U.S. Automakers Say Labor Costs Must Shrink to Compete
At a series of background sessions this month, executives from the three major Detroit car companies said they need to close a labor cost gap of $20 to $30 per hour with their Japanese counterparts in North America.
June 20, 2007
U.S. Automakers Say Labor Costs Must Shrink to Compete
Detroit automakers are vowing to fight for
significant labor savings in master contract negotiations with the
UAW.
At a series of background sessions this month, executives from the
three major U.S. car
companies said they need to close a labor cost gap of $20 to $30 per hour with
their Japanese counterparts in North
America.
The UAW is accustomed to wages and benefits
gradually growing, not shrinking. But these negotiations, which run until the
September 14 expiration of the current contract, must bring change, says Dave
Cole, director of the Center for Automotive Research, a think tank in
Ann Arbor, Michigan.
“I think you could see a
lockout,” Cole says. “The car companies won’t settle for anything short of
transformational change in their labor agreements.”
UAW president Ron
Gettelfinger has said the union already gave General Motors and Ford Motor Co.
substantial relief on health care costs over the past few years. He has said the
UAW is not interested in giving up more in the current negotiations.
Ford
has a goal to cut its labor costs by 30 percent, TheDetroit News reported last week. Ford
declined to confirm the report.
But in the face of massive financial
losses, the Detroit automakers must bring labor
costs that are now about $72 per hour ($28 an hour in wages plus benefits and
pension costs), closer to the $45 to $50 per hour of the Japanese car companies
operating in North America, Cole
says.
Among the ideas being floated by the Detroit automakers is a
new structure to pay for retiree health care. Under various scenarios, the car
companies would pay the UAW 60 cents to 70 cents on the dollar to assume a
combined liability of $93 billion for the Detroit companies.
The union would
then control the money and the risk of meeting the obligations through a trust
known as a Voluntary Employee Benefits Association.
The union isn’t
interested in that plan—at least not now, Cole says. But it is listening to the
idea as a hedge against possibly losing all those benefits should any of the
companies falter into bankruptcy, he says.
The UAW declined to comment
last week.
Filed by David Barkholz of
Automotive News, a sister publication of Workforce
Management. To comment, e-mail
editors@workforce.com.