
As the clock passed midnight on the East Coast last night, the Seattle Times reported that negotiations between Boeing and the IAM had broken down, all but assuring that Charleston would take joint custody of Boeing's 787 final assembly operations.
An announcement, thought to be days - if not hours away, say program sources - will finally bring to a close the "will they, won't they" discussion. Boeing is set to make a decision that could represent not only an existential transformation in its nearly century-long history, but a seismic shift in the North American commercial aerospace industrial center of gravity.
The last time Boeing opened a new commercial final assembly operation, it was in Everett for the 747 in the late 1960s.
Not to mention, a second 787 line might be the biggest positive economic deal this country has seen after a recession that began just days after the IAM authorized its strike in September of last year.
South Carolina's silent treatment of the competition is quite telling in comparison to that of Washington state, which as a century-old hub of aerospace expertise has had to awkwardly justify its existence. Washington state, for all its logistical and technical advantages, couldn't override the one political roadblock that dominated Boeing's thinking.
The hushed tones of Charleston County Airport Authority meetings and the mystery economic incentives passed by the South Carolina State Senate finance committee only served to reinforce the "worst kept secret" approach to the Lowcountry's bid for the 787 line.
The $170 million economic incentive package, passed yesterday out of committee, would exempt manufacturers from the state fuel tax for test flights and transporting aircraft. The package known as Project Gemini, after the Zodiac symbol 'Twins', didn't name Boeing, but then again, it didn't have to.
The silence from Charleston, one senior executive says, is a quiet confidence created by a document known as the Master Charleston Campus Plan. Those who have seen it say it outlines a massive expansion of the Boeing Charleston site including a final assembly line, delivery center, flight line and paint hangars. The plan is so compelling that the US Senators who quietly visited Boeing Charleston earlier this fall, and the normally vocal Mayor of Charleston, have virtually remained silent on the matter.
The reality is that Charleston has not always been the front runner for the 787 line. In 2007 and 2008, Charleston, it appeared, could do no right. Cash-strapped Vought sharing responsibility with Alenia Aeronautica at Global Aeronautica was nothing short of a crippling bottleneck for the program. Poor workmanship, arbitrary processes and an unstable design and oversight by omission did nothing to untangle Boeing's ability to manage the program. Boeing would eventually be forced to purchase 50% of Global Aeronautica in March 2008. Charleston was the last place Boeing wanted to lay down its roots.
Yet, as Boeing began to come to grips with the management of its global supply chain, coupled with the cost of doing business in Charleston with partners with their own bottom line to bolster, Boeing began to see the existing arrangement as a losing proposition. Negotiating the incorporation of design changes was an expensive and time consuming process and financially unstable partners presented an unacceptable risk to the program.
By early summer, it had become clear that the ownership of Vought's aft fuselage fabrication and integration plant would change hands. There were at least some high-level indications that the announcement of the acquisition could have come as early as the Paris Air Show, but "emergent first flight issues", now known to be the side-of-body issue, took precedent.
When the deal was announced on July 7th, it represented the company's biggest commercial expansion since its merger 12 years earlier with McDonnell Douglas. Yet, what had been quiet speculation about the future of Charleston, Boeing's purchase of Vought's 787 operations amounted to a proverbial starting gun for the competition for the second line.
Late Summer brought the filing of permits for the Charleston line and the de-certification of the IAM at Boeing Charleston, the last of the major hurdles for Boeing's competition. Both events would set the stage for the secret negotiations between Boeing and the leadership of the IAM, which appear to have ended in stalemate. For now.
Washington state elected officials are now frantically working both sides, trying to bring Boeing and the IAM back to the table, while Boeing maintains that no final decision has been made on the location of the line.
In the words of Yogi Berra: "It ain't over till it's over.
Underlying the whole selection process is a shifting justification for the second line. As Boeing was accumulating orders at a stunning pace, the company entertained the idea of using a second assembly line to raise production rates to as high as 16 787s per month, beyond the 10 per month it had planned for the end of 2009. However, as the reality of the production troubles set in, the difficulty in ramping up made the second line imperative to get to the originally targeted 10 per month, now set for the end of 2013.
It cannot be far from Boeing's mind that the "assurance of delivery" their customers seek is as much about labor relations as it is about program execution.
When the final announcement is made, congratulations will be offered, fingers will be pointed and blame will invariably be cast. The decision is both the close of another chapter for the 787, and the beginning of an entirely new one. All of this comes before a single hour has been flown by the Dreamliner.
What's past is prologue






on October 28, 2009 2:04 PM | Reply
The IAM has cast itself as a confrontational union, following the lead of the UAW. One need only consider the sculpture on the grass outside the Local 751 office in Everett, right outside the factory. It depicts a family waving picket signs next to a burn barrel, arranged so they are facing the Boeing plant entrance. The message? "We are the IAM, and we are all about the strike." The union could have chosen something that represents the might and capability of the IAM worker - say, two people riveting an airplane panel - but they didn't. Instead, they want the world to view them as a union that goes on strike a lot.
So the IAM has dug its own grave on that front. The other more fundamental issue is that the State of Washington is not a right-to-work state. And with a Democratic governor and two Democratic U.S. senators, don't expect that to change. Ever.
on October 28, 2009 3:08 PM | Reply
GOOD for South Carolina!!!
I totally support the NON-union mentality of this country ... just as the case with the UAW, we at Ford have had to re-negotiate our contracts with them to make building cars more economical for us ... otherwise how can we POSSIBLY compete ... or worse yet ... SURVIVE???
This is the FIRST positive step for Boeing ... now hire me back and I'll take care of the rest ... ROFLMAO!!!
on October 28, 2009 3:28 PM | Reply
It's important for Boeing to get rid of unions to compete with that cheap, non-unionized labor that Airbus can rely on in France and Germany.
on October 28, 2009 3:36 PM | Reply
I hope this is just a strategy move which will bring the parties back to the negotiating table where a non strike, arbitration type settlement can occur.
It is in everyone's interest to assure that the 787 will fly in the near future and for the company to move forward with Labor's cooperation.
One of the terms should also be for the removal of that "strike" statue to be replaced with a statue of productivity
on October 28, 2009 3:41 PM | Reply
Royce, while agree with (if it should come) to the second production line in South Carolina and that unions are not as good as people make them out to be, you are wrong about one thing. Almost all of the factory workers in France and Germany are unionized. They are also fairly well paid. The three major differences between them and the IAM is: 1. They don't stike, while the IAM does. 2. They have a higher tax rate which covers several governement programs that guarantee employment, health insurance, and retirement. 3. Airbus get billions in loans from differnet governements (which they don't always have to repay) that allows them to not not necessarily cover the full cost of their employees.
on October 28, 2009 6:22 PM | Reply
With apologies to the Governator...
To the Members of the International Machinists Union:
We are locating the second production line for the 787 in South Carolina.
For some time now we have grappled with the fact that the Union's propensity to organize frivolous,
unnecessary strikes just to prove that a HS education plus the Union equals PhD wages. Your health
care costs are a major expense to Boeing, yet the Union regards the benefits as a divine right. Your
kamikaze bargaining, irrespective of the health of the economy, employer & fellow workers, sucks.
Yet another calendar year has come and gone without the Union realizing the reality that members
overwhelmingly deserve. In light of this, with careful consideration, we believe that moving to a non-
union, right-to-work state is in the best interests of our shareholders, customers and other employees.
Sincerely,
Boeing Board of Directors.
PS. Google acrostic.