VW actually wants to unionize its American factory; Republicans freak out.

[PLATO]

FIXED

No doubt.

[MrFun]

It turns out that one possible consequence of the heavy-handed interference by Republican TN politicians is that this could cost Southern states future business opportunities with VW.

Exactly the opposite of what Republican anti-union politicians said would happen; they spewed out rhetoric that preventing unionization would increase such opportunities.

[MrFun]

Maybe VW would prefer to locate in states where state politicians do not interfere unnecessarily in possible working agreements made between workers and their employers.

[Dinner]

VW still wants a workers council but state laws still prevent them from having them without a union vote. This is stupid.

[Dinner]

Check France's unemployemt rate. Note, you're the Wisconsin to their New York.

The real travesty is that the UK's GDP has been smaller than France's since 2012. Austerity has really ****ed hard with the UK's economy while France has, for the most part, performed better until the last six months. In 2012 the UK looked like it was on the path to possibly repassing Germany to become Europe's largest economy by 2020 but it all went to hell in 2012 for the UK while Germany and France have done much better.

[-Jrabbit]

Reuters story out of Berlin on the VW works council's reaction to the outcome:

VW workers may block southern U.S. deals if no unions: labor chief

BERLIN Wed Feb 19, 2014 6:38am EST

(Reuters) - Volkswagen's top labor representative threatened on Wednesday to try to block further investments by the German carmaker in the southern United States if its workers there are not unionized.

Workers at VW's factory in Chattanooga, Tennessee, last Friday voted against representation by the United Auto Workers union (UAW), rejecting efforts by VW representatives to set up a German-style works council at the plant.

German workers enjoy considerable influence over company decisions under the legally enshrined "co-determination" principle which is anathema to many politicians in the U.S. who see organized labor as a threat to profits and job growth.

Chattanooga is VW's only factory in the U.S. and one of the company's few in the world without a works council.

"I can imagine fairly well that another VW factory in the United States, provided that one more should still be set up there, does not necessarily have to be assigned to the south again," said Bernd Osterloh, head of VW's works council.

"If co-determination isn't guaranteed in the first place, we as workers will hardly be able to vote in favor" of potentially building another plant in the U.S. south, Osterloh, who is also on VW's supervisory board, said.

The 20-member panel - evenly split between labor and management - has to approve any decision on closing plants or building new ones.

Osterloh's comments were published on Wednesday in German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung. A spokesman at the Wolfsburg-based works council confirmed the remarks.

"The conservatives stirred up massive, anti-union sentiments," Osterloh said. "It's possible that the conclusion will be drawn that this interference amounted to unfair labor praxis."

Republican U.S. Senator Bob Corker, a staunch opponent of unionization, said last Wednesday after the first day of voting that VW would award the factory another model if the UAW was rejected.

The comments even prompted U.S. President Barack Obama to intervene, accusing Republicans of trying to block the Chattanooga workforce's efforts.

Undeterred by last Friday's vote, VW's works council has said it will press on with efforts to set up labor representation at Chattanooga which builds the Passat sedan.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/19/us-vw-usplant-idUSBREA1I0S820140219

[DinoDoc]

Can anyone tell me why VW needs the UAW to set up the so-called worker's council they actually want? It appears to me that VW doesn't really want the UAW but feels they somehow need them in order to set that council up.

[-Jrabbit]

why VW needs the UAW to set up the so-called worker's counci

Tennessee law.

[DinoDoc]

Which says what?

[PLATO]

It is funny that these reports out of Germany are saying that the "Conservatives" stirred up anti union sentiment. The plant was overwhelmingly anti union until the UAW made a full court press. Even then they came up woefully short. The simple truth around here is that most people don't like unions. Really nothing more than that. Neither Corker's or Obama's statements had anything really to do with it at all. Interestingly, the negative comments out of Germany and the U.S. are nearly all from labor organizations and not from VW. Even though the German labor representative takes part in the management council at VW, he does not speak for VW.

I am fairly confident from what I hear around here that VW will get a solution to its work council desires.

[PLATO]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/17/us-autos-vw-council-analysis-idUSBREA1F0VV20140217

(Reuters) - Workers at Volkswagen AG's Chattanooga, Tennessee, plant may have voted against joining the United Auto Workers union last week but they may still gain some representation in the company through the formation of a works council.

Frank Fischer, chief executive of VW Chattanooga and manager of the plant, emphasized on Friday night that while the workers voted against the UAW they did not vote down the idea of a works council. "Throughout this process, we found great enthusiasm for the idea of an American-style works council both inside and outside our plant," Fischer said. "Our goal continues to be to determine the best method for establishing a works council in accordance with the requirements of U.S. labor law."

The power of such a council, which would be a first of its kind in the United States, would be very limited under U.S. labor law. It could be consulted only on some limited matters rather than negotiate with management on working conditions. And some labor experts say if the workers want to participate in a works council they may have to set up their own independent union to avoid the perception of a company-organized union, which is not allowed under the law.

In Germany, a works council typically involves both white- and blue-collar workers who elect representatives to participate on a body that is involved in decisions about the workplace environment and rules. However, wages and benefits are usually left for separate negotiations between labor unions and management.

Chattanooga is Volkswagen's only plant in the United States. The idea for a works council has the backing of some of the workers at the Chattanooga plant who had opposed the UAW, and also has support from some politicians who had been warning about the dangers of a UAW victory. VW's works council in Germany also said it still wanted one to be set up in Chattanooga and some of its officials would be traveling to the United States to hold talks with labor law experts about the possibility in the next two weeks.

Last week's vote at the plant - which was 53 percent to 47 percent against the UAW - dealt a body blow to the union, which has been unable to expand into auto plants in the U.S. South, even as its ranks have declined elsewhere.

The UAW had high hopes for the vote because VW at the prodding of IG Metall, the powerful German union that has several representatives on VW's supervisory board, had maintained what it calls a "neutral" stance toward the UAW and did not campaign against the union. It had even permitted UAW representatives limited access to the plant to address workers.

If the UAW had been successful, VW planned to form a works council with representatives from the union and representatives from nonunion white-collar employees.

DIFFICULT LEGAL HURDLES

Labor experts said they think it will be very difficult, if not impossible, to set up a works council without an independent union.

"While it's something novel, they are up against a statutory framework set up to prevent this from happening," said Steve Bernstein, an attorney at Fisher & Phillips, a national labor law firm that represents the management side in labor issues.

Bernstein said that as long as any workforce body only "consults" with management, they may meet U.S. labor law but if they "deal" - or negotiate - with management then that would not be allowed. "The test is whether they are exchanging ideas and proposals with management. If they refrain from that, you will have a committee with diluted power, but more likely will be accepted" under U.S. labor law, he said.

One possibility would be that the workers at the Chattanooga plant form a new independent union themselves and then join a works council, though under U.S. National Labor Relations Board rules they would almost certainly have to wait until at least a year after last week's vote. The UAW could also seek another vote after a year has passed.

The discussions have some of those who lined up against the UAW, both at the plant and outside, wondering if there is a new way to worker representation that fits better with a modern America that has moved decisively against traditional labor unions in the past 30 years. In 2013, only 11.3 percent of the American labor force was unionized, down from 20.1 percent in 1983. The latest government statistics show that only 6.7 percent of American workers in the private sector are in unions.

Bob Corker, a Republican U.S. senator from Tennessee, who was accused of interfering in the vote by the UAW for comments he made last week, told Reuters on Saturday that there was now the possibility of looking at workplace representation in the United States "in a very different way."

Corker, Chattanooga's former mayor who helped lure the Volkswagen factory to that city with substantial tax incentives, said whether a German-style works council is allowed under U.S. law is a tough legal question. He also said that if there was a need for a union then the workers should organize their own.

Mike Burton, a key member of a VW Chattanooga anti-UAW worker group called Southern Momentum, said that it wants "to create a new business model" involving worker representation without setting up a union. "We want to make it so that in a year when the UAW is allowed to come back, we'll have something set up and they won't have a chance to come in."

[-Jrabbit]

Which says what?

My bad, should have checked the OP; apparently it's US law.

One open question in Chattanooga is whether the 1,600 or so hourly workers at the VW factory would need to belong to a union like the U.A.W. to join a works council.

The U.A.W. said it would welcome a works council, but said that it would be legal only if a majority of workers had opted for a union. And many labor experts agree.

“If the company set up a representation system like that, a union would challenge it and they could probably win their argument that it’s a company-dominated union,” said Richard Hurd, a professor of industrial and labor relations at Cornell University. Such a union set up by the company would violate American labor law, he said.

[BlackCat]

Crazy yanks

Many American labor experts say it would be illegal under federal law for a company to establish a works council unless workers first voted to have a union represent them. Without that, a works council might be viewed as an illegal company-dominated, company-created employee group.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/17/business/labor-regroups-in-south-after-vw-vote.html?_r=0

Edit: beaten by two minutes

[DinoDoc]

My bad, should have checked the OP; apparently it's US law.

This sounds like an argument to change US law.

[BlackCat]

This sounds like an argument to change US law.

Are you really claiming that you belive that if a US law is stupid, it should be changed ?