Good thing it’s t he kind of contaminated garbage that heals the wounds of a planet and nation, yes? GM insists that contaminated oil booms used in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill cleanup wouldn’t have been recycled by anyone else and that, according to John Bradburn, manager of GM’s waste-reduction efforts

This was purely a matter of helping out. If sent to a landfill, these materials would have taken hundreds of years to begin to break down, and we didn’t want to see the spill further impact the environment. We knew we could identify a beneficial reuse of this material given our experience.

Possibly even more importantly, all that bad British Petroleum PR would have just sat there bumming people out about the impacts of oil dependence. Thank goodness GM’s PR team had the experience to break it down, clean it off and transform it into good PR about the semi-petroleum-independent Chevy Volt.

When “Maximum” Bob Lutz showed up on the advisory board at Lotus, we were hardly surprised about his choice of post-retirement projects. After all, Lotus is one of the most audacious (privately-funded) turnaround attempts in an industry that runs on turnarounds, and Lutz is the king of building automotive hype, fresh off of one of the most overexposed automotive projects in recent memory, the Chevy Volt. Besides, Lotus’s shot at an overnight leap from niche enthusiast brand to Ferrari and Porsche-rivaling juggernaut is so brazenly implausible, that Lutz actually lends credibility to the project. At least, he would do if he didn’t have that irrepressible knack for saying things like

People keep asking me if I’m sure the new plan will work, and of course I can’t guarantee that. It’s a risk. But I’m quite certain it stands a better chance than the Lotus status quo, which for sure would eventually lead this great brand into terminal decline

Lutz goes on to tell Autocar that Lotus’s billion dollar turnaround “a big gamble,” and admits that “a fair bit of showbiz” is driving Lotus’s quantum leap towards becoming a full-line sportscar and supercar maker. Does it sound like Lutz might have some mixed feelings about Lotus’s rush to trample its enthusiast credentials? More maximum mixed feelings below the fold.

The “News. Any way you want it” syndrome is no longer an exclusive of China. You can have it from Ford as well. Looking for Ford success? No problem! Looking for Ford market disasters? We can deliver! Would you like the good news or the bad news?

Unable to provide meaningful representation to its dwindling membership, the United Auto Workers is continuing its post-bailout strategy of poking its nose into everyone else’s business with a protest planned for today at the Hyundai America Technical Center in Ann Arbor, MI. While its own workers face the aftermath of a bailout that saw tens of US plants shut down, the UAW opines on the Korean situation in a release which notes:

Frustrated by their temporary status, auto workers at a Hyundai Motor Co.mpany plant in Ulsan, South Korea, declared a strike on Nov. 15, and one desperate worker set himself on fire in protest of the company’s refusal to offer secure jobs. About 500 workers have since led an occupation of various plants in the Hyundai compound… To anyone interested in workplace fairness, the resolution of the Ulsan Hyundai workers’ strike is critical. It could either speed up progress toward ensuring global living wages, or provide a green light on the race to the bottom the auto industry began years ago – — with Toyota and Hyundai getting a head start.

One must, however, point out that the UAW has made its fair share of contributions to recent declines in auto worker wages. After all, it forced nearly half of GM’s Orion Assembly plant workforce to take a 40 percent wage cut in order to build a politically-popular fuel-efficient subcompact (the next-gen Aveo) in the US. Not only did this represent an unconscionable screwing of its own union “brothers” but it also directly hurts the Korean workers the UAW now so self-righteously defends by by stealing jobs using the very same “race to the bottom” that it decries. Besides, the labor situation in Korea is a bit more complex than the UAW’s Manichean moralizing makes it out to be…

“Toyota is in trouble. The Japanese automaker is playing defense as sales slump, dealer inventories swell — even for the Camry and Prius — and consumers demand larger discounts to remain loyal to the brand once viewed as unstoppable,” so beginneth a lengthy article in Detroit’s Freep that reads like a swansong for a formerly mighty ToMoCo. First, the requisite recitation of the ode to the obvious:

When Porsche introduced the world to its first production SUV in 2003, it set off an intense, polarized debate that continues to this day. For some, the Cayenne was a crossing of the Rubicon (no pun intended) leading to the dumbing-down of a proud marque… for others, it was a new, more accessible way to experience the brand. Sure enough, sales of the Cayenne have been good (significantly better than the Cayman and Boxster combined), but Porsche seems to have let passion for its brand run out of control.

Since the Cayenne controversy, every V6 Panamera and Cayman S has given the anti-Cayenne faction evidence of the slippery slope of brand destruction they saw coming with Porsche’s first SUV (and which Jack Baruth traces back as far as the 914). And now, as if to confirm the worst fears of even some of its own executives, Porsche is throwing rocket fuel on the fire in the form of a new, smaller SUV. The question this time: after the Cayenne, Pana V6, and various sins against the fanbase (some more deadly than others), are the purists still fired up enough to rage against the Cajun?

Don’t thank us GM… thank George W. Bush. Also, do we remember what happened when Chrysler tried this? History seems to indicate that paying back every penny is the best “thank you” of all.

Volkswagen, a top-tier player in the global auto business, is locked in an epic struggle. Represented by the most prestigious and legendary car in its expansive stable, the Bugatti Veyron, Volkswagen has spared no expense to vanquish… a little sportscar outfit out of West Richland, WA.

Shelby Super Cars’s Ultimate Aero, beat VW’s champion for the title of world’s fastest street-legal car, prompting Wolfsburg to “significantly re-engineer” the Veyron in a fit of pique (and at a staggering cost, no doubt). Bugatti reclaimed the crown with the $2.58m Veyron Super Sport, Top Gear went nuts, and the money was probably considered well spent. Until SSC, apparently unaware that it is tangling with a global industrial juggernaut, announced a new generation of Ultimate Aero aimed at “upping the ante on ALL levels.” And with styling provided by Jason Castriota of Pininfarina, Bertone and Saab, at least the next-gen Veyron-slayer won’t look quite so much like a Diablo replica. Having tangled with SSC already, how can VW not prepare a response?

NHTSA Investigation Action Number AQ10001, opened November 18, 2010 notes:

The agency, particularly in recent months, has been informed of incidents involving allegations of personal injury and death claimed to have been caused by safety defects and failures to conform to minimum Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) on rental car vehicles for which a safety recall to remedy the safety defect or noncompliance had allegedly not been performed prior to the rental car company’s lease of the vehicle. NHTSA understands that there is presently a petition before the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) seeking to prohibit at least one rental car company from renting vehicles on which safety recall campaign remedies remain outstanding. The purpose of this audit query (AQ) is to investigate recall remedy completion by rental car companies on the above-listed safety recall campaigns. These campaigns were chosen due to their inclusion of vehicles used in the rental market. This information is expected to provide the agency an indication of how completely and how quickly rental car fleets, in general or individually, perform necessary recall-related repairs or other remedies on the vehicles owned and then leased for use on the roadways.

But rental companies wouldn’t risk the safety of their customers for a buck would they? The Enterprise/Alamo/National syndicate tells Bloomberg it grounds cars upon receiving recalls… Hertz and Avis have yet to chime in. The weirdest part of it all: only vehicles made by GM, Ford and Chrysler are being investigated. Why are the Accents and Rios receiving recall repairs while Avengers and Malibus are left to be investigated for “failures to conform to minimum Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards”? Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? A list of vehicles under investigation can be found below the fold.

Because success in the auto industry depends upon both the buildup of industrial might and deft maneuvering on the winds of fashion, analysts often struggle to determine how business decisions impact consumer choice. For example, GM and Chrysler long resisted the pressing need to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection because their leaders believed that Americans would not buy a car from a bankrupt firm, and that sales would go into an irrecoverable tailspin if they filed. Needless to say, that assumption proved to be deeply flawed, and sales during the GM and Chrysler bankruptcies barely dipped (if only compared to the miserable months preceding bankruptcy). In any case, the rating agency Moody’s is taking on the challenge of translating good business news into sales by arguing [via Bloomberg]

U.S. consumers who don’t know anything about over- allocation options or the need for strong liquidity in a cyclical industry knew that something exceptionally good happened to GM last week. That knowledge makes it more likely that they will consider buying a GM vehicle and possibly buy one. That’s good for the company’s credit quality.

But does the general air of positivity surrounding the IPO actually make a difference with consumers?

Forget about Europeans complaining about missing parts. Over in America, there is an acute car shortage. Dealers blame who they always blame: The manufacturers. “They’ve cut back production so much that we’ve run out of cars,” Boston dealer magnate Herb Chambers tells his hometown paper, the Boston Herald. He says he had to “beg, borrow and steal” Cadillacs from dealers in other parts of the country. Down at the South Shore, dealer Dan Quirk loses 60 to 90 sales a month. “The Big Three just don’t have enough manufacturing capacity any more,” kvetches Quirk. “Some of the automakers, particularly General Motors, closed a lot of their plants when the meltdown hit.” Supposedly it’s not just a Bostonian phenomenon. Supposedly. At closer look, it might be a fire breathing, rip-snorting chimera.

As an automaker and union-funded think tank, the Center For Automotive Research often run afoul of TTAC during the bailout debates of 2008-2009. CAR is to Detroit’s apologists what CAR has long maintained that a failure to bail out GM and Chrysler would have resulted in the total destruction of America’s entire industry, and based on that questionable assumption, it’s latest report [ PDF] is claiming that the auto bailout saved the federal government $28.6b over two years. The study is an update of a report CAR issued in May which

produced estimates for two scenarios, as well: a quick, orderly Section 363 bankruptcy (which is what happened), and a drawn-out, disorderly bankruptcy proceeding leading to liquidation of the automakers.

Because those were the choices. A messy, marginally-successful intervention (with demand for GM’s IPO “through the roof”, the firm will still be worth only about what taxpayers put into it) or utter complete annihilation of the industrial Midwest. But if, as CAR takes as gospel, a halfway “normal” restructuring weren’t an option, it was only because the managers of both GM and Chrysler refused to even contemplate the possibility of a bankruptcy filing until it was far too late. And here’s where the long-term impacts get scary: by taking GM and Chrysler under the taxpayer wing, the Government may have saved some money in the short term, but it created a dangerous precedent for the future. Given the events of the auto bailout, why would the leaders of any other failing industry take the difficult path through restructuring when, with the help of think tank apologists, they could simply collapse into a publicly-funded do-over?

Ever since it became clear that the government would rescue General Motors and Chrysler, the Treasury Department has made it clear that it would stay out of “day to day” decision making at the rescued automakers. Allowing the rescued firms to operate independently was a political calculation based on the desire to keep politics from affecting sales at the two rescued automakers, but according to a Reuters special report, Treasury has not been able to keep its hands completely out of important decisions concerning the future of the two firms. Particularly in terms of setting up GM’s Initial Public Offering, Reuters found that the Treasury made important decisions affecting

its speed and size, the fees paid to the bankers and the potential involvement of offshore investors

Though this has kept the IPO out of election season and all of its potential for political problems, there is some downside to the Treasury’s involvement, particularly because it will not be exiting its equity position in GM until about 18 months after the IPO. As a result, analysts predict problems securing investors in a firm that may still be subject to ongoing government control. Morningstar’s David Whiston tells Reuters

I’m sure that there will be some institutional investors, and even some individual investors, that it scares away



Editor’s Note: On Monday, TTAC’s Martin Schwoerer wrote about a planned record-breaking non-stop run of 600 KMs, from Munich to Berlin, with a car that was equipped with a “revolutionary” electric battery system. Something smells funny, he said, and vowed to donate 100 Euros in case the drive was completed. Well, it was. So, how does it feel to have pie on your face?

How about Vegetarians Against the klan? Or maybe the Tugg Speedman Foundation? No, there are probably better organisations to give my money to. Guess I’ll ask the Best & Brightest…

You know that something is a fad when A) it’s bubbling on the stock market or when B) snake-oil salesmen tout the newest revolution, and regular folks actually start believing them.We’re not quite there yet with “A)”, but check out what I call an exhibit for “B)”.

Fiat could do more if it could cut off Italy

Having been handed a bankruptcy-rinsed Chrysler by the American government, Fiat’s Canadian-born CEO Sergio Marchionne is beginning to see Italy as nothing more than aging, uncompetitive factories and troublesome unions. And now he’s not just telling the Italian media that not only would Fiat be better off without the country that birthed it. According to Reuters

The CEO added that not a single euro of the 2 billion euros ($2.8 billion) of trading profit that Fiat is targeting for 2010 will come from Italy, where all Fiat car passenger plants are loss-making.

The funny part: Chrysler still holds a value of precisely zero dollars on Fiat’s balance book. And with the Fiat and Alfa-Romeo brands headed to the US, Italian-ness is still an important element of Fiat’s identity. But until Marchionne’s Chrysler revival and Italian invasion take hold stateside, and as long as mother Italia is a drain on its resources, Fiat might be best described as a Brazilian company.

Italian speakers can enjoy Marhionne’s interview here.

As we’ve noted before, Hyundai and Kia have been quick to exploit the weakness of the domestic auto industry by advertising their American-made cars as American-made cars. Now, they’re taking the attack to a whole new level, as Hyundai USA President John Krafcik tells CNN Money that his brand will build 80 percent of its vehicles in the United States by next year. If the Korean brand can actually achieve that goal, it would make Hyundai’s lineup the most American-built full line on the market. And though he insists that Hyundai doesn’t make decisions about production based on PR, Krafcik can’t help but twist the knife, saying

I’m going to build my three best selling cars in the US. Ford builds its best selling car in Mexico.

Oh snap!

A few days ago I wrote about Ralph Nader asking Toyota to break down their somewhat suspect figure of “$1,000,000 every hour” on safety. Well, quite surprisingly, Toyota answered back.

Aston Martin’s decision to sell a worked-over Toyota iQ has raised some serious questions for “brand values” advocates across the internet of late. Does an aristocratic sportscar brand need to take on the problems of urban congestion and carbon intensity? Does the Cygnet’s noblesse oblige PR value outweigh the furor of countless Aston Martin aspirants at the thought of their beloved brand becoming a glorified Toyota tuner house? The answer to both of these questions is apparently yes…

If the recent flap over the Volt’s drivetrain has taught us anything it’s that A) GM’s internal-combustion-assisted plug-in is more complicated than we thought, and B) GM is fine with simplifying its complex reality in order to make it appear as attractive as possible. Which is just fine: they’re the ones trying to sell a $41k car, and as such they’re entitled to do what they can to make it seem worth its many shortcomings. What the automotive media needs to take away from the brou-ha-ha isn’t necessarily that GM’s hesitance to bring forward “the whole truth” is an intrinsically big deal (let’s just say this wasn’t the first time), but rather that knowledgeable writers should focus on explaining the Volt in ways that are both comprehensible and fully accurate. In this spirit, the most important question isn’t “what should we call the Volt?” but “how efficient is the Volt in the real world?”And on this point, there’s plenty of room for some truthful clarification.

The autoblogosphere is agog at the revelation that the Volt’s gas engine occasionally powers its wheels. The GM-created “category” of Extended-Range Electric Vehicles (EREV, or E-REV) as uniquely epitomized by the Volt is suddenly revealed [by Motor Trend via GM] to

[have] more in common with a Prius (and other Toyota, Ford, or Nissan Altima hybrids) than anyone suspected.

So, why did the putative “Father of the Volt” (aka “Maximum” Bob Lutz) tell the car’s primary fan site gm-volt.com that the Volt was born because

My desire was to put an electric car concept out there to show the world that unlike the press reports that painted GM as an unfeeling uncaring squanderer of petroleum resources while wonderful Toyota was reinventing the automobile, I just wanted something on the show stand that would show that hey we’re not just thinking of a Prius hybrid here, we’re trying to get gasoline out of the equation entirely.

?

As GM finally begins to let journalists drive its Chevy Volt, the two-year-long trickle of bad news about the project is turning into a raging torrent. The latest bit of bashing: InsideLine claims that, in direct contradiction to GM’s hype, the Volt is in fact powered by its gasoline engine under certain circumstances.

At the heart of the Volt is the “Voltec” propulsion system and the heart of Voltec is the “4ET50” electric drive unit that contains a pair of electric motors and a “multi-mode transaxle with continuously variable capacity.” This is how GM describes it:

“Unlike a conventional powertrain, there are no step gears within the unit, and no direct mechanical linkage from the engine, through the drive unit to the wheels.”

The 4ET50 is, however, in fact directly bolted to the 1.4-liter, four-cylinder Ecotec internal combustion engine. When the Volt’s lithium-ion battery pack runs down, clutches in the 4ET50 engage and the Ecotec engine is lashed to the generator to produce the electric power necessary to drive the car. However under certain circumstances — speeds near or above 70 mph — in fact the engine will directly drive the front wheels in conjunction with the electric motors.

I believe that, legally, I’m still their U.S. distributor. And I want trucks delivered to our dealersImporting niche vehicles from an unknown foreign automaker has long been a fraught process for US-based entrepreneurs, and John Perez’s attempt to bring diesel-powered Mahindra pickups to the US has been no exception. For four years, Perez’s Global Vehicles distribution network waited while Mahindra sought EPA certification for its diesel pickup engine, and then six days after approval arrived, the Indian firm dumped Perez with little ceremony. Now Mahindra says it will consider giving franchisees to the dealers who paid Perez up to $200k for the right to sell Mahindras, but that it is not obliged to do so. Perez is suing Mahindra for failing to fill an order for pickups, while dealers are considering suing Perez and Mahindra is seeking to end its agreement with Perez so it can distribute pickups through independent dealers. Mahindra’s Roma Balwani tells Automotive News [sub]The current dealers’ contract is with GV [Perez’s distribution channel, Global Vehicles] and hence they do not automatically become Mahindra dealers. However, we would be considering these dealers for our network if they are interested. We will need a new distribution network and soon we will start a dialogue with potential dealers, including the ones who are signed up with GV, if they are interested in signing up with Mahindra.

The day after Toyota announced that it still hasn’t found an electronic cause for unintended acceleration in its vehicles and that UA complaints are down 80%, Consumer Affairs reports that Allstate Insurance filed a $3m suit against the Japanese automaker, claiming it “essentially hid the problem.” The suit, filed in the Southern Californian district court that is hearing all UA-related suits against Toyota alleges

Furthermore, the suit claims that it had to compensate UA-related claims because Toyota hadn’t fitted a brake-override to its vehicles, a feature that is not yet required by law. Toyota is adding brake-override to all of its 2011 models, but claims that Allstate’s charges “have no basis.”

What do you do when a company you own (through your trusty Treasury Department) won’t help you out over the phone? Out of luck with his dealer and pissed off at the “condescending” attitude of GM’s phone support staff, one former Marine and “lifelong GM customer” drove from Virginia to Detroit in order to get The General to take responsibility for chronic power steering pump failures in his wife’s Chevy HHR. His initial reward: more condescension, and the privilege of getting escorted from the premises of GM’s Headquarters. But Marines don’t quit that easily…

It’s not that the ad itself fails to mention the car it’s actually promoting, namely the Subaru Legacy. After all, if Subaru wants to entertain enthusiasts without actually indulging in the kind of gauzy praise they lampoon so effectively here, that’s fine by us. No, the only problem with the whole “2011 Mediocrity” campaign is that Subaru’s own Tribeca was clearly styled by the very designers they mock in this spot. And in this day and age, bland, uninspired crossovers are at least as lampoonable a cliche as the bland, uninspired sedans that Subaru slams (and which earned Toyota the cash for a 16.5% stake in Subaru’s parent company). Still, this is a ballsy move for a brand that is already growing like gangbusters in the US, and it shows just how far off the mark Volkswagen’s current attempt at US market growth is likely to be.

The things we make, according to the Jeep Grand Cherokee “Manifesto,” make us. Which apparently means that the Grand Cherokee is an on-the-job drinker. Yes, despite an ad campaign that touts craftsmanship and American manufacturing prowess (not to mention the litany of “Detroit Reborn” hype), Jeep Grand Cherokee assembly workers at the Jefferson North plant were caught drinking and doobing on their lunch break. Clearly, these gentlemen appreciate Chrysler’s new-found dedication to quality, and are eager to create value for their union and taxpayer owners. Oy vey…

UPDATE: The Detroit News reports

The lunchtime habits of a small group of workers, which included a trip to a party store and then to a public park, were captured on video by WJBK-TV (Channel 2). WJBK was tipped off by concerned workers at the plant.

Chrysler executives are now using the video to identify the workers, a number of whom have already been suspended without pay.

This is a company that could not tell you, on any given day, within five hundred million dollars, how much cash it had… not only were they not prepared, but Rick Wagoner had very specifically said he didn’t want to prepare… frankly, it’s an irresponsible position [for a CEO to take].

What do you do when you’ve overseen a divisive bailout and an investment scandal all within the last year? Writing a book goes without saying, but it doesn’t hurt to bash on the executives you ousted while “Overhauling” the industry. That way, people who were (ahem) bearish on GM leading up to the bailout can at least be vindicated in their pessimism (and have the pleasure of imagining what might of happened if Ron Gettelfinger had been fired as Wagoner’s sacrificial lamb). In any case, that’s just what former auto bailout czar Steve Rattner has done in an interview with CBS News, and despite Rattner’s relentless striving to appear respectable and brave, it’s worth a watch. Especially in hindsight, pre-bankruptcy GM makes even Rattner look good.

Having told the world that Onstar will allow users to update their Facebook profiles and listen to Facebook news feeds from their cars, bosses at the GM subsidiary reveal that they haven’t actually determined if these features are safe yet. Onstar Marketing boss Sam Mancuso explains the situation to AdAge

Today people are texting while they are driving. It’s not legal and it’s a very bad idea; 47% of people who are texting say that they have done so in their vehicle while driving. To do a normal text message takes 4.6 seconds, and at the speed of 55 miles an hour, someone can travel the length of a football field. We know that people want to use technology, but we are working on using it in ways that they don’t have to be distracted. Our goal is to minimize that distraction to virtually zero.

The litmus test we use is “Keep your eyes on the road, your hands on the wheel and your mind on the drive.” If we find that the texting service or Facebook audio update capability causes people to be distracted we’re not going to do it. We’ll vet those things out internally…We’d be very proud to talk to you, others in the media or family and friends and say we tested it, developed it and it’s not safe.

Does anyone actually believe that this will be the outcome, now that GM and Onstar have begun hyping these features?

Fiat/Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne is an agonizing character. There can be no doubt that he’s one of the smartest execs in the business, and yet he so often comes off as the stuffy, pedantic college professor, who sputters into ad hominem at the faintest sign of criticism. His speeches often revolve around stock speaking points and a copy of Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations, and as the video above proves, his delivery is rarely inspiring. But between the Einstein quotes and plaintive self-sympathy, Marchionne can offer moments of unexpected candor. His speech to Chrysler’s dealers earlier this week offered several such moments, and though it’s too long (and, frankly, boring) to reprint in its entirety (click here for the whole thing), here are a few stunners from the mind of Marchionne.

Several weeks back, Lamborghini CEO Stephan Winkelmann was hinting to Forbes that weight loss would be crucial to the Lambo future (he also revealed that the brand’s best-selling colors “are white, black and the grey tones”). As the hype builds towards the release of the new Murcielago-replacing Jota, Winkelmann has released a “manifesto” that he says will guide Lamborghini into a sustainable future.

Alternatively, it could also be seen as an after-the-fact justification for Lamborghini’s decision to ditch the V12. After all, the Jota teaser image released with the Winkelmann-ifesto hints very strongly at a ten-cylinder drivetrain… which means the era of V12-powered Lamborghini flagships is probably about to end. Can one little manifesto really explain that kind of brand-defying break with tradition? Hit the jump to judge for yourself.

In the second bit of bad news for Toyota to break today, Corporate Counsel reports that former Toyota lawyer Dimitrios Biller has been cleared by an arbitrator to present evidence that Toyota claimed was protected by attorney-client privilege. That evidence reportedly proves that Toyota concealed safety information, although its value has been hotly debated. The evidence will be presented in Biller’s civil RICO suit against Toyota now that the arbitrator in that case has ruled that hey are not protected by attorney-client privilege. Biller tells CC

Attorney-client privileged information almost never gets to the finder of fact to determine the merits of the case. I am halfway there. The burden is now on Toyota to prove me wrong

But for full context, a retired federal judge clarifies that

The Arbitrator does not rule that a crime or a fraud has taken place. The ruling is simply that a prima facia showing has been made, so otherwise-privileged materials may be used in discovery and arbitration.

Editor’s note: GM CEO Dan Akerson sent the following email to GM’s employees, his first such communication as GM’s CEO, in recognition of Labor Day Weekend Eve.

GM Employees,

As Labor Day approaches in the U.S. and Canada, I would like to wish everyone at General Motors a safe, happy holiday weekend. I also ask that we pause for moment to reflect on what this day means as we celebrate labor’s many contributions here and around the world.

Of course, labor’s role in building up this nation and others is well recognized and rightly so. And, coming from a union family, I know on a very personal level the good things that unions can do.