UAW-GM Contract Closer To Approval On Final Day Of Voting

Cameron Aubernon
by Cameron Aubernon

With hours remaining until voting ends on the tentative contract between General Motors and the UAW, support for the contract continues to grow.

According to The Detroit News, over 80 percent of GM’s 52,600 hourly employees have had a chance to look over and vote upon the agreement, including those in Lordstown Assembly in Ohio, and Lansing Delta Township Assembly in Michigan.

Among Lansing’s over 3,000 employees, 54 percent of production and 43 percent of skilled trades workers voted in favor, per UAW Local 602. Over in Lordstown, Local 1714 (Stamping, Complex West) found healthy majorities in favor of the contract — 67.9 percent production, 57.4 percent skilled trades — while Local 1112 saw 72 percent of production and 29 percent of skilled trades workers voting the same. Both unions represent over 4,100 Lordstown employees.

Similar schisms between production in favor and skilled trades opposed have emerged throughout voting, including New York’s Tonawanda powertrain factory and its 1,564 hourly employees, where 58 percent of production voted for the contract, while 72 percent of skilled trades voted against. The contract was barely approved with 51 percent overall, according to Local 774.

Meanwhile, both production and skilled sides among Kokomo, Indiana’s GM Components Holdings plant voted overwhelmingly against the agreement at 84.8 percent and 72.4 percent opposed, respectively. Kokomo’s 758 workers are among those working in the automaker’s four GMCH plants against the contract, taking issue with the pay scale cap of $19.86/hour, differing from the $29/hour path over eight years for entry-level employees working for other GM production plants. A total of 3,400 employees make up the voting base for the four facilities.

Should the contract be approved, entry-level workers would be moved onto the same health care plan as veteran employees in January 2016, as well as an $8,000 signing bonus for all full-time workers and $2,000 for temps. Performance bonuses of $1,000 annually and $500 for meeting quality targets would also come into play, as would an increase in pay for veteran employees, a $60,000 early retirement bonus for 4,000 employees, and the elimination of the two-tier system over eight years.

Finally, for the hundreds of workers who took positions at GM plants away from home — one of the effects of the 2008-2009 collapse and bailout of the United States auto industry — the contract would allow any affected employee to come back home though special “one-time enhanced language.” The UAW spent a year hammering out the details of language, which would apply to those who met certain transfer conditions, and would be based on seniority, as well as available openings. The transfer agreement would affect most employees who once called Spring Hill home, with the offer made to those employees to return by the end of Q1 2016.

[Photo credit: General Motors/ Facebook]

Cameron Aubernon
Cameron Aubernon

Seattle-based writer, blogger, and photographer for many a publication. Born in Louisville. Raised in Kansas. Where I lay my head is home.

More by Cameron Aubernon

Comments
Join the conversation
  • Ltcmgm78 It depends on whether or not the union is a help or a hindrance to the manufacturer and workers. A union isn't needed if the manufacturer takes care of its workers.
  • Honda1 Unions were needed back in the early days, not needed know. There are plenty of rules and regulations and government agencies that keep companies in line. It's just a money grad and nothing more. Fain is a punk!
  • 1995 SC If the necessary number of employees vote to unionize then yes, they should be unionized. That's how it works.
  • Sobhuza Trooper That Dave Thomas fella sounds like the kind of twit who is oh-so-quick to tell us how easy and fun the bus is for any and all of your personal transportation needs. The time to get to and from the bus stop is never a concern. The time waiting for the bus is never a concern. The time waiting for a connection (if there is one) is never a concern. The weather is never a concern. Whatever you might be carrying or intend to purchase is never a concern. Nope, Boo Cars! Yeah Buses! Buses rule!Needless to say, these twits don't actual take the damn bus.
  • MaintenanceCosts Nobody here seems to acknowledge that there are multiple use cases for cars.Some people spend all their time driving all over the country and need every mile and minute of time savings. ICE cars are better for them right now.Some people only drive locally and fly when they travel. For them, there's probably a range number that works, and they don't really need more. For the uses for which we use our EV, that would be around 150 miles. The other thing about a low range requirement is it can make 120V charging viable. If you don't drive more than an average of about 40 miles/day, you can probably get enough electrons through a wall outlet. We spent over two years charging our Bolt only through 120V, while our house was getting rebuilt, and never had an issue.Those are extremes. There are all sorts of use cases in between, which probably represent the majority of drivers. For some users, what's needed is more range. But I think for most users, what's needed is better charging. Retrofit apartment garages like Tim's with 240V outlets at every spot. Install more L3 chargers in supermarket parking lots and alongside gas stations. Make chargers that work like Tesla Superchargers as ubiquitous as gas stations, and EV charging will not be an issue for most users.
Next