1. What are the advantages to Boeing of its nonunion South Carolina workforce? Of its unionized Washington workforce?
2. If a Boeing human resource manager transferred from a Washington facility to a South Carolina facility, what differences could he or she expect in the department’s work?
3. Could Boeing and the Machinists develop a more cooperative working relationship in Washington? Why or why not? What could Boeing do to encourage cooperation?

Boeing’s headquarters is in Chicago, but until recently at least, the hub of its commercial-aircraft business was in the state of Washington. That changed when Boeing bought a South Carolina factory that had been making sections of the fuselage for Boeing’s 787 Dreamliner, as well as a stake in an adjoining factory making 787 subassemblies. Eventually, amid talk that the South Carolina legislature would provide tax incentives worth $450 million, Boeing announced that it would be building a second 787 assembly line in South Carolina. It planned to start production in 2011.
Boeing has not been shy about saying the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, which represents workers at the Everett, Washington, assembly plant, bears much of the responsibility. During the past twenty years, the union has called several strikes. With the company way behind schedule in 2008, a strike by the Machinists set production back another eight weeks, costing Boeing $2 billion and leading some customers to cancel their orders and buy from rival Airbus. In addition, the union recently refused to accept concessions in negotiating a new contract. The Machinists blame Boeing for presenting vague contract requirements, a charge the company denies. Boeing’s Jim Proulx told reporters that strikes in Washington mattered: “Repeated labor disruptions have affected our performance in our customers’ eyes. We have to show our customers we can be a reliable supplier to them.”