New York Times Addresses UAW/Big 3 Issue That Center Analyst Addressed Five Weeks Ago

The New York Times has addressed an issue Labor Policy Director Paul Kersey first wrote about more than a month ago — that of the union's demands for an end to concessions despite being the beneficiary of GM and Chrysler bankruptcy restructuring.

"The bankruptcies were structured to protect the union interests at the expense of the creditors and investors," Kersey told The Times. "So I don't see there being a whole lot of public support for them pursuing a restoration of the concessions."

Here is part of what Kersey wrote in his April 8 blog post: "The actual competitiveness of the Big Three never rated highly as a value for the government's restructuring of the industry, and the union has shown it is prone to act cavalierly towards those same companies as they struggle back toward profitability. This is the natural consequence of a "bankruptcy" process that shielded the union from the consequences of its own avarice. Whether out of greed or ignorance, the UAW could still bring these companies down."

Permission to reprint this blog post in whole or in part is hereby granted, provided that the author (or authors) and the Mackinac Center for Public Policy are properly cited.