The United Auto Workers’ Catch-22 For President Biden: LRI INK

- Tweet0
- 0
- Pin It 0
- 0
- Subscribe to RSS
Subscribe

Subject: The United Auto Workers’ Catch-22 For President Biden: LRI INK

July 6, 2023

To visit the blog post, click on the link below the article.

The United Auto Workers’ Catch-22 For President Biden

by Kimberly Ricci

Joe Biden holds himself out as the most union-friendly president in U.S. history. His NLRB does everything possible to back that reputation up with anti-business rulings galore. However, he finds himself in an awkward situation with unions.

Biden’s actions could cost him a coveted UAW endorsement. Union members saw when he brokered a 2022 railway worker deal that a major union rejected.

The president responded by forcing the deal to avert a strike. This decision prevented railway workers from settling a core grievance: lack of sick pay.

Subsequently, the UAW has been playing hard to get by making Biden work for their 2024 endorsement. Union president Shawn Fain, who is new on the job and must quickly prove his worth to members, holds a vested interest in appearing to be, to put it bluntly, a hardass who will not tolerate a repeat of what happened to railway workers.

The most significant wrinkle: Biden cannot reconcile his pro-labor and pro-environment stances, and the latter does not jibe with staying on the UAW’s good side regarding EVs. Those cars are cheaper to produce than gas-powered autos. This also means that EV jobs pay less and are not as plentiful.

The wage differences are stark: EV factory hourly wages land between $16.50 and $20.00 per hour, with traditional auto plants paying anywhere from $32 to $60 per hour.

The UAW endorsed Biden in 2020, but could he lose such a tried-and-true ally? Ex-President Trump hopes so, and he recently aligned himself with Fain’s criticism, arguing that EVs will bring the “decimation” of jobs. However, Fain outwardly stressed, “Another Donald Trump presidency would be a disaster.”

So, will the UAW endorse no candidate? Stranger things have happened.

What lies ahead: UAW contract negotiations with the Detroit Big Three are the top priority for Fain, with current deals set to expire on Sept. 14. Fain has preemptively declared war on the companies. The EV issue will loom over negotiations, and one wonders if Biden will end up forcing another union deal. The UAW has also declared other issues to be top priorities, including restoring their long-lost COLA benefits. The path to a settlement will be complex in 2023.

Already, two significant developments do not bode well for smoothing over the ire:

Fain unloaded on Biden after his Energy Department planned to lend $9.2 billion to three EV plants in Kentucky and Tennessee that will be “a joint venture of Ford Motor (F.N) and South Korea's SK.” Fain also accused Biden of not considering the effect on auto worker wages.
The Energy Department announced $2 billion in grants toward retooling existing auto factories into EV plants to fast-track shifting two-thirds of new auto production into the EV market by 2032. The UAW argues that this aggressive timeline will cost the swift loss of thousands of auto jobs.

No winners here: The White House still insists that Biden prioritizes “good-paying, union jobs” for the auto industry. The UAW still accuses Biden of “actively funding the race to the bottom” for workers.

Update: Biden is putting long-time Democratic adviser Gene Sperling in charge of helping smooth the upcoming labor contract talks between the auto workers’ union and Big Three automakers, a White House official confirmed Monday.

Blog Post

Starbucks and the Pride Controversy: A Cup of Dissent

by Kimberly Ricci

As the Starbucks saga continues to unfurl, we see the company grappling with the repercussions of worker unionization at some of its stores in the United States.

The labor dispute, dubbed Strike with Pride, was initiated by Starbucks Workers United (SWU) on June 23rd, 2023, and took the form of a week-long unfair labor practice strike that involved over 3,000 workers from more than 150 stores nationwide, with the union claiming to have closed 20+ locations due to the strike.

The union called for a week-long unfair labor practice strike. They are demanding that Starbucks negotiate a contract and stop opposing the union, along with allegations that the company has implanted changes in policies and programs that have significantly impacted Starbucks’ LGBTQ+ workforce.

Workers are protesting reports that some Starbucks stores banned LGBTQ+ Pride displays this year after backlash against companies like Target, where angry customers tipped over Pride displays and confronted workers. The union also says Starbucks officials have warned workers that unionizing could threaten their health benefits, including gender-affirming care for transgender workers. The union filed an unfair labor practices charge about the Pride decorations with the National Labor Relations Board on June 7.

Despite Starbucks' denial, some workers, like Jack Savin, a shift supervisor at a Starbucks location in Madison, Wisconsin, report that Pride decorations were ordered to be removed by a district manager. This reportedly occurred without written notice and contradicted the company's past practice of allowing employees to celebrate their queer identities at the workplace.

Starbucks refutes these allegations, asserting that SWU is spreading false information about the company's benefits, policies, and negotiation efforts, all in an attempt to divide Starbucks' partners. The company contends that it has consistently supported the LGBTQ+ community and has not changed any policies on the celebration of Pride Month in June.

Starbucks responded to the union charges by filing its own unfair labor practice charge with the NLRB alleging that the union’s “unlawful campaign” has included making “recklessly false statements about Starbucks’ longstanding support of Pride month and decorations in its stores.”

This issue is far from resolved and will continue to unfold in the coming months. What does this mean for Starbucks and other businesses?

For Nick Kalm, founder and president of Reputation Partners, this is a good time for employers to look before they leap into the turbulent waters of social activism.

“...A company staking a position on almost anything is virtually certain to provoke an equally negative reaction from a significant portion of the country.

I'm not saying that companies should never take a position on a societal issue, but they shouldn't do it rashly or without careful analysis and deliberation.”

To assist employers who need help responding to these types of issues. Kalm provided a checklist to prepare a response. It's a complex world out there, folks. Let's navigate it wisely.

Blog Post

Links

**********

Union Bailout

Bar Eyes Implications Of NLRB Memo Targeting Noncompetes

Subscribe

Subject: The United Auto Workers’ Catch-22 For President Biden: LRI INK