Hooray! Unions struck a blow against offshoring!

[Le Jacquelope]

It's just a drop in the bucket, and a temporary victory at best, but hey, at least someone was able to tap the brakes on our relentless race to the bottom.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100206/ap_on_bi_ge/us_pratt___whitney_jobs/print

Judge: Pratt can't move jobs out of US
By STEPHEN SINGER, AP Business Writer Stephen Singer, Ap Business Writer Sat Feb 6, 3:53 am ET

HARTFORD, Conn. – A federal U.S. judge ordered jet engine maker Pratt & Whitney to halt its plans to move 1,000 jobs out of Connecticut and to Japan, Singapore and the state of Georgia.

U.S. District Judge Janet C. Hall in Bridgeport issued a permanent injunction, stopping the company's plans to shift the jobs.

The judge strongly criticized the subsidiary of United Technologies Corp., saying it evaded the spirit of its union contract requiring it to make every effort to keep the jobs in the state.

The union, which represents about 3,700 workers, hailed the decision. In its lawsuit, the union accused Pratt & Whitney of failing to comply with the contract that required it to do everything possible to preserve the jobs.

"This is a full win for the union," said James Parent, chief negotiator for the Machinists local.

Pratt & Whitney, reeling from a downturn in the aerospace industry, announced in September plans to shut its engine overhaul and repair plant in Cheshire by early 2011 and shift repair operations from its East Hartford facility beginning in the second quarter of this year.

Greg Brostowicz, a spokesman for Pratt & Whitney, said in an e-mailed statement that the company will consider all its options, including a possible appeal.

"We believe we upheld our contractual obligations to act in good faith and made every reasonable effort to keep this work in Connecticut," he said. "The fact remains that we face a declining aerospace market, a shifting customer base and a significant and permanent volume drop at these two facilities."

Hall said in her decision that Pratt's actions were not taken out of a "mistaken view" of what the contract required.

"To the contrary, Pratt understood its obligations, but decisively attempted to evade them," she said.

The union said its victory was only temporary because its contract with Pratt & Whitney expires in December.

"The Machinists union and its members will be gearing up for whatever fight is necessary to preserve these jobs and expand opportunities in the next contract," it said in a statement.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Uh, oh...the contract expires in December. Hmmm.

Well, enjoy your job till Christmas, then!

 

[ishtat]

HARTFORD, Conn. – A federal U.S. judge ordered jet engine maker Pratt & Whitney to halt its plans to move 1,000 jobs out of Connecticut and to Japan, Singapore and the state of Georgia.
.

Bolds above added by me. Is it constitutionally allowable to cut a deal which allows one state (eg Connecticutt) to be advantaged at the expense of another (eg Georgia)

Many federated nations with written constitutions have provisions within their constitutions which disallow any restiction by contract or law within their nation. Is that so in the USA?

 

[Handley_Page]

Bolds above added by me. Is it constitutionally allowable to cut a deal which allows one state (eg Connecticutt) to be advantaged at the expense of another (eg Georgia)

I read somewhere that Boeing have a similar problem in Kansas.
One thing. Where's 'Cheshire' ? I assume it's not the one in the UK.

 

[Katyusha]

Bolds above added by me. Is it constitutionally allowable to cut a deal which allows one state (eg Connecticutt) to be advantaged at the expense of another (eg Georgia)

Many federated nations with written constitutions have provisions within their constitutions which disallow any restiction by contract or law within their nation. Is that so in the USA?

The State of Georgia, in this case, I believe refers to one of the former Soviet blocs.

 

[Boxlicker101]

The State of Georgia, in this case, I believe refers to one of the former Soviet blocs.

But "state" is not capitalized, and the usual reference would be "The Republic of Georgia.

I don't believe there is anything specific in the US Constitution, except for giving the Feds toe power to regulate interstate commerce. This might be a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

But "state" is not capitalized, and the usual reference would be "The Republic of Georgia.

I don't believe there is anything specific in the US Constitution, except for giving the Feds toe power to regulate interstate commerce. This might be a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.

If Obama had a bigger pair he would push a law outlawing the manufacture of anything aerospace-related outside the US.

It seems the entire world's working population gets a shot at jobs serving the US market, but American workers can't even get a shot at producing goods for our own country, much less others.

If Brazil, Singapore and China want economic prosperity it's time they did it for themselves... service your own friggin markets for God's sake.

 

[Lisa Summers]

Do you really think a judge can force a company to use union workers forever? The laws of economics are a little more enduring than those of some state, or country...

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Do you really think a judge can force a company to use union workers forever? The laws of economics are a little more enduring than those of some state, or country...

The union's toast when the contract expires.

 

[unregistered]

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

IB

I carried a sheet metal workers card for 16 years and my old man carried an operating engineer card. My union stole the pension fund, so I'm no fan of unions.

That said I think this. I'm a goose-stepping fascist. I spent some time in Spain when Franco was dictator, and one of his policies impressed me: If you planned to sell something in Spain you sure as shit better have a factory in Spain to make it. The town I lived in had a Dodge plant.

Here in America Toyota and Honda and others built car plants.

If Hewlett Packard and Microsoft and Boeing et al wanna make shit in China using Chinks to make it, fine; let them sell their wares in China. But if they wanna sell in America they better build an American plant.

My thinking is based on American standard of living. In China they drink the same water they piss in; kids go to school for 6 years then gotta go to work; they eat dogs & cats. A chink can get by making 25 cents an hour. Not so in America. We gotta wear shoes and underpants and use deodorant, we cant shit in the street. The Usual Suspects get all weepy when people sleep in refrigerator boxes.

 

[Handley_Page]

It seems the entire world's working population gets a shot at jobs serving the US market, but American workers can't even get a shot at producing goods for our own country, much less others.

If Brazil, Singapore and China want economic prosperity it's time they did it for themselves... service your own friggin markets for God's sake.

They need investment to get started.

I think there's two aspects to this problem, which has been building for many years, IMO. Decades of prosperity, where the markets for products were there to be served, and everyone wanted US aeroplanes, engines or (even) bombs gave the manual workers a chance to earn a good bit and the expectation that it would continue. The UK had a similar problem after the Industrial Revolution, although a rather different management.

What US companies do for the home market is not the point. Those companies are at liberty to bid for contracts in "foreign" countries (provided always that Congress approves).

Well, the real growth area these days seems to the the Pacific Rim. SO why pay for all that transport from the US (or the EU for that matter, the principle is the same), when building a new factory over there gives a satisfactory quality and a damned good production price. The Company has shareholders to whom it owes a debt of responsibility for profit and therefore dividends. The workers are not the sharholders so the company cares little for them.

Just as Toyota & Honda and whoever else put a factory in the US (and the EU), it strikes me as there's no difference between them and the US building a factory to make widgets in China or wherever to sell them in or out of that area. The difference is that Honda & Toyota wanted to sell their cars in the US, and that required American Workers (to some extent); the same applies to the UK with similar firms (Sony, in Wales to start with).

But have you noticed who makes the bits for your computer ? My Microsoft XP software came from Ireland. The Hard drive came from Malaysia. The case came from Singapore. Heaven only knows where the RAM came from. But the keyboard is a US-built thing (I'm pleased to say).

Truth to tell, I don't like it any more than you. But that's how it works these day, kiddies.

.

 

[Katyusha]

But "state" is not capitalized, and the usual reference would be "The Republic of Georgia.

I don't believe there is anything specific in the US Constitution, except for giving the Feds toe power to regulate interstate commerce. This might be a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act.

"...Columbus, Georgia, Singapore, and Japan..." Sounds like you're right, so nevermind.

Their union agreement seems to require them not just to keep jobs in the U.S., but also keep them in Connecticut. "'We upheld our contractual obligations to act in good faith and made every reasonable effort to keep this work in Connecticut...'" Not "in the U.S." That would make the union contract illegal if there is such a law here preventing this kind of restriction within the nation. I don't know much about it though.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

They need investment to get started.

No they don't... they need domestic innovation. They have the resources.

I think there's two aspects to this problem, which has been building for many years, IMO. Decades of prosperity, where the markets for products were there to be served, and everyone wanted US aeroplanes, engines or (even) bombs gave the manual workers a chance to earn a good bit and the expectation that it would continue. The UK had a similar problem after the Industrial Revolution, although a rather different management.

What US companies do for the home market is not the point. Those companies are at liberty to bid for contracts in "foreign" countries (provided always that Congress approves).

Well, the real growth area these days seems to the the Pacific Rim. SO why pay for all that transport from the US (or the EU for that matter, the principle is the same), when building a new factory over there gives a satisfactory quality and a damned good production price. The Company has shareholders to whom it owes a debt of responsibility for profit and therefore dividends. The workers are not the sharholders so the company cares little for them.

As I've said before, Capitalism is due to join Communism in the dustbin of history. We need a hybrid system where Capitalism does not get priority over the concept of the social contract. The will of the community must have equal footing with shareholders.

I'd say that every company should have a Union in which the workers have an equal level of power as the shareholders. Replace the union boss with consensus.

Just as Toyota & Honda and whoever else put a factory in the US (and the EU), it strikes me as there's no difference between them and the US building a factory to make widgets in China or wherever to sell them in or out of that area. The difference is that Honda & Toyota wanted to sell their cars in the US, and that required American Workers (to some extent); the same applies to the UK with similar firms (Sony, in Wales to start with).

But we rarely get factories put here. We're running near infinite deficits with everyone on this planet and maybe even beyond, if you believe the tabloids.

But have you noticed who makes the bits for your computer ? My Microsoft XP software came from Ireland. The Hard drive came from Malaysia. The case came from Singapore. Heaven only knows where the RAM came from. But the keyboard is a US-built thing (I'm pleased to say).

Truth to tell, I don't like it any more than you. But that's how it works these day, kiddies.

.

"How it works" is not written in biblical tablets by God. That means we can change "how it works".

We just need the guts to attack this on a structural level.

At some point it won't work anymore, because China will close out on the United States, start selling off our currency and debt, which will cease to be of use to them.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

I'm by no means a fan of unions -carried an IBEW card for fifteen years and all I got for it was the right to pay dues that they -the union- then gave to causes I opposed.

That said, unions are only part of the reason companies are moving jobs off shore. Unions are an issue -ask any of the US Big Three automakers; it's criminal what the management of those companies have allowed unions to get away with. (NOTE: I blame the management, not the unions for agreeing to the crippling perks and benefits.)

Why is it that you won't mention the enormous perks that management gets for themselves? What about the perks they got even as they designed increasingly unpopular vehicles with ultra low gas mileage?

Why is it that everyone has this super gigantic blind spot about the excesses of corporate management pay?

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Nonesense BLACK JACK

Capitalism always mates with fascism. Always has, always will.

What youre thinking of is the Old Plantation Days.