Boeing (Seattle, Tacoma: loans, employment, wages)

[Flat2MT]

Originally Posted by cobolt

It's naive to think that there is a lack of educated and skilled workers outside of WA state, or becauase a state has a lower cost of living and therefore lower wages, that these people will do less of a good job or that quality will suffer outside of WA. THe truth of the matter is that we operate in a global economy, that Boeing although based in the US is an international operation that must compete internationally, and that there are skilled workforces outside of this state and this country that turn out good producs. $16 an hour is pretty good money in SC and they have a skilled and educated workforce. The facility that Boeing will be using used to be an active duty and then a reserve Air Force base that was closed due to BRAC. There were many govt and defense contracting positions there and it was, at one time, the logistics hub of the SE before much of those operations and personnel moved to Tinker AFB (Oklahoma). ....

Charleston Air Force Base is an active AF base (with reserve components) and home base to the C17 Globemaster III strategic airlifter. It's not going anywhere any time soon.

They closed the Charleston Naval Base in 1996 during that round of BRAC. The Navy still has a lot of professional white collar positions (engineers, etc) supporting numerous installations in the Charleston area. They are always hiring.

Coincidentally, the day Boeing executives were in town to announce their decision to build some of the 787s in Charleston, another C17 was delivered to CAFB.

[pirate_lafitte]

Originally Posted by SonicsFan93

I think they're going to regret placing this line in South Carolina. And Boeing isn't leaving. Jobs aren't moving from the Puget Sound to South Carolina. These are just 3,800 jobs that we're not going to get. But it sets an alarming precedent, the Boeing could very easily start placing more jobs elsewhere. But, you know, I don't think it's a bad thing, because this will force our local economy to diversify. I don't think it's a good to have "all your eggs in one basket".

But, in the end, I think we'll be fine. Plenty of other companies are moving here (Spring Wireless USA, Ambassadors International, Mike's Hard Lemonade, Motricity, Oncothyreon, Coastal Hotels Group, Hydra Developments, Entellium, Gastronaut Studios) and others are having IPOs (Omeros, Symetra Financial, Infrastrux Group), while other private companies are starting up and locating here (MTR Western, Seattle Sounders, Evri, J&D's Down Home Enterprises)

I hope Boeing doesn't leave Seattle. My father used to be an engineer for Boeing. As a former resident of the Seattle area, it would dishearten(and anger) me if Boeing left the Puget Sound area. The headquarters are in Chicago now, which I am not thrilled about it. Seattle might be able to survive without Boeing, but I can't imagine Seattle without it. Kind of the same way I felt when the Kingdome was imploded. I have only been in it one, and that was to see a baseball game when I was 5.

[SonicsFan93]

Originally Posted by cobolt

The problem IS that WA state only has start up headquarters (Starbucks, Costco, Microsoft) but can't attract other businesses to move their headquarters here. There is a reason Boeing moved their HQ to Chicago years ago and is, in stages, moving from WA. There is a reason businesses are NOT moving to WA state. And there is a reason that Texas leads the nation in business start ups and many companies are relocating there, and to other Southern states. Certainly not all the workforce in Texas is undeducated, nor are they in these other states. I know, I've lived and worked there. Until WA state gets off the "high superior elite" horse and faces the fact that companies will respond to incentives instead of punishment, then the exodus will continue.

Exodus? What exodus? Boeing hasn't moved any jobs out of state, and they're the only major company to pack up their headquarters and leave Seattle

And businesses aren't moving to Washington State?

Coastal Hotel Group moving to Seattle - Puget Sound Business Journal (Seattle):

Business & Technology | Windstar's parent company moving to Seattle | Seattle Times Newspaper

Motricity moving headquarters from North Carolina to Bellevue - Puget Sound Business Journal (Seattle):

Mike's Hard Lemonade moving HQ to Seattle - Puget Sound Business Journal (Seattle):

Biotech to move to area, change name - Puget Sound Business Journal (Seattle):

And actually, for three years running Washington State has had the most business startups per capita, so no, Texas doesn't lead the country in business startups. We do.

10 Best states for starting a business - 4. Washington (4) - FORTUNE Small Business

[grastus]

People here are being way too alarmist. This isn't Boeing leaving WA in one fell swoop. It's opening one new production line for the 787, which amounts to about 4,000 new jobs, in SC. Engineering, finance, hell, even headquarters (Commercial Airplanes, not corporate as a whole) will stay in Puget Sound.

It makes sense to move blue-collar to SC. It doesn't make sense to move engineering on the same scale of numbers.

[SonicsFan93]

Originally Posted by grastus

People here are being way too alarmist. This isn't Boeing leaving WA in one fell swoop. It's opening one new production line for the 787, which amounts to about 4,000 new jobs, in SC. Engineering, finance, hell, even headquarters (Commercial Airplanes, not corporate as a whole) will stay in Puget Sound.

It makes sense to move blue-collar to SC. It doesn't make sense to move engineering on the same scale of numbers.

THANK YOU! I mean really people, how hard is it?

[pirate_lafitte]

Originally Posted by grastus

People here are being way too alarmist. This isn't Boeing leaving WA in one fell swoop. It's opening one new production line for the 787, which amounts to about 4,000 new jobs, in SC. Engineering, finance, hell, even headquarters (Commercial Airplanes, not corporate as a whole) will stay in Puget Sound.

It makes sense to move blue-collar to SC. It doesn't make sense to move engineering on the same scale of numbers.

And it better stay that way. Seattle without Boeing is something that would make me sad.
Why doesn't Boeing open up a plant in Detroit or Buffalo? I hear those areas could use jobs too.

[eskercurve]

There are so many factors here in trying to figure out the future of Boeing in the area.

1) Diversification and the political capital it nets: Having manufacturing and assembly sites across not just many different states, but in many different nations means that Boeing gets political points. That's invaluable in an inherently political business like aviation.

Russia: Want us to buy your planes?
Boeing: YEAH!
Russia: OK, how about you invest $300 mn to make a plant to refine the titanium we make and employ 200-300 engineers and laborers? In return we'll buy 100 planes.
Boeing: DEAL!

China: I want to buy some of the 3,000 widebody planes that we ALONE will need over the next 20 years. How about you give us some of the manufacturing so we can employ the MILLIONS of ENGLISH-SPEAKING COLLEGE GRADS WE PRODUCE EVERY YEAR?
Boeing: DEAL!

South Carolina: So I hear you and the Union twerps are at it again. Hey, we got ourselves a nice low cost of living, the auto industry was our entire economy and that went belly up, how bout you come on down and get rid of that overhead baggage, make a plant here, we'll give you tax credits, and we'll (eventually) profit by increased sales and income taxes?
Boeing: Sounds like a plan.

2) Boeing's customers have said - repeatedly - they cannot afford to sustain strikes like what happened in the past. And - finally - Boeing is listening and doing something about it.

3) The 787 debacle has taught even the most big-headed executives what humility is. They've learned their mistakes, and will bring back more of the work to megasites if possible, at least back into the company. So concentrating knowledge and more manufacturing in-house makes sense.

4) What better way to show your customers you aren't strangled by a rabid, stupid union? A union that works with the company is what is needed, not against it. Kinda like SPEEA.

[grastus]

I'm thinking about moving to South Carolina now. Sounds so cheap and warm, plus trying to find an engineering job in puget sound (that has nothing to do with software or computers ugh) is proving to be quite the task. I doubt my middle-eastern heritage will win me any brownie points down south, though.

[pirate_lafitte]

Originally Posted by grastus

I'm thinking about moving to South Carolina now. Sounds so cheap and warm, plus trying to find an engineering job in puget sound (that has nothing to do with software or computers ugh) is proving to be quite the task. I doubt my middle-eastern heritage will win me any brownie points down south, though.

I am trying to get away from the South too.

South Carolina is cheap and warm. I should know because I moved there from the Seattle area. I miss Seattle to this day. SC might be cheap and warm, but it doesn't beat having a major league city and plenty to do. I will take Seattle over South Carolina anyday. I lived in both areas and know the difference.

[pirate_lafitte]

Originally Posted by eskercurve

There are so many factors here in trying to figure out the future of Boeing in the area.

1) Diversification and the political capital it nets: Having manufacturing and assembly sites across not just many different states, but in many different nations means that Boeing gets political points. That's invaluable in an inherently political business like aviation.

Russia: Want us to buy your planes?
Boeing: YEAH!
Russia: OK, how about you invest $300 mn to make a plant to refine the titanium we make and employ 200-300 engineers and laborers? In return we'll buy 100 planes.
Boeing: DEAL!

China: I want to buy some of the 3,000 widebody planes that we ALONE will need over the next 20 years. How about you give us some of the manufacturing so we can employ the MILLIONS of ENGLISH-SPEAKING COLLEGE GRADS WE PRODUCE EVERY YEAR?
Boeing: DEAL!

South Carolina: So I hear you and the Union twerps are at it again. Hey, we got ourselves a nice low cost of living, the auto industry was our entire economy and that went belly up, how bout you come on down and get rid of that overhead baggage, make a plant here, we'll give you tax credits, and we'll (eventually) profit by increased sales and income taxes?
Boeing: Sounds like a plan.

2) Boeing's customers have said - repeatedly - they cannot afford to sustain strikes like what happened in the past. And - finally - Boeing is listening and doing something about it.

3) The 787 debacle has taught even the most big-headed executives what humility is. They've learned their mistakes, and will bring back more of the work to megasites if possible, at least back into the company. So concentrating knowledge and more manufacturing in-house makes sense.

4) What better way to show your customers you aren't strangled by a rabid, stupid union? A union that works with the company is what is needed, not against it. Kinda like SPEEA.

This is my perspective on unions. I know why unions were formed and what they were meant for. They were made so that the worker can get a better deal and have benefits. Better pay, better benefits. What went wrong? There were crooks who got involved and caused problems. There were also crooks in the corporate world too. The unions should stop being greedy. With that said, the company should also have standards too. There are crooks all over.