Bailout Watch 321: UAW Boss: "GM, Chrysler May Not Need More Bailout Bucks"

At first glance, this makes no sense: the head of the United Auto Workers (UAW) telling the world that GM and Chrysler are done feasting at the bailout buffet. “If we can get by without more money, that’s what we want to do,” Big Ron Gettelfinger told Automotive News [AN, sub] in an interview at Solidarity House. And if I could convince my Lexus dealer to give me a new IS-F with a handstand, that’s what I’d want to do. Clearly, Ron Gettelfinger is promising someone a rose garden– while he’s painted the ailing automakers into a corner. Ish. First, this is what car salesman call an “if then” close. Second, Ron told AN that “how well the money holds out will depend on sales volume this year.” Gettelfinger is hopeful that “sales will not dip more than 1 million units below 2008’s depressed 13.1 million.” So, IF U.S. new car sales DON’T dip below 12.1m per year, THEN GM and Chrysler recover without any more federal funding? Nonsense. Make no mistake: Ron’s statement is part of a calculated plan to avoid making any concessions during the federally-mandated negotiations to reduce his members’ pay and benefits. In other words, the UAW doesn’t need to make concessions because everything’s going to be alright. It is, in fact, Ron’s opening gambit. And it’s not bad. But shame on AN for swallowing the union boss’s bait; hook, line and sinker. I mean, what is this…

“The $13.4 billion earmarked for GM may be sufficient, said a source close to the company. When asked directly if GM plans to ask for money beyond the $13.4 billion, the source answered, ‘no.’

‘We’ve got enough’ money from the loan, the source said, ‘in terms of what our downside scenario is.

‘The downside was 10.5 million, which is where most people are. What happens if that downside gets worse? That’s anybody’s guess.'”

I swear AN’s making that shit up. And if they’re not, someone else is. And if someone else is, AN should know enough not to hoist themselves with someone else’s petard. To paraphrase California’s governor, they’ll be back.