Claims of Shoddy Production at Boeing plant in N. Charleston SC

Interesting article. I bet if you interviewed the employees and ex-employees of any aircraft manufacturer, you'd get the same stuff. Would it be more or less, relatively speaking? Dunno. But people have been leaving tools and swarf inside of airplanes since 1903. The problem is, Boeing is under the microscope right now, so the story has legs.
 
Boeing moving production to a 'right to work' state was let's say not very popular with the machinists union. After their initial argument that: 'those toothless south Carolinians can't read the directions and will put the plane together the wrong way around' didn't exactly catch, they now have to come up with something else.
 
It’s funny that the people doing the work are complaining about debris being left behind. Management isn’t putting it there, the technicians doing the work are... Clean up your work area and quit bytch’n!:p
 
Right, this was covered quite some time ago and is only a piece of the story about corporate cultural changes at Boeing and all of the missteps that plagued the 787 program from way back.
 
This is union plants going after the right to work plant when it’s easier to make waves in the news cycle. Yeah there some truth to it but it’s always doom and gloom to the max.
 
Bell206 said:
As reported else where, the funny thing is this story was already reported on a few years ago. Glad to see The Times keeping up to date... unless there is a "reason" to bring this up again?
https://www.aljazeera.com/investigations/boeing787/
Click to expand...
Thanks for the link and history.

Unfortunately a story by Al Jazeera is immediately rejected by too many here just based on the source, which is too bad because AJ was doing some high quality reporting at the time.

So I’m glad the NYTs has brushed off and refreshed the story. The fact that I and probably many many others missed the AJ story but are seeing the NYT’s update is reason enough.

Of course many will discount the story just based on the source.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
weilke said:
Boeing moving production to a 'right to work' state was let's say not very popular with the machinists union. After their initial argument that: 'those toothless south Carolinians can't read the directions and will put the plane together the wrong way around' didn't exactly catch, they now have to come up with something else.
Click to expand...

So this reporting is part of a conspiracy by IAM and the NYT to denigrate the decision to put a plant in SC? Okay


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
Bill Watson said:
So this reporting is part of a conspiracy by IAM and the NYT to denigrate the decision to put a plant in SC? Okay


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

Yes, unions are fighting for their political lives. Membership has been dropping precipitously everywhere that workers are not required to join a union (and pay dues) in order to have a job. Boeing placing a large factory in a right to work state is a huge ongoing threat to labor unions, so if they can tie the 737 Max problems to free labor, they will (right or wrong, they will try desperately to connect the two causally, to boost the "positive effect" of union labor).
 
kyleb said:
Interesting article. I bet if you interviewed the employees and ex-employees of any aircraft manufacturer, you'd get the same stuff. Would it be more or less, relatively speaking? Dunno. But people have been leaving tools and swarf inside of airplanes since 1903. The problem is, Boeing is under the microscope right now, so the story has legs.
Click to expand...

It all comes down to a few things, like the culture, and the quality control, as well as procedures.

This is like saying “look, everyone makes mistakes now and then” which though true doesn’t have anything to do with it. I’ve worked in factories, many different, and the differences were enormous when it can to quality, follow up and pride in workmanship.

Factories can go through cycles too. A once excellent factory can be almost bitten by a “bug” of carelessness by the people actually doing the work. Often happens when there is no incentive, when management stops rewarding excellence, etc.

I once had a job where I had to seal online leaks in pipes in oil refineries when I was going to night school to learn electronics, it was a dangerous job. We sealed (supposed to be temporary until the next maintenance cycle, but some used it as permanent!) leaks of steam, propane, acids, etc.

When we showed up at Shell, or Chevron, they were in control. They were professional, and safety conscious.
There was another group of refineries, that were like night to the day of chevron and shell. The workers all had a kind of malaise, they didn’t care one bit about safety. I had to demand that they check for the deadly H2S possibility before went in.
 
LongRoadBob said:
It all comes down to a few things, like the culture, and the quality control, as well as procedures.
Click to expand...

Yep. But I bet I could open up any large aircraft and find swarf in some nook or cranny. Likewise, I bet if you did an exhaustive check of the ramp at Hartsfield, you'd find more than a few screwdrivers, wrenches, bucking bars, and loose hardware inside the MD-X's, B-7XX's, and A-XXX's on the ramp, regardless of whether the stuff was left behind during assembly or maintenance.

None of that is acceptable, but is the article on Boeing/SC popping up because of a pile-on effect or is it that location different from the norm at a large aircraft manufacturer? Find me the best aircraft manufacturing location in the world, and I can find an ex-employee who is happy to dump on the safety/QC at that facility.
 
weilke said:
Boeing moving production to a 'right to work' state was let's say not very popular with the machinists union. After their initial argument that: 'those toothless south Carolinians can't read the directions and will put the plane together the wrong way around' didn't exactly catch, they now have to come up with something else.
Click to expand...

I suspect this has more than a little to do with the complaints. The union tried mightily through the NLRB to force the plant to be unionized.
 
Last edited:
NYT blocks private mode reading, so I won't be reading the article. But I do note that the NYT does have an agenda and strong bias even in "factual" reporting.
 
kyleb said:
Yep. But I bet I could open up any large aircraft and find swarf in some nook or cranny. Likewise, I bet if you did an exhaustive check of the ramp at Hartsfield, you'd find more than a few screwdrivers, wrenches, bucking bars, and loose hardware inside the MD-X's, B-7XX's, and A-XXX's on the ramp, regardless of whether the stuff was left behind during assembly or maintenance.

None of that is acceptable, but is the article on Boeing/SC popping up because of a pile-on effect or is it that location different from the norm at a large aircraft manufacturer? Find me the best aircraft manufacturing location in the world, and I can find an ex-employee who is happy to dump on the safety/QC at that facility.
Click to expand...

I’m more stuck on the quality of production, materials, etc.

But in any case this is something that needs to be checked. Either it is substandard, for whatever reason, or it isn’t. Betting at one could find in any large aircraft is really not the point. It’s conjecture.

Fact is, as I mention, some factories have almost a disease among workers, has to do with pay, but not just that, with the attitudes, the spirit. I don’t know at all what kind Boeing had, and at this stage it is just possible info. But it’s wrong to dismiss it outright, betting that all the others are “about the same”. Needs to be checked.
 
weilke said:
Boeing moving production to a 'right to work' state was let's say not very popular with the machinists union. After their initial argument that: 'those toothless south Carolinians can't read the directions and will put the plane together the wrong way around' didn't exactly catch, they now have to come up with something else.
Click to expand...
They didn't say that, the quoted part. I even GTS'd it. Looks like the Flight Ready Techs got a vote for representation, by their own accord. But like many employers, they dislike the assumed and perceived disruption a micro union may cause. One may conclude that Boeing would take a similar stance and take the micro union's representational unit to court on the grounds that it is not lawful to assemble as an association of uniquely skilled workers in the aforementioned fashion, which they have done. And, to help keep the micro union thing from becoming a thing, the new NLRB member will help in that regard. Win win for everyone.

ibtl.gif
 
LongRoadBob said:
It all comes down to a few things, like the culture, and the quality control, as well as procedures.

This is like saying “look, everyone makes mistakes now and then” which though true doesn’t have anything to do with it. I’ve worked in factories, many different, and the differences were enormous when it can to quality, follow up and pride in workmanship.

Factories can go through cycles too. A once excellent factory can be almost bitten by a “bug” of carelessness by the people actually doing the work. Often happens when there is no incentive, when management stops rewarding excellence, etc.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

But in my thinking it’s always about management. Starts at the top and when the right things aren’t coming from the top, that’s an example of the most basic of management problems. Culture, quality control and procedures are management responsibilities. When the workforce is blamed, management has failed. Moving an operation to a place where the workforce may need some extra training and upgrading is a management decision and responsibility as well.

When leadership falters and employees are no longer properly motivated, there’s no way the operation can resist ‘infection’.

The ‘gremlins’ will eventually get you.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
3393RP said:
I suspect this has more than a little to do with the complaints. The union tried mightily through the courts to force the plant to be unionized.
Click to expand...

The Obama labor secretary actually tried to shut the plant down right after it opened because it was non-union. That was no secret


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
weilke said:
Boeing moving production to a 'right to work' state was let's say not very popular with the machinists union. After their initial argument that: 'those toothless south Carolinians can't read the directions and will put the plane together the wrong way around' didn't exactly catch, they now have to come up with something else.
Click to expand...
Except of course that apparently those toothless south Carolinians can't read the directions and will put the plane together the wrong way around. A LADDER in the tail?
 
Bill Watson said:
Agreed.

But in my thinking it’s always about management. Starts at the top and when the right things aren’t coming from the top, that’s an example of the most basic of management problems. Culture, quality control and procedures are management responsibilities. When the workforce is blamed, management has failed. Moving an operation to a place where the workforce may need some extra training and upgrading is a management decision and responsibility as well.

When leadership falters and employees are no longer properly motivated, there’s no way the operation can resist ‘infection’.

The ‘gremlins’ will eventually get you.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...


I had to wonder what direction Boeing was taking when it moved its headquarters from aviation friendly Seattle to aviation hostile Chicago. Putting barriers between top management and line workers is something that tends not to go over well.
 
Remington Firearms had the same issue when they moved to South Carolina. Product quality su
ARFlyer said:
This is union plants going after the right to work plant when it’s easier to make waves in the news cycle. Yeah there some truth to it but it’s always doom and gloom to the max.
Click to expand...

South Carolina sure wouldn’t have been my choice to open a manufacturing plant.
 
Clip4 said:
Remington Firearms had the same issue when they moved to South Carolina. Product quality su


South Carolina sure wouldn’t have been my choice to open a manufacturing plant.
Click to expand...

"The manufacturing plant in Greer, South Carolina has the highest production volume of the BMW plants worldwide, currently producing approximately 1,900 vehicles per day. The models produced at the Spartanburg plant are the X3, X4, X5, X6 and X7 SUV models."
 
How do you lose tools in a production environment ? Can their techs just go and pick up a new tool if they can't find the one they were issued ? Are the tools not serialized ?
 
3393RP said:
"The manufacturing plant in Greer, South Carolina has the highest production volume of the BMW plants worldwide, currently producing approximately 1,900 vehicles per day. The models produced at the Spartanburg plant are the X3, X4, X5, X6 and X7 SUV models."
Click to expand...

Fee if any of machined parts are originating in SC.
 
Clip4 said:
Fee if any of machined parts are originating in SC.
Click to expand...

SC does quite a lot of manufacturing, yes many of those parts used in BMW originate in the area. We also make parts for many other automakers. I spent a year there (BMW) finding that out for myself.
 
weilke said:
How do you lose tools in a production environment ? Can their techs just go and pick up a new tool if they can't find the one they were issued ? Are the tools not serialized ?
Click to expand...
It's been nearly 40 years since I worked in the Boeing production world, but I believe the machinists personally own many of the tools...at least in the Seattle IAM environment. I remember signs on the toolboxes saying something about the tools being purchased using union wages. Certain precision tools are owned by the company to be checked out as needed.

This is probably a quirk of the union contract for the production folks; in the engineering/development areas I worked, Boeing definitely supplied common tools.

Ron Wanttaja
 
wanttaja said:
It's been nearly 40 years since I worked in the Boeing production world, but I believe the machinists personally own many of the tools...at least in the Seattle IAM environment. I remember signs on the toolboxes saying something about the tools being purchased using union wages. Certain precision tools are owned by the company to be checked out as needed.

This is probably a quirk of the union contract for the production folks; in the engineering/development areas I worked, Boeing definitely supplied common tools.

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...

So Boeing operates like 'Joeys Automotive' down at the corner in that regard. Suprising that none of their certifications requires tool accountability.
 
weilke said:
wanttaja said:
It's been nearly 40 years since I worked in the Boeing production world, but I believe the machinists personally own many of the tools...at least in the Seattle IAM environment. I remember signs on the toolboxes saying something about the tools being purchased using union wages. Certain precision tools are owned by the company to be checked out as needed.
Click to expand...
So Boeing operates like 'Joeys Automotive' down at the corner in that regard. Suprising that none of their certifications requires tool accountability.
Click to expand...

Boeing has what is called "tool rooms". When a worker needs a non-Snap-On sort of tool, they check it out there. The tool room provides the recurring certifications of the tool, and of course tracks who has checked it out.

That's only for specific tools, though. There's no tracking of the individual wrenches, screwdrivers, and sockets in the machinists' tool boxes. There may be industries that do that, but for companies the scale of Boeing, Airbus, Cessna, etc. the effort would be massive. Technically, the QA organization is supposed to prevent problems along this line, but there are obviously problems. I know they track stuff like this during surgery, but even then, mistakes are made.

The issue isn't new... stuff has been being left in airplanes for a long time....
welded.jpg

Ron Wanttaja
 
Last edited:
mryan75 said:
Except of course that apparently those toothless south Carolinians can't read the directions and will put the plane together the wrong way around. A LADDER in the tail?
Click to expand...

If the fuselage is built around formers, of course there’d be a LADDER in the tail.
 
Lachlan said:
If the fuselage is built around formers, of course there’d be a LADDER in the tail.
Click to expand...
After the plane was delivered? That's some really aggressive preventative maintenance I guess.
 
wanttaja said:
Boeing has what is called "tool rooms". When a worker needs a non-Snap-On sort of tool, they check it out there. The tool room provides the recurring certifications of the tool, and of course tracks who has checked it out.

That's only for specific tools, though. There's no tracking of the individual wrenches, screwdrivers, and sockets in the machinists' tool boxes. There may be industries that do that, but for companies the scale of Boeing, Airbus, Cessna, etc. the effort would be massive. Technically, the QA organization is supposed to prevent problems along this line, but there are obviously problems. I know they track stuff like this during surgery, but even then, mistakes are made.

The issue isn't new... stuff has been being left in airplanes for a long time....
welded.jpg

Ron Wanttaja
Click to expand...

But a surgeon forgets one teeny tiny scalpel in some guy’s gut, and the hoardes and mobs want the poor Doc’s head!
 
topcat2001 said:
Amazing how people throw in bizarre anti-union statements with no evidence while completely ignoring the copious evidence of shoddy practices in the South Carolina plant in the article.
Click to expand...

Evidence? I would categorize it as "claims" until somebody shows me documentation or pictures.
 
topcat2001 said:
Amazing how people throw in bizarre anti-union statements with no evidence while completely ignoring the copious evidence of shoddy practices in the South Carolina plant in the article.
Click to expand...
Well...what's interesting is that we've had reports of QC problems both at in the Seattle area (union machinists) and South Carolina (non-union). Obviously, the more-recent complaints about South Carolina might have been leaked by the Seattle union, but the complaints are pretty specific to be completely fabricated.

So you've got union on one side, non-union on the other, and QC issues at each. What's the common denominator?

Boeing management, of course. QC awareness at Boeing essentially exists as a collection of yellowed posters on the walls, yet the third sentence in every management talk refers to "enhancing shareholder value" (e.g., cutting costs). Too many at the upper level of Boeing management have NO experience in aircraft production. To them, building an airplane is no different from building a toaster. The view quality control as an unnecessary expense ("Let's just assume the machinists can follow instructions") and undercut it as much as they can get away with. They look at QC as an additional expensive organization that costs money to stand up, and costs them even more money when they require work be re-done.

Ron Wanttaja
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top