Still look slike the union broke the rules...
United States Code: Title 29,158. Unfair labor practices | LII / Legal Information Institute
Bubba... since this is the correct statute... maybe you'd care to look at the link provided and find the specific one Boeing broke???to engage in, or to induce or encourage any individual employed by any person engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce to engage in, a strike or a refusal in the course of his employment to use, manufacture, process, transport, or otherwise handle or work on any goods, articles, materials, or commodities or to perform any services; or
Last edited by Whovian; 04-23-11 at 11:53 AM.
Excerpt from the NLRB website:
This appears to be the section referred to in the case:
THE BOEING COMPANY
and Case 19-CA-32431
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS
DISTRICT LODGE 751, affiliated with
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS
COMPLAINT AND NOTICE OF HEARING
International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers District
Lodge No. 751 ("Local 751" or the "Union"), affiliated with International Association of
Machinists and Aerospace Workers ("IAM"), has charged in Case 19-CA-32431 that
The Boeing Company ("Respondent" or "Boeing"), has been engaging in unfair labor
practices as set forth in the National Labor Relations Act (the "Act"), 29 U.S.C. § 151 et
The Unions home page:TITLE 29 > CHAPTER 7 > SUBCHAPTER II > § 151
§ 151. Findings and declaration of policy
The denial by some employers of the right of employees to organize and the refusal by some employers to accept the procedure of collective bargaining lead to strikes and other forms of industrial strife or unrest, which have the intent or the necessary effect of burdening or obstructing commerce by
(a) impairing the efficiency, safety, or operation of the instrumentalities of commerce;
(b) occurring in the current of commerce;
(c) materially affecting, restraining, or controlling the flow of raw materials or manufactured or processed goods from or into the channels of commerce, or the prices of such materials or goods in commerce; or
(d) causing diminution of employment and wages in such volume as substantially to impair or disrupt the market for goods flowing from or into the channels of commerce.
The inequality of bargaining power between employees who do not possess full freedom of association or actual liberty of contract, and employers who are organized in the corporate or other forms of ownership association substantially burdens and affects the flow of commerce, and tends to aggravate recurrent business depressions, by depressing wage rates and the purchasing power of wage earners in industry and by preventing the stabilization of competitive wage rates and working conditions within and between industries.
Experience has proved that protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce from injury, impairment, or interruption, and promotes the flow of commerce by removing certain recognized sources of industrial strife and unrest, by encouraging practices fundamental to the friendly adjustment of industrial disputes arising out of differences as to wages, hours, or other working conditions, and by restoring equality of bargaining power between employers and employees.
Experience has further demonstrated that certain practices by some labor organizations, their officers, and members have the intent or the necessary effect of burdening or obstructing commerce by preventing the free flow of goods in such commerce through strikes and other forms of industrial unrest or through concerted activities which impair the interest of the public in the free flow of such commerce. The elimination of such practices is a necessary condition to the assurance of the rights herein guaranteed.
It is hereby declared to be the policy of the United States to eliminate the causes of certain substantial obstructions to the free flow of commerce and to mitigate and eliminate these obstructions when they have occurred by encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining and by protecting the exercise by workers of full freedom of association, self-organization, and designation of representatives of their own choosing, for the purpose of negotiating the terms and conditions of their employment or other mutual aid or protection.
IAM District 751 Home
The Unions contract:
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT of November 2, 2008
BETWEEN THE BOEING COMPANY and
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS
AND AEROSPACE WORKERS, AFL-CIO
AND CERTAIN DISTRICTS AND LOCAL LODGES THEREOF
Article about Boeing's possible motives:
Boeing's whopping incentives | The Post and Courier, Charleston SC - News, Sports, Entertainment
IMO Boeing and certain other big corporation have merely become legal extortionist. The "How about I move all the jobs if you want a union?" and "We will move our factory to your town if you give us tax breaks for the next 50 years" is hurting wages and tax revenue......The Post and Courier's analysis, which relied on conservative figures, put the incentives-package value at more than $900 million, and it could easily be worth more.
The bulk of the incentive package comes in the form of property tax breaks in Charleston County worth at least $306 million over the next 30 years, and up-front money to be given to the company through state bonds at a cost of roughly $399 million.
Some items, like exempting Boeing from paying sales taxes on computers, jet fuel and construction materials, are difficult to value and were not included in The Post and Courier's estimate.
This much is clear: For every dollar Boeing has promised to invest, the state has promised Boeing more than $1.25 in benefits, either in up-front cash or in future tax breaks.....
Can't say as I blame the businesses for doing such when you hear of thugs like these people.
- Alexander Hamilton. Spiritual father of #NeverTrump
If a company decides to move out of one state becuase that state is a denial-of-freedom state, and moves to a pro-freedom, ie, right-to-work state, guess what?
It's literally no one's business but the stock holders.
It's not the unions' business, except to the extent they can vote the shares of stock they hold in the company.
A company should not be denied its freedom to move just becuase another state is less tolerant of racketeering unions.
A company, when the union's contract expires, has every moral freedom to fire all workers who refuse to come to work. It's under no obligation whatsoever to re-negotiate next year's bondage, if it feels it's more profitable to shift back to an non-union workforce.
The employer controls the job and who gets to do it, not the unions. That basic freedom should never be violated.