GM plant offer sets off union power struggle

A tentative sales agreement between General Motors Co. and JD Norman Industries Inc. for the Indianapolis stamping plant
where more than 600 people work has touched off a power struggle within the auto workers union.

The United Auto Workers in Detroit confirmed Thursday morning that UAW Local 23 will vote Monday on Illinois-based JD Norman's
proposal to buy the plant.

"There is a tentative agreement," UAW spokeswoman Michelle Martin said via e-mail. "There will be an informational
meeting on Sunday and a vote on Monday."

However, local bargaining committee chairman Greg Clark said an overwhelming majority of the 631 represented workers at the
plant voted on May 26 not to negotiate with JD Norman. The majority still do not want to consider the latest proposal or vote
on it, he said.

Clark said he believes UAW's regional and international representatives don't have the right, under the UAW's
constitution, to override that stance.

Higher-level union reps didn't communicate with him about the meeting, he said, and he took down posters at the plant
advertising it.

"This is a law," Clark said. "The constitution is the supreme law of the UAW."

Clark added that he's not sure about his next step.

UAW Region 3 Director Mo Davison said Thursday morning in a prepared statement: "The International Union has in the
past and will in the future, call meetings when we have vital information to share with our membership.  Our members'
livelihood is hanging in the balance and they deserve to hear the facts so they can make an informed decision."

GM plans to close the massive sheet metal-stamping plant just west of downtown by Sept. 14, 2011, if it isn't sold first.
To outsiders, JD Norman would appear to be a potential savior of jobs and tax revenue for the city, but many who work there
don't see it that way. Like Clark, they've transferred to Indianapolis from other GM plants in hopes of staying with
the company long enough to collect retirement benefits.

Clark said previously that he thinks GM will find work for him and other employees at other plants, but that's not an
option if the local facility stays open, and if the union starts working for JD Norman.

There is a camp within Local 23, led by President Ray Kennedy, that wants to stay. Kennedy could not be reached for comment
this morning. Clark said he believes most people on Kennedy's side already qualify for GM's retirement, but want a
chance to keep working, even if for lower wages, in Indianapolis.

Officials for JD Norman, based in Addison, Ill., did not return a phone call this morning. The privately held company describes
itself as a diversified manufacturer of metal components and systems with operations in the United States and Mexico. It supplies
companies in the aerospace, defense, appliance, automotive, building technologies, electrical, energy and medical industries.

The company has acquired seven stamping plants since 2005—the last one being HSM Industries in Mexico in November.

UAW Local 23's current four-year labor contract with GM, negotiated in 2007, contains a two-tiered system in which new
employees earn about $15 an hour compared with the prevailing $29-an-hour wage for more experienced workers.

JD Norman doesn't have to assume GM's contract with the union, but because it would be taking over the same metal-stamping
work, it has to recognize and bargain with the incumbent union, said Marquita Walker, assistant professor of labor studies

As for the UAW's internal dispute, Walker said it's typical of struggles throughout organized labor, especially since
the recession. Local chapters are pushing for democratic union governance, but they've gotten little traction.

"The power resides where the money is," she said. "The money is in the national and international. They collect
the dues. They are able to hire really nifty attorneys that know labor laws inside and out. Until the rank-and-file are able
to amass the funding… it's not going to happen."

UAW spokeswoman Martin said the union would not release details of the JD Norman proposal before the vote.

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Editor's note: IBJ is now using a new comment system. Your Disqus account will no longer work on the IBJ site. Instead, you can leave a comment on stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Past comments are not currently showing up on stories, but they will be added in the coming weeks. Please note our updated comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining
{{ articles_remaining }}
Free {{ article_text }} Remaining Article limit resets in {{ count_down }} days.