Boeing opens 787 line in Charleston today

Unions are just some crazy, lazy, and whiny kids that for some reason, think they deserve everything under the moon because they are Union. Infact, It has been proven that Union workers produce 10% less product at a 20% higher cost than non-union employees. I will find the source and post it again.

Those crazy, lazy, whiny kids from the Triangle Shirtwaist Company didn't have any collective representation, and individually they had no way of speaking up about issues, such as SAFETY. So 146 of them died, many of them young girls who jumped to their deaths to escape the flames. Your ignorance of the history of organized labor, and their contributions to not just employee safety, but the safety of everyone, is glaring. Did you think crew rest and flight time rules just popped into the mind of some thoughtful airline executive, or FAA administrator? FOX news is not a credible source of labor statistics.

Fox news isn't credible PERIOD

I'm amazed at how quickly a story about Boeing on flightglobal.com turned into slamming fox news in the comments!

So...when will the 787 be delivered?

ANA expexts delivery in 3 months...
They have some flight crews ready and one 787 is flying to Japan this month with an entire Boeing Crew to test the Dreamliner in actual routes & working conditions to see how it performs, they call it "SROV" (Service Ready Operational Validation).
So i guess the plane shoud have a TCDS (be certified)soon.
Regards,

This program mismanagement is epic, Boeing effort to avoid fair wage with their union was so costly they could have doubled their employees salary and still done a lot better than sub contracting to foreign companies that was so bad , they eventually had to send people from Seattle to get the job done. Four year late and continued cancellations I see nothing to celebrate here. However if there board has any use , they would fire every manager that birth this decision.

YEA ANDY, what he said....:-)

Golfer

i look at it this way it takes the pressure off the other boeing plant

Quoting Horace Sinclair: "Four year late and continued cancellations I see nothing to celebrate here"

The thing to celebrate here is thousands of new, good paying jobs for my fellow South Carolinians as well as those transferred here from other place to work here. We make no apologies for being a pro-business, right to work state, which is why our economy is growing while the rest of the country is closing up shop. South Carolina in general and Charleston in particular (as well as my hometown of Greenville) are FANTASTIC places to live and work. Istead of poor-mouthing everything somebody else is able to accomplish, why not learn a lesson from people who are doing what works.

Also, construction of the plant was completed SIX MONTHS ahead of schedule and with 8 million man-hours worked without a lost time accident. The General Contractor is HQ'd in Alabama, with major offices in Nashville, Charlotte, and Greenville (SC). Most of the steel for the job was fabricated in SC. We hillbilly, redneck, southerners know how to get it DONE boss!

Oh and BTW, we don't work for peanuts here either like you union whiners like to think, but you can live pretty well here on $50 grand a year! My company's HQ is in Tacoma and it's INSANE what it costs to live up there, and the weather SUCKS, so there.....

And, those 2,000 jobs could just as easily become 200 if they need to downsize, and seniority or qualifications are no guarantee of keeping your job in such a situation. SC is a "Right to work" State, but in reality it is a right to be fired for any reason, or no reason State.

Those who have studied the labor movement, from the National Labor Relations Act (Wagner Act) of 1935, the Fair Labor Standards Act, or Wages and Hours Act (1938), the Taft-Hartley Labor Act of 1947, the Landrum-Griffin Act of 1959, and the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) of 1970 can see a pattern of protecting workers. Those who would throw out the protections granted from those acts, and from the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act, The Wilson Tariff Act, the Antitrust Civil Process Act, and the International Antitrust Enforcement Assistance Act clearly have no interest in workers well being, despite what they may say in public.

Boeing has the right to establish aircraft anywhere it chooses in the United States as the unions as welll as the government have no authority to dictate where Boeing can and cannot build airplanes. South Carolina has a far more business-friendly climate than Washington State so the unions have only themselves to blame as they are the ones whom drove Boeing to locate its second 787 'Dreamliner' assembly plant outside Washington State as Boeing wanted a no-strike clause in the unionized workers' contract but the unions said no. Can you really blame the company for wanting uninterrupted airplane production?. Look on the bright side: even if a workers' strike happens at the main plant in Everett, WA and all halts airplane production there, production in the 787 assembly plant in North Charleston, SC will still continue. Did you know that assembly on the first 787 for new United Airlines will start next month in North Charleston?.

The National Labor Relations laws specifically prohibit a company from taking action to undermine or circumvent union activity. While the company can certainly locate a plant anywhere they want, if the decision to do so is to undermine or circumvent union activity, then it is prohibited by federal law.

Consider this, if there is a dispute between the Machinists Union and Boeing in Washington, would the fact that Boeing has built a plant in South Carolina, which is non-union, and to which Boeing could transfer the jobs represented by the Union, be a stick held over the head of the Union, to force them to take concessions not in their best interest? Clearly, that is the situation and that, by definition is an unfair labor practice and the NLRB is obligated by law to take action.

This is another example of Obama's Chicago-style politics trying to protect the unions and their inefficient out-dated agendas.
Thank god that people are starting to wake up to the fact that unions are killing the competitiveness of America, and causing a great deal of the Federal deficit with the bloated salaries and benefits.
The idea that companies don't have the right to build and operate plants where they can be profitable is absurd.

Mr Grady,
Surely you can't be serious (and I won't call you Shirley), following this logic, any company who has a Union plant would never be able to open a plant in a right to work state for fear of being sued for retaliation. The intent of the law is one thing, this kind of enforcement is quite another. The executive branch of our government is tasked with law enforcement by the constitution, and the current administration will leverage its authority to go after any business that threatens its source of money and power.
I have over 50 employees myself, and in a free market (read as "right to work" and yes - "right to fire") if I don't take care of my employees, pay them well, treat them with respect, and provide the things that the market expects, they will leave and go elsewhere. Conversely, if I can never fire somebody for sub-par performance or outright insubordination and graft, my business will suffer from the dead weight. Businesses are in business to make a profit, not as social programs. No profits (or low return on investment) equal no jobs for anybody, including me!

Boeing acknowledged that the reason to relocate to South Carolina was directly related to the machinists strike in 2008. It was a direct attempt to punish the union, and to instill in the union the fear that should there be another strike, they would move even more jobs. During the negotiations, the union agreed to a no-strike clause in the contract, for a period of 12 years, then Boeing demanded 20 years. This is the essence of the unfair labor practices charge. And, it is a falsehood that a union member cannot be fired. It happens all the time, but there has to be a direct correlation between the act or omission on the part of the employee and the job duties. And when you have double digit unemployment, it is easy to replace an employee.

From the Seattle times of April 22, 2011

Clearly, Boeing could have skipped the negotiation and put its second line in North Charleston, S.C., keeping its reasons to itself. The "unfair" thing was to bellyache publicly that it was tired of strikes, which everyone knew, and to offer to put the plant here if the Machinists agreed not to strike for 10 years.

Was it not better to offer the chance for a deal?

If that put the Machinists under pressure — and it did — such pressures are part of life in American industry. This page urged the union to agree to a no-strike deal, as did public figures such as U.S. Rep. Norm Dicks, D-Bremerton.

Machinists did negotiate, offering Boeing a no-strike agreement if the company would have a no-layoff agreement. The company would not. The Machinists would not accept Boeing's proposal without one of their own. The talks ended and Boeing announced for North Charleston.

From the New York Times of April 20, 2011:

Although manufacturers have long moved plants to nonunion states, the board noted that Boeing officials had, in internal documents and news interviews, specifically cited the strikes and potential future strikes as a reason for their 2009 decision to expand in South Carolina.

From the Seattle Pi of April 20, 2011:

The board said it "found reasonable cause to believe that Boeing had violated two sections of the National Labor Relations Act because its statements were coercive to employees and its actions were motivated by a desire to retaliate for past strikes and chill future strike activity."

IAM District 751 President Tom Wroblewski welcomed the complaint in a statement Wednesday, saying: "By opening the line in Charleston (S.C.), Boeing tried to intimidate our members with the idea that the company would take away their work unless they made concessions at the bargaining table. But the law is clear: American workers have a right to pursue collective bargaining, and no company – not even Boeing – can threaten or punish them for exercising those rights."

The NLRB has presented its case to the Administrative Law Judge, together with the internal memos obtained by subpoena from Boeing. Lets wait and see how the judge rules, shall we. And, I am neither pro union nor anti union, I am a retired attorney who believes in following the law that is in place. If you don't like the law, change it, but until you do, you follow it. When one person or entity believes that another has violated the law, they have every right to resort to legal proceedings. That is the rule of law and the basis for everything we do in this country. The National Labor Relations Act sets out what the various sides can and can not do. The union filed a complaint with the NLRB and based upon their review, they found credible evidence to suggest that the law had been broken and after attempts to resolve the matter with Boeing and the Union, did exactly what they were supposed to do, file a complaint and proceed to court. Why do you and others seem to have a problem with that? Should the NLRB just ignore the law?

Two Seattle papers and the NYT - there you have three totally non-biased news stories regardingthis whole deal. You don't think they would have an agenda of their own do you? I don't suppose you'd give the same credibility for unbiased news reporting to "The Greenville News", The State", or the "Charleston Post and Courier" if the articles in those publications took a differing view would you? Just curious.

Brian, I did a Google search and those where the first three that came up. The NLRB is presenting the matter to the court and Boeing is putting in their case. Lets let the judge decide, shall we? Neither of us has any first hand knowledge of what went on, who said what, when it was said or to whom. According to court papers, there are internal memos in the Boeing files that were obtained by subpoena that clearly establish the unfair labor practice, but I haven't seen them, nor have you, but the court will review them. If Boeing is right, the case will be dismissed and they can build their airplane in Charleston, until they decide they can build it in China quicker and cheaper. If the NLRB proves its case, the Judge will determine the appropriate measure of damages.

That is called the rule of law.