SEATTLE - In the opinion of the Machinists union, it's a smoking gun: a series of internal Boeing documents presented in the second and third quarters of 2009 that clearly indicate the company was looking to build at least some of its airplanes without interference from the union.
Boeing does not dispute the legitimacy of the documents that are now part of the case brought by the National Labor Relations Board against Boeing. The NLRB accuses the company of breaking the law by moving some 787 production to a non-union plant in North Charleston, S.C.
The documents were meant for the eyes of Boeing's board and senior executives. In one, the company outlines its strategy as a "solution for establishing long-tem manufacturing capability outside of Puget Sound, starting with a second 787 final assembly line and progressing to the next new airplane program.”
Back-to-back strikes by the Machinists in 2005 and then again in 2008 played a role, to the point where the company said it felt hostage. But at the same time, the documents lay out the pros and cons, classifying the Charleston expansion as high risk, trading away the experienced-but-restive workforce in Everett against inexperienced workers in South Carolina. The move was also high cost – about $1.5 billion.
But it will be up to an administrative law judge to conclude whether Boeing's move to South Carolina breaks federal labor law that bars companies from uprooting and moving existing factories just to avoid unions and whether an expansion to avoid unions constitutes the same violation.
In a statement, Boeing said, "...these documents confirm what Boeing has said from the outset; that we made a legitimate business decision based on a variety of factors, including the need to ensure our future competitiveness."
To add a comment, please register or login.