GM and CAW reach agreement, May 22, 2009

Published on rabble.ca (http://rabble.ca)

GM and CAW reach agreement
May 22 2009 - 2:20pm

CBC.ca

Quote:

Lewenza said the union and the automaker reached the tentative deal around 11 p.m. ET Thursday.

Voting on the agreement by union members is slated for Sunday and Monday.

"We have preserved our wages. We have preserved and secured our pension benefits," said Lewenza. "We have protected most of our core benefits."

Pension issues were one of the major items, with Lewenza saying Friday that the union has agreed to a pension benefit freeze extending through 2015.

He pointed out that the pension plan for the workers is only 39 per cent funded on a windup basis

Union pension official Sym Gill said the pension shortfall is roughly $6.5 billion to $7 billion, adding that the pension is expected to be back on a fully funded basis in 10 years.

And showing who is really leading the bandwagon for concessions:

Quote:
"I’m hopeful when we look at the deal that all involved have made the difficult decisions necessary to create a viable company," Harper said.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - --- - -- -- - - --
A little about the pension:

CAW news release [3]

The new agreement also includes a comprehensive restructuring of the
company's pension plan.

Through this plan, the company commits to move to funding its pension on
a solvency basis, moving away from the special funding loophole established in
1992 in Ontario (referred to as Section 5.1). Thanks to a combination of
upfront contributions and sustained funding commitments over the next several
years, GM's pension funding status will quickly reach levels comparable to
Ford and Chrysler in Canada.

"This deal will be an immense relief to the more than 25,000 retired GM
workers in Canada," said CAW President Ken Lewenza. "They will sleep much
easier tonight." [...]

Additional changes negotiated in the second round of talks with GM
include substantial workplace practices and productivity improvements, an
extra freeze in all pension levels (going out to 2015), and the details of
GM-specific deals regarding pensions and the new independent Health Care
Trust.



Source URL (retrieved on May 23 2009 - 12:56am): http://rabble.ca/babble/labour-and-consumption/gm-and-caw-reach-agreement

CAW blasts `cookie-cutter' concessions, TheStar.com

Demands not `economically necessary or tolerable'
May 20, 2009
Tony Van Alphen
Business Reporter

Canadian and U.S. governments now want thousands of General Motors workers and retirees here to accept concessions similar to those of their American counterparts, their union revealed yesterday.

The Canadian Auto Workers said in a bleak update on concession negotiations with GM that the union faces an unprecedented "cookie-cutter" approach in demands from the reeling automaker and governments.

The U.S., federal and Ontario governments are considering billions of dollars in public loans to keep the ailing auto giant alive, but want major concessions by stakeholders, including unions in both countries, before a June 1 deadline for submission of a restructuring plan.

"Because the Canadian and U.S. governments are planning a joint effort to support GM's restructuring, we now face a dangerous attempt to enforce a "cookie-cutter" approach on our bargaining," the union said in a leaflet to more than 7,500 active workers.

"In other words, whatever is done in the U.S. must also be done in Canada. This philosophy is absolutely offensive to us as Canadians, and it is leading the government to demand things that are neither economically necessary or tolerable."

The CAW, which has been bargaining with GM since May 11 so it can be more competitive with rival Toyota, said the new demands clearly originate from the U.S. government. In the leaflet titled "We are approaching a Moment of Truth", the union said the latest demands ignore savings in health care here and different cost structures.

"It makes no sense to impose a "one-size-fits-all formula on us that ignores Canada's advantage," the union said, noting that the next few days of talks will be "worrisome and frightening."

The union did not disclose specific demands, but sources say some proposals would force active workers to pay for the first time into the company's pension plan, which is underfunded by up to $7 billion.

GM and the governments are also pressing for more concessions than workers accepted recently at Chrysler Canada, the union said last week.

Government interference hampering talks: CAW, The contract talks being held in Toronto will be allowed to continue through May 31

The contract talks being held in Toronto will be allowed to continue through May 31

Grace Macaluso, Canwest News Service Published: Tuesday, May 19, 2009

Ottawa extends deadline for GM union deal to May 31


Chrysler pension plans may be underfunded by more than US$10-billion


WINDSOR, Ont. -- Federal and provincial governments are interfering with efforts by union and company negotiators to reach a cost-cutting contract aimed at preventing General Motors from going bankrupt, the Canadian Auto Workers said Tuesday.

"They continue to interfere in the process, making new demands all the time," the union's master bargaining committee said in an update to its membership. "Their lack of experience in labour relations, and their repeated threats to pull the plug entirely on GM Canada, have made this process all the more difficult."

The union also complained about the presence of another party in the talks -- the U.S. government.

"Some of the new demands placed on the CAW in this bargaining clearly originated south of the border," the union said. "Because the Canadian and U.S. governments are planning a joint effort to support GM's restructuring, we now face a dangerous attempt to enforce a ‘cookie-cutter' approach on our bargaining."

Pensions, in particular a multi-billion-dollar deficit in the GM pension plan, remain a sticking point in negotiations.

"If we accepted cuts in pension benefits today in a fruitless effort to subsidize an enormous deficit that we did not create, then every other pension plan will be in jeopardy too," the union said.

Earlier Tuesday, federal Industry Minister Tony Clement said the contract talks being held in Toronto would be allowed to continue through May 31.

Ottawa had previously set a deadline of last Friday for the two sides to substantially reduce labour costs in order for the company to receive long-term government aid in Canada.

GM and the CAW were making progress on some issues, while others were more problematic, Mr. Clement told reporters in Atlanta.

On Monday, CAW president Ken Lewenza said the two sides were nowhere near a deal. He said demands were reaching the union's limit, despite "incredible sacrifices" made by union members to help GM stay afloat.

"We're trying to get people to understand the significance (of those sacrifices), but we haven't been successful to date," he said.

"The provincial and federal governments are scrutinizing everything we're doing and (have) indicated very clearly that they expect more sacrifices made in the area of pensions and benefits . . . over and beyond what we did with Chrysler."

GM and the union must reach an agreement that satisfies conditions outlined by the federal government in order for the troubled automaker to qualify for an additional $6-billion in financial aid, or risk liquidation.

If no deal is reached, the federal and provincial governments have said they will cease providing financial support to the company, which would then presumably move into bankruptcy protection.

Windsor Star

CANADIAN LABOUR, By Sam Hammond

By Sam Hammond

(The following article is from the May 16-30, 2009, issue of People's Voice, Canada's leading communist newspaper.)
________________________________________________________
OUR LABOUR MOVEMENT is a very real and important example of social organization, reflecting the existence of opposing classes in the capitalist stage. It is both historically a result of the creation of a working class which the early capitalists needed to exploit, and a quantitative component of the ensuing class struggle.

It is necessary to understand the historical need that created the labour movement, because that original historic purpose is essential to measure whether the movement is a quantity of decline, or still a quantity of growth in the competition and struggle between the opposing classes. In the escalating attack on Canadian labour launched by imperialism, the corporate neo-liberal agenda is a weapon wielded by compliant governments and chameleon institutions. Is our labour movement capable of mounting defensive struggle and counter-attacking, or are we a spent force?

Although the attack is universal it spins out in different ways in the imperialist states, of which Canada is one. We have a highly developed working class that has created a mature and able trade union movement. However, the period from the beginning of the Cold War to the early 1970s, marked by McCarthyism, by the attack on the left and left-led unions, can be looked at in retrospect as a period of attempted pacification of the working class. The purpose of the state (and its allies within our class) was to neutralize the quantity of resistance, of class struggle, and replace it with a quantity of compliance and collaboration.

Although not completely successful, this offensive destroyed the Canadian Seamen's Union, and wore down the membership of the Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers who had given so much to Canadian labour. It was used to justify the expulsion of other left unions from the central labour bodies, and to separate the peace movement and the social justice movements from all but the minority of left unions. Leadership was gradually shifted into the hands of those who rose in position because of anti-communism, not through experience or ability to represent workers needs.

The recognition of this injustice against the working class and its most militant representatives must be part of the resurgence of labour and its rededication to the needs of all working people. To the credit of the Canadian working class, the victory of capital was never complete. While business trade unionism became dominant at the top, in contradiction to rank-and-file needs, a small but very tenacious left survived and continued to exert considerable influence. The emergence of CUPE, the CAW and CEP were all expressions of continuing creativity and militancy, and the ability of Canadian workers to struggle not only for unionism but for Canadian unions.

In Quebec the working class also maintained its historic roots, introducing its national character and needs into the struggle, with the CNTU growing as a force and the QFL establishing itself within the CLC as a national labour body.

The present onslaught, whose central thrust is brutally directed against the CAW, was preceded by more than twenty years of skirmishes and probes. The economic slump of the mid-1980s was a softener. The 1995 election of the Harris Tories preceded an attack on the dispossessed, twinned with an attack on Ontario public sector workers. This Tory agenda was challenged by massive worker support for the Ontario Days of Action, which ended in a split between the CAW and the Ontario Federation of Labour over whether to continue the fight. The right won and the fightback was abandoned. The CAW unfortunately left the OFL in search of go-it-alone solutions that led it to the Liberal party and weakened Ontario labour considerably.

Ontario's teachers launched an historic political strike in defence of quality education and funding but were failed by weak leadership. In British Columbia, emboldened by weak labour leadership, the Campbell government shamelessly drove back wages and working conditions for health workers, despite their massive public support and the stirrings of a general strike. The same Campbell government, using the Supreme Court as a weapon, was later repulsed and shamed by the courageous stand of the BC Teachers, who put it on the line in a major struggle for teaching and learning conditions.

In Quebec a few years ago, preparations for massive resistance to the Charest government, including a national work stoppage, were neutralized behind the scenes by the machinations of some major union leaders. But things have changed. On May 11, all the public and para-public sector unions in Quebec announced the creation of their biggest common front in history, representing half a million workers. Despite the economic crisis, unions are demanding a major wage increase of 11.25% over 33 months. Calculated on the average public sector wage level, this means negotiating an increase of over 15% for lower paid employees. The Charest government has reacted by saying that unions must be "reasonable."

These skirmishes, by no means passive, were not the only ones fought in the recent past. They clearly demonstrate the two main ideological trends in Canadian labour, and their corresponding strengths and weaknesses.

The rejection of independent labour political action by the right forces in the OFL allowed then CAW President Buzz Hargrove an excuse to implement concessionary thinking, including a semi-alliance with the Liberal party hidden behind programs of strategic voting that were embraced by some Ontario Teachers, most Building Trades unions, and a few others. The OFL went into a deep slumber and became an absentee labour movement. The CLC has also been in "Rip Van Winkle" mode, emerging periodically to check its own shadow. There have been campaigns on paper but not on pavement, with the exceptions of a CAW attempt to put substance into the CLC "Manufacturing Matters Campaign," and the CLC's EI and "Get Real Campaign" that so far has received only token support from the rest of labour.

Against this backdrop, the CAW leadership made some rather dramatic turns into concessionary bargaining and a failed experiment with a company compliant, collaborationist "Framework of Fairness" agreement with Magna Corporation. The die was cast. Buzz Hargrove no longer looked to the militants in the rank and file, but to the elements of compliance and careerism who could be easily recruited to his agenda. Three years of concessions (small at first but developing into major) and early contract openings with the "Big Three" auto plants in Ontario preceded the vicious attack by the Harper Tories government, the auto companies, and in the background, the Bush presidency. Now labour's "friend in the White House" is demanding non-union parity from the United Auto Workers, with the "Northern Stooge" putting the same to the CAW.

CAW president Ken Lewenza walked into this cesspool, and has been desperately trying to salvage his members and union from corporate double-cross, government attack and broken promises. A couple of explosions of militant action, reminiscent of the older CAW, have been handled too easily by court injunctions.

Sold as a way to save jobs in the CAW, concessionary bargaining only whetted the corporate thirst. The present onslaught was bolder because of this sign of weakness. The jobs have disappeared and the union is left without a "Plan B". The demands of the capitalist state and the corporations were not retarded or lessened by a resistance campaign, or even a condemnation of the attack. In fact, Ken Lewenza has mistakenly complimented the two levels of government for their injection of public cash into the corporations, approved the takeover of Chrysler by yet another foreign corporation (Fiat of Italy), and failed to raise the possibility of nationalizing what we have already paid for to launch a real Canadian vehicle, transportation and farm implement industry. He is no doubt desperately searching for a way to save his members and his union. This deserves respect, but it is not the way.

The labour movement is in rather deep hibernation, but it is not a spent force. The most mauled, the CAW, is still intact. It has the members and the traditions to regroup, to sustain itself and counter-attack. This cannot be done by one union alone, and it is a compliment to Ken Lewenza and his union that they are going back into the Ontario Federation of Labour even if the horse is out of the barn.

Hopefully this will spur some militant fightback in Ontario, where the OFL and all workers need the CAW presence in the central labour body as an alternative voice to wake up the Rip Van Winkles. Ken Lewenza is not the architect of concessionary bargaining, and hopefully he will learn that there are other roads.

The victims of the global crisis include one in ten of Canadian children who eat out of food banks, the 75% of workers who cannot access Unemployment Insurance, auto workers deprived of wages and benefits, the unemployed from 67 idle wood processing mills in British Columbia, the Quebec workers ejected from Bombardier, relocated Maritimers all over Canada, teachers wrestling with education funding cuts, the Hamilton Steelworkers, the locked-out Hamilton Steel Car Workers, striking BC Paramedics. All these citizens and their children are wondering how to pay rent and mortgages, how to eat, how to heat, how to hold families together. For them there is no sleep.

The Canadian Labour Congress, the Quebec Federation of Labour and the CNTU cannot sit in their respective solitudes while the Canadian working class is dissected piecemeal. There must be early and urgent meetings to plan a counter-offensive that includes the social justice movements. Coalition building led by organized labour is the order of the day. No group or strata is strong enough to repulse the tactics of the offensive by capital and the state. With the organization and experience of labour in the pivotal position, coalitions will rush together to turn the tide and win public support. This is the lesson of France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Guadeloupe, and other recent struggles.

As long as there is exploitation and as long as working people have needs, the labour movement will be the most important part of the fightback, the latent threat of massive resistance, the training ground of tactical struggle, and the potential army of a political movement of the left that will destroy this treadmill of gain and loss and give our hard won gains constitutional permanence.

Canadian Labour is not a spent force. It remains to be seen if the present leadership of labour is a spent force.
_____________________________________________________________________