Boeing CEO: Labor complaint makes manufacturing in U.S. less attractive

Published 4:32 pm Tuesday, May 10, 2011

The National Labor Relations Board’s complaint against the Boeing Co. is a “fundamental assault on the capitalist principles that have sustained America’s competitiveness,” the company’s CEO wrote in a column in the Wall Street Journal that was posted online Tuesday.

Jim McNerney, Boeing’s chief executive, said the labor board is wrong in its allegation that Boeing illegally retaliated against its Machinist union in picking South Carolina for a second 787.

Last month, the labor board’s general counsel issued a complaint against Boeing over its South Carolina selection and set a hearing on June 14 in Seattle.

The labor board’s “overreach could accelerate the overseas flight of good, middle-class American jobs,” wrote Boeing’s McNerney.

Boeing made a “rational, legal business decision” in picking South Carolina for the second 787 line in 2009, he wrote.

The labor board’s counsel pointed to statements by McNerney and others indicating the company selected South Carolina to avoid labor strikes in Washington. The Machinists went on strike for 57 days in 2008.

McNerney writes that if the labor board’s complaint is allowed to stand, it will discourage companies from keeping manufacturing sites in the country:

The world the NLRB wants to create with its complaint would effectively prevent all companies from placing new plants in right-to-work states if they have existing plants in unionized states. But as an unintended consequence, forward-thinking CEOs also would be reluctant to place new plants in unionized states—lest they be forever restricted from placing future plants elsewhere across the country.

Interestingly, McNerney’s response on the labor board’s complaint comes a day after Lafe Solomon, the labor board’s general counsel, suggested that the parties involved in the case “respect the legal process, rather than trying to litigate this case in the media and public arena.”