Union Rejects Final Offer From Boeing; 777X Future Still Up In The Air

This is an archived article and the information in the article may be outdated. Please look at the time stamp on the story to see when it was last updated.

As the third day of negotiations between Boeing and the International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers has come to a close, there is no resolution in sight.

Thursday afternoon, union leaders rejected Boeing’s best and final counter-proposal.

According to a release from Boeing, the revised 8-year contract extension would have built on the company’s previous offer with substantial economic improvements. Employees would have received a $15,000 bonus as well as additional dental benefits.

The company would have committed to placing final assembly of the 777X, as well as the fabrication and assembly of the airplane’s composite wing, at a Boeing location in the Puget Sound area.

The rejection means Huntsville and 54 other sites across the country are still in the running to be the new development site for the next generation 777x jetliner.

Huntsville leaders have been pushing hard for the project. Around a dozen sites got pre-approval to submit proposals.  However, several sites may be chosen for different aspects of the operation.

Possibly four or more sites could win some aspect of production from this process.

Boeing officials say a decision could be expected as soon as early 2014.


  • preacher

    These unions are a “cancer” to society. Maybe these greedy union workers will get what they “rightfully” deserve and Boeing will expand in Huntsville and the leeches will learn a hard life lesson. They don’t “own” these companies, so Boeing should send all of them packing. The fast food industry is hiring. Amen…

    • Wake Up

      Right to Work (RTW) states pass laws that make it very difficult for unions to be strong supporters of the workers. The GDP, or the total amount of goods and services produced in a year, is probably the most accessible single measure of standard of living. A high GDP positively correlates with a high standard of living, and changes in living standards can be swiftly observed in corresponding changes in the GDP.

      According to 2009 data, the GDP per capita for union-friendly states collectively was $43,899, while the GDP per capita for the RTW states was $38,755 or 13.3 percent lower. It is worth emphasizing that GDP represents goods and services produced, and is not the same as per capita income. Thus, the initial analysis of this measure indicates that the union-friendly states appear to be significantly “more productive” than the RTW states.

      Poverty rates: Obviously a state with a high standard of living would be expected to have fewer residents living in poverty. Using U.S. Census income data, and applying it to the two groups of states, we find again that RTW states have a lower standard of living. Eleven of the 15 states with the highest poverty rates are RTW states, while nine of the 11 states with the lowest are union-friendly. Furthermore, the percentage of the 2008 population living in poverty in RTW states was 14.4 percent, while the percentage in union-friendly states was 12.4 percent. To put this difference in perspective, if the rate of poverty in RTW states was extended across the nation, an additional 3,670,000 American men, women, and children would be living in poverty today.
      Health insurance: One would expect that a state with a high standard of living would have more of its citizens covered by basic health insurance, giving them access to preventive care and swift medical treatment. And, once again, the Census data show that the union-friendly states have a higher standard of living. Fully 11 of the 13 states with the lowest uninsured rates are union-friendly states, while 11 of the 15 states with the highest uninsured rates are RTW states. The median uninsured rate for union-friendly states is 12.6 percent, while for RTW it is 15.7 percent. Again, to put this in perspective, if the rates of non-insured citizens in RTW states were spread across the country, then an additional 8,640,480 Americans would be uninsured and suffer a lack of access to affordable health care.

      Life expectancy: While there may seem to be little reason for a correlation to exist between RTW laws and the life expectancy of citizens in those states, life expectancy data from the Harvard School of Public Health was included here because it is a very common measure of standard of living. And, as it turns out, the data reveal a surprising trend. Of the 13 states with the highest life expectancy rates, 10 are union-friendly states. Conversely, of the 12 states with the lowest life-expectancy rates, only two are union-friendly states. In union-friendly states, citizens can expect to live 77.6 years (the median), while citizens in RTW states can expect to die at 76.7.

      Amen. . . .

    • Wake Up

      Detroit is only one city. What I provided takes a look at the big picture that is obscured by the anecdotal evidence of the small view. That is why you have to look at whole states and areas — not just one city. Would you say that the South is a failure because we have the Birmingham example?

Comments are closed.