Bye Bye Boeing in Seattle!
11-17-2013, 07:03 PM
#11
Banned
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Posts: 248
Be careful, you may get what you vote for..
Boeing may look to the MidEast after unions reject Seattle 777X plan - Transport - ArabianBusiness.com
Boeing may look to the MidEast after unions reject Seattle 777X plan - Transport - ArabianBusiness.com
11-18-2013, 11:33 AM
#12
Works Every Weekend
Joined APC: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,210
Nope. Boeing ain't leaving Seattle now, or ever. There's too much infrastructure here.
As for the machinists... I find it disturbing that a bunch of pilots will stand around and criticize a labor group that voted to hold the line on compensation, after what we've collectively gone through in the last 20 years. Their contract wasn't even up for a few more years, and management wanted frozen pensions and a gutted payscale.
Boeing will move the 777X regardless of the vote outcome. The best you can do as a worker is full pay to the last day. Everyone yells about Pinnacle and PSA voting for cuts in favor of theoretical job security, but then anyone who holds the line is "stupid."
As for the machinists... I find it disturbing that a bunch of pilots will stand around and criticize a labor group that voted to hold the line on compensation, after what we've collectively gone through in the last 20 years. Their contract wasn't even up for a few more years, and management wanted frozen pensions and a gutted payscale.
Boeing will move the 777X regardless of the vote outcome. The best you can do as a worker is full pay to the last day. Everyone yells about Pinnacle and PSA voting for cuts in favor of theoretical job security, but then anyone who holds the line is "stupid."
11-18-2013, 12:12 PM
#13
Banned
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Posts: 248
Who said they were leaving Seattle in it's entirety?
Management chose to minimize the cost of doing business and unions chose to maximize their wages and benefits. It might seem both could have compromised, but Boeing has other choices too - there are workers elsewhere who could choose to work for less than those in WA state.
Nowhere in Puget Sound can these workers earn a fraction of the money that they can earn at Boeing.
They resisted (I see nothing about their contract being 're-opened, this was for future work). Boeing offered a $10,000 signing bonus, having future retirement monies subject to a defined contribution plan, having to pay higher co-pay amounts for healthcare costs. Apparently the prospect of future work was just too much of a sacrifice for these workers who earn about $60-70,000 per year before overtime and with much vacation time.
They remind me of the unionized autoworkers who felt that they were indispensable until the factories closed and production moved to the South and to Mexico.
I can understand the frustration of the workers because they bailed out 787 production after management took a McDonnell-Douglas approach to subcontract out nearly all work except for final assembly and that cost the company billions. The workers also kept the cash flowing with record 737 production. when the company needed that cash due to the drain of revenue shortfalls from delayed deliveries, of paying to correct the manufacture of the 787, and of paying penalties to airlines suffering from delayed deliveries.
Unfortunately for the Puget Sound machinists, many just voted themselves out of future employment later this decade and beyond. They would have been clever to take this deal as their leverage would have increased once Boeing constructed the 777X in Everett.
In any event, the chest-thumping shop stewards who exhorted the "no" vote won't lose their jobs; they never do.
Management chose to minimize the cost of doing business and unions chose to maximize their wages and benefits. It might seem both could have compromised, but Boeing has other choices too - there are workers elsewhere who could choose to work for less than those in WA state.
Nowhere in Puget Sound can these workers earn a fraction of the money that they can earn at Boeing.
They resisted (I see nothing about their contract being 're-opened, this was for future work). Boeing offered a $10,000 signing bonus, having future retirement monies subject to a defined contribution plan, having to pay higher co-pay amounts for healthcare costs. Apparently the prospect of future work was just too much of a sacrifice for these workers who earn about $60-70,000 per year before overtime and with much vacation time.
They remind me of the unionized autoworkers who felt that they were indispensable until the factories closed and production moved to the South and to Mexico.
I can understand the frustration of the workers because they bailed out 787 production after management took a McDonnell-Douglas approach to subcontract out nearly all work except for final assembly and that cost the company billions. The workers also kept the cash flowing with record 737 production. when the company needed that cash due to the drain of revenue shortfalls from delayed deliveries, of paying to correct the manufacture of the 787, and of paying penalties to airlines suffering from delayed deliveries.
Unfortunately for the Puget Sound machinists, many just voted themselves out of future employment later this decade and beyond. They would have been clever to take this deal as their leverage would have increased once Boeing constructed the 777X in Everett.
In any event, the chest-thumping shop stewards who exhorted the "no" vote won't lose their jobs; they never do.
Last edited by Sum Ting Wong; 11-18-2013 at 12:25 PM.
11-18-2013, 12:23 PM
#14
Banned
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Posts: 248
"As for the machinists... I find it disturbing that a bunch of pilots will stand around and criticize a labor group that voted to hold the line on compensation, after what we've collectively gone through in the last 20 years. Their contract wasn't even up for a few more years, and management wanted frozen pensions and a gutted pay scale."
It has never been about what the Unionist want or think is fair. It has always been about what they can do and how much they want for their services compared to everyone else. The entire notion of unionism is anti-competitive -- you hold an employer hostage to interuptions from strikes and/or having to rehire and retrain a large portion of their workforce, and use that leverage to ask for higher wages and benefits than there are similarly skilled and willing individuals in the economy is willing to work for.
Regardless, now that they have rejected a readjustment of their expectations based on the current market value of their skills and labor, my prediction is as follows:
Washington (Puget Sound) gets to keep final assembly of the 777X. The large composite wing goes to Spirit Wichita Kansas (if they can get a decent labor contract there), or it goes to Mitsubishi in Japan which has a ready workforce and has the facility. Fuselage sections get parcelled out to Long Beach, Charleston, Utah or Texas. Propulsion nacelles go to Charleston in the new composite facilty already being built for this purpose.
Basically, the IAM unionists get to keep about 1/3 the work and the 777 workforce drops from 22,000 to about 7,000~8,000. Boeing gets to keep final assembly in skilled if pricey hands, and it gets to keep the use of the existing massive 747/777 facility in Everett. The wing and prefab fuselage sections go elsewhere. Propulsion nacelles go to Charleston. ISM union rolls in Puget Sound go from about 55,000 to 40,000 in 2020.
It has never been about what the Unionist want or think is fair. It has always been about what they can do and how much they want for their services compared to everyone else. The entire notion of unionism is anti-competitive -- you hold an employer hostage to interuptions from strikes and/or having to rehire and retrain a large portion of their workforce, and use that leverage to ask for higher wages and benefits than there are similarly skilled and willing individuals in the economy is willing to work for.
Regardless, now that they have rejected a readjustment of their expectations based on the current market value of their skills and labor, my prediction is as follows:
Washington (Puget Sound) gets to keep final assembly of the 777X. The large composite wing goes to Spirit Wichita Kansas (if they can get a decent labor contract there), or it goes to Mitsubishi in Japan which has a ready workforce and has the facility. Fuselage sections get parcelled out to Long Beach, Charleston, Utah or Texas. Propulsion nacelles go to Charleston in the new composite facilty already being built for this purpose.
Basically, the IAM unionists get to keep about 1/3 the work and the 777 workforce drops from 22,000 to about 7,000~8,000. Boeing gets to keep final assembly in skilled if pricey hands, and it gets to keep the use of the existing massive 747/777 facility in Everett. The wing and prefab fuselage sections go elsewhere. Propulsion nacelles go to Charleston. ISM union rolls in Puget Sound go from about 55,000 to 40,000 in 2020.
11-18-2013, 03:10 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Retired
Posts: 651
Originally Posted by Sum Ting Wong
... but Boeing has other choices too - there are workers elsewhere who could choose to work for less than those in WA state.
Boeing has a problem, and it is not their employees -- who cost less than Airbus's.
Boeing's senior management needs to get their heads out of the MBA clouds and start worrying about designing and building airplanes.
11-18-2013, 03:58 PM
#16
Banned
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Posts: 248
Originally Posted by 742Dash
And that worked out so well for the 787 program.
Boeing has a problem, and it is not their employees -- who cost less than Airbus's.
Boeing's senior management needs to get their heads out of the MBA clouds and start worrying about designing and building airplanes.
Boeing has a problem, and it is not their employees -- who cost less than Airbus's.
Boeing's senior management needs to get their heads out of the MBA clouds and start worrying about designing and building airplanes.
Boeing will break even on a unit-cost basis for each 787 starting in 2014....what metric are you using? Meanwhile, the -9 entered test back in Sep.
Charleston and Long Beach can use the work.
11-18-2013, 04:04 PM
#17
Banned
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Posts: 248
Their union should really open their eyes and start worrying about the future rather than grasping for the past. First, HQ moves to Chicago, then they open a new plant in Charleston, SC. Management is looking for partners. South Carolina (leadership and the workforce) have proven to be good partners. Can organized labor say the same thing? I don't think so. They have about 18 months to change their ways in the Pacific NW ... its up to them.
Last edited by Sum Ting Wong; 11-18-2013 at 04:26 PM.
11-18-2013, 04:19 PM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2009
Position: Airbus 319/320 Captain
Posts: 880
If everybody unionized we wouldn't be having this conversation and having a union would be a cost of doing business much like upper management pay scales. It's always the unions fault when things don't go well for the company, isn't it?
11-18-2013, 04:25 PM
#19
Banned
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Posts: 248
The union thing is far past any logical discourse and management will finally bite the bullet and pull out for greener pastures. Unless the citizen's of Washington state ever wake up, and embrace right to work legislation, industry and jobs will continue to locate elsewhere. I have been amazed at the patience of management to remain in Washington but things change and the objectives of the stockholders have to be considered.
11-18-2013, 04:30 PM
#20
New boss = Old boss
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: Ca B737
Posts: 2,762
The IAM knows Boeing is going to do what ever they want regardless of the outcome of the vote. They were right to hold the line on pay and benefits. Now the gov of Washington is saying the state is going to have to compete to keep Boeing in Washington. The ball is now in Washington's court.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
