Let's Make a Deal: GM, UAW Reach Tentative Agreement in 11th Hour

Mark Stevenson
by Mark Stevenson

General Motors and the United Auto Workers union reached a deal Sunday night, minutes before the union’s midnight deadline, averting any strike for now, according to the automaker.

The deal will be sent to the union’s UAW National GM Council for discussion and vote on Wednesday. The union’s national council is composed of local leaders. If approved, the agreement would head to workers for ratification.

Neither the UAW or GM released specific details of the agreement.

“We believe that this agreement will present stable long-term significant wage gains and job security commitments to UAW members now and in the future,” UAW President Dennis Williams said in a statement. “We look forward to presenting the details of these gains to local union leaders and the membership.”

A clear path to full pay for Tier 2 workers and a larger cut of GM’s record profits were some of the issues discussed during this year’s bargaining.

“The significant gains in this agreement are structured in a way that will provide certainty to our members and create a clear path for all GM employees now and in the future. The agreement not only rewards UAW-GM members for their accomplishments, but it protects them with significant job security commitments,” UAW Vice President Cindy Estrada said in a statement.

“The new UAW-GM national agreement is good for employees and the business,” Cathy Clegg, GM North America Manufacturing and Labor Relations vice president said, according to the automaker. “Working with our UAW partners, we developed constructive solutions that benefit employees and provide flexibility for the company to respond to the needs of the marketplace.”

The UAW represents 52,600 workers at General Motors.

Mark Stevenson
Mark Stevenson

More by Mark Stevenson

Comments
Join the conversation
9 of 12 comments
  • Xeranar Xeranar on Oct 26, 2015

    Was it ever really in doubt? It's SOP to do this tactic and it isn't a surprise to see it used here.

    • See 6 previous
    • Xeranar Xeranar on Oct 27, 2015

      @Xeranar Sorry, I find your argument to be lacking in the empirical data department once again. Also before we go further lets be clear: When people claim that getting you irritated means that they have a bone of contention they're trying to defend their position with complete hogwash. I get irritated because I see you act like a know-it-all gasbag that uses their worldview to defend their entitlements while ignoring the mountains of evidence that is to the contrary. I'm not upset you're getting my goat (since you aren't). I'm upset that it's the same tired strawman arguments week after week. It's to a point where I realize we're never going to agree but I'm tired of being on the defense, I moved to the offensive on this comment, putting the onus on you to defend your wordage and you didn't. Plain and simple. By the way, I wrote that feeling high and mighty, not pissed at all. :) When you agree to a cooperative union but hate a hostile one, I can point at nearly every union in the book as both. It comes down to management's position that drives them in either direction. They're symbiotic, you can't just claim the guys YOU KNOW are better than the guys you don't know. It's at best anecdotal and at worst intentional bias.

  • 50merc 50merc on Oct 26, 2015

    Enviable pay and benefits, coupled with guaranteed job security. Why, you'd almost think GM is a government agency. Oh, wait....

  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh A prelude is a bad idea. There is already Acura with all the weird sport trims. This will not make back it's R&D money.
  • Analoggrotto I don't see a red car here, how blazing stupid are you people?
  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
Next