Sir, - The crisis in Delphi Packard Electric over the last two years has been contrived. By now everyone knows the callous disregard that G.M. have for human resources and indeed human life going back to the US decision to invade Chile in support of the Pinochet regime in 1973.
Delphi Automotive Systems is just one of six divisions of GM supplying components. Delphi Automotive Systems has 171,200 employees internationally with sales of $26.1 billion. Within EC countries this breaks down to 30,068 and $3.6 billion sales in 11 countries. As your paper correctly points out the devastating loss of 800 jobs in the Tallaght community was of little concern to senior management for half an hour in the staff canteen they explained why the human resources ware no longer viable.
What role did industrial relations play in GM arriving at this decision? We honestly believe little or none. Indeed Jose Couto admitted that the plant would most likely have closed irrespective of negotiations in December 1994.
In 1993 PEI made a profit. In May 1994 GM implemented a long standing policy decision to place 20 per cent of their contracts outside GM. This resulted in 200 lay offs in PEI as GM gave a contract to supply Vauxhall, Ellesmere Port to a non GM company, UTA.
This decision pushed up labour costs as a proportion of total costs. On April 30th, the company refused to give us information relating to these costs from 1990 when the plant was employing 1,400 people and operating successfully.
This decision artificially raised questions of PEI competitiveness and in the climate of PCW's allowed PEI to attach the meagre pay condition of all employees. Were the company cynically attempting to provoke the unions as an excuse for closure? The question has to be asked when you look at the demands raised by the company of a workforce of whom the majority of employees earn £205 per week gross. Their demands included a 10 per cent, pay cut, an additional 20 per cent pay cut for mid shift employees, an increase of production line speed by 17.6 per cent, elimination of the 10, minute "relief break", and elimination of bonus payments up to 13 per cent of basic pay.
The unions, in fact, did adopt a very high risk strategy and offer the hand of friendship to save Tallaght. We treated none of our conditions as " sacred cows offered to loan the company core conditions and make a productivity deal. This took place under our leadership of the Joint Shop Stewards Committee and to paint Martin Walsh as an inflexible convenor due to his membership of the Militant Tendency is the complete opposite to the true role he played during negotiations.
The historic move to a 41 hour week and a productivity deal was made on January 18th, 1995, not merely because of our personal endorsement of the rescue plan but because of the long term interests of members.
The company cynically took the two hours unpaid and other concessions and did nothing else. In May of 1995 they announced 400 indefinite lay offs. During this period we received a letter from the Department of Enterprise and Employment dated. May 13th, 1995, where Minister Richard Bruton is unclear of the then MD, David Schramm's intention regarding 400 lay offs. He called on the company to treat the unions fairly in the January negotiations. Yet on January 17th, 1995, Minister Bruton was "hopeful that any such lay offs could be minimised".
Neither the company nor the Minister informed us of the company's intentions before the January 18th, 1995 meeting of members.
This meant that in June 1995 the axis of negotiations changed.
The continuation of GM investment in the Tallaght area and the securing of redundancy payments were the central issues.
The two of us differed on how best to secure the future. Martin resigned as convenor to urge a rejection of the deal as he believed it was no longer a rescue plan. Liam recommended in favour as he believed that such a strategy would at least secure redundancy payments and thought it too difficult to win against GM alone.
The deal was accepted in June and also that month both of us were re elected shop stewards.
The JSSC elected Liam as chairman. The JSSC continued with the flexible approach of the January agreement and as shop stewards we have remained united in serving the long term interest of members. It is wrong to suggest that "Liam has adopted a more flexible approach but has received little thanks." Nothing has divided us in dealing with the company since June. The truth is the workforce has received little thanks for the painful sacrifices made since January 1995 and before.
The announcement of closure unites us all against the dictatorship of the market. Especially when it is mainly an internal market dictated by GM executives. The idea that competition is open in a private corporation 20 times bigger than the Irish economy is plainly untrue. The closure of PEI has been contrived and we will remain united to the continued class struggle to force GM and the Government to live up to their responsibilities to the Packard workforce and the Tallaght community. Yours, etc.,
Shop Steward,
Chairman,
Shop Steward,
Packard Electric (I) Ltd.,
Airton Road,
Tallaght,
Dublin 24.