DETROIT (AP) — United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger says Republican senators who thwarted a compromise bailout bill want workers and retirees to shoulder the entire cost of restructuring the U.S. auto industry.
Gettelfinger said at a news conference Friday in Detroit that he's happy the Treasury Department says it's ready to act to stop a possible collapse of the industry.
He says he doesn't think the union will have to negotiate wage cuts or other terms with the White House for the industry to get federal loans.
General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC are seeking $14 billion in federal loans to make it through March. Both companies say they are running critically low on cash.
A deal to provide the loans collapsed in the Senate Thursday night after negotiations between lawmakers and the UAW over steep wage cuts fell apart.
Comments
The UAW will not take a pay cut but they want the US taxpayer to bail out GM, Ford and Chrysler? The UAW and the "Big Three" can stick it where the sun don't shine. What company will be next to bail out? The Steel industry did not get a bail out. If Bush approves this he should be impeached.
While I understand that a collapse of the auto industry is not something that should be desired, I do not support the bailout without concessions by the UAW and Gettelfinger. I would particularly like to see Gettelfinger and the higher ups in the Union give not so much the actual union members. I do feel however that the inequality of wages and wages levels of all people in the union should be addressed. The people with the least seniority keep getting the raw end of the deal while those that caused the issue with their bloated benefits don't have to concede anything. I do not support that.
Part of the bailout cash that got tabled last night included pay raises for all federal judges.
UAW doesn't have to feel the pinch of the bail-out it had a major role in causing.
Between the pork in the bill and the pork of the UAW, this whole thing smells of a pig farm.
Hey Ron:
"The Senate rejected the bailout 52-35 on a procedural vote — well short of the 60 required — after the talks fell apart. Just 10 Republicans joined 40 Democrats and two independents in backing it. Three Democrats sided with 31 Republicans in opposition. Reid also voted "no" for procedural reasons."
I really enjoy this media source's blatant generalities because they have an agenda, or do not know proper research techniques. Don't you think the facts above are very pertinent to the story? Hacks.
Certainly there were a majority of reds voting against the loan. But, Harry Reid too, my god, he must have gone republican. Here's a more meaningful question: Where were the absent senators who did not vote? Spending taxpayer dollars on vacations, hookers, and blow?
The country is asking jokers (congress) to act like professionals? Fat chance.