macc From Austria, joined Nov 2004, 1098 posts, RR: 3 Posted (2 years 4 months 14 hours ago) and read 14631 times:
According to a report in WSJ due to the troubles with its Dreamliner Boeing has started to lay off hundreds of workers in their North Charleston plant. At the moment only contracted ones are affected, not direct employees.
Is that a hint that B is slowing down its 787 production?
txjim From United States of America, joined May 2008, 255 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 4 months 9 hours ago) and read 13428 times:
I don't know about Boeing, but where I work contract workers have a limited time before they have to be hired or released. Can't touch them again for at least 6 months. I believe this is related to the defination of Full Time labor and has financial impact to the company.
My point is that I don't believe Boeing is attempting to staff a long-term labor force with contract workers.
moose135 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 2637 posts, RR: 20
Reply 5, posted (2 years 4 months 9 hours ago) and read 13369 times:
A couple of points from the WSJ article. It sounds like this was an expected move by Boeing.
This was from "a person familiar with the plan", who also said it was begun late last year, before the battery issue came up...
Quote: The cuts largely target the plant's outside contractors, although Boeing also would reduce staff positions by not replacing some workers who leave or are promoted, the person said.
And from a Boeing spokesman...
Quote: Boeing spokesman Marc Birtel confirmed the reductions in contract labor, but declined to discuss specific numbers...Mr. Birtel said Boeing is "not laying off any direct Boeing Commercial Airplane employees at this time," adding that reduction in the use of contractors in South Carolina "has been our plan."
Roseflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 10387 posts, RR: 52
Reply 8, posted (2 years 4 months 4 hours ago) and read 11743 times:
I don't have much knowledge on this, but have a feeling it is related to the Vought workforce and not with the 787 final assembly and production work force.
Engineering work is mostly complete for the 787, so the engineering workforce usually gets cut and reallocated to other production models after an airplane enters into service. To help maintain the core workforce employed by Boeing, they fill in with 10-20% contract labor workers. These people get paid more, but don't have job security. When the project ends, they are usually released. In final assembly, once the process is up and running and is more automated, fewer workers are needed.
I doubt it. It probably is an indication that 787 design work is coming to an end and the program is moving into a sustaining & production engineering mode which requires fewer engineers. It happens with every airplane model.
[Edited 2013-03-01 10:36:50]
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
liquidoblivion From United States of America, joined Nov 2009, 6 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (2 years 4 months 2 hours ago) and read 8954 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 10):
Quoting PGNCS (Reply 7):
You know that Charleston is in South Carolina, right?
North/South - I get confused sometimes.
It's like South Carolina doesn't exist. Anytime I am away from this area and you tell them you are from SC, 5 mins later they are asking you about what its like in NC. You can remind them and that might last for an hour or two, but the next time you see them you will be that guy from NC. :/
KELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6620 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (2 years 4 months 2 hours ago) and read 8884 times:
Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 8): Engineering work is mostly complete for the 787, so the engineering workforce usually gets cut and reallocated to other production models after an airplane enters into service.
You sure about that? I'd imagine the EE's are a might bit busy at the moment... Not to mention that Boeing is probably actively engineering further 787 derivatives, like the -10...
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
Unflug From Germany, joined Jan 2012, 614 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (2 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 4423 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 10): Actually, it is the German link to the article that is poorly worded. They also believe Charleston is in North Carolina, so that alone makes me wonder if they bothered to read the WSJ article.
You are correct - the author either hasn't even read it or he/she doesn't have a clue what's written in it.
At least they fixed the City Name to North Charleston in South Carolina, which seems to be correct.