Boeing built by region, owes much in return

Editor, The Times:

Those Boeing officials who are considering manufacturing the 787 Dreamliner in South Carolina should study the company's history.

It was the natural resources of the Pacific Northwest out of which Boeing was created and built. Early on, it was the spruce forests of Oregon and Washington. Then it was the region's abundant and low-cost water power that generated the large amount of electricity needed to make aluminum when that became the basic material in airplane manufacture.

Throughout, it was the local intellectual, educational and governmental infrastructure, largely paid for by Washington taxpayers, that trained and nurtured a work force capable of designing and manufacturing great airplanes. South Carolina cannot take credit for any of this. Boeing, having capitalized on these resources, owes something in return.

-- Fred Granata, Lake Oswego, Ore.

Union members need to be team members

When will Everett's Mayor Ray Stephanson and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Union understand why Boeing is seeking permits for a 787 Dreamliner final-assembly plant in South Carolina? ["Boeing expansion: permits not required," Opinion, editorial, Aug. 28.]

Boeing doesn't want to deal with striking union members. IAM members are being lead down a dark path with no future. IAM's leaders are relics from the past, and their strong-arm tactics are tiresome.

Consider these things: Boeing's nonunion employees look for ways to improve processes to stay competitive, you're encouraged to do the bare minimum; a company needs team members working toward a common goal, you're labeled as adversarial antagonists by the public; Boeing is in business to make money for everyone's benefit, not be held for ransom losing billions of dollars in revenue and forcing customers to look elsewhere while you're on strike; the list goes on.

Boeing doesn't want volatile workers on their payroll and neither would you. Boeing doesn't have to negotiate with the IAM anymore, they'll just move away. IAM members have a chance to think for themselves and do what's right for Boeing, its entire work force, its customers and suppliers.

Be team members and change for the better.

-- Conrad Rupp, Renton

Boeing going elsewhere doesn't produce results

I think the point has been proven that Boeing aircraft manufacturing must not move from the Seattle area. See what is happening when other parts of the nation and world try to build parts for the new Dreamliner 787? Wrinkles in the fuselage? Come on.

It looks like the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers union strike didn't have much to do with the delay of first delivery, although I hope the union and Boeing can work out a deal to avoid such hassles in the future.

Keeping it all here will build the best airplanes available.

-- Douglas Mays, Seattle

Just follow the signs to see why Boeing may leave

A recent visit to the Boeing plant in Mukilteo provides a poignant metaphor for the relationship between Boeing and Greater Seattle. Many other visitors and I got lost on the way to the Boeing tour due to insufficient signs.

Boeing advised us that the government highway authorities thought there were too many signs already and refused to allow Boeing to put up signs directing visitors to their tourist facilities. I can assure you South Carolina will ask Boeing, "How many signs?" and "Where shall we put 'em?"

Sam Howe Verhovek ["Boeing and Puget Sound -- shared DNA," Opinion, guest columnist, July 19] engages in some wishful thinking in hypothesizing that Boeing rocket scientists have overlooked important factors in their move.

What is surprising is that they have waited this long. Boeing gives me the same feeling that Caterpillar did in the '90 s when they were dealing with labor unrest. They made the tough decisions and have been the darling of Wall Street ever since.

Boeing is appropriately responding to Seattle's tepid embrace.

-- Bob Bell, Brooklyn, New York

Unions aren't team players for Boeing success

A word of advice to Boeing unions, specifically the International Association of Machinists: As an outsider looking in, I can tell you that you're being led down a dark path with no future.

Your leaders are relics from the past and their strong-arm tactics are tiresome. Consider that Boeing's nonunion employees look for ways to improve processes to stay competitive, yet you are encouraged to do the bare minimum. A company needs team members working toward a common goal, but you're labeled as adversarial antagonists by the public. Boeing is in business to make money for everyone's benefit, not to be held for ransom losing billions of dollars in revenue and forcing customers to look elsewhere while you're on strike, and the list goes on.

Boeing doesn't want volatile workers on their payroll and neither would you. Get your heads out of the sand, guys and gals: Boeing doesn't have to negotiate with you anymore. They will just move away. You've got a chance to think for yourselves, and do what's right for Boeing, its entire work force, its customers and suppliers.

Be team members, and change for the better.

-- Conrad Rupp, Renton

Plastic bags for plastic wings?

Could it be that, secretly, Boeing is behind the plastic grocery bag ban because it needs plastic bags for the wing repair on the 787 Dreamliner?

-- Ed Anderson, Kirkland

Negotiating away right to strike is not an option

Editor, The Times:

The Boeing Machinists Union's recent strike is a proud example of hardworking Americans' efforts to protect themselves from the unadulterated greed of increasingly wealthy management.

Boeing routinely pays its CEOs tens of millions of dollars annually in salary, bonuses and severance. Union workers are routinely asked to make concessions, presumably so the increasingly wealthy can become obscenely, grotesquely wealthy. The union has a strong voice in the process only by having the right to strike.

Politicians like Norm Dicks and columnists like Danny Westneat ["Don't let Boeing slip away," NWWednesday, July 8] who suggest that any union even consider negotiating away the right to strike are only hastening our return to the robber-baron era when concepts like workplace-safety standards, minimum wage and weekends off were but a dream.

-- Jim Trimbell, Shoreline

Maybe Puget Sound should just let Boeing go

So Boeing has decided that unless the union agrees to never again strike, they are moving out of the state ["Key lawmakers warn of Boeing ultimatum," page one, July 8]. What a bunch of manure!

Why not just return to slavery? It would be good for business. No more pesky contracts, no more benefits.

There is a special place in hell reserved for the executives who are making millions and blaming the unions for any problems they encounter.

I, for one, am disgusted. Any politician who does not remind the company and themselves of the numerous tax incentives and benefits Boeing has already received is remiss. And as we can see from past agreements, Boeing is never going to have enough to ensure that it will stay in this area.

I say we let them go, and don't let the door hit them on the way out.

-- Carol Barber, Kent

Delays are result of Boeing outsourcing, not strike

Boeing and Norm Dicks blame the machinists' strike for the delay of the 787 Dreamliner. Boeing wants a no-strike clause, or it will pick up its jobs and move them to South Carolina.

In truth, all the machinists have done is provide livable-wage jobs with decent benefits to thousands in the Puget Sound area. Boeing, on the other hand, has outsourced its production inefficiently and "cheaply," and it has gotten what it paid for:

• Sept. 6, 2007: Boeing announced its first delay of Dreamliner.
• Oct. 11, 2007: Boeing announced at least a six-month delay.
• Dec. 11, 2007: Boeing announced it was working through "wrinkles" that would delay the Dreamliner until "late 2008."
• Jan. 2, 2008: Boeing listed "unresolved production problems" had pushed delivery until 2009.
• Feb. 2, 2008: Boeing transferred two executives to a "special assignment" involving production problems.
• Sept. 7, 2008 to Nov. 1, 2008: The machinists' strike stopped production.
• June 23, 2008: Boeing released information that the problems were related to parts manufactured by Fuji and Mitsubishi that don't meet properly in 36 separate places where the wings meet the body.

Boeing will move to South Carolina if they can't break the union, but we all know that it is Boeing's "doing things on the cheap" that was responsible for the delays, not the machinists.

-- Thalia Syracopoulos, Seattle