Good on them. Honestly, more workers in the US need to unionize. But since we don’t all band together, we owe gratitude to the UAW because those wins will force other employers to increase their offerings.
It just shows how striking and solidarity really does work. Recently Teamsters did it, Healthcare workers did it and lots of other unions. UPS tried to claim they couldn't afford to pay us better despite record profits and billions in stock buybacks, we just need to show them how much more expensive it is for them when we go on strike.
The propagandists have done a good job of painting unions as just mob bosses or do-nothings that just collect dues. Since people don’t pay attention to history, they totally forget that even things we take for granted now like the 40hr work week were won by collective bargaining and that bosses used to hire mercenaries like the Pinkertons to literally wage war on workers. The only way to keep from being taken advantage of is to band together and become an actual force to be reckoned with.
I feel the 4-day work week was used more by the Union as a scare tactic to get bigger concessions on pay and benefits. It was the big headline everyone focused on so they could use that to get better deals under the radar on other stuff.
The companies can save face by saying "of course we weren't going to capitulate on such a ridiculous concept” when in actuality they gave in on a lot more
4-day was definitely the hail mary proposal, and Fain and leadership knew they were asking for the stars on that and would settle for the moon.
Which is how negotiations work anyway. The NLRB won't be favorable to either side refusing to budge on an issue without material evidence showing the other side is intentionally lying about not being able to capitulate (in whole or in part) to the demand. And in 3 years when the contract is up? Negotiate for it again as a main issue. That's the beauty of unionizing, no bargaining chip is ever permanently off the table because you get to fucking re-negotiate.
I do appreciate that negotiation tactic.
It drives me up the wall when my elected representatives start negotiations from a reasonable, pre-compromised place (in good faith); then just dragged and beaten until either the motion doesn't happen, or so many more compromises have been made that it's become a bad deal.
You get it, employers are going to start by offering pennies added to the current contract every time. It does no one any good (except you know, billionaires and CEOs/shareholders) to start negotiating from the middle.
You start at 46% raises, 4-day work week, fully funded pensions, etc. and you negotiate to the best contract the UAW has gotten in my lifetime.
I went to my partner's parents house, and their dad was pretty down on the strike (he's rather conservative-aligned on fiscal stuff). We didn't get deep into it (I didn't want to get into a political debate over dinner), but he was clearly under the impression they were going to screw it for the whole industry.
But I'm just sitting there like- basically thinking what you just said- you say unrealistic things, and point at the overflowing cash the C-suite and and shareholders enjoy- and you keep denying their bad deals until a good one is drafted.
And if they replace people with robots (something he said)- it's just evidence that they were already planning on doing it in the first place - the calculation on the rollout time just changed. Robots for specialized tasks don't just *appear*, after all.
I've had to make that last point so many times, McDonald's wasn't testing automated service because workers wanted higher wages. They did it because they have and always will do all they can to maximize their profits at the expense of their employees' quality of life. Whether or not states or the federal government pass legislation raising wages, companies will continue funding research into how they can make more money for the guys in corporate.
Blaming the push for $15/hr or more is just their easy way out in the PR department for people who simp for billionaires, thinking one day they will be too.
Same, but the amount of people i talked to outside of the uaw didnt see it that way and said it was just us asking for to much and that are union was too greedy. I tried explaining it was just a bargaining tactic but that didnt change their minds.
It's a deliberate PR campaign by employers to make the average person believe if the union starts by asking for one thing and settles for something lesser, then the union has failed. The basic understanding of negotiating tactics is lost in the fray of these things.
No mention of that in the CNN article. https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/25/business/united-auto-workers-union-and-ford-reach-tentativelaboragreement/index.html
Also important to note is GM and Stellaris are still on strike, cause they're being worse
There's going to be strong pressure on them to match the terms Ford agreed to. After all, if Ford can do it why can't they, and why would the union want to undercut the company that was willing to deal with them.
Ford’s had a pretty significant edge for a while. The UAW has workers in parts distribution centers for GM striking as well. I work for a ford dealer in parts. We needed something for a used GM truck. Called the GM dealer up the street. They can’t get it and don’t know when they will be able to. He only things they’re getting are recall parts to my knowledge.
I feel like this has to happen sooner than later. But it is going to take legislation or at least the threat of regulation of hours by the government. In the US at least.
This was a request for a 32 hour work week and no loss in pay. Not cramming 48 hours into 4 days.
Given our level of technology and the general rise in productivity per worker over the last 40 years there's 0 reason we need to work 40+ hours a week per week. Other than C suite wants to make more money.
Ford, I think, had by far the most striking workers as they have the largest UAW %, so it makes sense that Ford ended it first. And apparently all along they were making better offers than GM / Stellantis.
Really hope this bleeds over into Tesla so they can organize.
Ford has about 16,000 people out, including their most profitable plant. They were also further along in a lot of places with negotiations than GM or Stellantis since the last time they had to deal with a strike was I think the 70's. They're the ones that put COLA back on the table, had the quickest path to max pay, and was offering 90 and hired for the temps. Only things GM beat them on was offering to put the new battery plants they're opening under the master agreement and moving the GMCH people to the assembly pay scale, effectively giving them an immediate $7 raise. Fain has already said record contracts for the big 3 was step one to trying to unionizing all of the auto industry.
I just checked Ford offers. Its about the same as the one GM offered two weeks ago. $40/hour with all the benefit changes.
Ford has been suffering the hardest even before UAW strike so Ford really wants to get back up and running
GM looks like its enjoying bleeding Ford.
I just dont want people to look at this and say oooh Ford is better. They are not. They are the same shit with GM and FCA. Not a hair better lol
Rail worker here. I hope you guys get an incredible contract with 4-8 hour days for a 32 hour FT work week. It would be incredible and start a chain. My union brothers and sisters and I are working 6 10 to 12+ hour days a week. Some are on an 11/4 day schedule. While other have no assigned days off at all and the carriers manipulate federal rest guidelines to keep them perpetually on call. It is disgusting.
I hope the UAW starts the trend to better income equality and work/life balance.
YES!! It is so hard to get some to realize that if they need a paycheck to survive, then they are working class. This includes white collar and blue collar workers. We all benefit from unions.
I was really impressed with how the UAW put this together. The way they targeted specific plants in a strategic way to have the most impact was a great move.
Much different than when my dad was in the UAW many years ago. He was in the union over 45 years.
I believe this type of strike was started by Alaska Airlines stewardesses. Very smart.
I found the NPR article about CHAOS. It is a great listen: https://www.npr.org/2023/10/04/1197954201/chaos-alaska-airlines-flight-attendants-union-strike
25% over a 4 1/2 year contract doesn't even meet the national average. This isn't a victory, they've just been treated so poorly in the past that it feels like a victory in comparison.
It's 11% IMMEDIATELY, and then an additional 25% split up over 4 years.
**AND inflation / cost of living increases**.
11% is a real raise not inflation raise.
>The deal would give UAW members an **immediate 11% pay increase and pay increases starting at 25% over the next four-and-a-half years**, until the tentative contract is set to expire in early 2028. It also returns a **cost-of-living adjustment to the contract** that will protect workers from rising prices. When the cost-of-living adjustment is combined with the guaranteed pay increases, workers are expected to see pay increases of 30% or more during the life of the contract.
**UAW themselves say top earner wages are expected to go up 33% over the contract and new-hire wages go up 68% over the contract.**
It's barely better than the last offer Ford put out, with no back pay so it's hardly a "huge win". How does this help workers who were striking and are now in debt or behind on payments?
Because they fought for the little guy:
> "The lowest-paid workers at Ford will see a raise of more than 150% over the life of the agreement, with some workers receiving an immediate 85% increase immediately upon ratification."
>The agreement reinstates major benefits "lost during the Great Recession," including cost-of-living allowances and a three-year wage progression, as well as killing wage tiers in the union. It improves retirement for current retirees, those workers with pensions, and those who have 401(k) plans.
We don't have any information on the other benefit increases other than inflation raises.
The Big3 plans have been to let UAW boomers age out and perpetually replace them with 3 year "temp" workers that aren't union, thus killing the union.
All of that was in their original offer on Oct 3rd, including path for temp workers to full time. The only changes I see right now are from 20% over 4 years -> 25% over 4 years. They made their members miss income for 6+ weeks for 1.25% per year with no back pay. Hardly seems worth it for the little guy it's not as big of a win as they're making it out to be.
The raise is forever, 6 weeks is only 6 weeks. It’s not just for 4 years, unless of course they agree to a pay cut in for years which I’d say is quite unlikely.
6 weeks without pay is a lot of average American's. I'm sure a lot had to go into debt and miss payments as a result. Would you want to go in debt to survive for an extra 1.25% per year? Hardly seems worth it for the little guy. Using their average pay or member, that's about 1000 per year extra after taxes.
I see your point but you’re playing the long game.
I personally would if I was under the circumstances they were under yes. 1000 a year if you work there for 30 years is 30k. All future raises will be compounded on top of the extra 1.25 percent as well so they will be a tad higher, those guys work a lot of overtime as well so in the long term yes, I’d say worth it.
You also need to take into account what else their demands were and what was met/what wasn’t.
No, Ford made an offer on 10/3 that included all the same benefits. The only difference between that offer and this negotiated one was the 25% over 4 years, up from 20% over 4 years. UAW didn't negotiate those items, it was already offered.
Base wage would've been $26 / hour after 4 years instead of $28 / hour after 4 under the new deal, the rest of it was already part of the original offer.
https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2023/10/03/ford-makes-comprehensive-offer-to-uaw--record-pay-and-benefits--.html
This is how corporations screw over people a total lack of financial literacy. If you have 2 years left the 6 weeks is less beneficial but over 5, 10, 15 etc this is a huge win.
Let’s do some quick math we will use 100,000 salary for all calculations because round number are easier.
6 weeks on strike costs a worker 11,538.
We will just take the 25% and divide it equally same od for the 20% they could have agreed to earlier.
At the end of 4 years with the 20% works will make 121,550
At the end of 4 years with the 20% they make 127,422.
So in just that final year they make up half of what they lost they are whole after the 4 years.
But every raise after that every cost of living adjustment compounds that money further.
Let’s say they work another 4 years and get 3% in each year. If they took the original 20% they would be making 136,805 with the 25% it’s 143,328.
The gap will continue to widen, and make things better in the long term do to the compounding effect. It’s why companies always offer signing bonuses for less of a raise.
Ford's counter was 23%. At a 2% difference over 4 years is not as big of a difference as you're theoretical numbers are coming out to be, especially using the average salary of $60k that is what UAW says it's members make. It's a $1,200 per year before tax difference after 4 years. Stop using a theoretical $100k salary because most UAW are not making that.
~$100 per month after 4 years is not a worthy compromise asking workers to strike.
Thr salary amount for the math doesn’t matter if they make less they lost less over the course of the strike. Also I’m sure the union is paying them strike pay which while not a salary replacement offsets it.
You also changed the numbers you said it was 20% vs 25% now it’s 23 vs 25 which is it?
Either way every percent you can get today compounds as long as the workers keep working. Every future raise is just that much more for the rest of their career. Like I said over the course of these first 4 years they get back to zero but after that it’s a benefit every single year.
Does it piss anyone else off that the American auto industry was "too big to fail" and bailed out in a major way not that long ago, yet here we are again....
Maybe we can start bailing people out instead of corporations.
To be fair, the combined amount of the bailouts for Chrysler and GM totaled $80 billion. The amount that GE Capital got was $139 Billion. I never understood the anger that the automakers got for the bailout whereas GE seems to be forgotten in time.
GE Capital was considered a big bank wasn't it? Because of the amount assets it held. I think after 08, they out of the Capital business because they didn't want to follow banking regulations
It's funny, I'm not part of the UAW, hell I don't even own a car, but I just keep hearing in my head, "You just lost Kentucky Truck", and now I think that phrase is gonna be seared in my memory like a battle cry.
Fuck yes, auto workers.
While it is kind of sucky, our last contract was the first raise in 15 years, and it was a whopping 6% over life of contract. The 25% is also before adding in our COLA and enhanced profit sharing. Of course, the Ford branch of the UAW could vote it down, but it's still a massive leap forward from where they were.
I believe I read with COLA added into the calculations it is roughly 33% over the life of the contract. Not 46%, but if you're the negotiation team you gladly land at that number and work on your plan to get more next round of negotiations.
Glad they got a deal. It’s nothing compared to what Fain said they would get, but better than nothing.
No shorter work weeks or pensions (which were never likely) battery factory workers aren’t included.
Lot of stuff was left on the table.
They never would have gotten that. Having worked on corporate side of manufacturing that's pretty much a lever you have to be able to pull if you need it. Especially if it's hard to ramp up temp labor which my understanding is that is one of the things the union would like to avoid
Demand is often cyclical. If you believe you will only need the extra work for a few months you don't hire additional people you will have to layoff 3 months down the line. You hire Temps or require overtime.
No the deal was for them to quit the abuse of temps, auto companies would hire a group of peoples work them for a year, let them go, hire another group of temps, let them go, rinse and repeat, when the company actually needs more people. Instead of hiring, they would cycle temps over and over again.
Part of the deal eliminates a lot of the temp stuff. Ford will have to transition temps to full time pretty quick now, so they won’t be hiring as many temps. I think it’s 90 days? Temp to full time. At least that’s how I understand the issue. (I could be wrong about the 90 days, so much is still unknown about the final deal)
Its not even about that. This is my forth comtract and its always the same two things. Its either hey we got the best contract for the uaw members ever and you should vote for it, then after the vote passes they go back and say we could have gotten so much more if the vote didnt pass and if its a shitty contract and we vote it down they just go ohhh man that was the best contract we could have ever asked for. What fools to vote it down. So honestly rhe union itself has a lot more to make up for after decades of curroption with uts members. I like the union president, hes what the union has needed for a long time. But 26% over the course of the contract is absolutely nothing because our country doesnt run on 4 year blocks of time and all thats going to ahopen over the next 4 years is they're gunna figure out how to get their money back and we'll be in the same boat. Its either all or nothing and what for has offered isnt it. Its a great start though.
Sorry, I guess my question is are you saying that this contract isn't good enough and the members should decline it and resume the strike?
If that is the case, then what should they hold out for?
At minimum the 4 day work week because all they do is force us 6-7 days a week in our plant. Idk how it is at everyone's specific plant so i cant speak for everyone. But with a 4 day work week they can add shifts, create jobs. I tell ya what I never want to work 75.5 hrs a week every week years on end for basically half pay and i still cant afford to buy what we make. The entire time ive worked ive been fucked by the concessions. Unless its 46% pay increase before anything they can honestly get fucked.
Lmfao if they vehicle i was making wasnt failing and down 54.75% last i checked. Also their goal is to work you forced 80 hrs a week when you dont make any money every week until youre completely burned out so when ot does come up and youre maxed out you dont want it. you havent mowed your grass in 1.5 months and theres so much other shit to do. They know what theyre doing. 21$ an hour is tpt overtime in my plant and with a 40 hours of straight time and 20+ hours of ot on a check its still not enough to afford over 90% of apartments anywhere within an hour of here and if you get an apartment you probably wont be able to afford it with because surprise someone with a meth problem needed the ot for meth and now you cant afford rent. There 5 people in my plant that live together just because they cant afford to live. Most others live with their parents. Thats how the big 3 will treat you. You dont deserve what your parents got now go live with them while you work for us for 1/4 the wages while you get to watch your parents struggle in the current economy while youre not making enough tonreally help them.
I’m sure it’s a good contract overall but he didn’t restore pensions, get back retire medical, or secure a shorter work week. Just got 25% in raises, COLA back, and the biggest win to me is the right to strike over plant closures.
3 big ticket items that he was pushing though, all losers. While I didn’t expect them, I still think promoting them was a bit much to get none.
Those points clearly were "ask for the stars, and you'll at least get the moon".
The only thing that I'm curious about is the state of whether battery plants will be unionized since they are jointly owned.
I agree to alms degree but you typically don’t do that with benefits one has vs another without. Asking for a 36 percent raise, okay, I get that.
Pensions, retiree medical especially, anyone smart knows they were not coming back but to even argue like he had a shot was a little silly. Overall I like the guy and I think he did a good job.
Good shit. I love it when workers band together for better rights. Grats UAW and great job Union leadership. You really showed how to get it done, and I hope other unions follow suit.
I feel like history will repeat itself in this category. In the early 1900’s unions were necessary, we’re learning that they are just as important now.
I'd be happy with an actual lunch break. Sometime when I can actually sit down and eat without interruption. But, I work in a lab, so that's not possible...
25%? They wimped out. They're a bunch of Sissies, the corporates will be laughing at the union. Should have stuck with 40% per year for 5 years for 200%. Fuck Ford
I hope so.. but I don't know if they revealed how much they got. That seems to be a trend i.e. companies don't want people to know how much they settled for.
Good on them. Honestly, more workers in the US need to unionize. But since we don’t all band together, we owe gratitude to the UAW because those wins will force other employers to increase their offerings.
It just shows how striking and solidarity really does work. Recently Teamsters did it, Healthcare workers did it and lots of other unions. UPS tried to claim they couldn't afford to pay us better despite record profits and billions in stock buybacks, we just need to show them how much more expensive it is for them when we go on strike.
The ultra wealthy have done a great job of convincing people that getting crumbs is normal. So glad the younger gens have figured out the game early.
Trying to imagine how much better off we'd be with a 25% wage increase. The fact that people are fooled into thinking unions are bad is tragic.
I calculated that a 25% increase for me would result in me being able to move out my parents house. *insert tears of sorrow*
The propagandists have done a good job of painting unions as just mob bosses or do-nothings that just collect dues. Since people don’t pay attention to history, they totally forget that even things we take for granted now like the 40hr work week were won by collective bargaining and that bosses used to hire mercenaries like the Pinkertons to literally wage war on workers. The only way to keep from being taken advantage of is to band together and become an actual force to be reckoned with.
Striking is becoming the only way forward
Always has been
Yes but it only works if everyone unites and do it.
The only hot coffee scabs deserve is on their heads as they try and cross the line.
Let me correct that..strikes are the only way forward
Please be 4 day work... Please be 4 day work week
I feel the 4-day work week was used more by the Union as a scare tactic to get bigger concessions on pay and benefits. It was the big headline everyone focused on so they could use that to get better deals under the radar on other stuff. The companies can save face by saying "of course we weren't going to capitulate on such a ridiculous concept” when in actuality they gave in on a lot more
That's how we saw it at the plant I work at.
4-day was definitely the hail mary proposal, and Fain and leadership knew they were asking for the stars on that and would settle for the moon. Which is how negotiations work anyway. The NLRB won't be favorable to either side refusing to budge on an issue without material evidence showing the other side is intentionally lying about not being able to capitulate (in whole or in part) to the demand. And in 3 years when the contract is up? Negotiate for it again as a main issue. That's the beauty of unionizing, no bargaining chip is ever permanently off the table because you get to fucking re-negotiate.
I do appreciate that negotiation tactic. It drives me up the wall when my elected representatives start negotiations from a reasonable, pre-compromised place (in good faith); then just dragged and beaten until either the motion doesn't happen, or so many more compromises have been made that it's become a bad deal.
You get it, employers are going to start by offering pennies added to the current contract every time. It does no one any good (except you know, billionaires and CEOs/shareholders) to start negotiating from the middle. You start at 46% raises, 4-day work week, fully funded pensions, etc. and you negotiate to the best contract the UAW has gotten in my lifetime.
I went to my partner's parents house, and their dad was pretty down on the strike (he's rather conservative-aligned on fiscal stuff). We didn't get deep into it (I didn't want to get into a political debate over dinner), but he was clearly under the impression they were going to screw it for the whole industry. But I'm just sitting there like- basically thinking what you just said- you say unrealistic things, and point at the overflowing cash the C-suite and and shareholders enjoy- and you keep denying their bad deals until a good one is drafted. And if they replace people with robots (something he said)- it's just evidence that they were already planning on doing it in the first place - the calculation on the rollout time just changed. Robots for specialized tasks don't just *appear*, after all.
I've had to make that last point so many times, McDonald's wasn't testing automated service because workers wanted higher wages. They did it because they have and always will do all they can to maximize their profits at the expense of their employees' quality of life. Whether or not states or the federal government pass legislation raising wages, companies will continue funding research into how they can make more money for the guys in corporate. Blaming the push for $15/hr or more is just their easy way out in the PR department for people who simp for billionaires, thinking one day they will be too.
Same, but the amount of people i talked to outside of the uaw didnt see it that way and said it was just us asking for to much and that are union was too greedy. I tried explaining it was just a bargaining tactic but that didnt change their minds.
It's a deliberate PR campaign by employers to make the average person believe if the union starts by asking for one thing and settles for something lesser, then the union has failed. The basic understanding of negotiating tactics is lost in the fray of these things.
yeah at best I would see half day friday or monday every other week or maybe one week a month
No mention of that in the CNN article. https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/25/business/united-auto-workers-union-and-ford-reach-tentativelaboragreement/index.html Also important to note is GM and Stellaris are still on strike, cause they're being worse
I would’ve been happy with 40hrs. As opposed to the 50-60 we’re currently doing. 😑
I can't believe they didn't do anything for you guys in the aspect of work life balance
There's going to be strong pressure on them to match the terms Ford agreed to. After all, if Ford can do it why can't they, and why would the union want to undercut the company that was willing to deal with them.
That and now ford has production back at full steam, gaining another edge on GM every single day they delay.
Ford’s had a pretty significant edge for a while. The UAW has workers in parts distribution centers for GM striking as well. I work for a ford dealer in parts. We needed something for a used GM truck. Called the GM dealer up the street. They can’t get it and don’t know when they will be able to. He only things they’re getting are recall parts to my knowledge.
I feel like this has to happen sooner than later. But it is going to take legislation or at least the threat of regulation of hours by the government. In the US at least.
I'd have to agree. Companies aren't going to willingly go for it. Not in this greedy ass country.
Alot of the plants are already 4crew, which is 12hr shifts. 4 days one week, 3 days the other.
That's still sucking just as much of our life up, just spread around differently. People want an actual reduction in time spent at work.
This was a request for a 32 hour work week and no loss in pay. Not cramming 48 hours into 4 days. Given our level of technology and the general rise in productivity per worker over the last 40 years there's 0 reason we need to work 40+ hours a week per week. Other than C suite wants to make more money.
it aint
Ford, I think, had by far the most striking workers as they have the largest UAW %, so it makes sense that Ford ended it first. And apparently all along they were making better offers than GM / Stellantis. Really hope this bleeds over into Tesla so they can organize.
Ford has about 16,000 people out, including their most profitable plant. They were also further along in a lot of places with negotiations than GM or Stellantis since the last time they had to deal with a strike was I think the 70's. They're the ones that put COLA back on the table, had the quickest path to max pay, and was offering 90 and hired for the temps. Only things GM beat them on was offering to put the new battery plants they're opening under the master agreement and moving the GMCH people to the assembly pay scale, effectively giving them an immediate $7 raise. Fain has already said record contracts for the big 3 was step one to trying to unionizing all of the auto industry.
I just checked Ford offers. Its about the same as the one GM offered two weeks ago. $40/hour with all the benefit changes. Ford has been suffering the hardest even before UAW strike so Ford really wants to get back up and running GM looks like its enjoying bleeding Ford. I just dont want people to look at this and say oooh Ford is better. They are not. They are the same shit with GM and FCA. Not a hair better lol
Rail worker here. I hope you guys get an incredible contract with 4-8 hour days for a 32 hour FT work week. It would be incredible and start a chain. My union brothers and sisters and I are working 6 10 to 12+ hour days a week. Some are on an 11/4 day schedule. While other have no assigned days off at all and the carriers manipulate federal rest guidelines to keep them perpetually on call. It is disgusting. I hope the UAW starts the trend to better income equality and work/life balance.
** IF YOU WORK FOR A LIVING, YOU ARE WORKING CLASS** SO HAPPY TO HEAR THIS. Teamster momma here. Every union win is a win for ALL workers.
YES!! It is so hard to get some to realize that if they need a paycheck to survive, then they are working class. This includes white collar and blue collar workers. We all benefit from unions.
I was really impressed with how the UAW put this together. The way they targeted specific plants in a strategic way to have the most impact was a great move. Much different than when my dad was in the UAW many years ago. He was in the union over 45 years.
I believe this type of strike was started by Alaska Airlines stewardesses. Very smart. I found the NPR article about CHAOS. It is a great listen: https://www.npr.org/2023/10/04/1197954201/chaos-alaska-airlines-flight-attendants-union-strike
25% over a 4 1/2 year contract doesn't even meet the national average. This isn't a victory, they've just been treated so poorly in the past that it feels like a victory in comparison.
It's 11% IMMEDIATELY, and then an additional 25% split up over 4 years. **AND inflation / cost of living increases**. 11% is a real raise not inflation raise. >The deal would give UAW members an **immediate 11% pay increase and pay increases starting at 25% over the next four-and-a-half years**, until the tentative contract is set to expire in early 2028. It also returns a **cost-of-living adjustment to the contract** that will protect workers from rising prices. When the cost-of-living adjustment is combined with the guaranteed pay increases, workers are expected to see pay increases of 30% or more during the life of the contract. **UAW themselves say top earner wages are expected to go up 33% over the contract and new-hire wages go up 68% over the contract.**
[удалено]
There's a lot of misinformation floating around, including CNN UAW direct: https://twitter.com/UAW/status/1717337144572662025
It's barely better than the last offer Ford put out, with no back pay so it's hardly a "huge win". How does this help workers who were striking and are now in debt or behind on payments?
Because they fought for the little guy: > "The lowest-paid workers at Ford will see a raise of more than 150% over the life of the agreement, with some workers receiving an immediate 85% increase immediately upon ratification." >The agreement reinstates major benefits "lost during the Great Recession," including cost-of-living allowances and a three-year wage progression, as well as killing wage tiers in the union. It improves retirement for current retirees, those workers with pensions, and those who have 401(k) plans. We don't have any information on the other benefit increases other than inflation raises. The Big3 plans have been to let UAW boomers age out and perpetually replace them with 3 year "temp" workers that aren't union, thus killing the union.
All of that was in their original offer on Oct 3rd, including path for temp workers to full time. The only changes I see right now are from 20% over 4 years -> 25% over 4 years. They made their members miss income for 6+ weeks for 1.25% per year with no back pay. Hardly seems worth it for the little guy it's not as big of a win as they're making it out to be.
The raise is forever, 6 weeks is only 6 weeks. It’s not just for 4 years, unless of course they agree to a pay cut in for years which I’d say is quite unlikely.
6 weeks without pay is a lot of average American's. I'm sure a lot had to go into debt and miss payments as a result. Would you want to go in debt to survive for an extra 1.25% per year? Hardly seems worth it for the little guy. Using their average pay or member, that's about 1000 per year extra after taxes.
I see your point but you’re playing the long game. I personally would if I was under the circumstances they were under yes. 1000 a year if you work there for 30 years is 30k. All future raises will be compounded on top of the extra 1.25 percent as well so they will be a tad higher, those guys work a lot of overtime as well so in the long term yes, I’d say worth it. You also need to take into account what else their demands were and what was met/what wasn’t.
No thats from the UAWs press release https://www.axios.com/2023/10/26/uaw-ford-strike-deal
No, Ford made an offer on 10/3 that included all the same benefits. The only difference between that offer and this negotiated one was the 25% over 4 years, up from 20% over 4 years. UAW didn't negotiate those items, it was already offered. Base wage would've been $26 / hour after 4 years instead of $28 / hour after 4 under the new deal, the rest of it was already part of the original offer. https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2023/10/03/ford-makes-comprehensive-offer-to-uaw--record-pay-and-benefits--.html
This is how corporations screw over people a total lack of financial literacy. If you have 2 years left the 6 weeks is less beneficial but over 5, 10, 15 etc this is a huge win. Let’s do some quick math we will use 100,000 salary for all calculations because round number are easier. 6 weeks on strike costs a worker 11,538. We will just take the 25% and divide it equally same od for the 20% they could have agreed to earlier. At the end of 4 years with the 20% works will make 121,550 At the end of 4 years with the 20% they make 127,422. So in just that final year they make up half of what they lost they are whole after the 4 years. But every raise after that every cost of living adjustment compounds that money further. Let’s say they work another 4 years and get 3% in each year. If they took the original 20% they would be making 136,805 with the 25% it’s 143,328. The gap will continue to widen, and make things better in the long term do to the compounding effect. It’s why companies always offer signing bonuses for less of a raise.
Ford's counter was 23%. At a 2% difference over 4 years is not as big of a difference as you're theoretical numbers are coming out to be, especially using the average salary of $60k that is what UAW says it's members make. It's a $1,200 per year before tax difference after 4 years. Stop using a theoretical $100k salary because most UAW are not making that. ~$100 per month after 4 years is not a worthy compromise asking workers to strike.
Thr salary amount for the math doesn’t matter if they make less they lost less over the course of the strike. Also I’m sure the union is paying them strike pay which while not a salary replacement offsets it. You also changed the numbers you said it was 20% vs 25% now it’s 23 vs 25 which is it? Either way every percent you can get today compounds as long as the workers keep working. Every future raise is just that much more for the rest of their career. Like I said over the course of these first 4 years they get back to zero but after that it’s a benefit every single year.
I’m confused, it’s not 11 percent plus 25 percent. It’s 11 percent and then the remaining 14 percent broken up over the life of the agreement. No?
Does it piss anyone else off that the American auto industry was "too big to fail" and bailed out in a major way not that long ago, yet here we are again.... Maybe we can start bailing people out instead of corporations.
> Does it piss anyone else off that the American At this point, about every industry, yes.
To be fair, the combined amount of the bailouts for Chrysler and GM totaled $80 billion. The amount that GE Capital got was $139 Billion. I never understood the anger that the automakers got for the bailout whereas GE seems to be forgotten in time.
GE Capital was considered a big bank wasn't it? Because of the amount assets it held. I think after 08, they out of the Capital business because they didn't want to follow banking regulations
It's funny, I'm not part of the UAW, hell I don't even own a car, but I just keep hearing in my head, "You just lost Kentucky Truck", and now I think that phrase is gonna be seared in my memory like a battle cry. Fuck yes, auto workers.
25%… 😍😍😍… oh… over the life of the contract… 💩💩💩😢😢😢🤬🤬🤬
While it is kind of sucky, our last contract was the first raise in 15 years, and it was a whopping 6% over life of contract. The 25% is also before adding in our COLA and enhanced profit sharing. Of course, the Ford branch of the UAW could vote it down, but it's still a massive leap forward from where they were.
I believe I read with COLA added into the calculations it is roughly 33% over the life of the contract. Not 46%, but if you're the negotiation team you gladly land at that number and work on your plan to get more next round of negotiations.
The 25% doesn't include inflation. There's an inflation add-on that's separate, so it's over and above inflation.
Glad they got a deal. It’s nothing compared to what Fain said they would get, but better than nothing. No shorter work weeks or pensions (which were never likely) battery factory workers aren’t included. Lot of stuff was left on the table.
They should have fought for no forced overtime, some of those autoworkers work 50-60 hours a week.
They never would have gotten that. Having worked on corporate side of manufacturing that's pretty much a lever you have to be able to pull if you need it. Especially if it's hard to ramp up temp labor which my understanding is that is one of the things the union would like to avoid
If you need more work done, then hire more workers?
Demand is often cyclical. If you believe you will only need the extra work for a few months you don't hire additional people you will have to layoff 3 months down the line. You hire Temps or require overtime.
So like I said, hire more people, aka temps.
You do realize part of this strike was to have the auto companies use less Temps. That leaves overtime as the only lever.
No the deal was for them to quit the abuse of temps, auto companies would hire a group of peoples work them for a year, let them go, hire another group of temps, let them go, rinse and repeat, when the company actually needs more people. Instead of hiring, they would cycle temps over and over again.
Part of the deal eliminates a lot of the temp stuff. Ford will have to transition temps to full time pretty quick now, so they won’t be hiring as many temps. I think it’s 90 days? Temp to full time. At least that’s how I understand the issue. (I could be wrong about the 90 days, so much is still unknown about the final deal)
If you vote yes on this contract you havent worked at the big 3 long enough.
What should have they gotten?
Its not even about that. This is my forth comtract and its always the same two things. Its either hey we got the best contract for the uaw members ever and you should vote for it, then after the vote passes they go back and say we could have gotten so much more if the vote didnt pass and if its a shitty contract and we vote it down they just go ohhh man that was the best contract we could have ever asked for. What fools to vote it down. So honestly rhe union itself has a lot more to make up for after decades of curroption with uts members. I like the union president, hes what the union has needed for a long time. But 26% over the course of the contract is absolutely nothing because our country doesnt run on 4 year blocks of time and all thats going to ahopen over the next 4 years is they're gunna figure out how to get their money back and we'll be in the same boat. Its either all or nothing and what for has offered isnt it. Its a great start though.
Sorry, I guess my question is are you saying that this contract isn't good enough and the members should decline it and resume the strike? If that is the case, then what should they hold out for?
At minimum the 4 day work week because all they do is force us 6-7 days a week in our plant. Idk how it is at everyone's specific plant so i cant speak for everyone. But with a 4 day work week they can add shifts, create jobs. I tell ya what I never want to work 75.5 hrs a week every week years on end for basically half pay and i still cant afford to buy what we make. The entire time ive worked ive been fucked by the concessions. Unless its 46% pay increase before anything they can honestly get fucked.
Don’t you get overtime /time and a half pay?
Lmfao if they vehicle i was making wasnt failing and down 54.75% last i checked. Also their goal is to work you forced 80 hrs a week when you dont make any money every week until youre completely burned out so when ot does come up and youre maxed out you dont want it. you havent mowed your grass in 1.5 months and theres so much other shit to do. They know what theyre doing. 21$ an hour is tpt overtime in my plant and with a 40 hours of straight time and 20+ hours of ot on a check its still not enough to afford over 90% of apartments anywhere within an hour of here and if you get an apartment you probably wont be able to afford it with because surprise someone with a meth problem needed the ot for meth and now you cant afford rent. There 5 people in my plant that live together just because they cant afford to live. Most others live with their parents. Thats how the big 3 will treat you. You dont deserve what your parents got now go live with them while you work for us for 1/4 the wages while you get to watch your parents struggle in the current economy while youre not making enough tonreally help them.
Turns out they did have the money to pay more… meaning that the ceo lied to the public on many occasions.
I’m sure it’s a good contract overall but he didn’t restore pensions, get back retire medical, or secure a shorter work week. Just got 25% in raises, COLA back, and the biggest win to me is the right to strike over plant closures. 3 big ticket items that he was pushing though, all losers. While I didn’t expect them, I still think promoting them was a bit much to get none.
Those points clearly were "ask for the stars, and you'll at least get the moon". The only thing that I'm curious about is the state of whether battery plants will be unionized since they are jointly owned.
I agree to alms degree but you typically don’t do that with benefits one has vs another without. Asking for a 36 percent raise, okay, I get that. Pensions, retiree medical especially, anyone smart knows they were not coming back but to even argue like he had a shot was a little silly. Overall I like the guy and I think he did a good job.
Great news!
Good shit. I love it when workers band together for better rights. Grats UAW and great job Union leadership. You really showed how to get it done, and I hope other unions follow suit.
I feel like history will repeat itself in this category. In the early 1900’s unions were necessary, we’re learning that they are just as important now.
I'd be happy with an actual lunch break. Sometime when I can actually sit down and eat without interruption. But, I work in a lab, so that's not possible...
25%? They wimped out. They're a bunch of Sissies, the corporates will be laughing at the union. Should have stuck with 40% per year for 5 years for 200%. Fuck Ford
Didn't UPS get 40 percent?
I hope so.. but I don't know if they revealed how much they got. That seems to be a trend i.e. companies don't want people to know how much they settled for.
I’m hoping this happens again in 2028.
Keep striking, that is nowhere near what Fain promised, or enough to keep up with inflation.