Advertisement

Big 3 In Round 2 Over U.s. Bailout

The firms will try to convince skeptics that they deserve help.

AUTOS

December 02, 2008|Jim Puzzanghera and Ken Bensinger, Puzzanghera and Bensinger are Times staff writers.

Yet labor specialists wonder how much more the union can give. Last year, the UAW signed a landmark deal with the Big Three that will effectively allow the automakers to unload retiree healthcare costs starting in 2010.

Alan Reuther, legislative director for the UAW, said the union would discuss further givebacks, but added: "We're not prepared to be the only ones making sacrifices."


Advertisement

Savings from renegotiated UAW contracts are a huge future relief for the companies -- about a third of the frequently cited $74 hourly cost of UAW workers goes to retiree benefits.

But it also means that once those savings are realized, Detroit's labor costs are likely to be on par with those of Asian automakers producing cars with nonunion labor in the U.S., such as Toyota Motor Corp.

Even if the UAW agreed to more cuts, the savings to the Detroit Three might be surprisingly small.

Only a few years ago, GM's UAW payroll was well over 100,000. Today it's barely 55,000. As a result, even an across-the-board 20% pay cut "would result in a savings of only $1.1 billion per year," said Michigan State University professor Richard Block, a specialist in labor relations. "That's enough to keep them going for what, two weeks?"

Plans to ensure long-term viability

Last month, saying Detroit's Big Three had failed to make their case, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told the companies they would have to explain their plans for using federal money to ensure long-term viability.

"Members of Congress definitely proved their point last time that the money wasn't going to come easy," said Clint Currie, a Washington-based transportation analyst at Stanford Group Co. "We'll see if they've paid their pound of flesh."

GM and Chrysler have both expressed concern that they could run out of cash by early next year, whereas Ford has insisted that it does not necessarily need government aid and would take it only if there weren't too many strings attached.

Ford's sales are off by nearly as much as GM's this year, but its cash position is stronger thanks to $23 billion the company borrowed in late 2006, and the fact that Ford still has an untapped credit line worth more than $10 billion.

GM, on the other hand, has been unable to borrow cash and exhausted its last line of credit this summer.

Los Angeles Times Articles
|