Boeing machinists reject contract 75-25%, vote to go on strike

[glenn1]

Very ballsy (or foolhardy) to call for a strike in this environment with unemployment as high as it is. I'd be very curious to see how much sympathy the strike workers would get if the company decided to offer 1,500 job openings to replacement "scab" workers.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...9E65FA6D950C8C5C86257741005C4916?OpenDocument

 

[CycloWizard]

How much blood can you get from a turnip?

 

[Moonbeam]

How much blood can you get from a turnip?

I don't know but you can be sure Boeing squeezes its employees as hard as possible.

 

[Hacp]

How is it balsy? Its stacked against boeing. Boeing can't hire machanists and fire all the union employees. Collective bargaining ftl.

 

[cubby1223]

Have I ever mentioned on this forum how much I hate unions?

Then one of the wonderful effects they have is it splits a company against itself, employers against workers, and workers against other workers.

Pension plans do not work. Basic math has shown us they are unsustainable. But the idiot union bosses who weave their tales of a utopia where if we just hate the owners enough, take away all their money, there will be enough for the pensions to be paid...

 

[pcgeek11]

Why do you think Boeing is moving the majority of the Washington State Assembly plant operations to SC... No Frickin Union.

Unions Suck!

 

[UberNeuman]

Have I ever mentioned on this forum how much I hate unions?

Then one of the wonderful effects they have is it splits a company against itself, employers against workers, and workers against other workers.

Pension plans do not work. Basic math has shown us they are unsustainable. But the idiot union bosses who weave their tales of a utopia where if we just hate the owners enough, take away all their money, there will be enough for the pensions to be paid...

Then why do these companies enter into bargaining with unions?

They're quite free to not...

 

[UberNeuman]

Then why do these companies enter into bargaining with unions?

They're quite free to not...

well, cubby - what's your answer?

 

[JEDIYoda]

Very ballsy (or foolhardy) to call for a strike in this environment with unemployment as high as it is. I'd be very curious to see how much sympathy the strike workers would get if the company decided to offer 1,500 job openings to replacement "scab" workers.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...9E65FA6D950C8C5C86257741005C4916?OpenDocument

Balsy...nope...not at all......

 

[UberNeuman]

well, cubby - what's your answer?

and cubby has no answer... colour me shocked...

 

[FallenHero]

Then why do these companies enter into bargaining with unions?

They're quite free to not...

Depends on state law. If a group votes to unionize, some states force the employer to recognize the union. Once negotiations start, if the employer refuses to come to the table or starts being unreasonable and it goes to arbitration, the arbitrator can come in and rule in favor of the union, granting them everything they are asking for. It's in the best interest of the company to deal with the union once it's formed.

 

[Hacp]

Have I ever mentioned on this forum how much I hate unions?

Then one of the wonderful effects they have is it splits a company against itself, employers against workers, and workers against other workers.

Pension plans do not work. Basic math has shown us they are unsustainable. But the idiot union bosses who weave their tales of a utopia where if we just hate the owners enough, take away all their money, there will be enough for the pensions to be paid...

No problem with unions. I do have a problem with the collective bargaining BS and all the other government given perks the unions had.

 

[TruePaige]

That's very brave of themselves to put their own well being on the line for something that wouldn't even hurt them.

" Boeing machinists today overwhelmingly rejected a contact that would have raised salaries but prevented future workers from participating in the company pension plan."

They care about their brothers and sisters and want the future workers of Boeing to have the same benefits they have. Pretty much the opposite of greedy.

 

[MotF Bane]

Boeing should let every last one of them go, tell the union to go fuck itself, and hire some new workers.

 

[Genx87]

That's very brave of themselves to put their own well being on the line for something that wouldn't even hurt them.

" Boeing machinists today overwhelmingly rejected a contact that would have raised salaries but prevented future workers from participating in the company pension plan."

They care about their brothers and sisters and want the future workers of Boeing to have the same benefits they have. Pretty much the opposite of greedy.

I'd assume anybody not part of the pension plan doesnt contribute to said plan. If they dont contribute the inflow is cut off. It is certainly in their best interest to make sure new workers are contributing to the pension plan to make sure they get their payments at retirement. Greedy? I dont know if that is greedy, but it isnt altruistic either. And IMO with the way pensions work, it is terrible for the new workers as it may simply bankrupt the company.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Why do you think Boeing is moving the majority of the Washington State Assembly plant operations to SC... No Frickin Union.

Unions Suck!

Pssst ...

They also moved their main office to Chicago. So. What's your point? Management Sucks!?!?

A significant portion of their manufacturing remains on the Left Coast; and you forgot to add that their 'move' into SC was initiated with the purchase of Vought Aircraft in North Charleston (which made a portion of the Dreamliner fuselage).

Of course, you also neglected to mention that additional assemblies are made in Japan, Italy, Canada and France.

Or that the State of SC ponied-up $200 million in incentives ...





because that didn't fit your Rant and Rage.




--

 

[Double Trouble]

Fire all of the bastards, I'm sure there are plenty of other people looking for work who could be trained to do the job. Break the union and get on with running a business without the anchor that is a union.

 

[Craig234]

Have I ever mentioned on this forum how much I hate unions?

Then one of the wonderful effects they have is it splits a company against itself, employers against workers,

Laughing out loud, at the excellent specimen of ideology.

Yes, without unions, there would be no conflict between the owners and the workers - the workers wouldn't want more while the owners wanted to pay less.

No, it'd be a picture of harmony, workers trying to give up pay increases, while owners were frustrated at workers' refusal to take more money they wanted to give.

No, there is a balance of power - one in which, before unions, was settled by 'people need to eat' and a lot of poverty for workers while the robber barons did great.

Hint: the 1900 average wage in the US adjusted for inflation was $10,000.

The unions provide for some balance for workers, and are essential to American being a country with a prosperous and large middle class rather than a nation of serfs.

The unions also largely set the business culture that private workers benefit from.

Without unions, a powerless work force that better do what it's told without complaining, with low pay and rights, might 'look' harmonous to the quoted poster.

The unions are not the cause of 'worker owner conflict'. They're a protection of workers and the American public.

 

[Craig234]

Fire all of the bastards, I'm sure there are plenty of other people looking for work who could be trained to do the job. Break the union and get on with running a business without the anchor that is a union.

Bring back slavery. We don't need the GOVERNMENT interfering with business telling them they can't have slaves, and providing assistance less efficiently than slaveowners can.

Slavery was an essential part of our nation's becoming a leading world economic power, and we can't afford to let our international competitiors with massive nearly free workforces keep passing us up ecoomically, to our competitive disadvantage that has already destroyed our manufacturing base. Prosperous middle class? Forget it, commie!

 

[Genx87]

Bring back slavery. We don't need the GOVERNMENT interfering with business telling them they can't have slaves, and providing assistance less efficiently than slaveowners can.

Slavery was an essential part of our nation's becoming a leading world economic power, and we can't afford to let our international competitiors with massive nearly free workforces keep passing us up ecoomically, to our competitive disadvantage that has already destroyed our manufacturing base. Prosperous middle class? Forget it, commie!

Why yes your argument has to be sound to use such an outrageous example to prove your point. In the private sector what % is unionized?

 

[halik]

Very ballsy (or foolhardy) to call for a strike in this environment with unemployment as high as it is. I'd be very curious to see how much sympathy the strike workers would get if the company decided to offer 1,500 job openings to replacement "scab" workers.

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/ne...9E65FA6D950C8C5C86257741005C4916?OpenDocument

And people in south carolina are doing their happy dances.

 

[rudder]

Laughing out loud, at the excellent specimen of ideology.

Yes, without unions, there would be no conflict between the owners and the workers - the workers wouldn't want more while the owners wanted to pay less.

No, it'd be a picture of harmony, workers trying to give up pay increases, while owners were frustrated at workers' refusal to take more money they wanted to give.

No, there is a balance of power - one in which, before unions, was settled by 'people need to eat' and a lot of poverty for workers while the robber barons did great.

Hint: the 1900 average wage in the US adjusted for inflation was $10,000.

The unions provide for some balance for workers, and are essential to American being a country with a prosperous and large middle class rather than a nation of serfs.

The unions also largely set the business culture that private workers benefit from.

Without unions, a powerless work force that better do what it's told without complaining, with low pay and rights, might 'look' harmonous to the quoted poster.

The unions are not the cause of 'worker owner conflict'. They're a protection of workers and the American public.

Exactly this was needed in the early 1900's. Not so much now. Compare and contrast these two companies Nissan and GM. Nissan non-union. GM heavily unionized. I pick these two because there is a GM plant near me operating at 5% capacity. There is also a Nissan plant a 40 minute drive away that has plans to hire 1000+ people to build their electric car. I've known many Nissan employees over the years. They are paid well, have excellent benefits, and enjoy working for Nissan.

Pensions do not work. They will kill many American unionized companies.

 

[CitizenKain]

So why is bad for employees to organize? Why are corporations only allowed power?

 

[child of wonder]

So why is bad for employees to organize? Why are corporations only allowed power?

Unions are great in principle, but, like all things, when power and people are involved, corruption is sure to follow.

 

[Strk]

Exactly this was needed in the early 1900's. Not so much now. Compare and contrast these two companies Nissan and GM. Nissan non-union. GM heavily unionized. I pick these two because there is a GM plant near me operating at 5% capacity. There is also a Nissan plant a 40 minute drive away that has plans to hire 1000+ people to build their electric car. I've known many Nissan employees over the years. They are paid well, have excellent benefits, and enjoy working for Nissan.

Pensions do not work. They will kill many American unionized companies.

The last time I checked, the only plants in the world that aren't union are foreign-owned plants in the US. Nissan, Toyota, Honda and so on are all union outside of the US.