Electric and Hybrid Vehicles

More stories

  • 150 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Europe and Asia React to U.S. Push for Tech and Clean Energy

    by

    Other governments, particularly in Europe, are trying to counter the Biden administration’s industrial policies with their own incentives.The United States has embarked on the biggest industrial policy push in generations, dangling tax breaks, grants and other financial incentives to attract new factories making solar panels, semiconductors and electric vehicles.That spending is aimed at jump-starting the domestic market for crucial products, but it has implications far outside the United States. It is pushing governments from Europe to East Asia to try to keep up by proposing their own investment plans, setting off what some are calling a global subsidy race.Officials, particularly in Europe, have accused the United States of protectionism and have spent months complaining to the Biden administration about its policies. Governments in the European Union, in Britain and elsewhere are debating how to counteract America’s policies by offering their own incentives to attract investment and keep their companies from relocating to the United States.“I think we all deny that there is a subsidy race, but up to a certain extent, it’s happening,” said Markus Beyrer, the director general of BusinessEurope, Europe’s largest trade association.The United States is deploying nearly $400 billion in spending and tax credits to bolster America’s clean energy industry through the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Another $280 billion is aimed at facilities that manufacture and research semiconductors, as well as broader technological research.The Biden administration says the full agenda will unleash $3.5 trillion in public capital and private investment over the next decade. It is both a response to the hefty subsidies offered by governments in China and East Asia and an attempt to rebuild an American factory sector that has been hollowed out by decades of offshoring.Fredrik Persson, left, and Markus Beyrer, executives of BusinessEurope, a large trade group. “I think we all deny that there is a subsidy race, but up to a certain extent, it’s happening,” Mr. Beyrer said.Virginia Mayo/Associated PressThe administration says the investments will put the United States in a better position to deal with climate change and make it less dependent on potentially risky supply chains running through China.But the spending has sparked concerns about taking government resources away from other priorities, and adding to the debt loads of countries when high interest rates make borrowing riskier and more expensive. Gita Gopinath, the first deputy managing director of the International Monetary Fund, said in an interview in October that the spending race was “a matter of concern.”Ms. Gopinath pointed to statistics showing that whenever the United States, the European Union or China enacts subsidies or tariffs, there is a very high chance that one of the other two will respond with its own subsidies or tariffs within a year.“We are seeing a tit-for-tat there,” Ms. Gopinath said.The spending competition is also straining alliances by giving the companies that make prized products like batteries, hydrogen and semiconductors the ability to “country shop,” or play governments against one another other as they try to find the most welcoming home for their technologies.Freyr Battery, a company founded in Europe that develops lithium ion batteries for cars, ships and storage systems, was partway through building a factory in Norway when its executives learned that the Inflation Reduction Act was under development. In response to the law, the company shifted production to a factory in Georgia.“We think it is a really ingenious piece of modern industrial policy, and consequently, we’ve shifted our focus,” Birger Steen, Freyr’s chief executive officer, said in an interview. “The scaling will happen in the United States, and that’s because of the Inflation Reduction Act.”Mr. Steen said the company was keeping the Norwegian factory ready for a “hot start,” meaning that production could scale up there if local policies become friendlier. The company is talking to policymakers about how they can compete with the United States, he said.Some countries are reaping direct benefits from U.S. spending, including Canada, which is included in some of the clean energy law’s benefits and has mining operations that the United States lacks.Canada’s lithium industry stands to benefit as battery manufacturing moves to the United States and companies look for nearby sources of raw material.Brendan George Ko for The New York TimesKillian Charles, the chief executive at Brunswick Exploration in Montreal, said in an interview that Canada’s lithium industry stood to benefit as battery manufacturing moved to the United States and companies looked for nearby sources of raw material.But in most cases, the competition seems more zero-sum.David Scaysbrook, the managing partner of the Quinbrook Infrastructure Partners Group, which has helped finance some of the largest solar and battery projects in the United States, said that America’s clean energy bill was the most influential legislation introduced by any country and that other governments were not able to replicate “the sheer scale” of it.“Other countries can’t match that fiscal firepower,” he said. “Obviously, that’s a threat to the E.U. or other countries.”The United States has sought to allay some of its allies’ concerns by signing new trade agreements allowing foreign partners to share in some of the clean energy law’s benefits. A minerals agreement signed with Japan in March will allow Japanese facilities to supply minerals for electric vehicles receiving U.S. tax credits. American officials have been negotiating with Europe for a similar agreement since last year.But at a meeting in October, the United States and Europe clashed over a U.S. proposal to allow labor inspections at mines and facilities producing minerals outside the United States and Europe. Officials are continuing to work toward completing a deal in the coming weeks, but in the meantime, the lack of agreement has cast a further pall over the U.S.-E.U. relationship.Biden administration officials have continued to defend their approach, saying that the Inflation Reduction Act does not signal a turn toward American protectionism and that climate spending is badly needed. Even with such significant investments, the United States is likely to fall short of international goals for curbing global warming.John Podesta, the senior adviser to the president for clean energy innovation, said in a conversation at the Brookings Institution in October that foreign governments had been doing “a certain amount of bitching.” But he said the U.S. spending had ultimately spurred action from other partners, including a green industrial policy that Europe introduced early this year.“So with the bitching comes a little bit more shoulder to the wheel, so that’s a good thing,” he added.Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, presented the European Union’s Green Deal Industrial Plan in Brussels in February after the United States enacted the Inflation Reduction Act.Yves Herman/ReutersIn addition to the Green Deal Industrial Plan, which the European Union proposed in February, the bloc has approved a significant green stimulus program as part of an earlier pandemic recovery fund, and additional spending for green industries in its latest budget.Japan and South Korea have proposed their own plans to subsidize green industries. In the technology industry, South Korea and Taiwan both approved measures this year offering more tax breaks to semiconductor companies, and Japan has been setting aside new subsidies for major chipmakers like TSMC and Micron.Europe also proposed a “chips act” last year, though its size is significantly smaller than the American program’s. And China has been pumping money into manufacturing semiconductors, solar panels and electric vehicles to defend its share of the global market and prop up its weakening economy.The competition has also given rise to anxieties in smaller economies, like Britain, about the ability to keep up.“The U.K. is never going to compete on money and scale at the same level as the U.S., E.U. and China because we are firstly under fiscal constraints but also just the size of the economy,” said Raoul Ruparel, the director for Boston Consulting Group’s Center for Growth and a former government special adviser.British officials have made it clear that they don’t intend to offer a vast array of subsidies, like the United States, and are instead relying on a more free-market approach with some case-by-case interventions.Some economists and trade groups have criticized this approach and Britain’s resistance to creating a sweeping industrial strategy to shape the economy more clearly toward green growth, with the assistance of subsidies.“The question is, do you want to capture the economic benefits along the way and do you want to tap into these sources of growth?” Mr. Ruparel asked.TSMC is building a $7 billion plant in Kikuyo, Japan. Japan has been setting aside new subsidies for major chipmakers like TSMC and Micron.Kyodo News, via Getty ImagesSome experts insist fears of a subsidy race are overblown. Emily Benson, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said the scale of overall spending by the United States and the European Union was not significantly different, though European spending was spread out over time.“I don’t see some huge kickoff to this massive subsidy race that will completely upend global relations,” Ms. Benson said.Business leaders and analysts said the frustration in the European Union stemmed partly from broader economic concerns after the conflict with Russia. The combination of higher energy prices and tougher competition from the United States and China has pushed down foreign direct investment in Europe and sparked other fears.Fredrik Persson, the president of BusinessEurope, said the companies his group represented had “a very strong reaction” to the Inflation Reduction Act.“We fully support the underlying direction with the green transition, but it came at a sensitive moment,” he said.Madeleine Ngo More

  • 113 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    E.U. Relaxes Trade Rules on Electric Cars From Britain

    by

    The NewsThe European Union plans to postpone strict local-content rules that would have led to costly tariffs imposed on cars traded between the bloc and Britain beginning Jan. 1.“This removes the threat of tariffs on export of E.U. electric vehicles to the U.K. and vice versa,” Maros Sefcovic, the European Union’s executive vice president, told journalists in Brussels Wednesday.The tariffs would have forced consumers in Britain and the European Union to pay more for many electric vehicles. Andrew Testa for The New York TimesWhy It Matters: Relief for carmakers that were facing tariffs.The proposal provides for a three-year delay in the trade rule, and represents a huge reprieve for many carmakers, especially those with plants in Britain. Eighty percent of cars made in Britain are exported, with 60 percent of them going to the European Union. The delay means that British electric vehicles with batteries made outside Europe will no longer face tariffs of up to 10 percent starting in three weeks.European carmakers would have faced similar hits in their sales of cars to Britain, a major market. The delay will probably be seen as a win for Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s British government, which lobbied for the change along with the European car industry.Background: Europe and Britain do not make enough batteries.The rule would have made it virtually impossible for cars made in Britain with batteries from Asia to be imported tariff-free into the European Union. Neither Britain nor the Europe Union is manufacturing enough batteries for the rising number of electric vehicles expected to be produced in coming years. Batteries are the most expensive components of electric vehicles.Local origin rules are designed to discourage automakers from importing expensive parts, and to encourage local production. But this rule would have been counterproductive, the auto industry argued, by forcing consumers to pay more for many electric vehicles. Those higher prices could have opened the door for electric vehicles from outside Europe, especially China, whose makers are churning out low-cost models that have gained traction in Britain.What Happens Next: Time for the battery industry “to catch up.”The proposal still needs the support of European Union governments. Early indications are that it will be welcomed by auto industry. An extension would give “the European battery industry time to catch up,” the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders, a British trade group, said Wednesday in a statement.Mr. Sefcovic also said the European Union planned to provide 3 billion euros ($3.25 billion) to encourage local manufacturing of batteries. More

  • 125 Shares119 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Limits China’s Ability to Benefit From Electric Vehicle Subsidies

    by

    The Biden administration issued new rules to prevent Chinese firms from supplying parts for electric cars set to receive billions of dollars in tax credits.The Biden administration proposed new rules on Friday aimed at shifting more production of electric vehicle batteries and the materials that power them to the United States, in an attempt to build up a strategic industry now dominated by China.The rules are meant to limit the role that firms in China can play in supplying materials for electric vehicles that qualify for federal tax credits. They will also discourage companies that seek federal funding to build battery factories in the United States from sourcing materials from China or Russia.The rules could encourage shifts in automotive supply chains, which continue to rely heavily on China for materials and components of electric vehicles. Automakers are also facing intense cost pressures as they try to modify their factories to make electric cars, and China offers some of the most advanced and lowest-priced battery technology in the world.The Biden administration is trying to use billions of dollars in new federal funding to change that dynamic and create a U.S. supply chain for electric vehicles.The climate law that President Biden signed in 2022 includes up to $7,500 in tax credits to consumers who buy electric vehicles made in the United States using largely domestic materials. The law also included a general ban on Chinese products. Lawmakers mandated that firms in China, Russia, North Korea and Iran be prohibited from providing certain materials to cars that received those tax breaks.But the law left open several questions, including what constitutes a Chinese or Russian company. Administration officials said those definitions included any entity that was incorporated or had headquarters in China or Russia, as well as any firm in which 25 percent of the board seats or equity interest was held by Chinese or Russian governments.Chinese companies that set up operations outside China appear to be able to benefit from the rules as long as the Chinese government is not a significant shareholder. That provision came as a relief to some automakers, which feared that the Biden administration might bar them from contracting with Chinese-owned mines or factories in the United States or other parts of the world.Lithium hydroxide is processed at a facility in Bessemer City, N.C. American companies are investing in factories and technologies aimed at developing the materials needed for electric vehicle.Travis Dove for The New York TimesThe law also requires battery makers that strike contracts or licensing agreements with Chinese firms to ensure that they are retaining certain rights over their projects. That provision is intended to make sure a Chinese firm is not effectively in control of such a project.Some conservative lawmakers had challenged Ford Motor’s plans to license technology from the Chinese battery giant known as CATL for a plant in Marshall, Mich., arguing that such a partnership should not be eligible for federal tax credits. Some Republican lawmakers suggested on Friday that the Treasury Department’s guidance did not go far enough to lessen the country’s dependence on China.“At a time when China is using massive subsidies to undercut U.S. manufacturers and throttle the global market for battery components, Treasury’s naïve new regulations would open the floodgates for American tax dollars to flow to Chinese companies complicit in trade violations and forced labor abuses,” said Representative Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin, chairman of the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party. The rules kick in for battery components in 2024, and in 2025 for critical minerals like lithium, cobalt and nickel. They could be adjusted depending on industry comment.The rules could have a profound impact on the U.S. electric vehicle market, which is rapidly growing — battery-powered vehicles made up about 8 percent of new cars sold in the third quarter. Car and battery makers said Friday that they were still reviewing the rules, and that it would take time to determine how many models would qualify for tax credits.Tesla said on Friday that the two least expensive versions of its Model 3 sedan would qualify for only half the $7,500 credit starting in January. The Model Y sport utility vehicle also might not qualify for the full credit after Dec. 31, Tesla said. The Model Y and Model 3 are the top two electric vehicles by sales in the United States. Tesla buys some batteries from CATL.John Bozzella, the chief executive of Alliance for Automotive Innovation, wrote in a blog post Friday that the rules struck “a pragmatic balance,” including by exempting trace materials. If the administration had banned all minor Chinese parts from the supply chain, no car models might have qualified for tax credits next year, he said.Many cars have already been disqualified from purchase credits by other rules, like a requirement that vehicles be assembled in North America. Only about 20 vehicles currently qualify for the program out of more than 100 electric vehicles sold in the United States.The rules also raised new questions about whether stricter requirements for supply chains could continue a trend of driving more shoppers to lease, rather than buy, vehicles.The prohibition on sourcing from China applies only to vehicles that are sold, not to those that are leased. Consumers can receive tax credits for electric vehicles they lease from auto dealers, and that has led to a boom in E.V. leasing.Jack Fitzgerald, chairman of Fitzgerald Auto Malls, which operates dealerships in Florida, Maryland and Pennsylvania, said he had seen a spike in customers leasing electric vehicles. But he said concern about electric vehicle range and the availability of chargers, more than price, was holding back electric vehicle sales.“That’s the principal thing,” Mr. Fitzgerald said.Auto industry lobbyists have warned that extremely strict rules could stifle electric vehicle sales, and they have urged the administration to strike more trade deals to secure supplies of scarce battery minerals. But Paul Jacobson, the chief financial officer of General Motors, said the company had structured its electric vehicle operations to be successful regardless of the federal rules.“We’re not anchoring the business on saying this has to happen” with regard to regulations, Mr. Jacobson told reporters on Thursday. If regulations change, he added, “it’s not a backbreaking thing for us.”While the rules may create headaches for automakers, they are likely to benefit companies planning to supply batteries from factories in the United States.“It’s actually good news for us,” said Siyu Huang, chief executive of Factorial, a Massachusetts company that is developing next-generation electric vehicle batteries with support from Mercedes-Benz, Hyundai and Stellantis, the owner of Dodge, Jeep and Ram.Acquiring large amounts of lithium, an essential ingredient in batteries, could be difficult because most of the metal is processed in China, Ms. Huang said. But the rules will encourage investment in U.S.-based refineries, she continued. “Its definitely going to be another incentive to build more domestic supply,” Ms. Huang said.John DeMaio, chief executive of Graphex Technologies, which is building a factory in Michigan to process graphite for batteries, said the rules might temporarily slow electric vehicle sales by making it harder to qualify for the tax credit. But in the long run, he added, they will encourage investment in domestic suppliers.“It might be a hiccup,” he said, “but in general it provides certainty and clarity to get people off the fence.”Wally Adeyemo, the deputy secretary of the Treasury Department, said in a briefing with reporters that the rules would help advance the administration’s goals of building up an American clean energy supply chain while also cutting emissions in the transportation sector.“These changes take time, but companies are making the investments and Americans are buying these cars,” he said.Over the past year, companies have invested $213 billion in the manufacturing and deployment of clean energy, clean vehicles, building electrification and carbon management technology in the United States, according to tracking by the Rhodium Group and the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. That is a 37 percent increase from a year earlier..A lithium mine in northern Quebec. A majority of the world’s lithium and cobalt is processed in China.Brendan George Ko for The New York TimesStill, the global electric vehicle industry remains heavily anchored in China, which is the world’s largest producer and exporter of electric vehicles. China produces about two-thirds of the world’s battery cells, and refines most of the minerals that are key to powering an electric vehicle.The rules also restrict automakers from sourcing nickel used in their batteries from Russia, which is one of the world’s largest nickel producers.One of the challenges for automakers will be developing systems to track all the components of their battery through a long, and often opaque, supply chain.Vehicles that are reported incorrectly will be subtracted from an automaker’s eligibility for tax credits, Treasury said, and automakers that commit fraud or intentionally disregard the rules could be declared ineligible for the credit in the future. More

  • 150 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    U.S. Debates How Much to Sever Electric Car Industry’s Ties to China

    by

    Some firms argue that a law aimed at popularizing electric vehicles risks turning the United States into an assembly shop for Chinese-made technology.The Biden administration has been trying to jump-start the domestic supply chain for electric vehicles so cleaner cars can be made in the United States. But the experience of one Texas company, whose plans to help make an all-American electric vehicle were upended by China, highlights the stakes involved as the administration finalizes rules governing the industry.Huntsman Corporation started construction two years ago on a $50 million plant in Texas to make ethylene carbonate, a chemical that is used in electric vehicle batteries. It would have been the only site in North America making the product, with the goal of feeding battery factories that would crop up to serve the electric vehicle market.But as new facilities in China came online and flooded the market, the price of the chemical plummeted to $700 a ton from $4,000. After pumping $30 million into the project, the company halted work on it this year. “If we were to start the project up today, we would be hemorrhaging cash,” said Peter R. Huntsman, the company’s chief executive. “I’d essentially be paying people to take the product.”The Biden administration is now finalizing rules that will help determine whether companies like Huntsman will find it profitable enough to participate in America’s electric vehicle industry. The rules, which are expected to be proposed this week, will dictate the extent to which foreign companies, particularly in China, can supply parts and products for American-made vehicles that are set to receive billions of dollars in subsidies.The administration is offering up to $7,500 in tax credits to Americans who buy electric vehicles, in an effort to supercharge the industry and reduce the country’s carbon emissions. The rules will determine whether electric vehicle makers seeking to benefit from that program will have the flexibility to get cheap components from China, or whether they will be required instead to buy more expensive products from U.S.-based firms like Huntsman.After pumping $30 million into the project, Huntsman halted work on it. “If we were to start the project up today, we would be hemorrhaging cash,” said Peter R. Huntsman, the company’s chief executive.Callaghan O’Hare for The New York TimesCan the World Make an Electric Car Battery Without China?From mines to refineries and factories, China began investing decades ago. Today, most of your electric car batteries are made in China and that’s unlikely to change soon.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.We are confirming your access to this article, this will take just a moment. However, if you are using Reader mode please log in, subscribe, or exit Reader mode since we are unable to verify access in that state.Confirming article access.If you are a subscriber, please  More

  • 150 Shares189 Views

    in Economy

    Ford Resumes Work on E.V. Battery Plant in Michigan, at Reduced Scale

    by

    A battery plant in Michigan will be smaller than planned, Ford said, citing slower E.V. demand than expected, as well as labor costs.Ford Motor said Tuesday that it was resuming work on an electric vehicle battery plant in Michigan but significantly scaling back its plans in part because of slow E.V. adoption in the United States.A company spokesman said that Ford now expected the plant in Marshall, Mich., to create 1,700 jobs rather than 2,500, but that it still expected production to begin in 2026.Demand for electric vehicles is “not growing at the rate that we originally expected,” said the Ford spokesman, T.R. Reid. In the most recent quarter, large auto companies like Ford reported that E.V. sales had increased, but not at a rate sufficient to keep up with the Biden administration’s ambitious goals.The plant was originally planned to produce 35 gigawatt-hours’ worth of batteries annually, which Ford estimated was enough to equip about 400,000 vehicles. Now, the plant will produce 20 gigawatt hours annually, enough for roughly 230,000 vehicles, or a 42.8 percent cut.Ford did not specify exactly how much money it would be pulling back from the project, but said it would be roughly equivalent to its reduction in output. If the 42.8 percent cut in output was applied to its investment, it would represent a $1.5 billion reduction in the initially announced investment of $3.5 billion.Ford said in September that it was suspending construction because of concerns that it would not be able to manufacture products at a competitive price. At the time, the company was in the middle of contentious negotiations with the United Automobile Workers union.Rising labor costs were also a factor in Ford’s decision to scale back its plans for the factory, Mr. Reid said. Ford’s contract agreement with the U.A.W., which has been ratified by union members, raises the top wage for production workers by 25 percent.The agreement will allow U.A.W. members to be transferred to battery and electric-vehicle plants under construction, like the one in Marshall. If workers there choose to unionize, they will be protected under the U.A.W.’s contract.The U.A.W. hopes to keep its membership rates up amid the transition to electric vehicles, but the automakers have pushed back, arguing that it puts them at a disadvantage compared with their nonunionized competitors.The U.A.W. did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Tuesday.Ford has also faced criticism from conservative lawmakers over its plan to license technology from CATL, a Chinese battery maker. Lithium-iron-phosphate batteries, or LFP, are not currently produced in the United States. Some U.S. electric automakers, such as Tesla, import LFP batteries from China.It is not clear whether U.S. companies that license technology from other countries will qualify for government incentives to promote the shift from fossil fuels. Mr. Reid said Ford was “confident about the technology licensing agreement for this plant.” More

  • 113 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    Job Action Against Tesla Puts Sweden’s Unions in Spotlight

    by

    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

  • 100 Shares99 Views

    in Economy

    U.A.W. Strike Gains Could Reverberate Far Beyond Autos

    by

    Experts said the union’s new contracts could set precedents that give labor advantages when bargaining contracts and organizing workers.Laying out a tentative contract agreement to end a six-week wave of walkouts at Ford Motor, the United Automobile Workers president made an unusual pitch to other labor unions.“We invite unions around the country to align your contract expirations with our own,” the U.A.W. leader, Shawn Fain, said Sunday night.“If we’re going to truly take on the billionaire class and rebuild the economy so that it starts to work for the benefit of the many and not the few,” Mr. Fain added, “then it’s important that we not only strike, but that we strike together.”While it remains to be seen whether other unions follow the U.A.W.’s lead, Mr. Fain’s invitation highlights the sweeping ambition of the union’s strategy during the recent strike, the first to target all three Detroit automakers simultaneously.Beyond seeking the largest wage and benefit increases in decades — and a reversal of the concessions the union made during the companies’ downturn, such as lower wage tiers for newer workers — Mr. Fain repeatedly spoke of fighting for “the entire working class.”Labor experts said the proposals that union negotiators agreed to with Ford, General Motors and Stellantis, the parent of Jeep, Ram and Chrysler, had produced gains that could in fact reverberate well beyond the workers that the union represented.“It is a historic and transformative victory by the U.A.W.,” said Nelson Lichtenstein, a labor historian at the University of California, Santa Barbara.Dr. Lichtenstein said that winning substantial gains through a strike in a critical industry demonstrated the benefits of work stoppages after decades in which workers had been taught to regard strikes warily.“Fain says: ‘Hey, strikes work, solidarity works; we’re more unified now than before the strike,’” he added. “I think that’s a powerful argument unions can take elsewhere.”To make the economy “work for the benefit of the many and not the few,” Shawn Fain, the U.A.W. president said, “then it’s important that we not only strike, but that we strike together.”Brittany Greeson for The New York TimesEven before the strike ended, unions at other companies appeared to be doing just that.In an interview in late September, David Pryzbylski, a lawyer who represents employers, said union officials in two separate contract negotiations had invoked the U.A.W. when discussing the possibility of a strike. “Outside the U.A.W., it’s putting wind in their sails,” Mr. Pryzbylski said. “They may be blustering, but I am seeing it already trickle down.”A recent report by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce raised concerns that an emboldened labor movement was increasing strike activity and “causing collateral damage to a host of local businesses and communities” by harming the economic ecosystem that depended on automakers and other employers.The element of strategy that the U.A.W. brought to its strike may also prove instructive to other workers and unions. Rather than ask all employees to strike at once, the union started small, with one key plant at each of the Big Three, then ramped up as it sought to bring additional pressure. The U.A.W. refrained from expanding the strike when it felt a company was bargaining productively, and it expanded to a highly valuable plant when it felt a company was dragging its feet — in both cases, to create an incentive for the companies to engage with the union.The approach may not translate perfectly to other industries, such as retail and hospitality, that are harder to disrupt with the loss of a small number of locations. But Peter Olney, a former organizing director with the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, said the strategy was more widely applicable than it might appear at first glance.He cited the possibility of organizing and striking at coffee bean roasting plants and distribution centers for a company like Starbucks, where workers at hundreds of retail stores in the United States have organized over the past few years. “They have 9,000 locations, there’s a lot of redundancy and replication,” Mr. Olney said, referring to company-owned stores in the United States. “But there are some choke points in that system, too.”And it is difficult for service-sector industries to send operations offshore in response to labor unrest, because proximity to customers is critical. By contrast, the U.A.W. may have to contend with the risk that companies shift production to Mexico as labor costs increase.“That’s where the international solidarity aspect of it comes in — the need to build up a cross-border network with Mexico,” Mr. Olney said. Last year, workers at a large G.M. plant in the country voted out a union accused of colluding with management in favor of an independent union.In some ways, the recent U.A.W. effort builds on the gains made by unions involved in other high-profile standoffs. To resolve a nearly five-month strike with Hollywood writers in September, major studios agreed to a set of restrictions on the use of artificial intelligence. The agreement was a break with employers’ typical insistence that management should have control over technology and investment decisions.In its new contract with the union, Ford Motor agreed to let current U.A.W. members transfer to battery and electric vehicles plants the company was building in Michigan and Tennessee.Nic Antaya for The New York TimesThe tentative U.A.W. contracts award the union more influence over such decision-making as well — for example, by allowing workers to strike against the entire company over the threat of a plant shutdown before their contract has expired. The union also successfully pressed Stellantis to reopen an Illinois plant that the company had closed.Mr. Pryzbylski, the management-side lawyer, said that while such strike provisions and plant reopenings are not unheard of, they are uncommon.Dr. Lichtenstein said securing these gains in such a high-profile context could prompt employees at other companies to demand a say in decisions that their employers had typically characterized as management prerogatives. “It restores a kind of social and political character to investment decisions,” he said. “It’s something the left has wanted for over a century.”In other cases, the U.A.W. managed to extract concessions at plants where it doesn’t yet represent workers — another unusual win that could be mimicked by fellow unions. Ford agreed that U.A.W. members would be allowed to transfer into battery and electric vehicles plants under construction in Michigan and Tennessee, and that these plants would fall under the union’s national contract if the workers unionized there. According to the U.A.W., that would happen without the need to hold a union election at either site.Madeline Janis, co-executive director of Jobs to Move America, a group that seeks to create good jobs in clean technology industries, called these arrangements a “huge historic, unprecedented deal” for helping to ensure that the E.V. transition benefited workers.U.A.W. officials say that adding new members is critical to the union’s survival, and that the Big Three contracts will provide a major boost to these efforts because organizers can point to large concrete benefits of unionizing.“We’re not going to win a contract victory this big in the future if we’re not able to start organizing, especially in the E.V. sector,” said Mike Miller, a U.A.W. regional director in the Western United States. “It has to involve Tesla, Volkswagen and Hyundai.”But some experts said the momentum of the recent contracts could help organizing campaigns that were even further afield. “It’s not just personal vehicle manufacturing — it’s the fleets of delivery vans, big electric buses and trains,” said Erica Smiley, executive director of Jobs With Justice, which helps workers seeking to unionize and bargain collectively.Ms. Smiley noted that many of these companies, just like electric vehicle manufacturers, had received public subsidies, creating an opportunity for organizers to appeal to politicians for help raising pay and improving benefits so that they more closely resembled what the U.A.W. just won.“The administration is investing in these industries,” she added. “The question is how to use this to raise the floor.” More

  • 125 Shares179 Views

    in Economy

    U.A.W. Strikes Near an End After G.M. Reaches Tentative Deal

    by

    Tentative accords at Ford Motor, General Motors and Stellantis are the most generous in decades, raising costs as the industry shifts to electric vehicles.A six-week wave of strikes that hobbled the three largest U.S. automakers has resulted in tentative contract agreements that would give workers their biggest pay raises in decades while avoiding a protracted work stoppage that could have damaged the economy.On Monday, General Motors and the United Automobile Workers reached a deal that mirrored agreements the union had reached in recent days with Ford Motor and Stellantis, the parent company of Ram, Jeep and Chrysler. The terms will be costly for the automakers as they undertake a switch to electric vehicles, while setting the stage for labor strife and demands for higher pay at nonunion automakers like Tesla and Toyota.The tentative agreements, which still require ratification by union members, also appeared to be a win for President Biden, who had risked political capital by picketing with striking workers at a G.M. facility in Michigan last month.“They have reached a historic agreement,” Mr. Biden said Monday after speaking with Shawn Fain, the U.A.W. president. The deals, the president said, “reward autoworkers who gave up much to keep the industry working and going during the global financial crisis more than a decade ago.”The strike stretched longer than White House officials would have liked, but was resolved before causing significant shortages of new cars and trucks that might have frustrated voters already angry about inflation.“The near-term impact of this strike will be relatively minor,” said Karl Brauer, executive analyst at iSeeCars.com, an online auto sales site. We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.We are confirming your access to this article, this will take just a moment. However, if you are using Reader mode please log in, subscribe, or exit Reader mode since we are unable to verify access in that state.Confirming article access.If you are a subscriber, please  More