How the Obama administration is Using Executive Po

companies are no longer free to operate in their own best interest ....

How the Obama administration is Using Executive Power to Support Union Goals:What The NLRB’s Recent Complaint Reveals


Last week, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) filed a complaint against Boeing that the firm cannot open a new factory in a “right to work” state, South Carolina, because the move was undertaken to avoid strikes that plagued the firm’s factory in Puget Sound, Washington. Is this a new departure for the Board, and does it in any way go way beyond its original mandate?

<snip>


Now, recent events reveal that labor, having failed to pass card check for the time being, is trying to use the new pro-union Board stacked with new appointments made by President Obama to hurt business and in effect make fiscally sound business decisions illegal by government fiat. Last Wednesday the NLRB filed a complaint seeking to force Boeing to stop building a new airplane plant near Charleston, South Carolina — a “right to work state” — and to expand the current plant that exists in the state of Washington.

Boeing’s plant is near Puget Sound, and negotiations with the International Association of Machinists collapsed when the union refused to agree to a long-term no strike clause. What Boeing was upset about was that the IAM went on strike four times since 1989, and the company claimed it cost them nearly $2 billion in lost revenue.

The NLRB complaint cites the words of a senior Boeing official, who told The Seattle Times that “we cannot afford to have a work stoppage, you know, every three years.” The plant, however, had been planned for the past two years, and Boeing has already hired one thousand workers who would not have jobs if the company is prohibited from building in South Carolina. So it comes down to whether the union will stop non-union workers from getting a job and earning a living, in order to force Boeing to build and expand next to the plant that already exists in Puget Sound. And, it turns out that at the Puget Sound factory, Boeing has already hired 2000 more workers since October of 2009, even though they had already announced construction of the Charleston plant!

In fact, that Washington plant not only still exists, but is scheduled to assemble seven planes each month compared to three in the new Charleston facility. Yet the union claims that Boeing is “inherently destructive or the rights guaranteed employees” by federal labor law. The union local’s president argued that Boeing was trying “to intimidate our members with the idea that the company would take away their work unless they made concessions at the bargaining table.”

But in fact, what the NLRB is doing is using a labor grievance as an excuse to interfere with a corporation’s right to build plants were it wants, and a Boeing executive is correct when he says that the NLRB complaint is “legally frivolous and represents a radical departure from both NLRB and Supreme Court precedent.” A corporation certainly has the right to consider whether or not strikes will occur that interfere with production, when making a decision where to operate. Since Boeing is not closing the Washington plant, and is actually hiring more workers there, it is hardly a case of workers losing jobs when a new plant is built elsewhere.

Indeed, it marks a new departure in the corporatist and statist policy of the Obama administration. For the first time, a government board dominated by pro-union appointees is being empowered to tell a private corporation where to build a new factory. The NLRB decision, as an editorial in The Examiner points out, violated the existing Boeing agreement with the IAM that allows the firm to build in other areas.

[bcp (Premo)]

You know, the administration can maybe stop a major company and contributor from opening a plant in another state to avoid the foolish demands of a greedy union.

However, there is no way they can stop that same company from opening a new plant in another country. And if I owned Boeing, or if I Controlled the company, that is exactly what I would do. I would open somewhere in Germany or France, ( or maybe Iraq just to really piss off the administration) then I would shut down all U.S jobs and further throw the countries unemployment numbers in the tank.
Any complaints and I pretty much would be willing to scale back and just make sure that no spare parts, or new equipment be allowed sold to the U.S.

I would also try to convince any other manufacturer of planes or repair parts to do the same.
Let the unions shut down the air industry in the country.

Hmm yeah ......



isn't that what the AF Tanker fight was all about ....... EDS would have been building overseas ...... Boeing is home grown

[ImnoMensa]

Originally Posted by bcp

You know, the administration can maybe stop a major company and contributor from opening a plant in another state to avoid the foolish demands of a greedy union.

However, there is no way they can stop that same company from opening a new plant in another country. And if I owned Boeing, or if I Controlled the company, that is exactly what I would do. I would open somewhere in Germany or France, ( or maybe Iraq just to really piss off the administration) then I would shut down all U.S jobs and further throw the countries unemployment numbers in the tank.
Any complaints and I pretty much would be willing to scale back and just make sure that no spare parts, or new equipment be allowed sold to the U.S.

I would also try to convince any other manufacturer of planes or repair parts to do the same.
Let the unions shut down the air industry in the country.

That might not work out so well when it comes to getting huge contracts from Government.

While Obama is in office the Unions have a lock on the White House. They own it. They bought it fair and square. What we have to do is get rid of Obama, and it won't be easy.

[bcp (Premo)]

Originally Posted by EmptyTimCup

Hmm yeah ......



isn't that what the AF Tanker fight was all about ....... EDS would have been building overseas ...... Boeing is home grown

with our economy it wont be long before things like the refuling tanker will be scrapped anyway. Europe is poised to take the lead as the worlds richest nations.
I am fairly certain that the money lost on the tanker should the contract be pulled would be more than made up in reasonable labor costs vs paying the extortion money to the unions.

Let Europe innovate and produce the new products for the new century.

To be honest, if i personnally owned Boeing as a private company and had all say in its doings, I would complete the current contracts however and as fast as I could, I would then take on no more contracts, I would leave just enough manufacturing to take care of any warrenty issues that could come up and I would shut down all new manufacturing and design.

I would do everything I could to hurt the unions that are trying to strong arm with threats.

[Bean Machine]

Bump to bury noboy