The EADS-BAE Systems merger is off, killed by a combination of government interference and a key BAE shareholder who opposed it. Read here and here and here.
We favored the merger as a way to get the French and Germans out of EADS’ knickers. The British government also meddled in the affair, for its concern about the diminished role of BAE post-merger. BAE is a top UK employer and defense contractor.
Flight Global published a list of the Top 100 aerospace companies in the world. Boeing is #1, EADS #2 and BAE #15. A PDF is here Top 100 Aerospace Companies, avoiding Flight’s annoying new Flight Global Club nonsense.
A new round of news articles has emerged concerning launch aid to Airbus for the A350. This one is typical. It and others tied the subsidies identified in the long-running WTO case received by Airbus to the proposed merger between Airbus parent EADS and Britain’s BAE Systems.
BAE gets about half its revenue from the US Department of Defense. According to Bloomberg rankings, BAE was DOD’s No. 9 supplier last year (down from #5 in 2009 when the US was still engaged in the Iraq War).
Some say the Airbus WTO issue may cause a problem for the merger with US authorities while others say it shouldn’t. The news that Airbus received $4.5bn in launch aid will add fuel to the fire.
(We wrote a couple of years ago that Airbus had received launch aid–it was revealed in the EADS financial statements. We’re a bit perplexed why the big hubbub now.)
Airbus and the European Union say launch aid per se wasn’t deemed illegal by the WTO and only the terms and conditions providing below market interest rates and other T&C were. Any subsequent launch aid would comply with the WTO ruling.
Boeing and the US Trade Representative say launch aid itself is illegal.
But while some try to connect launch aid to military contracts (see the USAF tanker) and even to this merger, the fact remains that military contracts are completely exempt from WTO rules over subsidies.
The Seattle Times has this story about the latest developments in the contract negotiations between SPEEA and Boeing. The Everett Herald has this story. Note the discussion of moving jobs in The Times story and note what we said in The Herald story.
It strikes us that Boeing may not have learned anything from the outsourcing dispute in the IAM NLRB dispute. We told a Boeing communications person during the discussions about where to put 787 Line 2 that all the focus on the union and strikes was a bad idea and that a good reason to locate a line elsewhere was to diversify from the natural disaster risk. The response to us then was “that wouldn’t be true.”
Now Boeing is openly saying once again it will move jobs if it doesn’t get the labor contract it wants. What is it thinking??? You can move jobs because Washington State can’t fill them and there’s nothing that anyone can argue with about that.
This is another head-shaking moment of bewilderment in Boeing management strategy.
Update: Boeing’s Doug Alder sent us this statement:
“Boeing has made no threats to move work. We have simply noted our ability to use the full resources of the company in order to stay competitive. We’re confident we can reach an agreement with SPEEA that benefits the company and our workforce.”
GOL Orders the MAX: Boeing and the Brazilian airline GOL announced an order for 60 737 MAXes. The press release did not specify sub-type but GOL tells us the order is for the MAX 8.
Qatar’s 787s: Qatar’s CEO says the shaft issues on the GEnx engines are what’s behind the airline refusing to take delivery of its Boeing 787s.
SPEEA Deal: Boeing CEO Jim McNerney says he expects a deal with SPEEA within a few weeks, according to this article.
SPEEA, the engineers union for The Boeing Co., rejected the company’s proposed contract Monday by a 96% vote margin. The Seattle Times has this story.
Boeing issued this statement:
The SPEEA negotiations team notified Boeing that SPEEA’s membership rejected Boeing’s initial contract proposal. Our focus now is on resuming discussions on October 2 with your negotiations team.
In the spirit of good faith, we will continue to listen closely to your negotiations team. We want to understand your viewpoints and objections, which is what the bargaining process is all about. As was true when we made our initial proposal – we are committed to continuing discussions, answering questions and considering any proposals or counter-proposals from your negotiations team.
While Oct. 6 is the expiration date of the contract, it remains in effect until Nov. 25, 2012. On Nov. 25, the contract will terminate as a result of SPEEA filing a 60-day termination notice per Article 23 of the contract. No strike can take place until after Nov. 25.
We will continue to provide updates on the progress of negotiations and encourage you to check the negotiations website on a regular basis.
We expect the negotiations, which commence at 1pm today, to be difficult. Boeing is determined to reduce health care and pension costs; SPEEA is determined to prevent higher cost sharing on heath care premiums and shifting new employees from a defined pension plan to a 401(K) plan. Boeing offered raises of 2.5% to 3% and the union wants 5%. But, as The Times story notes, the big sticking point right now seems to be the union’s assertion that Boeing has language in the proposed contract that will allow the company to unilaterally change terms and conditions at a later date, particularly for current retirees on health care. Boeing says it has “no plans” to do so, which SPEEA labeled weasel words.
Boeing threatens to move engineering jobs out of Puget Sound (30% of engineering is already outside of the Seattle area), but SPEEA claims Boeing’s defense unit is already doing so.
Although there are no sanctioned job actions by members, there have been reports of work slow-downs. We expect these actions to increase.
The last time SPEEA struck, in 2000 for 40 days, Boeing’s deliveries dropped by 50 aircraft.
It’s 10pm Monday PDT and SPEEA is voting down the Boeing contract. New talks are scheduled for Tuesday.
The contract offer vote count begins today at SPEEA headquarters at 5pm, with results anticipated by around 10 or 11 pm PDT.
The offer by Boeing is considered by the SPEEA leadership to be so bad that it was sent directly to the members for a vote rather than engaging in bargaining after Boeing laid the offer on the table.
Boeing calls the offer industry-leading but which reduces health care and pension costs.
A rejection by a wide margin is expected, but a vote on authorizing a strike is not on the table at this time. Once the contract is rejected, SPEEA and Boeing are expected to go to the bargaining table and negotiate a second contract offer.
Boeing’s Board is expected to be asked very soon, perhaps at its meeting in October, to grant Authority to Offer the 787-10 to customers, according to two sources.
A Boeing spokeswoman said that ATO for the 787-10 is expected to occur before the ATO for the 777X, since the -10 is a more straight-forward project than the X, but could not confirm the October timeline.
The straight-forward stretch of the 787-9 will have less range (about 6,900nm) than either the -8 or -9 models, which comfortably top 8,000 nm but it is expected to carry around 323 passengers, putting it squarely in the class of the 777-200ER and the A350-900.
At 6,900nm, the airplane will cover most missions required by airlines. By foregoing a new wing and added fuel tankage, the operating weight of the airplane is expected to be roughly equal to the 787-9. A slightly higher-thrust engine will be required. Rolls-Royce announced a higher thrust version of the Trent 1000 now powering the 787 at the Farnborough Air Show, and insiders said this engine is specifically intended for the 787-10.
The 787-10 is billed by Boeing as the airplane that will “kill” the Airbus A330-300, but the 787 was also billed as the airplane that would kill the A330-200. The delays in the 787 program have given Airbus time to enhance the A330 family and the rival announced gross weight, range and engine Performance Improvement Packages to the 300 (and which are anticipated for the 200) at the Farnborough Air Show.
Airbus is also selling the A330 family at discounts to the 787 family today and this will continue in the future. The lower capital costs, Airbus believes, allows the A330 to remain competitive. Airbus COO-Customers John Leahy told us that Airbus expects to sell the A330 beyond 2020.
The 787-10 would replace the 777-200ER, which has largely been killed by the A350-900.