MSUMUN XVI
March 18th - March 20th
THE TREATY OF DETROIT:
UNITED AUTO WORKERS
Chair: Ramon Feliu
Crisis Director: Natalie Orcutt
Jon-Michael Burgess, Emma Fedorchuk, Kade Katrak, Ricky Kent, William Ross
Murphy.
Michigan State University Model United Nations XVI
Greetings Delegates,
Welcome to MSUMUN XVI!
My name is Natalie Orcutt and I am the Crisis Director for The UAW on our Treaty of
Detroit Joint Crisis committee this year. I hope you guys can have as much in every session
that we’ve had throughout the year preparing for the conference!
I am a sophomore at Michigan State studying Experience Architecture with a Minor in
Graphic Design/Computer Science. I am originally from Minneapolis, Minnesota so the
Treaty of Detroit has definitely been a new topic for me being that I’m not actually from
Michigan, however I have really enjoyed learning about it and I hope you as delegates get a
lot out of the experience of learning more about this lovely state. Other than being involved
in MSUMUN I am also a campus tour guide for prospective high school students and am
involved in Greek life. I am a HUGE Minnesota Vikings fan (#SKOLVIKES) and my love of
sports is one of the reasons I am currently a Student -Athlete Tutor here at Michigan State.
I look forward to seeing each of you in committee and wish you luck in the future
negotiations! The UAW has a very large platform of issues to discuss throughout
committee, only a few of which are directly referenced in the background guide, however,
you never know what my crisis staff might come at you with. If you have any questions
about research or your position or anything please feel free to contact our committee.
Thank you and see you all soon,
Natalie Orcutt
UAW
Crisis Director
[email protected]
MSUMUN XVI
2
Rules
Article I: General Rules
Delegates are expected to adhere to all regular MSUMUN rules and standards of decorum
except as otherwise outlined in the MSUMUN Coalition Rules of Procedure.
In the event of a dispute over the Rules of Procedure, either those of MSUMUN generally or
Committee specifically, the MSUMUN Secretary General will be the ultimate authority of
appeal.
Article II: Meetings
All Committee meetings shall be attended by all specified members of the Committee,
unless otherwise authorized by the MSUMUN Secretariat.
Quorum for discussion and voting will always be __ Committee members, unless otherwise
authorized by the Secretariat of MSUMUN
Unless otherwise indicated by the Secretariat or Committee staff, all meetings of the
Committee will be held in the specified Committee chambers.
Article III: Agenda
Committee members are encouraged to confine their debate to items outlined in the
background guide, though they may discuss other issues if they determine them to be
relevant.
Committee member may make a motion to restrict debate to one topic. If this motion
passes, debate shall be limited to the topic specified until such time as another motion is
made to either change the topic under consideration or return to general debate.
If at any point an imminent crisis should arise, the Committee Chair shall immediately
declare it as such and limit all debate to the topic of said crisis, upon conclusion of the
crisis, debate may or may not return to the previous topic.
Article IV: Conduct of Business
Committee proceedings shall be conducted in the form of a permanent Moderated Caucus
until such a time that a member of the Caucus makes a motion.
Committee may motion at any time for either a Roundtable or a Straw Poll. A Roundtable
consists of the Chair recognizing each Committee member in turn to speak for a specified
amount of time on a specific topic or proposal. A Straw Poll consists of Committee members
giving their probable vote on a specific proposal.
MSUMUN XVI
3
Committee members may motion at any time to be allowed to introduce intelligence or
other garnered information that they feel may be of relevance to the Committee’s
proceedings. The Chair may also invite nations to introduce intelligence. In either case, the
speaking time for each introduction must be specified in advance.
From time to time, representatives of parties to a crisis who are not necessarily on the
Committee may become available to meet with the Committee members. If this should
happen, the Chair will announce their availability and invite them to address the
Committee. At the conclusion of a representative’s presentation, if they are available to
answer questions, the Chair shall call upon members until such time as either there are no
more questions or the representative must depart. Upon a representative’s departure,
debate may or may not return to the previous topic.
Article V: Types of Proposals
Directive. A directive requires only one sponsor, though it may have more. The amount of
required signatories is up to the discretion of the Chair. A Committee member need only
move to introduce a directive in order for it to be considered by the entire Committee.
Press Releases. A press release is usually passed in lieu of a directive if doing so is more
likely to make the Committees intentions clear. A press release is written either in the form
of a directive or an announcement; it requires the same amount of sponsors and
signatories as a directive.
A communique is a formal invitation to an outside actor to arrive to committee to discuss
or provide more in-depth information about a situation. It requires the same amount of
sponsors and signatories as a directive.
Upon introduction, a directive or press release is discussed non-exclusively along with all
other committee business.
Article VI: Voting
Votes may be entered as Affirm, Deny, or Abstention.
Votes on non-substantive proposals or procedural matters will be passed by the
affirmation vote of a simple majority of Committee members. Abstentions are allowed on
non-substantive proposals, but not procedural matters.
Votes on substantive matters will be passed by the affirm vote of a simple majority of
Committee members.
MSUMUN XVI
4
Gentlemen,
We are faced with an unprecedented opportunity to secure a better life and
more stable future for every members United Auto Workers. For years we have been
forced to deal with one company at a time and settle for short term agreements. Our
wildcat strikes have successfully put pressure on the industry and we have brought
the Ford, General Motors and Chrysler to the table at one time. This agreement will
set standards for American workers in the decades to come. It is up to us to
champion the blue collar way of life and propel the middle class forward. We will not
accept simple wage increases like we are taking a cheap bribe. The UAW must exert
its cultural, economic and political strength to expand what it means to be an
American worker. It is time for the companies and their shareholders to make a long
term commitment to the worker. Our goals are simple; Expand healthcare, establish
a pension agreement, and take control of our own workplace. Are you with me?
Sincerely,
Walter Reuther
Post World War II Economy
After World War II the United States economy was booming. America was the only country
that was heavily involved with the war that had very little damage on the home front.
Europe and Japan had suffered billions of dollars in damages to their infrastructure. It is
estimated that Europe had lost of 70% of its industrial capacity during the war. Their
economies were destroyed and they were incapable of competing with American
companies. The Marshall plan pumped $12 billion to Europe to help rebuild. The effort
created a huge demand of American made goods and factories began to take off. To further
bolster exports the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) agreement was signed,
thus decreasing tariffs and reducing trade barriers to the signing countries. During this
time the economy was at full employment and the Dollar was extremely strong.
The automakers were flourishing at this time because their factories had been transitioned
back to making cars and trucks. Automobiles reached a high demand with many people
coming home from the war. The GI Bill passed in 1944 helped veterans go to school, get
extremely low interest loans to buy homes, farms, start businesses, etc. This attributed to
the growing middle class that demanded more and more cars from the Detroit automakers.
The increase in highways and interstates between the cities and the suburbs created a need
for people to have automobiles. At the time, the Big Three Automakers were some of the
largest, if not the largest companies in the world. They had widespread influence
branching throughout the economy government and American culture. Thousands of
workers depended on them for wages and millions saw their vehicles as a symbol of
freedom and the promised American dream.
MSUMUN XVI
5
The auto industry helped support many sectors of the economy. Countless part suppliers
sold lights, tires, motors and other components to the big three. Insurance companies grew
to accommodate the demand of people who wanted to insure their new cars. Gas, oil, and
steel companies worked tirelessly to quench the massive auto factories thirst for resources.
The Auto industry was the foundation that held up the world’s largest economy.
Status of the Big Three
At this time the U.S. automotive industry was dominant. Globally the United States
manufactured 80% of the world’s automobiles. Aside from that, the Big Three faced
virtually no domestic competitors, and with a great demand for automobiles post-WWII
there was plenty room for the Big Three to grow. With all three firms headquartered in
southeast Michigan, Americans from all over poured into Michigan seeking work.
The Big three was also close with the federal government, because of their role producing
weapons and vehicles for the military in World War II. In fact, Several executives in each
company would go on to serve on presidential cabinets and consultants to the Eisenhower
and Kennedy administrations.
General Motors was the largest of the big three automakers. GM held 41 percent of the
automobile market in 1941. During World War II GM ranked 1st among US corporations in
wartime production contracts.
Ford struggled under the faltering leadership of Henry Ford. In his old age he was unable to
adapt to rapidly changing circumstances in the industry. Henry was eventually forced to
hand the company over to his grandson Henry Ford II in 1945. When Henry II took over,
the company was losing nine million dollars a month.
Walter Chrysler died in 1940, the same year Chrysler got a contract to build tanks for the
military. During World War II the Chrysler Corporation’s facilities were strictly devoted to
the production of military vehicles. Due to the military contracts Chrysler ranked 8th among
United States corporations in value. After the war, Chrysler continued a lot of
manufacturing for the US Military in the form of missile technology.
Negotiating Tactics of the Big Three
Each big company had a slightly different relationship with the UAW. When initiating a new
negotiation the union would select one of the companies to target. Typically they would
choose the company who was most vulnerable at that time.
GM’s executives were wanted to maintain stability within the UAW’s leadership and
general members. They are the biggest company with factories all over the country. If there
was instability within the union it could lead to more unpredictable strikes. GM had the
most complex and extensive supply line, but the least control over individual plants. A rash
of wildcat strikes could cost the company millions. In order to ensure that this didn’t
MSUMUN XVI
6
happen, the company was very generous with frequent wage increases, because these were
extremely popular with the rank and file of the union. However more progressive leaders
in the UAW saw the benefit of more long terms benefits such as the healthcare and
pensions. GM did not support UAW leaders who pushed for these programs and would try
to turn their employees against them. GM had the most employees and feared that long
term benefit guarantees would not be financially viable. Whenever the union started bring
up pensions or healthcare the company would much rather offer wage increases. However
GM has many contacts within the federal government, if the company was forced to provide
healthcare or pensions government tax breaks would make it much more financially viable.
Ford had an extremely large work force as well, but their workers were concentrated in a
few major facilities and the company had much more control. The River Rouge facility in
Dearborn Michigan had thousands of workers, and ford controlled every aspect of
production in that place. Raw materials went in one end and cars rolled out the other.
Through the process of vertical integration the company became much less reliant on
outside suppliers and contractors. Just like the supply chain, Ford tried to control their
workforce. The company constantly worked to improve its image amongst the workforce to
prevent wild cat strikes. In many cases Ford management would offer new benefits before
negotiations even begin with the union. If the Union asks for more than was initially
offered, Ford would paint the unionists as greed, unreasonable and counterproductive.
Chrysler was the smallest company, and the most reliant on military contracts. The UAW
was extremely aggressive when striking against Chrysler, because the smaller company
could only lose productivity for so long before they gave in. However the smaller company
was not able to offer the same lucrative deals as the big three. Especially when government
contracts were not available. In the late 1940’s war time spending was slowing down. This
left Chrysler in a position where they needed to expand their business and find new stable
sources of income.
MSUMUN XVI
7
The State of the UAW
The UAW was regarded as a prominent force in the automaker's market and the best
known and documented labor union since its creation. During the 20th century there were
several dozens of labor unions founded that would later disband because of their lack of
power, but the UAW would prevail and become bigger and stronger. 180 new labor unions
were founded in 1950 alone. In 1935 the UAW was the same size as the Building Service
Employees and the Fire Fighters; by 1943 it was the largest American union. By 1950, it
had reached one million members.
As an international symbol of mass production and high wages, Detroit had attracted
armies of upwardly mobile job-seekers, a disproportionate share of the world's skilled
metal workers, and a large number of political activists. The enormous power of the area's
largest employers also set Detroit apart from other industrial centers in the Midwest and
elsewhere. A large percentage of the city's activists had had prior union experiences in
Britain, Germany, or the U.S., were committed to the labor movement, and were influenced
by or members of socialist or communist political groups. This made Detroit the setting for
the massive labor organizations that dealt with the even bigger automakers.
The wartime economy was disastrous for the American worker. They worked longer hours
and were compelled by patriotism to not demand improved conditions. Yet, the massive
shifts on production and lack of increase in compensation did not crumble the UAW.
Between 1939 and 1941 the number of GM UAW locals doubled and union membership
tripled. In the following years, the fates of the UAW and the Big Three firms were closely
intertwined. Roosevelt Administration's management of war mobilization favored big
business over small business in awarding contracts for military equipment and supplies,
which targeted, by default, union members. Government made a vigorous anti-union policy
virtually impossible for large and visible corporations. The UAW leadership took advantage
of this and seized the opportunity for The Treaty of Detroit.
The UAW grew extremely important during World War II due to the necessity of Detroit for
mass production of war vehicles. Yet, during the war, UAW members were patriots that had
no room for pay raises or additional benefits. By the end of the war, half of GM’s and
Chrysler’s workers were part of the UAW. These companies had a part in more than just
auto parts, as the UAW expanded to other metal workers. As one author states: “During the
war it enlisted many aircraft and farm machinery workers, plant guards, and other nonauto industry workers. After 1946, it turned more aggressively to other occupations. Only
6% of UAW members worked outside the auto industry in 1940. By the late 1940s, the
proportion of non-auto workers was twice as great, numbering more than 100,000.”
Because UAW was mainly a Midwest based union, they had great political power in those
states. Union leaders became prominent in Democratic affairs and sponsored candidates.
This made sense because politicians now wanted to gain the support of such a huge voter
base. UAW leaders sought a private welfare system that soon overshadowed the American
welfare system and became a model for the big business sector of American companies.
MSUMUN XVI
8
The UAW was a force to be reckoned with by the automakers. Their political, economic and
most importantly social standing, is why they are the ones to negotiate such a huge deal
that will shape the future of American labor.
Negotiating Tactics of UAW
Early UAW Tactics
When the UAW was initially formed, its main plans included “organizing” each of the main
auto industry leaders in Detroit including Ford, General Motors and Chrysler. Organizing
these industry workers meant that the corporation the workers belonged to would have to
recognize the UAW as the union of their company. This requires the companies to hire and
fire workers through the guidelines agreed upon with the union. In the early days of the
United Auto Workers, this was extremely difficult as there were several instances of
violence throughout the 1930s aimed at union leaders handing out union handbills or other
propaganda. Workers could be fired if they were suspected to be affiliated with the union
and despite the large amount of press circulating the formation of the UAW, the beginnings
of the UAW are very bloodstained. There were often differences between local UAW
chapters and the goals of the national organization. It was difficult for the national leaders
to balance the specific demands of each individual chapter, but they focused on wage
increases, shorter working days and benefits for workers.
UAW Tactics and Relationship with Ford
Henry Ford Senior had great difficulty accepting most, if not all union demands and he
remained involved in the company even after his resignation until his death in 1947. The
UAW had great difficulty gaining a foothold in Ford, with the “Battle of the Overpass” in
1937 where Walter Ruether and other UAW supporters marched to the gates of the Rouge
River Ford plant to pass out union handbills to workers, when they were brutally attacked
by anti-union Ford workers, 60 people were injured including many women supporters
and 207 handbillers were arrested by police. However, in 1939, Ford was found violating
the National Labor Relations Act and had to reach some kind of solution with the UAW once
it was formally organized. The 1941 negotiations with Ford were probably the most
generous in the history of industrial relations, Ford conceded to most of the UAW demands
and despite the wishes of Henry Ford, Edsel Ford gladly signed them. These negotiations
mainly focused on wages, and paid back the wages of 4,000 workers wrongly fired for
suspected Union involvement. They also promised to match the highest wages of the
industry. In 1948 the UAW directed their attention on large negotiations with Ford once,
again, however the topic of these being pension plans. Worker pensions and worker
benefits including health care continued to be a major movement in the UAW in coming
years.
UAW Tactics and Relationship with Chrysler
UAW and Chrysler relationships began with the massive sit-down strikes at the Flint
Chrysler plant 1937 which only came to an end after a wage increase. The UAW had several
other negotiations with Chrysler often mimicking demands they gave to other members of
the Big Three. That being said, Chrysler was the automaker most heavily reliant on
MSUMUN XVI
9
government and military contracts. In the late 1940’s their efforts concentrated on
attaining pensions for Chrysler workers. A $100 a month pension plan including Social
Security was the ultimate goal.
UAW Relations with GM
In an effort to be the single bargaining partner of GM, the UAW staged a sit-down strike in
1936 in Flint, much like the later strike of Chrysler. The strike ended very violently after
several days and both workers and police were injured in the scuffle, and eventually the
Michigan National Guard was called in to surround the factory. Following the strike was the
first Union contract in the history of the auto industry, it aimed at improved job conditions
and job security, as well as recognizing the UAW’s organization within GM. Later in 1949,
the UAW’s goals change to raise wages at GM in proportion to worker productivity and the
cost of living index. Going throughout 1949-1950 UAW also had the aims of wanting
pension plans similar to those proposals of Chrysler and Ford, however many workers
wanted these specific pensions to exclude Social Security and be based on the number of
years one had worked for the company.
Timeline of Negotiations
Events:
1935 - UAW Formed
1935 – Sit down strikes
1936 – Sit down strikes
1937: UAW bargaining union security, grievance procedures, seniority
1939: UAW negotiates overtime pay
1940: UAW negotiates vacation pay
1941: UAW organizes Ford
1941: UAW war policy department
1941: UAW bargains Union shop
1942: Walter Reuther negotiates turning unions into “Arsenals for Democracy”
1942: UAW War Policy Division: Women’s bureau
1942: UAW negotiates improved call in pay
1945: Start of 113 day GM strike and new UAW strategy
1946: Unions initiate anti-communism measures
1946: UAW bargaining: dues check off
1946: UAW fair practices and anti-discrimination dept.
1948: UAW bargaining cost of living escalator
1949: U.S. recession
First Negotiation or “First Round” (1946)
Following a strike of 320,000 GM workers on Nov. 21, 1945, workers demanded a 30%
wage increase and a pledge from GM not to raise car prices,
Strike lasted 113 days
United Electrical Workers, United Steel Workers and rubber workers all agreed to 18 cent
wage increase with the Auto Industry. When they agreed it forced the UAW to follow.
MSUMUN XVI
10
“Second Round” (1947)
Contract GM was forced to sign included a
‘cost of living allowance’ or COLA, which
based workers’ wages on the cost-of-living
index from the Bureau of Labor
“Third Round”
Chrysler Corporation agreed to a 13 cent
per hour wage increase
“Fourth Round”
Resulted in the Treaty of Detroit
Treaty of Detroit Negotiation Topics:
Pensions:
A pension is a regular payment made to a retiree from investment funds created when they
were working. These funds can come from the retiree, the employer, or a combination of
the two. There are two types of pension plans: defined benefit plans and defined
contribution plans. In a defined benefit plan, the employer agrees to pay a predetermined
monthly benefit calculated with a formula that usually includes age, length of service, and
earnings history. Defined benefit plans are typically fully-funded by the employer. In a
defined contribution plan, contributions are paid into an individual account by the
employer, employee, or both. If the employee is paying into the plan, they typically do so
through the deferral of some part of their wages or salary, which the employer may then
match. The money in the plan is then invested, and any returns on the investment,
regardless of whether they are positive or negative, are credited to the account.
In the years leading up to the Treaty of Detroit, pensions were of increasing importance to
UAW officials. Following the war, Social Security benefits were around $30 a month -- not
enough in the eyes of Walter Reuther and other UAW officials, especially when post-WWII
inflation was taken into account. Reuther felt that workers deserved a lifelong pension and
it was the employer’s responsibility to provide it.
Historically, however, there was little precedent for employer-funded pensions. In 1940,
only 15 percent of all private-sector workers were covered by some type of pension plan.
Employers, the “Big Three” included, felt that the cost of providing retirement benefits for
all workers would be too great. Reuther cited the fact that some Big Three executives were
set to get pensions of $25,000 a year upon retirement, trying to make the point that $1,200
a year for normal employees should not burden the company. His opponents, on the other
hand, raised the (valid) argument that two or three pensions at $25,000 a year was still
under $100,000 a year -- not a huge financial concern for the Big Three. There were around
100,000 members of the UAW, however, and giving each a pension of $1,200 could be up to
$1,200,000,000 (a number that approached the welfare budget of the entire federal
MSUMUN XVI
11
government). A pension plan of this scope had never been seen before and critics argued
that it could be unsustainable, especially if it were funded entirely by the employer as
Reuther and the UAW wanted.
The idea of a pension had been introduced in the auto industry prior to the Fourth Round
of bargaining. In 1947, Ford had given unionized workers a choice -- they could either have
a 7 cent raise and the creation of a pension plan, or a straight wage increase of 15 cents and
six paid holidays. Reuther’s and other UAW officials urged workers to vote for the pension
plan, saying that employers would take its failure as a sign that a pension plan was
unnecessary. But despite the opinion of union leadership, the locals overwhelmingly voted
for the straight wage increase instead. Going into the Fourth Round, Reuther was
determined to get the pension plan through.
Cost of Living Adjustments:
One reason for the apparently cyclical strikes which the UAW and other labor institutions
tend to inflict upon big business is that wages negotiated during each successive strike
steadily become devalued by inflation. Inflation is the rise in the price of the same basket of
goods over time. During periods of sustained economic growth, increased demand for
goods can drive up the price level. In order to compensate for the increased cost of
household goods needed to survive, workers require higher wages. Since companies,
especially large companies are often hesitant to increase wage rates this can lead unions to
go on strike in order to compel these higher wages. Cost of living adjustments (COLA) are
increases in the wages paid over time, which can be used to automatically adjust for
inflation.
The second round of negotiations resulted in a two year contract between General Motors
and the UAW featuring a first of its kind automatic cost of living adjustment for worker’s
wages tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) which is calculated by the Federal Bureau of
Labor Statistics. The CPI takes a basket of goods commonly purchased by working families
and calculates the change in the price of that basket of goods since the baseline year. The
agreement stipulated that each fiscal quarter wages would be adjusted by one cent per
hour for every 1.14 point increase or decrease in the Consumer Price Index, but that wages
could not decrease more than 4 cents an hour. In the absence of a new agreement this will
lapse in April of 1950. General Motors and the UAW also agreed to an annual increase of
wages 3 cents per hour over the two year period based on predicted increases in the
productivity of workers of about 2 percent per year. This increase was not similarly tied to
an outside index. Because COLA wage adjustments are tied to an index, they may result in
ballooning obligations over time if incorporated into a permanent or long-term deal.
Health Care Benefits:
Before 1950, access to company health care was very limited. Most workers were
responsible for providing their own health care. Injuries on the job were common and if
they occurred, it would fall upon the person to pay for it. Healthcare costs were on the rise
and injured workers would lose their income until they were healthy enough to work. Only
the higher ups in the company would receive employee health care. It wasn’t until Walter
Reuther came into power at the UAW that the idea of company health care was prevalent.
MSUMUN XVI
12
Throughout most of the UAW’s history their negotiating positions were one dimensional.
Most new contracts were focused on increasing wages. The average worker did not
consider the long term benefits of having health care coverage or a retirement plan, and
auto executives were reluctant to offer such a long term financial commitment to
thousands of workers.
Under Reuther’s leadership the union brought long term health coverage to the forefront.
Healthcare costs were rising
Production Schedule and Lay Off Policy:
The dreaded layoff was the bane of the UAW prior to 1950. When the automakers prepared
to change a factory from one product to another, they were forced to stop production and
retool the factory. This process could take months as new equipment and factory layout
was installed. Before the retool, most companies rapidly ramped up production for a few
weeks and then abruptly laid off all of the workers while they re-tooled the facility.
Workers were rarely given advanced notice of the layoffs and regularly had to wait months
before being hired back to the newly remodeled factory. This was a serious issue for young
and minority factory workers. They were often paid less than the average worker was, they
were the first to be laid off, and they rarely had enough savings to live comfortably through
a production slowdown. Some workers would buy a new car or house, only to find out that
they would be out of work for the next 2-5 months. The lack of transparency added stress
and animosity to the workplace. This is not a key issue for most UAW members, but it is
considered a vital issue for retaining young and minority members.
In the upcoming negotiations the UAW will request that all production schedules be
released at least 2 years in advance, with that lay-off duration and size being negotiated in
advance with the UAW. Their goal is for union workers to be able to plan around layoffs, for
some lower income workers to receive transfers to different plants during lay-offs, and for
lay-offs to be a short as possible.
The Big Three Automakers want to retain autonomy over their production schedule. They
view it as crucial to be able to adjust production to market changes and they do not want
their competitors to know about production strategies in advanced. For example, poor
sales numbers of a new model or a sudden increase in steel prices might call for a
slowdown in production. The automakers want to be able to make those adjustments as
necessary.
MSUMUN XVI
13
Character Bios:
Big Three Characters
General Motors
Chairman of the Board - Alfred P. Sloan
Starting his education at the Brooklyn polytechnic institute but later transferring to MIT
Sloan graduated with a degree in electrical engineering. After college, he became president
of Hyatt Roller Bearing Company, which in 1916 merged into United Automotive Company
and soon after became part of General Motors Corporation. He became Chairman of the
board in 1937. Alfred P. Sloan was an extremely profit driven, planner, manager and
automotive giant. He was against the unions but also did not agree with Ford’s violent
tactics, and preferred spying on workers instead. Sloan’s general goal in the committee is to
maximize profit in any way possible and to deal with the unions in a way that would hurt
his company the least in the eyes of the public and in the pockets of the shareholders
Chief Executive Officer - Charles E. Wilson
Wilson was born in Ohio and received a degree in electrical engineering from Carnegie
Mellon University in 1909. After graduation, he worked at Westinghouse Electric Company
in Pittsburgh. During this time Wilson married Jessie Ann Curtis, they had five kids. Wilson
started as a chief engineer and sales manager, but worked his way to become President by
1941. During WW2 Wilson was the head of GM’s colossal defense production effort. The
CEO is responsible for everyday decision making to keep the company running as
efficiently as possible. His goal in committee is to make sure that the company will
continue to run in the most profitable way possible regardless of workers strikes and
threats to unionize.
Chief Operations Officer - Curtis H. Harlow
Curtis Harlow studied accounting at Ferris State College in Big Rapids Michigan. Harlow
joined General Motors as a bookkeeper for the AC Spark Plug Company and a year later was
promoted to comptroller (a financial executive). Even though Harlow was formally
educated in accounting, he was extremely knowledgeable in engineering, production,
styling, and salesmanship, making him an extremely well rounded executive. Harlow’s
goals in committee are to manage client accounts, worker efficiency, and overall growth of
the company. Harlow would be ensuring clients. That nothing is wrong. But using most of
his energy to try to work out a deal with the workers that most people are happy with and
will allow the most growth for the company.
Chief Financial Officer - Albert Bradley
Bradley worked extensively with Donaldson Brown over the years to develop the financial
operations of GM. While on the Board of Directors, he served in nearly all important policy
groups including finance, engineering, marketing, personnel and overseas. Given this, he
MSUMUN XVI
14
holds influence in many aspects of the company. His work in finance makes him one of the
preeminent financial experts in the room and a strong source for the costs of negotiations.
A CFO’s job is to keep track of the finances and make sure money is being spent in an
efficient manner. His goals in committee is to be responsible of the company's finances and
monitor the profits and costs of the company.
Chief of Internal Affairs - Donaldson Brown
After becoming Vice President in charge of finance in 1921, Brown guided financial
decisions over the decades. He was influential in decentralizing operations and yet
coordinating control from a central authority. He had a great amount of power over dealer
and employee relations, working with negotiators to benefit GM as much as possible by
minimizing costs to the company. Given a strong background in building the financial
operations of the corporation, he had significant influence over what actions made the
most sense monetarily. The Chief of Internal affairs job requires him to make sure relations
with plant managers, laborers, etc. all are running smoothly, when things go south it is his
job to work to solve the issues. His goals in committee is to ensure the company is being
responsible and stays updated with the employees.
Ford Motor Company
Chairman of the Board - Arjay Miller
Arjay Miller was hired along with nine other U.S. Army Air force veterans in 1946. Born to
a Nebraska farmer in 1915, he graduated from UCLA with highest honors in 1937 and went
to graduate school at the University of California Berkeley. He was considering pursuing a
PhD but decided to join his fellow veterans in working for Ford. It has paid off as he has
been one of the most successful and finds himself as Chairman of the board. The Chairman
of the Board is primarily focused on the profits of the company and ensuring shareholders
are happy with the company. He would communicate with shareholders for opinions and
work to make the company look good in the public eyes. His goals in committee is to be
sure shareholders are happy with the company and profits continue.
Chief Executive Officer - Ernest Breech:
Ernest Breech was 49 years of age when he was recruited by Henry Ford II to help turn the
company around from losing 10 million dollars a month. Ernest had previously held titles
of Assistant General Treasurer of General Motors, President of North American Aviation,
and President of Bendix Aviation (both affiliates of GM). He was known as a powerhouse in
the industry, capable of getting things done extremely well in a timely fashion. Breech was
a very loud, profane man who intimidated many of his peers, thus allowing him to make
tough decisions that lead the company to great profits. He was also extremely competitive
and had unparalleled strategy skills. Breech’s main goals included making the greatest
profits for the company.
Chief Operations Officer - Robert McNamara:
Robert McNamara graduated from University of California Berkeley, and then later
graduated with a master’s degree from Harvard University. He taught at Harvard at age 24
being the youngest assistant professor.. After the war, he was recruited to Ford Motor Co.
MSUMUN XVI
15
as one of the “Whiz Kids” that helped attribute to getting Ford out of its financial
disaster. McNamara was extensively concerned with his social responsibility by focusing
on safety in automobiles, rather than company profits. McNamara’s focus is to ensure the
company held financially responsible and functions in an efficient manner.
Chief Financial Officer - J. Edward Lundy
Edward Lundy was hired along with nine other U.S. veterans in 1946. An ambitious man,
he has quickly worked his way up the corporate ladder. He was born in Iowa in 1915 and
has not married. As the CFO, Lundy’s goal is to ensure that Ford makes financial
responsible decisions. He also is always looking for young talent with potential to be
executives in the future. His goals in committee is to be responsible of the company's
finances.
Chief of Internal Affairs - John Bugas
John Bugas was second in command as Vice President of Internal Affairs at Ford under
Henry Ford II. Bugas was more than just an automobile man. Before Ford, Bugas was head
of Detroit’s FBI office where he brought down two Nazi spy rings and captured public
enemy number one Tom Robinson at gunpoint. An energetic and ambitious man, Bugas
played a large role in revitalizing Ford in its transition from military manufacturing to
peacetime production. Bugas’ legendary status at the FBI and Ford made some describe
him as a “real life John Wayne.” As Chief of Internal Affairs, he is responsible for the
relationship between management and workers. His goals in committee is to make sure
that management and employees work together well, to ensure that the company continues
to profit.
Chrysler
Chairman of the Board - K.T. Keller
K.T. Keller was once an autocratic engineer that Chrysler recruited from GM in 1926 to
become VP. By 1935, he was President of Chrysler. Under this title, Keller helped guide
Chrysler through WWII, during which he accepted many wartime contracts from the U.S.
government, which involved building tanks, guns, and engines for planes. Described as the
“heir” to Walter Chrysler in terms of rigidity, toughness, and lack of sympathy, Keller was
firm in negotiations with the UAW and was part of the post-war labor struggle that
witnessed numerous strikes. Keller led the company in a fiscally conservative style that
was slow to update car style. This caused problems in growth for Chrysler. He served as
President until 1950, when he stepped down to become chairman of the board before he
retired in 1956. As chairman, he is responsible to shareholders and public opinion, he
wants to ensure that the company looks as good as it can.
Chief Executive Officer - Lester Lum “Tex” Colbert
Tex Colbert was the son of a Texas cotton trader and practiced that trade throughout his
teenage years. He attended the University of Texas and graduated from Harvard Law
MSUMUN XVI
16
School in 1929. He was hired by as a law clerk by a top New York City law firm, but was
soon transferred to Detroit to be Chrysler’s resident attorney. Colbert worked hard to learn
about the auto industry and rose quickly through the ranks of Chrysler; becoming the
president of the Dodge division in 1945 and vice president of Chrysler in 1949, before
finally becoming president in 1950. As CEO he acts quickly on day to day problems that
arise, his goals for committee is to make sure that anything that goes on is in the best
interest to the success of the company in the present and the future.
Chief Operations Officer - William C. Newberg
William Newberg was born in Seattle in 1910. He graduated from University of Washington
with a degree in mechanical engineering and went on to get a master’s degree in
automotive engineering from the Chrysler Institute of Engineering. Newberg was hired to
Chrysler and held various engineering positions before moving into management. He is
good friends with Tex Colbert, and considered by many to be his heir apparent. As the COO,
Newberg will want the committee to ensure that manufacturing efficiency is maximized.
His goals in committee is to encourage the companies to be efficient and make sure that no
resource is going to waste.
Chief Financial Officer - Byron C. Foy
Byron Cecil Foy married into the Chrysler family. He had little to no biographical
background before he married into the Chrysler family. Byron was a longtime executive
during WWII. He was originally from Texas and very driven and successful at Chrysler. His
wife, Thelma Chrysler Foy, brought him into the spotlight by helping him become an
executive in Chrysler administration. For years after their marriage Thelma, who was the
biggest of the Detroit socialites, led the social scene in Detroit. After her death, in 1957 of
leukemia, he fell out of the public spotlight but continued to work at Chrysler until his
death. As CFO his main focus is to be sure that the company is financially responsible and
does not waste money. In committee, he should be in charge of the finances and do what he
can to keep the company financially in the black.
Chief of Internal Affairs - Edgar C. Row
Edgar Row was the brains of the operation and a very persuasive negotiator with the
competitors Ford and GM. His biggest achievement was convincing them that the Plymouth
was going to be such a big hit that they lowered the prices of their cars in anticipation of
the competition and hemorrhaged money for months as Chrysler continued to purposely
stall on the Plymouth. His ambition was to destroy Ford from the inside out. Row was
highly connected with many people in the government. As the Chief of Internal Affairs he
needs to be sure the management and workers get along and there is no wasting of
resources. In committee, he would be very much involved with UAW leaders to make sure
they can work out a deal to keep the workers in the factories.
MSUMUN XVI
17
UAW Characters
Ken Bannon- Director of Ford Council
Ken Bannon was born in Scranton, Pennsylvania on June 27, 1914. He attended high school
where he grew up in Pittston, Pennsylvania and after graduating, continued working there
in the coal mines where he became a member of the United Mine Workers. He moved to
Detroit in 1936 and immediately received a job at the River Rouge plant of Ford Motor
Company. The following year he joined the UAW in the earliest days of its organization at
Ford, where he played an active role in gaining members and momentum for the
organization up until the 1941 UAW-Ford negotiations. He continued working as a steward,
committeeman and unit bargaining committee member for the UAW Local 600 in the
Rouge plant until he was transferred to the Ford Highland Park plant in 1943. Following his
transfer he was inducted into the Navy where he served from 1943-1945 and was
honorably discharged and returned to the Highland Park Ford plant. At his return, Bannon
was elected chairman of the UAW Local 400’s bargaining committee and in 1946 he was
elected president of the Local. After only serving a year as president of the Local 400, UAW
President Ruether appointed him UAW National Ford Director, and as director, he led all
negotiations with Ford from the beginning of his appointment in 1947.
Director of Chrysler- Norman Matthews
Following the end of the war, there was rapid inflation and in 1946, food prices increased
14%. Many workers in the UAW pressured their leaders to take action on increasing wages
to assist in curbing inflation’s affect on the worker’s cost of living, these demands were
primarily directed at Chrysler because of the way their previous wage negotiations had
been set up, allowing any wage negotiations to be discussed given a 60 day notice. Norman
Matthews was appointed Chrysler Department Director, because of this, he led all
negotiations, and was in charge of the Local’s bargaining units when the negotiations with
Chrysler leaders were set to occur later that year. Matthews remained independent from
the factional politics of the UAW throughout his career, and while he was in charge of them,
he believed the wage negotiations with Chrysler were premature. He felt very strongly that
UAW should not have to coordinate any of their demands with the demands made by the
CIO. UAW President Walter Ruether was also Director of GM Department and shared these
views with Norman Matthews. It was because of this that they two developed a very close
working relationship through the ’46 negotiations and Ruether trusted and listened to the
views of Matthews in their continued work together.
Director of GM Council - Jon Michael Rivers
Appointed as deputy director of GM council by Walter Reuther himself, after Rivers made a
name of himself after participating in the 1936 GM strike. He was a main participant in
organizing for the UAW in GM. After a machine exploded in a Flint plant, Rivers ended up
being injured after the ceiling collapsed and trapped him under the factory for hours. If he
had not become a director for the UAW, he would not be able to work for GM and would be
left without a job and high medical bills. Now wheelchair bound, his main goal in the UAW
MSUMUN XVI
18
is to guarantee safety standards for all workers. He also is a strong proponent of a pension
system, since he worries about his health costs after he retires.
President of Ford Local- Alfred Granakis
The River Rouge complex is a Ford automobile factory located in Dearborn, MI.
Constructed in 1928 it employs about 100,000 Ford workers, where they assembled the
original Mercury at this time. The president is expected to represent the best interest of the
River Rouge factory workers and will have the ability to unite them in anyway and anytime
he/she feels fit. His goals for negotiations are making sure the workers he oversees are
fairly represented. He will be in constant contact from his constituency and workers at the
River Rouge plant throughout negotiations and must use this communication make
informed decisions in committee, or risk losing his job.
President of Chrysler Local- Mike Warren
The Jefferson Avenue complex is a Chrysler automobile factory located in Detroit, MI.
Jefferson Avenue was bought by Chrysler in 1925, and employs about 6,000 Chrysler
workers, where they assembled the Chrysler Imperial at this time. The president is
expected to represent the best interest of the Jefferson Avenue factory workers and will
have the ability to unite them in anyway and anytime he/she feels fit. Along with the goal of
representing his constituents, the Local president will be in constant communication with
the autoworkers belonging to his local and this Chrysler plant, about changing demands
and needs. He must use this information to make informed decisions throughout
negotiations or risk being fired and losing re-election.
President of GM Local- Francis R. “Jack” Palmer
Started out as a factory worker in Flint, MI straight out of high school. He joined the AFLCIO in 1933 and UAW Local 569 in 1937. An active member of Local 569, he acted as both
Chairman of its Educational Committee and its Vice President, and eventually was elected
its president in 1947, the position he serves throughout negotiations. Palmer is a strong
advocate for “elevator clauses” in labor agreements. His goals for committee include
representing his constituents, the fine workers of the GM Flint plant, as well as making his
best decisions on their behalf. He will be in constant communication with workers from his
Local and must use this information to make informed decisions during negotiations or run
risk of being fired.
President of Parts Supplier Local- Chester “Moon” Mullins
An official of UAW Local 174, which represented (among others) workers at Detroit’s
Kelsey-Hayes Wheel Company. A “popular militant,” Mullins was one of several organizers
of a six-week strike in 1945, just after V-J Day (Lichtenstein). This strike was one of the
main factors that led to the shutdown of numerous Ford plants and the layoffs of 50,000
Ford employees. He was part of a movement to remove Kelsey-Hayes employees from
Local 174 and form their own charter -- a move that put him in direct conflict with Reuther
and others in his camp. His goals going into negotiations include holding his own despite
the fact that part suppliers are smaller companies, and to make the best decisions possible
for his constituents and workers at Local 174. Keep in mind that workers at part supplying
companies are more heavily concerned with the health and well-being of the Big Three
MSUMUN XVI
19
than traditional autoworkers because if one of the companies is hurting, the part suppliers
and their workers will undoubtedly hurt more.
Secretary Treasurer of the United Automobile Workers- Emil Mazey
Emil Mazey is a grassroots unionizer who was fired from two separate companies in the
1930’s for organization before becoming the leader of the union at the Briggs
Manufacturing Company. He helped to organize the Ford Rouge plant in 1941. Mr. Mazey
has since ascended to the second highest position in the UAW as the Secretary Treasury. In
the third round of negotiations, he was the lead negotiator and elicited a 13-cent increase
in wages from Chrysler. His goals for the negotiations include ensuring the UAW stay
united in their demands as a union, but also monitoring the Union’s finances, and financial
goals throughout committee.
National Recruitment Director – Richard Frankensteen
The position of National Recruiting Director for the UAW requires a focus not merely on
any one company, but a broader awareness of the UAW across the country as well as in
Michigan. Well the biggest and most influential automakers are currently in the Midwest
part of what gives the UAW the degree of bargaining power that it possesses is that the
UAW is able to set policy for autoworkers throughout the country. This makes companies
somewhat more willing to work with us since they do not have to worry about being
underbid by non-unionized competition. As such this job is key to the overall functioning
and negotiating power of the UAW.
International Vice President - Leonard Mr. Woodcock
Quit college in the Depression to get a job, was brought up to champion trade unions. Hard
working, intelligent and ambitious, he rose steadily as a Reuther protégé and potential
successor through the 1940's, 50's and 60's.Is in charge of General motors and aerospace
divisions and will have more ties to general motors as a result. He seeks to try and unify his
power as international vice president and show Reuther he is a capable successor
Expert Negotiator - Douglas Andrew Fraser
Expert negotiator. World War II veteran. As a democratic liberal, Douglas has had a strong
belief in the strife of the working man since he was a young man, starting assembly line
jobs when he was 18, where he lost his job when trying to unionize with his co-workers. He
found a stable movement with the United Auto Workers, where he is rising through the
ranks, impressing with his negotiating skills with the management of the automotive
companies. Reportedly, his business-savvy personality has resulted in being offered
management positions within the companies he is fighting. His goal during the conference
will be to utilize standing in the automotive market industry to promote his welfare
agenda.
Enforcer - Thomas D. Lorenzo
Main enforcer of the U.A.W and runs a system of enforcers to make sure the union is unified
in its struggle. Has gathered both widespread respect and fear from union leaders. Has
been accused of assault in two different incidents but charges were dropped in one case
MSUMUN XVI
20
and he was found not guilty in another. Despite this reputation, he is fiercely loyal to
Reuther and would do anything to make sure that no one dares go against the UAW leaders.
Head of Public Relations - Roy Reuther
Head of the Public Relations for the UAW. Under this regime, he wanted to bolster up all
ideas of his brother, Walter Reuther. He was the vocal component of Reuther’s fight for
pensions and healthcare. He wanted to limit the effect of local chapters in negotiations so it
would not lead to a wage increase.
Lobbyist - Remy Danton
Well connected, former corporate executive turned lobbyist. Formerly worked in DC to
push positive legislation for southern Natural Gas companies. After returning home to
Detroit one Christmas, he met and was recruited by Walter Reuther. He believes the best
strategy for the unions is to focus on the companies providing welfare for the workers, and
for Capitol Hill to keep contracting the Big Three in their production needs. Born and raised
in Detroit, he is very well connected with the democrats in Michigan, and the State
Congress. Throughout his life, his goal has been to keep generating money and prosperity
for those who he works with, the question is, who he is working it at the moment.
Assistant Director of Chrysler- Arthur Hughes
Hughes began his career as a materials handler for the main Chrysler Dodge plant in 1933,
he took part in the 1937 sit down strikes and soon became President of Local 140 for five
consecutive terms, then to be appointed UAW Region 1 Assistant Director, and finally
Assistant Director to the Chrysler Department Director Norman Matthews. Having served
as Local President for so long he is more directly connected to the needs of workers than
his superior Matthews is. His goals for negotiations include creating benefits packages for
workers, but also making sure agreements directly benefit the Chrysler plant workers that
he is committed to.
MSUMUN XVI
21
Work Cited
Cobb, J Adam. "FROM THE ‘TREATY OF DETROIT’ TO THE 401(k): THE
DEVELOPMENT AND EVOLUTION OF PRIVATIZED RETIREMENT IN THE UNITED
STATES." 2012. Web. 25 Nov. 2015.
LeFevre, William. "The Treaty of Detroit « Seeking Michigan." Seeking Michigan. 23
Aug. 2011. Web. 25 Nov. 2015.
The First Hundred Years of the Consumer Price Index: A Methodological and
Political History : Monthly Labor Review: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics." U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014. Web. 30 Oct. 2015.
Thomas, Mark. "Economist's View." : The "Treaty of Detroit" 10 July 2008. Web. 25
Nov. 2015.
https://reuther.wayne.edu/files/LR000935.pdf
http://uawford.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/sixtyyears.pdf
https://books.google.com/books?id=RcR5vQwxOkQC&pg=PA185&lpg=PA185&dq=Norma
n+Matthews+uaw&source=bl&ots=NhfJBoCA6T&sig=DWsR4ZrLPyrgOCpdwEkWCtbNXk&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAmoVChMIuZe4r9PwyAIVBBceCh
3MTQSU#v=onepage&q=Norman%20Matthews%20uaw&f=false
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/gm-signs-first-autoworkers-contract
http://capitalresearch.org/2012/01/the-union-difference-a-primer-on-what-unions-doto-the-economy/
http://uaw.org/solidarity-magazine/uaw-history/
http://multimedia.detnews.com/pix/photogalleries/historygallery/gm1937sitdownstrike
_02102012/index20.html\
http://radioopensource.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/lefevre_1950_GM_small.jpg
MSUMUN XVI
22