Gm case study

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282281749
Case Study General Motors Europe
Chapter · October 2006
CITATIONS
0
READS
2,298
4 authors:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Developing personal and household services in the EU A focus on housework activities View project
Monitoring legal framework(s) for European Works Councils View project
Romuald Jagodzinski
European Trade Union Institute
99 PUBLICATIONS   58 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Stefan Stracke
SEE PROFILE
Melinda Kelemen
Independent researcher
SEE PROFILE
Laszlo Neumann
Eötvös Loránd University
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Romuald Jagodzinski on 29 September 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Wyattville Road, Loughlinstown, Dublin 18, Ireland. - Tel: (+353 1) 204 31 00 - Fax: 282 42 09 / 282 64 56
email: postmaster@eurofound.europa.eu - website: www.eurofound.europa.eu
Case study: GM Opel
EWCs in the new Member States
European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions
This case study is available in electronic format only.
Company profile
Industrial relations, interest representation and corporate culture
EWC experience and practice
Conclusions and outlook

1
This case study is based on interviews undertaken with national delegates of the General Motors EWC/GME European
Employee Forum (EEF) and with local trade union representatives in Poland and Hungary, and, in addition, with an
EWC deputy member from Poland. The interviews were carried out between February and July 2006. Additional
information for the case study was delivered by the GM EEF.
Company profile
General information about the company
The joint stock-company General Motors (GM), with its headquarters in Detroit, is the world’s largest automotive group,
with nearly 9.2 million vehicles sold around the world in 2005 (14.3% of the global vehicle market; at the end of June
2006, GM’s global market share was 14.5%). Founded in 1908, GM employs about 327,000 people around the world
today. With more than 25,000 global suppliers, the company has manufacturing operations in 33 countries, while its cars
and trucks are sold in some 200 countries.
GM became the world’s largest car-maker by acquiring and growing a number of independent companies in the USA,
Europe and other regions. At present, GM is organised into 13 major groups of branches with a comprehensive range of
cars and commercial vehicles – Opel (Vauxhall in the UK), Saab, Chevrolet, Cadillac, Corvette, Hummer, Buick,
Pontiac, GMC, Saturn, Holden and Daewoo.
GM’s engagement in Europe dates back to 1911, only three years after the GM Corporation was formed. The company
started producing Chevrolet cars in Copenhagen (1923) and Antwerp (1925) before acquiring British car manufacturer
Vauxhall in the UK in 1925 and Opel in Germany in 1929. Since that time, Vauxhall and Opel have formed the
‘backbone’ of GM’s car manufacturing in Europe. In 1989, GM acquired a 50% stake in Swedish Saab, taking full
ownership in 2000.
With the establishment of General Motors Europe’s (GME) headquarters in Zurich in 1986, the automotive company
started a shift towards greater centralisation of its European operations. Today, GME is active in about 30 national
markets, focusing especially on the brands Saab, Opel and Vauxhall as the core of GM’s business in Europe. The
company operates 11 production and assembly facilities in eight European countries and employs a workforce of
approximately 64,500 (including GM Powertrain, GM Purchasing & Supply Chain, and Chevrolet Europe employees),
10,500 of whom work in engineering and 42,000 in production at the end of 2005. Additional directly related jobs are
provided by about 8,700 independent sales and service outlets.
At the end of 2005, GM’s market share in Europe was 9.4%, with the highest market share achieved in Eastern and
Central Europe (e.g. 11.1% in Poland and 16.7% in Hungary).
In the light of an increasingly competitive environment in Europe and decreasing market shares, as well as overcapacities
and profitability problems, GME began restructuring its European operations in the mid-1990s. The restructuring
process, however, has been accelerated in recent years. Two major restructuring plans have been laid out: firstly, the
restructuring programme ‘Olympia’ in 2001 and, secondly, a widespread new restructuring plan laid out in 2004/2005.
As part of the latter restructuring programme, GM announced 12,000 job cuts in Europe, with a majority of the
reductions taking place in Germany (9,500 employees), in order to reduce its annual operating costs by €500 million by
2006. According to this plan, GM recently decided to cease its only Portuguese assembly plant in Azambuja, employing
1,200 people, at the end of 2006, while shifting production to the GM plant in Zaragoza, Spain.
© European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions, 2006

2
This comprehensive restructuring process has been accompanied by increasing competition between different GM
production sides in Europe.
According to GM executives, the company has not completed its restructuring of European operations, yet – even
regarding the closing of another plant. But at the same time, GM also tries to accelerate the introduction of new vehicle
models designed for European customers to enhance revenues.
GM Opel in Poland and Hungary
Poland
The history of GM in Poland dates back to 1928, when a Chevrolet assembly plant was set up in Warsaw. At that time,
the plant produced some 600 cars per year.
The GM engagement in Poland started again at the beginning of the transformation process in Eastern Europe in the early
1990s. In 1991, GM Poland was registered and the company developed quickly from the very beginning.
In 1994, GM also started to invest in manufacturing facilities in Poland, when the assembly plant for the Opel Astra
model (and afterwards for the Opel Vectra series in 1998) was inaugurated in Warsaw. The Warsaw plant, however,
closed operations in 2000, shortly after the Opel factory in Gliwice had been set up as a greenfield investment in 1998
(construction work began in 1996, production/assembly started in 1998). Today, the Gliwice plant is not only the main
GM production centre in Poland, but also one of the most modern automotive plants of the GM Corporation worldwide.
Besides this, Gliwice is the only GM assembly plant in the former Warsaw Pact states (apart from manufacturing joint
ventures in Russia and Romania).
Overall, GM has invested more than €650 million so far in GM Manufacturing Poland (former Opel Polska). The first
model produced by that plant was the Astra Classic. Currently, three car lines are produced in Gliwice: the Opel Agila
microvan with 34,200 units in 2005, the Astra Classic II (63,100 units) and, as of September 2005, the Opel Zafira II
(28,600 units). The total output of cars increased from 116,600 units (2004) to 128,700 units (2005), of which more than
90% are exported. Besides production and passenger-car assembly, GM in Poland is also producing engines at two GM
Powertrain production sites, in Bielsko Biala and Tychy.
At present, GM’s Polish workforce numbers nearly 3,000 employees in total (15% of them temporary workers), about
2,600 of whom are assembly workers (plus some 50 engineers and 150 administration staff). There is an additional 1,000
people working in GM’s premises in Gliwice; these are, however, workers of companies that were outsourced by GM.
Hungary
GM started its engagement in Hungary by setting up a subsidiary as a joint venture with the Hungarian Rába company
in 1990, the state-owned producer of trucks, diesel engines and axles, to build engines and assemble cars at
Szentgotthárd in western Hungary.
GM and Rába signed a contract in order to establish a joint company in which GM/OPEL had got a 65% share. At that
time, GM bought a 30,000 square meters empty production hall in Szentgotthárd, which had been used by the Rába
company. From 1991 until 1994, the Hungarian Investment Office also had a minority share (15%) of the new company.
These shares were obtained by Rába, which kept 20%. In 1995, GM/OPEL bought out the shares of the other two
owners.

3
GM Opel
Originally, two firms – the manufacturing plant General Motors Hungary Vehicle Repairing Ltd. (Szentgotthárd) and
GM Car Distributing Ltd. (Budapest) – were registered in January 1991. Then, in 1997, the Budapest-based distribution
company became the regional headquarters of the new Opel Southeast Europe (OSE) organisation, responsible for
marketing, sales and aftersales of Opel vehicles in Hungary and south-east Europe. In 2002, GM opened a regional office
in Budaörs, which is in charge of the overall coordination of GM’s business activities (including Chevrolet, Saab and
other GM brands) in 18 Eastern and Central European countries. In the same year, GM established the Eastern and
Central European Company of GM-Daewoo, also with headquarters in Budaörs.
Currently, GM’s sales network in Hungary comprises 150 distributors in 62 towns. In 2005, GM sold about 37,200 cars
and light commercial vehicles in Hungary (Opel: 26,500), which represents a market share of 16.7%.
Initially, the Szentgotthárd plant as a brownfield investment produced the first generation of the Astra model, as well as
Opel engines and cylinder heads. By 1998, the total number of employees had grown to over 1,300. In addition, various
sub-contractor companies were given assignments under GM/OPEL, their employment amounting to a further 300-400
people. After the Szentgotthárd car assembly ceased in 1998 (as a so-called ‘CKD unit’, where cars were finalised from
incoming components), GM continued Astra production in Poland, where an integrated car-manufacturing plant was
built up, including production of the main components. This reorganisation resulted in a significant cut-back in
Szentgotthárd, effecting approximately 200 workers with fixed-time contracts.
At present, the Szentgotthárd plant, which is part of GM Powertrain Europe, produces cylinder heads, engines (460,200
units in 2005) and transmissions (15,100 units) only. The number of employees is about 700 (plus a further 100
temporary workers). In addition, about 150 people are employed by sub-contractors at the plant, which was renamed
Opel Hungary Szentgotthárd in 2004.
At the end of 2005, the total workforce of GM in Hungary amounted to about 900 people, with the majority working in
assembly, about 200 in administration (sales, marketing, aftersales and support functions) and about 12 in engineering.
Besides the manufacturing plant in Szentgotthárd, there is also a trading unit of Opel Hungary in Budapest. Since 1997,
it has operated as Opel Southeast Europe Ltd. and, in addition to Hungary, it also organises sales and marketing of Opel
in Slovenia, Croatia, Macedonia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Romania, Bulgaria and Albania. The company is a legally
independent unit since 2001.
Industrial relations, interest representation and corporate culture
Poland
There are three trade union organisations representing about 23% of the workforce at GM in Gliwice. These are NSZZ
Solidarnosc, a workers’trade union which concentrates on assembly workers who are the core of the plant’s staff; OPZZ;
and ‘Olimpia’, a professional trade union of security workers, which only plays a minor role with less than 20 members
in total (see Table 1 for summary).
Due to the fact that the Gliwice plant was a greenfield investment, the company-level trade union organisation was
established in 1998. When the plant was first opened, the GM Director in Gliwice tried to ensure that management
created satisfactory working conditions so that trade union organisations would be superfluous and unnecessary.
However, with the establishment of the trade union organisation in Gliwice, management today are engaging with the
trade unions, although only in reality with Solidarnosc.

4
Nevertheless, dialogue is taking place between OPZZ, Olimpia and Solidarnosc. While there are no major problems at
the moment, there were some difficulties between these three unions in the beginning. Moreover, no formal structures
for cooperation between these trade unions can be ascertained, which is probably due to the minor role that OPZZ and
Olimpia play in comparison to Solidarnosc.
According to the interviewees, the trend as regards unionism is an upward one. Between 2002 and 2006, Solidarnosc
almost doubled the number of its members (from 511 to 968), while there was an increase of more than 90% in all the
companies coordinated by the inter-plant trade union committee at GM. (This committee, comprising 38 members plus
the president, stands for management of trade union structures at the Gliwice plant, as well as for trade union structures
at some other companies delivering products or supplying services to the GM plant.).
In contrast to this upward trend, members are also leaving the trade union for two reasons: firstly, due to the annual
membership fee being too high and, secondly, because of disappointment with the lack of salary increases. According to
the interviewees, some people expected that, with accession to the EU, salaries would automatically go up and soon reach
the level set in other plants in the EU15. But, in fact, there is an agreement that in the next three years salaries will only
increase in line with the official inflation index. Overall, the upward trend in the unionism rate is expected to continue.
There are numerous meetings and forms of management contact with employees, such as direct participation by round
table discussions. From the point of view of the interviewed trade union officer, management tries to play these
additional bodies off against the trade unions. As a result, the local trade unions fear a lessening of their role and oppose
any kind of competition.
Overall, there is plenty of friction and conflicts, according to the interviewed trade union representatives. The biggest
problem with regard to employer-employee-relations is inter-personal relations. There are many managers and principals
that should be ‘educated and brought up’ in terms of how to treat or interact with workers. As a result, the corporate
culture seems to cause problems. The interviewees suspect that in countries with long-established industrial relations and
dialogue-orientated culture (as, for example, in Scandinavian countries and Germany), such situations (where a manager
becomes a success-orientated ‘supervisor’ on the back of the workforce) do not occur, whereas in Poland and other
Central European countries this grievance is much more likely.
Hungary
In Hungary, employee representation is organised by both a trade union and a works council (see Table 1 for summary).
Trade union history at the Szentgotthárd plant goes back to 1993. Only a few months after production started, a local
unit of the independent trade union organisation Munkástanácsok was established in the then engine factory. From the
point of view of the interviewee, the reason for organising a Munkástanácsok unit at GM Opel was a concrete grievance
of the employees: the company had missed the annual wage increase that year. Thus the employees needed an
independent interest representation body.
At that time, the two factories employed different pools of workers – mainly locals worked in the car factory and mainly
commuters worked in the engine factory. In addition, their skill structures were different. As a result, union organisation
began in the car factory, but workers at the engine factory finally joined the initiative. One year later, the trade union was
incorporated into the main Metalworkers’ Union, Vasas. The reason for the new affiliation was that Vasas promised a
more professional interest representation background and network for its members.
At present, the trade union has about 250 members, 96% of them blue-collars workers. The trade union density among
GM employees in Hungary is about 30%.

5
GM Opel
Furthermore, a collective agreement is in effect from July 1996, including inflation-adjusted salary increases. The rate
over indexation is laid down in wage agreements every year. In addition, the company pays a contribution to voluntary
pension funds. Salaries are relatively high in comparison with local labour market wages (e.g. a maintenance worker’s
monthly salary can reach 300,000 HUF gross). There is no collective agreement at sectoral level in this industry.
A works council at the Szentgotthárd plant was also established in 1993. Elections generally take place every three years.
Despite the fact that seven out of the nine members of the works council are trade union officials, the works council and
the trade union operate separately, as far as the Labour Code separates functions.
Concerning industrial relations specifically, according to the EWC representative, the relationship between employee
representatives and management was hostile at the beginning, due to the fact that the expatriate director was not willing
to conclude a collective agreement. The relationship became more balanced after the signing of the collective agreement,
but when restrictions occurred in the Hungarian company, relations again became strained. Today, the company’s
business is managed by an Hungarian director and there has been no serious conflict to date. The wage agreement for
this year, however, is not yet signed (up to July 2006).
Table 1: Profile of GM Opel industrial relations in Poland and Hungary
Source: Authors
EWC experience and practice
EWC profile
The EWC of General Motors Europe (GME) is a very particular case for a number of reasons concerning formation
process, operational features, trade union involvement and position within the companies’ national and international
structure of interest representation.
The EWC, which is known as GME European Employee Forum (EEF), was established by a voluntary agreement in
1996. Since then and during the course of industrial debates on cross-border restructuring, caused by overcapacity in
European GM plants and losses in market shares, the EEF has developed from an information and consultative body into
a negotiation body, which is also able to sign agreements with GME management (see Table 2).
Features Poland Hungary
Investment type Greenfield (without R&D activities), but also
sales activities
Brownfield
Number and size of workplaces 1 major production site (vehicle production)
and 2 smaller production sites (Powertrain
production), plus admi nistration facility
1 production site plus administration
facility
Number of employees 3,000 900
Profile of workforce Assembly work, administration staff, 2%
engineers, outstanding qualification levels
Assembly work, administration staff,
outstanding qua lification levels
Type of interest organisation Trade union Dual system (1 trade union, 1 works
council)
Trade union structure 3 trade unions, but domination by one trade
union
Only one trade union
Union membership and coverage 23% About 30%
Board-level representation No No
Coordination of collective bargaining Inter-plant trade union committee Yes

6
As a result, the EEF is a well-known example with regard to enabling the negotiation role of EWCs, developing a
proactive and agenda-oriented EWC practice which is characterised by a strong integration of European interest
representation into national channels, a strong trade union basis and employee involvement structures, as well as the
definition of genuine European objectives, the development of a European agenda and the creation of joint European
projects to be implemented.
During the 1990s, a number of national agreements had already been signed between European GM management and
the employee interest representations of GM subsidiaries in single European countries (Opel, Vauxhall and Saab).
Although the EEF played no crucial role in the national negotiations on the production security agreements at that time,
a mechanism had been shaped permitting EEF members to keep one another informed about national agreements and
developments across European GM plants.
In this way, EEF members realised that an employment pact for one individual site might be a drawback for another plant
and, moreover, that GME management might play one side off against another. Since then, the EEF has been active in
four major negotiation sets aimed at the conclusion of framework agreements with GM management, caused by
restructuring plans carried out by management.
The development at GM Europe can be described by the following milestones:
national and local job agreements at Opel Germany in 1993 and 1998;
national and job agreements at Vauxhall (UK) in 1998;
first European framework agreement concerning the GM-Fiat-Alliance in 2000;
second European framework agreement concerning the guarantee of the Luton production site (UK) in 2001;
restructuring programme ‘Olympia’ and third European framework agreement in 2001;
second major restructuring effort and fourth European framework agreement in 2004/2005.
The agreements especially addressed cost-reduction programmes, with commitments of security for production locations
and workforce reductions only allowed by socially acceptable means (including no redundancies to be made for
economic reasons). The framework agreements were facilitated by Europe-wide coordination of plant and trade union
representation, as well as the mobilisation of employees beyond national borders (with so-called ‘GM Days of Action’
as European-wide protests against job cuts). According to the EWC headquarters representatives, EWC practice has a
significant influence on company policy (even if the closure of the Portuguese GM plant could not be prevented in 2006).
The EEF is a very diverse and pluralistic body. Currently, it comprises 29 members from 17 countries, with two groups
of countries (‘Nordic Cluster’ and ‘South East Cluster’) being represented by one delegate each. EEF business is run by
a Steering Committee of six members who organise the daily work, coordinate communication with and between
national EEF delegates, prepare meetings and agenda topics and, most notably, represent the EEF against the GM
management. The EEF, as well as the Steering Committee, is directed by the chairman of the German GM Opel works
council.
Each EEF session is preceded by a meeting of working groups, consisting not only of EWC members but also other
advisors from different countries where GM operates. Furthermore, task groups can be established to tackle certain
subjects. For example, the task group ‘Delta’ was set up for prospective models and Delta Group II was established to
work out where the Meriva II generation vehicle will be produced.

7
GM Opel
Table 2: Key features of GM Opel EWC
Source: Authors
Operational issues and resources
Points of departure
A delegate from Hungary was already involved in the EEF as an observer at the time of establishing the European
interest representation body. In 1998, the Hungarian representative became a full member of the EEF (see Table 3).
Poland has been taking part in the EWC with observer status since 1999–2000 and since then has been a full member of
the EEF. The initiative to participate in the EWC was taken by the private and informal Solidarnosc-based contacts of
the latter delegate. The local GM management was suspicious and a little fearful of workers’ representatives from
Gliwice being involved in the EWC; however, it presented no obstacles or problems to involvement.
Nomination and delegation process
In both Hungary and Poland, EEF representatives are elected, but there are differences in the election process. The
Hungarian delegate is formally elected by the local works council; in practice, it is always the president of the works
council who is elected to take part in the EWC.
In Poland, there is a direct election to the EWC, taking into account each employee’s personal ballot. However, only
employees with a certain history in the company are eligible to vote (strictly GM employees and not outsourced workers
of related companies). The local management in Poland tried to promote its own candidate in 2000, but the trade union
was able to get its own representative accepted (even though it is not stated that a trade union member must be a
representative in the EWC). Moreover, private contacts of the later Polish delegate were used to a certain extent to obtain
a proposal to join the EWC.
Profile of EWC delegates
The EWC representative from Hungary is the current chairman of the local works council and also a trade union leader,
thus representing both interest representation channels.
The EWC representative from Poland is a member of the plant trade union committee, a member of NSZZ Solidarnosc
and a full-time worker at the GM plant. But his activities in the field of EWC matters are only part of his activities at
the respective GM plant, in contrast to the deputy/subsidiary EWC member from Poland (due to the EWC agreement,
Features GM Opel EWC
Initial EWC agreement 1996
Further agreements 1999, 2000 (consolidated European Employee Forum Agreement)
National law/headquarters Belgium
EWC type Employee only
Total EWC members/countries 29 from 17 countries (DK, FI, IE and Norway are grouped together in the ‘Nordic Cluster’
represented by one delegate, and IT and EL form the ‘South East Cluster’, also represented by
one delegate)
New Member States PL (1), HU (1)
Steering group/countries Manufacturing Committee (‘Lenkungsausschuss’) with 17 members (including PL and HU)
and Steering Committee with 6 members (BE, DE (2), ES, SE and UK)
Annual meetings Once per year (Manufacturing Committee and Steering Committee also once per year)
Consultation and negotiation role Negotiation role on European level (including agreement conclusion)

8
Poland has only one member, but the deputy is allowed to participate in the working group sessions and to take part in
the preparation process of the EWC plenary sessions, without actual involvement in these sessions).
The deputy EEF delegate from Poland is a full-time trade union officer, representing Solidarnosc in the plant, and also
the president of the inter-plant trade union committee at GM, which comprises 38 members plus the president. (The
inter-plant trade union committee stands for management of the trade union structures at the plant, as well as for trade
union structures at some other companies delivering products or supplying services to the GM plant.) As president, he
coordinates the actions of the trade union, leads the committee and looks after the implementation of decisions taken by
committee members.
Table 3: Key features of involvement of NMS in GM Opel EWC
Source: Authors
General conditions of EWC participation
According to the Hungarian EEF representative, the general requirements of EWC involvement seem to be sufficient
regarding clerical and other technical and infrastructural equipment (the delegate is the chairman of the works council,
with adequate equipment and support staff). For both the Hungarian delegate and the Polish EWC representative,
expenses of participation in EWC meetings (travel and accommodation costs, interpretation support) are covered by the
company and, furthermore, there are no problems with obtaining time off for EWC meetings.
In contrast to the situation in Hungary, the Polish interviewee reports some facilities for EWC involvement as
unsatisfactory. Firstly, there was no language training for the EWC member from Poland. Secondly, the situation as
regards office equipment is not satisfactory, e.g. old computers have to be used and equipment is inadequate (the
activities are driven from the NSZZ Solidarnosc office within the plant) and, above all, there is a lack of personnel to
deal full time with EWC issues. Due to the fact that the Polish EWC member is a full-time employee in GM, he has little
time to take care of EWC issues; if required, he manages operations during his spare time, using his private resources at
home (internet, computer).
Influencing EWC policy
A regular EWC meeting takes two days. On the first day, trade union and employee representatives come together in a
preparatory meeting, where the delegates have the opportunity of discussing diverse topics and questions. Management
representatives join in the plenary meeting on the second day.
Features GM Opel EWC
Start of EWC participation 1998 (HU), 1999 (PL)
Building on previous contacts Yes
Status Observer status from the beginning, full membership since 1998 (HU)
Observer status 1999-2000, since then full membership (PL)
Number and shar e of NMS members 2 (7%)
Involvement in EWC enlargement Yes (HU and PL had already been members of the EEF before enlargement
started, but there are no other delegates from NMS at the moment)
Representation in steering/control functions Yes (PL, Manufacturing Committee)
Delegation procedure Election (HU, PL)
Profile of EWC members Chairman of local works council (HU)
Member of plant trade union committee and trade union official (PL)
Information on EWC Via trade union (PL)
Trade union and works council (HU)

9
GM Opel
There is a special characteristic that the spokesmen of the EWC meeting are always those who are most affected by the
given issue, which predominantly deals with restructuring. Hungary has not been involved in such a situation to date
because the parallel cut-offs in European plants mostly involve employees in Western Europe at present. In case of
conflicts, the EWC representatives hold further meetings subsequent to the plenary sessions. Besides this, the EWC
agenda as a whole is set by the Steering Committee. Usually, each member can influence the agenda by contacting the
Select Committee via the intranet, as well as during the course of the preparatory meetings before the plenary sessions
of the EWC. It should be stated, however, that the Hungarian representative, who is not part of the Steering Committee,
can influence the EWC agenda only to a limited extent.
Because the Polish EWC delegate has been a member of the Manufacturing Committee for several years, potentially he
can influence EWC policy to a certain extent. But as a result of this delegate’s particular problems (as mentioned above
– being a regular worker at the GM plant and a lack of technical and personal equipment), it is rather difficult to fulfil
an influencing role in practice from his point of view.
Competence-building and training
Even though there are stipulations for language training in the underlying EWC agreement, especially with regard to
English (but also including accounting, financial, economic and legal knowledge), in practice differences can be seen
between the countries considered.
According to the Hungarian interviewee, there is sufficient training held regularly for EWC members. However,
according to the Polish interviewee, there is no special training (including preparatory training) provided for
participation in the EWC. However, the Polish EWC member, being a trade union officer, has been undergoing certain
training courses within the framework of trade union activity programmes.
Communication and coordination of EWC practice
Communication between EWC members and with other trade unionists involved in EWC work is carried out via the
intranet, e-mail and mobile phones. In general, cooperation is regarded as moderately lively, including at EWC sessions,
events, exchanges of information and preparatory meetings, where problems are discussed and a strategy set for the
forthcoming appointment with management representatives.
In Poland, the EWC representative gives his feedback to employees usually via channels that already existed before
Poland joined the EWC, i.e. via the trade union’s bulletin, issued by the local trade unions in Gliwice.
The EWC structure and subsidiary structures are plain and ‘classic’ – apart from the EWC session, since there is only
one plant of GM in Poland, there are no follow-up meetings after EWC sessions. With the integration of GM Powertrain
and the production sites in Bielsko Biala and Tychy, this situation has changed and coordination of EWC policy and
integration of these plants in both Polish and European structures is seen as a major task for the near future.
Problems and barriers
Both the Hungarian and Polish EEF delegates consider the timing of management’s information and also its quality to
be major problems in EWC practice at the moment. From the point of view of the Polish delegate, the information
provided by management is regarded as too general and only refers to the global group policy, future strategic plans,
efforts to enter new markets, etc. The information has little, or only very limited, reference to the employees’ situation
in the GM plants across Europe.
Overall, the information is considered to be too diluted to have much impact and importance for employees and the
specific needs of certain plants. According to the interviewees, however, employees are interested in developments that

10
will have an impact on the future of their plant. Both the Hungarian and the Polish interviewees complain that too little
attention is devoted by management to employee matters and problems. The interviewees perceive these problems as
obstacles to an even more effective functioning of the EEF, although the EEF is currently one of the most proactive
European negotiation bodies.
In the opinion of the Polish interviewee, another major weakness of management’s communication is the fact that
sometimes EWC members are provided with information and questions related to it and are then expected or required
to give answers on the same day. This is considered unacceptable since the EWC is given no time to work out a common
standpoint that would satisfy all its members.
Moreover, an inherent EWC communication problem, identified by the Polish delegate, concerns the communication of
problems between certain plants. Due to the strong competition among plants in countries where GM operates,
representatives from these countries or plants often do not want to inform their EWC colleagues about problems and
difficulties in order not to be highlighted as the ‘problem’ plant.
Interview partners emphasised the following points as the main advantages of EWC involvement:
contacts with other representatives from other European countries;
exchange of information about general vehicle market trends;
exchange of information about GM management policies and the international situation concerning GM plants.
Problems with regard to EWC practice at GM Opel mainly concern the number of annual EWC sessions (one is not
enough), the nature of EWC issues (too general – more attention should be devoted to single plants) and the working
time and personnel resources available for EWC business (an additional worker to deal only with EWC matters would
be a solution). Also, the intense competition between GM production sites and national plants is seen as a major problem
for the EWC.
Impact on industrial relations and corporate culture
In both Hungary and Poland, the corporate culture at GM plants is currently strongly influenced by the company’s
difficult situation. The delegates stressed that the central management introduced, or tends to introduce, much
competition among single plants and countries (or that is at least the outcome of the current situation). Similarly, much
attention is devoted to efficiency in order to improve economic performance .
According to the Hungarian interviewee, the role of the EWC within the company is highlighted by the latest conflict
situation, when GM management recently announced the closure of the Portuguese plant as a first step in its European-
scale reorganisation – manufacturing activities will be relocated gradually from the EU15 to Eastern European countries.
After the announcement, employee delegates of the EEF held an extraordinary meeting and devised a European action
plan, including the so-called ‘Euro-strike’. Real strikes were held only in Portugal and Spain; other countries only held
plant meetings.
The workers in Hungary demonstrated their solidarity by taking part in an assembly, called together by the works
council, during paid working hours. (According to the Labour Code, the works council has the right to inform
employees.) The president of the works council informed the company director that it would be a European solidarity
action. The director allowed the workers’ assembly to be held as if it was the most natural thing in the world. (In theory,
if a trade union calls a strike, the company does not pay wages.) Practically, such meetings are held every quarter, but

11
GM Opel
usually at management’s request. This time, the Hungarian management tended to downplay the importance of the
workers’ assembly. A video recording was made of the meeting for local TV and workers on the other shift.
According to the Polish trade union representative, local management in Poland are a negative case example. HR
managers are often people with theoretical knowledge but with little practical experience in managing a team of workers.
The working climate is thus not good and this is to a large extent a consequence of the activities and approach of local
management. On the other hand, however, the local management in Poland does not show any hostility or cause any
difficulties or problems. They do not fight or mistreat the EWC member(s). The contacts with the local management are
acceptable.
The only groups of interest are concentrated around future production quotas and new platforms (models of cars to be
produced in the future). This introduces many tensions, including ones that have not been voiced, and leads to atomising
the EWC. In consequence, the representative from Poland does not feel that the EWC is to be seen as a uniform
employees’ representation that has the potential to act as a united collective partner for management.
According to the Polish delegate, the EWC has improved information and consultation in Poland only to a limited extent.
As stated above, the information is too general and with little reference and meaning for specific plants. On the other
hand, it can be used as an overview of general trends and developments, and thus is of some value. Communication to
the EWC has not been improved greatly (the information presented is often only a repetition of what was conveyed to
local management, so there is little added value). Management takes the position of the employee side in decision-
making into account to a very limited extent, if at all. This was especially evident in the decision as to where the new
Opel Meriva should be produced. Even though lobbying was coming from each representation in the EWC, the EWC
(or at least the Polish representation) believed that management did not take its opinion much into account.
From the point of view of the Polish delegate, the EWC has an impact on industrial relations, HR policy and participation
practice in Poland to a very limited extent, if at all. Moreover, the EWC has no impact on business decisions and
operational practice in Poland. Besides this, internal employee relations are not really influenced by the EWC. Workers
are much more interested in the social and pay conditions in their own plant, not in general trends on car markets or in
the company’s strategies. They are interested in whether they will have work in the next few years and how much they
will earn. The international matters and interdependencies are much too complicated for them and thus the vast majority
of workers are not interested in the EWC. Also, the EWC has not had much impact on the trade unions to date. It might
have reinforced their position towards the local management and influenced the fact that they can act on a par with the
employer in Poland.
Conclusions and prospects
GM Opel is obviously a case where EWC practice and active involvement in European bodies of interest representation
has developed in a rather hostile environment. EEF practice is integrated into national structures and organisations of
interest representation and employee participation, as well as trying to support national participation practice and define
genuine European objectives, agendas and joint projects. Moreover, the EEF is one of the EWC cases that has the
greatest advantage in terms of being able to develop a European identity of interest representation and ideas, as well as
broaden its negotiation role. However, the remarks of the Polish and Hungarian interview partners also highlight
difficulties with regard to developing joint ideas and a solidarity approach.
Romuald Jagodzinski, ETUI-REHS, Brussels, Melinda Kelemen and Lázló Neumann, National Employment
Office, Budapest, Stefan Stracke, Wilke, Maack und Partner, Hamburg
EF/06/65/EN C9
View publication statsView publication stats

Gm case study

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (7)

Similar to Gm case study

Similar to Gm case study (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Gm case study