1,400 jobs, the Berlin site and wage standards under pressure

According to management, vacant positions will no longer be filled but will instead be permanently relocated abroad. In the future, new jobs are to be created in so-called “best-cost countries.” At the same time, employees in Germany are expected to work significantly longer hours, face reduced job security, and forego improvements under collective bargaining agreements. Plans include, among other things, an increase in the weekly workweek to 40 hours, no wage increases until at least 2028, cuts in both collectively bargained and non-collectively bargained pay, and only 25 days of vacation. In addition, there will be mandatory training programs with tests and potential labor law sanctions for failing these tests.

“Management calls this a restructuring. In reality, it’s a program of drastic cuts,” says Thilo Reusch, chief negotiator for IG Metall. “Anyone who wants to cut 1,400 jobs, close an entire site, erode collective bargaining standards, and put pressure on employees with tests is not presenting a vision for the future. This is a declaration of war on the workforce.”

The planned closure of the Berlin site is particularly troubling. Berlin is a central and historically established location for IAV. Offering employees a transfer to Gifhorn is not a viable solution. For many, this would be virtually impossible to implement—due to family, place of residence, caregiving responsibilities, or social ties. “A workplace is not a point on a map that can be moved at will,” says Reusch. “Anyone who wants to close Berlin and tells employees they can just go to Gifhorn is misjudging the reality of our colleagues’ lives.”

IG Metall recognizes that IAV and the entire automotive and engineering services industry are under significant pressure to change. Transformation, changing customer structures, cost pressures, and technological upheavals demand answers. But from the union’s perspective, the management’s proposed plan does not provide a robust response to these challenges. Instead of a viable strategy for new business areas, future investments, and upskilling, the plan focuses primarily on staff cuts, relocations, and deteriorating conditions.

“Transformation does not mean fewer people, worse conditions, or cheaper locations,” Reusch emphasizes. “Transformation means securing skills, attracting new work, training employees, and developing locations. Those who only make cuts are not restructuring—they are amputating.”

The union also strongly criticizes the planned changes to existing collective bargaining standards. Working hours, pay, vacation time, and collectively agreed compensation components cannot be unilaterally rewritten by management. These issues belong at the bargaining table. IG Metall makes it clear that it will not accept any deterioration in collective bargaining terms.

“Collective bargaining agreements are not bargaining chips that can simply be set aside when the going gets tough,” says Reusch. “Anyone who questions collective bargaining standards is picking a fight with us. We will not allow employees to foot the bill for management mistakes and strategic failures.”

The employee representatives also view the planned training initiatives with skepticism. While training is fundamentally the right approach and necessary, they argue, it must not become a tool for weeding out employees. Tests with consequences under labor law create pressure rather than fostering development and place employees under general suspicion. “Training is meant to empower people, not weed them out,” explains Reusch. “Anyone who suddenly subjects employees to testing systems after years of dedicated work and threatens sanctions if they fail is not creating a culture of learning. They are creating fear.”

From the perspective of IG Metall and the works councils, management’s approach to date is also unacceptable. For months, there has been talk of economic risks, impending insolvency, and restructuring. However, robust plans, transparent figures, and a viable path forward have not yet been sufficiently presented. Instead, a key points paper has now been issued that is intended to force far-reaching concessions from employees in a very short time. 

IG Metall and the works councils make it clear: they are willing to negotiate necessary adjustments. However, this is contingent on unilateral dictates being taken off the table. What is needed is transparency regarding the economic situation, a sound financial plan, genuine prospects for the future at all locations, and respect for co-determination and collective bargaining agreements.

“We are not turning a blind eye to reality,” says Reusch. “But we reject a plan that divides workers, pits locations against one another, and destroys social standards. Anyone who wants negotiations must come to the table with proposals—not with blackmail tactics.”

IG Metall is demanding a fundamental change of course from management. Necessary measures include refraining from site closures, maintaining collective bargaining standards, providing binding job security, investing in future-oriented fields, and implementing a training program that offers employees prospects rather than creating pressure.

Specifically, IG Metall is insisting on:

• The reversal of the planned closure of the Berlin site
• A binding commitment to safeguard existing sites
• No deterioration in collective bargaining agreements, pay, working hours, and vacation time
• A transparent presentation of the economic situation and financing
• A viable long-term strategy for new business areas and employment
• Socially acceptable solutions instead of pressure to accept severance agreements
• Training without punitive measures and without selection procedures
• Negotiations on equal footing with works councils and IG Metall

IG Metall has announced that, together with the works councils, it will use every legal, operational, and collective bargaining tool at its disposal to fight off the planned cuts. At the same time, it is calling on employees to remain united, not to allow themselves to be divided, and to join the union. “We will continue to negotiate. But one thing is clear: negotiations only make sense if the unilateral dictates are taken off the table,” explains the union representative. “If management sticks to the take-it-or-leave-it approach, it will provoke massive resistance from our colleagues.”