Connect with us

Business

‘We’re in the abyss’: How the UAW strike could hit the economy on September 20, 2023 at 10:00 am Business News | The Hill

Published

on

While the current economic impact of a targeted strike by the United Auto Workers (UAW) is limited, the threat of a full walkout looms over contract negotiations with auto giants Ford, General Motors and Stellantis.

Right now, that threat is hard to quantify — any estimate will depend on the length of the strike and how many more workers are called to the picket line.

Even so, the economic impact of a full-fledged 10-day strike against the Big Three could top $5 billion, the Anderson Economic Group estimated in an August report.

A months-long work stoppage could also eat into the Big Three’s cash holdings, Fitch Ratings warned Friday, particularly if the targeted strikes balloon to a widespread shutdown.

Advertisement

And autoworkers are already being laid off by some companies, as thousands more UAW members brace for making just $500 per week on the picket line.

“Nobody knows now. We’re in the abyss,” Pete DeVito Jr., and automotive director of the United Service Workers Union, told The Hill in a phone interview. 

After the negotiations broke down before the union’s contract expired at midnight last Friday, UAW President Shawn Fain called on nearly 13,000 workers to strike at three plants — one from each of the Big Three.

“We expect the initial financial impact of this first round of strikes to be limited, since the UAW is only striking one plant each at Ford, GM and Stellantis,” Stephen Brown, senior director at Fitch Ratings, said in a written statement.

Advertisement

During a Facebook Live event hours before the contract deadline, Fain warned that while the initial strike is limited, the union won’t rule out an all-out strike. 

Additional strikes could come as soon as Friday at noon without “serious progress” in contract negotiations with the Big Three, Fain said Tuesday.

All three automakers have “robust liquidity positions that will help them to withstand a potentially drawn-out period of production disruption,” Brown added.

A Stellantis spokesperson declined to comment on the current cost of the targeted strikes but said the impact of a strike would depend on the length of the disruption.

Advertisement

Spokespeople for the UAW, Ford and General Motors did not return The Hill’s requests for comment.

Workers are already being laid off

Automakers and suppliers are already planning to lay off nonstriking workers and are ringing alarm bells about the potential long-term impacts.

Ford temporarily laid off 600 workers Friday, citing “knock-on effects” from the strike, and General Motors said it would likely lay off around 2,000 employees, the Detroit Free Press reported.

A Michigan auto supplier also plans to temporarily lay off nearly 300 employees starting Oct. 2, according to a Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) filing. The supplier, CIE Newcor, said in the filing that it tentatively anticipates a one-month layoff, but it would depend on the length of the strike.

Advertisement

A company official did not immediately return The Hill’s request for comment on the filing.

The UAW has amassed an $825 million strike fund, and the union has said it would extend stipends to workers laid off as a result of the strikes.

But the $500 per week stipend for striking and laid-off workers is well under their weekly earnings on the job.

“The first impact of a strike will be felt in auto worker homes and communities, who will see a drop in revenues, as strikers shift to spending less,” Juscelino Filgueiras Colares, a business law professor at Case Western Reserve University, told The Hill in an email. 

Advertisement

“Next, depending on the length and scope of the strike […], part suppliers will see a decline in orders, which will also affect workers’ compensation and their communities,” he said.

Another shock to the auto market

DeVito also warned that consumers could bear the brunt of higher car prices, which had just begun to fall from historic highs during the pandemic.

“You’re going to see the prices go back up to COVID levels for the customer,” said DeVito, saying the dealers will need to maximize profits.

High interest rates and inflation have slowed demand for cars, leaving manufacturers and dealerships with high inventories that could help stabilize prices for some vehicles, Colares told The Hill.  

Advertisement

“They see their dealers have high inventories; they have had major losses after manufacturing EVs that few consumers can afford or want … and they now face intense competition from Tesla and growing Chinese EV manufacturers,” he said.

Why the Big Three, autoworkers are at odds

The transition to electric vehicles (EVs) underlies the wage, benefit and job security demands the union is making. The union asks include representation for battery plant workers, substantial wage hikes, reduced work hours and restored pensions.

Automakers have argued that their counteroffers are historically generous and the workers’ demands are unrealistic, especially as the companies make massive investments in EV development and manufacturing.

But the union has pointed to skyrocketing company profits and CEO pay at the Big Three in recent years, money it says the companies have not been shared fairly with workers.

Advertisement

Profits at the Big Three collectively rose by 92 percent, and CEO compensation jumped 40 percent from 2013 to 2022, according to an analysis by the Economic Policy Institute released last week. 

Inflation has eaten into auto manufacturing workers’ average hourly wages, which dropped 19.3 percent in real dollars since 2008, the left-leaning think tank found.

“These are legitimate factors in what’s led the UAW here today,” DeVito said. “We hope this is a short interruption for everybody’s sake and doesn’t progressively get worse.”

In remarks at the White House on Friday, Biden said record profits should be shared with workers and that he understood workers’ frustrations. But the president stopped short of endorsing the strike, and acknowledged that the companies have made “significant offers.”

Advertisement

During an interview Monday with MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Fain said the White House would have no role in the negotiations.

“This battle is not about the President, it’s not about the former president, or any other person prior to that. This battle is about the workers standing up for economic and social justice and getting their fair share, because they’re fed up with going backwards,” Fain said.

Zack Budryk contributed.

​Business While the current economic impact of a targeted strike by the United Auto Workers (UAW) is limited, the threat of a full walkout looms over contract negotiations with auto giants Ford, General Motors and Stellantis. Right now, that threat is hard to quantify — any estimate will depend on the length of the strike and…  

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business

How Trump’s Tariffs Could Hit American Wallets

Published

on

As the debate over tariffs heats up ahead of the 2024 election, new analysis reveals that American consumers could face significant financial consequences if former President Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs are enacted and maintained. According to a recent report highlighted by Forbes, the impact could be felt across households, businesses, and the broader U.S. economy.

The Household Cost: Up to $2,400 More Per Year

Research from Yale University’s Budget Lab, cited by Forbes, estimates that the average U.S. household could pay an additional $2,400 in 2025 if the new tariffs take effect and persist. This projection reflects the cumulative impact of all tariffs announced in Trump’s plan.

Price Hikes Across Everyday Goods

The tariffs are expected to drive up consumer prices by 1.8% in the near term. Some of the hardest-hit categories include:

  • Apparel: Prices could jump 37% in the short term (and 18% long-term).
  • Footwear: Up 39% short-term (18% long-term).
  • Metals: Up 43%.
  • Leather products: Up 39%.
  • Electrical equipment: Up 26%.
  • Motor vehicles, electronics, rubber, and plastic products: Up 11–18%.
  • Groceries: Items like vegetables, fruits, and nuts could rise up to 6%, with additional increases for coffee and orange juice due to specific tariffs on Brazilian imports.

A Historic Tariff Rate and Economic Impact

If fully implemented, the effective tariff rate on U.S. consumers could reach 18%, the highest level since 1934. The broader economic consequences are also notable:

  • GDP Reduction: The tariffs could reduce U.S. GDP by 0.4% annually, equating to about $110 billion per year.
  • Revenue vs. Losses: While tariffs are projected to generate $2.2 trillion in revenue over the next decade, this would be offset by $418 billion in negative economic impacts.

How Businesses Are Responding

A KPMG survey cited in the report found that 83% of business leaders expect to raise prices within six months of tariff implementation. More than half say their profit margins are already under pressure, suggesting that consumers will likely bear the brunt of these increased costs.

What This Means for Americans

The findings underscore the potential for substantial financial strain on American families and businesses if Trump’s proposed tariffs are enacted. With consumer prices set to rise and economic growth projected to slow, the debate over tariffs is likely to remain front and center in the months ahead.

For more in-depth economic analysis and updates, stay tuned to Bolanlemedia.com.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

U.S. Limits Nigerian Non-Immigrant Visas to Three-Month Validity

Published

on

In July 2025, the United States implemented significant changes to its visa policy for Nigerian citizens, restricting most non-immigrant and non-diplomatic visas to a single entry and a maximum validity of three months. This marks a departure from previous policies that allowed for multiple entries and longer stays, and has important implications for travel, business, and diplomatic relations between the two countries.

Key Changes in U.S. Visa Policy for Nigerians

  • Single-Entry, Three-Month Limit: As of July 8, 2025, most non-immigrant visas issued to Nigerians are now valid for only one entry and up to three months.
  • No Retroactive Impact: Visas issued prior to this date remain valid under their original terms.
  • Reciprocity Principle: The U.S. cited alignment with Nigeria’s own visa policies for U.S. citizens as the basis for these changes.
  • Enhanced Security Screening: Applicants are required to make their social media accounts public for vetting, and are subject to increased scrutiny for any signs of hostility toward U.S. institutions.

Rationale Behind the Policy Shift

  • Security and Immigration Integrity: The U.S. government stated the changes are intended to safeguard the immigration system and meet global security standards.
  • Diplomatic Reciprocity: These restrictions mirror the limitations Nigeria imposes on U.S. travelers, emphasizing the principle of fairness in international visa agreements.
  • Potential for Further Action: The U.S. has indicated that additional travel restrictions could be introduced if Nigeria does not address certain diplomatic and security concerns.

Nigeria’s Updated Visa Policy

  • Nigeria Visa Policy 2025 (NVP 2025): Introduced in May 2025, this policy features a new e-Visa system for short visits and reorganizes visa categories:
    • Short Visit Visas (e-Visa): For business or tourism, valid up to three months, non-renewable, processed digitally within 48 hours.
    • Temporary Residence Visas: For employment or study, valid up to two years.
    • Permanent Residence Visas: For investors, retirees, and highly skilled individuals.
  • Visa Exemptions: ECOWAS citizens and certain diplomatic passport holders remain exempt.
  • Reciprocal Restrictions: Most short-stay and business visas for U.S. citizens are single-entry and short-term, reflecting reciprocal treatment.

Impact on Travelers and Bilateral Relations

  • Nigerian Travelers: Face increased administrative requirements, higher costs, and reduced travel flexibility to the U.S.
  • U.S. Travelers to Nigeria: Encounter similar restrictions, with most visas limited to single entry and short duration.
  • Diplomatic Tensions: Nigerian officials have called for reconsideration of the U.S. policy, warning of negative effects on bilateral ties and people-to-people exchanges.

Conclusion

The U.S. decision to limit Nigerian non-immigrant visas to three months highlights the growing complexity and reciprocity in global visa regimes. Both countries are tightening their policies, citing security and fairness, which underscores the need for travelers and businesses to stay informed and adapt to evolving requirements.

Continue Reading

Business

Nicki Minaj Demands $200 Million from Jay-Z in Explosive Twitter Rant

Published

on

Nicki Minaj has once again set social media ablaze, this time targeting Jay-Z with a series of pointed tweets that allege he owes her an eye-popping $200 million. The outburst has reignited debates about artist compensation, industry transparency, and the ongoing power struggles within hip-hop’s elite circles.

Credit: Heute.at

The $200 Million Claim

In a string of tweets, Minaj directly addressed Jay-Z, writing, “Jay-Z, call me to settle the karmic debt. It’s only collecting more interest. You still in my top five though. Let’s get it.” She went further, warning, “Anyone still calling him Hov will answer to God for the blasphemy.” According to Minaj, the alleged debt stems from Jay-Z’s sale of Tidal, the music streaming platform he launched in 2015 with a group of high-profile artists—including Minaj herself, J. Cole, and Rihanna.

When Jay-Z sold Tidal in 2021, Minaj claims she was only offered $1 million, a figure she says falls dramatically short of what she believes she is owed based on her ownership stake and contributions. She has long voiced dissatisfaction with the payout, but this is the most public—and dramatic—demand to date.

Beyond the Money: Broader Grievances

Minaj’s Twitter storm wasn’t limited to financial complaints. She also:

  • Promised to start a college fund for her fans if she receives the money she claims is owed.
  • Accused blogs and online creators of ignoring her side of the story, especially when it involves Jay-Z.
  • Warned content creators about posting “hate or lies,” saying, “They won’t cover your legal fees… I hope it’s worth losing everything including your account.”

She expressed frustration that mainstream blogs and platforms don’t fully cover her statements, especially when they involve Jay-Z, and suggested that much of the coverage she receives is from less reputable sources.

Credit: Heute.at

Satirical Accusations and Industry Critique

Minaj’s tweets took a satirical turn as she jokingly blamed Jay-Z for a laundry list of cultural grievances, including:

  • The state of hip-hop, football, basketball, and touring
  • The decline of Instagram and Twitter
  • Even processed foods and artificial dyes in candy

She repeatedly declared, “The jig is up,” but clarified that her statements were “alleged and for entertainment purposes only.”

Political and Cultural Criticism

Minaj also criticized Jay-Z’s political involvement, questioning why he didn’t campaign more actively for Kamala Harris or respond to President Obama’s comments about Black men. While Jay-Z has a history of supporting Democratic campaigns, Minaj’s critique centered on more recent events and what she perceives as a lack of advocacy for the Black community.

The Super Bowl and Lil Wayne

Adding another layer to her grievances, Minaj voiced disappointment that Lil Wayne was not chosen to perform at the Super Bowl in New Orleans, a decision she attributes to Jay-Z’s influence in the entertainment industry.

Public and Industry Reaction

Despite the seriousness of her financial claim, many observers note that if Minaj truly believed Jay-Z owed her $200 million, legal action—not social media—would likely follow. As of now, there is no public record of a lawsuit or formal complaint.

Advertisement

Some fans and commentators see Minaj’s outburst as part of a larger pattern of airing industry grievances online, while others interpret it as a mix of personal frustration and performance art. Minaj herself emphasized that her tweets were “for entertainment purposes only.”

Credit: Heute.at

Conclusion

Nicki Minaj’s explosive Twitter rant against Jay-Z has once again placed the spotlight on issues of artist compensation and industry dynamics. Whether her claims will lead to further action or remain another dramatic chapter in hip-hop’s ongoing soap opera remains to be seen, but for now, the world is watching—and tweeting.

Continue Reading

Trending