Boeing machinists strike.

[rick-l]

Originally Posted by Zef

I'm not very willing to fly an aircraft made in China...!

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/news/2005/q2/nr_050602g.html

[Scuba Steve]

Originally Posted by Dave Nordhoff

We do have a union. SPEEA. There are a few "immortals" but most of us are
just regular working guys and gals.

Dave

In Everett I don't see SPEEA making a lot of noise (yet). I get the idea that's pretty much the norm.

[jackobleep32]

I think the quality of union labor is usually better, without question. Not too many people can effectively argue this. Productivity? Well, that's a whole different question.

It's clear that these machinists need a wake up call. With all the tight budgets these days, I'm surprised that the union would be able to withstand a 1 week strike.

[red911sc]

Originally Posted by jackobleep32

I think the quality of union labor is usually better, without question. Not too many people can effectively argue this.

How do you think that the quality of union labor is better than non-union? You state that not many people can effectively argue this, I ask how can you effectively argue that union labor's quality is better?

[Tim Hancock]

Originally Posted by red911sc

How do you think that the quality of union labor is better than non-union? You state that not many people can effectively argue this, I ask how can you effectively argue that union labor's quality is better?

One definitely can't claim that UAW labor is top notch..... There are a lot of unskilled lazy knuckleheads working in auto plants (I have seen it first hand many times). I will concede that construction trades have some quality union workers, but they sure the hell should be for the premium wage they are paid.

[Jim Sims]

If they can get a better deal by striking, more power to them. It is the American way to charge all the market can bear or to quote Rush Limpbaugh boasting about his radio show ad rates: "Charge confiscatory rates".

[Jeff Higgins]

The IAM is far different than most unions, insofar as the skill of its most qualified members. Granted, they do have some very low-level, unskilled jobs covered by that union. Would it surprise some of you here to learn that the entry level union wage in those jobs is still under ten bucks an hour? That a family of four, with the father working for the largest aerospace company on the planet, qualifies for food stamps at those wages?

At the other end of the spectrum are some of the most highly skilled, highly trained mechanics and machinists in the world. Bar none. Some one mentioned a few posts back how they felt it was wrong that the guy designing the part can sometimes make less than the guy making or installing the part. I hear that all the time around here, from our junior engineers. My simple answer to them is to go out to the shops and to try to learn something from these guys. When they even begin to approach the knowledge of our products that these guys have, then maybe they will have something to talk about. Until then they better just shut up and pay attention. The "engineers" that are too proud, too conceited to do that never make good engineers. The ones that realize some of those machinists and mechanics have forgotton more about airplanes than they may ever learn, and swallow their pride to go out and learn something from those guys, will eventually make good engineers.

The saying around here (in regards to our airplanes) is that "every one is a prototype". Every airplane we build is different than the one before or the one after it, even in any given block of "identical" aircraft for the same customer. It is nothing like automotive or similar mass production assemby line work. The amount of training and skill the best guys out there bring to the table vastly exceeds that of many "engineers" in this company. They deserve every penny they make, and then some.

If some of you guys would like to better direct your rightous indignation, you may want to take a look at what our execs (and execs in similar large American companies) make. Their salaries and bonuses are well beyond obscene. Remember what the Daimler Benz CEO said about that when they bought out Chrysler? The CEO of the failing American company was making several times what he was, while running a succesful company. Boeing is no different.

Oh, and I've heard all of the arguments about the entrepeneurs, risking it all to build their companies, and therefore deserving of their rewards. While I very much agree with those sentiments, Boeing and other large corporations are all well beyond that. Our execs are hired hands, just like our mechanics. They come in at no risk to themselves or their net worth. They get the sweetest deal possible; millions in wages and bonuses, with no risk whatsoever. And the disparity in pay between them and the workforce has grown by over tenfold in our lifetimes. They, not the unions, are really at the heart of the problem in corporate America today.

[lendaddy]

Jeff, do you feel the strike/demands are a wise move then?

[lendaddy]

Originally Posted by Jim Sims

If they can get a better deal by striking, more power to them. It is the American way to charge all the market can bear or to quote Rush Limpbaugh boasting about his radio show ad rates: "Charge confiscatory rates".

No one said they shouldn't have the right to strike just that it's a classic case of be careful what you wish for. There are repercussions to these actions and IMHO they are not weighing them.

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by Jim Sims

If they can get a better deal by striking, more power to them. It is the American way to charge all the market can bear or to quote Rush Limpbaugh boasting about his radio show ad rates: "Charge confiscatory rates".

That would be true and I would agree, but it isn't a fair market. the unions control the labor, the materials, etc. they picket and get other unions to support them so they completely and intentionally interupt and prevent the market from stabilizing on what is fair. Extortion is the best description I can think of.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by lendaddy

Jeff, do you feel the strike/demands are a wise move then?

I have really mixed feelings on this. They were given a fantastic offer, when compared to the industry today. In speaking with the friends I've made in the shops over the years, however, it becomes clear that is the rub.

They are not comparing this offer to anything else anyone else is working under today. They are comparing it to what they were working under 20 years ago. In their estimation (and I would have to agree), unions have been losing ground to corporate America in their lifetimes. Or maybe that is too broad of a generalization; it's true here at Boeing, anyway. Not so sure about anywhere else. Anyway, at Boeing in particular, the company has had the good fortune to be able to negotiate new contracts with the union during industry downturns. The company has taken full advantage of that, reducing benefits and such in every contract for the last generation.

Boeing essentially has its back up against a wall right now, like no other time since most of these guys have worked here. The union guys see it as their chance, finally, to return to the kinds of contracts enjoyed by their predecessors, and that they enjoyed when they first started here. There has been a lot of animosity built up within their ranks, as the company repeatedly seized its opportunities to chip away at their contracts. "It's payback time..." is what I was hearing.

I do not agree with everything for which the union stands. I do think they overly coddle and protect unproductive, non-contributing members. I do think they have aniquated work rules and job descriptions that are designed to keep the maximum number of them employed. But I do think they are fighting for what is fair and right as far as compensation, assuming they really are doing the skilled jobs about which this union is formed. I do think the disparity in compensation between them and our execs is downright criminal.

Like I said, mixed feelings. I don't think they will substantially improve their contract by striking. I wish they could come up with a better way. Both sides (company and union) are, however, quite intractable and stubborn on this front.

[Jim Sims]

"That would be true and I would agree, but it isn't a fair market. the unions control the labor, the materials, etc. they picket and get other unions to support them so they completely and intentionally interupt and prevent the market from stabilizing on what is fair. Extortion is the best description I can think of."


There are really no "fair" (whatever that means) markets anymore (if there ever were). There are always restraints on trade; some for good reason. State Bars and Boards for lawyers and doctors are two that come immediately to mind. Professional engineering registration is a third. Fair trade price floors on commodities (milk?) are another. I seem to recall that one couldn't sell margarine in the state of Wisconsin. Required pollution controls in the developed world versus little or nothing in developing countries. Auto manufacturers not releasing their vehicle diagnostic codes to independent mechanics. The list is endless.

[The Gaijin]

Thanks Jeff. Some very good insights.

[onewhippedpuppy]

Jeff, as an engineer at an aircraft company I largely agree. However, I doubt the minimum is under $10/hr. I read the union contract at my company prior to the IAM striking for 4-weeks, their minimum pay was over $10/hr.

There are a great many talented machinists and aircraft assemblers. There are also a good number of lazy, worthless ones that could be easily replaced. The union does serve to protect (coddle) these worthless workers, and actively works to project an attitude of entitlement upon the workforce. Do you think a workforce that believes that they are ALWAYS entitled to more works harder?

The behavior before and during the strike at my company was eye-opening to say the least. I would compare them to children, but I don't believe my 4 year old would act as immature as many strikers did. The workforce is so brainwashed that they don't realize that their other option for work is Wal-Mart. They don't understand that their extortion tactics are simply driving their jobs elsewhere. They simply follow the union leadership like sheep. I don't get their benefits. I don't get a guaranteed 12% raise over 3 years. They don't have $40k in student loans to pay off. It will make me very sad if their jobs go elsewhere, but I won't blame the company. Fair went out the window a long time ago.

[Walter_Middie]

From my desk, I can see about a dozen IAM picketers. No one is happy about this strike, but there are a few issues that brought the IAM to this point.

The members don’t really like the union, but they don’t trust Boeing to do the right thing unless they have the union to apply pressure. So for most people, the union is a necessary evil.

In past contracts, the IAM has agreed to reduced benefits when times where not as good for the company, with the promise that the benefits would return when the company is doing well. The company now has a huge back-log of orders – where’s the payback? If not now, then when?

The company has been trying to build airplanes using less and less people. Our factories are “Lean”, having less people doing more of the work. Working smarter, not harder, usually results in less people doing the work many more used to do. The result is mandatory overtime, long hours, and working mandatory weekends. This doesn’t sound too bad at first, but when it goes on and on, month after month, it gets tiresome. I would think there are many IAM folks that are looking at this strike as their only chance at a break from all the work.

The 11% wage increase is over 3 years. The first year they will get a 5% increase, and in the 2nd and 3rd year, they will get a 3% increase. Inflation is usually 2 to 3% per year – so what are they left with in the long run? Just keeping up with normal inflation? And hasn’t our inflation lately been running much higher than this?

Both the union and the company lose from a strike – I think all the IAM members realize this. For the IAM members, it’s not about whether they come out ahead this time. It’s about the future – it’s about the new hires that will be trying to earn enough money to raise a family – it’s about protecting benefits for retirees that have worked 30 or more years to receive, and it’s about sharing the wealth of this countries largest exporter during times of record profits and new airplane orders.

[Jeff Higgins]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

Jeff, as an engineer at an aircraft company I largely agree. However, I doubt the minimum is under $10/hr. I read the union contract at my company prior to the IAM striking for 4-weeks, their minimum pay was over $10/hr.

Originally Posted by cashflyer

Well, it would certainly surprise ME. In my experience, that claim is WRONG.

In 2003, the IAM came into the company I worked for. They demanded that the minimum pay level be set at $16.37 with each current workers pay increased above that to a level commensurate with their seniority.

Doubt all you want. State "that claim is wrong" all you want. I work here. What, do you think I made that up? Anyone here has free access to union pay scale information. Starting pay for their lowest labor grade is $9.76/hr for a grade "1". I'm not sure what a grade "A" is, but they start at under $9.00/hr.


http://www.iam751.org/currentwagecard.htm

[onewhippedpuppy]

Originally Posted by cashflyer

As I said, IN MY EXPERIENCE, that claim is wrong. I guess your experience in Washington is different, but I know what was being demanded by the IAM at our location.

Same here. Suprising that their lowest pay is lower than ours, unless they have lower pay grades. However, I am told that Boeing's highest IAM pay is higher than ours.

[IROC]

Originally Posted by Walter_Middie

The company has been trying to build airplanes using less and less people. Our factories are “Lean”, having less people doing more of the work. Working smarter, not harder, usually results in less people doing the work many more used to do. The result is mandatory overtime, long hours, and working mandatory weekends. This doesn’t sound too bad at first, but when it goes on and on, month after month, it gets tiresome.

This goes for the engineers at Boeing also. I was working four programs at the same time when I left. Overtime (free) on a daily basis was not only expected, it was explicitly demanded by management. That was one of the main reasons I left - quality of life. I knew many engineers working 12-14 hours a day, day after day after day. I refused to do it. I was only averaging about 9 hours a day and was scolded on more than one occasion for "not putting in long hours".

[onewhippedpuppy]

Originally Posted by IROC

This goes for the engineers at Boeing also. I was working four programs at the same time when I left. Overtime (free) on a daily basis was not only expected, it was explicitly demanded by management. That was one of the main reasons I left - quality of life. I knew many engineers working 12-14 hours a day, day after day after day. I refused to do it. I was only averaging about 9 hours a day and was scolded on more than one occasion for "not putting in long hours".

Working 9 hours and getting your work done? I've encountered a lot of people that work long hours, but don't seem to get all that much done. I've always been of the mindset that when my work is done, I go home. I think some like to project their dedication to the company by always being at the office. I work as hard as I can, get things done, then leave. Life is too short to live at work.

[IROC]

Originally Posted by onewhippedpuppy

Working 9 hours and getting your work done? I've encountered a lot of people that work long hours, but don't seem to get all that much done. I've always been of the mindset that when my work is done, I go home. I think some like to project their dedication to the company by always being at the office. I work as hard as I can, get things done, then leave. Life is too short to live at work.

I completely agree.

The only thing that seemed to enable me to avoid the wrath that most others received is that I got my stuff done (and then some - that's why I was working four programs at once - I could get stuff done).

I actually had the same outlook as you - there's no sense in "working over" if you were on top of everything and were getting things done when they needed to get done and supporting everyone, etc. Our management didn't see it that way - the edict was simply work long hours. Every day. I disagreed and that led to some friction.