April 20, 2024

Strike Adds to Problems at Indian Auto Plant

The strike is the latest in a series of labor relations problems at the four-year-old plant in Manesar, about 30 miles south of New Delhi, that are crimping sales for the automaker. The company, which makes about half the cars sold in India, is majority-owned by Suzuki of Japan.

Maruti Suzuki has said that its sales fell 20.8 percent in September from a year earlier, to 85,565 cars, largely because of earlier problems at the Manesar plant. The factory, where workers began the current strike last Friday, has the capacity to produce 1,200 cars a day, including popular models like the Swift, A-Star and SX4.

Shares of Maruti Suzuki were little changed in Mumbai on Tuesday, but the stock is down more than 24 percent this year.

Other Indian auto companies have also been hit by labor unrest this year. In March, some workers at a General Motors factory in the western state of Gujarat went on strike for nearly three months. There is a growing dissatisfaction among Indian factory workers, particularly those in the auto industry, that they are not sharing in the financial success of their companies at a time when inflation in India is running at nearly 10 percent.

Union workers are also angry over the growing use of contract workers, who are paid far less than regular employees and — unlike permanent workers — can be laid off without government approval. In some auto factories, contract workers make up more than half the staff.

Monthly manufacturing wages in India range from 6,000 rupees, or about $120, for contract workers, to about 35,000 rupees ($715) for highly skilled and experienced workers. While those wages are better than the average income in India — about $81 a month — living on them at the lower end of that range can still be tough.

Still, while government protection against layoffs gives union autoworkers some leverage, they know they have few employment alternatives — especially in north India where Maruti Suzuki and many other auto companies have built their factories.

About half of the country’s population is 25 or younger, and nearly 12 million people become working age every year. But India creates only a few million new jobs each year because of its stringent labor laws, weak infrastructure and anemic education system.

One striking worker at the Manesar plant, Satyawan, a 24-year-old who has been working at Maruti for five years and uses only one name, acknowledged that good factory jobs were few and far between. “Unemployment is increasing by the day so we won’t get a job, even if we look for one,” he said.

A company spokesman, Puneet Dhawan, said the company was not negotiating with the workers, who he said had seized “effective control” of the plant. He accused the workers of breaking furniture and damaging equipment at the plant.

“Negotiations can happen only when there is an environment for that,” Mr. Dhawan said by telephone. “Right now, we are looking at a mob of people who are going on a rampage.”

Workers at some Maruti Suzuki parts suppliers, a Suzuki engine factory and a Suzuki motorcycle factory also went on strike Friday, but some production has since resumed at those factories.

The Manesar auto plant, which began operations in 2007, has been the site of several disputes between managers and workers since July. The crux of the disagreement is whether workers there can form a new union, rather than join a union that also represents workers at Maruti Suzuki’s older plants in nearby Gurgaon. The Manesar union workers contend that the older plants’ unions are too compliant with management.

Vikas Bajaj reported from Munbai, India, and Sruthi Gottipati from New Delhi and Manesar, India.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/12/business/global/strike-adds-to-problems-at-indian-auto-factory.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Working for Less: In Detroit, Two Wage Levels Are the New Way of Work

Nothing distinguishes them from other workers at the Jefferson North plant, except their paychecks. The newest workers earn about $14 an hour; longtime employees earn double that.

With the economy slumping and job creation once again a pressing issue in the White House and Congress, the advent of a two-tier wage system in Detroit is spiking employment for one of the country’s most important manufacturing industries. The new jobs, which are seen as long term, are being watched closely by economists, executives in other industries and Washington policy makers eager to increase employment in manufacturing and other areas.

For many, the opportunity for steady employment is welcome, even at a lower wage and with no certainty when it might increase.

“Everybody is appreciative of a job and glad to be working,” said Derrick Chatman, who makes $14.65 an hour putting tires on Jeeps after being laid off at Home Depot, working odd construction jobs and collecting unemployment.

What was once seen as a desperate move to prop up the struggling auto industry is now considered an integral part of its future. The demand for $14-an-hour manufacturing jobs is providing Detroit’s Big Three automakers with a ready pool of eager new employees. Last year, Chrysler was flooded with inquiries about the jobs here. It froze the list after receiving 10,000 applications.

The companies say the two-tier wages are paying off. Despite the disparity, there is no appreciable difference in the Grand Cherokees produced on the shift dominated since last fall by the lower-paid workers, the plant manager says. At General Motors, savings from its two-tier workers are crucial to production that began last month of an inexpensive, subcompact car in suburban Detroit.

Two-tier wage systems have been tried in the airline industry and others with spotty success. Usually the lower wages disappear rather quickly when the economy picks up. But the arrival of vastly different wage rates in auto factories is a seminal event in an industry long influenced by a powerful union devoted to equal pay regardless of seniority.

“This is not going away,” said Kristin Dziczek, a labor analyst at the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor, Mich. “It has allowed the Big Three to reduce labor costs without cutting the pay of incumbent workers. Is it good for the health and competitiveness of the companies? Yes. And is that good for job security? Yes.”

Four years ago, the United Automobile Workers agreed to allow Chrysler, G.M. and Ford to pay lower wages to new hires to help close the cost gap with foreign carmakers. Now the two-tier arrangement is at the forefront of labor talks between the U.A.W. and the Detroit companies.

The union’s president, Bob King, has made an increase in entry-level wages a top priority in negotiations for a new national contract to replace the current agreement, which expires Wednesday.

So far, about 12 percent of Chrysler’s 23,000 union workers earn the lower wage, and over all, 4,000 or so of the 112,000 U.A.W. members are second-tier hires. Those numbers are expected to grow — and in fact can increase significantly even under the current contract. The jobs are central to the contract talks because they are viewed as critical to the industry’s continued recovery.

Some benefits for the lower-tier workers are scaled back as well. They get the union’s traditional medical benefits, but a maximum of four weeks paid time off a year, versus five for the longtime workers. And instead of the guaranteed $3,100-a-month pension a full-paid worker receives after age 60, the new hires have to build their own “personal retirement plan” based on contributions from the company of less than $2,000 a year.

The gap in wages between regular and entry-level workers has created dissent in U.A.W. ranks. Some long-term employees have demonstrated against the two-tier system and called for it to be abolished. Mr. King, however, has focused on getting meaningful pay raises for the lower tier rather than eliminating it.

At the big Labor Day parade in Detroit, union activists chanted “equal pay for equal work,” and some full-paid workers said they were willing to forgo a wage increase in the new contract to help the lower-tier employees.

Nick Bunkley contributed reporting.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=f321e8559bbe962eabf896bd60e31359

Ford Sued Over Patents for System That Allows Drivers to Connect Electronic Devices

High-tech amenities, like the popular Ford Sync system that lets drivers seamlessly connect their car and mobile phone, have helped bring more customers and huge profits to the automaker. But now a small company in Washington State says it actually developed the technology behind Sync and a handful of safety features that Ford is adding to much of its lineup. The company, Eagle Harbor Holdings, has filed a federal lawsuit against Ford, accusing the carmaker of infringing on seven patents.

Although the suit, filed last week, is unlikely to result in Ford being forced to stop putting the features in its vehicles, the carmaker could pay millions of dollars in licensing fees if it loses in court or agrees to settle. Analysts say such cases, commonplace in the high-tech world but not in the auto industry, will be seen more frequently as cars and trucks increasingly become roadworthy computers.

“When you start getting into more software in the vehicles you’re going to have this happen a lot more,” Kevin Hamlin, an analyst with the research firm IHS iSuppli, said. “Writing code in software leads to a lot of these suits. It just kind of goes along with the territory.”

Ford declined to comment on the suit, saying in an e-mailed statement that officials “have not yet had an opportunity to review the details.”

Eagle Harbor’s general counsel, Jeff Harmes, said the company had been in discussions with Ford for six years about licensing its technology to the automaker, but Ford cut off the talks in 2008.

The founders of Eagle Harbor, Dan Preston and his son Joseph, are inventors whose previous company, Airbiquity, developed technology licensed by General Motors for its OnStar communication service. Ford currently licenses technology from Airbiquity.

“This is a group of engineers with a long track record of developing commercially viable technology,” Mr. Harmes said.

In addition to Sync, which Ford developed in a partnership with Microsoft, the technology at issue in the suit includes MyKey, which gives parents the ability to monitor and limit actions by teenage drivers, and several safety features that use sensors. One of the features automatically steers the vehicle into a parallel parking space and another alerts drivers to vehicles in their blind spots and warns of potential collisions when backing out of a parking space.

Ford has been highlighting some of the innovations in recent commercials, and about 80 percent of Ford buyers get their vehicle with Sync, a $395 option that responds to voice commands and has been installed on nearly four million vehicles since its introduction in 2007. Sync has been a major contributor to Ford’s improved reputation and increased market share, though a newer offshoot known as MyFord Touch has been panned by Consumer Reports and criticized by buyers in a recent J. D. Power Associates quality survey.

Mr. Harmes said, before filing suit, Eagle Harbor repeatedly told Ford in 2009 and 2010 that it was infringing on the company’s patents.

“We would prefer to reach some business settlement with Ford as opposed to continuing the suit,” he said.

Eagle Harbor has been in discussions with other automakers and suppliers about its technology but none have agreed to license it yet, Mr. Harmes said. It also is working to commercialize environmental technology, including a method to strip metals from the waste created by coal-fired power plants

The company, with just 15 employees and a small office on an island in Puget Sound, would seem to have long odds in taking on Ford. But it is being backed by the Northwater Intellectual Property Fund, an investor in i4i, a Canadian company that was awarded $290 million in patent dispute against Microsoft that was upheld last month by the United States Supreme Court.

Katherine E. White, a law professor at Wayne State University in Detroit and an expert on intellectual property litigation, said infringement cases like the one against Ford hinged on whether the technology performed “the same function, in substantially the same way, to get the same result” as the patented concept. She said Ford was in little danger of having to stop offering Sync or the other disputed technology, so its risk was limited to paying royalties, not halting production and losing sales.

“Injunctions have become very difficult to get now for companies that don’t make anything,” Ms. White said. “Big companies can afford to pay the damages later. What they can’t afford is to stop producing.”

Ford agreed to pay $10.2 million to Robert Kearns, who invented intermittent windshield wipers, in a highly publicized 1990 case; it was the subject of the 2008 film “Flash of Genius.” Mr. Kearns later also received $30 million from Chrysler.

About a year ago, Ford settled a longstanding case brought by a Florida company, Paice, that accused Ford of infringing on a 1994 patent for hybrid technology. Ford agreed to license the Paice technology, but the terms were not released publicly. Paice also had sued Toyota, which agreed to license 23 patented technologies.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=82b9828ec2b41ae66b65a80afbd4651c

Economix: Cars as a Harbinger of an Upturn

A Chrysler assembly line in Michigan last month.Carlos Osorio/Associated PressA Chrysler assembly line in Michigan last month.

For those who believe that the economic recovery has merely hit some bumps, and that growth will accelerate during the second half of the year, the automobile industry may offer the most persuasive evidence.

Sales of cars and light trucks plunged after the Japanese earthquake from an annual rate of 13.1 million vehicles in April to an annual rate of 11.8 million vehicles in May. That’s slightly better than last year, but 2009 and 2010 were the first years since 1982 in which Americans bought fewer than 12 million vehicles.

The decline, it seems clear, was driven by a lack of supply. The flow of vehicles from Japan came to a standstill. The 150-acre Toyota parking lot in Long Beach, Calif., where imported cars usually sit in long white rows, is as empty as the blacktop around a football stadium in springtime.

American factories also were disrupted. Most Toyotas sold in America are built in America, but many of the parts come from Japan. Companies based in the United States like Ford and General Motors also rely on Japanese parts. North American factories made 4 percent fewer cars and light trucks in May than in the same month last year, according to the trade publication Ward’s, which covers the auto industry.

The results can be seen most clearly in the dwindling inventory of vehicles available for sale. The standard metric compares vehicles sold on an average day with those available for sale. Ward’s reported that inventories would last 54 days at the end of April, but only 49 days by the end of May. And this ratio was buoyed by the declining pace of sales — actual inventories fell by an even larger increment.

With demand outstripping supply, automakers and dealers cut back on incentives. Edmunds.com reported that incentives on new cars fell 20 percent in April compared to the previous year. The average incentive of $2,118 on a new car was the lowest in seven years. It then dropped again in May.

This chain reaction — lower supply, higher prices, lower demand — is a key reason the economy is falling short of forecasts in the second quarter. It also has helped to drive up inflation indexes.

But there is a silver lining: By all indications, it is a problem that already appears to be fading away.

The Fed’s chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, included it Wednesday on a list of “factors that are likely to be temporary” in predicting that the pace of growth will increase in the third quarter.

Car companies outside Japan are ramping up production, hoping to lure away customers. And the Japanese automakers are racing to respond.

Toyota, the world’s largest automaker before the earthquake, said its Japanese factories will not resume full production until November. But its American factories, which produce most of the models sold in the United States, will return to full production by September, much earlier than expected.

The company told the trade publication Automotive News earlier this week that it was resuming its advertising campaigns and increasing its offers of sales incentives.

“There’s a perception that there’s no cars around, but we have good supply and got the pipeline going, so we are shifting focus to marketing,” Bob Carter, a Toyota executive, told Automotive News. “We have deals, and dealers have the vehicles.”

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=360d8666d17be32beaa37b48c6d42157

G.M. Pieces Together a Japanese Supply Chain

Toyota, which gets up to 15 percent of the parts used in its North American plants from Japan, is experiencing shortages of 150 critical parts. The company is operating at about 30 percent of normal capacity in the United States, with full operations not expected before November or December.

But American automakers are mostly winding down their disaster response operations — and though some supply problems remain, they are taking stock of a crisis averted. Analysts said the near-term outlook remained bleak for the Japanese automakers, while their rivals in Detroit, Korea and Europe are past the most difficult period.

The largest American automaker, General Motors, which spends about 2 percent of its parts-buying budget in Japan, identified 118 products that it needed to monitor for shortages but has resolved problems with all but five. The company’s chief executive, Daniel F. Akerson, predicted last week that the Japanese disruptions would have no material impact on G.M.’s earnings.

That is a big change from the early weeks after the March 11 disaster, a period Mr. Akerson described as “white-knuckle time” when numerous plants came close to halting work and just one of the potential supply problems could have prevented G.M. from building 75,000 vehicles.

“It was pretty tense,” he recalled in an interview.

Though G.M. obtains considerably fewer parts from companies in troubled areas than its Japanese competitors, its handling of the problems, as recounted by executives and employees involved in the effort, reveals how closely Detroit teetered toward disaster.

Four days after the earthquake, G.M. had assembled hundreds of employees into a team that began working around the clock to manage what has turned out to be the biggest catastrophe to hit the auto industry’s complex supply chain. G.M. regularly creates contingency plans for supply disruptions, “but nothing on this kind of scale or scope,” Stephen J. Girsky, a G.M. vice chairman, said. Through what it called “Project J,” General Motors briefly idled two plants to conserve supplies but otherwise found alternative sources for some parts and helped many suppliers get back online quickly enough to keep car and truck assembly lines running. The outstanding problems are essentially limited to semiconductors and other electronics. Because these devices are widely used in vehicles and substitution options are generally limited, G.M. executives said they were not entirely in the clear.

“We still have issues,” said Robert E. Socia, G.M.’s vice president for global purchasing and supply chain, “and the issues we have now are getting tougher to solve.”

General Motors has coordinated its disaster response from three “crisis rooms” at its Vehicle Engineering Center in Warren, Mich. Early on, dozens of people crowded into two windowless, seventh-floor conference rooms — one of which is devoted solely to monitoring the many critical electronic components that G.M. buys from Japan — while engineers filled a room in the basement.

Maps and dry-erase boards on the walls track the status of each affected supplier, the parts G.M. buys from them and the plants that need those parts to stay open. Using a color code, suppliers out of commission were labeled in red. Any that were unscathed but lacked reliable power and water supplies were labeled in yellow. The goal was to turn them all green.

The team, which requested and quickly received portable air-conditioners to fight the heat created by working long days in close quarters, ultimately identified the 118 problematic items, Bill Hurles, the executive director of G.M.’s global supply chain, said. Issues with 33 of the products did not become known until early April, mostly because they involved disruptions at sub-suppliers that G.M. rarely interacted with directly.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=05a6a974a8072ace5feb491de2dbb7fa