- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
Summary
Volkswagen workers across Germany began strikes in response to plans to close three factories, cut pensions, and implement €18 billion in budget reductions.
Led by the IG Metall union, the strikes, involving tens of thousands of employees, are part of what unions promise to be VW’s “toughest wage dispute ever.”
The cuts follow a 64% drop in VW’s Q3 profits, driven by declining industrial orders, shrinking Chinese market share, and EU-China tariff tensions.
Union leaders demand executive concessions, with next week’s talks expected to determine escalation or resolution.
You must log in or register to comment.
Just a small reminder that Volkswagen paid out 4.5 billion euros in dividends last year.
And are still profitable… they just want more profit. So they reduce pension payments and wage growth and other employee benefits so they can pay enough dividends next year.
For now only “warning strikes” lasting 2hrs each, rather than a true indefinite strike.
However, in VW’s 87-year history, this is the first time that German plants would close. I think that’s actually something the workers can use to their benefit. Shareholders are not exactly in a great position as it is.
Is this good timing? At the height of profits is a great moment to start striking. During a recession they have less bargaining power.
I’d say they have more power, as the downside of leaving the strike unresolved is more impactful.
VW have less they can offer though.
Exactly what my point was, yes.
Not to mention that VW is also partially owned by the state of Saxony, I think 20% and where their plants are. We will see if they will be able to close those plants.
Lower Saxony.
I hope the car industry implodes
I’m so annoyed at coverage of these issues and the economy as a whole. Journalists have to use the biggest numbers they can to make people think it’s important.
Ok a 64% reduction in profits is not good. But that also means that the company is still profitable and wants to fire the thousands of people, and in so doing harm the local economy, that gave it massive profits for decades.
A 64% reduction in profits cannot be the company making a loss. Yet the article claims that BMW and Mercedes are “also making similar large losses”.
Shareholders have been robbing employees blind for decades, and the second it gets a little bit less profitable we have to fire thousands of people?
And yes, I understand there must be some consideration of future proofing costs against a shrinking consumer base, but such drastic measures are solely aimed at preservation of shareholder dividends and value (see Boeing).
