Published: Sunday, May 17, 2009
AEROSPACE INDUSTRY
Take strikes off the table
As one of many needed steps, Gov. Chris Gregoire's creation of the Washington Council on Aerospace last week was welcome.
The governor did by executive order what the Legislature failed to do. The council, which includes top leaders in higher education, the aerospace industry, its key unions and state government, will work to see that Washington is competing effectively to support a robust aerospace industry -- and the thousands of jobs and billions of dollars of economic activity that come with it.
That's all good. On its own, though, it isn't nearly enough.
State government has made necessary moves on taxes and unemployment insurance, and must continue to improve training opportunities, research and development programs, and the infrastructure for transportation and freight. But without labor peace between the Boeing Co. and its top unions, such efforts could become moot.
This is the free enterprise system, and the cost of doing business is likely to dictate whether Boeing continues to provide the foundation of Washington's manufacturing base or rebuilds it elsewhere. If costs here -- including those created by work stoppages -- are higher than a suitable alternative, look for a potential second line of the 787, and the next generation of the 737, to be welcomed into a new home in another state.
Talk about a gut blow. It's hard to overstate how devastating the eventual loss of Boeing, and the related companies that would surely follow, would be to the state economy. Think the current cuts to education are bad? If Boeing leaves for greener pastures, these might be remembered as the good old days.
It's time for Boeing's key unions, those representing Machinists and aerospace engineers, to put their considerable weight behind a coordinated effort to ensure the company's long-term success here in Puget Sound. Nothing would do more than eliminating the prospect of business-killing strikes, which lead to fewer orders and a loss of confidence in Boeing among its customers.
The unions should agree to a system of binding arbitration, which would lead to reasonable dispute resolution without the damage strikes inflict on both sides. That would remove one of the chief obstacles to Boeing's success here, while ensuring the company's skilled and valued workforce is treated with the respect it deserves.
Elected leaders should encourage the unions to take this road. If they don't, no one should be surprised if the next road Boeing takes is one that leads out of town.
The governor did by executive order what the Legislature failed to do. The council, which includes top leaders in higher education, the aerospace industry, its key unions and state government, will work to see that Washington is competing effectively to support a robust aerospace industry -- and the thousands of jobs and billions of dollars of economic activity that come with it.
That's all good. On its own, though, it isn't nearly enough.
State government has made necessary moves on taxes and unemployment insurance, and must continue to improve training opportunities, research and development programs, and the infrastructure for transportation and freight. But without labor peace between the Boeing Co. and its top unions, such efforts could become moot.
This is the free enterprise system, and the cost of doing business is likely to dictate whether Boeing continues to provide the foundation of Washington's manufacturing base or rebuilds it elsewhere. If costs here -- including those created by work stoppages -- are higher than a suitable alternative, look for a potential second line of the 787, and the next generation of the 737, to be welcomed into a new home in another state.
Talk about a gut blow. It's hard to overstate how devastating the eventual loss of Boeing, and the related companies that would surely follow, would be to the state economy. Think the current cuts to education are bad? If Boeing leaves for greener pastures, these might be remembered as the good old days.
It's time for Boeing's key unions, those representing Machinists and aerospace engineers, to put their considerable weight behind a coordinated effort to ensure the company's long-term success here in Puget Sound. Nothing would do more than eliminating the prospect of business-killing strikes, which lead to fewer orders and a loss of confidence in Boeing among its customers.
The unions should agree to a system of binding arbitration, which would lead to reasonable dispute resolution without the damage strikes inflict on both sides. That would remove one of the chief obstacles to Boeing's success here, while ensuring the company's skilled and valued workforce is treated with the respect it deserves.
Elected leaders should encourage the unions to take this road. If they don't, no one should be surprised if the next road Boeing takes is one that leads out of town.
Comments
(