Showing posts with label Boeing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Boeing. Show all posts

Friday, April 22, 2011

Boeing & Obama's War On The Free Markets In Support Of Unions

This from the NYT:

In what may be the strongest signal yet of the new pro-labor orientation of the National Labor Relations Board under President Obama, the agency filed a complaint Wednesday seeking to force Boeing to bring an airplane production line back to its unionized facilities in Washington State instead of moving the work to a nonunion plant in South Carolina.

In its complaint, the labor board said that Boeing’s decision to transfer a second production line for its new 787 Dreamliner passenger plane to South Carolina was motivated by an unlawful desire to retaliate against union workers for their past strikes in Washington and to discourage future strikes. The agency’s acting general counsel, Lafe Solomon, said it was illegal for companies to take actions in retaliation against workers for exercising the right to strike.

Although manufacturers have long moved plants to nonunion states, the board noted that Boeing officials had, in internal documents and news interviews, specifically cited the strikes and potential future strikes as a reason for their 2009 decision to expand in South Carolina.

Boeing said it would “vigorously contest” the labor board’s complaint. “This claim is legally frivolous and represents a radical departure from both N.L.R.B. and Supreme Court precedent,” said J. Michael Luttig, a Boeing executive vice president and its general counsel. “Boeing has every right under both federal law and its collective bargaining agreement to build additional U.S. production capacity outside of the Puget Sound region.”

It is highly unusual for the federal government to seek to reverse a corporate decision as important as the location of plant.

But ever since a Democratic majority took control of the five-member board after Mr. Obama’s election, the board has signaled that it would seek to adopt a more liberal, pro-union tilt after years of pro-employer decisions under President Bush. . . .

This is such a vast overreach by Labor and its cronies in the Obama administration - it is such a fundamental attack on capitalism - it is difficult to know where to begin. As a threshold matter, the anti-retaliation provisions of the NLRA protect individuals from being fired or demoted for their union activities. The Obama radicals on the NLRB now seek to vastly expand the scope of those provisions to a point that corporations would become captives of unionized, closed shop states.

Unions are an anachronism of the communist movement near two centuries old - which itself was a response to inequities that arose early in the Industrial Age, something that has long been consigned to the history books. There is a reason unions are drastically declining in the private sector in the U.S.. They do not make economic sense in an age of vast national wealth where competition for labor and the mobility of labor insures that laborers will be able to receive fair market value.

It is beyond any form of contention that, where unions exist, the end product is at best, substantially more expensive than that produced by non-union labor, such as with automakers, or in the worst case, substantially lessens the quality of the service being delivered, as is the case with teachers unions and public education. Further, the reality is that in "closed shop" states, unions create a form of indentured servitude, where to even work in a desired field, a laborer must pay a union for the privilege. The laborer then has no say in how the union uses those dues. Whatever justification for unions existed in 1848, when Marx, in the Communist Manifesto, described unions as the building blocks of his Communist utopia, those justifications do not exist in America today.

The only thing that can possibly save private sector unions in the U.S. is the point of the gun by the government. And indeed, that is what we are seeing today with Obama's NLRB outrageously trying to use the police power of our government to force Boeing to keep all production in Washington.

The only reason unions still exist in America, both public sector and private sector, is that they are economic base of the Democratic party. It is hard to think of a more corrupt or malign situation. When the administrations change in 2012, it is time to go to war on unions - outlawing public sector unions and changing the rules for private sector unions. No place in America should be subject to a "closed shop," the U.S. government should never favor unions in its contracting, and the NLRB should be disbanded.

Read More...

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

No Good McDeed Goes Unpunished

In 2001, Sen. John McCain became suspicious of the manner in which a plan to lease tankers from Boeing for $26 billion was structured. After dogged investigation and a refusal to bow to extremes of pressure from all sides, McCain exposed an arrangement between Boeing and a corrupt Air Force procurement officer that was costing American’s billions. The end result was the procurement officer and several of Boeing’s leadership were sent to jail and America got a procurement process far freer of fraud. A few days ago, a KC-35 Tanker contract, subject to competitive bid, was awarded by the Air Force to an Air Bus consortium, and McCain is being accused of somehow causing the loss of American jobs. What insanity is this?

__________________________________________________

This story began in 2001 when John McCain found a footnote in the federal budget providing $26 billion for the Air Force to lease tankers from Boeing. The fact that it was a lease raised McCain’s interest. A lease circumvents the normal authorization and competitive bid process.

McCain demanded answers from the Air Force and Boeing, but instead got obstuction, "Boeing's 35-person Washington lobbying operation in a classic Washington power play and a media blitz worthy of Madison Avenue." Despite this and pressure from his colleagues, McCain was utterly "tenacious" in his investigation. At the end of the road was "the biggest Pentagon weapons scandal in 20 years." You can read an extensive background of the story of McCain’s investigation here.

CBS’s 60 Minutes did a program on the scope of the fraud and corruption involving Air Force senior procurement officer, Darleen Druyun, that was brought to light by McCain’s investigation. She was eventually convicted and sent to jail. Boeing itself came under a new CEO, its chief lobbyist involved in the fraud stepped down, one executive was sent to jail, and Boeing paid a $615 million fine to the government. Our government made a "sea change" in its procedures for procurement. Senator John McCain showed the political courage that is his hallmark, and the outcome was very positive for America.

Fast forward to today,

Now, the utterly odious Nancy Pelosi is suggesting that the Air Force’s recent decision to award a KC 35 Tanker contract to Northrupp Grumond and an Air Bus consortioum is the result of "intervention" by John McCain, an act also discussed in an AP article. Moreover, because one individual who is working on the McCain campaign is also a lobbyist for the Air Bus consortium, some are suggesting that McCain is somehow responsible for the decision by the Air Force to award the contract to Air Bus. There is no evidence whatsoever that McCain influenced the Air Force’s decision in this specific instance. To suggest otherwise is logic worthy of the New York Times in their hit piece on the Paxson Communications matter. Unfortunately, one of my "daily read" favorites, Gateway Pundit, gets it wrong on this. As regards this matter, to paraphrase Shakespeare, we should come to praise McCain, not to bury him.

As Ed Morrisey notes at Hot Air, "[T]he politicians fulminate about the award going to an outside firm. The time to consider that question was at the RFP stage, not the award stage. If the government didn’t want the contract to go to a European firm, it shouldn’t have allowed EADS to bid on it. And if the US wants to compete in the European market, it can’t act protectionist here."

Read More...