kscarbel2

Cummins Press Release / February 4, 2016 Cummins today reported results for the fourth quarter and full year of 2015. Fourth quarter revenues of $4.8 billion decreased 6 percent from the same quarter in 2014, with the impact of currency, primarily a stronger US dollar, negatively impacting sales by 4 percent. Revenues in North America declined 2 percent while international sales declined by 12 percent. Within international markets, sales in Latin America declined the most. Earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) in the fourth quarter of 2015 were $531 million, or 11.1 percent of sales, excluding charges for impairments of $211 million and restructuring of $90 million. This compares to $661 million or 13.0 percent of sales a year ago, excluding $32 million of expense related to cost reduction activities in the Power Generation segment in 2014. Other recent highlights: - The Company increased its dividend by 25 percent and repurchased 7.2 million shares - For the eighth consecutive year, Cummins was named one of the world’s most ethical companies by the Ethisphere Institute - Diversity Inc named Cummins as one of the Top 50 companies for diversity for the seventh consecutive year - The Company was named as a winner of the Golden Peacock Award for Excellence in Corporate Governance Cummins was named to the 2015 Dow Jones North American Sustainability Index for the tenth consecutive year Read the full press release – including fourth quarter 2015 detail for all Cummins business units – by clicking on the link below. Press Release – Cummins Announces Financial Results for the Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2015

Heavy Duty Trucking / February 4, 2016 Navistar has sold its Pure Power Technologies (PPT) subsidiary to an investment group, allowing PPT to become an independent company. Pure Power Technologies (http://www.purepowertechnologies.com/) is a supplier of diesel fuel-injection systems, machining products and systems for medium- and heavy-duty trucks. The investment group’s principals include the Smithfield Group and Kensington Capital Partners. PPT will continue to be Navistar's primary supplier of diesel fuel-injection systems as part of a 10-year supply agreement. "Pure Power Technologies' independence provides us with a tremendous opportunity for product diversity and growth," said Jerry Sweetland, president and CEO, Pure Power Technologies. "We are now well positioned to bring our world-class diesel technologies, precision manufacturing and testing capabilities to new market segments and customers that complement our core business with related products and solutions." Navistar originally acquired Pure Power Technologies when it purchased the engine components business of Continental Diesel Systems in 2009. It then launched Pure Power Technologies as a separate, dedicated R&D operating company to support Navistar’s diesel power system components. “We view this agreement as a win-win for Navistar and Pure Power Technologies and its hard-working, dedicated workforce,” said Scott Mackie, Navistar vice president, business development. “Our supply agreement with Pure Power Technologies will help us continue to deliver high levels of quality and uptime to customers, while providing PPT the opportunity to grow and expand as a standalone, independent company.”

UAW Assails Mack for Saying Contract Approved By Workers The Philadelphia Inquirer / February 4, 1987 A Mack Trucks spokesman said the Allentown United Auto Workers membership had approved a new contract despite opposition from the international in Detroit. William McCullough, Mack vice president for corporate affairs, told United Press International yesterday that members of UAW Local 677 had approved, in a vote Saturday, the terms of a January 18th agreement between local union officials and Mack. The Allentown local, locked in a dispute with the union's international Detroit office, imposed a news blackout Monday on the progress of its talks with Detroit officials. The international, whose approval of contract terms is a required part of the ratification process, opposes the January 18th agreement because of wage and benefit concessions it contends are unprecedented. Before Saturday's vote, Local 677 officials had endorsed the tentative 6-year agreement with Mack Trucks primarily because of guarantees by the company that it would not close operations in the Lehigh Valley during the life of the contract. Mack also had promised job offers at a new truck plant in Winnsboro, S.C. to at least 600 Local 677 members who are laid off or facing loss of their jobs. But within a week after the terms of the tentative January 18th agreement were released, the international indicated it would oppose the contract no matter how Local 677 members voted !!! Local 677 has called its disagreement with the international a "family" matter and even declined to provide some details about the dispute to Pennsylvania Governor Robert Casey, who went to Allentown on Sunday to try to bring the parties closer. Casey also met with Mack chairman John B. Curcio. Robert Grotevant, a spokesman for Governor Casey, said one of the international's primary objections focused on Mack's refusal to give the UAW an open door for organizing workers at the new South Carolina plant. Wages at that plant are expected to be significantly lower than those at the Mack plant in Macungie, Pennsylvania. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Newest Mack Rolled Out December 02, 1988 / The Morning Call "It's the new CH600. This conventional stands alone. It's the sleekest bulldog ever bred, a dimension all its own." - jingle for Mack Truck Inc.'s new conventional truck. Mack Trucks Inc. unveiled its "sleekest bulldog" yesterday in Allentown - five years and $60 million after it was proposed. The newest "bulldog" arrived some 600 miles distant from the Winnsboro, S.C., assembly plant where its production will begin January 1. In a ceremony more reminiscent of the Ice Capades than a press conference, executives started what they described as a new era for the company's truck Class 8 truck line. As lights flashed and a black curtain opened, fog rolled onto the floor and a maroon CH600 slowly became visible, starting with a gold- plated bulldog hood ornament. Music began: "A new dimension of comfort . . . of power, style and grace. The pride of Mack is showing. You can see it every place. No job is too demanding. CH600 is here. Take the future in your hands and depend on it for years . . . " About 150 members of the trade and general media sat silently and studied Mack's first redesigned conventional heavy-duty truck since the R model was unveiled in 1965. "I'm impressed," said James Winsor, executive editor of Heavy Duty Trucking magazine of Wayne, Delaware County. "Everything is going Mack's way right now. The new truck is out, and looks good. Its new plant in Winnsboro, S.C., is up. And it has a long contract until 1992 with the United Auto Workers." Financial analysts arrive at Mack's world headquarters in Allentown today to study and ride the new truck and delve into the company's finances. "The Mack Trucks Engineering Development and Test Center is here, and so are its people," explained Deb Woolley, a Mack spokeswoman. "That's why we invited people here this time - not Winnsboro. They were down South to visit the plant after it opened." Since operating in red ink from 1982 through 1986, Mack earned $4.09 million in 1987 and is expected to move further into the black this year. Through the first nine months of 1988, Mack reported earning of $18 million on sales of $1.6 billion, compared to a $15 million profit on sales of $1.4 billion during the same period in 1987. If Mack continues to stay in the black this year, it will have consecutive profitable years for the first time since 1978-79. The CH600 - and the E-7 engine to be introduced for the truck in July or August - are part of Mack's $500 million capital expenditure program begun by the company chairman and chief executive officer, John B. Curcio, in 1983. The program is Mack's response to deregulation in the trucking industry, which has seen a general decline in sales since 1979. Mack, which has always been strong in off-the-road vehicles, is looking to gain sales with owner-operators with the CH600's larger cabs and sleeping space. Such innovations are expected to increase Mack's market share by 2 to 3 percentage points by 1991 from its current share of about 15 percent, said Paul Ritter, senior vice president of sales for Mack. The CH600 will be no more expensive than Mack's former conventional R model truck - averaging about $60,000. But its aerodynamic design and improved cab will make the vehicle more attractive, said Joseph P. Rossetti, Mack's executive vice president of international marketing. "We see the results of shortcutting this process far too often in today's super-competitive truck industry," added Curcio. "We, too, could have introduced rehashed, old products. But we didn't . . . We resisted the temptation to rush to the market with a rehashed version of the same old thing, or to rush a less-than-fully developed and tested vehicle to market, as some other manufacturers have done." Part of Curcio's expenditure program was to replace the company's antiquated 5C assembly plant in Allentown with one of the industry's most modern assembly plants. He opened the $86 million, facility in South Carolina in August 1987. Its 900-member workforce earns about half of what production counterparts in Allentown earned. About 1,800 had been employed at Allentown 5C. The Winnsboro plant, whose workforce has remained non-union, was built specifically to assemble Mack's new series of CH trucks. Last year, Mack introduced its CM400, its down-sized "Baby 8" intercity vehicle, and began producing it in its Macungie assembly plant. And it is spending $100 million to modernize its power-train division in Hagerstown, Md., for production of the new E-7 engine. "Over the past five years, we've heard from more than our share of doubting Thomases - those who didn't believe Mack's commitment to stay on course with our extensive restructuring program," Curcio said. "They were certainly wrong, and today there is plenty of visual evidence to show that they weren't right." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Renault Has No Plans To Merge Mack, Volvo `We See No Links,' Official Says The Morning Call / July 14, 1990 An executive for Renault Vehicules Industriels (RVI) said yesterday that the French vehicle manufacturer has no plans for Mack Trucks Inc. to merge operations or facilities with Volvo GM Heavy Duty Trucks Inc. "A merger between Volvo GM and Mack in the United States is only speculation," said Elios Pascual, executive vice president of planning-administration for RVI and a director for Mack. "Mack has to be able to survive without the help of Volvo. We see no links." RVI, a subsidiary of Renault, on Thursday began its offer to purchase all outstanding shares of Mack's common stock at $6 per share. RVI, which currently holds 44.6 percent of Mack's stock, will spend about $103 million to make Mack a wholly owned subsidiary -- if the offer is accepted by enough stockholders to give the French company 90 percent of its outstanding shares by midnight Aug. 8. Mack stock closed at 7-1/4 yesterday, up -5/8 in over-the-counter trading. "Mack is losing $90 million for the first half of this year," Pascual said in a phone conversation from Paris. "Mack cannot continue at this rate. "RVI will give financial and operational support. We are prepared to take the risk that Mack will lose more money." A certain partner is Volvo, which in February agreed to buy 45 percent of Renault's truck operations. Volvo owns the majority of Volvo GM Heavy Truck Corp. But Pascual said RVI has no expectations that Volvo GM and Mack would share facilities such as Mack's Winnsboro, S.C., plant or consolidate headquarters in Volvo GM's new facility in Greensboro, N.C. "We have no comment on how to restructure Mack," Pascual said. "That's up to Mack." Mack officials were not available for comment yesterday, but the company assured the 750 employees in the South Carolina plant on June 25 that reports about the facility were "speculative." "The company is aggressively pursuing many options to reduce cost," the plant's general manager, Ted Jones, wrote in a letter to employees. "The closure of the Winnsboro assembly plant is not one of the options." But before deciding to acquire all of Mack's stock, RVI has explored several options, including the sale of its stake of the truck maker to competitors, according to information released in RVI's formal offer to purchase. Among the disclosures were the following: * Navistar International Corp. expressed interest in buying Mack in November, but no offer was made and talks were subsequently terminated. "The document speaks for itself," said Bill Greenhill, director of financial communications at Navistar. "We have no further comment." * PACCAR Inc. of Bellevue, Wash., and Hiller Group of Metairie, La., had recently submitted a bid to acquire Renault's 44.6 percent interest in Mack. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Navistar Says It May Bid For Mack Chicago Tribune / July 20, 1990 Navistar International Corp. said Thursday that it might bid competitively for financially ailing Mack Trucks Inc. Navistar said it might exceed the $6-a-share tender offer for Mack made July 6 by Renault Vehicules Industriels (RVI) that expires August 8. Renault owns 44.5 percent of Mack’s 29.7 million shares. A Navistar spokesman said it would not make a firm offer for Mack until it completed a due diligence review, which would take about 10 days. The spokesman acknowledged that “it would not be possible to effectively proceed with the offer without the approval of . . . Mack’s board of directors and a decision of the Renault Group to dispose of its investment in Mack.” In a statement, Mack said that Renault has advised Mack’s board that it “has no interest in disposing of its investment in Mack.” The developments come at a troubled time for U.S. truckmakers. Allentown, Pa.-based Mack Thursday reported a loss of $63.3 million on sales of $400.9 million in its second quarter. Mack Trucks, which controls 13 percent of the U.S. truck market, also had to request an extension to December 31 of Friday’s maturity of its revolving credit agreement with a syndicate of banks led by Citibank and Credit Lyonnais` New York branch. The company said its latest financial results violated the terms of the agreement and, without the extension, its banks could force the firm to repay the entire amount due. Navistar, which sells 24 percent of all trucks bought in the U.S., also has been hit by the downturn in truck sales, which are off about 16 percent from a year ago. The truckmaker lost $10 million on $1.9 billion in sales in the first half of its fiscal year, which began Nov. 1. Some analysts questioned the wisdom of a Navistar bid for Mack. “There’s some logic to it, but it doesn’t give them the diversification they’ve talked about now for three years,” said Steven Colbert, analyst for Prudential-Bache Securities Inc. “What are they going to do with all that Mack capacity? They’ve got too much,” he said. Mack makes over-the-road freight-hauling trucks in Winnsboro, S.C., and off-highway construction and garbage trucks, or vocational vehicles, in Macungie, Pa. The firm also has a small truck manufacturing facility in Oakville, Ontario. Navistar, though based in Chicago, does all its assembly at a Springfield, Ohio, plant. It makes only over-the-road trucks. Antitrust approval of a deal with Navistar could be a problem. The combined firms would have nearly 40 percent of the U.S. truck market. “Maybe they could get the Justice Department to let them take just the Macungie plant,” said Colbert. “Mack is making money there and has a dominant share of the (vocational vehicle) market.” Ralph E. Reins, Mack chairman, said that a special committee of the board appointed to evaluate the Renault offer also would study a Navistar offer and report back “in due course.” ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ RVI Makes Mack Deal Official The Morning Call / October 05, 1990 Renault Vehicules Industriels (RVI) announced yesterday that Mack Trucks Inc. has officially become its wholly-owned subsidiary. RVI, a division of French-owned Renault, announced on Monday that it had gained 93.1 percent of Mack's stock to satisfy Pennsylvania takeover laws. Mack's board of directors had approved the $6.25-per-share offer, worth about $107 million, on Sept. 5. Each publicly held share of Mack common stock not tendered into the offer has been converted into the right to receive $6.25 per share, RVI said. With the merger, the Allentown company will become part of a worldwide alliance between Renault and AB Volvo that next year will form the largest truck-making organization in the world. The deal, which began with a $6-per-share offer on July 12, also pulls Mack out of dire financial straits. With the heavy-duty truck industry into a deep sales slump since last year, Mack recently said it expects to lose at least $180 million for the second consecutive year. Only the backing of RVI allowed Mack to renegotiate two bank loans worth a total of $498 million that had gone into default. According to an amended version of RVI's offer to purchase Mack stock, dated Sept. 11, the French company could put Mack through "significant restructuring and down-sizing in order to return to profitability." The statement predicted employment cuts and the possible closing of a major manufacturing facility in the United States. Mack has three major plants in this country -- a powertrain plant in Hagerstown, Md., employing 1,500 people, and truck assembly operations in Winnsboro, S.C., and Macungie, each employing 750. Elios Pascual, RVI's executive vice president of planning-administration and a director for Mack, said Monday that the French company intends to make Mack profitable, but he wouldn't discuss details. "We can't keep losing $180 million a year," Pascual said. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ New Mack Chief Makes His Debut The Morning Call / November 16, 1990 It wasn't what Elios Pascual said yesterday that surprised those attending his first press conference as chairman and chief executive officer of Mack Trucks Inc. It was what he didn't say. Pascual, formerly secretary general of Renault Vehicules Industriels, told the gathering that layoffs would be necessary at Mack because of the depressed state of the economy. But he didn't say in which departments or how many. Pascual said that Mack, now a subsidiary of French-owned Renault, would become a great contributor to the new worldwide alliance between Renault and A.B. Volvo of Sweden. But he wouldn't say that Volvo trucks will soon be coming off assembly lines at Mack's plant in Winnsboro, S.C. And, pointing to his lapel, Pascual displayed a special Mack bulldog pin with a inset diamond representing his 12 years service to the truck maker while at RVI. Though he didn't say it, receptionists at Mack facilities were attaching pins to visitors' lapels -- returning to a popular corporate custom stopped last year in a cost-cutting campaign. An engineer by trade, Pascual, 50, plans on producing more and talking less at Mack. "I'm not Rambo." he said. "I'm not Zorro. I'm not the Miracle Maker. I'm not here to apply French ways to manage. "I know I'm capable of doing some things, like putting a lot more rigor in Mack Trucks. The people have to learn that doing a job at a 90 percent rate is nothing. They must go 100 percent." Although RVI completed a $107 million takeover of Mack on Oct. 5, Pascual said he plans to maintain Mack's American management style. "All the top management of Mack Trucks will be American," Pascual said. "I want to keep Mack an American company. Hopefully, one day, my successor will be an American. "I'm going to bring some French people -- not because they are French, but because we have some opportunities to get people from RVI who can rapidly fill some gaps in Mack Trucks. Maybe five or six people. No more." When Ralph E. Reins resigned as Mack's chairman, president and chief executive officer on Oct. 16, the position of president was left open. Pascual downplayed that move. "As a Frenchman, I didn't want to have five or six different titles as the Russians have," Pascual said. Regardless of his title, Mack's financial condition presents Pascual with a tough job. He faces the formidable task of turning around a company that will lose in excess of $180 million for the second consecutive year, at a time when the heavy-duty truck market is slumping severely. Pascual has worked closely with Mack since 1978, when Mack and Renault joined forces for the Mack Mid-Liner medium truck that's produced in France and marketed by Mack dealers in America. He's been a member of Mack's board of directors since 1983. "Due to that past history, I feel I am aware of the problems we have faced and things that lie ahead," Pascual said. "We have tremendous potential here. I am fully confident of a steady return to profitability even if there are not any miracles to expect. It's not going to be an overnight shift to profitability." Pascual said it was premature to disclose the blueprints for reaching his goal. But he disclosed two steps that have already been taken. "First, our employees have a new direction," Pascual said. "It focuses on the need to dig in and put real meaning into the phrase `Mack quality: Depend on it.' "Second, our distributors network -- and I know half of the dealers -- is the finest in the U.S. Somebody said it's the finest in the world, but maybe that's a little overstated. It's now behind the new RVI-Mack team." Over the past 12 years, Mack's work force has been reduced by about 10,000 workers to the current 7,000. Cuts are expected to continue until Mack is profitable, Pascual said. "With the current state of the economy and the depressed volume of the markets, we have to expect some more layoffs in the plants and everywhere in the company," he said. "But this is not the only action. It's going to be a global action to improve everything in the company, including improving efficiency. Layoffs are a necessity; I cannot lie." The United Auto Workers union, which represents Mack's hourly workers in production plants in Macungie, Winnsboro, and Hagerstown, Md., has a contract with Mack guaranteeing that the facilities will remain open until at least 1992. Pascual was asked if he planned to reopen Mack's contract with the union, and ask for concessions. "It's premature for me to give you an answer," he said. "The relationship between Mack and the UAW has been, in the past, very bad. But it dramatically improved over the last two years, under the action of Ralph Reins and (Mack executive vice president of administration) Bill Craig. Now I think the relationship is at an all-time high level." Finally, Pascual took exception to a quote in The Morning Call from one Winnsboro worker who equated the French arrival at Mack to how "Grant took Richmond." Rather, Pascual said, "It's like the Battle of the Marne in World War I, when the Germans thought that the French were defeated and they were 50 kilometer from Paris. "The French decided no more retreat. They counterattacked and it was the pivotal point of that war. I'm trying to do the same thing here." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Renault, Volvo Confirm Talks About Merger The Morning Call / May 08, 1992 The owners of Mack Trucks Inc. and Volvo-GM Heavy Duty Trucks Inc. intend to keep separate companies, brand names, facilities and distribution channels, Mack's chairman and chief executive officer said yesterday. But company officials confirmed yesterday that Renault and A.B. Volvo are discussing the possibility of a full merger, The New York Times reported late last night. "Our alliance can only go in one direction, toward intensified cooperation and a possible merger, and that is what the current talks are about. There is no way back," Kirster Joranson, a spokesman for Volvo AB, told The New York Times. "Renault remains committed to and will continue to support Mack as long as our business conditions require that support," said Mack chairman and chief executive Elios Pascual. Pascual was responding to industry analysts' comments on Wednesday that said Mack would likely merge operations with Volvo-GM of Greensboro, N.C., and leave the Lehigh Valley if Renault of France and A.B. Volvo merge truck and car operations. A Swedish news report said that Volvo and Renault were taking steps to merge their car and truck operations and form a new company named Renault-Volvo AB. Christine Rare, a spokeswoman for Renault SA, confirmed to The New York Times that discussions were taking place "on an evolution and closening of the Volvo-Renault relationship." But she said no decision had been made. In 1990 Volvo and Renault swapped 45 percent stakes in their truck and 20 percent stakes in auto operations. Yesterday morning, Pascual distributed letters to employees and distributors "in view of the speculative comments concerning a merger of car and truck operations between Volvo and Renault and the impact on Mack." Pascual said Renault has made its intentions clear since it acquired Mack and rescued the Allentown-based company from possible bankruptcy in late 1990. "Renault is committed to Mack for the long term, and sees Mack as having a strong future as a viable player in the heavy-duty truck market," Pascual said. He also addressed Mack's 5,471 employees and about 1,000 dealers. "The strength of Mack and our ability to meet these goals is dependent upon each of us performing at our best and by working together," he said. On Wednesday, David Garrity, auto analyst for McDonald & Co. of Cleveland, said that Volvo and Renault were trying to downplay the merger for the moment. He said a consolidation between Mack and Volvo GM was "readily foreseeable" because of the inefficiency of both operations, with both having management operations and production capacity far greater than needed. "The headquarters in Allentown would be gone," Garrity said. "Perhaps we'll see the operations in Macungie go away. "The company will get down to a North Carolina base with operations in South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia. "The work forces who will be the most flexible and cooperative will be those who will be put on top." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Renault Announces New Chairman May 28, 1992 / The Morning Call Louis Schweitzer, grandnephew of Nobel peace prize winner Albert Schweitzer, has been named chairman and president of Renault S.A., owner of Mack Trucks Inc. Schweitzer, who replaces the retiring Raymond Levy, has been a strong voice in merger talks between the French-owned company and Volvo AB, truck industry analysts said yesterday. Schweitzer's appointment was approved by the French government yesterday, three days after he was named director of Renault. He had been the company's managing director. Under Schweitzer, 50, plans for a full merger between the companies should shift into overdrive if they maintain cooperation from the French government, analysts said. "Schweitzer was actively involved in negotiations between Volvo and Renault," said Gary McManus, an analyst with Merrill Lynch of New York. "I can't see that there will be major changes in the works because of him. "It should be a very orderly transition. Schweitzer was earmarked as the heir apparent more than a year ago. Levy has gone on record in support of the merger, and Schweitzer is equally committed to the alliance. "It's not a negative. It could speed things along." Schweitzer replaced Levy, 64, whose term expired yesterday and who is approaching the mandatory retirement age. During his farewell luncheon last week, Levy told The Associated Press that he expected Renault and Volvo of Sweden to merge eventually. But the French government has said no such plans are under consideration. Renault would need the approval of the French Parliament if the government's stake in the company is to drop below 75 percent, analysts said. On Monday, the executive committee of France's governing Socialist Party approved a motion to speed the privatization of major state-owned enterprises, according to The New York Times. Levy had been chairman of Renault since 1988, following the assassination of chairman Georges Besse. He guided the company to a remarkable recovery, considering it lost $700 million in 1986 and earned $567 million in 1991. Through that period, Renault cut 42,000 jobs and sold its 46 percent stake in American Motors to Chrysler Corp. In 1990, he guided Renault into an agreement with Volvo, in which the companies swapped ownership and left Renault with 45 percent of Volvo Truck Corp., 25 percent of Volvo Car Corp. and 8 percent of Volvo. Also in 1990, Renault prevented a potential bankruptcy at Allentown-based Mack Trucks by acquiring the 55 percent stake that it hadn't previously owned. In 1991, Renault spent $200 million to keep Mack afloat, and the truckmaker responded. Mack lost $164 million during the recession of 1991, compared to $318 million in 1990. Since 1990, nearly 4,000 jobs have been cut at Mack, where 5,424 are currently employed. And now there is talk of merger with Volvo GM Heavy Duty Trucks Inc. in Greensboro, N.C., and more restructuring at Mack -- including an exit from the Lehigh Valley. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Volvo-Renault Pact Dies, Mack Agreement On Trucks In Limbo The Morning Call / December 03, 1993 A stockholder revolt in Sweden yesterday forced the chairman of AB Volvo to resign and his company to destroy plans for a merger with French automaker Renault. Left in limbo were Mack Trucks Inc. and Volvo GM Heavy Truck Corp. in Greensboro, S.C., which had planned closer ties in the American market. "Renault deplores that proposed merger ... has not been ratified," said a statement from Renault received at Mack's headquarters in Allentown. "Renault management is assessing the consequences of this situation and will study the actions needed to safeguard the company's interests." Long-time Volvo chairman Pehr Gyllenhammar and four other board members quit after colliding with a growing force of Swedish shareholders, who had not been convinced that the French government would sell its majority stake in Renault. "Volvo is now left with an aborted merger, a crashed organization and an alliance which most likely will end," Gyllenhammar said. "I think the Renault management might have lost faith in Volvo." Bo Rydin, currently vice-chairman, will take over as temporary chairman at Volvo. The vote to form Renault-Volvo RVA, already postponed once, had been set for Tuesday. The new company was set to begin operations on Jan. 1, forming the world's sixth largest car company and second largest truck maker with sales of about $40 billion. Elios Pascual, Mack's chairman and chief executive officer, distributed a letter to the company's 5,000-some employees explaining that the implications to Renault "will be better understood over the next few weeks." The relationship between Volvo and Renault began in 1990, when they agreed to swap 45 percent of their truck and bus operations. In auto operations, Volvo holds 20 percent of Renault and the French company owns 25 percent of Volvo. That led Mack and Volvo GM, in which the Swedes own a majority interest, to work under an alliance for product development and joint purchasing agreements. The merger announced in September would have gone a step further, forming four "trademark" truck companies -- Volvo Trucks, Renault Vehicules Industriels, Volvo GM and Mack. It was to be headed by Karl-Erling Trogen, chief executive officer of Volvo GM. In America, Mack and Volvo GM were to be run by a holding company, whose site had not been announced, according to Volvo shareholder documents. A combined Mack-Volvo operation would have produced a force against Daimler-Benz of Germany, which owns Freightliner Corp. of Portland, Oregon. While Freightliner dominates the $12 billion U.S. retail market with about 23.5 percent, Volvo GM owns 11.6 percent and Mack has 10.9 percent. "Volvo GM and Mack have seven years left on a 10-year alliance," said Tom Clifford, a spokesman for Volvo North American Corp. in New York. "Whether the two partners will now dissolve that, I don't know." But Mack, which was losing about $180 million per year when Renault acquired it in 1990, will likely to be hurt without Volvo GM. "These operations continue to be heavily loss making and require significant restructuring in order to achieve operating break-even," said a study by First Boston Ltd. that described Mack to Volvo shareholders. But Pascual, Mack's chairman, disagreed with that assessment. "We at Mack are well on our way to meeting our objective to break even by the second quarter of 1994," Pascual said. "We will remain focused on this objective." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mack Trucks Happy To Be Back In Black The Morning Call / April 06, 1995 The last year Mack Trucks Inc. made money, presidential candidate Mike Dukakis was driving a tank and Ernest was saving Christmas. Yesterday, Mack said that it had made about $43 million in operating income in 1994 -- its first year in the black since 1988. It was the Allentown company's best year since 1984, when it earned $74.9 million. Pierre Jocou, chairman, president and chief executive officer, said there were two reasons for Mack's success: God and the employees. "It was mainly God," said Jocou. "By that, I mean God helped us with the truck market. "And we helped ourselves with quality improvements, less waste and a good job by the company. The improvement was huge." The last year Mack made money, its stock was still rated "buy" on Wall Street and former Chairman John B. Curcio announced earnings of $31.8 million. But Mack was nearly forced into bankruptcy protection in 1990 following a costly battle with the United Auto Workers union over the relocation of Mack's main assembly plant from Allentown to Winnsboro, S.C. Renault Vehicules Industriels, the truck division of Renault SA of France, bought Mack for $107 million that year. Under the leadership of Elios Pascual, former chairman, president and chief executive, and investments from Renault, Mack gradually emerged from annual losses nearing $250 million in 1991. Cutting about 2,000 people and making quality improvements, Pascual was able to reduce operating losses to $73 million by last year. Mack went into the black in February 1994 with a monthly profit of $800,000. Pascual, 55, donned a pair of sunglasses for photographers to show "Mack's future is so bright, I need to wear shades." Soon after, he exited for another assignment at Renault. In March, he was replaced by Jocou, 58, a quality expert who inherited one of the hottest heavy-duty truck markets in decades. Mack held 11.5 percent of the North American factory sales market last year with 25,911 tractors. Overall, Mack's sales last year were up 28.8 percent, to $2.185 billion, just short of 1988 revenues. "We are not any more the black sheep of the bunch," Jocou said. "In America, we are not the sick guys any more. We are average now. "We caught some competitors. I'm not saying which ones." Industry analysts have been expecting big profits from most of the truck makers because of a 17.6 percent increase in the market to 185,696 vehicles last year. "The truck market has been extraordinarily hot," said Gary F. McManus, an analyst with JP Morgan in New York. "Navistar International Corp. had pre-tax earnings of $148 million, including $88 million in their manufacturing division." Mack produced 26,260 trucks last year, up from 19,131 in 1993, leading the company to increase employment by 516 people to 5,763 at plants in Hagerstown, Md., Winnsboro, and the Lehigh Valley. "Mack is probably the best demonstration of value in the market," Jocou said. "Maybe sometime in Mack history, some mistakes were made and the quality was not there. "I don't know the reason for that. But in the market, I think Mack is up to its image and fame." But Jocou realizes that 1994 will be hard to repeat if the truck market slows. "I'm facing the challenge of increasing our productivity without losing jobs, which is probably the most difficult thing to do," Jocou said. "Productivity is about being streamlined. "The market is just now changing, and we are now at the turning point, so we have to work very fast. "It's a challenge to keep our people safe -- not playing with employment, but instead playing with production," he added. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mack Trucks Sues Former Executive, Says Marc Gustafson Took Company Secrets With Him To His New Job The Morning Call / October 01, 1996 Mack Trucks Inc. has sued the new president of a rival truck manufacturer, Volvo GM Heavy Truck Corp., accusing him of taking company secrets when he left Mack two weeks ago. And Mack has won at least a partial victory in Round 1 of the legal battle involving Marc Gustafson, a former Mack executive vice president. Chief Judge Edward Cahn of the U.S. District Court in Allentown issued a temporary restraining order Friday. The order forbids Gustafson, who helped rebuild the Mack image, from participating in any Volvo sales and marketing activities or from disclosing any Mack sales and marketing information at Volvo. But Mack wanted Gustafson blocked from working for Volvo -- or any Mack competitors -- for at least a year. Mack also asked for damages to be awarded at a trial. At a hearing next Tuesday, Cahn will more deeply delve into the case so he can issue a permanent order. Gustafson served as Mack's executive vice president for sales and marketing for four years until he resigned Sept. 19, effective that day. He then went to work at Volvo GM Heavy Truck headquarters in Greensboro, North Carolina. Mack sued him last week in Lehigh County Court. But he asked that the case be heard in federal court, and Mack did not object. Mack claims that Gustafson is violating his contract with Mack. In the contract, according to Mack, Gustafson promised to not disclose any confidential Mack information outside Mack [good luck with that]. "It would be impossible for him to ignore his knowledge of Mack's business plans as he considers Volvo's business plans and its competitive strategies," according to Mack's lawsuit. For example, the suit claims, Gustafson has knowledge of Mack secrets about its costs and pricing structures. This information, which Mack uses when bidding on large orders of trucks, is known only to select individuals at Mack. Since Mack and Volvo often compete for such orders, Volvo will have an unfair advantage, according to Mack. Also, Gustafson's knowledge about products being developed by Mack will enable Volvo to take steps to respond to Mack's new products before the products are announced publicly, Mack claims. Before filing the suit, Mack Chairman Pierre Jocou sent a letter to Volvo's chairman, asking him to not employ Gustafson, at least until the two sides resolve Mack's concerns. The two companies compete for sales of such heavy-duty trucks as tractor-trailers, cement mixers and dump trucks. In the last two years, Mack has gained a larger share of that market than Volvo, according to Mack. At Mack, in addition to his job as executive vice president, Gustafson also was chairman and president of Mack Canada Inc. He worked 22 years for Mack and was its second highest-compensated Mack employee. In its suit, Mack cited the case of Air Products & Chemicals Inc. against its former marketing vice president, Richard Johnson. Johnson went to work for Liquid Air, one of Air Products' direct competitors. After Air Products sued, the state Superior Court upheld a county court ruling forbidding him from working for Liquid Air for a year. It isn't the first time that automotive companies have wrangled over executives. General Motors accused Volkswagen AG of engaging in unfair competition by luring seven managers from a GM unit. But a judge in Germany rejected that claim. That case was related to an investigation of GM's claims that its former purchasing head stole industrial secrets in 1993 when he left for VW. Gustafson did not return a telephone call seeking comment. Lawyer Thomas McGarrigle, representing Gustafson, declined comment except to say that Gustafson did not violate his contract with Mack. Mack is wholly owned by French automaker Renault SA, which broke off merger plans with Volvo three years ago. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ One reason for the downfall of Mack Trucks was a traitor named Marc Gustafson. The clout of his father, who owned several dealers in Florida, allowed him the chance in 1992 to join Mack Trucks in Allentown, fast tracked to vice president of sales and marketing. But Marc had no integrity, or loyalty for Mack. During his four short years at Mack, he was working clandestinely for the ruthless Swedes at Volvo. Gustafson abruptly left Mack in 1996 to become [gasp here] CEO of Volvo Trucks of North America. He betrayed Mack and used his privileged insider knowledge against Mack Trucks to help orchestrate Volvo’s takeover. Unlike the thousands of career Mack veterans across America, Gustafson only cared about his own personal advancement. He was no team player. Note the time period, 1996. This is when Mack lost momentum and direction. At Volvo, Gustafson convinced Volvo Group that with his insider knowledge, he could deliver Mack Trucks into Volvo’s hands. Renault-appointed Mack President Pierre Jocou responded quickly and took a hard stand against Gustafson’s defection. But Volvo then used its relationship with Renault (the result of their merger negotiations) to ease the legal battle against Gustafson. Volvo succeeded in replacing the pro-Mack Mack President Pierre Jocou with the pro-Volvo takeover Mack President Michel Gigou. This is why Pierre Jocou's tenure as Mack president, which began in March 1995, ended prematurely in November 1996. From December 1996 thru July 2001, Gigou was merely minding store while the Volvo takeover of “The Greatest Name in Trucks” was being negotiated behind closed European doors. Ironically, after Gustafson used his four years at Mack to stab the company in the back, he only lasted 4 years as CEO at Volvo Trucks of North America. And then, just one year as head of American LaFrance under Freightliner as his downward spiral continued. It always catches up with you, sooner or later......but an American icon was lost. If Marc had been a committed Mack man like Zenon C.R. Hansen, Mack Trucks would still be operating today, autonomously, under Renault. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Gustafson Reaches Accord With Mack On Jump To Volvo The Morning Call / October 05, 1996 Ex-sales VP Gets Go-ahead As Chief Of Swedish Truck Maker's U.S. Operations Marc F. Gustafson has been legally freed from the Mack bulldog's bite. Mack Trucks Inc. of Allentown said yesterday it had reached a settlement with its former executive vice president of sales and marketing. It allows him to work more freely as president and chief executive officer of Volvo GM Heavy Trucks Inc. in Greensboro, N.C. "As a result of today's settlement, the temporary restraining order will be removed," said a release from Mack late yesterday. "Mack is satisfied that the agreement successfully protects the interests of the company and its shareholders." Terms of the settlement were not disclosed. In a written statement released last night, Gustafson denied leaking any Mack confidential information to his new employer. "I am very glad to have this matter behind me so that I can concentrate completely on my duties at Volvo, particularly the further development of our new Volvo VN Series program," he said in the release. Last week, a judge in U.S. District Court in Allentown issued a temporary restraining order barring Gustafson, 44, from conducting certain activities for Volvo GM. Mack had accused Gustafson of taking company secrets when he left Mack three weeks ago to work for its competitor. Gustafson, who had owned Mack dealerships in Florida, had been employed as a sales and marketing executive at the company's world headquarters in Allentown since 1992. AB Volvo of Sweden, which holds part of Volvo GM, ended a merger proposal with Renault SA of France, Mack's parent, nearly three years ago. Chief Judge Edward Cahn issued a temporary restraining Sept. 27. It banned Gustafson from participating in any Volvo sales and marketing activities or from disclosing any Mack sales and marketing information at Volvo. Mack had wanted Gustafson blocked from working for Volvo -- or any Mack competitors -- for at least a year. Mack also asked for damages to be awarded at a trial. According to Mack, Gustafson promised in a contract not to disclose any confidential Mack information outside Mack. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Volvo urges truck merger with Scania Independent / January 16, 1999 Volvo yesterday urged Scania to merge with it and create the biggest truck and bus manufacturer in Europe after picking up a 13.5 per cent stake in its Swedish rival in a stock market raid. A Volvo-Scania merger would produce a combined group with truck and bus sales of 130,000 a year, turnover of pounds 7.6bn and 50,000 employees. In the market for heavy trucks of 16 tonnes and over, the merged business would leapfrog Mercedes Benz into the number one spot commanding 30 per cent of sales in West Europe. Worldwide, it would be the second biggest truck and bus company. The controlling shareholder in Scania, Investor, reacted angrily to Volvo's move. Investor's chief executive, Claes Dahlback, described the pounds 385m share purchase as "unfortunate" and said it would make the merger discussions so far held between the two companies more difficult. The discussions are thought to have stalled because of a dispute between the two companies over the valuation of Scania. Mr Claes said a merger with Volvo could produce significant synergy gains but there were alternative possibilities that were even more interesting which it would continue to pursue. Volvo said it was interested in pursuing a "constructive dialogue" with Scania's shareholders, suggesting that a hostile bid was unlikely. However, it indicated it could launch a tender offer for the remaining shares. If that happened, it would pay the difference between the price at which it picked up shares yesterday and the final takeover price. The move on Scania fuelled speculation that Volvo would sell off its car division in a deal with a volume car maker. It has appointed the investment bank JP Morgan to examine a sale and two possible partners are Ford and Fiat of Italy. However, Leif Johansson, Volvo's chief executive, appeared to contradict this yesterday saying the strategy in cars was to be a niche player based on organic growth. In 1997 Volvo produced 70,000 trucks and 12,000 buses while Scania produced just over 42,000 trucks and 4,500 buses. In the key heavy trucks market they each have a 15 per cent share compared with Mercedes Benz's 21 per cent. Any merger could run into trouble with European Commission competition authorities. Karl-Erling Trogen, president of Volvo Truck Corporation, said there is a need for consolidation within the automotive industry and Volvo wants "to take part in this industry restructuring." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Prospects dim for Volvo-Scania merger approval Today’s Trucking / March 8, 2000 Volvo AB chairman Leif Johansson said his company would offer no further concessions to quell concerns of the European Commission (EC) that its proposed acquisition of rival Scania AB would create near monopoly conditions in Sweden and a dominant position in Nordic Europe. The EC will meet on March 14 and is expected to rule on the deal by March 23. The Reuters news agency said an EU source has said that the planned takeover in its present form is likely to be stopped on antitrust grounds. Hans Westberg, an analyst at den Danske Bank, told Reuters news agency that Volvo wants to pressure the EC to consider the future political ramifications of its decision. "Volvo is saying that if the EC blocks this deal it is probably going to block other truck deals, and that will allow the North Americans into the market with their strong currency,' Westberg said. If the EC blocks the deal, Volvo may be forced to come up with an alternative strategy, which could include entertaining offers from prospective buyers. "If such a bid is proposed the board will look at it and see what is best for its shareholders," Johansson told a news conference. "We never see bids as hostile," added PACCAR, Volkswagen, and Fiat were among those opposed to the deal, according to daily Dagens Industri. These firms have also been mentioned by analysts as possible buyers of Volvo. The Financial Times speculated today that Volvo could make a bid to buy Chicago-based International if the Scania deal failed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ European regulators reject Volvo-Scania merger Today’s Trucking / March 15, 2000 The European Commission (EC) yesterday rejected Volvo AB's planned $6.9 billion US merger with rival Swedish truck and bus maker Scania over concerns that it would be anticompetitive. The unanimous decision was based in part on a report that the combined companies would own 50% to 90% market shares in several European countries. While Volvo is not allowed to combine operations, its 45.5% ownership of Scania is not affected by the decision. Volvo has said it does not plan to sell its stake in the company; shares purchased from stockholders that accepted Volvo's takeover bid will be returned, however. The commission's decision sparked rumors about how Volvo would react. Some market analysts have said Volvo may put itself up for sale, a strategy Volvo CEO Leif Johansson would consider. "We will evaluate the alternatives both in Europe, North America and Asia," Johansson told journalists during a conference call. "We have as an overall strategy to make sure that we are among the world's biggest in all our business areas. ... We certainly feel that we have the opportunity as a company to be in the driving seat to make acquisitions but we have also said that if good proposals come from outside, whatever the structure, we will look at them." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mack-Volvo Merger Talks Are Reported But Analysts Doubt The Rumors The Morning Call / April 11, 2000 Bloomberg News contributed to this report. Deal Would Claim 20% Of U.S. Truck Market For the second time in seven years, Mack Trucks Inc. is facing a merger with Swedish truck maker Volvo AB, according to European newspaper reports. The Financial Times of London reported Monday that a deal could be announced before Volvo's April 26 shareholders meeting and would give the combined companies control of 20 percent of the American truck market and 30 percent in Europe. Mack officials at the company headquarters in Allentown declined to comment on the reports. But industry experts on Monday were skeptical about the possibility of a merger between Volvo and Renault Vehicules Industriels, Mack's parent. RVI is the industrial subsidiary of Renault SA of France. "It's the takeover rumor of the week," said analyst Eli Lustgarten of Schroder Securities in New York. "The rumors will continue." But it was the real thing in December 1993, when Renault officials announced an end to their planned merger with Volvo, which had been set for Jan. 1, 1994. In that deal, Renault and Volvo were set to combine both their car and truck operations. A difference in corporate cultures helped kill the deal, and the companies drifted apart until recently, industry analysts said. But with Volvo selling its auto business to Ford Motor Co., it now wants to grow by taking over Renault's truck operations, according to European reports. Volvo has been searching for a new partner since its $6.9 billion takeover of Swedish-based Scania AB was rejected in March by European antitrust regulators. By buying a large stake in Renault, Volvo could stay independent and allow the companies to combine parts production and engine development. On March 30, Swedish daily Dagens Industri reported that Volvo was interested in RVI and its Mack subsidiary. But neither company would comment on that report. RVI sold 53,095 trucks in Europe in 1999, while Volvo sold 39,630. In the United States, Mack sold 40,135 trucks compared to 34,300 for Volvo. A deal would make Volvo-Mack No. 2 in the United States for heavy-duty truck sales, behind Freightliner Co., a subsidiary of Daimler-Chrysler Corp. The companies would reinforce their stakes in Asia, where Volvo had a new truck and bus venture with Mitsubishi Motors Corp. and Renault holds 22.5 percent of Nissan Diesel Motor Co. American analysts are cautious. `The market is suffering from a large global overcapacity," said Robert Friedman, an industry analyst with S&P Equity Group in New York. `That means these companies have little pricing power and are vulnerable to changes in interest rates. "The markets in North America and Europe are mature. As far as RVI and Volvo, I'd caution against investing on companies solely on merger potential." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Future Unclear For Back-office After Merger Of Volvo The Morning Call / April 27, 2000 Mark Gustafson, President And CEO Of Volvo Trucks, Talks About Mack Trucks Marc F. Gustafson has Swedish experience and a Mack pedigree. So it was no surprise that he was sought out by the truck media after Swedish AB Volvo agreed to acquire Mack Trucks Inc. and the truck division of France's Renault SA on Tuesday. “I couldn't be more pleased to be associated with both companies," Gustafson said Wednesday from Volvo Trucks of North America headquarters in Greensboro, N.C. Gustafson, has been president and chief executive officer of Volvo Trucks since 1996. But before that, he wore a Mack bulldog pin on his lapel. He's been a second-generation Mack dealer in Florida, president of Mack Canada and a former executive vice president of sales and marketing at Mack headquarters in Allentown. "I have a lot of memories up there," he said. When he left in 1996, Mack and Gustafson settled a lawsuit in which the company charged that he had leaked trade secrets when moving to Volvo. Now, Gustafson, 47, is a strong bet to run Volvo-Mack, which will be formed by the end of the year. He said the acquisition of Mack was a "passing lane opportunity" to become the No. 2 truck company in North America behind only Daimler-Chrysler's Freightliner Corp. State Senator Lisa M. Boscola of Bethlehem on Wednesday urged Governor Tom Ridge's action team to intervene in Volvo's takeover because 2,500 jobs are at stake in the Lehigh Valley. Volvo is paying $1.5 billion, or about 15 percent of its shares, to acquire the truck division of France's Renault SA. Under the agreement Renault will buy another 5 percent of Volvo stock for a total investment in Volvo of about $2 billion. Gustafson said both Volvo and Mack product lines and dealer organizations will be continued, and said there were no plans to close factories. He said Volvo-Mack will need the capacities of Volvo's Dublin, Va., plant and Mack's Macungie and Winnsboro S.C. plants to meet market needs. He saw no need to close either the Allentown or Greensboro headquarters, but told Heavy Duty Trucking Magazine that "synergies to be explored with back-office functions and parts distribution." Gustafson wouldn't comment Wednesday on the combined company's engine plan. About 20 percent of U.S.-built Volvo trucks have Volvo-built 12-liter engines, and 98 percent of Mack trucks are sold with its 12-liter engine made in Hagerstown, Maryland. "Both companies build our own engines, and that gives us two strong technical teams to face the emissions challenges for 2002," Gustafson said. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mack Trucks Begins a $5 Million Expansion The Morning Call / October 25, 2000 The Addition to the Engineering Site Comes Despite Slowing Industry Mack Trucks Inc. has begun construction on a $5 million addition to its Engineering Development and Test Center on Lehigh Parkway South in Allentown, the company said recently. The expansion of the center, built in 1975, is being driven by Mack's desire to house members of its 3P group, which stands for product programs, product development and purchases, the company said in a news release. Work is expected to be concluded next year, the company said. Mack and Renault SA's truck division are facing a takeover by AB Volvo. The $1.83 billion deal was announced in April and is expected to be completed by next year upon approval of European and American regulators. The construction also comes when the truck industry is facing a downturn, with backlogs down 63 percent in September compared to a year before, according to J.P. Morgan in New York. `This is a project that has been planned and budgeted for some time," said John Mies, a Mack spokesman. `It represents an investment in the future that we think is important regardless of the current market environment." In early September, Mack said it would shut down its Macungie assembly plant for four weeks before the end of the year, forcing temporary layoffs for 1,000 people. Mack plants in Hagerstown, Md., and Winnsboro, S.C., were scheduled to close the week of Oct. 2 and next week. The Hagerstown plant has about 1,350 employees, and the Winnsboro plant, about 1,000. Until last year, the 3P group was made up of independent departments, both at Mack and at the company's parent, Renault Vehicules Industriels of France, the company said. Those functions were brought together under one organization to ensure that Mack and Renault VI could cooperate among departments. The center, which is near Queen City Airport, houses 345 engineering and purchasing personnel who are the center of all Mack's truck development and testing. After the 36,870-square-foot addition, about 512 people will be employed in the expanded 158,870-square-foot building. The 167 additional employees will move to the site from a leased annex building and the company's headquarters, both on Allentown's South Side. The two-story addition will have office space, a cafeteria and a lobby. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ U.S. COMPETITION AUTHORITY GIVES CLEARANCE TO AB VOLVO'S ACQUISITION OF RENAULT V.I. /MACK Volvo Press Release / December 18, 2000 Volvo and Department of Justice have entered into a consent decree which is awaiting approval by U.S. district court in Washington D.C. Thereby AB Volvo has now received clearance from the U.S. Department of Justice for the acquisition of Renault V.I. /Mack. AB Volvo and Renault SA expect to conclude the transaction at year-end. The approval is subject to the condition that Volvo Trucks' North American low cab-over-engine (LCOE) business be divested. This segment amounts to less than 3% of the total heavy truck market in North America. The Volvo Group is now establishing a new business area, Volvo Global Trucks, comprising the Volvo, Renault and Mack truck brands. Tryggve Sthen will be chief executive officer of the new business area. Today Tryggve Sthen is CEO for Volvo Trucks. Volvo Global Trucks represents 70% of the Volvo Group's worldwide sales. The intention is that the management of Volvo Global Trucks will be operational by the beginning of 2001. In April of this year, AB Volvo and Renault SA concluded an agreement in principle whereby AB Volvo will receive 100% of Renault's truck operations, Renault V.I./Mack, in exchange for 15% of AB Volvo's shares. The agreement was finalized in July and approved by the European Union (EU) in September. "I am very pleased with this decision," says Leif Johansson, Volvo Group's President and Chief Executive Officer. "It means that after the closing we can immediately start the integration process. We are very eager to quickly implement the strategy for the new truck group and the merged powertrain units. Our intentions are to have a functional management and organization in place by early next year." As a result of the acquisition, Volvo Group is becoming the world's second-largest and Europe's biggest manufacturer of heavy trucks, with a strong global market presence and almost twice its former volume of business. "The acquisition will increase the Volvo Group's possibilities to deliver outstanding value by supplying world class transport solutions to our customers and dealers", says Leif Johansson. Volvo Trucks' and Renault V.I./Mack's combined sales in 1999 amounted to approximately 151,000 heavy trucks and 22,500 light and medium-heavy trucks. Their combined share of the market for heavy trucks in Western Europe amounts to approximately 28%, and to approximately 24% of the market in North America. Department of Justice grants clearance The U.S. Department of Justice decided to grant clearance to the transaction under the condition that AB Volvo divests Volvo Trucks' LCOE business in North America. This segment represents less than 3% of the total heavy truck market in North America. In 1999, Volvo Trucks delivered about 2,100 trucks in this segment. AB Volvo has agreed with the authorities to divest Volvo Trucks' LCOE business within three months. "The LCOE segment is only a limited portion of our North American truck operations," says Volvo Group CEO Leif Johansson, and we are in discussions already with identified interested parties. The divestment involves only those assets associated with the LCOE operations, and will affect the “Xpeditor” models within Volvo Trucks North America.The Volvo trademark and assembly plants are not included. EU approval granted in September The EU decided to approve the transaction in September, subject to a number of concessions, as follows: - AB Volvo must divest its holding in Scania within a time period of up to three years. - Renault V.I. must divest its 50-percent holding in RS Hansa Auto Oy, the Finnish truck distributor, within a time period of up to one year following approval of the transaction by the competition authority in the U.S. - Irisbus - the joint venture held equaly by Renault and Iveco - must be rescinded within two years. Transaction expected to be finalized at year-end After the necessary clearance from EU and Department of Justice, the 10% of Volvo's shares that AB Volvo repurchased will be delivered to Renault as payment for Renault V.I. and Mack. AB Volvo will then buy back additional shares in order to be able to deliver the remaining 5% of the company's shares to Renault SA. Renault will continue to be a Volvo shareholder for at least three years and has declared its intention to increase its holding in Volvo to a maximum of 20% through purchases in the open market in the future. Renault SA's holding in Volvo today amounts to 4.7% of the company's share capital and 4.8% of the voting rights. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mack-Volvo deal has been seven years in the making The Morning Call / December 24, 2000 Dec. 2, 1993 -- A stockholder revolt in Sweden forces the chairman of Volvo AB to resign and his company to ditch plans for a merger with French automaker Renault, parent of Allentown-based Mack Trucks Inc. "Volvo is now left with an aborted merger, a crashed organization and an alliance which most likely will end," says deposed Volvo chairman Pehr Gyllenhammar. "I think the Renault management might have lost faith in Volvo." Mar. 15, 2000 -- The European Commission (EC) yesterday rejected Volvo's planned $6.9 billion US merger with Scania over concerns that it would be anticompetitive. Dec. 18, 2000 -- Volvo receives clearance from the U.S. Department of Justice for the $1.8 billion acquisition of Renault Vehicules Industriels (RVI) of France and subsidiary Mack. "I am very pleased with this decision," says Leif Johansson, Volvo's president and chief executive officer. "We are eager to quickly implement the strategy for the new truck group and the merged powertrain units." It has been seven years between attempted mergers. Ten years have passed since Renault and Volvo began their relationship by swapping stock in their truck, bus and auto companies. But in April, Renault chairman and CEO Louis Schweitzer announced a relationship with Volvo that would form Global Trucks -- the second-largest truck group in the world behind German-based DaimlerChrysler. The deal involved exchanging 100 percent of the Renault truck group's shares for 15 percent of Volvo's shares. It hinged on approval from the U.S. Department of Justice, which focused in America on Volvo's and Mack's heavy interest in trash trucks. So what is Mack getting out of all this? The bulldog image wasn't the big selling point for Volvo. It was the Mack engines and powertrain built at its plant in Hagerstown, Maryland. Global Trucks will have only one engine and transmission plant in North America -- Hagerstown. Before the merger, Volvo engines and transmissions were imported from two plants in Sweden. "One of our ambitions is to increase the penetration of our own [Volvo] powertrain components in this market," said Thomas Clifford, a Volvo spokesman. "Since we don't build in this market, it's very logical to look at the Mack [production] system here." Mack assembly plants in the Lehigh Valley and Winnsboro, S.C., won't gain as much interest initially. And neither has Marc Gustafson, president and chief executive officer of Volvo Trucks in Greensboro, N.C. When the deal was announced earlier this year, industry experts figured Gustafson, who has been an executive with both truck makers, would be a shoo-in to run Mack and Volvo operations in America. But in a letter to employees on Nov. 21, Tryggve Sthen, the new president of the Global Trucks, named executives who will report to him. He named former Renault executive Michel Gigou, who will continue as president of Mack and be appointed to senior vice president of Global Trucks. But Gustafson, a former executive vice president of sales and marketing at Mack, wasn't on the list. Volvo spokesman Phil Rhomba said Monday that Gustafson is "still high-ranking. He's head of Volvo Trucks North America." A common concern is the trash trucks. Mack and Volvo account for about 86 percent of the U.S. market -- a near monopoly, according to the Justice department. It wants Global Trucks to divest some of its interests here. With these trucks being 11 percent of Mack's overall sales and a key product at its 1,000-worker assembly plant in Macungie, Johansson said he would drop Volvo's line -- which holds 3 percent of the North American market. The merger just begins to satisfy Wall Street, which sees an overcapacity in truck production in the United States. In October, U.S. retail sales of heavy-duty trucks were about 36 percent below a year before. American workers, including many of the 6,700 at Mack facilities in the Lehigh Valley, Hagerstown, Md., and Winnsboro, S.C. have taken extra down-time this year. It was Johansson, Volvo's chairman and CEO, who best expressed his company's feelings about the merger during a tour of Mack last summer: "There are few times in an industrialist's life when he can do something with such strong positive and no negative effects." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Volvo agrees to sell Xpeditor Fleet Owner / July 26, 2001 To comply with a deal it entered into with the U.S. Dept. of Justice when it acquired Renault VI and Mack Trucks Inc. in December 2000, Volvo Trucks North America Inc. said today it will sell its Xpeditor truck product line to Grand Vehicle Works Holdings LLC. The agreement involves the assembly and sale of low cab-over-engine (LCOE) heavy-duty Class 8 trucks and unique aftermarket parts. As part of the deal, Volvo will license the Autocar truck brand name to Autocar LLC, a newly formed subsidiary of Grand Vehicle Works Holdings, which will use it to market the LCOE products. The trucks included in the deal are the Xpeditor models WX and WXLL. In addition to the license for the Autocar brand name, the terms of the agreement include model-specific designs, tooling and other assets, including component tooling located at supplier facilities. Upon completion of the sales transaction, there will be an up to 24-month transition period during which Volvo will continue to assemble LCOEs for Grand Vehicle Works Holdings on a contract basis. The Class 8 LCOE segment represents less than 3% of the total heavy truck market in North America, and 8% of Volvo Trucks North America's sales. This divestiture will not materially impact the volume or production capabilities of Volvo's New River Valley, VA truck assembly facility. According to the OEM, no layoffs will result directly from the closing of the transaction. Autocar LLC - http://www.autocartruck.com/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ A short walk through history with Mack and the union The Morning Call / October 14, 2001 Minutes after the United Auto Workers International won the vote to form a union in Winnsboro, S.C., Bob Miller and three other UAW officials emerged from the Mack Trucks assembly plant. With smiles on their faces, they jumped into their Ford LTD, drove to the giant Mack bulldog statue near the parking lot exit and planted a UAW sticker on the bulldog's nose. Miller posed for a snapshot. "I wanted to have my picture taken with the bulldog," said Miller, the UAW's chief organizer in Winnsboro. "And that's what I got." It was April 1989. For many of the 4,700 UAW members who had won transfers from Mack plants in the Lehigh Valley and Hagerstown, Md., in 1987, it would be one of the most joyous events in the Winnsboro plant's 14-year history. As their union slogan went, they'd "Organized the South." But not everyone in the 3,500-population town agreed. In the least unionized state in America, Winnsboro was seeking economic growth, but not from unions. The state had given Mack an incentives package worth about $21 million, believing that the Detroit-based UAW wouldn't follow. Not since Gen. Sherman's troops burned parts of the South Carolina town in 1865 were townsfolk so upset about an "invasion" from the North. This time, the "Yankees" were United Auto Workers. "We're upset," Polly Parker said at the time. She was then co-owner of The News & Herald Tavern (which served no alcohol). "We don't need big-time unions here. They've ruined businesses in the North." Or as Sarah Cook, then a desk clerk at the Days Inn motel in Winnsboro, said, "I'm afraid Mack is going to move this operation to Mexico." In the end, neither the UAW workers nor the townfolk had much say in the matter. With Mack losing $20 million per month in 1991, Renault bought the bulldog and saved it from bankruptcy. Then this year, as rumored for nearly a decade, the French company merged its truck operations with AB Volvo in a $1.13 billion stock deal. Volvo Global Trucks, Mack's new Swedish parent, shut the case on Winnsboro Sept. 28. Volvo Global announced plans to close the Winnsboro plant within 15 months. Mack had spent $87 million to build the South Carolina plant -- and much more to keep it up. Now, Mack will simply disappear from Winnsboro -- with workers laid off or possibly bumped by seniority into Northern plants. Volvo will take a $150 million write-off, and no word has been said about a sale of the Winnsboro site. The work -- production of over-the-road Mack models including the CH and CX models -- will go to Volvo's New River Valley assembly plant in Dublin, Va. And that's the saddest twist. On March 21, Mack offered Winnsboro workers a chance to transfer to its Macungie plant, where its construction and garbage trucks remained hot items in the slumping market. Mack had moved production of its CL model, a larger version of its CH highway vehicle, to its Macungie assembly plant from South Carolina. Only 45 workers from South Carolina agreed to move back to the North, leaving about 250 former Maryland and Lehigh Valley natives in Winnsboro today. They faced a Winnsboro plant that has been closed about 50 percent of the time this year because of a downturn in over-the-road truck sales. Overall, heavy-duty truck sales were predicted to fall 37 percent below 2000 levels. The flow of workers, some South Carolina natives, in March came as part of the previous union contract that called for employees to move with their work. That's something that probably won't happen when the highway truck production is moved to Volvo's plant in Virginia. Today, Mack workers in the Lehigh Valley and from three other states will vote on a 3-year contract that may decide the fate of Winnsboro employees. It could decide whether workers in Winnsboro have a right to carry their seniority to Mack plants in Macungie and Maryland. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ VOLVO'S ACQUISITION OF RENAULT V.I./MACK IMPLEMENTED TODAY Volvo Press Release / January 2, 2001 Following approval by the European Union and the Department of Justice in the United States, Volvo has today January 2, 2001, transferred to Renault S.A. 13,860,494 Series A Volvo shares and 30,291,594 Series B Volvo shares as partial payment for 100 percent of the shares in Renault V.I./Mack, Renault's truck business. Volvo acquired the transferred shares, which represents 10 percent of the share capital and voting rights in Volvo, through an offer to its shareholders in the spring of 2000 and through purchases in the open market. Following the transfer, Volvo does not own any of its own shares. After having acquired 4.9 percent of Volvo shares in the open market, Renault now holds 14.9 percent of the shares in AB Volvo. Volvo intends to repurchase additional company shares in order to be able to transfer to Renault the remaining five percent of Volvo's shares that will constitute the final payment to Renault. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Volvo closing Mack World Headquarters The Morning Call / August 15, 2008 Mack Trucks, the definition of rugged power for more than a century, is moving its headquarters from Allentown to North Carolina. {relocating the Mack headquarters functions that hadn’t already been terminated into Volvo’s Greensboro, North Carolina headquarters} President and Chief Executive Dennis R. Slagle shocked employees Thursday with the news, which even surprised Gov. Ed Rendell, who has built a reputation for enticing companies to Pennsylvania and keeping them here. The move to Greensboro will result in a net loss of 580 Lehigh Valley jobs over the next two years and will affect nearly 1,000 local employees, some of whom might lose their jobs if they don't decide to uproot and head south. But all the news isn't bad. Soon, all Mack trucks will be assembled at the Macungie plant, where the company will invest $20 million and add 200 blue-collar jobs. The plant now employs 540 and makes construction and refuse trucks, while Mack's New River Valley plant in Virginia builds all of the highway trucks. The headquarters move next year to Greensboro, where fellow Volvo Group subsidiary Volvo Trucks North America is based and Mack has its information technology, human resources, finance and other support functions, is part of a plan "to improve our profitability and competitiveness," Slagle said. "Taking these steps will make us a more efficient, agile and cost-effective organization in almost every aspect of our business, from product development to production to aftermarket support," he said. Mack will transfer 200 people from its headquarters to a nearby customer demonstration and reception center, now the test center near Queen City Airport. The test [R&D] center's work will go to Greensboro in 2010. Industry experts said Mack's restructuring is tied to the industry-wide impact of a slump in truck sales that started in 2007, due initially to strict federal emission standards that made trucks more expensive. The ongoing slump in the economy has also affected Mack's sales as demands have decreased for home building and freight shipping. "This is definitely a market thing," said Christopher Brady, a trucking industry expert with Commercial Motor Vehicle Consulting, an analysis and research firm. "…They are in the process of reducing costs." In 2007, Mack delivered 18,600 heavy-duty trucks, down 50 percent from 2006. Through June 2008, the company shipped 8,585 trucks to dealers, down 2.7 percent from the first six months of 2007. The company doesn't build trucks on speculation the way automakers do, so deliveries directly represent customer orders. Slagle, who became Mack's chief in April, said the restructuring comes after a recent study to find ways to improve the company's competitiveness and position it for long-term industry leadership. He said 680 employees staff the headquarters on Mack Boulevard and an additional 300 are at the test center. After the move, 200 from headquarters will staff the new customer demonstration center, while most of the remaining employees will be offered the opportunity to move to Greensboro. The loss of about 780 jobs will be partly offset, Slagle said, by adding the 200 positions at the Macungie plant later this year. To fill the new production positions, Mack will turn to the ranks of employees laid off in previous years. The plant in Lower Macungie Township produces 38 trucks per day, while the New River Valley plant builds 24. With the consolidation, a spokesman said, the Macungie plant will push its output to more than 60 trucks per day. Slagle said Mack will offer relocation opportunities to all affected employees, including members of the United Auto Workers. The UAW, which agreed to a contract extension with Mack, will begin negotiations on a new labor contract next month. Mack said it will provide severance pay and job assistance to workers. Ed Balukas, president of the union's Allentown Local 677, couldn't be reached for comment. Mack employment regularly waxes and wanes by hundreds of jobs in tune with business cycles. In 2006, 450 Macungie workers were laid off because of a sales slowdown following a boom. But Mack was never the Valley's largest employer. The news is more about losing its headquarters -- an emotional rather than economic loss. "Losing Mack Trucks is a symbolic blow to the area, maybe even more so than an economic blow," said Lehigh County Executive Don Cunningham, who as Bethlehem mayor suffered through the loss of Bethlehem Steel. "Allentown and the Lehigh Valley have been synonymous with being the headquarters of Mack Trucks for a long time." Mack is also one of the last bastions of big manufacturing in the Valley. For the nostalgic, it conjures memories of a single, union factory job as the economic sustaining force for a family. The company moved to the Lehigh Valley in 1905 when brothers Jack and Gus Mack began looking to replace their small wagon-making shop in Brooklyn, N.Y. It was bought by the Volvo Group in 2001. Dan Lynch, president of the Greensboro Economic Development Alliance, said Mack will be a welcome addition to a city that has seen its share of corporate flight in the last two decades. "We had the demise of the textile and apparel industry here, so we have been on the other side of the coin," Lynch said. "We are enthusiastically embracing Mack, but we also are sensitive to what Allentown is going through." The move is expected to create nearly 500 jobs in Greensboro with an average salary of $73,800, Lynch said, nearly double the Guilford County average of $37,700. "These are professional-level jobs that Mack will be bringing to the area," he said. "It creates job opportunities for our young professionals here in Greensboro." As an incentive to move to North Carolina, Mack will get a Job Development Investment Grant from that state, which could equal $8.5 million over the next nine years. The grant is based on the number of jobs Mack creates. Slagle said the company didn't give Pennsylvania a chance to make a pitch to retain it, preferring instead to keep the move quiet until Thursday. "We knew what was available," Slagle said. "There is not much [Pennsylvania] could have done to tip the scales. To be fair, we didn't give them the opportunity. We felt it would be futile." The move sent shock waves through City Hall and Harrisburg and angered and upset many employees. Rendell and several legislators said they had no knowledge of it before Thursday morning. "We would have absolutely immediately addressed Mack's concerns, and we would have done everything we could to help them," said state Rep. Karen Beyer, R-Lehigh, whose 131st District is home to the Mack headquarters. "For Mack Trucks to not even give the commonwealth the opportunity to keep them here is mind-boggling. Disappointment is not a strong enough word for me." This restructuring is the latest consolidation by Volvo, of Sweden, to save money. In 2002, Volvo closed Mack's Winnsboro, S.C., plant, which had replaced the 5C plant in Allentown in 1987. The Winnsboro operation made Mack highway trucks. That work was then moved to New River Valley. As another part of the restructuring, Mack will close spare parts distribution centers (PDCs) in Columbus, Ohio, and Dallas. It will also shrink PDCs in Baltimore (Severn), Chicago (Bridgeview), Jacksonville, Fla., and Memphis, Tenn. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Renault sells remaining Volvo stake Bloomberg / December 12, 2012 Renault SA has sold its remaining Volvo AB stake for 12.8 billion kronor ($1.92 billion) to boost funding, ending an 11-year run as the Swedish truckmaker’s largest owner. Renault disposed of a 6.5 percent holding at 92.25 kronor per share, 3.8 percent below yesterday’s closing price of 95.90 kronor, to reduce debt and invest in France, Russia and China, the company said. Renault sold a 14.9 percent stake in Volvo in 2010 for 3 billion euros. The French carmaker acquired its holding in 2001, when it sold the heavy truck unit to Volvo. Goldman Sachs Group Inc. placed the shares, the U.S. bank said in a statement. Industrivaerden AB said today it bought 10 million A shares, equivalent to 1.2 percent of voting rights and 0.5 percent of the share capital. The Swedish holding company, which has stakes in companies including Skanska AB, steel-maker SSAB AB, Svenska Handelsbanken AB and Sandvik AB, now owns 6.2 percent of Volvo AB’s share capital and 18.7 percent of the voting rights, making it the manufacturer’s largest shareholder. “It’s important for Volvo to have a strong and stable owner structure and we believe that after this sale, it will continue to have such a structure,” Carl-Olof By, Industrivaerden’s deputy chief executive officer, said in a telephone interview. “We believe in the company and see big potential and will continue to be a long-term owner.”

The conversation going on here (http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/index.php?/topic/43877-driving-impresions-of-cats-ct680l/) prodded me to try and lay out what was happening in the 1990s, which was actually quite a bit.

11KBA51406AP1 is your transmission's assembly part number. With that, a Mack parts person can look up all the parts. Changing over to a T2060 (9.02/0.60) or T2070 (14.16 / 0.60) would help, but realize you only have a 225hp engine.

The 12.4-liter International-branded N13 and CAT-branded CT13 are the proven MAN D26 (D2676) built under license in Huntsville, Alabama. Both have been revised, away from a "massive EGR" design to SCR. However the ADR80/03 (Euro-5) C15 available in Australia is very much a CAT engine. Website - http://www.cattrucks.com.au/trucks/ct630sc/#tab=3 CT15 PDF - http://www.westrac.com.au/Promotions/NSW/Documents/Cat%20CT13,%20C15%20Engine%20Specifications%5B1%5D.pdf About the N.A. market CAT truck production relocation: http://www.drivecat.com/blog/2015/08/truck-manufacturing-moves-to-u-s-caterpillar-facility/ http://www.bigmacktrucks.com/index.php?/topic/41132-caterpillar-to-build-its-own-vocational-trucks-in-us-end-navistar-cooperation/?hl=victoria

TPP was approved by Washington at the behest of American manufacturers, as was NAFTA.

TPP is going to have as great an effect on Americans as NAFTA did (Perot was correct about that "giant sucking sound", the sound of jobs heading south to Mexico). I'm very surprised that there are no comments on this. But, details were kept secret up to the last minute, and it's received little coverage in mainstream media like CNN. The ramifications of TPP are so great, that like NAFTA, the American people should have had the ability to vote on it. But as it has always been*, it is largely the aristocracy which guides the country's direction, which includes the big business heads. *The founding fathers of our country were amongst the small group of wealthy and schooled individuals, the aristocracy, in the thirteen British colonies that felt the uneducated commoners were unqualified to participate in government. This is why the Electoral College was created, to avoid allowing the mass population to vote directly. The Electoral College, overseen by the founding fathers, would ensure behind the veil that a proper choice was made for president and vice-president. The founding fathers enticed the commoners (mass population) of the English colonist to join together in a revolutionary war for independence by promising them the ability to participate in government. However they didn’t really mean it and, at that time, were quite concerned that should they gain independence, the commoners would hold them to their promises. Much to their relief, that never happened. Under the illusion that they had a say in government, the ignorant commoners for the most part fell in line and allowed the founding fathers to run the show. (To gain an accurate picture of our beginning, I encourage you to read "Independence: The Struggle to Set America Free", by John Ferling - http://www.amazon.co...s=independence)

Mack Trucks was owned by Renault at that time. However the truck was still designed by Mack, as Renault allowed Mack to operate autonomously for the most part. In other words, the truck did not contain any Renault components (the U.S.-produced CM400 being a special case).

This is for folks who want-need to replace their pre-2010 Series 60 in Australia. Australia heavy truck emissions standards ADR70/00 (equivalent of Euro 2) Applicable Jan 1, 1995 (alternative standard - EPA91) ADR80/00 (equivalent of Euro 3) Applicable Jan 1, 2002 (alternative standard - EPA98) ADR80/02 (equivalent of Euro 4) Applicable Jan 1, 2007 (alternative standard - EPA2004) ADR80/03 (equivalent of Euro 5) Applicable Jan 1, 2010 (alternative standard - EPA2007) ADR80/04 (equivalent of Euro 6) Original plan for Jan 1, 2016 cancelled, under review again (alternative standard - EPA2010) (ADR - Australian Design Rules)

To each his own my friend.........I don't feel the hood is ugly at all. For a mixer chassis, it looks reasonably attractive, and extremely functional in design (my humble opinion).

Trans-Pacific Partnership: four key issues to watch out for The Guardian / November 5, 2015 On the words ‘climate change’ being absent from the TPP, trade minister Andrew Robb says: ‘It’s not an agreement on climate change, it’s a trade agreement’ Overnight, thousands of pages of text of the Trans-Pacific Partnership have been released, ending months of secrecy. As experts around the world begin the task of poring over the detail, here are four key issues to watch. Environment The language in this chapter of the TPP covers objectives ranging from protecting the environment from ship pollution, protecting the ozone layer, dealing with “invasive alien species” and implementing voluntary mechanisms to enhance environmental performance. But green groups and trade experts including Matthew Rimmer, professor of intellectual property and innovation at the Queensland University of Technology, have been surprised to learn the chapter doesn’t actually use the words climate change. “Instead [of climate change], there is some weak language on the transition to a low emissions economy,” Rimmer says. TPP or not TPP? What's the Trans-Pacific Partnership and should we support it? The “low emissions” language in the text is not so much weak as artfully non-specific. It says parties to the TPP recognise “each party’s actions to transition to a low emissions economy should reflect domestic circumstances and capabilities”. It presages cooperation between the signatories on energy efficiency, renewable energy investment, sustainable urban infrastructure development, addressing deforestation and forest degradation, conducting emissions monitoring, developing market and non-market mechanisms, and pursuing low-emissions, resilient development (whatever that might mean). It also says the parties shall, “as appropriate”, engage in cooperative and capacity-building activities related to transitioning to a low emissions economy. On the omission of the words “climate change” from the TPP, the Australian trade minister, Andrew Robb, says: “Well, this is not a climate change policy. It’s not an agreement to do with climate change, it’s a trade agreement.” Environmental group Greenpeace says the chapter as a whole is very disappointing. “There are no new enforcement mechanisms to ensure that countries uphold their own environmental standards, and the mechanisms to enhance environmental performance are only voluntary,” said Emma Gibson, head of program for Greenpeace Australia Pacific. Labour rights This chapter draws on the declaration of the International Labour Organisation to articulate labour standards and regulations within signatory countries. It says parties to the TPP should engage in cooperative activity to “enhance opportunities to improve labour standards and to further advance common commitments regarding labour matters, including workers’ wellbeing and quality of life and the principles and rights stated in the ILO declaration”. It also notes “each party recognises the goal of eliminating all forms of forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory child labour”. TPP deal: US and 11 other countries reach landmark Pacific trade pact In Australia, trade unions will be paying close attention to the labour rights chapter, particularly in the wake of controversy over comparable provisions in the recent bilateral Australia/China free trade agreement. Looking globally, Rimmer says there will be a lot of discussion as to whether the TPP’s labour rights enforcement regime will be effective and workable. The enforcement provision says this: “No party shall fail to effectively enforce its labour laws through a sustained or recurring course of action or inaction in a manner affecting trade or investment between the parties after the date of entry into force of this agreement.” Rimmer predicts the global labour movement will be unconvinced by the wording. “There will remain much disquiet about the inclusion of Vietnam, Brunei and Malaysia in the agreement. There will continue to be concerns about labour rights, freedom of association, and human trafficking,” he says. Intellectual property Any non-lawyerly person contemplating reading the TPP’s intellectual property chapter before they’ve downed a stiff whiskey or some other mind clearing substance is a very brave soul indeed. But read we must, because the IP chapter has been one of the biggest fight clubs of the TPP. In summary, the chapter delivers a stronger regime in copyright protection, trademark and patent law, and sets out rules for “biologics” – pharmaceuticals, in layperson’s terms. The Australian trade minister Andrew Robb says 40 straight hours of negotiation were required at the final meeting to settle the treatment of biologics to Canberra’s satisfaction. The US wanted at least eight years of data exclusivity for biologics, when the Australian standard is five years. The US demand would have meant Australians waiting longer before cheaper versions of pharmaceuticals became available. “We haven’t moved one iota on any of that health area,” Robb says. From cars to cough medicine: why the Trans-Pacific Partnership matters to you But Patricia Ranald, coordinator of the Australian Fair Trade and Investment Network says the TPP text isn’t open and shut. It opens up the prospect of a review, and further consultations. “Five years is a minimum standard but the text also refers to eight years and to ‘other measures’ which would ‘deliver a comparable market outcome,’ and to a future review. It is not clear how this will be applied in Australia,” Ranald says. But trade consultant Alan Oxley plays down the risk. “That’s called a negotiation, I really don’t think that is significant. Robb had a brief and he held it.” Rimmer also points to another area of potential controversy in the IP chapter: criminal procedures and penalties in respect of disclosure of trade secrets, computer crimes and espionage. “Such provisions could have a significant impact upon journalists, whistleblowers, and civil society,” he says. Investment The TPP aims to free up investment between signatory countries. But the controversy in this chapter will be focussed squarely on the inclusion of an investor state dispute settlement clause. Trade agreements with ISDS clauses are increasingly controversial both in Australia and around the world. These clauses allow foreign investors to sue governments over policies that harm their interests. On Friday, the shadow trade minister Penny Wong said Robb should have “rejected the inclusion of ISDS provisions in the TPP”. Greens leader Richard Di Natale said it was “remarkable that what we are prepared to do is to see big foreign multinational corporations given the power to sue governments for protecting people’s health and the environment”. Trans-Pacific Partnership will lead to a global race to the bottom | Rose Aguilar But trade consultant Oxley is unmoved by the backlash. He says the current opposition to ISDS clauses is merely a new focal point for anti-trade liberalisation activists. “Business supports ISDS clauses – no-one in Australian business thinks these are a bad idea. The onerousness of them is significantly misrepresented.” But Ranald cites an often quoted case – the Philip Morris case – as a reason ISDS clauses should be a no go zone. The tobacco firm is taking legal action against Australia’s plain packaging laws. “The general ‘safeguards’ in the TPP text are qualified, and similar to those in other recent agreements which have not prevented cases against health and environmental laws,” she says. The TPP text recognises it is legitimate to protect “public welfare objectives” and this activity does not constitute “indirect expropriations, except in rare circumstances”. Robb has pointed to these exclusions as significant, preventing potential abuse of the ISDS process. Rimmer points out the general exceptions chapter in the TPP text provides the opportunity for countries to elect to protect tobacco from the investment regime for tobacco control measures. There’s a “but”, though. “However, this is not a complete carve-out for tobacco control measures. Moreover, the agreement does not necessarily provide protection for tobacco control measures from attack under other regimes.”

TPP or not TPP? What's the Trans-Pacific Partnership and should we support it? The Guardian / October 5, 2015 Twelve Pacific rim countries have signed a sweeping trade deal but will it cut red tape and boost commerce or is it a sellout to big business that will cost jobs? Close to a decade in the making, the most important trade pact in a generation moved closer to becoming a reality on Monday. Thanks to the alphabet soup of acronyms and the byzantine path the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) has taken, and the secrecy in which talks have been conducted, many people have ignored the pact. But as a deal gets closer to being sealed, tempers are fraying and the TPP is set to make its way up the news agenda. Here’s your guide through the maze – what we can see of it anyway. So we have a deal. Yes, at least the beginning of a deal. In a final round of negotiations, Pacific trade ministers from Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the US and Vietnam reached the widest-ranging trade deal in a generation, covering everything from pharmaceuticals and banking to milk. The terms of the agreement will now have to be approved by each of the TPP countries. Who is missing? The notable exception is China. In part, the deal is meant to tackle China’s dominance in the region. China has its own trade plans under discussion but could one day be part of the TPP. Will the US sign off? It should do – although the effort won’t be without friction. Hoping to avoid a long, drawn-out fight over the TPP, Obama asked the US Congress to give him Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) to negotiate the trade agreement. TPA gives Congress the ability to review and vote for or against a final trade agreement, but they are not able to amend it or filibuster. Getting the TPA through Congress wasn’t easy, but after weeks of back and forth the bill was finally passed in late June. Who is against this trade deal? Among those speaking out against the agreement are unions, workers’ rights groups and environmentalists, all of whom have traditionally been Obama supporters. Many in the president’s own party – including senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren – oppose the trade deal. Free speech advocates and financial reformers are also worried about the deal. Warren is specifically afraid that if it is passed, a future president could use the TPP to change regulations like Dodd-Frank that are meant to safeguard US investors. In a statement issued on Monday, Sanders said that he is “disappointed but not surprised by the decision to move forward on the disastrous Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement that will hurt consumers and cost American jobs. “Wall Street and other big corporations have won again. It is time for the rest of us to stop letting multinational corporations rig the system to pad their profits at our expense,” he said. He added that this agreement was akin to failed trade deals with Mexico and China which cost the US millions of jobs and vowed to do what he could to defeat the agreement in Congress. Who supports the agreement? Big businesses like Nike – from whose headquarters Obama controversially chose to shill for the deal – support the agreement because it would reduce the tariffs on the shoes they produce overseas and then ship to the US. (Right now 98% of shoes in the US are imported.) They also argue free trade will benefit US companies and create more jobs at home. The deal would clarify trade rules that currently ensnare businesses large and small in red tape and would arguably make trading in the Pacific rim far easier. Did the corporations lobby for passage of the deal? They sure did. An analysis of Federal Election Commission data showed that corporate members of the US Business Coalition for TPP donated more than $1m to members of US Senate campaigns between January and March of this year, when fast-tracking the TPP was being debated. Here is what that analysis found: Out of the total $1,148,971 given, an average of $17,676.48 was donated to each of the 65 “yea” votes. The average Republican member received $19,673.28 from corporate TPP supporters. The average Democrat received $9,689.23 from those same donors. Wasn’t there another agreement that promised much the same but cost the US jobs? Yes. That was Nafta – the North American Free Trade Agreement – signed in 1994 between the US, Canada and Mexico. As Sanders points out, post-Nafta the US lost nearly 700,000 jobs, and over 60% of the lost jobs were in manufacturing. Obama is really tired of people making the Nafta comparison. While speaking at Nike HQ in May, he told the audience that Nafta was a different agreement, passed 20 years ago. “In fact, this agreement fixes some of what was wrong with Nafta by making labor and environmental provisions actually enforceable,” he said. He argued the agreement will not cost US jobs and will raise standards for workers in countries like Vietnam, where many large US companies currently outsource work. So who is right, and what does the agreement actually say? Well, that’s the thing: we don’t know. The agreement is secret. The most detail we have had so far comes from WikiLeaks, which leaked chapters on intellectual property proposals that have caused consternation online. “If you read, write, publish, think, listen, dance, sing or invent; if you farm or consume food; if you’re ill now or might one day be ill, the TPP has you in its crosshairs,” said the WikiLeaks founder, Julian Assange. Meanwhile, Obama insisted that the deal is not secret at all. … how? Well, he says that people will get to see it before he officially signs off on it. This is what he said in May: “You’ve got some critics saying that any deal would be rushed through; it’s a secret deal, people don’t know what’s in it. This is not true. Any agreement that we finalize with the other 11 countries will have to be posted online for at least 60 days before I even sign it. Then it would go to Congress – and you know they’re not going to do anything fast. So there will be months of review. Every T crossed, every I dotted. Everybody is going to be able to see exactly what’s in it.” So what now? Now, we wait for the 30 chapters of the agreement to be posted. Everyone – from lawmakers to unions to lobbyists – is eager to get their hands on a copy of the deal to see what exactly it contains. “We ask the administration to release the text immediately, and urge legislators to exercise great caution in evaluating the TPP,” Richard Trumka, president of the largest labor union federation in the US, AFL-CIO, said on Monday. After it receives the text of the agreement, Congress will have 90 days to review it before a straight yes-or-no vote. Thanks to the TPA, there will be no amendments and no filibusters. Wait, so this is not over yet? Nope. Let’s get together in another three months and see how it’s going then.

Is the Trans-Pacific Partnership Unconstitutional? The Atlantic / June 23, 2015 Provisions that allow foreign investors to bypass the federal courts could undermine U.S. legal protections. It is January 2017. The mayor of San Francisco signs a bill that will raise the minimum wage of all workers from $8 to $16 an hour effective July 1st. His lawyers assure him that neither federal nor California minimum wage laws forbid that and that it is fine under the U.S. Constitution. Then, a month later, a Vietnamese company that owns 15 restaurants in San Francisco files a lawsuit saying that the pay increase violates the “investor protection” provisions of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement recently approved by Congress. The lawsuit is not in a federal or state court, but instead will be heard by three private arbitrators; the United States government is the sole defendant; and the city can participate only if the U.S. allows it. It is not a far-fetched scenario. The TPP reportedly includes such provisions, as a means of solving a thorny problem. In the United States, the courts are, by and large, independent and willing to fairly decide challenges to arbitrary government laws and rulings, no matter who the plaintiff is. The same is not consistently true in less developed countries. The solution proposed in the TPP is to allow foreign investors to bring claims for money damages over violations of the TPP’s investor protection provisions before a private arbitration tribunal that operates outside the challenged government’s court system. One arbitrator would be chosen by the investor, one by the country being challenged, and a third by agreement of the other two arbitrators. The arbitrators are often lawyers who specialize in international trade and investment, for whom serving as arbitrators is only one source of their income. Unlike U.S. judges, they are not salaried but paid by the hour, and they can rotate between arbitrating cases and representing investors suing governments. Despite the fairness of our court system, the U.S. government has consented in prior trade agreements, and in a leaked version of the still-secret TPP, to allow foreign investors to bypass our courts and instead move to “investor-state” arbitration. Thus, challenges based upon TPP to our duly enacted laws and other regulatory actions would be decided by three individuals who are not government officials and need not be American citizens. And they would have the final word as to whether the federal government will be compelled to pay damages, because there is no judicial review in any U.S. court of the merits of these arbitral rulings. If such a case were brought, the foreign investor would sue the United States and ask that the arbitrators find that “investor-based expectations” under the TPP were violated. So, for example, it might claim that doubling the minimum wage from its prior level violated the TPP’s provisions requiring fair and equitable treatment of foreign investors. If the arbitrators agreed, they would assess money damages that would be paid from the federal treasury, but the San Francisco wage law would not be directly affected. However, because the ruling would open the door for other foreign investors in any number of businesses to bring similar claims, Congress would almost assuredly step in and override the wage increase to prevent opening the doors to the Treasury to every foreign investor in San Francisco. Indeed, in a similar situation Canada reversed a toxics ban and published a worldwide advertisement that the chemical was safe in order to avoid the possibility of having to pay substantial damages. In recent years, there has been a major increase in the use of arbitration in the United States to decide commercial disputes, but those cases involve contracts in which the parties agreed to arbitration, with the outcome generally depending on how factual issues are resolved. TPP arbitrators, by contrast, will decide what is essentially a legal question: whether governmental actions, which are designed to protect our health, safety, environment and economic well-being, are consistent with the TPP. Those protections extend from locally enacted laws like the San Francisco minimum-wage provision, to state statutes and regulatory actions, to laws passed by Congress and decisions of federal regulatory agencies. And under the TPP, as under other trade agreements, decisions of a majority of the arbitrators on compliance with the TPP will not be subject to review in any court, federal or state. Among the other important public policy measures currently being debated that might be the basis for a TPP claim by a foreign investor include water rationing in California, the legality of selling e-cigarettes to minors, and the state regulation of medical facilities performing abortions. If a foreign investor won a TPP arbitration in these situations or the wage increase discussed above, that would not only cost the Treasury, but it would disadvantage American competitors who cannot benefit from TPP arbitrations, unless the offending law were set aside. And if governments feel compelled to set aside such laws in response to adverse rulings, the three arbitrators will effectively have substituted their own judgments for that of the electorate. Under the TPP, the arbitrators will act like judges, deciding legal questions just as federal judges decide constitutional claims. However, unlike judges appointed under Article III of the Constitution, TPP arbitrators are not appointed by the president or confirmed by the Senate, nor do they have the independence that comes from life tenure. And that presents a significant constitutional issue: Can the president and Congress, consistent with Article III, assign to three private arbitrators the judicial function of deciding the merits of a TPP investor challenge? The Supreme Court has not ruled on this precise question. But the collective reasoning in four of its recent rulings bearing on the issue leans heavily toward a finding of unconstitutionality. The Court has placed significant limits on the ability of Congress to assign the power to decide cases traditionally handled by the courts to people other than Article III judges, even when the judicial substitutes are full-time federal officials, such as bankruptcy judges or the heads of federal agencies. Moreover, in each case in which the Court approved of a dispute being taken away from federal judges, there was judicial review at the end of the process, which is not the case with TPP. Moreover, although the Justice Department issued a lengthy opinion in 1995 on when arbitration can be used to replace court adjudication, it did not then, and has not since then, defended the constitutionality of arbitration provisions like those in the proposed TPP. As it presses for the passage of TPP, the administration needs to explain how the Constitution allows the United States to agree to submit the validity of its federal, state, and local laws to three private arbitrators, with no possibility of review by any U.S. court. Otherwise, it risks securing a trade agreement that won’t survive judicial scrutiny, or, even worse, which will undermine the structural protections that an independent federal judiciary was created to ensure.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership clause everyone should oppose The Washington Post / February 25, 2015 The United States is in the final stages of negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a massive free-trade agreement with Mexico, Canada, Japan, Singapore and seven other countries. Who will benefit from the TPP? American workers? Consumers? Small businesses? Taxpayers? Or the biggest multinational corporations in the world? One strong hint is buried in the fine print of the closely guarded draft. The provision, an increasingly common feature of trade agreements, is called “Investor-State Dispute Settlement,” or ISDS. The name may sound mild, but don’t be fooled. Agreeing to ISDS in this enormous new treaty would tilt the playing field in the United States further in favor of big multinational corporations. Worse, it would undermine U.S. sovereignty. ISDS would allow foreign companies to challenge U.S. laws — and potentially to pick up huge payouts from taxpayers — without ever stepping foot in a U.S. court. Here’s how it would work. Imagine that the United States bans a toxic chemical that is often added to gasoline because of its health and environmental consequences. If a foreign company that makes the toxic chemical opposes the law, it would normally have to challenge it in a U.S. court. But with ISDS, the company could skip the U.S. courts and go before an international panel of arbitrators. If the company won, the ruling couldn’t be challenged in U.S. courts, and the arbitration panel could require American taxpayers to cough up millions — and even billions — of dollars in damages. If that seems shocking, buckle your seat belt. ISDS could lead to gigantic fines, but it wouldn’t employ independent judges. Instead, highly paid corporate lawyers would go back and forth between representing corporations one day and sitting in judgment the next. Maybe that makes sense in an arbitration between two corporations, but not in cases between corporations and governments. If you’re a lawyer looking to maintain or attract high-paying corporate clients, how likely are you to rule against those corporations when it’s your turn in the judge’s seat? If the tilt toward giant corporations wasn’t clear enough, consider who would get to use this special court: only international investors, which are, by and large, big corporations. So if a Vietnamese company with U.S. operations wanted to challenge an increase in the U.S. minimum wage, it could use ISDS. But if an American labor union believed Vietnam was allowing Vietnamese companies to pay slave wages in violation of trade commitments, the union would have to make its case in the Vietnamese courts. Why create these rigged, pseudo-courts at all? What’s so wrong with the U.S. judicial system? Nothing, actually. But after World War II, some investors worried about plunking down their money in developing countries, where the legal systems were not as dependable. They were concerned that a corporation might build a plant one day only to watch a dictator confiscate it the next. To encourage foreign investment in countries with weak legal systems, the United States and other nations began to include ISDS in trade agreements. Those justifications don’t make sense anymore, if they ever did. Countries in the TPP are hardly emerging economies with weak legal systems. Australia and Japan have well-developed, well-respected legal systems, and multinational corporations navigate those systems every day, but ISDS would preempt their courts too. And to the extent there are countries that are riskier politically, market competition can solve the problem. Countries that respect property rights and the rule of law — such as the United States — should be more competitive, and if a company wants to invest in a country with a weak legal system, then it should buy political-risk insurance. The use of ISDS is on the rise around the globe. From 1959 to 2002, there were fewer than 100 ISDS claims worldwide. But in 2012 alone, there were 58 cases. Recent cases include a French company that sued Egypt because Egypt raised its minimum wage, a Swedish company that sued Germany because Germany decided to phase out nuclear power after Japan’s Fukushima disaster, and a Dutch company that sued the Czech Republic because the Czechs didn’t bail out a bank that the company partially owned. U.S. corporations have also gotten in on the action: Philip Morris is trying to use ISDS to stop Uruguay from implementing new tobacco regulations intended to cut smoking rates. ISDS advocates point out that, so far, this process hasn’t harmed the United States. And our negotiators, who refuse to share the text of the TPP publicly, assure us that it will include a bigger, better version of ISDS that will protect our ability to regulate in the public interest. But with the number of ISDS cases exploding and more and more multinational corporations headquartered abroad, it is only a matter of time before such a challenge does serious damage here. Replacing the U.S. legal system with a complex and unnecessary alternative — on the assumption that nothing could possibly go wrong — seems like a really bad idea This isn’t a partisan issue. Conservatives who believe in U.S. sovereignty should be outraged that ISDS would shift power from American courts, whose authority is derived from our Constitution, to unaccountable international tribunals. Libertarians should be offended that ISDS effectively would offer a free taxpayer subsidy to countries with weak legal systems. And progressives should oppose ISDS because it would allow big multinationals to weaken labor and environmental rules. Giving foreign corporations special rights to challenge our laws outside of our legal system would be a bad deal. If a final TPP agreement includes Investor-State Dispute Settlement, the only winners will be multinational corporations.

In 2016, let's hope for better trade agreements - and the death of TPP The Guardian / January 10, 2016 The Trans-Pacific Partnership may turn out to be the worst trade agreement in decades Last year was a memorable one for the global economy. Not only was overall performance disappointing, but profound changes – both for better and for worse – occurred in the global economic system. Most notable was the Paris climate agreement reached last month. By itself, the agreement is far from enough to limit the increase in global warming to the target of 2ºC above the pre-industrial level. But it did put everyone on notice: the world is moving, inexorably, toward a green economy. One day not too far off, fossil fuels will be largely a thing of the past. So anyone who invests in coal now does so at his or her peril. With more green investments coming to the fore, those financing them will, we should hope, counterbalance powerful lobbying by the coal industry, which is willing to put the world at risk to advance its shortsighted interests. Indeed, the move away from a high-carbon economy, where coal, gas, and oil interests often dominate, is just one of several major changes in the global geo-economic order. Many others are inevitable, given China’s soaring share of global output and demand. The New Development Bank, established by the Brics (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa), was launched during the year, becoming the first major international financial institution led by emerging countries. And, despite Barack Obama’s resistance, the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank was established as well, and is to start operation this month. The US did act with greater wisdom where China’s currency was concerned. It did not obstruct the renminbi’s admission to the basket of currencies that constitute the International Monetary Fund’s reserve asset, Special Drawing Rights (SDRs). In addition, a half-decade after the Obama administration agreed to modest changes in the voting rights of China and other emerging markets at the IMF – a small nod to the new economic realities – the US Congress finally approved the reforms. The most controversial geo-economic decisions last year concerned trade. Almost unnoticed after years of desultory talks, the World Trade Organization’s Doha Development Round – initiated to redress imbalances in previous trade agreements that favored developed countries – was given a quiet burial. America’s hypocrisy – advocating free trade but refusing to abandon subsidies on cotton and other agricultural commodities – had posed an insurmountable obstacle to the Doha negotiations. In place of global trade talks, the US and Europe have mounted a divide-and-conquer strategy, based on overlapping trade blocs and agreements. As a result, what was intended to be a global free trade regime has given way to a discordant managed trade regime. Trade for much of the Pacific and Atlantic regions will be governed by agreements, thousands of pages in length and replete with complex rules of origin that contradict basic principles of efficiency and the free flow of goods. The US concluded secret negotiations on what may turn out to be the worst trade agreement in decades, the so-called Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), and now faces an uphill battle for ratification, as all the leading Democratic presidential candidates and many of the Republicans have weighed in against it. The problem is not so much with the agreement’s trade provisions, but with the “investment” chapter, which severely constrains environmental, health, and safety regulation, and even financial regulations with significant macroeconomic impacts. In particular, the chapter gives foreign investors the right to sue governments in private international tribunals when they believe government regulations contravene the TPP’s terms (inscribed on more than 6,000 pages). In the past, such tribunals have interpreted the requirement that foreign investors receive “fair and equitable treatment” as grounds for striking down new government regulations – even if they are non-discriminatory and are adopted simply to protect citizens from newly discovered egregious harms. While the language is complex – inviting costly lawsuits pitting powerful corporations against poorly financed governments – even regulations protecting the planet from greenhouse gas emissions are vulnerable. The only regulations that appear safe are those involving cigarettes (lawsuits filed against Uruguay and Australia for requiring modest labeling about health hazards had drawn too much negative attention). But there remain a host of questions about the possibility of lawsuits in myriad other areas. Furthermore, a “most favoured nation” provision ensures that corporations can claim the best treatment offered in any of a host country’s treaties. That sets up a race to the bottom – exactly the opposite of what US President Barack Obama promised. Even the way Obama argued for the new trade agreement showed how out of touch with the emerging global economy his administration is. He repeatedly said that the TPP would determine who – America or China – would write the twenty-first century’s trade rules. The correct approach is to arrive at such rules collectively, with all voices heard, and in a transparent way. Obama has sought to perpetuate business as usual, whereby the rules governing global trade and investment are written by US corporations for US corporations. This should be unacceptable to anyone committed to democratic principles. Those seeking closer economic integration have a special responsibility to be strong advocates of global governance reforms: if authority over domestic policies is ceded to supranational bodies, then the drafting, implementation, and enforcement of the rules and regulations has to be particularly sensitive to democratic concerns. Unfortunately, that was not always the case in 2015. In 2016, we should hope for the TPP’s defeat and the beginning of a new era of trade agreements that don’t reward the powerful and punish the weak. The Paris climate agreement may be a harbinger of the spirit and mindset needed to sustain genuine global cooperation.

Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal signed AFP / February 3, 2016 The biggest trade deal in history was signed Thursday, yoking 12 Pacific rim countries in a US-led initiative aimed at wresting influence from booming China. The ambitious Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) aims to slash tariffs and trade barriers for an enormous 40 percent of the global economy -- but pointedly does not include Beijing. "TPP allows America -- and not countries like China -- to write the rules of the road in the 21st century," US President Barack Obama said after the pact was signed in New Zealand. The deal -- whose birth was fraught by domestic opposition in the US and in other key players, such as Japan -- is a key plank of Obama's so-called "pivot" to Asia, as he seeks to counter the rising power of China. Along with a rebalancing of the US military machine towards the western Pacific, the TPP is recognition of the growing might of China, which has come to dominate the region, threatening American influence. Supporters of the deal say harnessing the power of free trade in such a dynamic part of the world is vital if the US is to fend off China's challenge to its supremacy. Trade ministers from 12 participating countries -- Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam -- signed the pact in Auckland early Thursday. Beijing was muted in its reaction to the deal, saying its officials were studying the 6,000-page document. A commerce ministry statement said China would "actively participate in and facilitate highly transparent, open and inclusive free trade arrangements in the region". Despite Obama's comments, the US has also sought to play down any overt anti-China rhetoric. US trade representative Michael Froman, in Auckland, said the agreement was "never directed against" any specific country and "it's important to have a constructive economic relationship" with China. Although the signing marks the end of the negotiating process, member states still have two years to get the deal approved at home before it becomes legally binding. "We will encourage all countries to complete their domestic ratification processes as quickly as possible," New Zealand Prime Minister John Key said. "TPP will provide much better access for goods and services to more than 800 million people across the TPP countries, which make up 36 percent of global GDP." However, ratification may prove far from easy, notably in the United States, where poisonous election-year politics are likely to stymie co-operation over a deal opponents have spun as a job killer. "It's highly unlikely (ratification) before the national elections in November," Tom Switzer of the University of Sydney's US Studies Centre told AFP. "In an election year, free trade is not a popular cause, and there are a lot of constituencies in both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party who are very much opposed to free trade or any kind of trade deal." In Japan -- the second biggest economy in the bloc, and one that was a relative latecomer to the process -- mainstream politicians and economists have generally supported the TPP as positive for Tokyo's export-driven growth even amid concerns over its impact on its prized agriculture industry. The Canadian government, which has changed since the deal was negotiated, signed up Thursday but has yet to decide whether to go through with ratification. While the 12 trade ministers were shaking hands in Auckland, thousands of protesters clogged the streets outside to voice their opposition. They argue the TPP will cost jobs and impact on sovereignty in Asia-Pacific states. American economist and Nobel Prize winner Joseph Stiglitz believes the TPP "may turn out to be the worst trade agreement in decades. "In 2016, we should hope for the TPP's defeat and the beginning of a new era of trade agreements that don't reward the powerful and punish the weak," Stiglitz recently wrote in The Guardian newspaper.

Prime Mover Magazine / February 3, 2016 Penske Power Systems’ on-highway team will introduce a Euro 4 version of the flagship DD15 engine in 2016 as part of the latest Detroit initiative to both boost engine life and maintain its service to dedicated Series 60 EGR customers. According to Kevin Dennis, Director of On-Highway at Penske Power Systems, the Australian and New Zealand Euro 4 DD15 project was in direct response to customer demand. “The heart of the project is focused on delivering cost of ownership benefits to Series 60 EGR customers whose engines are at the point of overhaul and provide them with the opportunity to upgrade to the many benefits of DD15,” he said. “The Euro 4 is a standard DD15 engine, less the after-treatment device.” Currently, one prototype is being repowered at Penske Power Systems’ Altona engineering centre in Melbourne. The engine is part of a 6x4 Freightliner Argosy owned by Queensland’s Peter Carter Transport. The Detroit team working on the project will also aim to investigate other potential truck configurations, according to Dennis. “The installation is well under way and we’re aiming to bring this home at an attractive package to our dedicated customers,” he said. “Should this be a success for Peter Carter Transport, we are confident that we can also make this work in other trucks and are already investigating an opportunity in New Zealand.” The company also said a full promotion will be rolled out via Penske Power Systems’ branches in the coming months.

Scania Group Press Release / February 3, 2016 Singapore is the world’s third most densely populated country. Land is scarce and building activity consequently reaches higher and higher. Since traditional stationary cranes would block roads and congest traffic builders are increasingly making use of mobile knuckle-boom cranes. The Singapore firm Hong Fa is specialised in these cranes – all mounted on Scania trucks. “In Singapore, places are getting more and more confined,” says Managing Director Ong Wei Yeng, Hong Fa. “Knuckle-booms take up less space and have better maneuverability than conventional mobile cranes.” The four-axle Scania G 480 with its Fassi F1950 crane is one of the largest in Singapore. This Scania has a reinforced chassis, heavy duty hub reduction drive axles and nine tonne (20,000lb) front axles with a total gross vehicle weight of 48 tonnes (106,000lb). Related information (Fassi F1950 crane) - http://www.fassi.com/fassi-loader-crane/heavy-duty/f1950ra-he-dynamic.html

Renault Trucks Press Release / December 9, 2016

Truck News / February 3, 2016 Caterpillar has announced its model CT681 vocational truck is now in full production. The CT681 is a Class 8 set-forward axle truck intended for snow plow, concrete mixer, dump and super dump applications. The company says it conducted extensive testing on the new model before putting it in full production. “This process provides a crucial feedback loop between our customers and our vocational truck product team, identifying any required changes to design and production,” said Dave Schmitz, global on-highway truck product manager. “Customers who have tested the truck tell us it drives well, it’s powerful, it’s quiet and their drivers enjoy getting behind the wheel. Based on this feedback, we’re confident the CT681 is ready to handle whatever tough jobs our customers throw at it.” Cat says its field follow program is the equivalent to more than three years of heavy truck use. The company boasts an industrial, attachment-ready design and a comfortable, productive cab for drivers. It’s powered by a Cat CT Series vocational truck engine with up to 430 hp and peak torque ratings from 1,250-1,550 lb.-ft. An optional Cat CX31 automatic transmission is available, as well as the Eaton UltraShift Plus vocational transmission and a variety of manual offerings. “We designed the CT681 based on hundreds of hours of customer input,” said George Taylor, director of Caterpillar’s global on-highway truck group. The result is a truck that’s built to maximize payloads, work hard and last for years, even in the toughest applications, and the success of our field follow program bears that out.” Related information - http://www.drivecat.com/ .

Today’s Trucking / February 3, 2016 This video showcases the driving experience by highlighting various driver amenities and cab features that reduce cab noise and make the driving experience pleasant. Cat's new axle-forward CT680L is a work truck, make no mistake, bit Cat's approach is obviously that drivers shouldn't suffer for their craft. The CT680L is quiet and comfortable and includes some great driver amenities. Loads of storage space in the cab for all the small stuff, a dashboard that won't eat pens and cell phones and things you place up there and tremendous visibility. Check out the Driving Impressions of the Cat CT680L to see all that I found to like on the truck. There are two more videos about the truck; one on the performance and functionality of the truck and a walk-around highlighting its significant features. We'll have those posted shortly. Related information - http://www.drivecat.com/

Vlad, that "NO" has your name all over it. Many were retrofitted with enclosed cabs. I'm wondering if this is one of the many units refurbished by Memphis Equipment......they fitted enclosed cabs. I have one of their NO sales brochures somewhere. On another matter Vlad, tell them about the ZIL-131/137 10x10 tractor trailer (the driveshaft to the trailer tandem runs up through the 5th wheel). http://www.russianmilitarytrucks.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2106

The Wall Street Journal / February 3, 2016 Orders reach second-lowest level since 2012 as trucking companies remain wary of weak industrial shipping demand Orders for new big rigs plunged in January, as trucking companies eyeing weak shipping demand held back from investing in fleets. Just 18,200 new trucks were ordered last month, down 48% from a year earlier and marking the second-lowest monthly total since 2012. The data dashed equipment makers’ hopes that relatively strong December orders would carry over into the new year. Instead, trucking companies are canceling expansion plans and postponing trade-ins for their older vehicles. They fear that new trucks will sit idle if lower-than-expected retail sales over the holidays and signs of contraction in the manufacturing sector translate into a sluggish freight market this year. On Tuesday, USA Truck Inc., a truckload carrier based in Van Buren, Ark., said it operated nearly 400 fewer trucks in the fourth quarter compared with the previous year. Knight Transportation Inc. said last week it would stop expanding its fleet, and Swift Transportation Co. , the largest truckload carrier, said in October it wouldn't add to the number of vehicles it operates. U.S.-based truckmakers are expected to produce 250,000 new trucks this year, down over 20% from 2015. Production is likely to be only slightly higher than the number needed to replace older trucks leaving service, meaning few companies will expand their fleets. Truck manufacturers have laid off workers and cut back production to match the decline in orders. Last week, Paccar reported a 12% decline in fourth-quarter profits, which fell below analyst estimates. Paccar expects sales to bounce back from recent lows as dealers have made progress in working through abnormally high inventories of unsold trucks.

They are good looking trucks. With the switch over to the CAT-themed instrumentation, I will miss the classically themed old-school instrumentation of the PayStar. It had an air of quality. I'd like to see the PayStar interior remain as an HX factory option.