Chrystler Town & Country Van on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Detroit Three autoworkers could get huge bonuses

For a long time, being a line worker for one of the Detroit Three has meant living with an uncertain future. With the health of American automakers on the rise, though, things are also starting to look up for the men and women building the cars. The latest sign that things aren't bad? Big profit-sharing checks.
According to The Detroit News, Ford, General Motors and Chrysler could end up paying over $800 million to 130,000 workers as part of a profit-sharing plan. According to The News, the economic impact of these profits in Michigan alone could exceed $400 million, besting the NFL's Super Bowl, MLB's All-Star Game and the NHL's Winter Classic for their economic impact.
This is the third straight year the Detroit Three have issued profit-sharing checks to UAW employees, and for many workers, the checks are as close as they'll get to a raise, due to the most recent contract between the union and the manufacturers. On average, employees at GM and Ford receive $1 for every $1 million in North American (not just the US) pre-tax profits. Chrysler, meanwhile, gets a similar deal, although the Auburn Hills-based company calculates profit sharing using 85 percent of the brand's global profits.

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.

Automakers want to stop the EPA's fuel economy rules change, and why that's a shortsighted move

With a Trump Administration looming, the EPA moved quickly after the election to propose finalizing future fuel economy rules last week. The auto industry doesn't like that (surprise), and has started making moves to stop the EPA. Ford CEO Mark Fields said he wanted to lobby Trump to lower the standards, and now the Auto Alliance, a manufacturer group, is saying it will join the fight against cleaner cars. The Alliance represents 12 automakers: BMW, Fiat Chrysler, Ford, GM, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota, VW, and Volvo. Gloria Bergquist, a spokesperson for the Alliance, told Automotive News that the "EPA's sudden and controversial move to propose auto regulations eight months early - even after Congress warned agencies about taking such steps while political appointees were packing their bags - calls out for congressional action to pause this rulemaking until a thoughtful policy review can occur." The EPA was going to consider public comments through April 2017, but then said it would move the deadline to the end of December. That means that it can finalize the rules before President Obama leaves office. The director of public affairs for the Consumer Federation of America, Jack Gillis, said on a conference call with reporters last week when the EPA originally announced its decision that it is unlikely that President Trump will be able to roll back these changes. Gillis also said on the same call that any attempt by the automakers to prevent these changes would be history repeating itself. "These are the same companies that fought airbags, and now promoting the fact that every car has multiple airbags," he said. "These are the same companies that fought the crash-test program, and now are promoting the crash-test ratings published by the government. So, it's clear that they're misperceiving the needs of the American consumer." There are more reasons the Allliance's pushback is flawed. Carol Lee Rawn, the transportation program director for Ceres, said on that call that the automotive industry is a global one, and many automakers are moving to global platforms to help them meet strict fuel economy rules around the world.