I've repeatedly made the point that it's ridiculous to imagine that any sort of long term (near lifetime) contracts can be guaranteed to be enforced and honored. I consider this to be a bug. Apparently The Economist is puzzled that anyone would expect companies to honor their contractual obligations to workers, and think it's a feature.
I hope the publishers of the Economist have taken a long hard look at "Buttonwood's" contractual pension benefits, if there are any, and decided to cancel them.
(via DeLong)
