Washington has a plethora of industry, but there are two names that pretty much come to people’s minds when they think of the state:  Boeing and Microsoft.  I have worked for both, and while I have mentioned my high tech industry experiences, I don’t talk about Boeing much.

I hired on to the 777 plant in Everett in 1996, about a year and a half after I left the Air Force.

Prior to my hiring on, in 1995, I began to pay attention to Boeing.  It was just prior to Christmas in 1995.  I heard the stories and saw the TV reports.  Christmas shopping at the Auburn Super Mall we drove past the picket lines.

I noticed something.  Boeing had offered them a new contract at around 45 days and they were voting on it.  A person labeled as a Union Officer came on TV expressing his optimism.  The membership flatly rejected it.  Shortly afterward, the same guy spoke on TV about how he had been pretty sure the Members would reject it.

I admit, I laughed.  I figured if that was the kind of dufas they elected, oh well.

The strike went another 3 weeks or so finally ending at 69 days.

When I hired on in 1996, the veterans and old timers were still crowing about that strike.

I mentioned to one what I had noticed, and he nodded sagely, and told me a startling accusation:  the union was in cahoots with Boeing management and the strike had been engineered deliberately. 

NOTE: Obviously I need to add the disclaimer, this is not my theory, but that of a veteran employee.

So intrigued (hey it beat working) I asked him to explain.  He claimed that Boeing as behind in planning and production on the 777, and rather then pay penalties for delays, they could take advantage of a 45 day extension on contracts that was allowed during - you guessed it -  contract disputes.

So, he claimed that Boeing deliberately offered a crappy contract on day one, and forced the strike.  Then, around day 45, when they lost the extension, they offered the real contract.

Hi Readers.  I write to you from my death bed (cough cough)…(sniff hack)…(snort)

OK, not so bad as all that.  A pesky cold and some back problems has really kept me low, but I am back to work tomorrow and back to writing tonight.

So while I was resting this weekend, the world, despite my polite request, kept turning, the news kept churning and the fires kept burning.

The big local story was Boeing losing another airplane bid to main rival Airbus.  The shock however was that the customer is The US Air Force for its next generation tanker fleet.  Now Boeing got severely slapped previously in a bod on the tanker, so this is insult to injury.

The thing is, if Boeing cannot make a competitive product, guess what?  They lose sales, and Airbus has proven itself a serious rival for years.

Now, Ken Schram blames Boeing for all its outsourcing.  I disagree with him because I think the problem is not in that small facet, but in the larger way that Boeing does business.  I worked there for three years and I say, in my opinion, the problems at Boeing are deeply rooted in its arrogance, its top heavy management, its catering to unions and its wasteful business practices.

For instance, requiring new applicants to pass an completely ridiculous diversity screening test is absurd.  The test is geared to make you answer that you love working with people of other cultures, and that you wouldn’t dream of not working without them.  If however, you answer that you really don’t care, that you work well with anyone, well, you are unsuitable.

While some areas are sleek and modern, others are antiquated, sluggish and inefficient.