That headline from the Everett Herald is worth a laugh. The Machinist Union, whose consistent contract demands have driven up Boeing's in-house labor costs far past what other private industries bear, wishes it got more of the action with Boeing's current hot-selling product.
Perhaps they should consider that it was the obnoxious pay and benefit packages on which they insisted - or went on company crippling strikes if they didn't get them - which drove Boeing into its current business model for the 787 which is heavy on outside partners, but much lighter on Machinist labor? It's a graduate-level case study in being penny-wise and pound-foolish.
Posted by Eric Earling at July 04, 2007 11:30 PM | Email ThisThe left fails because ultimately their ideas are based on a failed philosophy. The only way the left can even gain ground is when the good people subsidize their irrational schemes.
Posted by: Jeff B. on July 4, 2007 11:49 PMUnions helped American workers gain decent wages, a 40-hour standard work week, overtime, health benefits and a safer work environment. Today's union leaders seem more concerned, however, with advancing the cause of socialism than protecting workers' rights. Corrupt union leaders use workers' dues to bribe politicians and hold corporate executives hostage while living and traveling in hypocritical executive/politician-style luxury. This brand of union leadership will continue to drive more private-sector jobs overseas. Look no further than the US auto industry for an example.
Posted by: Saltherring on July 5, 2007 06:34 AM
As a fire fighter I get real steamed over what our own union tells us who to vote for. In all these years not one time have I seem them say vote for a Rep. Not it's LIB's all the time.
yes even worthless I never went to war but said i did Mc Demmot!
They even had the gal to blame Bush for lack of funds for fire fighting when it was Clinton who had cut the funds not Bush.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on July 5, 2007 06:43 AMDefinitely a loss of sanity in union leadership. I would have thought they would have wanted to maximize their contribution.
They gambled. They lost. Now, they will want government to bail them out.
Posted by: swatter on July 5, 2007 06:55 AMWhat about the bits made in china? That's about $1.50 an hour. Are you in favor of that?
The political right in this country is all for making as much money as possible. For themselves.
And don't give me this 'individual effort' crap. You lose credability on that every time you whine about estate taxes.
Posted by: Rivitman on July 5, 2007 07:13 AMMy second is the food chain and the contaminated feed products that are sent our way. First, they give us contaminated pet food, but they also give food to our food animals.
rivets, most people looking at your agreements concur that your union was too greedy. You gambled. You lost. But don't expect me to want to bail you out.
Posted by: swatter on July 5, 2007 07:57 AMIronically, it's the overhead cost of the bureaucracy that often creates the problem. For example, teachers perform a very valuable service, but we have allowed the education bureaucracy to swell to the point where very little of the $12K per student per year actually makes its way to the tip of the spear, the teacher. So, we can't pay teachers a wage that encourages competition and a higher quality of applicant. If Union and other Heavy Bureaucracy was removed from education, business, etc. there would be more money to pay those that really contribute.
But simply demanding a wage through the extortion of Unions, is as noted above, cutting off one's arm to spite one's finger. Union members all just want to keep their high wages now, even if that bankrupts the companies where they are employed in the coming years.
The solution is to \embrace the free market. That's what the rest of us private sector workers do. And in the long run, we make much more for our efforts, because there's more money that can go into our pockets and not the pockets of overhead and cronies.
Posted by: Jeff B. on July 5, 2007 08:57 AMDo you remember when in the early '90s you all went on strike and your slogan was world class pay for world class workers?
I was a member of the same union and all I can say about you world class workers is that the only thing world class about you is your pay. I worked with one yayhoo who said they didn't pay him enough to work hard. My response to his lazy ass was, they could double his wages and he would say the same thing.
Most of the people who come to the machinist union come without any skills and they are all taught to them on the job.
The union has become a stronghold for the shiftless lazy s. o. b. I sense that you can identify.
BTW I left because I improved myself through education. I now make 2X the amount I did then. Not too many of the guys I knew then would have done that, although I do know some who did, but it was a small number.
I've known very few people that would stand up and talk about how great a union is, but when they do I can't help but notice that they nearly always come across as both stupid and unemployable.
Posted by: H Moul on July 5, 2007 09:33 AMKyoto's problem was that China refused to sign it and now, they are the world's biggest polluters and scammers. Can you imagine (I know, it is difficult)the uncompetitive advantage that gives them? Trust, but verify as Reagan used to say.
But, Jason, the machinists were greedy. When they were negotiating, everyone I knew were pounding their heads in disbelief at the shortsightedness.
Posted by: swatter on July 5, 2007 09:58 AM
Or they are on the profitable end of the pyramid scheme
Click HERE to check the RATING on your favorite (or favorite to hate) blog. It speaks volumes!
Have fun!
...and continued KUDOS to Stefan, et al.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on July 5, 2007 10:10 AMSave for the "chicken fasteners" that the FAA makes them use, which make the panels less strong, when they make a hole for the fastener.
The Geez.
Posted by: The Geezer on July 5, 2007 10:12 AMYour statement "far past what other private industries bear" is a crock, but where's the surprise there?
Wiring from various vendors? Nope.
Fasteners from other cheaper vendors. Nope.
Vought being on schedule? Nope.
Other vendors? Nope.
Crippling strikes? Nope. Automatic talking points? Yep.
Jack Metcalf endorsed for U.S. House? Yep.
So Eric, yer dingbattin' a thousand, sonny.
Posted by: Smells a crock on July 5, 2007 11:25 AMUnless I miss my guess, Rivitman is an anagram for Vitamin R.
Please please try very very hard to laugh instead of going on auto-personal-attack.
ONCE!
Posted by: Boltman on July 5, 2007 11:32 AMGee, sounds alot like what happens in the FREE MARKET, where if you hire people below the market value of their services, they will soon find employment elsewhere. Why not let Boeing try that? Probably because a whole lot of people at the bottom of the union food chain will find they are getting paid alot more than they would otherwise.
Posted by: Palouse on July 5, 2007 12:30 PMSure, there are many (maybe 20%) of the union workers who are overpaid @ BA. But there are, conversely, 20% who are underpaid. Folks who are up against a false ceiling called "management".
At BA, the vast majority of a manager's single talent is their ability to say "yes" to their boss regardless of the impossibility of the demand. If by chance, the IAM members come through for that boss, he is rewarded. (Chances are good, since after all, anybody who knows commercial aircraft and aerospace hardware knows BA puts out a better product than *any* of their competitors).
Now, all you "capitalists": Why should the reward go to the manager who did nothing while the actual workers who solved the problem (usually in spite of management's intractable ignorance of all things mechanical) get nothing?
Is this not called "communism"?
No wonder we need a union.
And actually, the pendulum for me has pretty much always swung in my favor, because the more technological the offloading to these mindless vendor/suppliers, the more work and $$$ I get.
The biggest problem with that last paragraph is: Think of all the shipping/receiving/managing/contracts money that could be saved if they'd just had me/us build it right the first time.
Guess that's why BA has (from me to the top) 12 levels/steps of management. The Japanese rarely have more than 4 or 5.
Where's the competitiveness there? Or have I hit on the truth of it all: BA is paid by our customers to design and build aircraft and aerospace components. Management, like the Mafia, does neither. But, like the Mafia, they want a cut of everything that goes on.
With that said, the U.S. sucks at manufacturing for the most part, and it has been getting worse for the past 20 years.
Wow. Sounds like someone who's never had to manage a bunch of dead-beat, slacker union employees. It also sounds like someone who's never had to be responsible and suffer the consequences for the actions (or more accurately, the non-actions) of that bunch of dead-beat, slacker union employees.
Is that too broad of a brush? Painting all union employees that way? Sure. And it was different from your screed how?
Posted by: jimg on July 5, 2007 04:07 PMAll Unions, whose consistent contract demands have driven up Sound Transit's and road building labor costs far past what other private industries bear, wishes it got more of the action with the latest 38 Billion State of washington RTID and Sound Transit's Vote.
"THE GREATEST CONTRACT IN AEROSPACE HISTORY"
Then the poor schmucks who voted for the agreement lost their jobs and many more to come.
That is how I remember it.
Posted by: fRed on July 5, 2007 04:29 PMIMO, having a "subject-matter expert" rise to management is far, far better than having a "minority" (take that how you wish), in management. Personality types are always an issue, regardless, and I've seen far better functionality/results from managers who knew their subject (be it engineering or assembly) than any attempt to have institutionalized "diversity" or some "feel-good-is-everybody-happy-today" manager.
And, it is that "feel-good" management style (P.C.) that allows unproductive behavior, regardless of station. And, THAT BEHAVIOR IS AS DETRIMENTAL TO PRODUCTIVE EMPLOYEES who constantly see that disruptive behavior condoned! Document the situation, address it, eliminate it! Don't blame the union (SPEEA or IAM) for management's blatant laziness or inefficiency. This P.C.-lack of conflict style is wasting.
Inversely, having an @sshole who knows nothing about the subject but beats everybody up is counter-intuitive. Thankfully, there are precious few of them. Still, "X-theory" is preferable to "Y-theory" for results. IMO. It also breeds far more loyalty to a manager if they are predictable as opposed to wishy-washy.
But there is still this huge disconnect between anything in the engineering/shop ranks and somebody who is 3rd (frequently 2nd) level.
Frankly, anymore a manager doesn't have to know diddly to be at that level. Just how to make charts. Lots of charts. And, since much of what is being tracked can be twisted ("figures lie and liars figure"), a manager can be made to look extremely influential while not knowing jack about how to design and build anything.
As an example, back in the day, T. used to stop in every Christmas in the shop next to where I worked to see the fellas. He knew them and they knew him. He drove an old Rambler wagon and was salt-of-the-earth. McNerney wouldn't care squat if BA went under tomorrow if he could sque-e-e-e-e-ze just one more dollar out of her. That's the difference between men and ....
Posted by: cmiklich on July 5, 2007 04:41 PMAhh. I have been found out.
Nevertheless, I can argue that resposibility for Boeing's offshoring, and outsourcing lies squarly in the lap of corperate feudalism run amok, greed, and the globalist free trade theory, one that works as long as you can accept a two class world.
And any examination of two class states reveals that shooting usually breaks out at some point.
As to all the manure being spread about the machinist's union (convieniently forgetting the teamsters, the engineers, et-al) SOMEBODY built all those jets out there. So I would submit the universal slacker sterotype is the product of extraordinarily weak intellect.
Let me put it plainly for those out there of less powerful thought processes:
YOU, my friend, are stupid.
Are there bad eggs? Sure are. Everywhere else too. But in Boeing, most of the incompetance is in management, who have all the tools they need to handle the few lame and lazy. They are just lamer, and lazier themselves, to much so to do anything.
Without even thinking about it, Boeing has offloaded....management. They can't manage themselves or the workforce, so they let contracts instead.
Posted by: Rivitman on July 5, 2007 05:32 PMIt's hard to see what Boeing is doing "wrong" or how they are lame and lazy, as they are beating the pants off Airbus with a successful new product. Would you prefer they be losing this competition?
They are searching for the low cost way to produce the planes. That's what companies do.
I can choose not to "accept" this economic "theory" IU guess, just like I can choose not to "accept" it that it is cloudy a lot here in Seattle.
It will still be cloudy.
If they don't grab market share, a competitor will. We have to WIN the competition to be able to export and raise incomes of everyone. Or else our companies and their number of employees will shrivel up and die.
Posted by: Seattle Democrat on July 5, 2007 05:52 PMEffect, meet Cause.
Posted by: CrazyFool in Lynwood on July 5, 2007 06:36 PMThe basic V-8 engine design detroit uses is half a century old.
Pushrods and lifters, live axels, poor milage, poorer longevity. Poor handling chassis set up by frankenstien himself.
Show me ANY car from the big three, and i'll show you a better, more desirable car from a european or Japanese carmaker.
American cars are rubbish. And it has nothing to do with design or construction. It has to do with marketing and executive decision making taking a back seat to engineering and manufacturing.
American cars are also crap becasue they are assembled here from mostly outsourced parts.
Sound familiar?
Posted by: rivitman on July 6, 2007 07:08 AMAs someone who has worked as an apprentice-trained journeyman machinist, and (with further education) a design engineer, and (with additional experience) a project manager, I can speak with some measure of expreience (33 years prior to recent retirement). Yes, the greatest percentage of modern upper level managers are now chart-and-graph idiots, and yes, a fair percentage of shop-floor workers are lazy, whining losers. Mid-level managers who rely on charts and graphs, in my opinion, do so becuase they lack the grass-roots experience to quantify productivity. In other words, they have no "feel" for how a project is progressing. Charts and graphs have their place (bean-counter and senior managers), but mid-level managers must "connect" with the shop floor to promote a productive environment and correct inefficiency. .....And lazy, whining shop floor losers will always exist. It's up to management, AND THE UNION, as to whether they are tolerated, marginalized or fired.
Posted by: Saltherring on July 6, 2007 07:13 AMNow back to the subject at hand - I have shared this with you all before, but it bears repeating. Back when I was in my teens I was flying out of Montana and had a stopover in Butte. I had three hours to kill before I could make my connection and a family of slobs walked in and sat down next to me. They had one newspaper to share between the four of them while they waited to pick up a relative who was flying in on the plane I was waiting to fly out on. The mother kept the front-page section and distributed the remaining sections. As she looked at the paper to read front page and read aloud "Anaconda Copper to Pull Out of Butte" to which she added, "so what if Anaconda pulls out, we don't need Anaconda Copper - the Union will take care of us." I was about fifteen and will never forget the pity I felt for this moron, It's sad that not one of them had the sense to realize that the Union would beat Anaconda Copper out of Butte and furthermore that the Union couldn't give two hoots and a holler what happened to them now that they were no longer of use to the Union.
You nailed it on the head brother. The unions should be as concerned about the financial health of the company as they are about the union members who make their living from the company. These dufus's have no idea how economics works. That is why they make such good democrats, since they don't understand either.
Rivitman;
The unions were a necessary thing in their day. But that day is long gone. Like any good thing, the left and their ilk have turned it into something to be ashamed of.
Posted by: REBEL on July 6, 2007 08:40 AMThe basic V-8 engine design detroit uses is half a century old. Pushrods and lifters, live axels, poor milage, poorer longevity. Poor handling chassis set up by frankenstien himself.
Hey, quit knocking the cars NASCAR fans pay to see. ;)
Posted by: JC Bob on July 6, 2007 09:55 AMI am not sold on the Kyoto protocol but at the same time I am not comfortable with the idea that there is some sort of double-standard that the US should not be expected to follow because we are a special case. Where does one, then, draw the line as to who should adopt a certain policy and who shouldn't?
Posted by: Jason on July 6, 2007 10:27 AMThe facts are; if the same car was built in a GM unionized plant and a Toyota, non-unionized plant (both located in the U.S.) the GM car would be 1500 to 2000 dollars more expensive because of legacy costs of past union agreements. You can also add on another 1500 bucks for "job banks" and restrictive work rules that the unions cling to. Toyota doesn't function under any of those anarchisms (and the Toyota workers seem to like it that way). No matter how good a car (or any product) may be, it can't overcome a 3 or 4 thousand dollar pricing disadvantage.
I remember years ago when you bought a car you didn't want one built on Monday (hangover) or Friday (daydraming of the weekend) because the quality would be piss-poor. Get one built in the middle of the week. It was also well known, and bragged about, that workers would put put bottles and other junk in the doors so that they would rattle.
Yep, those union workers. The pride of America.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_suicide
Posted by: JDH on July 6, 2007 11:10 AMwith the idea that there is some sort of double-standard that the Al Gore should not be expected to follow because he is a special case. Where does one, then, draw the line as to who should adopt a certain policy and who shouldn't?
So why does AlGore get a pass when he is using 20+ times the average amount of energy that the average American family uses? and this is not taking into account his frequent corporate jet fuel consumption. That would take him into the thousands of times the average American's carbon based fuel consumption.
And besides that I do not want America to compete with the rest of the world, I want to see America trounce the rest of the world. I play to win and I want to be on the winning team.
Posted by: JDH on July 6, 2007 11:24 AMI don't particularly concern myself with Al Gore's personal energy usage habits because as a percentage of total energy usage, it is a drop in the ocean. That is not to say, however, that I don't believe that one person can make a difference. It's just that I would choose to put my energy (no pun intended) into more fruitful endeavors before attacking along that particular angle.
America *does* compete with the rest of the world -- we are a very and increasingly interconnected world. America, however, is decreasingly effective at certain things, such as building airplane parts. Which is why the 787 is the most "outsourced" plane ever. Final assembly, however, is performed here, and for good reasons (security and logistics come mind, among a plethora of others).
Although I would not use the word "trounce" as to how I see America competing with the rest of the world, I believe that we can compete, and do so with a level playing field -- that is to say: without having to compete by expecting arbitrary rules to be followed by others and not us. America has the ingenuity, willpower, and framework to compete effectively, and to lead with prominence, not dominance.
Posted by: Jason on July 6, 2007 11:56 AMIt would be another worthless organization/bureaucracy like my energy credit company and the UN.
So, back at you- why should the US sign on to Kyoto when they would follow it but other countries wouldn't?
My word, the world can't even get Iran to quit their nuke program. How do you think the world would do with pollution?
Posted by: swatter on July 6, 2007 12:55 PM