We’re ready for change

Unions are often accused of “resisting change.” If the “change” we are talking about is the s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d removal of money from workers’ pockets, and its transfer to someone else’s pocket, then I plead: “Guilty as charged.” That’s the kind of change I will resist until the day I die.

But if we are speaking of “change” in a more genuine sense, as the ongoing evolution and flux of the economy in the face of technical and global developments, then it isn’t clear at all that unions must inevitably resist it. In fact, in the right circumstances, unions can embrace and facilitate change.

A great example of this was provided in the CAW’s recent triennial collective bargaining with the Canadian affiliates of the Big Three automakers. Can you imagine a sector that has experienced more change than the auto industry? Automation, changing consumer tastes, skyrocketing gasoline prices, burgeoning imports, currency appreciation, financial upheaval — the only thing predictable about the auto industry is its unpredictability. And together, all these factors presented us with major challenges in our bargaining.

After much deliberation, the CAW decided to negotiate our first contract with Ford Motor Co. This choice in itself reflected “out-of-the-box” thinking on our part. After all, Ford was the weakest automaker in Canada, with the most underutilized plants. According to traditional “bargaining power” theories, it should have been the last company we’d want to negotiate with.

However, our primary goal this year was to secure the future prospects of Canada’s auto industry, given the economic storm clouds on the horizon — not to extract the biggest wage gain possible. And the pattern settlement we eventually reached with Ford provides, in my judgment, a model of how a union and a company can work together: not to resist change, but to manage it, in a humane and efficient manner.

A key prerequisite for our success with Ford was a frank and genuine relationship between the company and the union. Ford was completely upfront with us regarding their overcapacity problem, and how they planned to resolve it. We were equally upfront with them about our need to protect jobs — even if that meant accepting a wage package that was historically moderate for our union.

Ford indicated that closure of its castings plant in Windsor (employing about 500 CAW members) was inevitable. We went to work to design an adjustment process that protected our members and their families, while allowing Ford to focus available resources on strengthening its core powertrain and auto-assembly operations in Canada.

We negotiated a generous $70,000 restructuring incentive, to encourage senior workers to retire early — rather than forcing junior workers on to layoff. We also arranged for preferential hiring opportunities at other Ford locations in Ontario, for displaced workers from Windsor who were not fully absorbed through the early retirements.

The bottom- line result was genuinely and mutually beneficial. Ford could reduce excess capacity and strengthen its bottom line. But CAW members could be guaranteed that no one would be thrown on the street as a result. Our agreement will contribute to the eventual turnaround of this company, a pillar of Canada’s industrial economy.

The most amazing and inspiring aspect of the whole agreement was the response of CAW members at Ford to the deal we negotiated. Naturally, workers react negatively to the closure of a plant and the loss of several hundred jobs. And I do not want to understate the pain and loss that Windsor will experience as a result of the closure.

But CAW members recognized that mutual efforts had been made to facilitate the restructuring in a humane and compassionate manner. They understand the inevitability of change in this industry. And they agreed that we had made the right choices, by focusing on securing Ford’s core operations ( including its car assembly plant in St. Thomas, and its Essex engine plant in Windsor — both of which were secured by this agreement) and managing Ford’s downsizing without involuntary layoffs.

CAW members at Ford voted 95% in favour of the pattern contract. The vote was highest at Windsor, where the downsizing will be most severe. Is that resistance to change? Quite the contrary. Ford and the CAW proved that change — even difficult, painful change — can occur in a mutually acceptable way, so long as peoples’ basic rights are respected, and the two sides fairly negotiate the adjustment process.

Just imagine what this could mean for the rest of Canada’s economy. Suppose all workers could confront change, as CAW members at Ford did, with decent protections for themselves and their families, and a requirement that employers negotiate change, not just dictate it. As a society, we could then act together to seize the potential benefits of economic change, while better managing its negative consequences. And we’d all be better off as a result.