Letter to the EditorLetter to the Editor
Strike spurs more community frustration
Similar Stories
Re: “Strike calls for anger management” Nov. 17, 2009
To the Editor:
I commend HBA II student Natalia Ignatenko for reminding us that getting angry with any one group involved in the LTC labour dispute is pointless.
She does, however, seem to think the union representing LTC workers is at the back of the problem. Indeed, according to her sophomoric analysis, General Motors latest voyage through bankruptcy and “massive job losses” in the United States are all due to trade unions.
Give us all a break, Ms. Ignatenko. I don’t think trade unions had anything to do with the creation of asset backed commercial paper and sub-prime mortgage lending schemes. Trade unions didn’t design the crappy cars that nobody wants to buy. Trade unions are not responsible for intransient management attitudes, or for declining ridership on public transit.
Indeed, the idea she suggests — that we are to blame for living on bus routes rather than driving cars — is itself part of the problem contributing to the LTC strike.
So, no, let’s not get angry with each other, but perhaps we should also refrain from advancing simplistic criticism of any single party to this unfortunate dispute.
—Bryce Traister
Associate Professor, English
Dear Bryce,
It is likely that this message won’t reach you, but I felt the need to respond to your criticism.
Though there are undoubtedly many factors that contributed to the fall of GM, I would not dismiss the union’s fault so lightly. Yes, GM did jump the gun by producing trucks instead of green cars, but many of their products still sold. When they sold, however, the margin realized by GM was much slimmer than that of its competitors. With legacy costs (pensions and benefits) at $1,600 per vehicle, nowhere near its Japanese competitors, GM had little room for price flexibility. GM’s unionized labour demanded significantly higher wages than a non-unionized workforce. Less and less money became available for marketing and R&D. UAW strikes cost GM billions of dollars and led to more and more inflexible labour contracts. So no, the union was not the only cause of GM’s bankruptcy, but it is hardly sophomoric to suggest that it was not a major one.
Here is a good Wall Street Journal article with more on this (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124389995447074461.html).
These are things I would address if I were writing a paper on UAW’s role in the collapse of GM. But I wasn’t. I was simply expressing my frustration at the ludicrous stubbornness of the ATU – Local 741 in demanding a 20% raise during the recession and being unwilling to settle for reasonable counter-offers. A union weighed heavy on GM; a union weighs heavy here.