f members of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers and local politicians do not ratify an agreement announced by Boeing (NYSE:BA) earlier this week, the jet manufacturers latest aircraft the 777X will likely not be built in the Seattle area, the companys traditional manufacturing base. On Friday, in a statement emailed to the Seattle Times, Boeing said the company was ready to pursue other options outside Washington for manufacturing the jet. The warning was issued hours after senior members of the union voiced opposition to the proposed labor contract, which will go to a membership vote next Wednesday, the publication reported.
At the end of a Thursday night meeting attended by a hundreds of union workers, District 751 President Tom Wroblewski tore up a copy of Boeings proposed contract, saying he would try to have it withdrawn even before the vote took place. I know this is a piece of crap, Wroblewski said. Vote No, proclaimed many signs held by meeting attendees, and as the publication reported, that was the tenor of the meeting in general. Similarly, earlier that day, union workers at Boeings Everett jet-assembly plant marched through the facility chanting the same sentiment: vote no.
All of our options are still on the table, including those within Boeing and interest we have received from outside. We chose to engage in Puget Sound first, but without full acceptance by the union and Legislature, we will be left with no choice but to open up the process competitively and pursue other options for locating the 777X work, read Boeings statement.
Typical pattern:
Company sets up shop in a state, employs tons of people- who then pay taxes from their income- state profits, citizens profit, everyone profits.
Along come statist morons who leech their way into the above situation and suck the company and its employees for every dollar they can and then some. When company finally wakes up and realizes: "Hey, it's a free country. We can move and not put up with this. In fact, it's a free WORLD. We can go do business wherever the red carpet is rolled out for us," the statist morons whine "NO FAIR!! YOU'RE SO GREEDY!!! WAHHH!!! EVIL COMPANY! HOW DARE YOU DO WHAT MAKES YOU MORE MONEY!! EVIL! GREEDY! %@@$%%#$#$#!@*^@!!!"
Statist morons 'solution' is then to put the squeeze on EVEN MORE. Higher taxes, more red tape, electing an even more clueless set of business hostile assholes who despise the free market and want to punish people who own companies and hire other people.
Company says, "FUCK YOU" takes it's money, its jobs elsewhere, leaves hundreds even thousands unemployed. People in another state or (increasingly more often as statist morons make it so no one can trust just moving elsewhere in the US and not having the same pattern happen again) another country enjoy the jobs, income and tax revenue provided by the company moving where it makes more financial sense for them to operate.
Statist morons back in the empty husk they chased all the jobs out of: YAY! We won vs. the big corporate bogeyman! We showed them!
And then (making no connection to ANY of the above):
Same statist morons: "WAHHH! THERE'S NO DECENT JOBS!!!! NOTHING BUT MINIMUM WAGE!!!!! EVERYONE IS SOOOO GREEDY!!! WHY ISN'T ANYONE COMING HERE WITH LOTS OF GOOD, HIGH PAYING JOBS!!! WAAHHH! MAKE THE MINIMUM WAGE $20 AN HOUR!! THAT'S THE ONLY JOBS!!!! WHERE'S ALL THE JOBS!! EVIL GREEDY BUSINESS!!! WAHHH!!!! @@***%%$&&*%^!!!!"
Lather, rinse, repeat until serfdom is complete.
In the long run, the strike devastated the American steel industry. More than 85 percent of U.S. steel production had been shut down for almost four months. Hungry for steel, American industries began importing steel from foreign sources. Steel imports had been negligible prior to 1959. But during the strike, basic U.S. industries found Japanese and Korean steel to be less costly than American steel, even after accounting for importation costs. The sudden shift toward imported steel set in motion a series of events which led to the gradual decline of the American steel industry
Fuck the workers! Right? Take it or leave it!
The unions obviously have too much power and poor little Boeing doesn't have any good options!
The best time to negotiate a contract is when the contract is up that day, using leverage to negotiate is dirty, except unless you are a poor little corporation like Boeing, then it's ok.
How did I do sophitia?
For decades unions have unwaveringly supported the Democratic Party, sticking with them through thick and thin. However, in recent years, the Democratic Party has repaid union loyalty by pushing through pro-corporate legislation at the expense of the working class. It very well may be time for the unions to break from the Democrats and form their own party.
The betrayal of labor by Democrats began with NAFTA, which would allow free trade between the US, Mexico, and Canada. It was touted as a great deal to expand and grow Americans economy, even though there was resistance to it not only from labor unions but from ordinary people.
Fear was part of the arsenal used to get the bill passed. Then-President Bill Clinton predicted that international competitors [would] themselves forge free trade agreements with Mexico if Congress fail[ed] to approve the North American Free Trade Agreement, giving nations such as Japan an economic windfall at U.S. expense. [1] However, he was quite incorrect. A New York Times article published at the time stated that most European and Japanese companies [would] be much more interested in investing in Mexico if NAFTA is passed, so they can gain free access to the U.S. market. [2] (emphasis added) There were also elitists such as Andrew Tobias pushing for NAFTA. In a Time Magazine article on the subject, he stated:
The problem with NAFTA is that, like almost any change, it will disrupt the lives of some Canadian workers, some American workers and some Mexican workers. They are a tiny minority, but anyone who thinks he or she might wind up in that tiny minority is understandably fearful and upset. And vocal. Compounding this, there are those who would play to those fears with demagoguery, rather than minister to them with reassurance and support. [3]
One can see his contempt for the working class, acting as if the lives of Canadian, Mexican, and American workers arent really that big of a deal, that what occurs to them is negligible. In that same article he states that over the long run, NAFTA will employ more of everybody, however, just as with Bill Clinton, he was quite incorrect. A while after NAFTA was signed into law by Bill Clinton in the name of the free market, The US Department of Labor certified that well over half a million U.S. workers lost their jobs due to NAFTA [4] and the Economic Policy Institute stated that The resulting $30 billion U.S. net export deficit with these countries [Mexico and Canada] in 1993 increased by 281% to $85 billion in 2002 [5] and that NAFTA has resulted in job losses in all 50 states and the District of Columbia.
Under President Obama, things have only gotten worse as multi-billion dollar corporations are given handouts and labor is left to suffer. Just last month, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner revealed that the Obama administration wants to lower the top corporate tax rate from the current 35 percent to less than 30 percent and as low as 26 percent. [6] The Democrats have now gone the route of the right-wing by allowing the super rich to recklessly dominate the economy while giving them massive handouts. [7]
All the while this is going on; unions are running a fools errand as they continue to support the Democratic Party when they are blatantly looking out for the interests of corporations instead of the worker.
Since unions cant match the money that the super rich are able to give out to the political elite, the best thing for them to do as of now would be to cut their losses and break away from the Democratic Party in order to form a labor political party, funded and supported by unions to look out for union interests.
Only then will unions be able truly look out for their interests.
Seriously, if I ever owned a business and my employees voted to unionize, I would shut it down.
Unions are the worst thing for business and are even worse for employees.
Eh? That makes no sense. Who should run food service industries(not sure why that got singled out in the first place) if not corporations? Leprechauns?Which would probably be a win for everyone. I'm pretty anti union and believe they have no place in the food service industry but, I also believe corporations have no place in it either.
What experience do you really have with unions?Most members in these forums have no problem with businesses skirting the letter of the law in pursuit of profits (unless it affects them directly of course) but, it typically results in unwonted exploitation of those with little voice in the matter. Hence, the union gives the disenfranchised a voice.
Which would probably be a win for everyone. I'm pretty anti union and believe they have no place in the food service industry but, I also believe corporations have no place in it either.
However, unions do have a place in some industries. Most members in these forums have no problem with businesses skirting the letter of the law in pursuit of profits (unless it affects them directly of course) but, it typically results in unwonted exploitation of those with little voice in the matter. Hence, the union gives the disenfranchised a voice.
I believe this story hinges more on the specifics of the contract rather than unions versus big business.
That's my feeling as well. I'm anti union but in the absence of competition for employees (most industries can easily find replacement workers), I feel unions are needed. The employer/employee balance is way out of wack so I have no proble
With the "little guy" using what ever leverage necessary to get a fair wage.
Yes, designing and building aircraft was always a shitty job before unions white-knighted it and made it tolerable... just like those other shitty professions like brain surgeon, rocket scientist, etc.
Unions had and do still have their place. (Private industry that is. Public unions are a whole other can of rot). It's just that all too often these days they're just another wing of nutbag government, set up to extort money out of an industry until they burn it to the ground. (Detroit, great example of the end result).
But hey, some union guys and their corrupt political cohorts got rich, so it was all worth it.
Please see the above bolder. I understand your frustrations with unions within your own industry but, I also understand that other industries still require them to limit predatory management. Try to keep an open mind, there are greedy opportunists on both sides.Eh? That makes no sense. Who should run food service industries(not sure why that got singled out in the first place) if not corporations? Leprechauns?
I singled out food service because I am a Chef and that is the industry I have the most experience with in regards to unions. The reason unions and corporations do not belong in food service (and, I suspect any service base business like yours) is that they both inhibit flexibility, quick reaction to local needs /wants and, reward seniority over performance. I believe individually owned foodservice can serve customers better at every price point.
What experience do you really have with unions?
I have had a fair amount of experience on both sides of management in dealing with unions during my 35 years or so feeding people. As I said, I believe that they do not belong in food service nor, perhaps in any service based industry.
Most I've had dealings with (including the one I belong to now) do virtually nothing but collect dues, and give huge donations to political candidates that will do the most favors for the union. (Note: not even favors that benefit the business sector the union leeches off of, but the union itself).
In my industry (entertainment) the unions aren't made up of fellow artists, writers, editors, directors etc. who care about the craft and the business- they're a bunch of suits who've found a way to siphon an excellent living off collecting dues from a lot of workers, in an industry they could give two shits about.
The idea that they're always giving voice to the little guy is fucking pathetic- they're giving voice to fatcat politicians and whoever kicks them the most money- they're all about the biggest of the big guys. The little guy to them is a percentage of a paycheck, and that's it. They'll burn the industry itself to the ground if opposed (see the thousands of 'little guys' that were out on the streets during the Hollywood writer's strike back in '07. The little guy got shafted out of months of pay, so that millionaires could get a higher share of an already vastly profitable royalty arrangement.) But anyone below the line? F you.
For everything they do that's supposedly so great for the little guy they do three or four things that rob the little guy blind, and keep the little guy less-employed.
And this idea that without unions strangling the life out of an industry they can just do whatever they want with no regard for laws and regulations is just pure horses hit. Yeah sure, Boeing will stay in business with no problems what-so-ever making planes that routinely fall apart and crash every other flight. There's no such thing as any accountability for things like that, riiiight. They need a union sucking the wallets of every employee and hard balling them until they're ready to move their operations elsewhere, in order to insure that they don't make planes that can't fly straight- cause it makes soooo much sense that the market would reward a company for doing so.
That's my feeling as well. I'm anti union but in the absence of competition for employees (most industries can easily find replacement workers), I feel unions are needed. The employer/employee balance is way out of wack so I have no proble
With the "little guy" using what ever leverage necessary to get a fair wage.
Ah, sorry before I didn't realize you were speaking from a position of working in the food service industry, I misread as if the discussion had shifted to the food service industry. My bad.Please see the above bolder. I understand your frustrations with unions within your own industry but, I also understand that other industries still require them to limit predatory management. Try to keep an open mind, there are greedy opportunists on both sides.
So do you in turn disagree with certain unions/sectors in which the employer/employee balance is way out of whack in favor of the union/employee?
Absolutely! The auto industry was a perfect example of that.