Apparently, negotiations have been hot and heavy over a Boeing demand that the Machinists union agree to a no-strike clause, or risk the company moving 787 assembly to South Carolina. But…
… less than a week ahead of a Boeing board meeting to discuss the choice, the labor talks are deadlocked and hindered by distrust on each side, according to a high-level person close to the negotiations.
Really? The Machinists distrust Boeing? Could it have anything to do with the company’s demand that the union give up the only real collective bargaining lever it has?
Anyway, given the tone and tension of the negotiations, here’s my carefully considered recommendation for how to settle this seemingly intractable dispute. The Machinists union should agree to Boeing’s ridiculous demand for a no-strike clause. And then, if as feared, Boeing refuses to negotiate the subsequent contract in good faith, they should strike anyway.
Some might argue that such an approach would be dishonest and disrespectful, but, well, Boeing set the tone for these negotiations, so why should the Machinists treat the company with any more sincerity than the company has treated them?
And besides, this way everybody wins. Boeing executives get to save face and claim victory in beating down the unions, all the while keeping production where economically it makes most sense… the Machinists get to keep their jobs while giving up nothing substantive in return… and in the end, nothing really changes but the bragging rights.
I’d make a helluva diplomat, wouldn’t I?
I’m the Henry Kissinger of Seattle. As a tactic, I accuse opponents of immorality and amorality, but I’m as amoral as Henry.
@1 Why should management have a monopoly on duplicity, dishonesty, and taking unfair advantage? Since bosses benefit from behaving like that shouldn’t workers get similar benefits?
WHAT? Both sides in a dispute can act like a-holes! SHOCKING!
So Boeing wants to move most minor side work overseas, start moving manufacturing out of state (or to China eventually), and wants a guarantee the works can’t strike. Sweet deal for Boeing! Although this nutty idea of parsing out thousands of parts to dozens of countries around the world is looking like a silly idea now (787)…who could have imagined difficulties in getting parts from Pakistan? LOL
If the unions hadn’t go on strike for minor/silly crap before, they’d have a better moral high ground. But with the economy the way it is, and Boeing NOT flowing with billions in profit, do the unions take a strike pose just on “principle” and risk their jobs? Or cave in and give Boeing pretty much everything (knowing Boeing is planning on moving all work to China in 25 years anyway).
We seem to be hearing an awful lot of news lately coming from these supposedly “secret” negotiations…
Yes! I’m a big fan of this idea.
Goldy, I think there’s an easier way. My suggestion will greatly simplify things, make complicated and drawn-out negotiations unnecessary, and avoid future strikes! Instead of negotiating with Boeing all the Machinists should QUIT.
That’s right, they should just stop working. That way, they won’t have to worry about what Boeing might do, and won’t have any more conflicts with management, because Boeing won’t be their employer anymore.
Oh, some people will say, “how are they supposed to live without wages?” to which I’ll respond, “how can they afford to live on wages?” In fact, working is the worst way to get money there is, and wages are the least useful form of income. Workers have a lot of expenses they must bear themselves just to go to a job. And, unlike business owners, they can’t deduct their costs of producing income. They’re taxed on gross, not net, income and unlike businesses can’t pass taxes (and other expenses) through to customers by raising prices. Even worse, tax rates on wages are several times the tax rates on capital gains and dividends, and thousands of times the tax rates on inheritances (which are none for most heirs).
When you look at the facts, you’ll realize that getting money by working for it is so disadvantageous that most people will come out ahead if they simply quit their jobs. Most jobs are negative amortization deals. You’re required to get education and training at your own expense; to provide your own means of transportation to and from the job site; to provide your own uniforms, safety equipment, and tools; and you even have to pay your own union dues. The union is necessary to keep the employer from sending your job to China after you’ve made all the foregoing investments.
Frankly, I don’t think it’s worth it. The costs of working are just too high, and the rewards too slight. The Machinists should do what I did: Walk away from the Work World. I get money from a public pension, social security, and flipping stocks. Yes, it’s true that I’m an unproductive leech on society who contributes nothing to the economy.
But that’s not my fault. The system created me. Like capital does, I merely flowed to the best opportunity. Any economist will tell you that’s perfectly rational behavior. In fact, it’s important that I behave rationally in this way, because if I don’t, it’ll screw up all the economic models and make the economy unpredictable. Then policymakers will have no way to know what the effect of their policies will be.
What I’m saying is that it’s important for Congress to know that if they enact tax policies that discriminate against workers, people will quit working. And that if their policies reward speculators and flippers, people will flip Boeing’s stock instead of building Boeing’s airplanes.
Personally, I think it’s a good thing if nobody shows up to work at the Boeing plants and no airplanes get built, because then Boeing’s stock will go to 50 cents a share. I’d much rather buy it at 50 cents than 50 bucks, where it is now. Even if it only goes up to 75 cents I’ll make a 50% capital gain! With only a couple mouse clicks I can make more money that assembling Chinese parts in an airplane factory pays. And there’s no union dues to pay or union negotiations with the company to worry about!
My stock flipping is nonunion. That should make the union haters happy! And it’s raw capitalism at its finest. That should make the Ayn Rand types happy! And I pay almost zero taxes. That should make the government-haters happy. I’m telling you, my system works! It’ll bring domestic political bliss because everyone will be on the same page.
Like I said, the Machinists should stop negotiating and just QUIT. I don’t work, and they shouldn’t work, either.
Dishonesty is the cornerstone of the Progressive Bowel Movement.
At least you are consistent Goldy.
@7 Oh, and Republicans are honest? You’re funnier than Senator Al. (Not as smart, though. And he has a better, or at least more normal, sex life than you.)
Let’s see now…
Stockholders own the Company and elect the Board of Directors (for better or worse).
The Board hires a CEO and gives him policy directives (for better or Worse).
The CEO hires Managers.
Managers hire Employees.
Seems like employees are on the bottom-rung and if they don’t like working for Boeing, they are free to leave at any time.
Boeing has customers and deadlines.
If employees leave, they must be replaced.
If there is a high demand for employees and the supply is low, employees are in a good bargaining position.
When there is a low demand for employees and supply is high (like now)…shouldn’t employees be thankful they have a job with excellent benefits??
National Unemployment is nearly 10%.
The includes UNDERemployment is closer to 17%.
The supply is high.
The demand is low.
The Union represents the workers.
Certainly in this environment, isn’t the Union obliged to set aside their emotions and recommend taking this deal??
I’m just askin’
Rog spews:
Rog lies again.
Stock-flipping is short-term capital gains taxed at regular rates subject to minimum tax.
I assume your Pension & SS (if any) is also taxable. How do you pay almost zero taxes if you are a successful stock-flipper Rog. Is success making $1000/yr.?? Methinks not.
Define success lying Leftist?
The way Boeing’s current management is running the company, no matter what kind of contract they manage to get, the machinists (in fact, all Boeing employees) ought to be keeping their eyes open for, shall we say, other opportunities.
@9 “Certainly in this environment, isn’t the Union obliged to set aside their emotions and recommend taking this deal??”
No.
Boeing is going to leave – no stopping it now.
I hope the soon-to-be-unemployed union thugs are happy….they just kissed away their $40/hour jobs – now they can go work at Walmart or McDonalds for $10/hour.
The news that the IAM and Boeing are negotiating in D.C. caught me by surprise this morning. As recently as yesterday, all the information I had was that Boeing was making public demands for a non-strike pledge from the Union, but wasn’t talking with them, and was refusing to give anything in return.
Upon reading the article in the times (and hearing the first news report on NPR this morning on the way in to work), it appears that Boeing insisted on talks with the Union head office, by-passing the local representatives here. Just their way of giving the local machinists the finger.
Talking with someone knowledgable from the State of Washington this morning, he offered his opinion that Boeing decided on the move months ago – even before the last strike was settled. Apparantly they weren’t dealing with the Union in good faith then, because just as they signed a deal which specifically dealt with limits on outsourcing of union jobs, they were planning on doing just that in opening the 2nd line in Charleston. They spent this year laying the groundwork, negotiating the purchase of the Vought facilities, and letting the employees there know that in order for them to keep getting Boeing work, they had to first kick out the union.
Last month Boeing applied for building permits to expand the Charleston facilities for the 787 line. At the same time, they were cutting down trees at the Everett plant without permits, and daring the city to do anything about it while the assembly line issue is still unannounced.
It’s a good thing Gregoire didn’t jump through the hoops and push through all sorts of extra tax cuts and payouts to Boeing in an attempt to court them into staying in the area. Boeing would have taken everything the state offered, and then opened up the second line in Charleston anyway.
I love the way a high-level source familiar with the talks blabs to The Seattle Times about a deadlock, and then the company claims it’s honoring the confidentiality agreement for the talks. Nice.
I’m sure Boeing would never intentionally leak something that puts pressure on their Machinist friends to give up their right to strike. Heaven forfend!
McNerney & Co. are just trying to distract shareholders from the fact that the company is losing BILLIONS OF DOLLARS per quarter due to management’s failures by doubling down — with confidence! — on their strategy to turn the world’s greatest airplace manufacturer into a Final Assembler of Frankenliners.
They are killing this company before our eyes. If you haven’t sold your stock by now…
AF–
Then kiss the jobs good-bye.
@13–
I heard the Union is setting up a retraining Program.
The top priority is to teach unemployed Boeing Workers to say;
“Do you want fries with that?” and “Can we supersize that for you ma’am?”
These workers are too skilled and qualified to be flippin’ Burgers and asking questions like that. It’s a real shame. They also will not be able to sell their homes as the market is about to tank even worse with repo’s being dumped on a glutted market with few buyers (except Distress Property REIT’s paying 40% on the dollar). I know folks at Boeing who will be affected and are very, very worried about their family and future and feel helpless because of the Union. Helpless.
If you think the Union Workers are united on this, you are foolish. They aren’t.
rhp–
Your story is interesting…and hopefully you can support your allegations at some point with hard evidence.
I would caution you however, that Boeing has an OBLIGATION to it’s stockholders to have Contingency Plans in place to protect the Company. You seem to think or imply that the world should stop during Union negotiations and Boeing must finish negotiations before doing any contingency work or it’s “Bad Faith”.
Hardly.
We aren’t in the room and certainly don’t know all the sticking points. Proving BAD FAITH has a very high legal standard. Will cost the Union MILLIONS to pursue. MILLIONS in legal fees and no more dues payers and no more jobs.
Sounds bleak…but not hopeless.
I hope the Union quickly comes to it’s senses before it really is too late.
Is Boeing actively ready to move? Absolutely. They publicly told the world it was between Everett and Charleston…right?
Why wouldn’t they prepared for a possible move?
I think you are writing in a few things here rhp.
We’ll soon find out.
I hope the Union concedes and Boeing stays…I really do as I have family & friends directly and indirectly affected.
17: No, I’m not going to give you my sources. It was an informal discussion, not an announcement by a state agency.
As for your other point: contingency plans are one thing. But entering into a binding contract, while knowing that you intend to breach the spirit of the contract shortly thereafter, is negotiating in bad faith. That’s part of the reason why, as Dominic Gates mentioned in his article, the Union and Boeing relations are so strained and difficult – there is a lack of trust.
I don’t know the details of the last IAM contract, but I’m wondering if the IAM might be within it’s rights to strike if Boeing decides to go to Charleston. Boeing might not have drafted the contract as carefully as it believed it did. Also, I think the State of Washington should consider suing Boeing for a return of a good portion of the money which it spent to entice Boeing to locate the 787 production line here. Boeing’s going to have to add that to it’s costs.
And McNerney calling the risks and costs of opening up a duplicate assembly line in Chareleston as being “moderate” just shows why Boeing workers refer to the Chicago headquarters as the “opium den”. Past experience has shown their complete inability to judge the risks and costs of making major changes in the manufacturing methods, despite frequent and very loud attempts by everyone to warn them that they aren’t taking everything into account.
One caveat: the only way opening up a second line in Charleston makes any sense is if Boeing intends to move BOTH 787 lines to Charleston. It’s quite possible that it does indeed plan to do so, once the Charleston line is up and running in the next few years. I would expect that will become an issue right about the time of the next union contract negotiations, with Boeing pulling that threat out of their pocket and telling the Union to bend over and take whatever Boeing deems to give to them.
@17 “No, I’m not going to give you my sources. It was an informal discussion, not an announcement by a state agency.”
Don’t worry about it. KPLU was reporting essentially the same thing during drive time this morning.
Cyn…you weren’t paying attention. And in a way, we’re agreeing with you. The union has nothing to lose because the jobs are already gone. Boeing’s already welched on whatever agreement came from the recent strike, and now they’re just going through the motions of making the machinists an offer they couldn’t possibly accept. Then they’ll blame the union for the succession of epic failures that follow.
You can make a lot of money over the long term by building a business up, and you can also make a lot of money in a short time by taking an already successful enterprise and destroying it–and guess what Wall Street’s incessant demand for quarterly numbers favors? I’ve seen it happen first-hand, and surely a lot of the rest of you have as well. The Stonecipher crowd has already done in two once viable aerospace companies, and now they’re going to consume Boeing from the inside out and leave the fetid corpse for the world to wonder at for a while and then forget. In the meantime, they’ll no doubt blame it all on the labor force that made the company great in the first place.
Things have gone downhill since the Merger.
Boeing ISN’T in WA. The corp HQs are where?
@9 Anyone who thinks shareholders have a say in how companies are run or how much executives are paid or whether they’re fired for lousy performance lives in a dream world.
The only vote shareholders have is with their feet. And that’s exactly what I do. When a company is poorly run, loses money, and management is beyond anyone’s control, I don’t touch that stock with a 100-foot pole. No one else should, either. A stock like that should be worthless, and major shareholders who tolerate such boards and managements deserve to end up broke.
Given that about 2/3rds of all shares are owned by institutions (mutual funds, insurance companies, banks, pension funds, endowments, etc.), it should be obvious that individual investors have no say at all in corporate governance. I never vote my proxies. It isn’t worth a stamp, or 15 seconds of my time. Your only effective vote is your “sell” order. That’s what I do to companies that don’t return anything to their owners.
@10 Well, you see Cyn, I do most of my stock trading in tax-sheltered retirement accounts.
@9 You seem to think the union has no bargaining power and should just cave in. (If they do, what will Boeing demand next, that they work for free?) Wrong-o, my friend. If the Machinists walk out, where will Boeing get people who know how to assemble those airplanes? Do you want to fly on a plane that was built by $1-a-day Pakistanis? Be my guest.
AF–
Some good points….
Would you agree there is plenty of blame to go around?
And rhp–
How can you prove Boeing was “
??
That seems real tough unless you have documents that say specifically that…a smoking gun. If you have that, more power to you. That just ain’t right. But it sure takes a high level of irrefutable proof to make it stick, know what I mean?
23. Roger Rabbit spews:
Smart Rabbit!
@13 “they just kissed away their $40/hour jobs”
It would be better if they gave them away?
@13 Like I said, try finding someone else to build the planes. And then fly on them, because I won’t.
Me too…except the Wells Fargo I’m currently holding for LT Gains (I bought it at around 12 Rog FYI)
22. Roger Rabbit spews:
You’re right. I was talking about IN THEORY though and shareholders have been derelect in their responsiblities and over time…it has evaporated to a club where you invest at your own risk.
The more I think about it…it is kind of insane today, isn’t it Rog. But lots of little people have created vast wealth by making a few strategic market moves in their lives at the right time and are mighty comfortable today.
There’s a certain airline around here that killed a planeload of people because they were too cheap to replace a worn-out jackscrew. That same airline hires gang members to handle baggage because they’re too cheap to pay union labor, and guess what happened, the gang members rifled the luggage to steal passengers’ valuables. I won’t fly on that airline. I’ll go out of my way, and change my schedule if necessary, but under no circumstances will I get on a plane operated by that airline. I don’t — and won’t — own their stock either. I voted with my feet, and I have big feet. All that airline will ever see of me is the backside of my legs and my cute cottontail!
@30 You have to separate the wheat from the chaff in politics too, Cynical, or you’ll get burned there, too.
28. Roger Rabbit spews:
Always a good option Rog…after all, it’s YOUR MONEY! I shy away from advertisers on NBC (there are lists published and circulated).
It’s America…at least today it is.
@26 I’m glad you finally acknowledged my talents. Better late than never.
@29 “I bought it at around 12”
When? In 1954?
@29 “I bought it at around 12” (continued)
Are you waiting for it to go back to 12?
32. Roger Rabbit spews:
Funny…I’m a Conservative, not a Republican. I disliked BOTH Bushes and voted for Perot in 1992 & 1996. I only voted for Bush holding my nose because Al Gore is a serious KLOWN in my book and I didn’t like Kerry’s politics at all.
Hell, if Bill Clinton had run for a 3rd term, I might have voted for him.
I have voted for plenty of Democrats in past.
Never again.
35. Roger Rabbit spews:
Back in March sometime…when you kept telling me how stupid I was. I did a series of ST flips which I paid plenty of taxes on in 2008 BTW and then I decided to buy 4000 shares and just hold for a year because of the dividend.
I think you forgot because you kept telling me I was stupid.
Anyone could have doubled their money this year by throwing darts at a stock list in a newspaper and buying last spring when share prices were in the toilet. It didn’t take any brains, because everything went back up after the fire sale ended.
What happened was mutual funds, hedge funds, and investors were forced to sell by redemptions, withdrawals, and margin calls. Back in late February and early March, stocks were absurdly cheap, even if you assumed reduced earnings for years to come.
For example, if you had bought Ford at close to its 2009 low (nobody can time the exact bottom — that’s just sheer luck), let’s say you paid $12,000 for 10,000 shares at $1.20 a share, and then sold it a few months later for $8.50, you’d have made a $73,000 profit and roughly a 1,500% return on your investment on an annualized basis.
That’s better than the 1/2% that banks pay on savings accounts.
True enough..timing is everything, isn’t it.
But even idiots need to have good timing.
My neighbor just called. It’s sunny and upper 50’s and he wants to go horseback riding.
YEEEEEEEEEEEEEE_HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA.
We’re gonna go Mule Deer Scoutin’.
There is a herd of about 20 with at least 2 bucks…one nice that we have seen regularly.
Trying to zoom in on the big SOB.
We eat what we kill.
I suppose you paranoid KLOWNS could find that refreshing…or reaaaaaaaaally disturbing.
There’s no trick to it. You just look at the company fundamentals and the stock price, and decide whether it’s too cheap, too expensive, or fairly priced. If it’s too cheap, you buy it. If it’s too expensive, you sell it (that is, if you own it). If it’s fairly priced, look elsewhere, because there’s little profit in waiting for a company to grow by 5% or 6% a year. What I’m looking for is other investors’ mistakes.
Sometimes you see academics claim the market is perfectly efficient and stocks are fairly priced at any given time. That’s bullshit. Investment decisions are made by humans, and humans make mistakes. But much more important to you than inadvertently mispriced stocks are the bad investment decisions made by people who know they’re making bad decisions but make them anyway.
Foremost among these are mutual fund managers who buy stocks they know they shouldn’t and sell stocks they know they shouldn’t. There are a variety of reasons for this. For example, last winter a lot of people were pulling their money out of mutual funds so the managers had no choice but to sell because most mutual funds (like banks) keep only a small percentage of their assets in liquid cash. But mutual funds also buy and sell stocks to look good, or to keep regulators happy, or for other reasons that have nothing to do with making money for their customers.
If you’re getting the impression from this that mutual funds are a bad deal for average people, you’re right. I don’t touch mutual funds with a 10-foot pole. A large majority, around 2/3rds, of mutual funds do worse than the market averages. So much for the ability of so-called “professionals” to pick stocks and manage a portfolio.
What I’m saying is the big institutional investors are forced to make bad investing decisions; and as a small investor who answers to no one, you have a huge advantage over them because you can make decisions with complete freedom, and therefore you can base all your decisions on the simple criterion of whether they will make money or not.
In addition, institutional investors handle so much money they can only buy shares of big companies. If you buy and sell stock in $500 million to $1 billion blocks, there’s a very limited number of companies with enough shares outstanding. So, they’re all locked into trading within a small universe of big stocks, and as a small investor, you don’t have to compete with them for shares of small-cap growth stocks, which is where the big money is.
I’m not saying anyone can, or should, do this. You have to know something about business, and when you look at a stock report, you have to know what the numbers you’re looking at mean. It takes practice to be able to look at a financial report and then deduce whether the stock is cheap, fairly priced, or expensive. It takes me less than 5 minutes to decide whether to buy or sell a stock, and I do it by feel. It isn’t math, it’s instinct, because the market isn’t as rational as people assume and you’ve got to have good instincts for how other people are going to react to the stock you’re looking at. I’m not saying it’s some kind of voodoo, it’s not, it’s just common sense. If a company’s sales and earnings are going up and its stock price is going down, and you can’t find a good explanation for that, then there probably isn’t one and you should take advantage of whoever is selling that stock. Chances are it’s being dumped by one or more mutual funds that are selling it for reasons that have nothing to do with the company or the intrinsic quality of the stock. That’s when you snap it up. A few months later, you sell it back to them when they’re forced to pay too much for it. That’s how it works. The whole system is driven by institutional investors who make decisions for reasons other than making money for their customers. That’s why most mutual funds underperform the market and that’s why you should pick stocks yourself instead of letting a mutual fund manager pick them for you.
@41 You’re not only a goatfucker, you’re a Bambi Killer too! You should be institutionalized for public safety.
RR@44, I thought Mr.C was a sheep fucker, not a goat fucker. Eh, maybe Mr.C is into fucking anything with 4 legs, live or dead.
@41 Well, hope you have a good time…and that you nail the critter right between the eyes so he dies quick and the meat tastes better.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a larger group of people than on this blog more interested in the imaginary sex lives of others.
Like rush said about obama, “I live in his head rent free,” it’s obvious on this blog the heads with us freeloaders in them.
Maybe I’m wrong on this, but it seems to me like Boeing and the machinists union have been duking it out like this for at least the last 25 years.
Maybe its time for both of them to realize that the need each other?
@41
You wouldn’t want to eat a 10 year old cow, why do you want to eat a 10 year old deer?
Marvelous Marvie @47,
Imaginary sex? Go ahead. Prove that you perverted trolls aren’t screwing goats and other farm yard animals.
Not all Republicans fuck goats. Many are pedophiles, not that they’re above wearing animal costumes while waiting for their next victim to arrive.
@50 “Prove that you perverted trolls aren’t screwing goats and other farm yard animals.”
heh- That’s gonna be a tough one for Marvin,
RR @ 43: “Sometimes you see academics claim the market is perfectly efficient and stocks are fairly priced at any given time. That’s bullshit.”
I had to laugh at that one, becuase just last month I listened to an economics professer give a one-hour presentation on the history of economics theory. Now normally you would think it is ridiculous to cover such a subject in an hour. But this guy was a genius and a master of understated humor, and he gave it as an after-dinner speech, and he had us laughing the whole time.
Anyway, after explaining the (generally conservative) theory that markets will reach a level of equilibrium, he then put up a slide which gave the question from a U.S.C. economics test:
The correct answer, according to U.S.C Economics Department was:
Cynical @ 25: “That seems real tough unless you have documents that say specifically that…a smoking gun. If you have that, more power to you. That just ain’t right. But it sure takes a high level of irrefutable proof to make it stick, know what I mean?”
No, it doesn’t require irrefutable proof, or even a smoking gun. In a civil case the burden of proof is by a preponderence of the evidence – which means “more likely than not”. The only question is whether Boeing made the decision before the strike was settled. If so, then bad faith could be inferred.
E-mails would be nice (people tend to forget how much of a record trail they leave in e-mail these days), but there are probably lots of people talking at the time, too. I presume that my source came to his conclusion based upon conversations he had with someone in the know, although he didn’t specify the source (and I didn’t ask him).
48. Michael spews:
I think the problem TODAY is that with the high unemployment and more than living wage & excellent benefits Boeing offers….Boeing does not need the Machinists Union. There were times they did…certainly, when planes were being cranked out and profit margins were high. But TODAY is the issue at hand and Boeing has the leverage…SUPPLY & DEMAND.
rhp@53–
That’s a good one!
rhp@54—
Wouldn’t they be suing under some UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE Statute?? Not sure what the Burden of Proof is there. If it’s simply Preponderence and they have $3 million or so to invest in Discovery and another $1-2 million for trial proceedings etc….would make a big difference.
Rog @ 43–
Good assessment…I absolutely agree there are bargains and great opportunities to sell at any point in time. It’s like walking thru a field of gold nuggets and fools gold….you have to know the difference.
Hey, that was pretty good. I just made that one up.
Where you can get snookered is relying on bad information. Look at Worldcom and other disasters..yeah, there were some clear warning signs and I wasn’t in any of those losers, but it was really difficult because of such glowing, but FALSE info.
You are certainly right in principle. A good investor should do just that and not fall in love with a stock. Folks lost a fortune on Microsoft for example from it’s high to today, right? It’s just that no matter how great your expertise, you can still get bamboozled with bad info.
49. Michael spews:
I don’t like to shoot 10 year-old deer really. They are mainly for jerky and hamburger. I’m not in to trophy animal killing but my neighbor is. You should see some of the animal heads and racks in his house. It’s very impressive. It’s an individual choice. I’m part of the Ted Nugent “Eat what you Kill” wildlife management consortium.
Actually yearlings are very, very tasty…but a lot of work for little meat.
2-3 year olds are prime.
Sometimes hard to tell from 300+ yards.
@60
Yep!
I wouldn’t know. Every shot I ever took was from (inside generally well inside) of 100 yards, antelope in Wyoming included. That’s called being an ethical hunter, btw.
61. Michael spews:
Michael–
I was talking about our scouting today that the deer were 300+ yards away. I’m with you. Part of the sport is getting close enough for a clean kill.
Let’s see now…
Stockholders own the Company and elect the Board of Directors (for better or worse).
The Board hires a CEO and gives him policy directives (for better or Worse).
The CEO hires Managers.
Managers hire Employees.
Seems like employees are on the bottom-rung and if they don’t like working for Boeing, they are free to leave at any time.
Finally a fucktard member of the bourgeoisie willing to actually put it out there. The capitalist hierarchy trumps all of the Constitutional constructs of equality and justice for all. I have been waiting so long for this degree of honesty. Wage slavery being publicly supported like this is an amazing acknowledgment that Marx was actually correct about the future of capitalism and the attitudes of the bourgeoisie (especially in a world where there is one job available for every six people seeking work).
spyder–
Boeing workers are not paid Slave Wages bonehead. Far from it.
We now have too few people paying for a massively increasing Big Government.
What Obama is doing is not effective and certainly not sustainable. He needs to INCENT folks to invest capital and create jobs…not try and bully them and do something really stupid like the Union payoff Auto Bailout and Cash for Klunkers. That was obscene friend…and ineffective…and unsustainable.
@64 Welllll…”slave wages” has a different definition depending on time and location. What was a handsome salary for a Boeing machinist might have looked a little slim at the height of the real-estate bubble, particularly to a young feller with a growing family in need of an additional bedroom or two. Granted, that’s somewhat corrected itself. This is in and of itself good for Boeing-ites or any other working stiff wanting to buy a house but the pits for those in the business of building them. In fact, at the moment inflation in general has come to a halt–Social Security ain’t doing a COLA this year because the cost-of-living indices are negative.
Likewise, machinists or people in general might be comfortable with a lower paycheck Dixie, because a lot of stuff costs less there. A decade and a half ago, we were seriously considering a move to Alabama, where half the money would have bought three times the house.
Wherever Boeing operates, assuming they’re actually going to keep building airplanes, they’re going to need machinists, or “carbon fiberists”, or whatever you choose to call people with something other than mush between their ears and the esoteric skills to put together those big machines that go through the sky at 500MPH with hundreds of people inside. Whether these people belong to a union or not, supply-and-demand works on the human-resources side as well as with raw materials and finished product.
“Boeing does not need the Machinists Union. There were times they did…certainly, when planes were being cranked out and profit margins were high. But TODAY is the issue at hand and Boeing has the leverage…SUPPLY & DEMAND.”
Boeing has found out, to it’s detriment, that aerospace workers aren’t easily interchangeable. Boeing management thought that just about anybody can drill holes, install fasteners, and install sealant to build a composite fibre airplane body. That’s because the current management never worked on the factory floor – or even walked it, other than as part of a VIP tour. It’s far more complicated than they realized. It takes skills which take years to develop, and the need to have everything conform to engineering drawings (which are changing daily), with QC inspections and buy-offs of each finished job, all within a highly regulated environment.
And few of the machinists building the 787 are making $40.00 per hour in straight time. Most of the 787 workers are new hires, and are making less than half that amount ($15 to $18 p/hour, I believe).
Of course, since they are now working ten hour days, six days a week, most are getting overtime pay, and sometimes even double time. It’s makes for some nice paychecks, but after a couple of years of such a schedule, it’s getting very tiring – they don’t have time or energy to do the hundreds of personal and family items which are part of our everyday lives. In the meantime most are using the overtime to pay down debt or put it into savings – they know full well that sometime in the next year or two, the overtime will stop and layoffs will loom. It’s as regular as clockwork at Boeing.
Montana Sheep Fucker @62
You should join the Army and go hunt Taliban over in Afghanistan where they shoot back. Now that is real sport.
Read this Comment from “787Guy” and also read today’s article about Boeing’s decision re” Charleston. This is all very interesting for us unaffected….but a lifechanger for many!
The Union is really screwin’ the workers here.
I’ve heard the same thing from others who work there. Almost no one wants to strike.,,,and are more than willing to vote Yes on a non-strike clause.
http://community.seattletimes......ost_923951
rhp–
I see nothing wrong Boeing has done in this article that can be construed as Bad Faith. They have created competition.
The Union used it’s leverage in the recent Strike. Was that Bad Faith?
Boeing is moving forward as if moving.
Why is the Union waiting so long to vote??
rhp spews:
I totally agree. But think about it…how many Boeing Workers would immediately move to Charlston if given a moving package???
They have to move somewhere because there are NO JOBS here.