"The company reneged on its contract, so the workers are well within their rights to strike."
I don't think anyone is arguing whether they have the right to strike or not.
Bankruptcy is a legally sanctioned way to reneg on legal, binding contracts. You can't force a business to stay open when it can't meet all of its contractual obligations.
The ONLY way for Delphi to stay open as a viable business is for these drastic cuts to be made. It's going to ruin a lot of lives and communities.
In one way, I suppose, there is logic to striking a bankrupt company - There is no assurance that Delphi will be managed any better in the future (even with drastic wage cuts) that in the past, so why not just force it to close and let people get on with their lives?
I don't agree with that logic, but I can see how some people would think that way, especially if they are living paycheck to paycheck before a pay cut.
I guess the workers feel the company has screwed them out of what has been promised. It has caused them to have to sell their houses, move, and possibly has put a real bind on their kids' college educations. They feel that their lives have been shut down, so it seems fair to make sure the company doesn't survive. I don't totally agree with that way of thinking, but I can totally see where they are coming from. Also, I live about 25 miles from Delphi, so I can see what it's going to do to the communities. That makes me a bit biased, I would guess.
Someone b-slap me if I am way off base. I heard on the radio news about a week or so ago, that Iraqi forces are in need of military equipment, specifically armoured vehicles. Than I heard these auto plants are closing. Why can't the government, the unions, of the auto makers make a deal. Make armoured vehicles and sell them to Iraq. The plants stay open, people are employed, capitolism expands, Iraq has its vehciles. I know it sounds way too simple so there must be something wrong in this thinking?