Working time flexibility dispute at Delphi plant

Download article in original language : ES0101231FES.DOC

January 2001 saw an agreement over flexible working time arrangements at the Delphi Diesel Systems plant at St Cugat del Vallés in Spain, following a long-running dispute. A number of other Delphi factories have recently been involved in disputes as the US-based automobile components multinational plans to close plants and cut its workforce.

The US-based multinational Delphi Automotive Systems, which manufactures automobile components, has more than 180 factories worldwide, of which 59 are located in the European Union and 11 in Spain. In 2000, it had a total workforce of about 216,000 workers

Delphi is currently planning to close factories and reduce its workforce, which has caused several disputes in Spain in 2000 and early 2001. The four Delphi Packard automobile cable factories in Spain have suffered redundancies over the last year and strikes have been called in protest, and at least one plant is still threatened with closure. Furthermore, the Delphi Diesel Systems factory at St Cugat del Vallés, Barcelona, which manufactures injection pumps for diesel engines, was involved in a dispute from January 2000 to January 2001, which has now been resolved through a major reorganisation of working time.

Delphi Diesel Systems' new strategy

When Delphi bought the St Cugat facility from the UK-based Lucas over two years ago, it proposed to produce its new "common rail" injection pump there. This involved an investment of almost ESP 20 billion over the next few years, a major increase in production and possibly some increase in the workforce. However, the management foresaw that from 2002 the employees would have to work more days per year (for example, in 2003, the peak year, 289 days as against the current 224), which would have involved a reorganisation of working time, with flexible shifts, in order to operate six days a week. It also meant that almost the whole workforce would be obliged to work on several Saturdays a year, whereas this had previously been voluntary and paid separately. At the start of bargaining over the company's collective agreement for 2000, the management thought that the time had come to agree the change.

Workers' response

The negotiations during 2000 were difficult and the tension mounted, partly due to a division in the 23-member workers' committee- made up of nine representatives of the Popular Workers' Group (Colectivo Obrero Popular, COP), nine representatives of the Trade Union Confederation of Workers' Commissions (Comisiones Obreras, CC.OO) and five representatives of the General Workers' Confederation (Unión General de Trabajadores, UGT). However, CC.OO and UGT reached a preliminary agreement with the company in which they accepted the new reorganisation of work in exchange for 65 fewer hours of work a year (calculated on a weekly basis, this would have been equivalent to a 35-hour week), the maintenance of existing holidays, and a bonus of 10% of the basic wage in 2003.

COP, a small trade union dating from the Lucas era that is present in Delphi and some other local companies, obtained the greatest number of votes in the most recent elections of workers' committee representatives, although it lost its previous absolute majority on the committee. Its proposals, influenced by the radicalism of the small leftist groups which grew up in later period of the Franco regime and first years of democracy in the 1970s, were in total opposition to those of the other two unions.

Thus, when CC.OO and UGT, with a majority on the workers' committee, decided to accept the preliminary agreement agreed in October and to put it to a workforce referendum, COP organised a strong campaign of opposition and 65% of the workers voted against it on 9 November. COP, and with it most of the workers who rejected the agreement, maintained that working on Saturdays should be voluntary and paid as overtime. It also argued that the agreement involved continual changes of shift to meet the needs of the company, which would interfere too greatly in the family and social life of the workers.

Redundancies planned

The reaction of the company to the rejection of the deal was radical. It stated that if there was no reorganisation of working time, it would not be possible to respond to the requirements of its customers over the next few years. If the reorganisation was not possible in Spain, another location would be found for the new investment. The St Cugat factory then went into serious decline. In November 2000, management presented an application to the labour authorities to make 788 of the 1,125 workers (70% of the total) redundant over three years. To the surprise of many observers, the labour authorities authorised the redundancies. After the authorisation, the workers' committee resolved its internal differences and organised strikes and demonstrations in November 2000 and January 2001.

Back to flexible working time

CC.OO and UGT tried again to persuade the St Cugat workers of the validity of their proposal, armed with additional arguments: in exchange for working on some Saturdays the continued existence of the factory would be guaranteed, the dismissal of most of the workforce would be avoided and new staff would be recruited. For COP, the redundancy procedure was merely a form of blackmail to persuade the workers to accept flexibility. A new referendum was held on 16 January amid a certain tension but with a very high level of participation: 66% of the workforce approved the proposal, 31% continued to reject it, and 3% abstained. On 17 January, work at the factory returned to normal.

Delphi's human resources managers and other executives had stated many times that the specific terms of the more flexible working time arrangements would be negotiated with the workers' committee and that, if they were accepted, the company would guarantee the new investments. These negotiations may lead to a new dispute, but this remains to be seen.

The St Cugat dispute not only involved the population of this small town of 60,000 inhabitants, but also the local government. After urging the management of the company to continue negotiating, it explicitly asked the workers to reconsider their rejection of greater flexibility.

Commentary

The Delphi dispute highlights one of the key questions in industrial relations at present: flexible working time. In many companies, flexibility is being introduced or increased through new shifts, new timetables, and variable timetables according to the time of year. In some cases, this flexibility affects only temporary or newly-recruited workers, and in others it affects the whole workforce. Companies want a free hand to meet competition by adjusting the rate of production.

This new flexibility, which in the short term may save jobs, involves the risk of seriously interfering in the life of the workers involving by subordinating their time to the needs of the companies. It is one thing always to work night shifts, for example, but quite another if one's shift is continually changed or one is put on the night shift after years on the day shift.

Finally, the continued existence of the St Cugat plant is not completely guaranteed. In fact, competition is so strong in the sector that the possibility of failure cannot be ruled out. It is therefore surprising that the labour authorities were so willing to accept a redundancy procedure affecting 70% of the workforce, which was in fact a proposal for closure. (Fausto Miguélez, QUIT-UAB)