Completely Restored, Red/red, Fantasic Condition 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

Fiat Chrysler global HQ lands in London's ultra-posh West End

It seems Fiat is bent on bolstering its image as a global automaker, as word has leaked out that the Italian/American conglomerate has chosen to locate its global headquarters in a rather swanky neighborhood in London. According to Bloomberg, the rental location on St. James Street in London's West End is a 10-minute walk from Buckingham Palace, and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles will fill up three complete floors of an office building that also houses The Economist magazine.
As a neutral location between Italy and the United States, the London-based headquarters makes sense, though, at $277 per square foot, this area is said to be the most expensive office space in the world. There's no mention of what FCA has actually agreed to pay for renting the space, but we're certain it isn't coming cheap.
Not surprisingly, Bloomberg also cites research indicating that the largest number of immigrants moving into London from January through August of this year hail from Italy, which makes sense considering the number of Italian executives and workers we'd expect would have to relocate to the UK in order to work at Fiat's new home. The company reportedly plans to be in place in London by the time it holds its next round of board meetings in October.

Fiat Chrysler will pay $70M to settle safety disclosure suit

FCA US will pay a $70 million civil penalty to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration for failing to submit Early Warning Report data going back to 2003. The automaker will also provide any missing data since that time, and an auditor will monitor future compliance. NHTSA says the failures to report this information "stem from problems in FCA's electronic system for monitoring and reporting safety data, including improper coding and failure to account for changes in brand names." There are no allegations of any intentional deception by the automaker. NHTSA will wrap up the latest fine with the previous consent order against FCA US earlier this year for the automaker's handling of 23 recalls. The company will know owe the safety regulator a total of $140 million in cash, and there will be possibility of $35 million more in deferred penalties if FCA doesn't comply with the agency's requests. In a statement about the fine to Autoblog, FCA US said the automaker "accepts these penalties and is revising its processes to ensure regulatory compliance." The company strongly believes that it didn't miss any safety problems over the time with this problem. Early Warning Reports include information on deaths, injuries, crashes, and other potential safety concerns, and NHTSA often uses the data in investigations for possible recalls. In September, the safety agency first announced the automaker failed to submit these documents. At the time, the regulator's administrator Mark Rosekind promised to "take appropriate action after gathering additional information on the scope and causes of this failure." FCA US also released a statement then about the lapse and said the company notified NHTSA immediately after discovering the problem. FCA US is not the first company to run afoul of NHTSA's reporting requirement. The agency fined Triumph Motorcycles and Honda this year for similar lapses. It also punished Ferrari in 2014. U.S. DOT Fines Fiat Chrysler $70 million for Failure to Provide Early Warning Report Data to NHTSA WASHINGTON – The U.S. Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has imposed a $70 million civil penalty on Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) for the auto manufacturer's failure to report legally required safety data. The penalty follows FCA's admission in September that it had failed, over several years, to provide Early Warning Report data to NHTSA as required by the TREAD Act of 2000.