UAW grants concessions, exec warns of depression
Photo 
General Motors employee Rodney Kirkland holds a sign along with other demonstrates outside U.S. Sen. John Cornyn's, R-Texas, office in Dallas, Wednesday, Dec. 3, 2008.
DETROIT Worried about their jobs and warned that the cost of bankruptcy could be a widespread depression, hundreds of leaders of the United Auto Workers voted overwhelmingly Wednesday to make concessions to struggling U.S. automakers, including all but ending a much-derided program that let laid-off workers collect up to 95 percent of their salaries.
"Everybody has to give a little bit," said Rich Bennett, an official for Local 122 in Twinsburg, Ohio, representing Chrysler workers. "We've made concessions. We really feel we're doing our part."
Union leaders also agreed to let the cash-starved automakers delay billions of dollars in payments to a union-administered trust set to take over health care for blue-collar retirees starting in 2010.
In addition, they decided to let the Detroit leadership begin renegotiating elements of landmark contracts signed with the automakers last year, a move that could lead to wage concessions.
The vote came on the eve of congressional hearings on as much as $34 billion in loans that General Motors and Chrysler say are critical to their survival. Ford has said it may be able to hang on through 2009 without additional credit.
Democratic congressional leaders say they want to act to prevent one or more of the automakers from collapsing, but they have made no commitments to approve an unpopular bailout at a time of economic peril.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said a Democratic plan to tap the Wall Street rescue fund to save U.S. automakers does not have the votes to pass.
UAW President Ron Gettelfinger said the union must help persuade Congress to offer the loans or risk destroying what he said is the country's economic spine.
"Let's look at the backbone and the millions of jobs lost if we lost this industry," he said.
Earlier in the day, Chrysler Vice Chairman Jim Press went a step further, warning of a depression if even one automaker runs out of cash.
"We're on the brink with the U.S. auto manufacturing industry," Press told The Associated Press in an interview. "If we have a catastrophic failure of one of these car companies, in this tender environment for the economy, it's a huge blow. It could trigger a depression."
Both Chrysler LLC and General Motors Corp. are so perilously low on cash that the companies may not be able to pay all their bills by the end of the year. GM wants a total of $18 billion in loans. Chrysler is seeking $7 billion, and both manufacturers say they need cash this month.
Ford Motor Co., which borrowed billions before credit markets tightened, says it can survive through 2009 and may not need to tap the $9 billion credit line it requested.
As a further sign of the companies' dire straits, Moody's Investors Service on Wednesday downgraded its ratings for GM and Chrysler, sending them further into non-investment, or "junk," status. Moody's affirmed its ratings for Ford, but said the outlook for the three automakers is "negative," implying further downgrades are possible.
Sent home empty-handed last month, executives from all three companies knocked on doors on Capitol Hill and made television appearances Wednesday, hoping the detailed plans they submitted Tuesday would convince hostile lawmakers to help. CEOs from all three, plus Gettelfinger, will appear before Senate and House committees Thursday and Friday.
Fritz Henderson, GM's president and chief operating officer, stressed on NBC's "Today" show that bankruptcy isn't a viable option.
Choosing bankruptcy, he said, would further erode consumer confidence in the automaker and "we want them to be confident in their ability to buy our cars and trucks."
All three executives took hybrid cars from Detroit to Washington after enduring harsh criticism last month for using corporate jets for the trip.
The automakers' plans were being scrutinized by legislators, the White House and the Treasury and Commerce departments.
"It sounds to me like the companies have given this a lot of thought and are willing to make some tough decisions," White House press secretary Dana Perino said. "We just need a little more time to pore through the documents."
President-elect Barack Obama said it appeared that the CEOs were returning to Congress with a "more serious set of plans" for how their companies are going to survive.
The plans painted the most dire portrait yet of the industry's woes — including the prospect of shuttered factories and massive job losses if Congress does not act quickly.
The much-derided "jobs bank" that permits laid-off workers to receive most of their pay was created in the mid-1980s as a trade-off to the UAW for increased factory automation. But the system became a symbol for the union's largess when workers were paid for years after their factories closed.
Gettelfinger said the union will suspend the bank, but he did not give specifics or a timetable.
"We're going to sit down and work out the mechanics," Gettelfinger said. "We're a little unclear on some of the issues."
Members of Congress criticized the automakers last month for paying laid-off workers, saying it's one reason why their labor costs are higher than competitors. About 3,500 workers from all three companies are now in the jobs bank.
Until the 2007 contract, workers could stay in the jobs bank indefinitely, but the new pact imposes time limits. Workers in the bank must report to local union halls. Sometimes they do charity work, but other times they do nothing.
Gettelfinger stopped short of saying the union would reopen its contracts but said it would return to the bargaining table to change some terms. Modifications would have to be ratified by members.
Delaying the health care trust payments will help the companies survive their cash shortages, which they say were brought on by the severe economic downturn and the worst U.S. sales in more than a quarter century.
The delay will have to be approved by federal courts, which already have blessed the trusts' formation.
Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said she hopes Congress acts to help the automakers. Reid said he would advance a bill Monday in preparation for a possible auto bailout vote later in the week.
The automakers, humbled by criticism from their last visit, gave lengthy plans with minute details about how they plan to repay the government money.
Ford CEO Alan Mulally and GM CEO Rick Wagoner both said they would work for $1 a year if their firms took any government loan money. Chrysler chief Robert Nardelli already works for $1 a year.
Per the UAW's constitution, Gettelfinger receives an annual salary of about $145,000 per year, plus insurance, retirement and other benefits.
Ford offered to cancel management bonuses and salaried employees' merit raises next year, and GM said it would slash top executives' pay. Ford and GM both said they would sell their corporate aircraft.
Nevertheless, Sen. Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, said the mood in Congress "is not supportive" of the automakers, although he called the consequences of just one of them failing "cataclysmic."
___
Associated Press writers Ken Thomas, Julie Hirschfeld Davis and Jennifer Loven in Washington, and AP Business Writer Deborah Yao in Philadelphia contributed to this report.

Dec 5, 2008 at 9:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
Instead of bailing out all these massive corporations so that their exec's can go on spa weekends, why not give that money to the citizens of the US? We will be able to pay OUR bills,debt will decrease, we will increase spending, and then abacadabra! Our economy is back!
Dec 4, 2008 at 2:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
The UAW exec didn't foresee the "Big 3's" imminent collapse, so I don't think I'll put much faith in Chicken Little's dire and self serving warnings of impending doom for our economy if we don't bail them out.
Dec 4, 2008 at 12:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Curious that the Democrats who control congress by a large majority can't even get enough the votes to pass this bill through. The public support for this is falling off a cliff. Polls showed it at about 50/50 to start off, and now its up to about 65% against. Rather funny that skits done on S&L and Jay Leno, seem to be what drive polls today (look at the recent presidential election)!
.
It's really going to be interesting to see what the democrats in congress do. As I posted many times in past discussions, every major state in the country is heading to DC to get a bailout for their over bloated/over spent budgets, which are DEEP in red. The big dilemma many in DC are now just seeing is do you bailout everyone, and ease things for the short term right now? Which if done will only make the problems so bad down the road with a massive deficit that it will literally doom the entire economy. As usual, I'm sure they will give in to the forces that are pushing them right now. Try to fix the problem myopically, and make even bigger messes down the road.
Dec 4, 2008 at 12:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ok I am sorry but I did research and apparentely the head gaskets do mess up on about half of these 2003 and most of the 2002 and also a recall with something with the gas tanks.
**
2002 chevy venture with bad head gasket?
My venture (3.4 L) was overheating and using coolant (alot) so I took it to the dealer to have it looked at. They said the head gasket was shot. They said it would be $2000 to fix. Is this something I can fix myself or is this something the pros should handle. I am pretty handy but this engine is a complete pain to work on. Why the h#%l did GM ever design such a P.O.S. ?
9 months ago
Report Abuse
by Dr Deep Member since:
February 10, 2008
Total points:
383 (Level 2)
Add to My Contacts
Block User
Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
I'm a chevy technician and have had to do several of these myself. They are a serious pain. It's a semi-common problem with these. The head gasket "blows" at the #1 cylinder (back, far passenger side) and leaks coolant into the combustion chamber. Typically you relace both head gaskets at the same time. By doing this you can keep the exhaust manifolds bolted to the heads, as well as the crossover pipe between them, which means you pull both heads at the same time.
Unless the engine overheated, it isn't necessary to have the heads checked, and there is no fan clutch to remove.
$2K is actually about right, unfortunetly. It is an extremely laborious job, about 13-15 hours of labor. I dread having to do them, and I get paid to do so. I would highly recommend letting a professional do this. Sorry buddy.
Why did GM design this? I ask myself that every single time.
9 months ago
Source(s):
Chevy tech
Dec 4, 2008 at 10:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
nurse4u I have a 2003 chevy venture and have never had 1 single problem with it. Bought it brand new. I now other people who also have them and they have had no problesm either. You can buy a car from ford, chrysler or even a foreign car and get a lemon. It isn't just GM.
Dec 4, 2008 at 10:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
tickle32 says "The union wanted everything for the employees, sending costs through the roof, and continuing to build gas guzzlers that nobody was buying."
If the fact that america cars are built buy union workers is the reason cars cost so much, what is your excuse for the prices of foreign cars which cost pretty much the same without union workers?
and the gas guzzlers are being bought/shipped to foreign countries, so they are still selling them. If they weren't selling GM would be closing the Arrlington TX plant too, but it's running 3 shifts with overtime.
and nurse4u- GM but in the first head gasket, the service shop you took your car to put in the other two. I'd be taking that issue up with them!!
Dec 4, 2008 at 10:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
Too little too late.
Dec 4, 2008 at 9:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
Can any one explain to me why my head gaskets keep going out on my 2003 Chevy Venture when its not even paid off yet? Three times is a little much don't you think? Especially when I service it when it needs to be serviced.
Hey can someone come bail me out??
Dec 4, 2008 at 9:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
I am sorry for the position these workers have been put into but with times the way they are and the FACT that the government messes up everything they put their hands into. I would rather suffer through the disaster of bankrupt car companies than to let the government be in a position to take them over. The management and the workers need to remember they are ultimately responsible for their position not the taxpayer. To the Janesville workforce I sincerely wish you the best.
Dec 4, 2008 at 9:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
Back on topic, the UAW concessions are a good start. I question how serious they will be when sitting down at the negotiating table again if a bailout is passed. Congress wants specifics, and I'm not hearing that from Gettelfinger.
The UAW is only part of the solution, however. The entire burden of the recovery can't be placed on the backs of the autoworker. GM has to actually shed dealers and brands, not just talk about "possibly" selling SAAB and Saturn, or making Pontiac a "nich" brand (what does that mean?). GM has to commit to changing their business model. We'll see.
Dec 4, 2008 at 9:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
localboy how can you blame the Democrats for the greed of the UAW? The union wanted everything for the employees, sending costs through the roof, and continuing to build gas guzzlers that nobody was buying. The crisis of the auto industry is mostly their own making. Yes the economy has tanked and people aren't buying cars. However, laid off employees of GM in Janesville will be collecting almost 100% of their salary between unemployment and the supplemental pay they get. They will be collecting these salaries until the contract is up which I think is in 2010. You certainly can't blame that on the democrats
Dec 4, 2008 at 9:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
Politics in the first comment? Really?
Of course, it's all the Democrats fault. Nevermind the previous 6 years of Republican control of the White House AND Congress. Nope, those 6 years had absolutely NOTHING to do with the housing bubble, or financial deregulation, or the giant sucking sound of jobs leaving the U.S. Nope, it's all the Democrats fault.
/end sarcasm
Dec 4, 2008 at 8:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Just take a look around and think back. What has happened to America in the last 2 years? Coincides with the Democrats taking over both houses. Ironic isn't it? Buckle down, as it will only get worse with a Democrat in the white house rubber stamping everything.
Before you post a comment, consider this:
Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy AgreementPost Comment
Commenting requires registration.