Senate’s union-busting spurs anger in auto plants

The House of Representatives passed a bill Dec. 9 to make $14 billion available immediately to General Motors, Chrysler and Ford. GM and Chrysler would get an emergency “bridge loan” to cover expenses while Ford would get a line of credit for future use if needed. The funds would come out of an already-approved $25 billion for developing fuel-efficient vehicles.

Congress, including leading House Democrats, made bogus allusions to “equality of sacrifice” as they demanded that current and retired members of the United Auto Workers absorb the cost of restructuring the industry.

Their real agenda was spelled out in the bill itself: to “prohibit the eligible automobile manufacturer which received the loan from consummating any such proposed sale, investment, contract [our emphasis–MG], commitment, or other transaction, if the President’s designee determines that consummation of such transaction would be inconsistent with or detrimental to the long-term viability of the eligible automobile manufacturer.” (Detroit Free Press) In other words, a so-called “car czar” would have the power to dismantle union contracts.

Yet the fear of one of the Detroit Three (formerly known as the Big Three) going under was so deep that UAW President Ron Gettelfinger worked overtime to win passage of the House bill.

Then on Dec. 11, with “right-to-work”-state Republicans leading the assault, the bailout died in the Senate. It wasn’t enough that House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi took the position that “everyone is getting haircuts in terms of the conditions. Labor has to take a haircut.” What Bob Corker of Tennessee, Richard Shelby of Alabama and their cohorts wanted was the union’s head.

The UAW was presented with a non-negotiable demand that it reduce labor costs immediately to be equivalent to those at non-union plants of Honda, Toyota and other overseas carmakers.

Like a broken record the senators repeated the myth that UAW members make $80 an hour. Actually wages at other auto plants are relatively close to those of union autoworkers. What differs are the “legacy costs” of supporting almost 800,000 UAW members collecting pensions. Yet even these cost figures disregard the fact that pensions are legally defined as deferred wages—earned years ago by retirees when they were still on the job.

By calling for “parity” in 2009, these incarnations of Taft and Hartley were after not only concessions from the UAW but a complete surrender. It was more than even Gettelfinger could go along with. Now Shelby, Corker and company are making it look like it’s the union’s own fault if the companies run out of cash and can’t make payroll.

Autoworkers on the shop floor saw the Senate action for what it was: a brazen attempt to break their union. Chrysler workers also heard the call for them to submit to a job-killing merger with GM or some foreign auto firm, or else face bankruptcy or complete annihilation. Shelby and Corker were flooded with calls from angry workers and their family members.

As of this writing the White House has given no word as to the terms under which the automakers might now tap into the Troubled Assets Recovery Program, through which $700 billion was set aside to bail out the banks. Any variation on the failed Congressional bill will require some kind of concessions from the UAW right away. The future of collective bargaining will be subject to the dictates of the czar, probably drawn from the ranks of finance capital.

The UAW leadership has tied its own hands with the no-win strategy of saving at all costs the very capitalists who have cut the workforce down to a fraction of its former strength. They have taken on the bowed posture of a debtor—of one forever indebted to those “gracious” bosses who “give” workers their jobs.

In fact the rank-and-file workers are the companies’ biggest creditors. On any given day they are owed a minimum of five days’ pay for work already performed. As future retirees they are owed billions of dollars in deferred wages to be collected upon retirement.

Now GM, Ford and Chrysler owe billions of dollars more to the UAW, which has allowed them to delay payment into a fund set up to cover retiree health care. Washington is demanding the workers take half of that owed payment in company stock. This would make them part owners as well as creditors.

When workers begin to understand who really owes whom, then they can start to think outside the suicidal box of class collaboration.

As the biggest creditor, in the case of bankruptcy the workers would have the legal right to seize the assets of a debtor in possession. Furthermore, their investment—representing millions of hours of hard labor—is threatened by the reckless spending and well-proven ineptitude of management. Thus workers could, even if bankruptcy is avoided, argue the right to take over the plants to protect their stake—possibly under eminent domain.

Dec. 30 is the 72nd anniversary of the beginning of the Flint Sit-Down Strike that forced GM to recognize the UAW. On Dec. 5, 2008, that tradition was revived in Chicago, by the workers at Republic Windows and Doors. In studying both history and current events, justifiably angry autoworkers will learn that it is possible to fight and win.

Grevatt is a 21-year Chrysler worker and executive board member of UAW Local 122 in Twinsburg, Ohio.