1984 Chrysler Lebaron Base Convertible 2-door 2.6l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

FCA employees likely to reject UAW contract

For a brief, blissful glimmer of time, it seemed like we might have a period of labor harmony here in the Motor City. The United Auto Workers and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, the UAW's lead bargaining company, came to a pending agreement that seemed promising enough that union president Dennis Williams, shown above with FCA boss Sergio Marchionne, thought it'd be ratified by the membership. Well, he was wrong. It's widely expected that FCA's rank-and-file workforce will vote against the deal, which gave workers a raise, would establish a VEBA-style healthcare pool, and deliver a $3,000 bonus for signing the agreement, while retaining the much-hated two-tier wage system. According to The Detroit News, it'd be the first time in over three decades the union's general population didn't follow its leadership's recommendation. Two of FCA's big US facilities, Toledo Assembly and Sterling Heights Assembly, overwhelmingly voted no, with The News saying they "mathematically sealed the deal's fate." According to The News, UAW Local 1700 President Charles Bell said roughly 90 percent of SHAP's 3,000-plus union workforce voted "no" on the deal. Should the pending agreement fail as it's expected to, there are three potential avenues for the union. First, as The News details, both sides could return to the bargaining table. Second, FCA workers could hit the picket line. Finally, union leadership may opt to focus its firepower on General Motors or Ford. It's a good thing we aren't the gambling sort, because those all seem very much within the realm of possibility. Not surprisingly, rank-and-file UAW members have taken issue with the survival of the two-tier wage structure, while others simply think that union employees deserve a wage hike. There was also, we're betting, some serious concerns over the reshuffling of production that would come with a new FCA/UAW deal. As previously reported, no fewer than four UAW facilities would have their vehicle lines shuffled around, including both SHAP and Toledo. Expect more news as soon as the UAW formally announces the results of its FCA voting. News Source: The Detroit NewsImage Credit: Paul Sancya / AP Plants/Manufacturing UAW/Unions Chrysler Fiat FCA toledo sterling heights

GM, Chrysler bailouts saved 2.6 million jobs

The Center for Automotive Research (CAR) has been studying the effects of the General Motors and Chrysler bailouts in 2009. Now that the US Treasury has officially sold off the rest of its stake in GM (and Chrysler has already paid back its loan), CAR has released its study on the effects of the bailout with this concluding note: "CAR is confident that in the years ahead, this peacetime intervention in the private sector by the US government will be seen as one of the most successful in US economic history."
Big words, for sure, but there's plenty of evidence to back up the claim. Bailing out GM alone saved 1.2-million jobs. If both GM and Chrysler hadn't been bailed out, US employment would have been reduced by 2.631-million jobs in 2009 and another 1.519-million jobs in 2010, according to the study. If both automakers were allowed to fail, personal income in the US would have decreased by $173.5 billion in 2009 and $110.9 billion in 2010. Instead, the study found that $284.4 billion of personal income was saved by the bailouts.

Court ruling to delay Fiat's Chrysler buyout?

We've already reported on the attempts of Fiat to purchase the remaining 41.5-percent stake in Chrysler, currently owned by the United Auto Workers' VEBA healthcare trust. And while the issues still aren't resolved, Fiat has received both a bit of good news and a bit of bad news from a Delaware judge.
The good news is that the court ruled in favor on two key arguments of Fiat's, relating to what is a fair price for the Chrysler shares. The rulings essentially slash half a billion dollars off the price of the 54,000 shares owned by VEBA, according to a report from Reuters.
The bad news is that this makes the UAW an even more difficult opponent in negotiations. Its VEBA fund is meant to cover ever escalating retiree healthcare costs, so naturally, the UAW wants to get as much money as possible. Losing a big chunk of cash isn't likely to make the union more cooperative.