posted on Nov, 24 2009 @ 03:18 PM
Don't blame Boeing, blame the union. Last Fall the machinist union went on strike (which in and of itself is offensive. They had good paying jobs
and job security at a time when much of the rest of America was slipping into under and unemployment and struggling. Beef #1 with unions- they do not
pick their battles wisely.) and it really hurt Boeing. The company ended up seeing their deadline for the new Dreamliner colapse because of the
strike and many of the preorders for the plane evaporated with the new deadline, causing the compnay to lose billions. Had the union stayed on the
job, the contracts would have been filled inside the deadline and Boeing would have been one of the few companies to weather the recession without
much of a hit in capital. As it turned out, thousands were ultimately laid off... all thanks to the greed of the union.
Why would Boeing want to increase the number of union workers by not using as many contract workers as possible? It might be a "nice gesture"
towards the veterans, but it sure wouldn't make any sense from a corporate standpoint. Maybe if the workers Boeing has already hadn't proven
themselves to be as much of a detriment to the health of the company as they are a benefit, Boeing would have a sensible reason to hire them into the