UAW: "GM Should Not Be Taking Taxpayers' Money Simply to Finance the Outsourcing of Jobs to Other Countries."

Edward Niedermeyer
by Edward Niedermeyer

Oh noes! The UAW did the math on GM and Chrysler’s newest restructuring plans and it’s not pleased at all. Well, with GM’s plan, anyway. Commence angry letter ( PDF) to Senator: [blank]!

“Incredibly, between 2010-2014 GM’s restructuring plan also calls for a 98% increase in the number of vehicles it will be importing into the United States from Mexico, Korea, Japan and China, with the number of imports from these countries increasing from 371,547 to 736,743. As a result, the share of GM’s sales in the U.S. market that will be imported from these countries will increase from 15.5% to 23.5%. The overall number of vehicles GM will be importing in 2014 represents the production of four assembly plants, the same number that GM plans to close in the United States.”

“The UAW recognizes that GM needs to “right-size” its production in the U.S. to reflect current reduced consumer demand for its vehicles. We also recognize that automakers will have facilities in other countries so they can build vehicles in the markets where they sell them. But the UAW strongly objects to GM’s restructuring plan because it essentially means that GM will be shifting more of its manufacturing footprint from the U.S. to Mexico, Korea, Japan and China, and importing more of the vehicles it sells in the U.S. market from these countries. In our judgment, if GM is going to receive government assistance to facilitate its restructuring, along with the benefits from tremendous sacrifices by UAW members and other stakeholders, we believe it should have an obligation to build in this country the vehicles it will be selling in the U.S. market, thereby maintaining the maximum number of jobs in the United States. GM should not be taking taxpayers’ money simply to finance the outsourcing of jobs to other countries.”

Edward Niedermeyer
Edward Niedermeyer

More by Edward Niedermeyer

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 25 comments
  • MaintenanceCosts Poorly packaged, oddly proportioned small CUV with an unrefined hybrid powertrain and a luxury-market price? Who wouldn't want it?
  • MaintenanceCosts Who knows whether it rides or handles acceptably or whether it chews up a set of tires in 5000 miles, but we definitely know it has a "mature stance."Sounds like JUST the kind of previous owner you'd want…
  • 28-Cars-Later Nissan will be very fortunate to not be in the Japanese equivalent of Chapter 11 reorganization over the next 36 months, "getting rolling" is a luxury (also, I see what you did there).
  • MaintenanceCosts RAM! RAM! RAM! ...... the child in the crosswalk that you can't see over the hood of this factory-lifted beast.
  • 3-On-The-Tree Yes all the Older Land Cruiser’s and samurai’s have gone up here as well. I’ve taken both vehicle ps on some pretty rough roads exploring old mine shafts etc. I bought mine right before I deployed back in 08 and got it for $4000 and also bought another that is non running for parts, got a complete engine, drive train. The mice love it unfortunately.
Next