"It's Boeing, and the Union's Going"

[jblomenberg16]

Somebody rep BBI. INGO wants me to spread the wealth around before I can give him more.

I'd bring that one up to your Union rep...sounds like the man is keeping you and me down! I have to spread it around too!


I've had good and bad experiences with Unions. I think that the landscape in business today has changed significantly in the last century, and so to the mission and purpose of the unions. Undoubtedly many of us (even non-union "white collar" folks) have unions to thank for some of the improvements in working conditions. If you look at industry 100 years ago, and look at it now, we are light years ahead in health and safety, working conditions, workers rights, etc. Sure, some of the really great companies out there probably would have gotten there without union influence.

I think a lot of folks are sour on unions for the very publicized bad examples, such as protecting workers that don't do their jobs. I've seen first hand a union go out of its way to protect a member that was blatantly disobedient, verbally abusive, sleeping on the job, breaking company rules, doing shoddy work - when he was actually working, etc. Non-union folks find that particularly frustrating as similar behavior would mean instant termination for them.

Sure, there are also the very public examples of thug behavior, and everyone likes to jump on the inflated wages / pension bandwagon. I think the companies that agreed to those contracts are just as guilty as the unions that negotiated them. Like BBI said, these businesses were doomed to fail as it was, and perhaps the union just accelerated that.

I've also seen the good part of unions. They've figured out how to quickly train and develop new employees, clearly identify skill sets required for certain positions, provided a ready pool of flexible labor to cover open positions during sick time, vacations, etc.


Personally I think labor unions and right to work can co-exist. Right to work allows employees to make a decision...do we work at a company that already does a good job of providing a fair wage, fair benefits, and a safe work environment? If so, the union won't likely make much difference. If they work at a place that doesn't have those things, perhaps the union can use its influence to make change.


Just remember, an organized union at the highest level is not too much different than the NRA or other organization, which collects a nominal annual membership fee to help collectively represent its membership base.

 

[zippy23]

What I find hilarious is that these unions all steal workers money to donate to the left. Then those politicians over the years have passed so many worker protection laws and minimum wage crap that they have literally slit their own throats!! They are pricing themselves out of the market and more jobs are going overseas. Its disgusting they believe the union protects them and their jobs, and as the years go by they see more and more jobs going over seas and yet the union continue to take their money! Liberals love to trash billionaires for donating money to the right, yet unions outspend republican donations by a ton. So stupid.

 

[Leo]

When Unions quit taking care of what was right and started making themselves rich manipulating the workers for the benefit of the socialists (er..democrats), any good was thrown out of the big picture.

Of course, if there was not unions, who would take the blame for poor business management models and bad quality decisions? Even with all the "high wages" the American workers actually still produce at levels that is right up there with the rest of the world. When a run down, obsolete plant like Kokomo transmission can take molten aluminum and foundry iron and SHIP a 4 speed automatic trans axle, parts and labor with a torque convertor, wiring harness and full of oil for $215.00 AND the plany makes record profit, the workers wages cannot really be much of an issue.

One thing that is constantly brought up is that people from here, where taxes and living expenses are somewhat low, making judgements on how much workers get paid other places. We saw that when the twinkie plant shut down, that the "high wages" at the Chicago plants were to blame. I have lived in Chicago, you cannot even afford to live in your car working a $12 an hour job. I spent 6 months in the Pacific Northwest, and a $20 and hour job will not buy a bag of groceries after the tax man takes his, and the housing price on a bungalo there would not be affordable on the wages that a factory forman makes here.

 

[tbhausen]

The government doesn't subsidize anything, taxpayers do.

 

[MisterChester]

What I find hilarious is that these unions all steal workers money to donate to the left. Then those politicians over the years have passed so many worker protection laws and minimum wage crap that they have literally slit their own throats!! They are pricing themselves out of the market and more jobs are going overseas. Its disgusting they believe the union protects them and their jobs, and as the years go by they see more and more jobs going over seas and yet the union continue to take their money! Liberals love to trash billionaires for donating money to the right, yet unions outspend republican donations by a ton. So stupid.

Jobs are moving overseas regardless of the status of unions in the U.S. I've personally seen companies fire people, just to rehire someone on a work visa, temp contract, for lesser pay. There was no Union to speak of. What you speak of is a bucket of water in the proverbial lake.

 

[jblomenberg16]

Jobs are moving overseas regardless of the status of unions in the U.S. I've personally seen companies fire people, just to rehire someone on a work visa, temp contract, for lesser pay. There was no Union to speak of. What you speak of is a bucket of water in the proverbial lake.

Some companies move jobs overseas for the reduction in manufacturing costs, including labor. Others move jobs overseas (or create new jobs over seas vs. here on US soil) because it is more profitable for the company, especially when competing in those global markets.


There are a lot of folks that think its entirely about US labor prices. That's part of it, but its part of our tax structure, transportation costs, etc. There area lot of US based companies that are stronger and more profitable with a global strategy than if they were 100% US based.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Some companies move jobs overseas for the reduction in manufacturing costs, including labor. Others move jobs overseas (or create new jobs over seas vs. here on US soil) because it is more profitable for the company, especially when competing in those global markets.


There are a lot of folks that think its entirely about US labor prices. That's part of it, but its part of our tax structure, transportation costs, etc. There area lot of US based companies that are stronger and more profitable with a global strategy than if they were 100% US based.

^^^^^^^^^^ What he said.

 

[MisterChester]

Some companies move jobs overseas for the reduction in manufacturing costs, including labor. Others move jobs overseas (or create new jobs over seas vs. here on US soil) because it is more profitable for the company, especially when competing in those global markets.


There are a lot of folks that think its entirely about US labor prices. That's part of it, but its part of our tax structure, transportation costs, etc. There area lot of US based companies that are stronger and more profitable with a global strategy than if they were 100% US based.

It doesn't help when our congressmen continually vote against keeping jobs here in America. It's almost like they are told to do so by the people who fatten their wallets the most.

 

[BogWalker]

It doesn't help when our congressmen continually vote against keeping jobs here in America. It's almost like they are told to do so by the people who fatten their wallets the most.

See the thread about the Clinton Foundation taking bribes from foreign nations on issues that included trade deals.

 

[jblomenberg16]

It doesn't help when our congressmen continually vote against keeping jobs here in America. It's almost like they are told to do so by the people who fatten their wallets the most.

I must have missed the most recent "Keep jobs in America" law Congress was debating. Can you elaborate? I'm not calling you out personally, just curious as to why you wrote what you wrote. I know some policies passed through Congress have been dubious at best and haven't always helped keep jobs in America per se, but in general I don't think I've seen too many that are deliberate attempts to move job overseas either.


I think many US businesses have realized that with the opening of China, India, and now African markets, that there is more money to be made as a Global company (manufacturing and non-manufacturing presences globally as well as a global market for the goods) than there is to be a multinational US company (some manufacturing ops outsourced, but most of the market and ops in the US.)

 

[Dosproduction]

Modern gunner what is ment by "In the last part of the 20th century and first part of the 21st, unions have done more to harm the life and lifestyle of the average working man than all the combined union achievements in the last turn of the century mark." Can you explain this?

Im in a union and feel it does a great job of getting me a fair pay with benefits. Can not speak for every union. I feel that the right to association should be free to all. That means join or dont join a union should be up to u. But i also feel that a buisness owner also has a right to hire or fire who ever he/she wants union or no. But if they are in contract with some one that is different and that is where a union comes in handy. But on another note i feel large corporations should not have this same option when they have a large amount of employees. It seems like it is to easy for a walmart or mcdonalds to screw there employees and the employe has no leg to stand on against a billion dollar plus corporation and that is where a union would come in handy. Not that a mcdonalds worker should get paid 15 dollars but should be able to negotiate fair work enviroments and what not.

 

[croy]

As a member of a worthless union I don't blame them.

We didn't get a say on our last contract. The raises we're ok plus we got a bonus incentive plan, but they jacked up our insurance and also implemented a spousal carve out which in turn will cost me a lot more than the raise and incentive plan combined.

Also we have two plants operating under 1 union and 2 contracts and the contract favors the other plant a lot more.

 

[Hawkeye]

Modern gunner what is ment by "In the last part of the 20th century and first part of the 21st, unions have done more to harm the life and lifestyle of the average working man than all the combined union achievements in the last turn of the century mark." Can you explain this?

Im in a union and feel it does a great job of getting me a fair pay with benefits. Can not speak for every union. I feel that the right to association should be free to all. That means join or dont join a union should be up to u. But i also feel that a buisness owner also has a right to hire or fire who ever he/she wants union or no. But if they are in contract with some one that is different and that is where a union comes in handy. But on another note i feel large corporations should not have this same option when they have a large amount of employees. It seems like it is to easy for a walmart or mcdonalds to screw there employees and the employe has no leg to stand on against a billion dollar plus corporation and that is where a union would come in handy. Not that a mcdonalds worker should get paid 15 dollars but should be able to negotiate fair work enviroments and what not.

You do realize that most McDonalds are not owned/run by McDonalds, WW enterprise. Only ~ 10% of the stores are "corporate".

 

[femurphy77]

I know precious little about that...but didn't United's management failing to deliver even half of promised jobs, 9/11 and the Chapter 13 process have a little more to do with that than the IAM?

9/11 was the excuse that United needed to get out of Indianapolis. UA management did not want to locate in this area since it was a secondary market. The only reason they did is because when it came down to the top 3 or 4 choices Indiana/Indianapolis signed a blank check and then bent over and pulled their butt cheeks apart with a big sign above them that said "Insert Here".

The IND Maintenance Center is/was supposed to be a premier maintenance facility for the entire fleet but since U only flew 727,737, A319 and A320 with the occasional 757 in here on schedule the rest of the fleet flew in dead head. On top of that we had a 767 in for heavy maintenance that grew roots, I don't remember the exact numbers but I believe it was in the hangar for around 6 months as the result of a IAM sponsored work slowdown. It got so bad that U pulled the crews and let the plane just sit. Lots of little crap like that took place in the 3 years I was there.

On 9/12 I told the guys I worked with to start looking for a job and predicted almost to the day when they would shutter the place, I wish I had been wrong because I really enjoyed working there. When the mechanics contract came up it was pathetically humorous to watch our bib-overall wearing "representative" "negotiating with their legal team and agreeing to their every demand including adding new steps to an already convoluted "B" scale mechanics pay package.

The work was there, a state of the art facility was in place but the IAM ****ed the junior guys to protect their pay scale, not their jobs, their pay scale. I actually had a couple of their stewards call me in one night because I was doing a job in 8 hours that "everyone agreed would take 2 days". This wasn't thru short cuts, this all following all proper procedures and WORKING instead of sitting around bull-****ting all night.

I really wish the place had succeeded but I saw the writing on the wall the day I started there and started working on my next career almost immediately.

 

[MisterChester]

I must have missed the most recent "Keep jobs in America" law Congress was debating. Can you elaborate? I'm not calling you out personally, just curious as to why you wrote what you wrote. I know some policies passed through Congress have been dubious at best and haven't always helped keep jobs in America per se, but in general I don't think I've seen too many that are deliberate attempts to move job overseas either.


I think many US businesses have realized that with the opening of China, India, and now African markets, that there is more money to be made as a Global company (manufacturing and non-manufacturing presences globally as well as a global market for the goods) than there is to be a multinational US company (some manufacturing ops outsourced, but most of the market and ops in the US.)

There were attempts in 2010, 2012, and 2014 to deal with job outsourcing. Unsurprisingly, the GOP voted against them all. Here's my favorite example from 2012: GOP senators block top Obama jobs initiative - CNNPolitics.com

We have tried lowering taxes for companies, they are the lowest they've ever been in a very long time yet they still complain and whine. So why don't we lower them even more for them if they bring jobs home? It's almost unpatriotic how they act.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

There were attempts in 2010, 2012, and 2014 to deal with job outsourcing. Unsurprisingly, the GOP voted against them all. Here's my favorite example from 2012: GOP senators block top Obama jobs initiative - CNNPolitics.com

We have tried lowering taxes for companies, they are the lowest they've ever been in a very long time yet they still complain and whine. So why don't we lower them even more for them if they bring jobs home? It's almost unpatriotic how they act.

What in the wide world of sports are you talking about? We have the highest corporate tax rate in the free world. That - and our relatively high cost of labor - are the reasons we're losing our industrial base and manufacturing businesses to overseas flight.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Modern gunner what is ment by "In the last part of the 20th century and first part of the 21st, unions have done more to harm the life and lifestyle of the average working man than all the combined union achievements in the last turn of the century mark." Can you explain this?

Im in a union and feel it does a great job of getting me a fair pay with benefits. Can not speak for every union. I feel that the right to association should be free to all. That means join or dont join a union should be up to u. But i also feel that a buisness owner also has a right to hire or fire who ever he/she wants union or no. But if they are in contract with some one that is different and that is where a union comes in handy. But on another note i feel large corporations should not have this same option when they have a large amount of employees. It seems like it is to easy for a walmart or mcdonalds to screw there employees and the employe has no leg to stand on against a billion dollar plus corporation and that is where a union would come in handy. Not that a mcdonalds worker should get paid 15 dollars but should be able to negotiate fair work enviroments and what not.

I suspect he is thinking about the way the Steel Workers, United Auto Workers, and various airline unions priced their respective industries out of the market. It was especially evident when pilots and mechanics of several airlines disregarded the market forces in their industry and forced their airlines to go bankrupt (Eastern, Continental, Alaskan Airlines, Northwest - just to name the ones I had some familiarity with.) Ford, Chrysler, and GM are still feeling the effects of the labor contracts they were forced into in the 70s and 80s which loaded them with so much debt they had to go to the federal government for bailouts (Well, Ford managed to avoid it, seemingly).

 

[oldpink]

What in the wide world of sports are you talking about? We have the highest corporate tax rate in the free world. That - and our relatively high cost of labor - are the reasons we're losing our industrial base and manufacturing businesses to overseas flight.

He has no clue what he's talking about; he only knows what the DNC tells him to say.

 

[tbhausen]

9/11 was the excuse that United needed to get out of Indianapolis. UA management did not want to locate in this area since it was a secondary market. The only reason they did is because when it came down to the top 3 or 4 choices Indiana/Indianapolis signed a blank check and then bent over and pulled their butt cheeks apart with a big sign above them that said "Insert Here".

The IND Maintenance Center is/was supposed to be a premier maintenance facility for the entire fleet but since U only flew 727,737, A319 and A320 with the occasional 757 in here on schedule the rest of the fleet flew in dead head. On top of that we had a 767 in for heavy maintenance that grew roots, I don't remember the exact numbers but I believe it was in the hangar for around 6 months as the result of a IAM sponsored work slowdown. It got so bad that U pulled the crews and let the plane just sit. Lots of little crap like that took place in the 3 years I was there.

On 9/12 I told the guys I worked with to start looking for a job and predicted almost to the day when they would shutter the place, I wish I had been wrong because I really enjoyed working there. When the mechanics contract came up it was pathetically humorous to watch our bib-overall wearing "representative" "negotiating with their legal team and agreeing to their every demand including adding new steps to an already convoluted "B" scale mechanics pay package.

The work was there, a state of the art facility was in place but the IAM ****ed the junior guys to protect their pay scale, not their jobs, their pay scale. I actually had a couple of their stewards call me in one night because I was doing a job in 8 hours that "everyone agreed would take 2 days". This wasn't thru short cuts, this all following all proper procedures and WORKING instead of sitting around bull-****ting all night.

I really wish the place had succeeded but I saw the writing on the wall the day I started there and started working on my next career almost immediately.

None of this surprises me one bit. Thanks for the insight.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

What in the wide world of sports are you talking about? We have the highest corporate tax rate in the free world. That - and our relatively high cost of labor - are the reasons we're losing our industrial base and manufacturing businesses to overseas flight.

Tax rates are one thing. Given the complexity of the tax code, taxes paid are quite another.

Some Key Findings:​

• As a group, the 288 corporations examined paid an effective federal income tax rate of just 19.4 percent over the five-year period — far less than the statutory 35 percent tax rate.​

• Twenty-six of the corporations, including Boeing, General Electric, Priceline.com and Verizon, paid no federal income tax at all over the five year period. A third of the corporations (93) paid an effective tax rate of less than ten percent over that period.​

• Of those corporations in our sample with significant offshore profits, two thirds paid higher corporate tax rates to foreign governments where they operate than they paid in the U.S. on their U.S. profits.​

These findings refute the prevailing view inside the Washington, D.C. Beltway that America’s corporate income tax is more burdensome than the corporate income taxes levied by other countries, and that this purported (but false) excess burden somehow makes the U.S. “uncompetitive.”​

Other Findings:​

• One hundred and eleven of the 288 companies (39 percent of them) paid zero or less in federal income taxes in at least one year from 2008 to 2012.​

• The sectors with the lowest effective corporate tax rates over the five-year period were utilities (2.9 percent), industrial machinery (4.3 percent), telecommunications (9.8 percent), oil, gas and pipelines (14.4 percent), transportation (16.4 percent), aerospace and defense (16.7 percent) and financial (18.8 percent).​

• The tax breaks claimed by these companies are highly concentrated in the hands of a few very large corporations. Just 25 companies claimed $174 billion in tax breaks over the five years between 2008 and 2012. That’s almost half the $364 billion in tax subsidies claimed by all of the 288 companies in our sample.​

• Five companies — Wells Fargo, AT&T, IBM, General Electric, and Verizon — enjoyed over $77 billion in tax breaks during this five-year period.
​

The Sorry State of Corporate Taxes | Citizens for Tax Justice

U.S. companies are looking for all sorts of ways to reduce their tax bill. But scores of big U.S. companies just paid no taxes or effective tax rates of 0%.
There are 20 companies in the Standard & Poor's 500, including drugmaker Merck (MRK), computer storage company Seagate (STX) and automaker General Motors (GM), which reported effective tax rates of 0% or lower in the second calendar quarter despite reporting a profit during the period, according to a USA TODAY analysis of data from S&P Capital IQ. To be included, the companies also needed to report positive earnings before taxes including unusual items.

This analysis shows that while U.S. companies and investors constantly grumble about corporate tax rates, there are many companies that pay nowhere near the highest rates. This is the rule, not an exception. A 2013 report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that profitable U.S. firms filing a Schedule M-3 paid federal taxes of 13% of pretax worldwide income. That's well below the top 35% statutory rate.

20 big profitable US companies paid no taxes

In case you missed it in the first quote, Boeing hadn't paid any federal tax in 5 years at the time of this article:

Many of the most profitable U.S. corporations paid little or no federal income tax from 2008 to 2012, according to a five-year study issued on Tuesday by a left-leaning tax activist group.
Citizens for Tax Justice looked at 288 profitable Fortune 500 companies and said that 26 of them - including Boeing Co (BA.N), General Electric Co (GE.N) and Verizon Communications Inc (VZ.N) - paid no federal income tax in the five-year period.

Many big U.S. corporations pay very little in taxes: study | Reuters