Frustrated over repeated strikes by its workers in Seattle, Boeing has sought to build a new airliner production line to South Carolina, an anti-union state. But the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ruled the manufacturer must have the assembly line in Washington, because the relocation amounts to retaliation against organized labor for exercising its lawful rights to strike, a motivation that is prohibited by the 1935 National Labor Relations Act.

 

Companies have been moving from union to non-union states for a long time, but they have usually refrained from saying publically that unions were a factor in their moves. What makes Boeing’s case different is that the NLRB has cited internal company documents and Boeing officials’ interviews with local newspapers as proof that Boeing’s relocation of a new 787 Dreamliner assembly plant was driven by a desire to punish workers and discourage future labor walkouts.

 

Boeing’s position would appear to be that strikes are disruptions to production schedules; thus avoiding them is an investment decision unrelated to labor laws.

 

South Carolina’s Republican U.S. senators, Jim DeMint and Lindsey Graham, were incensed by the NLRB ruling. “The administration, I believe, is acting like thugs that you might see in a third-world country, trying to bully and intimidate employers,” DeMint said on the Senate floor.

 

Graham is pushing legislation that would deny funding to the NLRB so it can’t enforce its complaint against Boeing.

-Noel Brinkerhoff, David Wallechinsky

 

Labor Board Tells Boeing New Factory Breaks Law (by Steven Greenhouse, New York Times)

Republicans Threaten To Defund the National Labor Relations Board (by Mike Elk, In These Times)

The Answer to Boeing’s Labor Dispute (by Steven Pearlstein, Washington Post)

Boeing Received $5 Billion in Illegal Government Subsidies (by Noel Brinkerhoff, AllGov)

Boeing Shareholders Sue Over Hidden Flaws in 787 (by Noel Brinkerhoff, AllGov)