GM Reveals Salaried Downtime Paid Absence Policy (SDPA)

Robert Farago
by Robert Farago
gm reveals salaried downtime paid absence policy sdpa

Download this pdf to get the 411 on a new GM-on-the-brink compensation scheme, sent to us by a member of TTAC’s Best and Brightest. The program has been activated by GM’s recent decision to shut down production for nine weeks over the summer. How’s this for reassurance? “SDPA salary will be paid on a semi-monthly basis. The current percentage established by this policy is 75%. Leadership reserves the right to terminate, modify, suspend, increase or decrease salaries and benefits provided under this policy.” Equally worrying (for some), employees getting free vehicles form GM will have to pay for their own fuel during the downtime. “Fuel expenses incurred during the entire paid downtime period are at the expense of the employee (similar to when on vacation or Holiday). All other vehicle expenses (e.g., oil changes, etc.) will continue to be covered in accordance with the PEP/ECVP rules and terms in effect throughout the paid downtime period(s).” Every 3000 miles?

Join the conversation
4 of 19 comments
  • MikeInCanada MikeInCanada on Apr 26, 2009

    gmbuoy : GM Canada is not an independent company. The only stockholder is the GM mothership. When you evaluate it from that perspective, the P&L picture changes dramatically. "GM Canada pays, income taxes every year, property taxes, payroll taxes and rst..." You forgot to mention the other part of the income statement - expenses, depreciation, payments back to GM HQ, etc., etc. Income taxes - GM Canada does not (and never was designed) to make a profit - it's not a company - it's a division. GM's North American manufacturing has in fact not been profitable for a very long time. It's hard to believe that a company that is full of smart finance people (and GM sure is) would allow a division to be profitable - and have to pay tax - while at the same time, the US divisions are losing money. It's simple, legal, and all too common to structure a foreign division (GM Canada) so that it breaks even (at best). As far as payroll taxes, you assume that if these employees did not work for GM Canada that would not be working anywhere else - and not paying any taxes. "The auto sector is too important, too big a section of the Canadian Economy to be allowed to turtle over night." GM Canada is not the 'auto sector'. You conveniently forget all the other manufactures from other companies. If the sector was as critical as you make it seem, how come the government is not asking Honda and Toyota what can they do to help them and their suppliers? Are not the taxes paid by their workers as important as GM's? "If GMCL goes down it is going to take a huge chunk of the Ontario economy with it. And that would snowball across the great white north from Naniamo to Argentia." That's a bit dramatic. I'd like to see the data just how GM Canada effects the economies of Alberta or BC, or anyone west of Ottawa for that matter. Bottom Line: This is a economic disaster for the CAW, but not for the country. Outside Oshawa, Windsor and a couple of small towns in southern Ontario the union and auto manufacturing is just an afterthought. That the economy revolves around the auto industry is a perspective that is 30 years out of date. It is no longer accurate. Even the CAW will carry on. The day after GM's Bankruptcy Bombardier will still make aircraft, Air Canada planes will still takeoff and arrive (late), Alberta will still pump oil and gas, and Quebec will continue to mine killer asbestosis and export gorgeous strippers. And GM Canada will be just another case study that I have to deal with on Thursday nights at UT.

  • Transam455 Transam455 on Apr 29, 2009

    As I read through this thread, my thoughts are more around what economy will our children grow up and work in. Will there be a quality of life GM has afforded so many families across the world? As the mayor of Lansing suggested, should those GM'ers apologize for a company that has supported a high standard of living or should we be trying to work towards the lowest denominator in the global economy? Make no mistake, GM is a great company to work for. It has affored me two university degrees and the opportunity to work as a professional. It has allowed me to give my family a great standard of living. I pay my income taxes in good faith that it is supporting a better place to live. I pay extra for local products and services with the belief it will support my neighbour/city/country. So instead of bantering over whether GM should survive or not, lets think about how to build great companies like GM, and make great lifestyles available in countries like Canada and the US for our children to live and work in.

  • Transam455 Transam455 on Apr 29, 2009

    A couple more thoughts: MikeinCanada, where are you going to work when you graduate from UT? Where will you live? What standard of living to do you want? mikey, As one of those "bloated ,inept overpaid,underworked senior management." GM guys, I find my self working another 60+ hour work week, far away from my family, worrying about my families future while trying to make my company more successful. What did you do this week that makes you so special? I wish all companies could support their employees in good times and bad times as well as GM.

  • MikeInCanada MikeInCanada on Apr 29, 2009

    Re: Transam455 I've been an aerospace engineer for almost 20 years now. I've never stopped going to school. After my second layoff (which aerospace and aviation is famous for) I learned the hard way that it's not my 'job' rather it is my skills that pays the bills. It's my responsibility to be 'marketable'. If you've been able to obtain two university degrees while employed good for you. Your motivation and intelligence are are going to take care of you in the long run - not any one company. I agree that good companies should be nurtured - and the everyone, employees, society should enjoy the benefits accordingly. Unfortunately, GM has not fit the description of a great company in a long time. What antagonizes people (I think) is not that GM tried to compete - and lost. It's that when faced with competition, they did everything in their power not to perform as the markets demanded.