More stories

  • in

    VW Workers in Tennessee Vote for Union

    The Volkswagen plant in Chattanooga is set to become the first unionized auto factory in the South not owned by one of Detroit’s Big Three.In a landmark victory for organized labor, workers at a Volkswagen plant in Tennessee have voted overwhelmingly to join the United Automobile Workers union, becoming the first nonunion auto plant in a Southern state to do so.The company said in a statement late Friday that the union had won 2,628 votes, with 985 opposed, in a three-day election. Two earlier bids by the U.A.W. to organize the Chattanooga factory over the last 10 years were narrowly defeated.The outcome is a breakthrough for the labor movement in a region where anti-union sentiment has been strong for decades. And it comes six months after the U.A.W. won record wage gains and improved benefits in negotiations with the Detroit automakers.The U.A.W. has for more than 80 years represented workers employed by General Motors, Ford Motor and Stellantis, the producer of Chrysler, Jeep, Ram and Dodge vehicles, and has organized some heavy-truck and bus factories in the South.But the union had failed in previous attempts to organize any of the two dozen automobile factories owned by other companies across an area stretching from South Carolina to Texas and as far north as Ohio and Indiana.With the victory in Chattanooga, the U.A.W. will turn its focus to other Southern plants. A vote will take place in mid-May at a Mercedes-Benz plant in Vance, Ala., near Tuscaloosa. The U.A.W. is hoping to organize a half-dozen or more plants over the next two years.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

  • in

    U.S. Steel Acquisition Proposal Tests Biden’s Industrial Policy

    The president is under pressure from Democrats and Republicans to block the sale to Japan’s Nippon Steel, which could upset a key foreign ally.U.S. Steel is an iconic example of the lost manufacturing muscle that President Biden says his economic policies will bring back to the United States.But last month, the storied-but-diminished company announced plans to be acquired by a Japanese competitor. That development has put Mr. Biden in an awkward bind as he tries to balance attempts to revitalize the nation’s industrial sector with his efforts to rebuild international alliances.Mr. Biden’s administration has expressed some discomfort with the deal and is reviewing the proposed $14.1 billion takeover bid by Japan’s Nippon Steel. The company is offering a hefty premium for U.S. Steel, which has struggled to compete against a flood of cheap foreign metal and has been weighing takeover offers for several months.The proposal has quickly become a high-profile example of the difficult political choices Mr. Biden faces in his zeal to revive American industry, one that could test the degree to which he is willing to flex presidential power in pursuit of what is arguably his primary economic goal: the creation and retention of high-paying union manufacturing jobs in the United States.Mr. Biden is under pressure from the United Steelworkers union and populist senators from both parties, including Democrats defending crucial swing seats in Ohio and Pennsylvania this fall, to nix the sale on national security grounds. The senators contend that domestically owned steel production is critical to U.S. manufacturing and supply chains. They have warned that a foreign owner could be more likely to move U.S. Steel jobs and production overseas.“This really should be a no-brainer,” Senator Josh Hawley, Republican of Missouri, said in an interview last week. “I don’t know why it would be difficult to say, my gosh, we’ve got to maintain steel production in this country, and particularly a company like this one, where you have thousands of workers in good union jobs.”U.S. Steel executives say the deal would benefit workers and give the merged companies “world-leading capabilities” in steel production. They announced last month that Nippon Steel had agreed to keep the company’s headquarters in Pittsburgh and to honor the four-year collective bargaining agreement that the steelworkers’ union ratified in December 2022.Other supporters of the takeover bid say blocking the sale risks angering a key American ally. Mr. Biden has courted Japanese collaboration on a wide range of issues, including efforts to counter Chinese manufacturing in clean energy and other emerging technologies, and welcomed Japanese investment in new American manufacturing facilities including for advanced batteries.Wilbur Ross, a former steel company executive who served as commerce secretary under President Donald J. Trump, wrote last week in The Wall Street Journal that there is “nothing in the deal from which the U.S. needs defending. Attacks by Washington pols only create unnecessary geopolitical tensions, and those, not the acquisition itself, could endanger American national security.”Adding to the cross-pressures on Mr. Biden: It is unclear what would happen to the 123-year-old U.S. Steel if the administration scuttles the deal and whether doing so would actually guarantee greater job security for the company’s nearly 15,000 North American employees.U.S. Steel executives say the deal with Nippon Steel would benefit workers, but skeptics of the deal are urging President Biden to review it to prevent lost steel production and jobs.Lawrence Bryant/ReutersU.S. Steel has faced challenges for decades because of intensifying foreign competition, particularly from China, which has flooded the global market with cheap, state-subsidized steel. American presidents have spent years trying to bolster and protect domestic steel makers through a mix of subsidies, import restrictions and so-called Buy America requirements for government purchases.“No U.S. industry has benefited more from protection than the steel industry,” Scott Lincicome, a trade policy expert at the libertarian Cato Institute think tank, wrote in a 2017 research paper.In recent years, presidents have increased those protections further. Mr. Trump imposed tariffs on imported steel, including from Japan. Mr. Biden has partially rolled back those levies in an attempt to rebuild alliances. Mr. Biden also included strict Buy America provisions in sweeping new laws to invest in infrastructure, clean energy and other advanced manufacturing.Those efforts have not come close to bringing back the levels of domestic steel production that the United States enjoyed in the 1970s — or even of recent decades. Raw steel production reached higher levels under Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama than it has under Mr. Biden or Mr. Trump.Employment in the industry fell steadily in the 1990s and mid-2000s. In 2022, there were just over 83,000 workers in iron and steel mills in the United States, which was less than half the number from 1992.Senators including Sherrod Brown of Ohio and Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, both Democrats, and Mr. Hawley and J.D. Vance of Ohio, both Republicans, urged Mr. Biden to review the proposed U.S. Steel sale to guard against lost steel production and jobs. Mr. Brown cited Nippon Steel’s failure to notify or consult with union leaders ahead of making its bid for the company.“Tens of thousands of Americans, including many Ohioans, rely on this industry for good-paying, middle-class jobs,” he wrote in a letter to Mr. Biden last month. “These workers deserve to work for a company that invests in its employees and not only honors their right to join a union, but respects and collaborates with its work force.”The calls for an administrative review of the deal largely focused on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, which is known as CFIUS and headed by Janet L. Yellen, the Treasury secretary. The committee scrutinizes possible sales of American firms to foreign ones for possible national security threats, then issues recommendations to the president, who can suspend or block a deal.Shortly before Christmas, Mr. Biden appeared to grant the request for review, while stopping short of saying he would block it.Lael Brainard, who chairs the White House National Economic Council, said in a news release that Mr. Biden welcomed foreign investment in American manufacturing but “believes the purchase of this iconic American-owned company by a foreign entity — even one from a close ally — appears to deserve serious scrutiny in terms of its potential impact on national security and supply chain reliability.”The administration, Ms. Brainard said, “will be ready to look carefully at the findings of any such investigation and to act if appropriate.”Steelworkers cheered the move. David McCall, president of United Steelworkers International, said in a statement that Mr. Biden was “demonstrating once again the president’s unwavering commitment to domestic workers and industries.”Independent experts say it would be well within historical norms for the committee to evaluate the sale. That will likely include a detailed economic analysis of whether the deal could lead to diminished steel production capacity in the United States, said Emily Kilcrease, a CFIUS expert and senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security.But Ms. Kilcrease said that based on the committee’s past decisions, she expected the review to stop well short of a recommendation to kill the sale. Instead, she said, CFIUS might require an agreement from Nippon Steel to maintain certain levels of U.S. employment or production as a condition of the sale’s going through.“I would be shocked if this deal got blocked,” she said.Mr. Hawley said the choice was ultimately Mr. Biden’s — and a test of his commitment to the industry.“If the administration wants to block the sale, they absolutely have grounds to do it and the legal authority,” he said. “So it’s just a question of, do they want to? And will they have the guts to do it?” More

  • in

    Unions in Sweden Expand Blockade Against Tesla

    The LatestElectricians and dockworkers across Sweden on Friday joined a widening effort by unions in the country to pressure Tesla to sign a collective bargaining agreement with its mechanics.The labor action expanded three weeks after the autoworkers’ union, IF Metall, called a strike against Tesla in an effort to secure a collective arrangement over pay and working conditions for its roughly 120 members who work as mechanics for the electric vehicle maker. In the latest move, dockworkers at dozens of ports refused to unload cars from ships and electricians stopped repair work at the company’s charging stations, highlighting the power of organized labor in a country where collective agreements cover nine in 10 of all employees.Port workers blocking a ship from loading Tesla vehicles onto a ship moored at the port of Malmo in Sweden, in early November.Johan Nilsson/TT News Agency, via Associated PressTesla in Sweden: No production but many sales.Tesla does not produce any vehicles in Sweden, but runs several facilities where the cars are serviced. So far this year, the Tesla Model Y is the best-selling new car in Sweden, with more than 14,000 registrations through October, according to Mobility Sweden, an industry group.At the outset of the mechanics’ strike, a Tesla representative told Swedish media that the company followed labor laws in the country, and that it chose not to sign a collective agreement. The company said it would do what it could to keep its business operating.Quotable: ‘It is both important and obvious that we help.’The Swedish Transport Workers’ Union, whose members work at Sweden’s docks, said in a statement that “it is both important and obvious that we help, to stand up for the collective agreement and the Swedish labor market model.”How It Started: Mechanics at Tesla went on strike on Oct. 27.In late October, IF Metall, which represents 300,000 workers in Sweden, including some of Tesla’s mechanics, said talks with company representatives had ended without resolution. The union began the strike action at Tesla’s 12 service centers on Oct. 27.Dockworkers initially refused to unload any Teslas at four major Swedish ports starting on Nov. 7, which on Friday expanded to 55 ports.Unions representing cleaners have also refused to service Tesla facilities, and the postal workers’ union stopped any deliveries from reaching the company’s sites.Both IF Metall and the Transport Workers’ Union have acknowledged that Tesla has found ways around the strikes. Tesla appeared to be bringing in other mechanics to staff its facilities and bringing new vehicles into Sweden by truck, they said.The strike efforts have also been hampered by some union members who work for Tesla and refused to join, Swedish media have reported.What Other Unions Say: Germans have voiced support.In Germany, where Tesla produces the Model Y at a gigafactory outside Berlin, union leaders have been seeking to organize the roughly 11,500 employees who work there. Tesla’s leadership has not engaged with the German autoworkers’ union, IG Metall. Last month, several hundred workers wore union stickers calling for “safe and fair work.”Dirk Schulze, the regional head of IG Metall in Brandenburg, where Tesla has its factory, has expressed his solidarity with the striking workers in Sweden. The strike in Sweden has given workers in Germany “the courage and confidence to organize themselves into a union and take their fate into their own hands,” Mr. Schulze said in a statement.The union has not announced any further measures.What Happens Next: More strikes are planned in Sweden.This week, IF Metall said 50 of its members at Hydro Extrusions, a company that produces an aluminum component for Tesla, would walk off their jobs next Friday. More

  • in

    Job Action Against Tesla Puts Sweden’s Unions in Spotlight

    The automaker’s mechanics in Sweden are striking for a collective agreement, and dockworkers say they will support the battle. Tesla is expected to join the talks on Monday.More than a week after Tesla mechanics in Sweden began a strike to compel the U.S. automaker to accept a collective labor agreement, union officials said Tesla representatives would meet with the union on Monday.Tesla did not respond to a request for comment.Tesla doesn’t make cars in Sweden, and the country is a relatively small market for the automaker. But the job action by dozens of mechanics is beginning to reverberate. Dockworkers at the country’s four largest ports said they would stop unloading shiploads of Teslas on Tuesday in support of the strikers.The trade union IF Metall has for years called on the automaker to enter into talks about adopting a collective agreement that would set the basis for wages and benefits for the roughly 120 mechanics who are employed by Tesla to work at its service facilities in Sweden. About 90 percent of all workers in Sweden are covered by such agreements.Since the union called the strike on Oct. 27, dozens of the mechanics who are union members have been staying home, disrupting service appointments for some Tesla drivers. Not all of the union members have taken part, said Jesper Pettersson, a spokesman for IF Metall, acknowledging reports that some service facilities appeared largely unaffected.“It is not an easy thing to be on strike,” he added.But the action, combined with the threat of other unions getting involved, appeared to be enough to force Tesla to the bargaining table. A meeting between the union and company representatives was scheduled for Monday, Mr. Petterson said.Despite its relatively small size, Sweden has the world’s third-highest share of electric vehicle sales, at 32 percent, after Norway and Iceland, according to the World Resources Institute, a research organization. Tesla enjoys a growing fan base and its Model Y, a sport-utility vehicle manufactured in Germany, has been the top-selling electric vehicle in Sweden this year.Tesla’s owner, Elon Musk, has for years resisted efforts to unionize Tesla workers, and in 2018 threatened the compensation of U.S. employees seeking to join a union, (a statement later found to violate labor laws). German Bender, a labor market analyst at Arena, a think tank in Stockholm, said Tesla may “see this small conflict in Sweden as posing a risk of contagion to other markets.” In Germany, IG Metall, a union affiliated with Sweden’s IF Metall, has been seeking to organize Tesla’s factory in Grünheide, outside of Berlin. And in the United States, on the heels of the significant gains in wage and benefits won by the United Automobile Workers after a six-week wave of walkouts at the three big Detroit automakers, union’s leaders have set their sights on Tesla’s U.S. workers as part of a wider push to organize nonunion factories across the United States.The power of organized labor in Sweden is considerable. About 70 percent of the country’s work force belongs to a union, and Swedish law allows for solidarity strikes in support of other unions’ efforts.That is what happened in 1995, when another well-known U.S. company started doing business in Sweden. Toys “R” Us was unwilling to accept a collective labor agreement, and its retail workers in Sweden went on strike. Although the company employed only 80 people in the country, other unions rallied to their cause, including postal, transport and municipal workers who disrupted mail delivery and trash removal. After three months, the company signed an agreement.In support of IF Metall, the Swedish Transport Workers’ Union said that, starting at noon on Tuesday, dockworkers would not unload any more Tesla cars.“When IF Metall asks for Transport’s support, it is both important and obvious that we help, to stand up for the collective agreement and the Swedish labor market model,” the transport workers’ union said.IF Metall has not requested support from any other unions, pending the outcome of Monday’s talks, Mr. Pettersson said.Sweden relies on collective agreements hammered out between employers and unions within each industrial sector, to set basic terms for employment. Under the agreement that IF Metall is seeking, Tesla workers would gain a broader insurance package, guaranteed training to transition to a different job if theirs is cut and annual wage increases, the union said. Even workers who do not belong to a union are covered by collective agreements.Foreign-based firms are not the only ones reluctant to support the country’s century-old model of collective bargaining agreements. Some homegrown enterprises, like Klarna, the buy-now-pay-later giant, and the streaming provider Spotify have pushed back against them, citing the need to remain flexible and nimble in the rapidly changing tech industry.After eight months of negotiations, two of the unions representing employees at Klarna had threatened to walk off their jobs next week. They were able to secure an agreement late Friday, avoiding a strike, the company said. More

  • in

    U.A.W. Says It Could Expand Auto Strikes on Friday

    The United Automobile Workers union said the strikes against General Motors, Ford and Stellantis could grow on Friday if negotiators don’t make enough progress.The United Automobile Workers union said on Wednesday that it planned to expand its strike against the big three Michigan automakers on Friday if negotiators failed to make substantial progress on new contracts.The union ordered workers to walk off the job nearly two weeks ago at three vehicle assembly plants — each owned by one of the companies, General Motors, Ford Motor and Stellantis, the parent of Chrysler and Jeep. Last Friday the union broadened the strike to include spare parts-distribution centers owned by G.M. and Stellantis, saying it had made progress in its talks with Ford.The U.A.W. president, Shawn Fain, is scheduled to update members in a video streamed live on Facebook on Friday morning.The union is seeking a substantial wage increase to make up for much smaller raises over the last decade. Each of the companies has offered to lift wages by roughly 20 percent over four years, about half of what the U.A.W. is seeking. The union has demanded other measures including cost-of-living adjustments, the right to strike to protest plant closures, pensions for more workers and company-paid health care for retirees.The three plants that have been shut down by the strike include a G.M. factory in Wentzville, Mo., a Ford plant in Wayne, Mich., and a Stellantis complex in Toledo, Ohio. They make some of the manufacturers’ most profitable models, including the GMC Canyon pickup truck, the Ford Bronco sport-utility vehicle, and the Jeep Wrangler.The second wave of the strike idled 20 Stellantis parts-distribution centers and 18 owned by G.M. More than 18,000 U.A.W. workers are now on strike. The union represents about 150,000 workers employed by G.M., Ford and Stellantis.The union and the companies started negotiating new collective bargaining agreements in July, but made little progress until this month. Their contracts expired on Sept. 14 and Mr. Fain called on the first round of work stoppages the following day. More

  • in

    U.A.W. Prepares for Partial Strike Against Detroit Automakers on Friday

    The union’s president, Shawn Fain, said negotiators were nowhere near an agreement and ruled out a contract extension while talks continued.Barely 24 hours before the contract deadline, the United Auto Workers leader said Wednesday that his members were prepared for a strike against the three Detroit automakers — first at a limited number of factories, with the walkout expanding if talks remain bogged down.The U.A.W. president, Shawn Fain, also ruled out any extension of the existing four-year contracts with General Motors, Ford Motor and Stellantis after they expire on Thursday night. “September 14 is a deadline, not a reference point,” he declared in an address to union members on Facebook Live.He said the initial strike locations would be “limited and targeted,” and would be communicated to members on Thursday night ahead of a Friday walkout.This tactic — a departure from the union’s usual strategy of staging an all-out strike against a single automaker chosen as a target — is intended to give the U.A.W. negotiators increased leverage in the talks, and to keep the manufacturers off balance.“It will keep them guessing on what’s going to happen next,” Mr. Fain said.Striking at even a handful of plants would disrupt the automakers’ production while ensuring that a large portion of the 150,000 U.A.W. members at the three companies continued to work and receive paychecks.The union plans to pay striking workers $500 per week and cover the cost of their health insurance premiums. The union has a strike fund of $825 million, which would cover payments to workers in a full strike against all three companies for about three months.In its initial proposal to the companies, the union demanded a 40 percent increase in wages over four years, on the premise that pay packages of the companies’ chief executives have on average risen that much over the last four years. The union has also sought regular cost-of-living adjustments that would nudge wages higher in response to inflation.The union is also seeking pensions for all workers, improved retiree benefits, shorter work hours and an end to a tiered wage system that starts new hires at about half the top U.A.W. wage of $32 an hour.The companies — each negotiating separately with the union — have made counterproposals raising wages by roughly half what the union is asking, according to Mr. Fain, and have done even less to satisfy the other demands.After Mr. Fain’s announcement, General Motors issued a statement saying in part: “We continue to bargain directly and in good faith with the U.A.W. and have presented additional strong offers. We are making progress in key areas.”Declaring that “the future of our industry is at stake,” Ford said it was “ready to reach a deal,” adding, “We should be working creatively to solve hard problems rather than planning strikes and P.R. events.”Stellantis said it had presented its latest offer to the union on Tuesday. “Our focus remains on bargaining in good faith to have a tentative agreement on the table before tomorrow’s deadline,” the company said.A week ago, the U.A.W. filed a complaint with the National Labor Relations Board saying G.M. and Stellantis had failed to respond to the union’s proposals and were bargaining unfairly.Erik Gordon, a business professor at the University of Michigan who follows the auto industry, said a strike was very likely. “I think they can reach an agreement on wages,” he said, “but these other issues are complicated and can’t be resolved in the last 36 hours by splitting the difference.”Mr. Fain’s 40-minute address was highlighted by citations from the Bible; memories of his grandfather, who was also a union autoworker; and plenty of fiery language.“For the last 40 years, the billionaire class has been taking everything and leaving everybody else to fight for the scraps,” he exclaimed at one point. “We are not the problem. Corporate greed is the problem.”He also showed a series of slides listing the union’s demands for wages, benefits, job security and other issues alongside what he said were the companies’ responses. And he contrasted his leadership team’s approach to the negotiations with that of the predecessors they ousted last year.In the past, the U.A.W. leadership typically gave union members little information on the state of the negotiations until a tentative agreement was reached. Mr. Fain said that members were “fed up with the company-union philosophy” and that dealings with the companies would be transparent to union members, “not behind closed doors as in the past.”The prospect of a large-scale strike comes as the automakers are reaping near-record profits but also contending with the transition to electric vehicles. G.M., Ford and Stellantis — the parent of Chrysler — are investing tens of billions of dollars to develop new technologies and electric models, build new battery plants, and retool older factories.The union is concerned about the potential loss of jobs as a result of the transition. Electric vehicles — which don’t have components like transmissions or fuel systems — require fewer workers to produce.All three companies are also building battery plants with partners that are not automatically covered by the U.A.W. contract. Workers at one G.M. battery plant in Ohio that started production late last year voted to join the U.A.W. and are negotiating a contract of their own with the company.Kurtis Lee More

  • in

    Automakers and U.A.W. Remain Far Apart as Contract Deadline Nears

    The United Auto Workers has said it is prepared to strike at General Motors, Ford and Stellantis if a deal is not reached before current contracts end on Thursday.The United Auto Workers union and the three established U.S. automakers remain far apart on wages and other issues with less than a week to go before contracts covering 150,000 union workers expire.So far, the companies — General Motors, Ford Motor and Stellantis, the parent of Chrysler — have offered to raise pay by 14 percent to 16 percent over four years. Their offers include lump sum payments to help ease the impact of inflation, and policy changes that would lift the pay of recent hires and temporary workers, who typically earn about a third less than veteran union members.But the union’s combative new president, Shawn Fain, has dismissed the offers as “insulting,” noting that the three manufacturers have been making near-record profits for almost a decade, and that pay packages of top executives have increased substantially. He has been seeking pay increases of about 40 percent and repeatedly warned that workers were ready to leave assembly lines when the current collective bargaining agreements with the automakers expire on Thursday.Mr. Fain has said the union is willing to strike at all three automakers simultaneously, a step it has never taken before. An across-the-board stoppage would deal a big blow to the economies of Michigan and other states.“We aren’t going to stand by and allow them to drag out the negotiations like they’ve done in the past,” Mr. Fain said Friday in a video on Facebook. “If we hit 11:59 on Thursday without a deal at any of the Big Three automakers, there will be a strike — at all three if need be.”A Summer of StrikesSee how a wave of labor activity in the United States this summer compares with decades past.The talks are taking place during a sweeping shift from combustion engine cars and trucks to electric vehicles, which require fewer parts and less labor to produce. U.A.W. leaders and members are increasingly worried that the transition will eliminate jobs and, over time, reduce wages and benefits.The automakers are also worried about the transition. G.M., Ford and Stellantis are spending tens of billions of dollars to build new factories and scour the world for battery raw materials like lithium. Company executives have argued that offering the U.A.W. members big raises could leave them at a significant cost disadvantage to Tesla, which dominates the U.S. electric car market and employs nonunion workers.The auto industry is the largest U.S. manufacturing sector, and accounts for about 3 percent of the nation’s economic output. The three Detroit automakers operate dozens of plants that make about 500,000 cars a month.The Anderson Economic Group, a research firm in East Lansing, Mich., estimated that a 10-day strike against the three companies would reduce the companies’ profits by $1 billion and wages by $900 million for U.A.W. members and workers employed by other companies that depend on the automakers.Aside from wages, the union and the companies remain far apart on several other matters, including measures to preserve jobs and discourage the closing of U.S. plants, increases in retirement benefits and cost-of-living adjustments, which were once standard in U.A.W. contracts.The union has made some progress in its discussions with Ford. In response to Mr. Fain’s demands, the automaker offered to increase wages by about 15 percent, through a 9 percent increase in base wages and one-time lump sum payments of $11,000 per worker. While Mr. Fain rejected that, the two sides have continued bargaining. He was scheduled to update U.A.W. members later on Friday about Ford’s latest offer.Talks with G.M. and Stellantis have proceeded more slowly. The U.A.W. filed a complaint last week with the National Labor Relations Board, saying the two manufacturers had refused to offer proposals in response to the union’s demands and were not negotiating in good faith.G.M. responded by offering a combination of base wage increases and lump sum payments that would lift worker pay by about 16 percent. “We have already said we want to reward and recognize our employees with wage increases,” Gerald Johnson, G.M.’s executive vice president for global manufacturing, said this week.Agreeing to all of the union’s demands would threaten G.M.’s ability to compete, he added.Mr. Fain said the wage offer didn’t go far enough to make up for the impact of inflation on workers’ take-home pay over the last decade, and was too little in light of the profits G.M. was making. The automaker reported profits of $7 billion in the first half of the year. Mr. Fain also complained that G.M. had rejected the union’s proposals on job security, retiree pay, cost-of-living adjustments and other issues.Stellantis submitted its proposal to the union Friday morning, offering a 14.5 percent rise in base wages with no lump-sum payments.“This is a responsible and strong offer that positions us to continue providing good jobs to our employees,” Mark Stewart, the chief operating officer of Stellantis’s North American operations, said in a statement. “With this offer, we are seeking a timely resolution to our discussions.”Stellantis, which is based in Amsterdam and was created by the merger of Fiat Chrysler and Peugeot in 2021, earned 11 billion euros ($12 billion) in the first half of the year, a record. More

  • in

    West Coast Dockworkers Reach Contract Deal With Port Operators

    After a year of prolonged negotiations that have led to delays and declines in cargo, the two sides agreed to a new contract with help from the Biden administration.After a year of contract negotiations that resulted in numerous delays and a decline in the movement of cargo at ports along the West Coast, union dockworkers and port operators have reached a tentative deal set to last for six years.In a joint statement released late Wednesday, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union and the Pacific Maritime Association announced a tentative agreement on a new contract that covers 22,000 workers at 29 ports from San Diego to Seattle, some of the busiest in the world.Details about the agreement, which is expected to be formally ratified by both sides, were not immediately released.President Biden, who stepped in last year to urge a swift resolution, released a statement congratulating both parties for reaching an agreement “after a long and sometimes acrimonious negotiation.”“As I have always said, collective bargaining works,” Mr. Biden said. “Above all I congratulate the port workers, who have served heroically through the pandemic and the countless challenges it brought and will finally get the pay, benefits, and quality of life they deserve.”Mr. Biden also thanked Julie Su, the acting U.S. labor secretary, for assistance in finalizing the deal.The outcome on Wednesday somewhat mirrored past negotiations between the two sides. In 2015, as negotiations went on for nine months, officials in the Obama administration intervened amid work slowdowns and increased congestion at ports.The protracted negotiations between the union and the Pacific Maritime Association, which represents the shipping terminals, have focused on disagreements over wages and the expanding role of automation.In recent weeks the Longshore and Warehouse Union, or the I.L.W.U., has staged a series of work slowdowns at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, which in recent months have lost sizable business to ports along the Gulf and East Coasts. Cargo processing at the Port of Los Angeles, a key entry point for shipments from Asia, was down roughly 40 percent in February, compared with the year before.Recently, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce wrote a letter to Mr. Biden urging the administration to intervene immediately in the negotiations and appoint an independent mediator to help the two parties reach an agreement.Matthew Shay, president of the National Retail Federation, said the ongoing delays and disruptions have had a negative impact on retailers and other stakeholders who rely on the West Coast ports for business operations.“As we enter the all-important peak shipping season for holiday merchandise, retailers need a seamless flow of containers through the ports and to their distribution centers,” Mr. Shay said.On Wednesday, Gene Seroka, head of the Port of Los Angeles, said in a statement that the tentative agreement between the I.L.W.U. and the Pacific Maritime “brings the stability and confidence that customers have been seeking.”Matt Schrap, chief executive of the Harbor Trucking Association, a trade group for transportation companies serving West Coast ports, said his organization is eager for cargo traffic to return to normal soon.“We need the certainty,” he said. “This has been a long, hard process.” More