• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Labor Board Tells Boeing New Factory Breaks Law

DontDoIt

DontDoIt

Active member
Joined
Jan 18, 2011
Messages
391
Reaction score
72
Location
Illinois, Land of Liberals
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/21/business/21boeing.html

the National Labor Relations Board under President Obama, the agency filed a complaint Wednesday seeking to force Boeing to bring an airplane production line back to its unionized facilities in Washington State instead of moving the work to a nonunion plant in South Carolina.
Click to expand...

Maybe one day some of the pro-union lovers including the president will realize that more and more businesses don't agree with being unionized.

Thoughts?
 
Whovian said:
already another thread on this.
Click to expand...
Hmm didn't see it, my apologies.

whysoserious said:
Business has never agreed with being unionized. That's the point of unions. If unions and business agreed there would be no point to having unions.
Click to expand...
Then why does the government continually and enforcing interfer with business trying to push through unionization if 9/10 businesses don't like it?
 
shintao said:
So, more businesses do not want to be unionized. Why do you think that is?
Click to expand...
From the standpoint of a business owner it would cause you to pay more for less, and have to hassel through strikes. It also has it's disadvantages from a workers perspective too, but that is a different topic.
 
whysoserious said:
Business has never agreed with being unionized. That's the point of unions. If unions and business agreed there would be no point to having unions.
Click to expand...

In fact they were pretty violently opposed to them when they first came on the scene. Shot some people dead they did.
 
whysoserious said:
Business has never agreed with being unionized. That's the point of unions. If unions and business agreed there would be no point to having unions.
Click to expand...

That is not true, for a whole lot of reasons.
 
DontDoIt said:
From the standpoint of a business owner it would cause you to pay more for less, and have to hassel through strikes. It also has it's disadvantages from a workers perspective too, but that is a different topic.
Click to expand...

Unions are people, so it is the same topic. Where has a business paid more for less using union help? Or faced strikes instead of walk outs? And what disadvantaged workers are your refering to? Union workers or nonunion workers?
 
... the labor board said that Boeing’s decision to transfer a second production line for its new 787 Dreamliner passenger plane to South Carolina was motivated by an unlawful desire to retaliate against union workers for their past strikes in Washington and to discourage future strikes. The agency’s acting general counsel, Lafe Solomon, said it was illegal for companies to take actions in retaliation against workers for exercising the right to strike. ...
Click to expand...

smoking gun communications point to boeing engaging in unfair labor practices

federal government enforces those legal requirements


my prediction is that boeing will be allowed to remain in charleston with stipulations requiring any terminations/layoffs to first be required at the sc facility

that would make the union whole
 
justabubba said:
smoking gun communications point to boeing engaging in unfair labor practices

federal government enforces those legal requirements


my prediction is that boeing will be allowed to remain in charleston with stipulations requiring any terminations/layoffs to first be required at the sc facility

that would make the union whole
Click to expand...

Yeah, I hate to see that, but you maybe right. Boeing should have the right to walk on an expired union agreement if it is up for re-negotiating, or decide not to have union help, if that is the way the workers vote.
 
What always confuses me about those that keep sticking up for those poor union workers is this. If this 2nd line of of Boeing is so profitable, then why don't the union, just buy them out … keep it where it is, and then they could share all that profit among themselves?

How much of an investment could it be, from what I can find out there are approx. 180,000 members of this union, so if they invested just $10,000 each that would be 1.8 billion dollars for that one line. Problem solved, seeing it would be a workers owned company there should never be another strike. With those huge profits being made by Boeing, why workers bonuses should more then pay off their investments in just a few years.

I know this will never happen, because unions want to enjoy all that they can, without any of the risks of putting up their own money. I just can't help but to think, if they were to put up their own money, and risk their livelihood, they would see things differently.
 
The Barbarian said:
What always confuses me about those that keep sticking up for those poor union workers is this. If this 2nd line of of Boeing is so profitable, then why don't the union, just buy them out … keep it where it is, and then they could share all that profit among themselves?

How much of an investment could it be, from what I can find out there are approx. 180,000 members of this union, so if they invested just $10,000 each that would be 1.8 billion dollars for that one line. Problem solved, seeing it would be a workers owned company there should never be another strike. With those huge profits being made by Boeing, why workers bonuses should more then pay off their investments in just a few years.

I know this will never happen, because unions want to enjoy all that they can, without any of the risks of putting up their own money. I just can't help but to think, if they were to put up their own money, and risk their livelihood, they would see things differently.
Click to expand...

Why of course, just like any worker who choses to slave for someone else in exchange for bread & water. Did you buy the company you work for? Were you Union? LOL!
 
The Barbarian said:
What always confuses me about those that keep sticking up for those poor union workers is this. If this 2nd line of of Boeing is so profitable, then why don't the union, just buy them out … keep it where it is, and then they could share all that profit among themselves?

How much of an investment could it be, from what I can find out there are approx. 180,000 members of this union, so if they invested just $10,000 each that would be 1.8 billion dollars for that one line. Problem solved, seeing it would be a workers owned company there should never be another strike. With those huge profits being made by Boeing, why workers bonuses should more then pay off their investments in just a few years.

I know this will never happen, because unions want to enjoy all that they can, without any of the risks of putting up their own money. I just can't help but to think, if they were to put up their own money, and risk their livelihood, they would see things differently.
Click to expand...

Well, for one, Boeing isn't going to sell a production line for planes that cost $200 million each for $1.8 billion and create competition for their own freaking airplane.
 
Last edited:
I believe Unions are run like the Mafia and act as the same. They also are blindly following and anti-American who I see as a Godless Ideologue, who is bent of our destruction in favor of his idea of Socialist/Marxist utopia.
 
shintao said:
Why of course, just like any worker who choses to slave for someone else in exchange for bread & water. Did you buy the company you work for? Were you Union? LOL!
Click to expand...

Are you for real? Now a job at Boeing is equal to being a slave?

You are worse than a racist because you minimize the ugliness of true slavery with such reprehensible comparisons. Have you no dignity?
 
DontDoIt said:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/21/business/21boeing.html



Maybe one day some of the pro-union lovers including the president will realize that more and more businesses don't agree with being unionized.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...


The Mayor knows the pro-union people don't give a rat's ass who doesn't want to be in a union, if they get the power, they're going to force them in, anyway.

They're certainly not going to let a company move to a free state when they're already in a slave state.

Shades of the Underground Railroad....
 
justabubba said:
smoking gun communications point to boeing engaging in unfair labor practices

federal government enforces those legal requirements


my prediction is that boeing will be allowed to remain in charleston with stipulations requiring any terminations/layoffs to first be required at the sc facility

that would make the union whole
Click to expand...

Nothing "unfair" about opening an assembly line in a different state. Not in the least.

If Boing had opted to open the same facility in a slave state, there would be no mention of "unfair" trade practices, hence the practice is not inherently unfair.

Also, deciding who to layoff or fire, and where, isn't a subject the federal government has any authority to interfere with. Those decisions are proprietary to the owners of the company. Perhaps this is why Boing is desirous of shifting portions of it's operations out of a slave state and into a free state?
 
Last edited:
Seattle (and Boeing) was built by union workers, not by entrepreneurial ideas and investments. If the capitalists all go away, all will be well in Seattle.
 
Management threatened to move jobs as part of a labor dispute? That's a big no no in the worker/management relationship. If the threat is documented and that new work was documented as to be performed by the union employees and then that same work has been moved someplace else non-union then I believe the workers have a reasonable gripe. Seems like management has made some poor decisions here.

Although manufacturers have long moved plants to nonunion states, the board noted that Boeing officials had, in internal documents and news interviews, specifically cited the strikes and potential future strikes as a reason for their 2009 decision to expand in South Carolina.
Click to expand...


The NLRA protects the rights of employees to:
* Form or join a union
* Bargain collectively for a contract that sets wages, benefits, hours, and other working conditions
* Discuss wages, working conditions or union organizing with co-workers or a union
* Act with co-workers to improve working conditions by raising complaints with an employer or a government agency
* Strike and picket their employer, depending on the purpose or means of the action
* Choose not to join a union or engage in union activities
* Organize coworkers to decertify a union
If employees choose a union as their bargaining representative, the union and employer must bargain in good faith in a genuine effort to reach a binding agreement setting out terms and conditions of employment. The union is required to fairly represent employees in bargaining and enforcing the agreement.
Employers may not:
* Prohibit employees from discussing a union during non-work time, or from distributing union literature during non-work time in non-work areas, such as parking lots or break rooms
* Question employees about their union support or activities in a manner that discourages them from engaging in that activity
* Fire, demote, transfer, reduce hours or take other adverse action against employees who join or support a union or act with co-workers for mutual aid and protection, or who refuse to engage in such activity
* Threaten to close their workplace if employees form or join a union
* Promise or grant promotions, pay raises, or other benefits to discourage or encourage union support
* Prohibit employees from wearing union hats, buttons, t-shirts, and pins in the workplace except under special circumstances
* Spy on or videotape peaceful union activities and gatherings
Click to expand...


Maybe the solution is to organize the workers in South Carolina.

Note to management: Don't publicly threaten to move jobs over labor issues and if you must move jobs, be a good citizen do it tactfully.
 
shintao said:
Where has a business paid more for less using union help?
Click to expand...
Obvious examples: Schools and auto manufacturing. And both have gone down the tubes.

.
 
mattillac said:
Management threatened to move jobs as part of a labor dispute? That's a big no no in the worker/management relationship. If the threat is documented and that new work was documented as to be performed by the union employees and then that same work has been moved someplace else non-union then I believe the workers have a reasonable gripe. Seems like management has made some poor decisions here.





Maybe the solution is to organize the workers in South Carolina.

Note to management: Don't publicly threaten to move jobs over labor issues and if you must move jobs, be a good citizen do it tactfully.
Click to expand...

Imagine that. Labor unions are screwing up every modern American industry that we have. Oh, if they are major American businesses that have the nerve to think they can’t be socialist union puppets, the brown shirts will come and fix it. Walmart?
 
Last edited:
Mayor Snorkum said:
Nothing "unfair" about opening an assembly line in a different state. Not in the least.

If Boing had opted to open the same facility in a slave state, there would be no mention of "unfair" trade practices, hence the practice is not inherently unfair.

Also, deciding who to layoff or fire, and where, isn't a subject the federal government has any authority to interfere with. Those decisions are proprietary to the owners of the company. Perhaps this is why Boing is desirous of shifting portions of it's operations out of a slave state and into a free state?
Click to expand...

you reveal your ignorance of labor law
"unfair" as in unfair labor practice is found when the employer intentionally takes actions detrimental to the interests of its employees/union
in this instance, internal management communications and a public statement made it evident that boeing established another non-unionized assembly line to avoid having to deal with the union and to have an alternative to avoid the impact of union actions (such as a strike)
under federal law, that is found to be anti-labor practice. now the federal board responsible for enforcing the law will take boeing to court and will hammer out the impact and implementation of that action and to examine to what degree boeing actions adversely affected the interests of the employees/union

as an aside, the employees/union, like the employer, is subject to that same restriction from engaging in unfair labor practices. the law is not one sided
if you want to become more acquainted with the provisions of federal labor law (and you really need to, based on what was found within your post), the statutes will be found at 5 USC chapter 71
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom