home  |  book  |

Changing The Supreme Court: The Real Problem Democrats and "The Politics of Polarization"

print view

Who Lost Delphi?

by Christopher Chantrill
October 18, 2005 at 11:11 am

|

FOR THOSE of you still transfixed by hurricanes and Supreme Court nominations, here’s a more important issue: Who lost Delphi?

Dell Who? Of course. Delphi Corporation, the former parts division of General Motors, isn’t exactly a household word. But Delphi filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on October 8, 2005. And that means that its workers could be facing wage cuts, and its retirees pension and health care benefit cuts.

The cuts could be substantial. “We pay hourly workers three times the market rate; salaried staff are paid a market rate and execs are paid below market,” said Delphi CEO Steve Miller. He proposes to cut hourly wages by 63 percent. United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger (http://www.detnews.com/2005/autosinsider/0510/16/D01-349665.htm) responded by accusing Miller of using “scare tactics.”

How could Delphi have got into a position where it can’t pay the pensions it promised? Who is to blame? Is it greedy management? Is it greedy unions? Is it the FASB? Is it Congress? Or is it all due to the inattention of President Bush? It’s important to get out in front in the blame game because the Delphi bankruptcy could set a precedent for bigger bankruptcies coming down the road. Like General Motors.

When we get to the bankruptcy of General Motors even the sluggish minds of the mainstream media will sit up and take notice. It took an agonizing two days for them to decide that the mess of hurricane Katrina was all President Bush’s fault. It is unlikely that they will take as long to come to a decision when GM goes broke. It is important to establish a narrative now so that when the great minds at the MSM grab for their ledes on Detroit’s Black Monday, the American people won’t find themselves on the hook for the mother of all bailouts.

Who is to blame? London’s (http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=5017138) Economist blames the managements of “older manufacturing firms with (at least until recently) large workforces and unions strong enough to negotiate generous retirement benefits.” The United Auto Workers demanded “More” and management gave it to them. Well, not quite. What management actually gave the workers was something rather less; they gave them a promise. They offered to pay them their benefits out of future earnings. Now it turns out that there aren’t going to be any earnings. Delphi lost $741 million on revenue of $13.9 billion in the first half of 2005.

What an outrage! How dare they renege on their promises! That is what the politician and the activist in each of us say. How could Detroit have made extravagant promises and then passed the bills off for the next generation to pay?

When a corporation creates a successful new product or innovates a business process and creates a new “global best practice,” it gets to enjoy extraordinary profits for a while until the rest of the world catches up. It gets to charge “rent.” Investors and speculators clamber aboard for the ride, and other rent seekers—employees organized into labor unions—also demand their piece of the action.

The auto manufacturers of Detroit were the most productive in the world from the introduction of the Model T until the heyday of the magnificent land yachts of the 1960s. They spewed out cash in every direction: to investors, to managers, to government, and to organized labor. Then God created Toyota and the rent dried up.

In response, the automakers improved their products, eventually. But they did not reduce the promises and the rent payments first established when the Rocket V-8 and the Turbo-Hydromatic were the wonders of the world. For one thing, the United Auto Workers refused to let them.

Twenty-five years later, everyone is complaining about the mess. It seems that corporations everywhere are going into Chapter 11 bankruptcy, tanking their labor agreements, shuffling their pension obligations off onto the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC), and, freed from their obligations, obtaining an unfair advantage over their competitors.

But there’s another angle to the story. In the airline bankruptcies, the workers and shareholders have submitted to the Chapter 11 process rather meekly. The shareholders get wiped out; the pension beneficiaries get a haircut from the PBGC, the unions get their above-market wages thrown in the toilet, and we hardly hear a peep. Will the Delphi stakeholders agree to go under the knife so quietly? We’ll soon find out.

Imagine a nice smooth Delphi bankruptcy, with management blamed, shareholders wiped out, and the workers and retirees given a really close shave without bloody nicks and cuts. It could set the rules for the upcoming General Motors bankruptcy.

Meanwhile it’s time for Congress to get to work. It could stop corporations from making reckless promises to current employees about future benefits. Neither today’s “global best practice” corporation nor its employees should assume that the rent will go on forever.

Christopher Chantrill blogs at americanmanifestobook.blogspot.com.

Buy his Road to the Middle Class.

print view

To comment on this article at American Thinker click here.

To email the author, click here.

 

 TAGS

Responsibility

Seeckt: "to make of each individual member of the army a soldier who, in character, capability, and knowledge, is self-reliant, self-confident, dedicated, and joyful in taking responsibility [verantwortungsfreudig] as a man and a soldier."
MacGregor Knox et. al., The dynamics of military revolution, 1300-2050

Living the Virtues

When recurrently the tradition of the virtues is regenerated, it is always in everyday life, it is always through the engagement by plain persons in a variety of practices, including those of making and sustaining families and households, schools, clinics, and local forms of political community.
Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue

Moral Imperatives of Modern Culture

These emerge out of long-standing moral notions of freedom, benevolence, and the affirmation of ordinary life... I have been sketching a schematic map... [of] the moral sources [of these notions]... the original theistic grounding for these standards... a naturalism of disengaged reason, which in our day takes scientistic forms, and a third family of views which finds its sources in Romantic expressivism, or in one of the modernist successor visions.
Charles Taylor, Sources of the Self

US Life in 1842

Families helped each other putting up homes and barns. Together, they built churches, schools, and common civic buildings. They collaborated to build roads and bridges. They took pride in being free persons, independent, and self-reliant; but the texture of their lives was cooperative and fraternal.
Michael Novak, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism

Society and State

For [the left] there is only the state and the individual, nothing in between. No family to rely on, no friend to depend on, no community to call on. No neighbourhood to grow in, no faith to share in, no charities to work in. No-one but the Minister, nowhere but Whitehall, no such thing as society - just them, and their laws, and their rules, and their arrogance.
David Cameron, Conference Speech 2008

Faith and Politics

As far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the principal focus of her interventions in the public arena is the protection and promotion of the dignity of the person, and she is thereby consciously drawing particular attention to principles which are not negotiable... [1.] protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [2.] recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family... [3.] the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.
Pope Benedict XVI, Speech to European Peoples Party, 2006

Never Trust Experts

No lesson seems to be so deeply inculcated by the experience of life as that you should never trust experts. If you believe doctors, nothing is wholesome: if you believe the theologians, nothing is innocent: if you believe the soldiers, nothing is safe. They all require their strong wine diluted by a very large admixture of insipid common sense.
Lord Salisbury, “Letter to Lord Lytton”

Conservatism's Holy Grail

What distinguishes true Conservatism from the rest, and from the Blair project, is the belief in more personal freedom and more market freedom, along with less state intervention... The true Third Way is the Holy Grail of Tory politics today - compassion and community without compulsion.
Minette Marrin, The Daily Telegraph

Class War

In England there were always two sharply opposed middle classes, the academic middle class and the commercial middle class. In the nineteenth century, the academic middle class won the battle for power and status... Then came the triumph of Margaret Thatcher... The academics lost their power and prestige and... have been gloomy ever since.
Freeman Dyson, “The Scientist as Rebel”

Government Expenditure

The Union publishes an exact return of the amount of its taxes; I can get copies of the budgets of the four and twenty component states; but who can tell me what the citizens spend in the administration of county and township?
Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America

Conservatism

Conservatism is the philosophy of society. Its ethic is fraternity and its characteristic is authority — the non-coercive social persuasion which operates in a family or a community. It says ‘we should...’.
Danny Kruger, On Fraternity

Postmodernism

A writer who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is ’merely relative’, is asking you not to believe him. So don’t.
Roger Scruton, Modern Philosophy

presented by Christopher Chantrill

 •  Contact