The Machinists and Aerospace Workers of Wichita chose death over
continued employment last week. With General Aviation feeling the
brunt of a double blow (cyclic sales downturn + record-poor economy)
Hawker Beechcraft has been struggling to stay afloat. The company and
Wichita have been working together to forge an economic incentive
package to keep the old Beechcraft in Wichita. The company announced
a couple of weeks ago that they would keep most operations in Wichita
if the Union would ratify an agreement to accept some wage and benefit
decreases - Otherwise, they had standing plans and offers to move.
The city of Wichita strongly urged the membership to accept the offer,
because Beech had already outsourced a significant amount of work to
Mexico; and a Louisiana location was strongly courting the company for
the 'full meal deal' - complete buyout of operations. The rumor mill
is also indicating that a major defense company is poised to buy some
of their lucrative training and defense work.
Guess what - the union said no!
Guess what else - The company announced this morning that most of its
remaining Wichita backshop and subassembly operations would be moved
to Mexico during the January through August 2011 time frame.
Immediate effect - 900 jobs, not counting 350 salaried workers that
were laid off this Friday. If the Louisiana deal works out, Beech,
one of the founding companies of Wichita's aircraft manufacturing
legacy, could be gone in a matter of 1-2 more years. For those who
yell "company greed" I would add that several of the executive
management team have invested millions from their pockets to help the
company develop new products during this downturn. They have also
accepted the same pay and benefit cuts proposed to the union.
Do these people not own televisions, radios or subscribe to
newspapers? They are converting Wichita from "Aircraft Capital of the
World" to "Food Stamp Capital of Kansas"; and they are taking hundreds
of salaried engineers, technicians and business ad folks with them.
As of last week, the week after the union vote, the outflow of
talented engineers and other professionals, to other companies had
begun - some companies are standing by to scoop up the cream of
Beech's crop.
Union greed and stupidity at its best......worst!
RonB
On Oct 25, 10:39=A0am, "Steve B" <[email protected]> wrote:
> "dpb" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
>
>
> > Robatoy wrote:
> >> On Oct 24, 9:03 pm, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> > ...
>
> >>> Question: Can't the workers get together and fire the fucking union
> >>> and accept the company's offer themselves, as free agents?
> > ...
>
> > ...
>
> >> Unity when it comes to safety issues is good... killing the company
> >> you work for with unreasonable demands is not.
> > ...
>
> > There seems to be a general misunderstanding started that somehow "the
> > union" is different than the members thereof in this situation.
>
> > This was a general membership vote to accept a _modification_ to an
> > existing contract (which wasn't that old, actually, having two years le=
ft
> > to run); it wasn't a decision made by some minority of the the workforc=
e
> > or union leadership and announced to the rank and file.
>
> > As I noted earlier, I think the outcome was almost preordained by the
> > orchestrated manner in which the whole thing was handled by H-B managem=
ent
> > and I think it was done deliberately in order to provide them a conveni=
ent
> > excuse for what had already been decided.
>
> > The whole thing came to a head and was demanded to be ratified in a ver=
y
> > short time frame; if they hadn't already come to a decision there was
> > afaict no reason that negotiations couldn't have continued and more eff=
ort
> > made to actually show reason why H-B requires such changes to a contrac=
t
> > to which they had only recently agreed. =A0Instead, the insistence and =
the
> > threats served only to antagonize rather than build a sense of shared
> > burden to work through difficult times. =A0Very poor tactics by managem=
ent
> > if really wanting concessions and consensus unless the intent was to fo=
rce
> > the outcome.
>
> All the more to prove that it was a plot originated by Dubya.
>
> It doesn't make any sense. =A0The workers basically had a vote on whether=
to
> keep the shop open or close it. =A0I think Dubya, Cheney, Rice, et al had=
a
> hand in pilfering the stuffing the ballot boxes. =A0Who would vote to clo=
se
> down their own shop?
>
> Except for a good union man, that is?
>
> Steve
Does Katherine Harris work for H-B? Is James BakerIII on their BoD?
My niece, who teaches in Clearwater KS, tells me that a lot of people
she knew from her teaching days in Wichita think there's something
wrong with the voting process. IOW, they just can't believe the
outcome.
On Oct 24, 7:13=A0pm, allen476 <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Oct 24, 2:38=A0pm, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > RonB wrote:
> > > The Machinists and Aerospace Workers of Wichita chose death over
> > > continued employment last week. =A0...
> > > a couple of weeks ago that they would keep most operations in Wichita
> > > if the Union would ratify an agreement to accept some wage and benefi=
t
> > > decreases ...
>
> > ...
>
> > I don't have a dog directly in the hunt altho do live in KS, not in
> > Wichita...
>
> > Call me cynical but having watched the overall situation w/ Cessna,
> > Boeing/Spirit, Lear/Bombardier the last several years and the most
> > recent Hawker-Beech stir-up, I'm convinced H-B management deliberately
> > caused a union vote on a contract they knew wouldn't be ratified for th=
e
> > express purpose of have an excuse to do what they had already decided t=
o
> > do. =A0If, on the outside chance the threats had worked, I'm also
> > convinced within another year or two at the outside we would have been
> > hearing the same dire news. =A0Note for those who aren't aware that thi=
s
> > vote was for a revision of an existing relatively new agreement some tw=
o
> > years before the end of their current contract.
>
> > As a Kansan, while I would certainly like to see Beech (not so much
> > Hawker since believe it was their cause after purchasing Beech that has
> > caused the majority of the problems as opposed to Beechcraft themselves
> > as an entity) stay in Wichita, but not at the expense of the rest of th=
e
> > State continuing to be held hostage and subsidizing them as the Guv's
> > plan to which the aforementioned vote was also tied.
>
> > Certainly the rest of us outside Wichita and KCK areas are tired of
> > always receiving the short end of the stick in KS revenue and services.
>
> > I don't generally have much sympathy for the union being self-employed
> > but I can't be too harsh on them on this one; I don't think other than
> > perhaps a little quicker time frame than otherwise might have been that
> > the end result is any different than if they had ratified this one.
>
> > --
>
> =A0 The problem isn't companies as a whole but rather the economy and
> the opportunity.
>
> =A0 The amount of jobs available has increased in this area. But the
> actual wages offered has declined. I applied for a job 2 months ago
> that I turned down 3 years ago because I was making better than what
> they were offering. I was interviewed again and was told that it was
> starting at $3 less per hour than when I turned it down. This company
> has been in the area a long time and always has work.
>
> =A0 So this company is no different. It sees opportunity. If the jobs
> are going to Louisiana, it is their decision. With many communities
> offering big incentives to attract jobs, I can't blame them especially
> in this economy. The cost savings are big in some cases and if they
> can't save where they are at, they will look elsewhere.
>
> =A0Now if they arbitrarily moved the jobs to Mexico, then I could see
> some outrage. But they had a chance to save themselves.....
>
> Allen
When your patch grows fewer beans, you eat fewer beans. IOW, I think
there is even going to be more belt-tightening now that they are all
out of work. Now their patch is growing no beans at all.
On Oct 24, 2:38=A0pm, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
> RonB wrote:
> > The Machinists and Aerospace Workers of Wichita chose death over
> > continued employment last week. =A0...
> > a couple of weeks ago that they would keep most operations in Wichita
> > if the Union would ratify an agreement to accept some wage and benefit
> > decreases ...
>
> ...
>
> I don't have a dog directly in the hunt altho do live in KS, not in
> Wichita...
>
> Call me cynical but having watched the overall situation w/ Cessna,
> Boeing/Spirit, Lear/Bombardier the last several years and the most
> recent Hawker-Beech stir-up, I'm convinced H-B management deliberately
> caused a union vote on a contract they knew wouldn't be ratified for the
> express purpose of have an excuse to do what they had already decided to
> do. =A0If, on the outside chance the threats had worked, I'm also
> convinced within another year or two at the outside we would have been
> hearing the same dire news. =A0Note for those who aren't aware that this
> vote was for a revision of an existing relatively new agreement some two
> years before the end of their current contract.
>
> As a Kansan, while I would certainly like to see Beech (not so much
> Hawker since believe it was their cause after purchasing Beech that has
> caused the majority of the problems as opposed to Beechcraft themselves
> as an entity) stay in Wichita, but not at the expense of the rest of the
> State continuing to be held hostage and subsidizing them as the Guv's
> plan to which the aforementioned vote was also tied.
>
> Certainly the rest of us outside Wichita and KCK areas are tired of
> always receiving the short end of the stick in KS revenue and services.
>
> I don't generally have much sympathy for the union being self-employed
> but I can't be too harsh on them on this one; I don't think other than
> perhaps a little quicker time frame than otherwise might have been that
> the end result is any different than if they had ratified this one.
>
> --
The problem isn't companies as a whole but rather the economy and
the opportunity.
The amount of jobs available has increased in this area. But the
actual wages offered has declined. I applied for a job 2 months ago
that I turned down 3 years ago because I was making better than what
they were offering. I was interviewed again and was told that it was
starting at $3 less per hour than when I turned it down. This company
has been in the area a long time and always has work.
So this company is no different. It sees opportunity. If the jobs
are going to Louisiana, it is their decision. With many communities
offering big incentives to attract jobs, I can't blame them especially
in this economy. The cost savings are big in some cases and if they
can't save where they are at, they will look elsewhere.
Now if they arbitrarily moved the jobs to Mexico, then I could see
some outrage. But they had a chance to save themselves.....
Allen
On Oct 24, 9:29=A0pm, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 17:04:22 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
>
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>On Oct 24, 7:13=A0pm, allen476 <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> =A0Now if they arbitrarily moved the jobs to Mexico, then I could see
> >> some outrage. But they had a chance to save themselves.....
>
> >> Allen
>
> >When your patch grows fewer beans, you eat fewer beans. IOW, I think
> >there is even going to be more belt-tightening now that they are all
> >out of work. Now their patch is growing no beans at all.
>
> Won't they get union unemployment wages for awhile (that they already
> paid in) now that the union bent 'em over?
>
> --
> An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile,
> hoping it will eat him last.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 -- Sir Winston Churchill
I wonder by what margin the idiots passed that vote....
Snippage
> Union greed and stupidity at its best......worst!
>
> RonB
We can speculate all we want about the company "setting up" the whole
thing, etc. etc.
However, unions(AND companies) can be dumber than dirt! In Jamestown,
NY(which for many years had been a MAJOR player in furniture mfging),
Coca-Cola came in and wanted to build a new bottling facility, paying
some pretty decent wages. The "furniture kings" killed the possibility
of building IN Jamestown, but Coke built it just over the city line
anyway, and couldn't sign up employees fast enough. As to unions, in
the 70's, "Art Metal", a long time maker of office furniture, working
out of old outdated facilities, sunk the whole wad on a new factory,
better working conditions, A/C, etc.As noted, they bet the whole pot
on it, even with cash flow problems, figuring they could pull out of
it with new improved production. Well, the "union", in their infinite
idiocy, decided if the company had money for the new plant, "they"
should get some of it, and voted to strike. The company had nothing
more to give, and the idiots couldn't understand which side their
bread was buttered on, and after 6-8mo. the company just folded,
leaving a lot of unemployed workers and a nice new plant moldering.
Chamber of Commerce worked many years trying to get someone interested
in the plant, considering many businesses were leaving NY state
because of taxes.
They finally interested someone, and for a good many years Cummins
Engines have been very busy there, with people clamoring to get hired.
Now, maybe Art Metal shouldn't have dived into the deep end of the
pool without a better life preserver, but the union surely could have
done something more intelligent than shooting themselves in the foot
like that.
Norm
"RonB" wrote:
<snip>
> Union greed and stupidity at its best......worst!
---------------------------------
Has the smell of a set up.
Go back 40 years, move to the "Rust Belt", and it was the same thing
for the domestic steel and automotive industries.
Let's face it, Wichita is a one horse town when it comes to industry.
It has the aircraft industry and not much else.
If you want to live there, you accept the fact you're not in a strong
bargaining position which is not unique to Wichita.
There are one horse towns all across the country.
Just look at Wilmington, OH when Airborne pulled up stakes and left
town.
Just another sign of the changing economy.
Lew
On 2010-10-24 16:41:33 -0400, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> said:
> Go back 40 years, move to the "Rust Belt", and it was the same thing
> for the domestic steel and automotive industries.
Still going on -- GM was closing their Indianapoolis stamping plant,
but had an offer from JD Norman to buy the operation. The offer was
contingent on union acceptance of wage cuts for employees hired going
forward. Union national said take the deal, Union local leadership said
no ^&%(&*^*& way. Vote came, concessions turned down. Plant will close.
Union local management -- many had come here as a result of other
closings -- will move along to other GM positions. Their brethern,
well, they're taking it in the ear.
Nice. real nice. Doesn't "union" connote all for one?
"Steve" wrote:
> Still going on -- GM was closing their Indianapoolis stamping plant,
> but had an offer from JD Norman to buy the operation.
----------------------------
Indy was one of several stamping plants within GM that spent a ton of
money for new stamping presses in the mid '80s.
It was also marked the birth of Saturn.
Roger was on a major expansion kick across GM back then.
Too bad he failed to realize the market no longer wanted big tail fins
on Detroit's unreliable offerings.
Lew
On 2010-10-25 01:20:59 -0400, "Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> said:
> Too bad he failed to realize the market no longer wanted big tail fins
> on Detroit's unreliable offerings.
Also too bad: Saturn became just another marque offering standard
(read: rebadged) GM fare, rather than the plucky little upstart it once
was.
On Oct 24, 9:03=A0pm, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 10:24:57 -0700 (PDT), RonB <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >The Machinists and Aerospace Workers of Wichita chose death over
> >continued employment last week. =A0With General Aviation feeling the
> >brunt of a double blow (cyclic sales downturn + record-poor economy)
> >Hawker Beechcraft has been struggling to stay afloat. =A0The company and
> >Wichita have been working together to forge an economic incentive
> >package to keep the old Beechcraft in Wichita. =A0The company announced
> >a couple of weeks ago that they would keep most operations in Wichita
> >if the Union would ratify an agreement to accept some wage and benefit
> >decreases - Otherwise, they had standing plans and offers to move.
> >The city of Wichita strongly urged the membership to accept the offer,
> >because Beech had already outsourced a significant amount of work to
> >Mexico; and a Louisiana location was strongly courting the company for
> >the 'full meal deal' - complete buyout of operations. =A0The rumor mill
> >is also indicating that a major defense company is poised to buy some
> >of their lucrative training and defense work.
>
> >Guess what - the union said no!
> >Union greed and stupidity at its best......worst!
>
> Question: Can't the workers get together and fire the fucking union
> and accept the company's offer themselves, as free agents?
>
> --
> An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile,
> hoping it will eat him last.
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 -- Sir Winston Churchill
With the exceptions where teamwork is essential, sports teams,
military units, it is every man for himself, survival of the fittest
etc.
Unity when it comes to safety issues is good... killing the company
you work for with unreasonable demands is not.
I had a conversation with a retired autoworker from Flint MI who told
me about his benefit package..... I couldn't believe my ears. How much
does GM owe the retired union members?
On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 17:04:22 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
<[email protected]> wrote:
>>On Oct 24, 7:13 pm, allen476 <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Now if they arbitrarily moved the jobs to Mexico, then I could see
>> some outrage. But they had a chance to save themselves.....
>>
>> Allen
>
>When your patch grows fewer beans, you eat fewer beans. IOW, I think
>there is even going to be more belt-tightening now that they are all
>out of work. Now their patch is growing no beans at all.
Won't they get union unemployment wages for awhile (that they already
paid in) now that the union bent 'em over?
--
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile,
hoping it will eat him last.
-- Sir Winston Churchill
On Oct 25, 9:35=A0am, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The whole thing came to a head and was demanded to be ratified in a very
> short time frame; if they hadn't already come to a decision there was
> afaict no reason that negotiations couldn't have continued and more
> effort made to actually show reason why H-B requires such changes to a
> contract to which they had only recently agreed. =A0Instead, the
> insistence and the threats served only to antagonize rather than build a
> sense of shared burden to work through difficult times. =A0Very poor
> tactics by management if really wanting concessions and consensus unless
> the intent was to force the outcome.
>
I'm no pro union man, more pro business, but it makes me sick to think
that H-B would go that route. Are they defence contractors as well by
chance?
On 10/24/2010 12:24 PM, RonB wrote:
> The Machinists and Aerospace Workers of Wichita chose death over
> continued employment last week. With General Aviation feeling the
> brunt of a double blow (cyclic sales downturn + record-poor economy)
> Hawker Beechcraft has been struggling to stay afloat. The company and
> Wichita have been working together to forge an economic incentive
> package to keep the old Beechcraft in Wichita. The company announced
> a couple of weeks ago that they would keep most operations in Wichita
> if the Union would ratify an agreement to accept some wage and benefit
> decreases - Otherwise, they had standing plans and offers to move.
> The city of Wichita strongly urged the membership to accept the offer,
> because Beech had already outsourced a significant amount of work to
> Mexico; and a Louisiana location was strongly courting the company for
> the 'full meal deal' - complete buyout of operations. The rumor mill
> is also indicating that a major defense company is poised to buy some
> of their lucrative training and defense work.
>
> Guess what - the union said no!
>
> Guess what else - The company announced this morning that most of its
> remaining Wichita backshop and subassembly operations would be moved
> to Mexico during the January through August 2011 time frame.
> Immediate effect - 900 jobs, not counting 350 salaried workers that
> were laid off this Friday. If the Louisiana deal works out, Beech,
> one of the founding companies of Wichita's aircraft manufacturing
> legacy, could be gone in a matter of 1-2 more years. For those who
> yell "company greed" I would add that several of the executive
> management team have invested millions from their pockets to help the
> company develop new products during this downturn. They have also
> accepted the same pay and benefit cuts proposed to the union.
>
> Do these people not own televisions, radios or subscribe to
> newspapers? They are converting Wichita from "Aircraft Capital of the
> World" to "Food Stamp Capital of Kansas"; and they are taking hundreds
> of salaried engineers, technicians and business ad folks with them.
> As of last week, the week after the union vote, the outflow of
> talented engineers and other professionals, to other companies had
> begun - some companies are standing by to scoop up the cream of
> Beech's crop.
>
> Union greed and stupidity at its best......worst!
Not at all!! ... it is surely Bush's fault, eh?
--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 4/15/2010
KarlC@ (the obvious)
On Oct 24, 2:38=A0pm, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
> RonB wrote:
> > The Machinists and Aerospace Workers of Wichita chose death over
> > continued employment last week. =A0...
> > a couple of weeks ago that they would keep most operations in Wichita
> > if the Union would ratify an agreement to accept some wage and benefit
> > decreases ...
>
> ...
>
> I don't have a dog directly in the hunt altho do live in KS, not in
> Wichita...
>
> Call me cynical but having watched the overall situation w/ Cessna,
> Boeing/Spirit, Lear/Bombardier the last several years and the most
> recent Hawker-Beech stir-up, I'm convinced H-B management deliberately
> caused a union vote on a contract they knew wouldn't be ratified for the
> express purpose of have an excuse to do what they had already decided to
> do. =A0If, on the outside chance the threats had worked, I'm also
> convinced within another year or two at the outside we would have been
> hearing the same dire news. =A0Note for those who aren't aware that this
> vote was for a revision of an existing relatively new agreement some two
> years before the end of their current contract.
>
> As a Kansan, while I would certainly like to see Beech (not so much
> Hawker since believe it was their cause after purchasing Beech that has
> caused the majority of the problems as opposed to Beechcraft themselves
> as an entity) stay in Wichita, but not at the expense of the rest of the
> State continuing to be held hostage and subsidizing them as the Guv's
> plan to which the aforementioned vote was also tied.
>
> Certainly the rest of us outside Wichita and KCK areas are tired of
> always receiving the short end of the stick in KS revenue and services.
>
> I don't generally have much sympathy for the union being self-employed
> but I can't be too harsh on them on this one; I don't think other than
> perhaps a little quicker time frame than otherwise might have been that
> the end result is any different than if they had ratified this one.
>
> --
A well though-out look on the situation. Thanks for that.
The world does look a little different when you're self employed, wot?
On Oct 25, 11:09=A0am, Robatoy <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Oct 25, 9:35=A0am, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > The whole thing came to a head and was demanded to be ratified in a ver=
y
> > short time frame; if they hadn't already come to a decision there was
> > afaict no reason that negotiations couldn't have continued and more
> > effort made to actually show reason why H-B requires such changes to a
> > contract to which they had only recently agreed. =A0Instead, the
> > insistence and the threats served only to antagonize rather than build =
a
> > sense of shared burden to work through difficult times. =A0Very poor
> > tactics by management if really wanting concessions and consensus unles=
s
> > the intent was to force the outcome.
>
> I'm no pro union man, more pro business, but it makes me sick to think
> that H-B would go that route. Are they defence contractors as well by
> chance?
Last question was rhetorical.
On Oct 24, 1:24=A0pm, RonB <[email protected]> wrote:
> The Machinists and Aerospace Workers of Wichita chose death over
> continued employment last week. =A0With General Aviation feeling the
> brunt of a double blow (cyclic sales downturn + record-poor economy)
> Hawker Beechcraft has been struggling to stay afloat. =A0The company and
> Wichita have been working together to forge an economic incentive
> package to keep the old Beechcraft in Wichita. =A0The company announced
> a couple of weeks ago that they would keep most operations in Wichita
> if the Union would ratify an agreement to accept some wage and benefit
> decreases - Otherwise, they had standing plans and offers to move.
> The city of Wichita strongly urged the membership to accept the offer,
> because Beech had already outsourced a significant amount of work to
> Mexico; and a Louisiana location was strongly courting the company for
> the 'full meal deal' - complete buyout of operations. =A0The rumor mill
> is also indicating that a major defense company is poised to buy some
> of their lucrative training and defense work.
>
> Guess what - the union said no!
>
> Guess what else - The company announced this morning that most of its
> remaining Wichita backshop and subassembly operations would be moved
> to Mexico during the January through August 2011 time frame.
> Immediate effect - 900 jobs, not counting 350 salaried workers that
> were laid off this Friday. =A0If the Louisiana deal works out, Beech,
> one of the founding companies of Wichita's aircraft manufacturing
> legacy, could be gone in a matter of 1-2 more years. =A0For those who
> yell "company greed" I would add that several of the executive
> management team have invested millions from their pockets to help the
> company develop new products during this downturn. =A0They have also
> accepted the same pay and benefit cuts proposed to the union.
>
> Do these people not own televisions, radios or subscribe to
> newspapers? =A0They are converting Wichita from "Aircraft Capital of the
> World" to "Food Stamp Capital of Kansas"; and they are taking hundreds
> of salaried engineers, technicians and business ad folks with them.
> As of last week, the week after the union vote, the outflow of
> talented engineers and other professionals, to other companies had
> begun - some companies are standing by to scoop up the cream of
> Beech's crop.
>
> Union greed and stupidity at its best......worst!
>
> RonB
yup..that'll learn thum....
"RonB" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:74fb35a9-0b79-4944-8444-69682dda71d2@x42g2000yqx.googlegroups.com...
> The Machinists and Aerospace Workers of Wichita chose death over
> continued employment last week. With General Aviation feeling the
> brunt of a double blow (cyclic sales downturn + record-poor economy)
> Hawker Beechcraft has been struggling to stay afloat. The company and
> Wichita have been working together to forge an economic incentive
> package to keep the old Beechcraft in Wichita. The company announced
> a couple of weeks ago that they would keep most operations in Wichita
> if the Union would ratify an agreement to accept some wage and benefit
> decreases - Otherwise, they had standing plans and offers to move.
> The city of Wichita strongly urged the membership to accept the offer,
> because Beech had already outsourced a significant amount of work to
> Mexico; and a Louisiana location was strongly courting the company for
> the 'full meal deal' - complete buyout of operations. The rumor mill
> is also indicating that a major defense company is poised to buy some
> of their lucrative training and defense work.
>
> Guess what - the union said no!
>
> Guess what else - The company announced this morning that most of its
> remaining Wichita backshop and subassembly operations would be moved
> to Mexico during the January through August 2011 time frame.
> Immediate effect - 900 jobs, not counting 350 salaried workers that
> were laid off this Friday. If the Louisiana deal works out, Beech,
> one of the founding companies of Wichita's aircraft manufacturing
> legacy, could be gone in a matter of 1-2 more years. For those who
> yell "company greed" I would add that several of the executive
> management team have invested millions from their pockets to help the
> company develop new products during this downturn. They have also
> accepted the same pay and benefit cuts proposed to the union.
>
> Do these people not own televisions, radios or subscribe to
> newspapers? They are converting Wichita from "Aircraft Capital of the
> World" to "Food Stamp Capital of Kansas"; and they are taking hundreds
> of salaried engineers, technicians and business ad folks with them.
> As of last week, the week after the union vote, the outflow of
> talented engineers and other professionals, to other companies had
> begun - some companies are standing by to scoop up the cream of
> Beech's crop.
>
> Union greed and stupidity at its best......worst!
>
> RonB
Way to go! That union really showed THEM, didn't they?
Steve
RonB wrote:
> Union greed and stupidity at its best......worst!
>
> RonB
Wonder if there is a statistic for how many jobs lost to foreign countries
due to unions? I'm sure there is one for how many jobs lost to greedy
corporations.
--
"You can lead them to LINUX
but you can't make them THINK"
Man. 2010.1 Spring
KDE4.4
2.6.33.5-desktop-2mnb
RonB wrote:
> The Machinists and Aerospace Workers of Wichita chose death over
> continued employment last week. ...
> a couple of weeks ago that they would keep most operations in Wichita
> if the Union would ratify an agreement to accept some wage and benefit
> decreases ...
...
I don't have a dog directly in the hunt altho do live in KS, not in
Wichita...
Call me cynical but having watched the overall situation w/ Cessna,
Boeing/Spirit, Lear/Bombardier the last several years and the most
recent Hawker-Beech stir-up, I'm convinced H-B management deliberately
caused a union vote on a contract they knew wouldn't be ratified for the
express purpose of have an excuse to do what they had already decided to
do. If, on the outside chance the threats had worked, I'm also
convinced within another year or two at the outside we would have been
hearing the same dire news. Note for those who aren't aware that this
vote was for a revision of an existing relatively new agreement some two
years before the end of their current contract.
As a Kansan, while I would certainly like to see Beech (not so much
Hawker since believe it was their cause after purchasing Beech that has
caused the majority of the problems as opposed to Beechcraft themselves
as an entity) stay in Wichita, but not at the expense of the rest of the
State continuing to be held hostage and subsidizing them as the Guv's
plan to which the aforementioned vote was also tied.
Certainly the rest of us outside Wichita and KCK areas are tired of
always receiving the short end of the stick in KS revenue and services.
I don't generally have much sympathy for the union being self-employed
but I can't be too harsh on them on this one; I don't think other than
perhaps a little quicker time frame than otherwise might have been that
the end result is any different than if they had ratified this one.
--
On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 13:38:41 -0500, dpb wrote:
> Call me cynical but having watched the overall situation w/ Cessna,
> Boeing/Spirit, Lear/Bombardier the last several years and the most
> recent Hawker-Beech stir-up, I'm convinced H-B management deliberately
> caused a union vote on a contract they knew wouldn't be ratified for the
> express purpose of have an excuse to do what they had already decided to
> do.
Cynical? I'd call it realistic. But it would have been nice if the
union had called their bluff. Too much greed on both sides.
--
Intelligence is an experiment that failed - G. B. Shaw
Robatoy wrote:
> On Oct 24, 2:38 pm, dpb <[email protected]> wrote:
>> RonB wrote:
>>> The Machinists and Aerospace Workers of Wichita chose death over
>>> continued employment last week. ...
>>> a couple of weeks ago that they would keep most operations in Wichita
>>> if the Union would ratify an agreement to accept some wage and benefit
>>> decreases ...
>> ...
>>
>> I don't have a dog directly in the hunt altho do live in KS, not in
>> Wichita...
>>
>> Call me cynical but having watched the overall situation w/ Cessna,
>> Boeing/Spirit, Lear/Bombardier the last several years and the most
>> recent Hawker-Beech stir-up, I'm convinced H-B management deliberately
>> caused a union vote on a contract they knew wouldn't be ratified for the
>> express purpose of have an excuse to do what they had already decided to
>> do. If, on the outside chance the threats had worked, I'm also
>> convinced within another year or two at the outside we would have been
>> hearing the same dire news. Note for those who aren't aware that this
>> vote was for a revision of an existing relatively new agreement some two
>> years before the end of their current contract.
>>
>> As a Kansan, while I would certainly like to see Beech (not so much
>> Hawker since believe it was their cause after purchasing Beech that has
>> caused the majority of the problems as opposed to Beechcraft themselves
>> as an entity) stay in Wichita, but not at the expense of the rest of the
>> State continuing to be held hostage and subsidizing them as the Guv's
>> plan to which the aforementioned vote was also tied.
>>
>> Certainly the rest of us outside Wichita and KCK areas are tired of
>> always receiving the short end of the stick in KS revenue and services.
>>
>> I don't generally have much sympathy for the union being self-employed
>> but I can't be too harsh on them on this one; I don't think other than
>> perhaps a little quicker time frame than otherwise might have been that
>> the end result is any different than if they had ratified this one.
>>
>> --
>
> A well though-out look on the situation. Thanks for that.
> The world does look a little different when you're self employed, wot?
Well, it just so happens that this afternoon I saw the Wichita Eagle
story -- it isn't quite so dire a situation as the OP's post makes it
sound at the moment anyway. What H-B announced was cuts/layoffs of the
already planned non-hourly and that the King production is going to go
out-source and Mexico. However, remaining existing production in
Wichita is there for the time-being as it was.
The out-sourcing will probably put a fair number of same folks to work
for the smaller shops in Wichita rather than as H-B employees so even
that isn't a total loss in all likelihood.
As for the longer term, I'd surely think it too early to make a
definitive call--I'm sure the Guv has been on the blower regarding the
incentive package and all and there are things yet to happen that aren't
public or anybody's talking about...
LA is a club H-B is using, certainly. Whether they want anything out of
it more than the leverage it allows, only they can know for certain.
The pisser imo is it appears to be pretty high probabilities that it's
the existence of the massive amounts of Federal $$ dumped in to LA
post-Katrina that has allowed the funds to be found to be able to create
these incentives.
This thing of localities/states subsidizing industries that are supposed
to be private enterprise has just gotten totally out of hand imo; this
is just a recent example.
--
"Larry Jaques" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 17:04:22 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>On Oct 24, 7:13 pm, allen476 <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Now if they arbitrarily moved the jobs to Mexico, then I could see
>>> some outrage. But they had a chance to save themselves.....
>>>
>>> Allen
>>
>>When your patch grows fewer beans, you eat fewer beans. IOW, I think
>>there is even going to be more belt-tightening now that they are all
>>out of work. Now their patch is growing no beans at all.
>
> Won't they get union unemployment wages for awhile (that they already
> paid in) now that the union bent 'em over?
LOL!
Robatoy wrote:
> On Oct 24, 9:03 pm, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
> wrote:
...
>> Question: Can't the workers get together and fire the fucking union
>> and accept the company's offer themselves, as free agents?
...
...
> Unity when it comes to safety issues is good... killing the company
> you work for with unreasonable demands is not.
...
There seems to be a general misunderstanding started that somehow "the
union" is different than the members thereof in this situation.
This was a general membership vote to accept a _modification_ to an
existing contract (which wasn't that old, actually, having two years
left to run); it wasn't a decision made by some minority of the the
workforce or union leadership and announced to the rank and file.
As I noted earlier, I think the outcome was almost preordained by the
orchestrated manner in which the whole thing was handled by H-B
management and I think it was done deliberately in order to provide them
a convenient excuse for what had already been decided.
The whole thing came to a head and was demanded to be ratified in a very
short time frame; if they hadn't already come to a decision there was
afaict no reason that negotiations couldn't have continued and more
effort made to actually show reason why H-B requires such changes to a
contract to which they had only recently agreed. Instead, the
insistence and the threats served only to antagonize rather than build a
sense of shared burden to work through difficult times. Very poor
tactics by management if really wanting concessions and consensus unless
the intent was to force the outcome.
--
Steve B wrote:
> "dpb" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Robatoy wrote:
>>> On Oct 24, 9:03 pm, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>>> Question: Can't the workers get together and fire the fucking union
>>>> and accept the company's offer themselves, as free agents?
>> ...
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> Unity when it comes to safety issues is good... killing the company
>>> you work for with unreasonable demands is not.
>> ...
>>
>> There seems to be a general misunderstanding started that somehow "the
>> union" is different than the members thereof in this situation.
>>
>> This was a general membership vote to accept a _modification_ to an
>> existing contract (which wasn't that old, actually, having two years left
>> to run); it wasn't a decision made by some minority of the the workforce
>> or union leadership and announced to the rank and file.
>>
>> As I noted earlier, I think the outcome was almost preordained by the
>> orchestrated manner in which the whole thing was handled by H-B management
>> and I think it was done deliberately in order to provide them a convenient
>> excuse for what had already been decided.
>>
>> The whole thing came to a head and was demanded to be ratified in a very
>> short time frame; if they hadn't already come to a decision there was
>> afaict no reason that negotiations couldn't have continued and more effort
>> made to actually show reason why H-B requires such changes to a contract
>> to which they had only recently agreed. Instead, the insistence and the
>> threats served only to antagonize rather than build a sense of shared
>> burden to work through difficult times. Very poor tactics by management
>> if really wanting concessions and consensus unless the intent was to force
>> the outcome.
>
> All the more to prove that it was a plot originated by Dubya.
>
> It doesn't make any sense. The workers basically had a vote on whether to
> keep the shop open or close it. I think Dubya, Cheney, Rice, et al had a
> hand in pilfering the stuffing the ballot boxes. Who would vote to close
> down their own shop?
From listening to the ones they've talked to on the evening news, for
the most part the general consensus seemed to be that H-B was going to
do what they were going to do, irregardless. I can't say as I can see
they are wrong in that assessment.
> Except for a good union man, that is?
...
The vote wasn't "open" or "close" the shop, it was a "maybe we'll hang
around a little longer: then again, who's to say we'll not leave
anyway?" vote.
I think the tag line somebody had earlier regarding the crocodile is
quite appropriate altho probably unintentioned by the user.
I keep coming back to the thought of it's a lot like the old days of the
treaties w/ the American Indians -- sign a treaty guaranteeing something
for a long time or in perpetuity, but as soon as it was
convenient/desirable demand a revision. Eventually, there was a
rebellion even knowing couldn't win in the long run at least might as
well go down swinging.
--
Robatoy wrote:
...
> My niece, who teaches in Clearwater KS, tells me that a lot of people
> she knew from her teaching days in Wichita think there's something
> wrong with the voting process. IOW, they just can't believe the
> outcome.
I don't have any particular inside info; reading paper and watching
evening news out of Wichita TV indicates to me that the 2:1 rejection
would seem about right.
I have a cousin who's staunch union (IBEW, not machinist at Boeing
military, not commercial) in Wichita and I've had the similar
conversations with him in the past.
One could probably have sold the package eventually if had had taken the
time to let the membership come to grips with it rather than trying to
force it in such a hurry. Most afaict were ok with, while not happy
obviously, the pay rate change. What they couldn't stomach was the even
more costly health care changes combined the demand for a 10-yr deal
that had no provision for recovery of any benefits or wages if there is
a turnaround in that time frame. Add onto that there really was no
great guarantee of work for Wichita and that there's no trust that any
promises made in a contract have any meaning to management anyway, and
it was a recipe doomed to failure from the start imo.
In general I also am pro-business and understand the purpose of a
company is not to be a source of jobs w/o commensurate return but at
some point there has to be some mutual respect as a basis for trying to
earn some trust. I don't see that in H-B management, unfortunately.
At one time (many years ago now), I met the Beech and the Cessna
families as well as Bill Lear while working laying tile and other
remodeling work in their homes for my uncle over summers and some
weekends while in school at Manhattan. It isn't Mr Beech's company any
more, certainly--I don't think he would have allowed it to reach this point.
--
Nahmie wrote:
...
> However, unions(AND companies) can be dumber than dirt! ...
Indeed; that's partly my point--_if_ H-B really did want this agreement,
it doesn't seem they could have chosen a more unlikely way to go about
trying to get it.
I was gone for a while so didn't see absolutely every day's reporting
but afaik union leadership did recommend accepting even with
reservations but would have preferred to put off the vote pending
further negotiation but H-B said "take it or leave it as is; voting will
be such_and_such date".
--
On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 10:24:57 -0700 (PDT), RonB <[email protected]>
wrote:
>The Machinists and Aerospace Workers of Wichita chose death over
>continued employment last week. With General Aviation feeling the
>brunt of a double blow (cyclic sales downturn + record-poor economy)
>Hawker Beechcraft has been struggling to stay afloat. The company and
>Wichita have been working together to forge an economic incentive
>package to keep the old Beechcraft in Wichita. The company announced
>a couple of weeks ago that they would keep most operations in Wichita
>if the Union would ratify an agreement to accept some wage and benefit
>decreases - Otherwise, they had standing plans and offers to move.
>The city of Wichita strongly urged the membership to accept the offer,
>because Beech had already outsourced a significant amount of work to
>Mexico; and a Louisiana location was strongly courting the company for
>the 'full meal deal' - complete buyout of operations. The rumor mill
>is also indicating that a major defense company is poised to buy some
>of their lucrative training and defense work.
>
>Guess what - the union said no!
>Union greed and stupidity at its best......worst!
Question: Can't the workers get together and fire the fucking union
and accept the company's offer themselves, as free agents?
--
An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile,
hoping it will eat him last.
-- Sir Winston Churchill
On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 19:29:41 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
<[email protected]> wrote:
>On Oct 24, 9:29 pm, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>> On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 17:04:22 -0700 (PDT), Robatoy
>>
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>On Oct 24, 7:13 pm, allen476 <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> Now if they arbitrarily moved the jobs to Mexico, then I could see
>> >> some outrage. But they had a chance to save themselves.....
>>
>> >> Allen
>>
>> >When your patch grows fewer beans, you eat fewer beans. IOW, I think
>> >there is even going to be more belt-tightening now that they are all
>> >out of work. Now their patch is growing no beans at all.
>>
>> Won't they get union unemployment wages for awhile (that they already
>> paid in) now that the union bent 'em over?
>>
>> --
>> An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile,
>> hoping it will eat him last.
>> -- Sir Winston Churchill
>
>I wonder by what margin the idiots passed that vote....
The idiots in the union or the idiots running the union who had the
actual say?
--
If you're looking for the key to the Universe,
I've got some good news and some bad news.
The bad news: There is no key to the Universe.
The good news: It was never locked.
--Swami Beyondananda
"dpb" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Robatoy wrote:
>> On Oct 24, 9:03 pm, Larry Jaques <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
> ...
>
>>> Question: Can't the workers get together and fire the fucking union
>>> and accept the company's offer themselves, as free agents?
> ...
>
> ...
>
>> Unity when it comes to safety issues is good... killing the company
>> you work for with unreasonable demands is not.
> ...
>
> There seems to be a general misunderstanding started that somehow "the
> union" is different than the members thereof in this situation.
>
> This was a general membership vote to accept a _modification_ to an
> existing contract (which wasn't that old, actually, having two years left
> to run); it wasn't a decision made by some minority of the the workforce
> or union leadership and announced to the rank and file.
>
> As I noted earlier, I think the outcome was almost preordained by the
> orchestrated manner in which the whole thing was handled by H-B management
> and I think it was done deliberately in order to provide them a convenient
> excuse for what had already been decided.
>
> The whole thing came to a head and was demanded to be ratified in a very
> short time frame; if they hadn't already come to a decision there was
> afaict no reason that negotiations couldn't have continued and more effort
> made to actually show reason why H-B requires such changes to a contract
> to which they had only recently agreed. Instead, the insistence and the
> threats served only to antagonize rather than build a sense of shared
> burden to work through difficult times. Very poor tactics by management
> if really wanting concessions and consensus unless the intent was to force
> the outcome.
All the more to prove that it was a plot originated by Dubya.
It doesn't make any sense. The workers basically had a vote on whether to
keep the shop open or close it. I think Dubya, Cheney, Rice, et al had a
hand in pilfering the stuffing the ballot boxes. Who would vote to close
down their own shop?
Except for a good union man, that is?
Steve