http://www.rep-am.com/articles/2010/07/11/opinion/494220.txtWhile we remain skeptical about the competence of federal judges to conclude Pratt & Whitney did or did not act in good faith in its dealings with the machinists union, some aspects of this tragic vignette in Connecticut's industrial decline are beginning to grow clear.
Pratt wants to cut about 1,000 jobs by closing its Cheshire Engine Plant and Connecticut Airfoil Repair facility in East Hartford, and moving the work to Georgia and Asia. The company insisted it made "every reasonable effort" to keep the plants open, as required by its contract with the machinists union. The union disagreed.
A U.S. District Court judge sided with the union, and so did three federal appeals court judges. Pratt thus can't move to close either plant at least until December, when the machinists' contract expires.
To grasp the long-term hopelessness of this job-saving quest, try viewing it in reverse. Suppose Pratt was operating happily and profitably in Georgia, and some agency ordered it to move to Connecticut. Pratt would argue energy and labor costs are 40 percent higher in the Nutmeg State, and corporate taxes are 25 percent higher; therefore, it could not operate profitably, if at all, if forced to move.
Would it not be madness to force it to do so? In America, yes. In the old Soviet Union, where bureaucrats dictated the narrowest details of manufacturing and other commerce, no. And we all know what happened to the Soviet Union.
What is particularly galling is the role played by government officials, including Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell, Democratic Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., and Rep. Christopher Murphy, D-5th District.
FULL story at link.