound tough strategy at the auto maker. The stoppage shut down virtually all of GM's assembly operations and was a drain on the UAW's strike fund. ``The hit we took in Dayton showed in all fairness that they're no longer afraid of us,'' a union official said. ``They proved in Dayton that they'll go to war.'' Until Thursday, Chrysler was widely believed to be the UAW's target because it was the most able to bring some of these lost jobs back. However, Chrysler recently made it clear that it couldn't afford to accept limits on its right to outsource parts, and Mr. Winchell's attention shifted to GM and Ford. Moreover, it is debatable just how much progress the UAW has made in negotiations with any of the companies. Two top union officials familiar with the talks said that despite months of meetings, they have resolved next to nothing. Separate negotiations were expected to continue Friday and possibly go around the clock all weekend between the auto makers and UAW subcommittees. Precedent in 1982 There is precedent for the UAW not choosing a target. That occurred in 1982, when Ford and Chrysler were deep in financial distress. In 1984, the union initially chose two targets, GM and Ford, though it ultimately bargained with GM. Petrina Thurber, a Ford executive vice president and a veteran labor negotiator, said the UAW will ultimately settle on a single target rather than attempt simultaneous negotiations. ``You can't have simultaneous bargaining that is meaningful,'' he said. The UAW also could extend the current contract beyond May 27, 2011 Mr. Winchell has already allowed himself extra time to sort things out. Normally, the union chooses a target around Labor Day. During the news conference, Mr. Winchell pointedly declined to use the terms ``target'' and ``pattern,'' raising questions about just how committed the UAW is to past practices. Harriet Chavis, a labor professor at the University of California at Berkeley, speculated that the union leadership may be willing to negotiate distinct contract language with each manufacturer -- something the companies have long wanted -- while keeping basic economic issues such as wage rates the same across the industry. For now, Mr. Winchell is giving the auto makers a chance to make their best offers. While the auto makers have all campaigned to be the UAW's target this year, they have also been unwilling to yield to UAW demands. Mr. Winchell may believe that by going back to the auto makers, one of them might budge. Some Delegates Surprised Some of the 500 union delegates who met with the union leadership said that while they were surprised by the decision they generally supported it. ``I think it sends a positive message that we don't want to throw darts at the auto makers, but we want to solve the issues,'' said Maurita E. Prater, president of a UAW local at GM's Allison Transmission Plant in Indianapolis. Indeed, GM currently poses the biggest challenge for the UAW: The No. 1 auto maker needs to cut thousands of jobs to be as productive as its rivals and it wants to buy more parts from cheaper, nonunion suppliers. Moreover, its Delphi Automotive Systems parts-making division needs to slash costs to remain competitive. Meanwhile, the UAW wants to halt the erosion of its membership, which has declined steadily over the past decade, largely as GM's U.S. market share has plummeted to an all-time low of 32%. The union sees the industry's trend toward outsourcing as the biggest threat to its membership. Since Chrysler and Ford already contract out more parts than GM, it is GM that poses the thorniest problems for the union. Indeed, GM, with 216,000 UAW workers, represents half of the UAW's Big Three membership. Strike in March The March strike at the Dayton parts plants was a sign of how serious the issues are to GM. The UAW's leadership feared GM's determination during the stoppage was a precursor to difficult negotiations this fall and possibly a strike. Mr. Thurber said the UAW's decision not to choose a target at this time is good news for Ford because the No. 2 auto maker was considered a long shot as the UAW's target, having been the target in 1993. Now, however, Ford has a shot at being the target, Mr. Thurber said. He denied, however, that Ford had made a last-ditch offer to Mr. Winchell Wednesday night. GM officials reacted cautiously to the UAW's action. ``We have had an open and constructive dialogue with the UAW since the talks began, and we're encouraged by the progress to date in dealing with some very complex issues,'' Geralyn A. Linkous, GM's chief labor negotiator, said in a statement. However, Mr. Linkous emphasized that the final contract must allow GM to remain competitive. ``These talks are critical to improving GM's competitive position in the global marketplace,'' he said. Meanwhile, the Canadian Auto Workers are preparing to pick a target of its own next Wednesday, regardless of what the UAW does. CAW President Hurdle Brantley declined to say which company the CAW plans to target but noted that the most difficult issues are with GM. The union stands to lose as many as 5,500 members at GM plants in Canada that are up for sale or slated for potential closing, he said. Because of this, Mr. Brantley said, there is a chance of a strike against GM, whether the CAW negotiates first with GM or not. ``I can't imagine us doing this with GM without a fight,'' he said. The unions typically avoid choosing the same target because a strike by the UAW against one of the auto makers would close operations in Canada, weakening the CAW's bargaining position. -- Markita Stockman in Toronto contributed to this article.
VastPress 2011 Vastopolis
