Fisker, UAW aim to reach labor deal before end of year

[GM2004]

Fisker, UAW aim to reach labor deal
Tue Nov 3, 2009 1:54pm EST
DETROIT (Reuters) - Fisker Automotive, a California-based start-up car company, expects to complete a deal with the United Auto Workers before year-end for the union to represent workers at an old General Motors Corp plant it is acquiring.
"We're doing some negotiations with the UAW that are going to go through in the coming months," Henrik Fisker, the company's founder and chief executive said.
Speaking at the Reuters Autos Summit in Detroit, Fisker said he expected to close the deal to buy the GM plant by January and would look to complete initial negotiations with the UAW before then.
Fisker is buying a Delaware assembly plant from the bankruptcy estate of General Motors Co GM.UL and has ambitious plans to develop a number of plug-in hybrid vehicles it would build and export from the facility.
Fisker announced last month that it was buying the old GM plant, which once produced the Pontiac Solstice and Saturn Sky sports cars, for $18 million.
Part of the funding to retool that plant to build plug-in hybrid vehicles would come from $528 million in low-cost loans from the U.S. government under a U.S. Department of Energy program to spur the development of more fuel-efficient cars.
Fisker said he had been encouraged by his meetings with UAW President Ron Gettelfinger and was confident that he could reach a deal with the union that would give the company low enough costs to allow it to export half of the output of the Delaware plant, which is expected to reach 100,000 units annually.
"I think from the talks we have had with the UAW and Ron Gettelfinger and some others in the organization that they're ready to make this a success and they're committed to it.
"We're ready to work with them and for this to be a success," Fisker said.
The U.S. auto industry has lost tens of thousands of jobs during a four-year downturn that has taken sales to the lowest level since the early 1980s.
Gettelfinger, who also attended the Reuters Autos Summit, said he was also confident a deal could be reached.
"These guys seem to have it together. If you look at speed of execution for a start-up, it seems sort of amazing what they can do," Gettelfinger said.
"We're very hopeful that we'll be able to represent workers there," he said.
Other automakers, including Asian automakers, have looked to build new factories in Southern states outside the area of traditional influence of the UAW.
But Fisker said the Delaware plant acquisition would be much cheaper than that alternative.
"One of the things that drew us was the skilled work force. If you're a start-up you could maybe go somewhere in the South and buy a greenfield and invest hundreds of millions of dollars," he said.
"But I think what's important for Fisker is to get skilled workers who have assembled cars and who understand what it takes to build a car."
(Reporting by Kevin Krolicki, editing by Gerald E. McCormick)

http://www.reuters.com/article/Autos...5A24OZ20091103

[goochman]

Just curious why Fisker would need to engage the UAW at all? They are buying a dead property and retooling it for their own use.

[ne_one]

Originally Posted by goochman

Just curious why Fisker would need to engage the UAW at all? They are buying a dead property and retooling it for their own use.

Sounds like they intend to hire former GM employees. The union evidently wants to preserve some control here.

[K-1]

Originally Posted by goochman

Just curious why Fisker would need to engage the UAW at all? They are buying a dead property and retooling it for their own use.

No idea. Take the building/grounds, drop the dead weight. Or have the workers locked themselves inside...?

[Ambalanche]

Originally Posted by goochman

Just curious why Fisker would need to engage the UAW at all? They are buying a dead property and retooling it for their own use.

I was thinking the same thing. Why is it that all American companies need to have unions but the transplants don't? Why would they want the UAW to hold them hostage at the negotiating table when companies like Turdota do whatever they want?

[sigma]

Originally Posted by Ambalanche

I was thinking the same thing. Why is it that all American companies need to have unions but the transplants don't? Why would they want the UAW to hold them hostage at the negotiating table when companies like Turdota do whatever they want?

Because you're operating under the assumption that the imports don't offer parity with the UAW contract to keep the UAW out of the plant. They do. Legacy benefits and costs have hamstrung the domestic automakers, not their current or previous UAW contracts.

Furthermore, the UAW represents a large pool of well trained, highly experienced, very productive workers that are already familiar with the plant and it's operations. Dealing with them cuts the startup time for the plant from between 6 months to two years down to almost nothing.

It makes sense.

[goochman]

Originally Posted by sigma

Because you're operating under the assumption that the imports don't offer parity with the UAW contract to keep the UAW out of the plant. They do. Legacy benefits and costs have hamstrung the domestic automakers, not their current or previous UAW contracts.

Furthermore, the UAW represents a large pool of well trained, highly experienced, very productive workers that are already familiar with the plant and it's operations. Dealing with them cuts the startup time for the plant from between 6 months to two years down to almost nothing.

It makes sense.

Makes sense Sigma - the article came off like they had to work with the UAW in order to use the plant - that is prob not the case but that they'd want to get a trained workforce in place vs having to bring new folks up to speed.

[Ambalanche]

Originally Posted by goochman

Makes sense Sigma - the article came off like they had to work with the UAW in order to use the plant

That's the way it read. I don't trust the union leaders though. They have been a greedy bunch! And just to block the flames in advance, I'm not talking about the workers. Other than voting, they really don't have the control of what the "leaders" do.

[Aprime]

Originally Posted by sigma

Because you're operating under the assumption that the imports don't offer parity with the UAW contract to keep the UAW out of the plant. They do. Legacy benefits and costs have hamstrung the domestic automakers, not their current or previous UAW contracts.

Furthermore, the UAW represents a large pool of well trained, highly experienced, very productive workers that are already familiar with the plant and it's operations. Dealing with them cuts the startup time for the plant from between 6 months to two years down to almost nothing.

It makes sense.

You're forgetting that Fishker is a company that wouldn't even be existing if it weren't for subsidies, government mandates and regulation. Soooo, they owe something to the UAW in a way. :P

[mbukukanyau]

Fisker is screwed before it even walked. It will be dead within a decade.

[CaptainDan]

Originally Posted by sigma

Because you're operating under the assumption that the imports don't offer parity with the UAW contract to keep the UAW out of the plant. They do. Legacy benefits and costs have hamstrung the domestic automakers, not their current or previous UAW contracts.

Furthermore, the UAW represents a large pool of well trained, highly experienced, very productive workers that are already familiar with the plant and it's operations. Dealing with them cuts the startup time for the plant from between 6 months to two years down to almost nothing.

It makes sense.

Even an experienced workforce is still going to need months or years to re-tool a plant. Even without any ownership change, it takes time (and money) to gear up to produce a new product.

You don't need the UAW to hire experienced workers. There are thousands of experienced former UAW workers available and willing to do those jobs with or without the union. The UAW does not own those workers.

I worry for Fisker. Are they being too lazy to actually figure out how to build a car/ run a plant. Are they thinking that they can just hire the existing crew to just go out and do it for them? That a plant can be re-tooled in a snap? That they can sell 100,000 cars a year to pay for that plant? That the US government will front the money to pay for all that? (they could be right about that one)

[tgferg67]

Originally Posted by sigma

Because you're operating under the assumption that the imports don't offer parity with the UAW contract to keep the UAW out of the plant. They do. Legacy benefits and costs have hamstrung the domestic automakers, not their current or previous UAW contracts.

Furthermore, the UAW represents a large pool of well trained, highly experienced, very productive workers that are already familiar with the plant and it's operations. Dealing with them cuts the startup time for the plant from between 6 months to two years down to almost nothing.

It makes sense.

True, but there is also the "dead" weight of some less desirable employees that you can not "get rid of" and replace with a better worker.

[jry]

Originally Posted by ne_one

Sounds like they intend to hire former GM employees. The union evidently wants to preserve some control here.

One of my engineer friends, cut loose from there, is applying at the new plant.