Boeing Busts Unions, Claims Government "Conspiracy" Against Businesses (Also Called U

[White Eagle]

Boeing has made a big booboo. They have been saying they are opening the plant in South Carolina instead of Washington because of the Unions going on strike and the like. They don't like the unions and are doing this in retaliation, or so the story goes.
That is against the law. There are comments made in this article that I haven't seen in all the Wisconsin, Michigan etc articles we have been discussing for months. Maybe this covers more about what the law is for unions. Wish I worked so I could form a union! Maybe at Walmart? Hahaha

http://www.alternet.org/newsandview...s_(also_called_upholding_the_law)/#paragraph3

Boeing Busts Unions, Claims Government "Conspiracy" Against Businesses (Also Called Upholding the Law)

The National Labor Relations Board is attempting to enforce our country's laws and the corporate conservatives are going nuts - literally. They are challenging the concept of law itself, while making wild claims of conspiracies by government against business itself. Yikes!

The National Labor Relations Board has filed a complaint against Boeing for retaliating against employees for legitimate union activities. Boeing opened a 787 assembly line in "right-to-work" South Carolina that they had previously stated would go to Washington State, after repeatedly having to grant concessions to union workers in Washington State. Opening an assembly line is not illegal, of course, but doing so in retaliation for union activities or for the purpose of threatening a union is illegal.

The key to the NLRB action is that Boeing executives said repeatedly they were opening the South Carolina plant because of union activities. They boasted they were breaking the law, and finally someone has dared to enforce the law.

The International Associaltion of Machinists and Aerospace Workers complaint states that a Boeing executive stated Boeing was "diversifying Boeing's labor pool" to South Carolina due to "strikes happening every three to four years." The complaint cites several other instances of Boeing officials stating the reason for opening the South Carolina assembly line was because of union activities, as well as threatening the union with losing work in Washington state because of union activities.

 

[JB3]

The fact that Boeing added 2,000 jobs to the plant that they were supposedly 'punishing' and 'intimidating' at the same time as they made the decision to open the South Carolina plant undermines the NLRB's complaint.

If Boeing had really want to intimidate those employees, why would they have added 2,000 new jobs at that plant?

 

[MoltenRock III]

Boeing is so stupid. In their effort to evade paying union wages to their US staff, their 787 project has been one colossal fuck up. Most new wide-body aircraft break even at 500 to 600 aircraft. Seeing how badly their non-union sourcing has fucked up, causing the plane to be over 3 years late to market, now looks to need nearly 1,500 aircraft to break even. The 747, 767, and 777, have only sold a little over 1,000 aircraft each, so Boeing in its infinite wisdom may never make money on their "game changing" 787. Ridiculous.

 

[MoltenRock III]

The fact that Boeing added 2,000 jobs to the plant that they were supposedly 'punishing' and 'intimidating' at the same time as they made the decision to open the South Carolina plant undermines the NLRB's complaint.

If Boeing had really want to intimidate those employees, why would they have added 2,000 new jobs at that plant?

It shows how little you know about Boeing and the aviation market. Those 2,000 jobs are resources (you know, employees) to "unfuck" the 787 line up of unfinished and botched work from Boeing's supply chain.

 

[Seasoned]

Very ridculous. They wished the dreamliner to reinvent aircraft building by using composite materials that would make for a lighter, roomier, larger window aircraft. The composite material has failed some stress tests. Why wouldn't they want their happiest, most experienced, and proudest employees building this plane? I could imagine the whole concept being scraped. I remember looking at their website showing off this plane's features from my desk at work. I retired in 2003! Airbus here we come?

 

[JB3]

It shows how little you know about Boeing and the aviation market. Those 2,000 jobs are resources (you know, employees) to "unfuck" the 787 line up of unfinished and botched work from Boeing's supply chain.

Which doesn't change anything. If they were punishing the employees at that plant, they would have given those jobs to SC without a second thought.

(and I know quite a bit about Boeing and their issues with the 787, so don't pull that shit in here)

 

[NineOfClubs]

If this is the way the USA treats Boeing, they ought to move ALL production off shore.

 

[JB3]

Boeing is so stupid. In their effort to evade paying union wages to their US staff, their 787 project has been one colossal fuck up. Most new wide-body aircraft break even at 500 to 600 aircraft. Seeing how badly their non-union sourcing has fucked up, causing the plane to be over 3 years late to market, now looks to need nearly 1,500 aircraft to break even. The 747, 767, and 777, have only sold a little over 1,000 aircraft each, so Boeing in its infinite wisdom may never make money on their "game changing" 787. Ridiculous.

The 787 hasn't been delivered to a customer yet and Boeing has over 800 orders for it. Compare that to Boeing's last major aircraft launch, the 777, which has been on the market for 17 years, which has a little over 900. (roughly 53 a year) Or the 737, which has been on the market in some form for 44 years and has 6,700 orders. (Roughly 152 a year)

If Boeing delivers every one of the planes ordered right now, the 787 would be on pace to outflank the 737 on orders per year in short order. Its the fastest selling plane in the company's history, and they haven't even delivered one yet! Your pessimism is not well-placed.

 

[palemale]

The Republicans and business community is upset because the NLRB is actually enforcing the law. They got used to 8 years under Bush where employers got away with murder. Labor law in this country is a joke. Even with aggressive enforcement, the law doesn't do a whole lot to protect workers' rights and discourages, rather than encourages, collective bargaining.

Here is an excerpt form the first section of the National Labor Relations Act:

It is declared to be the policy of the United States to eliminate the causes of certain substantial obstructions to the free flow of commerce and to mitigate and eliminate these obstructions when they have occurred by encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining and by protecting the exercise by workers of full freedom of association, self- organization, and designation of representatives of their own choosing, for the purpose of negotiating the terms and conditions of their employment or other mutual aid or protection.

Anti-union politicians and the business lobby always seem to forget that the stated purpose of Congress is to encourage collective bargaining.

 

[MoltenRock III]

The 787 is so bottlenecked from production screw ups because of Boeing's outsourcing they cannot realistically deliver any new 787 orders until 2020. The current 800 orders came over the course of the past 7 years while the plane was in production, and now during the past 3 years of corporate CYA trying to get the thing to fly with FAA certification.

Don't take my word for 1,500 planes until break even, that's one of aviation's most respected and influential people.

Industry icon Steven Udvar-Hazy has given his assessment of the profitability potential for Boeing's 787, saying the US airframer will need to sell at least 1,500 twinjets to break even after more than three years of delays.

http://www.flightglobal.com/article...-sell-1500-787s-to-break-even-udvar-hazy.html

The 787 is a perfect study in trying to save a penny to spend a dollar trying to avoid paying one's own knowledge laden workers their due wage. Regardless of how many total aircraft the 787 finally delivers the fact remains that due to outsourcing over 1,000 aircraft will have been sold at zero profit that otherwise would have been there. And that is tens of billions of $$$.

 

[MoltenRock III]

Ronald Reagan.... "They remind us that where free unions and collective bargaining are forbidden, freedom is lost. They remind us that freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction."

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oITaWo5z1IQ[/ame]



[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orwN4WKhriw[/ame]

 

[palemale]

Republicans politicians are simply corporate whores. They don't give a shit about workers' rights.

 

[Kulindahr]

it seems weird to me that the federal government could force a company to build a factory in one state over another.

In those terms, they can't. But if the company's purpose is to bash a union, they can, because then it's not a matter of building a plant, it's a matter of subverting the law.

In this case, it's not a clear call: Boeing has added union jobs in Washington at the same time as building the plant in Carolina.

Boeing is so stupid. In their effort to evade paying union wages to their US staff, their 787 project has been one colossal fuck up. Most new wide-body aircraft break even at 500 to 600 aircraft. Seeing how badly their non-union sourcing has fucked up, causing the plane to be over 3 years late to market, now looks to need nearly 1,500 aircraft to break even. The 747, 767, and 777, have only sold a little over 1,000 aircraft each, so Boeing in its infinite wisdom may never make money on their "game changing" 787. Ridiculous.

From a sister-in-law who's an engineer at Boeing, the problems have very little to do with any non-union outsourcing, but with technical materials and engineering processes for the new composites and their assembly. There's been an immense amount of back-and-forth between engineering units and teams, none of whom are union because they're contract or salaried employees with advanced degrees.

Though yes, that's changed the profitability curve, it has nothing to do with where plants are built: the plants don't go up until all the engineering and other technical part is worked out.

If this is the way the USA treats Boeing, they ought to move ALL production off shore.

What, making sure they obey the law?

 

[MoltenRock III]

From a sister-in-law who's an engineer at Boeing, the problems have very little to do with any non-union outsourcing, but with technical materials and engineering processes for the new composites and their assembly. There's been an immense amount of back-and-forth between engineering units and teams, none of whom are union because they're contract or salaried employees with advanced degrees.

So your sister-in-law is contradicting official Boeing statements, press releases, and investor conf. calls? Would like me to list the litany of excuses Boeing has released to its clients, investors, vendors, and banks?

I'll give you the first excuse for free; Boeing blamed "fasteners" (think rivets) for the 1st delay. There have been 7 (+/- 1) delays described by Boeing. Remember, Boeing hasn't delivered even one aircraft yet, although they claim THIS TIME they are serious, and will actually deliver one in the fall.

The 787 is on MBA programs around the country in studies of how NOT to do something.

 

[MoltenRock III]

What, making sure they obey the law?

Agreed! It never ceases to amaze me at the union hate that the US has. It really seems like non-union average Joes are pissed they don't make as much, or have as many benefits as some union positions, and therefore anti-union. It's strange because its their corporate master they should be mad at for not providing similar wages / benefits. But corporations are smart and poison the well, so that the working masses are divided and against each other, all the while ignoring the real culprit..... the corporations.

 

[JB3]

The 787 is so bottlenecked from production screw ups because of Boeing's outsourcing they cannot realistically deliver any new 787 orders until 2020. The current 800 orders came over the course of the past 7 years while the plane was in production, and now during the past 3 years of corporate CYA trying to get the thing to fly with FAA certification.

Don't take my word for 1,500 planes until break even, that's one of aviation's most respected and influential people.

Industry icon Steven Udvar-Hazy has given his assessment of the profitability potential for Boeing's 787, saying the US airframer will need to sell at least 1,500 twinjets to break even after more than three years of delays.

http://www.flightglobal.com/article...-sell-1500-787s-to-break-even-udvar-hazy.html

The 787 is a perfect study in trying to save a penny to spend a dollar trying to avoid paying one's own knowledge laden workers their due wage. Regardless of how many total aircraft the 787 finally delivers the fact remains that due to outsourcing over 1,000 aircraft will have been sold at zero profit that otherwise would have been there. And that is tens of billions of $$$.

You know nothing. Its as simple as that.

Outsourcing is not the cause of the issues. The source of them is the fact that the 787 uses technologies NEVER used on a wide scale for a production aircraft. Boeing did not anticipate how severe the issues would be, which is why they are where they are now. All you need to do is look at the 747-8 to see that that is true; that plane is suffering none of the issues of the 787, even though it was conceived at around the same time. It, contrary to the 787, is built using pretty standard methods.

 

[JB3]

So your sister-in-law is contradicting official Boeing statements, press releases, and investor conf. calls? Would like me to list the litany of excuses Boeing has released to its clients, investors, vendors, and banks?

I'll give you the first excuse for free; Boeing blamed "fasteners" (think rivets) for the 1st delay. There have been 7 (+/- 1) delays described by Boeing. Remember, Boeing hasn't delivered even one aircraft yet, although they claim THIS TIME they are serious, and will actually deliver one in the fall.

The 787 is on MBA programs around the country in studies of how NOT to do something.

They're not rivets, because that isn't how the plane is assembled.

Here's a list of the reason for the delays. (in order):

1) Out of sequence production work, parts shortages, and incomplete software and systems integration.
2) Assembly issues related to the composite structure
3) Supply chain problems
4) Parts shortages, redesigns of components, and added time for testing
5) Machinist strike that resulted in parts shortages, and also a redesign of the fasteners that then had to be implemented on new planes
6) Redesign of part of the side-body of the plane
7) Fire in the electrical systems, which grounded the test planes until it was fixed

Oh, and at the end of April analysts that study the aircraft industry stated that they believe the 787 is on track for delivery in september, and that Boeing has shifted focus from certification to first delivery, which indicates that delivery is not far off.

 

[Kulindahr]

So your sister-in-law is contradicting official Boeing statements, press releases, and investor conf. calls? Would like me to list the litany of excuses Boeing has released to its clients, investors, vendors, and banks?

I'll give you the first excuse for free; Boeing blamed "fasteners" (think rivets) for the 1st delay. There have been 7 (+/- 1) delays described by Boeing. Remember, Boeing hasn't delivered even one aircraft yet, although they claim THIS TIME they are serious, and will actually deliver one in the fall.

The 787 is on MBA programs around the country in studies of how NOT to do something.

I just looked at some Bloomberg analysis, and apparently there are a public side and a not-so-public side to this. It looks like the delays my sister-in-law is referencing haven't even been mentioned to the public. One had something to do with an annealing process promised by a contractor, related to making the body of the plane -- which to me sounds like something that would be an early delay, before they even flew the first test plane. And there was something to do with fasteners, but they sounded a lot more complicated than rivets.

But blaming it all on using non-union people is a joke: the non-union workers aren't in the picture until they've flown an approved aircraft and actual production begins. Blaming it on organization is another matter; if nothing else, apparently engineers frequently cursed the management for moving to Chicago and spreading other operations out, because where on previous planes they had at worst short trips up and down I-5 to take a look at things, people have been flying back and forth all over the bloody country, and more. I remember touring the plant back a couple decades; I was really impressed by the long development building that had an area for each stage of the plane, laid out in the same order that they would be for production, so if people working on one assembly needed to work something out with the team doing a mated assembly, they just walked fifty feet -- and for broader consultations, they had electric golf carts. This business of spreading it all out looks good only on paper, to executives who are clueless about the real business.

Got a cite for that about MBA programs? I'd love to forward it -- she'd get a brief chuckle, then go back to cursing management (and senior engineers who've been in place since before jets, thanks to a seniority system).

 

[Kulindahr]

They're not rivets, because that isn't how the plane is assembled.

Here's a list of the reason for the delays. (in order):

1) Out of sequence production work, parts shortages, and incomplete software and systems integration.
2) Assembly issues related to the composite structure
3) Supply chain problems
4) Parts shortages, redesigns of components, and added time for testing
5) Machinist strike that resulted in parts shortages, and also a redesign of the fasteners that then had to be implemented on new planes
6) Redesign of part of the side-body of the plane
7) Fire in the electrical systems, which grounded the test planes until it was fixed

Oh, and at the end of April analysts that study the aircraft industry stated that they believe the 787 is on track for delivery in september, and that Boeing has shifted focus from certification to first delivery, which indicates that delivery is not far off.

Ah -- listed that way, some of those ring bells. From your list, "out of sequence production work", "assembly issues related to the composite structure", "redesigns of components, and added time for testing" plus "redesign of the fasteners", and "Redesign of part of the side-body" ring bells from things my sister-in-law said. And they had nothing to do with non-union people except possibly parts shortages... and one of the delays was precisely BECAUSE of unions.

Sometimes I wish I were an engineer; too much of what my family talk about -- when they even condescend to be around the 'black sheep' of the family -- goes by me because of technical talk.