I posted this on another site, but its relevant here:
Here's my take on this whole mess (it may be a little simplistic):
Who's to blame? Both GM and the UAW.
Should either party focus on who caused this? No, the past is the past. Unless somebody builds a time machine, that's not going to change.
The UAW is very quick to say at contract negotiations that if GM is doing great financially that they deserve some of the pie (i.e. are partially responsible for the wealth). But when times are tough and GM's losing money, they seem to take the stance of "We are not responsible, why should we be punished?" The pendulum swings both ways. GM is bleeding, the UAW needs to help (and I don't mean by finally accepting health care burden that is NOT representative of what Joe Q. American has been paying all along, I'm talking SERIOUS help, i.e. wage decrease, normal health care payout, etc..). Its seems to me that when GM is doing great (2001), the UAW says "Your success is due to our high quality people making high quality vehicles." but when GM bleeds, the stance is "Its management's fault."
I read an article (I wish I could find it to link to), that basically had a Delphi UAW employee saying that they were ready to strike even if it meant taking GM down in oblivion with them. How is this even logical??? Would you rather have a job offer for 50% of your pay or NO JOB AT ALL???
There are ALWAYS choices in life. If you are a Delphi UAW worker you are about to have 2 choices: A) take a lower wage or B) find a new job. That's it. No Option C) Keep your current job with same benefits. And if you take GM down with your strike, you do nothing but guarantee you will have NO job to return to. Think I'm wrong? Go ask the Northwest mechanics how their strategy worked.