Honeywell Spending More To Keep Workers Locked Out Than Cost of Their Demands

[marmar]

from In These Times:




Honeywell Spending More To Keep Workers Locked Out Than Cost of Their Demands

Thursday
21 Oct 10
3:45 pm

By Mike Elk


The locked-out workers of USW Local 7-699 in Metropolis, Ill., are claiming that their company, defense contractor Honeywell, is spending more money to keep its workers locked out than what it would cost to give the workers what they are demanding. Honeywell wants to cut retiree healthcare and pensions entirely for new hires and increase their healthcare contributions to $8,500 a year (see more about the Honeywell lockout here).

USW spokesman John Smith claims that, according to calculations done by the union, it would cost Honeywell a total of $20 million over the three-year life of the contract for workers to keep their health and retiree benefits at current levels. Union officials say that Honeywell has already spent or lost at least $48.8 million to keep the workers locked out of the facility.

This figure includes the costs of contracting at scab labor estimated to be $20 million, an estimated $5 million to house, feed, transport, and provide additional security for the 300 scab labor working inside the plant, and $2.5 million for overtime pay for management working extra hours. This figure does not include legal costs for Honeywell, which has sued the union for their picketing activities.

Additionally, the plant has lost at least $22 million in production in the 11 weeks the plant was shut down. Honeywell plant manager Larry Smith confirmed that the plant lost $2 million each week for the 11 weeks the plant shut down—a total loss of $22 million for the company. ...........(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.inthesetimes.com/working/entry/6578/honeywell_spending_more_to_keep_its_workers_locked_out_than_to_pay_for/

[Gaedel]

1. Both sides do that

Workers as well will choose to lose more in wages in a prolonged strike than they could gain by holding out for a larger contract.

It isn't the current cost of the health care that Honeywell is fighting, it is the future growth.

Both sides will sometimes sacrifice economically for principle.

[mediaman007]

2. Some workers have to set the stage to challenge corporate profiteering!

We have returned to 1910. Unions are necessary!

[Celtic Raven]

3. Exactly -- it's not about the short term loss of money

for these corporations. It's all about breaking the unions until eventually we'll all be grateful to find a job paying 1910 wages.

[Cal Carpenter]

5. Exactly

the only ones sacrificing here are the workers. The executives and (most) shareholders are gonna be fine.

The unions must be broken, like Honeywell is trying to do, or co-opted into uselessness, so that the owners can keep skimming profits off the back of the working class.

How long will people promote the ruling class mentality that these greedy workers have it better than most so they should take these benefit-cuts and be grateful they even have a job?

How low can we go?

[Blue_Tires]

4. ttt

[Brickbat]

6. Always.

It's not about the money; it's about control.

[snot]

7. It's an investment.