4 ms·
The trope is that the South Carolina facility is largely un-unionized (because it's in a freedom-to-work state), which has caused poor quality. I have not seen
by nickff 5y ago
The trope is that the South Carolina facility is largely un-unionized (because it's in a freedom-to-work state), which has caused poor quality. I have not seen any clear evidence of this, as all Boeing facilities seem to have QC issues. On a related note, I'm not sure how Boeing's QC compares to Airbus, though both seem to have similar aircraft availability rates, which would indicate similar levels of QC.
- masklinn 5y ago> The trope is that the South Carolina facility is largely un-unionized (because it's in a freedom-to-work state) FWIW "right to work" is the normal terminology.
- justinjlynn 5y ago"Freedom to work" and "Right to work" are both Orwellian euphemistic terms, to be honest. Realistically, it's best described as "mutual right to terminate employment without cause" or just "right to terminate".
- nickff 5y agoThey're euphemisms, but I am not sure they're Orwellian. How would you say they're Orwellian? It's better to just allow people to name their own movement, otherwise, you end up endlessly fighting about names (i.e. are people 'pro-life' or 'anti-choice' and 'pro-murder'/'anti-life' and 'pro-choice').
- masklinn 5y ago> They're euphemisms, but I am not sure they're Orwellian. How would you say they're Orwellian? Right to work laws do not in any way provide a right to work.
- djbebs 5y agoThey do though
- masklinn 5y agoNo, not in any sense of the word. There's no guarantee that you'll get any job let alone a specific one in an RTW state. Therefore it's not a right to anything. It's just union busting. Especially since RTW legislation is not about closed shops (which are illegal at the federal level), so these were jobs you could always get.
- kwertyoowiyop 5y agoIt does mean the opposite of what the phrase might normally imply.
- masklinn 5y ago> "Freedom to work" and "Right to work" are both Orwellian euphemistic terms, to be honest. The latter is essentially a term of art, the former is not. Using the former is imprecise and confusing. > Realistically, it's best described as "mutual right to terminate employment without cause" or just "right to terminate". That is a completely different concept called at-will employment. RTW is about union shops (not to be confused with closed shops, which have been illegal in the US since Taft-Hartley)
- rootusrootus 5y agoOr perhaps "right to freeload"?
- masklinn 5y ago… What?
- rootusrootus 5y agoThat's the whole point of 'right to work.' Allow new employees to freeload on the union-negotiated rates for the shop without requiring them to actually join the union. Who would pay if they got the benefits anyway? So the union gets defunded.
- deltarholamda 5y agoInterestingly, back when Jesse Jackson was in the news a lot, he did a lot of advocating for Right-to-Work legislation. The idea was that unions were racially discriminating against blacks, and RtW laws prevented this. Goes to show... something, I guess.
- blendergeek 5y agoYou are thinking of "at-will" employment [0]. That is a separate issue from "right-to-work" which has to do with labor unions [1]. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At-will_employment [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-to-work_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-to-work_law
- ncmncm 5y ago"Right to work" has everything to do with labor unions.
- Dylan16807 5y agoI don't blame you for confusing the terms but I am so upset that the average person upvoted you without checking. You have the wrong term, and I'm going to comment here just to give people an extra chance to know that.
- panick21_ 5y agoSpaceX manufacturing facility in California is also un-unionized. The amount of difference between the two places is very large, to just conclude that it has to do with unions seems like a stretch to me. That one factory is the home factory close to where the designs are made and the other is so far away seems like a pretty important thing. This seems like the kind of argument people who really love unions would make.
- woodruffw 5y agoAmong other things: the safety tolerances for SpaceX are substantially different than those for commercial airliners. When a SpaceX launch craft fails, it explodes somewhere over the ocean or in LEO. When a commercial passenger airliner fails, several hundred human beings die.
- timgebrally 5y agoThere are Falcon 9 launches carrying humans on crewed Dragon launches. SpaceX carries people to orbit and to the ISS.
- ncmncm 5y agoSpaceX management is currently oriented to both high quality and high production rate. When their commitment to quality slips, such as traded off for production rate, quality will slip. When quality in a rocket engine slips, they explode. When that starts, we may expect they will start by exploding mainly on test stands, instead of vehicles.
- woodruffw 5y agoHow many launch failures have been attributed to materials failures in the engines themselves, and not improper process and/or maintenance before actual launches? My intuition is that the latter would exceed the former, and that test stands aren’t a realistic environment for predicting their likelihood.
- 5y ago