IBJNews

Union workers at Goshen's Cequent plant take severance deal

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

Union workers at a northern Indiana trailer-hitch manufacturer have voted to forego arbitration and accept a severance agreement that will pay the most senior employees $36,000.

Most of the 350 United Steelworkers Local 9550 workers at Cequent Performance Products in Goshen supported the package in votes tallied Friday night, Local 9550 Vice President Deb Hathaway said.

"No matter what they give us it's still not enough for us losing our jobs," she said.

Steelworkers Sub District 4 Director Mike O'Brien said 240 of the 350 union members at the plant voted. He didn't disclose vote totals.

"It was certainly not unanimous but it wasn't close," O'Brien said. "I think a lot of people looked at, 'Well, this is what the company is offering and we take a chance going to arbitration.'"

Cequent, a subsidiary of Bloomfield Hills, Mich.-based TriMas Corp., announced in November it would move operations from the 450-employee plant 25 miles southeast of South Bend to Reynosa, Mexico, to lower shipping costs.

Workers with less than a year's seniority will receive $500 while those with 30 years or more will receive $36,000. Workers also will receive company health benefits for at least a month after they are laid off. The total severance package is worth more than $3.5 million, O'Brien said.

Layoffs began Friday, but O'Brien said he didn't know how many workers lost their jobs.

More than half the employees are scheduled to remain on the job through the end of June, with the last due to be let go in December. 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Cequent moves to Mexico
    Cequent moves to Mexico to save shipping cost. What a bunch of bull. It is all about labor cost. Pensions and insurance which don't factor in Mexico. I hope their business profits go south also.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. These higher rates Co. e about only because physicians are now hospital employees. otherwise physicians couldn't charge these rates and share the windfall with the hospital. Community/rural hospitals probably not buying physicians practices and thus weren't getting the windfall anyway.

  2. The incentive for poor people to get themselves off public assistance and "no longer be poor" is even with help...they're STILL POOR! Being poor, even with some assistance, isn't all that pleasant. (I speak from experience) It's a stubborn myth that poor people, who are on public assistance, are sitting in the lap of luxury. You should try living on just those "freebies" that you mentioned and see how meager they actually are. By the way, I didn't mean you had to buy/own a puppy...just pet one. :)

  3. As near as I can tell the minority has ZERO constitutional obligation to offer a quorum to the majority. A requirement for quorum was inserted into the constitution so that tyrannical majorities could not simply shove through odious and objectionable legislation (which is exactly what they did.) By allowing a tyrannical majority to charge fines against the minority for exercising their constitutional prerogative to deny quorum the court as made a mockery of constitutional governance in the state of Indiana.

  4. The voters elected the Reps to make a vote not walk out on the vote. They had to the right to exercise their opinion and vote "no" to the bill. Let me ask you this if you walked out of your job for 5 straight weeks would you get paid? Would you even have a job to go back to? If any elected official walks out on the people they should be arrested for stealing tax dollars from the public. They were elected to do a job and not leave when the job gets stuff.

  5. I have been to several of their locations in Pennsylvania and always go in for 1 item and leave with a basket full of things. I'm very happy they decided on Indiana, now if only they would put the other store in eastside.

ADVERTISEMENT