this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
170 points (99.4% liked)

Work Reform

10144 readers
1187 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] JoshuaFalken 48 points 3 months ago (2 children)

This article doesn't specify, but based on the previous 25% offer, I'm guessing this new and improved proposal is also structured over four years.

New information to me is that the union initially sought a 40% increase. Kind of silly to think that when 90% of your workers decline an offer - any offer - that adding an extra few percent will get you an agreement.

I wrote this before when the union declined the 25% bump, but it bears repeating:

If Boeing were to pay the 40% the union is looking for upon returning to work, and committed to annual salary increases that were double whatever inflation is moving forward, they would have 32,000 employees that would never strike the rest of their careers.

[–] Sanctus 41 points 3 months ago (1 children)

But then the shareholders get less ROI and the bench needs their till.

[–] ArbiterXero 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

How would they afford next year’s stock buyback?

[–] pdxfed 2 points 3 months ago

Think of all the "extra" bolts that competent mechanics and engineers would put in airplane doors, you'd hurt margins...slightly. Hard no from Board.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

What do you mean the article doesn't specify? It's literally the first sentence of the article.

Boeing increased its wage proposal to tens of thousands of striking workers on Monday, offering a 30% general wage increase over four years in what it called its "best and final" offer as a work stoppage that began on September 13 drags on.

[–] JoshuaFalken 4 points 3 months ago

Funny, I went through the article twice looking for the term length. Maybe I missed it because it's written and I was looking for a digit. Thanks for pointing that out.