Re: Boeing in hot water?
Fri Apr 22, 2011 9:23 am
Nathan wrote:I really don't understand all of this.
We are sure you do not 'Nathan', but at least you can add to your posting total!
Re: Boeing in hot water?
Fri Apr 22, 2011 10:48 am
The facility there WAS IAM, but about 36 months ago, the company had a big 'de-certify' vote, and ain't it amazing!?! they voted 95+% to decertify the union. Reduced benefits, no Boeing Pension Plan, limited medical programs.
What I was trying to get to is the fact that this is a technical leap in process about on a par with the Model T line having a FERARRI F-50 dropped on them, the principal is the same but the execution is so different. You cannot treat the material like you would aluminum, stupid appearing things like a strand 'blowout' from a poorly drilled hole might cause the entire barrel section to be rejected because that fiber strand will tear all the way to the edge of the part, it can't be 'trimmed off', that could be extremly expensive since the airplane is built in sections or barrels and not sheet by sheet like a tin airplane is. One bad enough hole and it's $6 or 7 millions to replace that barrel plus the time loss, a screwed up wing could be 6 or 7 or 8 months out because the manufacturer isn't geared up to make a spare. Subassemblies coming from S.C. are full of expensive, 'wasn't thinking' or 'I forgot what you told me' type mistakes and some cases of outright covering up of mistakes (maybe they got away with that stuff @ VOUGHT, but with Boeing, hiding a defect is a high speed trip to the outside of the cyclone fence, a terminating offense), 'wire bundles' which are mostly fiber optic cables are wound up in tight loops instead of big smooth loops, being wound up tightly fractures the glass cables inside and makes the bundle expensively worthless. Holes freehand countersunk that are out of round but have had fasteners installed anyway. Warped and wrinkled parts that cause big expensive delays to try to mate to the airplane in final assembly, holes that are supposed to be piloted to #40 or #30 are drilled out beyond what the final hole size was supposed to be making the part a very expensive desk chatcski but not airworthy. Evidence of the edges of parts being pried on to line up, which fractures the laminate bonding making the part a failure ticking bomb, a subsurface disbond could show no exterior signs of problems for 5 or 10 or 20 years and it just takes a speck of moisture to get in a void and start the freeze/thaw cycle each cycle making the void just a teeny bit bigger every cycle, and if you aren't vigilant you can cause that to happen very innocently. I could go on for pages, I guess it comes down more to taking previous knowledge by the installer, and having them be able to quickly adapt to the differences and new techniques. A fairly large number of experienced installers @ Everett didn't make the skills adjustment while in training because they wouldn't or couldn't make the mental adjustments, or thought it didn't really matter (I've always done it this way so don't tell me),they went back to their shops on the 767 or 777 and will not be reconsiderd to transfer to the 787 program.
So it's not union vs non union, it's knowledge, perception, training, and correct application of those skills.
I'm not going to address the subs that come from ALENIA where no one cares because they have jobs for life and they own the manufacturing rights to the parts -VISION 2016-
What I was trying to get to is the fact that this is a technical leap in process about on a par with the Model T line having a FERARRI F-50 dropped on them, the principal is the same but the execution is so different. You cannot treat the material like you would aluminum, stupid appearing things like a strand 'blowout' from a poorly drilled hole might cause the entire barrel section to be rejected because that fiber strand will tear all the way to the edge of the part, it can't be 'trimmed off', that could be extremly expensive since the airplane is built in sections or barrels and not sheet by sheet like a tin airplane is. One bad enough hole and it's $6 or 7 millions to replace that barrel plus the time loss, a screwed up wing could be 6 or 7 or 8 months out because the manufacturer isn't geared up to make a spare. Subassemblies coming from S.C. are full of expensive, 'wasn't thinking' or 'I forgot what you told me' type mistakes and some cases of outright covering up of mistakes (maybe they got away with that stuff @ VOUGHT, but with Boeing, hiding a defect is a high speed trip to the outside of the cyclone fence, a terminating offense), 'wire bundles' which are mostly fiber optic cables are wound up in tight loops instead of big smooth loops, being wound up tightly fractures the glass cables inside and makes the bundle expensively worthless. Holes freehand countersunk that are out of round but have had fasteners installed anyway. Warped and wrinkled parts that cause big expensive delays to try to mate to the airplane in final assembly, holes that are supposed to be piloted to #40 or #30 are drilled out beyond what the final hole size was supposed to be making the part a very expensive desk chatcski but not airworthy. Evidence of the edges of parts being pried on to line up, which fractures the laminate bonding making the part a failure ticking bomb, a subsurface disbond could show no exterior signs of problems for 5 or 10 or 20 years and it just takes a speck of moisture to get in a void and start the freeze/thaw cycle each cycle making the void just a teeny bit bigger every cycle, and if you aren't vigilant you can cause that to happen very innocently. I could go on for pages, I guess it comes down more to taking previous knowledge by the installer, and having them be able to quickly adapt to the differences and new techniques. A fairly large number of experienced installers @ Everett didn't make the skills adjustment while in training because they wouldn't or couldn't make the mental adjustments, or thought it didn't really matter (I've always done it this way so don't tell me),they went back to their shops on the 767 or 777 and will not be reconsiderd to transfer to the 787 program.
So it's not union vs non union, it's knowledge, perception, training, and correct application of those skills.
I'm not going to address the subs that come from ALENIA where no one cares because they have jobs for life and they own the manufacturing rights to the parts -VISION 2016-
Re: Boeing in hot water?
Fri Apr 22, 2011 11:15 pm
Call me a bit biased, but I'm glad they decertified IAM. IAM is one of the problem Unions in the world because they've become "for us" (the union itself) and not "for you" (the union members).
Here's a thought - when your airline is offering the ramp workers you represent the best vestment time in the industry, better back pay than they ever have, and medical that's better than the non-union guys across the concourse are getting, the union should be urging its workers, who've gone for 2 years without a contract to accept the contract, not deny it and threaten strike because they want another year less in vestment (4 years instead of 5 when the average was 7 at the time), another percent in back pay (4% instead of 3%).
Considering that ALPA had just started the end of the company as a United Express carrier when they got mainline to walk in and waive the marketing agreement over the company's head to give in to their (at the time) outrageous demands or go on strike, and the Mechanics and FA's still hadn't gotten their contract, and the rampies are threatening strike?
The result - the airline got its revenue cut by 1/3 overnight because of a new marketing agreement that was forced on them by mainline that paid only for the filled seats, not the actual number of available seats the airline had as they had before, the pilot's pay went up by 5% and their benefits by almost another 5%, not to mention back pay and other costs, the rampies were about to go on strike, and then Sept. 11th happened. I got screwed in the whole deal because the Union had a 120 day probation period and so I was the most senior number terminated and that resulted in me not getting unemployment since it was termination and not layoff. I'd already been paying union dues, had already been told that I had to follow the union line, and all I got was a pink slip from that same union and the company and its employees ended up half its size and flying for US Airways within 3 years in part because the Unions forced the company to spend more money than it could afford even before Sept. 11th and then made worse because the Unions continued their line for almost a year afterward.
Here's a thought - when your airline is offering the ramp workers you represent the best vestment time in the industry, better back pay than they ever have, and medical that's better than the non-union guys across the concourse are getting, the union should be urging its workers, who've gone for 2 years without a contract to accept the contract, not deny it and threaten strike because they want another year less in vestment (4 years instead of 5 when the average was 7 at the time), another percent in back pay (4% instead of 3%).
Considering that ALPA had just started the end of the company as a United Express carrier when they got mainline to walk in and waive the marketing agreement over the company's head to give in to their (at the time) outrageous demands or go on strike, and the Mechanics and FA's still hadn't gotten their contract, and the rampies are threatening strike?
The result - the airline got its revenue cut by 1/3 overnight because of a new marketing agreement that was forced on them by mainline that paid only for the filled seats, not the actual number of available seats the airline had as they had before, the pilot's pay went up by 5% and their benefits by almost another 5%, not to mention back pay and other costs, the rampies were about to go on strike, and then Sept. 11th happened. I got screwed in the whole deal because the Union had a 120 day probation period and so I was the most senior number terminated and that resulted in me not getting unemployment since it was termination and not layoff. I'd already been paying union dues, had already been told that I had to follow the union line, and all I got was a pink slip from that same union and the company and its employees ended up half its size and flying for US Airways within 3 years in part because the Unions forced the company to spend more money than it could afford even before Sept. 11th and then made worse because the Unions continued their line for almost a year afterward.
Re: Boeing in hot water?
Mon Apr 25, 2011 8:42 pm
IAM is one of the problem Unions in the world because they've become "for us" (the union itself) and not "for you" (the union members).
I agree with this for the most part, however I have worked for many non unionized aerospace companies and always had the thought that "they" (insert your favorite company here) could "get rid of you" for any reason or non reason "they" choose. Case in point.......Alaska air lines 2005ish....
http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/stor ... ily27.html
I worked for Alaska for nearly three years as a "ramp rat". It was an open shop. After two years of humping heavy bags, cargo, dead people, thousands and thousands of pounds of frozen fish, horses, jet engines, R-22 helo's, mushrooms, strawberries, millions in cash, hundreds of cases of sea urchin gonads, thousands of pounds of stinky Caribou meat, and cleaning up gallons of blood from these "meat hauling flights", plus bitter cold and scorching heat (YES it gets VERY COLD and VERY HOT at SEA-TAC). Wing walking, marshaling, tows, push backs.... I received a 20 cent raise and a six month pin, thats when I realized "they" could have paid more for the quality work being done every day with nearly ALL flights on time! In-fact, in the almost three years I was at ASA "we" were voted best airline right behind Mid west express! So "they" decided to save a few dollars, and what did "they" get?
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/b ... ska07.html
Alaska Airlines Inc. has released 472 baggage handlers and other unionized ramp-service employees at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport and outsourced their jobs to a non-union outside provider. The move is part of the company's cost-management plan, and saves the Seattle-based airline $13 million annually, officials said.
Read more: Alaska Airlines fires 472 at Sea-Tac | Puget Sound Business Journal
http://www.katu.com/news/local/106552383.html
The fired workers are employed by Menzies Aviation, which Alaska Airlines contracts to do such tasks as loading and unloading baggage and guiding planes into and out of airport gates
http://www.businessinsider.com/can-boei ... ent-2011-4
http://www.scribd.com/doc/53489994/NLRB ... -Complaint
My impression of IAM guys...
Count your fingers after shaking their hands!
I think what the Inspector said is correct "pay peanuts".... get a chunky turd.......
Re: Boeing in hot water?
Mon Apr 25, 2011 11:22 pm
While you're right that under Right to Work, they can terminate you for pretty much anything, there are limits to it. They still have to comply with federal employment laws which say in part they can't terminate you for reduction of force. In that case, they have to lay you off and make you eligible for unemployment.
Re: Boeing in hot water?
Tue Apr 26, 2011 9:58 am
A 'reason' can always be found or 'infractions' can be 'documented' to divest a RTW company of an employee, and that former employee has zero recourse and the company can advise the States Unemployment Office to not cover that individual because of why they were terminated, whether true or untrue.
ASA had a great deal of trouble with Menzies as most of their employees are/were apparently (given the amount of gang related graffitti in the cargo bays) involved in rival L.A. and San Diego Latino gangs and involved some fairly serious direct threats. And I'm pretty sure they weren't hired because they would be paid more than the ex 'rampers'.
Somehow, in some way, everyones pay rate is tied to a negotiated contract in either that industry or a related industry. I'm not really a big pro union individual (having seen plenty of Bovine Byproduct created by unions too in 4 decades in this business) but do understand enough of economics to know that if no negotiated contracts were in place somehere in industry, pretty much everyone would be making $5.00 a 10 hour day with one 15 minute lunch/pee break just like when Henry was making Model 'T's 'so how ya doing on your 50 cents an hour?' (and where do you think the term 'pink slip' came from? If Henry or one of his 'enforcers' didn't like your style or work ethic, you were given a pink slip of paper meaning that was your last day with FOMOCO). NORTHROP while non-union, had to pay rates within a few percentage points of what DOUGLAS, LOCKHEED, and ROHR paid or no one would work there.
ASA had a great deal of trouble with Menzies as most of their employees are/were apparently (given the amount of gang related graffitti in the cargo bays) involved in rival L.A. and San Diego Latino gangs and involved some fairly serious direct threats. And I'm pretty sure they weren't hired because they would be paid more than the ex 'rampers'.
Somehow, in some way, everyones pay rate is tied to a negotiated contract in either that industry or a related industry. I'm not really a big pro union individual (having seen plenty of Bovine Byproduct created by unions too in 4 decades in this business) but do understand enough of economics to know that if no negotiated contracts were in place somehere in industry, pretty much everyone would be making $5.00 a 10 hour day with one 15 minute lunch/pee break just like when Henry was making Model 'T's 'so how ya doing on your 50 cents an hour?' (and where do you think the term 'pink slip' came from? If Henry or one of his 'enforcers' didn't like your style or work ethic, you were given a pink slip of paper meaning that was your last day with FOMOCO). NORTHROP while non-union, had to pay rates within a few percentage points of what DOUGLAS, LOCKHEED, and ROHR paid or no one would work there.