Today's statements from Boeing's CEO makes me feel even less warm and fuzzy about Boeing's long-term presence in Washington state:
McNerney warned that the International Association of Machinists' (IAM) "track record of repeated union work stoppages" is "earning us a reputation as an unreliable supplier to our customers."The memo did not address the gap between the two sides on compensation issues, instead focusing on the union's insistence that Boeing reduce outsourcing of work and offer workers some guarantees of future jobs.
He also alluded to the disastrous long-term outcome that past labor settlements by the Detroit auto companies had on that industry, and raised the specter that competition emerging in the American south would use cheap labor to undercut commercial jet manufacturing in the Puget Sound region.
"It would be gravely unwise for Boeing to agree to terms in any contract that would fundamentally restrict our ability to manage our business," McNerney wrote. "U.S. auto companies, for one, all but fatally wounded themselves years ago by promising unsustainable wage and benefit levels and by agreeing to contract conditions (including job guarantees) that limited their flexibility to run their businesses in the face of intense global competition. Today, their market shares continue to fall, and their layoffs have grown by the thousands."
"We want this strike to end," said McNerney. "But we cannot sacrifice our long-term competitiveness for expedience in a short-term agreement to end the walkout."
Couple those comments with the belligerent attitude of the Machinists Union and one can see where this is going.
None of it looks terribly good for the Evergreen State.
Posted by Eric Earling at October 06, 2008 07:24 PM | Email ThisThe real world depends on tough choices. There is no guarantee of a job, or a house, etc.
Maybe after Boeing leaves, WA citizens will wise up to the fact that their Democrat Politicians/ Collectivist/ Unions Boss handlers are usually acting only in their own best interests, and that long term, that will force business out of WA, just like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac collapsed under the weight of promises they could never keep.
With that said, I despise this Union and have no doubt that it will one day feel the pain of no work at all because of their spoiled short-sightedness. I was a member and never put in for recall rights. Thuggery is not my cup of tea.
Posted by: Editor on October 6, 2008 08:13 PMYep only the folks who got the loans are at fault, the lenders have no responsibility whatsoever. In fact it was the borrowers who packaged the loans into slice and dice securities that practically no one can understand and sold them on the world market. Thanks for the explanation of why the financial sector is going down the tubes worldwide, now I understand.
Posted by: Rank Stranger on October 6, 2008 08:30 PMFear of nationalization and the loss of US defense contracts are the only reason why they haven't decamped 100% to China IMHO. It's certainly not any sense of loyalty to the lazy, entitled American aerospace worker that keeps them here.
Gotta say I'm not thrilled with either side in Boeing vs. Machinists. A pox on both their houses. Sorta like McCain vs. Obama, come to think of it.
Posted by: Boeing gone already... on October 6, 2008 08:34 PMThe Unions have a history of destroying far more than they create. As the World gets more competitive, companies that are afflicted with runaway Unions will be pushed aside. It is very difficult to have a flexible competitive workforce when you have interfering stiff Unions work rules and Strikes backed with excessive demands, stifling productivity and necessary change to remain viable and a leader in the market. The Arrogant Unions have no place on telling Boeing or any other Business on how to buy supplies, outsource or any activity in the managing and running a Business. The Greatest Threat to the IAM workers and their jobs is the Union itself.
I've heard that the IAM was working 68-hr weeks in Everrett, trying to get the 787 ready for flight. If Boeing came to the negotiating table with such a non-negotiable attitude, I'd be tempted to say "Screw it! I need a vacation." and go on strike just to get a little rest.
Boeing is taking the same attitude with SPEEA. We'll see what happens come December.
Posted by: Mike S on October 6, 2008 09:21 PMLike Franklin Raines, he is an overpaid manager who obviously is in way over his head.
But, he does live in Chicago, like Earling's hero, Obama, so it'll all be okay. As long as those patriotic Americans in the Union (who want to keep American jobs in America) just stand down.
Posted by: cmiklich on October 6, 2008 09:42 PMSaying that Obama is my "hero" might be the single dumbest accusation I've seen lobbed at me in the comments. That's quite an accomplishment.
Posted by: Eric Earling on October 6, 2008 09:52 PMBut of course we were a non-union company. So the workers realized that if they didn't like working hard, they could always leave. The union binds.
And there is no such thing as an "American Job." There are businesses who happen to employ people in America. But being an American is not a birth right to a job, a house, or anything material. It is a birth right to freedom. And if freedom means that Boeing moves more and more of its work to where people are willing to work harder for less pay, then that's going to be a big wake-up call for many in WA.
Posted by: Jeff B. on October 6, 2008 10:22 PMAnd take all the toxic chemicals in the Duwamish with you, Boeing.
The union wins, no matter how long the strike lasts.
People forget that Boeing saves a TON of money each day the workers are on strike, the result of the very generous wages paid.
That is weighed against all of the "losses" bOeing is dealing with.
This could be a very long and costly strike to both sides, but who really LOSES the most?
Posted by: elmo on October 7, 2008 12:03 AMEarling is worthy of ridicule for being a milquetoast, but I would hardly say he is bashing McCain.
Posted by: pbj on October 7, 2008 03:32 AMThat bit about company ownership sounds awfully collectivist JeffB.
"So the workers realized that if they didn't like working hard, they could always leave. The union binds."
So the IAM won't let people quit their jobs?
Posted by: Rank Stranger on October 7, 2008 06:47 AMUnion leaders have sold them that "no one is as productive as the American worker". That's false. It's also false that the job is too "sophisticated" to train Chinese or Mexicans to do. They are convinced they are competing with their own company. They aren't, they're competing with foreign labor. Only the 2 company strangle hold on large planes has prevented that reality from coming all the way home to roost, but the nature of the dollars and sense tells you it's only time. Planes and parts can be built for a fraction of the cost, elsewhere. It's a magnetic relationship.
Posted by: Cecil on October 7, 2008 07:22 AMI applaud Boeing's stand against the unions. To use terms that the union can understand, the union and its workers have become a bourgeois class who care not for the greater good, but only for the lining of their own pockets.
Posted by: TheSenator2012 on October 7, 2008 07:33 AMKeep asking for the world and you may get zip in the end.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on October 7, 2008 08:00 AMYou call this recovery?
Massive traffic.
Rathole condos.
Weekly shootings in Rainier?
A Puget Sound that has become a toilet bowl?
Is this success?
Posted by: John Bailo on October 7, 2008 09:32 AMPlease, your answer is dumb. Any city that grows can bring problems with it. If your government does zip. Seattle police chief is a joke, same as it's mayor. The gov here won't build zip. So our freeways are junk.
By the way. Were you born here? what about your parents or grand parents? How far back should I go till YOU no longer have family here and ask you the same question. What are you doing here. I bet you caused problems too.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on October 7, 2008 09:44 AMThey have said their goal is to strike until the entire $10B surplus of Boeing is gone.
They have said they will strike until Boeing's reputation is destroyed, until they have their orders canceled.
Apparently the concept that they work for Boeing isn't clear. I can assure you the 787 is the last plane assembled in Everett. You stupid retards.
They even have a debt clock up that shows how much money they are costing their employer:
http://www.iam751.org/
Posted by: Uncle Steve on October 7, 2008 10:09 AMI'd roll the clock back to 1986 when I cruised in from the East Coast. That would get rid of all the Californians mainly.
Then it would just be me, the native Americans, and the old Swedish people in Ballard riding the electric bus...just like it used to be.
Posted by: John Bailo on October 7, 2008 10:20 AMYet we don't always get what we want. (do we)
God knows I've watched san diego go down hill because of the gangs who have moved in from mexico. )-:
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on October 7, 2008 11:53 AM1. If Boeing does finally win the tanker contract, all of the work will be done in a right-to-work state (not WA) with non-union labor.
2. If nothing changes, Boeing will be pretty much gone from WA by 2020.
NOBODY else ever gets a guarantee against losing their job so why should the machinists get one? Union labor is killing itself in the country. Nobody is to blame except for themselves.
Posted by: blindman on October 7, 2008 01:14 PMIt's nice to reminisce and to think things were better back then but they weren't. WA has always had it's problems. The problems just change over time. Heck, I have older family members who are uneasy with Rossi because "he looks Italian" and they don't want another crook like that "Italian" Gov. Rossellini. Now that is gruesome history.
I have to remind them that all politicians are crooked at some level to be successful, you just have to know how to pick the one who is bent in your direction. And in Gregoire's People's Revolutionary Democratic National Republic of Washington, it is you, the taxpayer, that gets bent instead.
To bring this post back to my original point, things weren't perfect back then but it seems like it was better because the problems we have today didn't exist back then, but don't forget that some of the problems we had back then don't exist today. So, have we eliminated more problems than we have created? No.
Our continual loss of liberty and the collectivist social engineering by the left in this state has ruined the once proud spirit of conservation and "green" living combined with common sense that used to make WA what it was--the evergreen state crowned by the emerald city.
Posted by: blindman on October 7, 2008 01:41 PMI thought you believed Boeing and the IAM were working together Danny... I must have gotten throught to you. You finally said something that is true.
I do believe Boeing will move out of Washington. I don't think they'll move overseas as they are a huge chunk of our trade balance in favor of the US. They may have a hard time with our government and WTO if they move too much production overseas.
Unions are in it to protect themselves, not so much their membership. They tell members to vote for Democrats becasue they incorrectly believe that Democrats are more pro-union. Outwardy maybe they are. But the results of Democrats putting too much power on the side of Unions is exactly what happened to Detroit auto makers. Now UAW Union members find themselves in the odd position of voting for Democrats who will not allow oil drilling, which is what has caused the high gas prices - which are what are responsible for the closing of production lines for SUV's, Trucks, and Hummers.
But don't worry, Boeing will move production to right-to-work states and hire non-union labor. There are already a bunch of states lining up with tax breaks and other incentives to get Boeing to move.
And Gregoire would be the first to wave goodbye. What an idiot.
Posted by: blindman on October 7, 2008 05:04 PM
In their lust for all things monetary, all things commerce related (for you so-called Christian Conservatives, the Bible refers to it as "Mammon", the Canaanite god of Commerce), the corporate heads in America are zealously destroying this country.
BA is GIVING the technology to the foreign countries that it says the Unions must take wage cuts to compete against. Think about that.
BA is GIVING American technology, much of which has military applications, to countries that historically have been our enemies. Like the Soviet Union, nee Russia. Think about THAT!
And the Unions are the bad guys in this fight?
Anybody that says that the enemy are people who want to defend America, to save American jobs, and to protect American hegemony is a traitor.
There's a lot of folks around here that wrap themselves in patriotism, all the while corporations like BA ARM AMERICA'S ENEMIES. Think about that. And then go f**k yourself.
The UNION is the good guy in this fight! BA's executives, like McNerney are as unAmerican as Al Qaeda. Working to ruin America whether by suicide bomb or suicide offload, it's all the same.
Posted by: cmiklich on October 7, 2008 08:46 PMMy God, they sit up there in their corporation buildings, you see, being all corporation-y and stuff, it's really shocking how we can let them get away with all this.
Is there no decency left in America?!
I say we hunt down these corporations wherever they may be and KICK THEIR CORPORATION ASSES!
Of course, union pukes wouldn't have jobs anymore, but that's OK because we'll have stood up to the corporations!
{que marching music here}
Posted by: Uncle Steve on October 8, 2008 12:57 PMBA is GIVING (that's GIVING away like in "the farm") to its competitors. "Free market"? Yeah, it's "free" alright. Freely given away. Don't know if I can explain capitalism to you folks, because this AIN'T it. It also isn't patriotism.
Just like the Bundists being fifth columnists for Nazi Germany, BA execs are GIVING the technology away to totalitarian regimes like Soviet Russia (sorry to burst your little minds on that one, but Russia is as vicious as EVER) and RED China.
The Soviets will use that technology to harm American interests and (probably, eventually) to kill American soldiers. So will Red China.
But, hey that's okay with you lefties on this board (and elsewhere). Just goes to show how far downhill America has gone when corporate America giving away proprietary military technology to enemy countries is celebrated.
Posted by: cmiklich on October 8, 2008 03:46 PMBut, you know what BA has way too much money being p!ssed away on? Management. That's right. If you're so up on "competition" as you call it, then it only stands to reason that cheaper is better at EVERY LEVEL. Otherwise, you are a hypocrite (but we all know you are already).
BY YOUR LOGIC, BA should have a CEO making WAY less than a MILLION per month like McNerney. THAT would be competition. It should be a race to the LOWEST PRICE! And the LOWEST WAGE!
Now, THAT is competition!
Unfortunately, there is SO MUCH corruption @ BA, let alone corporate America: Anyone hear anything about some financial scandals going on? There was a piece about it recently in ALL THE F**KING MEDIA!!!!!!!!!!! Competition NEVER truly happens anymore. The corporate fatcats won't let it. They're milking the federal cow as hard as they can. You want competition? Fine. Then you must be in favor of ABSOLUTELY NO CORPORATE HANDOUTS OF ANY KIND! Corporations, since they are treated as individuals by the courts, should pay the EXACT SAME TAXES AS INDIVIDUALS. There's your competition! But, I bet you're not in favor of that are you? (What did I post above about you being a hypocrite? It's double if you aren't for fairness in tax rates!)
Just as a "bailout" winds up being 400+ pages of PURE F**KING PORK, BA management, like virtually every other corporation out there is so corrupt they can't compete without badmouthing their most valuable asset: The folks who put out the product that MAKES ALL OF BA's PROFITS!
Posted by: cmiklich on October 8, 2008 04:06 PMSo is AIG.
So is Lehman Brothers.
So was WaMu. Bear Sterns, Countrywide. The list of corrupt corporations is truly long.
Combined, those corporations have taken more MONEY from taxpayers, directly and indirectly, than any 100 other corporations will generate in profits this year. Or next. Or next.
Calling the bureaucracy that is a corporation these days, with all the attendant welfare-queen CEOs (like McNerney, Mulally @ F, or Wagoner @ GM) a "business" is laughable. All 3 of those cretins have taken TENS of BILLIONS $$ in direct and indirect HANDOUTS from the various levels of government. That's heroic? That's wealth creation? Taking more money from the Feds than you are putting out (especially in the case of F and GM) in terms of economic gain like jobs, is NOT a good thing.
Yes, business can be a good thing. Unregulated business, just like people, is a recipe for disaster. "Locks keep honest people honest."
The management of BA, as is well documented over the last decade, is rotten. Corrupt.
From the looks of your posts (that's the possessive "your", Danny, not the contraction of "you" and "are") you still don't get that BA is in Russia, showing them how to improve their military aircraft.
And, this is where you "conservatives" who obviously do not understand "trade" are confused.
"Trade" is NOT giving your competitor the technology to defeat you. NO! "Trade" IS when your trading partner has something of value that CANNOT be obtained elsewhere. Giving the Red Chinese or the Soviets the means whereby they can defeat us in combat (or aid our enemies like Iran) is suicidal. It IS NOT trade. It is short-sighted GREED. Nothing more.
You guys would sell your mother for piece of @ss!
Posted by: cmiklich on October 8, 2008 08:46 PMSee, union-types do not have an entrepreneurial bone in their bodies; they always work FOR a corporation. Be free, imagine that you can own the business (meaning you accept all the risks but take all the gains). The unions don't do that, they let Boeing take the risks but want the gain to somehow be their right.
And anally correcting grammar, spelling and punctuation on an internet chat line is a sure sign you have lost the argument.
Posted by: Uncle Steve on October 8, 2008 09:02 PMA liberal thinks homosexuality is the equal of heterosexuality. BA encourages and promotes homosexual behavior among employees and the nation at large through their hiring and benefits. I am aginst this, you are in favor of BA.
A liberal thinks that abortions should be funded while making parents pay for childbirth. BA encourages their employees to have abortions and charges employees additional medical costs for childbirth. Again, you like BA and abortion, I am morally opposed to abortion (it's practically a state religion with the Red Chinese and Obama, too).
As far as military secrets, BA had to pay a HUGE FINE (big whoop) for "accidentally" giving the Red Chinese the guidance computers to enable their ICBMs to target America. Oopsie. That's not a patriotic thing. Even after they were busted for it, BA continued to do it.
Boeing has been busted NUMEROUS times for illegal technology transfers to the Red Chines, Russia, Malaysia, Turkey, and on and on and on!
Even you guys with your public school educations should be able to easily find information regarding BA's history of corruption on the www. There are entire websites dedicated to BA's legal and moral failings.
Y'know, I keep coming up with FACTS to prove my position (a conservative trait) and you girls keep responding with "feelings".
BTW, I work for the "corporation" the same as any manager. No ONE is above the law (another truly conservative ideal, one lost on you girls)! However, I will admit to putting my pants on one leg at a time. Too many managers have god complexes and don't think they even need to wear pants. Stonecipher took his off every chance he got!
Posted by: cmiklich on October 9, 2008 04:53 PMThis area began moving away from being a manufacturing town, the moment Microsoft established themselves in the Puget Sound region. For example, traffic impact wouldn't be as great as one would think if Boeing were to leave. Hello...does anyone notice that 520 is way more congested going EASTWARD in the morning, not the other way around.
Unions do serve a purpose to make sure that workers are given fair working conditions, but where unions fall down is the belief that they are immune to the establishment of the global economy. With the global economy firmly in place, American companies have to be competitive in order to survive. Boeing, no doubt, puts out an excellent product, but their monopoly on commercial airplanes won't last forever. Airbus is nipping at their heels.
Puget Sound is not a cheap place to do business and live in anymore, thanks to all those rich techies and all of the businesses that feed off of them. IAM is going to have to accept the concept of incentive-based performance and stop acting so entitled. Boeing is going to have to adopt better worklife balance policies if they are unable to provide their more job security (70-hr workweeks in manufacturing only sets up workers to on-the-job injury and poor health, which then transcends into spiraling health costs to BOTH Boeing and its workers). It is the only way to ensure Boeing's ability to operate in a more expensive region.
Posted by: Lali on October 13, 2008 11:34 AM