US House passes bill restricting action against Boeing's 787 Charleston line

[Lowrider717]

Boeing made public statements that they were moving jobs to SC in retaliation for the union members going on strike in Washington. That is illegal. The NLRA prohibits companies from taking any action in retaliation for legal job actions. If Boeing had been smart, they would have just said that they were moving the plant to SC for purely financial reasons. But because they wanted to scare the union members into not taking any job actions in the future, they did a stupid thing and made public statements that got them in trouble under the law. They deserve all of the pain that they are getting from the NLRB.



Under the NLRA, this is interference in union activities. Taking actions to suppress legal job actions, like retaliating for past legal job actions, is considered interference. Why? Because it suppresses union members from taking actions to protect themselves in the future with further legal job actions. Sorry, you may not like it, but what Boeing has done is illegal, and the NLRB is doing exactly what the law charges them with doing.

Classic

 

[densoo]

The new governor accomplished more in his first 120 days that the previous governor accomplished in 8 years, but she was pretty so nothing else mattered.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Al2b-QJjISI&feature=youtube_gdata_player

 

[scoreboardII]

Boeing made public statements that they were moving jobs to SC in retaliation for the union members going on strike in Washington. That is illegal. The NLRA prohibits companies from taking any action in retaliation for legal job actions. If Boeing had been smart, they would have just said that they were moving the plant to SC for purely financial reasons. But because they wanted to scare the union members into not taking any job actions in the future, they did a stupid thing and made public statements that got them in trouble under the law. They deserve all of the pain that they are getting from the NLRB.



Under the NLRA, this is interference in union activities. Taking actions to suppress legal job actions, like retaliating for past legal job actions, is considered interference. Why? Because it suppresses union members from taking actions to protect themselves in the future with further legal job actions. Sorry, you may not like it, but what Boeing has done is illegal, and the NLRB is doing exactly what the law charges them with doing.

As is expected you're fabricating what you want to "be" the truth. Boeing NEVER made a statement saying they are moving a plant to another state due to labor issues, NEVER.

Boeing never made the move during labor issues including strikes, so there is no direct retaliatory issues.

There is no indirect coercion, no union member was ever told "you struck so we are moving".

What has Boeing done? They have clearly explained to the union that unless they reduce their demands for wages, they will take the plant elswhere where labor costs are lower. THIS is totally legal and within their rights as a corporation and complies with all NLRB statutes, yet the socialists inside the NLRB are on a witch hunt. That is all you see here, a political witch hunt to rally the unions.

Here is what Boeing said to the NLRB:

Boeing responded that because the corporation is not closing its Puget Sound plant, the retaliation claims are "legally frivolous." Boeing recently issued a further statement claiming it would have opened its South Carolina line regardless of labor conditions in Washington state

Please get your facts straight even though they are counter to your desires.

 

[Sacha]

I liked how Granholm moved to Berkley the day that Synder was sworn in so she could start her new job as a Professor at Cal Berkley.

She really did care about Michigan! Plus the fact that she was a liberal Canadian to start with..

RF

most libs can barely contain their disdain and disgust for "flyover country"
The only reason she was in Michigan as long she was was because no other state would have her. Remember Obamas "clinging to God and Guns" reference. I think it's great that she is going to take her ignorance and stupidity to Berkley, she will fit right in. She will add another voice to the impending implosion of the great state of Kalifornia......

 

[densoo]

Thanks, Sen Pryor (D)

Split down the middle, the Senate Appropriations Committee narrowly rejected a GOP amendment to deny funding for the National Labor Relations Board to pursue any order threatening Boeing’s new non-union 787 production line in South Carolina.

Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) joined 14 Republicans on the 15-15 vote, which failed for lack of a majority after a strong push by labor.

To contact this senator, here's a link:

http://www.pryor.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=ContactForm

 

[Dornier 335]

the saga continues ...

source

Labour relations trumped 787 profitability on line selection: Documents

By Jon Ostrower


Despite the conclusion that the establishment of the second Boeing 787 final assembly line in North Charleston, South Carolina presented a high risk and would erode the profitability of its long-delayed flagship programme, Boeing weighed its labour relations as its deciding factor, newly released documents show.


Ahead of the October 2009 decision, Boeing evaluated placement of its second 787 line - dubbed Project Gemini - duplicating its already existing Everett, Washington final assembly line, "establishing long-term manufacturing capability outside of Puget Sound, starting with a second 787 final assembly line and progressing to the next new airplane programme," reads one 27 April 2009 presentation by then-Commercial Airplanes CEO Scott Carson.


The package of documents from Boeing's Board of Directors and strategy meetings was released today, just days before the delivery of Boeing's first 787 to Japan's All Nippon Airways, by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), the company's largest union.
One of Boeing's chief considerations, the documents show, focused on its labour relationship with its unions, with the decision following the 57-day September-October 2008 IAM strike.


A 26 October 2009 presentation, given just before the Charleston site selection by Commercial Airplanes CEO Jim Albaugh to the Boeing Board of Directors identifies one of three objectives behind the South Carolina selection as "leverage 787 final assembly placement decision by rebalancing an unbalanced and uncompetitive labour relationship".


In its defence, Boeing claims the rationale for placing the second 787 line in South Carolina was driven by multiple considerations, including supporting customers with reliable deliveries and support and improving short and long-term cost competitiveness.


However, under the "cons" identified for placing the line in Charleston, Boeing said the $1.5 billion price tag for the line would reduce "earnings on 1/3 of the backlog" which stood above 850 aircraft.


Further, a 19 October 2009 presentation cites a "negative impact to 787 programme profitability" and a cost which stood "significantly greater than incremental capacity increase to Everett".


Bernstein Research now estimates the break even point on the 787 programme to stand at around 1,000 deliveries.


The move by the IAM comes as the US National Labour Relations Board is pressing its case against Boeing, alleging its second 787 line placed in North Charleston was retaliation for the 2008 strike.

 

[scoreboardII]

Lets see, who do Ii believe can do the math correctly to decide if a company is going to make money; Boeing, the technological and schedule driven corporation doing positive earnings for decades, or some liberal hack inside the beltway who couldn't balance his own checkbook and merely parrots what his bosses want him to say?

 

[UALRATT]

Lets see, who do Ii believe can do the math correctly to decide if a company is going to make money; Boeing, the technological and schedule driven corporation doing positive earnings for decades, or some liberal hack inside the beltway who couldn't balance his own checkbook and merely parrots what his bosses want him to say?

Which of the leather seats were you sitting in again??

 

[Dornier 335]

[...] or some liberal hack inside the beltway who couldn't balance his own checkbook and merely parrots what his bosses want him to say?

Maybe you should look across the party line. Liberal or conservative, it's all the same sh!t!

 

[densoo]

They are trying to employe workers in SC because they can pay them less than half what they must pay in Washington. This is an obvious attempt to circumvent labor contracts with cheap labor.

And now unemployed. Note this has NOTHING to do with the 787. Good thing they contracted around all those high-quality engineers in Seattle so now the wrench-turners lose their jobs.

Boeing to cut 20% of workforce at S.C. 787 plant, report says
Reuters
7:49 pm, February 28, 2013

Boeing Co. will cut hundreds of jobs at a South Carolina plant that makes 787 Dreamliners this year, but the move has nothing to do with the grounding of the troubled jetliner, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday.

The cuts, which chiefly target contract workers, are not uncommon as productivity improves on an airplane program and were conceived before major problems with the 787s battery surfaced, the Journal said. Two high-profile battery malfunctions led to international aviation regulators grounding the jetliner in mid-January.

The cuts could account for up to 20 percent of the workforce in some teams at the plant in North Charleston, the Journal reported, citing an unnamed source familiar with the plan. Overall, the plant employs more than 6,000 people.

Boeing did not confirm the layoffs, but did tell Reuters it plans to reduce reliance on contract workers in South Carolina.

"Boeing regularly uses contract labor and 'industry assist' to supplement its workforce during surge activities and on development programs that require a production ramp up - that's standard practice in the aerospace industry," said Marc Birtel, a Boeing spokesman. "As we progress in improving efficiencies in our processes, training our entry-level employees and growing the experience of our team in South Carolina, we expect to continue to reduce reliance on contract labor/industry assist to meet our production objectives."

The South Carolina plant is the second Boeing facility where 787s are assembled after the larger Everett, Washington, facility north of Seattle. Between them, Boeing turns out five Dreamliners per month.

So far, the plane maker has said production has not been slowed by the grounding of the 787 and it aims to fulfill its plan to ramp up to 10 787s per month by the end of 2013.