The Tragedy of GM Closing

We are too proud of ourselves, as auto makers and as union men and women, to let General Motors have the last say about the closing of the Van Nuys plant. We have put much of our lives here, working more seriously and professionally than we are given credit for, often with mediocre engineering and management.

Our tragedy was that complacency and concessions prevailed over an aggressive strategy to confront and pressure GM over the decision to move production of Camaros and Firebirds to Canada. Instead of building GM’s electric car or other feasible alternatives, we will become the early casualties of Bush’s proposed North American Free Trade Agreement.

The departure of older industries, like auto making, is being joined by recent corporate runaways in aerospace (Lockheed), food processing (Oscar Meyer), financial services (Bank of America credit card operations), transportation (American Airlines reservation center) and warehousing (Sears catalogue).

As companies increasingly assign the role of consumer and spender--but not producer and wage earner--to this country and to the Los Angeles region, we allow business operations that are the bedrock of the economy, totaling tens of thousands of jobs, to disappear without a fight.

Some unions, like our United Auto Workers, are disarmed by philosophies of labor-management cooperation, based on the Japanese team concept. We are hampered by national contracts that accept an orderly shrinkage of plants and workers. Local public officials avoid confrontation with corporations for fear of being labeled “anti-business.”

Thus General Motors is praised for its donations to Rebuild L.A. while the Van Nuys closure wipes out the future gains of that effort.

MARK MASAOKA, unit chairman

JAKE FLUKERS, vice president

PETE BELTRAN, ex-president, United Auto Workers, Local 645, Van Nuys