Opinion: Greatest Long-Term Threat To Boeing Is The Loss Of Talent

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,714
Reaction score
1,102
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Since so many of my neighbors work for Boeing and the Puget Sound economy is affected by the fortunes of Boeing, I am very disappointed that Boeing is moving defense work out of the Puget Sound. State and local governments have given Boeing many tax breaks to persuade them to stay.


"Opinion: Greatest Long-Term Threat To Boeing Is The Loss Of Talent"
Boeing is two companies. Management should remember that.
Oct 13, 2014 Richard Aboulafia | Aviation Week & Space Technology

Source:
http://aviationweek.com/defense/opinion-greatest-long-term-threat-boeing-loss-talent

Boeing recently decided to move the majority of its defense services and support work out of Seattle. The primary goal was to cut expenses; Seattle is a high-cost area, and the jobs will go to cheaper St. Louis and Oklahoma City. The move also reinforces Boeing’s industrial footprint and political presence outside of Washington state.

Boeing Defense, Space & Security (BDS) CEO Chris Chadwick termed the moves “necessary if we are going to differentiate ourselves from competitors and stay ahead of a rapidly changing global defense environment.” He is exactly right. The problem is that Boeing Commercial Airplanes (BCA) is positioned very differently from BDS, and yet corporate management is taking a one-size-fits-all approach to labor relations.

BDS is under siege. Not only has the U.S. topline defense budget decreased in the past five years but Boeing’s share has been under pressure, too. Production of BDS’s most profitable and longest-running platforms—the C-17, F-15 and F/A-18E/F—is scheduled to end in the next few years. They have become victims of defense cuts at home and heavy competition in export markets. The rotorcraft unit is also facing serious cuts during the next five years, with V-22 procurement winding down by the end of the decade.

The two most important new Boeing defense platforms face problems, too. The KC-46 tanker faces hundreds of millions of dollars in cost overruns, much of which will be borne by Boeing, which won the tanker contract with a very aggressive bid. P-8 maritime patrol aircraft procurement in fiscal 2015 was cut by half from last year’s plan.

Meanwhile, BDS’s competitors are largely based in lower-cost production regions with weaker unions. Given these circumstances, aggressive cost cuts are the correct strategy. But it’s also important to remember that when a company takes aggressive action to move jobs and reduce labor costs, it always creates risk. In particular, key skills and experienced workers can be lost, threatening execution and company capabilities.

In the case of Boeing’s defense side, this risk is probably worth taking, given the pressure it faces from both market forces and competitors. But BCA is in the exact opposite position of BDS.

BCA’s topline market has been growing by 4-5% per year since the dawn of the jet age, with the last 10 years seeing accelerated growth of almost 10% per year. BCA is planning on more growth. It faces exactly one competitor, and high barriers to entry in this industry mean the duopoly will stand for decades. There are no technological shifts that could threaten BCA’s market position, which is growing relative to Airbus’s. Its labor costs certainly are not lower than Boeing’s. Best of all, BCA’s product line is in great shape, with a high level of technological leadership. Current or forthcoming products cover all market segments.

In short, BCA’s revenue, market share and profits are all set for growth. Yet Boeing corporate’s approach to labor at BCA has been more draconian than at BDS.

The past year or so has seen a litany of aggressive labor tactics. A new machinists’ contract that cut benefits and pensions nearly resulted in a strike, which was only averted by the narrowest of margins, and even then only by threatening jobs. In March, Boeing eliminated pensions for 68,000 non-union workers. The company then announced it would transfer thousands of engineering jobs out of the Puget Sound area. Just after that, Boeing informed 2,000 engineers that half would be fired soon (the other half, of course, were given a good reason to leave). In September, Boeing Senior Vice President Tim Keating criticized leadership of the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace (BCA’s engineer union), saying its legal complaints “are not the ingredients for a happy ongoing relationship.”

Management’s approach will likely have negative consequences for BCA’s long-term prospects. First of all, anything that alienates or scatters talent is bad for a company whose competitiveness depends on solid engineering. Second, management should have learned from the series of emergencies that made up the 787 development program. (see photo). Time and again, engineers and technical workers were asked to go the extra mile. As the 737 MAX, 787-10, 777X and any other new programs go through development and certification, will workers respond the same way when problems emerge? This is an industry that depends heavily on employee enthusiasm for a common goal.

Boeing’s strong-arm approach to BCA labor is also a violation of basic market economy principles. BCA is asking more from its workers, not less. Normally, when demand goes up, so does the price. At the very least, it does not go down.

Managing labor for a growth business means attracting and retaining talent. Managing for a retrenching business means a focus on costs. To use a more extreme analogy from a different industry, what works for General Motors is different from what works for Tesla. Boeing management needs to remember the greatest long-term threat to BCA isn’t the cost of labor; it’s the loss of talent and the erosion of core capabilities.

Richard Aboulafia is vice president of analysis at Teal Group. He is based in Washington.
 

AeroFranz

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
2,406
Reaction score
454
I can tell you that if I were an engineer living in Seattle and was asked to move to KS or MO, my answer would be "thanks, but no thanks". I personally know a dozen people from my graduating class in college who work at BCA, and given the choice their answer would be the same. Just the other day one told me she was getting an MBA because of the uncertainty and that the degree would give her freedom to pursue other jobs if it came to that.


I own old issues of AvWeek from the seventies, plastered with ads trying to lure talent to southern California citing the nice weather and location. The priorities must have changed quite a bit, good luck trying to get people to move to these other places (no offense to KS and MO, but it ain't the same thing). Frankly if I were in that situation i'd rather switch careers and do something else. The Amazons and Googles are recruiting like crazy, eager to scoop up people highly trained courtesy of BCA. Boeing is going to regret creating an unsustainable situation.
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
11,400
Reaction score
3,031
AeroFranz said:
I can tell you that if I were an engineer living in Seattle and was asked to move to KS or MO, my answer would be "thanks, but no thanks". I personally know a dozen people from my graduating class in college who work at BCA, and given the choice their answer would be the same. Just the other day one told me she was getting an MBA because of the uncertainty and that the degree would give her freedom to pursue other jobs if it came to that.


I own old issues of AvWeek from the seventies, plastered with ads trying to lure talent to southern California citing the nice weather and location. The priorities must have changed quite a bit, good luck trying to get people to move to these other places (no offense to KS and MO, but it ain't the same thing). Frankly if I were in that situation i'd rather switch careers and do something else. The Amazons and Googles are recruiting like crazy, eager to scoop up people highly trained courtesy of BCA. Boeing is going to regret creating an unsustainable situation.

I'm even more worried about more highly trained vocations like those needed by our laboratories to be able to, if needed, design, develop and build the next generation of nuclear weapons.

I haven't seen anything recently but in the early 2000's, about 10 years after the so-called end of the Cold War there were many articles decrying the 'brain drain' from our labs.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,714
Reaction score
1,102
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
TomS said:
sferrin said:
You can thank the unions.

Or the lack of unions in other locations.

Boeing management seems to have declared war on the International Association of Machinists (IAM) and the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace (SPEEA) unions here in the Puget Sound region. The unions have given up a lot and state and local government have given the company some very generous tax breaks to keep them in the Puget Sound region. But Boeing has lately had a "My way or the highway" attitude for the past several years when negotiating with the unions and state and local government. We seem to be in a race to the bottom with right-to-work North Charleston, South Carolina.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,872
Reaction score
3,896
GTX said:
sferrin said:
TomS said:
sferrin said:
You can thank the unions.

Or the lack of unions in other locations.
You effectively said the same thing.


I think there might be a subtle difference.
Unions chase business away, states without unions attract it. Boeing is expanding here in Utah as well. (Bought a million sq. ft building they're building out, in addition to what's already here.)
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
3,158
Reaction score
526
Seems the other states tied their incentive packages to specific job numbers whereas Washington State's representatives (in their wisdom) did not.

On an unrelated note, these Pay-to-Play opinion pieces are really becoming quite tiresome.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
3,158
Reaction score
526
AeroFranz said:
The Amazons and Googles are recruiting like crazy, eager to scoop up people highly trained courtesy of BCA.

Recruiting like crazy does not mean hiring like crazy. In many instances, these companies are just going through the motions in order to get PERM certification; age discrimination is rampant in the tech field. The fact that your friend is getting an MBA is telling and (sadly) typical.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,872
Reaction score
3,896
Orionblamblam said:
sferrin said:
Unions chase business away, states without unions attract it.

Point of order: there are no states without unions. What we *do* have are states that do not legally force workers to belong to unions.

Okay good point. Anyway, those who aren't beholden to the unions are going to prosper while the rest go the way of Detroit. Hell, Unions even managed to kill the Twinkie and I'd have thought it'd take a nuke to do that.
 

fredymac

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 14, 2009
Messages
2,157
Reaction score
732
Funny thing about the SPEEA where you have a union made up of engineering staff (salaried professionals). You would think that would result in a reasoned, moderate union. Somehow, it wound up being the opposite. I never dealt with any SPEEA folks directly but I did have to work with UAW (boiler technicians of all things) employees and got written up too many times to count. Carrying your own equipment to a work area is strictly forbidden.
 

F-14D

I really did change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2007
Messages
1,887
Reaction score
496
sferrin said:
Orionblamblam said:
sferrin said:
Unions chase business away, states without unions attract it.

Point of order: there are no states without unions. What we *do* have are states that do not legally force workers to belong to unions.

Okay good point. Anyway, those who aren't beholden to the unions are going to prosper while the rest go the way of Detroit. Hell, Unions even managed to kill the Twinkie and I'd have thought it'd take a nuke to do that.

Well, in the case of Twinkies, Management was as much at fault as well. They made no attempt to adapt as the market and tastes changed and sales were continually fell. When was the last time you or anyone you know ate a couple of Twinkies?

A more relevant example would be SFO, the helicopter airline in the San Francisco Bay Area, operating S-61s and S-62s. I rode in both of then when I was a wee person. It was the first to operate without a Federal subsidy. As a result, it always operated on rather thin margins. It went through some troubling times but was doing OK when the mechanics' union threatened a strike. The owners said they wouldn't be able to afford it, and they had people who wanted to buy their Sikorskys. So they said that if the mechanics went on stirke they 'd shut down the airline and sell the choppers. Well, they did, and so they did.

If you want to appreciate how much inflation has hit us, back then a flight from Berkeley to SFO cost a massive $4.75.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,714
Reaction score
1,102
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Posters seem to be taking the most ridiculous examples of their experiences with unions. They then proceed to throw the baby out with the bath water. They seem to forget what working conditions were like in factories in the United States before unions and occupational government regulations. Are you all temporarily embarrassed future robber barons or executives in aerospace firms? How did we get to the point that workers will get nothing and like it?

Part of the health of the industrial base is recruiting top-talent and then retaining this talent and maintaining a productive workforce. Expertise is lost when a company moves to a lowest-cost region. After forty-five years of service to a company, employees should be able to retire and receive the pensions that they were promised or retire without the fearing of falling into poverty.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,872
Reaction score
3,896
Triton said:
Posters seem to be taking the most ridiculous examples of their experiences with unions. They then proceed to throw the baby out with the bath water. They seem to forget what working conditions were like in factories in the United States before unions and occupational government regulations. Are you all temporarily embarrassed future robber barons or executives in aerospace firms?

Part of the health of the industrial base is recruiting top-talent and then retaining this talent and maintaining a productive workforce. Expertise is lost when a company moves to a lowest-cost region. After forty-five years of service to a company, employees should be able to retire and receive the pensions that they were promised or retire without the fearing of falling into poverty.
As many companies unions have destroyed, and as corrupt as many (most?) unions are, and you wonder why the word "union" leaves a bad taste in one's mouth? I've heard first hand horror stories about the unions at Boeing and Sikorsky. One can read the news almost any day to see more examples of union corruption, greed, etc. and how it effects companies.
 

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
4,039
Reaction score
2,785
Website
beyondthesprues.com
Triton said:
Posters seem to be taking the most ridiculous examples of their experiences with unions. They then proceed to throw the baby out with the bath water. They seem to forget what working conditions were like in factories in the United States before unions and occupational government regulations. Are you all temporarily embarrassed future robber barons or executives in aerospace firms? How did we get to the point that workers will get nothing and like it?


I agree. Although we can point to cases of union corruption and stupidity (just as one can also identify stupidity on the part of CEOs and the like), we must also remember that unions have also achieved an awful lot for workers over the decades and that many of the rights and conditions we take for granted now were hard fought for. To try to cast unions as the root of all evils and the cause of company failures and the like is misguided. This is not to say that in some cases they have contributed to such, but I think you could just as easily mount an argument that there were other issues going on as well.
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
11,400
Reaction score
3,031
Triton said:
Posters seem to be taking the most ridiculous examples of their experiences with unions. They then proceed to throw the baby out with the bath water. They seem to forget what working conditions were like in factories in the United States before unions and occupational government regulations. Are you all temporarily embarrassed future robber barons or executives in aerospace firms? How did we get to the point that workers will get nothing and like it?

Part of the health of the industrial base is recruiting top-talent and then retaining this talent and maintaining a productive workforce. Expertise is lost when a company moves to a lowest-cost region. After forty-five years of service to a company, employees should be able to retire and receive the pensions that they were promised or retire without the fearing of falling into poverty.

Rather than go back 150 years and say "Hey remember" well no it would be better to recognize the problems with unions today. I don't think anyone would disagree that unions have, historically, contributed to a better work place and worker pay and dignity. But at the same time are you going to use that positive history to exempt unions today?

If I were president the first thing I would do, in the spirit of FDR, is outlaw the federal public sector unions. FDR realized the inherent flaw and easy corruptibility of unions being able to derive pay and benefits not the real 'owners' the taxpayer.
 

marauder2048

"I should really just relax"
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
3,158
Reaction score
526
bobbymike said:
If I were president the first thing I would do, in the spirit of FDR, is outlaw the federal public sector unions. FDR realized the inherent flaw and easy corruptibility of unions being able to derive pay and benefits not the real 'owners' the taxpayer.

The Brits used to have a system under which anyone who received a majority of their income from the government was ineligible to vote and organize.
Perhaps the same thing should apply to unionized workforces who are largely/exclusively paid from Federal (e.g. DOD) contracts.

In many cases, much of the criticism of unions is not directed at the rank-and-file but at union leadership who on many issues hold and agitate for positions
which are far more radical (e.g. immigration) than that of the membership.
 

Steve Pace

Aviation History Writer
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
2,266
Reaction score
79
The same applies to General Atomics, Northrop Grumman and Lockheed Martin.
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
9,233
Reaction score
3,989
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Triton said:
They seem to forget what working conditions were like in factories in the United States before unions and occupational government regulations.

Yes, and now we have labor laws that cover that. Today labor unions seem to exist mostly in order to stifle any form of competition. Look at the taxi "medallion" nonsense in New York.

I'd be more comfortable with unions if, instead of collective negotiation for individual wages, the union in a shop just got a lump sum from the company, and it was up to the union to distribute that sum to the union workers. So long as workers were free to extricate themselves from the union and negotiate on their own for their own job from the company, I don't see where there'd be a problem. Those workers who are simply expendable and easily replaced fungible commodities can be in the union; those who provide actual individual value can be direct employees and get paid 2 or 3 times more. The responsibility for pensions and health care and whatnot can thus fall to the union rather than the company.
 

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
4,039
Reaction score
2,785
Website
beyondthesprues.com
marauder2048 said:
The Brits used to have a system under which anyone who received a majority of their income from the government was ineligible to vote and organize.


Reference?
 

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
4,039
Reaction score
2,785
Website
beyondthesprues.com
There are a lot of people making comments about unions here. I wonder how many have actually had any direct experience and how many are simply making comments based on pre-determined points of view based on political leanings?


I also find it amusing how many seem all to willing to load on the failings onto unions and yet, apparently, don't seem to be willing to also share some of the blame for the failings of various businesses also at the feet of those running the businesses. After all, one could argue that the heads of Boeing etc have just as much (hopefully more) influence over company direction than those in the unions. Remember that "it takes two to tango"...
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,872
Reaction score
3,896
GTX said:
There are a lot of people making comments about unions here. I wonder how many have actually had any direct experience and how many are simply making comments based on pre-determined points of view based on political leanings?


I also find it amusing how many seem all to willing to load on the failings onto unions and yet, apparently, don't seem to be willing to also share some of the blame for the failings of various businesses also at the feet of those running the businesses. After all, one could argue that the heads of Boeing etc have just as much (hopefully more) influence over company direction than those in the unions. Remember that "it takes two to tango"...

When a union holds the company hostage while blackmailing management, how is that management's fault? As for "direct experience" listening to coworkers (former Boeing & Sikorsky employees) stories, I think I've heard enough. Seeing the results of union antics in the news tells me more.
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
11,400
Reaction score
3,031
GTX said:
There are a lot of people making comments about unions here. I wonder how many have actually had any direct experience and how many are simply making comments based on pre-determined points of view based on political leanings?


I also find it amusing how many seem all to willing to load on the failings onto unions and yet, apparently, don't seem to be willing to also share some of the blame for the failings of various businesses also at the feet of those running the businesses. After all, one could argue that the heads of Boeing etc have just as much (hopefully more) influence over company direction than those in the unions. Remember that "it takes two to tango"...

After college before I could start my career I worked for an union and can tell you first hand how as the new guy I was told, basically, do only what you are told to do in the allotted time and don't you dare do anything more. I remember how the union negotiated a per square foot per hour scale to determine an 8 hour day. I could complete my shift in just over an hour start to finish.

Yes anecdotal, yes only my experience but you asked.
 

Sundog

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,971
Reaction score
578
sferrin said:
As many companies unions have destroyed, and as corrupt as many (most?) unions are, and you wonder why the word "union" leaves a bad taste in one's mouth? I've heard first hand horror stories about the unions at Boeing and Sikorsky. One can read the news almost any day to see more examples of union corruption, greed, etc. and how it effects companies.

I've also heard and experienced first hand how management has destroyed companies, screwed over employees, and as corrupt as many in management are I see it in the news all the time how corrupt corporations are; especially when you consider unions only represent 7% of employees in the U.S., but 100% of all corporations have management, many of which try to screw over their people. Boeing is one of the most corrupt. So it is funny to see Boeing go after their union when Boeing management is far more corrupt. It makes you wonder how much of upper management is really corrupt and how much of what they do used to be considered corrupt until they changed the laws to legalize their wrong doing?
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
9,233
Reaction score
3,989
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
Sundog said:
especially when you consider unions only represent 7% of employees in the U.S., but 100% of all corporations have management,

This is an important point. You cannot have a functional company without someone who owns it and wants to see it be profitable. I.E. management, the Board, stockholders, etc. But you *can* get along without having labor guilds who *don't* have an interest in the long term success of the company.
 

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
4,039
Reaction score
2,785
Website
beyondthesprues.com
Orionblamblam said:
But you *can* get along without having labor guilds who *don't* have an interest in the long term success of the company.


Rubbish! The unions have an interest in the long term success of their members which is aided by the long term success of the companies. This "us and them" attitude is ridiculous and does not constitute reality.
 

bobbymike

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
11,400
Reaction score
3,031
GTX said:
Orionblamblam said:
But you *can* get along without having labor guilds who *don't* have an interest in the long term success of the company.


Rubbish! The unions have an interest in the long term success of their members which is aided by the long term success of the companies. This "us and them" attitude is ridiculous and does not constitute reality.

The US car companies are called 'healthcare and pension plans' that also build cars. State and Federal pension and medical plans are massively underfunded and have contribution structures that are illegal in the private sector. Unions are about getting as much pay and benefits as possible with little or no concern about the health of the underlying entity.

WHY ARE THEY only 7%, down from over 35% of US workers? That's why.

In 20 years in private sector banking I have not had one positive experience with unions, the truth no exaggeration.
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
9,233
Reaction score
3,989
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
GTX said:
The unions have an interest in the long term success of their members which is aided by the long term success of the companies.

You'd think. But the thing is: if a company goes under, the Union remains.

Take a look at teachers unions and the "rubber rooms." Union members can do quite well even while tearing the "company" (in this case, schools) to impoverished shreds.

This "us and them" attitude is ridiculous and does not constitute reality.

Have you ever been in a Union shop??? "Us-vs-them" is just about the entire world in such a place.

In the early 2000's I worked for United Tech out near San Jose. There were two places to do experimental work: the main, unionized part of the plant, and RAT Canyon (Research and Advanced Technology). RAT had much the lower budget and far fewer people. But the guy who ran the place - sans union interference - was able to pick and choose who to employ as techs. That's where the skill was. That's where, if you could get your project on the list, you went to actually get stuff done. The other part of the plant? That's where ideas went to die. Sadly, that's where most work simply had to be done. So a number of us design engineers wound up doing work we were not supposed to, stuff that could have gotten us into buckets of trouble with the union steward. Work we *had* to do ourselves because on the one hand, we couldn't wait the weeks it would take the union to get around to it, and work that, on the other hand, we couldn't rely on them doing right anyway.

I wound up making rocket motor components at home rather than waiting weeks and months. I friggen cooked rocket propellent in my kitchen rather than wait weeks and cost the taxpayers untold bucks. Want to know why we haven't been back to the moon since before you were born? Why we don't have SSTs? Or new nuclear powerplants? Part of it is due to malevolent politics and politicians. And part of it is due to groups more interested in keeping palms greased than in getting stuff done.
 

GTX

All hail the God of Frustration!!!
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
4,039
Reaction score
2,785
Website
beyondthesprues.com
Orionblamblam said:
Have you ever been in a Union shop??? "Us-vs-them" is just about the entire world in such a place.


Yes, I have. I have also had to work Christmas away from family because of union stupidity. I am also in Senior management and have helped run multiple businesses. Therefore, I have seen both sides of the issue and still believe unions have a role.

I have also seen cases where unions have worked closely with management and owners to the betterment of all and I can assure you that such cases are far more common than you would think...they just don't get reported as often since good news stories rarely get reported. To me anyone trying to try to argue that all unions are bad and that they have no place is ridiculous.

As for your own experience all I can say is that it sounds very much like a women who has been raped declaring that all men therefore are rapists. Sure the individual incident was unfortunate and deserving of condemnation, sympathy and where necessary punishment/change. However, to extrapolate that into saying all cases need to be tarted the same is myopic and stupid!
 

Orionblamblam

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2006
Messages
9,233
Reaction score
3,989
Website
www.aerospaceprojectsreview.com
GTX said:
... Therefore, I have seen both sides of the issue and still believe unions have a role.

... To me anyone trying to try to argue that all unions are bad and that they have no place is ridiculous.

... However, to extrapolate that into saying all cases need to be tarted the same is myopic and stupid!

See, this is why political issues like this seem to be outside the bounds of rational discourse. One guy says "I've seen the harm that unions can do," the other guy blows that up into "you're saying that all unions are bad and have no purpose and you're position is stupid."

Look, it's like this: There are bad *cops* in the world. Many police forces have way too much corruption, way too much power. Is pointing this out the same as saying that I think there should be *no* cops? No. Only an *idiot* or a political hack would draw that conclusion.
 

Similar threads

Top