23 Comments Add your own

• 1. FlyingHigh  |  October 21st, 2008 at 7:27 am

  I know lots of striking workers and their families.

  I feel for them as Christmas approaches. Why cant the union and Boeing sort this out once and for all?

• 2. Graphite Epoxy  |  October 21st, 2008 at 8:22 am

  There is a fundamental misconception of how the federal mediation and concilliation service works.

  It’s not something parties accept or reject.
  It an offered service.

  But the mediator only acts as a neutral go between and facilitator. And witness.

  The mediator simply communicates with parties at loggerheads to find openings for negotiating opportunities. There are not sessions unless the mediator sees opportunity. They add structure and set basic rules for the process.

  The FMRS has been involved for many weeks now if not longer.

  So the question:
  “Questions Remain As To Why It Took This Long For Mediation To Be Considered” is an invalid one.

  They have been there for some time now, but their job is not to stage cage fights. Someone’s position has softened, or been clairified, or someone was allowed to cool off, or perhaps the mediation service thought the new venue, with more easily accessed rescources and personnel would be helpful. Who knows. The mediator is sworn to secrecy and neutrality.

• 3. mike j  |  October 21st, 2008 at 9:26 am

  I hope for resolution…

  (maybe Boeing is getting caught-up on part shortages)

• 4. Jerrold  |  October 21st, 2008 at 10:51 am

  Lets hope that some sanity has returned to this unnecessarily long labor dispute. It has turned into a counterproductive contest with much damage being caused to to many people and to many allied companies.

  This seems to be a lesson on how easy it is to get into a strike and how difficult it is to got out of one.

  It would serve the best interest of everyone if the parties find some middle ground and return to work for everyone’s financial gain in these troubled economic times

• 5. Ken  |  October 21st, 2008 at 1:15 pm

  The old law of diminishing returns applies here like all strikes. The Company will offer what it feels is an affordable and manageable proposal, and must retain the right to manage the Company in a profitable manner, that satisfies the demands of it’s employee’s, it’s shareholders, it’s Banks, and it’s Customers.

  The Company has many to answer to, a huge financial investment to justify, and a customer base around the world who buys it products, and wants that product delivered.

  So the Company faces many demands from around the world, and it must meet those demands to stay in business, and the ability to try new ideas, new processes, new suppliers, new methods of assembly, and on and on, must be used to stay competitive.

  The Union must realize that they do not own the Company, do not run the Company, and do not dictate to the Company, they are employee’s, they get paid for what they do, if they are shareholders, then all the better.

  But in the end they must play a part in the success of the Company as well, we know that leaner manufacturing techniques have resulted in less workers being required, but thats called progress, thats called reducing the cost of production, and if the Company didn’t do what it had to, then they would no longer be competitive in the marketplace.

  It doesn’t take much common sense to realize that if you sell a product that costs 50 million to make, you can’t sell many if your competitor can make the same product for 40 million.

  It’s called reality, and if we don’t all face it, we’ll all be out of business.

• 6. Bobbelieu  |  October 21st, 2008 at 1:47 pm

  If you build the airplane utilizing various sources that cannot match the tolerances and quality necessary for a flyable product, you haven’t saved any money.

  There’s a lot of defeatism out there. I choose not to be part of that ilk. I still have a thing called self-respect and hope.

  If Boeing can’t listen to its engineers and workforce on the best way to build an airplane (and they are the ones who know) then maybe Boeing shouldn’t be in the business of building airplanes.

• 7. Aurora  |  October 21st, 2008 at 3:03 pm

  The federal government has the power to invoke Taft-Hartley to seek an injunction to end the strike. This is rarely used, but I am surprised that it hasn’t come up in the “dialogue”.

• 8. man711  |  October 21st, 2008 at 3:08 pm

  New info will come at start of new negotiations and it wouldn’t be good for IAM!

• 9. Reality check  |  October 21st, 2008 at 3:36 pm

  It’s about time, amazing how the members can eat up their savings. Boeing hasn’t been hurt, if you think they have they would have been back to the table as like wise for our Union representatives. The only people who lose is the Union members. The next three years after this contract is settled our members will not get back the lost wages and savings. We will not have job security(pipe dream). We will not control out sourcing another (pipe dream). Live in the real world, we should be bidding on the jobs and keeping them in house like our suppliers is the only way to combat this- we would when job security and out sourcing this way and only this way. We should be bargaining for in house bidding by the Union right now and save ourselves. Why not, it Boeing could by the product at home and not wait for it, why wouldn’t they? Why would you wait for a gallon of milk to be freighted in and most likely be sour, when you can buy a fresh gallon at the corner? We should be working on keeing it in house and building a Boeing plane by Boeing employees.

• 10. DonS  |  October 21st, 2008 at 3:53 pm

  lets keep a few numbers in mind relative to the company PR about costs.

  From the 2006 annual report BCAC revenue was 28.4 Billion

  Although averages are a poor thing to use when figuring payroll costs, it is the only number available

  27,000 IAM at an average of 57.000 year gives about 1.5 Billion for IAM payroll

  1.5 Billion divided by 28.4 billion gives about 5 percent of revenue for IAM costs

  However, Boeing claims a margin of 9.6 percent for BCAC , so with a cost of 28.4 m inus 2.73 billion, then the factor becomes 1.5 billion divided by 25.7 or about 11 percent. Of course if BA gives IAM a raise, then it filters down/up to all other employees so that supervisors/managers/ engineers get IAM plus …

  Even so , I wonder why both SPEEA and IAM do not come out with numbers to refute the Boeing PR BS, such as IAM getting a 23K raise over 3 years !

• 11. Aurora  |  October 21st, 2008 at 4:48 pm

  What about the prospect of Taft-Hartly? Anyone?

  I’m sensing a certain degree of “jitters” & “nerves” in the blogosphere. The solidarity is certainly there, but I suspect most union members would welcome a settlement soon. Is this a fair assessment?

• 12. 777mech  |  October 21st, 2008 at 6:14 pm

  Reality check- have you been following any of the updates from the union? Bidding on the work to keep it in house is one of the things the union is asking for. And it’s never about short term goals. Those who have sacrificed before us allow us to enjoy the benefits and wages we have today.

  Ken- We all know what LEAN is and recognize why it’s necessary. That’s why we participate in these programs. We also know we don’t own the company. And it’s not our job to run it. But we have seen the mess senior management has created with the 787 business model. It’s the same road MD went down prior to the merger and how many commercial jets do they make now? We all want success for Boeing as we know that is our only true hope for job security. Boeing is not a company about to go under.
  Boeing could have avoided this strike very easily. A modest GWI, lump sum bonus, pension increase, and no takeaways would have probably got the company an accepted contract.

• 13. DonS  |  October 21st, 2008 at 6:34 pm

  RE taft hartley from wikipedia - the pertinent part is

  Strikes

  The amendments required unions and employers to give sixty days’ notice to each other and to certain state and federal mediation bodies before they may undertake strikes or other forms of economic action in pursuit of a new collective bargaining agreement; it did not, on the other hand, impose any “cooling-off period” after a contract expired. Although the Act also authorized the President to intervene in strikes or potential strikes that create a national emergency, a reaction to the national coal miners’ strikes called by the United Mine Workers of America in the 1940s, the President has used that power less and less frequently in each succeeding decade. President George W. Bush invoked the law most recently in connection with the employer lockout of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union during negotiations with West Coast shipping and stevedoring companies in 2002.

  While POTUS could force a return to work - IMO it is very unlikely for a variety of reasons. Most of the Boeing military work is either in long beach- saint louis - or in facilities that have a minimum of government work and IAM represented employees

  It would be very hard to justify a national security issue

  IMO - the feds are just trying to do a little arm twisting since many other companies are now being affected.

  Boeings mantra or bribe em or bust em hasn’t changed

• 14. Aurora  |  October 21st, 2008 at 6:58 pm

  DonS: “It would be very hard to justify a national security issue”.

  I have been taught that there are 4 elements to national security: diplomatic, information, military & economic. Would it be too much of a stretch for a new (Obama?) administration to cite economic impact and resort to Taft-Hartly?

  I tend to think that the Bush Administration would not take this drastic measure. After all, things are in the toilet already; what do they have to lose?

  It’s a new administration, anxious to get things moving again, that would be likely to pull the trigger on this (IMVHO).

• 15. MEG  |  October 21st, 2008 at 8:38 pm

  Great point DonS, regarding revenue vs. labor. BA could have fully funded a new contract with the IAM in the time that they have been out on strike.
  The union understands that helping the company become efficient in all areas of production is important. However, the company continues to waste millions of dollars anyway, or projects, tools and resources that go against any kind of lean practices. A proud example is the 787 program. Absolutely zero manufacturing influence was taken into consideration during the planning, development and execution of this entire program, for concept to supply chain. Now it is up the IAM employees, majority of them new and most have never worked on an airplane that had to endure extra schooling, mind you, to unravel a company-sponsored mess.
  This is one of many issues that the public does not know about. Now they are ones suggesting that the IAM is greedy? Want to talk about DCAC-MRM?

• 16. mobile  |  October 21st, 2008 at 10:22 pm

  keep the line brothers machinists!
  don’t give in to greedy capitalist pigs in the mgmt! yes, it’s cold and will get colder, but you only live once!

  we salute you!
  THE PEOPLE OF ALABAMA

• 17. mike j  |  October 22nd, 2008 at 12:44 am

  If only we could demand LEAN for Boeing Management, ie: make them work more for less…

  That would save bundles of money!

• 18. Precocious  |  October 22nd, 2008 at 1:29 am

  While you were sleeping and enjoying the weather Boeing was doing things that IAM will not be able to protect you from harm. Big Brother is here to stay. i can say you were foolish to sit out a strike. I long to open my heart but Your computer account, how you get things done. Simple courtisy will be no more. By 2013 you iAM will be gone and you thought you knew. Even when AIG bailed out and Carson Boffinger, Blondin were there. While all those planes evaporated in demand they placed their accounts under Sharia Law in Dubai. Nope this was the worst time to sit out a strike. Speea won’t be foolish enough to do what you have done.

• 19. no respect for mechs  |  October 22nd, 2008 at 6:56 am

  Well fellow mechs if we want to prove our worth, they need to make deadlines. If we want to make it a test of wills, let the Big Three ( McNerney, Carson, Kight) come down to the Production floor and buck rivets. Everyone who think we don’t deserve what we are paid come see if you can do 10 to 12 hour shifts 7 days a week. Not all of us make 80 to 90 thousand dollars a year. Its shameful and unAmerican for companies to continue to outsource American jobs. I’m so proud of my brothers and sisters standing in solidarity. I ask who be next, probably us mechs!!! NO TAKEAWAYS!!!

• 20. roger  |  October 22nd, 2008 at 10:34 am

  Because of the attitude like No-Respects; I have lost all my respect, and most of my sympathy, for IAM members. You guys get paid very well for what you are supposed to be doing. Sure you’ve got skills and knowledge…. the skills and knowledge that Boeing paid you to get. There are plenty of other workers they can pay to get those too.

  What a dumb strategy. I’ll bet my retirement account that Boeing won’t allow themselves to be shut down by a bunch of overpaid, whining malcontents next time around.

  BTW, I am a union member myself. My “brothers” (thank god they are not) are equally as stupid.

• 21. no respect for mechs  |  October 22nd, 2008 at 7:16 pm

  Roger are you kidding, what type of union member are you? We’re fighting for our livelihoods. Do you have a family, a house, a car, or food. Guess what prices are rising. Our pay and benefits aren’t. Guess who’s pay and benefits are rising, need a hint. I could understand if the company was barely making a profit. Thats not case, the forecast for Boeing profits are very bright.
  Obviously Rog you must not be a mech. I’m extending an visitation to come buck rivets too. Maybe if you worked for a living you’d understand!!!

• 22. roger  |  October 22nd, 2008 at 11:19 pm

  I work as a maintenance mechanic. Wish I was making more, but I’m not complaining.

  If you don’t like working for Boeing, find a better job (Good luck with that). You work in a climate controlled environment with breaks, lunch, and plenty of overtime. You get paid well for your contribution to the bottom line. There are at least 10 people waiting for each job that each IAM member is pissing ang moaning about. Why not quit and to to work for NWA?

  Like I said, I’ve lost all my respect and almost all of my sympathy. Flame me all you want, you wont change my mind. You think that I’m different than almost all of the other blue collar workers in the country?

• 23. James  |  October 23rd, 2008 at 10:38 pm

  Americans have chosen the capitalist and free market economic system as all have collectively supported leaders and policies that advance the capitalist system. We’re in a period where most american companies would prefer to have a workforce of “free agents” where they hire and release employees as they please. It is a system that will always be at odds with organized labor which have always been based on socialist ideals (Union members/leaders may argue against this in futility).
  The current situation is not ideal for the machinists as they don’t have any other leverage other than a strike action. Which other Civilian aircraft manufacturer in the United States can they work for? McD.. gone, Lockheed.. gone, Convair.. gone. The machinist union should think long term as what the Boeing management is currently doing. They should not be naive enough to think that Boeing will never move its production facilities to a right-to-work state. If they cannot demand (or get into a favorable position to demand) better terms with Boeing in their current negotiation, they should look into possibly accepting the current terms in the short term. However, they should come up with a long term plan to try to get other manufacturers (e.g. Airbus, Spirit) to come to Washington State and compete against Boeing as this should open up opportunities for their members.

Leave a Comment

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed