Time for restructuring of our auto industry
According to data cited by University of Michigan economist Mark Perry, when you fold in health care, pensions, hourly pay, vacations and the rest of their benefits, the average total compensation for a Big Three autoworker is $73.21 an hour.
Toyota, Honda and Nissan pay a still-generous $44.20 an hour in total compensation - which gives them a cost edge of nearly 40 percent. So is it any wonder that Ford, General Motors and Chrysler can't compete?
The Big Three are being out-priced in their own backyard mainly as a result of labor agreements that have driven up costs and put a millstone around their necks.
Based on these basic facts, I, for one, would not want any part of my tax money to be invested in the Big Three. Why not let them go through Chapter 11 bankruptcy instead, which would allow the Big Three to renegotiate their labor and other costs ("Big Three bailout slow to materialize," Nov. 18)?
The auto industry should be held accountable for its problems, and that includes the United Auto Workers union.
If a bailout is inevitable, we should require the Big Three and their unions to restructure themselves as if they were in bankruptcy.
Benedict Frederick Jr., Pasadena
Bankruptcy best path for U.S. automakers
A top-to-bottom reorganization, under the umbrella of a Chapter 11 bankruptcy and assisted by the federal government, is the most effective way for the domestic auto industry to return to profitability ("Big Three bailout slow to materialize," Nov. 18).
The U.S. Treasury could provide the necessary financing through the existing Troubled Assets Relief Program. This would allow the companies to continue to operate while they reorganize.
And Congress could authorize a federal auto warranty guarantee program that would be available to all manufacturers who pay the required premiums.
The auto companies' pension liabilities could also be assumed by the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp.
Paul M. Heid, Baltimore
Tenure lets teachers advocate for kids
The best teachers advocate for their students. And sometimes doing what a teacher knows is right for his or her students is contrary to the wishes of the school administration.
But I wonder: If the teachers in Washington's schools should lose the safety net that tenure affords, as Washington schools chief Michelle Rhee wants them to ("D.C. public school experiment is a test for all of us," Commentary, Nov. 17), would they still advocate for their students?
