Trade-union plan for motor industry

Press, 6 September 1980, Page 26

Trade-union plan for motor industry

PA Wellington Trade I unionists . have suggested that New . Zea- ; land's future motor .vehicle industry’ could be built around one big assembly ■ and component manufacturing company, y launched with the backing' of Government cash. That is the basis of ; union blueprint .to. save the industry from a possible switch to completely, built-up (C.8.U.) cars imported / from overseas-.-, rather than assembling ive htcles in New Zealand.

The blueprint, preparev by a Federation of Labour research officer, Mr All Kirk, and a CoachworkersUnion representative,- Mr Graeme Clarke,. was presented ata seminar on the motor industry -. in Wellington, organised by motor-industry'unions. , • According to the .blueprint, ‘the “Gbvefriment would sponsor the formation of the assembly and component manufacturing company, which would be the sole recipient of Government aid. Each of the existing motor companies would be offered shares in the new company. If they elected to stay out, they would be disadvantaged by. paying higher duties.

Over the next , two years, the new company would reduce the number

of vehicle models assem-. bled - in New Zealand. Gradually, single plants would begin producing single models, or at the most two.' < The New Zealand company would ensure that completely knocked own C.K.D.) packs were brought from several sources so that one transnational company could be Slaved off against another <n-prices. • . . ■ Fewer models ; would ■ nean cheaper cars, .and nore productive plants. A ihorter working _ week .vould be phased in to keep up employment evels. Older assembly plants would be phased out. Bigger plants would increase production. . . , Workers would be offered work' iri M the bigger plants, beinggiven free transport to their new job or moving costs’ if necessary. '. All-component manufacturers would be assessed for efficiency. Where components could be imported at a much cheaper cost than they could he made in New Zealand component production would be “rationalised.” However, no component' plant would be shut down until alternative jobs were guaranteed. The blueprint recognised that, there would be politi-

cal opposition. It described where this would come from, and what to do about it.

New Zealand exports to markets in Britain, the United States,- Japan, and Australia could suffer if New Zealand nhased one of these countries out of the car market.

The blueprint said that only individual companies would suffer, but countries as a whole would still have a share in the market here. .

/Transnational companies , would oppose the changes proposed by ’5 the unions and their opposition could create a propaganda campaign, suggesting that the customer was losing out on a choice of car models. That, .said the blueprint, had .to ?ibe v fought, by emphasising that ‘‘under the ’ bonnet” most cars were essentially the same / anyway, and that retaining the present range of models could destroy the New Zealand car industry. The final problem could lie - within the New Zealand workforce, a big section of' which would not believe that the Government could contemplate running down the car ir>-[ dustry. 'This could only be overcome by ’ “popularising” the blueprint, throughout New Zealand the authors said!