Copy Of The Contract Modifications - READ

[AnotherAutoWorker]

FROM ANOTHER POST:

QUOTE (walktall @ Oct 15 2009, 09:36 AM)

There is something that was brought up in the National Ford meetings that no one has posted on. Gary W. told us that the arbitration on wages would not be normal arbitration. It would be what is called baseball arbitration. And this is very important. And i will try to explain it.

 

In normal arbitration if the UAW says we want a 5% raise and Ford says we want to cut you 50% the arbitatrator can decide to give you 2% or cut you 10 percent or anywhere he sees fit. But in baseball arbitration it is either/or if it makes it to arbitration you either get the 5% or the 50%loss. But, there is more to this. According to a co-worker who also has a law degree. If UAW askes for a raise at all Ford can force that into arbitration and also include their counter offer of a reduction. We all know the arbitrator isn't going to give us a raise, so we end up losing pay.

 

All of us have wondered why this arbitration letter feels wrong. And that is why. The UAW can in the next negotiations ask for a small raise and in doing so cause us to lose wages. But, this gives them an out, they can claim it wasn't their fault the arbitraitor did it. Ford gets what they want the UAW gets out of the hot seat.

 

SO ASK THIS QUESTION OF THOSE THAT WANT TO SELL YOU THIS CONTRACT. If they know we see what they are doing it makes it harder for them to do. Ask WHY DID WE AGREE TO BASEBALL ARBITRATION? We all felt a stink about that letter, cause none of us thought we would get a raise anyway. This is a trigger that will put us at the same wage rates as GM Chrysler without us seeing it coming. For everyone that thought they smelled a RAT, your RAT has been found.

 

p.s. dont try to google baseball arbitration, you get everything in the world but an explanation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

THANK YOU for bringing this to our attenttion!

 

I was going to vote NO before knowing this but I just cannot understand how or WHY anyone in this membership would vote yes after learning this...

 

Not all the membership reads this forum so please take a moment to tell your friends and co workers what you have learned about this baseball arbitration clause. JUST the possibility that this is true is enough to make me question the idiots pushing to pass this thing.

 

REMEMBER WHY MULLALY WAS HIRED IN THE FIRST PLACE! To bust this union. He was sucessful before, he's smart enough to do it again. DO NOT ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN! VOTE NO!

 

 

 

 

How many of us feel like this vote has a predetermined and convenient 49/51% outcome? Nevertheless VOTE NO! Protect yourself! Protect your right to protect yourself with the choice to strike IF needecd! Tell everyone you know about this "baseball" arbitration practice and ask them to vote no also.

 

This is some ugly underhanded union busting shit that will be proudly placed on Mulally resume as a job well done ~ another union busted. Gettlefinger should be ashamed of himself. How many of us can remember learning when Mulally got onboard that he was considered the "Master Union Buster" brought in to do what Bill Ford couldnt do? Just ask the membership of Boeing. Well, here it is, kids... right up side our heads with a vengence. We have no choice but to PROTECT ourselves and not fall for the bullshit some people are posting on here that clearly backs the company and company's propaganda and scare tactics. Even if it means we must protect ourself from the iUAW. (Ugh, what a sad sad day to have to say that...)

 

Gettlefinger should be impeached for this!

 

 

 

CAP Joke ~ Did Ford give you the cue cards to spin this information as well??? Cut and paste. Cut and Paste! Easy peasey.

Edited October 16, 2009 by AnotherAutoWorker

[1993Stang]

You should have asked your teacher more baseline questions to better address his question. What specifically did the company tell you to do?

 

If it was an unsafe action, or would it compromise quality? If so then you absolutely do not listen to the management, you call the local reps back to set up a hearing with your foreman's boss. I know who you work for but they cannot discipline you for refusing instructions that will cause quality issues, and/or unsafe. In a sense you were both correct!

 

This question was a basic hypothetical question and that is why I answered the way I did. My point was I was surprised how quickly he favored the salaried side instead of remaining objective about both. These type of back and forth went on during the semester. Like I said he knows his Labor Law inside and out and he is one of the very few Arbitration Lawyers in Michigan but I have to give pause when I look at people who are supposed to give an equal assessment of both sides. We would debate a lot because I have been on both sides while at the company. Maybe I saw what I wanted to see also because I so heavily lean in favor of the hourly U.A.W. The airlines were having problems at the time, they,the airline hourly mechanics lost big time, half the pay. From $28 to $14. I know personally someone who this happened two with 15 years in at the company. Just like that.

[chriper]

As a fking peace offering...are you kidding me, they just gave it to you out of the kindness of their hearts. There will always be disagreements and there is one of them here. There are alot of people getting ready to use up their Sub weeks and Tap, so how is it they just give you peace offererings? You won't get shit if this doesn't pass, as a matter of fact if this program gets delayed you will know exactly how those getting ready to use up SUB and TAP feel. Sorry, I am a little passionate about this because I know of others who are not getting that opportunity!

 

good ole CO CHUMP,or i mean cappy 752343627 you get the point ,,i see your back with more of your useless drool,,,i thought i heard one of the conditions of your workrelease was no use of the computer :stats: :stats: :stats: :stats: :stats: ,and the only oppurtinity i see in this contract ,,,,is to sell your soul for 6 years for a whole 1000 dollars

[Furious1Auto]

This question was a basic hypothetical question and that is why I answered the way I did. My point was I was surprised how quickly he favored the salaried side instead of remaining objective about both. These type of back and forth went on during the semester. Like I said he knows his Labor Law inside and out and he is one of the very few Arbitration Lawyers in Michigan but I have to give pause when I look at people who are supposed to give an equal assessment of both sides. We would debate a lot because I have been on both sides while at the company. Maybe I saw what I wanted to see also because I so heavily lean in favor of the hourly U.A.W. The airlines were having problems at the time, they,the airline hourly mechanics lost big time, half the pay. From $28 to $14. I know personally someone who this happened two with 15 years in at the company. Just like that.

 

 

Point received!

[Wanderinglost]

brilliant, you got it right, if we are doing some much better and we say we deserve a raise and the company agrees with us, then we get one. If they do not agree with that then we arbitrate it. That is exactly correct. You are exactly correct on that assuption. I will not debate that!

Just to be clear though we will not be taking wage cuts as a result of this language as some others are refering too!! I appreciate you taking the time to think that out. You got it dead on. Whether you feel it is right, wrong or indifferent your explanation is correct. I am out gotta feed the animals!

 

 

Cap, I hope you are right about this. Unfortunately, I don't trust either of the parties involved in this anymore. I read it the same way you seem to, but it is vague at best which leaves me wondering...........just can't help it anymore. :unsure:

[Speed bump]

The way I see this is giving up the right to strike over wage and benefit "improvements"is because Ford will want to cut our pay and benefits this would be an improvement for the company. Put your trust in an arbitrator and we are screwed

[MichiganTruck_Mafia]

The way I see this is giving up the right to strike over wage and benefit "improvements"is because Ford will want to cut our pay and benefits this would be an improvement for the company. Put your trust in an arbitrator and we are screwed

 

Yeah, we've seen what happens when you let a third party decide something. The workers lose every time.

[whereswaldo]

If you are for this it shows to what extreme you are a sellout company man.If we cannot strike just what is it exactly that we need a union for?To pay you sorry bastards over $100,000 a year to give back everyting we have worked for?Hey Cap GO AWAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!And everyone that supports you,the same goes for you!!!!!!!!!!

Gee ....I um guess...my job is done now.........Cappy doesnt need me anymore.....he has his own following now. :beerchug:

[super427]

Cap, I hope you are right about this. Unfortunately, I don't trust either of the parties involved in this anymore. I read it the same way you seem to, but it is vague at best which leaves me wondering...........just can't help it anymore. :unsure:

 

 

Hey Wanderinglost, you're not alone. You're right, we can't trust either party. Each of them have their own agenda's. Unfortunately they're not the same as our's.

 

We have to fight for what we believe is right. It's all about money. None of us working on the line are filthy rich. But we go to work every day and do the best we can to help build quality and meet production, so we can support our families, our way of life and keep our jobs.

 

We need to start thinking about THAT, and what we do everyday to help Ford be the best it can be! I'm tired of everybody saying we make too much money. Is it a crime to make a decent living building a great product that people want? I've been at Ford for 18 years and all I've asked for was a fair shake. Just like the rest of us. I'm done giving. We've ALL given as much as we can without sacrificing our way of life and our reason for working there in the first place!

[Pumpmaster]

Gee ....I um guess...my job is done now.........Cappy doesnt need me anymore.....he has his own following now. :beerchug:

:hysterical:

[Dale143]

Hey Wanderinglost, you're not alone. You're right, we can't trust either party. Each of them have their own agenda's. Unfortunately they're not the same as our's.

 

We have to fight for what we believe is right. It's all about money. None of us working on the line are filthy rich. But we go to work every day and do the best we can to help build quality and meet production, so we can support our families, our way of life and keep our jobs.

 

We need to start thinking about THAT, and what we do everyday to help Ford be the best it can be! I'm tired of everybody saying we make too much money. Is it a crime to make a decent living building a great product that people want? I've been at Ford for 18 years and all I've asked for was a fair shake. Just like the rest of us. I'm done giving. We've ALL given as much as we can without sacrificing our way of life and our reason for working there in the first place!

I'm mad as hell,and I'm not going to take this anymore!

 

[uawwidow]

Looks good for the bond holders/media/future borrowing. They is also some fear with wage parity with GM/Chrysler. Ford fears that our wages could grow way beyond being competitve with GM/Chrysler. Haven't heard much at all about transplants. I think that language came from the Gm/Chrysler bankruptcy language. So as some try and play off of the language and competitve with transplants, it was never really discussed in that context.

 

If it was never really discussed in that context; Why the Fuck NOT? It clearly was in the UAW/Chrysler language form 4/09. I'm just sayin. Do the different departments of the UAW talk? So see, "some weren't trying to play off the language." I'd appreciate if you guys would not insult our intelligence any longer. Language is below:

 

 

Excerpt from Chrysler 09 Agreement on Wages and Benefits

 

This is the html version of the file http://www.xpdnc.com/files/relatednewsandr...ler2009S-02.pdf.

Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 1

Binding Arbitration - Upon expiration of the 2007 Agreement, the parties willenter into a new National Collective Bargaining Agreement which will continue infull force and effect until September 14, 2015. Unresolved issues remaining atthe end of negotiations on the 2011 renewal of the 2007 Agreement shall beresolved through binding arbitration with wage and benefit improvements to bebased upon Chrysler maintaining an all-in hourly labor cost comparable to itsU.S. competitors, including transplant automotive manufacturers;

[snoozer]

good question. bump it up

[uawwidow]

If it was never really discussed in that context; Why the Fuck NOT? It clearly was in the UAW/Chrysler language form 4/09. I'm just sayin. Do the different departments of the UAW talk? So see, "some weren't trying to play off the language." I'd appreciate if you guys would not insult our intelligence any longer. Language is below:

 

 

Excerpt from Chrysler 09 Agreement on Wages and Benefits

 

This is the html version of the file http://www.xpdnc.com/files/relatednewsandr...ler2009S-02.pdf.

Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 1

Binding Arbitration - Upon expiration of the 2007 Agreement, the parties willenter into a new National Collective Bargaining Agreement which will continue infull force and effect until September 14, 2015. Unresolved issues remaining atthe end of negotiations on the 2011 renewal of the 2007 Agreement shall beresolved through binding arbitration with wage and benefit improvements to bebased upon Chrysler maintaining an all-in hourly labor cost comparable to itsU.S. competitors, including transplant automotive manufacturers;

 

The silence is deafening

[uawwidow]

If it was never really discussed in that context; Why the Fuck NOT? It clearly was in the UAW/Chrysler language form 4/09. I'm just sayin. Do the different departments of the UAW talk? So see, "some weren't trying to play off the language." I'd appreciate if you guys would not insult our intelligence any longer. Language is below:

 

 

Excerpt from Chrysler 09 Agreement on Wages and Benefits

 

This is the html version of the file http://www.xpdnc.com/files/relatednewsandr...ler2009S-02.pdf.

Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 1

Binding Arbitration - Upon expiration of the 2007 Agreement, the parties willenter into a new National Collective Bargaining Agreement which will continue infull force and effect until September 14, 2015. Unresolved issues remaining atthe end of negotiations on the 2011 renewal of the 2007 Agreement shall beresolved through binding arbitration with wage and benefit improvements to bebased upon Chrysler maintaining an all-in hourly labor cost comparable to itsU.S. competitors, including transplant automotive manufacturers;

?

[Captain723]

Gee ....I um guess...my job is done now.........Cappy doesnt need me anymore.....he has his own following now. :beerchug:

no...no...waldfk, you will always be my #1.

[Captain723]

Hey Wanderinglost, you're not alone. You're right, we can't trust either party. Each of them have their own agenda's. Unfortunately they're not the same as our's.

 

We have to fight for what we believe is right. It's all about money. None of us working on the line are filthy rich. But we go to work every day and do the best we can to help build quality and meet production, so we can support our families, our way of life and keep our jobs.

 

We need to start thinking about THAT, and what we do everyday to help Ford be the best it can be! I'm tired of everybody saying we make too much money. Is it a crime to make a decent living building a great product that people want? I've been at Ford for 18 years and all I've asked for was a fair shake. Just like the rest of us. I'm done giving. We've ALL given as much as we can without sacrificing our way of life and our reason for working there in the first place!

The company loves this shit....got the members mad at the leadership, which creates distrust, which create a weaker union. Union busting at its best. Solidairity Forever!!

[Captain723]

If it was never really discussed in that context; Why the Fuck NOT? It clearly was in the UAW/Chrysler language form 4/09. I'm just sayin. Do the different departments of the UAW talk? So see, "some weren't trying to play off the language." I'd appreciate if you guys would not insult our intelligence any longer. Language is below:

 

 

Excerpt from Chrysler 09 Agreement on Wages and Benefits

 

This is the html version of the file http://www.xpdnc.com/files/relatednewsandr...ler2009S-02.pdf.

Google automatically generates html versions of documents as we crawl the web.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 1

Binding Arbitration - Upon expiration of the 2007 Agreement, the parties willenter into a new National Collective Bargaining Agreement which will continue infull force and effect until September 14, 2015. Unresolved issues remaining atthe end of negotiations on the 2011 renewal of the 2007 Agreement shall beresolved through binding arbitration with wage and benefit improvements to bebased upon Chrysler maintaining an all-in hourly labor cost comparable to itsU.S. competitors, including transplant automotive manufacturers;

I wouldn't insult your intelligence, you are correct of the Chrysler language...that is the fking chrysler language. Our language clearly states the UAW will not strike over wage and benefit improvements. The UAW wage and Benefit improvements. Read our fking language not Chryslers. Chrysler/GM language was put in place the protect the Gov. bailout money from us, the tax payer. Ford did not have the concern over paying back the gov., they had the concern of whether or not the UAW was going to try and take advantage of this situation and ask for increases that Chrysler/GM may or may not be able to do because of arbitration. That was the only concern and that is why the UAW demanded that the language be put in place to address their concern "wage nad benefit increases ONLY". In the same language it clearly states that we still retain the right to strike over all other issues! The leadership/negotiators/Legal do not see any issue with this language because we would never strike over wage and benefit increases anyway and because of pattern bargaining they would never allow one company to have a disadvantage over the next. Never have and never will.

[whereswaldo]

The company loves this shit....got the members mad at the leadership, which creates distrust, which create a weaker union. Union busting at its best. Solidairity Forever!!

Dont blame any of us. We are NOT the English majors who wrote this crap up. Following your theories , then the IUAW is complicit in weakening our union. Divide from within. Beautiful....they must be proud.

[whereswaldo]

no...no...waldfk, you will always be my #1.

And you are my #1 :kissass: :kissass:

[uawwidow]

I wouldn't insult your intelligence, you are correct of the Chrysler language...that is the fking chrysler language. Our language clearly states the UAW will not strike over wage and benefit improvements. The UAW wage and Benefit improvements. Read our fking language not Chryslers. Chrysler/GM language was put in place the protect the Gov. bailout money from us, the tax payer. Ford did not have the concern over paying back the gov., they had the concern of whether or not the UAW was going to try and take advantage of this situation and ask for increases that Chrysler/GM may or may not be able to do because of arbitration. That was the only concern and that is why the UAW demanded that the language be put in place to address their concern "wage nad benefit increases ONLY". In the same language it clearly states that we still retain the right to strike over all other issues! The leadership/negotiators/Legal do not see any issue with this language because we would never strike over wage and benefit increases anyway and because of pattern bargaining they would never allow one company to have a disadvantage over the next. Never have and never will.

I do understand that it was the Chrysler language, and I have read our language. Now, let's look at your last phrase....

"never allow one company to have a disadvantage over the next. Never have and never will". Follow me here, Chrysler language says: with wage and benefit improvements to bebased upon Chrysler maintaining an all-in hourly labor cost comparable to itsU.S. competitors, including transplant automotive manufacturers.

 

Given that info on Chrysler and the statement that YOU made concerning any of the companies to be put at a disadvantage. Why is it not reasonable to assume that an arbitrator would not rule to equalize our wages and benefits with those unfortunate companies that have gone thru bankruptcy and had this imposed on them ?

[FiredMotorCompany]

The company loves this shit....got the members mad at the leadership, which creates distrust, which create a weaker union. Union busting at its best. Solidairity Forever!!

 

Like Ford didn't plan on that when they "GAVE" the VEBA to the UAW to manage. Now the membership will be fighting our union when the benefits are drained dry by the I-UAW "Brother-In-Laws" and kinfolk. They'll say, "Well you know we have to manage all these huge amounts of money, and that costs money. If there is any left after we manage it, you can have what's left."

[Furious1Auto]

The company loves this shit....got the members mad at the leadership, which creates distrust, which create a weaker union. Union busting at its best. Solidairity Forever!!

 

 

Wrong the members aren't fighting each other. They are coming together in solidarity to stop the two entities that are trying to destroy them!

[lquidspine]

I wouldn't insult your intelligence, you are correct of the Chrysler language...that is the fking chrysler language. Our language clearly states the UAW will not strike over wage and benefit improvements. The UAW wage and Benefit improvements. Read our fking language not Chryslers. Chrysler/GM language was put in place the protect the Gov. bailout money from us, the tax payer. Ford did not have the concern over paying back the gov., they had the concern of whether or not the UAW was going to try and take advantage of this situation and ask for increases that Chrysler/GM may or may not be able to do because of arbitration. That was the only concern and that is why the UAW demanded that the language be put in place to address their concern "wage nad benefit increases ONLY". In the same language it clearly states that we still retain the right to strike over all other issues! The leadership/negotiators/Legal do not see any issue with this language because we would never strike over wage and benefit increases anyway and because of pattern bargaining they would never allow one company to have a disadvantage over the next. Never have and never will.

The parties are committed to resolving all open issues in a peaceful, cooperative manner. To this end, the parties agree to continue good faith bargaining on unresolved issues not subject to binding arbitration without resorting to economic weapons at their disposal until the parties have the benefit of bargaining on such issues with full information on the final outcome of unresolved UAW Ford issues subject to arbitration. Upon expiration of the 2007 agreement and consistent with the above, the UAW shall maintain the right to strike on all remaining unresolved issues other than improvements to existing wages and benefits.

 

 

Thats from page 1 second paragraph of OUR tentative contract!!

Maybe you need to read our fucking language as well as what we are being compared too, remember parity Captain. You are in denial if you can see that while in arbitration we can not strike normal strike-able issues that are not subject to arbitration.

Edited October 22, 2009 by lquidspine

[MSchmi]

Like Ford didn't plan on that when they "GAVE" the VEBA to the UAW to manage. Now the membership will be fighting our union when the benefits are drained dry by the I-UAW "Brother-In-Laws" and kinfolk. They'll say, "Well you know we have to manage all these huge amounts of money, and that costs money. If there is any left after we manage it, you can have what's left."

 

Yep they are hiring high paid people fast and furious. Why not, it's our retirees' money not theirs!

================================================================================

=

 

http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/26/74/40.php

October 20, 2009

United Auto Workers’ Voluntary Employee Beneficiary Association Gets Investment Staff in Order

 

The new United Auto Workers voluntary employee beneficiary association won’t officially open for business until January 1, but the association—with more than $37 billion in assets—has a chief investment officer and is looking for managing directors to oversee equity, fixed income and risk management.

Eric Henry, who resigned in August as executive director and chief investment officer of the $15.6 billion Texas Municipal Retirement System in Austin, will lead the VEBA’s investment staff as chief investment officer.

The association was created through agreements with General Motors Co., Detroit; Ford Motor Co., Dearborn, Michigan; and New Chrysler Corp., Auburn Hills, Michigan; to shift the remainder of their retiree medical care obligations to the new trust.

Ridgeway Partners, with U.S. offices in New York and Boston, was hired by the VEBA to assist in recruiting candidates for the positions. Ridgeway officials declined to comment.

The VEBA’s equity and fixed-income managing directors will report to Henry. It was not clear to whom risk management personnel will report.

The VEBA was created through labor contracts with the three auto companies before GM and Chrysler filed for bankruptcy protection this year. Both companies emerged from their bankruptcies weeks later under a bailout plan that gave the VEBA part ownership in the restructured companies.

Ford did not file for bankruptcy protection.

The association has an 11-member board made up of five of UAW officials and six independent members, all appointed by the union.

The three-member investment committee consists of two independent trustees: Olena Berg-Lacy, former assistant secretary of the Department of Labor’s Employee Benefits Security Administration, and Robert Naftaly, retired president and chief executive of PPOM, an independent operating subsidiary of Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan. Berg-Lacy is now a board member and senior advisor for Financial Engines Inc. of Palo Alto, California.

The third member will be UAW trustee Daniel Sherrick, director of the union’s legal department.

Other independent board members include: Teresa Ghilarducci, Schwartz professor of economic policy at The New School for Social Research, New York; David Baker Lewis, chairman and CEO of the law firm Lewis & Munday, Detroit; Marianne Udow-Phillips, director of the Center for Healthcare Research & Transformation, a nonprofit partnership between the University of Michigan and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan; and Edward Welch, professor emeritus at the School of Labor and Industrial Relations, Michigan State University, Lansing.

The names of the independent trustees came from a 2008 filing in U.S. District Court in Detroit about the VEBA. Names of the other UAW members on the board couldn’t be obtained.

The three automakers will not have board representation or involvement with the VEBA. Their only obligation is to provide startup funding, which will permanently end their commitment to provide retiree health care to employees who belong to the UAW under earlier labor contracts.

The UAW will run the VEBA as a single fund combining all the automaker contributions, although it will have separate accounts for GM, Ford and Chrysler to pay the medical benefits for each company’s retirees.

The VEBA is expected to be based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and its asset size would rival that of very large pension funds.

UAW officials declined to provide details about the VEBA, including how it is structuring its investment management and use of money mangers and consultants. Henry and Berg-Lacy and other trustees couldn’t be reached for comment.

The VEBA is expected to rely on external managers in managing its assets. The fund will consist of a combination of widely diversified investments and securities of the three auto companies.

Of the Big Three, GM will make the biggest contribution to the VEBA.

Contributions by GM to the VEBA consist of:

• 17.5 percent of GM stock.

• $6.5 billion in GM preferred stock with a 9 percent interest rate.

• A $2.5 billion note.

• GM warrants entitling the VEBA to acquire an additional 2.5 percent, or 15.1 million newly issued shares, of GM common stock.

• $9.4 billion in diversified investments from GM’s internal VEBA, which will be disbanded.

The GM warrants would be exercisable at a price of $126.92 a share of GM stock anytime before 2016. At that price, GM would have total equity value of $75 billion.

GM has not released current estimates of the value of its stock, which isn’t traded. The company hopes to begin trading the stock publicly in 2010.

Ford is contributing a total $13.1 billion in funds and securities. Under a ratified agreement with the UAW earlier this year, Ford will restructure its VEBA debt obligations into a $6.5 billion note payable in Ford stock or cash at the company’s option and a $6.6 billion note payable in cash, both due 2018.

Chrysler’s contributions will total $4.59 billion in a promissory note and company securities.

GM and Chrysler have filed proposals with the Department of Labor’s Employee Benefits Security Administration seeking exemptions under ERISA to contribute company securities to the VEBA. The EBSA, which must approve the exemption, has opened a 45-day period for each proposal for submission of public comments on the proposals.

GM filed its proposal in September; Chrysler’s proposal was filed this month.

The VEBA is searching for independent trustee companies to oversee the securities of GM and Chrysler. The hiring of the independent fiduciaries is a primary condition of the DOL exemptions, if granted.

 

Filed by Barry B. Burr of Pensions & Investments, a sister publication of Workforce Management. To comment, e-mail editors@workforce.com.

Stay informed and connected. Get human resources news and HR features via Workforce Management’s Twitter feed or RSS feeds for mobile devices and news readers.