14 replies to this topic

[News Feed]

Fiat saw about 13% of its union workers join a general, one-day strike called by FIOM, the Italian metalworkers' union. FIOM called for an eight-hour strike to protest the new government of Mario Monti and the decision by Fiat to unilaterally terminate its labor agreements. Italy's other three major labor organizations, CGIL, CISL and UIL, gave limited support to the strike. FIOM says it is still counting the number of workers that participated and hopes to have a clearer picture by tomorrow. While the strike did not change the agreement that will be signed between Fiat and unions representing a majority of its employees, it did postpone the signing for another day. FIOM, which has already lost a court challenge to the new contract's terms, will not be a party to the signing. Fiat would like to have the contract signed before Wednesday, when CEO Sergio Marchionne and board chairman..

View the original, full post

[ChrycoFan]

News Feed, on December 12, 2011 at 04:10 pm, said:

Fiat saw about 13% of its union workers join a general, one-day strike called by FIOM, the Italian metalworkers' union. FIOM called for an eight-hour strike to protest the new government of Mario Monti and the decision by Fiat to unilaterally terminate its labor agreements. Italy's other three major labor organizations, CGIL, CISL and UIL, gave limited support to the strike. FIOM says it is still counting the number of workers that participated and hopes to have a clearer picture by tomorrow. While the strike did not change the agreement that will be signed between Fiat and unions representing a majority of its employees, it did postpone the signing for another day. FIOM, which has already lost a court challenge to the new contract's terms, will not be a party to the signing. Fiat would like to have the contract signed before Wednesday, when CEO Sergio Marchionne and board chairman..

View the original, full post

It seems that FIOM, the communist union,  wants to lose its representation at Fiat.   It is working hard to do so.

[MoparNorm]

Wasn't this strike supposed to be on the 16th?
Looks like the other four Italian unions are on board and the metalwork will now come from Toledo...

[artsybob]

Maybe Allpar should make a clock counting down the time until Marchionne throws up his hands in disgust and says "#%$@ this, I'm shipping everything off to America!"

[DeWitte]

Why?

Does UAW usually says to CEOs: please do what you want?

p.s. FIOM is no more communist since a lot of time. Comunism died in Europe in 1989.

[DaveAdmin]

The job of a union is to negotiate, not to automatically capitulate.

Admittedly FIOM managed to exclude itself from negotiations.

I think they are faced with the same Hobson's choice as the UAW: either slash pay and benefits, or lose your jobs completely.

Funny that boards of directors never seem to do that with ineffectual CEOs... but that's another story.

[tazdevil]

FIOM not comunist? Comunism is dead? Seriously, have you paid any attention to the history of FIOM and the current fiasco in Russia, Argentina, Iran, Cuba?

[DeWitte]

I wrote "FIOM no more..." = it was in the past. Not it wasn't at all.

I wrote Comunism in Europe is dead. Not in the world.

Argentina and Iran communists? When?

[Bob_Sheaves]

This is not a political board. Take it elsewhere.

[DaveAdmin]

+1, Bob. I unapproved a couple of messages in case anyone wondered - from both left and right.

[RVC]

I'll just point out that this article has a number of non-exact infos:
A) FIOM is not a major "4th union" together with CGIL, CISL and UIL; FIOM is the metalworkers part of CGIL, so do fall intents and purposes the denomination should be FIOM-GCIL.
Nowhere did the other unions support FIOM in its grandstanding, or in its calling this strike. I fact, CISL and UIL flat out denounced FIOM as acting upon politically motivated grounds (I.e., the Lords, as they call the Managers and ownership, are oppressing the labourers, as whey call the workers), instead of negotiating on behalf of their members. I fact CGIL, is the only one of the three that "gave limited support to the strike"; this is all the more telling of the isolation of FIOM if you consider that CGIL is the parent Union to FIOM.
C) today FIAT signed the new contract with all other unions, including CISL, UIL, and the other that represent the 86,000 workers inside fiat and fiat industrial plants in Italy.

Basically FIOM is trying to collect the die hard post-communists (or simply communists; sorry DeWitte, they still do exist in Italy and elsewhere in Europe), and will go on in its struggle against the "lords" on another battlefield: Italian courts.

[RVC]

MoparNorm, on December 12, 2011 at 06:58 pm, said:

Wasn't this strike supposed to be on the 16th?
Looks like the other four Italian unions are on board and the metalwork will now come from Toledo...

It was moved ahead to coincide with the day FIAT launches the Panda. Since the Panda is a symbol of what FIAT is willing to do if the workers sign the new contract (Pomigliano is the first plant that signed the contract that was used as the blueprint for the contract that was singed today by all oth unions, and in return they got the production of one of FIATs best sellers), FIOM decided to do everything possible to "steal the thunder" of the launch on TV and papers.

Pathetic attitude on the part of FIOM if you ask me, but it is what it is.

[DaveAdmin]

I don't think anyone is arguing with you, RVC.

I could argue that it's sad about how industrial workers in the "first world" countries are pretty much stepping back 60 years, but then, the people who are getting the new factories are coming out of poverty in a lot of cases, and it might be doing them more good than the harm it's doing to those who are losing out. (Tell that to the guys in the old steel-and-auto cities, though.)

It does look as though, globally, we will have a glut of labor for the foreseeable future. There are solutions to that, but none that are painless, religiously/morally acceptable, politically acceptable, and/or likely.

[Jeepnut]

artsybob, on December 12, 2011 at 07:22 pm, said:

Maybe Allpar should make a clock counting down the time until Marchionne throws up his hands in disgust and says "#%$@ this, I'm shipping everything off to America!"

To some extent that may be happening

DeWitte, on December 13, 2011 at 03:53 am, said:

Why?

Does UAW usually says to CEOs: please do what you want?

p.s. FIOM is no more communist since a lot of time. Comunism died in Europe in 1989.

Really then why are several major cities in Italy ran by communist party mayors? Although I haven't kept up with it lately so that could have changed in the last couple years

Bob_Sheaves, on December 13, 2011 at 12:39 pm, said:

This is not a political board. Take it elsewhere.

I agree Bob let's stick to the facts and not let this decend into a mudslinging from both sides of the political spectrum

Edited by Jeepnut, December 13, 2011 at 04:27 pm.

[RVC]

DaveAdmin, on December 13, 2011 at 04:23 pm, said:

I don't think anyone is arguing with you, RVC.

I could argue that it's sad about how industrial workers in the "first world" countries are pretty much stepping back 60 years, but then, the people who are getting the new factories are coming out of poverty in a lot of cases, and it might be doing them more good than the harm it's doing to those who are losing out. (Tell that to the guys in the old steel-and-auto cities, though.)

It does look as though, globally, we will have a glut of labor for the foreseeable future. There are solutions to that, but none that are painless, religiously/morally acceptable, politically acceptable, and/or likely.

Dave, I won't argue with you on this point. Just to be clear, I do not demonize Unions at all; it's just that in this case FIOM in particular is not acting as a union and negotiation good deals for its members, but doing something else.

As for the conditions that you suggest are a throwback to the '60s, I'll point out that what is being signed at FIAT would not even need to be talked about in the US: they are obvious things, that have become not obvious simply because the system has spiraled out of control in the last 40 yrs, and has given more rights than duties to workers, and less leverage to the company vs the union.
At the beginning of the XX century, the property/management ruled, and workers suffered dearly; in the 60s the social revolution in Europe started a pendulum swing in the other direction, where it stayed for he last 40yr. Now, the pendulum is swinging back to -I hope- a more centered position where the general interest of both the company and the workers can be taken into account and considered equally important.
Globalization doesn't necessarily mean that workers need to be paid Chinese salaries for a company to be profitable: look at Germany, or Japan! But it does mean that a new balance of rights and duties need to be fleshed out and applied (as it happened a few years back in Germany, and as it is now happening in Italy). Incidentally, the conditions that were signed off on are no worse than those that the agerman colleagues get: salary is lower, but will rise incrementally.