UAW leaders' salaries going up, but percentage increase isn't as high as in 2018

In 2018, the UAW made an intriguing change in the language that would appear in the union’s constitution related to salaries for positions such as president, secretary-treasurer and vice presidents.

Rather than listing the actual salaries as was the case previously, the 2018 document provided a formula, or multiplier, used to calculate the individual salaries for top leaders.

The result, according to union activist Scott Houldieson, was that delegates at that year's convention were left to figure out that the salaries were being boosted by about 31%.

“It was significant, and the formula was meant to confuse,” said Houldieson, one of the convention delegates representing UAW Local 551 at Ford’s Chicago Assembly Plant and chair of the dissident group, Unite All Workers for Democracy, or UAWD.

During this year’s convention, held last week in Detroit, the UAW dropped the formula and returned to more straightforward language. The union’s president, currently Ray Curry, was assigned an approximately $207,000 annual salary in the language that was adopted.

Salaries for secretary-treasurer and the three vice presidents were approved at $191,750 and $186,009, respectively. Other International Executive Board members would receive salaries of $171,082. Those salaries, which amount to an approximately 3% raise, would grow in March when another 3% raise, contingent on members getting profit-sharing checks, kicks in. The leaders are also eligible for payments this year and next of up to 3% of their salaries, also contingent on profit-sharing for members. Currently, Frank Stuglin is secretary-treasurer, and Cindy Estrada, Terry Dittes and Chuck Browning are the vice presidents, although Estrada and Dittes are retiring.

In its news release on the changes, the UAW explained that salaries were approved by delegates and that "the wage increases track the most recently ratified General Motors contract,” referencing the 2019 agreement with the union. UAW spokeswoman Sandra Engle did not respond to a request seeking additional information about the raises.

One of the resolutions that the UAWD had sought unsuccessfully for the convention would have done away with the raises handed out in 2018 and replaced them with 3% raises. That didn’t happen, but Houldieson credited the constitution committee for reverting to the more transparent way of listing salaries.

“Our perspective was that the transparency was vital. That was the most important part of it,” he said. “The transparency aspect we were thrilled over.”

But Houldieson said he was less thrilled by the way the process to approve the salary changes was handled at the convention.

Houldieson said he doesn’t personally begrudge union officers making a decent salary, but he’s bothered that a voice vote rejecting the new salaries was not accepted, even though the person leading this part of the convention proceedings, Vice President Dittes, acknowledged it. Instead, following more comments from delegates and a generally confusing stretch of the proceedings, the salaries were approved in a new vote with delegates standing.

More:UAW delegates vote to kill strike pay increase in closing hours of convention

More:UAW delegates, in departure from past, make nominations for top offices

“The way that it was done, it was offensive,” according to Houldieson, who said the salary resolution should have gone back to committee for adjustment before being brought back to the floor for a vote. “It definitely could have been done so much better.”

During the debate about the salaries, some delegates did indicate their support for salary increases for the leadership, and at least one person said he was pleased that the new process was more transparent. But concerns about the much larger raises approved during the 2018 convention, still prompted frustration, with one delegate noting that “I’m all for raises for the (International Executive Board), but the problem is they got 30-something percent the last time. I didn’t get 30%. My local membership didn’t get 30%.”

Marick Masters, a business professor and labor expert at Wayne State University, said pushback against raises for union leaders, any union leaders, is not surprising. But the corruption scandal involving union leaders and auto executives that saw even ex-UAW presidents abuse their positions, rip off their members and go to prison gives more fuel to that pushback.

“I think there’s a lot of lingering disappointment and disgust with the way the UAW handled the scandal overall,” Masters said, but “I think that raising salaries for officers is never a popular thing in a union. It’s sort of like voting for increases in pay for members of Congress.”

More:UAW touts reform efforts ahead of convention, but corruption scandal still weighs heavily

More:Whitmer tells UAW crowd: Workers won't get shortchanged on my watch

Masters said salary increases for union leaders and staff are among the most divisive issues unions face, and he would expect a negative response.

Still, in the current economic climate, with inflation pushing 9% or more, 3% raises look relatively modest, he said.

And Masters said it’s important to consider the UAW’s peers. 

“I think it’s reasonable to say the UAW does not overpay its officers relative to other unions,” Masters said, pointing to the Teamsters for comparison. A filing in March with the Labor Department lists the 2021 gross salary, not counting disbursements, for General President James Hoffa, who retired earlier this year, at $341,033.

As for what happened in 2018, Masters noted that that was the convention where the presidency shifted from Dennis Williams to Gary Jones. Both were convicted in the corruption probe.

“I would just be leery of that whole leadership transition,” Masters said.

Contact Eric D. Lawrence: elawrence@freepress.com. Follow him on Twitter: @_ericdlawrence. Become a subscriber.