Seattle

1590 readers

29 users here now

A community for news and discussion of Seattle, Washington and the surrounding area

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

steelrat

Boeing looks to avoid a strike with a 25% pay raise and plans to build its next plane in Seattle (qz.com)

submitted 3 months ago by chaospatterns to c/seattle

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 9 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] JoshuaFalken 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I wrote about this in another post but it's so slanted in Boeing's favour that near every outlet is reporting this as a 25% increase.

It's not effective right now - it's scaled over the next four years. This means it won't cover the rising cost of everything and it's peanuts compared to what the company could afford.

Honestly I wish one of these large unions would go all the way and get a salary that these workers actually deserve. We see these situations happen too often where the employer is obviously in the wrong, yet they have the capital - financially and otherwise - to stonewall the union and wait until they relent as the coffers run low.

[–] Anticorp 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

It also eliminates annual performance bonuses, doesn't improve their benefits, and leaves the pension that Boeing stole off the table. I was pretty excited when I read the news because someone close to me works there. When I talked to him about it he gave me the skinny. They're probably still going to strike if Boeing doesn't offer more.

Edited: my phone changed "doesn't" to "does", which completely changed the meaning

[–] JoshuaFalken 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I had read about that somewhere. It's unbelievable in some respects that if shareholders are looking for the company to make cuts, it always starts with the people towards the bottom of the ladder. So much could be recouped by taking the axe to the executive branch.

I wish your friend and his colleagues well. I hope they come out better off than this.

[–] Anticorp 4 points 3 months ago (1 children)

"Shareholder demands" is usually bullshit. It's the demands of a few majority shareholders who are greedy beyond measure. I agree with you on your proposition though.

[–] JoshuaFalken 3 points 3 months ago

That was a bit tongue in cheek, probably should have put it in quotes or something. The board can more or less make any decision so long as they can plausibly say it's in the interest of the shareholders. Like you say, this tends to match the interests of only a few entities, not actually everyone with stock.

I feel like a lot of problems arise from this short term view of any board's fiduciary responsibility to the 'shareholders'.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The response from workers should be "25%? That easily? You should have given us that raise a few years ago. We are still behind. Do better."

[–] Anticorp 4 points 3 months ago

That is their response so far.

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

"Here's half of what you ingrates asked for, now get back to work"

[–] Anticorp 4 points 3 months ago

Nah, we're moving forward with our strike.