General Motors CEO Hits Back At Striking Workers

[Webster]

(The Guardian) General Motors CEO hits back at strikers for rejecting 'most significant offer' in 115 years
The CEO of General Motors, Mary Barra, has come out with fighting words over the start of the auto workers’ strike, saying she is “extremely frustrated and disappointed” that industrial action has begun and warning that the walkout would harm employees, their families and the economy.

Speaking to CNBC, Barra, who has headed GM since 2014, called the concessions being offered by the Detroit three carmakers targetted by the strike “generous” and “historic”. They amounted to over 20% wage increases, she said, on top of job security and “world-class health care” which combined was “the most significant offer we’ve had in our 115-year history”. She added: “We didn’t have to be here”.

Some 3,600 GM workers belonging to the United Auto Workers (UAW) union walked out of the carmaker’s Wentzville, Missouri plant at midnight on Thursday, part of the total of 12,700 who are out across three plants in the first stage of the strike. The Wentzville plant builds the Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon midsize trucks as well as cargo vans, which are among GM’s most popular models.

Sounding a gloomy note, Barra told CNBC that “this is not going to be positive from an industry perspective or for GM”. She said that she thought the strike could be resolved quickly, but warned that its impact could be felt immediately, with painful consequences. We need to get there fast because this is not good for our employees, for the communities and their families. For every GM job there are six other jobs in the economy that depend on us running, so we’ve got to get back to work.”

 

[cowcatcher]

Where is the "other side" in this article? Obviously if the offer were "over 20% wage increases, she said, on top of job security and “world-class health care”" at face value, it seems like a good deal. There is a reason the UAW hasn't accepted this offer, why doesn't the Guardian tell us their side of the story?

 

[Webster]

Where is the "other side" in this article? Obviously if the offer were "over 20% wage increases, she said, on top of job security and “world-class health care”" at face value, it seems like a good deal. There is a reason the UAW hasn't accepted this offer, why doesn't the Guardian tell us their side of the story?

Because they were talking to the CEO of GM here, by chance?

And the UAW's demands were matching increases in hourly pay (matching as in "same percentage as the bosses") plus restarting their pension plans which GM (and Ford and Stellantis) got rid of in order to make the shareholders more money, the insensitive pricks.