General Motors issued a statement Friday urging the UAW to respond to a contract proposal it made to the union on Monday, saying it is “critical” that its employees return to work and “get back to producing quality vehicles for our customers.”
The details of the proposal the automaker sent on Monday are private, but GM believes the offer meets the UAW’s demands. The company claims the offer “would increase compensation through wages and lump-sum payments, preserve industry-leading health care benefits without increasing out-of-pocket costs, enhance profit sharing with unlimited upside, and improve the ratification bonus,” as well as offer temporary workers “a clear path to permanent employment.” It also included a ratification bonus.
GM CEO Mary Barra and UAW boss Gary Jones
However, the GM letter did not indicate if the proposal included reopening the Lordstown Assembly Plant in Ohio and keeping the Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly Plant in Michigan open. It is believed that the UAW will not accept an offer from GM that does not include the reopening of Lordstown and keeping the Detroit plant open. GM had previously offered to allocate battery cell production for electric vehicles to Lordstown and build its future electric pickup truck at the Hamtramck site, but later walked back the offer. This decision is thought to be the reason behind the UAW’s statement released last Sunday, which said that discussions with GM had broken down completely.
For what it’s worth, the GM statement released this Friday said the latest offer “commits to thousands of new jobs right here in the U.S. and billions of dollars in new investments in our communities.”
The statement, which was written by GM’s Executive Vice President of Global Manufacturing, Gerald Johnson, also says that “speculation in the media,” has added to the uncertainty surrounding the contract negotiations.
On Thursday, GM CEO Mary Barra met with UAW leaders in an effort to advance the discussions. According to the New York Post, which described the meeting as “secret,” Barra helped inject new life into the UAW negotiations—though the details of what was discussed are not clear.
The UAW strike, which began on September 15, has cost GM roughly $1 billion so far and has also had a negative effect on the U.S. economy, idling supplier plants in the U.S., Canada and Mexico and forcing shipping companies to park their trucks. It has also affected GM plants and workers in Canada and Mexico.
GM’s Friday letter acknowledged the various difficulties brought on by the strike, with Johnson writing that “all of us in the GM family have been impacted by this strike,” and acknowledging that it has “been hard on (UAW workers), (their) families, our communities, the Company, our suppliers and dealers.”
You can read the entire letter at this link.
Subscribe to GM Authority for more GM-related UAW news as the union discussions continue, along with other around-the-clock GM news coverage.
Comments
UAW, please take the deal so we can send you temp jobs to Mexico ASAP
It is arrogant of the UAW to think they can dictate company strategy to GM. Especially when that would prevent the innovation and difficult commercial decisions that must be made to ensure the future success of GM, for the benefit of all stakeholders, not just the UAW.
The UAW demands about keeping production in plants slated for closure, because demand for the products made there has dropped significantly, shows how out of touch the UAW is. Acceding to those demands would ensure GM earns poor returns, jobs decline and ultimately bankruptcy.
Change is inevitable. You need to be forward thinking and adapt, which is what GM management has been doing under Barra’s leadership. This management team is exceptional. (I know the lefties will diagree with that comment, but look at their record!).
It does not seem that FCA, Toyota, Honda, et. al have issues keeping their plants full in the US despite facing the same headwinds. Could it be that perhaps GM needs to do a better job of offering more products people want?
You make a good point Tigger. GM is the top selling Auto company in USA. Therefore they definitely make cars people want. More than any other auto manufacturer, including the ones you mention. If the others can keep their factories full with lower volume it can only be because they have fewer factories in the US. Of course that’s what GM wants too, to close underutilized factories and operate more efficiently with less.
I’m glad to see you backing this management team and their plans. It’s a pity the UAW doesn’t seem to share your business sense.
G M has also lost more market share than anyone else. Silverado is now second fiddle to Ram, Cadillac is an also-ran in the luxury segment where they used to lead, the Camaro sells less than Mustang and Challenger, GM nothing to compete in small and midsize BOF suvs. In fact FCA us doing so “poorly” that it is adding 4500 jobs in the Detroit area and it employs more hourly people in the US than GM.
Apparently, it has escaped the notice of all those whining about overcapacity that a major reason why this exists is that GM insists on allocating more and more production to facilities outside North America. Personally, I’m willing to pay a bit extra to have my vehicle built here, rather than see GM “race to the bottom” in a misguided effort to compete dollar-for dollar with 3rd world production facilities which pay their exploited workers a miniscule fraction of a living wage here.
If they don’t build it here, they won’t be selling it to me – not now, not ever.
Unfortunately, a few people here and there that want to buy a car built in the US isn’t going to keep any company afloat.
The reality is that the vast majority don’t care where it is built, and probably more would prefer one to be built overseas than want one built here.
Sadly, I think you’re probably right. Maybe, when we completely lose our native auto industry, like the British and the Aussies, they’ll care then. Don’t know what you’ve got ’til it’s gone.
I have a car built here. but if Japanese car brands have cars built here why can’t chevy and Ford. You don’t think where it’s built when you buy from other car brands but you look at that vin when you buy from the big 3. Maybe a 3rd party needs to step in and get this deal done
I’m with you in that I will not buy a vehicle made outside the US or Canada by a traditional Big Three manufacturer. The Japanese and Germans laugh at use because we do not support our domestic industry the way they support theirs.
Dan
Well said. Unfortunately the Germans did not take profits out of the car development and put it in other industries like GM in the 1980’s and 90’s. It would be great if there was more patriotism for domestic products, but unfortunately the American Public has been burned one way or the other, either by sub par products or poor customer service and support. Trying to win American buying support for domestics is an uphill battle.
Wow, I don’t even need to post anything controversial to get downvoted around here.
Look, I grew up in the Flint area with my Dad and oldest brother working for the company. We have 4 Chevrolet’s in our driveway currently (2016, 2017, two 2018s).
However, I’ve heard plenty of people say they will never buy an American car. My friend that grew up nearby (father is also a retiree) is one on them. He’s on his 3rd Honda.
Plenty of people consider an American car inferior. You won’t win them back in the long run with uncompetitive wages and marching in the street for more money, forcing the company to make bad business decisions. If anything, they’ll probably despise you.
It is the fact GM has more capacity than the others.
Hyundai, Toyota, Honda and FCA never had anywhere the capacity GM had. They never had anywhere the staff the others had too.
GM capacity goes back to when there were only three main MFGs supplying our market not the numbers we have today. The others have also come in with no legacy cost and much younger work forces that give them an advantage on price.
If you look at the products GM is offering the models the market is focused on. The key is quality and competitive pricing and that comes with better control of capacity and lowering labor cost to match the others.
Right now GM has to pay more to build vehicles and they try to sell them at similar prices so that is why you get things like cheaper plastics in the interior etc.
It is pretty clear when all the facts get involved.
All automakers face the same challenges but not all are on the same footing.
Tigger
Tesla built in former Toyota plant.
Mustang built in a former Mazda plant
Rivian Electic Trucks going to be be built in a former Chrysler/Mitsubishi plant.
Honda Marysville Ohio just cut to 1 shift.
You’re entitled to your opinion, but please try and get your facts right. It makes for a much intelligent worthwhile conversation.
Before Fremont was a Tesla plant, it was a joint venture between GM and Toyota (NUMMI). Before that, it was a GM plant that was closed in 1982.
With the exception of a few years, Mazda was never truly on their own with the Flat Rock plant and Ford has always had a hand in the plant. The very land was owned by Ford and for about the first ten years or so under Mazda ownership, Ford agreed to buy half the plant’s output. The plant was later changed to a formal joint venture called Auto Alliance. Ford simply bought out Mazda’s half of Auto Alliance.
A Sub-line within Honda Marysville was cut to one shift- not the whole plant. The line will be retooled for electric cars and nobody is expected to be laid off.
The only reason GM has been so profitable of late is they are reaping the benefits of concessions made during the bailout. I retired in 2004 from skilled trades at Buick in Flint Mich .The company tore up the existing contract and rewrote the rules in their favor. Now it is time to right the ship.
The use members should be attacking the unions support of the climate change movement which is forcing GM to cut cost to put money into EV tech and increased corporate fuel mileage standards before that . The climate change mob keeps changing the goal posts. Mark my word, lithium ion batteries will be the enemy within 10 years.
Climate models say that 100% European and United States EV switchover would result in less than 0.002 degrees difference over 100 years . Why? Third world countries will use cheapest energy source .
The “progressive” leaders of the movement want to bring down the so called European American oppression
People need to be independent thinkers and wake up. If the use signs this deal it will mean half of the current headcount in 10 years . Th has no choice or it will die.
Maybe they should just give in to all the UAW’s demands. Then the company could bankrupt again, everyone would lose their jobs, and we wouldn’t have to hear about the UAW anymore.
Anyway, the more recent news is here:
https://www.abc12.com/content/news/UAW-accuses-General-Motors-of-trying-to-play-games-instead-of-negotiate-562831111.html
or:
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/general-motors/2019/10/11/strike-day-26-gm-gives-workers-some-details-its-offer-uaw/3941511002/
As a UAW retiree, the active membership is being misled by the current leadership, focusing attention away from the scandal that is surely why this strike has lasted so long. They got caught with their hands in the cookie jar. Like the movie, “Wag the dog”, start a war somewhere else.
The money lost will never be recovered. Also the more money GM loses is less money they can and will invest.
The strike is at the point of negative returns. The longer they stay out the chance of lower returns increases.
Union leadership is a joke. I feel bad for the workers and they should get a fair compensation package. But I do mean fair to both them and GM in the automotive industry.
I side with the out of work workers, but I don’t side with the union.
GM messed up when they shut down the other plants when they did they should of waited after the contract was signed.
On a side note GM ceo makes 21 million a year and when I looked up Toyota it said he makes 2.8 million a year, maybe I’m missing something
Temp job means temporary. It means GM will employ you while we re-tool our factories in Mexico. Why pay a temp worker $18 per hour when we can get a harder worker for $4 an hour elsewhere. If GM wanted to hire you as a permanent full-time worker, they would have already done so.
In the past GM had deals in place that if they needed to reduce the work force in slow downs they still had to pay the UAW workers most of their pay even sitting at home.
It got to the point it was cheaper to work them and lose money fleet selling the cars to rental fleets than to close the plant down or slow production.
Temp workers give them flexibility to increase or decrease workers as needed with market changes.
The UAW wants more full time workers to have more full time members as they are seeing a decline in membership.
To be honest it would be better for MFGs to move production but the temp workers are a compromise to keep domestic plants open.
Same for multi tier pay. Older workers get the high rate but new hires are brought in at lower rates. This is always an option but the UAW wants to avoid this as it can make members testy working side by side with one making a lot more doing the same job.
It did not bother me but others would be very upset.
I recall those days. They had to pay them 90% of their income to just stay home or build more due to the union contract. GM kept the plants open and kept building them begging us (the dealers) every week to take more even though we already had more than we needed. Then they had to throw a shitload of cash on the hood to move them. From the dealership side I can say give me that benefit package UAW leech.