I can't speak specifically to Ford's agreement as my contract was tied to GM. Generally in the collective bargaining process the Union strives to make it cost more to outsorce jobs (like to Mexico) thereby encouraging managment to keep work here. So it could be true that certain workers were owed pay (sort of like severance) if their jobs were lost due to work done offshore.

I am only guessing because each situation is different. Sometimes laid off workers draw from a sub fund that is jointly funded by workers and managment to ensure income during the cyclical down turns in the business.

If anyone thinks it is business as usual in today's economy, they are wrong. The Union has paired with managment to improve things like cost and quality and made great progress. The auto industry is fighting for its life, and nothing is more important to the Union than salvaging the jobs that still exist. If that is not changing with the times, there is nothing else that the Union can do. They only exist to promote and protect the workers, and that will always be the case. The stratigic direction of the business solely belongs to managment.

That said the business choices managment made to build the gas gusslers instead of developing fuel efficent cars has proven to be a disaster. Who would have predicted that gas would go through the roof and america's love affair with the monster truck would end? It is very difficult to change direction on a dime for these large Corporations.

We all remain hopefull that any government help will be tied to R&D in new products and US job retention, and creation.