Obama: Making Sure The Economy Doesn't Recover

[Pilgrim]

Maybe there are some that haven't heard of the situation with the Boeing plant being planned for South Carolina, and then stymied by the Obama pro-labor bureaucrats. This is a big deal that must be defeated. If we get to the point where the NLRB can dictate where private businesses can and can not set up shop, our national economy will be in worse trouble than it already is. This is just another testament to this Boy President being an economic featherweight and a minion to the radical liberals and union thugs.

Review & Outlook: The Death of Right to Work - WSJ.com

 

[blackpup]

Boeing will be building planes overseas if the union wins this argument . Or would that be more aircraft built overseas ?

Another nail in the coffin of the US. economy.

jimmy

 

[Pilgrim]

Obama and his union lackeys on the NLRB will ruin the aircraft industry just like the UAW killed the American auto industry.

 

[greg334]

The American Auto Industry is doing well, outside of GM, and Chrysler there are no real issues with Honda, Toyota, Ford, Hyundia, Nissan, BMW, MB and other American Manufacturers.

To be exact, someone on CNN or some other entertainment channel mentioned that GM and Chrysler are in for a hell of a time with their product line because of the high price of gas. It seems to be the same old story, not focusing on fuel efficient cars but pushing the old crap and complaining about their market share. The other odd thing that was said was something that God came down and helped GM with their competitor by causing an earthquake in Japan, which I couldn't see that to be anywhere near the truth but hey it's show business.

 

[sparkle8859]

Business Finder
Auto Finder
Home Finder
Job Finder
Classifieds

19 free views left!
New
ShareThis
NLRB suit against Boeing asks return of state jobs

The Seattle Times

Thursday, April 21, 2011

SEATTLE — Boeing was retaliating illegally against its largest union when it decided in 2009 to put a second 787 Dreamliner assembly line in a nonunion plant in South Carolina, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) charged in a complaint filed Wednesday.

To remedy the alleged violation, the complaint says, Boeing should be ordered to operate the second line at a union plant in Washington.

Boeing said it would “vigorously contest” the case and proceed with plans to start assembling planes in Charleston, S.C., in July. “This doesn’t change anything,” spokesman Tim Neale said.

The South Carolina plant could be operating for years before the dispute is decided, a labor-law expert said.

“This process can take a long, long time to play out,” said Ross Runkel, a professor emeritus of law at Oregon’s Willamette University and labor-law specialist.

The first step in that process — a hearing in Seattle before an administrative-law judge — is scheduled June 14.

NLRB Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon filed the complaint after a yearlong investigation of an unfair-labor practices charge brought in March 2010 by Seattle-based International Association of Machinists District 751, the largest union at Boeing.

The IAM said Boeing was retaliating for a 2008 strike, and seeking to discourage potential future strikes, when it chose to locate the second line in Charleston rather than in the Puget Sound area.

 

[sparkle8859]

Maybe there are some that haven't heard of the situation with the Boeing plant being planned for South Carolina, and then stymied by the Obama pro-labor bureaucrats. This is a big deal that must be defeated. If we get to the point where the NLRB can dictate where private businesses can and can not set up shop, our national economy will be in worse trouble than it already is. This is just another testament to this Boy President being an economic featherweight and a minion to the radical liberals and union thugs.

Review & Outlook: The Death of Right to Work - WSJ.com

So you are advocating taking away good paying jobs in one state to give low paying jobs in another? It was my understanding that to stimulate the economy normal working people had to spend more money. That way more goods are manufactured,more freight for us ,more jobs are created to keep up with the demand.And so on and so on. Am I too simplistic in my thinking?

 

[greg334]

Well it isn't low paying jobs in another, it is the problem that the union is dictating terms of employment to a company. It isn't the job of the government to ensure the fairness of a company when there isn't a need for it. I mean ok the company is looking out for their future, not the future of their unionized employees, so ... If things like this continue, I can see Boeing saying screw you and moving production out of the country altogether to avoid the hassle.

 

[purgoose10]

I live in S. Carolina and can tell you for a fact that Boeing is hiring and training as we speak. They have already completed the shell of the plant and working 24/7 finishing construction. Don't know what the Union can do about it but if they keep it up we'll have more moving here. My Brother who works the aerospace industry and lives in Seattle said the union has settled on the production of the 737 and they are adding a line to that assembly plant in Renton (so side of Seattle). I don't think the union can do anything about S.Carolina and it's deal. Boeing is slowly but surely moving from Seattle, clear signs since moving they're headquarters to Chicago in 2007. Little bit at a time.

Oh yes those low paying jobs are starting at 28 an hour for fuselage assembly. I don't think that's to shabby for a high school graduate.

 

[blackpup]

So you are advocating taking away good paying jobs in one state to give low paying jobs in another? It was my understanding that to stimulate the economy normal working people had to spend more money. That way more goods are manufactured,more freight for us ,more jobs are created to keep up with the demand.And so on and so on. Am I too simplistic in my thinking?

I do not think the unions are helping themselves with this stance.

jimmy

 

[Pilgrim]

So you are advocating taking away good paying jobs in one state to give low paying jobs in another? It was my understanding that to stimulate the economy normal working people had to spend more money. That way more goods are manufactured,more freight for us ,more jobs are created to keep up with the demand.And so on and so on. Am I too simplistic in my thinking?

They aren't taking jobs out of WA - these are new jobs in SC and they aren't low paying by any stretch of the imagination. The hourly rate or base salary might be a little bit less due to the lower cost of living in Charleston, but the compensation for these workers will be very fair.

"As of the 1st quarter of 2009, the annualized average wage in aircraft manufacturing in Washington State was $89,600 – this average includes all occupations in the industry, not just machinists. Since the mix of jobs in South Carolina is similar to the mix in Washington, the average is reasonable."

Washington State - Boeing: Q & A - Our Northwest Economy

SC is a right to work state, and the union does not have a right to override their existing state law. Given the fact that Boeing is behind schedule on delivery of these planes, they are smart in setting up shop where they won't be vulnerable to union strikes at critical times. Notice the auto companies that are in the best shape right now and what they have in common, for the most part - they don't have to deal with the UAW. We will see more of their production go to plants in right to work states if they continue to have problems with the union in WA.

Keep in mind what Peterbilt did a couple of years ago with their plant in Madison, TN where the union had caused numerous problems over the years. The union at that plant struck one time too many, so they closed it and moved the production to Denton, TX - problem solved.