CAW Leaflet Leaves Door Open For Compromise, Strike Avoidance

Derek Kreindler
by Derek Kreindler

For all the rhetoric being passed back and forth between the OEMs and the CAW in this round of contract negotiations, the overwhelming feeling from our commenters is that there will be no strike, compromise will be had, and somehow, both sides will play it off as a victory. The latest bulletin from the CAW seems to support that notion.

The CAW published this copy of a leaflet, apparently handed out to the rank and file. The leaflet lists some of the automaker demands, including

eliminating the 30-and-out pension;


creating a two-tier workforce, mirroring the UAW agreement;


moving to a Defined Contribution pension plan even for current workers;


permanently eliminating the Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA);


further reducing benefits, including access to prescriptions.

The corporations are also refusing to commit to any new investments, which puts members’ jobs in jeopardy. Each


company has also insisted that any reward or bonus will be paid for by additional cuts to other areas of the agreement

Of course, not all of these demands will go through. But the CAW is already covering their own ass as far as compromises go. And we should expect some hefty ones.

The last paragraph continues this theme. Following a bit about how the union has “no intention of making these kinds of deep cuts again,” it reads

“A week from the deadline, anxiety levels are understandably high and rising. The bargaining committees will do


their best to keep members up to date on the status of negotiations. As September 17 approaches, it is increasingly


important that members at all facilities, in all local unions support their bargaining committees. To reach a deal, it’s


crucial that members continue having faith in their elected representatives and support their bargaining committees.”

And then we have the kicker. The one clause that basically undoes the entire (albeit necessary) “rah-rah solidarity” language of the bulletin

“As the landscape continues to shift, the bargaining committees will also strategically shift approaches with the goalof best protecting members’ interests.”

If that doesn’t say “we are totally willing to compromise to avoid a strike/save our jobs/save our plant” then I don’t know what does. There couldn’t be a better example of corporate doublespeak, buried right below a Fox-worthy tract of “us-versus-them” prose that it almost seems ironic.

Derek Kreindler
Derek Kreindler

More by Derek Kreindler

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 5 comments
  • Neb Neb on Sep 11, 2012

    Following the discussion, I've had to create alternative theories to what is going on with these negotiations. 1) The CAW talks tough because it knows that it doesn't really have many cards this time around. Given Harper interfering with all big labor disputes, the ability to strike effectively is doubtful anyway. So talk big and hopefully get a few concessions thanks to that. At least you look tough in the eyes of the members (who after all elect union officials.) 2) The entire thing is Kabuki theater, with the CAW and the Detroit three working together behind the scenes in complete agreement. The goal? See if they can get some money out of the province for new facilities.

  • Gentle Ted Gentle Ted on Sep 12, 2012

    The CEO of Chrysler talk of moving Production out of Canada, he has to be talking true his "hat" only 5% of any vehicle this Company makes is made up from Wages, the rest is profit, take the example of a Chrysler Van built in Windsor, Ontario is 10,000 dollars cheaper in Florida than it is in Canada, who is kidding who eh? The Canadian Plants in Brampton, Windsor and in the Toronto area where they have a Casting plant make good products and lots of Money for Chrysler!

  • ToolGuy First picture: I realize that opinions vary on the height of modern trucks, but that entry door on the building is 80 inches tall and hits just below the headlights. Does anyone really believe this is reasonable?Second picture: I do not believe that is a good parking spot to be able to access the bed storage. More specifically, how do you plan to unload topsoil with the truck parked like that? Maybe you kids are taller than me.
  • ToolGuy The other day I attempted to check the engine oil in one of my old embarrassing vehicles and I guess the red shop towel I used wasn't genuine Snap-on (lots of counterfeits floating around) plus my driveway isn't completely level and long story short, the engine seized 3 minutes later.No more used cars for me, and nothing but dealer service from here on in (the journalists were right).
  • Doughboy Wow, Merc knocks it out of the park with their naming convention… again. /s
  • Doughboy I’ve seen car bras before, but never car beards. ZZ Top would be proud.
  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
Next