In the US, you can fire anyone who doesn't belong to a union, at any time, for any reason. This makes jobs have no sense of permanence, and as a result, you constantly get "more expensive, less efficient" people replaced with "cheaper, less competent" people.
It is the basic conflict that the conservatives hold as justification for anti union action, and anti labor stance. The trouble is that they are not wrong, and Mandirva is a perfect example why. A company that employed expensive employees in an extremely employee biased legal framework has now been destroyed and all of those employee are out of work. In replacement of that company are any number of companies that have the exact same business model except that they operate in places that do not afford employee protections. In essence, the jobs were not lost, simply transferred to another location (All those Mandriva customer are now Red Hat, or Microsoft customers). At the end of the day, all other things being equal, employment will work like any other unregulated economy, and the jobs go to the lowest bidders (In this case, anywhere except France). Ultimately Conservatives and Liberals are fighting about labor laws, when they have all accepted a bad premise. The problem is neither the conservative viewpoint nor the liberal viewpoint. The problem is that everyone works from the assumption that capitalism is mandatory. Everyone is so busy arguing about which political faction has the right answers, when in fact none of them do. There is not a single political group on earth that has the right answers. They are all too busy worrying about the short term details that ultimately are irrelevant to the problem. Meanwhile the real root cause (human nature) is being almost completely ignored.