<$BlogRSDURL$>

Monday, March 09, 2009

With friends like these... 

This morning I was forwarded an article reported last Friday on The Motely Fool, a very popular stock investment website. Being familiar with their Shareholder Uber Alles mindset, I was quite shocked to read the following from reporter Rich Smith, regarding their perspective on the previous day's Boeing-WEU contract vote:

Late last night, Kansan engineers for the second time rejected Boeing's latest contract offer. But unlike their comrades out West, they elected not to punish Boeing by going on strike. By a vote of 140-118, the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace (SPEEA) instead limited itself to a polite refusal of Boeing's offer, coupled with the hope that "Boeing will have enough respect for their workforce to sit down and negotiate a respectful contract."...according to SPEEA, "the offered contract falls short of those signed with engineers at other work sites." Basically, all the Wichita workers are asking for here is a fair shake -- the same deal that Boeing already agreed to with its employees out West. If Boeing would accede to what sounds like a very reasonable request, everything should work out hunky-dory.

Speaking as a shareholder of a company...I have to ask: What's the deal, Boeing? Your employees in Kansas have shown restraint, not following their IAM brethren into the fire. They're asking for no more than what you've already given their peers. Meanwhile, you're still hewing to the tired old "best and final line" -- which you've already proven isn't either...

The fact that this article was written by the same reporter who penned "Boeing should let the union walk" and "Boeing busts the union" about the IAM negotiations and strike last fall should pretty much show everyone just how far outside of reality Boeing-Wichita's engineering negotiation team must live.


-- Bill, who's with Mizz Franklin on this one...

Tuesday, March 03, 2009

New Sheriff in Town... 

After eight years struggling under a Secretary of Labor who seemed to think her job was to help management keep workers down, it's refreshing to read that we now have one who understands the job is to advocate for Labor and not for the Chamber of Commerce:

"If you take care of an employee, that employee will produce. Productivity by our workforce, especially union members, has increased," she said. "But we don't see the same value in terms of their wages going up. So there has to be some morality placed there."


--Bill, who finds Ms Solis to be change he can believe in...

Monday, March 02, 2009

Open Letter to the HR folks monitoring this 'blog... 

Dear Sam, et alia,

At his weekly crew meeting last week, my boss gave his workgroup the Non-Rep Incentive presentation he received from y'all (display only, no copies allowed, as you directed). He covered all the talking points on the PowerPoint slides and reviewed your FAQs with us but he was unable to answer my questions about other pertinent details, so I was kinda hoping you might be able to clarify a couple of things:

  1. The presentation told some story about the Company getting Board approval to grant us this "discretionary" award but no indication of when this occurred. We know that the Board didn't approve any payment to us when they approved increasing our Exec's bonuses, so just when in the three weeks since did our Execs approach the Board to grant our Earned Time Off and just what new details prompted the Company to do so?

  2. The pitch stated that a calculation "similar to" that used to increase our Exec's bonuses by six days of pay was used was used to determine our three day award. My boss understood and could provide a very detailed explanation or how the '0.81" factor was used to calculate Exec bonuses but was unable to describe any of the math whatsoever used to determine how or why the non-reps were granted an additional three days of ETO. Just which performance numbers and calculations were selected to determine this performance award?

  3. Tell me again why no cash payout. The presentation said something about how we're getting days off because it allowed the Company to grant us "more" than a cash payout would allow, but again there were no details about a cash vs ETO determination and my boss was unable to provide detail. As absolutely nobody who's been paying attention could believe our Execs would do anything "more" for us that didn't somehow benefit themselves, what's really going on here? Cash payout would require an embarrassing public SEC announcement while ETO can be hidden in the books or what?

I anxiously await your detailed answers in the Comments section, below.


-- Bill, who'll be awaiting winged primates again tomorrow morning as well...

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?