OCR Text |
Show Labor Concessions r Lloyd McBride a,i H against the big raises IH counted on in the J" W Pnsingly enough, C not even the fact ne. the union's steely N laid off is putting a tt opposition to conce,; boiling up amonguW kers. In spite of the continuing recession re-cession and the critically high unemployment totals, the nation's na-tion's union workers are becoming be-coming steadily more reluctant reluc-tant to grant wage and fringe benefit concessions sought by industries. THERE IS no question but that in many instances companies com-panies are so beleaguered by labor costs-on top of exaggerated exagger-ated outlays in many other sec-tors-that they are in a touch financial condition. To seek reasonable contract adjustments adjust-ments from the unions has become be-come fairly common as the recession re-cession has become more prolonged. pro-longed. Calling upon labor and the workers to help started in 1979 when Chrysler faced collapse. The near-bankrupt firm succeeded suc-ceeded in wrangling from the United Auto Workers with the approval of the employes some $1.1 billion in pay and other concessions. As a measure of good faith, Chrysler elected UAW President Douglas A. Fraser to its board of directors. This collaboration was widely noted by .both management and labor, and was termed by many as the beginning of a completely new era in the field of management-labor relations. rela-tions. AS IS so often the case in trying out new techniques in labor agreements, the initial bright hopes have begun to darken menacingly. Contract givebacks and general moderation mod-eration in the largest negotiations negotia-tions between the UAW and Chrysler were simply rejected by the workers and some top representatives. As we have suggested above, the national--and now even internationall-recessionary internationall-recessionary conditions have not been able to lure the con- cessions, even though it is obvious ob-vious that a collapse of the company would creat reductions reduc-tions within the industry and make for many additional auto layoffs. It is clear by now that throughout the U.S. business fabric there is mounting labor resistance to management's widening efforts to win wage and benefits reductions or readjustments in some form or another. For quite a long while employes and their representatives represen-tatives in certain economic segments were willing to help keep ailing concerns afloat. CURRENTLY, however, it is becoming more evident that the rank and file are shifting away from concessionary bargaining bar-gaining to confrontation. The change is blamed in many quarters on the Reagan policies poli-cies that have brought about increasing worker discontent. The old built-in hostility between be-tween management and labor appeared to be easing through the necessity of finding mutual aid in more moderate worker demands. But the situation was superficial and was based to a high degree on the necessities necessi-ties of the moment. EARLIER this year, for example, ex-ample, General Motors and Ford workers approved settlements settle-ments granting wage and other concessions in favor of the corporations. cor-porations. Regrets are already showing up among the union members, and angry complaints com-plaints are being heard in many auto manufacturing centers. Workers are asserting that they were promised job security secur-ity as a result of their concessions conces-sions on pact issues. Their anger an-ger is now being fanned by the fact that many layoffs are still affecting plants in a number of parts of the country. So deep has the dissatisfaction become that President Fraser of the UAW is far less popular than he was. Many believe, in fact, that he could easily be replaced re-placed by a more aggressive successor in 1983. THE SAME abrasiveness showed up in July when the steel industry and labor tried to pare labor costs, a move now being repeated with no great support from the workers. United Un-ited Steelworkers President |