On UAW's Gettlefinger: It doesn't get any more surreal.

This week, the United Against Work United Auto Workers (UAW) is holding its 35th constitutional convention in Detroit this week, one protester was handcuffed (actually he is a UAW retiree and convention delegate) and the UAW's new king (Bob King, that is) is being challenged by a dissident member.

Meanwhile, the UAW's retiring boss, Ron Gettlefinger (the man who brought you Government Motors), in an interview with reporters, offered his rather surrealistic views on worker rights.

United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger gave a preview Sunday of part of his Monday farewell speech at the union's constitutional convention, telling reporters that he would vigorously defend the right of workers to organize.

Okay.  So far, so good.  But here's where he goes all screwy:

Gettelfinger questioned why it is all right for groups like the National Association of Manufacturers to have members, but businesses try to trample the rights of individual employees to form unions and collectively bargain for wages, benefits and working conditions. 

What Gettlefinger is doing in this one statement is deploying at least two distinct propaganda techniques, namely transfer and The Big Lie.

For decades, unions have used (as an argument for unionization) the transfer meme that there's really no difference between businesses belonging to associations like the National Association of Manufacturers or Chambers of Commerce versus workers belonging to labor unions.

Unfortunately, there are many differences between business associations and unions. Here are just a few:

• Businesses can quit their associations whenever they want, union workers cannot.  In fact, trying to get a union out of the workplace is extremely difficult for workers.
• Businesses can stop paying money to their associations any time they like and the worst that would happen to them is they get kicked out.  If a unionized worker quits paying a union, in 28 states, the union can have him fired.
• Businesses who break an association's rules can get kicked out, but a union worker who breaks a union's rules can be placed on trial by the union and fined money.
• Business associations cannot cause their members to go out on strike, unions can.
• Business associations cannot cause their members to lose their jobs, unions can.
• Business associations cannot cause their member companies to outsource jobs, unions can.
• Business associations cannot cause the government to nationalize companies, unions have the UAW has.

The second propaganda technique Gettlefinger uses is the Big Lie.  In fact, not only does he use it once in his statement but twice.

• First, Gettlefinger alleges that businesses try "to trample the rights of individual employees..."  Despite that this is an overly broad generality (there are over four million employers in the U.S.), the fact of the matter is, unions win roughly 68% of all NLRB elections.  This means that, if Gettlefinger's statement was true, employers are doing a pretty poor job at trampling the rights of workers.

• The second point Gettlefinger makes in the same sentence is another union myth:  "...individual employees to form unions and collectively bargain for wages, benefits and working conditions."  Unions like the UAW are no longer "formed" by workers, they are legal entities already established and, more importantly, when workers belong to a third-party union like the UAW, the union is the members sole and exclusive bargaining representative for the purpose of collective bargaining.  In other words, the workers don't do the bargaining, the union does.  Moreover, according to the UAW's own union constitution, in order for any UAW contract to be approved, the UAW must approve it (and the union has veto power as well).

What is even more hypocritical of Gettlefinger's portrayal of unions is the fact that his successor, Bob King, who was chosen by the UAW leaders last year, is not even going to be voted on by UAW members but will be installed this week by the convention delegates.

For more than 60 years, the UAW's top leadership has blocked attempts to permit union members to vote directly for the union presidency. Rather, as the UAW's new designated nominee, King has the support of the union executive board, which has picked the UAW presidents since the late 1940s through series of closed caucuses.

It's a good thing Ron Gettlefinger is retiring because the truth just can't be stretched any more than it has.

Goodbye, Ron.  It's been surreal.
__________________
“I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes.” Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776

For more news and views on today’s unions, go to LaborUnionReport.com.

“Cadillac Tax” Exemption: Union bosses get a deal while the rest of America gets screwed.

Apparently, the fix was in when union bosses' met in a closed door meeting at the White House on Monday and had a follow-up meeting House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Tuesday. Unions bosses were reportedly able to get an exemption for collectively-bargained health care plans from the so-called "cadillac tax."

According to Congress Daily:

Unions tentatively struck a deal Tuesday to exempt collectively bargained healthcare plans from a tax on high-cost plans expected to be used to help raise revenue for the healthcare overhaul.

AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, Service Employees International Union President Andy Stern and United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger met with House Speaker Pelosi Tuesday, a day after labor leaders met at the White House to express their opposition to the excise tax.

While Congress Daily notes that the exemption is not a done deal and it could be "tweaked" to include union-free workers as well, Congressman Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) stated:

"It's setting up a divide-and-conquer situation here where some people are going to feel they're paying for other people, and they're all working. That politically is possibly the most dangerous thing Democrats can do is create that division."

We couldn't agree more.

Since union bosses spent an estimated $1.5 billion of their members' money on electing Democrats in 2006 and 2008, it is expected that Democrats would be more amenable to union bosses' wishes than the Bush administration was. However, such flagrant capitulation to a special interest is appalling and should be thoroughly (and loudly) condemned.

-------------------------------

"I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes." Thomas Paine December 23, 1776

Follow LaborUnionReport on Twitter.

Did the UAW Just Kill Ford too?

There is an old joke among Chevy owners:

FORD = Found On the Road Dead.

Well, this week, the once-mighty UAW may have just sealed Ford's fate.

As most of America knows (or should know), through a tax-payer funded bailout and government-imposed bankruptcy, the Obama Administration gave General Motors and Chrysler shares to the United Auto Workers in exchange for debt owed to the UAW's Voluntary Employee Benefits Association, or VEBA. In other words, the UAW is a major stakeholder in both GM and Chrysler.

Ford, on the other hand, did not become a recipient of taxpayer money and was not forced into bankruptcy by the Obama Administration. And, for this, it appears that Ford may ultimately pay a price (literally and figuratively).

You see, through its government-structured bankruptcy deals with GM and Chrysler, the UAW agreed to concessions, which included lower costs and a no strike guarantee through 2015.

Since a strike is a union's only major weapon and since the Obama administration had convinced the UAW give up additional concessions and holster its strike weapon, both the lower costs and the labor peace has placed Ford in a huge competitive disadvantage. Not only is it left to contend with a higher-priced UAW contract, the UAW can strike Ford when its current contract expires in 2011.

Ford, as would any good business, recently sought to rectify GM and Chrysler's cost and labor peace advantage by asking the UAW to modify its contract to level the playing field for Ford.

Two weeks ago, the UAW leadership agreed to modify its agreement with Ford.

"This agreement is another step in meeting the challenges of a very difficult time in the U.S. auto industry, and we look forward to presenting it to UAW Ford workers," UAW President Ronald A. Gettelfinger said in a statement.

However, that's when the trouble started. Almost immediately, the UAW's 'solidarity' broke as rank and file union members began to campaign to reject the agreement, prompting UAW honcho Ron Gettlefinger to grouse that local leaders were campaigning on misinformation.

As the days progressed over these last two weeks and the local vote tallies came in, it became clearer that the UAW rank-and-file members were rejecting the notion of bringing parity to Ford.

As the Wall Street Journal reported this morning:

Ford Motor Co.'s rank-and-file union members rejected a concessions agreement, leaving the auto maker at risk to higher costs compared with competitors Chrysler Group LLC and General Motors Co.

Although some locals are still voting through Sunday, the United Auto Workers national leadership has accepted the defeat, said three union sources who asked not to be identified since they don't officially speak for the UAW.

The leadership is now reviewing other options, these people said. UAW President Ron Gettelfinger told Dow Jones Newswires on Friday he will not continue bargaining or conduct a re-vote. Ford will now have to wait for any formal changes until 2011 when the current contract expires.

....

"I think the UAW failed its membership in adequately explaining how important it is for Ford to stay competitive with Chrysler and GM and how relatively minor these contract changes were," said Brian Pannebecker, a Ford Sterling Heights, Mich. axle plant worker who voted for the concessions. The plant rejected the measure by almost 80%.

Now, with the government-backed GM and Chrysler having an economic advantage over Ford, the questions that emerge are: 1) Can Ford survive with its higher cost structure until 2011? 2) Will Ford, like GM and Chrysler, need a tax-payer financed auto bailout? and 3) Did the UAW just doom Ford to failure?

Follow LaborUnionReport on Twitter.

UAW's Top Boss Accuses His Union Brothers of 'Misinformation'

Its public persona is one of 'solidarity,' but there appears to be a schism building between the top brass at the UAW and its local unions at Ford Motor Co. It is a schism that has the UAW's top boss Ron Gettlefinger crying foul against his own union's local leaders, accusing them of misinforming their members on the unions deal with Ford.

Ten days ago, the United Auto Workers reached another give-back agreement with Ford to bring Ford to a par with the UAW-owned Chrysler and government-owned General Motors.

However, according to the Associated Press, there is rank-and-file opposition to the agreement.

Many of the opponents, including some elected leaders at Ford's pickup truck plant in Dearborn, Mich., have urged workers to vote against the agreement, saying it would require too many concessions and would limit the workers' right to strike. Opponents say Ford is profitable yet is asking for more concessions, and that it is time to take a stand against the company.

Gettelfinger said Saturday that opponents are telling workers that the UAW is giving up its right to strike in the next round of contract talks in 2011 — a charge Gettelfinger says is untrue.

"The Ford members retain the right to strike on every issue except improvements in wages and benefits," he said. "Those in opposition to this agreement are using that as an issue."

Those in opposition? Do you mean your own union members, Mr. Gettlefinger?