logo
'Holding our breath': Canadian auto workers face crisis as Trump threatens higher tariffs

'Holding our breath': Canadian auto workers face crisis as Trump threatens higher tariffs

USA Today30-04-2025
'Holding our breath': Canadian auto workers face crisis as Trump threatens higher tariffs President Donald Trump threatened to hike the 25% tariffs on Canadian cars. Canada's auto workers already fear the worst.
Show Caption
Hide Caption
Auto industry could get exemptions from tariffs, Trump says
President Donald Trump said he's considering temporary tariff exemptions for automakers amid attempts to move manufacturing back to the U.S.
Trump's tariffs threaten 125,000 Canadian auto worker jobs.
'These are not Donald Trump's jobs to take,' union leader Jeff Gray told USA TODAY.
"I really don't want cars from Canada," Trump said in the Oval Office on April 23.
OSHAWA, Canada − Canada's embattled auto workers are bracing for impact.
President Donald Trump's tariffs on Canadian cars hang like storm clouds over blue collar towns as rumors spread of coming layoffs and plant closures and economists warn higher tariffs could demolish the country's auto industry.
'We're holding our breath,' said Jeff Gray, president of Unifor Local 222, a union representing 5,000 workers and suppliers in Oshawa, home to a General Motors assembly plant. 'We have earned these jobs. These are not Donald Trump's jobs to take.'
More: 'Trump is trying to break us': Carney wins in Canada riding fury at Trump to victory
Crisis looms over Canadian auto towns
Trump's tariffs have stirred a fresh patriotism and national identity across Canada. On April 28, Prime Minister Mark Carney's Liberal Party won a comeback election on a tide of anti-Trump sentiment.
For the country's auto workers, that nationalism has become especially poignant as the industry stares down the barrel of catastrophe.
Mark Carney wins Canadian prime minister election
Mark Carney won the Canadian election to retain power as prime minister.
Auto assembly has been the beating heart of Oshawa, a small city of 185,000 an hour's drive from Toronto, for over a century.
Now, the windows of houses around the city are plastered with Canadian flags. A massive Canadian flag flies over a parking lot adjacent to the city's Walmart.
Chris Waugh, Local 222's chairperson and a 23-year worker at the plant, said Oshawa autoworkers were keeping the focus on their daily work in the face of possible job losses.
'They're mad, angry,' Waugh said. 'There's fear. They have mortgages, they have bills.'
A spokesperson for GM did not return a request for comment.
Trump on the offensive
Trump saddled all imported cars with a 25% tariff in early April. Carney, a former banker who took office earlier this year, hit back with a 25% tariff on U.S.-imported cars the next day.
On April 29, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed Trump will soon sign an executive order aimed at providing some relief to U.S. automakers, but the White House has yet to enact a pause on the additional 25% tariff on auto parts that's set to take effect May 3.
Trump floated raising tariffs on Canadian cars even higher.
"I really don't want cars from Canada," Trump said in the Oval Office on April 23. Six days later, he U.S. President signed an order to soften the blow of his auto tariffs with a mix of credits and relief for U.S. automoakers from other levies on materials.
Economists say Canada's auto industry − with 125,000 workers − is on the verge of collapse.
'It's not clear that the industry will survive in Canada,' said Douglas Porter, chief economist at BMO Financial Group.
Plant shutdown sparks panic
For other Canadian auto workers, the fear became a reality. Earlier this month, Stellantis, which makes Jeeps, Dodges and Rams, among other brands, temporarily shut down a plant in Windsor in response to Trump's tariffs. Windsor is directly across the border from Detroit in Ontario.
After a 2-week closure, employees at the plant returned to work April 21, Stellantis spokesperson Ann Marie Fortunate said.
Stellantis is 'continuing to assess the medium- and long-term effects of these tariffs on our operations, but also have decided to take some immediate actions, including temporarily pausing production at some of our Canadian and Mexican assembly plants,' Antonio Filosa, the company's chief operating officer, wrote in an April 3 letter to employees.
Although workers have their paychecks back, their anxiety has not faded, said Emile Nabbout, president of Unifor Local 195, which represents thousands of workers at the plant.
'It's impacting their livelihood,' Nabbout said. 'People really worry about how they're going to pay their bills.' Nabbout said 4,300 workers at the plant were affected.
The plant's workers 'don't know if this is one-time deal. They don't know if this is going to happen again,' he said. 'Nobody knows.'
Will 'buy Canadian' save the auto industry?
Union leaders said they hoped an internal redirection could save Canada's auto industry.
With around 1.8 million cars sold in Canada last year, the country's internal auto market is 'substantial,' according to Porter.
Still, "it's debatable whether it's a large enough market for a factory to continue producing just for the Canadian market,' he said.
By comparison, nearly 16 million cars were sold in the U.S. in 2024.
The U.S. is, by far, the biggest market for Canada's auto factories. Last year, Canada exported $28 billion worth of cars to the U.S. − 94% of its total annual auto exports.
Trump's tariffs are a traumatic blow for an industry that has enjoyed free trade across the U.S.-Canada border for decades.
After a 1965 U.S.-Canada agreement removed duties on most auto parts, the car industry enjoyed easy trade. That agreement was canceled in 2001, but the two country's auto industries had already become closely intertwined.
Rumors and stress
Andrea Penhale said layoffs at the GM plant in Oshawa could devastate her family.
Penhale, a 48-year-old behavioral analyst, said her son-in-law, who works at the plant, had heard rumors that the plant might lay off workers on the night shift.
'I don't think he knows what he might be in for,' she said.
Stacey Welsh, a 41-year-old Oshawa native, said some of her friends in the auto industry had been laid off in the past due to parts shortages. With the new trade war, "they don't know if the parts are going to come in," she said.
"They're really scared. They're scared if their jobs are still going to be there."
'Not one piece of equipment is going to leave'
Union leaders Gray and Waugh said they're used to fighting for auto workers' jobs. General Motors has moved to lay off Oshawa employees in the past.
The Oshawa union faced crisis beginning in 2018, when General Motors furloughed thousands of workers and threatened to close the plant. A May 2019 agreement between the company and the union kept the plant running – but in slimmed-down form.
This time, the threat to Canada's auto workers stems from international politics. Regardless, Gray said, the union won't allow General Motors to move jobs out of Oshawa.
'It's clean and simple,' Gray said. 'Once those jobs leave, they're never coming back, so we're not going to allow them to leave.'
"Not one piece of equipment is going to leave that plant,' Waugh said.
Oshawa auto workers held an "Elbows Up" march last month. The slogan has become a rallying cry for Canada to defend against Trump's tariffs and threats to make Canada a "51st state." Windsor auto workers also held a mass "Elbows Up" rally on April 26.
"We may have to fight. That's our rallying cry," Gray said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Safe Spaces Are Coming Back to Brown University—All Thanks to Trump
Safe Spaces Are Coming Back to Brown University—All Thanks to Trump

Yahoo

time20 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Safe Spaces Are Coming Back to Brown University—All Thanks to Trump

Brown University has settled with the Trump administration, which is currently waging war on elite institutions of higher education. Under the guise of combating antisemitism on campuses—an important problem, though not one the federal government is well-suited to address—President Donald Trump's Education Department has gone after Columbia University, Harvard University, and also Brown. Brown's deal with the federal government has been described as more favorable to the university than Columbia's; Harvard has yet to reach an agreement at all, but is reportedly willing to spend up to $500 million to settle the matter. Large sums of money are at stake for all three universities, as the federal government is responsible for doling out billions of dollars in research grants. Brown is the recipient of $510 million in public funding. So it's not surprising that Brown wanted to make a deal. It's unfortunate, of course, that the Trump administration is using the threat of a funding reduction to dictate terms to what is ultimately a private institution. This is obviously a version of jawboning, in which political figures use non-legislative means to achieve some sort of policy end. When the Biden administration threatened social media companies and browbeat them into making different moderation decisions, it was swiftly recognized as a free speech issue by many conservatives, libertarians, and even some on the left. It's similarly vexing when the Trump administration—which has pledged to restore free speech and end federally driven censorship—does this. It's true that institutions of higher education are not entitled to federal funding, which, after all, is paid by taxpayers. The Trump administration, or any administration, could decide, in a moment of unusual frugality, that the U.S. is too indebted to continue sending billions of dollars to wealthy private organizations that have their own massive endowments. But the government shouldn't use the threat of a funding cut as a form of coercion. That's no different from how the Obama administration handled Title IX enforcement: Obama's Education Department instructed campuses to adopt policies that were hostile to free speech and due process, and they implied that federal research dollars would evaporate in the event of noncompliance. Indeed, the extent to which the Obama higher ed coercion blueprint has been adopted by Trump is under-acknowledged. All that said, the details of the Brown settlement are disturbing in their own right. It's true that Brown avoided some of the harsher penalties that Columbia got stuck with, and it's good that the settlement recognizes that the government has no "authority to dictate Brown's curriculum or the content of academic speech." Veena Dubal, a law professor at the University of California at Irvine, complains that the settlement includes "no barrier to government interference in faculty hiring," but the only thing it really says about hiring is that it must be race neutral. The Supreme Court has already held that race-based hiring and admissions policies are almost always impermissible, so this is hardly some unreasonable, out-of-nowhere demand. But Dubal is also concerned about a provision of the settlement that permits the feds to collect and read Brown faculty course evaluations, and that's legitimately concerning. In fact, it speaks to the most troubling aspect of the settlement: It lends itself toward the creation of a campus antisemitism police that will be laser-focused on identifying, cataloguing, and eliminating uncomfortable and offensive speech that is nevertheless clearly protected by the First Amendment. In other words, the Trump administration is directly encouraging the formation of campus safe spaces. The settlement instructs Brown to survey students on their feelings of emotional safety. The survey questions are really something, and include: "whether they feel welcome at Brown; whether they feel safe reporting anti-Semitism at Brown; whether they have experienced harassment on social media." These are vague questions that will prompt subjective answers. Social media harassment is a particularly fraught topic; what constitutes harassment? If one student is being unkind to another student on Instagram or TikTok, is it really the university's job to intervene? Brown should act to counter identity-based harassment in cases where it's egregious, criminal, or abjectly violates the code of conduct. If students are drawing swastikas on Jewish people's doors, the university should certainly intervene. But the language in the settlement is too non-specific, and almost requires university administrators to overreach. No one should be naive about this, because it's obvious what's going to happen: An anti-Israel student will go after a pro-Israel student on social media, the pro-Israel student will say they are being harassed, and Brown will feel obligated to respond. No student should be made actually unsafe—i.e., be a victim of violence—because they are Jewish, or for any other reason. But it should be self-apparent to everyone who criticized the liberal safe space trend of the 2010s that re-orienting the campus speech police around the protection of Jewish students' subjective feelings of discomfort is not a positive development. This will produce the same sort of histrionics that existed when campus authorities were dedicated to policing speech that was perceived to be anti-black, anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-trans, etc. There will be an uptick in bias incident reports as students discover that they can weaponize the process against perceived enemies, as students absorb the idea that the administration is responsible for making them feel emotionally well at all times. I really thought the idea was to undermine the ideological foundations of the safe space mentality, not expand its identity-based reach. The Trump administration is erecting an edifice that would have been much to the liking of all those Play-Doh-loving, coloring-book-needing, puppy-hugging, safe-space liberals circa 2015. I'm joined by Amber Duke to discuss South Park's jokes about Trump, the latest Epstein Files news, Sydney Sweeney, Rep. Jasmine Crockett (D–Texas), and more. It has begun: My Nintendo Switch 2 arrived last night. I bought the system, one extra set of Joy-Cons, the Pro Controller, and three games: Donkey Kong Bananza, Mario Kart World, and Super Mario Party Jamboree. (The grand total was in the $800 range.) I spent most of the night transferring my data from the old Switch to the new one, and I've only had time to play about 20 minutes of Donkey Kong, so the full report will have to wait until next week. The post Safe Spaces Are Coming Back to Brown University—All Thanks to Trump appeared first on

Trump gives Mexico 90-day tariff reprieve as deadline for higher duties looms
Trump gives Mexico 90-day tariff reprieve as deadline for higher duties looms

Yahoo

time20 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Trump gives Mexico 90-day tariff reprieve as deadline for higher duties looms

By David Lawder and Aida Pelaez-Fernandez (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump gave Mexico a 90-day reprieve from higher tariffs to negotiate a broader trade deal but was expected to issue higher final duty rates for most other countries as the clock wound down on his Friday deal deadline. The extension, which avoids a 30% tariff on most Mexican non-automotive and non-metal goods compliant with the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement on trade, came after a Thursday morning call between Trump and Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum. "We avoided the tariff increase announced for tomorrow," Sheinbaum wrote in an X social media post, adding that the Trump call was "very good." Approximately 85% of Mexican exports comply with the rules of origin outlined in the USMCA, shielding them from 25% tariffs related to fentanyl, according to Mexico's economy ministry. Trump said that the U.S. would continue to levy a 50% tariff on Mexican steel, aluminum and copper and a 25% tariff on Mexican autos and on non-USMCA-compliant goods subject to tariffs related to the U.S. fentanyl crisis. "Additionally, Mexico has agreed to immediately terminate its Non Tariff Trade Barriers, of which there were many," Trump said in a Truth Social post without providing details. Trump is expected to issue tariff rate proclamations later on Thursday for countries that have not struck trade deals by a 12:01 a.m. EDT (0401 GMT) deadline. South Korea agreed on Wednesday to accept a 15% tariff on its exports to the U.S., including autos, down from a threatened 25%, as part of a deal that includes a pledge to invest $350 billion in U.S. projects to be chosen by Trump. But goods from India appeared to be headed for a 25% tariff after talks bogged down over access to India's agriculture sector, drawing a higher-rate threat from Trump that also included an unspecified penalty for India's purchases of Russian oil. Although negotiations with India were continuing, New Delhi vowed to protect the country's labor-intensive farm sector, triggering outrage from the opposition party and a slump in the rupee. TOUGH QUESTIONS FROM JUDGES Trump hit Brazil on Wednesday with a steep 50% tariff as he escalated his fight with Latin America's largest economy over its prosecution of his friend and former President Jair Bolsonaro, but softened the blow by excluding sectors such as aircraft, energy and orange juice from heavier levies. The run-up to Trump's tariff deadline was unfolding as federal appeals court judges sharply questioned Trump's use of a sweeping emergency powers law to justify his sweeping tariffs of up to 50% on nearly all trading invoked the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act to declare an emergency over the growing U.S. trade deficit and impose his "reciprocal" tariffs and a separate fentanyl emergency. The Court of International Trade ruled in May that the actions exceeded his executive authority, and questions from judges during oral arguments before the U.S. Appeals Court for the Federal Circuit in Washington indicated further skepticism. "IEEPA doesn't even say tariffs, doesn't even mention them," Judge Jimmie Reyna said at one point during the hearing. CHINA DEAL NOT DONE U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the United States believes it has the makings of a trade deal with China, but it is "not 100% done," and still needs Trump's approval. U.S. negotiators "pushed back quite a bit" over two days of trade talks with the Chinese in Stockholm this week, Bessent said in an interview with CNBC. China is facing an August 12 deadline to reach a durable tariff agreement with Trump's administration, after Beijing and Washington reached preliminary deals in May and June to end escalating tit-for-tat tariffs and a cut-off of rare earth minerals. (Additional reporting by Doina Chiacu and Susan Heavey in Washington and Aftab Ahmed in New Delhi; Editing by Nick Zieminski) Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Key inflation gauge picks up on goods, spending barely rises
Key inflation gauge picks up on goods, spending barely rises

Los Angeles Times

time22 minutes ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Key inflation gauge picks up on goods, spending barely rises

The Federal Reserve's preferred measure of underlying inflation increased in June at one of the fastest paces this year while consumer spending barely rose, underscoring the dueling forces dividing policymakers over the path of interest rates. The so-called core personal consumption expenditures price index, which excludes food and energy items, rose 0.3% from May, according to Bureau of Economic Analysis data out Thursday. It advanced 2.8% on an annual basis, a pickup from June 2024 that underscores limited progress on taming inflation in the past year. The data also showed inflation-adjusted consumer spending edged up last month after declining in May. The data illustrate the tug and pull in the economy that has Fed officials split over the course of monetary policy. On the one hand, progress on inflation has essentially stalled and central bankers fear that President Donald Trump's tariffs — some of which are already being passed on to consumers — will exert greater pressure on prices. On the other, a retrenchment in consumer spending due to a softening labor market risks a broader slowdown in the economy. The Fed kept borrowing costs unchanged for a fifth straight meeting on Wednesday, though two governors dissented in favor of a quarter-point cut. Chair Jerome Powell was staunch in his defense of a solid labor market and upside risks to inflation that support keeping rates steady for now. 'Weaker consumer spending and an upturn in goods prices due to tariffs could further complicate Fed policy,' Sal Guatieri, senior economist at BMO Capital Markets, said in a note. 'We will need to see either calmer inflation figures or weaker growth/softer job conditions to spur a rate cut on September 17.' The S&P 500 rose, Treasury yields declined and the dollar advanced after the report. The figures round out the softest consecutive quarters of growth in consumer spending since the pandemic. The gain in June spending reflected a rebound in outlays for non-durable goods. Purchases of durable goods fell for a third month — the longest stretch since 2021 — and outlays for services were tame, indicating weak discretionary spending. What Bloomberg Economics Says... 'Consumers are becoming more discerning in their spending habits — spending relatively more on necessities — as firms test how much of the tariff cost they can pass along.' — Stuart Paul and Estelle Ou Underlying the weakness in spending is a cooling labor market. Real disposable income was flat after declining in May, while wages and salaries barely rose. The July jobs report due Friday is expected to show a continued moderation in hiring and a slight pickup in unemployment. The saving rate held at 4.5%. Separate data Thursday showed initial applications for unemployment insurance were little changed last week. Another report showed labor cost growth rose 3.6% from a year ago, matching the lowest since 2021, reassuring Fed officials that the job market isn't a source of inflationary pressure. Inflation in June was driven by a pickup in prices for goods, including household furnishings, sports equipment and clothes that indicates some pass-through of import duties to consumers. Last month's consumer price index also showed costs of commonly imported goods like toys and appliances rose firmly. A key metric of services inflation that excludes energy and housing rose 0.2% for a second month. The PCE inflation figures were largely known coming into this report, thanks to inputs from the CPI data, as well as details from the producer price index and quarterly figures in Wednesday's report on gross domestic product. Looking ahead, economists say there could be more upward pressure on inflation as Trump is expected to outline a new round of tariffs on Friday and a stock-market rally keeps a key PCE input elevated. Smith writes for Bloomberg.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store