Lay-offs

[KC Shox]

Beech laying off 2,300 today, Cessna with 4,000, Coleman with 20 today, Accenture 198, with more to come. Wichita is going to hell in a handbasket. I feel so sorry for these people, despite their Union happy greediness, I wish no one to go unemployed.

[BenWSU]

Blame the unions for driving up wages. You could build planes in Mexico for atleast 1/4th the price here.

Blame Democrats for wanting corporate execs to have zero planes. That means less demand for planes from Wichita.

[Shocker85]

Blame the unions for driving up wages. You could build planes in Mexico for atleast 1/4th the price here.

Blame Democrats for wanting corporate execs to have zero planes. That means less demand for planes from Wichita.

Blame the unions all you want, but if the money wasn't there the companies wouldn't acquiesce to union demands. The companies manipulate everything to get what they want. Union wages and benefits pale to what corporate bigwigs get. Offshore outsourcing - check witih Boeing on how well that's going.

I agree with your laments about the blanket condemnation of corporate jets. There are many legitimate needs for them that commercial aviation can't satisfy.

Add to the list 800 layoffs by Wichita Boeing (mostly non-union, BTW). I would expect to hear about large numbers of layoffs at Spirit within 3-4 months when Boeing is forced to cut production rates. Trickle down to retail, auto sales, home sales, health care, and other services will cut deep in Wichita.

--'85.

[ShockerGorilla]

Trickle down to retail, auto sales, home sales, health care, and other services will cut deep in Wichita.

Can't wait!! :(

[SHOCKvalue]

Blame the unions all you want, but if the money wasn't there the companies wouldn't acquiesce to union demands.

So the true value of any good or service is basically 100% justifiable to it's current market? That's basically what you're saying, when drilled down to an elemental level.

How's that working in relation to:

-Health care
-Oil Futures
-Ethanol
-Home values in high COLI, urban areas
-etc?

The companies manipulate everything to get what they want.

Black helicopters or tin foil hats, which is your preference?

Union wages and benefits pale to what corporate bigwigs get.

You're right, on a unit cost level. But how's this work on an extended cost level when you've taken into consideration quantities? Not so well, do the math.

Most people with educated, rational thinking would say that a literal handful of execs getting (admittedly) large, gross bonuses is a drop in the bucket compared with the fact that 75% of a company's workforce is being paid - literally - twice their market value for education and job skills.

When your labor inputs are the highest in the world on a product or service that is produced globally, eventually there will be a collapse at some point in time when it hits a sort of saturation point. See the US automakers right now. As the world continues to progress into a global economy (whether we like it or not) you can't continue to pay GED's performing manual labor on a production line more than what most developing nations pay their doctors, top scientists/engineers and other national leaders, when that country is producing the same good or service as you are.

[martymoose]

I'm going to blame the union's greed...Sure bet all those people getting laid off wish they had an extra month's pay in their pockets right now...

[shocks771]

Give me a break. These layoffs have nothing to do with the unions. It's all simple economics. All of the aircraft companies have added employees over the past three or four years, some companies have almost doubled the amount of employees in this time period because aircraft orders were so high for the past few years. With the downturn in the economy these orders have fallen off dramatically, therefore there is a need for companies to layoff employees to offset the decrease in revenues. It sucks, but it needs to be done for these companies to survive.

[SHOCKvalue]

Give me a break. These layoffs have nothing to do with the unions. It's all simple economics.

FYI the words and phrases "union" and "simple economics" should not be used in consecutive sentences, or otherwise anywhere near one another.

[SB Shock]

It's all simple economics.

It can't be to simple - the "Messiah" can not even solve the problem.

[jazztrane]

I heard from a couple people that Cessna approached the union asking to cut back to 4 days/week and when the union refused, another 2k jobs were cut instead. I can't confirm 100% but I've heard that from 2 different Cessna employees FWIW...

I always found it funny in the past when aircraft employees would strike and the union would win a bigger pay increase, then employees would be laid off. At least to me it appears the union is more concerned about making headlines with "victories" than assuring the maximum number of people keep their jobs.

[SubGod22]

I'll have to ask my brother, sister or dad about that rumor.

[Shocker85]

I heard from a couple people that Cessna approached the union asking to cut back to 4 days/week and when the union refused, another 2k jobs were cut instead. I can't confirm 100% but I've heard that from 2 different Cessna employees FWIW...

I always found it funny in the past when aircraft employees would strike and the union would win a bigger pay increase, then employees would be laid off. At least to me it appears the union is more concerned about making headlines with "victories" than assuring the maximum number of people keep their jobs.

The aerospace industry is cyclic - always has been, always will be.

The layoffs will occur in aerospace whether the unions/workers make concessions or not. If the orders dry up, fewer planes are built and hence fewer workers are needed - it doesn't matter if they make $10 an hour or $40 an hour, they aren't going to pay anyone to do nothing when there is no work. Same thing with reducing the work week - if the work isn't there the companies can't keep everyone on-board. Furthermore, wages are in the neighborhood of 60-70% of the cost of an employee to the company and cutting the hours doesn't usually cut the benefits which actually DRIVES UP the total cost of labor per unit.

The unions know this, the workers know this, the company execs know this. People who work in aerospace have to be prepared for the 7-8 year cycle's ups and downs. If they can't accept that, they go into other work. Problem is, aerospace pays better than most hands-on labor in this area and non-educated workers are willing to accept the risk.

In the 70s when the SST program was dying and ultimately canned at Boeing, people were offered 25% pay cuts in order to keep their jobs. All that did was delay the inevitable - most or all were laid-off within 3 months anyway. The prevailing strategy is now to simply lay-off and re-hire as needed. Contract labor and out-sourcing are much more prevalent nowdays, and staffing is managed differently. 4,000 job cuts might not mean 4,000 lay-offs, but rather non-renewal of contractors, reduced ramp-ups from projects and perhaps 2,500 actual lay-offs. Just an illustration, not fact.

If is an easy cop-out to blame the unions, and I agree they have some philosophies and tactics that belong in the Dark Ages, but to lay 100% of the blame on them is wrong. The economy -both present and prospective - dictates the market in aerospace.

--'85.

[rrshock]

So who do you blame for layoffs if there isn't a union at the company?

Just curious.

[Shocker85]

So who do you blame for layoffs if there isn't a union at the company?

Why do you have to "blame" anyone? Lay-off help a company react quickly to outside factors. SOP in aerospace and most other manufacturing. In a free-market economy, no one is guaranteed a job.

--'85.

[rrshock]

So who do you blame for layoffs if there isn't a union at the company?

Why do you have to "blame" anyone? Lay-off help a company react quickly to outside factors. SOP in aerospace and most other manufacturing. In a free-market economy, no one is guaranteed a job.

--'85.

I understand that no one is guaranteed a job. Layoffs are necessary in order to keep a company out of financial trouble (at least delay problems). I was asking the question to those on here that like to blame the union for everything.

My question to them is this: Who is to blame for high costs and layoffs at companies that aren't unionized? If the unions have caused the auto makers and aircraft amnufacturers all of their problems, what about the businesses that don't involve unions? Or are they still to blame in some way?

I think that is only fair, seeing as how so many on here think that the unions cause all of this countries problems.