Dominic Gates of The Seattle Times has this story about the prospect of the IAM agreeing to a no-strike clause for Boeing.
The national head of the IAM is quoted as saying no way, no how. Although this is dismissed by an unidentified source as aggressive posturing by the national president, whether it is or isn’t, here’s an angle not covered in the story.
As readers know, there is fear in Washington State that Boeing will locate a second production line for the 787 outside Washington and that Charleston, SC, is the front-runner for this, particularly now that Boeing has agreed to buy the Vought Aircraft 787 facilities.
As we have previously pointed out, the Vought plant is represented by the IAM, albeit a different Local than that covering Boeing’s Seattle-area facilities. The Seattle IAM 751 local is very aggressive. The Vought Local is new and, at least for the moment, considered more willing to work with management (at Vought, at least) than 751. Or so the theory goes. (IAM 751 believes Boeing management is the problem, but we’ll not get into this argument.)
If Boeing insists on a no-strike clause for IAM 751, it’s only natural that Boeing will insist that there be a no-strike clause at Charleston, too. If IAM National won’t approve any such commitment, then what does this mean for the prospects of 787 Line 2 at Charleston–and does this elevate the prospects of San Antonio, TX, becoming to preferred site for Line 2?