INDENTURED SERVITUDE

Jeff Bezos's Former Housekeeper Sued Him, Alleging That 14-Hour Shifts And Lack of Bathroom Access Led to Frequent UTIs; Claims She Was Only Allowed To Eat In The Laundry Room And Faced Racial Discrimination — Hired To Work Without Being Seen By The Family

Jeannine Mancini
Tue, September 26, 2023 


Mercedes Wedaa, a former housekeeper for Amazon.com Inc. Founder Jeff Bezos, filed a lawsuit against him and two companies responsible for managing his properties. The lawsuit, filed in November 2022 in Seattle, claims that she and other employees worked in unsafe and unsanitary conditions for extended 14-hour shifts without breaks. According to Wedaa, she was hired in 2019 with the requirement that she "work around a family without being seen."

One significant issue raised in the lawsuit is the lack of readily accessible bathrooms for housekeeping staff. While the Bezos family was at home, the housekeepers could only enter the residence for cleaning purposes. Accessing a bathroom directly from the laundry door was not an option because that led to the family's living space. To reach a restroom, housekeepers had to climb out of the laundry room window, walk along a path to a mechanical room and proceed downstairs to a bathroom. This arrangement was in place for about 18 months, leading to frequent urinary tract infections among the staff because of restricted toilet access, Wedaa alleges.

Wedaa's other complaints include the absence of resting spaces for housekeepers, meals consumed in laundry rooms and discriminatory treatment toward Hispanic employees. She also claims she raised concerns about the employment of undocumented workers, the lack of rest breaks and unsafe working conditions. Following these complaints, Wedaa said she was demoted and then dismissed on the grounds that she seemed "unhappy" and was negatively affecting the team's morale. She seeks back pay, benefits and an undetermined amount in damages.

Bezos's attorney Harry Korrell refutes these claims, labeling them as meritless and absurd. Korrell notes that Wedaa was a lead housekeeper who made a six-figure salary and was in control of her break and meal times. He asserts that multiple bathrooms and break rooms were available to staff. In addition, he said that Wedaa filed the lawsuit after her demand for a $9 million settlement was rejected, and he insised she was terminated for performance reasons.

Patrick McGuigan, Wedaa's lawyer, supports his client as a "very credible person" with "compelling evidence" to back her allegations. The lawsuit contends that housekeepers were initially allowed to use a restroom in a security room, but this was later revoked for being a "breach of security protocol."

A source from one of the managing companies named in the lawsuit, Northwestern LLC, claims that staff had access to break rooms with seating, tables, stocked refrigerators, a coffee machine and snacks. They add that multiple bathrooms were available near the break rooms and that when the family was not in residence, staff could also use the family kitchen and other amenities.

In the midst of these competing narratives, Wedaa's lawsuit also states that she and other Hispanic housekeepers were treated differently from their Caucasian counterparts, adding another layer of complexity to a case already fraught with sensitive issues. Bezos's fiancée, Lauren Sanchez, is Mexican-American, and Korrell argues that the suggestion of racial discrimination against Wedaa is "absurd."

The lawsuit is still pending, and the amount of damages Wedaa is seeking will be determined at trial. Bezos is the third-richest man in the world with a net worth of $153 billion, according to Forbes.

© 2023 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

Canadian police won't investigate doctor for sterilizing Indigenous woman

MARIA CHENG
Wed, September 27, 2023

FILE - Senate committee on Human Rights committee member Sen. Yvonne Boyer responds to a question from the media during a news conference, Thursday, July 14, 2022 in Ottawa. Boyer, who has proposed law that would make forced sterilization itself a crime, said the long history of mistrust between Indigenous people and the police made it difficult for many victims to pursue criminal prosecution. “If a police officer becomes aware of a crime being committed, they have an obligation to investigate,” Boyer said. “Why would it be any different for an Indigenous woman being sterilized without consent?” (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press via AP, File) 

The Canadian government says it is urgently trying to end the forced sterilization of Indigenous women, describing the practice as a human rights violation and a prosecutable offense. Yet police say they will not pursue a criminal investigation into a recent case in which a doctor apologized for his “unprofessional conduct” in sterilizing an Inuit woman.

In July, The Associated Press reported on the case of an Inuit woman in Yellowknife who had surgery in 2019 aimed at relieving her abdominal pain. The obstetrician-gynecologist, Dr. Andrew Kotaska, did not have the woman’s consent to sterilize her, and he did so over the objections of other medical personnel in the operating room. She is now suing him.

“This is a pivotal case for Canada because it shows that forced sterilization is still happening,” said Dr. Unjali Malhotra, of the First Nations Health Authority in British Columbia. “It’s time that it be treated as a crime.”

Kotaska declined to comment to the AP. Last month, he released a public apology, acknowledging the sterilization “caused suffering for my patient.” He said he was acting in what he thought was the woman's best interest.

The Canadian government has said that anyone who commits forced sterilization could be subject to assault charges and that police are responsible for deciding whether to proceed with criminal investigations.

But the Royal Canadian Mounted Police said they would not be investigating Kotaska, because the woman hasn't filed a criminal complaint.

Kotaska’s statement is “very likely to not be admissible in a criminal court proceeding” and the victim would need to let investigators see her confidential medical records, the RCMP said. The police said they “respect the rights of the victim to seek justice for this through other legal mechanisms and choose which processes she participates in.”

The woman’s lawyer, Steven Cooper, said she is unwilling to proceed with a criminal complaint and remains traumatized from having participated in a medical board investigation.

Lisa Kelly, who teaches criminal law at Queen’s University in Ontario, said there is no requirement in Canada’s legal system for a victim to participate, if there is other compelling evidence.

“In this case, there is another doctor and nurse, and possibly others, who could provide credible and reliable evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that the patient had not consented to the sterilization,” Kelly said.

While police and prosecutors have discretion, Kelly said, they "do not have the discretion to simply turn a blind eye to what appears to be evidence of a serious aggravated assault.”

Sen. Yvonne Boyer, who has proposed law would make forced sterilization itself a crime, said the long history of mistrust between Indigenous people and the police made it difficult for many victims to pursue criminal prosecution.

“If a police officer becomes aware of a crime being committed, they have an obligation to investigate,” Boyer said. “Why would it be any different for an Indigenous woman being sterilized without consent?”

The woman sterilized by Kotaska sued him and the hospital for 6 million Canadian dollars ($4.46 million), alleging his actions were “oppressive and malicious.”

In May, medical authorities in the Northwest Territories suspended Kotaska’s license for five months, forced him to pay part of the cost of their investigation and required him to take an ethics course after finding him guilty of “misconduct.” Noting these punishments were now completed, Kotaska said he hoped to “continue working with humility.”

Emma Cunliffe, a law professor at the University of British Columbia, called it "a very light suspension for forcibly sterilizing someone.”

She added: “It sends a very disturbing message that these violations of Indigenous women are not viewed as serious.”

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Science and Educational Media Group. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Texas drag ban ruled unconstitutional; federal judge issues permanent injunction

FOX 7 Austin Digital Team
Tue, September 26, 2023 

Texas drag ban ruled unconstitutional

A federal judge has issued a permanent injunction against Senate Bill 12, blocking the legislation from becoming law.

HOUSTON - A district court judge has ruled Texas' ban on drag shows unconstitutional.

A federal judge in the Southern District of Texas has issued a permanent injunction blocking the legislation from becoming law. This also stops the Texas Attorney General and other government officials from enforcing any part of the ban.

Previously a temporary restraining order had been in place and extended blocking Senate Bill 12 from going into effect on Sept. 1.

SB 12 targets any performance that could be perceived as "sexual" and proposes criminal penalties, including up to a year in jail, for artists and others who support them.

AUSTIN, TEXAS - AUGUST 26: Austin, Tx drag queen Brigitte Bandit reads a book during a drag time story hour at The Little Gay Shop fashion accessories store on August 26, 2023 in Austin, Texas. SB12, a bill seeking to regulate sexually oriented performances by restricting such performances on the premises of public property, or in the presence of individuals younger than 18 years of age, goes into effect September 1, 2023. The ACLU of Texas is representing local LGBTQ groups, businesses, and drag queen Brigitte Bandit in a lawsuit against state officials enforcing the bill. Among other claims, the lawsuit argues that the bill poses harm and unconstitutional censorship to several types of performers including Broadway plays, theater performances, cheerleading, and drag shows. 

(Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty Images)More

RELATED COVERAGE

Judge extends temporary restraining order on Texas drag ban

Texas Senate passes bills restricting some drag performances around children

Texas Drag Shows: Federal judge issues TRO, says Texas law banning shows is 'likely' unconstitutional

The ACLU of Texas, which filed a lawsuit in August along Baker Botts LLP on behalf of LGBTQ groups, businesses and Austin drag queen Brigitte Bandit, previously said SB 12 violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments and threatens the livelihood and free expression of many Texans, including drag performers.

"Today’s ruling blocks a law that threatens some of the most cherished First Amendment freedoms we all hold dear," said ACLU of Texas attorney Chloe Kempf in a release. "S.B. 12 attempts to suppress drag artists and the LGBTQIA+ community, and its steep criminal and civil penalties would harm Black and Latinx transgender Texans the most."

The ACLU says the law is written in a way that could censor many constitutionally protected performances, from touring Broadway plays and professional cheerleading routines to karaoke nights and drag shows, anywhere that anyone under the age of 18 may be present.

Texas law banning drag performances in front of children ruled unconstitutional by federal judge

Brandon Gillespie
Tue, September 26, 2023 

Burbank Mayor Konstantine Anthony gets spanked by drag queen at a Democratic fundraiser event.


The Texas law dubbed the "Drag Ban" that restricted "sexually oriented performances" in the presence of a child or on public property was ruled unconstitutional on Tuesday by a federal judge, who issued a permanent injunction that bars state officials from enforcing it.

Senate Bill 12 was signed by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott in June and was set to go into effect Sep. 1, but it was blocked after being challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which filed a lawsuit against the law last month.

In his ruling, U.S. District Judge David Hittner for the Southern District of Texas said the law was "an unconstitutional restriction on speech" and that it "violates the First Amendment as incorporated to Texas by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution."

The ruling further ordered Republican Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and other state officials to not enforce the law.

According to one of the definitions in the law, a "sexually oriented performance" means a visual performance that features "a male performer exhibiting as a female, or a female performer exhibiting as a male, who uses clothing, makeup, or other similar physical markers and who sings, lip syncs, dances, or otherwise performs before an audience" and "appeals to the prurient interest in sex."

Critics have referred to the law as a "drag ban," though its author and supporters say it was proposed and signed into law to protect children.

The ACLU filed its lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of Texas in Houston and said the law "unconstitutionally singles out drag performances as a disfavored form of expression." It also asserted that several terms are not defined or are written in a way that targets protected expression.

"Drag" was described in the lawsuit as an "art form" that is "inherently expressive" and has no set standard. "As with any art form, there is nothing inherently sexual or obscene about drag," the lawsuit reads. "Drag can be performed for any age level and in any venue, since drag artists tailor their performances to their audience."

Fox News Digital has reached out to Paxton's office for comment.

Fox News' Greg Wehner contributed to this report.

 NJ minimum wage to hit record high of over $15 per hour

Daniel Munoz, NorthJersey.com
Updated Wed, September 27, 2023 

New Jersey’s minimum wage is set to hit a record hit on Jan. 1, 2024: $15.13 an hour, said a press statement sent out Tuesday.

That’s thanks to a law Gov. Phil Murphy signed in 2019 to gradually increase the statewide minimum wage. It was $8.60 an hour when the Democratic governor took office in 2018.

Murphy’s predecessor, Republican Chris Christie, blocked several attempts to raise the statewide minimum wage to $15 an hour.

“As we approach this long-awaited benchmark, I am hopeful that New Jersey workers will be able to improve their quality of life and secure a better future for their families in the middle class,” Murphy said Tuesday. “Our administration will continue to prioritize our workers, who are the backbone of our economy.”

Under the 2019 measure, the state Department of Labor sets the minimum wage based on the law or inflation, whichever is higher.

Thanks to a combination of historically high inflation and the COVID-19 pandemic, the minimum wage rose $1.13 to $14.13 an hour last year.

“This is a proud moment for New Jersey as we prepare to become one of only a handful of states with a minimum wage above $15 an hour,” said Labor Commissioner Robert Asaro-Angelo.

Not all minimum wage workers will be treated equally under the state law, however.

Agricultural workers will reach $15 an hour by 2027. This January, their wages will go up from $12.01 to $12.81 an hour.

Seasonal employers and small businesses — those with up to five employees — will see their minimum wage hit $15 an hour by 2026, “to lessen the impact on their businesses,” officials said. This January, their minimum wage will increase from $12.93 to $13.73 an hour.

Long-term care facility direct care staff will see their wages increase by $1 to $18.13 an hour.

Tipped workers' cash wage will remain at $5.26 an hour, generally at restaurants. Employers will be able to claim a $9.87 tip credit. If tips plus the minimum cash wage plus tips don’t equal $15.13 an hour, the employer must pay the difference.

Once the statewide minimum wage maxes out under the 2019 law, it will continue to increase under the Consumer Price Index.

Daniel Munoz covers business, consumer affairs, labor and the economy for NorthJersey.com and The Record.

Email: munozd@northjersey.com; Twitter:@danielmunoz100

This article originally appeared on NorthJersey.com: NJ minimum wage 2023 to hit all-time high of over $15

Biden's $15 minimum wage for federal contractors blocked by US judge

APPOINTED BY TRUMP

Daniel Wiessner
Wed, September 27, 2023 

FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Joe Biden arrives in California


By Daniel Wiessner

(Reuters) - A federal judge in Texas has ruled that President Joe Biden lacked the power to order U.S. government contractors to pay workers a minimum wage of $15 an hour, and blocked the plan from being enforced in three states.

In a ruling late on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Drew Tipton in Victoria decided that because the Democratic president's 2021 executive order potentially affects millions of workers and has "vast economic and political significance," only Congress had the power to adopt it.

Tipton, an appointee of Republican former President Donald Trump, blocked the Biden administration from enforcing the $15 minimum wage in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi, states that last year filed a lawsuit challenging the executive order. State agencies often receive federal contracts.

The judge paused his decision for seven days to allow the Biden administration to file an appeal.

Tipton made the ruling in part on the basis of what is called the major questions doctrine, a judicial approach that the U.S. Supreme Court has employed to invalidate major Biden policies including student debt relief deemed lacking clear congressional authorization. Tipton also found that Biden ran afoul of a federal law called the Procurement Act, which governs the way goods and services are purchased by federal agencies.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The executive order from Biden, who is seeking re-election next year, was one of his pro-labor moves since becoming president as he makes supporting blue-collar workers a priority.

The federal government spends hundreds of billions of dollars each year on contracts with private businesses, nonprofit entities and state agencies to provide goods and services.

The minimum wage under federal law is $7.25 an hour, though many states set higher minimums. Four states and several cities have a minimum wage of at least $15.

The White House last year estimated that 327,300 employees of federal contractors were paid less than $15 an hour, and that raising their wages would cost employers $17 billion over 10 years.

The administration argued that the Procurement Act gives the president broad powers to implement policies aimed at fostering an efficient contracting system. But Tipton agreed with the states that a president's authority was limited to supervising the buying and selling of goods. Only Congress can set minimum wages and adopt other employment policies unless it specifically grants those powers to federal agencies, Tipton wrote.

A spokesperson for Mississippi Attorney General Lynn Fitch, a Republican, said: "We are pleased the court reached the same conclusion we did, that Congress has not given the Biden administration authority to enact this burden on an already faltering economy (through) executive fiat."

In January, a federal judge in Arizona dismissed a similar challenge to Biden's executive order by five other Republican-led states. The states have appealed.

The major questions doctrine is an outgrowth of an approach favored by many conservatives and business groups to curb what they call the excesses of the "administrative state." They object to what they see as accumulated power by the U.S. government's executive branch without proper checks by the courts and Congress.

(Reporting by Daniel Wiessner in Albany, New York; Editing by Will Dunham and Alexia Garamfalvi)

ExxonMobil loses bid to truck millions of gallons of crude oil through central California

AP Finance
Wed, September 27, 2023 

SANTA BARBARA, Calif. (AP) — ExxonMobil lost a court bid Wednesday to truck millions of gallons of crude oil through central California — a crucial part of its efforts to restart offshore oil wells that were shut in 2015 after a pipeline leak caused the worst coastal spill in 25 years.

A federal judge refused to overturn a 2022 decision by the Santa Barbara County Board Supervisors that denied ExxonMobil's request to use trucks to carry crude from the three wells.

A request for comment from ExxonMobil about the decision wasn’t immediately returned.

The pipeline was shut down on May 19, 2015, when a corroded section above ground and running west of Santa Barbara ruptured, sending 140,000 gallons (529,958 liters) of oil onto a state beach and into the ocean.

Three decades-old drilling platforms were shuttered in the wake of the disaster.

ExxonMobil proposed sending up to 24,820 tanker trucks a year on coastal Highway 101 and and State Route 166 for up to seven years, arguing that was the only option for getting the oil from the offshore wells to onshore processing plants until a pipeline becomes available.

But county supervisors voted against issuing a permit amid concerns over the effect on local traffic and the potential for spills and accidents.

Environmental groups praised the court decision.

“ExxonMobil’s plan to restart its offshore platforms and truck millions of gallons per week through Santa Barbara County is reckless, dangerous, and totally unwelcome by this community,” said Linda Krop, chief counsel of the Environmental Defense Center, which represents four activist groups. "Today’s decision puts the safety of our communities, climate, and coastlines first.”

Meanwhile, a separate proposal to replace the pipeline remains under review by regulators.

California's oil and gas industry supports hundreds of thousands of jobs. But with climate change expanding the threat of wildfires and drought, the state has positioned itself as a global leader in renewable energy and pioneering policies intended to slow the planet’s warming. California plans to ban the sale of new gas-powered cars and trucks by 2035 and end oil production a decade later.

US judge refuses to overturn Exxon permit denial to truck crude oil in California

Clark Mindock
Wed, September 27, 2023 

A gas station is seen out of gas in Washington

(Reuters) - A U.S. judge on Wednesday refused to overturn a California county's decision to block Exxon Mobil Corp from using tanker trucks to ship crude oil from coastal facilities to inland refineries while a ruptured pipeline is fixed.

U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee in Los Angeles denied Exxon's bid to reverse the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors' denial of a trucking permit in early 2022, saying the board's decision was substantially supported by evidence that transporting crude oil by tanker trucks could present safety concerns on state highways.

Gee ruled that while Exxon has a right to operate its offshore oil platforms and related infrastructure in the area, it does not have a vested or fundamental right to use trucks to transport its crude while the pipeline system is fixed.

Exxon has claimed it needs to use dozens of tanker trucks a day to ship oil through Santa Barbara County until a pipeline that burst near Santa Barbara in 2015, creating one of the worst oil spills in the region in decades, can be replaced. The company has said trucks are "essential" to restarting three offshore oil platforms and an onshore oil processing facility that have been shuttered since the spill.

Representatives for Exxon and the county did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Gee's decision did not address Exxon's claims that the board's decision amounted to an unconstitutional taking of the company's property and other constitutional claims. Those claims are set to be considered next by the court.

The decision was applauded by environmental groups that had intervened in the lawsuit supporting the county's decision, including the Sierra Club and local organizations.

Attorney Linda Kropp, who represented several of those groups, said Exxon's trucking plan is "reckless, dangerous and totally unwelcome" and said it puts the community at risk of oil tanker crashes.

Exxon had sued in May 2022, alleging the board's denial was a "prejudicial abuse of discretion." It said the board's majority had essentially made up its mind to reject the application rather than deciding the issue on its merits, resulting in a "de facto ban on crude oil production and transportation."

The company also claimed it has a right to restart the oil production since it had invested significant resources in the area since the 1970s.

When Exxon first halted offshore production from its three Santa Barbara-area platforms, output from those rigs was estimated at 30,000 barrels a day (bpd), a fraction of California's daily crude diet of some 1.7 million bpd at the time.

(Reporting by Clark Mindock, Editing by Alexia Garamfalvi and Chris Reese)


Exxon Barred From Trucking Oil From California Offshore Platform

Joe Schneider
Wed, September 27, 2023 

(Bloomberg) -- Exxon Mobil Corp. won’t be able to revive oil platforms off the California coast by relying on trucks to ship crude to refineries on shore.

Three offshore platforms, known as Exxon Mobil’s Santa Ynez Unit, have been shut down since 2015 when a pipeline ruptured and created the worst coastal oil spill in the state in 25 years.

Exxon Mobil figures it’ll probably take five more years to repair or replace the pipeline. The company estimates it spends tens of million of dollars to maintain the facilities and pays $1 million annually in taxes while SYU is shut down.

US District Judge Dolly M. Gee in Los Angeles on Wednesday denied Exxon Mobil’s request to overturn a 3-2 decision by the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors to reject the oil company’s trucking plan in 2022. The judge said while Exxon Mobil has every right to operate its offshore oil platforms, it doesn’t have a right to truck the crude.

“The Board’s decision in this case does not permanently implicate Exxon’s vested right to use its SYU facilities, but only halts its proposed ‘restart’ which itself was a temporary fix to a bigger problem: the lack of viable pipeline transport,” Gee wrote. “That is a problem not caused by the Board’s decision.”

Exxon Mobil didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

“It’s time for Exxon to accept that the community won’t support drilling and transporting oil in their backyard,” Liz Jones of the Center for Biological Diversity said in a statement. “The costs of oil spills are too high to risk, and this decision is a well-deserved win for the community, ocean life and ecosystems.”

The oil company claimed the board was improperly using the Exxon Mobil project as a referendum on offshore production. Board Chair Joan Hartmann cited the current climate crisis for her decision to vote against the plan.

Exxon Mobil proposed sending almost 25,000 tanker trucks a year on coastal Highway 101 and State Route 166 for as long as seven years, or until the pipeline is repaired or replaced.

The judge found there is “substantial evidence” to support the board’s decision to deny the project because of the safety issues the trucks would create along Route 166.

The judge also rejected Exxon Mobil’s claim that the county supervisors’ opposition to oil production caused them to act improperly.

“It is undeniable that there are comments in the record — both by the public and some planning commission members and county supervisors — that reflect a desire to end oil production in Santa Barbara County altogether,” Gee wrote. “But their expression of these concerns does not mean they acted contrary to law.”

The case is Exxon Mobil Corp. v. Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors, 2:22-cv-03225, U.S. District Court, Central District of California.

 Bloomberg Businessweek

Why UAW strike puts GM most at risk — and Toyota in position to win

TOYATA ALREADY IS GLOBAL CAR MAKER #1

Jamie L. LaReau, Detroit Free Press
Updated Tue, September 26, 2023 

The UAW's strike against the Detroit car companies could position Japanese automakers to capture more U.S. market share as the strike — combined with high interest rates — puts affordability for domestic new vehicles out of reach for many consumers, economists say.

And of the Detroit Three automakers, General Motors is the most at risk for damage to its sales this year from a prolonged strike.

GM, Ford Motor Co. and Stellantis are expected to release third-quarter sales results next week amid the ongoing United Auto Workers strike. So far, the targeted strike is limited enough in its scope to not have a big impact on Detroit carmakers' sales yet, Cox Automotive Chief Economist Jonathan Smoke and senior economist and Cox's senior director of industry automotive Charlie Chesbrough said Tuesday.


But if the strike expands to more plants and persists into the fall, the supply of new vehicles — already tight — will shrink even more. If demand for cars remains steady, then it means "increasing prices in both the new market and the used market," Smoke said during a news media briefing.

Smoke said the Japanese brands are in the best position to benefit from the strike's fallout, especially Toyota, because its supply problems have resolved and it is now increasing vehicle production. Also, the Asian automakers' lineups tend to be lower-priced sedans and smaller SUVs compared with the Detroit Three's higher-priced big pickups and SUVs, making not only availability, but affordability attractive to consumers.

"The Stand Up Strike tactic that the UAW has decided to use really minimized initial disruption and is part of the reason why we haven’t seen much of an impact so far, but now the scope is expanding," Smoke said. "The approach that (the union is) taking could enable a much longer disruption. I don’t think it’s out of the question to envision a disruption that could last well into the fall. Ultimately, it’s a function of time that will determine how much of an impact we will see on the aggregate level of sales, supply and pricing."

UAW hitting all angles

UAW President Shawn Fain declared a strike when labor talks failed at 11:59 p.m. Sept. 14, the time the union's current contract expired.

In what the union dubs a Stand Up Strike, Fain announced the first wave of targeted plants the union would strike as: Ford Michigan Assembly Plant (Final Assembly and Paint only) in Wayne, Stellantis Toledo Assembly Complex in Ohio and GM's Wentzville Assembly in Missouri. On Friday, Fain expanded the strike to 38 parts distribution sites across the nation belonging to GM and Stellantis, saying the two companies have not made progress in negotiations.


So far, parts suppliers have felt the most collateral damage with some having to lay off hundreds of workers due to a lack of work at the closed facilities on strike. Many suppliers are worried about the solvency of their business if the strike persists. All three automakers, too, have had to lay off thousands connected to the striking facilities.

The strike comes right as consumers started seeing some income gains and interest rates level off from a peak high in the spring. July pricing data showed the smallest year-over-year price increase in the last decade with average transaction prices down 2.7%, or $1,335, the largest January to July drop in the last decade, Kelley Blue Book data showed. The average transaction price of a new vehicle in July was $48,334, about $199 higher than it was in the year-ago period.

Cox data shows that only about half of all U.S. households can afford a $400-a-month car payment and while the consumer has been unscathed by the strike so far, that could change with the UAW targeting the parts distribution centers, Smoke and Chesbrough said. Those facilities feed car parts to dealers for customer service work.

"Stellantis and GM have seen a lot of gains in fleet this year as has Ford, so if there is a prolonged strike they could cut back on fleet sales" to make inventory last a little longer for consumers, Chesbrough said. "That might explain why the UAW went after the parts distribution centers, because they knew the automakers could pull back on fleet sales and this would also impact retail sales. But prices are going to suffer as a result of this and we are going to see prices go up."

The impact coming next month

When the strike started, the U.S. auto industry had 800,000 more new vehicles in inventory than it did a year ago at this time, Smoke said. The Detroit Three represent 40% of all U.S. new vehicle sales, but their sales are weighted in pickups and SUVs and higher-priced vehicles than import brands, he said.

Collectively, most of the Detroit Three brands had more new vehicles in supply than the overall industry but, he said, “There are certain models that will act as a canary in the coal mine to tell you when indeed we might be seeing pricing dynamics starting to shift" such as Chevrolet vehicles in tight supply now and the Jeep Wrangler, which is made at Stellantis' Toledo Assembly plant.

Smoke said so far at GM at least, the union's strike targets have not hit the vehicles that would represent its “canary in the coal mine."

"We were worried about the Chevy Tahoe, but that factory was not targeted initially," Smoke said. "So it’s possible that this could get into November before it even shows up with the tightest supply manufacturer.”

Chesbrough said GM has the most at risk of the three because “they’ve been having a pretty good year” selling a lot of compact SUVs versus the other two that have been “floundering a bit. So GM doesn’t want any hiccups right now. So this strike is definitely a hiccup it didn’t need to have happen.”

GM is also planning several key launches of electric vehicles by year-end that are crucial to its long-term transition to selling all EVs. It is for that reason Wall Street is closely watching the strike impact with jitters.

Both agreed that if the strike lasts beyond Thanksgiving, the industry is likely to see a setback and a repeat of much of the dynamics of 2021 when the industry suffered a severe shortage of new vehicles due to the chips parts shortage. The lack of new car inventory hindered sales and inflated prices for new and used models.

"We are likely to start seeing the first signs of impact next month, in October, in the brands and vehicles with the tightest supply such as Chevrolet," Smoke said. "If it continues, it will cascade into the used market as well just as we saw in 2021."

But unlike in 2021 the risk of a severe supply/demand imbalance is mitigated because of high interest rates. This week, the average auto loan interest rates for new and used cars are at the highest levels in 23 years, Smoke said. The average new car loan interest rate is above 9.6% and for used it is above 14%, he said. That means if new or used car prices go too high, it will "simply choke off demand and calm everything down. As demand cools down, prices stop going up."

“Our hope is that everything will be solved this fall," Smoke said.

This story has been corrected to reflect the percentage of Detroit Three vehicles that make up U.S. new vehicle sales.

Contact Jamie L. LaReau: jlareau@freepress.com. Follow her on Twitter @jlareauan. Read more on General Motors and sign up for our autos newsletter. Become a subscriber.

This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: UAW strike puts GM at risk, sets up Toyota, experts say: Here's why

Toyota plans third India plant, new SUV as domestic sales surge - sources

FORDISM CREATES THE GLOBALIZED PROLETARIAT

Aditi Shah
Updated Wed, September 27, 2023 



NEW DELHI (Reuters) -Toyota Motor plans to build a third car plant in India, expanding production capacity in the country for the first time in over a decade as its partnership with Suzuki Motor boosts domestic volumes, two sources said.

The world's biggest car maker wants the plant to start with capacity of 80,000-120,000 vehicles a year, which could grow to around 200,000 over time, said one of the people who has direct knowledge of the plans.

The plant's proposed initial capacity would expand Toyota's existing manufacturing capacity in India by as much as 30% from 400,000 units currently.


Toyota has also begun development of a new sport utility vehicle (SUV) for the Indian market that would be launched in early 2026 and be an anchor product for the new factory, said the person and a third source briefed on the company's plans.

The sources declined to be identified as the automaker has not disclosed the expansion plans.

A representative for Toyota's India unit declined to comment.

Toyota's India sales have soared due to a global partnership with Suzuki under which the two Japanese car makers take some vehicles originally developed by their partner, then tweak and sell under their own brands to fill out their product line-up.

Cars originally from Maruti Suzuki's stable such as the Glanza hatchback and Urban Cruiser Hyryder SUV now account for 40% of Toyota's India sales.

About two-thirds of Toyota's current production capacity is used by Maruti Suzuki to build vehicles for both car makers as part of their partnership.

Toyota, known for its Fortuner SUV and Camry hybrid in India, told Reuters earlier in September it expects record domestic sales in 2023.

The Japanese car maker is now aiming to have production capacity of 500,000 vehicles per year before the end of the decade, including the car models it will supply to Suzuki, said two of the sources.

INDIA GROWTH

Toyota's expansion in India, the world's third-largest car market, comes at a time when it is seeing slowing growth in markets like Europe and North America and competition in Southeast Asia from Chinese players.

It currently has two car plants in Bidadi, a town in the southern Indian state of Karnataka, and the third one is being planned at the same premises. It added a third shift at the two plants in May, raising their combined annual capacity by 30% to over 400,000 vehicles.

The new C-segment SUV, codenamed 340D, that Toyota is working on will fill a gap between its mid-sized Urban Cruiser Hyryder and bigger multi-purpose vehicle Innova Hycross, two of the sources said.

It is working with suppliers to produce 60,000 units a year when it launches in early 2026, they added.

Toyota is also looking at introducing a "mini" Land Cruiser in India, they said, though added the car maker is not forecasting a large amount of sales and has yet to make a final decision. If Toyota does decide to press ahead with the model, parts would be imported for assembly in India, they said.

(Reporting by Aditi Shah; Editing by Edwina Gibbs)

Peace pioneer Bertha von Suttner's message still resonates

Blaise GAUQUELIN with Pierre-Henry DESHAYES in Oslo
Wed, September 27, 2023 

The message of Austrian pacifist Bertha von Suttner, the first woman to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, still resonates

(Carl Pietzner)

The first woman to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1905, Austrian pacifist Bertha von Suttner's reflections are still cited by peace advocates as the war in Ukraine grinds on.

Von Suttner was looking for a "better ideal", according to French journalist Antoine Jacob, whose new biography "Bertha la Paix" ("Bertha of Peace") will be published next week.

More than a century later, her 1906 Nobel Peace Prize recipient speech -- in which she said happiness is developed in times of peace -- has lost nothing of its acuity.

"Fortresses are being erected, submarines built, whole areas mined, airships tested for use in war; and all this with such zeal –- as if to attack one's neighbour were the most inevitable and important function of a state," von Suttner told her mostly male listeners.

- Provocative work -

She was born into an aristocratic family in the Austrian Empire in 1843.

Burdened by her mother's gambling debts, she became a governess and music teacher in the von Suttner household and married the family's son Arthur, who like her refused to conform to norms.

As journalist and novel writer, the polyglot published 60 short stories, a few essays and 19 novels, including the influential and provocative anti-war novel "Lay Down Your Arms" in 1889.

Thanks to her aristocratic origins, her energy and determination, and her talent for mobilising goodwill, von Suttner became one of the leaders of the international peace movement.

"Daughter of a general, she was raised in an environment where falling at the front with God's approval was an honour," her biographer Jacob told AFP.

"We have to realise how far she came."

With Russia's invasion of Ukraine, von Suttner's reflections on respect for international law, disarmament and multilateralism are "more relevant than ever", said Norwegian Nobel historian Asle Sveen.

"The international order advocated by Suttner and the peace movement is once again disintegrating," Sveen said.

"Her admonishing message 'Lay Down Your Arms' is more relevant than ever in the face of nuclear threat gestures," Austrian Foreign Minister Alexander Schallenberg told AFP.

Her cosmopolitan, liberal and anti-clerical worldview, however, earned her fierce enmity in nationalist circles, where she became derided as "Bertha of the Jews".

She died in June 1914 at the age of 71, just before World War I broke out.

- 'Decisive role' -

Von Suttner also played "a decisive role" in convincing her friend and patron, Swedish inventor Alfred Nobel, to award a prize for peace, according to Jacob.

But since the prestigious prize was first awarded in 1901, only 18 women have obtained the distinction, compared to 92 men.

The second woman to win it was American Jane Addams, 26 years after von Suttner.

Despite her prominence, which included being given a private audience by then US president Theodore Roosevelt, von Suttner did not have the right to vote -- and had to be accompanied by her husband when she travelled.

"Among all these men, she tried to play a role completely contrary to the dominant way of thinking and without anyone pushing her," Jacob told AFP.

Her legacy in Austria also had its ups and downs.

The Nazi regime, which annexed Austria in 1938, burned her books, and a Vienna square inaugurated in her honour was renamed in 1957 after poet Rainer Maria Rilke.

But in 1966 her image was printed on the 1,000-schilling banknote.

In 1986, a small Vienna street was named after her.

And today she appears on the two-euro coin of Austria, a neutral country which is host to several UN bodies.

bur-bg/jza/jj/smw

US

GOP lawmakers demand documents on Ford battery partnership with CATL

David Shepardson
Wed, September 27, 2023


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The chairs of three U.S. House of Representatives committees demanded Ford Motor turn over documents tied to its partnership with Chinese battery company CATL and threatened to call CEO Jim Farley to testify before Congress.

Republicans Jason Smith, Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Mike Gallagher - who chair the Ways and Means, Energy and Commerce and China select committees - jointly wrote to Farley with a new deadline seeking documents about the CATL partnership and the automaker's plan to build a $3.5 billion battery manufacturing plant in Michigan using Chinese technology.

"Ford’s ongoing refusal to provide substantive responses ... raises serious concerns regarding its licensing agreement with CATL," the lawmakers wrote on Tuesday in a previously unreported letter seen by Reuters.

Republicans have been probing Ford's battery plant plan for months over concerns it could facilitate the flow of U.S. tax subsidies to China and leave Ford dependent on Chinese technology.

On Monday, Ford said it paused work on the Michigan battery plant, citing concerns about its ability to operate it competitively as it remains in broader contract negotiations, drawing condemnation from the United Auto Workers union.

The lawmakers want documents including the Ford/CATL licensing agreement, communications between Ford and the Biden Administration referring to the licensing agreement and achievable tax credits, and records of Ford's knowledge of CATL's "apparent attempt to shield its connection to Xinjiang-based companies."

Human rights groups accuse Beijing of abuses against Xinjiang’s Uyghur inhabitants, including the mass use of forced labor in internment camps. China denies the allegations.

CATL did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment.

The lawmakers said if Ford does not disclose records sought previously by Oct. 6 "we will consider other means to obtain the documents, including compulsory process or insisting that you appear before Congress to publicly explain your failure to comply."

A Ford spokeswoman said the company had answered multiple congressional letters and "thoroughly responded to questions and shared detailed information about Ford’s work to strengthen domestic battery manufacturing" but did not say if the company would comply with the document request.

In 2022, Congress passed legislation barring $7,500 in future consumer EV tax credits if any battery components are manufactured or assembled by a "foreign entity of concern."


Ford has been awaiting guidance to determine if batteries produced by the Marshall plant would run afoul of the requirements.

Last week, Tesla CEO Elon Musk also faced questions from Smith about the automaker's relationship with CATL.

(Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Sonali Paul)