Airlines may not get the Boeing (NYSE: BA) Dreamliner on its new revised schedule after all. The plane has been delayed three times because of manufacturing and supplier glitches. If Boeing has problems with one of its unions, it might have to push back the launch date again. Some airlines are already asking Boeing for compensation for the late deliveries.
According to The Wall Street Journal, "With its aircraft order books so full that some customers must wait as long as five years for deliveries, Boeing can ill afford a strike -- especially one that could further delay the rollout of its new 787 Dreamliner jet."
At the center of the negotiations are pay and pensions, making them little different from most such talks. But the solution for both sides could involve an incentive.
Boeing does not want to be faced with a strike that could hurt its revenue. The unions want a bigger piece of Boeing's sales pie. Boeing should return to the bargaining table with a simple proposal. If its new jets are delivered on time, wages will go up at a rate close to the union's requests. If not, the increases will be lower.
Boeing could set up a partnership with its labor force driven by the common goal of product launches. That is better than a strike that does neither the union nor Boeing any good.
Douglas A. McIntyre is an editor at 247wallst.com.
Cramer on BloggingStocks: The Fed's push for TARP payback 
Hewlett-Packard reports growth in profit and operating margin in Q4
Before the bell: Stocks futures steady ahead of GDP, housing data
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
8-22-2008 @ 6:21PM
Johnathan said...
Your idea would be laughed at by the IAM. Unless you have worked at Boeing before you really have no idea what your talking about. First of all Boeing has posted record profits and they have a backlog list longer then the Great Wall in China. While union workers are being paid poverty level wages (new hires majorally) and have to work 12 hour shifts to maintain a decent lifestyle. That is NOT how the worlds number one exporter should be treating the employees who make them around $2.9 billion each month. Making a delivery date is not just the sole responsibilty of the the union employees. It takes more the just them to build an airplane....I thought you knew that. Thus it would be unfair to put such a clause as "delivery date" into a contract that would affect the quality of live for union employees. Where did you come up with this stuff? What silver spooned household did you grow up in? Ever hear of a late load? Ofcourse you haven't, you know nothing about working in the aerospace industry. All you know is facts and numbers. Well factor this, late deliveries of Boeing airplanes are usually due to vendor issues. When the company decided to outsource jobs and use outside vendors do you think it had anything to do with the delay of the 787? And when it's vendors run out of standards and don't have a backup plan how do you think that effects the production? There are many barriers that can arise to keep a union employee from completing their work. And not to sound like I don't trust the Boeing company and all but maybe you weren't paying attention to the share value trust situation. You didn't notice how the stock dropped dramatically right before thousands of employees were to be cut a check based soley off it. I'm sorry Doug, but maybe you should do some more research into what a union employee endures while employeed at Boeing before making such a statement. A delivery clause is out of the question....employees work hard and deserved to be paid for it. Reguardless of if the plane makes it delivery date or not. IT'S OUR TIME THIS TIME!
8-23-2008 @ 3:16AM
Rainier said...
Are you kidding? I'm no fan of the IAM. They demonize the leadership at Boeing, they are not interested in the long-term health of the company, and most annoyingly come contract time they act like they're in Junior High. Except less mature. But...
The current situation on the 787 has nothing to do with what IAM members contribute. They are doing everything they can to build this plane. It would not be fair to base their contract on a goal that they have little control over.
Not to mention the fact that the majority of machinists aren't even working on the 787 program. How is that fair to them?
If Boeing wants to avert a strike, they're going to have to scrap the idea of eliminating pensions. I don't think the IAM will accept anything less without a prolonged strike.
8-25-2008 @ 1:05PM
walter wayne dice said...
well all you employees need to stick together and make them pay you. i was an a-p machanic at one time and the rteason im not working in the field is because of the pay when the companys like boeing are making big money and not paying there employees right. I have stocks in boeing it's not right this company is giving us all a screwing