Boeing strikers stand up to outsourcing

[DainBramaged]

Mark Blondin is past president of International Association of Machinists (IAM) District 751, the IAM's aerospace coordinator, and the lead negotiator for the 27,500 machinists on strike at Boeing. The key issue in the battle is Boeing's attempts to use nonunion subcontractors.

After two days of talks with Boeing to resolve the six-week-old strike broke off October 13, the Blondin spoke to Darrin Hoop about the fight to defend union jobs. The two sides were supposed to resume negotiations again on October 23, with a federal mediator sitting in.

WHY DID negotiations fail?

BECAUSE THE Boeing Company refused to make a commitment to the very people who have made them successful. They'd rather rely on outside people to come in and mess with the system that our members have perfected and are willing to perfect even more.

We are willing to embrace new technology and give new innovations and processes, but the company has to make a commitment that they'll be here tomorrow. We aren't going to agree to language that will turn our backs on these people--and talking about a couple thousand jobs they'd like suppliers to do.

THERE ARE three issues that came up in the latest negotiations related to outsourcing. Could you tell us more about it?

ONE IS material delivery. When suppliers bring in their parts the company would like those suppliers to continue on and inspect them, do all the inventory, the movement, the dispersal and have them put it up on the airplane.

Our position is, we'll let the suppliers delivery their parts, but then the people who do that job for a living right now--our people--should do the rest of it. If it's a job that needs to be done, it ought to be done by the people who built this company, not outside suppliers. We can do it just as inexpensively, and we can certainly improve the processes that the company has put in place.

This union wants a broader scope of work to look at what we can make proposals to keep in-house. The company puts out far too much work at more cost then keeping it in house. We say, "Give us the same data you use, labor costs, material costs, transportation costs, rework costs. Give us your numbers, and let us make a proposal to see if we can't beat that and let the American worker compete for this work."

COULD THAT potentially lead to the union having to change work rules or undercutting itself by having to compete with non-union subcontractors?

THIS UNION has always been flexible in processes, in job descriptions. We're all for having a flexible worker, a multi-talented, multi-skilled worker. But it's a two-way street. When you have that multi-skilled worker, multi-talented worker who can do a variety of processes, make a commitment that they're going to be around tomorrow. Don't hang these intimidation tactics over their head--that "you could be gone tomorrow."

Our members give their all. They give all their thoughts, their ideas, their hard work, and they ought to be at least given an opportunity to perform that job. That's what it is all about: commitment.

http://socialistworker.org/2008/10/23/boeing-strikers-stand-up