Finally a Canadian Union Gets It; 600 Jobs to Mexico

[tay]

The announcement to lay off more than 600 workers at the CAMI - GM plant is a betrayal and shows why NAFTA is a terrible deal for Canadian jobs.

"This decision reeks of corporate greed. It is not based on sales, it is an another example of how good jobs are being shifted out of Canada for cheaper labour in Mexico and Unifor will not let it happen without a fight," said Unifor National President Jerry Dias. "The Equinox and Terrain are incredibly successful vehicles and given current market demand, there is no justification for lay-offs at the CAMI facility."

Today's announcement in Ingersoll triggers an unjustified loss of 625 jobs, said Unifor. The CAMI – GM plant was not part of the Detroit Three negotiations that happened this past fall where Unifor was able to secure a footprint in auto and more than $1.5 billion in investment for production and jobs. While pledging the union's full commitment to do all it can for its members Dias indicated that the announcement should be the last straw for the federal government and called for swift action.

"The CAMI announcement is a shining example of everything wrong with NAFTA, it must be re-negotiated. It is imperative that we have trade rules that help ensure good jobs in Canada," Dias said.

Unifor is calling on Trudeau to set up mechanisms to restore a balance in jobs and investment to protect the Canadian economy and Canada's auto industry. Unifor also asks the federal government to step up and act with confidence to protect jobs. According to industry data, the projected volumes for Equinox production in Mexico has steadily risen over the past few years, while previously it was solely made in Canada.

Unifor is Canada's largest union in the private sector, representing more than 310,000 workers, including 23,050 at the Detroit Three companies. It was formed Labour Day weekend 2013 when the Canadian Auto Workers and the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers union merged.

http://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/cami-announcement-signals-need-to-re-negotiate-nafta-611979055.html

And how will the neoliberal Trudeau and Wynne Parties respond? I will also be interested in how all the other parties respond.........

 

[Twila]

Part of the problem is an ever increasing profit business model and the other part is consumers wanting cheap products.

 

[Murphy]

Jiminy Jilickers! If President Trump puts a 20% tariff on Mexican goods entering the US, how much will the price hike be by the time we get the dingle balls and faux leather steering wheel covers up here?

Trump did say that he was going to renegotiate NAFTA. I wonder how that will affect us here? Probably better than we realize. We might see plants come into Ontario so that Wynn can tax the hell out of them and they'll end up moving to China.

:lol:

 

[Mowich]

Jiminy Jilickers! If President Trump puts a 20% tariff on Mexican goods entering the US, how much will the price hike be by the time we get the dingle balls and faux leather steering wheel covers up here?

Trump did say that he was going to renegotiate NAFTA. I wonder how that will affect us here? Probably better than we realize. We might see plants come into Ontario so that Wynn can tax the hell out of them and they'll end up moving to China.

:lol:

The 20% tariff on Mexico, if it goes ahead, will certainly not hurt Canada, Murph. I hope he rips NAFTA into a million tiny pieces - that will accomplish two things. It will keep Trump busy for awhile and away from a microphone and his twitter account and it will finally get us out of a really bad trade deal.

 

[mentalfloss]

I remember just a few short years ago when I made the assertion that NAFTA was taking manufacturing jobs (because free trade naturally has winners and losers) but the conbots were convinced it was the Ontario government instead.

Now they've changed their tune cuz Trump.

Let's see how long it takes them to finally give up worrying about manufacturing either way because of automation.

 

[Mowich]

I remember just a few short years ago when I made the assertion that NAFTA was taking manufacturing jobs (because free trade naturally has winners and losers) but the conbots were convinced it was the Ontario government instead.

Now they've changed their tune cuz Trump.

Yes well, considering that it was Mulroney who sold us down the river, I am quite sure that other conservatives thought it was peachy keen. Tell us something we don't know.

 

[mentalfloss]

Gee, I wonder who the free trade champion of the world was then.

 

[Mowich]

Gee, I wonder who the free trade champion of the world was then.

When?

 

[tay]

I remember just a few short years ago when I made the assertion that NAFTA was taking manufacturing jobs (because free trade naturally has winners and losers) but the conbots were convinced it was the Ontario government instead.

Now they've changed their tune cuz Trump.

No they haven't.......

Ambrose and the neoliberals are still convinced that Canadians should be competing with $2.00 an hour jobs by racing to the bottom and accepting those wages GM DID NOT CITE hydro costs as the issue despite Rona's simplistic response for the simple people.....

Speaking to reporters after a caucus meeting in Quebec City, interim Conservative leader Rona Ambrose said the incident speaks to the need for more government action

"We don't lose jobs south of the border or to Mexico because we don't have free enough trade," she said, "We lose them because we're uncompetitive."

"Whether it's labour costs, or energy costs — people believe that they can't do business and there isn't an environment to do business," Ambrose said.


And the Liberals response is just as weak..........


Asked for comment, Navdeep Bains, Canada's minister of innovation, science and economic development, said the government is "concerned about the impact of job losses on workers and their families and our thoughts go out to those affected."
"We remain optimistic about the strength and future of Canada's automotive industry," Bains said.

GM axing 625 jobs at Ontario plant, shifting some production to Mexico - Business - CBC News

 

[lone wolf]

Gee, I wonder who the free trade champion of the world was then.

Doesn't look a bit like Mulroney ... the same guy who realized he'd traded away so much industry he had to recover revenues the Manufacturer's tax wasn't making any more with a GST on everything

 

[tay]

Gee, I wonder who the free trade champion of the world was then.

Please stop this.

Yes the Cons are anti worker but show us where the Trudeau Libs are reacting positively for Canadian workers. They have pushed for CETA, were championing the TPP and now want 'Free Trade' with China and have expanded the TFW program.

As much as I disliked Harpers agenda I will give him credit for not pulling a bait and switch as Chretien did when he campaigned with his 'little red book' on pulling Canada out of NAFTA, then out and out lying after he got elected and refusing to do so........

When one thinks deeply about neoliberalism, one conjures up the face of greed, rapacity and monetary narcissism. Not at all a pretty face. But here in Canada, Thomas Walkom writes, neoliberalism is concealed by a human, some would say pretty, face, that of Justin Trudeau.

The essence of neo-liberalism is globalization. Neo-liberals strive for a world in which capital, goods and even labour move effortlessly from country to country. The aim is to let the free market do its magic and maximize wealth.​

Once the centrepiece of the Conservative Party, the legacy of the reviled Stephen Harper is now being carried by our 'new' prime minister. Youth and attractiveness seem to go a long way on a number of fronts, including the temporary foreign worker program that grew to outrageous proportions under the previous regime:

... the Trudeau Liberals are smooth. Last week, they eliminated a rule that prevented temporary foreign workers from staying in Canada for more than four years.

To make the move politically palatable, the Liberal government said it would also require employers to advertise among disadvantaged groups such as indigenous people and the disabled before turning to foreigners.

But the bottom line is that the new rule allows employers to use cheap foreign labour indefinitely.​

And Trudeau seems to understand something that Harper refused to: the need for 'social licence':

In Canada, that means wooing indigenous peoples and well-organized environmental groups.... And to win social licence for oil and gas pipelines, he worked on two fronts.

One was climate change. The government established its bona fides here by negotiating a path-breaking agreement with eight out of 10 provinces (plus three territories) to impose a price on carbon.

On its own, the carbon-price agreement is not enough to let Canada meet its climate targets. But in the end, it may be enough to convince enough Canadians that the pipelines from Alberta to the Pacific coast Trudeau wants should go ahead.​

Simultaneously, the government has been successfully wooing indigenous leaders — with promises of more money, a more respectful relationship and an inquiry into missing and murdered aboriginal women.​

And while people are oohing and aahing over this new style, globalization plans continue apace:

The free trade and investment deal between Canada and the European Union is closer to fruition. A similar deal with China is on the agenda, as is some kind of free-trade relationship with Japan.​

Trudeau's plans for an infrastructure bank is of the same neoliberal ilk. One may legitimately ask why, when the cost of borrowing is at record lows the Liberals will kick in $35-billion and hope to attract private sector dollars at a ratio of $4 to $5 in private funding for every $1 of federal money. Obviously, if we partner with private sector interests, their rates of return will have to be much more than, for example, a Canada Savings Bond would yield. Will that mean tolls/user fees for roads, bridges, etc.? Whose interests are thus served?


But a pretty face and a pleasing manner can conceal only so much. Perhaps the government's masked slipped a bit recently, and a truer visage emerged, as Walkom notes:

As for the hallmark of neo-liberal economies — the precarious workplace of low wages and multiple jobs — the advice from Finance Minister Bill Morneau is hardly encouraging.

He has said: Get used to it.​

 

[Machjo]

The announcement to lay off more than 600 workers at the CAMI - GM plant is a betrayal and shows why NAFTA is a terrible deal for Canadian jobs.

"This decision reeks of corporate greed. It is not based on sales, it is an another example of how good jobs are being shifted out of Canada for cheaper labour in Mexico and Unifor will not let it happen without a fight," said Unifor National President Jerry Dias. "The Equinox and Terrain are incredibly successful vehicles and given current market demand, there is no justification for lay-offs at the CAMI facility."

Today's announcement in Ingersoll triggers an unjustified loss of 625 jobs, said Unifor. The CAMI – GM plant was not part of the Detroit Three negotiations that happened this past fall where Unifor was able to secure a footprint in auto and more than $1.5 billion in investment for production and jobs. While pledging the union's full commitment to do all it can for its members Dias indicated that the announcement should be the last straw for the federal government and called for swift action.

"The CAMI announcement is a shining example of everything wrong with NAFTA, it must be re-negotiated. It is imperative that we have trade rules that help ensure good jobs in Canada," Dias said.

Unifor is calling on Trudeau to set up mechanisms to restore a balance in jobs and investment to protect the Canadian economy and Canada's auto industry. Unifor also asks the federal government to step up and act with confidence to protect jobs. According to industry data, the projected volumes for Equinox production in Mexico has steadily risen over the past few years, while previously it was solely made in Canada.

Unifor is Canada's largest union in the private sector, representing more than 310,000 workers, including 23,050 at the Detroit Three companies. It was formed Labour Day weekend 2013 when the Canadian Auto Workers and the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers union merged.

http://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/cami-announcement-signals-need-to-re-negotiate-nafta-611979055.html

And how will the neoliberal Trudeau and Wynne Parties respond? I will also be interested in how all the other parties respond.........

You're missing the big picture. If they're moving the car plants to Mexico, it's because they figure that the Mexican workers can do the same work for less. Even from a moral standpoint, that's a good thing. Those who are willing to do the same work for less are probably willing to do so because they are poorer. This serves as a redistribution of wealth.

Furthermore, it reduces costs to Canadian consumers, which can help those Canadians who can barely afford a car and puts pressure on workers in the car industry to reduce their wages. In short, it eliminates any monopoly they might have in the labour market. As a result, they can't hold the consumer hostage.

Meanwhile, moving the plant to Mexico will raise the value of the peso relative to the Canadian collar. That will help to promote Canadian exports to Mexico in areas in which Mexicans are less competitive.

 

[mentalfloss]

Tay, you are right.

The CPC is still very much about economic globalism but the 'real' conservatives (ie. racist trumpites/Locutus) are now about nationalist protectionism.

 

[Machjo]

Trade ideology is all Topsy now. Historically, the Liberals were pro free trade under Reciprocity while the Conservatives opposed it. Later in Canadian history, it gradually shifted so that by Brian Mulroney's time, the Conservatives fully embraced it while the Liberals rejected it. The NDP has mostly consistently opposed it except under Mulcair, but he's being ousted. Today, the Conservative, Livberal, and New Democratic parties support Free trade, though again tht might be short lived once Mulcair is ousted.


On the US side, at least in more recent history in the last few decades, both major parties supported free trade, but the Republicans more so than the Democrats. Trump and Sanders turned it a bit upside down. We'll see the fallout from that in the post-Trump era I suppose.

It would be interesting to look at the motives behind the ideology. To me, free trade promotes economies of scale, undermines at least some monopolies, and helps to redistribute wealth between wealthier and poorer countries while also reducing costs to the consumer.

To my mind, protectionism is just another form of nationalism, based on the same prejudices that feed racism, sexism, ethnicism, religious prejudice, linguistic prejudice, etc.

Please stop this.

Yes the Cons are anti worker but show us where the Trudeau Libs are reacting positively for Canadian workers. They have pushed for CETA, were championing the TPP and now want 'Free Trade' with China and have expanded the TFW program.

As much as I disliked Harpers agenda I will give him credit for not pulling a bait and switch as Chretien did when he campaigned with his 'little red book' on pulling Canada out of NAFTA, then out and out lying after he got elected and refusing to do so........

When one thinks deeply about neoliberalism, one conjures up the face of greed, rapacity and monetary narcissism. Not at all a pretty face. But here in Canada, Thomas Walkom writes, neoliberalism is concealed by a human, some would say pretty, face, that of Justin Trudeau.

The essence of neo-liberalism is globalization. Neo-liberals strive for a world in which capital, goods and even labour move effortlessly from country to country. The aim is to let the free market do its magic and maximize wealth.​

Once the centrepiece of the Conservative Party, the legacy of the reviled Stephen Harper is now being carried by our 'new' prime minister. Youth and attractiveness seem to go a long way on a number of fronts, including the temporary foreign worker program that grew to outrageous proportions under the previous regime:

... the Trudeau Liberals are smooth. Last week, they eliminated a rule that prevented temporary foreign workers from staying in Canada for more than four years.

To make the move politically palatable, the Liberal government said it would also require employers to advertise among disadvantaged groups such as indigenous people and the disabled before turning to foreigners.

But the bottom line is that the new rule allows employers to use cheap foreign labour indefinitely.​

And Trudeau seems to understand something that Harper refused to: the need for 'social licence':

In Canada, that means wooing indigenous peoples and well-organized environmental groups.... And to win social licence for oil and gas pipelines, he worked on two fronts.

One was climate change. The government established its bona fides here by negotiating a path-breaking agreement with eight out of 10 provinces (plus three territories) to impose a price on carbon.

On its own, the carbon-price agreement is not enough to let Canada meet its climate targets. But in the end, it may be enough to convince enough Canadians that the pipelines from Alberta to the Pacific coast Trudeau wants should go ahead.​

Simultaneously, the government has been successfully wooing indigenous leaders — with promises of more money, a more respectful relationship and an inquiry into missing and murdered aboriginal women.​

And while people are oohing and aahing over this new style, globalization plans continue apace:

The free trade and investment deal between Canada and the European Union is closer to fruition. A similar deal with China is on the agenda, as is some kind of free-trade relationship with Japan.​

Trudeau's plans for an infrastructure bank is of the same neoliberal ilk. One may legitimately ask why, when the cost of borrowing is at record lows the Liberals will kick in $35-billion and hope to attract private sector dollars at a ratio of $4 to $5 in private funding for every $1 of federal money. Obviously, if we partner with private sector interests, their rates of return will have to be much more than, for example, a Canada Savings Bond would yield. Will that mean tolls/user fees for roads, bridges, etc.? Whose interests are thus served?


But a pretty face and a pleasing manner can conceal only so much. Perhaps the government's masked slipped a bit recently, and a truer visage emerged, as Walkom notes:

As for the hallmark of neo-liberal economies — the precarious workplace of low wages and multiple jobs — the advice from Finance Minister Bill Morneau is hardly encouraging.

He has said: Get used to it.​

Free-traders are very much for the workers of the world, and aren't prepared to side with some workers at the expense of others based on national prejudices.

 

[tay]

You're missing the big picture. If they're moving the car plants to Mexico, it's because they figure that the Mexican workers can do the same work for less. Even from a moral standpoint, that's a good thing. Those who are willing to do the same work for less are probably willing to do so because they are poorer. This serves as a redistribution of wealth.

.

Do you think I am effing stupid or are you just trolling us as well?. Do you not think I read the articles I post?

Of course they think the Mexican workers can do the job for $2.00 an hour, that's the problem.. Now exactly what these low wage Mexicans will buy from Canada is a mystery.

And yes they Mexicans are poorer. And from a moral point that is NOT a good thing from my perspective. And when Canadians are poorer they will do the work for $1.75 an hour. That's why it's called a race to the bottom..

You seem to not be able to make the connection of corporate greed to worker exploitation..........

There are an estimated 14.3 million more Mexicans living in poverty than when NAFTA was first signed. It is now the most unequal country in the OECD, a grouping of 34 relatively high-income democracies.

Inside Mexico

 

[Machjo]

Do you think I am effing stupid or are you just trolling us as well?. Do you not think I read the articles I post?

Of course they think the Mexican workers can do the job for $2.00 an hour, that's the problem.. Now exactly what these low wage Mexicans will buy from Canada is a mystery.

And yes they Mexicans are poorer. And from a moral point that is NOT a good thing from my perspective. And when Canadians are poorer they will do the work for $1.75 an hour. That's why it's called a race to the bottom..

You seem to not be able to make the connection of corporate greed to worker exploitation..........

There are an estimated 14.3 million more Mexicans living in poverty than when NAFTA was first signed. It is now the most unequal country in the OECD, a grouping of 34 relatively high-income democracies.

Inside Mexico

Redistribution of wealth within the country is a separate matter. I can support shifting taxes to a reasonable personal wealth tax for example, due to it being far more progressive than income taxes. As for corporate taxes, they should be scrapped as they just push the cost of products to poor consumers up.

Again, if you want to promote a wealth tax, by all means, but redistribution of wealth between people within the state is a separate matter from the redistribution of wealth between states.

As a general rule, the poor country benefits the most from free trade. That's a good thing, is it not?

You seem to be confounding two separate matters.

Then how about this Tay: we raise tariffs against Mexico but we allow Mexicans to work freely in Canada? Are you for that, or is it just the white Canadian workers you care about?

 

[Murphy]

The 20% tariff on Mexico, if it goes ahead, will certainly not hurt Canada, Murph. I hope he rips NAFTA into a million tiny pieces - that will accomplish two things. It will keep Trump busy for awhile and away from a microphone and his twitter account and it will finally get us out of a really bad trade deal.

I was just kidding. That's why I put a laughing smiley there.

I see US business avoiding Mexico if tariffs are introduced. They don't pay tariffs. They pass on any extras to consumers.

Donald might be thinking of a double strike. Tariffs, which would collect some cash from south of their border, and influencing US businesses who were operating in, or buying from Mexico, to rethink their business model.

 

[taxslave]

Might want to see just how much Unifor is responsible for the move. Lets face it assembling cars is not worth $40 hr. Plus bennies.

 

[Curious Cdn]

I'll bet that this decision was months in the making ... perhaps a year or two.

Fake news.

 

[Corduroy]

People are funny. Socialists have been railing against globalization for decades. NAFTA isn't new. It was started in 199-****ing-4. Where the hell have you little fascists been all this time? Nazi-cheeto denounces it and you all start paying attention. Are you really against it or do you just love your white supremacist demagogue?