•  HOME 
  •  ARCHIVES 
  •  BOOKS 
  •  PDF ARCHIVE 
  •  WWP 
  •  SUBSCRIBE 
  •  DONATE 
  •  MUNDOOBRERO.ORG
  • Loading


Follow workers.org on
Twitter Facebook iGoogle




Auto workers need bailout, instead

Congress threatens UAW

Published Nov 24, 2008 9:28 PM

During the week of Nov. 17, the CEOs of General Motors, Ford and Chrysler, along with United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger, testified before Congress on the need for a government bailout of the auto industry. Specifically, they requested an emergency measure of $25 billion of the $700 billion in the Troubled Assets Recovery Program.

Without help, they claimed, one or more of their companies would go bankrupt, possibly before year’s end. This would threaten the 200,000 who work for the automakers in the U.S. and some 700,000 who build components for vehicles. It has been stated that 2.5 million jobs could be lost if one of the Big Three goes belly-up.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson balked at the proposal, arguing that the money was for the banks–which he represents. Speaking for his party, Republican Sen. Spencer Bachus stated, “My constituents do not understand why their taxpayer dollars should go to support less-efficient business.” (Detroit Free Press, Nov. 19)

Christopher Dodd, chair of the Senate Banking Committee, proposed the companies declare bankruptcy first as a condition for getting a little piece of the TARP. (abc.news.com, Nov. 13)

In the end Congress called for the CEOs to come up with a nine-point plan by Dec. 2, explaining how the billions would be used and demonstrating long-term viability and ability to repay the loan. Congress then adjourned for Thanksgiving recess, leaving autoworkers as nervous as ever about their futures.

Rick Wagoner of GM, Alan Mulally of Ford and Bob Nardelli of Chrysler were all grilled on their high executive salaries, private jets and other perks, but the real target of the bipartisan compromise was the union.

The letter signed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid asking for “significant sacrifices and major changes to their way of doing business” is a thinly veiled demand for yet more givebacks by the workers. (Detroit News, Nov. 21)

When asked about the UAW, Pelosi stated, “I think everybody has to participate in ensuring the viability of the auto industry.” (Detroit Free Press, Nov. 22) Would a bankrupt GM make the same outrageous proposals to the UAW as its former parts division, Delphi, did in 2005? At that time Delphi President Steve Miller wanted to trash the entire union contract with the exception of the no-strike clause.

Newspaper columnists from Detroit to Washington are going out of their way to demonize the UAW. Detroit News auto writer Daniel Howes complained Nov. 18 that Gettelfinger “isn’t doing himself or his union any favors by insisting that the union... wouldn’t consider accelerating historic gains [read concessions] scheduled to take effect in 2010.”

Conservative ideologue George Will opposes any government bailout. “The answer,” said Will, is to “do nothing that will delay bankrupt companies from filing for bankruptcy protection, so that improvident labor contracts can be unraveled, allowing the companies to try to devise plausible business models.” (Washington Post, Nov. 18)

First to face the axe in any “plausible business model” would be what is known as the “jobs bank.” Since its inception in the 1990s, the bank has provided a measure of job security for autoworkers who would otherwise be laid off. In the bank they perform “nontraditional” work, often for charities, and receive 40 hours pay.

Originally the jobs bank was a concession to allow the companies to eliminate “traditional” jobs through the use of high technology when contracts contained a moratorium on layoffs. When a three- or four-year contract expired, the workers in the bank were no longer protected. Yet in a limited way the job bank upheld the premise that a job is a right.

Now the jobs bank is portrayed as “a symbol of excess and inefficiency.” Clearly on the defensive, Gettelfinger argued against officially eliminating the program by stating, “It’s not gone yet, but it’s almost gone. We’re on the verge of eliminating that provision.” (Detroit Free Press, Nov. 22)

Presently the three companies combined have only about 3,500 workers in the bank, but the numbers could swell. Under the contract workers enter the bank after 48 weeks of layoff.

People are supposed to think that auto workers are overpaid and that they created this crisis for themselves. The reality is just the opposite. People are not buying cars for two reasons: higher unemployment and lower wages. Both are the end result of the capitalist drive to increase profits by reducing the price of labor power.

This is done by decreasing the number of hours needed to manufacture a product—resulting in layoffs–or by pushing down costs through wage and benefit cuts. Either measure reduces the purchasing power of the masses. Workers become increasingly unable to make payments on mortgages, car loans and credit cards. Now there is no more easy credit through which people bought what they otherwise were unable to afford.

The deliberate destruction of the union wage scale throughout the capitalist economy has yielded a glut of products that few can now afford to buy, even on credit. Car sales have hit a 25-year low, and workers pay the price with loss of their jobs.

What shape the bailout takes, and if it ultimately saves all three companies from insolvency, remains to be seen. GM’s Board of Directors is, according to Reuters, considering the bankruptcy option. (Nov. 22) Completely missing in the debate is the notion that jobs, health care and old-age security are not luxuries but basic workers’ rights.

Whatever scenario plays out, what is central to the UAW now is how to restructure itself to again become a fighting machine that can forcibly assert its members’ right to their jobs.

E-mail: [email protected]