Connect with us

Published

on

On September 25, Joe Biden made history as the first sitting president to walk a picket line when he joined striking members of the United Auto Workers (UAW) in Van Buren Township, Michigan.

Standing with UAW President Shawn Fain, Biden told the strikers through a bullhorn, “You deserve the significant raise you need and other benefits.” But a big raise for the UAW could very well come at the expense of one of Biden’s core campaign promises.

The strike began on September 15 when talks broke down between the UAW and the Big Three automakers (Ford, General Motors, and Stellantis). Among its demands, the union wants a 36-percent raise over four years, a 32-hour work week, and the reinstatement of pension and cost-of-living benefits that it gave up during the 2008 recession.

It also seeks protections as the industry transitions to a greater focus on electric vehicles (E.V.s), a central priority of Biden’s presidency. This year the Environmental Protection Administration adopted rules that would require 67 percent of all new vehicles sold in the U.S. by 2032 to be electric. “The UAW supports and is ready for the transition to a clean auto industry,” Fain noted in August. “But the EV transition must be a just transition that ensures auto workers have a place in the new economy.” Tied to that transition, the UAW’s demands include the right to strike over plant closures and additional job protections in the event that plants shut down.

Autoworkers are right to be worried: According to a 2019 report by the Congressional Research Service (CRS), traditional vehicles “have as many as 2,000 components in their powertrains,” and “of the nearly 590,000 U.S. employees engaged in motor vehicle parts manufacturing, about one-quarternearly 150,000make components for internal combustion powertrains.”

On the other hand, “an electric vehicle powertrain has only a few” components. “For example, Tesla has said its drivetrain has 17 moving parts, including two in the motor.” As a result, E.V.s require significantly fewer parts and therefore fewer man-hours to build: “Electric vehicle powertrains, if built domestically and not imported, would generate production employment,” the report noted, “but fewer employees may be needed than at present because vehicle battery packs have relatively few components and are less complicated to assemble than internal combustion engine powertrains.”

A July 2023 report from the America First Policy Institute, a think tank founded by former members of Donald Trump’s presidential administration, estimated that the Biden administration’s E.V. mandate would cost 117,000 auto industry jobs, nearly half of them from Michigan, Ohio, and Indiana.

But the union’s demands may not be feasible at the industry’s current trajectory. The union is asking for more money and fewer hours as the industry transitions to E.V.s, but established companies are hemorrhaging money on the transition. After previously predicting that it may lose $3 billion this year on its E.V. division, Ford now anticipates a loss of as much as $4.5 billion. Last year, General Motors CEO Mary Barra told investors that the company didn’t expect to make a profit on E.V.s until 2025.

Notably, the companies are struggling even after receiving billions of dollars in government subsidies. Most recently, at the end of August, the Biden administration authorized an additional $12 billion in grants and loans for companies to upgrade and retrofit their facilities.

Ford CEO Jim Farley said the UAW’s proposals could send the automaker into bankruptcy, while Barra said they were not “realistic.” Dan Ives, research analyst for Wedbush Securities, said in a note to investors that the UAW’s demands, if fully accepted, could cause automakers “to pass these costs onto the consumer” by increasing E.V. prices by as much as $5,000 each.

By visiting an active picket line, Biden made his preference clear in the fight between unions and management. But depending on how the negotiations go, he may not be able to have it both ways: Either UAW members can get a big raise, or automakers can push forward in the transition to electric vehicles.

Continue Reading

Business

Jobless rate hits four-year high- but makes interest rate cut more likely

Published

on

By

Jobless rate hits four-year high- but makes interest rate cut more likely

The UK’s unemployment rate has risen to a four-year high, in a surprise deterioration that boosts the case for a Bank of England interest rate cut.

The Office for National Statistics (ONS) reported a rise in the jobless rate from 4.6% to 4.7% in the three months to May.

No change had been expected after the 0.1 percentage point rise seen just last month.

The ONS data, which still comes with a health warning due to poor participation rates, also showed a reduction in the pace of wage rises, with average weekly earnings rising by 5%. That was down from the 5.2% level reported a month ago.

Money latest: The rising cost of airport drop-off fees

ONS director of economic statistics, Liz McKeown, said of its findings: “The labour market continues to weaken, with the number of employees on payroll falling again, though revised tax data shows the decline in recent months is less pronounced than previously estimated.

“Pay growth fell again in both cash and real terms, but both measures remain relatively strong by historic standards.

More from Money

“The number of job vacancies is still falling and has now been dropping continuously for three years.”

The data was released 24 hours after a surprise rise in the rate of inflation, to 3.6%, was revealed by the ONS.

It was seen as muddying the waters as the Bank considers the timing of its next interest rate cut.

But a quarter point reduction, to 4%, is widely expected at the next meeting of the rate-setting committee in early August,

The Bank, experts say, will be looking past the headline inflation numbers and see scope to introduce the third cut of the year due to the softening labour market seen in 2025 – a factor the Bank’s governor Andrew Bailey had suggested would come more into focus in a recent interview with The Times.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

What does ‘inflation is rising’ mean?

Weaker pay awards remain a compulsory element to bringing down borrowing costs as there are fears the UK’s difficulties in bringing down inflation are partly linked to wage growth outpacing price hikes since August 2023.

Add to that the slowdown in economic growth and you have a Bank seemingly grappling the effects of so-called stagflation – as scenario of weak growth with inflation persistently well above the Bank’s 2% target.

While there are conflicting forces at play for the Bank’s interest rate deliberations, rising inflation, coupled with weakening growth and jobs data, are all unwelcome for a chancellor under growing pressure.

Rachel Reeves was accused on Wednesday of contributing to inflation through taxes on employment deployed from April – with industry bodies in the grocery sector claiming an element of rising food price growth was down to businesses passing on those extra costs, alongside hikes to minimum pay requirements.

At the same time, those budget measures have clearly held back hiring since the spring.

One crumb of comfort for her is that the prospect of a rate cut next month remains on – with any reduction helping bring down the cost of servicing government debt as the headroom she has within the public finances remains under severe pressure.

Government U-turns on winter fuel payment curbs and welfare reforms have squeezed her fiscal rules, leaving her to cover likely at the autumn budget to cover shortfalls either through further tax hikes or spending cuts.

Yael Selfin, chief economist at KPMG UK, said of the rate cut prospects: “Slowing activity in the labour market, coupled with pay pressures easing, will likely prompt the Bank of England to lower interest rates next month.

“The impact of April’s tax and administrative changes has led to a marked slowdown in hiring activity among firms. With domestic activity remaining sluggish, the MPC will likely want to provide support via looser policy to prevent a more significant deterioration in the labour market.”

Continue Reading

Politics

‘We’re a team’: Jess Phillips defends PM’s decision to suspend Labour rebels

Published

on

By

Starmer suspends four Labour MPs for breaches of party discipline

A minister has defended Sir Keir Starmer’s decision to discipline rebellious MPs, saying they would have used “stronger” language against those who are “continually causing trouble”.

Home Office minister Jess Phillips told Sky News’ Matt Barbet that Labour MPs were elected “as a team under a banner and under a manifesto” and could “expect” to face disciplinary action if they did not vote with the government.

It comes after the prime minister drew criticism for suspending four Labour MPs who voted against the government on its flagship welfare bill earlier this month, while stripping a further three of their roles as trade envoys.

Politics latest: PM to welcome German chancellor

Brian Leishman, Chris Hinchliff, Neil Duncan-Jordan and Rachael Maskell.
Pic: Uk Parliament
Image:
Brian Leishman, Chris Hinchliff, Neil Duncan-Jordan and Rachael Maskell.
Pic: Uk Parliament

Brian Leishman, Chris Hinchliff, Neil Duncan-Jordan and Rachael Maskell all lost the whip, meaning they are no longer part of Labour’s parliamentary party and will sit as independent MPs.

Labour backbenchers lined up to criticise the move last night, arguing it was a “terrible look” that made “a Reform government much more likely”.

But speaking to Sky News, Ms Phillips said: “We were elected as a team under a banner and under a manifesto, and we have to seek to work together, and if you are acting in a manner that is to undermine the ability of the government to deliver those things, I don’t know what you expect.

“Now I speak out against things I do not like, both internally and sometimes externally, all the time.

“There is a manner of doing that, that is the right way to go about it. And sometimes you feel forced to rebel and vote against.”

Referring to a description of the rebels by an unnamed source in The Times, she said: “I didn’t call it persistent knob-headery, but that’s the way that it’s been termed by some.”

She said she would have described it as “something much more sweary” because “we are a team, and we have to act as a team in order to achieve something”.

More than 100 MPs had initially rebelled against the plan to cut personal independent payments (PIP). Ultimately, 47 voted against the bill’s third reading, after it was watered down significantly in the face of defeat.

Three other MPs – who also voted against the government – have had their trade envoy roles removed. They are Rosena Allin Khan, Bell Ribeiro-Addy and Mohammed Yasin.

However, it is understood this was not the only reason behind the decision to reprimand all seven MPs, with sources citing “repeated breaches of party discipline”.

Ms Maskell was one of the lead rebels in the welfare revolt, and has more recently called for a wealth tax to fund the U-turn.

Mr Hinchliff, the MP for North East Hertfordshire, proposed a series of amendments to the flagship planning and infrastructure bill criticising the government’s approach.

Read more:
Why suspended Labour MPs clearly hit a nerve with Starmer
Who are the suspended Labour MPs?

Mr Duncan-Jordan, the MP for Poole, led a rebellion against the cut to the winter fuel payments while Alloa and Grangemouth MP Mr Leishman has been critical of the government’s position on Gaza as well as the closing of an oil refinery in his constituency.

Ian Byrne, the Labour MP for Liverpool West Derby, wrote on X on Wednesday that the prime minister’s actions “don’t show strength” and were “damaging Labour’s support and risk rolling out the red carpet for Reform”.

Leeds East MP Richard Burgon added that “challenging policies that harm our communities” would “make a Reform government much more likely”.

Ian Lavery, Labour MP for Blyth and Ashington, warned the suspensions were “a terrible look”.

“Dissatisfaction with the direction the leadership is taking us isn’t confined to the fringes,” he wrote.

Continue Reading

Business

Jaguar Land Rover to cut hundreds of UK jobs

Published

on

By

Jaguar Land Rover to cut hundreds of UK jobs

Jaguar Land Rover (JLR) has revealed plans to cut 500 jobs as it moves to save costs while battling a sharp decline in sales.

The UK-based firm said the reduction in management roles, which amounted to 1.5% of its workforce, would be completed through a voluntary redundancy programme.

JLR has been struggling recently on the back of the US trade war.

Money latest: The rising cost of airport drop-off fees

It temporarily paused exports to the US, its biggest single foreign market, in April after Donald Trump’s hike to duties covering cars to 25%.

It was later trimmed to 10% under the US-UK trade truce agreement, but that rate only covers the cars it makes in the UK.

The terms of the deal also cap total annual car exports to the US at 100,000 models, so the higher rate will apply to those vehicles exceeding the threshold.

More on Tariffs

KEIR STARMER JLR
Image:
Sir Keir Starmer told JLR workers in April that he would protect their jobs

The tariff uncertainty, coupled with a planned wind-down of older Jaguar models, meant sales were 15% down over the three months to June to just over 94,000.

JLR confirmed its job cut plans on the day the UK’s jobless rate hit a four-year high.

It also follows on the back of a Kier Starmer speech to staff, promising to protect their jobs, back in April.

The company had said, after the US-UK truce in May, that the deal would do just that.

A spokesperson said: “As part of normal business practice, we regularly offer eligible employees the opportunity to leave JLR through limited voluntary redundancy programmes.”

Continue Reading

Trending