Latest news with #unions
Reuters
an hour ago
- Automotive
- Reuters
Stellantis, Ferrari workers in Italy agree salary increases over 2025-2026 period
MILAN, June 6 (Reuters) - Italy's largest automotive groups, led by Stellantis ( opens new tab, and unions on Friday signed an agreement for an overall 6.6% salary increase over the 2025-2026 period for their workers in Italy, further helping them cover the inflation peak in recent years. A first 3.7% increase will take effect from this month, while wages will rise by further 2% from January next year and 0.8% from November 2026, the companies involved and metalworker unions said in separate statements. The agreement covers over 60,000 workers in Italy at Stellantis, Ferrari ( opens new tab, Iveco ( opens new tab and CNH (CNH.N), opens new tab, all of which have their roots in the former Fiat group. No strike was called during the six-month negotiation period leading to the deal. Workers will also receive two one-off sums of 240 euros ($274) each, at the end of this month and in April next year, they said. Friday's deal is part of a broader four-year renewal of the labour contract the companies and unions signed in 2023, which however left salary adjustments for the final two years to be negotiated at a later stage. An agreed pay increase had amounted to over 11% over 2023-2024, when Italy's inflation topped 10%. With increases announced on Friday, the total salary boost at the end of the four-year period will amount to 18.7%, the unions said. Gianluca Ficco of trade union UILM said that was a remarkable achievement. It "has ensured the full recovery of (lost) purchasing power in a very difficult context, of high inflation and of crisis for the automotive industry," he said. "We think this agreement can become an example of positive labour relations for the whole metal-mechanic sector." Giuseppe Manca, Stellantis' HR head for Italy, said in a statement parties involved had shown a strong commitment to reaching an agreement in the context of participatory labour relations. Manca said that, despite persisting uncertainties about the time frame of energy transition and European Union policies, "we have together found solutions to adequately protect the interests of workers while guaranteeing the competitiveness of the company in the country". Ferrari, Iveco and CNH also welcomed the agreement. Truckmaker Iveco said in its statement the agreement came at a "considerable" economic effort for the company. ($1 = 0.8757 euros)
CTV News
16 hours ago
- Business
- CTV News
Quebec artists demand action to regulate AI in arts and culture
Montreal Watch Members of 6 Quebec unions representing thousands of artists and technicians are demanding action to regulate artificial intelligence in arts and culture.
Daily Mail
16 hours ago
- Business
- Daily Mail
Huge work from home deal about to be struck: What it means for you
Millions of workers could soon be allowed to work from home hassle-free as a growing number of bosses accept hybrid working arrangements are here to stay. Since August, the Fair Work Commission (FWC) has been reviewing the Clerks Award – which sets out the minimum legal entitlements for those in clerical and office jobs - to test its relevance for work in post Covid workplaces. The FWC will hear from employers and unions as new models are developed for hybrid workers who spend half of their work week at home. Innes Willox, the chief executive of the Australian Industry Group, said the award was being updated to fit 'modern day reality' as working habits changed. 'Essentially, since Covid, we've had a work from home free-for-all which is now starting to get more structure and shape around it,' he said. 'The industrial relations (IR) system is not set up for work from home or flexible work. The award system is set up around nine to five work, basically.' It's predicted the review will result in a clause to 'remove any existing impediments' to WFH and that the award will be used as a model for others. Unions want their members to earn the 'right to request' WFH days. Currently, employers can reject requests on reasonable business grounds. Some employers have argued a 'free-for-all' attitude towards WFH since the pandemic has impacted on productivity. Critics also say connections are lost in workplaces if employees are at home and that mentorship and leadership is difficult to enforce. But, a landmark government report recently found working from home is actually more productive than going into the office - in moderation. 'Allowing workers to work from home some days can improve worker satisfaction and allows people to benefit by avoiding the commute to work, meaning they have additional time for other purposes,' the Productivity Commission said. Working from home has proven particularly popular with women, who can save on childcare costs and complete other tasks in the hours they usually spend commuting. A hybrid model, mixing work from home and the office, was seen as the best approach to encourage creative interactions. 'Workers do not need to be in the office full-time to experience the benefits of in-person interactions,' it said. 'As a result, hybrid work (working some days remotely and some days in the office) tends to be beneficial to productivity, or at least, is not detrimental to productivity.' The Productivity Commission, however, said in-person interactions were more likely to spark initial breakthroughs. 'A key reason for this is that in-person interactions may be better for collaborative tasks and idea generation,' it said. 'Experimental evidence from engineering firms indicates that idea generation benefits from in-person interactions but in-person and virtual teams were equally effective in evaluating and selecting ideas that have already been developed.'
E&E News
a day ago
- Politics
- E&E News
Trump foes press Supreme Court to reject bid to restart layoffs
Unions and other groups challenging the Trump administration's plans for large-scale layoffs are urging the Supreme Court to reject the administration's latest bid to let those layoffs proceed. The Supreme Court should refuse the Trump administration's request to intervene, challengers said in a motion filed Monday. Their response comes after the Trump administration last week asked the justices to block a lower court's ruling that has paused layoffs across much of the government. 'If the breakneck reorganization of the federal government ordered by the President is implemented before the merits of this case may be decided based on a full record, then statutorily required and authorized programs, offices, and functions across the federal government will be abolished, agencies will be radically downsized from what Congress authorized, critical government services will be lost, and hundreds of thousands of federal employees will lose their jobs,' says the response filed by unions, conservation groups and other organizations fighting the layoffs in court. Advertisement 'There will be no way to unscramble that egg,' they added. 'If the courts ultimately deem the President to have overstepped his authority and intruded upon that of Congress, as a practical matter there will be no way to go back in time to restore those agencies, functions, and services.'
Forbes
a day ago
- Business
- Forbes
Why Annuities Are Healthy For Retirees?
Senior woman helping senior man during class or seminar Annuities are good for retirees, but America's workers lost access to annuities over the past forty years. Congress, states, and employers attacked the unions that supported defined benefit plans which paid benefits for life. Today, only about half of the 63 million Americans nearing retirement (or retired), age 50 - 64, have retirement accounts. Of those with retirement accounts, the average balance is about $150,000 – far less than they'll need for time they can expect to be retired. So annuities are starting to look better and better. With market volatility and increasing life expectancy, there's a resurgence of interest in guaranteed lifelong income. Annuities, especially when embedded in retirement systems, offer a solution to a complex and increasingly urgent problem for many. Most Americans near retirement—or recently retired—have endured a lifetime of financial insecurity. The scale of the challenge is staggering: 63 million Americans between ages 50 and 64 are entering retirement after decades of stagnant wages, weakened union coverage, and the disappearance of secure defined benefit pensions. Automation and globalization eroded demand for their skills, and many took on mortgages, consumer debt, and even student loans to support their families. Our team at the New School document the rising insecurity of retirement here. The 401(k) causes problems when it is time to spend it. The stress of managing a lump sum is immense. The math is impossible. Annuities help solve what Nobel laureate William Sharpe called the "nastiest problem in finance": how to make a lump sum last for an uncertain lifespan. Being targeted by criminals is also stressful. Scammers often pretend to be legitimate financial advisors and target older people with retirement nest eggs. A 72-year-old with $500,000 is a more juicy target than one with a $3,333 monthly benefit. It's predictable that the FBI reported an almost doubling of reported fraud on Americans age-60+ between and over form 2021 to 2023. There's a spate of research that backs up what, for most people, is common sense: economic security – through annuities – is good for retirees' emotional and physical health. Managing a steady monthly income is healthier than managing a one half million dollars in your 70s and 80s. There are 2 main reasons annuities are good for your health: 1) Since people with annuities have financial incentives to live a long time they take better care of their health, and 2) Lump- sum management causes more stress and depression compared to receiving guaranteed payments. Emerging research suggests that people who perceive they will receive an annuity may engage in more health-focused behaviors. A 2025 study presented at a Consumer Research conference showed that individuals expecting annuity payments expressed a willingness to invest in relatively expensive health checks and pay for more intensive exercise programs than their current routine. Even more notably, people who anticipated receiving an annuity actually increased the intensity of their exercise, compared to those who expected to receive a lump sum. Researchers hypothesize that knowing they can beat the bank by living longer than the expected prompts they to stay healthy. There are open research questions too: Do annuity recipients choose more life-extending treatments? Are they less likely to opt for suicide or assisted suicide? Research shows that financial hardship is a common factor in such decisions, even when controlling for pain, illness, and age, so having a guaranteed income may save lives. We know it lowers depression. In 2024, Canadian researchers found that more stable income—like that provided by annuities—reduced biological stress markers. People with predictable income had lower allostatic loads, a clinical measure of stress that includes high blood pressure, glucose levels, and cortisol. High allostatic load is a signal of increased risk of early death. Economist Constantine Panis found in 2006 and 2015 that annuities improve retiree satisfaction. Holding income constant, retirees with annuities reported higher well-being than those with defined contribution plans. Why would steady income boost health? Happiness is linked to better immune function, better glucose regulation, and lower levels of stress chemicals in the brain. In an article titled "What Makes Retirees Happy?" economists Keith Bender and Natalia Jivan found forced retirement, compared to voluntary retirements, makes people miserable. (And, sadly, most people retire earlier than they want to). A secondary finding is that retirees receiving regular payments were happier and had fewer symptoms of depression than those managing an equivalent lump sum. This research suggests that annuities not only reduce financial stress but can improve mental and physical health outcomes. If annuities are so good for people, why don't more buy them? There's plenty of blame to go around. Some researchers blame the victim. They argue people underestimate how long they'll live and overestimate the likelihood of dying early. Two economists blame this mistaken math calculation for causing chronic fear they will lose money if they turned their nest egg into annuities. And we can stop blaming retirees' bequest motives—wanting to leave money to children. In most cases, these desires could be met by annuitizing most of their savings and setting aside a small portion for heirs. We can blame governments and employers for destroying annuities. The seemingly unrelated trend – the decline in union membership – caused by 40 years of employer, federal, and state policies that undermined union organizing diminished the defined benefit system, while the same policies favored do-it-yourself retirement plans, like 401(k)s and IRAs. You can blame the structure of the commercial insurance industry which faces a rock and a hard place. The rocks in selling voluntary annuities are adverse selection and moral hazard. Adverse selection is caused by the buyers being biased towards healthier people who are more likely to buy annuities. And, as I showed above, once someone has an annuity, they may start living healthier, which creates moral hazard that insurers must also price in. The hard place is that insurance companies also have to price in profit. Together – profit motive, adverse selection, and moral hazard – tend to make annuities more expensive than annuities from defined benefit plans. Compounding the problem, many products are hard to understand. Some consumers are right to be cautious. Annuities can improve well-being by encouraging healthier behavior, reducing stress, and providing a stable income for life. Retirees with annuities report higher satisfaction, lower depression, and even biological markers of better health. Policymakers, employers, and financial planners should revisit how annuities are presented and offered. And the mother of all annuities – Social Security – needs preserving by increasing revenues into the system. Congress needs to pass the Retirement Savings for Americans Act, which provides easy to understand monthly benefits to low and moderate income workers. The evidence is clear: retirement income security isn't just good economics—it's good medicine.
