Should The UAW Own Part of Chrysler?

These are interesting times for Ron Gettlefinger and the United Auto Workers. What at first blush appears to be a golden opportunity for the union, is a double edged sword.

Last Thursday, Kirk Kerkorian's Tracinda Corp made a public bid to buy Chrysler that includes an offer to have the UAW take an equity stake in the company. Once the word got out, people in the industry at the New York Auto Show started speculating the UAW will jump at the chance to own part of the big 3. After all, the union has complained for years the problem with the big 3 isn't the inefficiencies and high labor costs in the American auto plant, it's the product management is pumping out. In essence, the union has been saying, "Design and build better cars and trucks and do some better planning, then the big 3 will bounce back." What better way to ensure the company is on the right path than a seat on the board and partial ownership of the company.


Read Article

chuck717 - 4/9/2007 2:00:27 PM

0 Boost

Really Chrysler needs to do a AMC and fold the tent. Let Jeep become part of someone else and retain that brand name, but the Chyrsler corp and name has to go as we know it and get on with the business of making and selling better cars. The public is fat up with new cars every 60 days and hoping something will stick to the wall for them under the Chrysler banner,lousy resale value and dealer network. In the big picture there are to many Auto MFG in the world it all but impossiable to be a niche player today, many of these companies shouldn't be in the ball game anyhow and Chrysler has shown for many a years now that strike three happen a long time ago for them.

jasongoudie - 4/9/2007 2:01:19 PM

+2 Boost

I say make them take a part of the company in order to stay. If not get rid of all of the unions.

This would be so great!! The union would finally be exposed for what it is. You know that the company would go down in a ball of flames because these hacks haven't actually worked a real job in years and trying to do what is best for the company is not in their vocabulary.

I say make them do it!! It would certainly spell the end of UAW forever!!!

And we would all hvae better cars as a result!!!!

Agent009 - 4/9/2007 2:57:36 PM

+1 Boost

It would probably change the way they do buisness in the future.

What if they tied UAW retirement to profitability of their own investment? The whole landscape changes then.

dumpsty - 4/10/2007 9:29:48 AM

+1 Boost

If the UAW took a larger portion of ownership in Chrysler, wouldn't that create a huge conflict of interest. The UAW has members working for other car companies...and if they were to make consessions to benefit their stake in Chrysler, other car companies would expect the same.

DCX's executive board has 50% union representation now. And then to de-merger or sell off a Group to have Union ownership would reflect negatively in the industry around the globe.

rocker - 4/10/2007 11:09:56 AM

+1 Boost

Kerkorian wanted Ghosn to run GM, Renault and Nissan. Now Ghosn doesn't even run all the facets of Renault/Nissan. His buddy Gerry York was a director for Chrysler at one time. Makes me wonder if Kerkorian is playing with a full deck nowadays. The union isn't the question, it's Kerkorian's sanity.

rocker - 4/11/2007 9:30:31 AM

+1 Boost

DCX is a lot smarter than I gave them credit for, they invited all bidders to a conference but did not invite Kerkorian. Smart move, he's a wealthy idiot.