The New York Times, June 22, 2010, Tuesday

The New York Times

June 22, 2010, Tuesday

The New York Times

U.A.W. Chief Is Taking On Toyota Plants

Locked into concessions to the Detroit carmakers and with its membership at a 70-year low, the United Automobile Workers union is picking a fight with a longtime adversary, Toyota, in a bid to regain some of its clout.

The union has been trying, and failing, to organize workers at Toyota for almost as long as the company has had assembly plants in this country. But now Bob King, the union’s new leader, says Toyota is vulnerable because of its safety problems and recalls.

He has called on union members to picket Toyota dealerships and has vowed to “pound on Toyota” on the organizing issue at its 10 plants in the United States, all nonunion.

The problem for the U.A.W. is that the auto industry’s troubles have actually compounded the challenge of organizing workers, labor experts say.

The union has little in the way of a sales pitch on wages and benefits now that the Detroit automakers have cut wages and benefits to union members to be more in line with Toyota and the other so-called transplant manufacturers.

“Toyota was most vulnerable when the auto industry was booming,” said Jeffrey K. Liker, a University of Michigan professor and author of a book about the Japanese carmaker.

“Now they look over the fence and say, ‘Look at how many plants the U.A.W. has lost.’ ”

Still, Mr. King has plenty to gain among his own ranks by taking on Toyota, even if the effort falls short, the experts said. Giving Toyota another black eye could show members that the union can still flex its muscles even after the beating it has taken.

“The union could really use a victory,” said Harry Katz, dean of the Cornell University School of Industrial and Labor Relations. “To win would be big for them, but even getting close would be a powerful statement.”

When the Detroit carmakers dominated the market, the U.A.W. was able to negotiate high wages and generous benefits because each company knew it would not be worse off than the others. Now Toyota, Honda, Nissan and other transplant companies employ tens of thousands of nonunion hourly workers in the United States, greatly reducing the union’s bargaining power.

A Toyota spokesman, Mike Goss, said the company recognized its workers’ right to unionize but that they had not chosen to do so in more than 20 years of manufacturing in this country. The company employees 34,000 blue-collar and management workers in the United States.

“Our job as a company is to give them good pay and benefits, which we know we do, and to have open communication between team members and management,” Mr. Goss, said. “It’s also our job to operate our company with some employment stability in mind.”

Professor Liker said morale among Toyota workers soared to “historic highs” during the recession, as U.A.W.-represented plants closed but Toyota kept its work force intact. The company halted some production as demand fell, but employees were still asked to report every day, often for training.

“People were extremely grateful when they looked at their neighbors losing their jobs and medical benefits, and Toyota was still bringing them in with full pay and benefits and not laying anybody off,” Professor Liker said.

Accordingly, convincing Toyota workers that the U.A.W. offers any better job protection than they already have could prove difficult. The U.A.W. needs Toyota workers to suffer more of a hardship before most would be willing to put themselves through the risks that inherently come with trying to unionize, said Gary N. Chaison, a professor of industrial relations at Clark University in Worcester, Mass.

“If you lose a job at a Toyota plant, you’re going to be unemployed for a long period of time,” Professor Chaison said. “They don’t want to spoil a good thing that they have. They don’t want to take chances. Many of these workers are just thankful that they have good jobs in manufacturing with benefits.”

The only jobs that Toyota has eliminated in large numbers were at a plant with union workers in California, known as New United Motor Manufacturing Inc., or Nummi, which was a joint venture with General Motors until G.M. withdrew as part of its bankruptcy. Toyota said the plant was not viable without a partner and closed it in April, laying off 4,700 U.A.W. workers.

The U.A.W. vehemently protested the closing, with Mr. King joining picket lines, and negotiated $281 million in severance pay for the workers.

Last month, Toyota revealed plans to build electric cars at the Nummi plant in conjunction with a small luxury carmaker, Tesla, but the operation will be much smaller, with significantly fewer workers than it had under Toyota and G.M. Toyota also said it would begin building the Corolla compact sedan, which used to be the primary product of the plant, at a new nonunion plant in Mississippi.

Mr. King said the Detroit automakers had never closed a plant just to open a new one with different workers at lower wages. Bringing workers at the foreign-based carmakers into the U.A.W., he said, was essential to create a level playing field and to ensure workers earned fair wages throughout the industry.

“When you have everybody organized and you do pattern bargaining, you can deliver on that promise,” he said.

The U.A.W. is also just plain desperate for members. Membership fell below 400,000 last year, a level not seen since 1940, after years of plant closures by General Motors, Ford Motor and Chrysler. At its peak 40 years ago, the union had about 1.5 million members.

“King has to talk about organizing because the U.A.W. has a big problem: it’s hemorrhaging members,” Professor Chaison said. “If you claim to be a labor movement, you have to grow.”