Two third of Readers in our on-line polling this week urged IAM 751 members to accept the Boeing contract offer that contains major concessions, notably on pensions, in exchange for Boeing selecting Washington State to assemble the 777X and produce its wing here.
The unscientific polling is broad-based and not restricted to union members, and should not be considered indicative of the outcome of the vote today. Results are to be announced tonight around 9pm PST.
The polling results below are as of January 2. Voting is still open so totals may differ in the original post vs what is reported below, but voting subsided to the point where results should remain constant.
Key political leaders in the Puget Sound area met Monday with Ray Conner, CEO of Boeing Commercial Airplanes, before meeting with the press and urging the members of IAM 751 to approve the contract.
The Puget Sound Business Journal has a detailed story, including the dire consequences if the contract is rejected.
The Associated Press has a similar story.
IAM 751 sent a letter December 23 to its members recommending a No vote and detailing why.
According to the civic leaders meeting with Conner, the BCA CEO said if the 751 members don’t accept the contract, the wing production will be sent elsewhere. According to the news reports, Conner was more ambiguous about the fuselage work and final assembly.
The Requests for Proposals Boeing issued after 751 members rejected the first contract offer on November 13 allowed for splitting the FAL and the wing production among sites. But we confirmed with Washington’s Director of Aerospace that if Boeing does this, none of the $8.7bn in tax breaks the state offered Boeing will be extended; it’s an all-0r-nothing offer.
Missouri is the only other state to go public with its tax break offer: $1.7bn from the state and $1.4bn from St. Louis County.
Texas, California, South Carolina, Alabama, Utah and Georgia are among the 22 states that offered up 54 sites to Boeing in the RFP process. North Carolina and Pennsylvania are the only ones to publicly reveal they were eliminated in Boeing’s early analysis of the RFPs.
The contract offers set off internal strife at the IAM. District 751 leaders are feuding with the IAM International leaders, who negotiated the contracts with Boeing and who have largely run roughshod over 751. Local leaders oppose ratification of the contract and the International urges acceptance. International forced the January 3 vote over the objections of the District.
But our polling also shows the District 751 leadership is in trouble. A large percentage of our Readers blame 751 leaders for the current mess and more want to see the District leaders replaced than the International heads.
A large number of Readers also believe District 751 should be decertified as Boeing’s union representation and a large number believe 751 should divorce from its affiliation with IAM International.
We understand that neither decertification nor “divorce” can occur until 2016 under the current contract, or until 2024 if the contract is Accepted and extended. One of our Readers believes that if this contract is rejected, it is possible for changes to be made this year. We don’t know the answer.
These poll results are below the jump.
|Replace the IAM 751 leadership||137||29%|
|Replace the IAM International leadership||95||20%|
|Decertify IAM 751 as the union representing Boeing workers||101||21%|
|IAM 751 should “divorce” IAM International||146||30%|
We found the following results to be perhaps the most interesting. Despite the very public dispute between IAM 751 and International leadership, in which 751 clearly opposed both contract proposals, 751 is viewed by most as responsible for the contract when combining question results.
|IAM International leadership||8||2%|
|IAM 751 leadership||19||5%|
|Boeing and IAM International leadership||117||30%|
|Boeing and IAM 751 leadership||67||17%|
|IAM International and IAM 751||13||3%|
|Boeing, IAM International and IAM 751||102||26%|