Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Friday August 26 2016, @09:54AM   Printer-friendly
from the cost-of-cutting-costs dept.

The World Socialist Web Site reports

The management of Volkswagen in Germany, [Europe's largest automaker, with around 620,000 employees,] has taken a hard-line stance in a dispute with two suppliers and accepted a partial halt in [vehicle] production.

[...] Almost 30,000 workers face the threat of forced time off or reduced hours. [...] The company has applied for reduced working hours at the federal labour agency, which means employees will receive reduced-hours pay, meaning significant wage reductions.

[...] Suppliers ES Automobilguss and Car Trim allege VW has forced them to halt deliveries by ending a development cooperation programme worth half a billion euros without notice or cause. Both firms are demanding VW pay €58 million in compensation. They describe the crisis at VW as self-made. "VW was offloading its own problems onto the supply industry" and was clearly exploiting "its dominant market position against suppliers", they claimed. An employee meeting took place at ES on [August 22].

ES specialises in transmissions, while Car Trim focuses on internal fittings like car seats.

[...] The conflict between VW and Prevent [Group, which overarches the two suppliers and others,] is the outcome of the years-long process of cutting costs by shifting production from the major automakers to suppliers. Much of production has been outsourced to Eastern Europe, where wages are many times lower than those in Germany.

Previous:
Volkswagen Sets Aside 6.5 Billion Euros for Fines and Recalls
Activist-Comedian Interrupts VW Exec's Geneva Presentation to Install "Cheat Box"


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 26 2016, @05:51PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 26 2016, @05:51PM (#393599)

    submissions have to be neutral

    I wouldn't give you a plugged nickel for a news source that doesn't have a point of view.
    Now, DISHONESTY is a different matter entirely.
    I challenge you to point to something in TFA which is a dishonest telling of the facts.

    - and it wasn't

    Folks who look at the Original Submission [soylentnews.org] (which you trimmed by 3 paragraphs--removing WSWS's reference to Dieselgate in the process) will see "cost killer".
    There is nothing inaccurate about that.
    There are other previous references to that characterization of that individual. [archive.li]
    (S/N's comment engine is still needlessly removing instances of e.g. %22 from URLs.)

    WSWS also used "extortion" (again, in the portion which was edited out by you).
    That a second Soylentil (the AC commenter) sees that kind of wording as accurate, reinforces the correctness of its usage.

    That you replaced my suggested dept. line wasn't a huge surprise.
    -That- _did_ go beyond the facts of the story and into interpretation.

    .
    I put the underscore in my nym(s) on the other end.
    It's been well over a year since I (accidentally) forgot to affix my nym to one of my comments.
    The AC commenter, though simpatico with my outlook, isn't me
    He's not nearly militant enough; I would have mentioned how Capitalism pursues profits at the expense of community.

    -- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]

  • (Score: 2) by janrinok on Friday August 26 2016, @06:36PM

    by janrinok (52) Subscriber Badge on Friday August 26 2016, @06:36PM (#393628) Journal

    I wouldn't give you a plugged nickel for a news source that doesn't have a point of view.

    And I wouldn't want it any other way. Perhaps I felt that the story was more biased than it deserved because I had read the source linksand other material from them on this matter to check the accuracy of the story.

    Your suggested dept (capitalism:-it's-a-race-to-the-bottom-for-workers) set the tone for me - I felt that you were making it more political than necessary. But the story was worth publishing so I tried to remove any perceived bias - if I was heavy-handed then I apologise.