Readers may conduct their own web searching, the focus here is the report published by Emptywheel, which speaks for itself and which links to an online complaint copy, and a previous letter between counsel. (Sent, Abbe Lowell to DOJ Special Counsel, Aug.14, 2023; cc to Inspector General, DOJ).
Of interest here, two things, first among relief sought:
D. Ordering Defendant to produce to Mr. Biden all documents in its possession, custody, or control regarding the inspection, transmittal, and/or disclosure of Mr. Biden’s confidential tax return information; E. Ordering the IRS to formulate, adopt, and implement a data security plan that satisfies the requirements of the Privacy Act;
They want the paper and e-trail, and want as a precedent, a formulation of a plan for how the IR is, in the future, to honor citizen rights under the Privacy Act. Bravo.
Second, early in the Complaint:
18. Non-party Attorney A is an attorney who represents Mr. Shapley in connection with his IRS whistleblower testimony and public statements related to Mr. Biden’s confidential tax information. Attorney A previously worked as Associate Counsel for the Office of the White House Counsel under former President Donald J. Trump. At all relevant times, Attorney A acted as an authorized agent of Mr. Shapley and, therefore, had apparent and actual authority to act on Mr. Shapley’s behalf, including with the improper release of tax return information.
19. Non-party Attorney B is an attorney who is President of Empower Oversight and represents Mr. Shapley and Mr. Ziegler in connection with their IRS whistleblower testimony and their public statements related to Mr. Biden’s confidential tax information. Attorney B recently announced he is running as a GOP candidate for West Virginia state House, and previously worked for the United States Office of Special Counsel under former President Donald J. Trump. At all relevant times, Attorney B acted as an authorized agent of Mr. Shapley and, therefore, had apparent and actual authority to act on Mr. Shapley’s behalf, including with the improper release of tax return information.
Trump former DOJ lawyers are behind the so-called "whistleblowers," and their host of TV appearances trading in Hunter Biden's private income tax matters.
Political to a fault.
DOJ has not acted against the two IRS agents, nor their lawyers, regarding Privacy Act matters, other than having the IRS investigation terminated in May 2023. A guess is the paper and e-trail leading up to that step would be part of what Biden's lawyers want disclosed. See, also, the ABC published timeline re Biden investigation(s). How and why the IRS team was shut down seems of interest to the public, while members of the public may wonder why Privacy Act matters which they could face were overridden, easily, without consequences to those breaching privacy on multiple TV shows.
Many new battery and electric vehicle factories are springing up and
could employ workers from the plants that have shut down. But automakers
are building most aggressively in the South, where labor laws are
tilted against union organizers, rather than in the Midwest, where the
UAW has more clout. One of the union's demands is that workers in the
new factories be covered by the automakers' national labor contracts — a
demand that the automakers have said they can't meet because those
plants are owned by joint ventures. The union also wants to regain the
right to strike to block plant shutdowns.
And
Union supporters say it would be wrong to blame workers if the traditional carmakers cannot compete with Tesla and other rivals.
"If you look at the breakdown
at what it costs to build an EV, labor is a very small part of the
equation. Batteries are the most," Janis said. "This idea that the UAW
is going to price Ford, GM and Stellantis out of the market is not
true."
The quoted spokesperson was identified earlier in the item as Madeline Janis, executive director of Jobs to Move America, an advocacy group that works closely with the UAW and other unions.
The cutover to electric vehicles was not unforeseen, and sound planning over the past decade would have been less dividends and buybacks, and holding capital. But that would have meant less upfront cash for the bosses.
NewRepublic, in a post, "GM CEO Twists Herself Into Pretzel Trying to Defend Outlandish Salary," we learn:
General Motors CEO Mary Barra is working overtime to defend her outlandish $30 million salary, as United Auto Workers begins a historic strike against the Big Three auto companies.
Barra
appeared on CNN Friday morning and was asked why General Motors workers
should not get the same type of pay increases she has in the last few
years.
“You
make almost $30 million; why should your workers not get the same type
of pay increases that you’re getting leading the company?” asked CNN’s
Vanessa Yurevich.
“My
compensation, 92 percent of it, is based on performance of the
company,” Barra said. “When the company does well, everyone does well.”
What
Barra really means is this: Her compensation as CEO is tied to General
Motors’ profit margins. This means that Barra’s exorbitant salary is
also a function of how low she can keep autoworkers’ wages. Barra’s
salary has increased 34 percent over the last four years, while in four
years workers’ pay has only increased by 6 percent.
Under the current contract, the $18 per hour starting pay for autoworkers is about 36 percent below
where it would be if the 2007 starting wage had kept up with inflation.
The UAW is asking for a 36 percent pay increase over the next four
years, as well as improved benefits and a 32-hour workweek.
As UAW noted, during the eight-and-a-half minute CNN interview Barra made more money than any autoworker makes in a full day.
So, the bosses have contracts tying compensation to profits; go figure.
Planning out the door. This quarter sets MY pay. Fucked up? You decide.
Now, go back to that specific quote from Barra, “When the company does well, everyone does well.”
Doesn't that sound something like, "What's good for General Motors is good for the USA?" Or, when the national economy does well, General Motors does well (as does Mary Barra, socking away the wealth).
That observation goes back to where the nation's elders may recall Al Capp and his comic strip character, General Bullmoose:
Often, Capp had parodied corporate greed [...] in 1952,
when General Motors president Charles E. Wilson, nominated for a cabinet post, told Congress
"...what was good for the country was good for General Motors and vice
versa", he inspired one of Capp's greatest satires—the introduction of
General Bullmoose, the robust, ruthless, and ageless business tycoon.
The blustering Bullmoose, who seemed to own and control nearly
everything, justified his far-reaching and mercenary excesses by saying
"What's good for General Bullmoose is good for the USA!"
Bullmoose's corrupt interests were often pitted against those of the
pathetic Lower Slobbovians in a classic mismatch of "haves" versus
"have-nots". This character, along with the Shmoos, helped cement Capp's
favor with the Left, and increased their outrage a decade later when Capp, a former Franklin D. Roosevelt
liberal, switched targets. Nonetheless, General Bullmoose continued to
appear, undaunted and unredeemed, during the strip's final right-wing
phase and into the 1970s.
Forbes, in June 2020, writes of Wilson's statement more favorably than Al Capp did, in explaining:
In 1953 President Eisenhower nominated Charles Wilson, the President
of General Motors, to be his Secretary of Defense. He retained a huge
stock position in GM and during his confirmation hearings was asked if
he could make a decision that was bad for GM. His response is still
remembered forever as the classic example of business arrogance –
“What’s good for GM is good for America.”
Except he never said that.
Wilson – who had overseen GM’s war production during World War II –
said something very different: that he hadn’t imagined the possibility,
“because for years I thought what was good for our country was good for
General Motors, and vice versa.” Wilson was saying exactly the opposite –
that the best thing he could do for General Motors would be to
faithfully serve his country, so there was no conflict. Wilson
understood that business can only flourish when the country does.
In his excellent The Fracturing of the American Corporate Elite,
Ross School of Business Professor Mark Mizruchi describes how for the
first few decades after the Second World War, the American business
community was united around centrist policies that were in the broad
national interest. This behavior was certainly self-interested and often
pushed policies that were far more favorable to the elite than they
were to the working class, but at base business leaders recognized that
their interests and the country’s went hand in hand.
In the 1970s, however, this elite fractured and began focusing on
narrow self-interest instead of broad national ones. Mizruchi identifies
a variety of reasons, ranging from victory in their battles against
unions to the decline of the large commercial banks which had
coordinated their activities. I’d add as particularly important the dominance of the American economy by the financial sector,
leading business leaders to focus on short-term gains, and the
realization by business leaders that their personal wealth benefited far
more from tax cuts focused on high earners than by public investments
that boosted the entire economy. The interests of the American business
elite and the rest of America got divorced, and it wasn’t an amicable
one. This has never been more brutally symbolized than by the last few
weeks, with the market soaring while the country suffers blow after
devastating blow.
The political power of American business remains formidable, however, even if it’s been misused for generations. [...]
More fundamentally, American business cannot prosper if American’s
don’t. If you are willing to push for favorable tax treatment or
beneficial regulation, then you can, and should, use your power to
defend the rights of your fellow citizens. Your business will benefit,
but don’t do it for that reason. Do it because it’s the right thing to
do. If you believe that you are a leader, well, it’s time to lead. Your
country needs you.
A thought was to save the image, put a $ on the forehead, and caption it, "Mark of the Beast." Then, no, play it straight. She's normally greedy, but not evil.
_________UPDATE_________
With transitioning to electric vehicles, back to Strib with its NYTimes carry:
The three companies are already struggling to get their electric vehicle
business going. A new GM battery factory in Ohio has been slow to
produce batteries, delaying electric versions of the Chevrolet Silverado
pickup and other vehicles. Ford had to suspend production of its
electric F-150 Lightning in February after a battery caught fire in one
of the pickups that was parked near the factory for a quality check. And
Stellantis won't even begin selling fully electric vehicles in the
United States until next year.
[...] Despite all the money that automakers have made in recent years, their
executives express a profound unease about the growth of electric
vehicles, which account for 7% of the U.S. new car market so far this
year and are on track to surpass sales of 1 million this year. Managers
are acutely aware that traditional companies like theirs have a poor
track record of retaining dominance after a big change in technology.
Witness the way that Apple sidelined Nokia and Motorola as cellphones
became smartphones.
[...] At the same time, union officials are aware of the changes in the
industry and have said they do not want to handicap GM, Ford and
Stellantis as the companies try to recover ground they have lost to
Tesla, which has aggressively resisted attempts to unionize its
factories. The Detroit carmakers also face challengers like Rivian, a
startup that makes electric pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles in
Illinois, as well as foreign-owned rivals like Mercedes-Benz and Toyota,
whose U.S. factories, mostly in the South, are not unionized.
And there is that non-union BMW plant in right-to-work [for less] South Carolina, the one Nikki Haley loves so much, plus - China. Geely, websearch, Wiki.
From online reporting, a fine automobile, Volvo moving as every other player in the auto manufacturing market is doing, with factories in China.
Those pesky Europeans. It is a worldwide game, and reporting is China has been active in batteries; where in the auto industry "Batteries not included" would not sell.
Globalization is as globalization does. In five years we'll have a better idea of the electric auto winners and losers. Remember Studebaker, Packard? American Motors and George Romney? The Rambler?
FURTHER: It is not an investment, but a big contract boost for a recently new player; Amazon delivery vans, by Rivian.
FURTHER: You know it is real when marquee brands move. Rolls. Cadillac. Check that Cadillac presentation. Mary Barra scripted it all by herself. No Dinah Shore singing, "See the USA, in your Chevrolet, America's the greatest land or all."
If Mary Barra had a singing voice, who knows?
Slick is the theme, kitsch is out, and good luck if you buy one. That you don't get a lemon, since new things often carry that risk. Limited production, hope for no slip-up in programming the factory robots.
FURTHER: You will know in a few years when the cut-over point has been reached. Gas stations then will be as rare as charging stations now.
____________FURTHER UPDATE__________
POLITICS:
Bernie has already spoken at an auto workers rally.
Websearch = "jeffries" "schumer" auto workers strike [timeline: past week]
yielded zippo on Schumer even voicing UAW support; and a single Jeffries item, per Politico, "Hakeem Jeffries to visit striking auto workers ‘in solidarity’ - “I’ll be heading to Detroit a little later on today,” he said."
Schumer? Readers are urged to attempt to find any online reporting of Schumer even saying a thing about UAW striking, much less showing solidarity. A/k/a Democratic Party leadership???
75% Of Americans Say They Support The UAW Strikers-- Elon Musk, Tim Scott & Trump Oppose It
[...] Bernie: “Despite what you might hear in the corporate media, what the UAW is fighting for is not radical. It is the reasonable demand that autoworkers, who have made enormous sacrifices over the past 40 years, finally receive a fair share of the enormous profits their labor has generated… The corporate media will always side with CEOs and shareholders. Every time working Americans stand up and demand what is just and fair, the corporate media is there to tell viewers that workers are asking for too much.”
Readers can decide whether Strib fits Bernie's "corporate media" statement.
More DWT:
Grim and Klipperstein concluded that “What’s clearly changed is that the American people aren’t buying the corporate spin anymore. The people have spoken, and they are sticking with the union.” Including Biden! While Trump told NBC News that “The auto workers are being sold down the river by their leadership,” Biden had a very different perspective. He said "record corporate profits" should lead to "record contracts" for workers. And yesterday he told the NY Times that “No one wants a strike. But I respect the workers right to use their options in the collective bargaining system, and I understand the workers’ frustration.”
Including Biden. More DWT:
Last night, Lucas Kunce (above), the progressive Democrat taking on Josh Hawley in Missouri, walked the picket line at the Wentzville GM plant. In a statement he said, “If CEOs at the Big 3 auto companies can afford to give themselves 40% pay raises while they’re handing out $66B in stock buybacks and dividends to shareholders, they sure as hell can afford to give auto workers fair wages and the contract they deserve. American auto workers have seen their average real hourly earnings fall 19.3% since 2008. It's criminal. I stand in solidarity with UAW and every auto worker fighting for what they've earned.” He wasn’t the only Democrat eager to show solidarity with the union members. Michigan Senator Gary Peters did likewise as did Sherrod Brown at the Toledo Stellantis plant. Today John Fetterman drove his UAW-built Ford Bronco from Braddock out to the factory in Michigan to walk the picket line with the workers. Bernie, at a UAW rally in Detroit yesterday: “It is time for you to end your greed,” Sanders said. “It is time for you to treat your employees with the respect and dignity they deserve. It is time to sit down and negotiate a fair contract... I say to Mary Barra, the CEO of GM. Last year, you made over $29 million. Since you became CEO 8 years ago, you have made over $200 million in total compensation. Do you have any clue what it’s like for one of your workers to try to survive on $17 an hour?... Let us stand together to end corporate greed, let us stand together to rebuild the disappearing middle class, let us create an economy that works for all, not just the one percent. Let us all, every American, in every state in this country stand with the UAW.”
Republicans? DWT:
Tim Scott said “We're seeing the UAW fight for more benefits and less hours working. More pay and fewer days on the job. It's a disconnect from work, and we have to find a way to encourage and inspire people to go back to work.” Señor Trumpanzee was on the same page: “I think [UAW president Shawn Fain is] not doing a good job in representing his union, because he's not going to have a union in three years from now. Those jobs are all going to be gone, because all of those electric cars are going to be made in China.”
Well, Trump was the one who pushed tariffs and "Made in America," so what is he saying if now elected? Jobs going to China? Union jobs. Forget tariffs?
Labor cost is a small part of cost of a vehicle. If China gains advantage it will be because they were thinking long term while U.S. firms were doing buybacks and pumping out dividends in order to boost their very generous CEO paychecks.
China has been working hard on battery technology and solar power. There is nothing wrong with that. They are following a responsible policy, even as they contribute a lion's share of combustion gasses to the climate, now. They see what Manchin "fails" to see because Manchin is hiding from seeing it because he owns vast coal money. The Chinese central planners see that things need to change.
Biden sees that too, but gets very much pushback from fossil fuel interests, and from Republicans allied with fossil fuel folks; e.g., here and here. Republicans appear to truly believe, or as is more likely, they see advantage to tout what Biden wishes to contain. Never mind best-for-the-country perspectives.
"Batteries not included?" Nio, swapable batteries, you can buy the car with no battery included. Lower down payment, on payments later, not messed up in a major way if getting a defective swapped battery, vs. up the creek if it's part of the auto framing integrity - wired in. It seems a no-brainer if technical feasibility works. Reserve battery packs at swap sites can be charged off-peak, allowing a present stressed power grid to delay upgrading until, perhaps, eminent domain reform for transmission lines reduces a bottleneck. Safety is necessary, but we can see how it works in China.
[The item has been updated, also with one correction re Elon Musk/X and the blue check for UAW having been temp. suspended, then reinstated - see in context below]
11:05 AM Saturday, September 16, 2023 - The homepage screen capture:
Lower left, top right, "cars will cost more"
This shows an anti-union bias which Taylor should think over. Labor puts his product out. Absent labor, no Strib.
Add to it, center feature, do-little politician - smooth race so far - Strib's image caption says, "She has no major Republican challenger yet in her re-election bid."
Hell, there are no major Republicans in the State, as a first point; and Amy's deserved challenger would be a populist-progressive, since she's GOP-lite.
There's an interesting range of Auto Workers Strike coverage on the web. Expect updating commentary to this post, but little more about the sad-sorry approach shown by Minnesota's largest daily news outlet. Change that last sentence to read "sad-sorry approach shown by Minnesota's mainstream media examplar."
And they wonder why MSM has critics?
_________UPDATE_________
ArsTechnica has a short but informative post - following a subheadline
It's the first time UAW workers have struck at the Big Three simultaneously.
UAW's strike action has been narrowly targeted.
Although the union represents about 146,000 members, most of them are
staying at their jobs. But 5,800 Stellantis workers at the company's
Jeep plant in Toledo, Ohio, are now on strike, as are 3,600 GM workers
at a plant in Wentzville, Missouri, plus 3,300 at Ford's factory in
Wayne, Michigan.
The union and automakers had been trying to reach a compromise before
the 4-year-old contract between them expired on Thursday night. Among
other things, the union has been looking to end the tiered pay structure
in the industry where new hires into a job earn less. It is also
seeking the restoration of cost-of-living increases and an end to
automakers subverting union jobs with temporary workers.
Ford, GM, and Stellantis responded to some of those demands
but fell far short of others, including a 36 percent pay raise spread
over four years and a return to defined-benefit pensions. In a
statement, Ford said that "the proposal would more than double Ford’s
current UAW-related labor costs, which are already significantly higher
than the labor costs of Tesla, Toyota, and other foreign-owned
automakers in the United States that utilize non-union-represented
labor."
UAW President Shawn Fain rejected that claim, telling CNN that
"[t]he cost of labor for a vehicle is 5 percent of the vehicle. They
could double our wages and not raise the prices of vehicles, and they
would still make billions of dollars. It's a lie like everything else
that comes out of their mouths."
It’s also about EVs
The ongoing switch to electric vehicles factors
in to this union fight. As Ford's statement notes, Tesla—which is
responsible for more than 60 percent of all new EV sales in the US—uses
non-union labor. And as we saw from Ford's financial results earlier this year, investing in EV production means a lot of red ink on the balance sheet.
The union is not opposed to electrification, but it doesn't want workers exploited in the process. In a 2021 white paper,
the UAW wrote that, "[w]hereas traditional powertrains have often been
made by automakers themselves and created quality union jobs, EV
batteries are mostly made by suppliers in other countries, with China in
the lead. And where automakers are entering battery production, they
are doing so through joint ventures with battery companies that have an
unknown track record on providing quality jobs."
As a result of the strike, there will be production disruptions for
GM's midsize trucks and full-size vans, the Ford Ranger and Bronco, and
the Jeep Wrangler and Gladiator models.
Tesla
isn't involved in the United Auto Workers' negotiations with General
Motors, Ford and Stellantis, but it's the elephant in the room
regardless.
Why it matters: For the Detroit
Three, the competitive threat from non-unionized Tesla heightens the
importance of reaching a reasonable contract that allows them to build
affordable electric vehicles.
Meanwhile, the UAW has a vested
interest in obtaining lucrative deals if it ever wants to resuscitate
its efforts to organize Tesla workers — or those at any other automaker,
for that matter.
Threat level: The UAW's
deals with GM, Ford and Stellantis expire at 11:59 p.m. Thursday — and
analysts at Evercore ISI and Wedbush Securities predict a greater than
85% chance of a strike at all three, which has never happened before.
The
UAW this week reportedly lowered its wage increase demand from 40% to
36%, signaling some progress at the bargaining table, but the parties
remain far apart on benefits.
Anderson Economic Group reports
that a 10-day strike at all three would lead to direct losses of $5.6
billion and a possible one-quarter recession in Michigan, Indiana and
Ohio.
Zoom in: Behind the scenes, automakers say the cost gap between them and Tesla is a big reason why they're struggling to compete with the EV titan.
Tesla
currently makes vehicles at an estimated labor cost of $45 to $50 per
hour, whereas the Detroit Three make vehicles for about $64 to $67 per
hour. Both figures include wages, benefits and profit-sharing.
Between the lines: Tesla's profits per vehicle are higher than any of its global rivals, and CEO Elon Musk is using that advantage as a weapon in a price war that is squeezing industry rivals.
Aside from paying lower wages and benefits, Tesla has padded its profit margins by winnowing production costs at its factories.
It
uses large castings in place of many small metal parts, for example,
and brought many parts of its supply chain, including battery
manufacturing, in-house.
For its next model, a $25,000 global car, it's building an even more efficient assembly plant in Texas.
Those efficiencies have enabled Tesla to rapidly scale its operations, posing a growing threat to the established U.S. automakers.
In 2017, GM's sales volume was 85 times larger than Tesla's. By 2022, that had shrunk to less than a five-fold advantage.
"The
competition in the auto industry is fierce, and the UAW, GM, Ford and
Stellantis need to keep that foremost in mind when they negotiate this
contract," Anderson Economic Group CEO Patrick Anderson tells Axios.
Ars, again, Musk being an asshole - [local update correction: Apparently not Elon in a snit, but X policy to temp. suspend X user blue check mark, if a user image is changed; see Intercept opening, here.]
After a report called out Musk's union-busting, UAW's blue check got reinstated.
The move seemingly makes it harder for UAW to maximize reach for its
posts on X, just as workers have begun striking, demanding better wages
and other benefits.
Ford has claimed that the deal UAW was negotiating would have doubled
automaker labor costs, and the Intercept noted that often wage
increases won by union workers "trickle down" to non-unionized workers
like Tesla's. That perhaps worried Musk, who seemingly has a financial
interest in keeping autoworker wages low and a history of union-busting.
Earlier this year, Musk lost a court battle and had to delete a tweet that threatened Tesla workers attempting to unionize.
A UAW official told The Intercept that the union had paid for X
verification and confirmed that the account had been marked as verified
until earlier today when UAW said it was removed without any
notification from X.
By midday Friday, UAW's verified check was reinstated. The Intercept's reporter, Ryan Grim, posted on X, writing, "Elon put the blue check back up. Maybe the Big Three will fold this fast too."
To a request for comment, X only sent Ars an auto-response, saying,
"Busy now, please check back later." (To be fair, in this case "check
back later" is a good summary of what happened.)
[...] Musk's stake in the strike could go beyond wage questions, though.
UAW's negotiations also seek to expand benefits for union workers
involved "in the production of electric vehicles and the batteries
needed to power them," The Intercept reported, and those conversations
could also impact Tesla operations.
On top of the backlash over Musk's union-busting tweet, Tesla has a history of violating labor laws.
[...]
ANDMusk is not the only As to self-promotinganti-labor assholes in the land these days. Remember things. Mistakes can be avoided.
Back to the strike. Best coverage on the issues - Guardian, an ocean away.
It’s the latest in a series of strikes called or threatened by workers in industries including shipping and logistics, TV and movie production and hotel and leisure. Given its scale, the strike could deal a significant blow to the US economy as well as the auto industry.
Why is it happening?
The United Auto Workers (UAW) union says workers have never been fully compensated
for the sacrifices they made after the 2008-09 financial crisis, when
they agreed to a raft of cuts to save the industry. The carmakers
received huge bailouts and soon returned to record profits.
Workers are pushing
for at least a 40% wage increase over four years in a new contract; an
end to two-tier wage systems in which new hires are paid significantly
less for doing the same work; an increase to benefits for retirees and
return of a defined pension instead of a 401k; reinstatement of
cost-of-living adjustment raises; a 32-hour working week; job security
protections; and protections for workers affected by plant closures.
How big is the pay gap?
The vast disparity in pay between workers and their bosses is one of the UAW’s biggest bones of contention.
General Motors CEO Mary Barra made $29m in 2022 – 362 times the median wage of $80,034 at the company.
Ford CEO Jim Farley made $21m in 2022 – 281 times the median worker of $74,691.
Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares made $24.8m in 2022 – 365 times the average worker’s $67,789 wage.
CEO pay at the big three companies jumped by
40% between 2013 and 2022. Meanwhile, auto manufacturing workers have
seen their average real hourly earnings fall 19.3% since 2008, according
to the Economics Policy Institute.
Starting
wages at GM’s Ultium Cells battery plant in Lordstown, Ohio, are just
$16.50, according to the UAW. Meaning it would take 16 years for a
full-time worker to earn what Barra earns in a week.
Who’s leading the charge?
The
UAW president, Shawn Fain, was elected to head the union as part of a
reform campaign within its ranks, aimed at taking a more aggressive
approach towards bargaining after workers had accepted concessions amid
bankruptcies during the 2008 economic recession. Workers have yet to
regain those concessions, or a share in the $250bn profits the big three automakers have raked in over the past decade.
How did the strike begin?
In late August, the UAW announced members voted about 97% in favor of the strike authorization. The union has never gone on strike at the big three automakers simultaneously.
A
minute before midnight on Thursday, after their contracts expired, UAW
members walked out at three assembly plants in Michigan, Missouri and
Ohio. The union said that about 13,000 workers were affected.
The Detroit Free Press reported that the Stellantis complex in Toledo, Ohio, erupted in cheering and honking of horns as the strike began.
When did the UAW last strike?
Workers at General Motors last went on strike in 2019. It lasted 40 days and cost the carmaker $3.6bn. In 2019, contracts were reached with Fiat-Chrysler, now Stellantis, and Ford without a strike occurring.
What happened to talks?
Talks
are going on, “in good faith”, General Motors chief executive Mary
Barra said on Friday morning. But management and workers failed to reach
an agreement by the midnight deadline when current contracts expired
and so the strike began. Fain has previously posted video updates on
negotiations in which he has thrown copies of proposals from the
automakers in the bin, criticizing the companies’ offers.
In the UAW’s most recent negotiation update,
Fain criticized the counteroffers from Ford, Stellantis and GM, saying
they keep in place two-tiered wages for workers; rejected their
retirement and pension proposals; called wage proposals from Ford and GM
“shameful and insulting”; and characterized Stellantis’s offer as
“deeply inadequate”. The union has called for significant wage increases
that reflect the salary increases of the companies’ CEOs.
“It
doesn’t make up for inflation, it doesn’t make up for decades of
falling wages and it doesn’t reflect the massive profits we generated
for this company,” said Fain.
The automakers have criticized the union’s proposals and claimed they are not “feasible”.
How serious could it get?
In the first instance, the UAW planned “standup” strikes aimed at individual auto plants, with members from three plants walking out overnight after talks failed.
Under
this strategy, a strike flares without warning at targeted, individual
plants. Then additional locations follow – ramping up the pressure on
the companies. UAW says as time goes on, more locals may be called on to
join the strike.
“This gives us maximum
leverage and maximum flexibility in our fight to win a fair contract at
each of the big three automakers.” The option to strike across all
facilities is “still on the table”.
What are the costs?
The automotive industry contributes about 3-3.5% of the US gross domestic product (GDP), the broadest measure of the economy.
Vehicle
supply – just recovering from pandemic shortages – would be hit hard. A
month-long strike at the three automakers could cut output by as many
as 500,000 vehicles, according to Sam Fiorani, vice-president of global
vehicle forecasting for AutoForecast Solutions.
Ten-day
strikes at all three automakers could cost manufacturers, workers,
suppliers and dealers more than $5bn, according to economic consulting
firm Anderson Economic Group.
Is the White House getting involved?
Biden
appeared to support the strikers when he spoke at a press briefing
hours after the strike began on Friday. The president said in his White
House address: “Record corporate profits … should be shared by record
contracts for the UAW.”
He also expressed
regret that the strike had not been averted but urged both parties to
return to the negotiating table. “No one wants a strike but I respect
workers’ rights to use their options under the collective bargaining
system and understand their frustrations,” Biden said.
Shawn Fain, UAW Board leader, on YouTube. He does not talk like Bernie. But what he says is what Bernie has been saying. There is a staged dimension to the presentation, a background "choir" used, but so far each of the three, Ford, GM and Fiat-Chrysler, (whatever they call themselves now), each with a single plant closure, so far, with it clear that the strike can escalate, while the union and firms still have the bulk of the industry currently operating. Whether crucial choke-point plants have been targeted, or simply representative facilities is unclear from reporting.
Old timers can remember when the Democratic Party was the unions' party, the workers' party, before the Clintons and before Schumer. What was, can be again.
FURTHER: Glen Taylor's Strib editors will not give a fair hearing to this side of things. Have you seen this telling of a story on FOX? Is Trump talking about anything besides his being sued by prosecutors in four places? Think about it.
Yes, you can say that the linked UAW YouTube item is propaganda. Not gross, but itself telling only one side of things. However, MSM is not supposed to have a dog in this hunt, instead it should be fair and balanced.
Is it?
_________FINAL UPDATE________
Paycheck-to-paycheck worry, and more, the UAW strike is a step toward a fairer economy, hence a fairer America.
Said by the man who should be our President speaking at a UAW rally. Video image quality is off. The quality of the thoughts, spot on.
His age is immaterial. His mental capacity is unquestioned. His continuing the quest is most admirable. A video only 18 minutes long encapsulates what sensible dissatisfaction in America is about - not gun ownership and white Angst. Not about these people:
Crabgrass focus is on a single item, BusinessInsider's report (dated Sept. 13, 2023), which in turn appends a Scribd complaint copy, (filed in LA federal court 9/13/2023).
The complaint as a pdf document is online here; and speaks for itself.
Commentary on complaint detail, later.
The BI report states:
A federal lawsuit filed by Hunter Biden accuses former Trump aide Garrett Ziegler of hacking his data.
Ziegler denied the allegations and told Insider that he came by the data legally from Biden's laptop.
The case opens a second front in the war
between the Bidens and the GOP. It could also impact First Amendment
protections for opposition research.
Lawyers representing Hunter Biden have
filed a civil lawsuit in federal court against Garrett Ziegler, a former
aide in the Trump White House who has since become a key figure in
collecting and publicizing data alleged to have been obtained from one
of Biden's abandoned laptops.
The suit alleges that Ziegler
violated laws against hacking and fraud. It also claims that his team
manipulated and altered some of the data, although it does not specify
how other than redacting explicit photos that appear to show Biden
naked, sometimes in the company of sex workers.
The lawsuit
signals the opening of a second front in the emerging legal battle
between GOP hardliners who want to impeach Biden's father, President Joe
Biden, and Hunter Biden's camp, who say he is being unfairly targeted
and that President Biden did nothing wrong. It could also redraw the
legal boundaries around "opposition research," the longstanding practice
of gathering as much derogatory information as possible on a political
candidate in order to influence the outcome of an election. As media
outlets have trimmed back spending on foreign bureaus and long-term
investigations, they have grown increasingly reliant on tips developed
by private researchers with bigger budgets and fewer ethical
constraints. The Hunter Biden laptop story is only the latest product of
opposition research to make headlines. Derogatory stories about the Clinton Foundation, anomalous server pings associated with a Russian bank, and the apparently mythical Donald Trump pee-tape, were all the fruits of opposition research.
Ziegler
posted more than 100,000 emails from Hunter Biden's account online,
along with photos and other documents. The provenance of the material
continues to be debated along with the privacy implications, but the
authenticity of the content has never been successfully challenged.
It appears Hunter Biden still has not publicly described any of the emails as his original and unaltered property, the complaint only vaguely refers to "data" of his claimed to have been wrongly breached - and - subjected to tampering.
BI continues:
Ziegler
once served in the Trump White House under Peter Navarro, the
pugilistic trade adviser who was found guilty last week of contempt of
Congress for ignoring a subpoena requesting information about the
January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol. Ziegler himself reportedly escorted
some of Trump's most pro-insurrection allies — Michael Flynn and Sidney
Powell — into the White House for a December 2020 meeting. (Ziegler has
disputed this.) He has backed the baseless claim that Trump was the
rightful winner of the 2020 election, and has reportedly accused the January 6 House select committee of being "anti-White" and "Bolsheviks."
Hunter Biden did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
When
reached by Insider on Wednesday, Ziegler claimed that the 14-page
lawsuit is "not worth the paper it's printed on." He denied manipulating
any of the data, beyond redacting explicit material, and claimed that
the metadata he had posted would prove that. He denied that any hacking
had occurred. Where the lawsuit alleges that Ziegler's team hacked into
"an encrypted iPhone backup," Ziegler said that they were able to access
the iPhone backup through a code found on the laptop's keychain app.
"Everything was contained on the laptop," he said.
Ziegler told
Insider that he obtained the data "directly from someone who got the
copy from the laptop shop owner." That person, Ziegler said, was Rudy
Giuliani, [...] Giuliani said that the
emails were derived from a laptop that Biden had abandoned at a computer
repair shop in Delaware.
Numerous reports indicate that Giuliani
was travelling to Ukraine during the months before the election, where
he pushed the Ukrainian government to open an investigation into Hunter
Biden, and solicited derogatory information about Biden from his
contacts.
[...] Kevin Morris, a Los Angeles entertainment
lawyer who has provided Hunter Biden with millions of dollars in
financial support, and reportedly meets with him regularly to discuss legal and public relations strategies, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
THE PLEADING:
Of initial interest, Defendants are:
GARRETT ZIEGLER, an individual, ICU, LLC, a Wyoming Limited Liability Company d/b/a Marco Polo, and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive
Paragraphs 13 and 14, stating:
13. Defendants sued herein as Does 1 through 10, inclusive, are sued in their fictitious names and capacities as their identities have not yet been determined. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each of such Defendants is responsible in some way for the acts alleged herein. Plaintiff will seek leave to amend this complaint to allege such Defendants’ true names and capacities when they have been ascertained.
14. Upon information and belief, at all times herein mentioned, each Defendant acted individually and/or as the agent, co-conspirator, aider, abettor, joint venturer, alter ego, third-party beneficiary, employee, officer, director or representative of the other Defendants and, in doing the things hereinafter averred, acted within the course and scope of such agency, employment or conspiracy and with the consent, permission and authorization of each of the remaining Defendants. Upon information and belief, all actions of each Defendant as averred in the claims for relief stated herein were ratified and approved by every other Defendant or their officers, directors or managing agents.
Paragraph 8 pleads a jurisdictional damages amount has been met, specifically:
8. The amount in controversy exceeds $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs. Damages that Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer as a result of the violations of the federal statute referenced above and the other claims asserted herein exceed $75,000.
The plea is damages suffered and which Plaintiff will continue to suffer, and that causation is later pled as an ongoing all encompassing collective activity, Ziegler named as a defendant, other "Doe" defendants to be ensnared as identity and role of each is "ascertained."
Pleading ongoing conspiracy can affect statute of limitations defense claims which one or more of the yet unidentified "Doe" defendants might assert. In particular, Delaware computer shop beginnings were pled as time barred in the Mac Isaac motion to dismiss (in separate litigation) discussed in earlier Crabgrass posting. If Mac Isaac is judicially recognized in this new litigation as a Doe defendant being an ongoing part of this alleged encompassing conspiracy, that would generally be independent of any response Biden makes in the other Mac Isaac litigation or how that motion is decided. (There could be collateral estoppel assertions where if you don't know what that means don't worry.)
One can wonder, is Ziegler the main target, or is counsel aiming to find specific suspected "Doe" individuals with deeper pockets and/or greater culpability, to really make a point. Starting from discovery of Ziegler, Hunter's lawyers can peel back layers of the onion.
Reading the complaint from such possible perspectives might be helpful to others in understanding where this litigation may be going, beyond what it says at the outset.
Reading the complaint shows it mentions other persons besides Ziegler, but not as yet making them parties.
Paragraphs 18 and 19:
18. According to published reports, Defendant Ziegler claims to have obtained one copy of a hard drive from what he claims was Plaintiff’s “laptop” computer incDecember 2020 from Jack Maxey, a former co-host on Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast who has described himself publicly as “Hunter’s Laptop King.” In or around early 2021, Defendant Ziegler claims to have obtained another copy of a hard drive from what he claims to be Plaintiff’s “laptop” computer from an associate of Rudy Giuliani, the former New York mayor who previously represented former President Trump. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant Ziegler also illegally accessed, tampered with, manipulated and copied data belonging to Plaintiff by means of a “cloud” storage and file hosting service offered by MEGA NZ.
19. Plaintiff’s data appears to have been tampered with, manipulated, altered and damaged both before Defendants received it and after it was obtained by Defendants and they began illegally accessing and tampering with it themselves. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendants intentionally altered at least some of Plaintiff’s data and that they severely damaged Plaintiff’s data through sloppy and inept handling of the data, by disregarding forensically sound methods for data preservation and analysis, and by engaging generally in reckless, incompetent and malicious activities with respect to the data that have impaired the ability of Plaintiff and others to verify all of the data’s authenticity and to determine the precise extent of tampering, alteration and damage.
Par. 22 presents the crux of specifics alleged against Ziegler:
22. Defendant Ziegler has stated publicly that Defendants used Plaintiff’s data from what he calls Plaintiff’s “laptop” computer to create a voluminous report entitled Report on the Biden Laptop, which Defendants first published on or about October 19, 2022. In addition, in or around May 2022, Defendants used Plaintiff’s data from the claimed Plaintiff’s “laptop” computer to create what Defendant Ziegler has described as “an online searchable database of 128,000 emails found on the Biden Laptop.” Plaintiff has never authorized or consented to any access of his data by any Defendant (or anyone working with any Defendant) at any time or for any purpose. To the contrary, Plaintiff has notified Defendants that Defendants are not authorized to accessany of his data, that they should cease doing so, and that they should return any of Plaintiff’s data in their possession to Plaintiff immediately.
The complaint is limited to 14 pages, 52 paragraphs, much of which (par. 33 onward) are in the Claims for Relief section following factual assertions.
The laptop is never admitted by Biden to be his. He admits there is data which was his, but not asserting any actual device held by others was. He asserts the integrity of his data might differ from what Ziegler posted, alleging tampering either intentionally corrupting his data, and/or ineptly inadvertently doing so.
It is not alleged whether Biden reviewed anything Ziegler put online, nor if his recollection would allow him to authenticate or repudiate any particular detail of what Ziegler posted. Ambiguity is in his favor, so far. He is adamant he did not authorize Ziegler to have access to any of his data and requested it all be returned.
Starting with Ziegler likely was a tactical choice, with "Doe" defendants in mind as possibly more at fault. Ziegler might be viewed as one who could be turned.
Crabgrass has a feeling this single filing could grow in size and scope.
The "MarcoPolo" online package Ziegler is fronting for was put together by some kind of team, and the "Does" uncovered may prove an interesting bunch.
Ziegler, online per a YouTube item. There he is fairly smooth, low key.
Ziegler is unrelated to the IRS investigator/testifier, but is related to former Nixon official Ron Ziegler. His roots are in the St. Louis area, having graduated from St. Louis University [Jesuit] and started in DC as an intern for U.S. Rep. John Shimkus, R-Collinsville, IL. RawStory suggests he is a zealot, one the Biden defense team wants investigated.
He is the front person pushing this online trove of questionably obtained data.
As a young "Trump years intern" and recent college grad, a guess is somebody else's money is behind the thing Ziegler fronts. The deep pocket(s) should be learned in discovery during the course of litigation.
Ziegler's place in the widespread Republican custody pool of "laptop" data holders, that network, is likely the aim of his being the only named defendant, so far. Those who technically decrypted things, their funding, again, wlll likely be disclosed via discovery. It is a civil action, not criminal, yet if Ziegler takes the Fifth it might delay uncovering key actors. Somebody funded "Marco Polo." Missouri Republican politics has enough money around, while Trump intern status suggests others with deep pockets. Mike LIndall, for all we know so far could have been project angel.
While
gathering information and drafting the Navarro report, Ziegler worked
with a research team that reported to Giuliani, according to Giuliani
associate Michael Trimarco. A Long Island businessman with a background
in finance and tech, Trimarco told
far-right conspiracy theorist Ann Vandersteel in a recent video that he
had been helping Giuliani analyze the contents of Hunter Biden's laptop
in October 2020, and then hastily switched over to researching alleged
election fraud after the election.
The Westin hotel in Arlington, Virginia, served as the initial hub
for the teams collecting affidavits to support the legal challenges, Raw
Story has found. Those teams promoted a fount of specious claims that
would fuel the violent effort to prevent Congress from certifying the
election.[...] "All of this would have fallen apart on that side of the river had it
not been for [Trimarco] showing up and not just with a credit card, but
trying to provide some adult supervision," Byrne said. "He's a real
champion, and the MAGA crowd should know that when push came to shove,
this fellow came up out of nowhere and was very valuable in helping
corral all these forces and keep things from just spinning apart in the
early days."
[...] The team at the Westin "did have access to Garrett at the White
House, they did get tours, and they did work with Garrett extensively,"
Trimarco told Vandersteel. [...] Prior to the election, Ziegler said he
worked on reports touting "the Trump economic record" in sectors like
mining and manufacturing in swing states. Beginning around Nov. 15 —
roughly the same time Powell moved her team from the Westin to the
Tomotley Plantation — Ziegler said he and three other aides started
helping Navarro compile reports casting doubt on the outcome of the
election.
[...] In the tangled web of relationships among the operatives working to
overturn the election at the Westin, Tomotley and across the country,
Trimarco was responsible for making sure crucial information reached
Giuliani.
[...] Trimarco comes from a politically connected family in New York. His
involvement in politics long predates the effort to overturn the 2020
election. During a New York state court trial to decide a complaint
brought by Trimarco against his former business partners, witnesses
testified that Trimarco took part in a meeting with then-Rep. Steve
Israel, D-N.Y., in 2002 to discuss a venture that would theoretically
capture and store biometric data to properly identify passengers at Long
Island's MacArthur Airport. Trimarco's former partners accused him of
failing to talk about their business during the meeting and instead
promoting a business owned by his family.
[...] In 2018, Trimarco sued Dish Network scion Chase Ergen, and he was
represented by a New York City lawyer named Howard Kleinhendler.
Trimarco told Vandersteel that he was analyzing the contents of
Hunter Biden's laptop for Giuliani in October 2020. Kleinhendler allowed
him to come by his law office to print out pages from the device. The
effort to mine the laptop for information that could damage the Biden
campaign pivoted to generating baseless election fraud theories once it
became apparent Trump was going to lose.
Timarco. Kleinhendler. Tied then to Ziegler. Deep Pockets with Marco Polo ties?
It speaks for itself, and a Complaint copy is posted on Scribd. Whatever happened to the intent behind court rules saying a Complaint shall be a short, clear statement * * * ?
107 paragraphs. The signature page is p.22. Long winded? Readers can figure that out. Make sense out of where these plaintiffs are coming from.
As a separate thing - When defamation is at issue, I believe in reliance on precedence. In Bebo v. Delander, 632 NW 2d 732,739-40 (Minn.App. 2001). Judge Barry Anderson wrote the Court's opinion, without dissent, (and believed to have not been overturned or expanded upon since) stating:
Courts consider four factors when determining whether a statement is
one of fact or opinion: (1) the precision and specificity of the
statement; (2) the statement's verifiability; (3) the social and
literary context of the statement; and (4) the public context in which
the statement was made. Huyen v. Driscoll, 479 N.W.2d 76, 79 (Minn.App.1991),review denied (Minn. Feb. 10, 1992); Lund, 467 N.W.2d at 368-69.
Application of this test shows that appellant has failed to allege
actionable defamatory statements. The first two statements, "a—hole" and
"c—sucker" are pure vulgarity and have no basis in fact. The statements
are not precise, specific, verifiable, and they were made in the
context of truck deliveries at the Silgan loading docks. Although
offensive, the statements are clearly statements of opinion and do not
rise to the level of "especially shocking or egregious" conduct given
the context in which they were made.
The logic hangs together. Hence I make a statement of opinion, an opinion I truly believe many, many hold, whether written, otherwise communicated, or only held in mind.
Trump is an asshole.
Written in reliance upon judicial precedent. That clear statement of opinion does not
rise to the level of "especially shocking or egregious" conduct given
the context in which it is made. And, moreover, there is a vagueness to it.
And back to the opening link, there it is:
Count Three 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 1988 U.S. Const. Amend. I, XIV Minn. Const. art. I, §§ 3, 7 First Amendment Freedom of Speech – Vagueness Procedural Due Process – Vagueness
At paragraph 84, et seq.
While handled lightly to this point, getting serious, this lawsuit is aimed to convince a court that speech aimed at voter turnout suppression is protected speech, and cannot be penalized. My guess, the plaintiffs are Republicans.
On December 12, 2022, the CATO Institute and the Manhatten Institute
submitted an amicus brief to the United States Supreme Court to support
the Upper Midwest Law Center’s case regarding Governor Walz’s COVID-19
Pandemic lockdowns of small businesses. CATO and Manhatten Institutes
write that while the two groups have not always agreed on legal and
policy questions, they share the plaintiffs’ concern in this matter.
Both are interested in this case because of their shared concern for
robust civil rights protection under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
UMLC is appealing to the Supreme Court a portion of the Northland
case involving the claim for reimbursement for the loss of revenue based
on the “taking” or hijacking of their businesses during the lockdowns.
UMLC has argued that the share of financial reimbursement is valid
whether the Governor’s order was constitutional or not because the
government owes refunds when it commandeers property, even if done
lawfully.
Well, yeah, likely Republicans. Likely a bunch of - no, I won't say it. I will hold that opinion to myself. I do believe they actually believe in what they are doing. I see it as counterproductive to our being a good nation. Opinions can differ.
