Boeing Blocked from opening second 787 Line

[delldude]

I thought we were talking about Boeing and the NLRB?

I hear all these talking heads on the radio and TV having a hissy fit over this. I'll just repeat what I said earlier.

It would appear that some people on this thread are missing a very important point. Point being the 787 program is a mess because of the decisions made at the beginning of the program by the people who run the company. The people who build the 787 in Everett have little to do with the problems with that program. The decision to have a second production three thousand miles from the first is just another bad decision piled on top of all the other ones regarding the 787. Setting up a second production line will not fix what is wrong.

I know people are going to try and say that if the union goons in Washington were to just get their act together they would not have the issue of a second production line. Once again the problem is not the folks building it. You can trace the problem to having a totally unrealistic entry into service date for the first mass produced composite airliner. Add to that having sub-contractors like Vought do work they had not done before. Like stuffing the sections they made with all the associated equipment whereas before Boeing would do that work. End result, work not being done properly which resulted in work getting out of sequence. That’s why Boeing has a facility in Charleston in the first place. Vought made such a mess of things, aided and abetted by Boeing; Boeing had no choice but to buy them out. For around a half a billion dollars, that should cut into profits.

Don't mean Dick......corporate decision is not any different than GE having non union facilities around the country.
This is activists in NLRB run by obama.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Don't mean Dick......corporate decision is not any different than GE having non union facilities around the country.
This is activists in NLRB run by obama.

The Empty Suit Socialist aka Barack Obama not with standing the fundamental issue is the Federal Government through activist judges and appointed bureaucrats are permitted to pick economic winners & losers. This is an abomination and a complete and total perversion of everything the COTUS and those who drafted it stood for.

Once again Jefferson said it best.

"Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread."

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

"I am not a friend to a very energetic government. It is always oppressive."

 

[Seatacus]

I thought we were talking about Boeing and the NLRB?
The people who build the 787 in Everett have little to do with the problems with that program. The decision to have a second production three thousand miles from the first is just another bad decision piled on top of all the other ones regarding the 787. Setting up a second production line will not fix what is wrong.

When these production people go on strike they do have something to do with the problems of building the 787.

 

[777 fixer]

When these production people go on strike they do have something to do with the problems of building the 787.

Little in the grand scheme of things. There have been strikes at Boeing in the past yet you never saw other programs fall three years behind schedule.

 

[Seatacus]

Little in the grand scheme of things. There have been strikes at Boeing in the past yet you never saw other programs fall three years behind schedule.

Little in your mind. When the strike is in the middle of a brand new program it means a lot. Not only do you have strike time off you have the "I am gonna strike slowdown" and the "I will come back from the strike when I want to" people. This coupled with vendor issues creates havoc. Besides I don't believe they gained anything from the strike except time off (which they had money for because of all their overtime). I talked to many strikers who said they just wanted some time off, it wasn't even a money issue.

 

[777 fixer]

Little in your mind. When the strike is in the middle of a brand new program it means a lot. Not only do you have strike time off you have the "I am gonna strike slowdown" and the "I will come back from the strike when I want to" people. This coupled with vendor issues creates havoc. Besides I don't believe they gained anything from the strike except time off (which they had money for because of all their overtime). I talked to many strikers who said they just wanted some time off, it wasn't even a money issue.

So how much of a delay did the strike cause in the 787 program? A month, a year, two years?

Is the strike to blame for the two year delay between rollout and first flight? I think you would have a hard time making that argument especially when you look at past programs. Take the 777 for example. The first one rolled out April 1997 and made its maiden flight in June. While there were no strikes at Boeing in that time period I seriously doubt the strike of 2008 is one of the main reason for the two year delay. Don't forget the 2008 strike happened a year after rollout. If the 787 program did not have the major problems that already existed it should have been getting ready for delivery to ANA by then.

 

[SparrowHawk]

So how much of a delay did the strike cause in the 787 program? A month, a year, two years?

Is the strike to blame for the two year delay between rollout and first flight? I think you would have a hard time making that argument especially when you look at past programs. Take the 777 for example. The first one rolled out April 1997 and made its maiden flight in June. While there were no strikes at Boeing in that time period I seriously doubt the strike of 2008 is one of the main reason for the two year delay. Don't forget the 2008 strike happened a year after rollout. If the 787 program did not have the major problems that already existed it should have been getting ready for delivery to ANA by then.

The specifics of the situation at Boeing don't matter a hoot in hell. The question is:

"Does the Federal Government in a capitalist society have the moral, ethical & legal right to pick winners and losers in business?"

In my mind actions have consequences.The IAM exercised their God Given right to strike on several occasions. They were successful in gaining improvements in their contract each time. Boeing decides that some of the work needs to go to a right to work state in order to ensure at least some production gets done given the history of IAM activity in WA.

Both parties are between a rock and a hard place.

Senior Boeing Management answers to the shareholder.
IAM answers to their members.

The above is what happens in a free market. The Government in the form of the NLRB "Picked" the IAM as the winner, when the free market was the appropriate venue for the decision that would have played out over time. SC doesn't have the greatest track record keeping jobs they lure to the state. So the final chapter has yet to be written.

Thomas Jefferson has a nice quote on Government intervention "Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread"

 

[Ms Tree]

The specifics of the situation at Boeing don't matter a hoot in hell. The question is:

"Does the Federal Government in a capitalist society have the moral, ethical & legal right to pick winners and losers in business?"

In my mind actions have consequences.The IAM exercised their God Given right to strike on several occasions. They were successful in gaining improvements in their contract each time. Boeing decides that some of the work needs to go to a right to work state in order to ensure at least some production gets done given the history of IAM activity in WA.

Both parties are between a rock and a hard place.

Senior Boeing Management answers to the shareholder.
IAM answers to their members.

The above is what happens in a free market. The Government in the form of the NLRB "Picked" the IAM as the winner, when the free market was the appropriate venue for the decision that would have played out over time. SC doesn't have the greatest track record keeping jobs they lure to the state. So the final chapter has yet to be written.

Thomas Jefferson has a nice quote on Government intervention "Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread"

When did we become a capitalist society?

 

[SparrowHawk]

When did we become a capitalist society?

I would submit that we were a Capitalist Society right up until the day we created the Federal Reserve Bank, being that you asked. Conceptually we still are. At least until you point out that Social Security and the EITC are two of the biggest examples of socialism in our government today.

 

[whatkindoffreshhell]

The specifics of the situation at Boeing don't matter a hoot in hell. The question is:

"Does the Federal Government in a capitalist society have the moral, ethical & legal right to pick winners and losers in business?"

Thomas Jefferson has a nice quote on Government intervention "Were we directed from Washington when to sow and when to reap, we should soon want bread"

I may be slightly incorrect here however I thought this South Carolina plant originally belonged to an Italian company whom Boeing sub-contracted the 787 fuselage work to and eventually the Italians had quality problems so Boeing bought them out.

Nice turn of events for Boeing to accomplish their ultimate goal I thought.

The IAM overplayed their hand and Boeing called their bluff.

 

[700UW]

It was owned by Vought, not Alenia.

 

[Seatacus]

So how much of a delay did the strike cause in the 787 program? A month, a year, two years?

Is the strike to blame for the two year delay between rollout and first flight? I think you would have a hard time making that argument especially when you look at past programs. Take the 777 for example. The first one rolled out April 1997 and made its maiden flight in June. While there were no strikes at Boeing in that time period I seriously doubt the strike of 2008 is one of the main reason for the two year delay. Don't forget the 2008 strike happened a year after rollout. If the 787 program did not have the major problems that already existed it should have been getting ready for delivery to ANA by then.

No, I am not blaming the strike for the two year delay. 787 delays are not to be blamed solely on employees. Most likely the strike caused about three month delay. The strike is not the main reason but needs to be factored in with all the reasons. It would have have been good to roll out the 787 three months earlier, don't you think?

 

[777 fixer]

No, I am not blaming the strike for the two year delay. 787 delays are not to be blamed solely on employees. Most likely the strike caused about three month delay. The strike is not the main reason but needs to be factored in with all the reasons. It would have have been good to roll out the 787 three months earlier, don't you think?

It's way down on the list of reasons that's for sure. When there's a strike like the one they had once it's over Boeing typically blows the OT budget so it's debatable if its three months. Lets say it was three months. That's still only a small part in the dealy for entry into serivice. The airlines are not being very forgiving about it.

 

[delldude]

But what does any of this have to do with the government sticking its nose into a business wanting to open another facility?

 

[dapoes]

But what does any of this have to do with the government sticking its nose into a business wanting to open another facility?

Nothing, just another typical liberal diversion from the matter at hand.