Angry French workers facing layoffs at a Caterpillar factory detained four of their bosses Tuesday at the U.S. manufacturer's plant in the Alps and refused to let them leave the premises, union representatives said.
It is the third time in several weeks that French workers have seized their bosses to protest job losses as a result of the global economic crisis.
Last week, workers at a 3M plant held the company boss for two days, and earlier this month workers at a Sony plant held a similar protest.
Unions representing the workers say they want new talks on Caterpillar's layoff plans at the site in Grenoble. The plant that produces building equipment is supposed to cut 733 jobs in two of its factories in France.
"There is no violence or sequestration, but simply pressure so they restart negotiations," said Pierre Piccarreta, a representative from the CGT union.
"At a time when the company is making a profit and distributing dividends to shareholders, we want to find a favorable outcome for all the workers and know as quickly as possible where we are going," Piccarreta said.
Caterpillar France says the layoffs are justified. In February, the company said it was facing a 55 percent loss of orders between 2008 and 2009.
In response to the worsening economic prospects, Caterpillar in January announced job cuts that will ultimate
Pierre Piccarreta’s claim that there was “no violence or sequestration,” is Orwellian doublespeak. Detaining” management is a form of intimidation and violence that I would not like to see imported by our country.
Posts
I believe this goes under the category "Structural Unemployment." In this case, the unions are not reacting well to the economic downturn. Because the demand for workers is decreasing, many people will be fired. Not everyone searching for a job will find one, especially when the economy is so badly hurt.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the unemployment rate is going to dwindle even more than it already has in the past several months of this economic recession. The unemployment rate is the percentage of the labor force that is unemployed.
ReplyDeleteDue to the drop in demand for workers, Caterpillar ultimately had to cut jobs. Although the workers may not particularly like the fact that they must search for a new job, especially in times such as these, it does not seem right to protest in such ways. Since the layoffs were justified, i do not feel the union's actions retaliating against the layoff were right.
ReplyDeleteWhile being angry for loosing a job is understandable, using harsh methods such as holding their bosses hostage is rather uncivilized. This even is a perfect example of the pressure Unions put on the factory causing them to have to hire overpriced labor. Furthermore,when economic times slow, they have to cut because the cost effeciency of having a union worker who should make 2/3 the salary they deserve puts to much pressure on the overall productivity of the company which is why the cut of jobs had to be made.
ReplyDeleteAny person would be angry if they were to be layed off, but acting hostile is not the way to go about it. In times where Caterpillar is facing a 55% loss in orders there isn't really a choice but to lay workers off. This situation is an example of structural unemployment. And if Caterpillar factory kept all of their workers, then it is just going to keep producing and not selling, which would certainly not be good for the company.
ReplyDelete-Double Dare
the workers should move on, if they were more skilled, then there jobs wouldnt have been cut regardless of the economic struggle there.
ReplyDeletejoe garza
Using intimidation and violence is not going to change the status of the economy. no matter how mad they get, jobs are going to be cut if the company wants to make a profit. the workers that were cut will just have to move on and find another job, or wait it out.
ReplyDeletekatie chs
I question whether war stimulates the economy over time over slowly cause the economy to decline
ReplyDeleteI believe that many companies are justified in making job cuts. Obviously it is not a practice that is easy for everyone involved, but I feel it is a carefully thought out process. If it is your job to make sure the company stays afloat and the demand for your product decreases substantially as the Caterpillar company did, then of course a big change that would help save the company is to let go of the unnecessary workers to free up payments that can not be backed up. There are certainly other companies similar to that line of work that the workers could apply for. It unfortunately is a great example of structural unemployment, and I'm afraid there'll be more companies facing this in the next few months.
ReplyDeleteLauren Ragan