Give and Take;Case Summary;The typically view of labor-management relations is that interactions are heated. However, many;unions and management teams work together effectively. One example is Harley-Davidson;which had to recently reduce costs in its York factory because of recessionary pressures. The;plant was antiquated, labor costs were high, and there was inflexibility in employee movement;across many different job classifications. Instead of simply closing the plant, Harley was;encouraged to renegotiate with the union workers.;The terms of the new agreement, approximately half of the jobs in the plant were cut, and the;number of job classifications was cut from 60 to five. Newly hired employees would also start at;lower wages than the current workers, and some of the workers who had retained their jobs;would take pay cuts. Further, Harley and the state of Pennsylvania agreed to update the York;plant, and the factory would be the first to staff new jobs when the economy recovers. Some;experts believe that this deal was too one-sided in favor of Harleys interests.;Give and Take;The general view of management and labor union is that they are antagonist: when one wins;the other loses and vice versa. In reality, of course they are many situations where businesses;and unions coexist quite peacefully. And there are other situations where businesses and unions;find they have little choice but to work together in order for both to survive. During the economic;recession of 2009, for example, unions agreed to help out the businesses that employed their;members in several cases.;One notable example came from Harley- Davidson, the big motorcycle manufacturer.;One of Harleys biggest factories is in York, Pennsylvania. The York plant, one of Harleys;oldest, employed about 2,000 nonmanagerial workers. The recession caused a dramatic drop in;revenue for Hurley and the firm desperately needed to cut costs. Company officials determined;that Harley needed to reduce its over-all cost by 120 million to 150 million to remain competitive.;The York factory was a key site for cost reduction. For one thing, the factory was in dire;need of modernization. For another, the labor contract governing York workers called for wages;well above the industry average, moreover, the factory had more than 60 different job;classifications, and the union contract made it nearly impossible to move workers across;classifications.;One of the first options Harley considered was simply closing the York plant and moving;its jobs to the firms newest factory in Kentucky. That plant had a more flexible union contract;and the newest technology. The international Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers;however, persuaded the company to negotiate a new arrangement that would allow some of the;unions workers to retain their jobs.;Under terms of the new agreement, which took effect in February 2010, about half of the;plants 2000 jobs would be eliminated. The number of job classification would also be cut from;60 to five, and Harley would have considerable flexibility to move workers from one to another.;Moreover, any new employees hired after February 2010 would start at an hourly rate of $;19.28, about 20 percent less than the previous starting rate of $ 24.10. Finally, the 1000 or so;workers who retained their jobs would be divided into two groups. About 750 first-tier production;workers would retain their full time jobs with current wages and benefits. The other 250 or so;would be classified as casual workers, these workers would take a wage cut about 30 percent;and would only work on an as-needed basis.;For its part, Harley agreed to invest $ 90 million to modernize the plant with the goal of;allowing the York factory to be the first one to create new jobs when demand for motorcycles;begins to increase. The State of Pennsylvania also agreed to chip in $ 15 million to support both;plant upgrades and new training programs for workers. Finally, Harley also agreed that the 750;first-tier production workers would have their jobs guaranteed for the duration of the 7 year deal.;Many observers saw this new contract as one-sided in favor of Hurley Davidson. One;expert, Professor Gary Chaison at Clark University, commented, This is tying the hands of the;Union for a long time. In contrast to similar renegotiations, the union does appear to have given;up a lot. For instance, the UAW renegotiated its labor contract with General Motors during the;automakers recent financial problems. Under terms of the new agreement, GM would be;allowed to eliminate one-third of its job and reduce its retiree health-care obligations by funding;a portion of its obligations with stock rather than cash. In exchange, the UAW received job;guarantees for two-thirds of the GM workforce, a large equity stake in GM, and a seat on GMs;board of directors.;Answer;1. Do you think the Harley deal was too one-sided? Why or why not?;2. If you were a Harley or GM employee and union member, would you have voted for the;new deal? Why or why not?;3. Do you think it is appropriate for a government entity (such as the state of Pennsylvania);to take an active role in union-management negotiations? Why or why not?;This another article can help.;MILWAUKEE Some motorcycle enthusiasts feared Keith Wandell might be the outsider who;drove Harley-Davidson into the ground. Instead, he may be remembered as the guy who kept;the motorcycle maker on the road.;Wandell grabbed the handlebars at the motorcycle maker in the heart of the economic crisis in;2009. Harley lost $55 million that year, as buying a motorcycle stopped being an option for;many consumers.;We had to make, quickly, some big, bold, decisions, he said in a recent interview.;Wandell was the first CEO from outside Harley, so those decisions were watched closely. Not all;were well-received. He got the unions approval to use temporary workers, which enabled;Harley to time its production closer to the peak bike-buying season, saving time and money. He;relied less on middle-aged men in the U.S. to buy the bikes. And he focused the company on;doing what many say it does best: making big, powerful, premium-priced Harleys. But that;meant getting rid of some popular secondary brands.;The company made $624 million last year, the best annual profit since 2008. It also boosted;profit by 30 percent in this years first quarter, compared to the same period in 2012. With lower;costs and more efficient production, analysts say Harley is in a good position to grow as the;global economy improves and in better shape to weather any future downturn.;Weve just got an awesome future, Wandell summed up in a recent interview.;Its a far cry from when he started. The recession and credit crisis sent shockwaves through;Harley, a company that had done so well for so long that there was little incentive to innovate. In;the early 2000s, many dealerships had waiting lists of buyers, and sales and profit grew year;after year. Then, in one year, bike shipments dropped about 25 percent and the company laid;off hundreds of workers.;The rapid change left employees stunned, and the introduction of Wandell, who didnt even own;a motorcycle at the time, was another blow.;You can just imagine. This was like, for the company, everything was upside down, said the;63-year-old Wandell, who came from car battery and building ventilation systems maker;Johnson Controls Inc., also based in Milwaukee. I mean, how can they bring in somebody from;the outside? What the hell is going on? The economys in the tank. Sales are down. Its this;that. People were just churning.;Harley had many of the same problems as the Detroit automakers: a big union labor force, old;manufacturing processes and strong competition from Japanese companies with cheaper;models on the market. It also had one additional, major disadvantage.;A luxury motorcycle, for most people, isnt necessarily a commuting tool, said Rommel;Dionisio, an industry analyst and senior vice president of equity research at Wedbush.;Under Wandells direction, Harley angered many riders when it pruned popular divisions. Fans;of Buell racing bikes were as avid as Harley enthusiasts, an
The typically view of labor-management relations is that interactions
This question was answered on: Dec 18, 2020
Buy this answer for only: $18.50
This attachment is locked
We have a ready expert answer for this paper which you can use for in-depth understanding, research editing or paraphrasing. You can buy it or order for a fresh, original and plagiarism-free copy (Deadline assured. Flexible pricing. TurnItIn Report provided)
Pay using PayPal (No PayPal account Required) or your credit card . All your purchases are securely protected by .
About this QuestionSTATUS
Dec 18, 2020EXPERT
GET INSTANT HELP/h4>
We have top-notch tutors who can do your essay/homework for you at a reasonable cost and then you can simply use that essay as a template to build your own arguments.
You can also use these solutions:
- As a reference for in-depth understanding of the subject.
- As a source of ideas / reasoning for your own research (if properly referenced)
- For editing and paraphrasing (check your institution's definition of plagiarism and recommended paraphrase).
NEW ASSIGNMENT HELP?
Order New Solution. Quick Turnaround
Click on the button below in order to Order for a New, Original and High-Quality Essay Solutions. New orders are original solutions and precise to your writing instruction requirements. Place a New Order using the button below.
WE GUARANTEE, THAT YOUR PAPER WILL BE WRITTEN FROM SCRATCH AND WITHIN YOUR SET DEADLINE.