Union recommends a Strike! Let the fun begin.
Link
Full Version: Strike
^
Thanks for getting the correct link up, my apologies on the failed link.
Thanks for getting the correct link up, my apologies on the failed link.
Now Boeing has to hope enough of the oldest and youngest members (who benefit most from Boeing's final offer) like it enough to keep the vote below the two-thirds majority needed to invoke the strike clause.
If that doesn't work, counter immediately with a 20% raise - 10% in Year 1 and 5% each in Years 2 and 3. Boeing can afford it based on planned deliveries and if the market tanks in the interim, they can wrench it back in the 2011 negotiations like they did when the market tanked in 1992.
If that doesn't work, counter immediately with a 20% raise - 10% in Year 1 and 5% each in Years 2 and 3. Boeing can afford it based on planned deliveries and if the market tanks in the interim, they can wrench it back in the 2011 negotiations like they did when the market tanked in 1992.
^
Assuming the market tanks in 2011, if not Boeing could be in a rock in a hard place. If they try to take back stuff if the market is doing good in 2011 and Boeing is making good profits, the mechanics will whine and cry about “Take away’s etc…” Boeing will be forced to hand out a more than generous contract.
Perhaps this will give Boeing more of a reason to produce the 737RJ in a “right to work state” when it does get built. Build a new factory, train new workers to build the new jet, then move 787 production to new factory as well.
Assuming the market tanks in 2011, if not Boeing could be in a rock in a hard place. If they try to take back stuff if the market is doing good in 2011 and Boeing is making good profits, the mechanics will whine and cry about “Take away’s etc…” Boeing will be forced to hand out a more than generous contract.
Perhaps this will give Boeing more of a reason to produce the 737RJ in a “right to work state” when it does get built. Build a new factory, train new workers to build the new jet, then move 787 production to new factory as well.
Well if the market remains strong, then Boeing will know they have to continue to offer very generous terms.
Though I agree they may very well move to close Renton and build the 737RS and 777RS planes in other states without unions.
Though I agree they may very well move to close Renton and build the 737RS and 777RS planes in other states without unions.
Guess who ultimately pays for the increases that the IAM receives and then SPEEA after that!
QUOTE (Fly787 @ Aug 29 2008, 03:39 PM) 
^
Assuming the market tanks in 2011, if not Boeing could be in a rock in a hard place. If they try to take back stuff if the market is doing good in 2011 and Boeing is making good profits, the mechanics will whine and cry about "Take away's etc…" Boeing will be forced to hand out a more than generous contract.
Perhaps this will give Boeing more of a reason to produce the 737RJ in a "right to work state" when it does get built. Build a new factory, train new workers to build the new jet, then move 787 production to new factory as well.
Assuming the market tanks in 2011, if not Boeing could be in a rock in a hard place. If they try to take back stuff if the market is doing good in 2011 and Boeing is making good profits, the mechanics will whine and cry about "Take away's etc…" Boeing will be forced to hand out a more than generous contract.
Perhaps this will give Boeing more of a reason to produce the 737RJ in a "right to work state" when it does get built. Build a new factory, train new workers to build the new jet, then move 787 production to new factory as well.
I put myself on the record as predicting no labor disruption this time around. This is a fair offer with immediate $$$ gratification for ratification. You can bet a lot of spouses are pushing their mates to approve. Baby needs new shoes....
QUOTE (UPSer @ Sep 2 2008, 05:42 AM)
Guess who ultimately pays for the increases that the IAM receives and then SPEEA after that!
One of the Admins usually does this, but I'm sure they are all off somewhere on their exciting "day jobs" which I just happen not to have at the moment.
QUOTE (jimc @ Sep 2 2008, 09:25 AM)
I put myself on the record as predicting no labor disruption this time around. This is a fair offer with immediate $$ gratification for ratification. You can bet a lot of spouses are pushing their mates to approve. Baby needs new shoes....
I agree that it sure looks like Boeing is hoping for a minimum 34% approval vote tomorrow to avert the strike.
But it sure is going to make 2011's negotiations tough for the Company - especially if sales and deliveries remain strong.
Comparing the 2008 offer to the contracts accepted in 2005 and 2002, the current one strikes me as relatively similar, to be honest. If Boeing does believe they can get a 34%+ ratification vote, this may very well be why.
In 2005, the union accepted just lump sum payouts (8% of their gross pay for the preceding year at ratification and $3000 at the end of both 2006 and 2007), a $70 pension multiplier (from $60 under the 2002 contract) and no increase in health care plan costs.
For 2008, in addition the average 9% pay raise, the ratification bonus is 5% of gross pay. The pay raise is worth well more per year then the $3000 lump sum payment and the pension multiplier goes to $80 (so the same $10 bump it did in 2002 and 2005) and Boeing maintains one health care plan with no cost, lowers the premiums on another, and raises the premiums of a third by 55%. They also withdrew their original proposal to put all IAM members hired from 2009 on a 401k program, instead of the existing pension.
In 2002, the Company agreed to no additional outsourcing. In 2005, additional outsourcing was allowed and Boeing invoked it at least for some (floor?) parts delivery for the 787 program, which is now handled by a North Carolina company. Boeing wanted to be able to outsource even more parts deliveries under the original 2008 proposal, but subsequently pulled them. However, the IAM wants a say in any decision to outsource future parts deliveries.
In 2005, the union accepted just lump sum payouts (8% of their gross pay for the preceding year at ratification and $3000 at the end of both 2006 and 2007), a $70 pension multiplier (from $60 under the 2002 contract) and no increase in health care plan costs.
For 2008, in addition the average 9% pay raise, the ratification bonus is 5% of gross pay. The pay raise is worth well more per year then the $3000 lump sum payment and the pension multiplier goes to $80 (so the same $10 bump it did in 2002 and 2005) and Boeing maintains one health care plan with no cost, lowers the premiums on another, and raises the premiums of a third by 55%. They also withdrew their original proposal to put all IAM members hired from 2009 on a 401k program, instead of the existing pension.
In 2002, the Company agreed to no additional outsourcing. In 2005, additional outsourcing was allowed and Boeing invoked it at least for some (floor?) parts delivery for the 787 program, which is now handled by a North Carolina company. Boeing wanted to be able to outsource even more parts deliveries under the original 2008 proposal, but subsequently pulled them. However, the IAM wants a say in any decision to outsource future parts deliveries.
It is official - the IAM has voted to strike at Everett, Renton and Wichita.
80% Rejected the Contract and 87% Voted to Strike.
Boeing had said they want to negotiate immediately and IAM Leadership has agreed to wait 48 hours before walking.
Needless to say, the rank and file are rioting.
80% Rejected the Contract and 87% Voted to Strike.
Boeing had said they want to negotiate immediately and IAM Leadership has agreed to wait 48 hours before walking.
Needless to say, the rank and file are rioting.
^
Boeing is a bit desperate at this point I think considering they want 48 hours before a walkout. I do not remember this happening on the last few strikes. I thought the current contract that was offered was pretty good, the one that will be put forward by Boeing to the IAM should be one that the IAM cannot refuse we hope. But only time (48 hours) will tell.
Boeing is a bit desperate at this point I think considering they want 48 hours before a walkout. I do not remember this happening on the last few strikes. I thought the current contract that was offered was pretty good, the one that will be put forward by Boeing to the IAM should be one that the IAM cannot refuse we hope. But only time (48 hours) will tell.
I do believe Boeing expected that they would indeed get the 34% minimum vote needed to avert the strike and when they didn't and the IAM leadership called to announce they were going on strike (as Wichita had voted to do earlier in the evening), Boeing management knew they had failed and felt they could not accept a strike if at all possible.
As such, I do expect Boeing to make a serious effort in the next 48 hours. For them to demand it and then just sit on their arse will only strengthen the IAM rank and file's resolve to "punish" Boeing with a strike. And that offer is going to be really good because the IAM rank and file have to be livid with Boeing. Boeing refusing to do any more negotiation up to the moment of the vote was seen as arrogance. And now, after a resounding rejection of the contract and call to strike, Boeing demands 48 hours.
Boeing can afford it, so they'll likely give the IAM most everything they want. Boeing's margins are quite strong so it should not materially impact their earnings and, frankly, giving the IAM everything they want is the right idea as Boeing looks to improve the production rate across the board so a happy workforce will be an even more productive workforce.
As such, I do expect Boeing to make a serious effort in the next 48 hours. For them to demand it and then just sit on their arse will only strengthen the IAM rank and file's resolve to "punish" Boeing with a strike. And that offer is going to be really good because the IAM rank and file have to be livid with Boeing. Boeing refusing to do any more negotiation up to the moment of the vote was seen as arrogance. And now, after a resounding rejection of the contract and call to strike, Boeing demands 48 hours.
Boeing can afford it, so they'll likely give the IAM most everything they want. Boeing's margins are quite strong so it should not materially impact their earnings and, frankly, giving the IAM everything they want is the right idea as Boeing looks to improve the production rate across the board so a happy workforce will be an even more productive workforce.
^
I do believe Boeing will give the IAM almost everything they want with the excepting of some wording coming out of the IAM 751 that they want more say in what gets outsourced/offset outside the company. I agree I think Boeing was expecting the 34% to avoid the strike, that clearly did not happen.
I do believe Boeing will give the IAM almost everything they want with the excepting of some wording coming out of the IAM 751 that they want more say in what gets outsourced/offset outside the company. I agree I think Boeing was expecting the 34% to avoid the strike, that clearly did not happen.
QUOTE (Fly787 @ Sep 4 2008, 03:10 PM)
^
I do believe Boeing will give the IAM almost everything they want with the excepting of some wording coming out of the IAM 751 that they want more say in what gets outsourced/offset outside the company. I agree I think Boeing was expecting the 34% to avoid the strike, that clearly did not happen.
I do believe Boeing will give the IAM almost everything they want with the excepting of some wording coming out of the IAM 751 that they want more say in what gets outsourced/offset outside the company. I agree I think Boeing was expecting the 34% to avoid the strike, that clearly did not happen.
I also think that Boeing will give whatever it takes. Then they will immediately start plans on a 2nd 787 assembly line- somewhere far away from the IAM. Congratulations IAM members. You're gonna get your new shoes. Too bad you shot yourself in both feet.
Well if Boeing somehow wins the KC-X re-bid, there will not be room in PAE to open a second 787 FAL, should such a decision be warranted. Since SAT (I believe) will be handling preparation for a number of initial 787s and Texas is a RtW state, SAT might not be a bad place to set-up that second FAL. I believe DFW was a finalist for the original 787 FAL.
Seattle radio just reported that Boeing and the IAM have failed to come to an agreement, so production will stop as of 12:01AM as the IAM workers formally go on strike.
Boeing has a real itchy finger when it comes to producing aircraft outside the state of WA, in other words they could be easily swayed to produce aircraft else where. If it was not for the incentives that the state of WA gave Boeing, Boeing would not have built the 787 in WA. The IAM is not giving Boeing too much incentive to build future aircraft in the state of WA. I am predicting that the 737RJ will be built in a “right to work state” such as Texas, and that once they do so, they will move 787 there as well.
Also, when I see some of the IAM workers on the local Seattle TV stations, the more I want to fly an Airbus made jet.
Also, when I see some of the IAM workers on the local Seattle TV stations, the more I want to fly an Airbus made jet.
Well the harsh reality is every order an airline cancels is one less plane Boeing needs machinists to build...
I still think they'll come to an agreement within 30 days. They'll spend a week glaring at each other, but after that they will talk.
The $150(?) a week strike pay won't cover the bills for most Machinists and those who did save ahead will eventually eat into their savings.
As for Boeing, they won't want to keep deferring $4-5 billion a month in orders and they're desperate to get the 787 into flight test.
I still think they'll come to an agreement within 30 days. They'll spend a week glaring at each other, but after that they will talk.
The $150(?) a week strike pay won't cover the bills for most Machinists and those who did save ahead will eventually eat into their savings.
As for Boeing, they won't want to keep deferring $4-5 billion a month in orders and they're desperate to get the 787 into flight test.
Having been through a lot of strikes at Boeing, the strike usually gets settled only after the union workers miss their second complete paycheck. The first paycheck after the strike starts usually has a partial payment for work done earlier and does not count. Two zero paydays usually is enough to make thing happen. When the wives can not buy groceries and pay the bills due, the strike usually ends quickly. That means the strike will probably last 4 to 6 weeks.
QUOTE
“How do you hide $13 billion? Do you stuff it in an airplane? Do you give it to the CEO? Or, do you share it with your workers?”
These questions are printed on union flyers being distributed by thousands of striking Boeing workers at locations in Washington state, Oregon and Kansas as the total shutdown of the nation's largest airplane maker entered its second day.
...
It is against that backdrop that workers became particularly angry when the company proposed not increases but cutbacks in benefits when it made its final offer.
Boeing demanded, for example, that a family of three should pay a maximum of $6,000 in out-of-pocket health care costs, up from the current $4,000 maximum. In addition, it proposed slashing of both vision and dental care benefits.
Source: pww.orgThese questions are printed on union flyers being distributed by thousands of striking Boeing workers at locations in Washington state, Oregon and Kansas as the total shutdown of the nation's largest airplane maker entered its second day.
...
It is against that backdrop that workers became particularly angry when the company proposed not increases but cutbacks in benefits when it made its final offer.
Boeing demanded, for example, that a family of three should pay a maximum of $6,000 in out-of-pocket health care costs, up from the current $4,000 maximum. In addition, it proposed slashing of both vision and dental care benefits.
Up to 6.000 USD out of pocket??? Medical is truly out of control. The insurance we use has 1.500 yearly maximum and we tend to help people who reach that maximum. Then of course we want our employees treated early so they come back quickly and not become unproductive because they worry about how to pay for treatment of family members.
Here's an interesting piece in tomorrow's Wall Street Journal regarding "outsourcing". Forgive the length, but without a subscription, some may not be able to use a link to read the full article.
Source
QUOTE
Outsourcing at Crux of Boeing Strike
Job Security Emerges as a Key Issue for Both Sides, Highlighted by a Troubled 787 Dreamliner Strategy
By J. LYNN LUNSFORD
September 8, 2008
At the heart of the union machinists' strike against Boeing Co. is a high-stakes showdown over something the aerospace giant once touted as a manufacturing innovation: Its effort to outsource key roles in producing its new 787 Dreamliner jet.
Boeing machinists began a strike this weekend after talks for a new three-year contract failed. Nearly 27,000 machinists walked off the job at 12:01 a.m. Saturday after last-ditch talks for a new three-year contract failed. While wages and health-care costs are key issues, job security has emerged as perhaps the most crucial topic, with both sides signaling that the new contract represents an important crossroads.
Boeing says it needs flexibility in its manufacturing to avoid the problems that have befallen other big industrial companies, while the union is fighting to keep as many jobs as possible.
The flashpoint in that debate is Boeing's troubled 787 Dreamliner program, which striking workers point to as Exhibit No. 1 in their case against outsourcing. Boeing extolled the business virtues of having suppliers from as far away as Japan and Italy build much of the fuel-efficient new jetliner, with Boeing performing final assembly.
But the plan backfired when suppliers fell behind in getting their jobs done, and the 787 program is now more than a year behind schedule. Boeing was forced to turn to its own union workforce to piece together the first few airplanes after they arrived at the company's factory in Everett, Wash., with thousands of missing parts. That fueled both anger and anxiety among union workers.
"If Boeing had let us build that airplane in the first place, it would be in service today," said Dale Flinn, a 20-year veteran on Boeing's 767 assembly line.
According to people familiar with the situation, negotiators for Boeing and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers were unwilling to budge significantly on how much say the union should have on when Boeing is allowed to ship work out to contractors. The two sides also remained apart on traditional economic issues, such as pay raises and pension hikes as well.
Resentment over outsourcing has been festering since the mid-1990s, when Boeing began a sweeping campaign to modernize its factories. The company has relied increasingly on contractors across the world to build larger and larger sections of its airplanes. By adopting many of the methods pioneered in the automobile industry, Boeing has been able to reduce the time it takes to build some of its jets by more than 50%.
Over a series of contracts, Boeing has sought greater freedom in its ability to decide when and how to outsource work. At issue is language that was inserted in 2002 into the union contract that gives Boeing the authority to allow contractors to deliver parts directly to the assembly line. Union members overwhelmingly rejected that contract, but failed to gain the two-thirds majority needed in a separate vote to strike, causing the contract to go into effect by default.
Striking workers this weekend pointed to the 2002 contract as one of the reasons that they were still seething.
"We want this company to be extremely successful, but it seems like every time we make a big leap forward in efficiency, Boeing finds a way to send more jobs to outside contractors," said John Jorgensen, who has worked on Boeing's assembly lines for 43 years.
Their fear is that Boeing will eventually seek to allow contractors to go one step further and install their components directly on the airplane. Boeing officials insist that they have no plans to do this, but at the same time, they have refused to give the union blanket assurances in writing.
According to people familiar with the situation, Boeing had hoped that IAM President Tom Buffenbarger would help break the impasse with local union officials over the job-security issue. The final round of negotiations was held at a Walt Disney Co. resort in Florida in order to be near Mr. Buffenbarger, who was preparing for a major machinists convention this week.
Instead, Mr. Buffenbarger agreed that job security was one of the union's priorities. "It's time for Boeing to listen to us on this," Mr. Buffenbarger said in a telephone interview from Florida.
Mr. Buffenbarger says he warned Boeing Chairman and Chief Executive Jim McNerney months ago that the issue would be important during the 2008 negotiations. "Jim said, 'I hear 'ya, I hear 'ya,'"Mr. Buffenbarger recalled. After talks failed on Friday, Mr. Buffenbarger said he left a voice message for Mr. McNerney urging him to take an active role in reaching an agreement on the issue.
"Jim ran General Electric's engine business, where the machinists have a great partnership with the company, so he knows how to do it," Mr. Buffenbarger said.
Mr. McNerney said in statement on Sunday that he was disappointed with the union's rejection of "what was by any measure an outstanding contract offer."
Mr. Buffenbarger said the union isn't looking for absolute protectionism. "The union just wants to be able to have a shot at making the case that our workers can do those jobs competitively before Boeing ships them out," he said.
Mr. McNerney said Boeing is "always open to discussions that provide our employees an opportunity to compete for work while also maintaining our flexibility to operate our business efficiently and respond quickly to changes in the aerospace market."
Boeing said the existing contract contains language that gives the union 180 days to make a bid to keep work that might be shipped out, but the union points out that clause applies only to existing projects. For new programs, such as the 787, Boeing has much greater leeway.
The problems with the 787 have become a rallying point for union workers. While the jet has been a runaway best-seller, garnering 900 orders from airlines worldwide, it has slipped more than 14 months behind schedule. The strike will only prolong those delays, threatening Boeing's ability to begin delivering the jets in late 2009 as promised.
Despite the setbacks, Mr. McNerney has repeatedly insisted that the 787 business model is "absolutely the right way to go," although he acknowledges that Boeing might "redraw some of the lines" next time when deciding how much of any new jet programs to outsource.
With the stakes so high, union officials believe they have the leverage to make Boeing blink on the job-security issue. With a backlog of more than 3,600 airplane orders, many customers are already facing waits of five years or more for their airplanes.
"This time around, the workforce is angry enough at Boeing that they have told us they're willing to stay out until 2009," said Mark Blondin, the union's lead negotiator.
Job Security Emerges as a Key Issue for Both Sides, Highlighted by a Troubled 787 Dreamliner Strategy
By J. LYNN LUNSFORD
September 8, 2008
At the heart of the union machinists' strike against Boeing Co. is a high-stakes showdown over something the aerospace giant once touted as a manufacturing innovation: Its effort to outsource key roles in producing its new 787 Dreamliner jet.
Boeing machinists began a strike this weekend after talks for a new three-year contract failed. Nearly 27,000 machinists walked off the job at 12:01 a.m. Saturday after last-ditch talks for a new three-year contract failed. While wages and health-care costs are key issues, job security has emerged as perhaps the most crucial topic, with both sides signaling that the new contract represents an important crossroads.
Boeing says it needs flexibility in its manufacturing to avoid the problems that have befallen other big industrial companies, while the union is fighting to keep as many jobs as possible.
The flashpoint in that debate is Boeing's troubled 787 Dreamliner program, which striking workers point to as Exhibit No. 1 in their case against outsourcing. Boeing extolled the business virtues of having suppliers from as far away as Japan and Italy build much of the fuel-efficient new jetliner, with Boeing performing final assembly.
But the plan backfired when suppliers fell behind in getting their jobs done, and the 787 program is now more than a year behind schedule. Boeing was forced to turn to its own union workforce to piece together the first few airplanes after they arrived at the company's factory in Everett, Wash., with thousands of missing parts. That fueled both anger and anxiety among union workers.
"If Boeing had let us build that airplane in the first place, it would be in service today," said Dale Flinn, a 20-year veteran on Boeing's 767 assembly line.
According to people familiar with the situation, negotiators for Boeing and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers were unwilling to budge significantly on how much say the union should have on when Boeing is allowed to ship work out to contractors. The two sides also remained apart on traditional economic issues, such as pay raises and pension hikes as well.
Resentment over outsourcing has been festering since the mid-1990s, when Boeing began a sweeping campaign to modernize its factories. The company has relied increasingly on contractors across the world to build larger and larger sections of its airplanes. By adopting many of the methods pioneered in the automobile industry, Boeing has been able to reduce the time it takes to build some of its jets by more than 50%.
Over a series of contracts, Boeing has sought greater freedom in its ability to decide when and how to outsource work. At issue is language that was inserted in 2002 into the union contract that gives Boeing the authority to allow contractors to deliver parts directly to the assembly line. Union members overwhelmingly rejected that contract, but failed to gain the two-thirds majority needed in a separate vote to strike, causing the contract to go into effect by default.
Striking workers this weekend pointed to the 2002 contract as one of the reasons that they were still seething.
"We want this company to be extremely successful, but it seems like every time we make a big leap forward in efficiency, Boeing finds a way to send more jobs to outside contractors," said John Jorgensen, who has worked on Boeing's assembly lines for 43 years.
Their fear is that Boeing will eventually seek to allow contractors to go one step further and install their components directly on the airplane. Boeing officials insist that they have no plans to do this, but at the same time, they have refused to give the union blanket assurances in writing.
According to people familiar with the situation, Boeing had hoped that IAM President Tom Buffenbarger would help break the impasse with local union officials over the job-security issue. The final round of negotiations was held at a Walt Disney Co. resort in Florida in order to be near Mr. Buffenbarger, who was preparing for a major machinists convention this week.
Instead, Mr. Buffenbarger agreed that job security was one of the union's priorities. "It's time for Boeing to listen to us on this," Mr. Buffenbarger said in a telephone interview from Florida.
Mr. Buffenbarger says he warned Boeing Chairman and Chief Executive Jim McNerney months ago that the issue would be important during the 2008 negotiations. "Jim said, 'I hear 'ya, I hear 'ya,'"Mr. Buffenbarger recalled. After talks failed on Friday, Mr. Buffenbarger said he left a voice message for Mr. McNerney urging him to take an active role in reaching an agreement on the issue.
"Jim ran General Electric's engine business, where the machinists have a great partnership with the company, so he knows how to do it," Mr. Buffenbarger said.
Mr. McNerney said in statement on Sunday that he was disappointed with the union's rejection of "what was by any measure an outstanding contract offer."
Mr. Buffenbarger said the union isn't looking for absolute protectionism. "The union just wants to be able to have a shot at making the case that our workers can do those jobs competitively before Boeing ships them out," he said.
Mr. McNerney said Boeing is "always open to discussions that provide our employees an opportunity to compete for work while also maintaining our flexibility to operate our business efficiently and respond quickly to changes in the aerospace market."
Boeing said the existing contract contains language that gives the union 180 days to make a bid to keep work that might be shipped out, but the union points out that clause applies only to existing projects. For new programs, such as the 787, Boeing has much greater leeway.
The problems with the 787 have become a rallying point for union workers. While the jet has been a runaway best-seller, garnering 900 orders from airlines worldwide, it has slipped more than 14 months behind schedule. The strike will only prolong those delays, threatening Boeing's ability to begin delivering the jets in late 2009 as promised.
Despite the setbacks, Mr. McNerney has repeatedly insisted that the 787 business model is "absolutely the right way to go," although he acknowledges that Boeing might "redraw some of the lines" next time when deciding how much of any new jet programs to outsource.
With the stakes so high, union officials believe they have the leverage to make Boeing blink on the job-security issue. With a backlog of more than 3,600 airplane orders, many customers are already facing waits of five years or more for their airplanes.
"This time around, the workforce is angry enough at Boeing that they have told us they're willing to stay out until 2009," said Mark Blondin, the union's lead negotiator.
Source
This mornings The Seattle Times also ran an article how outsourcing clauses imposed in 2002 and included in the 2008 contract are what will be the most likely cause for delays in agreeing a new contract.
It's a very good read and can be found here.
QUOTE
The union's ambition isn't to scrap the global-manufacturing model Boeing established with the new 787 Dreamliner, in which huge sections of the aircraft are completed overseas and elsewhere in this country. Boeing appears irrevocably committed to that strategic model, and the union can do little about it.
Instead, union leaders are trying to preserve the assembly and ancillary work still done here, including the delivery of parts to the assembly line and the maintenance of the factory buildings.
Since 2002, Boeing has whittled away at the work done in its Puget Sound-region factories. Leaders of the International Association of Machinists (IAM) want at least the right to bid for work against outside contractors and prove they can do it more productively.
Union leaders see Boeing's refusal to even consider that as proof the company is not concerned about saving money or improving efficiency, but rather about weakening the union long-term by having nonunion people do IAM work.
Instead, union leaders are trying to preserve the assembly and ancillary work still done here, including the delivery of parts to the assembly line and the maintenance of the factory buildings.
Since 2002, Boeing has whittled away at the work done in its Puget Sound-region factories. Leaders of the International Association of Machinists (IAM) want at least the right to bid for work against outside contractors and prove they can do it more productively.
Union leaders see Boeing's refusal to even consider that as proof the company is not concerned about saving money or improving efficiency, but rather about weakening the union long-term by having nonunion people do IAM work.
It's a very good read and can be found here.
With the new tanker competition now delayed to start in 2009, maybe this would be an excellent opportunity to move some production to somewhere like Alabama. Wouldn't that be an interesting situation for the Alabama Congressional delegation to ponder, having a Boeing assembly facility or an EADS facility in Alabama. Permanently fix the Seattle union problems by moving to another state. Boeing already owns a lot of land next to the airport in Alabama. Who knows maybe we will get a 787 tanker after all.
^
Boeing has verbiage in the current contract or past contract that gives the Union 180 days to prove they can produce parts cheaper than if it where outsourced. But this only covered current production at the time and did not include 787. I believe the strategy of the 787 outsource model was to spread risk among the various partners something the IAM cannot do.
But in principle I agree with the IAM about the assembly and ancillary work done on Boeing facilities. There is nothing stopping Boeing from allowing vendor produced parts from being installed by the Vendor something in which the IAM is against. I cannot say I blame them.
The article was good. Thanks for posting it Stitch.
Boeing has verbiage in the current contract or past contract that gives the Union 180 days to prove they can produce parts cheaper than if it where outsourced. But this only covered current production at the time and did not include 787. I believe the strategy of the 787 outsource model was to spread risk among the various partners something the IAM cannot do.
But in principle I agree with the IAM about the assembly and ancillary work done on Boeing facilities. There is nothing stopping Boeing from allowing vendor produced parts from being installed by the Vendor something in which the IAM is against. I cannot say I blame them.
The article was good. Thanks for posting it Stitch.
Is anything happening?
It is now on the third week and most news seems to be about the effects on suppliers and downstream from them. Has there even been direct talks?
It is now on the third week and most news seems to be about the effects on suppliers and downstream from them. Has there even been direct talks?
QUOTE (Falcon @ Sep 20 2008, 05:07 PM)
Is anything happening?
It is now on the third week and most news seems to be about the effects on suppliers and downstream from them. Has there even been direct talks?
It is now on the third week and most news seems to be about the effects on suppliers and downstream from them. Has there even been direct talks?
Nothing serious will happen until the workers have lost two complete pay checks, something over a month of strike. When the second pay check is missed wives will start harping on workers to prod the union to geterdone. Anyone that knows when the second complete empty pay check occurs can pretty well predict the end of the strike.
^
So you expect that after a month of lost pay they will crawl back and take Boeing's latest offer?
So you expect that after a month of lost pay they will crawl back and take Boeing's latest offer?
QUOTE (Falcon @ Sep 20 2008, 06:06 PM)
^
So you expect that after a month of lost pay they will crawl back and take Boeing's latest offer?
So you expect that after a month of lost pay they will crawl back and take Boeing's latest offer?
I did not say that, what I was saying is that is when the union will sit down to negotiate seriously. Might take another week or so after that to get another offer to recommend to the members for approval.
QUOTE (Falcon @ Sep 20 2008, 08:06 PM)
^
So you expect that after a month of lost pay they will crawl back and take Boeing's latest offer?
So you expect that after a month of lost pay they will crawl back and take Boeing's latest offer?
that and the turmoil in the financial market will cause the strike to be settled
QUOTE
Recent reports indicate that V Australia, Virgin Blue’s newly-formed long-haul airline, may face delays in the delivery of its 777s, meaning that its schedule to launch service to Los Angeles by mid-December could be in jeopardy.
Source: asap.co.ukWhat will Boeing do to keep customers happy? Sure delays due to strikes usually exclude compensation but typically there are requirements for the supplier to actively work on finding a solution and with no direct talks I'm not sure Boeing can claim they are doing their part.
Well 787 ZA001 is evidently in the final stages of being ready (the final work requires IAM staff) to start testing and the 787 line is being optimized to allow follow-on birds to be produced as quickly as possible, so I expect once Boeing is ready to go, they'll make a new offer to the IAM with better pay and pension benefits (15% and $90 per year of employment?) and see what it gets them.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.