Boeing workers approve contract securing new 777X for Seattle

Boeing (BA) machinists approve a labor contract that gives up some pension benefits in order to secure assembly of the new 777X airplane for the Seattle area, solidifying the company's presence in the region.

Had the workers rejected the offer, Boeing would have considered making the successor to the 777 widebody jet elsewhere, and had received offers from 22 states interested in hosting the new factory; instead, the company says "the future of Boeing in the Puget Sound region has never looked brighter."

The vote approving the eight-year contract was 51%-49%.

From other sites
Comments (35)
    , contributor
    Comments (133) | Send Message


    Well yes, I guess so, but 51-49 is not exactly
    an overwhelming yes.


    Boeing can make two variants, The 777-49
    and the 777-51.


    Plainly labelled please, I would opt for the 51.
    4 Jan 2014, 03:48 AM Reply Like
  • GarryGR
    , contributor
    Comments (354) | Send Message
    From some of what I've read, it appears that some of the older union members thought their pensions would be axed, if the contract was approved. An article today (1/3) quoted an employee who's retiring soon as saying that he got the impression, from the local IAM, that his pension would be gone, if the contract was approved! Man, how could they be so uninformed? And, if the local IAM was intentionally promoting that impression, that's disgusting.


    Thank God, cooler heads prevailed. You'd think with recent union fiascos, such as the UAW and GM & Chrysler, people could recognize reality, but, alas, apparently many never will. Reminds me of a Winston Churchill quote: “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter".
    4 Jan 2014, 04:34 AM Reply Like
  • brushman5
    , contributor
    Comments (50) | Send Message
    Garry on the next contract the younger members will sell out the older ones jest like they intend to in St Louis.
    4 Jan 2014, 10:23 AM Reply Like
  • dacama1
    , contributor
    Comments (221) | Send Message
    Winston was and continues to be so correct.
    4 Jan 2014, 07:25 AM Reply Like
  • dacama1
    , contributor
    Comments (221) | Send Message
    Just wait for the first strike...
    4 Jan 2014, 07:30 AM Reply Like
  • alexcampbello
    , contributor
    Comments (278) | Send Message
    not till 2024 ....
    4 Jan 2014, 12:03 PM Reply Like
  • paloaltolife
    , contributor
    Comments (27) | Send Message
    The union did the smart thing to 'approve' the offer.


    So, the jobs stay in Seattle area for now for the next ten years.


    Let us fight the battle on 'pension' benefits at a national level.




    Seelam Reddy a Boeing retiree
    4 Jan 2014, 08:22 AM Reply Like
    , contributor
    Comments (26) | Send Message
    The pension battle is over.
    4 Jan 2014, 01:27 PM Reply Like
  • Deja Vu
    , contributor
    Comments (1828) | Send Message
    Bad decision by Boeing to offer them another contract. The 777X is going to be plagued by poor workmanship causing enormous loss of goodwill and repair expenses for Boeing. Boeing should have relocated to right to work state.
    4 Jan 2014, 08:28 AM Reply Like
  • Mike Maher
    , contributor
    Comments (2867) | Send Message
    From what I heard yesterday, they're having some issues with the quality of the work being done down in Charleston. Not sure how true it is, but I'd imagine its very difficult to move production to a new state and set up that sort of workforce and infrastructure. Building the plane with a more experienced staff might be the prudent thing to do until they have more experience and perfect the process of building another production site and training and maintaining a full staff. Longer term I agree with you: there are 49 other states who would love that production facility and those jobs, and Boeing could probably get a lot of financial incentive from states like TX, PA, LA, OK that not only have cheaper labor, but also lower energy costs.
    4 Jan 2014, 09:44 AM Reply Like
  • Deja Vu
    , contributor
    Comments (1828) | Send Message
    There's two kinds of poor workmanship, inadvertent and deliberate. The UAW was famous for the second kind. I suspect Boeing will see the second kind too, in coming years, courtesy the IAM.
    4 Jan 2014, 10:20 AM Reply Like
  • abujordan
    , contributor
    Comments (173) | Send Message
    Employees who work in the railway or airline industries are not protected by a Right to Work law.


    4 Jan 2014, 11:50 AM Reply Like
  • Dantes_Will
    , contributor
    Comments (410) | Send Message
    This was the last nail in the coffin for my Boeing shares.


    Management did their customers a huge disservice by not separating manufacturing from over entitled Union workers who are brainwashed into thinking that they are underpaid and overworked by their Union heads.


    There is no winning with the Union. You get your concessions, and the entitled union workers will 'take it back' by under performing. I've worked with Union shops for over 20 years. This type of contractual retaliation never fails.
    4 Jan 2014, 01:28 PM Reply Like
  • Candy Cavalier
    , contributor
    Comments (34) | Send Message
    The Right to Work Law does not protect employees from getting fired though which is why corporations like to build in the states that have it. That means they have a right to fire you with no cause. It protects the employer not the employee.
    4 Jan 2014, 01:30 PM Reply Like
  • TAS
    , contributor
    Comments (4065) | Send Message
    A very astute observation.


    This is a "known known" for those of us used to working with union entitlements.
    4 Jan 2014, 03:52 PM Reply Like
  • bukdow
    , contributor
    Comments (860) | Send Message
    You are absolutely correct, Deja Vu. I presently work on the salary side for a unionized aerospace company. The UAW is nothing short of poison. From deliberate poor workmanship to sabotage to work holidays at triple-time the union employees are horrible. Of course, the union "leadership" keeps the union drone ignorant and misinformed. Even worse, the low information, entitlement class seems to becoming more and more a part of the union. These types are the worst. They spend their lives being told they are victims and taught to expect hand-outs, once the union fills their head with nonsense, they become completely insufferable.
    5 Jan 2014, 08:25 PM Reply Like
  • cjespo
    , contributor
    Comments (12) | Send Message
    Yea, like the plant in South Carolina where a lot of the planes being built had to be reworked.
    6 Jan 2014, 02:08 PM Reply Like
  • msteck
    , contributor
    Comments (53) | Send Message


    Boeing is not a airline, rather it is an aircraft manufacturer. Thus is it not exempt from any right to work laws in states where it builds it's airplanes.
    8 Jan 2014, 08:07 PM Reply Like
  • OptionManiac
    , contributor
    Comments (3506) | Send Message
    Boeing already has poor productivity in their South Carolina plant.
    4 Jan 2014, 08:44 AM Reply Like
    , contributor
    Comments (133) | Send Message
    It is never a good idea to do anything major
    if half are against it.


    Obamacare is a shining example. Not a
    single Republican voted for it, not one,
    this attempt to fundamentally change up
    to 20% of the entire economy.


    The result is the chaos we see and which
    will endure for another year at least, will
    be one-third above cost, and will cause
    misery and death to the millions who will
    not get proper medical care.


    The location of manufacturing should not
    depend on a near 50-50 union vote.


    If Boeing can go elsewhere, Boeing should.


    A near 50-50 vote can only mean eight years
    of trouble.
    4 Jan 2014, 09:00 AM Reply Like
  • msteck
    , contributor
    Comments (53) | Send Message
    Boeing can go wherever they want. They want to stay in Washington, and now that the union has finally given concessions they will stay there. The union vote did NOT directly determine where Boeing was going to build the 777.
    8 Jan 2014, 08:12 PM Reply Like
  • SoldHigh
    , contributor
    Comments (991) | Send Message
    This is going to end badly for Boeing. The Union leadership has demonstrated severe incompetence and poor leadership - both good reasons to build elsewhere. You can't trust these ignorant, lazy unions.
    4 Jan 2014, 10:11 AM Reply Like
  • msteck
    , contributor
    Comments (53) | Send Message
    But Boeing is choosing to stay in Washington, why do you think that is?


    I agree that there are a lot of problems with modern unions, their leadership and the politics associated with them, but prejudice and vitriol against the workers is really uncalled for. Workers at Boeing in Washington are hard working and competent and this is why Boeing is choosing to stay here rather than move somewhere else.
    8 Jan 2014, 08:18 PM Reply Like
  • Skezix
    , contributor
    Comments (54) | Send Message
    So Boeing went around the union to influence member voting with a P.R. campaign about moving. Why isn't this an unfair labor practice?
    4 Jan 2014, 01:07 PM Reply Like
  • Candy Cavalier
    , contributor
    Comments (34) | Send Message
    I do not understand, I personally want the BEST airplane machinists building the plane I am on, not someone who is learning how to build planes. A car is one thing, an airplane much more complicated. Look at the problems of the 787 being outsourced. No, give me the best.
    4 Jan 2014, 01:35 PM Reply Like
  • msteck
    , contributor
    Comments (53) | Send Message
    I completely agree and Boeing must as well, which is why they decided to stay. Just look at the problems they have had with workers at other plants (South Carolina), personally I don't want to be flying in a plane built by a low paid and poorly treated employee. I'm not saying unions are perfect - far, far from it - but I certainly trust the quality of work in Washington to be much higher than in _insert poor southern state here_.
    8 Jan 2014, 08:22 PM Reply Like
  • wyostocks
    , contributor
    Comments (9119) | Send Message
    49% voted to eliminate their jobs.
    Enough said.
    Boeing should move the manufacturing for that reason alone.
    4 Jan 2014, 01:56 PM Reply Like
  • fafatooey
    , contributor
    Comments (435) | Send Message
    Puget Sound Boeing workers are the most spoiled, overpaid, pompus, self-entitled bunch of fools. Ever. Boeing more than understands this, and they have been making a systematic and well planned exit from the region for 15 years. It will be all over soon
    4 Jan 2014, 03:17 PM Reply Like
  • msteck
    , contributor
    Comments (53) | Send Message
    You do realize that Boeing decided to build the 777x in Washington, right? Your comment makes no sense. They are staying you idiot; this is the opposite of an exit.


    Quit spouting prejudiced nonsense about union workers. There are plenty of major issues with unions in America, but attacking the workers rather than the union leaders is weak and sleazy
    8 Jan 2014, 08:29 PM Reply Like
  • jonashad
    , contributor
    Comments (105) | Send Message
    Boeing must beware - a 51-49 split may in strict terms be approval under the terms of a democratic election, but it indicates strong opposition which will inevitably lead to strife. Good management would realize that while final assembly of the 777X may successfully be carried out in the Socialist Republic of Washington, they might well be advised to build major subassemblies (like the composite wings) in right-to-work states. Bull-heads in unions can upend the agreement by either calling a series of strikes over trumped-up grievances, or sabotage of production.


    Given the deliberate misrepresentation by union officials to the members about the pension scheme adjustments, I would have precious little confidence that the Machineists would adhere to the spirit as well as the letter of the agreement.


    All it will take is one fatal aircraft crash resulting from deliberate sabotage to destroy Boeing.
    5 Jan 2014, 01:50 AM Reply Like
  • VinceLatona
    , contributor
    Comments (187) | Send Message
    Bad idea by Boeing....49% are against it - get it ? Half of the workers have an axe to grind and Boeing's 'negotiation' skills went out the window on top of it.


    Boeing will pay for this in the long run. The 'skills' that the Union brings are duplicatable. They are not a 'one off' set of skills.


    They sound like Obama when he said 'don't call my bluff.' Well if you are saying it's a bluff then....well...hello...
    5 Jan 2014, 02:05 AM Reply Like
  • KevinRemde
    , contributor
    Comments (578) | Send Message
    Disgruntled union airplane builders.
    New legal Pot use in WA.


    Looks like I'll be taking the train.
    5 Jan 2014, 08:43 AM Reply Like
  • Papaoomowmow
    , contributor
    Comments (371) | Send Message
    First an apology to a poster.. I wandered by here casually browsing Boeing stock. Encountered a post I thought mindlessly insulted millions of people and reflexively responded in kind. My post was deleted by SA (and it should have been) Again, sincere apologies to that poster.


    Quick soapbox.


    First I have no connection whatsoever with the Boeing unions or any other unions.


    Over the last couple of decades, I have a heard a tidal wave of demonizations of both corporations and unions. The latter far more popular... the former rapidly gaining ground.


    In my opinion, both are nonsense.


    In most cases, when corporations prosper it raises all boats. Fair bargaining agreements also raise all boats...often... over time.... for hundreds of millions of people who never will pay any dues. Profits are essential to everybody’s prosperity. So are solid wages for a work. (Businesses benefit from customers, don’t ya think?) And we all have enjoyed a slew of benefits that help make economic life more enjoyable and hopes more viable that never would have occurred without unions.The days of ten year old kids reporting tohe mines from dawn to dusk 6 days a week and families making just enough money to bring it all back to the company store and survive are thankfully long gone. Hope they stay that way.Thank unions.


    Corporations negotiate everything from the price of paper clips to grand mergers ferociously. The laundry from most of those backroom debates rarely meets the open wouldn’t be pretty if it did. Union squabbles are often on the evening news at one time or another. They aren’t pretty either. But workers need to be able to negotiate with some measure of clout too, because anyone who does not have a seat at any bargaining table anywhere anytime strongly tends to get screwed over time.


    And vigorous widespread and well funded efforts to keep the general workforce as poor, desperate and disposable as possible is economically suicidal for any nation in the long run. (even the Chinese governments know that)


    Foibles, excesses, and Calumnies on either side of the table? Sure. Sometimes. For every Jimmy Hoffa there are 5 Enrons.....But the general structure is sound.


    Nowadays the balance of creative tension between workers and companies seems to me be getting mighty lopsided.


    Best parable to the present scene I have read was in Forbes of all places. The gist, a Forbes columnist wrote guess it was a couple years ago..


    “ A multibillionaire, a nonunion worker and a union worker were sitting at a table with 100 cookies. The billionaire grabbed 99 and then whispered in the nonunion ear
    “Watch out for that union guy..that greedy fella wants your cookie”.
    6 Jan 2014, 04:49 PM Reply Like
  • GarryGR
    , contributor
    Comments (354) | Send Message
    I agree that workers have benefited greatly by the efforts of unions. However, unions no longer have the clout they used to have and they don't seem to be able to come up with a strategy to get back to, an at least, level playing field. Business, especially the global goliaths, have many tactics at their disposal, to do battle with unions. The biggest advantage, the ability to move work anywhere on the globe (out sourcing). But, global corporations compete with other global corporations. So, you have the downward pressure on the cost of labor. This can not be addressed by "local" union strikes etc. Those tactics just incentivize Business to find a way out, such as moving to locations where unions are weak.


    It seems obvious to me that until unions figure out how to do "global politics" successfully, they are DOOMED-DOOMED-DOOMED, like the commercial says! Hopefully, governments, as well as Business, will address the imbalance before we devolve into utter chaos!
    6 Jan 2014, 09:07 PM Reply Like
  • OptionManiac
    , contributor
    Comments (3506) | Send Message
    Just take a look at the rise in CEO pay and the fall of worker's pay, very telling on who has won.
    7 Jan 2014, 06:00 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)
ETF Screener: Search and filter by asset class, strategy, theme, performance, yield, and much more
ETF Performance: View ETF performance across key asset classes and investing themes
ETF Investing Guide: Learn how to build and manage a well-diversified, low cost ETF portfolio
ETF Selector: An explanation of how to select and use ETFs