Boeing (BA) CEO James McNerney on the U.S. government suit claiming the company's decision to...

Boeing (BA) CEO James McNerney on the U.S. government suit claiming the company's decision to build its 787 Dreamliner plant in South Carolina was retaliation against the unionized workforce in Washington state: a "fundamental assault on the capitalist principles that have sustained America's competitiveness."

From other sites
Comments (23)
  • Poor Texan
    , contributor
    Comments (3527) | Send Message
    "fundamental assault on the capitalist principles that have sustained America's competitiveness."


    Isn't that our current administration's goal? We need to take the ownership of all corporations away from the owners and give it to the workers. What could be more fair (and destructive) than that.
    11 May 2011, 06:07 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
    Why do workers in WA, rate above those in NC?


    Perhaps because they are Non-Union?


    Just a wild guess on my part.
    11 May 2011, 06:10 PM Reply Like
  • Cincinnatus
    , contributor
    Comments (6187) | Send Message
    Unions are no doubt the driving force, but it doesn't hurt that WA is a deep blue state. It's about the opposite of South Carolina, so Chicago-style politics are at work here as well.
    12 May 2011, 02:43 AM Reply Like
  • Hoopono
    , contributor
    Comments (381) | Send Message
    "fundamental assault on the capitalist principles that have sustained America's competitiveness."


    Of course. What would you expect? The administration would rather keep it's labor bosses pacified than actually support job creating initiatives from private industry.
    11 May 2011, 06:11 PM Reply Like
  • Windsun33
    , contributor
    Comments (4431) | Send Message
    This is so blatantly petty and politically driven that even some of the Democratic congress critters are scratching their heads. This may also cause any other company contemplating a move to Washington to have 2nd thoughts.
    11 May 2011, 06:39 PM Reply Like
  • 1980XLS
    , contributor
    Comments (3360) | Send Message
    Obama, the chosen one, will pick and choose the winners, that are more likely to choose him, come election day.
    11 May 2011, 06:45 PM Reply Like
  • tigersam
    , contributor
    Comments (1707) | Send Message
    What retaliation? BA is subsidies by government. If you sign the deal with devil you can not back out.
    11 May 2011, 07:00 PM Reply Like
  • The Geoffster
    , contributor
    Comments (4291) | Send Message
    BA isn't exactly capitalist as much as corporatist. It feeds at the DOD's trough and isn't above engaging in a little baksheesh from time to time. Ogotcha is just playing the same game, but in reverse. He's a union boy after all. Still, as a capitalist, I support the move to S.C.
    11 May 2011, 07:45 PM Reply Like
  • pre-boomer
    , contributor
    Comments (26) | Send Message
    The first revolution was about ' taxation without representation '. Now we have ' government by the unelected '. All of the various parts of the constitution and various court decisions regarding how government should work and limiting is powers DO NOT APPLY to the unelected departments, etc. now in charge in Washington. The recent actions of the NLRB are a perfect example.
    11 May 2011, 08:15 PM Reply Like
  • davidbdc
    , contributor
    Comments (3194) | Send Message
    I'd say we have both.


    Our children and grandchildren are being buried in debt due to spending they have no say on. And our federal government is home to literally 100's of thousands of professional do-gooders who believe its their purpose in life to tell others what to do.


    Our way of life is being destroyed from within.
    11 May 2011, 08:38 PM Reply Like
  • Pathfinder's
    , contributor
    Comments (212) | Send Message
    Bill Daley, current Chief of Staff to President Obama, was sitting on
    the Boeing Board of Directors and voted in favor of the new plant
    in South Carolina.


    This NLRB inquiry is no more than a political inquiry, for the benefit of the IAM and Aerospace workers Union.
    But, it should give us all pause, to wonder what the understanding of the Principles of Business and responsibility of Business, especially International Corporations.


    And it should make us wonder if these guys in the Washington
    Political Elite, understand the importance of Boeing , Lockheed Martin,
    Pratt and Whitney, Northrop Grumman, etc.


    Then again, They are the Washington Political Elite, they want High Speed Trains.
    11 May 2011, 08:37 PM Reply Like
  • If U Say So
    , contributor
    Comments (348) | Send Message
    I find it hilarious that the administration thinks they appear impartial because they've allowed the NLRB an attempt to circumvent the US constitution. The NLRB is about as impartial with their administration appointees as is the black chamber of commerce which Obama put together in the White House after the actual black chamber of commerce turned on him. How low will this administration stoop? Perhaps after the 2012 Republican primaries are over Obama will rule them not legitimate and then name his own opponent.
    11 May 2011, 08:41 PM Reply Like
  • Windsun33
    , contributor
    Comments (4431) | Send Message
    The NLRB since obama has ruled about 95% in favor of unions in everything that has come up in past 2.5 years.
    12 May 2011, 02:20 AM Reply Like
  • Teutonic Knight
    , contributor
    Comments (3410) | Send Message
    Not a lawyer myself, but the case seems to me to be mind-boggling.


    Is there itched in stone somewhere saying that it is the 'rights' of the Washington state unions to 'demand' that those jobs cannot be moved elsewhere as deemed by the management and/or owners of the company?


    What about the rights of the company?


    Oh well, bureaucrats have to find something to do to justify their charge numbers.
    11 May 2011, 08:42 PM Reply Like
  • Econdoc
    , contributor
    Comments (2938) | Send Message
    he's right. this is disgusting. completely disgusting.


    11 May 2011, 09:08 PM Reply Like
  • been there
    , contributor
    Comments (81) | Send Message
    all you need to understand obama or any actions of his administration is the word marxist
    11 May 2011, 09:14 PM Reply Like
  • Riley F
    , contributor
    Comments (12) | Send Message
    I believe it, I had a few interviews with Boeing the past few months and needless to say, I have not been offered a job. The managers I interviewed with said they aren't doing much hiring, mostly moving in-between departments.
    11 May 2011, 09:56 PM Reply Like
  • wyostocks
    , contributor
    Comments (9113) | Send Message
    This administration's enemies list makes Nixon look like an amateur.
    Pray we have Watergate like hearings so we can hear the current version of John Dean tell all.
    Unfortunetly the MSM will never report about it even if it were to happen.
    11 May 2011, 11:08 PM Reply Like
  • Windsun33
    , contributor
    Comments (4431) | Send Message
    The possible enemies list is only part of it - probably the worst drain on taxpayers though is their select friends lists - the ones that get favored treatment and special loans, and often even a publicity visit from Obama. A123 (AONE) is a prime example of how government intervention either way usually goes all wrong.
    12 May 2011, 02:23 AM Reply Like
  • 867046
    , contributor
    Comments (380) | Send Message
    Boeing is almost a protected government monopoly. There would have been a tremendous uproar among republicans and democrats if EADS had won the tanker bid. The comments from the neo types further heighten the irony behind their remarks.


    As usual, our naive neo-republicans are off the mark. The ultimate issues are more subtle:


    Who is paying for the new SC facility? Well ultimately the government maybe is. Usually assembly labor is a small cost component of these aircraft. The expense to set up a new facility in SC most likely outweighs any labor cost savings. Once the facility is built and expensed (taxpayers pay for the facility if any military aircraft work is done because it's depreciation is a contract overhead expense) then Boeing can use it as a labor cost lever. It is a valid issue to question whether opening a new facility in SC will raise the overhead rates on current government contracts.


    I think the ultimate benefit to Boeing is the addition of another congressional delegation to the Boeing family. In a sense, Boeing is hedging against either a democratic or republican controlled federal government.
    11 May 2011, 11:45 PM Reply Like
  • Machiavelli999
    , contributor
    Comments (831) | Send Message


    You do have a good point in a sense that Boeing and the military-complex companies are heavily propped up by the government. And as a free market advocate, I cry only crocodile tears for them.


    But they are not the ones that are important here. It is a precedent that this judgement sets for ALL OTHER COMPANIES in the future. That the government can potentially now tell you where you can or can not build factories. How someone cannot see that as an unprecedented intrusion and a huge economic backbreaker is beyond me.
    12 May 2011, 01:55 AM Reply Like
  • Windsun33
    , contributor
    Comments (4431) | Send Message
    The new factory is being outfitted solely for the new Dreamliner. While I suppose that they could make a military version there, that does not seem to be the main focus.
    12 May 2011, 02:26 AM Reply Like
  • Cincinnatus
    , contributor
    Comments (6187) | Send Message
    This is more than just a union issue. Obama is giving preferential treatment to a deep blue state and retaliating against a deeply red state. This is Chicago-style political and economic thuggery at work.
    12 May 2011, 02:53 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