ReportWire

Tag: compensation and benefits

  • Interest rates will stay high ‘as long as necessary’: European Central Bank leader

    Interest rates will stay high ‘as long as necessary’: European Central Bank leader

    [ad_1]

    FRANKFURT, Germany — The head of the European Central Bank said Monday that interest rates will stay high enough to restrict business activity for “as long as necessary” to beat back inflation. Still, she sympathized with homeowners who have seen their mortgage payments jump.

    Christine Lagarde said rates would stay high because upward pressure on prices “remains strong” in the 20 countries that use the euro currency.

    “Strong spending on holidays and travel” and increasing wages were slowing the decline in price levels even as the economy stays sluggish, she said. Annual inflation in the eurozone eased only slightly from 5.3% in July to 5.2% in August.

    “We remain determined to ensure that inflation returns to our 2% medium-term target in a timely manner,” Lagarde told the European Parliament’s committee on economic and monetary affairs. “Inflation continues to decline but is still expected to remain too high for too long.”

    The ECB this month raised its benchmark deposit rate to an all-time high of 4% after a record pace of increases from minus 0.5% in July 2022.

    “Do we also have on our mind … what pain it inflicts? It is on our mind, I can assure you,” Lagarde said during a question-and-answer period with lawmakers. “And yes, we know that 30% — 30% — of the households in the member states have variable interest rate mortgages. It is hard, we know that.”

    She noted the burden of inflation on lower-income households that pay a larger share of their income on basics like energy, saying that returning inflation quickly to 2% was the answer.

    “The faster it gets there, the more stable prices are, the less painful it will be going forward,” Lagarde said.

    Analysts think the ECB may be done raising rates given signs of increasing weakness in the European economy. Other central banks, including the Bank of England and the U.S. Federal Reserve, held off on rate increases last week as they draw closer to the end of their rapid hiking campaigns.

    Inflation broke out as the global economy rebounded from the COVID-19 pandemic, leading to supply chain backups, and then Russia invaded Ukraine, sending energy and food prices soaring.

    Lagarde has said interest rates are now high enough to make a “substantial contribution” to reducing inflation if “maintained for a sufficiently long duration.” The bank sees inflation declining to an average of 2.1% in 2025 after hitting a record-high 10.6% in October.

    Higher rates are central banks’ chief weapon against excessive inflation. They influence the cost of credit throughout the economy, making it more expensive to borrow for things like home purchases or building new business facilities. That reduces demand for goods and, in turn, inflation but also risks restraining economic growth.

    The ECB’s higher rates have triggered a sharp slowdown in real estate deals and construction — which are highly sensitive to credit costs — and ended a yearslong rally in eurozone home prices.

    Lagarde said the economy “broadly stagnated” in the first six months of this year and incoming data points to “further weakness” in the July-to-September quarter.

    She cited ECB forecasts that predict the economy to pick up as inflation declines, giving people more spending power, saying that “we do not have a recession in our baseline.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Auto workers still have room to expand their strike against car makers. But they also face risks

    Auto workers still have room to expand their strike against car makers. But they also face risks

    [ad_1]

    Even after escalating its strike against Detroit automakers on Friday, the United Auto Workers union still has plenty of leverage in its effort to force the companies to agree to significant increases in pay and benefits.

    Only about 12% of the union’s membership is so far taking part in the walkout. The UAW could, if it chose to, vastly expand the number of workers who could strike assembly plants and parts facilities of General Motors, Ford and Stellantis, the owner of the Jeep and Ram brands.

    Yet the UAW’s emerging strategy also carries potentially significant risks for the union. By expanding its strike from three large auto assembly plants to all 38 parts distribution centers of GM and Ford, the UAW risks angering people who might be unable to have their vehicles repaired at service centers that lack parts.

    The union’s thinking appears to be that by striking both vehicle production and parts facilities, it will force the automakers to negotiate a relatively quick end to the strike, now in its second week. To do so, though, some analysts say the union might have to act even more aggressively.

    “We believe the next step for UAW is the more nuclear option — going for a much more widespread strike on the core plants in and around Detroit,” said Daniel Ives, an analyst with Wedbush Securities. “That would be a torpedo.”

    Sam Abuelsamid, an analyst at the consulting firm Guidehouse Insights, suggested that with so many workers and factories still running, the union has a number of options with which to squeeze the companies harder.

    “They could add more assembly plants to the list,” Abuelsamid said. “They could target more of the plants that are building the most profitable vehicles.”

    As examples, he mentioned a plant in Flint, Michigan, where GM builds heavy-duty pickups, and a Stellantis factory in Sterling Heights, Michigan, that produces Ram trucks.

    All three companies said that talks with the union continued on Saturday, though officials said they expected no major announcements.

    In Canada on Saturday, Ford workers began voting on a tentative agreement that their union said would increase base pay by 15% over three years and provide cost-of-living increases and $10,000 ratification bonuses. The tentative deal was forged earlier this week, hours before a strike deadline.

    The union, Unifor, said the deal, which covers 5,600 workers, also includes better retirement benefits. If the deal is ratified in voting that will end Sunday morning, the union will use it as a pattern for new contracts at GM and Stellantis plants in Canada.

    In the United States, the UAW began its walkout more than a week ago by striking three assembly plants — one each at GM, Ford and Stellantis. In expanding the strike on Friday, the UAW struck only the parts-distribution centers of GM and Stellantis. Ford was spared from the latest walkouts because of progress that company has made in negotiations with the union, said UAW President Shawn Fain.

    Striking the parts centers is designed to turn up pressure on the companies by hurting dealers who service vehicles made by GM and Stellantis, the successor to Fiat Chrysler. Service shops are a profit center for dealers, so the strategy could prove effective. Millions of motorists depend on those shops to maintain and repair their cars and trucks.

    “It severely hits the dealerships, and it hurts the customers who purchased those very expensive vehicles in good faith,” said Art Wheaton, a labor expert at Cornell University. “You just told all your customers, ‘Hey we can’t fix those $50,000 to $70,000 cars we just sold you because we can’t get you the parts.’ ”

    The more combative union has declined to discuss its strike strategy publicly. Fain has said repeatedly that a critical part of its plan is to keep the companies guessing about the UAW’s next move. Indeed, the union has shown unusual discipline in sticking to its talking points.

    On a picket line Friday, Fain was asked whether striking against the spare-parts centers would hurt — and potentially alienate — consumers.

    “What has hurt the consumers in the long run is the fact the companies have raised prices on vehicles 35% in the last four years,” he shot back. “It’s not because of our wages. Our wages went up 6%, the CEO pay went up 40%. “

    Selling parts and performing service is highly profitable for car dealers. AutoNation reported a gross profit margin of 46% from service shops at its dealerships last year. The problem for the companies is that dealerships and other repair shops typically have lean inventories and depend on receiving parts quickly from the manufacturers’ warehouses.

    Mike Stanton, president of the National Automobile Dealers Association, said his members want to avoid anything that would impair customer service, “so we certainly hope automakers and the UAW can reach an agreement quickly and amicably.”

    To make up for the loss of striking workers, the automakers are weighing their options, including staffing the parts warehouses with salaried workers.

    “We have contingency plans for various scenarios and are prepared to do what is best for our business and customers,” said David Barnas, a GM spokesman. “We are evaluating if and when to enact those plans.”

    Similarly, Jodi Tinson, a Stellantis spokeswoman, said, “We have a contingency plan in place to ensure we are fulfilling our commitments to our dealers and our customers.” She declined to provide additional details.

    In negotiating with the companies, the union is pointing to the carmakers’ huge recent profits and high CEO pay as it seeks wage increases of about 36% over four years. The companies have offered a little over half that amount.

    The companies have said they cannot afford to meet the union’s demands because they need to invest profits in a costly transition from gas-powered cars to electric vehicles. They have dismissed out of hand some of the demands, including 40 hours’ pay for a 32-hour work week.

    ___

    Associated Press writer Alexandra Olson in New York contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Want to live in London or New York? Good luck if you’re renting | CNN Business

    Want to live in London or New York? Good luck if you’re renting | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    London
    CNN
     — 

    In May, Viveca Chow hurriedly transferred $3,700 over her phone while standing in the lobby of a building in Queens, New York. She made the upfront payment to secure an apartment minutes after seeing it.

    It was a moment the 28-year-old lifestyle influencer — forced to leave her previous accommodation after the landlord increased her monthly rent by $1,000 — described to CNN as “dystopian.”

    Yet it is something that Chow, along with millions of renters in big cities, has come to expect as part of the fight for affordable housing. Her realtor urged her to pay the holding deposit on the spot to secure the one-bedroom unit.

    In many urban centers, an influx of workers and students after the pandemic has collided with a lack of accommodation for rent, high levels of inflation, and rising interest rates that are trapping some people in the rental market when they would otherwise be buying a home.

    Average rents in New York and Sydney grew by an inflation-busting 4.7% and 6.9% respectively in the year to August, according to real estate firm Knight Frank. While growth in rental costs in both cities has slowed compared with its pandemic peaks, average rents are still at all-time highs.

    In other places, rents are rising even faster. In London, the average annual rise in the cost of a rental property exceeded 17% in April and again last month, the biggest jumps since real estate agency Hamptons started collecting the data in 2014.

    That runaway growth far exceeds both inflation and pay raises in the United Kingdom.

    Many are struggling to meet the costs.

    According to property website Realtor.com, affordability in the New York metropolitan area deteriorated the most out of the 50 largest US metro areas in the year to July. The share of median household income in the New York area eaten up by the median rent rose from 35% to 37% in that time.

    Based on one approach, housing costs are judged affordable if they account for no more than 30% of the typical household income, Realtor.com said. This is also the benchmark used by the UK Office for National Statistics when assessing private rents.

    In London, the destination for many UK college students looking for work after graduating, renting has become “entirely unaffordable” for that cohort, said SpareRoom, the UK’s biggest room search site, in a recent analysis.

    The platform used the ONS’s measure of affordability in its study and the average graduate starting salary of £29,000 ($36,000) a year. According to SpareRoom’s latest Quarterly Rental Index, average monthly room rent reached £971 ($1,190) in the second quarter, up by almost a fifth compared with the same period in 2022.

    Barnaby Scudds is feeling the pain. The public relations executive moved to London in March after graduating last year and now pays £975 ($1,195) a month to rent a room, which gobbles up more than half of his monthly paycheck.

    “I’m paid well for the work that I do, and yet it’s still difficult,” he told CNN.

    Even at those prices, rooms get snapped up fast.

    “It is very difficult because properties come on at about six o’clock in the morning generally, and they are normally gone by six o’clock in the evening,” he said.

    A property for rent in London, seen in August.

    Matt Hutchinson, communications director at SpareRoom, told CNN that the UK’s chronic lack of supply of rental properties was to blame.

    Beyond problems afflicting most global cities, such as a proliferation of short-term rentals offered through platforms like Airbnb, the shortage of places for long-term rent in London is exacerbated by local factors.

    Since 2016, the UK government has increased taxes on purchases of second homes and cut the amount of tax landlords can claim back. Put simply, being a landlord in the UK isn’t as lucrative as it used to be.

    “[It] is a much more tight-margin experience than it was six, seven years ago. And a lot of people are just selling up and leaving the market,” Hutchinson said, adding that rising interest rates, as well as higher costs for labor and materials, had discouraged many from investing in rental properties.

    In a recent note about rental markets in 10 cities worldwide, Liam Bailey, global head of research at Knight Frank, concluded: “Affordability of housing is set to become the leading political issue within the next 12 months.”

    London’s mayor, Sadiq Khan, last month reiterated his call for rent control, urging the UK government to impose a two-year rent freeze for the capital’s 2.7 million private tenants. It is a version of a policy proposed by politicians and campaigners over the years as a way out of the affordability crisis.

    But rental caps, while instinctively appealing, are generally “a bad idea,” Nikodem Szumilo, director of the Bartlett Real Estate Institute at University College London, told CNN.

    “It benefits people who live in the rent control unit and maybe the politicians who impose the policy, but nobody else,” Szumilo said, noting that rental caps discouraged home builders from investing in new units, which in turn limited supply growth in places where demand might be rising.

    A better way, Szumilo argues, is to simply make it easier to build more homes. Tokyo, the world’s most populous city, housing more than 37 million people, has a “very deregulated market” where rents are “relatively stable,” he said.

    Lifestyle influencer Viveca Chow feels lucky to have found a rent-stabilized apartment in New York City.

    Policies that help people become homeowners — for example, offering subsidies on down payments or on mortgages for first-time buyers, as the UK government has done — are also effective, Szumilo said, because they help ease demand in the rental market.

    Still, Chow in New York is grateful for rent control.

    She and her partner live in one of the city’s coveted rent-stabilized units, which means the $3,700 they pay each month can’t increase by more than 3.75% if they renew the lease for another year. That’s below the 4.7% annual increase in rental costs in the city recorded by Knight Frank at the start of August.

    That “doesn’t necessarily mean it’s cheap,” Chow said, but the cap provides a welcome safety net after the instabilities — and indignities — of her last place.

    “We didn’t even have a kitchen, a proper kitchen. It was like a kitchen nailed to the wall. So I was like, you’re not raising $1,000 on me!”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Contract negotiations: UAW strike puts the four-day workweek back in focus | CNN Business

    Contract negotiations: UAW strike puts the four-day workweek back in focus | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    When the United Auto Workers called a strike last week against General Motors, Ford and Stellantis, one of their demands focused on an idea circulating on the periphery of labor reform circles.

    In addition to calling for a 36% pay raise and increased job security, union members want a 32-hour, four-day workweek with no pay cuts.

    Proposals to shorten the workweek have gained traction in recent years, with the flexibility of pandemic-era remote work fueling many of these calls. The accelerating use of artificial intelligence in the workplace has also pushed some workers to question the necessity of a 40-hour week.

    Sen. Bernie Sanders has long been a vocal proponent of a shortened workweek.

    “We are looking at an explosion in this country of artificial intelligence and robotics. And that means that the average worker is going to be much more productive,” the Vermont Independent told CNN’s Jake Tapper on Sunday. “The question as a nation that we have to ask ourselves is: Who is going to benefit from this productivity? We should begin a serious discussion — and the UAW is doing that — about substantially lowering the workweek.”

    Several countries have conducted trials of four-day workweeks, with the largest held in the United Kingdom last year. The trial lasted six months and encompassed about 2,900 workers across 61 companies. Participants reported better sleep, more time spent with their children and lower levels of burnout.

    “It would be an extraordinary thing to see people have more time to spend with their kids, with their families, to be able to do more cultural activities, get a better education,” said Sanders. “People in America are stressed out for a dozen different reasons, and that’s one of the reasons why life expectancy in our country is actually in decline.”

    A separate study conducted in Iceland between 2015 and 2019 found reducing the number of work days a week did not lower productivity. A similar program in the United States and Canada, composed of dozens of businesses, found none of the companies planned to return to the five-day standard after the trial ended.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • UAW justifies wage demands by pointing to CEO pay raises. So how high were they?

    UAW justifies wage demands by pointing to CEO pay raises. So how high were they?

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — It’s been a central argument for the United Auto Workers union: If Detroit’s three automakers raised CEO pay by 40% over the past four years, workers should get similar raises.

    UAW President Shawn Fain has repeatedly cited the figure, contrasting it with the 6% pay raises autoworkers have received since their last contract in 2019. He opened negotiations with a demand for a similar 40% wage increase over four years, along with the return of pensions and cost of living increases. The UAW has since lowered its demand to a 36% wage increase but the two sides remain far apart in contract talks, triggering a strike.

    Fain’s focus on CEO pay is part of a growing trend of emboldened labor unions citing the wealth gap between workers and the top bosses to bolster demand for better pay and working conditions. In June, Netflix shareholders rejected executive pay packages in a nonbinding vote, just days after the Writers Guild of America wrote letters urging investors to vote against the pay proposals, saying it would be inappropriate amid Hollywood’s ongoing strike by writers. The WGA wrote similar letters targeting the executive pay at Comcast and NBCUniversal.

    Fain has pushed back against arguments that a big pay bump for the union would jack up costs of vehicles and put the Big Three automakers — General Motors, Ford and Stellantis (formerly Chrysler) — at a disadvantage against foreign competitors with lower-cost workforces in the race to transition to electric vehicles.

    “In the last four years, the price of vehicles went up 30%. Our wages went up 6%, The CEOs got 40%. There were billions of dollars in shareholder dividends. So our wages aren’t the problem,” Fain said in a recent interview with The Associated Press.

    CEO pay has ballooned for decades, while wages for ordinary workers have lagged. But did the Big Three chief executives really get 40% pay increases? Not exactly.

    “I don’t know where the 40% came from,” said General Motors CEO Mary Barra at a new conference when asked if the UAW’s numbers were accurate.

    Executive pay is notoriously complicated to calculate because so much of it comes in the form of stock grants or stock options. A detailed look at the compensation packages at all three companies shows how the UAW’s claim both overstates and understates reality, depending on the view.

    Barra, the only one of the three who held the role since 2019, is the highest paid, with a compensation package of worth $28.98 million in 2022. The single biggest component was $14.62 million in stock grants, which vest over three years and whose ultimate value depends on stock performance and other metrics.

    Her pay has increased 34% since 2019, according data from public filings analyzed for AP by Equilar.

    Ford CEO James Farley received nearly $21 million in total compensation in 2022, a 25% increase over the $16.76 million then-CEO William Clay Ford received in 2019. Farley’s package last year included $15.14 million in stock awards, which also vest over three years with an ultimate value dependent on performance.

    Where the the comparison gets complicated is at Stellantis, which was formed in 2021 with the merger of Italian-American conglomerate Fiat Chrysler Automobiles and French PSA Group. Because it is a European company, the way Stellantis discloses executive pay differs significantly from GM and Ford.

    In its annual renumeration report, Stellantis reported CEO Carlos Tavares’ 2022 pay was 23.46 million euros. That’s a nearly 77% increase over then Fiat Chrysler CEO Mike Manley’s 2019 pay of 13.28 million euros.

    Those are the numbers used by the UAW when it calculated that three automakers have, collectively, increased CEO pay by 40.1% since 2019, according to the methodology the union provided to The AP.

    But there’s a catch: Stellantis’ figures reflect “realized pay,” which include the value of previously granted equity that vested during the reporting year. U.S. companies, in contrast, use grant date value of stock packages awarded to executives during the reporting year.

    In its analysis, Equilar used the “grant date” method to make an equivalent comparison between all three CEOs. By that measure, Tavares’ 2022 compensation was in 21.95 million euros in 2022, including 10.9 million in stock awards with a three-year vesting period.

    That’s actually 24% decline from Manley’s compensation package in 2019, which was 29.04 million euros, according to Equilar.

    So, is Tavares really making less than Manley was four years ago? Not really.

    That’s because in some years, talking about a CEO’s “realized pay” can obscure exorbitant pay packages approved by company boards.

    Take Tavares’ 2021 compensation package, which included special incentive award of 25 million euros in cash as well as stock worth 19.56 million euros — all contingent on long-term performance goals — granted to Tavares in recognition of “his essential role” in leading the company through the merger.

    That one-time award, which came on top of millions of more in regular compensation, alone pushed Tavares’ 2021 compensation package far above what Manley got in 2019.

    Stellantis shareholders voted 52.1% to reject the pay proposal in their annual meeting, though the vote was only advisory and the board approved his package anyway.

    The CEOs of GM and Ford also saw their compensation packages peak in 2021, before declining slightly in 2022.

    However you slice the numbers, the gap between CEO pay and rank-and-file workers at all three companies is gigantic.

    At GM, the median worker pay was $80,034 in 2022. It would take that worker 362 years to make Barra’s annual compensation.

    At Ford, where the media pay $74, 691, it would take 281 years.

    At Stellantis, with a median pay of 64,328 euros, it would take 365 years, although the company noted its its annual report that the disparity includes expenses related to Tavares’ one-time grant. Excluding that, the pay ratio is 298-1.

    How extreme that disparity? It depends on the comparison.

    It’s far above the typical pay gap at S&P 500 companies, which was 186-1 according to AP’s annual CEO pay survey, which uses data analyzed by Equilar.

    And it’s astronomical by historical standards. According to a study of the 350 largest publicly traded U.S. firms by the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute, the CEO-to-Worker pay ratio was just 15-1 in 1965.

    The automakers, for their part, emphasize that their foreign competitors pay their workers much less. Including benefits, workers at the Detroit 3 automakers receive around $60 an hour, according to Harry Katz, a labor professor at Cornell University. At foreign-based automakers with U.S. factories, the compensation is about $40 to $45.

    Then there’s Tesla.

    CEO Elon Musk’s 2022 compensation was reported as zero in the company’s proxy statement, rendering its official pay ratio meaningless. Of course, that’s because Tesla hasn’t awarded Musk new packages since a 2018 long-term compensation plan that could potentially be worth more than $50 billion and is facing a legal challenge from shareholders.

    But the proxy offers glimpse at the mind-boggling wealth disparity between its workers and one of the world’s richest men.

    The filing reported Musk’s total “realized compensation” in 2021 at more than $737 million. A typical Tesla worker earned $40,723 that year.

    According to the proxy, for that worker to make Musk’s “realized compensation” that year, it would take more than 18,000 years.

    ______

    AP Auto Writer Tom Krishner in Detroit contributed to this story.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • UAW justifies wage demands by pointing to CEO pay raises. So how high were they?

    UAW justifies wage demands by pointing to CEO pay raises. So how high were they?

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — It’s been a central argument for the United Auto Workers union: If Detroit’s three automakers raised CEO pay by 40% over the past four years, workers should get similar raises.

    UAW President Shawn Fain has repeatedly cited the figure, contrasting it with the 6% pay raises autoworkers have received since their last contract in 2019. He opened negotiations with a demand for a similar 40% wage increase over four years, along with the return of pensions and cost of living increases. The UAW has since lowered its demand to a 36% wage increase but the two sides remain far apart in contract talks, triggering a strike.

    Fain’s focus on CEO pay is part of a growing trend of emboldened labor unions citing the wealth gap between workers and the top bosses to bolster demand for better pay and working conditions. In June, Netflix shareholders rejected executive pay packages in a nonbinding vote, just days after the Writers Guild of America wrote letters urging investors to vote against the pay proposals, saying it would be inappropriate amid Hollywood’s ongoing strike by writers. The WGA wrote similar letters targeting the executive pay at Comcast and NBCUniversal.

    Fain has pushed back against arguments that a big pay bump for the union would jack up costs of vehicles and put the Big Three automakers — General Motors, Ford and Stellantis (formerly Chrysler) — at a disadvantage against foreign competitors with lower-cost workforces in the race to transition to electric vehicles.

    “In the last four years, the price of vehicles went up 30%. Our wages went up 6%, The CEOs got 40%. There were billions of dollars in shareholder dividends. So our wages aren’t the problem,” Fain said in a recent interview with The Associated Press.

    CEO pay has ballooned for decades, while wages for ordinary workers have lagged. But did the Big Three chief executives really get 40% pay increases? Not exactly.

    “I don’t know where the 40% came from,” said General Motors CEO Mary Barra at a new conference when asked if the UAW’s numbers were accurate.

    Executive pay is notoriously complicated to calculate because so much of it comes in the form of stock grants or stock options. A detailed look at the compensation packages at all three companies shows how the UAW’s claim both overstates and understates reality, depending on the view.

    Barra, the only one of the three who held the role since 2019, is the highest paid, with a compensation package of worth $28.98 million in 2022. The single biggest component was $14.62 million in stock grants, which vest over three years and whose ultimate value depends on stock performance and other metrics.

    Her pay has increased 34% since 2019, according data from public filings analyzed for AP by Equilar.

    Ford CEO James Farley received nearly $21 million in total compensation in 2022, a 25% increase over the $16.76 million then-CEO William Clay Ford received in 2019. Farley’s package last year included $15.14 million in stock awards, which also vest over three years with an ultimate value dependent on performance.

    Where the the comparison gets complicated is at Stellantis, which was formed in 2021 with the merger of Italian-American conglomerate Fiat Chrysler Automobiles and French PSA Group. Because it is a European company, the way Stellantis discloses executive pay differs significantly from GM and Ford.

    In its annual renumeration report, Stellantis reported CEO Carlos Tavares’ 2022 pay was 23.46 million euros. That’s a nearly 77% increase over then Fiat Chrysler CEO Mike Manley’s 2019 pay of 13.28 million euros.

    Those are the numbers used by the UAW when it calculated that three automakers have, collectively, increased CEO pay by 40.1% since 2019, according to the methodology the union provided to The AP.

    But there’s a catch: Stellantis’ figures reflect “realized pay,” which include the value of previously granted equity that vested during the reporting year. U.S. companies, in contrast, use grant date value of stock packages awarded to executives during the reporting year.

    In its analysis, Equilar used the “grant date” method to make an equivalent comparison between all three CEOs. By that measure, Tavares’ 2022 compensation was in 21.95 million euros in 2022, including 10.9 million in stock awards with a three-year vesting period.

    That’s actually 24% decline from Manley’s compensation package in 2019, which was 29.04 million euros, according to Equilar.

    So, is Tavares really making less than Manley was four years ago? Not really.

    That’s because in some years, talking about a CEO’s “realized pay” can obscure exorbitant pay packages approved by company boards.

    Take Tavares’ 2021 compensation package, which included special incentive award of 25 million euros in cash as well as stock worth 19.56 million euros — all contingent on long-term performance goals — granted to Tavares in recognition of “his essential role” in leading the company through the merger.

    That one-time award, which came on top of millions of more in regular compensation, alone pushed Tavares’ 2021 compensation package far above what Manley got in 2019.

    Stellantis shareholders voted 52.1% to reject the pay proposal in their annual meeting, though the vote was only advisory and the board approved his package anyway.

    The CEOs of GM and Ford also saw their compensation packages peak in 2021, before declining slightly in 2022.

    However you slice the numbers, the gap between CEO pay and rank-and-file workers at all three companies is gigantic.

    At GM, the median worker pay was $80,034 in 2022. It would take that worker 362 years to make Barra’s annual compensation.

    At Ford, where the media pay $74, 691, it would take 281 years.

    At Stellantis, with a median pay of 64,328 euros, it would take 365 years, although the company noted its its annual report that the disparity includes expenses related to Tavares’ one-time grant. Excluding that, the pay ratio is 298-1.

    How extreme that disparity? It depends on the comparison.

    It’s far above the typical pay gap at S&P 500 companies, which was 186-1 according to AP’s annual CEO pay survey, which uses data analyzed by Equilar.

    And it’s astronomical by historical standards. According to a study of the 350 largest publicly traded U.S. firms by the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute, the CEO-to-Worker pay ratio was just 15-1 in 1965.

    The automakers, for their part, emphasize that their foreign competitors pay their workers much less. Including benefits, workers at the Detroit 3 automakers receive around $60 an hour, according to Harry Katz, a labor professor at Cornell University. At foreign-based automakers with U.S. factories, the compensation is about $40 to $45.

    Then there’s Tesla.

    CEO Elon Musk’s 2022 compensation was reported as zero in the company’s proxy statement, rendering its official pay ratio meaningless. Of course, that’s because Tesla hasn’t awarded Musk new packages since a 2018 long-term compensation plan that could potentially be worth more than $50 billion and is facing a legal challenge from shareholders.

    But the proxy offers glimpse at the mind-boggling wealth disparity between its workers and one of the world’s richest men.

    The filing reported Musk’s total “realized compensation” in 2021 at more than $737 million. A typical Tesla worker earned $40,723 that year.

    According to the proxy, for that worker to make Musk’s “realized compensation” that year, it would take more than 18,000 years.

    ______

    AP Auto Writer Tom Krishner in Detroit contributed to this story.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Autoworkers strike deadline nears as negotiators rush to avoid historic walkout | CNN Business

    Autoworkers strike deadline nears as negotiators rush to avoid historic walkout | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Detroit
    CNN
     — 

    With just hours to go before labor contracts expire at America’s three unionized automakers, thousands of autoworkers could walk off the job.

    Those limited, targeted strikes could be enough to grind production to a halt at General Motors, Ford and Stellantis, which builds vehicles under the Jeep, Ram, Dodge and Chrysler brands for North America.

    But the uncertainty and confusion underscore the high stakes, with a possible historic strike at all three major automakers, disruptions to the local and national economies, and, perhaps more than anything, a hint at the future of manufacturing jobs in America.

    The union and the automakers continued to negotiate down to the wire on Thursday. GM made a new offer on Thursday afternoon, including a 20% raise, matching Ford’s offer.

    “We don’t want there to be a strike. We’re ready to work until the deadline,” Ford CEO Jim Farley told CNN. “We’d like to make history by making a historic deal, not having a historic strike,” he said.

    And President Joe Biden himself spoke to leaders of the union and the automakers, as a strike could be politically costly for him, as well.

    UAW President Shawn Fain on Wednesday evening announced plans for those targeted strikes at any company that fails to reach a labor deal with the union before contracts expire at 11:59 pm Thursday. Fain suggested the strategy, including the possibility of ramping up strikes as negotiating continues, would give the UAW more leverage. “We have the power to keep escalating and keep taking plants out,” he said.

    But Farley said on CNN Thursday that striking plants that make critical parts could affect workers at downstream assembly plants.

    “We can’t make a vehicle without an engine or transmission or stamping. So those people will, you know, basically be furloughed,” Farley said.

    Slowing or stopping the production of a few engine or transmission plants at each company could be as effective at stopping operations as a full strike at all plants, according to industry experts.

    One engine or transmission location per company might be enough to shut down nearly three-quarters of the US assembly plants, said Jeff Schuster, global head of automotive for GlobalData, an industry consultant.

    “Two plants per company, you can pretty much idle North America,” he said.

    Halting the companies’ assembly lines would likely happen in less than a week that way, Schuster said.

    One advantage for the union of a targeted strike is the potential to save resources and extend a possible walkout. Striking union members are eligible for $500 a week from the union’s strike fund.

    If all 145,000 UAW members among the three automakers were to strike at the same time, it could cost the fund more than $70 million a week, draining the $825 million fund.

    If the companies shut down operations and lay off members who are not technically on strike, those workers could be eligible to receive state unemployment benefits rather than strike benefits, which could preserve the union’s resources.

    Strikers are not eligible for unemployment benefits, but workers on temporary layoff can receive the benefits, which differ by state but would be less than the union’s $500 strike pay. There also are legal questions in different states about qualifying for unemployment.

    An official with Ford told reporters Thursday that under state law, workers in Michigan and Ohio were not eligible to receive unemployment benefits if they were laid off due to lack of parts at their plant caused by a strike. There are some other states, such as Kentucky and Tennessee, where they would be able to receive unemployment benefits, according to the officials.

    But they said none of the Ford UAW members would be eligible for so-called “sub-pay,” which they typically receive during temporary layoffs. Sub pay is far more lucrative, covering most of the gap between unemployment benefits, typically less than $300 a week, and normal company pay, which can be close to $1,300 a week.

    GM CEO Mary Barra sent a letter to employees Thursday saying the company’s latest offer now includes a 20% raise, with an immediate 10% pay hike. The lower paid temporary employees would get $20 an hour, which represents a 20% raise from the current $16.67 an hour they receive. She called the offer “historic.”

    “We are working with urgency and have proposed yet another increasingly strong offer with the goal of reaching an agreement tonight. Remember: we had a strike in 2019 and nobody won,” she said in the letter.

    Farley told CNN the offer from Ford of a 20% raise over the life of the contract is the most lucrative offer the company has made to the union in the 80 years it has been there. But he said meeting the union’s demands of close to a 40% raise, along with a four-day work week and other benefit improvements, would have been unaffordable.

    Farley blamed the union for the lack of progress in negotiations. But the union has blamed the companies for waiting until the end of August or early September to make their first counteroffers.

    The union came up with the 40% raise request based on the increase in the pay of CEOs at the three automakers over the last four years. Ford CEO pay rose 21%, from $17 million for Farley’s predecessor Jim Hackett in 2019, to $21 million for Farley last year. (Farley is the lowest compensated of the three CEOs.)

    Asked why the union workers shouldn’t get the same increases, Farley responded, “We’re really open to huge increases.” As to the 40% increases for CEOs, Farley responded, “I wasn’t CEO four years ago, but we have put on the table huge increases, double digit increases.”

    Ford has not had a strike since 1978; it has more UAW workers than the other two automakers.

    President Joe Biden spoke with Fain and leaders of the major auto companies “to discuss the status of ongoing negotiations,” the White House said Thursday.

    The White House declined to say Wednesday that Biden would support UAW workers if they chose to strike.

    “I’m gonna leave it at, [Biden] believes the auto workers deserve a contract that sustains middle class jobs and wants the parties to stay at the table, to work round the clock to get a win-win agreement,” Council of Economic Advisors Chair Jared Bernstein told reporters during Wednesday’s White House press briefing.

    Biden became directly involved in 11th hour negotiations a year ago to stop engineers and conductors at the nation’s major freight railroad from going on strike and was credited by both sides with a deal being reached at that time. But Biden and Congress had power under a different labor law to keep workers on the job by imposing a contract, a power he used later in the year when rank-and-file rail workers rejected the deal he brokered and again threatened to strike

    The autoworkers fall under a different labor law, one that leaves Biden with no power to stop a walkout. And he has limited influence with the UAW, which has been critical of his push to have the industry convert to electric vehicles, a move that could cost members jobs in the long run.

    In a statement midday Thursday, GM said it remains in “good faith negotiations” with the UAW but cautioned that a strike would be disruptive to its business.

    “Any disruption would negatively impact our employees and customers, and would have an immediate ripple effect across our communities,” a company spokesperson said.

    One sticking point in negotiations is that wages are only part of the gap between the two sides. In some ways it might be the least difficult problem to solve, said Patrick Anderson, CEO of Anderson Economic Group, a Michigan research firm.

    “The difference between the automakers and the unions on wages is a gap that could be closed,” said Anderson. “The differences involving non-wage demands are a gulf, not a gap.”

    The union is attempting to reverse deep concessions that go back as far as 2007. At the time, years of losses had left Ford nearly out of cash, and GM and Chrysler were on their way to bankruptcy and federal bailouts.

    The number one concession the union wants to end is a lower tier of wages and benefits for workers hired since 2007. While top pay for those newer hires, who today make up a majority of membership, is the same as the $32.32 paid to more senior members, it takes many more years to reach that level.

    The union also wants to restore traditional pension plans for those hired since 2007, as the more senior workers now receive, as well as the same retiree health care coverage. And to protect members from rising prices, it wants a return of the cost-of-living adjustments to pay that all employees lost in 2007.

    Even Fain calls those demands “ambitious,” but he said they’re driven by record or near record profits at the automakers.

    Pandemic supply chain disruptions and shortages of some parts, particularly computer chips, have led to record car prices. The average purchase price of a new car in August was nearly $48,000, according to Edmunds. That’s up 30% from August of 2019.

    Automakers have used their limited supply of parts to build vehicles loaded with options to maximize profits. That’s produced a strong bottom line. General Motors reported record profits in 2022, and Ford posted near-record profits as well. Stellantis, a European-based automaker formed in 2021 by the merger of Fiat Chrysler and PSA Group, had 2022 profits up 26% compared to its first year of combined operations.

    A strike that halts production nationwide could also be costly for the automakers at a time of strong demand by car buyers and strong competition from nonunion automakers such as Tesla and foreign brands. GM said it lost $2.9 billion during its 2019 strike.

    While the automakers have done their best to build up inventory at dealerships, car buyers could have trouble finding some of the models they want and could have to wait longer for their choice of colors and options. And limited supplies could put upward pressure on some vehicle prices.

    – CNN’s DJ Judd contributed to this report

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • California fast food workers to get $20 minimum wage under new deal between labor and the industry

    California fast food workers to get $20 minimum wage under new deal between labor and the industry

    [ad_1]

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Most fast food workers in California would be paid at least $20 per hour next year under a new bill in the state Legislature aimed at ending a standoff between the industry and labor unions over wages and working conditions.

    California’s minimum wage is already among the highest in the country at $15.50 per hour. The bill, filed Monday with the blessing of both labor unions and the fast food industry, would increase the minimum wage to $20 per hour for workers at restaurants in California that have at least 60 locations nationwide — with an exception for restaurants that make and sell their own bread, like Panera Bread.

    The bill will impact about 500,000 fast food workers in California, according to the Service Employees International Union, which has been working to unionize fast food workers in the state. They include Ingrid Vilorio, who works at a Jack In The Box in the San Francisco Bay Area. She said the raise will help her family, who until recently was sharing a house with two other families to afford rent.

    “A lot of us (in the fast-food industry) have to have two jobs to make ends meet, this will give us some breathing space,” said Vilorio, who also works as a nanny.

    The bill is the first of what could be multiple victories for labor unions at the California Legislature this year on the heels of high-profile strikes in the entertainment and hospitality industries dubbed by some as “hot labor summer.” On Monday, the state Assembly voted to advance a proposal to give striking workers unemployment benefits — a policy change that could eventually benefit Hollywood actors and writers and Los Angeles-area hotel workers who have been on strike for much of this year.

    And health care workers are pushing for a $25 minimum wage in a bill that could get a vote before the state Legislature adjourns for the year on Thursday.

    “For us the big victory here is a seat at the table with employers,” said Mary Kay Henry, international president of the Service Employees International Union. “We think the lesson here is major corporations in the United States that operate globally can sit down and think through common issues in their industry with workers.”

    It’s unusual, but not unprecedented, for states to have minimum wages for specific industries. Minnesota lawmakers created a council to set wages for nursing home workers. In 2021, Colorado announced a $15 minimum wage for direct care workers in home and community based services.

    In California, most fast food workers are over 18 and the main providers for their family, according to Enrique Lopezlira, director of the University of California-Berkeley Labor Center’s Low Wage Work Program.

    Raising the minimum wage can both benefit and hinder the economy, according to Sung Won Sohn, an economist at Loyola Marymount University. He said any time wages increase in one sector, it tends to increase salaries in other sectors, too — meaning many other workers will benefit. But higher wages generally mean higher inflation, which increase the price of goods for everyone. Sohn said he estimates about two-thirds of the consumer price index — a measure of the change in prices for goods and services — can be explained by labor costs.

    “From a purely economic analysis, the consequences are pretty clear,” Sohn said. “From a social point of view, many of the workers who are engaged in lower wage jobs — they really need it.”

    The fast food industry’s unique structure — with independent owners operating franchises under the umbrella of large corporations — have made it difficult for governments to regulate and labor unions to organize. Last year, California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a law to create a Fast Food Council with the authority to raise wages and set workplace standards for the fast food industry.

    Before the law could take effect, the fast food industry gathered enough signatures to qualify a referendum on the law in the November 2024 election. That meant the law would be on hold until voters could decide whether to overturn it.

    Furious, labor unions responded by sponsoring legislation this year that make fast food companies like McDonald’s liable for any misdeeds of their mostly independent franchise operators in the state. Democratic lawmakers also restored funding to the Industrial Welfare Commission, a long-dormant state agency that has the power to set wage and workplace standards for multiple industries.

    Both of those moves alarmed the business groups. They agreed to withdraw their referendum and to increase the minimum wage in exchange for labor unions dropping both of those issues.

    “This agreement protects local restaurant owners from significant threats that would have made it difficult to continue to operate in California,” said Sean Kennedy, executive vice president for public affairs for the National Restaurant Association.

    The bill must still be approved by the Democratic-controlled state Legislature and signed into law by Newsom. If passed and signed, the bill can only take effect if the restaurant groups pull their referendum from the ballot. In the past, a referendum couldn’t be removed from the ballot, but Newsom signed a law last week allowing it.

    The $20 hourly wage would be a starting point. The nine-member Fast Food Council, which would include representatives from the restaurant industry and labor, would have the power to increase that minimum wage each year by up to 3.5% or the change in the U.S. consumer price index for urban wage earners and clerical workers, whichever is lower.

    ___

    Reporter Olga R. Rodriguez contributed from San Francisco.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why the United Auto Workers union is poised to strike major US car makers this week

    Why the United Auto Workers union is poised to strike major US car makers this week

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT — About 146,000 U.S. auto workers are set to go on strike this week if General Motors, Ford and Stellantis fail to meet their demands for big pay raises and the restoration of concessions the workers made years ago when the companies were in financial trouble.

    Shawn Fain, the combative president of the United Auto Workers union, has threatened to strike any of the three companies that hasn’t reached an agreement by the time its contract with the union expires at 11:59 p.m. Eastern time Thursday.

    Both sides began exchanging wage and benefit proposals last week. Though some incremental progress appears to have been made, a final agreement could come too late to avoid walkouts by UAW workers at factories in multiple states. Any strike would likely cause significant disruptions for auto production in the United States.

    Here’s a rundown of the issues that are standing in the way of new contract agreements and what consumers could face if a prolonged strike occurs:

    The union has asked for 46% raises in general pay over four years — an increase that would elevate a top-scale assembly plant worker from $32 an hour now to about $47. In addition, the UAW has demanded an end to varying tiers of wages for factory jobs; a 32-hour week with 40 hours of pay; the restoration of traditional defined-benefit pensions for new hires who now receive only 401(k)-style retirement plans; and a return of cost-of-living pay raises, among other benefits.

    Perhaps most important to the union is that it be allowed to represent workers at 10 electric vehicle battery factories, most of which are being built by joint ventures between automakers and South Korean battery makers. The union wants those plants to receive top UAW wages. In part, that is because workers who now make components for internal combustion engines will need a place to work as the auto industry increasingly transitions to EVs.

    “Our union,” Fain has said, “isn’t going to stand by while they replace oil barons with battery barons.”

    Currently, UAW workers who were hired after 2007 don’t receive defined-benefit pensions. Their health benefits are less generous, too. For years, the union gave up general pay raises and lost cost-of-living wage increases to help the companies control costs. Though top-scale assembly workers earn $32.32 an hour, temporary workers start at just under $17. Still, full-time workers have received profit-sharing checks ranging this year from $9,716 at Ford to $14,760 at Stellantis.

    Fain himself has acknowledged that the union’s demands are “audacious.” But he has argued that the richly profitable automakers can afford to raise workers’ pay significantly to make up for what the union gave up to help the companies withstand the 2007-2009 financial crisis and the Great Recession.

    Over the past decade, the Detroit Three have emerged as robust profit-makers. They’ve collectively posted net income of $164 billion, $20 billion of it this year. The CEOs of all three major automakers earn multiple millions in annual compensation.

    A contract offer from Ford proposed a cumulative 10% pay raise over the course of the four-year contract, plus several lump-sum payments, including $6,000 to cover inflation. GM has offered 10% as well, with similar lump sums. Stellantis (formerly Fiat Chrysler) offered 14.5% wage increases over four years, without lump sums in the wage package. But it proposed lump sums to cover inflation. All offered contract-ratification bonuses but rejected the shortened work week the UAW requested.

    Under its proposal, Ford said it calculated that average annual pay, including overtime and lump-sum bonuses, would rise from an average of $78,000 a year last year to more than $92,000 in the first year of a new contract.

    The companies have rebuffed the union’s demands as too expensive. The automakers’ argument is that they will be absorbing enormous capital expenses in the coming years to continue to build combustion-engine vehicles while at the same time designing electric vehicles and building battery and assembly plants for the future.

    They also contend that too lavish a UAW contract would saddle them with expenses that would force up the retail prices of vehicles, pricing Detroit automakers above competitors from Europe and Asia. Outside analysts say that when wages and benefits are included, Detroit Three assembly plant workers now receive around $60 an hour while workers at Asian automaker plants in the U.S. get $40 to $45.

    In a letter Friday, Mark Stewart, Stellantis’ chief operating officer, told employees that the company’s offer to the union would make it financially feasible to employ workers into the next generation.

    “It also protects the company’s future ability to continue to compete globally in an industry that is rapidly transitioning to electric vehicles,” Stewart wrote.

    The union and companies are continuing to trade wage and benefit counteroffers and will likely continue to do so into the work week ahead of Thursday night’s strike deadline.

    On Friday, Fain said that the company offers weren’t enough and that he had put them in the trash.

    On the one hand, the UAW has struck a confrontational stance. Its members voted 97% in August to authorize leaders to call for walkouts. It has filed unfair labor practice charges with the federal government against Stellantis and GM — charges that the companies have denied. And the union has called contract offers from all three companies “disappointing.”

    Still, Fain has raised some hope by saying the union doesn’t want to strike and would prefer to reach contract agreements with the automakers.

    Eventually. GM, Ford and Stellantis have continued to run their factories around the clock to build up supplies on dealer lots. But that’s also putting more money into the pockets of UAW members and strengthening their financial cushions.

    At the end of August, the three automakers collectively had enough vehicles to last for 70 days. After that, they would run short. Buyers who need vehicles would likely go to nonunion competitors, who would be able to charge them more.

    Vehicles are already scarce when compared with the years before the pandemic, which touched off a global shortage of computer chips that hobbled auto factories.

    Sam Fiorani, an analyst with AutoForecast Solutions, a consulting firm, said the automakers had roughly 1.96 million vehicles on hand at the end of July. Before the pandemic, that figure was as high as 4 million.

    “A work stoppage of three weeks or more,” Fiorani said, “would quickly drain the excess supply, raising vehicle prices and pushing more sales to non-union brands,” Fiorani said.

    Yes, if it’s long and especially in the Midwest, where most auto plants are concentrated. The auto industry accounts for about 3% of the U.S. economy’s gross domestic product — its total output of goods and services — and the Detroit automakers represent about half of the total U.S. car market.

    If a walkout occurs, workers would receive about $500 a week in strike pay —far short of what they earn while they’re working. As a result, millions of dollars in wages would be removed from the economy.

    The automakers would be hurt, too. If a strike against all three companies lasted just 10 days, it would cost them nearly a billion dollars, the Anderson Economic Group has calculated. During a 40-day UAW strike in 2019, GM alone lost $3.6 billion.

    It’s hard to say. The companies have plenty of cash on hand to withstand a strike. The union has an $825 million strike fund. But it would be depleted in just under three months if all 146,000 workers walk out.

    The union’s inability to organize U.S. factories run by foreign automakers represents a disadvantage for the union because those companies pay less than Detroit companies do.

    But organized labor has been flexing its muscles and winning big contract settlements in other businesses. In its settlement with UPS, for example, the Teamsters won wages for its top-paid drivers of $49 an hour after five years.

    So far this year, 247 strikes have occurred involving 341,000 workers — the most since Cornell University began tracking strikes in 2021, though still well below the numbers during the 1970s and 1980s.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why the United Auto Workers union is poised to strike major US car makers this week

    Why the United Auto Workers union is poised to strike major US car makers this week

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT — About 146,000 U.S. auto workers are set to go on strike this week if General Motors, Ford and Stellantis fail to meet their demands for big pay raises and the restoration of concessions the workers made years ago when the companies were in financial trouble.

    Shawn Fain, the combative president of the United Auto Workers union, has threatened to strike any of the three companies that hasn’t reached an agreement by the time its contract with the union expires at 11:59 p.m. Eastern time Thursday.

    Both sides began exchanging wage and benefit proposals last week. Though some incremental progress appears to have been made, a final agreement could come too late to avoid walkouts by UAW workers at factories in multiple states. Any strike would likely cause significant disruptions for auto production in the United States.

    Here’s a rundown of the issues that are standing in the way of new contract agreements and what consumers could face if a prolonged strike occurs:

    The union has asked for 46% raises in general pay over four years — an increase that would elevate a top-scale assembly plant worker from $32 an hour now to about $47. In addition, the UAW has demanded an end to varying tiers of wages for factory jobs; a 32-hour week with 40 hours of pay; the restoration of traditional defined-benefit pensions for new hires who now receive only 401(k)-style retirement plans; and a return of cost-of-living pay raises, among other benefits.

    Perhaps most important to the union is that it be allowed to represent workers at 10 electric vehicle battery factories, most of which are being built by joint ventures between automakers and South Korean battery makers. The union wants those plants to receive top UAW wages. In part, that is because workers who now make components for internal combustion engines will need a place to work as the auto industry increasingly transitions to EVs.

    “Our union,” Fain has said, “isn’t going to stand by while they replace oil barons with battery barons.”

    Currently, UAW workers who were hired after 2007 don’t receive defined-benefit pensions. Their health benefits are less generous, too. For years, the union gave up general pay raises and lost cost-of-living wage increases to help the companies control costs. Though top-scale assembly workers earn $32.32 an hour, temporary workers start at just under $17. Still, full-time workers have received profit-sharing checks ranging this year from $9,716 at Ford to $14,760 at Stellantis.

    Fain himself has acknowledged that the union’s demands are “audacious.” But he has argued that the richly profitable automakers can afford to raise workers’ pay significantly to make up for what the union gave up to help the companies withstand the 2007-2009 financial crisis and the Great Recession.

    Over the past decade, the Detroit Three have emerged as robust profit-makers. They’ve collectively posted net income of $164 billion, $20 billion of it this year. The CEOs of all three major automakers earn multiple millions in annual compensation.

    A contract offer from Ford proposed a cumulative 10% pay raise over the course of the four-year contract, plus several lump-sum payments, including $6,000 to cover inflation. GM has offered 10% as well, with similar lump sums. Stellantis (formerly Fiat Chrysler) offered 14.5% wage increases over four years, without lump sums in the wage package. But it proposed lump sums to cover inflation. All offered contract-ratification bonuses but rejected the shortened work week the UAW requested.

    Under its proposal, Ford said it calculated that average annual pay, including overtime and lump-sum bonuses, would rise from an average of $78,000 a year last year to more than $92,000 in the first year of a new contract.

    The companies have rebuffed the union’s demands as too expensive. The automakers’ argument is that they will be absorbing enormous capital expenses in the coming years to continue to build combustion-engine vehicles while at the same time designing electric vehicles and building battery and assembly plants for the future.

    They also contend that too lavish a UAW contract would saddle them with expenses that would force up the retail prices of vehicles, pricing Detroit automakers above competitors from Europe and Asia. Outside analysts say that when wages and benefits are included, Detroit Three assembly plant workers now receive around $60 an hour while workers at Asian automaker plants in the U.S. get $40 to $45.

    In a letter Friday, Mark Stewart, Stellantis’ chief operating officer, told employees that the company’s offer to the union would make it financially feasible to employ workers into the next generation.

    “It also protects the company’s future ability to continue to compete globally in an industry that is rapidly transitioning to electric vehicles,” Stewart wrote.

    The union and companies are continuing to trade wage and benefit counteroffers and will likely continue to do so into the work week ahead of Thursday night’s strike deadline.

    On Friday, Fain said that the company offers weren’t enough and that he had put them in the trash.

    On the one hand, the UAW has struck a confrontational stance. Its members voted 97% in August to authorize leaders to call for walkouts. It has filed unfair labor practice charges with the federal government against Stellantis and GM — charges that the companies have denied. And the union has called contract offers from all three companies “disappointing.”

    Still, Fain has raised some hope by saying the union doesn’t want to strike and would prefer to reach contract agreements with the automakers.

    Eventually. GM, Ford and Stellantis have continued to run their factories around the clock to build up supplies on dealer lots. But that’s also putting more money into the pockets of UAW members and strengthening their financial cushions.

    At the end of August, the three automakers collectively had enough vehicles to last for 70 days. After that, they would run short. Buyers who need vehicles would likely go to nonunion competitors, who would be able to charge them more.

    Vehicles are already scarce when compared with the years before the pandemic, which touched off a global shortage of computer chips that hobbled auto factories.

    Sam Fiorani, an analyst with AutoForecast Solutions, a consulting firm, said the automakers had roughly 1.96 million vehicles on hand at the end of July. Before the pandemic, that figure was as high as 4 million.

    “A work stoppage of three weeks or more,” Fiorani said, “would quickly drain the excess supply, raising vehicle prices and pushing more sales to non-union brands,” Fiorani said.

    Yes, if it’s long and especially in the Midwest, where most auto plants are concentrated. The auto industry accounts for about 3% of the U.S. economy’s gross domestic product — its total output of goods and services — and the Detroit automakers represent about half of the total U.S. car market.

    If a walkout occurs, workers would receive about $500 a week in strike pay —far short of what they earn while they’re working. As a result, millions of dollars in wages would be removed from the economy.

    The automakers would be hurt, too. If a strike against all three companies lasted just 10 days, it would cost them nearly a billion dollars, the Anderson Economic Group has calculated. During a 40-day UAW strike in 2019, GM alone lost $3.6 billion.

    It’s hard to say. The companies have plenty of cash on hand to withstand a strike. The union has an $825 million strike fund. But it would be depleted in just under three months if all 146,000 workers walk out.

    The union’s inability to organize U.S. factories run by foreign automakers represents a disadvantage for the union because those companies pay less than Detroit companies do.

    But organized labor has been flexing its muscles and winning big contract settlements in other businesses. In its settlement with UPS, for example, the Teamsters won wages for its top-paid drivers of $49 an hour after five years.

    So far this year, 247 strikes have occurred involving 341,000 workers — the most since Cornell University began tracking strikes in 2021, though still well below the numbers during the 1970s and 1980s.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why the United Auto Workers union is poised to strike major US car makers this week

    Why the United Auto Workers union is poised to strike major US car makers this week

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT — About 146,000 U.S. auto workers are set to go on strike this week if General Motors, Ford and Stellantis fail to meet their demands for big pay raises and the restoration of concessions the workers made years ago when the companies were in financial trouble.

    Shawn Fain, the combative president of the United Auto Workers union, has threatened to strike any of the three companies that hasn’t reached an agreement by the time its contract with the union expires at 11:59 p.m. Eastern time Thursday.

    Both sides began exchanging wage and benefit proposals last week. Though some incremental progress appears to have been made, a final agreement could come too late to avoid walkouts by UAW workers at factories in multiple states. Any strike would likely cause significant disruptions for auto production in the United States.

    Here’s a rundown of the issues that are standing in the way of new contract agreements and what consumers could face if a prolonged strike occurs:

    The union has asked for 46% raises in general pay over four years — an increase that would elevate a top-scale assembly plant worker from $32 an hour now to about $47. In addition, the UAW has demanded an end to varying tiers of wages for factory jobs; a 32-hour week with 40 hours of pay; the restoration of traditional defined-benefit pensions for new hires who now receive only 401(k)-style retirement plans; and a return of cost-of-living pay raises, among other benefits.

    Perhaps most important to the union is that it be allowed to represent workers at 10 electric vehicle battery factories, most of which are being built by joint ventures between automakers and South Korean battery makers. The union wants those plants to receive top UAW wages. In part, that is because workers who now make components for internal combustion engines will need a place to work as the auto industry increasingly transitions to EVs.

    “Our union,” Fain has said, “isn’t going to stand by while they replace oil barons with battery barons.”

    Currently, UAW workers who were hired after 2007 don’t receive defined-benefit pensions. Their health benefits are less generous, too. For years, the union gave up general pay raises and lost cost-of-living wage increases to help the companies control costs. Though top-scale assembly workers earn $32.32 an hour, temporary workers start at just under $17. Still, full-time workers have received profit-sharing checks ranging this year from $9,716 at Ford to $14,760 at Stellantis.

    Fain himself has acknowledged that the union’s demands are “audacious.” But he has argued that the richly profitable automakers can afford to raise workers’ pay significantly to make up for what the union gave up to help the companies withstand the 2007-2009 financial crisis and the Great Recession.

    Over the past decade, the Detroit Three have emerged as robust profit-makers. They’ve collectively posted net income of $164 billion, $20 billion of it this year. The CEOs of all three major automakers earn multiple millions in annual compensation.

    A contract offer from Ford proposed a cumulative 10% pay raise over the course of the four-year contract, plus several lump-sum payments, including $6,000 to cover inflation. GM has offered 10% as well, with similar lump sums. Stellantis (formerly Fiat Chrysler) offered 14.5% wage increases over four years, without lump sums in the wage package. But it proposed lump sums to cover inflation. All offered contract-ratification bonuses but rejected the shortened work week the UAW requested.

    Under its proposal, Ford said it calculated that average annual pay, including overtime and lump-sum bonuses, would rise from an average of $78,000 a year last year to more than $92,000 in the first year of a new contract.

    The companies have rebuffed the union’s demands as too expensive. The automakers’ argument is that they will be absorbing enormous capital expenses in the coming years to continue to build combustion-engine vehicles while at the same time designing electric vehicles and building battery and assembly plants for the future.

    They also contend that too lavish a UAW contract would saddle them with expenses that would force up the retail prices of vehicles, pricing Detroit automakers above competitors from Europe and Asia. Outside analysts say that when wages and benefits are included, Detroit Three assembly plant workers now receive around $60 an hour while workers at Asian automaker plants in the U.S. get $40 to $45.

    In a letter Friday, Mark Stewart, Stellantis’ chief operating officer, told employees that the company’s offer to the union would make it financially feasible to employ workers into the next generation.

    “It also protects the company’s future ability to continue to compete globally in an industry that is rapidly transitioning to electric vehicles,” Stewart wrote.

    The union and companies are continuing to trade wage and benefit counteroffers and will likely continue to do so into the work week ahead of Thursday night’s strike deadline.

    On Friday, Fain said that the company offers weren’t enough and that he had put them in the trash.

    On the one hand, the UAW has struck a confrontational stance. Its members voted 97% in August to authorize leaders to call for walkouts. It has filed unfair labor practice charges with the federal government against Stellantis and GM — charges that the companies have denied. And the union has called contract offers from all three companies “disappointing.”

    Still, Fain has raised some hope by saying the union doesn’t want to strike and would prefer to reach contract agreements with the automakers.

    Eventually. GM, Ford and Stellantis have continued to run their factories around the clock to build up supplies on dealer lots. But that’s also putting more money into the pockets of UAW members and strengthening their financial cushions.

    At the end of August, the three automakers collectively had enough vehicles to last for 70 days. After that, they would run short. Buyers who need vehicles would likely go to nonunion competitors, who would be able to charge them more.

    Vehicles are already scarce when compared with the years before the pandemic, which touched off a global shortage of computer chips that hobbled auto factories.

    Sam Fiorani, an analyst with AutoForecast Solutions, a consulting firm, said the automakers had roughly 1.96 million vehicles on hand at the end of July. Before the pandemic, that figure was as high as 4 million.

    “A work stoppage of three weeks or more,” Fiorani said, “would quickly drain the excess supply, raising vehicle prices and pushing more sales to non-union brands,” Fiorani said.

    Yes, if it’s long and especially in the Midwest, where most auto plants are concentrated. The auto industry accounts for about 3% of the U.S. economy’s gross domestic product — its total output of goods and services — and the Detroit automakers represent about half of the total U.S. car market.

    If a walkout occurs, workers would receive about $500 a week in strike pay —far short of what they earn while they’re working. As a result, millions of dollars in wages would be removed from the economy.

    The automakers would be hurt, too. If a strike against all three companies lasted just 10 days, it would cost them nearly a billion dollars, the Anderson Economic Group has calculated. During a 40-day UAW strike in 2019, GM alone lost $3.6 billion.

    It’s hard to say. The companies have plenty of cash on hand to withstand a strike. The union has an $825 million strike fund. But it would be depleted in just under three months if all 146,000 workers walk out.

    The union’s inability to organize U.S. factories run by foreign automakers represents a disadvantage for the union because those companies pay less than Detroit companies do.

    But organized labor has been flexing its muscles and winning big contract settlements in other businesses. In its settlement with UPS, for example, the Teamsters won wages for its top-paid drivers of $49 an hour after five years.

    So far this year, 247 strikes have occurred involving 341,000 workers — the most since Cornell University began tracking strikes in 2021, though still well below the numbers during the 1970s and 1980s.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Cincinnati Bengals quarterback Joe Burrow gets NFL record per-year salary, reports say | CNN

    Cincinnati Bengals quarterback Joe Burrow gets NFL record per-year salary, reports say | CNN

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Cincinnati Bengals quarterback Joe Burrow will have the NFL’s highest-ever salary by yearly average after agreeing to a five-year, $275 million extension with the team, according to multiple reports Thursday.

    ESPN’s Adam Schefter was the first to report the news, citing unnamed sources.

    The extension pays the 26-year-old $55 million per year and includes $219.01 million guaranteed, according to Schefter.

    CNN has sought comment from the Bengals and Burrow’s representation.

    The $55 million per year surpasses the average salary of Los Angeles Chargers quarterback Justin Herbert, who averages $52.5 million per year, according to sports salary tracking website Spotrac.

    Burrow was asked about the possibility of signing an extension with the team while speaking to reporters on Wednesday.

    “This is where I want to be my whole career,” Burrow said. “We’re working toward making that happen. You know you’ve seen what the front office has done, and what (coach) Zac (Taylor) has done in their time here.

    “I’m a small part of that and I’m excited to be a part of that. We have great people in the locker room that grind every day, that are excited to go and showcase their talents and excited to do it in the city of Cincinnati. We have the best fans. This is where I want to be.”

    Burrow, who was the first pick in the 2020 NFL Draft out of Louisiana State University, is entering his fourth year in the league.

    Burrow’s rookie season was derailed after tearing his ACL and MCL in his left knee. He has since helped lead the Bengals to two consecutive AFC championship game appearances in 2021 and 2022, and a trip to Super Bowl LVI, which the Bengals lost to the Los Angeles Rams.

    Burrow led the Bengals to a 12-4 record last season, throwing for 4,475 yards, 35 touchdowns and 12 interceptions. The Bengals would go on to lose to the Kansas City Chiefs in the AFC Championship game.

    The Bengals are scheduled to open their 2023 regular season on the road against the Cleveland Browns, a divisional rival, on Sunday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Saudi Arabia, Russia plan to extend 1.3 million barrel a day oil cut through the end of the year

    Saudi Arabia, Russia plan to extend 1.3 million barrel a day oil cut through the end of the year

    [ad_1]

    DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Saudi Arabia and Russia agreed Tuesday to extend their voluntary oil production cuts through the end of this year, trimming 1.3 million barrels of crude out of the global market and boosting energy prices.

    The dual announcements from Riyadh and Moscow pushed benchmark Brent crude above $90 a barrel in trading Tuesday afternoon, a price unseen in the market since last November.

    The countries’ moves likely will increase the cost for motorists filling up at the pump and put new pressure on Saudi Arabia’s relationship with the United States. President Joe Biden last year warned the kingdom there would be unspecified “consequences” for partnering with Russia on cuts as Moscow wages war on Ukraine.

    Saudi Arabia’s announcement, carried by the state-run Saudi Press Agency, said the country still would monitor the market and could take further action if necessary.

    “This additional voluntary cut comes to reinforce the precautionary efforts made by OPEC+ countries with the aim of supporting the stability and balance of oil markets,” the Saudi Press Agency report said, citing an unnamed Energy Ministry official.

    Russian news agency Tass quoted Alexander Novak, Russia’s deputy prime minister and former energy minister, as saying Moscow would continue its 300,000 barrel a day cut.

    The decision “is aimed at strengthening the precautionary measures taken by OPEC+ countries in order to maintain stability and balance of oil markets,” Novak said.

    Benchmark Brent crude traded Tuesday at $90 a barrel immediately after the announcement. Brent had largely hovered between $75 and $85 a barrel since last October.

    The Saudi reduction, which began in July, comes as the other OPEC+ producers have agreed to extend earlier production cuts through next year.

    A series of production cuts over the past year has failed to substantially boost prices amid weakened demand from China and tighter monetary policy aimed at combating inflation.

    The Saudis are particularly keen to boost oil prices in order to fund Vision 2030, an ambitious plan to overhaul the kingdom’s economy, reduce its dependence on oil and to create jobs for a young population.

    The plan includes several massive infrastructure projects, including the construction of a futuristic $500 billion city called Neom.

    Higher prices would also help Russian President Vladimir Putin fund his war on Ukraine. Western countries have used a price cap to try to cut into Moscow’s revenues.

    Western sanctions mean Moscow is forced to sell its oil at a discount to countries like China and India.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • UAW’s clash with Big 3 automakers shows off a more confrontational union as strike deadline looms

    UAW’s clash with Big 3 automakers shows off a more confrontational union as strike deadline looms

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT — A 46% pay raise. A 32-hour week with 40 hours of pay. A restoration of traditional pensions.

    The demands that a more combative United Auto Workers union has pressed on General Motors, Stellantis and Ford — demands that even the UAW’s own president calls “audacious” — are edging it closer to a strike when its contract ends Sept. 14.

    The automakers, which are making billions in profits, have dismissed the UAW’s wish list. They argue that its demands are unrealistic at a time of fierce competition from Tesla and lower-wage foreign automakers as the world shifts from internal combustion engines to electric vehicles. The wide gulf between the sides could mean a strike against one or more of the automakers, which could send already-inflated vehicle prices even higher.

    A potential strike by 146,000 UAW members comes against the backdrop of increasingly emboldened U.S. unions of all kinds. The number of strikes and threatened strikes is growing, involving Hollywood actors and writers, sizable settlements with railroads and major concessions by corporate giants like UPS.

    Shawn Fain, who won the UAW’s presidency this spring in the first direct election by members, has set high expectations and assured union members that they can achieve significant gains if they are willing to walk picket lines.

    In a speech to a Labor Day parade crowd in Detroit on Monday, Fain said that if the companies don’t come up with a fair contract, “come Sept. 14, we’re going to take action to get it by any means necessary.”

    Fain has characterized the contract talks with Detroit automakers as a form of war between billionaires and ordinary middle-class workers. Last month, in an act of showmanship during a Facebook Live event, Fain condemned a contract proposal from Stellantis as “trash” — and tossed a copy of it into a wastebasket, “where it belongs,” he said.

    Over the past decade, the Detroit Three have emerged as robust profit-makers. They’ve collectively posted net income of $164 billion over the past decade, $20 billion of it this year. The CEOs of all three major automakers earn multiple millions in annual compensation.

    Speaking last month to Ford workers at a plant in Louisville, Kentucky, Fain complained about one standard for the corporate class and another for ordinary workers.

    “They get out-of-control salaries,” he said. “They get pensions they don’t even need. They get top-rate health care. They work whatever schedule they want. The majority of our members do not get a pension nowadays. It’s crazy. We get substandard health care. We don’t get to work remotely.”

    UAW members have voted overwhelmingly to authorize its leaders to call a strike. So, too, have Canadian auto workers, whose contracts ends four days later and who have designated Ford as their target.

    The UAW hasn’t said whether it will select one target automaker. It could strike all three, though doing so could deplete the union’s strike fund in under three months.

    On the other hand, if a strike lasted even just 10 days, it would cost the three automakers nearly a billion dollars, the Anderson Economic Group has calculated. During a 40-day UAW strike in 2019, GM alone lost $3.6 billion.

    Last week, the union filed charges of unfair labor practices against Stellantis and GM, which it said have yet to offer counterproposals. As for Ford, Fain asserted that its response, by rejecting most of the union’s demands, “insults our very worth.”

    All three automakers have countered that the union’s charges are baseless and that they’re seeking a fair deal that would allow them to invest in the future.

    Marick Masters, a business professor at Wayne State University in Detroit, suggested that the strong U.S. job market and the companies’ outsize profits have given Fain leverage in negotiations. In addition, he noted, the automakers are poised to release a slew of new electric vehicles that would be delayed by a strike. And they have only a limited supply of vehicles to withstand a prolonged walkout.

    “They are vulnerable,” Masters said.

    “The question really is,” he said, “are the parties willing to move on some of these things at the table? That hasn’t been evident yet.”

    Even Fain has described the union’s proposals as “audacious” in demanding the restoration of traditional defined-benefit pensions for new hires; an end to tiers of wages; pension increases for retirees; and — perhaps boldest of all — a 32-hour week for 40 hours of pay.

    Currently, UAW workers who were hired after 2007 don’t receive defined-benefit pensions. Their health benefits are less generous, too. For years, the union gave up general pay raises and lost cost-of-living wage increases to help the companies control costs. Though top-scale assembly workers earn $32.32 an hour, temporary workers start at just under $17. Still, full-time workers have received profit-sharing checks ranging this year from $9,716 at Ford to $14,760 at Stellantis.

    At Detroit’s Labor Day Parade, workers said a strike appears likely now.

    Jason Craig, a worker at a Stellantis parts warehouse near Detroit, said his company appears most likely to be the strike target, but he said the union might go to Ford because it seems more family-oriented. Fain reiterated Monday that all three companies remain strike targets.

    Perhaps the biggest issue blocking a contract agreement is union representation at 10 EV battery plants that the companies have proposed. Most of these plants are joint ventures with South Korean battery makers, which want to pay less.

    “These battery workers deserve the same wage and salary standards that generations of auto workers have fought for,” Fain told members.

    The union fears that because EVs are simpler to build, with fewer moving parts, fewer workers will be needed to assemble them. In addition, workers at combustion engine and transmission plants will likely lose jobs in the transition; they’ll need a place to go.

    Fain, a 54-year-old electrician who came out of a Chrysler factory in Kokomo, Indiana, is among several labor leaders across the economy who have been escalating their demands and flexing their muscles. So far this year, 247 strikes have occurred involving 341,000 workers — the most since Cornell University began tracking strikes in 2021, though still well below the numbers during the 1970s and 1980s.

    Masters suggested that the automakers wouldn’t be able to quickly replace striking workers. The tight job market, diminished interest in manufacturing jobs and comparatively modest wages would make it difficult to hire enough workers.

    Some auto workers regard the UPS contract, with a $49-an-hour top wage for experienced drivers, as a benchmark for their negotiations. Others say they’re just hoping to get near that figure.

    But automakers say a generous settlement would stick them with costs far above their competitors’ just as they start producing more EVs. The inability to bring Hyundai-Kia, Nissan, Volkswagen, Honda and Toyota factories into the union has weakened the UAW’s leverage, said Harry Katz, a labor professor at Cornell.

    If you include the value of their benefits, workers at the Detroit 3 automakers receive around $60 an hour. The corresponding figure at foreign-based automakers with U.S. factories is just $40 to $45, Katz said. Much of the disparity reflects pensions and health care.

    If the Detroit companies end up with higher labor costs, they’ll pass them on to consumers, making vehicles more expensive, said Sam Fiorani, an analyst with AutoForecast Solutions, a consulting firm.

    “More than half of the vehicles built in the U.S. are in nonunion plants,” he said. “So if you raise the price to build a unionized vehicle, you could price yourself out of competition with vehicles already built in North America.”

    A strike of more than a couple of weeks would reduce still-tight supplies of vehicles on Detroit automakers’ dealer lots. With demand still strong, prices would rise.

    The UAW’s members are “reminding management that management can’t operate those factories without a settlement,” Katz said.

    Masters and Katz say there’s still time to settle without a strike. Katz predicts a settlement short of UPS numbers, possibly with 3% general pay raises plus cost-of-living adjustments, increased company contributions to 401(k) accounts for newer workers and faster transitions to top pay.

    That said, Katz suggested, Fain has to back up his tough talk: “He’s got to prove himself.”

    ____

    AP Writers Bruce Schreiner in Louisville, Kentucky, and Christopher Rugaber in Washington contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • UAW’s clash with Big 3 automakers shows off a more confrontational union as strike deadline looms

    UAW’s clash with Big 3 automakers shows off a more confrontational union as strike deadline looms

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT — A 46% pay raise. A 32-hour week with 40 hours of pay. A restoration of traditional pensions.

    The demands that a more combative United Auto Workers union has pressed on General Motors, Stellantis and Ford — demands that even the UAW’s own president calls “audacious” — are edging it closer to a strike when its contract ends Sept. 14.

    The automakers, which are making billions in profits, have dismissed the UAW’s wish list. They argue that its demands are unrealistic at a time of fierce competition from Tesla and lower-wage foreign automakers as the world shifts from internal combustion engines to electric vehicles. The wide gulf between the sides could mean a strike against one or more of the automakers, which could send already-inflated vehicle prices even higher.

    A potential strike by 146,000 UAW members comes against the backdrop of increasingly emboldened U.S. unions of all kinds. The number of strikes and threatened strikes is growing, involving Hollywood actors and writers, sizable settlements with railroads and major concessions by corporate giants like UPS.

    Shawn Fain, the pugnacious new leader of the UAW, has characterized the contract talks with Detroit’s automakers as a form of war between billionaires and ordinary middle class workers. Last month, in an act of showmanship during a Facebook Live event, Fain condemned a contract proposal from Stellantis as “trash” — and tossed a copy of it into a wastebasket, “where it belongs,” he said.

    Over the past decade, the Detroit Three have emerged as robust profit-makers. They’ve collectively posted net income of $164 billion over the past decade, $20 billion of it this year. The CEOs of all three major automakers earn multiple millions in annual compensation.

    Speaking last month to Ford workers at a plant in Louisville, Kentucky, Fain complained about one standard for the corporate class and another for ordinary workers.

    “They get out-of-control salaries,” he said. “They get pensions they don’t even need. They get top-rate health care. They work whatever schedule they want. The majority of our members do not get a pension nowadays. It’s crazy. We get substandard health care. We don’t get to work remotely.”

    UAW members have voted overwhelmingly to authorize its leaders to call a strike. So, too, have Canadian auto workers, whose contracts ends four days later and who have designated Ford as their target.

    The UAW hasn’t said whether it will select one target automaker. It could strike all three, though doing so could deplete the union’s strike fund in under three months.

    On the other hand, if a strike lasted even just 10 days, it would cost the three automakers nearly a billion dollars, the Anderson Economic Group has calculated. During a 40-day UAW strike in 2019, GM alone lost $3.6 billion.

    Last week, the union filed charges of unfair labor practices against Stellantis and GM, which it said have yet to offer counterproposals. As for Ford, Fain asserted that its response, by rejecting most of the union’s demands, “insults our very worth.”

    All three automakers have countered that the union’s charges are baseless and that they’re seeking a fair deal that would allow them to invest in the future.

    Marick Masters, a business professor at Wayne State University in Detroit, suggested that the strong U.S. job market and the companies’ outsize profits have given Fain leverage in negotiations. In addition, he noted, the automakers are poised to release a slew of new electric vehicles that would be delayed by a strike. And they have only a limited supply of vehicles to withstand a prolonged walkout.

    “They are vulnerable,” Masters said.

    “The question really is,” he said, “are the parties willing to move on some of these things at the table? That hasn’t been evident yet.”

    Fain, who won the UAW’s presidency this spring in the first direct election by members, has set expectations high. He has assured the workers that they can achieve significant gains if they’re willing to walk picket lines.

    Yet even Fain has described the union’s proposals as “audacious” in demanding the restoration of traditional defined-benefit pensions for new hires; an end to tiers of wages; pension increases for retirees; and — perhaps most audaciously — a 32-hour week for 40 hours of pay.

    Currently, UAW workers who were hired after 2007 don’t receive defined benefit pensions. Their health benefits are less generous, too. For years, the union gave up general pay raises and lost cost-of-living wage increases to help the companies control costs. Though top-scale assembly workers earn $32.32 an hour, temporary workers start at just under $17. Still, full-time workers have received profit-sharing checks ranging this year from $9,716 at Ford to $14,760 at Stellantis.

    Chris Lindsey, a union member who builds Ford trucks at a Louisville plant, argues that workers deserve a larger share of Ford’s sizable profits.

    “We keep giving up, but nothing in return,” Lindsey said. “We just want something fair.”

    Perhaps the biggest issue blocking a contract agreement is union representation at 10 EV battery plants that the companies have proposed. Most of these plants are joint ventures with South Korean battery makers, which want to pay less.

    “These battery workers deserve the same wage and salary standards that generations of auto workers have fought for,” Fain told members.

    The union fears that because EVs are simpler to build, with fewer moving parts, fewer workers will be needed to assemble them. In addition, workers at combustion engine and transmission plants will likely lose jobs in the transition; they’ll need a place to go.

    Fain, a 54-year-old electrician who came out of a Chrysler factory in Kokomo, Indiana, is among several labor leaders across the economy who have been escalating their demands and flexing their muscles. So far this year, 247 strikes have occurred involving 341,000 workers — the most since Cornell University began tracking strikes in 2021, though still well below the numbers during the 1970s and 1980s.

    Masters suggested that the automakers wouldn’t be able to quickly replace striking workers. The tight job market, diminished interest in manufacturing jobs and comparatively modest wages would make it difficult to hire enough workers.

    Some auto workers regard the UPS contract, with a $49-an-hour top wage for experienced drivers, as a benchmark for their negotiations. Others say they’re just hoping to get near that figure.

    But automakers say a generous settlement would stick them with costs far above their competitors’ just as they start producing more EVs. The inability to bring Hyundai-Kia, Nissan, Volkswagen, Honda and Toyota factories into the union has weakened the UAW’s leverage, said Harry Katz, a labor professor at Cornell.

    If you include the value of their benefits, workers at the Detroit 3 automakers receive around $60 an hour. The corresponding figure at foreign-based automakers with U.S. factories is just $40 to $45, Katz said. Much of the disparity reflects pensions and health care.

    If the Detroit companies end up with higher labor costs, they’ll pass them on to consumers, making vehicles more expensive, said Sam Fiorani, an analyst with AutoForecast Solutions, a consulting firm.

    “More than half of the vehicles built in the U.S. are in nonunion plants,” he said. “So if you raise the price to build a unionized vehicle, you could price yourself out of competition with vehicles already built in North America.”

    A strike of more than a couple of weeks would reduce still-tight supplies of vehicles on Detroit automakers’ dealer lots. With demand still strong, prices would rise.

    The UAW’s members are “reminding management that management can’t operate those factories without a settlement,” Katz said.

    Masters and Katz say there’s still time to settle without a strike. Katz predicts a settlement short of UPS numbers, possibly with 3% general pay raises plus cost-of-living adjustments, increased company contributions to 401(k) accounts for newer workers and faster transitions to top pay.

    That said, Katz suggested, Fain has to back up his tough talk: “He’s got to prove himself.”

    ____

    AP Writers Bruce Schreiner in Louisville, Kentucky, and Christopher Rugaber in Washington contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • UAW’s clash with Big 3 automakers shows off a more confrontational union as strike deadline looms

    UAW’s clash with Big 3 automakers shows off a more confrontational union as strike deadline looms

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT — A 46% pay raise. A 32-hour week with 40 hours of pay. A restoration of traditional pensions.

    The demands that a more combative United Auto Workers union has pressed on General Motors, Stellantis and Ford — demands that even the UAW’s own president calls “audacious” — are edging it closer to a strike when its contract ends Sept. 14.

    The automakers, which are making billions in profits, have dismissed the UAW’s wish list. They argue that its demands are unrealistic at a time of fierce competition from Tesla and lower-wage foreign automakers as the world shifts from internal combustion engines to electric vehicles. The wide gulf between the sides could mean a strike against one or more of the automakers, which could send already-inflated vehicle prices even higher.

    A potential strike by 146,000 UAW members comes against the backdrop of increasingly emboldened U.S. unions of all kinds. The number of strikes and threatened strikes is growing, involving Hollywood actors and writers, sizable settlements with railroads and major concessions by corporate giants like UPS.

    Shawn Fain, the pugnacious new leader of the UAW, has characterized the contract talks with Detroit’s automakers as a form of war between billionaires and ordinary middle class workers. Last month, in an act of showmanship during a Facebook Live event, Fain condemned a contract proposal from Stellantis as “trash” — and tossed a copy of it into a wastebasket, “where it belongs,” he said.

    Over the past decade, the Detroit Three have emerged as robust profit-makers. They’ve collectively posted net income of $164 billion over the past decade, $20 billion of it this year. The CEOs of all three major automakers earn multiple millions in annual compensation.

    Speaking last month to Ford workers at a plant in Louisville, Kentucky, Fain complained about one standard for the corporate class and another for ordinary workers.

    “They get out-of-control salaries,” he said. “They get pensions they don’t even need. They get top-rate health care. They work whatever schedule they want. The majority of our members do not get a pension nowadays. It’s crazy. We get substandard health care. We don’t get to work remotely.”

    UAW members have voted overwhelmingly to authorize its leaders to call a strike. So, too, have Canadian auto workers, whose contracts ends four days later and who have designated Ford as their target.

    The UAW hasn’t said whether it will select one target automaker. It could strike all three, though doing so could deplete the union’s strike fund in under three months.

    On the other hand, if a strike lasted even just 10 days, it would cost the three automakers nearly a billion dollars, the Anderson Economic Group has calculated. During a 40-day UAW strike in 2019, GM alone lost $3.6 billion.

    Last week, the union filed charges of unfair labor practices against Stellantis and GM, which it said have yet to offer counterproposals. As for Ford, Fain asserted that its response, by rejecting most of the union’s demands, “insults our very worth.”

    All three automakers have countered that the union’s charges are baseless and that they’re seeking a fair deal that would allow them to invest in the future.

    Marick Masters, a business professor at Wayne State University in Detroit, suggested that the strong U.S. job market and the companies’ outsize profits have given Fain leverage in negotiations. In addition, he noted, the automakers are poised to release a slew of new electric vehicles that would be delayed by a strike. And they have only a limited supply of vehicles to withstand a prolonged walkout.

    “They are vulnerable,” Masters said.

    “The question really is,” he said, “are the parties willing to move on some of these things at the table? That hasn’t been evident yet.”

    Fain, who won the UAW’s presidency this spring in the first direct election by members, has set expectations high. He has assured the workers that they can achieve significant gains if they’re willing to walk picket lines.

    Yet even Fain has described the union’s proposals as “audacious” in demanding the restoration of traditional defined-benefit pensions for new hires; an end to tiers of wages; pension increases for retirees; and — perhaps most audaciously — a 32-hour week for 40 hours of pay.

    Currently, UAW workers who were hired after 2007 don’t receive defined benefit pensions. Their health benefits are less generous, too. For years, the union gave up general pay raises and lost cost-of-living wage increases to help the companies control costs. Though top-scale assembly workers earn $32.32 an hour, temporary workers start at just under $17. Still, full-time workers have received profit-sharing checks ranging this year from $9,716 at Ford to $14,760 at Stellantis.

    Chris Lindsey, a union member who builds Ford trucks at a Louisville plant, argues that workers deserve a larger share of Ford’s sizable profits.

    “We keep giving up, but nothing in return,” Lindsey said. “We just want something fair.”

    Perhaps the biggest issue blocking a contract agreement is union representation at 10 EV battery plants that the companies have proposed. Most of these plants are joint ventures with South Korean battery makers, which want to pay less.

    “These battery workers deserve the same wage and salary standards that generations of auto workers have fought for,” Fain told members.

    The union fears that because EVs are simpler to build, with fewer moving parts, fewer workers will be needed to assemble them. In addition, workers at combustion engine and transmission plants will likely lose jobs in the transition; they’ll need a place to go.

    Fain, a 54-year-old electrician who came out of a Chrysler factory in Kokomo, Indiana, is among several labor leaders across the economy who have been escalating their demands and flexing their muscles. So far this year, 247 strikes have occurred involving 341,000 workers — the most since Cornell University began tracking strikes in 2021, though still well below the numbers during the 1970s and 1980s.

    Masters suggested that the automakers wouldn’t be able to quickly replace striking workers. The tight job market, diminished interest in manufacturing jobs and comparatively modest wages would make it difficult to hire enough workers.

    Some auto workers regard the UPS contract, with a $49-an-hour top wage for experienced drivers, as a benchmark for their negotiations. Others say they’re just hoping to get near that figure.

    But automakers say a generous settlement would stick them with costs far above their competitors’ just as they start producing more EVs. The inability to bring Hyundai-Kia, Nissan, Volkswagen, Honda and Toyota factories into the union has weakened the UAW’s leverage, said Harry Katz, a labor professor at Cornell.

    If you include the value of their benefits, workers at the Detroit 3 automakers receive around $60 an hour. The corresponding figure at foreign-based automakers with U.S. factories is just $40 to $45, Katz said. Much of the disparity reflects pensions and health care.

    If the Detroit companies end up with higher labor costs, they’ll pass them on to consumers, making vehicles more expensive, said Sam Fiorani, an analyst with AutoForecast Solutions, a consulting firm.

    “More than half of the vehicles built in the U.S. are in nonunion plants,” he said. “So if you raise the price to build a unionized vehicle, you could price yourself out of competition with vehicles already built in North America.”

    A strike of more than a couple of weeks would reduce still-tight supplies of vehicles on Detroit automakers’ dealer lots. With demand still strong, prices would rise.

    The UAW’s members are “reminding management that management can’t operate those factories without a settlement,” Katz said.

    Masters and Katz say there’s still time to settle without a strike. Katz predicts a settlement short of UPS numbers, possibly with 3% general pay raises plus cost-of-living adjustments, increased company contributions to 401(k) accounts for newer workers and faster transitions to top pay.

    That said, Katz suggested, Fain has to back up his tough talk: “He’s got to prove himself.”

    ____

    AP Writers Bruce Schreiner in Louisville, Kentucky, and Christopher Rugaber in Washington contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • US employers added a solid 187,000 jobs in August in sign of a still-resilient labor market

    US employers added a solid 187,000 jobs in August in sign of a still-resilient labor market

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The nation’s employers added 187,000 jobs in August, evidence of a slowing but still-resilient labor market despite the high interest rates the Federal Reserve has imposed.

    The job growth marked an increase from July’s revised gain of 157,000 but still pointed to a moderating pace of hiring compared with earlier this year. From June through August, the economy added 449,000 jobs, the lowest three-month total in three years.

    Friday’s report from the Labor Department showed that the unemployment rate rose from 3.5% to 3.8%, the highest level since February 2022 though still low by historical standards. But the rate rose for an encouraging reason: A sizable number of people — 736,000 — began looking for work last month, the most since January, and not all of them found jobs right away. Only people who are actively looking for a job are counted as unemployed.

    Indeed, the proportion of Americans who either have a job or are looking for one rose in August to 62.8%, the highest level since the February 2020, before COVID-19 slammed into the U.S. economy.

    The August jobs report also showed that wage gains are easing, a trend that may help signal to the Fed that inflation pressures are cooling: Average hourly wages rose 0.2% from July to August and are up 4.3% from August 2022. The year-over-year increase was down from 4.4% in both July and June.

    In addition to reporting August job growth, the Labor Department on Friday revised down the gains for June and July by a combined 110,000. A decelerating job market could help shift the economy into a slower gear and reassure the Fed that inflation will continue to decelerate. The Fed’s streak of 11 interest rate hikes have helped slow inflation from a peak of 9.1% last year to 3.2% now. Given signs that inflation has continued to ease, many economists think the Fed may decide no further rate hikes are necessary.

    The Fed wants to see hiring slow because intense demand for labor tends to inflate wages and feed inflation. The central bank hopes to achieve a rare “soft landing,” in which its rate hikes would manage to slow hiring, borrowing and spending enough to curb high inflation without causing a deep recession.

    Optimism about a soft landing has been growing. The economy, though growing more slowly than it did in the boom that followed the pandemic recession of 2020, has defied the squeeze of increasingly high borrowing costs. The gross domestic product — the economy’s total output of goods and services — rose at a respectable 2.1% annual rate from April to June. Consumers continued to spend, and businesses increased their investments.

    The Fed wants to see hiring decelerate because strong demand for workers tends to inflate wages and feed inflation.

    So far, the job market has been cooling in the least painful way possible — with few layoffs. The Labor Department reported Thursday that the number of Americans applying for unemployment benefits — a proxy for job cuts — fell for a third straight week.

    Instead of slashing jobs, companies are posting fewer openings — 8.8 million in July, the fewest since March 2021. And American workers are less likely to leave their jobs in search of better pay, benefits and working conditions elsewhere: 3.5 million people quit their jobs in July, the fewest since February 2021. A lower pace of quits tends to ease pressure on companies to raise pay to keep their existing employees or to attract new ones.

    Economists and financial market analysts increasingly think the Fed may be done raising interest rates: Nearly nine in 10 analysts surveyed by the CME Group expect the Fed to leave rates unchanged at its next meeting, Sept. 19-20.

    Despite what appears to be a clear trend toward slower hiring, Friday’s jobs report could get complicated. The reopening of school can cause problems for the Labor Department’s attempts to adjust hiring numbers for seasonal fluctuations: Many teachers are leaving temporary summer jobs to return to the classroom.

    And the shutdown of the big trucking firm Yellow and the strike by Hollywood actors and writers are thought to have kept a lid on August job growth.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • UPS workers approve 5-year contract, capping contentious negotiations that threatened deliveries

    UPS workers approve 5-year contract, capping contentious negotiations that threatened deliveries

    [ad_1]

    The union representing 340,000 UPS workers said Tuesday that its members voted to approve the tentative contract agreement reached last month, putting a final seal on contentious labor negotiations that threatened to disrupt package deliveries for millions of businesses and households nationwide.

    The Teamsters said in a statement that 86% of the votes casts were in favor of ratifying the national contract. They also said it was passed by the highest vote for a contract in the history of the Teamsters at UPS.

    The union said more than 40 supplemental agreements were also ratified, except for one that covers roughly 170 members in Florida. The national master agreement will go into effect as soon as that supplement is renegotiated and ratified, it said.

    UPS said voting results for deals covering employees under two locals are expected soon.

    “Our members just ratified the most lucrative agreement the Teamsters have ever negotiated at UPS,” Teamsters General President Sean M. O’Brien said in a statement. “This contract will improve the lives of hundreds of thousands of workers.”

    He said the contract set a new standard for pay and benefits.

    “This is the template for how workers should be paid and protected nationwide, and nonunion companies like Amazon better pay attention,” O’Brien said, giving a nod to the union’s growing ambitions to take on the e-commerce behemoth.

    Voting on the new five-year contract began Aug. 3 and concluded Tuesday.

    After negotiations broke down in early July, Atlanta-based UPS reached a tentative contract agreement with the Teamsters just days before an Aug. 1 deadline. It came as large and small businesses were working on contingency plans in the event of a strike, which would have spiked shipping prices and scrambled supply chains.

    Earlier this month, the delivery company reported its revenue fell for the second quarter as package volume declined amid negotiations with the union. The shipping industry has also been impacted by unpredictable consumer spending.

    The company, which has lowered its full-year revenue expectations by $4 billion, had said it expected bargaining to restart if members rejected the deal. But that outcome could have also opened the door to a strike with the potential to cause widespread disruption.

    Under the tentative agreement, full- and part-time union workers will get $2.75 more per hour in 2023, and $7.50 more in total by the end of the five-year contract. Starting hourly pay for part-time employees also got bumped up to $21, but some workers said that fell short of their expectations.

    UPS says that by the end of the new contract, the average UPS full-time driver will make about $170,000 annually in pay and benefits. It’s not clear how much of that figure benefits account for.

    As part of the deal, the delivery company also agreed to make Martin Luther King Jr. Day a full holiday, end forced overtime on drivers’ days off and stop using driver-facing cameras in cabs, among a host of other issues. It eliminated a two-tier wage system for drivers and tentative deals on safety issues were also reached, including equipping more trucks with air conditioning.

    Union members, angered by a contract they say union leadership forced on them five years ago, argued in the lead up to the deal that they have shouldered the more than 140% profit growth at UPS as the pandemic increased delivery demand. Unionized workers said they wanted to fix what they saw as a bad contract.

    The Teamsters’ leadership was upended two years ago with the election of O’Brien, a vocal critic of union President James Hoffa — son of the famed Teamsters firebrand — who signed off on the previous contract in 2018.

    The 24 million packages UPS ships daily amount to about a quarter of all U.S. parcel volume, according to the global shipping and logistics firm Pitney Bowes. UPS says that’s equivalent to about 6% of the nation’s gross domestic product.

    This isn’t the first showdown the union has had with the delivery company. During the last breakdown in labor talks a quarter of a century ago, 185,000 UPS workers walked out for 15 days, crippling the company’s ability to function.

    A walkout this time would have had much further-reaching implications, with millions of Americans now accustomed to online shopping and speedy delivery. The consulting firm Anderson Economic Group estimated a 10-day UPS strike could have cost the U.S. economy more than $7 billion and triggered “significant and lasting harm” to the business and workers.

    Labor experts say they see the showdown as a demonstration of labor power at a time of low U.S. union membership. This summer, Hollywood actors and screenwriters have been picketing over pay issues. United Auto Workers are considering a potential strike.

    “Together we reached a win-win-win agreement on the issues that are important to Teamsters leadership, our employees and to UPS and our customers,” Carol Tomé, UPS CEO, said when the tentative deal was announced.

    Industry groups, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, labor leaders and President Joe Biden also applauded the deal.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Biden urges UAW and Big Three automakers to reach deal to avoid strike | CNN Business

    Biden urges UAW and Big Three automakers to reach deal to avoid strike | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Washington DC
    CNN
     — 

    President Joe Biden sought to ramp up pressure on the United Auto Workers union and the nation’s three unionized automakers – Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis, known as the “Big Three” – one month ahead of a critical deadline for labor talks.

    “As the Big Three auto companies and the United Auto Workers come together — one month before the expiration of their contract — to negotiate a new agreement, I want to be clear about where I stand. I’m asking all sides to work together to forge a fair agreement,” Biden said in a new statement Monday.

    The White House has been closely monitoring the talks as the two sides appear far apart. The union is demanding significant pay raises of 40% or more for members to match increases in CEO pay at the companies over the last four years and a reversal of past concessions by the union.

    Negotiations could put the White House at odds with the union. While the AFL-CIO, which is made up of multiple independent unions, has already endorsed Biden’s reelection bid, calling him the “most pro-union president in our lifetimes,” the UAW itself has yet to join in that endorsement. A strike could have massive economic – and political – consequences. Biden and UAW President Shawn Fain met briefly in the West Wing last month while UAW leadership was at the White House briefing senior staff on their positions.

    The three contracts between the UAW and General Motors, Ford and Stellantis, which sells cars and trucks under the Dodge, Ram and Chrysler brands, are due to expire September 14. Fain last week denounced the most recent offer from Stellantis, throwing a copy of the offer in the trash during a video for members. Plans for strike authorization votes at all three companies is expected to be announced soon, the union said Monday.

    Traditionally the UAW will select one of the three companies to go first and have the other two put on hold while it concentrates on reaching a deal, then the union will push for similar from the other two automakers as part of a “pattern.”

    The UAW is pushing for an aggressive set of demands at the negotiating table, and has been critical of the Biden administration’s financial support for the transition to electric vehicles, arguing that the Biden administration has been overly supportive of automakers’ plans for EV battery plants that are expected to pay far less than union wages. Fain has publicly warned that UAW is prepared to strike, saying nearly 150,000 members will strike if the three automakers do not meet their demands.

    CNN has previously reported that while Biden enjoys hefty support from leadership of many unions, he has also faced lingering mistrust and concern among some of the rank-and-file of the UAW, according to people familiar with the dynamics, a perception fueled in part by the president’s intervention to avert a freight rail strike in December.

    In a nod to the UAW’s demands, Biden used the union’s “fair transition” to clean energy language.

    “I support a fair transition to a clean energy future. That means ensuring that Big Three auto jobs are good jobs that can support a family; that auto companies should honor the right to organize; take every possible step to avoid painful plant closings; and ensure that when transitions are needed, the transitions are fair and look to retool, reboot, and rehire in the same factories and communities at comparable wages, while giving existing workers the first shot to fill those jobs,” Biden said in the statement.

    The UAW said it saw the White House statement as an endorsement of it bargaining position.

    “We appreciate President Biden’s support for strong contracts that ensure good paying union jobs now and pave the way for a just transition to an EV future,” Fain said in a statement. “We agree with the president that the Big Three’s joint venture battery plants should have the same strong pay and safety standards that generations of UAW members have fought for.”

    The three automakers said they, too, want to reach deals that would avoid a strike.

    Ford pointed out that it employs more UAW members and builds more cars and trucks at US plants than any other automaker.

    “We look forward to working with the UAW on creative solutions during this time when our dramatically changing industry needs a skilled and competitive workforce more than ever,” it said.

    “Stellantis remains committed to working constructively and collaboratively with the UAW to negotiate a new agreement that balances the concerns of our 43,000 employees with our vision for the future,” said that company.

    “We will continue to bargain in good faith with the UAW to maintain our momentum and to provide opportunities for all in our EV future,” GM said in a statement.

    The union is concerned about the plans by all three automakers to convert from traditional gasoline powered vehicles to EVs in the coming decades. it takes an estimated one third less hours of work to assemble an EV than a car with an internal combustion engine, since that engine and the transmission that goes with it has so many moving parts missing from an EV.

    The Biden administration has been active in supporting the switch to EVs, providing tax credits for EV buyers and loans to build plants necessary for EVs, such as those that make batteries.

    There are about a dozen EV battery plants now under construction nationwide. For the most part, those plants are joint ventures between automakers and battery makers, and thus will not be covered under the UAW contracts with the Big Three. Workers at the one battery plant for one of the Big Three to open so far, a Warren, Ohio, plant for the joint venture between GM and LG, voted 98% in favor of joining the UAW. But the union has yet to reach a deal with plant management on a contract, and workers there are paid about half of what UAW members are paid at the Big Three.

    – CNN’s Vanessa Yurkevich contributed to this story

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Stock market today: Asian benchmarks mostly slip after Wall Street’s losing week

    Stock market today: Asian benchmarks mostly slip after Wall Street’s losing week

    [ad_1]

    TOKYO — Asian shares were trading mostly lower on Monday after U.S. employment data had Wall Street close out a losing week.

    Investors are also closely watching earnings reports due later this week, including from Disney in the U.S., Alibaba Group in China and Sony and SoftBank in Japan.

    Japan’s benchmark Nikkei 225 recouped losses earlier in the day and was down less than 0.1% at 32,190.31 in morning trading.

    Australia’s S&P/ASX 200 shed 0.4% to 7,298.60. South Korea’s Kospi inched down less than 0.1% to 2,602.49. Hong Kong’s Hang Seng lost 0.3% to 19,488.09, while the Shanghai Composite dropped 0.6% to 3,267.44.

    “Local stocks appear to be latching onto the U.S. downswing from Friday as investors are still absorbing a down week for most markets,” Stephen Innes at SPI Asset Management said of Asian trading.

    On Friday last week, the S&P 500 sank 23.86, or 0.5%, to 4,478.03. It was the fourth straight drop for Wall Street’s main measure of health after it set a 16-month high at the start of the week.

    The Dow Jones Industrial Average also drifted between gains and losses through the day before ending with a loss. It dropped 150.27 points, or 0.4%, to 35,065.62, and the Nasdaq composite gave up 50.48, or 0.4%, to 13,909.24.

    A highly anticipated U.S. jobs report said hiring was a touch weaker last month than economists expected, though wages for workers rose more than forecast.

    Although a strong job market is generally a positive sign for the economy, if wage growth is particularly strong, the U.S. Federal Reserve could see it as putting upward pressure on inflation.

    If the job market keeps moderating, it could allow inflation to continue to cool from its peak reached last summer.

    Big Tech stocks have led Wall Street’s charge this year. Like Amazon and Apple, which reported earnings last week, most companies in the S&P 500 have been reporting stronger profits for the spring than analysts expected.

    In energy trading, benchmark U.S. crude lost 4 cents to $82.78 a barrel. Brent crude, the international standard, slipped 4 cents to $86.20 a barrel.

    In currency trading, the U.S. dollar inched up to 141.97 Japanese yen from 141.71 yen. The euro cost $1.1000, down from $1.1012.

    In the bond market, the yield on the 10-year Treasury dropped Friday to 4.04% from 4.18% late Thursday. It helps set rates for mortgages and other important loans.

    The two-year Treasury yield, which moves more on expectations for the Fed, fell to 4.77% from 4.89%.

    ___

    AP Business Writer Stan Choe contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link