Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme;
Boeingrelease.doc
Heres some suggested edits for the press release, which hopefully comport with the complaint, which I havent seen yet.
NLRB-FOIA-00006806
NLRB-FOIA-00006807
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Hi Jennifer - If you put the changes in track mode, I can't see them because I'm home on my
Mac right now. I'll be in this afternoon. Could you tell me what you changed? Thanks
________________________________________
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme;
Heres some suggested edits for the press release, which hopefully comport with the
NLRB-FOIA-00006808
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Cleeland, Nancy
Boeingrelease1.doc
-----Original Message-----
Hi Jennifer - If you put the changes in track mode, I can't see them because I'm home on my
Mac right now. I'll be in this afternoon. Could you tell me what you changed? Thanks
________________________________________
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme;
Heres some suggested edits for the press release, which hopefully comport with the
NLRB-FOIA-00006809
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006810
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Abruzzo, Jennifer
________________________________________
-----Original Message-----
Hi Jennifer - If you put the changes in track mode, I can't see them because I'm home on my
Mac right now. I'll be in this afternoon. Could you tell me what you changed? Thanks
________________________________________
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme;
Heres some suggested edits for the press release, which hopefully comport with the
NLRB-FOIA-00006811
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Cleeland, Nancy
Nancy,
Hope the meeting was productive. So, what was the verdict? Could you send me the final press release and news
points? Sorry that I missed the meeting, but I have to catch my van at 4.
Take care,
Jennifer
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Solomon,
Any chance we could meet quickly again at 4 looks like everyone is free then to discuss messaging? Would be great
How do we
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
Thanks
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Szapiro, Miriam; Willen, Debra
Importance: High
Greetings all, Please review my latest revision, which attempts to incorporate comments from Celeste, Jennifer and
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00006812
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Cleeland, Nancy
Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen;
boeingreleasefinal.doc
Attached is the latest, and perhaps final, version of the Boeing release with some nice additions by Rich and Celeste. Fact
sheet will be coming soon. We'll link to that in the release if it's ready. Thanks everyone.
NLRB-FOIA-00006813
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006814
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Kearney, Barry J.
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer
FW :
Importance:
High
Subject:
Importance: High
Re:
Case 19-CA-32431
rd
captioned case.
office and Boeing concerning the facts and the law surrounding the
position.
decision which can be reviewed by the Board and ultimately the Courts.
Sincerely yours,
NLRB-FOIA-00006815
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Solomon, Lafe E.
Exemption 5
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Barry, are you available? If so, please bring Ellen and Jayme and others, if you deem it appropriate and they are
available.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00006816
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
NLRB-FOIA-00006817
Microsoft Outlook
Garza, Jose
Solomon, Lafe E.
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Barry, are you available? If so, please bring Ellen and Jayme and others, if you deem it appropriate and they are
available.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00006818
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
NLRB-FOIA-00006819
Microsoft Outlook
Solomon, Lafe E.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 5
--------------------------
Exemption 5
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Barry, are you available? If so, please bring Ellen and Jayme and others, if you deem it appropriate and they are
available.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00006820
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
NLRB-FOIA-00006821
Microsoft Outlook
Mattina, Celeste J.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
--------------------------
Exemption 5
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Barry, are you available? If so, please bring Ellen and Jayme and others, if you deem it appropriate and they are
available.
1
NLRB-FOIA-00006822
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
NLRB-FOIA-00006823
Microsoft Outlook
Solomon, Lafe E.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 5
--------------------------
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
--------------------------
Exemption 5
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00006824
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Barry, are you available? If so, please bring Ellen and Jayme and others, if you deem it appropriate and they are
available.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
NLRB-FOIA-00006825
Microsoft Outlook
Mattina, Celeste J.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 5
--------------------------
Exemption 5
--------------------------
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
--------------------------
Exemption 5
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00006826
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Barry, are you available? If so, please bring Ellen and Jayme and others, if you deem it appropriate and they are
available.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
NLRB-FOIA-00006827
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006828
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006829
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer;
Schiff, Robert
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006830
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006831
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006832
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006833
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006834
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006835
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006836
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Schiff, Robert
Re:
A few observations/thoughts:
In the introduction,
Exemption 5
As to response to 3,
As to response to 4,
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
--------------------------
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006837
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006838
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006839
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
FW :
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006840
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006841
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006842
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006843
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006844
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006845
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006846
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006847
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose; Schiff, Robert
FW :
Attached is the whole draft response, including Richs 2 cents and Joses response to question 2.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006848
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006849
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006850
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006851
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006852
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006853
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006854
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006855
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
FW :
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
Attached is the whole draft response, including Richs 2 cents and Joses response to question 2.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
NLRB-FOIA-00006856
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006857
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006858
NLRB-FOIA-00006859
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006860
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006861
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006862
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006863
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006864
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006865
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Farrell, Ellen
Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
Sophir, Jayme
RE:
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: FW:
See attached for a modification of the second full paragraph on p.3 to include a reference to
Exemption 5
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
Attached is the whole draft response, including Richs 2 cents and Joses response to question 2.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00006866
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006867
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006868
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006869
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006870
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006871
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006872
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006873
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006874
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006875
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Farrell, Ellen; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
Sophir, Jayme
Re:
--------------------------
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
Subject: RE:
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: FW:
See attached for a modification of the second full paragraph on p.3 to include a reference to
Exemption 5
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
Attached is the whole draft response, including Richs 2 cents and Joses response to question 2.
NLRB-FOIA-00006876
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006877
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006878
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006879
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Abruzzo, Jennifer; Farrell, Ellen; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
Sophir, Jayme
RE:
To: Farrell, Ellen; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
Subject: Re:
--------------------------
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
Subject: RE:
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: FW:
See attached for a modification of the second full paragraph on p.3 to include a reference to
Exemption 5
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006880
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
Attached is the whole draft response, including Richs 2 cents and Joses response to question 2.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006881
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006882
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006883
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen;
Exemption 5
In number 1,
Our reasoning re. # 3 and 4 were sent earlier.
Best regards,
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00006884
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006885
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006886
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006887
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006888
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006889
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006890
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006891
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006892
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006893
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Garza, Jose
Jose,
Jen
Issa's committee requested production of all documents and communications referring or relating to the Office
of General Counsel's investigation of Boeing, all documents and records of communications between anyone
in NLRB and IAM, and all documents referring or relating to the Office of General Counsel's investigation of
union election laws in Arizona, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah.
Issa's committee will apparently follow up after documents are produced by conducting a hearing on the Boeing
case. The Greenville News reported May 17 that Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), a member of the committee, said
Issa has agreed to conduct a June field hearing in South Carolina on the Boeing complaint.
According to the newspaper account, Gowdy expects to question NLRB officials at the hearing, and promised
to ask them: What were you thinking? Are you trying to intimidate South Carolina? Are you a shill for the
An NLRB spokesperson told BNA May 17 the agency had not been advised of a Government Operations
NLRB-FOIA-00006894
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Solomon, Lafe E.
Mattina, Celeste J.
Re:
I'm on my way.
--------------------------
Subject: Re:
Yes. Let's talk when I get into the office. I should be in in 20.
Subject:
Jose,
Jen
Issa's committee requested production of all documents and communications referring or relating to the Office
of General Counsel's investigation of Boeing, all documents and records of communications between anyone
in NLRB and IAM, and all documents referring or relating to the Office of General Counsel's investigation of
union election laws in Arizona, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah.
Issa's committee will apparently follow up after documents are produced by conducting a hearing on the Boeing
case. The Greenville News reported May 17 that Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), a member of the committee, said
Issa has agreed to conduct a June field hearing in South Carolina on the Boeing complaint.
According to the newspaper account, Gowdy expects to question NLRB officials at the hearing, and promised
to ask them: What were you thinking? Are you trying to intimidate South Carolina? Are you a shill for the
An NLRB spokesperson told BNA May 17 the agency had not been advised of a Government Operations
NLRB-FOIA-00006895
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Farrell, Ellen
Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
FW :
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Sophir, Jayme
Cc: Pomerantz, Anne; Anzalone, Mara-Louise; Finch, Peter G.; Harvey, Rachel
Exemption 5
In number 1,
Our reasoning re. # 3 and 4 were sent earlier.
Best regards,
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00006896
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006897
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006898
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006899
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006900
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006901
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006902
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006903
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006904
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Solomon, Lafe E.
Mattina, Celeste J.
Re:
--------------------------
Subject: Re:
Subject: Re:
I'm on my way.
--------------------------
Subject: Re:
Yes. Let's talk when I get into the office. I should be in in 20.
Subject:
Jose,
Jen
NLRB-FOIA-00006905
Issa's committee requested production of all documents and communications referring or relating to the Office
of General Counsel's investigation of Boeing, all documents and records of communications between anyone
in NLRB and IAM, and all documents referring or relating to the Office of General Counsel's investigation of
union election laws in Arizona, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah.
Issa's committee will apparently follow up after documents are produced by conducting a hearing on the Boeing
case. The Greenville News reported May 17 that Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), a member of the committee, said
Issa has agreed to conduct a June field hearing in South Carolina on the Boeing complaint.
According to the newspaper account, Gowdy expects to question NLRB officials at the hearing, and promised
to ask them: What were you thinking? Are you trying to intimidate South Carolina? Are you a shill for the
An NLRB spokesperson told BNA May 17 the agency had not been advised of a Government Operations
NLRB-FOIA-00006906
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen
klineandroeresponse.doc
While Ellen was sending her edits, I was about to send mine, so I incorporated hers into this one. My edits primarily deal
with
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006907
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006908
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006909
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006910
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006911
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006912
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006913
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006914
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006915
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006916
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.
klineandroeresponse2.doc
Heres an edited version per our discussion that may help you with the final. Ill get a copy of the complaint ready.
NLRB-FOIA-00006917
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006918
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006919
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006920
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006921
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006922
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Final version. Unless somebody expresses a reservation very soon, I will sign it and
NLRB-FOIA-00006923
NLRB-FOIA-00006924
NLRB-FOIA-00006925
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006926
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006927
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006928
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006929
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006930
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.;
Issa response
NLRB-FOIA-00006931
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006932
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006933
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006934
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006935
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006936
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006937
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006938
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Moskowitz, Eric G.
Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen;
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00006939
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006940
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006941
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006942
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006943
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006944
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006945
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006946
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006947
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006948
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006949
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006950
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006951
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz,
FW : Issa response
Exemption 5
. Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00006952
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006953
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006954
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006955
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006956
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006957
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006958
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006959
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006960
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006961
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006962
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006963
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006964
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz,
FW : Issa response
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
. Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
Non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00006965
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006966
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006967
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006968
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006969
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006970
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006971
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006972
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006973
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006974
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006975
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006976
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006977
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ahearn, Richard L.
FW : Issa response
I just saw Eriks latest draft; my suggestions were not incorporated. If you agree with them, do you want to do so?
Many thanks.
Rich
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.;
Moskowitz, Eric G.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric
G.
A couple suggestions:
Exemption 5
Rich
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006978
Exemption 5
Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00006979
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00006980
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Garza, Jose
Abruzzo, Jennifer
draft of the letter by tomorrow? Jen will be in on Friday, in the event that you need
something and she can certainly insure it is mailed out in the afternoon.
Exemption 6
NLRB-FOIA-00006981
Microsoft Outlook
Garza, Jose
Mattina, Celeste J.
Abruzzo, Jennifer
RE:
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Hi Celeste,
Exemption 5
I apologize for my confusion. Once I get that added I will send it over to you.
Subject:
draft of the letter by tomorrow? Jen will be in on Friday, in the event that you need
something and she can certainly insure it is mailed out in the afternoon.
Exemption 6
NLRB-FOIA-00006982
Microsoft Outlook
Abruzzo, Jennifer
RE:
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 5
Subject: RE:
Hi Celeste,
Exemption 5
I apologize for my confusion. Once I get that added I will send it over to you.
Subject:
draft of the letter by tomorrow? Jen will be in on Friday, in the event that you need
something and she can certainly insure it is mailed out in the afternoon.
Exemption 6
NLRB-FOIA-00006983
Microsoft Outlook
Mattina, Celeste J.
Garza, Jose
Abruzzo, Jennifer
RE:
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Exemption 5
Subject: RE:
Hi Celeste,
Exemption 5
I apologize for my confusion. Once I get that added I will send it over to you.
Subject:
draft of the letter by tomorrow? Jen will be in on Friday, in the event that you need
something and she can certainly insure it is mailed out in the afternoon.
Exemption 6
NLRB-FOIA-00006984
Microsoft Outlook
Mattina, Celeste J.
Garza, Jose
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Re:
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
--------------------------
Subject: RE:
non-responsive
tomorrow. Also, could we meet then? I want to run a few things by you. I hope you enjoy your evening.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
Subject: RE:
Hi Celeste,
Exemption 5
I apologize for my confusion. Once I get that added I will send it over to you.
Subject:
NLRB-FOIA-00006985
draft of the letter by tomorrow? Jen will be in on Friday, in the event that you need
something and she can certainly insure it is mailed out in the afternoon.
Exemption 6
NLRB-FOIA-00006986
Microsoft Outlook
Abruzzo, Jennifer
RE:
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
3pm works best for me. Also, do you have all of the exhibits that we are going to put on a thumbdrive, including those for
Subject: Re:
--------------------------
Subject: RE:
non-responsive
tomorrow. Also, could we meet then? I want to run a few things by you. I hope you enjoy your evening.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
Subject: RE:
Hi Celeste,
Exemption 5
I apologize for my confusion. Once I get that added I will send it over to you.
1
NLRB-FOIA-00006987
Subject:
draft of the letter by tomorrow? Jen will be in on Friday, in the event that you need
something and she can certainly insure it is mailed out in the afternoon.
Exemption 6
NLRB-FOIA-00006988
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Re:
Subject: RE:
3pm works best for me. Also, do you have all of the exhibits that we are going to put on a thumbdrive, including those for
Subject: Re:
--------------------------
Subject: RE:
Non-Responsive
tomorrow. Also, could we meet then? I want to run a few things by you. I hope you enjoy your evening.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
Subject: RE:
1
NLRB-FOIA-00006989
Hi Celeste,
Exemption 5
I apologize for my confusion. Once I get that added I will send it over to you.
Subject:
draft of the letter by tomorrow? Jen will be in on Friday, in the event that you need
something and she can certainly insure it is mailed out in the afternoon.
Exemption 6
NLRB-FOIA-00006990
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Please find attached a draft of the Boring Issa response that has all of the changes suggested on Tuesday. Are we still
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00006991
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006992
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006993
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006994
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006995
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006996
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006997
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00006998
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Please find attached a draft of the Boring Issa response that has all of the changes suggested on Tuesday. Are we still
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00006999
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Cleeland, Nancy
with my edits
Heres my attemptSorry I didnt put the changes in track, it got too confusing.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007000
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007001
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007002
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
It looks very good. I'm on my BB and can't edit doc. Two comments:
Exemption 5
--------------------------
Heres my attemptSorry I didnt put the changes in track, it got too confusing.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007003
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Good changes
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
It looks very good. I'm on my BB and can't edit doc. Two comments:
Exemption 5
--------------------------
Heres my attemptSorry I didnt put the changes in track, it got too confusing.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007004
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Thank you, Nancy. Attached please find a few minor suggestions to Nancys edits. I tried to incorporate Jennifers
Exemption 5
necessary?
Thanks!
Heres my attemptSorry I didnt put the changes in track, it got too confusing.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007005
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Solomon, Lafe E.
It looks good, I made just one small edit. I am copying Lafe, for his review. When
Thank you, Nancy. Attached please find a few minor suggestions to Nancys edits. I tried to incorporate Jennifers
Exemption 5
necessary?
Thanks!
Heres my attemptSorry I didnt put the changes in track, it got too confusing.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007006
Microsoft Outlook
Solomon, Lafe E.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 5
Thanks, Lafe
It looks good, I made just one small edit. I am copying Lafe, for his review. When
Thank you, Nancy. Attached please find a few minor suggestions to Nancys edits. I tried to incorporate Jennifers
Exemption 5
necessary?
Thanks!
Heres my attemptSorry I didnt put the changes in track, it got too confusing.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007007
Microsoft Outlook
Garza, Jose
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Cleeland, Nancy; Abruzzo, Jennifer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 6
momentarily.
I am available to chat about this at any time convenient for the group.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Cleeland, Nancy; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose
Exemption 5
Thanks, Lafe
It looks good, I made just one small edit. I am copying Lafe, for his review. When
Thank you, Nancy. Attached please find a few minor suggestions to Nancys edits. I tried to incorporate Jennifers
Exemption 5
Thanks!
Heres my attemptSorry I didnt put the changes in track, it got too confusing.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007008
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007009
Microsoft Outlook
Cleeland, Nancy
Garza, Jose; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
I have no opinion on this, except of course wanting jose to be completely safe at all times!
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Cleeland, Nancy; Abruzzo, Jennifer
Exemption 6
momentarily.
I am available to chat about this at any time convenient for the group.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Cleeland, Nancy; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose
Exemption 5
Thanks, Lafe
It looks good, I made just one small edit. I am copying Lafe, for his review. When
Thank you, Nancy. Attached please find a few minor suggestions to Nancys edits. I tried to incorporate Jennifers
Exemption 5
necessary?
Thanks!
NLRB-FOIA-00007010
Heres my attemptSorry I didnt put the changes in track, it got too confusing.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007011
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Please find attached a draft response to the second Issa invitation. I have a meeting from 9:30 to 11 and am leaving for
Thank you,
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007012
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007013
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007014
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007015
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
NLRB-FOIA-00007016
NLRB-FOIA-00007017
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007018
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007019
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007020
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007021
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
image001.jpg
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Cleeland, Nancy; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007022
NLRB-FOIA-00007023
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.
NLRB-FOIA-00007024
NLRB-FOIA-00007025
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007026
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007027
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007028
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007029
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Cleeland, Nancy
openingIssa.doc
Exemption 5
the GCs office at noon today to get the ball rolling in terms of process, strategy and schedules for the rest of the week.
NLRB-FOIA-00007030
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007031
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007032
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007033
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007034
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Abruzzo, Jennifer; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.
RE:
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Cleeland, Nancy
Subject:
Exemption 5
the GCs office at noon today to get the ball rolling in terms of process, strategy and schedules for the rest of the week.
NLRB-FOIA-00007035
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Cleeland, Nancy; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Solomon, Lafe E.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.
Re:
I am on my way in.
--------------------------
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Cleeland, Nancy
Subject:
Exemption 5
the GCs office at noon today to get the ball rolling in terms of process, strategy and schedules for the rest of the week.
NLRB-FOIA-00007036
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Cleeland, Nancy
openingIssa (2).doc
NLRB-FOIA-00007037
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007038
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007039
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007040
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007041
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Abruzzo, Jennifer; Solomon, Lafe E.; Kearney, Barry J.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy
FW :
openingIssa (2).doc
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Cleeland, Nancy
Subject:
NLRB-FOIA-00007042
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007043
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007044
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007045
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007046
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007047
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007048
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Solomon, Lafe E.; Kearney, Barry J.; Cleeland, Nancy
RE:
openingIssa (2).doc
Attached please find my suggested edits to the document Jennifer sent around after our meeting yesterday. It seems that
we have three great drafts that each point in a slightly different direction. I wonder if it makes sense for us to convene
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Solomon, Lafe E.; Kearney, Barry J.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy
Subject: FW:
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Cleeland, Nancy
Subject:
NLRB-FOIA-00007049
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007050
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007051
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007052
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007053
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.
Solomon, Lafe E.
openingIssa615.doc
Celeste,
Ive attached the draft of the written statement for your editing before we send to the others. Lafe, feel free to chime in.
Thanks,
Jen
NLRB-FOIA-00007054
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007055
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007056
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007057
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007058
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007059
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007060
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007061
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
'lbkiernan@zuckerman.com'
'Schilling, Judith M.'; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.;
Ferguson, John H.
openingIssa615.doc
Leslie,
Take care,
Jennifer
NLRB-FOIA-00007062
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007063
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007064
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007065
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007066
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007067
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007068
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007069
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Solomon, Lafe E.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.;
Abruzzo, Jennifer
lbkiernan@zuckerman.com
openingIssa615.doc
Exemption 5
To: 'lbkiernan@zuckerman.com'
Cc: 'Schilling, Judith M.'; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.
Take care,
Jennifer
NLRB-FOIA-00007070
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007071
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007072
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007073
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007074
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007075
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007076
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007077
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Cleeland, Nancy
Abruzzo, Jennifer
openingIssa615.doc
Hi Jennifer, can I please be on the distribution list for these drafts? Thank you.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.; Abruzzo, Jennifer
Cc: lbkiernan@zuckerman.com
To: 'lbkiernan@zuckerman.com'
Cc: 'Schilling, Judith M.'; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.
Leslie,
Take care,
Jennifer
NLRB-FOIA-00007078
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007079
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007080
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007081
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007082
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007083
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007084
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007085
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Cleeland, Nancy
Yes. I planned on sending it to you with the oral statement, which I thought you could take a crack at modifying to make it
Hi Jennifer, can I please be on the distribution list for these drafts? Thank you.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.; Abruzzo, Jennifer
Cc: lbkiernan@zuckerman.com
To: 'lbkiernan@zuckerman.com'
Cc: 'Schilling, Judith M.'; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.
Leslie,
Take care,
Jennifer
NLRB-FOIA-00007086
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
openingIssa615short.doc
Heres a shortened draft version for Lafe to read at the hearing. Nancy, do you have edits to make it more lay person
friendly?
Hi Jennifer, can I please be on the distribution list for these drafts? Thank you.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.; Abruzzo, Jennifer
Cc: lbkiernan@zuckerman.com
To: 'lbkiernan@zuckerman.com'
Cc: 'Schilling, Judith M.'; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.
Leslie,
Take care,
Jennifer
NLRB-FOIA-00007087
NLRB-FOIA-00007088
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007089
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007090
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007091
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007092
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007093
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007094
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Heres a shortened draft version for Lafe to read at the hearing. Nancy, do you have edits to make it more lay person
friendly?
Hi Jennifer, can I please be on the distribution list for these drafts? Thank you.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.; Abruzzo, Jennifer
Cc: lbkiernan@zuckerman.com
To: 'lbkiernan@zuckerman.com'
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007095
Cc: 'Schilling, Judith M.'; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.
Leslie,
Take care,
Jennifer
NLRB-FOIA-00007096
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
openingIssa615short.doc
I made the same change here. I agree with Jen, the oral version should be lay person
friendly. Nancy, your input would be great. I will try to play with this also later this
afternoon.
Heres a shortened draft version for Lafe to read at the hearing. Nancy, do you have edits to make it more lay person
friendly?
Hi Jennifer, can I please be on the distribution list for these drafts? Thank you.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.; Abruzzo, Jennifer
Cc: lbkiernan@zuckerman.com
To: 'lbkiernan@zuckerman.com'
NLRB-FOIA-00007097
Cc: 'Schilling, Judith M.'; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.
Leslie,
Take care,
Jennifer
NLRB-FOIA-00007098
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007099
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007100
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007101
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007102
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007103
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007104
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Heres a shortened draft version for Lafe to read at the hearing. Nancy, do you have edits to make it more lay person
friendly?
Hi Jennifer, can I please be on the distribution list for these drafts? Thank you.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.; Abruzzo, Jennifer
Cc: lbkiernan@zuckerman.com
NLRB-FOIA-00007105
deliberative - Exemption 5
To: 'lbkiernan@zuckerman.com'
Cc: 'Schilling, Judith M.'; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.
Leslie,
Take care,
Jennifer
NLRB-FOIA-00007106
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Solomon, Lafe E.
. Jen,
can you give it another lookthrough and put it in as final form as possible, with
whatever changes you think are appropriate, pending Nancys suggestion. I would like
to give it one last look when I come in and we should be in good shape to get it out by
NLRB-FOIA-00007107
NLRB-FOIA-00007108
NLRB-FOIA-00007109
NLRB-FOIA-00007110
NLRB-FOIA-00007111
NLRB-FOIA-00007112
NLRB-FOIA-00007113
NLRB-FOIA-00007114
NLRB-FOIA-00007115
NLRB-FOIA-00007116
NLRB-FOIA-00007117
NLRB-FOIA-00007118
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Ok. I'll have something for review by the time you get to the office tomorrow.
--------------------------
. Jen,
can you give it another lookthrough and put it in as final form as possible, with
whatever changes you think are appropriate, pending Nancys suggestion. I would like
to give it one last look when I come in and we should be in good shape to get it out by
NLRB-FOIA-00007119
NLRB-FOIA-00007120
NLRB-FOIA-00007121
NLRB-FOIA-00007122
NLRB-FOIA-00007123
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Garza, Jose
Hi all
I'm working on this tonight, with the idea of getting my suggestions to you all first thing
Ok. I'll have something for review by the time you get to the office tomorrow.
--------------------------
________________________________
another lookthrough and put it in as final form as possible, with whatever changes you think
come in and we should be in good shape to get it out by no later than noontime.
________________________________
<http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map>
[http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.gif]<http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/car
d/PHXR_9.map>[cid:image004.gif@01CC2B8A.70BCE2D0]<http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PH
XR_9.map?110,129><http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map>[cid:image005.gif@01CC2
B8A.70BCE2D0]<http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map?154,129><http://mm1.letterm
ark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map>[cid:image006.gif@01CC2B8A.70BCE2D0]<http://mm1.lettermark.
net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map?206,128><http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map>
NLRB-FOIA-00007124
NLRB-FOIA-00007125
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Cleeland, Nancy
Nancy,
Exemption 5
Thanks
Jennifer
--------------------------
Hi all
I'm working on this tonight, with the idea of getting my suggestions to you all first thing
Ok. I'll have something for review by the time you get to the office tomorrow.
--------------------------
________________________________
another lookthrough and put it in as final form as possible, with whatever changes you think
come in and we should be in good shape to get it out by no later than noontime.
________________________________
NLRB-FOIA-00007126
<http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map>
[http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.gif]<http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/car
d/PHXR_9.map>[cid:image004.gif@01CC2B8A.70BCE2D0]<http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PH
XR_9.map?110,129><http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map>[cid:image005.gif@01CC2
B8A.70BCE2D0]<http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map?154,129><http://mm1.letterm
ark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map>[cid:image006.gif@01CC2B8A.70BCE2D0]<http://mm1.lettermark.
net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map?206,128><http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map>
NLRB-FOIA-00007127
Microsoft Outlook
Cleeland, Nancy
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Exemption 5
(I don't think my Mac will handle the editing functions well so I'll have to get to it in the
morning.) ________________________________________
another lookthrough and put it in as final form as possible, with whatever changes you think
come in and we should be in good shape to get it out by no later than noontime.
________________________________
<http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map>
[http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.gif]<http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/car
d/PHXR_9.map>[cid:image004.gif@01CC2B8A.70BCE2D0]<http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PH
XR_9.map?110,129><http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map>[cid:image005.gif@01CC2
B8A.70BCE2D0]<http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map?154,129><http://mm1.letterm
ark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map>[cid:image006.gif@01CC2B8A.70BCE2D0]<http://mm1.lettermark.
net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map?206,128><http://mm1.lettermark.net/zuckerman/card/PHXR_9.map>
NLRB-FOIA-00007128
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
image006.gif
The first attachment is the latest draft version with edits (Leslies in green, Celestes in blue and mine in red). The second
Jen,
can you give it another lookthrough and put it in as final form as possible, with
whatever changes you think are appropriate, pending Nancys suggestion. I would like
to give it one last look when I come in and we should be in good shape to get it out by
NLRB-FOIA-00007129
NLRB-FOIA-00007130
NLRB-FOIA-00007131
NLRB-FOIA-00007132
NLRB-FOIA-00007133
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007134
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007135
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007136
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007137
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007138
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007139
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007140
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007141
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007142
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007143
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007144
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007145
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007146
Microsoft Outlook
Cleeland, Nancy
Garza, Jose
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Exemption 5
Thanks
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Lafe, once you have read it, let me know if you agree, and I can move it
there.
The first attachment is the latest draft version with edits (Leslies in green, Celestes in blue and mine in red). The second
NLRB-FOIA-00007147
. Jen,
can you give it another lookthrough and put it in as final form as possible, with
whatever changes you think are appropriate, pending Nancys suggestion. I would like
to give it one last look when I come in and we should be in good shape to get it out by
NLRB-FOIA-00007148
NLRB-FOIA-00007149
NLRB-FOIA-00007150
NLRB-FOIA-00007151
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007152
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007153
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007154
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007155
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007156
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007157
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Solomon, Lafe E.
OpeningIssafinal.doc
NLRB-FOIA-00007158
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007159
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007160
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007161
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007162
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007163
Microsoft Outlook
Abruzzo, Jennifer
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007164
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
NLRB-FOIA-00007165
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007166
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007167
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Thx.
--------------------------
Cc: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Just a heads up -- Rich may not attend our meeting today since he will be traveling to his resident office; however, his trial
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007168
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007169
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Garza, Jose
Cc: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Just a heads up -- Rich may not attend our meeting today since he will be traveling to his resident office; however, his trial
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
2)
3)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007170
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007171
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007172
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Exemption 5
Thank you for working on this.
Cc: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Just a heads up -- Rich may not attend our meeting today since he will be traveling to his resident office; however, his trial
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
4)
5)
NLRB-FOIA-00007173
6)
7)
8)
9)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007174
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Solomon, Lafe E.
Garza, Jose
Cc: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Just a heads up -- Rich may not attend our meeting today since he will be traveling to his resident office; however, his trial
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007175
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007176
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007177
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Abruzzo, Jennifer
FW :
Issa Letter Ross Question.doc; David Issa June 27, 2011 Letter.pdf; Letter to Darrell Issa
Subject:
Hi Jose,
I am sending you both the word and pdf versions of the July 11 response to David Issas June 27 letter. The pdf file has
the incoming letter from Issa behind the response the word version does not. I have the original and copy to be mailed to
NLRB-FOIA-00007178
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007179
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007180
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007181
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007182
NLRB-FOIA-00007183
NLRB-FOIA-00007184
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007185
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007186
R oe Statem ent: Subcom m ittee H earing on "C orporate C am paigns and the N L R B : T he Im ... Page 1 of 3
E D U C A T IO N &THE W O R K FO R CE
C O M M IT T E E
C o n ta ct P re ss O ffice (2 0 2 ) 2 2 6 -9 4 4 0
P re s s u re o n J o b C re a tio n "
W A SH IN G T O N ,D .C .I M ay 26,2011 -
e m p lo ye r
g re a te r a cce ss to th e p ro p e rty o f th e co n tra ctin g e m p lo ye r co n n e cte d to o rg a n izin g a ctivity T h e b o a rd h a s a lso re q u e ste d b rie fs th a t co u ld a llo w e ve n
In o n e ca se , th e b o a rd m o ve d to u p h o ld a n e le ctio n ta in te d b y in tim id a tio n o f w o rke rs b e ca u se th e in tim id a tio n o rig in a te d w ith "n o n p a rtie s" to th e
re p risa l" e xists? T h e w o rke r w h o re ce ive s a n a n o n ym o u s ca ll a t th e ir h o m e a n d h e a rs a vo ice p ro m isin g to "g e t e ve n " if th e w o rke r o p p o se s u n io n
re p re se n ta tio n ? O r a fe d e ra l b u re a u cra t?
o f th e ca se m a y sig n ifica n tly a lte r th e m a n n e r in w h ich e m p lo ye rs in ve st in o u r e co n o m y a n d o u r w o rkfo rce I re co g n ize th e ca se is in th e e a rly sta g e s o f
w h a t w ill b e co stly litig a tio n B u t I w o n d e r if a n yo n e se rio u sly d o u b ts th e tre m e n d o u s im p lica tio n s th is ca se p o se s to o u r w o rkfo rce , a n d co u ld p o ssib ly
A lth o u g h th is is lu st o n e o f m a n y ca se s p re se n te d to th e N L R B , w e m u st re m e m b e r th e b o a rd d o e s n o t o p e ra te in a va cu u m It is a n a rm o f th e fe d e ra l
g o ve rn m e n t, a n d its d e cisio n s g o ve rn virtu a lly e ve ry p riva te w o rkp la ce in th e n a tio n T h a t is tre m e n d o u s p o w e r th a t co m e s w ith a g re a t re sp o n sib ility to
T h e co m m itte e h a s p le d g e d to m a ke jo b cre a tio n a n d A m e rica n co m p e titive n e ss its le a d in g p rio ritie s W e h a ve a jo b to d o a n d th a t in clu d e s o ve rse e in g
th e va rio u s b o a rd s, a g e n cie s, a n d d e p a rtm e n ts w ith in o u r ju risd ictio n to e n su re th e y d o n o t u n d e rm in e th e stre n g th o f o u r w o rkfo rce T o d a y's h e a rin g is
a n im p o rta n t p a rt o f th a t e ffo rt
6/14/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00007187
Page 1 of1
null
til-
A TION W EEK
zt;i0
C lick to Print
By M ichaelM echam
line has been erected on a construction site next door to w here th.
com pany m akes and assem bles com posite fuselage sections for t1
jet.
com panies.
Boeing also plans to refurbish parts of its E verett,W ash.,w idebody aircraft factory to include a surge lin.
provide supplem entalassem bly capacity for the 787 program .W hen the South C arolina factory com es or
w illgive Boeing the capacity to operate three finalassem bly lines,if necessary.
Four of six 787 test aircraft are now flying,and the program is scheduled to achieve FA A certification an
Boeing elected to build its second assem bly line outside of the Seattle area because of repeated strikes by
m achinists,including one in 2008 that the com pany says cost it $4.3 billion.T he South C arolina plant,w
w orkers voted the m achinists union out last year,w illhelp ensure that it suffers "no disruptions" in
m anufacturing,Boeing says.
T he com pany originally established its presence in South C arolina indirectly five years ago,w hen V ough
A ircraftand A lenia A eronautica builtfactories adjacentto the city's airportin N orth C harleston to supply
But Boeing ended up buying both factories to relieve the suppliers of financialpressures they felt as the
Boeing uses a fleet of m odified 747 transports to haulw ing and fuselage sections to its finalassem bly lin
W hen its C harleston operation begins,som e fuselage sections w illsim ply be rolled next door to feed its
assem bly line,w hile others w illbe flow n to E verett to feed the originalline.
Tic
G M W -Ifin
L a s . it--
P IA 1
11111A
A /1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
NLRB-FOIA-00007188
B loom b erg
6 r
5'7
G O V E R N M E N T
T h u rsd a y Ju n o lb 2 0 1 1
&
W E L C O M E .
K e lle n
F ro m O b scu rity
Sie;>11311
, ff
fic r , lv s t, R
O , 1-1
M Y H O M E
A w n s
SEA R C H ES
H EPO ITTS
C U PB O A R D
w aA rs H E W
1- 1 0 ,
'2 5 M t," S t
acting general counsel of the N allonal L abor R elations B oard a year ago w as a snock after 39 years of relatry e
ever
S o lo m o n h as b eco m e a p u b lic en em a to b u sin ess g ro u p s an d th eir R ep u b lican allies esp en aily after h is A p ra 2 0
fo r w o n t sto p p ag es b y u n io n s at 1 1 5 S eattle-area p ro d u ctio n h u b B o ein g th e w o rld 's larg est aero sp ace co m p an y h as
d en ied su ch m o th es
T h e H o u se O v ersig h t an d G o v ern m en t R efo rm C o m m ittee h ead ed b y R ep u b h can R ep resen tab y e D arrell lssa o f
C alifo rn ia is H o ld in g to m o rro w s sessio n in N o rth C th an esto n site sto re p lan t T h e h earin g s rite in d icates th e
reception S olom on m ay receive -U nkoncallon T hrough R egulation T he N L R B s H olding P attern on F ree E nterprise '
L A FE SO L O M O N
B10130X
B oard
B o n s
S ep t 4 1 9 4 9 in H elen a
Ancansas
F am ily
E ducatfork
B A
E conom ics, B row n
U niversity, 1970
,J S T u la n e 'in h e re d ,
is7e
P rev io u s P o sth o rn
v. 1972 B ecom es N L R B
in M e N L R B O ffice of
sch o o l
k 1 9 8 1 Jo in s b o ard staff,
b o ard m em b ers
'T h e co m m ittee h as m ad e it clear th at q is th eir in ten tro n to su b p o en a flea Id a n o t v o lu n tan h ap p ear 'S o lo m o n
Q u estio n in g 'an A w e: acin g In its q u asi ju ctrn al cap acity ab o u t Its S essio n s in a p en d in g case '
C htics S ac S olom on ts patio( a pin-onion tat by the N L R B w hich investigates unfair-labor charges toy unions against
S o lo m o n m ai b e The keito im posing big labors entire agenda,'the N atio nal R igh t to W ork C om m ittee a group
based in S pur glleal 0101roa that opposes req.,w ing w orkers to Join unions said in a F ebruary statem ent
'C am e to lie'
S olom on's office atthe N L R B is decorated w ith w hile orchids he grow s in his off hours T here solos a yellow lava
w orked at the agency H e left the N L R B just long enough to get his law degree at T ulane tinlversIty In N ew O rleans
C eara ch airm an ap p -to ted lav P resid en t G eo rg e k 4 B ath , said lean in tem ew lie th in k s o u tsid e th e b o o '
-- -- -
l e
- - - S c h a u m b e r a la b o r c o n su lta n t fo r c lie n ts
C M S 8 , a 'T -E . u p ..il
d isag rees w it S o lo m o n s ad io n s as
recently
S o lo m o n h as said n e teed to reach a settlem en t w ith B o ein g fo r sa m o n th s P eto re issu in g th e co m p lain t ag ain st th e
com pany
F ie w an ts B o ein g to ad o tree 7 97$ a 010051, the num ber planned in S outh C arobna to its output in W asningion state
d iscu ssed d o in g
T h e N L R B co m p lain t m aq u o ted o r rrn sth aram erro eS statem en ts b y B o ein g m acu la., acco rd in g tu e M ay letter b y
co m p an y law y er J M ich ael L u ttig N o B o ein g w o rk ers In W ash in g to n state lo st ro b s C r h ad tea w ag es red u ces,
'T h e co m p lain t h as tam ed k u n d ay m en tal issu es an d T h e actio n itself is m ath u n p reced en ted N eale S aid in an
In tern e.
B u sin ess g ro u p s h av e en tro zed o th er step s tak en n o S o lo m o n H e th reaten ed in Jan u ar, to su e fo u r states o k er
co n stitu tio n al am en d m en ts th at g u aran tee w o rk ers a secret p allo r in u n io n elecb o n s an d m ien ,federal rules allow ing
em p lo y ers to accect In o n sig n -u p card s filled o u t S r a m ajo n te o f w o rk ers S o lo m o n su ffice filed a co m p lain t ag ain st
llrizona on M ak
H e also b ack ed a C ase ag ain st A m en can M ed ical R esp o n se a C o n n ecticu t am b u lan ce co m p an y , fo r flin g , w o rt er
w ho disparage:. her D oss or F acebook T he case led tc a settlem ent in F ebruary in *to C O the com pany agreed to
,2 3 0 1 B eco m es d n ecto r o f
O ffice S i R epresentation
A ppeals
x Ju n e 2 0 1 0 B eco m es
W hy H e M atters.
co m p an ies th at
R eb u t:n u n s crito ze as
H ow H e Gat H ere:
In Ju n e 2 0 1 0 P resid en t
S m ack O b am a n o m in ated
S o lo m o n lo b e g en eral
co u n sel an d m ad e h im
ad m g g en eral co u n sel
p en d in g S en ate actio n
Q uote A bout
+ le h as a d eep k n o w led g e
at S eitarth S haw L L I, in
b e ex p ed ed N o one likes to
h ak en t d o n e '
Be M rs O w n W ords
O n controversy oyer N L R B
co m p lain ts h e h as filed
II really g o es p an an d
V e g o es o n '
nom ination as N L R B
g en era/ co u n sel
-A s a 30-year em plom e,
w hether I m confirm ed or
O ct a rthesnt affect
fath er s 9 5 h e s still
an o th er career It b eso t
b e te ! m e '
R ep resen tatio n ru m ea s
lu co n tad th e rep o lm s o n th is sto ry S tep t an te firm o u r tn W ash in g to n at scar th t -crt T o rtro s g 'et H cla
T o contact the editor iespons ble 'or this story L arry L teben soil
NLRB-FOIA-00007189
A ssign to:
C ategory:
10(J)Potential:
D ia rtiiN t4 'To
A
s
N o :
(3 )
B ackpay Insert:
8(a)(1)
R D S
H U TD O W N O R R E LO C A TE
O NTR A C T U NIT W O R K
S U S P E NS IO N
W A G E S A LTE R E D
C O E R C IV E S TA TE M E N TS , IN C LU D IN G TH R E A TS
E NIA L O F A C C E S S (L E C H M E R E )
D IS C H A R G E O F S U P E R V IS O R (p A g g g a-R o s
D IS P A R A G E M E NT O F U NIO N/E M P LO Y E E
H A R A sstraw r
8(a)(4)
IN TE R R O G A TIO N
B E NE FITS A LTE R E D
D IS C H A R G E
D IS C H A R G E ,C O NS TR U C TIV E
D IS C IP LINE
L A w surrs
O TH E R A LLE G A TIO N S
P O LLIN G E M P LO Y E E S
P R O M IS E O F B E N E FITS
R U L E S : N O -S O L IC IT A T IO N /N O -D IS T R IB U T IO N R U L E S
R U LE S :O TH E R E M P LO Y E R R U LE S
S T A T E M E N T S O F F U T IU T Y
S U R V E ILLA N C E
V IO LE N C E
L A w surr
LA Y O FF
L ociou r
O N E R O U S A S S IG N M E N T S M O N D iT IO N S
O TH E R A LLE G A TIO N S
P R O M O T IO N S W IT H H E L D
R E F U S A L T O C O N S ID E R /H IR E A P P L IC A N T (N O T S A L T IN G )
R E F U S A L T O C O N S ID E R /H IR E A P P L IC A N T (S A L T IN G )
R E FU S A L TO R E IN S TA T E E M P LO Y E E /S TR IK E R (E .G ., L A ID L 4W )
R EW A R D S
S H U TD O W N O R R E LO C A TE
S U B C O N T R A C T U N IT W O R K
S U S P E N S IO N
U N IO N S E C U R IT Y R E L A T E D A C T IO N S
W A G E S A LTE R E D
S (a ) D IS C R IM IN A T IO N
C O NC E R TE D : B E NE FITS A LTE R E D
C O NC E R TE D : D IS C H A R G E
C O NC E R TE D : D IS C IP LINE
C O NC E R TE D : LA Y O FF
C O NC E R TE D : LO C K O U T
C O NC E R TE D : O NE R O U S A S S IG NM E NT/C O ND M O NS
C O NC E R TE D : O TH E R A LLE G A TIO NS
C O NC E R TE D : P R O M O TIO NS W ITH H E LD
C O NC E R TE D : R E FU S A L TO C O NS ID E R /H IR E
C O NC E R TE D : R E FU S A L TO R E INS TA TE
C O NC E R TE D : R E W A R D S
C O NC E R TE D : S H U TD O W N O R R E LO C A TE
C O NC E R TE D : S U S P E NS IO N
C O NC E R TE D : U NIO N S E C U R ITY R E LA TE D
C O NC E R TE D : W A G E S A LTE R E D
A LTE R E G O O R D IS G U IS E D C O NTINU A NC E
FA ILU R E TO S IG N A G R E E M E NT.
IM P LE M E NT D R U G TE S TING
IM P L E M E N T A T IO N (Q Q L C M 122=
O TH E R A LLE G A TIO NS
R E FU S A L TO B A R G A IN (INITIA L C O NTR A C T)
R E FU S A L TO H IR E M A JO R ITY
R E FU S A L TO R E C O G NIZE (G IS S E L )
S U B C O NTR A C T U NIT W O R K
TE S T O F C E R TIFIC A TIO N
W ITH D R A W A L O F R E C O G NITIO N
8(a)(2):
A S S IS TA N C E
C R E A T IO N O F IN -H O U S E O R G A N IZ A T IO N (E L E C IR O M A T IO N )
D O M IN A TIO N
IN TE R FE R E N C E
O TH E R A LLE G A TIO N S
U N LA W FU L R E C O G N ITIO N
8(1)(3):
B E N E FITS A LTE R E D
D IS C H A R G E
D IS C H A R G E , C O N S T R U C T IV E
D IS C IP LIN E
IN H E R E N T L Y D E S T R U C T IV E C O N D U C T
IN V E S TIG A TO R Y M E E TIN G S (W E IN G A R T E N )
LA W S U IT
LA Y O FF
LO C K O U T
O N E R O U S A S S IG N M E N T S /C O N D IT IO N S
O TH E R A LLE G A TIO N S
P R O M O T IO N S W IT H H E L D
R E F U S A L T O C O N S ID E R /H IR E A P P U C A N T (N O T S A L T IN G )
R E F U S A L T O C O N S ID E R /H IR E A P P L IC A N T (S A L T IN G )
R E F U S A L T O R E IN S T A T E E M P L O Y E E /S T R IK E R (E .G . 1"4/D LA W )
Yes:
. . .
1/
1JV C -
vt4.4vA 04-
IO C *
4
I
1- C o u t.1
p O n :t
do c
IL : 6 /2 6 /2 0 0 8
NLRB-FOIA-00007190
Fro m :
To:
S u b je c t:
D a te :
Nerve)",R achel
D ear M r. K i!berg:
co n ta ct m e if yo u h a ve a n y q u e stio n s.
S incerely,
N a tio n a l L a b o r R e la tio n s B o a rd , S u b re g io n 3 6 , R e g io n 1 9
6 0 1 S o u th w e st S e co n d A ve n u e - S u ite 1 9 1 0
P o rtla n d , O R 9 7 2 0 4 -3 1 7 0
(5 0 3 ) 3 2 6 -5 3 8 7 I F a x
rachel.harveyanlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007191
Page 1 of 2
by W E N D Y K A U F M A N
Ju n e 14, 2011
te xt size A
A A
E nlarge
B ruce S m ith/A P
A s B oeing and its political and corporate allies see it, the N LR B has overstepped its authority. "O ur
decision to build in C harleston is essentially being second-guessed by the N LR B ," says B oeing
spokesm an Tim N eale. "It really does get dow n to fundam ental rights about w hether a com pany that
has a unionized w orkforce can expand to a right-to-w ork state or not. That's the issue here."
In right-to-w ork states such as S outh C arolina,em ployees are not required to join unions,even if
w orkers at that com pany have approved one, and unions in those states are usually very w eak.
Tom W roblew ski, president of the S eattle-area m achinists union, says this case isn't about w here
B oeing builds its factories."This is allabout breaking the law ," he says.
S ince the 1930s, w orkers have had the right under federal law to join unions, engage in collective
bargaining and go on strike.The law says em ployers cannot discrim inate against union w orkers, and
The N LR B says B oeing did those things w hen it chose S outh C arolina over W ashington state for its
In 2005 and again in 2008, B oeing m achinists w ent on strike. S enior com pany executives like Jim
A lbaugh, w ho heads B oeing C om m ercialA irplanes,cited those strikes and w hat they called "the need
for production stability" as a m ajor factor in deciding to locate its new factory in a nonunion stronghold.
H ere's w hat A lbaugh told the S eattle T im es about that decision: "B ut again,the overriding factor w as
not the business clim ate, and it w as not the w ages w e're paying people today. It w as that w e can't
Page 2 of 2
To the N LR B 's top law yer,Late S olom on,that com m ent sounded like B oeing w as retaliating against its
w orkers for striking.S olom on tried to get B oeing and its m achinists union to resolve their dispute,but
w hen the effort failed,S olom on says,"Ifelt Ihad no choice but to issue the com plaint.Itook an oath of
office to uphold the N ationalLabor R elations A ct,and that's w hat I'm doing to the best of m y ability."
B eyond the com plaint itself,the rem edy being proposed has enraged B oeing and its friends.A lthough
the the new plant the size of 10 footballfields has already opened and hundreds of w orkers have
been hired,the N LR B w ants B oeing to m ove those production jobs back to unionized w orkers in
W ashington state.
Jam es G regory,a labor scholar at the U niversity of W ashington,says he w as surprised the N LR B w ent
after B oeing.
"It is a brand new expression of the N LR B 's w illingness to once again really try to enforce the law ,and
The agency's new stance has prom pted B oeing and its supporters to challenge the N LR B 's authority
and its decision-m aking process.They've m ade unprecedented requests for docum ents.and som e
A llof this m akes D avid C am pbell,a law yer for the m achinists union,bristle.
"B oeing has engaged in w hat Iview as a really outrageous cam paign to use politicalpow er and bullying
tactics to try to stop a law enforcem ent case because it know s it's going to lose this case on the w ell-
B oeing has called the N LR B charges frivolous and says the law is on its side.
In the hearing,N LR B law yers act as prosecutors,w ith an adm inistrative law judge from the agency
presiding.M ost observers think B oeing w illlose the case w ithin the N LR B .B ut B oeing has vow ed to
appeal,and the com pany is likely to fare m uch better in the federalcourts.
R elated N P R Stories
H O M E P A G E 1 T O D A Y S P A P E R I V ID E O , M O S T P O P U L A R T IM E S T O P IC S ,
S N Y / R F C IO N
A U T O S
OrangeHomeLoons
Search A ll N Y T im es corn
x d o tioric aw e
N N O R LD
P age 1 of 3
B u sin ess D ay
B U S IN E S S T E C IIN O L O C Y S C IE N C E R E M
T R S P O R T S O P IN IO N A R T S S T Y L E T R % N E I I JO B S R E A L E S T A T E
g .a ,c h G lo b a l D e a lB o o k M a rk e ts E c o n o m y E n e rg y , M e d ia P e rso n a l T e c h S m a ll B u sin e ss Y o u r M o n e y
W h at's P op u lar N ow
g d G 0 P S en ato r
B acks C ia.
M o n tag e in N ew
Y ork
L o g is to se c W m : jo u t (n e rd s
a re sh .rin g 0 1 1 1 yo n e s co r
P n vd cy P o licy 1 W h a t s T h is l>
In
P eo p le A rg u e Ju st
to lA in S ch o lars
A ssert
Im a o s
A B o o in g a sse m b v tr E ve ,e tt W a sh
E s S TE V E N G R E E N HO U S E
B arring a last-m inute settlem ent, law yers for the N ational L abor
in W ashington State.
A d d to P o rtfo lio
B o ein g C o m p an y
G o to your P ortfolio
S tJp h ,
N ik k i R H a e y , le ft, Jo re rrc r o S o u th
Ira w a n ts m o re p ro d .kn o n is h e r
s a te
R EC O M M EN D
T W IT T E R
S IG N IN T O E -
M A IL
P R IN T
S IN G LE P A G E
International A ssociation of
R E P R IN T S
SHAR E
B oeing has acknow ledged that the fear of labor disruptions factored into its thinking, but it
said the m ain reason for m oving the line w as South C arolina's low er production costs.
Starting pay at the South C arolina plant is $14 an hour, w hile starting pay in W ashington is
6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00007194
T he case has stirred a political firestorm R epublicans have joined business leaders in
accusing the labor board of trying to sabotage right-to-w ork states as w ell as the
fundam ental right of corporate m anagers to decide how and w here to run their businesses.
Page 2 of 3
P o litics E -M ail
006
; Sinn U p
South C arolina's governor,N ikki R .H aley,w ants to m ake the dispute an issue in the
presidential cam paign,w hile C ongressional R epublicans have threatened to cut the labor
board's financing and have urged President O bam a to w ithdraw the nom ination of L afe
Solom on,the board's acting general counsel,w ho brought the B oeing case
M O ST E -M A IL E D
"It is absurd, in this country that represents free enterprise, that one unaccountable,
Senator Jim D eM int,R epublican of South C arolina."T his is som ething you w ould expect
A lthough the president appoints the board's top officials,the agency operates
organized labor by having the board bring the case.M r.Solom on and O bam a
adm inistration officials say the W hite H ouse has had nothing to do w ith the dispute.
T he W hite H ouse has been largely silent about the case,although num erous C ongressional
D em ocrats have assailed R epublicans for attacking an agency that they say is m erely
R E C O M M E N D E D FO R Y O U
h ealth C are
3
T H E FE M A L E FA C T O R
Street P ro tect
b ased o n w h at y o u y e read
fl
[ L o p In [ R a g ist6 r N ew
W r
illie?
I O eulSna.
M r Solom on brought the case after the m achinists'union filed a com plaint, arguing that
the South C arolina plan w as illegally taking jobs from W ashington State.A s a rem edy,he
w ants B oeing to m ove the 1,000-em ployee production line,w hich w ill initially build three
M r. Solom on said in an interview that he spent three m onths in settlem ent talks w ith both
sides before the board filed the case,and that contacts continue interm ittently. "N othing
In a speech last w eek at a conference at the N ew Y ork U niversity School of L aw ,he added:
"I felt and still feel these parties have a longstanding relationship w ith each other.T hey
have a deep past together and have a deep future together,and It w ould be advantageous to
A L SO IN T R A V E L "
n y th n es.co m
TR AVEL
'rO V EriTiSEM EN TS
M any legal specialists say the N .L .R B .and the m achinists'union have a good chance of
w inning before the adm inistrative law judge in Seattle and in the next stage of the legal
C olum bia.T he case before the law judge is expected to last w eeks as the board and B oeing
spar over w hich docum ents to turn over to the other side.
B oeing and som e legal specialists say the com pany is likely to w in in the federal circuit
n y tio a c m .c o rn /
tim e a b o rid e d
L en o w n 7 2 H O U R S A L E
- Save up to 15% on
T h n ik P ad lap to p s
SH O P N O W ,
N E X T PA G E
E eto.*e a udge
A ds by G ooqle
D E L abor L aw P osters
SIG N IN
IN
T O E -
M A IL
PR IN T
www
SIN G L E PA G E
R E PR IN T S
ttia
6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00007195
Page 3 of 3
M o re H ead lin es F ro m A ro u n d th e W eb
Sponsored U nks
B oeing C ontpan,
LIF E S C A IP T C O S I
PC W ORLD
E P O LLO V E R C O M
K IP LIN G E R
A ds by G oogle
vyhats this
N o n H o d g kin s L ym p h o m a
To C om pensation? W e C an H elp ,
Ltd
DINING
&
THEATER
BUSINESS -
W INE -
r jt ib
ia
OPINION
H orne W
o rld li S
P'icac5
OPINION
H arbingers ot Spring
O p-E d:T he
H um anist in
the Foxhole
ili
`toorcom
N Y /R EG IO N -
YburAd CM ),C s
errs of Se rce
Jy
A dvertise
6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00007196
Page 1 of 4
H o t T o p ic s
' E co n o m ic O u tlo o k
'
H e a lth C a re
R e c e n t T o p ic s
C u s to m iz e
A ll R e c e n t T o p ic s >
N L R B N ew F ilin g
F in d er
D isp la y L a te st F ilin g s
; K ey F ea tu res
: A n a ly s is & P e rs p e c tiv e
S p e cia l R e p o rts
: A ls o in th e C o u rts
. N L R B S u m m a rie s
W a g e T re n d In d ic a to r
C a le n d a r o f E ve n ts
L a w F irm s
G ib so n D u n n
'
W o m b le C a rlyle
A ll L a w F irm s >
A g e n c ie s
C u s to m iz e
A ll A g e n c ie s >
S ta te s
C u s to m iz e
A ll S ta te s >
C o u rts /T rib u n a ls
C u s to m iz e
F e d e ra l S ta tu te s
A ll F e d e ra l S ta tu te s >
In d u s trie s
A ll In d u s trie s >
U n io n s
A g a in st IA M
U n fa ir L a b o r P ra c tic e s
H e a rin g O p e n s in S e a ttle o n U L P C o m p la in t
A c c u s in g B o e in g o f R e ta lia tin g A g a in s t IA M
Ju n e 2 1 a n d B o e in g to file a re p ly b rie f b y Ju n e 2 4 . F o rm a l o p e n in g
P ro c e e d in g s L ik e ly to S tre tc h T h ro u g h S u m m e r
m e m b e rs o f th e n e w s m e d ia a n d th e ir o w n w o rkfo rce .
B o e in g vio la te d fe d e ra l la b o r la w . O n Ju n e 9 , th e a tto rn e ys g e n e ra l
co m p la in t b e su sta in e d in w h o le o r in p a rt."
T h e A U sa id re p e a te d ly th a t h e p la n s to ru le o n a n issu e ra ise d b y
o ld e n b a n c co u rtro o m n o rm a lly u se d b y th e U .S . C o u rt o f A p p e a ls
b e ca u se e m p lo ye e s h a d stru ck a n d R e sp o n d e n t th re a te n e d o r im p li
Page 2 of 4
B o e in g M o v e s to D is m is s C o m p la in t
region.
co u ld e n su re th a t w e w e re co m p e titive o ve r th e lo n g h E
a g re e m e n t w h e re w e fe lt th a t w e co u ld e n su re p ro d u cti
ra te o f e sca la tio n o f w a g e s. A n d w e co u ld ju st n o t g e t t
w in fo r b o th o u rse lve s a n d th e u n io n . S o w e m a d e th e i
u p w ith w a ys o f b e in g co m p e titive h e re a n d w e ca n co n
w e 're n o t g o in g to h a ve la b o r strike s. A n d if w e ca n g e t
b e d o in g w o rk h e re fo r a lo n g , lo n g tim e ."
in th e ca se a g a in st B o e in g a n d th e ir d e te rm in a tio n to p u rsu e th e cz
W a sh in g to n w o rke rs.
C o n n ie K e llih e r, a sp o ke sw o m a n fo r D istrict L o d g e 7 5 1 , sa id sh e h a
u n p re ce d e n te d .
Page 3 of 4
A ske d w h a t sh e w o u ld te ll S o u th C a ro lin a e m p lo ye e s w h o m ig h t lo s
sh ifte d to W a sh in g to n , K e llih e r sa id th e re w o u ld b e n o re a so n th o s(
sa id th a t th e co m p a n y sh o u ld b rin g su ch w o rk b a ck a n d a ssig n it tc
B o e in g A tta c k s N L R B
Ju n e 1 0 th a t if B o e in g a tte m p ts to w in th e ca se b y ch a lle n g in g it o r
ju d g m e n t, th e co m p la in t sta n d s u p to th e le g a l te st a n d th e ir m o tic
b ig d e a l," h e sa id .
o f p a p e r," h e a d d e d .
T h e ca se co m m e n ce s a g a in st a h ig h ly p o litica lly ch a rg e d a tm o sp h e
case.
u n iq u e to th is ca se . W e h o p e a ll in te re ste d p a rtie s re sp e ct th e le g a l
ca se in th e m e d ia a n d p u b lic a re n a ."
R e p u b lic a n S e n a to rs C a ll fo r E n d to C a s e
th e co m p la in t a g a in st B o e in g a n d ca lle d o n P re sid e n t O b a m a to a d c
th a t th e y h a ve fa ith in B o e in g a s a co m p a n y a n d th e se a re g o o d p c
co m p a n y."
.- In is i- c
n f k n i- I, ii n in n
n n e l n n n o
o n
o n n
,A In t - 1 ,....c .
h e It h a ,I-o m r n e s r l iln .4 - o n
Page 4 of 4
I 1 9 1 1 1 ..Z
V I L A J L I I U I IIV I I 0 1
Ill 1 M
/1 1 1 .1 1 1 M
/1 i V V V I I\ G
I a , !J U L
I IC
L A
1 0 1
9 G
L I IC IL
III
u n a cco u n ta b le b o a rd is d o in g th e b id d in g o f u n io n b o sse s a n d n o t
h ttp ://se a ttle tim e s.n w so u rce .co m /h tm l/n a tio n w o rld /2 0 1 1 2 3 7 5 ,
H o m e I A b o u t I H e lp
C o n ta ct U s o r ca ll 1 -8 0 0 -3 7 2
IS S N 1 5 2 2 -5 9 6 8
3/18/11
although he had done w hat I asked (gotten B oeing to agree that no unit ees w ould be laid
off betw een now and the end of the contract expiration in Sept,2012),I w as still
considering issuing com plaint.I told him that the M achinists had proposed that the
parties m eet for a 2-w eek period w ith a m ediator and that I thought that if B oeing
accepted that offer,the parties m ight w ell reach a settlem ent.H e told m e that rather than
accept that offer,he thought that he w ould go to the H ill to prevent m e from litigating the
case.I told him that he w ould have to get such a rider through the Senate.I said that I had
the C E O on tape saying that the m ove to SC w as not because of econom ics but because
the M achinists strike.I said I had a triable case and that I w ould do w hatever I thought
w as right under the N L R A .B ut I reiterated that I thought the parties should m eet and try
3/28/11
L uttig called and I asked B arry K earney to be on the call w ith m e.L uttig said that B oeing
w ould not agree to a conversation w ith the M achinists w ith a m ediator,but that he w as
4/8/11
talked to him on m y cell phone.H e told m e that the "retaliatory charge" of the M achinists
against B oeing w ould have huge econom ic and political consequences.H e said that the
charge w ould scare B oeing's custom ers and could affect orders.H e said that the political
fallout w ould be huge and that he w as m ore reasonable than his Senate counterpart (Sen.
D e M int).
I explained to him that I had been trying to settle this case for the last 6 m onths,and I
asked for his help in getting B oeing to agree to the M achinists'request for a 2-w eek
m ediated conversation.I told him that this case had every potential to settle as B oeing's
business w as boom ing and that the parties had both indicated to m e that their futures
w ere tied to a successful relationship in the future,but that I had been unsuccessful in
getting the parties to talk to each other,rather than to m e.I also told him that I w ould not
be seeking the dism antling of the S.0 plant and that I had m ade it clear to the M achinists
H e said that he w as pessim istic that the M achinists and B oeing could w ork things out,but
that he never thought it w as a bad idea to talk.I thanked him for being w illing to help.
4/11/11
I left a m essage for D ebbie D urkin,the aide to Senator G raham w ho place the call on Fri.
I received a call back from W alt K uhn at noon.I told him that I w as follow ing up on m y
NLRB-FOIA-00007201
conversation w ith the Senator on Friand that I w anted to know if he had been successful
in contacting B oeing.H e said that the Senator w ould call m e back later this w eek.I told
W alt thatI w as ready to begin the com plaint process and that I could not hold it up
indefinitely.I said thatI w anted to talk to the Senator today if possible,and he said that
4/11/11
Senator G raham called m e at 3 pm .H e said thathe had talked to B oeing,and they had no
interest in m ediating the com plaint,w hich w as totally w ithout m erit.H e said that he
agreed w ith B oeing and understood their position.H e said that if a com plaint w as filed,it
w ill be "nasty," "very,very nasty." H e said that this w as a case of how not to grow the
econom y.H e said that w e had to do w hat w e had to do,and he had to do w hat he had to
do.It w as up to us.H e said that if com plaint issued,he w as going "full guns a-blazing."
NLRB-FOIA-00007202
B oeing union case tests vulnerable D em ocrats - Scott W ong and L aura H autala - PO L IT I... Page 1 of 4
P O L IT IC O I C o n g re ss I B o e in g u n io n ca se te sts vu ln e ra b le D e m o cra ts
D em o crats
B en N elson, M ary Landrieu and B illN elson are steering clear of the B oeing issue. I A P
Photos
p o w e rfu l e n d o rse m e n t fo r p re sid e n tia l a sp ira n ts, e sp e cia lly g ive n -th e fa ct
states.
L isten
6/16/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00007203
B oeing union case tests vulnerable D em ocrats - Scott W ong and L aura H autala - PO L IT I... Page 2 of 4
"W e live in the U nited S tates of A m erica, and people shouldn't be forced to
T im P aw lenty. "A nd the governm ent has no business telling people w hat
"T he right-to-w ork states are creating a lot m ore jobs today than the heavily
C hairm an Lam ar A lexander (R -T enn.) that w ould bar the labor board from
"T his unelected, unaccountable board is doing the bidding of union bosses
and not protecting w orkers, either union or nonunion," D eM int told reporters.
"A nd w e do callon the president to speak out. It's tim e that A m erica hears
from you. A re you really for jobs in this country or jobs in another country?"
nom inees to the N LR B : A cting G eneralC ounsel Lafe S olom on and board
m em ber C raig B ecker, a form er union law yer w hom O bam a granted a
G raham on T uesday repeated his threat to block O bam a's pick for
com m erce secretary, businessm an and form er B oeing board m em ber John
6/16/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00007204
Boeing union case tests vulnerable D em ocrats - Scott W ong and L aura H autala - PO L IT I...Page 3 of 4
B ryson, untilthe president speaks out against the B oeing suit, w hich
five board m em bers. F or the m ost part, the W hite H ouse has been silent on
R ead m o re ab o u t:
D em ocrats,
U n ion s,
B oein g,
B u sin ess,
A viation ,
B en N elson ,
B ill N elson ,
2012 E lection s,
2012,
2012
r-
3 ;
- -
S cott W ong
Laura H autala
M ore on P O L ITIC O
6/16/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00007205
. B oeing union case tests vulnerable D em ocrats - S cott W ong and L aura H autala - P O L IT I... P age 4 of 4
T ip S h eets
N ew s
PO LIT IC O
H om e
2012 LIV E
44
A rena
C ongress
O pinion
V ideo
PO LIT IC O
Pro
B en S m ith
D avid
C atanese
C LIC K
O n
C ongress
O n M edia
Josh
G erstein
P olicy
M ore Info
M oney
H ealth C are
E nergy
D efense
T echnology
A bout U s
A dvertising
A rticle A rchive
B reaking
N ew s A lerts
C om m unity
E m ploym ent
FA Q
Log
in/R egister
Playbook
M orning
S core
M orning
M oney
Pulse
H uddle
M orning
E nergy
M orning
D efense
M orning T ech
Influence
M obile
PO LIT IC O
PO LIT IC O
Jobs
R S S / W idgets
S ite M ap
S tore
S ubscription
6/16/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00007206
W ashington,D C 20006
June 16,2011
W ashington,D C 20570-0001
D uring a tim e w hen states are recovering from a recession,the best announcem ent a governor
can m ake is one about new investm ent and jobs.W hen a com pany chooses to com e to a state,it
does so because the state has a low cost of doing business,a trained w orkforce,and a favorable
regulatory clim ate.If the com pany chooses to locate in a right-to-w ork state,that is an added
bonus.
In O ctober 2009,South C arolina w elcom ed B oeing to N orth C harleston w here the com pany's
second line of 787 D ream liners w ould be produced and assem bled in a new state-of-the-art
facility.B y investing billions of dollars in the state and creating thousands of quality jobs,
B oeing w ith just one announcem ent changed the face of South C arolina forever.
H ow ever,in A pril,you and the N ational L abor R elations B oard (N L R B ) issued a C om plaint and
N otice of H earing for a charge claim ing that B oeing's decision to build a new and additional line
the facts are clear.A lthough South C arolina is a right-to-w ork state and W ashington is not,
B oeing continues to invest m oney and create jobs in both states w ith seem ingly little regard to
their differing labor policies. B oeing is not transferring w ork from a union to a non-union state;
W hile B oeing is com m itted to doing business w ith union and non-union states,the N L R B has
overstepped its m andate to protect the rights of laborers and has instead opted to protect only the
interests of organized labor.T his underm ines the principles of free m arket capitalism upon
w hich this nation is built.It is clear that if the N L R B can charge B oeing and punish South
W hen w e,as governors,are fighting to im prove the econom ic interests of our states,the federal
governm ent should not stand in our w ay.W hile governors are trying to break the ties that bind
NLRB-FOIA-00007207
free enterprises from doing business,the federalgovernm entshould nottellB oeing w here itcan
build airplanes.
B y issuing com plaints againstbusinesses for exercising their basic rights,as the N L R B has done,
a clear m essage is sentto allbusinesses thatthey are notw elcom e,thattheir jobs are notfitfor
our citizens,and thatthe benefits of their success should notbe shared w ith our com m unities.
A ccordingly,w e ask thatyou dism iss your case againstB oeing:C ase 19-C A -32431.
Sincerely,
Afo.ra
South C arolina
Indiana
Iow a
A labam a
Lime)
Florida
G eorgia
g d * tfS ;x .,
M aine
M ississippi
a44_
O klahom a
Idaho
NLRB-FOIA-00007208
./-
South D akota
T ennessee
T exas
iy
aeA titt.4.
U tah
_ ,
1'
e_
V irginia
W yom ing
NLRB-FOIA-00007209
J. M ichael L uttig
G e n e ra l C o u n se l
T h e B o e in g C o m p a n y
C h ica g o , IL 6 0 6 0 6 -1 5 9 6
M ay 3.2011
W ashington, D .C . 20570-0001
I w rite regarding statem ents in your com plaint and elsew here including
decision to place its new 787 final assem bly line in South C arolina. A num ber of
these statem ents, w hich are critical to your case against B oeing,fundam entally
m ischaracterizations, for the public record and also for purposes of the com plaint you
have filed. T hrough these m isquotations and m ischaracterizations, you have done a
grave disservice to T he B oeing C om pany, its executives and shareholders, and to the
160,000 B oeing em ployees w orldw ide. A nd, of course, you have filed a com plaint
based upon these m isstatem ents that cannot be credibly m aintained under law .
A s an initial m atter, repeated statem ents in the com plaint allege that B oeing
"rem oved w ork" from Puget Sound (16), "decided to tra n sfe r its second 787
D ream liner production line" to South C arolina (17(a)),and "decided to tra n sfe r a
sourcing supply program " to South C arolina (18(a)). Y our A pril 20 press release
m akes the sam e assertion: "T he N L R B launched an investigation of the tra n sfe r of
second line w ork in response to charges filed by the M achinists union and found
reasonable cause to believe that B oeing had violated tw o sections of the N ational
from Puget Sound. T he second line for the 787 is a new final assem bly line. A s it
did not previously exist in Puget Sound or elsew here, the second assem bly line could
not have been "rem oved" from , "transferred" or otherw ise "m oved" to South
C arolina. Sim ply put, the w ork that is and w ill be done at our C harleston, South
C arolina final assem bly facility is new w ork, required and added in response to the
historic custom er dem and for the 787. N o m em ber of the International A ssociation of
M achinists'union (1A M ) in Puget Sound has lost his or her job, or otherw ise suffered
NLRB-FOIA-00007210
any adverse em ploym ent action,as a result of the placem ent of this new w ork in the
Y our ow n R egional D irector,w hose office you have tasked w ith prosecuting
this case,understands that,and has accurately and publicly described the m atter
differently than you.A s the Seattle T im es reported last year,"R ichard A hearn,the
N L R B regional director investigating the com plaint,said it w ould have been an easier
case for the union to argue if B oeing had m oved existing w ork from E verett,rather
than placing new w ork in C harleston." D om inic G ates, M achinists F ile U nfair Labor
ER
are already,via public statem ents,transform ing the theory of the com plaint to say
that,because B oeing com m itted to the State of W ashington that it w ould build all of
spokesw om an,N ancy C leeland,apparently told a new s organization that "the charge
that B oeing is transferring w ork aw ay from union em ployees stem s from the
com pany's original com m itm ent 'to the State of W ashington that it w ould build the
T he prem ise underlying that assertion that B oeing com m itted to the State of
W ashington to build all of the C om pany's 787s in W ashington is false.B oeing did
not com m it to the State of W ashington that it w ould build all of its 787s in that state.
B oeing honored and fully all of its contractual com m itm ents to the State of
W ashington long before the decision to locate the C om pany's new production facility
in South C arolina.T he notion that B oeing had som ehow com m itted to W ashington
State to build all 787s in that state is neither m entioned nor even suggested either in
the IA M 's charge or in your recently filed com plaint,and you never asserted that
B oeing had m ade such contractual com m itm ents to the State of W ashington in the
several discussions w e have had w ith you in the m onths preceding your filing of the
com plaint.H ad you done so,w e w ould have explained to you w hy such an
understanding w as plainly incorrect.I call upon you to quickly and fully correct the
record on this point.In addition to being w holly uninform ed,it creates the
im pression that you and your office are now in search of a theory that w ill support a
predeterm ined outcom e,even a theory that has nothing to do w ith the N ational L abor
R elations A ct.
Your S tatem ent That B oeing S ought To "P unish" U nion E m ployees
suggesting that B oeing broke com m itm ents to the State of W ashington,is had
enough.Far m ore egregious,how ever,are the statem ents that have been m ade
B oeing executives sought to "punish" union em ployees and to "threaten" them for
NLRB-FOIA-00007211
their past and possible future strikes,through the C om pany's statem ents and its
m essage that [the C om pany and its E xecutives] w ere doing this to punish their
em ployees for having struck and having the pow er to strike in the future." (Steven
T im es,A pril 23,2010,em phasis added.) N either your com plaint nor the post-hoc
statem ents you and other officials of the N L R B have m ade since the tiling of the
com plaint offers a single B oeing statem ent let alone a "consistent m essage" that
stated that B oeing "decided to locate its 787 D ream liner second line in South
C arolina because of past U nit strikes,and threatened the loss of future U nit w ork
M arch 2,2010 interview of M r.A lbaugh by the Seattle T im es,but does not purport to
sheet" that quotes M r.A lbaugh as saying: "T he overriding factor [in transferring the
line.] w as not the business clim ate.A nd it w as not the w ages w e're paying today.It
w as that w e cannot afford to have a w ork stoppage,,you know ,every three years."
http:j!nlrb.gov liode;44-3
It w ould,of course,have been entirely perm issible under existing law for M r.
A lbaugh to have m ade a statem ent that the C om pany considered the econom ic costs
of future strikes in its business decision to locate w ork in South C arolina or even
that it w as the sole reason for such decision.B ut M r.A lbaugh did not even say either
W ell I think you can probably say that about all the states in the country right
now w ith the econom y being w hat it is.B ut again,the overriding factor w as
not the business clim ate and it w as not the w ages w e're paying people today.
can't afford to continue the rate of escalation of w ages as w e have in the past.
You know ,those are the overriding factors.A nd m y bias w as to stay here but
w e could not gel those tw o issues done despite the bestefforts of the U nion
presentation of this quotation on its w ebsite m ake clear that M r.A lbaugh w as
referencing tw o,rather than one,"overriding factors," only one of w hich is the risk of
a future strike.T hese are critical om issions that directly contradict your apparent
NLRB-FOIA-00007212
part of a "consistent m essage" that B oeing sought to "punish" its union em ployees.
M r.A lbaugh expresses his "bias" in favor of Puget Sound and lauds the good-faith
efforts of both sides.H e explains that the com pany's preference w as to locate the
new production line in Puget Sound and that both the com pany and the union m ade
good-faith elT hrts to accom plish that shared objective.T hus,w hen not m isquoted,it
is not even arguable that M r.A lbaugh's statem ent constitutes a "m essage" of
"punishm ent" to the union for its past or future strike capability.
C hairm an and C hief E xecutive O fficer,as a threat to punish union em ployees is but
another exam ple of m ischaracterization.T he com plaint alleges that M r.M cN erney
"m ade an extended statem ent regarding 'diversifying [B oeing's] labor pool and labor
relationship,'and m oving the 787 D ream liner w ork to South C arolina due to 'strikes
happening every three to four years in Puget Sound.'(C om plaint 6(a) (em phasis
added).)
statem ents.First,M r.M cN erney w as not m aking an "extended statem ent" about w hy
decision to locate the new final assem bly line in South C arolina had not even been
m ade at the tim e M r.M cN erney's statem ents w ere m ade.Second,M r.M cN erney
answ ered only the question as to com parative costs that w as asked.T hus,in the
passages you m isquote and m ischaracterize,he discussed the relative costs of a new
facility in a location other than Puget Sound,versus the potential costs associated
w ith "strikes happening every three to four years in Puget Sound." H e did not say,as
you allege through the com plaint's m isquotation,that B oeing selected C harleston
A nd M r.M cN erney did not even rem otely suggest that w hat w ould later turn
out to be the decision to open a new line in C harleston w as in retaliation for such
strikes,as you w ould have to establish to obtain the rem edies you seek in your
com plaint.H e did not say,he did not suggest,and he did not im ply in any respect
that B oeing intended to punish union em ployees or that a decision to locate a new
facility other than in Puget Sound w ould or m ight be m ade to punish the union for
past strikes or because of their pow er to strike in the future.N either did he say,
suggest,or im ply that any existing union w ork w as being transferred to C harleston.
H is answ er cannot be cited in support of the legal theories in the com plaint,m uch less
the sw eeping statem ent you m ade to the N ew York Tim es about B oeing's "consistent
m essage" that B oeing and its executives sought to "punish" the C om pany's union
em ployees.
B oeing's intranet w ebsite for all em ployees," m uch less posted for the purpose of
NLRB-FOIA-00007213
sending an illegal m essage under the N L R A ,as the com plaint incorrectly and
m isleadingly suggests.
N or do any of the other few statem ents you reference in your com plaint
w hich I attach to this letter rem otely suggest an intent to "punish" the C om pany's
unionized em ployees.Q uite the contrary: these statem ents show ,at m ost,that the
C om pany considered (am ong m ultiple other factors) the risk and potential costs of
future stnkes in deciding w here to locate its new final assem bly facility.T hose have
been deem ed perm issible considerations by an unbroken line of Suprem e C ourt and
N L R B precedent for 45 years.N ot only that,but,as you know ,B oeing reached out to
the IA M in an effort to secure a long-term agreem ent that w ould have resulted in
placing the second line in Puget Sound.A lthough those negotiations w ere not
successful,that effort alone defeats your w holly unsupported claim that B oeing
represented by unions and those w ho are not.Y our statem ent im plies that B oeing's
m ost senior executives acted out of personal spite and retribution tow ard its labor
em ployees,and the C om pany's shareholders.Y ou have no support for that statem ent
w hatsoever.
"consistent m essage" that the C om pany intended to "punish" the union for its prior
strikes and its pow er to strike in the future,you had no choice but to issue a
com plaint.(Specifically,you said: "I can't not issue a com plaint in the face of such
evidence.") A m ong other reasons,that statem ent is puzzling,to say the least,in light
of the course of B oeing's discussions w ith you and your office concerning this m atter
over the past six m onths.In particular,it is hard to reconcile w ith w hat has been your
repeated statem ent that you did not believe this w as a m atter in w hich the N L R B
should be involved and that you w ould take no action on the m atter if B oeing agreed
that it w ould not lay off any 787 em ployees in Puget Sound during the duration of its
W e of course understand that you reversed your position and abandoned the
agreem ent that you yourself sought from B oeing after your further discussions w ith
the com plainant.B ut the point is this: It is exceedingly difficult to understand how
you could have proposed and then agreed to such a resolution if,as you now say,you
believed that the statem ents and actions by B oeing and its executives w ere so
NLRB-FOIA-00007214
egregious that the law literally com pelled a com plaint by the N L R B .O f course,the
Finally,there is the issue of your articulation of the rem edy sought in this
com plaint.T he com plaint seeks an order directing B oeing to "have the [IA M ]
operate [B oeing's] second line of 787 D ream liner aircraft assem bly production in the
State of W ashington." N otw ithstanding that you are seeking this rem edy,your office
has been at pains since filing the com plaint to state publicly that this is not equivalent
B oeing's current plan is to produce a m axim um of ten 787s per m onth: seven in
Puget Sound,and three on the second line in C harleston.If the N L R B w ere to order
B oeing to produce out of Puget Sound the three 787s per m onth that are planned to be
assem bled in C harleston,that w ould of course require the production of all of the
explained repeatedly to you and your staff in our extended discussions before you
** * * * **
R elations B oard itself in upcom ing proceedings,M r.Solom on.T o the extent they
reflect m isunderstandings of the facts on your part,w e w ould expect your prom pt
Sincerely yours , _
7.1444,
A .. -
J. M ichaelL uttig
T he B oeing C om pany
A ttachm ent
NLRB-FOIA-00007215
B utkeep in m ind thatw e've gota pretty good-sized operation dow n in C harleston today.
T he -- there w ould be som e duplication.W e w ould obviously w ork to m inim ize that.
B utI think having said allof that,diversifying our labor pooland labor relationship,has
som e benefits.I think the union LA M and the C om pany have had trouble figuring itout
A nd I've gotto figure outa w ay to reduce thatrisk to the C om pany.A nd so som e of the
m ore than overcom e by strikes happening every -- every three or four years in Puget
Sound and the very negative financialim pactof the C om pany,our balance sheetw ould
be a lotstronger today had w e nothad a strike lastyear.O ur custom ers w ould be a lot
happier today,had w e nothad a strike lastyear.A nd the 787 program w ould be in better
just haven't figured out a w ay,the m ix doesn't -- isn't w orking w ell,yet.So w e've either
labor base.
im proving our com petitiveness and reducing vulnerability to delivery disruptions due to a
hostof factors,from naturaldisasters to hom eland security issues and w ork stoppages.
W ere electing notto getinto how individualsites fared in specific areas of the
evaluation.
* * * * * * * *
Q 8:W e understand you w ere pushing the union for a no-strike agreem entand cam e
close to getting a 10-year deal.O bviously you didn'treach an agreem ent.W as thatthe
A : It w as an im portant part of our discussion w ith the union,but it w asn't the only
factor in our decision.In the finalanalysis,this cam e dow n to ensuring our long-term
agreem ent,w e feltour discussions w ith the IA M w ere productive and focused on the
NLRB-FOIA-00007216
sustain a reliable,on-tim e flow of deliveries to our custom ers.W e look forw ard to
m oving forw ard w ith the IA M in a positive w ay to grow our business in an increasingly
* * * * * * * *
Q 26:Y ou say thathaving a second line in C harleston reduces risk,butif the JA M goes
A : G eographically diversifying final assem bly on the 787 w ill protect a portion of
stoppages due to labor disputes.H aving the second line w illalso give us assurance and
B oeing spokesm an Jim Proulx cited strikes in the PugetSound region as a m ajor factor in
the decision.W ith a second supplier for every part,B oeing potentially could continue
producing D ream liners in South C arolina even if the M achinists w enton strike here.
"R epeated labor disruptions have affected our perform ance in our custom ers'eyes,"
Proulx said."W e have to show our custom ers w e can be a reliable supplier to them ."
here," he added.
* * * * * * * *
"W e w illim m ediately begin identifying,selecting and contracting w ith suppliers to stand
Proulx said B oeing has notdeterm ined how m uch w ork w illbe replicated w ithin the
com pany in the new C harleston facility and how m uch m ay go to outside suppliers.
W hen B oeing broke ground on its C harleston assem bly line in N ovem ber,the com pany
disclosed extensive plans for other buildings atthe facility.A m ong these is a "fin and
NLRB-FOIA-00007217
H e said the replication of parts sourcing also w ould "accom m odate the ram p-up" required
* * * * * * * *
"W e inform ed the (IA M ) of our plans to begin dualsourcing during the com pany/union
discussions preceding our decision to place the second 787 line in South C arolina,"
C onner's m essage to m anagers stated."W e rem ain com m itted to strengthening our
* * * * * * * *
capabilities,based on their ability to produce high-quality com ponents and atthe best
value."
oversightis in place to m ake sure the perform ance standards are m et," he said.
"W e are notm oving any w ork thatB oeing em ployees are currently perform ing w e are
6(d)
P ugetSound B usiness JournalA rticle,D ecem ber 8,2009
* * * * * * * *
B oeing spokesm an Jim Proulx said itw as "too early" to tellif the new production w illbe
contracted outor done by B oeing itself atthe new South C arolina site,or elsew here in the
country.
this region.
"T here w illbe no jobs lostas partof this m ove.T here are no plans to take this w ork
aw ay," he said.
NLRB-FOIA-00007218
6(e) -- Jim A lbaugh Interview w ith the Seattle Tim es, M arch 2,2010
W ellI think you can probably say thataboutallthe states in the country rightnow w ith
clim ate and itw as notthe w ages w e're paying people today.Itw as thatw e can'tafford
to have a w ork stoppage every three years.W e can'tafford to continue the rate of
escalation of w ages as w e have in the past.Y ou know ,those are the overriding factors.
A nd m y bias w as to stay here butw e could notgetthose tw o issues done despite the best
NLRB-FOIA-00007219
iTheSeatttenttes
P erm ission to reprint or copy this article or photo, other than personaluse, m ust be obtained from T he S eattle
B y D om in ic G ates
S e a ttle T im e s a e ro sp a ce re p o rte r
"catastrophic."
JO H N LO K / TH E S E A TTLE TIM E S
A u stra lia
F inance C orp. (ILF C ), m akes huge deals w ith both the big jet m anufacturers and the airlines. ILF C ow ns the
w orld's largest w ide-body fleet and has 74 B oeing 787 D ream liners on order. H e's in a unique position to
H is rem arks w ere m uch m ore pessim istic than recent cautious statem ents from B oeing executives, w ho have
declared production is com pletely solid at least through the end of this year.
"B y the fourth quarter, w e could definitely see som e adjustm ents," he said. "I'd like to see it sooner.
"It w ould not be surprising to us if there w ere 30 to 35 percent cuts over the next 18 m onths," he added.
H e predicted the tw o m ajor producers w illdeliver few er airplanes next year than in 2009.
1 of 2
NLRB-FOIA-00007220
http ://seattletim es.n w so u rce.co m icg i-b in /P rin tS to ry .p l?d o cu m en t_ id = 2 0 0 8 7 1 7 2 8 2 & zsectio n _ id = 2 0 0 3 ...
"A irlines are focused on survival," he said. "O rdering new airplanes is not the flavor of the m onth."
In fact, he said, this year could see a net negative tally in the order books.
"It could happen that this w illbe the year w hen net cancellations and deferrals actually exceed the num ber of
new aircraft orders," U dvar-H azy said. "The elem ents are out there for that to happen."
The year has already begun w ith negative net orders for both A irbus and B oeing.
The E uropean plane m aker booked just four orders in January but lost 12 orders to cancellations, for a net
reduction of 8.
Through F eb. 3, B oeing had booked 18 new orders, but canceled 31 for a net decline of 13.
, A t an interview at the reception, B ranson expressed anger at how m uch the M achinist strike cost V A ustralia,
H is passengers w ere left stranded because V A ustralia's new 777-300E R , parked F riday on B oeing F ield,
w asn't available for the peak holiday-travelseason dow n under, B ranson said.
"It w as a horrible m ess that B oeing w as on strike. W e m essed up tens of thousands of passengers over
C hristm as," he said. "W e had to buy tickets on other airlines and scram ble to get seats w hich w eren't
available. The financialdam age in an industry w here the m argins are m inute is catastrophic."
B oeing contracts typically include a provision that it is not required to pay airlines com pensation for delays
due to strikes.
"W e're already thinking there's another lot of planes w e w ant to order. D o w e give it to B oeing or should w e
go to A irbus, w hich doesn't go on strike?" B ranson said. "W e have a choice. D o w e have to com e back to
A t this point, B ranson turned to U dvar-H azy and said U dvar-H azy had been m aking the sam e point at dinner
last night.
"Y ou can't dealw ith com panies that are unreliable," U dvar-H azy said.
A t the suggestion that B oeing could hardly guarantee no future strikes, B ranson said he w ould have to
exam ine w hether B oeing has "an unreliable m anagem ent/w ork-force situation."
"B ritain w as plagued by strikes 30 years ago," added B ranson, w ho is E nglish. "A m erica should have got over
2 of 2
NLRB-FOIA-00007221
A corporate
strategy's
im pact on
m id d le-class
A m erica
IN S T IT U T E F O R W IS C O N S IN 'S F U T U R E
p o lic y
re s e a rc h in
th e p u b lic in te r e s t
NLRB-FOIA-00007222
m id d le-class A m erica
Jack N orm an
A pril 2010
IN S T IT U T E F O R W IS C O N S IN 'S F U T U R E
p o lic y r e s e a r c h
in
th e p u b lic in te r e s t
NLRB-FOIA-00007223
Introduction
It w as early spring, a splendid tim e to be in S avannah, G eorgia. T hat's w hy it had been chosen to host
the 2004 annual m eeting of the S tate G overnm ent A ffairs C ouncil, a blue-chip trade organization w hose
m em bers are the chief state-capitol lobbyists for A m erica's biggest corporations.
A m id S avannah's spring blossom s, the content of the m eetings w as typical conference fare. O ne of the
w orkshops stood out, though, for as provocative title:Turning Y our S tate G overnm entR elations D epartm ent
from a M oney P itinto a C ash Cow.T he co-presenters w ere R obin S tone, then the form er vice president of T he
B oeing C om pany's state and local governm ent relations, and M ichael P ress, then national director of E rnst &
"C ash cow " m ay be a C E O 's favorite tw o-w ord phrase. It refers to a business operation that requires little
investm ent but steadily generates large am ounts of cash. C ash cow s are highly profitable. T he w orkshop
focused on how a com pany can leverage its influence w ith state and local leaders to force them to give the
firm large "incentives" to locate a new operation there or expand an existing one.
"Incentives" is the econom ic developm ent euphem ism for w hen governm ents provide financial help to a
com pany, from tax exem ptions to free training for em ployees, from free airport expansion to low -cost loans.
T he presentation cited five m ultinational firm s as incentive success stories, starting w ith E rnst & Y oung - the
accounting and consulting giant - and B oeing, the em ployer or form er em ployer of both presenters.
T his report exam ines how B oeing has im plem ented this 'cash cow 'philosophy of state and local
governm ent relations. It w ill show how doing so drives dow n the quality of life for A m erica's m iddle-class
B oeing - follow ing the pattern set out in the S avannah 'cash cow 'presentation - dem ands that state and
local governm ents help w ith the com pany's "hard costs," such as taxes. It dem ands governm ent help w ith
"hum an resource costs,"from w age rebates and free help in hiring and training em ployees to law s restricting
union organizing. It dem ands governm ent help w ith "soft costs" such as financing and sew ers and roads.
It backs up these dem ands by using its size, its insider connections, its skill in m anipulating public opinion
B oeing relentlessly m ilks revenue from state and local governm ents w hile forcing large public spending
on infrastructure. It holds dow n em ployee w ages - further m inim izing local tax revenue - at a tim e w hen
governm ents at all levels are in desperate financial condition, slashing services to try to balance budgets.
A ll this m atters because B oeing is so big and so influential, across the U nited S tates and around the
globe. It is the largest aerospace com pany in the w orld. It is the m ost successful export firm in A m erica. It
designs and builds aircraft and spacecraft that are potent expressions of progress and m odernity. Its senior
m anagem ent includes form er high-ranking governm ent officials both D em ocratic and R epublican. L egions
of S enators, C ongressm en, cabinet officials and state and local leaders faithfully enact its interests.
B oeing is on the eve of receiving an im portant verdict from the W orld T rade O rganization (W T O ), the
B russels-based institution that is the court-of-last-resort for international trade disputes. B oeing and its
E uropean com petitor in com m ercial aircraft, A irbus, have been fighting for a decade over each other's use
of governm ent incentives. E ach claim s the other's incentives violate international trade law .
In M arch 2010, the W T O ruled that A irbus w as receiving illegal subsidies. T he verdict against B oeing is
expected this spring or sum m er. T he issue is highly technical and the proceedings are secret. B ut w hatever
the W T O verdict against B oeing, from any com m on sense point of view , w hen it com es to seducing
NLRB-FOIA-00007224
T he global aircraft w ars and the governm ent subsidies that fuel them are im portant because they are
establishing a new pattern for com petition in high-tech industries. In the U nited S tates, w e are accustom ed
to the econom ic developm ent 'w ar betw een the states; a race to the bottom w ith states outdoing each
B oeing and A irbus have taken the incentives gam e global. It is no longer a m atter of W ashington state
com peting against S outh C arolina and K ansas and A labam a. In B oeing versus A irbus, it m eans also
com peting w ith incentive deals in B rem en, L ow er S axony and H am burg, F lintshire, C adiz and S evilla, A ichi,
E conom ic developm ent in the 21" century is not just a w ar betw een the states but a w ar am ong the states
of A m erica, the federal states of G erm any, the counties of B ritain, the provinces of S pain, the prefectures of
Japan, the regions of Italy, the departm ents of F rance. B ut it is still a race to the bottom .
T he B oeing story is a case study of w hat the W allStreetJournalrecently called the new "global tax
com petition."'It is depleting public resources everyw here, even as the dem ands for public structures and
services soar.
B oeing sees itself as a tem plate for a new kind of global corporation. "B reakthrough innovation is w hat w e
do," proclaim s C hairm an and C hief E xecutive W . Jam es M cN erney, Jr., as the com pany's latest m otto.'
B ut this tem plate is horribly flaw ed. In the long run, B oeing's dem ands are a recipe for econom ic disaster
T he'cash cow 'presentation in S avannah divided incentives into three categories: hard costs, hum an
resource costs and soft costs. F or this report, w e'll sum m arize these in the follow ing term s:
H ard costs: A dem and for m axim um breaks on all incom e, property and sales taxes;
H um an resource costs: A dem and both for governm ent assistance but m ore im portantly for a
subm issive w ork force, a non-union em ployee base eager to w ork for reduced w ages;
S oft costs: A dem and for a high level of infrastructure, from specially-built roads and harbors
and airfields, to quality schools and colleges w ith B oeing-tailored aerospace program s, to an
T here is no large com pany in A m erica better at avoiding taxes than B oeing. T he title of the S avannah
presentation, Turning YourState G overnm entR elations D epartm entfrom a M oney Pitinto a C ash C ow , is a
straightforw ard description of the com pany's view that a prim ary role of governm ent is to provide m oney
for B oeing.
B oeing developed its operations in W ichita, K ansas, by loaning itself several billion dollars,
funneling the cash through a city program to avoid paying property and sales taxes!'
NLRB-FOIA-00007225
B oeing built an assem bly plant in N orth C harleston, S outh C arolina, by extracting a 63%
discount on its property tax from the county - plus reim bursem ent for half of the rem aining
taxes it did agree to pay. S om e of the tax breaks m ay last beyond 2060. 5
B oeing agreed to assem ble a new product in the S eattle area, after W ashington state
prom ised it over three billion dollars - $3,000,000,000 - in tax breaks, just after the state cut
the com pany's unem ploym ent and w orker com pensation taxes, built B oeing a huge addition
to the port of S eattle and prom ised a four-billion dollar road project to m eet the firm 's traffic
needs.6
B oeing rented headquarters office space in C hicago, Illinois, after obtaining $60 m illion w orth
of state and local tax breaks, then engineering a m iddle-of-the-night prom ise by C hicago's
m ayor to give the current tenant one m illion dollars of city m oney as an 'encouragem ent'to
T he S avannah presentation listed fifteen different kinds of incentives com panies can dem and. F or B oeing,
this is no m ere'w ish list'but is instead a list of accom plishm ents. B oeing has obtained every one of the
fifteen benefits in one or m ore states, save possibly a w aiver of perm it fees. E xam ples include:
Incom e tax credits in W ashington state, S outh C arolina, Illinois and M issouri;
S ales tax exem ptions or refunds in W ashington, K ansas and S outh C arolina;
P roperty tax abatem ents in W ashington, K ansas, Illinois and S outh C arolina;
W age rebates and job tax credits in Illinois, S outh C arolina and P ennsylvania;
B u t ex p ed ited p erm its h as, w ith W ash in g to n 's p ro m ise to g iv e B o ein g 's p erm it ap p licatio n s
"priority status over all other projects" and C hicago granting B oeing an exem ption to a
B oeing's prow ess at obtaining tax breaks is w ell-docum ented by num erous studies of corporate tax
B oeing's federal incom e tax during 2001-2003 w as negative 18.8% , the fourth low est rate
am ong profitable F ortune 500 com panies, according to C itizens for T ax Justice and the
Institute on T axation and E conom ic P olicy, nonprofit research groups. T his m eans it received
m ore in federal tax breaks than it paid. B oeing got $3.06 billion in federal tax breaks over the
NLRB-FOIA-00007226
B oeing's state corporate incom e taxes during the sam e three years w ere also negative,
m eaning that the com pany booked a net inflow of $41 m illion in state incom e taxes w hile
accum ulating profits of $5.6 billion. B oeing's effective state incom e tax rate of negative 0.7%
w as fifth low est am ong the 252 com panies in the F ortune 500 that disclosed state incom e tax
B oeing had the second largest reduction in effective state tax rates during the period
from 1997-1999 through 2004-2006. B oeing cut its effective state incom e tax rates by 4.2
B erm uda, C aym an Islands, G ibraltar, H ong K ong, Ireland, N etherlands A ntilles, S ingapore and
the U .S. V irgin Islands, according to the U .S. G overnm ent A ccountability O ffice (G A O ). T he
G A O looked at the 100 largest publicly traded U .S . corporations and found only fifteen firm s
- m ostly financial institutions and oil firm s - w ith m ore tax haven subsidiaries than B oeing."
B oeing's effective federal incom e tax rate during 2002-2006 w as only 0.7% . T his w as third
low est am ong the corporations in S tandard & P oor's 500 Index, according to B usinessW eek
m agazine in 2007."
B oeing's effective federal incom e tax rate during 2005-2008 w as 3.2% , ninth low est in the
S & P 500. B oeing w as by far the m ost profitable com pany am ong the tw enty-five low est
taxpayers."
A nd in 2009, the m ost recent full year, B oeing reported a negative federal incom e tax, getting
a net $132 m illion in paym ent from the federal governm ent despite pre-tax profits in the U .S .
of $1.6 billion. T he year before, 2008, B oeing paid only $44 m illion in federal incom e tax on
N one of this is because B oeing failed to earn a profit. Its last m oney-losing year w as 1997, and it w as
B oeing w ill pursue extrem e strategies in its efforts to avoid taxes. In 2006, for exam ple, the firm paid a $615
m illion fine to the federal governm ent for tw o m ajor ethical violations. T he fine allow ed the com pany to
avoid crim inal charges for stealing secret docum ents from a com petitor and for illegally recruiting a top A ir
T he m isdeeds w ere significant, as the size of the fine suggests. In addition, B oeing w ent so far as to argue
that the paym ent fell in a tax loophole that allow ed it to take a tax deduction for the fine. T his w ould enable
it to recoup a sizable portion of the paym ent, perhaps m ore than a third of it. It w asn't until strong public
criticism from C ongress - expressed in letters to the Justice D epartm ent - that B oeing decided not to
claim the deduction. C ritics included R epublican S enators C huck G rassley of Iow a, chairm an of the S enate
F inance C om m ittee; John W arner of V irginia, chairm an of the A rm ed S ervices C om m ittee; and John M cC ain
of A rizona."
'
O ne w ay B oeing w ins lucrative tax concessions is by forcing a public contest am ong states for a new
B oeing investm ent. B oeing has been at the center of three of the m ost celebrated cases of site-location
com petition in recent U .S . history: the location of the first assem bly line for its new 787 D ream liner
passenger airplane; the re-location of its corporate headquarters aw ay from S eattle; and the location of the
second 787 assem bly line. A ll three w ere high-profile national cam paigns, w ith publicity in national, local
and trade new spapers pressuring officials in m any places to create tax-break packages larger than had ever
NLRB-FOIA-00007227
South C arolina
In the m ost recent case - in w hich details are still em erging - B oeing received about one billion dollars in
tax incentives to select N orth C harleston, S outh C arolina, as the site of its second 787 assem bly line. S outh
C arolina had not landed the first 787 assem bly line - w hich w ent to the S eattle area - but w as selected as a
D etails of S outh C arolina's bid for the second assem bly line began em erging last O ctober, w hen the state
legislature w ent to w ork on an incentives deal. B oeing's decision to build there cam e later that m onth, after
the passage of an incentive package. A t the tim e, no one w as sure about the details of w hat B oeing w ould
receive nor the total value of the package, despite legislative action. A s late as January 2010, the C harleston
Postand C ourier reported that "m onths after celebrating the groundbreaking for a m assive jet assem bly
facility in N orth C harleston, state officials credited w ith luring B oeing to the L ow country say they still don't
know w hat all the incentives offered to the aircraft giant are w orth."
T he price tag didn't seem to m atter, though initial estim ates pegged the ultim ate value of state and local
tax breaks at about $450 m illion, by far the largest ever given in the state. L ater, state officials w ho had
trum peted the $450 m illion value backed off, w ith com m ents such as, "I don't know w here the $450 m illion
(figure) cam e from ." A s the Postand C ourier noted, "O f the 163 state and county officials w ho voted on the
deal, it w as difficult to find a single person w ho claim s to know w hat incentives w ere actually w orthf
T hrough its research - difficult because both governm ent officials and B oeing tried hard to avoid releasing
details - the new spaper concluded in January that "the incentive package prom ised to B oeing is w orth
m ore than $900 m illion, at least double the highest estim ate first circulated by state officials
7O ne of
the reporting team that com piled the estim ate later told the S eattle Tim es,"T hese are low ball estim ates,
counting only the incentives w e could put a reasonably firm value on...I w ould expect the (final) value is
P roperty tax breaks in C harleston C ounty w orth at least $360 m illion over thirty years.
B oeing's new factory w ould pay property taxes of 4% rather than the usual 10.5% on the
assessed value, and half of the property taxes the com pany w ould pay w ould be rebated
U p-front m oney to B oeing through a state-issued bond of $270 m illion, w hich w ould require
about $399 m illion in total including interest paym ents (all paid by the state);
T en-year property tax exem ptions on the tw o specially-designed aircraft B oeing uses to
transport large aircraft subassem blies. E ach plane is valued at about $250 m illion and the tax
Job tax credits, up to $12,500 per w orker, to offset state incom e taxes;
A nd $100,000 as a utility tax credit to help B oeing w ith road and utility construction
expenses.
NLRB-FOIA-00007228
T his is the package agreed to in order to secure B oeing's investm ent. It does not include other costs
required by the deal. F or exam ple, tw o new m ajor road construction projects, aim ed at alleviating traffic
congestion around the airport and B oeing's new plant, are to cost an estim ated $155 m illion.' A nd the state
approved a $3.1 m illion program to train B oeing w orkers, in the S outh C arolina T echnical C ollege S ystem .
T he approval, in F ebruary 2010, w as accom plished using a special legal provision "last used in fiscal year
Illinois
B oeing w as founded in S eattle in 1916 and for the rest of the tw entieth century it located its corporate
headquarters and the m ajority of its w orkforce there. It w as the m ost significant private em ployer in the
state. B ut in 2001, B oeing decided to m ove its headquarters to another city in order to separate its corporate
office from production and engineering facilities. T he shocking announcem ent led to a short, intense battle
C hicago w on the battle w ith m ore than $63 m illion w orth of incentives, dw arfing the packages from
D allas/F t. W orth and D enver, both estim ated in the range of $14 m illion to $18 m illion. C hicago incentives
included:
taxes (in effect, B oeing w as allow ed to keep m ost of the state incom e tax it w ithheld
Job-training grants;
L ocal property tax abatem ents of $16 m illion over 20 years (technically, a
reim bursem ent of 73% of all city and school property taxes);
R eim bursem ent of at least $4 m illion for taxes expected to be paid over 20 years to
C ook C ounty, the C hicago P ark D istrict, local com m unity colleges and the M etropolitan
Im provem ents to M idw ay A irport to accom m odate B oeing's fleet of executive aircraft;
A nd a rem arkable $1 m illion gift by the city to convince a tenant to vacate the space
B oeing w anted. A s recounted in Site Selection m agazine: "L ast-m inute troubles in
securing space alm ost capsized the deal.. .that spurred several all-night negotiating
sessions... In the w ee hours of M ay 10, the deal finally cam e together. C ity officials
agreed to fork over an additional $1 m illion to nudge R ohm & H aas [the tenant] out." 21
NLRB-FOIA-00007229
N ot quite enough? T he city also agreed to w aive a city ordinance prohibiting com pany logos on the top
of buildings.
T he irony is that m any observers believed that the package w as far in excess of w hat C hicago needed to
attract B oeing's headquarters. B oeing C hief A dm inistrative O ffice John W arner, w ho led the headquarters
search team , said afterw ard that tax incentives, w hile an attractive part of C hicago's bid, "is not a m ajor
factor:O f greater im portance, he said, w as a so-called "pro-business"attitude and "the capacity of state
A s a team from G ood Jobs F irst, a non-profit tracking econom ic developm ent projects, soon noted,
"F inancial incentives, it seem s, w ere less im portant in them selves than they w ere as a sign of that
pro-business attitude. T he cum ulative evidence strongly suggests that Illinois and C hicago overpaid for
th e B o ein g d ear"
W ashington
B oeing and S eattle have a long and m utually beneficial relationship. W ith its pioneering com m ercial and
m ilitary aircraft, B oeing w as the core of a regional econom y that grew to incubate M icrosoft, S tarbucks
and a host of other m ajor businesses. B oeing jobs "are the backbone of the m iddle class in m y county," said
S nohom ish C ounty E xecutive A aron R eardon.24 S nohom ish C ounty, including suburban S eattle, is hom e to
S eptem ber 11, 2001 changed m any things, including B oeing's plans for its upcom ing superfast new
passenger plane. In the w ake of the attack, airlines dem anded fuel efficiency rather than extra speed.
B oeing dropped plans for its S onic C ruiser and replaced it w ith the 7E 7 (E for efficiency), later renam ed
the 787.
In M arch 2003, B oeing announced an open com petition for a site to build the 787. F irst delivery w as
planned for 2008. T his launched one of the biggest site-selection contests in history.
W ashington state, w hich once took B oeing's presence for granted, w as nervous. It had just lost the
corporate headquarters to C hicago. B oeing executives had for several years been strongly and openly
criticizing the state's business clim ate, including everything from the level of w orkers com pensation taxes
D espite a short tim e fram e bidding w as opened in M arch and closed in June tw enty-tw o states
subm itted proposals. B ids included $300 m illion in tax breaks in M ichigan, $543 m illion in N orth C arolina;
$500 m illion from K ansas, $350 m illion from T ulsa C ounty plus a secret state package in O klahom a; and
D esperate to hold onto the new airplane, W ashington w as quick to act. In June, G ov. G ary L ocke signed
a $3.2 billion, tw enty-year package of tax breaks for B oeing. In addition, changes w ere m ade in w orkers
com pensation and unem ploym ent taxes, in the port, and a $4 billion roads program w as launched.
"If they'd w anted us to bulldoze M ount R ainier so their planes w ould take off easier, w e'd have done it," state
N oted Tim es colum nist B rier D udley:"B oeing's engineering brilliance m ay only be surpassed by its lobbying
savvy:26
M any of the other 21 states bidding for the w ork expressed concern that they w ere invited to bid sim ply in
an effort to help B oeing drive a better deal w ith W ashington. A rkansas G ov. M ike H uckabee said, "O ne of the
things that w e don't know at this point is, is B oeing seriously shopping the national m arketplace for a plant,
NLRB-FOIA-00007230
or are they using this opportunity to really squeeze the state of W ashington for deeper incentives.""
T he econom ic developm ent director of P alm dale, C alifornia, said: "W hat I hear from people, including som e
of our elected officials, is this:'W e're still not 100 percent convinced that B oeing is not doing this just to get
W ashington to cough up m oney. T o go through a lot of brain dam age just to get B oeing a better deal in
W ashington is not som ething w e w ant to do."P alm dale subm itted a proposal anyw ay. 28
A nd in D ecem ber, B oeing announced that, indeed, W ashington w as the w inner. A s w ould happen later
in S outh C arolina, it took a barrage of freedom -of-inform ation dem ands before the full details of the
package w ere unveiled. W ashington's $3.2 billion incentive package, in addition to the changes in w orkers
com pensation and unem ploym ent, along w ith construction at the port and on the highw ays, included:
A 40% cut in B oeing's B usiness & O ccupation tax (a tax on receipts, w hat W ashington has
A further tax credit of 1.5% of all B oeing's preproduction developm ent expenses for any
aircraft;
$20 m illion in rebates for previously paid sales taxes on com puter hardw are and softw are;
E xem ption from sales tax on new purchases of com puter equipm ent and softw are;
E xem ption from sales tax on labor, m aterials and fixtures in the new assem bly line;
E xem ption from property taxes on the new plant, including its equipm ent;
E xem ption from leasehold taxes for B oeing facilities in the public port;
T he 787, m ade m ostly w ith com posite m aterials rather than m etals, is a big deal. T he com pany calls it
"the m ost im portant new airplane since the B oeing 707 at the daw n of the Jet A ge, half a century ago." 29
It quickly becam e the best-selling new airplane in history, w ith nearly 900 of the giant aircraft ordered by
airlines around the w orld even before the first test m odel had been built. Its sales book tallied over $120
W ithin a year of picking W ashington for its assem bly line, B oeing had begun new operations in S outh
C arolina, to serve as a subassem bly site for the 787. T he com pany w ould use a new system for building the
787. M ost of the w ork w ould be done in subassem bly plants rather than in B oeing's W ashington operations,
w ith partially com pleted airplanes shipped to W ashington for only the final piecing together. W hen
B oeing decided to put its second 787 assem bly line in S outh C arolina, it m eant that soon som e of the 787
T he second category of dem ands relates to hum an resource costs. In addition to w age rebates and job-creation
tax incentives,em ployee training grants,targeted em ploym ent credits and help w ith hiring,this includes an am ple
supply ofacceptable'w orkers.T he w ord "acceptable" sum m arizes a w illingness to w ork for less than m iddle-incom e
w ages,a resistance to labor unions and support for local political com pliance w ith com pany interests.
NLRB-FOIA-00007231
T his is easiest to see in the contrast betw een w orkforces in the S eattle area and the C harleston area. It is a
m ajor part of the reason w hy B oeing chose to put its second 787 assem bly line in C harleston rather than
S eattle. T he difference in w ages w as m ade explicit by the S eattle Tim es,w hich reported last O ctober on
T he new spaper reported that because C harleston didn't have enough skilled w orkers to do B oeing's
som ew hat challenging w ork, at least one-third of the em ployees there w ere free-lance m achinists hired
from across the U .S . and other countries. T hese tem porary w orkers w ere "experienced airplane m echanics
paid about $26 an hour, com pared w ith the $14 an hour for local em ployees:T he $26 w age, the
Tim es
notes, is the average B oeing w age for union m achinists in E verett, W ashington."
T he difference betw een $26 an hour and $14 an hour is exactly the difference betw een a m iddle-class job
and one that does not m easure up to that designation. T he higher rate translates into about $54,000 a year;
C onsider these federal statistics on incom e distribution in A m erica, in w hich household incom es are divided
into five equal parts, from the low est-paid fifth to the highest-paid fifth. T he average incom e in the m iddle-
fifth in 2008 w as $50,132. T his w ould place the household of a $26/hour B oeing w orker (if he/she w ere the
sole w orker in the hom e) about 8% higher than the average for A m erica.
N ow step dow n one category, from the m iddle fifth to the second-low est fifth.T he average incom e w as
$29,517, according to the U S C ensus B ureau. T his is the equivalent of B oeing's $14/hour w orker.
B y dow ngrading its production w orkforce from a $26 w age to a $14 w age, B oeing drops its w orkers from
being in the m iddle incom e fifth to a low er bracket. In B oeing's future, today's m iddle fifth w ould disappear
T he absence of unions in C harleston w as an im portant factor for B oeing. In S outh C arolina, 4.5% of w orkers
belong to unions, the 3'd low est rate in the nation. In W ashington, 20.2% of w orkers are unionized, the 4th
highest in the nation." S outh C arolina's law s are am ong the m ost union-hostile in the country. T his includes
a 'right-to-w ork'law so even in a unionized w orkplace, em ployees cannot be required to join a union.
T he contrast betw een W ashington and S outh C arolina goes m uch deeper than w ages and unions. T he
difference in quality of life can be seen in a variety of statistics. F or exam ple, S outh C arolina has the third
highest infant m ortality rate in the U .S . (9 per 1,000 births); W ashington has the third low est (5)" In the
proportion of adults w ith a college degree, S outh C arolina ranks 40th (24% ); W ashington is 12th (31% )." In
the proportion of children living in poverty, South C arolina ranks 11th (21.7% ); W ashington is 36th (14.3% ). 34
B oeing frequently blam ed its unions, especially the International A ssociation of M achinists and A erospace
W orkers, w hich -represents B oeing production w orkers in m any locations, for strikes and w age increases.
"T he overriding factor" in choosing S outh C arolina, said B oeing's Jim A lbaugh, C E O of the com pany's
C om m ercial A irplanes unit,"w as that w e can't afford to have a w ork stoppage every three years. A nd w e
A lbaugh's com m ent about the rate of escalation of w ages" is a clear statem ent that the $26-an-hour,
m iddle-class w age of B oeing's S eattle-area production w orkers is not to be continued. E ven the slow grow th
that has characterized overall w age gains in recent years it too m uch for B oeing, A lbaugh says. T he point is
straightforw ard: B oeing w ill not continue to support m iddle-class w ages for the bulk of its em ployees.
W hy don't unions organize B oeing's S outh C arolina w orkers? T hey did. D uring the early stages of setting
up a w orldw ide production system to build the 787, B oeing gave a subassem bly contract to V ought
A ircraft Industries, a T exas-based com pany that w ould build 787 rear fuselage sections in N orth C harleston.
T he M achinists w on bargaining rights at the V ought N orth C harleston plant in 2007 and the next year
NLRB-FOIA-00007232
B ut by the m iddle of 2008, the entire 787 program w as w ay behind schedule. T he various S outh C arolina
operations, including the V ought plant, contributed to the delays, having "been plagued w ith startup
problem s, partly due to the inexperienced w ork force," said the S eattle Tim es.S o in stages B oeing bought
out various subassem bly plants in S outh C arolina it had been using as subcontractors.
In July 2009, B oeing com pleted its acquisition of the V ought S outh C arolina plant, w ith its unionized
w orkforce. T his w ould have brought C harleston's unionized w orkers into B oeing itself, a m ajor strategic
B ut on July 30, 2009, the sam e day the acquisition of V ought N orth C harleston w as announced, a
decertification petition w as filed w ith federal labor officials. In the S eptem ber election, the union w as
decertified. T he next m onth - free from a union presence in N orth C harleston - B oeing announced that
S outh C arolina had w on the com petition for siting the second 787 assem bly line.
T here w as no m istaking the m essage that w as heard across the nation. U nder the headline 'B oeing's S .C .
jobs a setback for unions," the W ashington Postquoted a labor expert as saying: "T his is the escape from
collective bargaining." 36
B oeing also had at one tim e a large num ber of M achinist-represented w orkers in its extensive operations in
the W ichita, K ansas area. B ut in recent years B oeing has divested itself of m ost of those operations, selling
off its unionized com m ercial aircraft facilities there to a new com pany it helped establish, S pirit A erospace.
In 2001, B oeing em ployed 16,700 people in K ansas. B y 2007, that had plunged to under 3,000. 37
W hy do state and local governm ents give the incentives? O bviously, the answ er is jobs. T he only w ay to
im agine that the long-term tax breaks are w orthw hile is to assum e that their cost w ill be trum ped by the
value of the jobs B oeing brings to the com m unity. T he facts do not support such an optim istic view of how
B oeing operates.
F irst, B oeing itself is not in the business of creating jobs. Its strategy is just the opposite - w orldw ide global
outsourcing and - at m ost - a stable num ber of em ployees. A t the end of 1998, B oeing em ployed 231,260
In W ashington state, for exam ple, B oeing seriously overstated the em ploym ent im pact of its decision to
locate the first 787 assem bly line there. T he S eattle Tim es reported, "In 2003, state officials forecast that
the 787 w ould add 3,600 supplier jobs at existing B oeing subcontractors and at new suppliers draw n
to W ashington. B ut four years later, new suppliers have established just four m odest new D ream liner
m anufacturing operations em ploying around 200 people in W ashington, half of those jobs in unskilled
T he new spaper quoted a form er B oeing executive - w ho left the com pany to w ork for the state on
econom ic developm ent issues - acknow ledging/'W e have failed m iserably at attracting new engineering
F urther, B oeing has long m aintained a tw o-tier w age structure, even in W ashington w here its ow n
em ployees are w ell paid. T he "flinty reality" of the aerospace industry, as the S eattle Tim es put it, "O utside
B oeing, the hours are long and the pay is hardly sky-high."'' In 2007, the new spaper analyzed w ages at
B oeing and an additional 160 com panies claim ing state tax breaks for aerospace. It found that w hile 93%
of B oeing's production w orkers earned at least $20 an hour, only 21% of non-B oeing w orkers earned that
m uch. N early half the non-B oeing w orkers earned less than $15 an hour, com pared w ith only 4% of B oeing's
10
NLRB-FOIA-00007233
S o even in W ashington, w here the w ages of B oeing w orkers are solidly m iddle-class, once one steps beyond
B oeing itself, w age levels plum m et. T here is no reason to expect anything different in S outh C arolina,
especially w ith the absence of union pressure there. B ut in S outh C arolina, the supposedly higher w age
B oeing jobs them selves are only at the $16 range, equivalent to about $33,000 a year.
E ven those jobs - paying less than $30,000 annually - are likely to em erge in few er num bers than m any
B oeing boosters in S outh C arolina project. T his is because of the radically global approach to contracting
that B oeing is pushing to the lim it. U nlike older m anufacturing techniques, w here a large factory in
a com m unity spaw ned num erous nearby jobs w ith suppliers, B oeing's tw enty-first century sourcing
philosophy m eans that parts that are needed in its S outh C arolina factories can com e from literally
T hat's w hy the com pany has such high dem ands for the local infrastructure, such as ports, airports and
roads. It expects to bring in an enorm ous am ount of m aterial, rather than sourcing them locally. R ather than
building the airplane in one location, putting together sm aller com ponents from local and distant suppliers,
the 787 w as designed to have large subassem blies created in factories around the w orld. T hese large
com ponents are then transported to the final assem bly line - in W ashington or S outh C arolina - for a final
assem bly w hich requires m any few er w orkers and m uch less tim e than the traditional technique.
W ikipedia com piled a w ell-docum ented overview of how w idely distributed the new supplier system is
(or at least, w as intended to be). T he tail fin for the plane is m ade in W ashington. A ilerons and flaps com e
from A ustralia. W ings are m ade in Japan. H orizontal stabilizers are built in Italy; fuselage sections in S outh
C arolina, Japan and K ansas. P assenger doors are from F rance. C argo and other doors are built in S w eden.
F loor beam s are m ade in India and sent to subassem bly plants in Italy, Japan and the U .S . T he landing gear
is from F rance, using titanium from R ussia and brake parts from Italy.'" T w enty countries are reported to be
T he global pattern w as not restricted to the production part. E ven designing the new plane, the m ost
technically advanced part of the operation, w as shared w orldw ide to an unprecedented degree. A s B oeing
itself bragged:"T he program 's approach to the developm ent of the airplane has been as revolutionary as
T his new approach to outsourcing has not been an obvious success. T he plane has been plagued w ith
problem s from the beginning, forcing num erous delays. O riginally the plane w as to enter com m ercial
operation in 2008. B ut the first com m ercial airplane still has not been delivered, though it is now prom ised
for the fourth quarter of 2010. P roblem s w ith suppliers have been routinely blam ed for the constantly
C learing up supplier issues is one reason B oeing bought the original facilities in S outh C arolina that w ere
supposed to be ow ned by independent suppliers. B oeing acknow ledged problem s w ith suppliers in various
countries, w ith the com pany sending its ow n em ployees around the w orld to help clear up the problem s.
In w ell-publicized com m ents in 2007, both B oeing C E O Jim M cN erney and B oeing V ice P resident M ike B air
S till, this is unlikely to change the basic thrust of B oeing's com m itm ent to w orldw ide sourcing. T he com pany
m ay have taken it too far too quickly w ith the 787, but that is its desired path. "T he 787 defines the place w e
w ant to be [on outsourcing];'said an executive, especially w ith B oeing pressing its w orldw ide suppliers to
form their ow n local supply chains and infrastructure system s. "W e have to be global," he said. "It's a w hole
w orld full of people's talents and capabilities w e're bringing together to m ake this.""
It is also a w hole w orld full of untenable choices betw een reduced-w age w ork or no w ork at all.
11
NLRB-FOIA-00007234
F irst, B oeing dem ands huge tax breaks to reduce its hard costs. S econd, B oeing dem ands low w ages and
no unions, to reduce its hum an resource costs. T o com plete its package of dem ands, B oeing also requires
com m unities to provide expensive, high-quality infrastructure, to reduce its soft costs.
C ertainly a com pany building the biggest airplanes in the w orld is going to have m any infrastructure needs.
It requires a large w orkforce, w ith all that entails in term s of roads, schools and a w ide range of public
services. It requites huge pieces of equipm ent to be m oved in and out, putting m axim um stress on roads,
B oeing prefers to pay for as little of it as possible. It dem ands that state and local governm ent bear the costs
of providing an environm ent fit for B oeing's needs. T he m ost explicit dem onstration of this occurred in its
m ultistate com petition to land the 787's first assem bly plant, w hich ultim ately w ent to W ashington state
E arly in the site-location process, B oeing m ade public w hat it called a "S um m ary of 7E 7 site selection
criteria7 44T he item s on the list aren't surprising, given the scope of B oeing's project. B ut m any of the item s
on the list require m ajor spending by state and local governm ents. T he follow ing item s require substantial
investm ent by state and local governm ents, using taxpayer funds:
O ther criteria require varying degrees of taxpayer spending, including the need for convenient and
affordable utilities (w ater, sew er, pow er, w aste and telecom m unications) and w hat B oeing calls
"transportation enhancem ents.'T he com pany w on the right to a veto on w hich contractors are hired to
w ork on infrastructure.
B oeing further expects that local governm ent w ould devote their ow n resources to finding out B oeing's
needs and m eeting them . Its agreem ent w ith W ashington in 2003 included not just the billions in tax breaks
but also the use of at least four governm ent em ployees w orking to m axim ize benefits to B oeing. A ll four are
to be paid by the state (or local governm ent) but "selected in consultation w ith B oeing:'4'T hese include:
A T ax C om m itm ent and Incentives C oordinator, w hose job includes not just overseeing the
agreed-upon tax breaks but also"apply[ing] for and pursue[ing] all grants for w hich B oeing
m ay b e elig ib le
12
NLRB-FOIA-00007235
A nd a L arge C argo F reighter C oordinator, to coordinate issues relating to the developm ent
and operation of giant new cargo airplanes B oeing needed to m ove parts for the 787.
F or starters, B oeing is a huge com pany. It is not a com pany that can consider m ajor new operations w ithout
draw ing attention. B oeing com ing to tow n is som ew hat like the proverbial large gorilla entering the room .
B oeing is an aggressive com pany. A s the S avannah 'cash cow 'presentation stressed, its approach is to
"control publicity ... be proactive ... com m unicate progress to the elected officials and their constituents ...
B oeing's control over local governm ent is intricate. In W ashington, S outh C arolina and K ansas, for exam ple,
it has pushed for the creation of special degree program s in state institutions of higher education to m eet
their needs.
T he S avannah presentation w as filled w ith tips about how to court local officials in order to obtain tax
incentives. C hief am ong them w as the recognition that since the "public doesn't like 'corporate w elfare'the
com pany should be sure to use a "B ut forthrearT his is a threat that in the absence of large incentives, the
T he need for the firm to "C ontrol publicity" and "A void legislation if possible" (presum ably
T he need to "involve elected officials in press announcem ents!'T ax breaks are a "Q uid P ro
Q uo," the presentation noted, so one thing local officials get in exchange for low er taxes is
T he im portance of show ing gratitude. 'T hank everybody a zillion tim es,"the presentation
F inally,"B e m indful of the election & legislative cycle,"B e m indful of local turf battles; and
O ne im portant reason that B oeing know s how to deal w ith elected officials and other governm ent decision-
m akers is that so m any senior executives at the com pany are them selves form er high-ranking public
officials. O ne of the m ost striking facts about B oeing's executive group is the high proportion w ith previous
experience at senior levels in governm ent, both under D em ocratic and R epublican adm inistrations and
C ongresses.
W illiam M . D aley, form er U .S. Secretary of C om m erce and C hairm an of A l G ore's 2000
13
NLRB-FOIA-00007236
E dm und P.G iam bastiani,Jr.,form er V ice C hairm an of the U .S.Joint C hiefs of Staff;
B oeing's m ost senior executives include these form er governm ent officials:
Senior V ice President Shephard W .H ill,form er chief of staff and legislative affairs for
Senior V ice President T im othy K eating,form er special assistant to the President and W hite
A nd Senior V ice President and G eneral C ounsel J.M ichael L uttig,form er judge on the U .S.
C ourt of A ppeals for the Fourth C ircuit,form er assistant A ttorney G eneral and counsel to the
A ttorney G eneral.
M anagem ent ranks below these senior levels are full of form er ranking federal officials.T he U .S.G A O
reported in 2008 that 15 B oeing em ployees w ere form er "senior" D epartm ent of D efense officials and 76
other B oeing m anagers had been involved in D efense D epartm ent procurem ent m atters.
47T he federal jobs
14
NLRB-FOIA-00007237
B oeing is also one of the nation's largest corporate lobbyists and donors to political cam paigns. A t the
federal level, B oeing w as the 15th m ost active lobbyist in the U .S . in 2009, spending $17 m illion. In just the
current tw o-year election cycle, it has donated to cam paigns for 295 current m em bers of the U .S . H ouse of
R epresentatives (68% of m em bers) and for 35 current S enators (35% ). D em ocratic recipients outnum ber
B oeing's close ties w ith politicians hold true at the state level as w ell as the federal. In the 2007-2008
election cycle (the m ost recent for w hich data are available), B oeing m ade cam paign contributions to
an astounding 504 candidates in 18 states: A labam a, A rizona, C alifornia, F lorida, G eorgia, Illinois, K ansas,
M issouri, M ontana, N evada, N ew M exico, N orth C arolina, O klahom a, Pennsylvania, T exas, U tah, V irginia
and W ashington. T he offices B oeing m ade donations to include not just state legislators (both houses) but
also governor, lieutenant governor, attorney general, treasurer, com ptroller, secretary of state, insurance
com m issioner, com m issioner of public lands, auditor and state board of education. Its donations w ere split
In W ashington state, the com pany hired B ob W att, form er deputy m ayor of S eattle, and F red K iga, form er
chief of staff to the governor. W hen B oeing decided to enter S outh C arolina, the nam es of the local law yers
and lobbyists it hired "read like a proverbial w ho's w ho of P alm etto S tate pow er brokers!"
B oeing, in other w ords, is a com pany full of experience in how governm ent w orks and how best to take
advantage of opportunities for governm ent contracts and governm ent tax breaks. S uch close ties can lead
to conflicts of interest, and B oeing has had a full share of these. In 2006, B oeing w as fined $615 m illion and
had a $20 billion contract cancelled because of conflicts of interest involving an A ir F orce procurem ent
officer, D arleen D ruyun, and the com pany. D ruyun negotiated jobs for herself, her daughter and her son-in-
law w hile negotiating the contract w ith B oeing. B oth D ruyun and a B oeing official served prison tim e.
In S outh C arolina, three lobbyists hired by B oeing w ere at the sam e tim e also being paid to w ork for the
S outh C arolina R esearch A uthority, the state's prem ier econom ic developm ent agency.
In W ashington, the sam e firm that served as B oeing's auditor, D eloitte C onsulting, also received $715,000
from state governm ent to help get B oeing to choose W ashington for the first 787 assem bly line. T ax scholar
D avid B runori characterized the deal this w ay:"D eloitte gets m oney from W ashington to get B oeing to build
in the state. D eloitte gets m oney from B oeing to persuade W ashington to give it m oney to build. B oeing
gets m oney from W ashington. W ashington pays B oeing and D eloitte. T here m ight be m ore egregious
In C alifornia, B oeing recently received a $16 m illion contract for environm ental m onitoring at the sam e site
w here it had been fined for polluting a creak w ith chrom ium , dioxin, lead and m ercury."
B oeing is the second m ost-cited com pany in the F ederal C ontractor M isconduct D atabase, w ith 36 instances
ranging from im proper invoicing to gender discrim ination, from overbilling to sexual harassm ent, and from
B oeing w ants its m any dem ands m et im m ediately. B ut the only w ay states and com m unities can afford the
expensive infrastructure B oeing dem ands, w hile at the sam e tim e giving m ajor tax breaks, is by borrow ing
15
NLRB-FOIA-00007238
In W ashington state, the tax incentives given B oeing in 2003 w ill continue until July 1, 2024. T he W ashington
R esearch C ouncil, a non-partisan research organization, calculated that the value of the tax incentives
w ould grow each year until then, increasing from about $50 m illion in F iscal Y ear 2007 to $144 m illion in
In S outh C arolina, the incentives given in 2009 last various tim e periods. T he largest property tax breaks
extend for 30 years. O thers incentives are to last ten years and fifteen years. A nd if certain conditions are
m et, "som e of the property tax breaks could rem ain in force beyond 2060;'the C harleston P ost and C ourier
reported.
In K ansas, B oeing continues to have a property tax abatem ent and sales tax exem ption based on its use
of Industrial R evenue B onds (IR B s). T he bonds first appeared on B oeing's 10-K report for 2004 and the
A n unusual feature of these K ansas bonds is that B oeing borrow ed the m oney even though it had no need
to. T hat's clear from the fact that B oeing itself bought the bonds, thereby providing the very cash that
B oeing itself w as borrow ing. A s B oeing's 10-K states, "W e have also purchased the IR B s and therefore are the
bondholders as w ell as the borrow er/lessee of the property purchased w ith the IR B proceeds!
W hy did B oeing loan m oney to itself? B ecause issuing an IR B through the city of W ichita enabled B oeing
to w in a long-term property tax abatem ent and sales tax exem ption on everything connected w ith
the property it borrow ed m oney to build. B oeing reported $2.9 billion w orth of K ansas IR B s in 2004, an
enorm ous property value on w hich to be tax-exem pt. B oeing also reported a sm all but sim ilar arrangem ent
in G eorgia, in w hich it received a partial property tax abatem ent after being the purchaser of IR B bonds
A re these states and com m unities in strong enough financial condition to m anage w hile giving B oeing
large tax breaks? N o. E specially w ith the recession battering state and local budgets across the country,
the com m unities in w hich B oeing is receiving large tax breaks are struggling to m aintain services w hile
C onsider S outh C arolina, w here the tax incentives have just begun. T he state is running an anticipated
deficit of $1.2 billion for fiscal year 2010, or 20% of its total budget, and $1.3 billion in fiscal year 2011,
according to the W ashington, D .C .-based C enter on B udget and P olicy P riorities (C B P P ). Its projected deficit
T he state is dealing w ith these deficits in the custom ary w ay: by slashing program s. S outh C arolina has
already cut program s in public health, education at all levels from pre-school through K -12 to higher
education, w orkforce developm ent (except for B oeing) and service for the elderly and those w ith
disabilities. T he governor is further proposing to cap the state's children's health insurance package.
57
O n top of that, changes in federal health care law w ill m ean an additional half m illion people eligible for
the state's M edicaid program . A state official determ ined that"it w ill cost $914 m illion in state funds over
a decade to cover them !" C bincidentally, that's just about the am ount of tax breaks going to B oeing over
S im ilar stories can be told about W ashington and K ansas. In W ashington, the expected deficit for fiscal year
2010 is $6.2 billion, or 27% of the general fund budget. In K ansas, the expected deficit is $1.8 billion, or 30%
of the budget. T hese deficits are expected to run w ell into the future. T o deal w ith the troubled budgets,
W ashington has already cut program s in public health, K -12, pre-school, and higher education, w orkforce
developm ent (except for B oeing) and service for the elderly and those w ith disabilities. K ansas has m ade
sim ilar cuts, though so far it has exem pted public health program s. A recent headline noted, "K ansas'm odel
16
NLRB-FOIA-00007239
In K ansas, the experience w ith tax breaks for B oeing and other firm s has led to som e rethinking of the
practice of tax giveaw ays. In 2008, the L egislature's audit bureau conducted a P erform ance A udit R eport
on the state's econom ic developm ent strategies. Its conclusion: "M ost review s of econom ic developm ent
assistance find few results are achieved - a them e that audits in K ansas and other states com m only find, as
T he dilem m a, auditors noted, is that although "incentives don't have a significant im pact on econom ic
grow th.. .states have to continue offering such incentives to rem ain com petitive." It w ent on to say: "B ecause
so m any states offer econom ic developm ent assistance, m any business officials have com e to view these
B ut there is a severe price paid for these incentives, auditors noted: "O ne dow nside to offering public
assistance to so m any businesses is that it m ay cause less state funding to [be] available for public services:'
T hese are the very public services that provide the fram ew ork for a strong m iddle class and a stable
com m unity.
W hile pressing state and local governm ents from coast to coast for m ajor tax concessions, B oeing has
also w aged an international legal battle w ith the help of S enators, C ongressm en and the U S governm ent,
accusing its com petitor A irbus w ith - of all things - relying too heavily on governm ent assistance. In
M arch 2010, B oeing w on the latest round at the W orld T rade O rganization (W T O ), w ith a ruling that about
$20 billion in E uropean governm ent aid to A irbus constituted an illegal export subsidy. 6'
T he case is far from over. T he E uropeans are expected to appeal. A irbus'counterclaim about B oeing's
incentives is expected to be decided in com ing m onths. E ven the consequences of guilty verdicts are not
clear. T hey could include anything from repaym ents of incentives to prohibitions against future incentives
B ut the sparse public docum entation of the cases m akes it abundantly clear that the tax incentives urged at
the S avannah conference are w orldw ide in scope. Just as the A irbus com plaint against B oeing cites the tax
breaks in W ashington, K ansas and Illinois (S outh C arolina had not yet happened) - as w ell as federal aid -
th e B o ein g co m p lain t ag ain st A irb u s cites eco n o m ic d ev elo p m en t in cen tiv es g iv en to A irb u s in a n u m b er o f
E u ro p ean countries, including F rance, G erm any, S pain, Italy and the U nited K ingdom ." B oeing has its ow n
econom ic developm ent incentives in Italy for factories that supply the 787. A nd Japan's national and local
governm ents have provided at least $2 billion w orth of help to the three Japanese firm s doing contract
T he problem is that the greater the com petition for the kind of w ork involved in technologically advanced
design and production, the sw ifter the race to the bottom . W hen com panies like B oeing conduct
com petitions to locate a new facility, new kinds of incentives are invented and old kinds of incentives are
expanded.
W hen local governm ents here and abroad are forced to give up tax revenues to attract a new factory, w hen
w orkers are forced to accept reduced w ages, w hen com m unities m ust build expensive roads and ports and
high-quality educational program s, som ething m ust suffer. W hat suffers is the ability of com m unities to
m aintain a durable m iddle class and the system s needed for ongoing econom ic grow th.
17
NLRB-FOIA-00007240
B oeing has positioned itself to be a m odel for the global corporation of the 21's century. T his m odel
pressures state and local governm ents to reduce taxes and provide lavish financial incentives to com e and
stay in any given locality. In addition, the B oeing m odel w ants governm ental sanction and support to offer
low er w ages and benefits for the sam e w ork w ith no-cost hum an resource services and training. O n top of
these, the new m odel dem ands that governm ent provide extensive financing and infrastructure to support
operations. T he B oeing m odel uses sophisticated m arketing, heavy-handed relationships w ith key decision
B oeing and those w ho follow its lead drain resources from em ployees and governm ents w hile dem anding
investm ent in roads, sew ers, and supplem entary system s to facilitate expansion. T he m ultiple dem ands
leave state and local governm ents incapable of m aintaining the intricate netw ork of program s that are
vital for com m unities to thrive. T his also erodes the public sector fram ew ork for grow ing and m aintaining
a strong m iddle class education, public health and safety, transportation, housing and investm ents in
technology.
T his is the bottom line for B oeing's 'cash cow 'approach to local governm ent. T he com bination of dem ands
for low taxes, low w ages and high-cost infrastructure is unsustainable. In 2004, a review of state taxes by
the U niversity of K ansas sum m arized the consequences clearly:"L ow business costs generally translate into
low w ages and low tax revenues. L ow w ages generally translate into low incom es, and low tax revenues
generally translate into low levels of educational expenditure and other governm ent services. A nd low
incom e and low services generally translate into a low quality of life'
T hat's not how the com pany sees it, of course. B oeing and its top executives are self-consciously bold,
buoyant, futuristic, optim istic. T hat's w hy it calls the new 787 aircraft the D ream liner. B ut B oeing's 'dream '
scenario clashes w ith the realities of how it conducts business. B oeing m akes im possible dem ands of
com m unities that sim ply cannot be satisfied in a w orld of shared prosperity. T he only w ay that states and
com m unities can satisfy B oeing's insatiable dem ands is by disassem bling its prize public structures and
In the long run, B oeing's m odel for the new global corporation is a recipe for an A m erica w ithout a m iddle
class.
18
NLRB-FOIA-00007241
E ndnotes
'T he presentation w as first m ade public by P aul C hesser, "O n M ilking a S tate's'C ash C ow ," C arolina Journal
O nline, a publication of the C arolina C ouncil, M ay 20, 2004.1t w as subsequently referred to in G reg
L eR oy's com prehensive The G reatAm erican Job Scan:C orporate Tax D odging and the M yth ofJob C reation,
T he B oeing C om pany, Form ,10-K for various years. In 2009, see N ote 12, p.83
D avid S lade and K aty S tech,"B oeing's w hopping incentives;' C harleston Postand C ourier, January 17, 2010;
K aty S tech,"B oeing w ould pay 4 percent tax rate," C harleston Postand C ourier, January 9, 2010
'Jack lyne,"63 M illion in Incentives, L ast-S econd S pace D eal H elp C hicago L and B oeing;' Site Selection,June
2001.
'R obert S . M cIntyre and T .D . C oo N guyen, C orporate Incom e Taxes in the Bush Years, C itizens for T ax Justice
R obert S. M cIntyre and T .D . C oo N guyen, "State C orporate Incom e T axes: 2001-2003,"State Tax Notes,
M arch 7, 2005.
' M artin A . Sullivan, "C orporate R eports Show State T ax on Profits Falling,"State Tax Notes, M ay 19,2008
" U .S. G overnm ent A ccountability O ffice, InternationalTaxation:Large U .S.C orporations and Federal
C ontractors w ith Subsidiaries in Jurisdictions Listed as Tax H avens or FinancialPrivacy Jurisdictions, G A O -09-
17
"C om panies w ith the fattest tax breaks;'BusinessW eek, D ecem ber 4, 2007
13
N anette B yrnes, "W hat U .S. C om panies R eally Pay in Taxes;'BusinessW eek, A pril 7,2010
14
L eslie W ayne, "3 Senators Protest Possible T ax D eduction for B oeing in Settling U .S. C ase,"N ew York Tim es,
July 7, 2006
15
D avid S lade and K aty S tech,"B oeing's w hopping incentives:' C harleston Postand C ourier, January 17, 2010
16
19
19
Seattle Tim es business staff, "B oeing's C harleston tax breaks top $800M ; 60 years and counting for airplane
W arw ick Jones, "T rident T ech, B oeing S pending R aise Q uestions;' TheN erve (w w w .thenerve.oro, affiliated
R ick B rundrett,"B oeing to G et A nother T axpayer-Funded G ift," TheN erve (w w w .thenerve.org ,affiliated
21
27
23
Jack L yne,"63 M illion in Incentives, L ast-Second Space D eal H elp C hicago L and B oeing," Site Selection,
June 2001.
R on Starner and M ark A ren'cl,"B ehind B oeing's Flight Plan," Site Selection, S eptem ber 2001
Jeff M cC ourt, G reg L eR oy and Phillip M attera,"A B etter D eal for Illinois: Im proving E conom ic
19
NLRB-FOIA-00007242
D om inic G ates, "S .C . decision transform s B oeing's relationship w ith W ashington, labor unions1S eattle
24
" Jack L yne,"B oeing's $900-m illion 7E 7 Plant N earing T ouchdow n," Site Selection, S eptem ber 2003
26
B oth quotes are from B rier D udley,"L earning hard lessons from B oeing giveaw ays1S eattle Tim es,July 6,
2009
2 'D
avid P ostm an,"22 states bid for 7E 7; som e think they're just B oeing's bait," Seattle Tim es, June 20,2003
28
P ostm an
29
D om inic G ates, "W hy C harleston could land 787 line Seattle Tim es, O ct. 23, 2009
" U .S. B ureau of L abor Statistics, U nion Affiliation ofem ployed w age and salary w orkers by state, 2009
32
" U .S. C ensus B ureau, R 1502.PercentofPeople 25 Years and O verW ho H ave C om pleted a Bachelor's D egree,
2008
U .S.C ensus B ureau, R 1704.PercentofC hildren U nder18 Years Below Poverty Level, 2008
34
35 D
om inic G ates,"A lbaugh: B oeing's 'first preference'is to build planes in P uget S ound region;'S eattle T im es, M arch 1,
2010
D ana H edgpeth,"B oeing's S .C . jobs a setback for unions," W ashington Post, O ctober 30, 2009
36
31
T he B oeIng C om pany, "E m ploym ent by location1w w w .boeing.com /em ploym ent/em ploym ent ta b le .
htm l
38
39
D om inic G ates, "H uge tax breaks for aerospace didn't deliver m any new jobs,"Seattle Tim es, D ec.17,2007
D om inic G ates and Justin M ayo, "P ay in aerospace is low for non-B oeing w orkers1S eattle Tim es, D ec.16,
2007
41
W ikipedia contributors, "B oeing 7871 W ikipedia,The Free Encyclopedia, retrieved A pril 19, 2010
42
B ill Seil,"Sharing the D ream ," Boeing Frontiers, published by T he B oeing C om pany, A ugust 2006
43
D om inic G ates, "B oeing shares w ork, but guards its secrets," S eattle Tim es, M ay 15,2007
44
T he B oeing C om pany, Sum m ary of7E7 site selection criteria,Seattle Post-Intelligencer,M ay 17,2003
45
T he B oeing C om pany and the S tate of W ashington, C ounty of S nohom ish, C ity of E verett and certain
other governm ental units and authorities of or in the state of W ashington, ProjectO lym pus M aster Site
D evelopm entand Location A greem ent, D ecem ber 19,2003. A vailable from E vergreen F reedom F oundation
46
4
T he B oeing C om pany, N otice of2010 AnnualM eeting and Proxy Statem ent
' U .S. G overnm ent A ccountability O ffice, D efense C ontracting:Post-G overnm entEm ploym entofForm er D O D
48
"E ric K . W ard,"B oeing's'A 'T eam : T urned to Pow er B rokers," TheN erve (w w w .thenerve.org ,affiliated w ith the
52
D avid B runori,"L lam as, A lpacas, O striches, E m us, and a B ig D odo," State Tax Notes, A pril 5,2004
20
NLRB-FOIA-00007243
" W ill E vans, "S tim ulus funds aiding com panies fined for pollution, accused of fraud,"O range C ounty
54
56
E lizabeth M cN ichol and N icholas Johnson, R ecession continues to batter state budgets;state responses
could slow recovery," C enter on B udget and P olicy P riorities, F ebruary 25, 2010
" N icholas Johnson, Phil O liff and E rica W illiam s, A n update on state budgetcuts,"C enter on B udget and
58
59
68
61
62
63
64
L iv O sby,"A dditional coverage w ould cost nearly $1B," C harleston Postand C ourier, M arch 25, 2010
R ick M ontgom ery, "K ansas'm odel parole program collapses w ith state budget cuts,'Kansas C ity Star,
A pril 3,2010
L egislative D ivision of Post A udit, State of K ansas, Perform ance AuditR eport Econom ic D evelopm ent:
D eterm ining the Am ounts the State H as Spenton Econom ic D evelopm entProgram s and the Econom ic
See,for exam ple,C hristopher D rew and N icola C lark, "W .T .O .A ffirm s R uling of Im proper A irbus A id," N ew
The U .S . com plaint against E urope and A irbus is sum m arized in E uropean C om m unities and C ertain
M em ber States M easures A ffecting T rade in L arge C ivil A ircraft, W T /D S316, E xecutive Sum m ary of
the first subm ission of the U nited S tates of A m erica, N ovem ber 25, 2006. A vailable on B oeing's w eb
com plaint against the U .S . and B oeing is sum m arized in T he E U W T O challenge to U S subsidies to B oeing.
B ackground. D S 353. January 2008. A vailable at the E uropean U nion w eb site: http://trade.ec.europa.ed/
doclib/docs/2008/january/tradoc_137522.pdf
D om inic G ates, "B oeing shares w ork, but guards its secrets," S eattle Tim es, M ay 15,2007
D avid B urress, P atricia O slund and L uke M iddleton, Business Taxes and C osts:A C ross-State C om parison,"
21
NLRB-FOIA-00007244
lit
IN S T IT U T E F O R W IS C O N S IN 'S F U T U R E
p o lic y r e s e a r c h in th e p u b lic in te r e s t
325 W est S ilver S pring, G lendale, W I 53217 P hone 414-967-1682 Fax 414-967-3630
NLRB-FOIA-00007245
C harleston,South C arolina
F riday June 17,2011
I am Julius G etm an, E arl E . Sheffield R egents C hair of L aw at the U niversity of T exas at
A ustin. I have taught labor law since 1963. Prior to com ing to T exas I w as a tenured professor at
have w ritten extensively on issues of labor law . I am the co-author of a w idely used treatise on
basic labor law and w as co-principal investigator of a m ajor study of union organizing
cam paigns. M ost recently, I have published Restoring the P ow er of U nions It T akes a
M ovem ent, w hich tells the history of the hotel and restaurant w orkers union and discusses the
current law . I appreciate the opportunity w hich the com m ittee's invitation provides m e to express
T he G eneral C ounsel's com plaint alleges that B oeing has transferred w ork, w hich w ould
otherw ise have been done at its W ashington state facility, to South C arolina in reprisal for past
strikes, and w ith the avow ed purpose of heading off future strikes. If the G eneral C ounsel can
establish the truth of this allegation, and public statem ents by B oeing officials seem to
acknow ledge its accuracy,'he w ill have show n that B oeing violated Section 8 (a) (3) of the
N L R A . T here is nothing new or controversial about this conclusion. Section 8(a) (3) of the
N ational L abor R elations A ct m akes it an unfair labor practice for an em ployer "by
discrim ination in regard to hire or tenure of em ploym ent or any term of condition of em ploym ent
'A listof statem ents attributing the m ove of "dream hner" w ork to South C arolina to union activity is
NLRB-FOIA-00007246
is "to allow em ployees to freely exercise their right to join unions,be good,bad,or indifferent
m em bers,or abstain from joining any union w ithout im periling their livelihood." 3In accord w ith
this policy,the C ourt has held that to "encourage of discourage m em bership m eans also to
M oving jobs from once facility to another to avoid unionization or to punish w orkers for
engaging in protected activity violates this basic policy of the A ct.T hese practices have long
been declared illegal by the B oard,w ith the agreem ent of the C ourts.
In 1965,the Suprem e C ourt decided in the case of Textile W orkers U nion v.D arlington
M anufacturing C o 5 that a com pany m ay legally go out of business to thw art union activity,but
it also held that "[a] partial closing is an unfair labor practice ...if m otivated by a purpose to chill
unionism ."
T w o years later,then Judge,later C hief Justice B urger stated in Local 57, International
Ladies'G arm ent W orkers'U nion v.N ational Labor Relations B oard,1967, 6 "W hile it is now
clear that an em ployer m ay term inate his business for any reason,it is equally w ell settled that he
m ay not transfer its situs to deprive his em ployees of rights protected by Section 7." 7 N ot only
have the C ourts regularly affirm ed unfair labor practice findings based on retaliation,but they
2 49
1d. A t39-42.
380 U .S.263.
Ithas been understood since the N L R A w as passed in 1937 thatthe rightto stnke is protected by
Section 7.
NLRB-FOIA-00007247
have upheld strong rem edies including the restoration of im properly closed facilities. 8
A ccordingly I am in agreem ent w ith the host of distinguished labor law scholars w ho have
publically supported the G eneral C ounsel's conclusion that issuance of a com plaint w as justified
D espite a spate of angry statem ents to the contrary,there is no basis for the accusation
that the issuance of a com plaint is in any w ay connected to the fact that South C arolina is a right
to w ork state R ight to w ork is a frequently m isunderstood concept.D espite the nam e it has
nothing to do w ith the em ployer's ability to hire or fire.N or does it refer to the right to unionize.
It refers only to the ability of states to prohibit unions from negotiating m andatory dues
paym ents from w orkers that they represent.H ad B oeing transferred operations on the sam e basis
to a non-union facility in a non-right to w ork state,its actions w ould still have violated the A ct.
T his sam e w ell-established precedent supports the general counsel in the instant case.
G iven the routine nature of the violation and the lim ited nature of the proposed rem edy
(discussed below ),it is difficult for m e to understand the sense of outrage that has preceded and
given rise to this hearing.T he B oard has routinely found violations of section 8 (a) (3) based on
em ployer reprisal for union activity since the A ct w as first passed in 1935 I know of no case in
w hich a political reaction com parable to the current denunciations of the G eneral C ounsel's
action has resulted.O ne w onders w hy the issuance of a com plaint,a prelim inary step far less
G eneral C ounsel's actions.Som e seem to find,in the G eneral C ounsel's actions,the first step of
,9The listincludes Professors Jam es B rudney of O hio State,C athenne Fisk of C alIrvine,and Ellen
NLRB-FOIA-00007248
a process to take from em ployers the right to m ake basic business decisions.In fact the
com plaint itself specifically states that aside from returning the w ork im properly rem oved from
the unionized w orkers,"the A cting G eneral C ounsel does not seek to prohibit R espondent from
m aking non-discrim inatory decisions w ith respect to w here w ork.w ill be perform ed,including
non-discrim inatory decisions w ith respect to w ork at its N orth C harleston,South C arolina,
facility."
N or has this,or any other L abor B oard,ever argued for or signaled support for,a policy
depriving em ployers of the right to m ake basic entrepreneurial non-discrim inatory decisions.
A nd if the B oard w ere to overreact in this regard,the C ourts are available to correct their
excesses.
T he N ational L abor R elations B oard,the agency to w hich C ongress has delegated the
process of interpreting the N L R A ,has not yet ruled on the case.E ven if the G eneral C ounsel's
theory of violation w ere som ehow erroneous,there w ould be no basis for C ongressional
involvem ent in the decision process at this point.T he N L R B is an agency w ith tw o separate
arm s: the G eneral C ounsel w ho prosecutes possible unfair labor practices and the five-m em ber
B oard w hich rules on them .T here has been no ruling by the B oard itself on the B oeing case.
T he tw o branches of the B oard act independently of each other.T he five-m em ber B oard
according to statute and precedent played no part in the decision by the G eneral C ounsel to bring
a com plaint.A nd the G eneral C ounsel does not play a role other than that of advocate in the
B oard's decisional process.B efore the B oard itself issues any order,the case m ust be heard and
decided by an A dm inistrative L aw Judge and then by the B oard itself T he B oard should be
perm itted to decide this case according to the law w ithout political interference.A s Justice
NLRB-FOIA-00007249
Frankfurter stated over 50 years ago w ith respect to the reach of sections 7 and 8,"It is essential
that these determ inations be left in the first instance to the N ational L abor R elations B oard." I
T he com plaint is sim ply an allegation; it does not require B oeing to take any action.
Indeed the sam e w ould be true if the B oard ultim ately decides against B oeing.B oeing m ay bring
the m atter to a C ourt of A ppeals w ithout taking any of the steps contained in the B oard's order,
or it m ay sim ply w ait for the B oard to do so in an enforcem ent action,before com plying.N ot
until the B oard's order is enforced by a C ourt of A ppeals w ould B oeing be legally com pelled to
take action in accordance w ith the B oard's ruling.A nd if all of the adjudicatory agencies,yet to
rule on the case,agree w ith the A cting G eneral C ounsel,the im pact on B oeing w ill not be
catastrophic since the G eneral C ounsel is not seeking to have B oeing give up its South C arolina
facility and agrees that it m ay transfer w ork to it,so long as its decision to do so is m ade on a
non-discrim inatory basis.In short,there is no reason for the sense of urgency that has provoked
these hearings.
W hat is unprecedented is a com m ittee of the C ongress choosing to intervene w hile the
processes of law are still in so prelim inary a state.I know of no sim ilar instance.It is inevitable
that this intervention w ill be interpreted by m any as an unw arranted attack on the N L R B and an
NLRB-FOIA-00007250
C ongressm an T rey G ow dy
W ould you be doing a pretty a sorry job for your shareholders if you didn't factor in the
incentives a location is w illing to offer w hen you m ake a decision about w here to locate a
plant?
A re you fam iliar w ith the case of First N ational M aintenance C orp. v. N L R B ? A m I
stating this correctly that C ongress had no expectation that the union w ould becom e a
So B oeing has to m ake w hat is the best decision for them , right? T hey can factor in
incentives from another state, right? Is there any evidence that B oeing negotiated in bad
faith?
A nd this case is going to turn on w hether this a new line of w ork or a transfer of existing
w ork,right?
A re you privy to the fact that B oeing added nearly 2,000 jobs in W ashington State even
A re you fam iliar w ith the quote from the spokesperson of the N L R B ? "W e're not telling
B oeing they can't build planes in South C arolina, w e're talking about one specific piece
of w ork: three planes a m onth. If they keep those three planes a m onth in W ashington,
then there is no problem . B eyond the ten planes, B oeing can build w hatever it w ants in
South C arolina."
H ave w e gotten to the point w here the N L R B is going to tell a com pany how m any
w idgets or planes or anything else they can build in any particular state? Is that how you
read this? T he N L R B is going to tell a com pany precisely the num ber of a product it can
build in a state?
the new w ork is strikes. Is it inappropriate legally that one of the considerations for
w here they're going to place a new line of w ork is w hether or not they w ill have a
L et's be very clear on that, because there w as a costum er w ho said w e are going to have
reliability of your w ork. A costum er is going to go som ew here else because there have
NLRB-FOIA-00007251
W ell let m e ask you this,is it O K for him to think it and just not say it? I m ean w ould he
have been fine to just think to him self,w e better look for another,m ore consistent
w orkforce,instead of saying it,w as thatthe sin he com m itted thathe actually said it?
W ell,m y tim e is alm ost up,I find it an abom ination that you can w ear a prison uniform
and representyourself as a prisoner w hile you are at w ork but the CE O of B oeing cannot
NLRB-FOIA-00007252
ST A T E M E N T O F
L A FE E . SO L O M O N
A C T IN G G E N E R A L C O U N SE L
N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
B E FO R E T H E
C O M M IT T E E O N O V E R SIG H T A N D G O V E R N M E N T R E FO R M
U N IT E D ST A T E D H O U SE O F R E PR E SE N T A T IV E S
N O R T H C H A R L E ST O N , SO U T H C A R O L IN A
JU N E 17,2011
NLRB-FOIA-00007253
I appear before you today as the A cting G eneralC ounselof the N ationalL abor R elations
the 38 years before m y appointm ent,I have served as a career civil servant in m any
I w ould like to start by acknow ledging that w orkers in N orth C harleston are feeling
vulnerable and anxious because they are uncertain as to w hat im pact any final decision
m ay have on their em ploym ent w ith B oeing.T hese are difficult econom ic tim es,and I
truly regret the anxiety this case has caused them and their fam ilies.T he issuance of the
com plaint w as not intended to harm the w orkers of South C arolina,but rather,to protect
protected by the N ational L abor R elations A ct,w ithout fearing discrim ination.B oeing
has every right to m anufacture planes in South C arolina,or anyw here else,for that
m atter,as long as those decisions are based on legitim ate business considerations.
T his com plaint w as issued only after the parties failed to inform ally resolve this dispute.
I personally m et w ith the parties and I tried for three m onths to facilitate a settlem ent of
the case.I rem ain open to playing a constructive role in assisting the parties to settle this
dispute w ithout the costs and uncertainties associated w ith extended litigation.I believe
that,given the parties'longstanding bargaining relationship,a settlem ent w ould serve the
NLRB-FOIA-00007254
interests of the parties and the w orkers and w ould prom ote industrial peace.In the
absence of a m utually acceptable settlem ent,how ever,both B oeing and the M achinists
U nion have a legal right to present their evidence and argum ents in a trial and to have
I w ould like to begin by describing briefly the relevant regulatory fram ew ork and the role
of the O ffice of G eneral C ounsel w ithin that fram ew ork.T he N ational L abor R elations
A ct divides responsibility over private-sector labor relations betw een the N ational L abor
R elations B oard and the G eneral C ounsel of the B oard.T he B oard adjudicates cases in
accordance w ith the procedures set forth in the A ct itself,the A dm inistrative Procedures
T he O ffice of the G eneral C ounsel w as created by the T aft-H artley A m endm ents of 1947.
U nder Section 3(d) of the am ended A ct,the G eneral C ounsel has "final authority",on
behalf of the B oard,w ith respect to the investigation and prosecution of unfair labor
practice com plaints.In order to ensure that the new ly-established G eneral C ounsel of the
N L R B w ould have both the independence and resources necessary to m ake final,
unreview able decisions in typically heated labor and m anagem ent controversies,Section
3(d) also provided that,w ith the exception of adm inistrative law judges and legal
assistants to B oard m em bers,G eneral C ounsel "shall exercise general supervision over
all attorneys em ployed by the B oard" and w ould have general supervision "over the
officers and em ployees in the regional offices." L ike m y predecessors,I have gone to
NLRB-FOIA-00007255
great lengths to ensure that all unfair labor practice charges,w hich m ust be initiated by
T o that end,all charges filed w ith our regional offices are carefully and im partially
investigated to determ ine w hether there is reasonable cause to believe that,under the
B oard's precedents,an unfair labor practice has been com m itted.Fairness to the parties
and sound developm ent of the law w eighs in favor of presenting these types of cases to
if I turned a blind eye to evidence that an unfair labor practice m ay have occurred.I took
an oath to enforce the N ational L abor R elations A ct and to protect w orkers from unlaw ful
conduct.
T he G eneral C ounsel's concern w ith fairness to the parties does not end w ith the issuance
of the com plaint.T he Suprem e C ourt has recognized that the A ct and the B oard's rules
are designed to ensure that proceedings are conducted in a m anner that respects the
private rights of the charging party and the charged party. Autom obile W orkers v.
NLRB-FOIA-00007256
T he Suprem e C ourt has also recognized that "C ongress intended to create an officer
independent of the B oard to handle prosecutions, not m erely the filing of com plaints."
original).T hus,throughout the proceeding,the G eneral C ounsel rem ains m aster of the
com plaint and the charging party is not perm itted to pursue alternative theories of a
is justified by the facts and law .A s such,it rem ains open to the G eneral C ounsel to m ake
concessions on issues of fact or law and to pursue settlem ent discussions w ith the charged
For allthese reasons,the actual fairness of the proceedings before the B oard -- and,
equally im portant,the perception that the B oard's adm inistrative processes are fair --
vitally depends on the public and the parties retaining the confidence thatthe G eneral
C ounselis carrying out his prosecutorialresponsibilities on the basis of the facts and law
in the case,and is not m aking decisions on the basis of political or other m atters not
A s you know ,the B oeing hearing began on T uesday of this w eek before an
the B oeing litigation and in strategic decisions necessary for the prosecution of this case.
M y obligation to protectthe independence of the O ffice of the G eneralC ounsel and the
NLRB-FOIA-00007257
integrity of the enforcem ent process restricts m y ability to offer insight into the decision-
m aking here.I hope you w ill share m y com m itm ent that these proceedings not be
prosecutorial decisions in this case,w hich have been and w ill continue to be m ade based
on the law and the m erits and in a m anner w hich protects the due process rights of the
litigants.
I com e here voluntarily out of respect for the oversight role of C ongress.I w ill do m y
best to answ er your questions,consistent w ith m y obligations to the parties and to the
A m erican public w ith respect to the ongoing B oeing case.T he adjudicatory process m ust
be fair and im partial so that the parties'due process rights,w hich are guaranteed by the
fundam entalprinciples.
NLRB-FOIA-00007258
ST A T E M E N T O F
L A FE E . SO L O M O N
A C T IN G G E N E R A L C O U N SE L
N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
B E FO R E T H E
C O M M IT T E E O N O V E R SIG H T A N D G O V E R N M E N T R E FO R M
U N IT E D ST A T E D H O U SE O F R E PR E SE N T A T IV E S
N O R T H C H A R L E ST O N , SO U T H C A R O L IN A
JU N E 17,2011
NLRB-FOIA-00007259
I appear before you today as the A cting G eneralC ounselof the N ationalL abor R elations
I w ould like to start by acknow ledging that w orkers in N orth C harleston are feeling
vulnerable and anxious because they are uncertain as to w hat im pact any final decision
m ay have on their em ploym ent w ith B oeing.T hese are difficult econom ic tim es,and I
truly regret the anxiety this case has caused them and their fam ilies.T he issuance of the
com plaint w as not intended to harm the w orkers of South C arolina,but rather,to protect
protected by the N ational L abor R elations A ct,w ithout fearing discrim ination.B oeing
has every right to m anufacture planes in South C arolina,or anyw here else,for that
m atter,as long as those decisions are based on legitim ate business considerations.
T his com plaint w as issued only after the parties failed to inform ally resolve this dispute.
I personally m et w ith the parties and I tried for three m onths to facilitate a settlem ent of
the case.I rem ain open to playing a constructive role in assisting the parties to settle this
dispute w ithout the costs and uncertainties associated w ith extended litigation.I believe
that,given the parties'longstanding bargaining relationship,a settlem ent w ould serve the
interests of the parties and the w orkers and w ould prom ote industrial peace.In the
absence of a m utually acceptable settlem ent,how ever,both B oeing and the M achinists
NLRB-FOIA-00007260
U nion have a legal right to present their evidence and argum ents in a trial and to have
A ll,charges filed w ith our regional offices are carefully and im partially investigated to
determ ine w hether there is reasonable cause to believe that,under the B oard's precedents,
an unfair labor practice has been com m itted.Fairness to the parties and sound
developm ent of the law w eighs in favor of presenting these types of cases to the B oard
if I turned a blind eye to evidence that an unfair labor practice m ay have occurred.I took
an oath to enforce the N ational L abor R elations A ct and to protect w orkers from unlaw ful
conduct.
T he G eneral C ounsel's concern w ith fairness to the parties does not end w ith the issuance
of the com plaint.T hroughout the proceeding,the G eneral C ounsel rem ains m aster of the
com plaint and is responsible to ensure that the prosecution of the case is justified by the
facts and law .A s such,it rem ains open to the G eneral C ounsel to m ake concessions on
issues of fact or law and to pursue settlem ent discussions w ith the charged party -- even
For allthese reasons,the actual fairness of the proceedings before the B oard -- and,
equally im portant,the perception that the B oard's adm inistrative processes are fair --
vitally depends on the public and the parties retaining the confidence thatthe G eneral
C ounselis carrying out his prosecutorialresponsibilities on the basis of the facts and law
NLRB-FOIA-00007261
in the case,and is not m aking decisions on the basis of political O r otheim atters not
A s you know ,the B oeing hearing began on T uesday of this w eek before an
the B oeing litigation and in strategic decisions necessary for the prosecution of this case.
M y obligation to protectthe independence of the O ffice of the G eneralC ounsel and the
integrity of the enforcem ent process restricts m y ability to offer insight into the decision-
m aking here.I hope you w ill share m y com m itm ent that these proceedings not be
prosecutorial decisions in this case,w hich have been and w ill continue to be m ade based
on the law and the m erits and in a m anner w hich protects the due process rights of the
litigants.
I com e here voluntarily out of respect for the oversight role of C ongress.I w ill do m y
best to answ er your questions,consistent w ith m y obligations to the parties and to the
A m erican public w ith respect to the ongoing B oeing case.T he adjudicatory process m ust
be fair and im partial so that the parties'due process rights,w hich are guaranteed by the
fundam entalprinciples.
NLRB-FOIA-00007262
W A S H IN G T O N , D C 20510
M ay 4,2011
PresidentBarack O bam a
W ashington,D C 20500
D ear Presidentbarna:
In your State ofthe Union address,you said:"W e know w hatittakes to com pete for the jobs and
industries ofour tim e.W e need to out-innovate,out-educate,and out-build the restofthe w orld.
W e agree.G lobalcom petition for business and jobs is m ore im portantthan ever as our country
struggles to recover from the lingering recession and cope w ith the m assive debtburden im posed
R elations Board are m aking itm ore difficultfor A m erica to w in the future.
The N LR B,atthe behestofA cting G eneralC ounselLafe Solom on,has taken unprecedented
C arolina,a state thatassures w orkers the freedom notto join a union as a condition of
em ploym ent.W e consider this an attack on m illions ofw orkers in 22 right-to-w ork states,as
w ellas a governm ent-led actofintim idation againstA m erican com panies thatshould have the
Ifthe N LR B prevails,itw illonly encourage com panies to m ake their investm ents in foreign
nations,m oving jobs and econom ic grow th overseas.A m erica w illnotw in the future if
W ashington penalizes w orkers in states thathave discovered w inning econom ic strategies.R ight-
to-w ork states have faster job grow th,faster incom e grow th,and faster population grow th than
successfulw orkers rights are being stam ped out by politicalappointees w ho serve at your
term on January 5,2011,yet,m em bers ofthe Senate have notbeen able to vet him . M r.Solom on
has notappeared for a Senate confirm ation hearing,nor has he been subjected to a fullSenate
confirm ation vote,A dditionally,you granted a recess appointm entto C raig Becker,a form er
law yer for the Service Em ployees InternationalUnion and A FL-C IO ,to becom e one ofthe five
m em bers ofthe N LR B's pow erfulboard over w idespread,bipartisan objections in the Senate to
his nom ination.The Senate rejected his nom ination in February 2010.A ll41 R epublican
senators w rote you a letter in M arch 2010 urging you notto give M r.Becker a recess
NLRB-FOIA-00007263
appointm ent,w hich you did later thatm onth,effectively circum venting the w illofthe U.S.
Senate.
The Senate has been unacceptably denied the ability to exercise its constitutionalduty ofadvise
and consentin regards to the N LR B.In lightofthe N LR B's recentactions thatw ould have a
deleterious effecton job creation and econom ic opportunity across the country,itis tim e to hold
the N LR B accountable.
W e urge you to w ithdraw both M r.Solom on's and M r.Becker's nom inations to their respective
..._
Sincerely,
NLRB-FOIA-00007264
U e,L ,
-2)1
4 C % -.
NLRB-FOIA-00007265
June 16,2011
C hairm an
W ashington,D .C .20515
A s the R anking M em bers of the tw o H ouse C om m ittees w ith oversight and legislative
jurisdiction over the N ational L abor R elations B oard (N L R B ),w e w rite to express our grave
concerns about the June 17,2011,field hearing you have scheduled in South C arolina regarding
the N L R B com plaint against T he B oeing C om pany (B oeing).T hese concerns have been
heightened by your latest letter to the N L R B 's A cting G eneral C ounsel,L afe Solom on,on June
14,2011.
T he tim ing of the hearing,your insistence on M r.Solom on's personal appearance,and the
nature of your June 14 letter indicate a serious potential for im proper interference w ith a pending
case involving private parties and a disturbing disregard for w hat that interference could m ean for
Y our letter also raises new questions about the intent of this hearing. T he hearing
ostensibly relates to the N L R B A cting G eneral C ounsel's case against B oeing. T his case opened
hearing. T hat tim ing does not appear to be coincidental. A lthough you could have held a
hearing w ith any array of experts,you have insisted that the chief prosecutor of the case the
person w ith ultim ate decision-m aking authority over all prosecutorial decisions in the case
testify at this hearing w hile the trial is underw ay. T hose prosecutorial decisions do not end w ith
the issuance of a com plaint. Significant decisions w ill continue to be m ade until the prosecution
rests.Y et,you have indicated that you plan to subject this decision-m aker to questions about the
In the m eantim e,you have dem anded internal deliberative docum ents from M r.Solom on
that could include,am ong other things,docum ents revealing the prosecution's trial strategy.
Such inform ation,if disclosed during the pendency of the case, w ould unfairly advantage the
PR IN T E D O N R E C Y C LE D PA PE R
NLRB-FOIA-00007266
T he H onorable D arrellIssa
Page 2
respondent,B oeing,and disadvantage the prosecution and the charging party.T he intrusive
nature of your dem and for docum ents,as w ell as your approach to constitutional concerns in the
June 14 letter,indicate that you have every intention at the upcom ing hearing of pressing the very
kinds of questions that putthe due process rights of private parties in jeopardy.
A fter being invited to testify,M r.Solom on expressed his serious reservations to you
about his appearance and its potential im pact on the due process rights of the parties to the case.
Y ou overruled those concerns and threatened to use com pulsory m eans to force M r.Solom on's
appearance.M r.Solom on attem pted to accom m odate your request by offering the testim ony of
another N L R B official w ho has no direct involvem ent in the pending B oeing case and provide
M r.Solom on's reservations are clear,and w e share those reservations.R ather than
entirely dism issing those reservations,you show ultim ate disregard for them .In your June 14
letter,you stated:
[W ]hile Ido not believe this C om m ittee's oversight has any im plications for the due
process rights of the litigants,to the extent that it m ay,such a claim is for the affected
parties to raise ...in federalcourtafter a decision has been rendered by the agency....
[T ]he tim e to bring such a claim [of C ongressional intervention] is after a final agency
decision is rendered.T his is because a court's analysis w ill turn on w hether the decision-
interference w ith constitutional rights,that should not be the C om m ittee's concern and instead
B utitis the C om m ittee's concern,and it is the concern of all M em bers of C ongress that
w e conduct ourselves in a m anner that upholds the C onstitution.R ecognizing the risk of
interference, as w ell as the risk of the appearance of interference, a responsible chairm an w ould
take care to m inim ize these risks.R ather than creating a new basis for appealing any final
agency decision,increasing uncertainty,and shifting the costs of your interference onto private
parties,the C om m ittee should w ait until the case is no longer pending before calling the chief
O versight should',above all,be a tool for m aintaining the integrity of governm ent
here is attem pting to do just the opposite.A t every turn,it threatens that integrity.
T here is still an opportunity for you to dem onstrate som e m odicum of concern about the
constitutionaland ethical im pactof w hat you are doing.W e strongly urge you to be circum spect
aboutthe nature of the questions you and other M em bers pose to the chief prosecutor of this live
NLRB-FOIA-00007267
T he H onorable D arrellIssa
Page 3
case at the hearing.A t a m inim um ,w e ask that you direct C om m ittee M em bers to lim it all
questions to M r.Solom on to general questions aboutthe N L R B and its processes,and not issues
T here is no dispute that C ongress has the authority to conduct rigorous oversight of
federal agencies,including the N L R B .B ut C ongress m ust not abuse this authority.W e are
confident that the C om m ittee's oversight responsibility can be fulfilled w ithout com prom ising
Sincerely,
G eorge M iller
R anking M em ber
E ducation and W orkforce C om m ittee
. i
E lij.1 u m m in g s
67 3 )
R anking M em ber
NLRB-FOIA-00007268
N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
R egion 19
M ay 13, 2011
W ash in g to n , D C 20036-5306
R e : T h e B o e in g C o m p a n y
anticipate an am iable and highly professionalw orking relationship throughout this proceeding.
A greem ent and N otice to E m ployees that w e discussed. I w ould like to reiterate that the A cting
G eneral C ounsel rem ains open to considering any thoughts and suggestions you w ould like to
m ake.
that, given the direct and indirect costs to your client due to the breadth of this m atter, this m ay
th e p a rtie s m a k e a g ood-faith effort to explore a no n-B oard resolu tion, and w e stan d ready to
NLRB-FOIA-00007269
Pom -C om plaint
U pdated 4/11
SE T T L E M E N T A G R E E M E N T
IN T H E M A T T E R O F T H E B O E IN G C O M PA N Y ,C A SE 19-C A -32431
The undersigned C harged Party and the undersigned C harging Party,in settlem entofthe above m atter,and subjectto the approvalofthe R egional
U pon approvalof this A greem ent and receipt of the N otices from the R egion,w hich m ay include N otices in m ore
PO ST IN G O F N O T IC E
than one language as deem ed appropriate by the R egionalD irector,the C harged Party w illpostim m ediately in conspicuous places in and aboutits
plant/office,including allplaces w here notices to em ployees/m em bers are custom arily posted,and m aintain for 60 consecutive days from the date of
posting,copies of the attached N otice (and versions in other languages as deem ed appropriate by the R egionalD irector) m ade a part hereof,said
N otices to be signed by a responsible officialofthe C harged Party and the date ofactualposting to be show n thereon.In the eventthis A greem entis
in settlem ent of a charge against a union,the union w illsubm it forthw ith signed copies of said N otice to the R egionalD irector w ho w illforw ard
them to the em ployer w hose em ployees are involved herein,for posting,the em ployer w illing,in conspicuous places in and about the em ployer's
plantw here they shallbe m aintained for 60 consecutive days from the date ofposting.Further,in the eventthatthe charged union m aintains such
bulletin boards at the facility of the em ployer w here the alleged unfair labor practices occurred,the union shallalso post N otices on each such
In addition to physicalposting ofpaper notices,notices shallbe distributed electronically,such as by e-m ail,posting on an intranetor an internetsite,
or other electronic m eans,if the C harged Party custom arily com m unicates w ith its em ployees or m em bers by such m eans.T he electronic posting
shallrem ain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date itw as originally posted.T he C harged Party w ille-m ailthe R egion's C om pliance O fficer
atjam es.lorange,nlrb.gov w ith a link to the electronic posting location on the sam e day as the posting.In the event that passw ords or other log-on
inform ation is required to access the electronic posting,the C harged Party agrees to provide such access inform ation to the R egion's C om pliance
O fficer.Ifthe N otice is distributed via e-m ail,the charged party w illforw ard a copy ofthe e-m aildistributed to the R egionalC om pliance O fficer.
C O M PL IA N C E W IT H N O T IC E
The C harged Party w illcom ply w ith allthe term s and provisions ofsaid N otice.
B A C K PA Y
W ithin 14 days from approvalofthis agreem entthe C harged Party w illm ake w hole the em ployee(s)nam ed below by paym entto
each ofthem ofthe am ountopposite each nam e.The C harged Party w illm ake appropriate w ithholdings for each nam ed em ployee.
SC O PE O F T H E A G R E E M E N T
T his A greem ent settles only the allegations in the above-captioned case(s),and does not constitute a
settlem entofany other case(s)or m atters.Itdoes notpreclude persons from filing charges,the G eneralC ounselfrom prosecuting com plaints,or the
Board and the courts from finding violations w ith respectto m atters w hich precede the date ofthe approvalofthis A greem entregardless ofw hether
such m atters are know n to the G eneralC ounselor are readily discoverable.The G eneralC ounselreserves the rightto use the evidence obtained in
the investigation and prosecution ofthe above-captioned case(s)for any relevantpurpose in the litigation ofthis or any other case(s),and a judge,the
Board and the courts m ay m ake findings offactand/or conclusions oflaw w ith respectto said evidence.
In the eventthe C harging Party fails or refuses to becom e a party to this A greem ent,and ifin the
R E FU SA L T O ISSU E C O M PL A IN T
R egionalD irector's discretion it w illeffectuate the policies of the N ationalL abor R elations A ct,the R egionalD irector shalldecline to issue a
C om plaintherein (or a new C om plaintifone has been w ithdraw n pursuantto the term s ofthis A greem ent),and this A greem entshallbe betw een the
C harged Party and the undersigned R egionalD irector.A review of such action m ay be obtained pursuant to Section 102.19 of the R ules and
R egulations ofthe Board ifa requestfor sam e is filed w ithin 14 days thereof.This A greem entshallbe nulland void ifthe G eneralC ounseldoes not
sustain the R egionalD irector's action in the eventofa review .A pprovalofthis A greem entby the R egionalD irector shallconstitute w ithdraw alof
any C om plaint(s)and N otice ofH earing heretofore issued in the above captioned case(s),as w ellas any answ er(s)filed in response.
A U T H O R IZ A T IO N T O PR O VID E C O M PL IA N C E IN FO R M A T IO N A N D N O T IC E S D IR E C T L Y T O C H A R G E D PA R T Y .
C ounselfor the C harged Party authorizes the R egionalO ffice to forw ard the cover letter describing the generalexpectations and
instructions to achieve com pliance,a conform ed settlem ent,originalnotices and a certification of posting directly to the C harged
Party.Ifsuch authorization is granted,C ounselw illbe sim ultaneously served w ith a courtesy copy ofthese docum ents.
N o
Y es
Initials
Initials
PE R FO R M A N C E
Perform ance by the C harged Party w ith the term s and provisions ofthis A greem entshallcom m ence im m ediately after the
A greem ent is approved by the R egionalD irector,or if the C harging Party does not enter into this A greem ent,perform ance shallcom m ence
im m ediately upon receiptby the,C harged Party ofnotice thatno review has been requested or thatthe G eneralC ounselhas sustained the R egional
D irector.
The C harged Party agrees thatin case ofnon-com pliance w ith any ofthe term s ofthis Settlem entA greem entby the C harged Party,and after 14 days
notice from the R egionalD irector ofthe N ationalLabor R elations Board ofsuch non-com pliance w ithoutrem edy by the C harged Party,the R egional
D irector w illreissue the com plaintpreviously issued on [date] in the instantcase(s).Thereafter,the G eneralC ounselm ay file a m otion for default
judgm entw ith the Board on the allegations ofthe com plaint.The C harged Party understands and agrees thatthe allegations ofthe aforem entioned
com plaint w illbe deem ed adm itted and its A nsw er to such com plaint w illbe considered w ithdraw n T he only issue that m ay be raised before the
Board is w hether the C harged Party defaulted on the term s ofthis Settlem entA greem ent.The Board m ay then,w ithoutnecessity oftrialor any other
NLRB-FOIA-00007270
4 .
Post-C om plaint
U psLied 4/11
proceeding,find allallegations of the com plaintto be true and m ake findings of factand conclusions of law consistentw ith those allegations adverse
to the C harged Party on allissues raised by the pleadings.T he B oard m ay then issue an order providing a fullrem edy for the violations found as is
appropriate to rem edy such violations.T he parties further agree thata U .S.C ourtof A ppeals Judgm entm ay be entered enforcing the B oard order ex
parte,after service or attem pted service upon C harged Party/R espondentatthe lastaddress provided to the G eneralC ounsel.
N O T IFIC A T IO N O F C O M PL IA N C E
T he undersigned parties to this A greem entw illeach notify the R egionalD irector in w riting w hat
steps the C harged Party has taken to com ply herew ith Such notification shallbe given w ithin 5 days,and again after 60 days,from the date of the
approval of this A greem ent.In the event the C harging Party does not enter into this A greem ent,initial notice shall be given w ithin 5 days after
notification from the R egional D irector that no review has been requested or that the G eneral C ounsel has sustained the R egional D irector.
C ontingentupon com pliance w ith the term s and provisions hereof,no further action shallbe taken in the above captioned case(s).
D ate
W orkers
B y:
D ate
D ate
A pproved B y:
D ate
B y.
W illiam J.K ilberg,P.C .,A ttorney
G ibson D unn & C rutcher LLP
R ecom m ended B y:
M ara-Louise A nzalone,Field A ttorney
NLRB-FOIA-00007271
N O T IC E T O
FO RM NLRB-4724
(11-02)
PO STED PU R SU A N T TO
APPROVED BY A RE(
F E D E R A L L A W G IV E S YO U T H E R IG H T T O :
^W ,
"
..
1
'
benefi
t-and
protecti
on
W E W IL L N O T
NOT
W E W IL L N O T
W E W IL L N O T
.,
W E W IL L
"'
fu tu re s trik e s a g a in s t u s . , - -
787 D ream liner assem bly lines are m otivated by your authorization
W E W IL L N O T
W E W IL L N O T
im ply that our aw ard of additionalor new 787 D ream liner assem bly
gain additio nal or new 787 D ream lin er assem b ly w ork because of
charge orelection petition,you m ay speak confidentially to any agentwith the Board's Regioi
THISISANOFFICIALNOT
THIS NOTICE M UST REM AIN POSTED FOR 60 CONSECUTIVE DAYS FROM THE DATE OF POSTING AND1
THIS NOTICE OR COM PLIANCE W ITH ITS PROVISIONS M AY BE DIRECTED TO THE ABOVE REGIONAL OF
NLRB-FOIA-00007272
E M P L O YE E S
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
M AL DIRECTOR OF THE
AGENCY OF THE
.;;;;.1!i
3 v e " 7"
A ^.
AT!.
4;41.1
_1,104+ ;'
:
"
W E W ILL
:i:).ti'1,1'7.':*,
' '
'
7-0
- :.4
.
1,...,
N Y t;',4P .
"1 4 8 1 ,
O fX %
locate - th e seco n d 787 D ream lin er assem b li, lin e 'in E verett,
A .. " '
' -
%N;;;?.,t:.,:",
cs
'II
,''
j4.
(Em ployer)
'
,4
By:
(Title)
D ate.
S eattle, W A 98174
by em ployers and unions.To find outm ore aboutyour rights under the A ctand how to file a
IO ffice setforth below.You m ay also obtain inform ation from the Board'swebsite:
w w w .nlrb.00v.
NLRB-FOIA-00007273
Poq-C om plaint
U pdated 4/1).
U N IT E D ST A T E S G O V E R N M E N T
N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
SE T T L E M E N T A G R E E M E N T
IN T H E M A T T E R O F T H E B O E IN G C O M PA N Y ,C A SE 19-C A -32431
T he undersigned C harged Party and the undersigned C harging Party,in settlem ent of the above m atter,and subject to the approval of the R egional
PO ST IN G O F N O T IC E
U pon approval of this A greem ent and receipt of the N otices from the R egion,w hich m ay include N otices in m ore
than one language as deem ed appropriate by the R egional D irector,the C harged Party w ill post im m ediately in conspicuous places in and about its
plant/office,including all places w here notices to em ployees/m em bers are custom arily posted,and m aintain for 60 consecutive days from the date of
posting,copies of the attached N otice (and versions in other languages as deem ed appropriate by the R egional D irector) m ade a part hereof,said
N otices to be signed by a responsible official of the C harged Party and the date of actual posting to be show n thereon In the event this A greem ent is
in settlem ent of a charge against a union,the union w ill subm it forthw ith signed copies of said N otice to the R egional D irector w ho w ill forw ard
them to the em ployer w hose em ployees are involved herein,for posting,the em ployer w illing,in conspicuous places in and about the em ployer's
plant w here they shall be m aintained for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting.Further,in the event that the charged union m aintains such
bulletin boards at the facility of the em ployer w here the alleged unfair labor practices occurred, the union shall also post N otices on each such
In addition to physical posting of paper notices,notices shall be distributed electronically,such as by e-m ail,posting on an intranet or an internee site,
or other electronic m eans,if the C harged Party custom arily com m unicates w ith its em ployees or m em bers by such m eans.T he electronic posting
shall rem ain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date it w as originally posted.T he C harged Party w ill e-m ail the R egion's C om pliance O fficer
at lam es lorang@ nlrb gov w ith a link to the electronic posting location on the sam e day as the posting.In the event that passw ords or other log-on
inform ation is required to access the electronic posting,the C harged Party agrees to provide such access inform ation to the R egion's C om pliance
O fficer.If the N otice is distributed via e-m ail,the charged party w ill forw ard a copy of the e-m ail distributed to the R egional C om pliance O fficer.
C O M PL IA N C E W IT H N O T IC E
T he C harged Party w ill com ply w ith all the term s and provisions of said N otice.
B A C K PA Y --- W ithin 14 days from approval of this agreem ent the C harged Party w ill m ake w hole the em ployee(s) nam ed below by paym ent to
each of them of the am ount opposite each nam e.T he C harged Party w ill m ake appropriate w ithholdings for each nam ed em ployee.
SC O P E O F T H E A G R E E M E N T
T his A greem ent settles only the allegations in the above-captioned case(s),and does not constitute a
settlem ent of any other case(s) or m atters.It does not preclude persons from filing charges,the G eneral C ounsel from prosecuting com plaints,or the
B oard and the courts from finding violations w ith respect to m atters w hich precede the date of the approval of this A greem ent regardless of w hether
such m atters are know n to the G eneral C ounsel or are readily discoverable.T he G eneral C ounsel reserves the right to use the evidence obtained in
the investigation and prosecution of the above-captioned case(s) for any relevantpurpose in the litigation of this or any other case(s),and a judge,the
B oard and the courts m ay m ake findings of fact and/or conclusions of law w ith respect to said evidence.
R E FU SA L T O ISSU E C O M P L A IN T
In the event the C harging Party fails or refuses to becom e a party to this A greem ent,and if in the
R egional D irector's discretion it w ill effectuate the policies of the N ational L abor R elations A ct, the R egional D irector shall decline to issue a
C om plaint herein (or a new C om plaint if one has been w ithdraw n pursuant to the term s of this A greem ent),and this A greem ent shall be betw een the
C harged P arty and the undersigned R egional D irector A review of such action m ay be obtained pursuant to Section 102 19 of the R ules and
R egulations of the B oard if a request for sam e is filed w ithin 14 days thereof.T his A greem ent shall be null and void if the G eneral C ounsel does not
sustain the R egional D irector's action in the event of a review A pproval of this A greem ent by the R egional D irector shall constitute w ithdraw al of
any C om plaint(s) and N otice of H earing heretofore issued in the above captioned case(s),as w ell as any answ er(s) filed in response.
A U T H O R IZ A T IO N T O PR O V ID E C O M PL IA N C E IN FO R M A T IO N A N D N O T IC E S D IR E C T L Y T O C H A R G E D PA R T Y .
C ounsel for the C harged P arty authorizes the R egional O ffice to forw ard the cover letter describing the general expectations and
instructions to achieve com pliance,a conform ed settlem ent,original notices and a certification of posting directly to the C harged
Party.If such authorization is granted,C ounsel w ill be sim ultaneously served w ith a courtesy copy of these docum ents.
N o
Y es
Initials
Initials
PE R FO R M A N C E
Perform ance by the C harged Party w ith the term s and provisions of this A greem ent shall com m ence im m ediately after the
A greem ent is approved by the R egional D irector, or if the C harging P arty does not enter into this A greem ent, perform ance shall com m ence
im m ediately upon receipt by the C harged Party of notice that no review has been requested or that the G eneral C ounsel has sustained the R egional
D irector.
T he C harged Party agrees that in case of non-com pliance w ith any of the term s of this Settlem ent A greem ent by the C harged Party,and after 14 days
notice from the R egional D irector of the N ational L abor R elations B oard of such non-com pliance w ithout rem edy by the C harged Party,the R egional
D irector w ill reissue the com plaint previously issued on [date] in the instant case(s).T hereafter,the G eneral C ounsel m ay file a m otion for default
judgm ent w ith the B oard on the allegations of the com plaint.T he C harged Party understands and agrees that the allegations of the aforem entioned
com plaint w ill be deem ed adm itted and its A nsw er to such com plaint w ill be considered w ithdraw n.T he only issue that m ay be raised before the
B oard is w hether the C harged Party defaulted on the term s of this Settlem ent A greem ent T he B oard m ay then,w ithout necessity of trial or any other
NLRB-FOIA-00007274
P ost-C om plaint
U pdated 4/11
.,
proceeding,find all allegations of the com plaint to be true and m ake findings of fact and conclusions of law consistent w ith those allegations adverse
to the C harged Party on all issues raised by the pleadings.T he B oard m ay then issue an order providing a full rem edy for the violations found as is
appropriate to rem edy such violations.T he parties further agree that a U S.C ourt of A ppeals Judgm ent m ay be entered enforcing the B oard order ex
parte,after service or attem pted service upon C harged Party/R espondent at the last address provided to the G eneral C ounsel.
N O T IFIC A T IO N O F C O M PL IA N C E - T he undersigned parties to this A greem ent w ill each notify the R egional D irector in w riting w hat
steps the C harged Party has taken to com ply herew ith.Such notification shall be given w ithin 5 days,and again after 60 days,from the date of the
approval of this A greem ent.In the event the C harging Party does not enter into this A greem ent,initial notice shall be given w ithin 5 days after
notification from the R egional D irector that no review has been requested or that the G eneral C ounsel has sustained the R egional D irector.
C ontingent upon com pliance w ith the term s and provisions hereof,no further action shall be taken in the above captioned case(s).
D ate
W orkers
B y:
D ate
D ate
A pproved B y.
D ate
T he B oeing C om pany
B y
R ecom m ended B y
NLRB-FOIA-00007275
A llen , C o n sta n ce
F ro m :
P o m e ra n tz, A n n e
S e n t:
W e d n e sd a y, S e p te m b e r 0 1 , 2 0 1 0 5 :0 5 P M
T o :
A d vice ; K a rsh , A a ro n
C c:
A lb e rtse n , M a ry
S u b je ct:
R E : B o e in g C o m p a n y, 1 9 -C A -3 2 4 3 1 , S u b m issio n
Page 1 of2
A a ro n ,
M a ry fo rw a rd e d yo u r e -m a il to m e fo r re sp o n se . T h e file s in th is ca se a re q u ite vo lu m in o u s, a s yo u m a y h a ve
B o e in g .
A nne
G -)
Fro m : A lb e rtse n , M a ry
S e n t: W e d n e sd a y, S e p te m b e r 0 1 , 2 0 1 0 1 :5 5 P M
T o : P o m e ra n tz, A n n e
S u b je c t: F W : B o e in g C o m p a n y, 1 9 -C A -3 2 4 3 1 , S u b m issio n
M are Albertsem
7:7
C)t
? -
AO M
R e g io n 1 9 - S e a ttle , W A
(2 0 6 ) 2 2 0 -6 3 1 8
Fro m : A dvice
S e n t: W e d n e sd a y, S e p te m b e r 0 1 , 2 0 1 0 8 :4 2 A M
T o : A lb e rtse n , M a ry
S u b je c t: F W : B o e in g C o m p a n y, 1 9 -C A -3 2 4 3 1 , S u b m issio n
T h a n ks fo r th e su b m issio n . P le a se le t u s kn o w o n w h a t d a te a n d in w h a t fo rm yo u w ill b e se n d in g u s th e R e g io n a l
a re a n d h o w m a n y th e re a re ?
T h a n ks -
A a ro n K a rsh
D A G C . A d vice
Fro m : A lb e rtse n , M a ry
S e n t: T u e sd a y, A u g u st 3 1 , 2 0 1 0 7 :2 1 P M
9/2/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00007276
U n ite d S ta te s G o v e rn m e n t
giF IC E O F T H E G E N E R W O U N S E L
S .A
IvA dvice M
r(j2-jz
FORRISTRIBUTION-
em orandum
DA T E
A p r il 1 1 , 2 0 1 1
TO
R i c h a r d L . A h e a r n , R e g i o n a l Di r e c t o r
Region 19
FROM
Di v i s i o n o f A d v i c e
SU B JE C T
Case 19-CA-32431
512-5006-5062
512-5006-5067
512-5036-8387
512-5036-8389
524-0167-1033
524-5029-5037
524 - 0167-1033
524-5060
524-8307-1600
524-8307-5300
530 - 6050-0825-3300
530 - 6067-4011-4200
530 - 6067-4011-4600
530-8054-7000
775-8731
collective-bargaining agreement.
NLRB-FOIA-00007277
Case 19 -C A - 3 2 4 3 1 .
-2
seven planes on the first line. Thus, the Region should seek
the first ten 787 aircraft that it produces each month and to
FA C T S
to arbitration. ...
NLRB-FOIA-00007278
Case 19 - CA-32431411
-3
Bo e i n g I n t r o d u c e s t h e 7 8 1 " D r e a m l i n e r "
That line opened in May 2007, with the capacity for producing
our customers and competing to win the new business that will
NLRB-FOIA-00007279
Case 19-CA-32431410
-4
noted that he and Carson grew up in and shared a love for the
the CEO was "sick and tired" of the union's strikes and was
Integrated Defense Systems CEO Jim Albaugh, and for the first
Di s t r i c t 7 5 1 DB R T o m W r o b l e w s k i . T h i s w a s t h e f i r s t
occurred in 1948 (140 days), 1965 (19 days), 1977 (45 days),
1989 (48 days), 1995 (69 days), and 2005 (28 days).
NLRB-FOIA-00007280
Case 19-CA-32431410
-5
bargaining agreement.
second line outside the Puget Sound area unless it could reach
NLRB-FOIA-00007281
Case 19 - CA-32431411
-6
without intermediaries." 3 B o e i n g a l s o i s s u e d a F A Q d o c u m e n t
to the employees stating that the mass layoffs that took place
a s s e m b l y l i n e . F o r e x a m p l e ,
The Post and the Courier reported
a d v a n t a g e i n t h e 7 8 7 c h a s e { . ] " A n a r t i c l e i n t h e Charleston
Second 787 line but that it had not yet made a decision as to
only way Boeing would place the second line in Washington was
that this was not possible, but the Union would consider a
-for some -
sort -of - neutrality agreement -. A t t h e e n d o f t h e
long-term agreement.
NLRB-FOIA-00007282
Case 19-CA-3243140
- 7 -
do.
The Union lost the election in South Carolina eight days later
and wanted the Union's input within the next three to four
resolve economic issues for the long term rather than through
would get more. On October 15, for the first time, Boeing
said that it wanted a lower wage structure for new hires and a
NLRB-FOIA-00007283
Case 19-CA-32431f"
Carolina.
work; location of the second line in the Puget Sound area; and
was the Union's "last and final" offer, but the Union
NLRB-FOIA-00007284
-9
couple of weeks."
Meanwhile, the_governmental_bodies_in_South-Ca-rol-ina-were--
and invest more than $750 million in the State within the next
NLRB-FOIA-00007285
Case 19-CA-32431
- 1 0 -
Bo e i n g A n n o u n c e s i t s D e c i s i o n s t o L o c a t e t h e S e c o n d L i n e i n
phased out once the South Carolina line was up and running.
issues and work stoppages." The memo further stated, "In the
units who produce parts for the 787 assembly line are likely
Journal o n De c e m b e r 8 d i s c u s s e d t h i s a n n o u n c e m e n t . T h e
customers."
NLRB-FOIA-00007286
Case 19-CA-32431
0
11 -
I n t e g r a t e d De f e n s e S y s t e m s C E O t o r e p l a c e C a r s o n . ) T h e
The issue last fall was really about, you know, how
Charleston.
_
When asked whether_going to Charleston, in light of the
that the 2008 strike reduced its earnings by $1.8 million, far
NLRB-FOIA-00007287
Case 19-CA-32431
III
- 12 -
decision as follows:
And it was not the wages we're paying today. It was that
escalation of wages....
from the main assembly line. Once supply issues are resolved
ACTION
employees, on
Sound unit employees that they could retain all of the 787
this interview.
NLRB-FOIA-00007288
Case 19-CA-32431
411
- 13 -
problems.
not be ready for production for two years because of the need
assemble in the Puget Sound area the first ten 787 aircraft
NLRB-FOIA-00007289
Case 19-CA-32431
- 14 -
I. T h e E m p l o y e r V i o l a t e d S e c t i o n 8 ( a ) ( 1 )
supplier strategy." 9 T h e e m p l o y e r s t a t e d t h a t i t h a d
plant. The employer also made clear that the plant's nonunion
employment. 10 A n d t h e e m p l o y e r c o n v e y e d t h e m e s s a g e t h a t t h e
planned to introduce. 11 T h e B o a r d c o n c l u d e d t h a t a l t h o u g h t h e
activity."- 2 T h e B o a r d e x p r e s s l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d a n e m p l o y e r ' s
5 See NLRB V. Gissel Packing Co., 395 U.S -. 575, 618 -(19-69)--
6 Ibid.
NLRB-FOIA-00007290
Case 19-CA-32431 0
- 15 -
date. "13
employees that they will lose their jobs if they join a strike
14 See, e.g., Kroger Co., 311 NLRB 1187, 1200 (1993), affd.
mem. 50 F.3d 1037 (11 th Cir. 1995); General Electric Co., 321
NLRB 662, fn. 5 (1996), enf. denied 117 F.3d 627 (D.C. Cir.
1997).
15 A e l c o C o r p . , 3 2 6 N L R B 1 2 6 2 , 1 2 6 5 ( 1 9 9 8 ) . S e e a l s o Do r s e y
part 233 F.3d 831 - (4 tn Cir. 2000) (threat to close the plant if
16 3 1 1 N L R B a t 1 2 0 0 . S e e a l s o G e n e r a l E l e c t r i c C o . , 3 2 1 N L R B
17 See, e.g., Tawas Industries, 336 NLRB 318, 321 (2001) (no
466, 466 (2000) (no factual basis for statements about having
unionized).
NLRB-FOIA-00007291
Case 19-CA-32431
- 16 -
t o p r e d i c t i n g " u n a v o i d a b l e c o n s e q u e n c e s . " 20
testifies. 21 B y c o n t r a s t , r e p o r t e r s u m m a r i e s c a n n o t f o r m t h e
Sound." 22 H i s c o m m e n t s w e r e i n d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e f r o m t h e
19
- -
5 -
consequences").
20
22
23
S e a ttle T im e s.
NLRB-FOIA-00007292
Case 19-CA-32431
- 17 -
removed jobs from Puget Sound because employees had struck and
strikes. 25
activity. 26
drove home the message: union activity could cost them their
II.
question that the decision will direct work away from Puget
Sound employees_with_consequent_adverse-effecta---Instead-of----
to employees.
25 T h e a u t h o r s o f t h e s e a r t i c l e s w i l l n e e d t o t e s t i f y . I f
NLRB-FOIA-00007293
Case 19-CA-32431 4 0
- 18 -
sourcing" program means that the Puget Sound and Portland unit
implemented.
retaliatory motive. 28
employer-thay-not,- for-unlawfully-motivated-reasons,-d-ivert -
employees. 30 S i m i l a r l y , i n C o l d H e a d i n g C o . , t h e e m p l o y e r
28 Ibid.
29 See Adair Standish Corp., 290 NLRB 317, 318-19 (1988), enfd
NLRB-FOIA-00007294
- 19 -
the fact that unit employees may not yet have experienced the
sub nom. O'Dovero v. NLRB, 193 F.3d 532 (D.C. Cir. 1999)
33 See id. at
-365-67 (employer violated - Section -8(a-)(3)
failing to
35 See Parexel International, LLC, 356 NLRB No. 82, slip op.
NLRB-FOIA-00007295
Case 19-CA-32431
111
- 20 -
III
activity.""
36
37
38
39
40 See ibid.
NLRB-FOIA-00007296
Case 19-CA-32431 4 0
- 21 -
substantial. "42
striking.
See 295 NLRB 1095, 1095 (1989), enfd. 903 F.2d 396 (5 th Cir.
41
42
43
NLRB-FOIA-00007297
Case 19-CA-32431 4 0
- 22 -
intent. f44
I n I n t e r n a t i o n a l P a p e r C o . , t h e B o a r d s e t f o r t h
rights. 45 F i r s t , t h e B o a r d l o o k s t o t h e s e v e r i t y o f t h e h a r m
employee rights. 47
economic weapon, and for the Union itself, and thereby hinder
_any_future_collective_bargaining.__ThirdBoeingLs_conduct_
835, 863-64 --(1999-), -enf:- denied -in pertinent - part- 2-3-3- FT3d- 8-31-
(4th C i r . 2 0 0 0 ) .
44
See 319 LRB 1253, 1269 (1995), enf. denied 115 F.3d 1045
45
46
NLRB-FOIA-00007298
Case 19-CA-32431 i s
- 23 -
Section 8(a)(3).
I I I . T h e U n i o n W a i v e d i t s R i g h t t o Ba r g a i n
48
49
NLRB-FOIA-00007299
- 24 -
A . M a n d a t o r y S u b j e c t o f Ba r g a i n i n g
unit jobs. 54 F o r e x a m p l e , i n Q u i c k w a y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , I n c . ,
51 303 NLRB 386, 391 (1991), enfd. sub nom. Food & Commercial
52- -Ibid:
53 See, e.g., Titan Tire Corp., 333 NLRB 1156, 1164-65 (2001)
to other facilities).
(2000), revd. mem. 248 F.3d 1131 (3d Cir. 2000) ("We think it
employees").
NLRB-FOIA-00007300
Case 19-CA-32431 4 0
- 25 -
bargaining unit." 55 L i k e w i s e , i n S p u r l i n o M a t e r i a l s , L L C , t h e
an expanded unit. 56 A n d i n Do r s e y T r a i l e r s , I n c . , t h e B o a r d
jobs. 57
the Employer cannot afford the rate at which unit wages are
57 See 321 NLRB 616, 617 (1996), enf. denied in relevant part
134 F.3d 125 (3d Cir. 1998). Accord Acme Die Casting, 315
NLRB-FOIA-00007301
Case 19-CA-32431 0
- 26 -
B. W a i v e r o f t h e R i g h t t o Ba r g a i n
right_waa_"vested,exclustvely_in_the.Emplayer"_and was_not
waive the right to bargain about such changes for all time).
NLRB-FOIA-00007302
Case 19-CA-32431 4 0
- 27 -
subject to arbitration. 65 A l t h o u g h a n o t h e r c o n t r a c t u a l
contract."
offloading decision.
waiver but asserts instead that the Employer may not take
waiver; rather, the cases on which the Region and Union rely
8(a)(3) violation. 68
waiver are also unavailing. Thus, the Union asserts that the
65
Id. at 1260.
66
Id. at 1262.
67 S e e A l l i s o n C o r p . , 3 3 0 N L R B a t 1 3 6 5 .
See Reno Hilton, 326 NLRB 1421, 1430 (1998), enfd. 196 F.3d
(USA) Mineral Sands, Inc. v. NLRB, 281 F.3d 442, 450 (4 th Cir.
protected activity").
68
NLRB-FOIA-00007303
- 28 -
also lacks merit. While Boeing took the position that the
modifications. 71 F o r t h i s r e a s o n , w e d o n o t r e a c h t h e
6 9 Thus, if there- is - a d u t y t o b a r g a i n o v e r a r e l o c a t i o n - -
See St. Barnabas Medical Center, 341 NLRB 1325, 1325 (2004)
those negotiations).
70
See Boeing Co., 337 NLRB 758, 763 (2002) (employer did not
NLRB-FOIA-00007304
Case 19-CA-32431
29 -
111
rights. 72 T h e n o t i c e r e a d i n g i s p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e i f
72 See, e.g., Homer D. Bronson Co., 349 NLRB 512, 515 (2007),
F.3d 9 2 0 ( D. C . C i r . 2 0 0 5 ) ( e m p l o y e e s w i l l p e r c e i v e t h a t " t h e
the Act").
enfd. mem. 55 F3d 684 (D.C. Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516 U.S.
1093 (1996).
See also, e.g., Homer D. Bronson Co., 349 NLRB
Texas Super Foods, 303 NLRB 209, 209 (1991) notice reading by
employees).
NLRB-FOIA-00007305
- 30 -
ROFs - 9
H:ADV.19 - CA-32431.Response2.Boeing.dlw
NLRB-FOIA-00007306
U n ite d S ta te s G o v e rn m e n t
SE
N a tio n a l L a b o r R e la tio n .t B o a rd
O A F IC E O F T H E G E N E R O U N S E L
A .N dvice M
FORBISTRIBUTION-
em orandum
D A T E :
A p ril 1 1 , 2 0 1 1
TO :
Ri c h a r d L . A h e a r n , Re g i o n a l D i r e c t o r
Region 19
FR O M :
Division of Advice
su aT cr:
T h e B o e i n g C o m p a n y
Case 19-CA-32431
512-5006-5062
512-5006-5067
512-5036-8387
512-5036-8389
524 - 0167-1033
524-5029-5037
524-0167-1033
524-5060
524-8307-1600
524-8307-5300
530 - 6050-0825-3300
530 - 6067-4011-4200
530 - 6067-4011-4600
530 - 6067-4011-7700
530-8054-7000
775-8731
T h e Re g i o n s u b m i t t e d t h i s c a s e f o r a d v i c e o n s e v e r a l
l i n e . S p e c i f i c a l l y t h e Re g i o n r e q u e s t e d a d v i c e a s t o w h e t h e r :
collective-bargaining agreement.
W e c o n c l u d e t h a t t h e Re g i o n s h o u l d i s s u e a c o m p l a i n t
a c t i v i t y . H o w e v e r , t h e Re g i o n s h o u l d d i s m i s s t h e S e c t i o n
S e c t i o n 8 ( a ) ( 1 ) s t a t e m e n t s , t h e Re g i o n s h o u l d r e q u e s t , i n
NLRB-FOIA-00007307
C a se 1 9 -C A -3 2 4 3 1 0
-2
the first ten 787 aircraft that it produces each month and to
FA C T S
ten employees
In addition, the notice and review process
to arbitration
NLRB-FOIA-00007308
Case 19 - C A - 3 2 4 3 1 0
Bo e i n g I n t r o d u c e s t h e 7 8 7 " D r e a m l i n e r "
That line opened in May 2007, with the capacity for producing
- -
our customers and competing to win the new business that will
NLRB-FOIA-00007309
Case 19 - CA-32431410
-4
noted that he and Carson grew up in and shared a love for the
the CEO was "sick and tired" of the union's strikes and was
Integrated Defense Systems CEO Jim Albaugh, and for the first
In his
that the
occurred
1989 (48
NLRB-FOIA-00007310
future st'rikes
He said that the parties had to come up with
Doug Kight
The parties focused on how to build a better
labor relations
Wroblewski thought that one of the purposes
supplier issues
For the first time, Conner raised the
IAM
bargaining agreement
second line outside the Puget Sound area unless it could reach
Boeing to be viable
They stated that Boeing needed a long-
customers
At this point, Boeing was two years behind
July,
During August,
- \,
NLRB-FOIA-00007311
Case 19 - C A - 3 2 4 3 1 4 1 0
-6
w i t h o u t i n t e r m e d i a r i e s . " 3 Bo e i n g a l s o i s s u e d a F A Q d o c u m e n t
to the employees stating that the mass layoffs that took place
d e c i s i o n c o u l d i n f l u e n c e w h e r e Bo e i n g l o c a t e d t h e s e c o n d 7 8 7
a s s e m b l y l i n e . F o r e x a m p l e ,
The Post and the Courier repor te d
a d v a n t a g e i n t h e 7 8 7 c h a s e [ . ] " A n a r t i c l e i n t h e
Charleston
Business Journal a s s e r t e d t h a t C h a r l e s t o n m i g h t b e a b e t t e r
O n A u g u s t 2 6 , Bo e i n g e - m a i l e d i t s m a n a g e r s a n d h u m a n
second 787 line but that it had not yet made a decision as to
w h e r e t o l o c a t e t h e s e c o n d l i n e . T h e f o l l o w i n g d a y , Bo e i n g
o n l y w a y Bo e i n g w o u l d p l a c e t h e s e c o n d l i n e i n W a s h i n g t o n w a s
Bo e i n g s u g g e s t e d a s e r i e s o f t h r e e - y e a r a g r e e m e n t s w i t h a n
that this was not possible, but the Union would consider a
long-term agreement.
w a s s c h e d u l e d f o r S e p t e m b e r 1 0 . I n r e p o r t i n g o n Bo e i n g ' s
p e r m i t f i l i n g s i n S o u t h C a r o l i n a , t h e P u g e t S o u n d Bu s i n e s s
2 , K i g h t p r e s e n t e d a n h o u r - l o n g v i d e o o n Bo e i n g ' s w e b s i t e
( l a t e r q u o t e d i n a S e p t e m b e r 2 9 a r t i c l e i n t h e Seattle Times).
s t u d i e d , n o d e c i s i o n h a s b e e n m a d e . Bu t t r u t h f u l l y , i t
Bo e i n g u n i l a t e r a l l y c h a n g e d i t s a c c e s s r u l e s b u t w i t h d r e w t h e
NLRB-FOIA-00007312
Case 19 - CA-32431411
- 7 -
do.
The Union lost the election in South Carolina eight days later
and wanted the Union's input within the next three to four
resolve economic issues for the long term rather than through
would get more. On October 15, for the first time, Boeing
said that it wanted a lower wage structure for new hires and a
NLRB-FOIA-00007313
Case 19 - C A - 3 2 4 3 1 4 1 0
-8
Carolina.
work; location of the second line in the Puget Sound area; and
was the Union's "last and final" offer, but the Union
NLRB-FOIA-00007314
Case 19-CA-32431 4 0
-9
couple of weeks."
Conner stated that the Union's economic terms and demand for
not respond--
Meanwhile, _the_governmental_bodies_in-South-Ca-roldna-were-
and invest more than $750 million in the State within the next
NLRB-FOIA-00007315
Case 19-CA-32431
- 1 0 -
Bo e i n g A n n o u n c e s i t s D e c i s i o n s t o L o c a t e t h e S e c o n d L i n e i n
phased out once the South Carolina line was up and running.
issues and work stoppages." The memo further stated, "In the
line.
A s a r e s u l t , e m p l o y e e s i n t h e P u g e t S o u n d a n d P o r t l a n d
units who produce parts for the 787 assembly line are likely
Journal o n D e c e m b e r 8 d i s c u s s e d t h i s a n n o u n c e m e n t . T h e
customers."
NLRB-FOIA-00007316
Case 19-CA-32431
411
_ 11 _
The issue last fall was really about, you know, how
Charleston.
-
-
- -
that the 2008 strike reduced its earnings by $1.8 million, far
NLRB-FOIA-00007317
Case 19-CA-32431
4 0
- 12 -
decision as follows:
And it was not the wages we're paying today. It was that
escalation of wages....
from the main assembly line. Once supply issues are resolved
ACTION
Sound unit employees that they could retain all of the 787
this interview.
NLRB-FOIA-00007318
Case 19-CA-32431
i s
- 13 -
m o n t h s . Ra t h e r , t h e d e l a y r e s u l t e d p r i m a r i l y f r o m i t s o w n
problems.
not be ready for production for two years because of the need
assemble in the Puget Sound area the first ten 787 aircraft
NLRB-FOIA-00007319
Case 19-CA-32431
ilo
- 14 -
I. T h e E m p l o y e r V i o l a t e d S e c t i o n 8 ( a ) ( 1 )
supplier strategy." 9 T h e e m p l o y e r s t a t e d t h a t i t h a d
plant. The employer also made clear that the plant's nonunion
employment. 10 A n d t h e e m p l o y e r c o n v e y e d t h e m e s s a g e t h a t t h e
planned to introduce. 11 T h e B o a r d c o n c l u d e d t h a t a l t h o u g h t h e
activity. 12
T h e B o a r d e x p r e s s l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d a n e m p l o y e r ' s
6 Ibid.
NLRB-FOIA-00007320
- 15 -
date. "13
employees that they will lose their jobs if they join a strike
14 See, e.g., Kroger Co., 311 NLRB 1187, 1200 (1993), affd.
mem. 50 F.3d 1037 (11 th Cir. 1995); General Electric Co., 321
NLRB 662, fn. 5 (1996), enf. denied 117 F.3d 627 (D.C. Cir.
1997).
15 A e l c o C o r p . , 3 2 6 N L RB 1 2 6 2 , 1 2 6 5 ( 1 9 9 8 ) . S e e a l s o D o r s e y
part 233 F:3d 831 -74 th Cir. 2000) (threat to close the plant if
16 3 1 1 N L RB a t 1 2 0 0 . S e e a l s o G e n e r a l E l e c t r i c C o . , 3 2 1 N L RB
17 See, e.g., Tawas Industries, 336 NLRB 318, 321 (2001) (no
466, 466 (2000) (no factual basis for statements about having
unionized).
NLRB-FOIA-00007321
Case 19-CA-32431 4 0
- 16 -
t o p r e d i c t i n g " u n a v o i d a b l e c o n s e q u e n c e s . " 20
testifies. 21 B y c o n t r a s t , r e p o r t e r s u m m a r i e s c a n n o t f o r m t h e
Sound." 22 H i s c o m m e n t s w e r e i n d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e f r o m t h e
1 9 -See
,
Miller Industries Towing Equipment, Inc., 342 NLRB
E. y
g.,
consequences").
20
c i
.
Sheet Metal Workers Local 15 (Brandon Regional Medical
21
22
23
S e a ttle T im e s.
NLRB-FOIA-00007322
Case 19-CA-32431 4 0
- 17 -
removed jobs from Puget Sound because employees had struck and
strikes 25
activity. 26
drove home the message: union activity could cost them their
II.
question that the decision will direct work away from Puget
Sound_employees_w_ith_consequent_adverse-effects-- Instead-of---
to employees.
25 T h e a u t h o r s o f t h e s e a r t i c l e s w i l l n e e d t o t e s t i f y . I f
NLRB-FOIA-00007323
- 18 -
sourcing" program means that the Puget Sound and Portland unit
implemented.
retaliatory motive. 28
e m p l o y e e s . 30 S i m i l a r l y ,
in Cold Heading Co., the employer
28 Ibid.
29 See Adair Standish Corp., 290 NLRB 317, 318-19 (1988), enfd
NLRB-FOIA-00007324
Case 19-CA-32431
411
- 19 -
the fact that unit employees may not yet have experienced the
sub nom. O'Dovero v. NLRB, 193 F.3d 532 (D.C. Cir. 1999)
- 3 3 - S e a -id:
34 See Century Air Freight, 284 NLRB 730, 732 (1987) (employer
35 See Parexel International, LLC, 356 NLRB No. 82, slip op.
NLRB-FOIA-00007325
Case 19-CA-32431
- 20 -
activity." 36
strike. 38 S p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e C o u r t f o u n d t h a t t h e u s e o f a
36
37
38
39
See
ibid.
NLRB-FOIA-00007326
Case 19-CA-32431 4 0
- 21 -
substantial. "42
Union's_efforts_to_ negotiate_a_longterm_no_stri.ke_agreement.
striking.
41 See 295 NLRB 1095, 1095 (1989), enfd. 903 F.2d 396 (5 th
Cir.
43 See
NLRB-FOIA-00007327
Case 19-CA-32431
40
- 22 -
intent.
In International Paper Co., the Board set forth
rights. 45 F i r s t , t h e B o a r d l o o k s t o t h e s e v e r i t y o f t h e h a r m
employee rights. 47
'
"
economic weapon, and for the Union itself, and thereby hinder
835, 863-64 (1999), - enf:- denied- in- pertinent- part- 233- F-.-3d- 831 -
(4 th
Cir. 2000).
45 See 319 LRB 1253, 1269 (1995), enf. denied 115 F.3d 1045
NLRB-FOIA-00007328
Case 19-CA-32431
410
- 23 -
Section 8(a)(3).
III. T h e U n i o n W a i v e d i t s R i g h t t o Ba r g a i n
NLRB-FOIA-00007329
Case 19-CA-32431 4 0
- 24 -
A.
M a n d a t o r y S u b j e c t o f Ba r g a i n i n g
unit jobs. 54 F o r e x a m p l e , i n Q u i c k w a y T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , I n c . ,
51 303 NLRB 386, 391 (1991), enfd. sub nom. Food & Commercial
52Ibid.
53 See, e.g., Titan Tire Corp., 333 NLRB 1156, 1164-65 (2001)
to other facilities).
(2000), revd. mem. 248 F.3d 1131 (3d Cir. 2000) ("We think it
employees").
NLRB-FOIA-00007330
Case 19-CA-32431
40
- 25 -
bargaining unit." 55 L i k e w i s e , i n S p u r l i n o M a t e r i a l s , L L C , t h e
an expanded unit. 56 A n d i n D o r s e y T r a i l e r s , I n c . , t h e B o a r d
jobs. 57
the Employer cannot afford the rate at which unit wages are
57 See 321 NLRB 616, 617 (1996), enf. denied in relevant part
134 F.3d 125 (3d Cir. 1998). Accord Acme Die Casting, 315
NLRB-FOIA-00007331
Case 19-CA-32431
40
B.
- 26 -
W a i v e r o f t h e R i g h t t o Ba r g a i n
60
61
waiver- of-right-to-bargain-about-drugla-Icohoilesting - -- -- - -
waive the right to bargain about such changes for all time).
63
64
NLRB-FOIA-00007332
Case 19-CA-32431
40
- 27 -
subject to arbitration. 65 A l t h o u g h a n o t h e r c o n t r a c t u a l
contract. 66
a g r e e m e n t . A s i n I n g h a m Re g i o n a l M e d i c a l C e n t e r , t h e o t h e r
offloading decision.
waiver but asserts instead that the Employer may not take
waiver; rather, the cases on which the Region and Union rely
8(a)(3) violation. 68
waiver are also unavailing. Thus, the Union asserts that the
65 Id. at 1260.
66 Id. at 1262.
67
See A l l i s o n C o r p . ,
3 3 0 N L RB a t 1 3 6 5 .
See Reno Hilton, 326 NLRB 1421, 1430 (1998), enfd. 196 F.3d
(USA) Mineral Sands, Inc. v. NLRB, 281 F.3d 442, 450 (4 th Cir.
protected activity").
88
NLRB-FOIA-00007333
- 28 -
also lacks merit. While Boeing took the position that the
modifications. 71 F o r t h i s r e a s o n , w e d o n o t r e a c h t h e
IV .
T h e A p p ro p ria te R em ed y
December, even though -no- unit - work- would- be - reaocated - before ---
See St. Barnabas Medical Center, 341 NLRB 1325, 1325 (2004)
those negotiations).
70
See Boeing Co., 337 NLRB 758, 763 (2002) (employer did not
NLRB-FOIA-00007334
Case 19-CA-32431
- 29 -
rights. 72 T h e n o t i c e r e a d i n g i s p a r t i c u l a r l y e f f e c t i v e i f
72 See, e.g., Homer D. Bronson Co., 349 NLRB 512, 515 (2007),
F . 3 d 9 2 0 ( D . C . C i r . 2 0 0 5 ) ( e m p l o y e e s w i l l p e r c e i v e that "the
the Act").
enfd. mem. 55 F3d 684 (D.C. Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516 U.S.
1093 (1996).
See also, e.g., Homer D. Bronson Co., 349 NLRB
Texas Super Foods, 303 NLRB 209, 209 (1991) notice reading by
employees).
NLRB-FOIA-00007335
Case 19-CA-32431 4 0
- 30 -
B.
ROFs - 9
H:ADV.19 - CA-32431.Response2.Boeing.dlw
...,
r e q u e s t f o r p r e l i m i n a r y i n j u n c t i v e r e l i e f . T h e Re g i o n s h o u l d
NLRB-FOIA-00007336
7fr'
neSeattleM m es
Perm ission to reprint or copy this article or photo,other than personaluse,m ust be obtained from The S ea W e Tim es.C all
sa y s
By JIM DAVENPORT
A ssociated Press
S outh C arolina G ov.-elect NikkiH aley says her new C abinet pick to run
N ikki H aley
AP /C harles D harapak
H aley said W ednesday the state D epartm ent of Labor,Licensing and R egulation w illplay a big role in keeping unions out of
the B oeing C o.plant that assem bles the com pany's new 787 D ream liner.H aley notes director nom inee C atherine Tem pleton,
a law yer w ho has specialized in union fights,has fought U nited A uto W orker organizing attem pts.
"S he is ready for the challenge.S he know s w hat it takes to take it on and she understands it's going to be a partnership level
that w e cannot lose," H aley said."W e're going to fight the unions and Ineeded a partner to help m e do it.S he's the right
person to help m e do
The InternationalA ssociation of M achinists says it hasn't given up on organizing the North C harleston plant.W orkers there
voted against union representation in S eptem ber 2009."Last Ichecked,the right to organize w as protected under federal
law ," said Frank Larkin,a spokesm an for the U pper M arlboro,M d.-based union.
S outh C arolina's anti-union reputation w as key to last year's decision by C hicago-based B oeing to expand its assem bly
operation here.In 2009,only tw o other states had sm aller share of unionized w orkers than S outh C arolina's 5.4 percent,
B efore B oeing's board decided to expand the North C harleston operation,it used the threat of the plant in bargaining w ith the
m achinists union.The union w aged an eight-w eek strike last year that shut dow n the com pany's P uget S ound assem bly line
in W ashington.
"In m y experience Ihave found there is not one com pany that operates m ore efficiently w hen you put another layer of
bureaucracy in," Tem pleton said."W e w illdo everything w e can to w ork w ith B oeing and m ake sure that their w ork force is
taken care of,that they run efficiently and that w e don't add anything unnecessarily."
H aley said Tem pleton w illalso lead stream lining efforts at the agency,including reducing the tim e it takes to get professional
and business-related licenses."W e've got slow ness.W e've got regulatory issues that are not w orking w elland so w e need
som eone that's going to go in there and clean this up," H aley said.
Tem pleton is the second C abinet nom inee that the state S enate w illconsider for confirm ation after it returns in January.O n
M onday,H aley said B M W executive and form er new spaper editor B obby H itt w as her choice for state com m erce secretary,
R epublican H aley takes office in January replacing outgoing G O P G ov.M ark S anford,w ho leaves office under the state's tw o
C o p yrig h t 0 T h e S eattle T im es C o m p an y
Page 1 of 1
NLRB-FOIA-00007337
A e ro s p a c e N e w s
1-
1 0 9 9 .asp
S ou th C arolin a G ov .-elect N ik k i H aley 's n om in ee to ru n th e state's lab or ag en cy w ill lead efforts to fig h t u n ion org an izin g ,
p articu larly at B oein g 's n ew N orth C h arleston p lan t, H aley told th e A ssociated P ress W ed n esd ay .
C ath erin e T em p leton , H aley 's n om in ee to h ead th e state D ep artm en t of L ab or, L icen sin g an d R eg u lation , is a law y er w h o h as
"W e're g oin g to fig h t th e u n ion s an d I n eed ed a p artn er to h elp m e d o it," H aley told th e A P .
T h e In tern ation al A ssociation of M ach in ists said it h asn 't g iv en u p on org an izin g th e p lan t, w h ose w ork ers
ousted th e u n ion
last y ear. A fter th at v ote, an d failu re of d iscu ssion s w ith P u g et S ou n d u n ion s, B oein g
decided to p u t its secon d 787 D ream liner
S ee m ore in th e story .
P osted by A u b re y C o h e n a t D e ce m b e r 8 , 2 0 1 0 4 :2 4 p .m .
http://blog.seattlepi.com /print.asp?en...
Page 1 of 1
NLRB-FOIA-00007338
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Estep, Susan C.
Kobe, James; Ahearn, Richard L.; Pomerantz, Anne; Eskenazi, Martin; Hayashi, Minoru N.;
See attached.
NLRB-FOIA-00007339
Date:
ACTIVE C CASES
CATEGORY 3
FILED
ACTION
AGENT/SUPV
DUE
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007340
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007341
non-responsive
CA-32431
Boeing Company
3/26/10
5/14/10
Todd
non-responsive
Page 3 of 31
NLRB-FOIA-00007342
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007343
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007344
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007345
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007346
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007347
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007348
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007349
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007350
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007351
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007352
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007353
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007354
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007355
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007356
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007357
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007358
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007359
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007360
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007361
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007362
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007363
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007364
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007365
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007366
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007367
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007368
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007369
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007370
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Pomerantz, Anne
Ahearn, Richard L.
memo in Boeing
Dianne/Colleen,
When you send me the Boeing memo to edit, please also send it to my home email, in case I have trouble accessing this
E.6 Privacy
Anne
Anne P. Pomerantz
NLRB-FOIA-00007371
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Estep, Susan C.
Ahearn, Richard L.; Pomerantz, Anne; Kobe, James; Eskenazi, Martin; Jablonski, Colleen G.;
Finch, Peter G.
See attached.
NLRB-FOIA-00007372
Date:
ACTIVE C CASES
CATEGORY 3
FILED
ACTION
AGENT/SUPV
DUE
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007373
CA-32431
Boeing Company
3/26/10
5/14/10
Todd
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-000073
NLRB-FOIA-00007374
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007375
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007376
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007377
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007378
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007379
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007380
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007381
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007382
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007383
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007384
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007385
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007386
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007387
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007388
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007389
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007390
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007391
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007392
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007393
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007394
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007395
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007396
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007397
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007398
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007399
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007400
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007401
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007402
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007403
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007404
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007405
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007406
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Cleeland, Nancy
Ahearn, Richard L.
Boeingrelease.doc
Hi Rich, Here is the latest draft. Please feel free to mark it up!
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007407
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007408
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Cleeland, Nancy
Boeingfactsheet.doc; Boeingrelease.doc
Hi here is what I have so far for the fact sheet. I know there are a lot of gaps but I hope to get them all filled by the end
of the day.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007409
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007410
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007411
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007412
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007413
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Ahearn, Richard L.
________________________________________
My suggestions in red.
-----Original Message-----
On the train home I read over the statement and thought there was one missing piece,
Exemption 5 deliberative
Here's the whole thing cut and pasted - what do you think?
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007414
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007415
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Ahearn, Richard L.
Yes, absolutely!
--------------------------
--------------------------
My suggestions in red.
-----Original Message-----
On the train home I read over the statement and thought there was one missing piece,
Exemption 5 deliberative
Here's the whole thing cut and pasted - what do you think?
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007416
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007417
Microsoft Outlook
Pye, Rosemary
Ahearn, Richard L.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Non-responsive
On Boeing, I spoke about it in RI, where they have 11% unemployment. They empathized with Charleston and were
amazed that Boeing couldnt come up with a better explanation. Is Airbus their only competitor? Is there another
domestic airplane manufacturer? Given all those strikes, they dont seem to have lost business as a result.
Rosemary
Subject:
Rosemary,
non-responsive
non-responsive
Also, thanks for the kind words about Boeing; I am astonished at the level of rancor, politics it has generated.
Rich
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007418
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007419
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007420
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Thanks
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007421
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007422
Microsoft Outlook
Cleeland, Nancy
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Thanks
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007423
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007424
Microsoft Outlook
Kearney, Barry J.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Nancy
As to the AP and Examiner inquiry,it is not unusual for the GC to get letters from parties commenting on case handling
Exemption 5
Thanks
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007425
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007426
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007427
Thanks
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
2
NLRB-FOIA-00007428
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007429
Microsoft Outlook
Cleeland, Nancy
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
As to the AP and Examiner inquiry,it is not unusual for the GC to get letters from parties commenting on case handling
Exemption 5
Thanks
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007430
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007431
Microsoft Outlook
Kearney, Barry J.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
R
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
As to the AP and Examiner inquiry,it is not unusual for the GC to get letters from parties commenting on case handling
Exemption 5
Thanks
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007432
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
2
NLRB-FOIA-00007433
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007434
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Kearney, Barry J.
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Rich
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007435
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Rich
Thanks
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
2
NLRB-FOIA-00007436
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007437
Microsoft Outlook
Cleeland, Nancy
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
R
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
As to the AP and Examiner inquiry,it is not unusual for the GC to get letters from parties commenting on case handling
Exemption 5
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007438
Thanks
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007439
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007440
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Snook, Dennis
FW :
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007441
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007442
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007443
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007444
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007445
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007446
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007447
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Snook, Dennis
Ahearn, Richard L.
FW :
Subject: FW:
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007448
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007449
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007450
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007451
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007452
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007453
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007454
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007455
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Pomerantz, Anne
Ahearn, Richard L.
5-13.pdf
Importance:
High
Rich,
Here is the letter I have cleared with the accompanying pdf versions of the settlement agreement and notice to employees
that we understand Advice approved yesterday. We have committed to transmitting these to Boeings counsel today.
Please let me know if you have any changes to the letter youd like to make.
Thanks.
Anne
M-L.A.
NLRB-FOIA-00007456
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007457
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007458
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007459
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007460
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007461
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Albertsen, Mary
FW :
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
Subject: RE:
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: FW:
See attached for a modification of the second full paragraph on p.3 to include a reference to
Exemption 5
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
Attached is the whole draft response, including Richs 2 cents and Joses response to question 2.
NLRB-FOIA-00007462
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007463
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007464
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007465
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007466
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007467
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007468
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007469
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007470
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007471
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Albertsen, Mary
Ahearn, Richard L.
RE:
Region 19 - Seattle, W A
(206) 220-6318
Subject: FW:
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
Subject: RE:
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: FW:
See attached for a modification of the second full paragraph on p.3 to include a reference to
Exemption 5
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007472
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
Attached is the whole draft response, including Richs 2 cents and Joses response to question 2.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007473
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007474
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007475
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007476
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007477
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007478
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007479
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007480
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007481
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Pomerantz, Anne
Ahearn, Richard L.
Anne P. Pomerantz
NLRB-FOIA-00007482
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007483
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007484
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007485
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007486
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007487
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007488
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007489
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
FW : Issa response
To: Simms, Abby; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Eric
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00007490
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007491
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007492
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007493
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007494
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007495
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007496
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007497
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Pomerantz, Anne
FW : Issa response
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Ex 5
. Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Ex 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Ex 5
. Im happy to discuss further.
NLRB-FOIA-00007498
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00007499
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007500
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007501
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007502
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007503
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007504
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007505
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ahearn, Richard L.
FW : Issa response
I just saw Eriks latest draft; my suggestions were not incorporated. If you agree with them, do you want to do so?
Many thanks.
Rich
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.;
Moskowitz, Eric G.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric
G.
A couple suggestions:
Exemption 5
Rich
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007506
Exemption 5
Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007507
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00007508
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Estep, Susan C.
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
Jose,
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007509
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007510
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007511
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Rich
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
5)
6)
7)
8)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007512
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007513
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007514
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Jose,
Ahearn, Richard L.
Tomorrow morning the region will supplement your list of documents below.
Rich
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
5)
6)
7)
8)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007515
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007516
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Thx.
--------------------------
Cc: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Just a heads up -- Rich may not attend our meeting today since he will be traveling to his resident office; however, his trial
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007517
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007518
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
--------------------------
Cc: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Just a heads up -- Rich may not attend our meeting today since he will be traveling to his resident office; however, his trial
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
NLRB-FOIA-00007519
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007520
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007521
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Anzalone, Mara-Louise
Pomerantz, Anne
Finch, Peter G.
5-13.pdf
M-L.A.
NLRB-FOIA-00007522
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007523
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007524
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007525
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007526
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007527
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Anzalone, Mara-Louise
Thx.
Anne P. Pomerantz
NLRB-FOIA-00007528
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007529
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007530
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007531
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007532
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007533
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007534
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00007535
Microsoft Outlook
Cleeland, Nancy
Solomon, Lafe E.
RE: Boeing
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ok
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Subject: Boeing
Ellen, W ould you please send electronically to Nancy the Boeing Advice memo and fact sheet?
Nancy, W e anticipate that Region 19 will issue complaint next week. We can talk about it, but
Exemption 5
Thanks, Lafe
NLRB-FOIA-00007536
Microsoft Outlook
Cleeland, Nancy
Farrell, Ellen
RE: Boeing
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Thanks Ellen
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
Attached are the memo, which issued yesterday, and the fact sheet.
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: Boeing
Ellen, W ould you please send electronically to Nancy the Boeing Advice memo and fact sheet?
Nancy, W e anticipate that Region 19 will issue complaint next week. We can talk about it, but
Exemption 5
. Thanks, Lafe
NLRB-FOIA-00007537
Microsoft Outlook
Cleeland, Nancy
Farrell, Ellen
RE: Boeing
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
Attached are the memo, which issued yesterday, and the fact sheet.
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: Boeing
Ellen, W ould you please send electronically to Nancy the Boeing Advice memo and fact sheet?
Nancy, W e anticipate that Region 19 will issue complaint next week. We can talk about it, but
Exemption 5
Thanks, Lafe
NLRB-FOIA-00007538
Microsoft Outlook
Cleeland, Nancy
Farrell, Ellen
RE: Boeing
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Fair enough.
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007539
Nancy
Attached are the memo, which issued yesterday, and the fact sheet.
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: Boeing
Ellen, W ould you please send electronically to Nancy the Boeing Advice memo and fact sheet?
Nancy, W e anticipate that Region 19 will issue complaint next week. We can talk about it, but
Exemption 5
Thanks, Lafe
NLRB-FOIA-00007540
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Kearney, Barry J.; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Cleeland, Nancy; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
Jayme Sophir
202-273-3837
NLRB-FOIA-00007541
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Cleeland, Nancy
W agner, Anthony R.
Boeingpressrelease.jls.doc
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Cleeland, Nancy; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme
Rich
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Cleeland, Nancy; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
Jayme Sophir
202-273-3837
NLRB-FOIA-00007542
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007543
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007544
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007545
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007546
Microsoft Outlook
Cleeland, Nancy
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Thanks
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007547
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007548
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007549
Thanks
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
2
NLRB-FOIA-00007550
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007551
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
As to the AP and Examiner inquiry,it is not unusual for the GC to get letters from parties commenting on case handling
Exemption 5
Thanks
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007552
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007553
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Cleeland, Nancy
Kearney, Barry J.
Exemption 5
Rich
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007554
Exemption 5
Thanks
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
2
NLRB-FOIA-00007555
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007556
Microsoft Outlook
Ahearn, Richard L.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 5
R
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
As to the AP and Examiner inquiry,it is not unusual for the GC to get letters from parties commenting on case handling
Exemption 5
Thanks
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007557
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Thoughts?
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
2
NLRB-FOIA-00007558
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007559
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Solomon, Lafe E.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007560
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Cleeland, Nancy
image001.gif
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Hi I was about to send this and then thought we should probably discuss first.
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007561
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
A labor historian told me that the NLRB used to bring suits like this
When was the last time the Board brought a case like this
profile employer)
Hi Wendy, Here are a couple of links related to committee requests for information I mentioned earlier.
http://oversight.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1290&Itemid=29
http://edworkforce.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=242822
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007562
NLRB-FOIA-00007563
Microsoft Outlook
Cleeland, Nancy
Garza, Jose; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Solomon, Lafe E.; Kearney, Barry J.
RE:
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
I think that's a good idea - I have some thoughts on it but have not had time to write them
________________________________________
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Solomon, Lafe E.; Kearney, Barry J.; Cleeland,
Nancy
Subject: RE:
Attached please find my suggested edits to the document Jennifer sent around after our
meeting yesterday.
It seems that we have three great drafts that each point in a slightly
different direction.
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
________________________________
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Solomon, Lafe E.; Kearney, Barry J.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy
Subject: FW:
________________________________
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Cleeland, Nancy
Subject:
NLRB-FOIA-00007564
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Sophir, Jayme
Boeingpressrelease.jls.doc
Jayme Sophir
202-273-3837
NLRB-FOIA-00007565
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007566
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007567
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Cleeland, Nancy
Farrell, Ellen
Boeingpressrelease.jls.doc
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Cleeland, Nancy; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme
Rich
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Cleeland, Nancy; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
Jayme Sophir
202-273-3837
NLRB-FOIA-00007568
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007569
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007570
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen;
Any chance we could meet quickly again at 4 looks like everyone is free then to discuss messaging? Would be great
How do we
Exemption 5
Thanks
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Szapiro, Miriam; Willen, Debra
Importance: High
Greetings all, Please review my latest revision, which attempts to incorporate comments from Celeste, Jennifer and
Exemption 5
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00007571
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Cleeland, Nancy; Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry
I can make it at 4.
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Solomon,
Any chance we could meet quickly again at 4 looks like everyone is free then to discuss messaging? Would be great
How do we
Exemption 5
Thanks
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Szapiro, Miriam; Willen, Debra
Importance: High
Greetings all, Please review my latest revision, which attempts to incorporate comments from Celeste, Jennifer and
Exemption 5
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00007572
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Cleeland, Nancy; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen;
OK.
Rich
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Solomon,
Any chance we could meet quickly again at 4 looks like everyone is free then to discuss messaging? Would be great
How do we
Exemption 5
Thanks
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Szapiro, Miriam; Willen, Debra
Importance: High
Greetings all, Please review my latest revision, which attempts to incorporate comments from Celeste, Jennifer and
Exemption 5
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00007573
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy; Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.;
Me too.
To: Cleeland, Nancy; Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir,
I can make it at 4.
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Solomon,
Any chance we could meet quickly again at 4 looks like everyone is free then to discuss messaging? Would be great
How do we
Exemption 5
Thanks
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Szapiro, Miriam; Willen, Debra
Importance: High
NLRB-FOIA-00007574
Greetings all, Please review my latest revision, which attempts to incorporate comments from Celeste, Jennifer and
Exemption 5
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00007575
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Kearney, Barry J.
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy; Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer;
To: Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy; Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme;
Solomon, Lafe E.
Me too.
To: Cleeland, Nancy; Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir,
I can make it at 4.
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Solomon,
Any chance we could meet quickly again at 4 looks like everyone is free then to discuss messaging? Would be great
How do we
Exemption 5
Thanks
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007576
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Szapiro, Miriam; Willen, Debra
Importance: High
Greetings all, Please review my latest revision, which attempts to incorporate comments from Celeste, Jennifer and
Exemption 5
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00007577
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Kearney, Barry J.
Fw:
--------------------------
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: RE:
With my section.
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007578
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007579
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007580
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007581
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007582
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007583
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007584
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007585
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Kearney, Barry J.
Fw:
--------------------------
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007586
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007587
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007588
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007589
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007590
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007591
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007592
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007593
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Kearney, Barry J.
FW :
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
Attached is the whole draft response, including Richs 2 cents and Joses response to question 2.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
NLRB-FOIA-00007594
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007595
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007596
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007597
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007598
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007599
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007600
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007601
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Kearney, Barry J.
FW :
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
Attached is the whole draft response, including Richs 2 cents and Joses response to question 2.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
NLRB-FOIA-00007602
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007603
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007604
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007605
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007606
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007607
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007608
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007609
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
5-13.pdf
Importance:
High
Follow Up Flag:
Flag Status:
Follow up
Flagged
Importance: High
Rich,
Here is the letter I have cleared with the accompanying pdf versions of the settlement agreement and notice to employees
that we understand Advice approved yesterday. We have committed to transmitting these to Boeings counsel today.
Please let me know if you have any changes to the letter youd like to make.
Thanks.
Anne
M-L.A.
NLRB-FOIA-00007610
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007611
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007612
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007613
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007614
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007615
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Farrell, Ellen
Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
Sophir, Jayme
RE:
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: FW:
See attached for a modification of the second full paragraph on p.3 to include a reference to
Exemption 5
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
Attached is the whole draft response, including Richs 2 cents and Joses response to question 2.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00007616
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007617
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007618
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007619
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007620
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007621
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007622
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007623
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007624
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007625
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Farrell, Ellen; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
Sophir, Jayme
Re:
--------------------------
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
Subject: RE:
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: FW:
See attached for a modification of the second full paragraph on p.3 to include a reference to
Exemption 5
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
Attached is the whole draft response, including Richs 2 cents and Joses response to question 2.
NLRB-FOIA-00007626
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007627
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007628
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007629
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen;
Exemption 5
In number 1,
Our reasoning re. # 3 and 4 were sent earlier.
Best regards,
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00007630
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007631
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007632
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007633
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007634
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007635
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007636
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007637
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007638
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Farrell, Ellen
Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
FW :
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Sophir, Jayme
Cc: Pomerantz, Anne; Anzalone, Mara-Louise; Finch, Peter G.; Harvey, Rachel
Exemption 5
In number 1,
Our reasoning re. # 3 and 4 were sent earlier.
Best regards,
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00007639
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007640
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007641
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007642
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007643
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007644
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007645
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007646
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007647
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Farrell, Ellen
Thank you, Ellen. I will try to circulate a draft that incorporates your section Monday morning. Enjoy your weekend!
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Sophir, Jayme
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Sophir, Jayme
Ive prepared the attached partial draft of a response re the Issa questions regarding Boeing.
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007648
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.;
Issa response
NLRB-FOIA-00007649
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007650
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007651
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007652
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007653
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007654
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007655
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007656
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Moskowitz, Eric G.
Simms, Abby; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson,
FW : Issa response
Eric
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00007657
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007658
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007659
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007660
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007661
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007662
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007663
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007664
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz,
FW : Issa response
Exemption 5
. Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00007665
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007666
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007667
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007668
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007669
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007670
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007671
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007672
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007673
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007674
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007675
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007676
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007677
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz,
FW : Issa response
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
. Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00007678
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007679
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007680
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007681
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007682
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007683
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007684
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007685
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007686
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007687
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007688
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007689
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007690
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Farrell, Ellen
Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Sophir, Jayme;
Pomerantz, Anne
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.;
Moskowitz, Eric G.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric
G.
A couple suggestions:
Exemption 5
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00007691
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Exemption 5
. Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
. Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007692
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00007693
Pag e 1 o f 1
F arrell, E llen
F ro m :
S olom on,Late E .
S en t:
To:
S u b ject: FW : seattle/hearing,etc
F ro m : C leeland,N ancy
T o : S olom on,Lafe E .
S u b ject: seattle/hearing,etc
H iLafe,
I'm getting a lot of calls from reporters planning to go to S eattle.There are tw o m ain issues:
TV reporters w ant to know if there w illbe anyone from the N LR B in S eattle that they can talk to,preferably on
cam era.They especially w ant som eone that first day w ho could do a 'stand up'interview outside the courthouse
t w ould help m e in
Thanks
N ancy C leeland
(202) 273-0222
n a n c v . c le e la n c l@ n irb . g o v
6/7/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00007694
N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
1099 14th ST R E E T N W
W A SH IN G T O N D C 20570
N 'U IO N I I % 1
0 1 :
w w w .nlrb.gov
K 1 1 1 1 1 0 \1 ii(M IZ I)
M ay 9 , 2 0 11
T he B oeing C om pany
C h ica g o , IL 6 0 6 0 6 -1 5 9 6
D ear M r. Luttig:
R e:
T h e B o e in g C o m p a n y
captioned case.
state m ents in the pre ss abou t this m atter. N eed less to sa y, I do n't a gree w ith
your contentions. T he re have been num erou s conversa tions b etw een m y office
and B oeing concerning the facts and the law surrounding the circum stances of
forum to test those positions and the relevance and probative value of your
adm inistrative law judge can m ake a decision w hich can be review ed by the
B oa rd and ultim ately the C ourts. F inally, w h ile our ea rlier efforts to resolve this
m atter w ere unsuccessful, I still rem ain open to a resolution betw een the parties.
S incelel
Lafe/E . S olom on
NLRB-FOIA-00007695
N a tio n a l L a b o r R e la tio n s B o a rd
O F F IC E O F T H E G E N E R A L C O U N S E L
A dvice M em orandum
S.A.M.
D A TE
Ap r i l 1 1 , 2 0 1 1
D a
R i c h a r d L . Ah e a r n , R e g i o n a l D i r e c t o r
Region 19
Hmx&
B a r r y J . K e a r n e y , As s o c i a t e G e n e r a l C o u n s e l
D i v i s i o n o f Ad v i c e
SU B JE C T :
C a s e 1 9 - C A- 3 2 4 3 1
512-5006-5062
512-5006-5067
512-5036-8387
512-5036-8389
524-0167-1033
524-5029-5037
524-0167-1033
524-506
524-8307-1600
524-8307-5300
530-6050-0825-3300
530-6067-4011-4200
530-6067-4011-4600
530-6067-4011-7700
530-8054-7000
775-8731
collective-bargaining agreement.
NLRB-FOIA-00007696
Case 19-CA-32431
-2
seven planes on the first line. Thus, the Region should seek
the first ten 787 aircraft that it produces each month and to
FA C T S
to subcontracting and of
of
to arbitration. ...
NLRB-FOIA-00007697
Case 19-CA-32431
-3
That line opened in May 2007, with the capacity for producing
our customers and competing to win the new business that will
NLRB-FOIA-00007698
Case 19-CA-32431
-4
noted that he and Carson grew up in and shared a love for the
the CEO was "sick and tired" of the union's strikes and was
summit i n C h i c a g o . M a n a g e m e n t o f f i c i a l s a t t e n d i n g i n c l u d e d
C E O M c N e r n e y , B o e i n g C o m m e r c i a l Ai r p l a n e s C E O Carson,
Integrated Defense Systems CEO Jim Albaugh, and for the first
In his
that the
occurred
1989 (48
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007699
Case 19-CA-32431
bargaining agreement.
second line outside the Puget Sound area unless it could reach
NLRB-FOIA-00007700
Case 19-CA-32431
-6
to the employees stating that the mass layoffs that took place
assembly line. For example, The Post and the Courier reported
second 787 line but that it had not yet made a decision as to
only way Boeing would place the second line in Washington was
that this was not possible, but the Union would consider a
long-term agreement.
NLRB-FOIA-00007701
Case 19-CA-32431
- 7 -
do.
The Union lost the election in South Carolina eight days later
and wanted the Union's input within the next three to four
resolve economic issues for the long term rather than through
would get more. On October 15, for the first time, Boeing
said that it wanted a lower wage structure for new hires and a
NLRB-FOIA-00007702
Case 19-CA-32431
-8
Carolina.
work; location of the second line in the Puget Sound area; and
was the Union's "last and final" offer, but the Union
NLRB-FOIA-00007703
Case 19-CA-32431
r e l a t i o n s h i p h a s s o m e b e n e f i t s . . . . An d s o s o m e o f t h e
couple of weeks."
Conner stated that the Union's economic terms and demand for
and invest more than $750 million in the State within the next
NLRB-FOIA-00007704
Case 19-CA-32431
1 0 -
phased out once the South Carolina line was up and running.
issues and work stoppages." The memo further stated, "In the
l i n e . As a r e s u l t , e m p l o y e e s i n t h e P u g e t S o u n d a n d P o r t l a n d
units who produce parts for the 787 assembly line are likely
t o s u f f e r a l o s s o f w o r k . Ar t i c l e s t h a t a p p e a r e d i n t h e
Journal o n D e c e m b e r 8 d i s c u s s e d t h i s a n n o u n c e m e n t . T h e
customers."
NLRB-FOIA-00007705
Case 19-CA-32431
- 1 1 -
The issue last fall was really about, you know, how
h a u l . An d w e h a d s o m e v e r y p r o d u c t i v e d i s c u s s i o n s
w i t h t h e u n i o n . An d u n f o r t u n a t e l y , w e j u s t d i d n ' t
o f w a g e s . An d w e j u s t c o u l d n o t g e t t o a p l a c e
Charleston.
w e ' v e h a d a l a b o r n e g o t i a t i o n w i t h t h e I AN . . . . An d
a c t u a l l y d o d e l i v e r . An d w e h a v e l o s t - o u r
s i t e , t h e r e ' s r i s k i n v o l v e d . At t h e s a m e t i m e , w i t h t h e
that the 2008 strike reduced its earnings by $1.8 million, far
NLRB-FOIA-00007706
Case 19-CA-32431
- 12 -
decision as follows:
An d i t w a s n o t t h e w a g e s w e ' r e p a y i n g t o d a y . I t w a s t h a t
escalation of wages....
from the main assembly line. Once supply issues are resolved
ACTION
Sound unit employees that they could retain all of the 787
y e a r s . Al t h o u g h t h e U n i o n e n t e r e d n e g o t i a t i o n s w i t h B o e i n g
this interview.
NLRB-FOIA-00007707
Case 19-CA-32431
- 13 -
problems.
not be ready for production for two years because of the need
assemble in the Puget Sound area the first ten 787 aircraft
NLRB-FOIA-00007708
Case 19-CA-32431
- 14 -
supplier strategy." 9 T h e e m p l o y e r s t a t e d t h a t i t h a d
plant. The employer also made clear that the plant's nonunion
employment. 10 An d t h e e m p l o y e r c o n v e y e d t h e m e s s a g e t h a t t h e
planned to introduce)- 1 T h e B o a r d c o n c l u d e d t h a t a l t h o u g h t h e
activity.
5 See NLRB v. Gissel Packing Co., 395 U.S. 575, 618 (1969).
6 Ibid.
10
11
12 See id.
at 522.
NLRB-FOIA-00007709
Case 19-CA-32431
- 15 -
date. "13
employees that they will lose their jobs if they join a strike
14 See, e.g., Kroger Co., 311 NLRB 1187, 1200 (1993), affd.
mem. 50 F.3d 1037 (11 th Cir. 1995); General Electric Co., 321
NLRB 662, fn. 5 (1996), enf. denied 117 F.3d 627 (D.C. Cir.
1997).
15 Ae l c o C o r p . , 3 2 6 N L R B 1 2 6 2 , 1 2 6 5 ( 1 9 9 8 ) . S e e a l s o D o r s e y
th
16 3 1 1 N L R B a t 1 2 0 0 . S e e a l s o G e n e r a l E l e c t r i c C o . , 3 2 1 N L R B
17 See, e.g., Tawas Industries, 336 NLRB 318, 321 (2001) (no
466, 466 (2000) (no factual basis for statements about having
unionized).
NLRB-FOIA-00007710
Case 19-CA-32431
- 16 -
t o p r e d i c t i n g " u n a v o i d a b l e c o n s e q u e n c e s . " 20
testifies. 21 B y c o n t r a s t , r e p o r t e r s u m m a r i e s c a n n o t f o r m t h e
b a s i s f o r a S e c t i o n 8 ( a ) ( 1 ) v i o l a t i o n . An d s t a t e m e n t s
Sound." 22 H i s c o m m e n t s w e r e i n d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e f r o m t h e
20 E.g.,
consequences").
Seattle Times.
NLRB-FOIA-00007711
Case 19-CA-32431
- 17 -
removed jobs from Puget Sound because employees had struck and
strikes. 25
activity. 26
drove home the message: union activity could cost them their
11.
question that the decision will direct work away from Puget
24 T h e R e g i o n
to employees.
25 T h e a u t h o r s o f t h e s e a r t i c l e s w i l l n e e d t o t e s t i f y . I f
NLRB-FOIA-00007712
Case 19-CA-32431
- 18 -
sourcing" program means that the Puget Sound and Portland unit
implemented.
retaliatory motive. 28
27
28 Ibid.
30
NLRB-FOIA-00007713
Case 19-CA-32431
- 19 -
the fact that unit employees may not yet have experienced the
31 S e e 3 3 2 N L R B 9 5 6 , f n . 5 , 9 7 5 - 7 6 ( 2 0 0 0 ) . S e e a l s o
sub nom. O'Dovero v. NLRB, 193 F.3d 532 (D.C. Cir. 1999)
34 See Century Air Freight, 284 NLRB 730, 732 (1987) (employer
35 See Parexel International, LLC, 356 NLRB No. 82, slip op.
NLRB-FOIA-00007714
Case 19-CA-32431
- 20 -
activity. "36
strike. 38 S p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e C o u r t f o u n d t h a t t h e u s e o f a
v i t i a t e t h e S e c t i o n 1 3 r i g h t t o s t r i k e . An d t h e B o a r d h a s
40
See ibid.
NLRB-FOIA-00007715
Case 19-CA-32431
- 21 -
substantial. "42
striking.
d e s t r u c t i v e o f e m p l o y e e i n t e r e s t s . " 43 C o n d u c t i s " i n h e r e n t l y
th
41 See 295 NLRB 1095, 1095 (1989), enfd. 903 F.2d 396 (5
Cir.
NLRB-FOIA-00007716
Case 19-CA-32431
- 22 -
employee rights. 47
Paper.
First, the harm to employees' Section 7 rights was
economic weapon, and for the Union itself, and thereby hinder
835,
863-64 (1999), enf. denied in pertinent part 233 F.3d 831
(4 th
Cir. 2000).
44 Ibid.,
See 319 LRB 1253, 1269 (1995), enf. denied 115 F.3d 1045
45
46
Dorsey Trailers,
327 NLRB at 863-64 (employer's closing of
NLRB-FOIA-00007717
Case 19-CA-32431
- 23 -
S o u t h C a r o l i n a e m p l o y e e s d i d n o t . Ac c o r d i n g l y , B o e i n g ' s
Section 8(a)(3).
III. T h e U n i o n W a i v e d i t s R i g h t t o Ba r g a i n
48
49
NLRB-FOIA-00007718
Case 19-CA-32431
- 24 -
A . M a n d a t o r y S u b l e c t o f Ba r g a i n i n g
52 Ibid.
to other facilities).
53
(2000), revd. mem. 248 F.3d 1131 (3d Cir. 2000) ("We think it
employees").
54
NLRB-FOIA-00007719
Case 19-CA-32431
- 25 -
jobs. 57
Trailers
the assignment of unit work to nonunit employees in
the Employer cannot afford the rate at which unit wages are
57 See 321 NLRB 616, 617 (1996), enf. denied in relevant part
59 S e e
NLRB-FOIA-00007720
Case 19-CA-32431
- 26 -
bargaining.
B.
60
61
waive the right to bargain about such changes for all time).
63
64
NLRB-FOIA-00007721
Case 19-CA-32431
- 27 -
s u b j e c t t o a r b i t r a t i o n . " Al t h o u g h a n o t h e r c o n t r a c t u a l
contract."
agreement.
As in Ingham Regional Medical Center, the other
of
decision.
waiver but asserts instead that the Employer may not take
waiver; rather, the cases on which the Region and Union rely
8(a)(3) violation."
waiver are also unavailing. Thus, the Union asserts that the
65 Id. at 1260.
66 Id.
at 1262.
68 See Reno Hilton, 326 NLRB 1421, 1430 (1998), enfd. 196 F.3d
(USA) Mineral Sands, Inc. v. NLRB, 281 F.3d 442, 450 (4 Cir.
protected activity").
NLRB-FOIA-00007722
Case 19-CA-32431
- 28 -
also lacks merit. While Boeing took the position that the
See St. Barnabas Medical Center, 341 NLRB 1325, 1325 (2004)
those negotiations).
70
See Boeincr Co., 337 NLRB 758, 763 (2002) (employeL did not
NLRB-FOIA-00007723
Case 19-CA-32431
- 29 -
Locristics & Operations, 340 NLRB 255, 258 (2003), affd. 400
F.3d 920 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (employees will perceive that "the
the Act").
72
enfd. mem. 55 F3d 684 (D.C. Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516 U.S.
1093 (1996). See also, e.g., Homer D. Bronson Co., 349 NLRB
Texas Super Foods, 303 NLRB 209, 209 (1991) notice reading by
employees).
73 Three Sisters Sportswear Co.,
NLRB-FOIA-00007724
Case 19-CA-32431
- 30 -
B.J.K.
ROFs - 9
H:ADV.19-CA-32431.Response2.Boeing.dlw
NLRB-FOIA-00007725
U N ITE D S TA TE S O F A M E R IC A
B E F O R E TH E N A TIO N A L LA B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
R E G IO N 19
T H E B O E IN G C O M P A N Y '
and
IN TE R N A TIO N A L A S S O C IA TIO N O F
M A C H IN IS TS A N D A E R O S P A C E W O R K E R S
IN TE R N A TIO N A L A S S O C IA TIO N O F
M A C H IN IS TS A N D A E R O S P A C E W O R K E R S
C O M P L A IN T A N D N O T IC E O F H E A R IN G
Lodge N o. 751 ("Local 751" or the "Union"), affiliated w ith International A ssociation of
M ach in ists an d A ero sp ace W o rkers ("IA M "), h as ch arg ed in C ase 19-C A -32431 th at
The B oeing C om pany ("R espondent" or "B oeing"), has been engaging in unfair labor
practices as set forth in the N ational Labor R elations A ct (the "A ct"),29 U.S .C . 151 et
seq.
R elations B oard (the "B oard"),by the undersigned,pursuant to 10(b) of the A ct and
102.15 of the B oard's R ules and R egulations, issues this C om plain t an d N otice of
1.
The C harge w as filed by the Union on M arch 26, 2010, and w as served on
NLRB-FOIA-00007726
2.
(a)
areas.
(b )
(c)
above in paragraph 2(a),both sold and shipped from ,and purchased and received at,
the facility goods valued in excess of $50,000 directly to and from points outside the
State of W ashington.
(d )
3.
The Union is, and has been at all m aterial tim es, a labor organization
4.
A t allm aterialtim es the follow ing individuals held the positions set forth
opposite their respective nam es and have been supervisors w ithin the m eaning of
-2 -
NLRB-FOIA-00007727
2(11) of the A ct,and/or agents w ithin the m eaning of 2(13) of the A ct,acting on
behalfofR espondent:
Jim Albaugh
ScottC arson
R ay C onner
C om m ercialA irplanes
ScottFancher
Program
Fred K iga
Relations
D oug K ight'
C om m ercialA irplanes
Jim M cN em ey
Jim Proulx
B oeing spokesm an
Pat Shanahan
A irplane Program s
G en e W o lo sh yn
5.
(a)
the collective bargaining agreem ent described below in paragraph 5(c),including, inter
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining w ithin the m eaning of 9(b) of the
(b )
the collective bargaining agreem ent described below in paragraph 5(c),including, inter
-3 -
NLRB-FOIA-00007728
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining w ithin the m eaning of 9(b)
(c)
.S ince at least 1975 and at allm aterialtim es,the IA M has been the
designated exclusive collective bargaining representative of the P uget S ound Unit and
(d )
6.
O n or about the dates and by the m anner noted below ,R espondent m ade
coercive statem ents to its em ployees that it w ould rem ove or had rem oved w ork from
the U nit b ecause em ployees h ad struck and R espond ent threatened or im pliedly
threatened that the Unit w ould lose additional w ork in the event of future strikes:
callthat w as posted on B oeing's intranet w ebsite for allem ployees and reported in the
S eattle P ost Intelligencer A erospace N ew s and quoted in the S eattle Tim es,m ade an
relationship," and m oving the 787 D ream liner w ork to S outh C arolina due to 'strikes
h a p p e n in g e v e ry th re e to fo u r y e a rs in P u g e t S o u n d ." .
-4 -
NLRB-FOIA-00007729
(b)
entitled "787 Second Line,Q uestions and A nsw ers for M anagers," inform ed em ployees,
am ong other things,that its decision to locate the second 787 D ream liner line in South
,,
the S eattle Tim es,attributed R espondent's 787 D ream liner production decision to use a Ilf
. .
..
"dual-sourcing" system and to contract w ith separate suppliers for the South C arolina
(c)
line to pastUnitstrikes.
(d )
x p ,
to use a "dual-sourcing" system and to contract w ith separate suppliers for the South
(e)
Tim es reporter,stated that R espondent decided to locate its 787 D ream liner second line
in S outh C arolina because of past Unit strikes,and threatened the loss of future Unit
7.
(a)
but no later than O ctober 28,2009,R espondent decided to transfer its second 787
D ream liner production line of 3 planes per m onth from the Unit to its non-union site in
-5 -
NLRB-FOIA-00007730
(b )
7(a) because the Unit em ployees assisted and/or supported the Union by, inter alia,
an d/or o ther em ployees from eng aging in these or oth er union and/or p rotected,
concerted activities.
(c)
8.
(a)
but no later than D ecem ber 3,2009,R espondent decided to transfer a sourcing supply
program for its 787 D ream liner production line from the Unit to its non-union facility in
(b )
8(a) because the Unit em ployees assisted and/or supported the Union by, inter alia,
an d/or o ther em ployees from eng aging in these or oth er union and/or p rotected,
concerted activities.
(c)
com bined w ith the conduct described above in paragraphs 6 and 7(a),is also inherently
-6 -
NLRB-FOIA-00007731
9.
interfering w ith, restraining, and coercing em ployees in the exercise of the rights
10.
been discrim inating in regard to the hire or tenure or term s or conditions of em ploym ent
11.
has engaged in unfair labor practices affecting com m erce w ithin the m eaning of 2(6)
12.
A s part of the rem edy for the unfair labor practices alleged herein,the
A cting G eneral C ounsel seeks an O rder requiring either that one of the high level
officials of R espondent alleged to have com m itted the violations enum erated above in
paragraph 6 read,or that a designated B oard agent read in the presence of a high level
B oeing official, any notice that issues in this m atter, and requiring R espondent to
13.
(a)
A s part of the rem edy for the unfair labor practices alleged above in
-7 -
NLRB-FOIA-00007732
to have the Unit operate its second line of 787 D ream liner aircraft assem bly production
in the S tate of W ashington,utilizing supply lines m aintained by the Unit in the S eattle,
(b)
requested by the A cting G eneralC ounseldoes not seek to prohibit R espondent from
m aking non-discrim inatory decisions w ith respect to w here w ork w illbe perform ed,
including non-discrim inatory decisions w ith respect to w ork at its N orth C harleston,
South C arolina,facility.
A N SW E R R E Q U IR E M E N T
B oard's R ules and R egulations,it m ust file an answ er to this C om plaint.The answ er
b efore M ay 1 2011. Unless filed electronically in a pdf form at,R espondent should file
an originaland four copies of the answ er w ith this office and serve a copy of the answ er
th e A gen cy's w eb site. In ord er to file an an sw er electron ically, access th e A gen cy's
/-
N um ber,and follow the detailed instructions.The responsibility for the receipt and
usability of the answ er rests exclusively upon the sender.Unless notification on the
continuous period of m ore than 2 hours after 12:00 noon (E astern Tim e) on the due
-8 -
NLRB-FOIA-00007733
date for filing,a failure to tim ely file the answ er w illnot be excused on the basis that the
transm ission could not be accom plished because the A gency's w ebsite w as off-line or
unavailable for som e other reason.The B oard's R ules and R egulations require that an
a pdf docum ent containing the required signature,no paper copies of the docum ent
need to be transm itted to the R egionalO ffice.H ow ever,if the electronic version of an
answ er to a com plaint is not a pdf file containing the required signature,then the E-filing
rules require that such answ er containing the required signature be subm itted to the
R egionalO ffice by traditionalm eans w ithin three (3) business days after the date of
electronic filing.
S ervice of the answ er on each of the other parties m ust be accom plished
filed or if an answ er is filed untim ely,the B oard m ay find,pursuant to M otion for D efault
N O T IC E O F H E A R IN G
N ationalLabor R elations B oard.A t the hearing,R espondent and any other party to this
proceeding have the right to appear and present testim ony regarding the allegations in
-9 -
NLRB-FOIA-00007734
this com plaint. The procedures to be follow ed at the hearing are described in the
(k,...,--
10-
NLRB-FOIA-00007735
U N IT E D ST A T E S O F A M E R IC A
B E FO R E T H E N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
R E G IO N 19
T H E B O E IN G C O M PA N Y
and
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A SSO C IA T IO N O F
M A C H IN IST S A N D A E R O SPA C E
W O R K E R S D IST R IC T L O D G E 751,affiliated
w ith
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A SSO C IA T IO N O F
M A C H IN IST S A N D A E R O SPA C E
W O R K E R S
A N SW E R
A nsw er to the C om plaint and N otice of H earing ("C om plaint") filed by the A cting G eneral
G E N E R A L D E N IA L
E xcept as otherw ise expressly stated herein,B oeing denies each and every allegation
violated the N ationalL abor R elations A ct ("N L R A ") in any of the m anners alleged in the
C om plaint or in any other m anner.Pursuant to Section 102.20 of the B oard's rules,averm ents in
the C om plaint to w hich no responsive pleading is required shallbe deem ed as denied.B oeing
expressly reserves the right to seek to am end and/or supplem ent its A nsw er as m ay be necessary.
NLRB-FOIA-00007736
D E FE N SE S
W ithout assum ing any burden of proof,persuasion or production nototherw ise legally
assigned to it as to any elem ent of the claim s alleged in the C om plaint,B oeing asserts the
1.
2.
T he statem ents cited in Paragraphs 6(a)-6(e) of the C om plaint are protected '
statem ents under Section 8(c) of the N L R A and under the First A m endm ent to the United States
C onstitution and are not adm issible to show any violation of the N L R A .
3.
B oeing's decision to place the second 787 assem bly line in N orth C harleston w as
based upon a num ber of varied factors,incltiding a favorable business environm ent in South
C arolina for m anufacturing com panies like B oeing; significant financialincentives from the
State of South C arolina; achieving geographic diversity of its com m ercialairline operations; as
w ellas to protect the stability of the 787's globalproduction system .In any event,even
ascribing an intent to B oeing that it placed the second line in N orth C harleston so as to m itigate
the harm fuleconom ic effects of an anticipated future strike w ould not be evidence that the
decision to place the second assem bly line in N orth C harleston w as designed to retaliate against
the IA M for past strikes.N evertheless,B oeing w ould have m ade the sam e decisions w ith
respect to the placem ent of the second assem bly line in N orth C harleston even if it had not taken
into consideration the dam aging im pact of future strikes on the production of 787s.
4.
E ven if the actions described in the C om plaint had constituted m ovem ent or
M achinists and A erospace W orkers D istrictL odge 751,affiliated w ith InternationalA ssociation
NLRB-FOIA-00007737
'r
5.
B oeing has not violated Section 8(a)(3) of the N L R A as it has not discrim inated in
the hire,w ages,tenure,or term s or conditions of em ploym ent of any Unit m em ber.
6.
under the N L R A because, inter alia,in its collective bargaining agreem ent w ith B oeing,the JA M
expressly agreed that B oeing has the right to place w ork in any location of its choice w ithout the
need to bargain w ith the JA M ,and because an intent to m itigate the adverse econom ic im pact of
an anticipated future strike is notinherently destructive ofprotected em ployee rights under the
N L R A .
7.
B oeing has not violated Section 8(a)(1) of the N L R A as it has not interfered w ith,
restrained,or coerced em ployees represented by the IA M in the exercise of their rights protected
by the N L R A .
8.
T he rem edy requested in the C om plaint is im perm issibly punitive and w ould
cause an undue hardship on B oeing,its em ployees,and the State of South C arolina.M oreover,
none of the com plained of actions caused any hardship on any B oeing em ployees or the State of
W ashington.
9.
10.
NLRB-FOIA-00007738
I-
11.
12.
Paragraph 13(b) w ould effectively cause B oeing to close its assem bly facility in N orth
C harleston,South C arolina.
13.
Som e or allof the claim s asserted in the C om plaint are barred by the six m onth
14.
did not law fully hold the office of A cting G eneralC ounselat the tim e he directed that the
C om plaint be filed.
Pream ble: B oeing denies the allegations contained in the pream ble,except to adm it that
D istrict L odge 751,affiliated w ith the InternationalA ssociation of M achinists and A erospace
W orkers ("IA M ") has charged in case 19-C A -32431 thatB oeing has engaged in certain unfair
labor practices prohibited by the N L R A ,and that the A cting G eneralC ounselof the N L R B has
issued this C om plaint and N otice of H earing based upon the IA M 's charge.
1.
B oeing lacks inform ation and know ledge sufficient to form a belief as to the
2.
NLRB-FOIA-00007739
(b) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 2(b),except to adm it that in the
last tw elve m onths its business operations resulted in gross revenues in excess of $500,000
(c) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 2(c),except to adm it that during
the last tw elve m onths it received,shipped,sold and/orpurchase goods at its facilities in the
State of W ashington valued in excess of $50,000 from places outside of the State of W ashington
(d) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 2(d),except to adm it that it is and
T he first sentence of Paragraph 4 states legal conclusions forw hich no answ eris
required A s to the rem aining allegations in Paragraph 4,B oeing adm its that the
R aym ond L C onnerV ice President and G eneral M anagerof Supply C hain
Scott FancherV ice President and G eneral M anager,B oeing 787 D ream liner
Fredenck C K iga V ice President,State and L ocal G overnm ent R elations and
A irplanes
NLRB-FOIA-00007740
A irplane
(a) T he allegations contained in Paragraph 5(a) state legal conclusions forw hich
no response is required,but to the extent a response is required,B oeing adm its that the
production and m aintenance em ployees in W ashington State constituted a "U nit" forcollective
bargaining purposes
(b) T he allegations contained in Paragraph 5(b) state legal conclusions forw hich
no response is required,but to the extent a response is required,B oeing adm its that the
production and m aintenance em ployees in the Portland,O regon area constitute a "U nit" for
'
that,it "rem oved" or"had rem oved w ork" from its facilities in E verett,W ashington orPortland,
O regon because U nit em ployees had struck B oeing,and also specifically denies that it threatened
orim pliedly threatened that those facilities w ould lose additional w ork in the event of future U nit
NLRB-FOIA-00007741
(a) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 6(a),except to adm it that its
O ctober 21,2009; and B oeing specifically denies that M r.M cN erney m ade an "extended
statem ent" or any statem entaboutm oving 787 D ream liner w ork to South C arolina due to
"strikes happening every three or four years in PugetSound." B oeing adm its thatthe referenced
new spaper articles appeared in The Seattle Post-Intelligencer and The Seattle Tim es.
(b) B oeing denies the allegations ofParagraph 6(b),and further states thatthe
(c) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 6(c),except to adm it that the
referenced new spaper article appeared in The Seattle Tim es on D ecem ber 7,2009.
(d) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 6(d),except to adm it that the
referenced new spaper article appeared in The PugetSound B usiness Journal on D ecem ber 8,
2009.
(e) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 6(e),except to adm it that a Seattle
T im es reporter conducted a video-taped interview ofM r.A lbaugh and thatthe tape speaks for
itself.
7.
(a) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 7(a),and specifically denies that it
transferred the "second 787 D ream liner" assem bly line from its facility in E verett,W ashington to
O ctober 28,2009,B oeing announced that it w ould place a new second assem bly line for the 787
NLRB-FOIA-00007742
e-
8.
(a) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 8(a),and specifically denies that it
transferred a sourcing supply program for the 787 D ream liner assem bly line from its facilities in
9.
10.
11.
12.
H ow ever,to the extent that a response m ay be deem ed to be necessary,B oeing denies that the
A cting G eneralC ounselis entitled to,or thatthe B oard can order the rem edy requested in
Paragraph 12.
13.
(a) Paragraph 13(a) does not allege facts for w hich an answ er is required,but
relates the rem edy sought by the A cting G eneralC ounseland,accordingly,no response is
required.H ow ever,to the extent that a response m ay be deem ed to be necessary,B oeing denies
thatthe A cting G eneralC ounselis entitled to the rem edy,or thatthe B oard can order the rem edy
(b) Paragraph 13(b) does not allege facts for w hich an answ er is required but
m erely describes w hat the A cting G eneralC ounselsays is not part of the rem edy he is seeking.
T o the extent that a response m ay be deem ed to be necessary,B oeing denies that the A cting
G eneralC ounselhas correctly stated thatthe rem edy soughtin Paragraph 13(a)w illnot
effectively cause B oeing's assem bly facility in N orth C harleston to shut dow n.
NLRB-FOIA-00007743
Boeing reserves the rightto raise any additionaldefenses notasserted herein ofw hich
D ated: M ay 4,2011
--Z .le
_a
C 2r a
W illiam J.
I4fiV erg P.C .
T elephone:202.955.8500
M C K EN N A LO N G & A LD R ID G E
T elephone: 404.527-4000
NLRB-FOIA-00007744
R EG IO N 19
TH E BO EIN G C O M PA N Y
and
M A C H IN ISTS A N D A ER O SPA C E
W O R K ER S D ISTR IC T LO D G E 751,affiliated
w ith
M A C H IN ISTS A N D A ER O SPA C E
W O R K ER S
C E R T IFIC A T E O F SE R V IC E
R egional D irector
Seattle,W ashington.98174-1078
M ara-Louise A nzalone
10
NLRB-FOIA-00007745
D avid C am pbell
C ounselfor IA M
D avis
W ashington,D .C .20036-5303
NLRB-FOIA-00007746
's.
U N IT E D ST A T E S O F A M E R IC A
B E FO R E T H E N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
R E G IO N 19
T H E B O E IN G C O M PA N Y
and
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A SSO C IA T IO N O F
M A C H IN IST S A N D A E R O SPA C E
W O R K E R S D IST R IC T L O D G E 751,affiliated
w ith
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A SSO C IA T IO N O F
M A C H IN IST S A N D A E R O SPA C E
W O R K E R S
A N SW E R
A nsw er to the C om plaint and N otice of H earing ("C om plaint") filed by the A cting G eneral
G E N E R A L D E N IA L
E xcept as otherw ise expressly stated herein,B oeing denies each and every allegation
violated the N ationalL abor R elations A ct ("N L R A ") in any of the m anners alleged in the
C om plaint or in any other m anner.Pursuant to Section 102.20 of the B oard's rules,averm ents in
the C om plaint to w hich no responsive pleading is required shallbe deem ed as denied.B oeing
expressly reserves the right to seek to am end and/or supplem ent its A nsw er as m ay be necessary.
NLRB-FOIA-00007747
0 .
te
D E FE N SE S
W ithout assum ing any burden of proof,persuasion or production nototherw ise legally
assigned to it as to any elem ent of the claim s alleged in the C om plaint,B oeing asserts the
1.
2.
statem ents under Section 8(c) of the N L R A and under the First A m endm ent to the United States
C onstitution and are not adm issible to show any violation of the N L R A .
3.
B oeing's decision to place the second 787 assem bly line in N orth C harleston w as
based upon a num ber of varied factors,including a favorable business environm ent in South
C arolina for m anufacturing com panies like B oeing; significant financialincentives from the
State of South C arolina; achieving geographic diversity of its com m ercialairline operations; as
w ellas to protect the stability of the 787's globalproduction system .In any event,even
ascribing an intent to B oeing that it placed the second line in N orth C harleston so as to m itigate
the harm fuleconom ic effects of an anticipated future strike w ould not be evidence that the
decision to place the second assem bly line in N orth C harleston w as designed to retaliate against
the IA M for past strikes.N evertheless,B oeing w ould have m ade the sam e decisions w ith
respect to the placem ent of the second assem bly line in N orth C harleston even if it had not taken
into consideration the dam aging im pact of future strikes on the production of 787s.
4.
E ven if the actions described in the C om plaint had constituted m ovem ent or
M achinists and A erospace W orkers D istrictL odge 751,affiliated w ith InternationalA ssociation
NLRB-FOIA-00007748
5.
B oeing has not violated Section 8(a)(3) of the N L R A as it has not discrim inated in
the hire,w ages,tenure,or term s or conditions of em ploym ent of any Unit m em ber.
6.
under the N L R A because, inter alia,in its collective bargaining agreem ent w ith B oeing,the JA M
expressly agreed that B oeing has the right to place w ork in any location of its choice w ithout the
need to bargain w ith the IA M ,and because an intent to m itigate the adverse econom ic im pact of
an anticipated future strike is notinherently destructive ofprotected em ployee rights under the
N L R A .
7.
B oeing has not violated Section 8(a)(1) of the N L R A as it has not interfered w ith,
restrained,or coerced em ployees represented by the IA M in the exercise of their rights protected
by the N L R A .
8.
T he rem edy requested in the C om plaint is im perm issibly punitive and w ould
cause an undue hardship on B oeing,its em ployees,and the State of South C arolina.M oreover,
none of the com plained of actions caused any hardship on any B oeing em ployees or the State of
W ashington.
9.
10.
NLRB-FOIA-00007749
11.
12.
Paragraph 13(b) w ould effectively cause B oeing to close its assem bly facility in N orth
C harleston,South C arolina.
13.
Som e or allof the claim s asserted in the C om plaint are barred by the six m onth
14.
did not law fully hold the office of A cting G eneralC ounselat the tim e he directed that the
C om plaint be filed.
Pream ble: B oeing denies the allegations contained in the pream ble,except to adm it that
D istrict L odge 751,affiliated w ith the InternationalA ssociation of M achinists and A erospace
W orkers ("JA M ") has charged in case 19-C A -32431 that B oeing has engaged in certain unfair
labor practices prohibited by the N L R A ,and that the A cting G eneralC ounselof the N L R B has
issued this C om plaint and N otice of H earing based upon the IA M 's charge.
1.
B oeing lacks inform ation and know ledge sufficient to form a belief as to the
2.
NLRB-FOIA-00007750
(b) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 2(b),except to adm it that in the
last tw elve m onths its business operations resulted in gross revenues in excess of $500,000.
(c) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 2(c),except to adm it that during
the last tw elve m onths it received,shipped,sold and/or purchase goods at its facilities in the
State of W ashington valued in excess of $50,000 from places outside of the State of W ashington.
(d) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 2(d),except to adm it that it is and
3. '
4.
required.A s to the rem aining allegations in Paragraph 4,B oeing adm its that the
Jam es ("Jim ") F.A lbaugh: E xecutive V ice President,T he B oeing C om pany;
R aym ond L .C onner: V ice President and G eneralM anager of Supply C hain
Scott Fancher: V ice President and G eneralM anager,B oeing 787 D ream liner
Frederick C .K iga:V ice President,State and L ocalG overnm entR elations and
G lobalC orporate C itizenship for the N orthw est R egion,B oeing C om m ercial
A irplanes
NLRB-FOIA-00007751
A irplanes
no response is required,butto the extenta response is required,B oeing adm its thatthe
5.
production and m aintenance em ployees in W ashington State constituted a "Unit" for collective
bargaining purposes.
no response is required,butto the extenta response is required,B oeing adm its thatthe
production and m aintenance em ployees in the Portland,O regon area constitute a "Unit" for
6.
that,it"rem oved" or "had rem oved w ork" from its facilities in Everett,W ashington or Portland,
O regon because Unit em ployees had struck B oeing,and also specifically denies that it threatened
or im pliedly threatened that those facilities w ould lose additionalw ork in the event of future Unit
NLRB-FOIA-00007752
(a) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 6(a),except to adm it that its
O ctober 21,2009; and B oeing specifically denies that M r.M cN erney m ade an "extended
statem ent" or any statem entaboutm oving 787 D ream liner w ork to South C arolina due to
"strikes happening every three or four years in PugetSound." B oeing adm its thatthe referenced
new spaper articles appeared in The Seattle Post-Intelligencer and The Seattle Tim es.
(b) B oeing denies the allegations ofParagraph 6(b),and further states thatthe
(c) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 6(c),except to adm it that the
referenced new spaper article appeared in The Seattle Tim es on D ecem ber 7,2009.
(d) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 6(d),except to adm it that the
referenced new spaper article appeared in The PugetSound B usiness Journal on D ecem ber 8,
2009.
(e) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 6(e),except to adm it that a Seattle
T im es reporter conducted a video-taped interview ofM r.A lbaugh and thatthe tape speaks for
itself.
7.
(a) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 7(a),and specifically denies that it
transferred the "second 787 D ream liner" assem bly line from its facility in E verett,W ashington to
O ctober 28,2009,B oeing announced that it w ould place a new second assem bly line for the 787
NLRB-FOIA-00007753
8.
(a) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 8(a),and specifically denies that it
transferred a sourcing supply program for the 787 D ream liner assem bly line from its facilities in
9.
10.
11.
12.
H ow ever,to the extent that a response m ay be deem ed to be necessary,B oeing denies that the
A cting G eneralC ounselis entitled to,or thatthe B oard can order the rem edy requested in
Paragraph 12.
13.
(a) Paragraph 13(a) does not allege facts for w hich an answ er is required,but
relates the rem edy sought by the A cting G eneralC ounseland,accordingly,no response is
required.H ow ever,to the extent that a response m ay be deem ed to be necessary,B oeing denies
thatthe A cting G eneralC ounselis entitled to the rem edy,or thatthe B oard can order the rem edy
(b) Paragraph 13(b) does not allege facts for w hich an answ er is required but
m erely describes w hat the A cting G eneralC ounselsays is not part of the rem edy he is seeking.
T o the extent that a response m ay be deem ed to be necessary,B oeing denies that the A cting
G eneralC ounselhas correctly stated thatthe rem edy soughtin Paragraph 13(a)w illnot
effectively cause B oeing's assem bly facility in N orth C harleston to shut dow n.
NLRB-FOIA-00007754
Boeing reserves the rightto raise any additionaldefenses notasserted herein ofw hich
D ated:M ay 4,2011
T elephone:202.955.8500
Facsim ile:202.467.0539
M C K EN N A LO N G & A LD R ID G E
T elephone: 404.527-4000
NLRB-FOIA-00007755
R EG IO N 19
TH E BO EIN G C O M PA N Y
and
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A SSO C IA T IO N O F .
M A C H IN ISTS A N D A ER O SPA C E
W O R K ER S D ISTR IC T LO D G E 751,affiliated
w ith
M A C H IN ISTS A N D A ER O SPA C E
W O R M S
C E R T IFIC A T E O F SE R V IC E
R egionalD irector
M ara-Louise A nzalone
10
NLRB-FOIA-00007756
D avid C am pbell
C ounselfor IA M
D A TED this 4
thday ofM ay,2011
iniii7 D avis
W ashington,D .C .20036-5303
D D avis@ G ibsondunn.com
NLRB-FOIA-00007757
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A SSO C IA T IO N of M A C H IN IST S
and A E R O SPA C E W O R K E R S
C H R IS T O P H E R T . C O R S O N
G en eral C o u n sel
L eg al. D ep artm en t
U p p er M arlb o ro , M D 20772-2687
.4 5 0 .3
F ax (301) 967-4594
NLRB-FOIA-00007758
and A ER O SPA C E W O R K ER S
C H R IS T O P H E R
T.C O R S O N
G eneral Counsel
NLRB-FOIA-00007759
. P
Exemption 5
_3
NLRB-FOIA-00007760
. . . .
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-0000
NLRB-FOIA-00007761
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007762
3/18/11
M ike L uttig,B oeing's G C ,called m e at 2 pm .H e told nip that he w as "m iffed" that
although he had done w hat I asked (gotten B oeing to agree that no unit ees w ould be laid
off betw een now and the end of the contract expiration in Sept,2012),I w as still
considering issuing com plaint.I told him that the M achinists had proposed that the
parties m eet for a 2-w eek period w ith a m ediator and that I thought that if B oeing
accepted that offer,the parties m ight w ellreach a settlem ent.H e told m e that rather than
accept that offer,he thought that he w ould go to the H illto prevent m e from litigating the
case.I told him that he w ould have to get such a rider through the Senate.I said that I had
the C E O on tape saying that the m ove to SC w as not because of econom ics but because
the M achinists strike.I said I had a triable case and that I w ould do w hatever I thought
w as right under the N L R A .B ut I reiterated that I thought the parties should m eet and try
3/28/11
L uttig called and I asked B arry K earney to be on the callw ith m e.L uttig said that B oeing
w ould not agree to a conversation w ith the M achinists w ith a m ediator,but that he w as
4/8/11
talked to him on m y cellphone.H e told m e that the "retaliatory charge" of the M achinists
against B oeing w ould have huge econom ic and politicalconsequences.H e said that the
charge w ould scare B oeing's custom ers and C ould affect orders.H e said that the political
fallout w ould be huge and that he w as m ore reasonable than his Senate counterpart (Sen.
D e M int).
I explained to him that I had been trying to settle this case for the last 6 m onths,and I
asked for his help in getting B oeing to agree to the M achinists'request for a 2-w eek
m ediated conversation.I told him that this case had every potentialto settle as B oeing's
business w as boom ing and that the parties had both indicated to m e that their futures
getting the parties to talk to each other,rather than to m e.I also told him that I w ould not
be seeking the dism antling of the S.0 plant and that I had m ade it clear to the M achinists
H e said that he w as pessim istic that the M achinists and B oeing could w ork things out,but
that he never thought it w as a bad idea to talk.I thanked him for being w illing to help.
4/11/11
I left a m essage for D ebbie D urkin,the aide to Senator G raham w ho place the callon Fri.
I received a callback from W alt K uhn at noon.I told him that I w as follow ing up on m y
NLRB-FOIA-00007763
conversation w ith the Senator on Friand thatI w anted to know ifhe had been successful
in contacting Boeing.H e said thatthe Senator w ould callm e back later this w eek.I told
W altthatI w as ready to begin the com plaintprocess and thatI could nothold itup
indefinitely.I said thatI w anted to talk to the Senator today ifpossible,and he said that
4/11/11
Senator G raham called m e at3 pm .H e said thathe had talked to Boeing,and they had no
interestin m ediating the com plaint,w hich w as totally w ithoutm erit.H e said thathe
agreed w ith Boeing and understood their position.H e said thatifa com plaintw as filed,it
w illbe "nasty," "very,very nasty." H e said thatthis w as a case ofhow notto grow the
econom y.H e said thatw e had to do w hatw e had to do,and he had to do w hathe had to
NLRB-FOIA-00007764
J. M ichael Luttig
G eneralC ounsel
C hicago, IL 60606-1596
M ay 3,2011
W ashington,D .C .20570-0001
I w rite regarding statem ents in your com plaint and elsew here including
decision to place its new 787 finalassem bly line in South C arolina.A num ber of
these statem ents,w hich are criticalto your case against B oeing,fundam entally
tnischaracterizations,for the public record and also for purposes of the com plaint you
160,000 B oeing em ployees w orldw ide.A nd,of course,you have filed a com plaint
based upon these m isstatem ents that cannot be credibly m aintained under law .
A s an initialm atter,repeated statem ents in the com plaint allege that B oeing
"rem oved w ork" from PugetSound (116),"decided to transfer its second 787
sourcing supply program " to South C arolina (1[8(a)).Y our A pril20 press release
second line w ork in response to charges filed by the M achinists union and found
reasonable cause to believe that B oeing had violated tw o sections of the N ational
from Puget Sound.T he second line for the 787 is a new finalassem bly line.A s it
did not previously exist in Puget Sound or elsew here,the second assem bly line could
not have been "rem oved" from ,"transferred" or otherw ise "m oved" to South
C arolina.Sim ply put,the w ork that is and w illbe done at our C harleston,South
C arolina finalassem bly facility is new w ork,required and added in response to the
historic custom er dem and for the 787.N o m em ber of the InternationalA ssociation of
Tni
hIA
)on
in P uget Sound has lost his or her job,or otherw ise suffered
M achi
sts'Muti
NLRB-FOIA-00007765
any adverse em ploym entaction,as a resultofthe placem entofthis new w ork in the
Y our ow n R egionalD irector,w hose office you have tasked w ith prosecuting
this case,understands that,and has accurately and publicly described the m atter
differently than you.A s the Seattle Tim es reported lastyear,"R ichard A hearn,the
N LR B regionaldirector investigating the com plaint,said itw ould have been an easier
case for the union to argue ifBoeing had m oved existing w ork from Everett,rather
than placing new w ork in C harleston." D om inic G ates, M achinists F ile U nfair Labor
419:01671116g
are already,via public statem ents,transform ing the theory ofthe com plaintto say
that.because Boeing com m itted to the State ofW ashington thatitw ould build allof
com pany's originalcom m itm ent'to the State ofW ashington thatitw ould build the
The prem ise underlying thatassertion thatBoeing com m itted to the State of
W ashington to build allof the C orn .an '787s in ftstin_ton ts false.B oeing did
notvim m ito the State ofW ashington thatitw ould build allofits 787s in thatstate.
Boeing honored and fully allofits contractualcom m itm ents to the State of
W ashington long before the decision to locate the C om pany's new production facility
in South C arolina.The notion thatBoeing had som ehow com m itted to W ashington
State to build all787s in thatstate is neithdr m entioned nor even suggested either in
the IA M 's charge or in your recently filed com plaint,and you never asserted that
Boeing had m ade such contractualcom m itm ents to the State ofW ashington in the
severaldiscussions w e have had w ith you in the m onths preceding your filing ofthe
com plaint.H ad you done so,w e w ould have explained to you w hy such an
im pression thatyou and your office are now in search ofa theory thatw illsupporta
predeterm ined outcom e,even a theory thathas nothing to do w ith the N ationalLabor
R elations A ct.
Your S tatem ent That B oeing S ought To "P unish" U nion E m ployees
suggesting thatBoeing broke com m itm ents to the State ofW ashington,is bad
enough.Far m ore egregious,how ever,are the statem ents thathave been m ade
Boeing executives soughtto "punish" union em ployees and to "threaten" them for
NLRB-FOIA-00007766
their pastand possible future strikes,through the C om pany's statem ents and its
Airt7AFAIIKG '
m essage that[the C om pany and its Executives]w ere doing this to punish their
em ployees for having struck and having the pow er to strike in the future." (Steven
Tim es,A pril23,2010,em phasis added.)N either your com plaintnor the post-hoc
statem ents you and other officials ofthe N LR B have m ade since the filing ofthe
com plaint()tiers a single Boeing statem ent letalone a "consistentm essage" that
stated thatBoeing "decided to locate its 787 D ream liner second line in South
C arolina because ofpastU nitstrikes,and threatened the loss offuture U nitw ork
M arch 2,2010 interview ofM r.A lbaugh by the Seattle Tim es,butdoes notpurportto
sheet" thatquotes M r.A lbaugh as saying:"The overriding factor [in transferring the
line]w as notthe business clim ate.A nd itw as notthe w ages w e're paying today.It
htto://nIrb.goY lnode/443
Itw ould,ofcourse,have been entirely perm issible under existing law for M r.
A lbaugh to have m ade a statem entthatthe C om pany considered the econom ic costs
offuture strikes in its business decision to locate w ork in South C arolina or even
thatitw as the sole reason for such decision.ButM r.A lbaugh did noteven say either
W ellI think you can probably say thataboutallthe states in the country right
notthe business clim ate and itw as notthe w ages w e're paying people today.
Itw as that w e can't afford to have a w ork stoppage every three years. W e
You know ,those are the overriding factors.A nd Iny bias w as to stay here but
The italicized sentences w hich w ere deliberately om itted from your office's
presentation ofthis quotation on its w ebsite m ake clear thatM r.A lbaugh w as
referencing tw o,rather than one,"overriding factors," only one ofw hich is the risk of
NLRB-FOIA-00007767
M r.A lbaugh expresses his "bias" in favor ofPugetSound and lauds the good-faith
efforts ofboth sides.H e explains thatthe com pany's preference w as to locate the
new production line in PugetSound and thatboth the com pany and the union m ade
"punishm ent!" to the union for its pastor future strike capability.
The com plaint's attem ptto depicta statem entby Jim M cN erney,Boeing's
another exam ple ofm ischaracterization.The com plaintalleges thatM r.M cN erney
relationship,'and m oving the 787 D ream liner w ork to South C arolina due to 'strikes
added).)
statem ents.First,M r.M cN erney w as notm aking an "extended statem ent" about why
decision to locate the new finalassem bly line in South C arolina had noteven been
m ade atthe tim e M r.M cN tirney's statem ents w ere m ade.Second,M r.M cN erney
answ ered only the question as to com parative costs thatw as asked.Thus,in the
passages you m isquote and m ischam cterize,he discussed the relative costs ofa new
w ith "strikes happening every three to four years in PugetSound." H e did notsay,as
A nd M r.M cN erney did noteven rem otely suggestthatw hatw ould later turn
outto be the decision to open a new line in C harleston w as in retaliation for such
strikes,as you w ould have to establish to obtain the rem edies you seek in your
com plaint.H e did notsay,he did notsuggest,and he did notim ply in any respect
facility other than in PugetSound w ould or m ightbe m ade to punish the union for
paststrikes or because oftheir pow er to strike in the future.N either did he say,
H is answ er cannotbe cited in supportofthe legaltheories in-the com plaint,m uch less
the sw eeping statem entyou m ade to the N ew York Tim es aboutBoeing's "consistent
m essage" thatBoeing and its executives soughtto "punish" the C om pany's union
em ployees.
Boeing's intranetw ebsite for allem ployees," m uch less posted for the purpose of
NLRB-FOIA-00007768
sending an illegalm essage under the N LR A ,as the com plaintincorrectly and
m isleadingly suggests.
N or do any ofthe other few statem ents you reference in your com plaint
w hich I attach to this letter rem otely suggestan intentto "punish" the C om pany's
unionized em ployees.Q uite the contrary:these statem ents show ,atm ost,thatthe
C om pany considered (am ong m ultiple other factors)the risk and potentialcosts of
future strikes in deciding w here to locate its new finalassem bly facility.Those have
placing the second line in PugetSound.A lthough those negotiations w ere not
represented by unions and those w ho are not.Y our statem entim plies thatBoeing's
m ostsenior executives acted outofpersonalspite and retribution tow ard its labor
w hatsoever.
"consistentm essage" thatthe C om pany intended to "punish" the union for its prior
strikes and its pow er to strike in the future,you had no choice butto issue a
evidence.")A m ong other reasons,thatstatem entis puzzling,to say the least,in light
ofthe course ofBoeing's discussions w ith you and your office concerning this m atter
over the pastsix m onths.In particular,itis hard to reconcile w ith w hathas been your
should be involved and thatyou w ould take no action on the m atter ifBoeing agreed
thatitw ould notlay offany 787 em ployees in PugetSound during the duration ofits
you could have proposed and then agreed to such a resolution itas you now say,you
believed thatthe statem ents and actions by Boeing and its executives w ere so
NLRB-FOIA-00007769
egregious thatthe law literally com pelled a com plaintby the N LR B.O fcourse,the
Your S tatem ent That The C om plaint D oes N ot S eek To C lose C harleston
Finally,there is the issue ofyour articulation ofthe rem edy soughtin this
com plaint.The com plaintseeks an order directing Boeing to "have the [[A M ]
operate [Boeing's]second line of787 D ream liner aircraftassem bly production in the
State ofW ashington." N otw ithstanding thatyou are seeking this rem edy,your office
has been atpains since filing the com plaintto state publicly thatthis is notequivalent
Boeing to produce outofPugetSound the three 787s per m onth thatare planned to be
explained repeatedly to you and your staffin our extended discussions before you
* * * * * * *
R elations Board itselfin upcom ing proceedings,M r.Solom on.To the extentthey
7.J%.44,
Sincerely yours,
M ichaelLuttig
A ttachm ent
NLRB-FOIA-00007770
Butkeep in m ind thatw e've gota pretty good-sized operation dow n in C harleston today.
The --there w ould be som e duplication.W e w ould obviously w ork to m inim ize that.
ButI think having said allofthat,diversifying our labor pooland labor relationship,has
som e benefits.I think the union IA M and the C om pany have had trouble figuring itout
A nd I've gotto figure outa w ay to reduce thatrisk to the C om pany.A nd so som e ofthe
m ore than overcom e by strikes happening every --every three or four years in Puget
Sound and the very negative financialim pactofthe C om pany,our balance sheetw ould
be a lotstronger today had w e nothad a strike lastyear.O ur custom ers w ould be a lot
happier today,had w e nothad a strike lastyear.A nd the 787 program w ould be in better
shape had w e not.A nd so I don'tblam e --I don'tblam e this totally on the union.W e
labor base.
im proving our com petitiveness and reducing vulnerability to delivery disruptions due to a
W e're electing notto getinto how individualsites fared in specific areas ofthe
evaluation.
* * * * * * * *
Q 8:W e understand you w ere pushing the union for a no-strike agreem entand cam e
close to getting a 10-year deal.O bviously you didn'treach an agreem ent.W as thatthe
factor in our decision.In the finalanalysis,this cam e dow n to ensuring our long-term
agreem ent,w e feltour discus.sions w ith the IA M w ere productive and focused on the
NLRB-FOIA-00007771
sustain a reliable,on-tim e flow ofdeliveries to our custom ers.W e look forw ard to
m oving forw ard w ith the LA M in a positive w ay to grow our business in an increasingly
* * * * * * * *
stoppages due to labor disputes.H aving the second line w illalso give us assurance and
Boeing spokesm an Jim Proulx cited strikes in the PugetSound region as a m ajor factor in
the decision.W ith a second supplier for every part,Boeing potentially could continue
producing D ream liners in South C arolina even ifthe M achinists w enton strike here.
"R epeated labor disruptions have affected our perform ance in our custom ers'eyes,"
.Proulx said."W e have to show our custom ers w e can be a reliable supplier to them ."
The second production line "has to be able to go on regardless ofw hat's happening over
here," he added.
* * * * * * * *
"W e w illim m ediately begin identifying,selecting and contracting w ith suppliers to stand
Proulx said Boeing has notdeterm ined how m uch w ork w illbe replicated w ithin the
com pany in the new C harleston facility and how m uch m ay go to outside suppliers.
W hen Boeing broke ground on its C harleston assem bly line in N ovem ber,the com pany
disclosed extensive plans for other buildings atthe facility.A m ong these is a "fin and
NLRB-FOIA-00007772
H e said the replication ofparts sourcing also w ould "accom m odate the ram p-up" required
* * * * * * * *
"W e inform ed the (LA M )ofour plans to begin dualsourcing during the com pany/union
discussions preceding our decision to place the second 787 line in South C arolina,"
C onner's m essage to m anagers stated."W e rem ain com m itted to strengthening our
* * * * * * * *
capabilities,based on their ability to produce high-quality com ponents and atthe best
value."
oversightis in place to m ake sure the perform ance standards are m et," he said.
"W e are notm oving any w ork thatBoeing em ployees are currently perform ing w e are
* * * * * * * *
Boeing spokesm an Jim Proulx said itw as "too early" to tellifthe new production w illbe
contracted outor done by Boeing itselfatthe new South C arolina site,or elsew here in the
country.
this region.
"There w illbe no jobs lostas partofthis m ove.There are no plans to take this w ork
aw ay," he said.
NLRB-FOIA-00007773
6(e)--Jim A lbaugh Interview w ith the Seattle Tim es, M arch 2,2010
W ellI think you can probably say thataboutallthe states in the country rightnow w ith
clim ate and itw as notthe w ages w e're paying people today.Itw as thatw e can'tafford
to have a w ork stoppage every three years.W e can'tafford to continue the rate of
escalation ofw ages as w e have in the past.Y ou know ,those are the overriding factors.
A nd m y bias w as to stay here butw e could notgetthose tw o issues done despite the best
NLRB-FOIA-00007774
r...
A L A N W IL SO N
ATTO R N E Y G E N E R AL
A pril 28,2011
1099 14
th
Street, N W , Suite 8600
W ashington, D C 20570
C ounsel of the N ational L aborR elations B oard ("N L R B "), to w ithdraw im m ediately the
com plaint num bered 19-C A -32431 against B oeing. T his com plaint represents an assault upon the
constitutional right of free speech, and the ability of ourstates to create jobs and recruit industry.
Y our ill-conceived retaliatory action seeks to destroy our citizens'right to w ork. It is South
C arolina and B oeing today, but w ill be any of ourstates, w ith ourright to w ork guarantees,
tom orrow .
constitutionally enforceable through our states'right to w ork law s. See R etail C lerks Int'l v.
Scherm erhom , 375 U .S. 96 (1963). Such law s are designed to elim inate union affiliation as a
criterion for em ploym ent. H ow ever, the N L R B , through this single proceeding, attem pts to
sound the death knell of the right to w ork. A dditionally, this tenuous com plaint w ill reverberate
throughout union and non-union states alike, as international com panies w ill question the
w isdom of locating in a country w here the federal governm ent interferes in industry w ithout
cause orjustification.
Furtherm ore, this com plaint disrupts, and m ay w ell elim inate, the production of B oeing
787 D ream liners in South C arolina. In fact,B oeing has expanded its operations to m eet product
dem and in South C arolina, w hile adding new jobs in W ashington State. T he com plaint charges
B oeing w ith the com m ission of an unfairlaborpractice, but appears to do so w ithout legal and
factual foundation. T his unparalleled and overreaching action seeks to drive a stake through the
heart of the free enterprise system . T he statem ents of B oeing officials cited in your com plaint are
the innocent exercise of the com pany's right of free speech. T he Suprem e C ourt long ago m ade
it clearthat the N L R A does not lim it, and the First A m endm ent protects, the em ployer's right to
express view s on laborpolicies orproblem s. N .L .R .B . v. V a.E lectric and Pow er, 314 U S 469,
NLRB-FOIA-00007775
H on.Lafe E.Solom on
A pril27,2011
Page 2
130S.
C t.876,899-90
O urstates are struggling to em erge from one of the w orsteconom ic collapses since the
bureaucracy on behalf of unions w illnotcreate a single new job orputone unem ployed person
back to w ork.
The only justification forthe N LR B 's unprecedented retaliatory action is to aid union
bullying and federalcoercion.W e thus callupon you to cease this attack on ourrightto w ork,
Sincerely,
16 4 0
L ev
A lan W ilson
A ttorney G eneral
NLRB-FOIA-00007776
H on.Lafe E.Solom on
April27,2011
Page 3
....
K en C uccinelli
Attorney G eneral
Q S. Inaft.a..
Attorney G eneral
,c
i--2e/---
E.ScottPruitt
Attorney G eneral
Jon C .Bruning
Attorney G eneral
Pp,416ti,
Pam Bondi
Attorney G eneral
State ofFlorida
,i7 .a,
G reg Abbott
Attorney G eneral
State ofTexas
LA03114 f S k e o le L .
Luther Strange
Attorney G eneral
State ofAlabam a
,-----7-7
/ o--
Al-a s2 ___.
Tom H orne
Attorney G eneral
State ofArizona
NLRB-FOIA-00007777
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ferguson, John H.
. If it suits you,
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007778
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007779
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007780
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007781
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007782
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007783
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007784
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007785
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007786
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007787
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007788
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Finch, Peter G.
Ahearn, Richard L.
sendeminmw.doc; ATT00001..htm
Peter, please see draft response to Senator DeMint. Note that this has not been sent out yet as the
NLRB-FOIA-00007789
Page 1 of 1
file://C:\IGCShared\in\23\1.htm
8/29/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00007790
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007791
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007792
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007793
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007794
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Flanagan, Kevin P.
Simms, Abby
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007795
Non-responsive
Boeing (Nancy) - Helped Region acquire newspaper video interviews for use in ULP case.
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007796
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Cleeland, Nancy; Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry
I can make it at 4.
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Solomon,
Any chance we could meet quickly again at 4 looks like everyone is free then to discuss messaging? Would be great
How do we
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
Thanks
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Szapiro, Miriam; Willen, Debra
Importance: High
Greetings all, Please review my latest revision, which attempts to incorporate comments from Celeste, Jennifer and
Exemption 5
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00007797
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Garza, Jose
fyi
________________________________________
On the train home I read over the statement and thought there was one missing piece,
Exemption 5 deliberative
Here's the whole thing cut and pasted - what do you think?
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007798
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007799
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Cleeland, Nancy
Thanks, Nancy.
fyi
________________________________________
On the train home I read over the statement and thought there was one missing piece,
Exemption 5 deliberative
Here's the whole thing cut and pasted - what do you think?
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007800
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007801
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Garza, Jose
FYI,
AP is writing a piece this morning about the Boeing letter too. We have this, and bigger stories by the Financial Times and
CQ Weekly. Its turning out to be another very busy day with the press.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007802
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Garza, Jose
Yes but tied up in meetings much of the day. Im working with barry and rich ahearn
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
FYI,
AP is writing a piece this morning about the Boeing letter too. We have this, and bigger stories by the Financial Times and
CQ Weekly. Its turning out to be another very busy day with the press.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
We are editorializing in tomorrow's print and online editions concerning the issues raised
by the Luttig letter and would like to include any responses that have been offered to it by
--
Mark Tapscott
Suite 500
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007803
202-459-4968 (Newsroom)
301-275-6645 (Cell)
mark.tapscott@gmail.com
mtapscott@dcexaminer.com
http://www.dcexaminer.com/
Proprietor,
http://www.dcexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/TapscottsCopyDesk/
"Tether the state in the morning and by noon it knows the full length of its tether." ---
NLRB-FOIA-00007804
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007805
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007806
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Solomon, Lafe E.
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007807
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007808
Microsoft Outlook
Garza, Jose
Solomon, Lafe E.
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Barry, are you available? If so, please bring Ellen and Jayme and others, if you deem it appropriate and they are
available.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00007809
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
NLRB-FOIA-00007810
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Fyi:
If you are having trouble viewing this message, you can view the message online.
Unsubscribe
Update My Profile
(202) 224-3254
WASHINGTONToday, Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA), Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
Committee, spoke on the Senate floor to address recent attacks on the National Labor Relations Board regarding its
"Mr. President, recently, the National Labor Relations Board issued a complaint against the Boeing Company alleging that
the company violated the National Labor Relations Act. This routine administrative procedure set off a melodramatic
outcry from the business community. A headline on the Wall Street Journals editorial page called it The Death of Right
to Work. South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley declared that it was government-dictated economic larceny. The
senior Senator from Utah, Senator Hatch, warned that foot soldiers of a vast and permanent bureaucracy were trying to
implement a leftist agenda. You would think that capitalism itself was threatened.
"So instead of talking about how we can get Americans working again and get the middle class back on its feet, my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle have chosen to spend their time on the Senate floor attacking the handling of a
routine unfair labor practice charge. While I dont necessarily think debating this issue is the best use of the Senates time,
I feel compelled to respond because of the disturbing misinformation that has distorted the public discussion of this case.
"They say that a lie travels halfway around the world before the truth can put its boots on Id say in the Senate
misinformation travels even faster than that. So its time to set the record straight.
"Here are the facts in this case: Boeing recently decided to locate its production facility for new Dreamliner planes in
South Carolina. The NLRBs complaint alleges that this decision was unlawful retaliation against Boeing workers in
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007811
Washington State, who had previously gone on strike. According to the complaint, Boeing management repeatedly,
publicly stated that they were going to build their new planes in South Carolina rather than Washington because the
unionized workers in Washington went on strike too often. Arguably, this violates the National Labor Relations Act,
which prohibits retaliation against employees who stand up for their rights.
"I have no opinion about whether or not Boeing violated the NLRA. It is not my job to determine the merits of this case,
and, likewise, it is not the job of my colleagues in Congress. We do not know all the facts and have not studied all of the
cases interpreting the law. But I do believe that the case should be decided impartially and should not be derailed by
"Opponents of workers rights have said that this complaint was issued because President Obamas labor-friendly
appointees on the Board were doing political favors for their union friends. Nothing could be further from the truth.
"This case has been handled without favoritism or political interference. The facts in the case were investigated by
dedicated, strictly nonpartisan career employees of the National Labor Relations Board, and career attorneys reviewed the
legal precedent for the case. Because the case involved novel issues of law, the regional office consulted the Division of
Advice in Washington DC. These are attorneys who are scholars of the law and have studied the legislative intent and the
75 years of decisions by our courts interpreting the NLRA. They carefully reviewed the case and made their
"Prior to issuing the complaint, Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon a career employee who spent more than 30 years
working at the NLRB under both Republican and Democrat superiors made every effort to resolve the dispute. Solomon
and the NLRB spent months trying to encourage the two sides to settle the dispute. The parties were unable to come to an
agreement, so the General Counsel issued the complaint on April 20th. A hearing is scheduled for June 14th before an
Administrative Law Judge. Depending on the outcome, the case can be appealed to the National Labor Relations Board
and eventually the Federal courts. That is the process that has been laid out by our laws and, personally, I have faith in that
process. Our system is designed to ensure that the rule of law is applied impartially to all parties. This case has provoked
controversy, and powerful interests have a big stake in the outcome. This makes it all the more important that we protect
"The dramatic responses to the complaint have needlessly complicated the issue and the NLRBs process.
There have
been threats to the NLRB budget as well as attempts to link the fate of nominations pending before the Senate HELP
Committee to the outcome of the case. These actions threaten the integrity of our judicial and prosecutorial processes.
This case like any adjudication handled by an independent agency should be determined based on the facts and the law,
not politics.
"In addition to mischaracterizing the NLRBs handling of this case, opponents of workers rights have also
mischaracterized the fundamental issue at stake. Several public officials, including some of my Senate colleagues, have
suggested that this case represents an assault on right to work laws. Again, thats just factually incorrect. There is
absolutely no way that the outcome of this case could affect in any way the right to work laws of any state.
"This case is not about right to work laws its about workers rights. If, indeed, the NLRB General Counsel is able to
prove that Boeing retaliated against Washingtons workers because they stood up for themselves, thats a very serious
"This is about far more than just one group of workers in Washington State. Unions are one of the few voices left in our
society speaking up for the little guy, and the rights provided in the NLRA are one of the few tools that workers can use
stand up for fair treatment, including good American jobs that pay good American wages and benefits. If we let powerful
CEOs trample all over these rights without consequences, we might as well give up on having a middle class altogether.
"Thats what this all comes down to. What we are really witnessing here is another example of the Republican assault on
the middle class that has been echoing across the country for months now. Just as people are rising up in states across the
country to tell Governors and other elected leaders not to destroy their rights, we in this body also need to stand up and tell
powerful and politically connected corporate CEOs that they are not above our nations laws.
"Americans understand fairness, and they resent it when the wealthy and powerful manipulate the political system to reap
huge advantages at the expense of working people. Thats exactly whats happening in this case. Powerful corporate
interests are pressuring members of this body to interfere with an independent agency, rather than let justice run its course.
"Instead, we should turn our attention back to the issues that really matter to American families how we can create jobs
2
NLRB-FOIA-00007812
in Washington, South Carolina, Iowa, and across the country . . . how we can rebuild the middle class . . . and how we can
ensure that working hard and playing by the rules will help you build a better life for your family and your children. I plan
to spend a lot of time in the HELP Committee this year exploring these issues, and I hope my colleagues on both sides of
###
NLRB-FOIA-00007813
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo,
RE:
With my section.
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007814
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007815
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007816
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007817
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007818
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007819
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007820
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007821
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Schiff, Robert
Re:
A few observations/thoughts:
In the introduction,
Exemption 5
As to response to 3,
As to response to 4,
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
--------------------------
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007822
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007823
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007824
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
FW :
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007825
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007826
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007827
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007828
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007829
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007830
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007831
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007832
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
RE:
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
Attached is the whole draft response, including Richs 2 cents and Joses response to question 2.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
NLRB-FOIA-00007833
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007834
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007835
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007836
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007837
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007838
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007839
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007840
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Farrell, Ellen
Thank you, Ellen. I will try to circulate a draft that incorporates your section Monday morning. Enjoy your weekend!
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Sophir, Jayme
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Sophir, Jayme
Ive prepared the attached partial draft of a response re the Issa questions regarding Boeing.
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007841
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Garza, Jose
FW : Issa response
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Exemption 5
. Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
Im happy to discuss further.
NLRB-FOIA-00007842
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00007843
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007844
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007845
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007846
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007847
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007848
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007849
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Garza, Jose
FW : Issa response
Exemption 5
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric
G.
A couple suggestions:
Exemption 5
Rich
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Exemption 5
. Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007850
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00007851
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme;
Pomerantz, Anne
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric
G.
A couple suggestions:
Exemption 5
Rich
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Exemption 5
Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007852
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00007853
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Garza, Jose
FW : Issa response
I just saw Eriks latest draft; my suggestions were not incorporated. If you agree with them, do you want to do so?
Many thanks.
Rich
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.;
Moskowitz, Eric G.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric
G.
A couple suggestions:
Exemption 5
Rich
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007854
Richard L.
Exemption 5
. Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007855
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00007856
Microsoft Outlook
Garza, Jose
Mattina, Celeste J.
Abruzzo, Jennifer
RE:
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Hi Celeste,
Exemption 5
I apologize for my confusion. Once I get that added I will send it over to you.
Subject:
draft of the letter by tomorrow? Jen will be in on Friday, in the event that you need
something and she can certainly insure it is mailed out in the afternoon.
Exemption 6
NLRB-FOIA-00007857
Microsoft Outlook
Garza, Jose
Re:
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
Subject: RE:
Hi Celeste,
Exemption 5
I apologize for my confusion. Once I get that added I will send it over to you.
Subject:
draft of the letter by tomorrow? Jen will be in on Friday, in the event that you need
something and she can certainly insure it is mailed out in the afternoon.
Exemption 6
NLRB-FOIA-00007858
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
latest attack
Tim Scott announcing hes introducing some bill to keep us from doing what were doing from Boeing.
http://timscott.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=242859
I got a call from a reporter with Law 360 who hasnt seen the bill but is planning to write off the release. I told him that
would be irresponsible. Apparently they have not produced the actual bill anywhere. Man
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007859
Microsoft Outlook
Garza, Jose
Cleeland, Nancy
Still around?
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Non-responsive
Tim Scott announcing hes introducing some bill to keep us from doing what were doing from Boeing.
http://timscott.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=242859
I got a call from a reporter with Law 360 who hasnt seen the bill but is planning to write off the release. I told him that
would be irresponsible. Apparently they have not produced the actual bill anywhere. Man
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007860
Microsoft Outlook
Cleeland, Nancy
Garza, Jose
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Non-responsive
Non-responsive
Tim Scott announcing hes introducing some bill to keep us from doing what were doing from Boeing.
http://timscott.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=242859
I got a call from a reporter with Law 360 who hasnt seen the bill but is planning to write off the release. I told him that
would be irresponsible. Apparently they have not produced the actual bill anywhere. Man
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007861
Microsoft Outlook
Garza, Jose
Cleeland, Nancy
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Non-responsive
Non-responsive
Non-responsive
Tim Scott announcing hes introducing some bill to keep us from doing what were doing from Boeing.
http://timscott.house.gov/News/DocumentSingle.aspx?DocumentID=242859
I got a call from a reporter with Law 360 who hasnt seen the bill but is planning to write off the release. I told him that
would be irresponsible. Apparently they have not produced the actual bill anywhere. Man
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007862
Microsoft Outlook
Garza, Jose
Mattina, Celeste J.
Abruzzo, Jennifer
RE:
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
non-responsive
tomorrow. Also, could we meet then? I want to run a few things by you. I hope you enjoy your evening.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
Subject: RE:
Hi Celeste,
Exemption 5
I apologize for my confusion. Once I get that added I will send it over to you.
Subject:
Exemption 6
draft of the letter by tomorrow? Jen will be in on Friday, in the event that you need
something and she can certainly insure it is mailed out in the afternoon.
NLRB-FOIA-00007863
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Re:
Subject: RE:
3pm works best for me. Also, do you have all of the exhibits that we are going to put on a thumbdrive, including those for
Subject: Re:
--------------------------
Subject: RE:
non-responsive
tomorrow. Also, could we meet then? I want to run a few things by you. I hope you enjoy your evening.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
Subject: RE:
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007864
Hi Celeste,
Exemption 5
I apologize for my confusion. Once I get that added I will send it over to you.
Subject:
Exemption 6
draft of the letter by tomorrow? Jen will be in on Friday, in the event that you need
something and she can certainly insure it is mailed out in the afternoon.
NLRB-FOIA-00007865
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Please find attached a draft of the Boring Issa response that has all of the changes suggested on Tuesday. Are we still
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007866
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007867
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007868
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007869
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007870
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007871
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007872
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007873
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Please find attached a draft of the Boring Issa response that has all of the changes suggested on Tuesday. Are we still
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007874
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Lafe,
Please find attached a rough draft of talking points for our meeting tomorrow. I am available to meet at your convenience
Thank you,
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007875
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007876
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007877
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007878
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
It looks very good. I'm on my BB and can't edit doc. Two comments:
Exemption 5
--------------------------
Heres my attemptSorry I didnt put the changes in track, it got too confusing.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007879
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Thank you, Nancy. Attached please find a few minor suggestions to Nancys edits. I tried to incorporate Jennifers
Exemption 5
necessary?
Thanks!
Heres my attemptSorry I didnt put the changes in track, it got too confusing.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007880
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007881
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007882
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Solomon, Lafe E.
FW : with my edits
It looks good, I made just one small edit. I am copying Lafe, for his review. When
Thank you, Nancy. Attached please find a few minor suggestions to Nancys edits. I tried to incorporate Jennifers
Exemption 5
necessary?
Thanks!
Heres my attemptSorry I didnt put the changes in track, it got too confusing.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007883
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007884
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007885
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Solomon, Lafe E.
It looks good, I made just one small edit. I am copying Lafe, for his review. When
Thank you, Nancy. Attached please find a few minor suggestions to Nancys edits. I tried to incorporate Jennifers
Exemption 5
necessary?
Thanks!
Heres my attemptSorry I didnt put the changes in track, it got too confusing.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007886
Microsoft Outlook
Garza, Jose
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Cleeland, Nancy; Abruzzo, Jennifer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 6
momentarily.
I am available to chat about this at any time convenient for the group.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Cleeland, Nancy; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose
Exemption 5
Thanks, Lafe
It looks good, I made just one small edit. I am copying Lafe, for his review. When
Thank you, Nancy. Attached please find a few minor suggestions to Nancys edits. I tried to incorporate Jennifers
Exemption 5
Thanks!
Heres my attemptSorry I didnt put the changes in track, it got too confusing.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007887
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00007888
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
NLRB-FOIA-00007889
NLRB-FOIA-00007890
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007891
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007892
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007893
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007894
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
image001.jpg
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007895
NLRB-FOIA-00007896
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Cleeland, Nancy
openingIssa.doc
Exemption 5
the GCs office at noon today to get the ball rolling in terms of process, strategy and schedules for the rest of the week.
NLRB-FOIA-00007897
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007898
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007899
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007900
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007901
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Cleeland, Nancy
openingIssa (2).doc
NLRB-FOIA-00007902
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007903
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007904
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007905
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007906
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Solomon, Lafe E.; Kearney, Barry J.; Cleeland, Nancy
RE:
openingIssa (2).doc
Attached please find my suggested edits to the document Jennifer sent around after our meeting yesterday. It seems that
we have three great drafts that each point in a slightly different direction. I wonder if it makes sense for us to convene
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Solomon, Lafe E.; Kearney, Barry J.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy
Subject: FW:
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Cleeland, Nancy
Subject:
NLRB-FOIA-00007907
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007908
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007909
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007910
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007911
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.
openingIssa3.doc
NLRB-FOIA-00007912
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007913
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007914
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007915
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007916
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007917
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007918
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Ok. I'll have something for review by the time you get to the office tomorrow.
--------------------------
Jen,
can you give it another lookthrough and put it in as final form as possible, with
whatever changes you think are appropriate, pending Nancys suggestion. I would like
to give it one last look when I come in and we should be in good shape to get it out by
NLRB-FOIA-00007919
NLRB-FOIA-00007920
NLRB-FOIA-00007921
NLRB-FOIA-00007922
NLRB-FOIA-00007923
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
image006.gif
The first attachment is the latest draft version with edits (Leslies in green, Celestes in blue and mine in red). The second
Jen,
can you give it another lookthrough and put it in as final form as possible, with
whatever changes you think are appropriate, pending Nancys suggestion. I would like
to give it one last look when I come in and we should be in good shape to get it out by
NLRB-FOIA-00007924
NLRB-FOIA-00007925
NLRB-FOIA-00007926
NLRB-FOIA-00007927
NLRB-FOIA-00007928
NLRB-FOIA-00007929
NLRB-FOIA-00007930
NLRB-FOIA-00007931
NLRB-FOIA-00007932
NLRB-FOIA-00007933
NLRB-FOIA-00007934
NLRB-FOIA-00007935
NLRB-FOIA-00007936
NLRB-FOIA-00007937
NLRB-FOIA-00007938
NLRB-FOIA-00007939
NLRB-FOIA-00007940
NLRB-FOIA-00007941
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Cleeland, Nancy
The first attachment is the latest draft version with edits (Leslies in green, Celestes in blue and mine in red). The second
Jen,
can you give it another lookthrough and put it in as final form as possible, with
whatever changes you think are appropriate, pending Nancys suggestion. I would like
to give it one last look when I come in and we should be in good shape to get it out by
NLRB-FOIA-00007942
NLRB-FOIA-00007943
NLRB-FOIA-00007944
NLRB-FOIA-00007945
NLRB-FOIA-00007946
Microsoft Outlook
Garza, Jose
Cleeland, Nancy
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
Lafe, once you have read it, let me know if you agree, and I can move it
there.
The first attachment is the latest draft version with edits (Leslies in green, Celestes in blue and mine in red). The second
Jen,
can you give it another lookthrough and put it in as final form as possible, with
whatever changes you think are appropriate, pending Nancys suggestion. I would like
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007947
to give it one last look when I come in and we should be in good shape to get it out by
NLRB-FOIA-00007948
NLRB-FOIA-00007949
NLRB-FOIA-00007950
NLRB-FOIA-00007951
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007952
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007953
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007954
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007955
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007956
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007957
Microsoft Outlook
Mattina, Celeste J.
Garza, Jose
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Lafe is reading it now. As soon as he is done with it, we will make the final changes
and forward everything to you for submission. Unless you want us to submit it from
here
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
Lafe, once you have read it, let me know if you agree, and I can move it
there.
The first attachment is the latest draft version with edits (Leslies in green, Celestes in blue and mine in red). The second
NLRB-FOIA-00007958
Jen,
can you give it another lookthrough and put it in as final form as possible, with
whatever changes you think are appropriate, pending Nancys suggestion. I would like
to give it one last look when I come in and we should be in good shape to get it out by
NLRB-FOIA-00007959
NLRB-FOIA-00007960
NLRB-FOIA-00007961
NLRB-FOIA-00007962
Microsoft Outlook
Garza, Jose
Mattina, Celeste J.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Lafe is reading it now. As soon as he is done with it, we will make the final changes
and forward everything to you for submission. Unless you want us to submit it from
here
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
Lafe, once you have read it, let me know if you agree, and I can move it
there.
NLRB-FOIA-00007963
The first attachment is the latest draft version with edits (Leslies in green, Celestes in blue and mine in red). The second
Jen,
can you give it another lookthrough and put it in as final form as possible, with
whatever changes you think are appropriate, pending Nancys suggestion. I would like
to give it one last look when I come in and we should be in good shape to get it out by
NLRB-FOIA-00007964
NLRB-FOIA-00007965
NLRB-FOIA-00007966
NLRB-FOIA-00007967
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also working to pull
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007968
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007969
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
NLRB-FOIA-00007970
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007971
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007972
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Jose,
Tomorrow morning the region will supplement your list of documents below.
Rich
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
NLRB-FOIA-00007973
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007974
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Exemption 5
Thank you for working on this.
Cc: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Just a heads up -- Rich may not attend our meeting today since he will be traveling to his resident office; however, his trial
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
4)
5)
NLRB-FOIA-00007975
6)
7)
8)
9)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007976
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Solomon, Lafe E.
Garza, Jose
Cc: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Just a heads up -- Rich may not attend our meeting today since he will be traveling to his resident office; however, his trial
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
1
NLRB-FOIA-00007977
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00007978
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007979
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Abruzzo, Jennifer
FW :
Issa Letter Ross Question.doc; David Issa June 27, 2011 Letter.pdf; Letter to Darrell Issa
Subject:
Hi Jose,
I am sending you both the word and pdf versions of the July 11 response to David Issas June 27 letter. The pdf file has
the incoming letter from Issa behind the response the word version does not. I have the original and copy to be mailed to
NLRB-FOIA-00007980
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007981
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007982
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007983
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007984
NLRB-FOIA-00007985
NLRB-FOIA-00007986
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007987
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007988
Microsoft Outlook
non-responsive
Per Regional Director Ahearns instructions, attached is a memo requesting guidance in the above case.
NLRB-FOIA-00007989
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007990
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007991
non-responsive
Per Regional Director Ahearns instructions, attached is a memo requesting guidance in the above case.
NLRB-FOIA-00007992
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007993
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00007994
Microsoft Outlook
non-responsive
Per Regional Director Ahearns instructions, attached is a memo requesting guidance in the above case.
NLRB-FOIA-00007995
Microsoft Outlook
non-responsive
Per Regional Director Ahearns instructions, attached is a memo requesting guidance in the above case.
NLRB-FOIA-00007996
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jablonski, Colleen G.
Dunn, Sara C.; Snyder, Michael J.; Kim, Angelie C.; Todd, Dianne
Perkins, Victoria
case status
NLRB-FOIA-00007997
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00007998
non-responsive
0 to
NLRB-FOIA-00007999
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008000
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008001
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008002
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008003
non-responsive
C CASE
CA-32431
Boeing Company
3/26/2010
4/30/2010
5/14/2010 Seattle
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008004
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008005
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008006
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Kobe, James
Estep, Susan C.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Pomerantz, Anne; Eskenazi, Martin; Sweeney, Brian;
EOM Update
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008007
non-responsive
19-CA-32431-001
Boeing Company
3
Todd
Exemption 5
non-responsive
PAGE 1 of 4
NLRB-FOIA-00008008
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008009
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008010
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008011
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Todd, Dianne
Colleen also brought up some concerns she had regarding the language of the proposed order that I
would like to discuss. Will there be time on Monday? Here is the draft proposed order language.
Thanks,
Dianne
Ex. 5 Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00008012
Ex. 5 Deliberative
Dianne/Colleen,
When you send me the Boeing memo to edit, please also send it to my home email, in case I have trouble accessing this
E.6 Privacy
Thanks much.
Anne
Anne P. Pomerantz
NLRB-FOIA-00008013
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008014
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008015
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008016
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008017
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008018
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008019
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008020
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008021
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008022
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008023
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008024
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008025
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008026
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008027
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008028
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008029
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008030
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008031
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008032
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008033
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008034
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008035
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008036
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008037
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008038
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008039
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008040
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008041
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008042
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008043
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008044
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008045
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008046
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008047
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008048
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008049
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008050
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008051
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008052
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008053
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008054
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008055
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008056
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008057
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008058
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008059
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008060
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008061
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008062
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008063
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008064
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008065
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008066
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008067
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008068
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008069
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008070
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008071
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008072
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008073
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008074
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008075
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008076
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008077
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008078
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008079
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008080
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008081
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008082
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Kobe, James
Jablonski, Colleen G.; Little, Janet C; Schaff, David; Eskenazi, Martin; Sweeney, Brian;
Rooker, Karen
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008083
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008084
non-responsive
19-CA-32431-001
Boeing Company
3
Todd
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008085
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008086
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008087
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Jablonski, Colleen G.
Perkins, Victoria
CASE STATUS
NLRB-FOIA-00008088
Nonresponsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008089
Nonresponsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008090
Nonresponsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008091
Nonresponsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008092
Nonresponsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008093
Nonresponsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008094
Nonresponsive
Case #
Case Name
Filed
Dec.Date
Disp Date
Location
120 days
Status
C CASE
CA-32431
Boeing Company
3/26/2010
4/30/2010
5/14/2010 Seattle
Nonresponsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008095
Nonresponsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008096
Nonresponsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008097
Nonresponsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008098
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Estep, Susan C.
Kobe, James; Eskenazi, Martin; Jablonski, Colleen G.; Rooker, Karen; Sweeney, Brian;
Hayashi, Minoru N.
See attached. Please keep me informed regarding groupings and any decisions that are made ASAP. Thanks in advance.
NLRB-FOIA-00008099
Date:
December 8, 2010
ACTIVE C CASES
CATEGORY 3
FILED
ACTION
AGENT/SUPV
DUE
Non-responsive
CA-32431)
Boeing Company
3/26/10
5/14/10
Todd
CA-32811)
Boeing Company
11/1/10
12/20/10
Non-responsive
Related to 19-CA-32811 filed 11/1/10
Non-responsive
Page 1 of 37
NLRB-FOIA-00008100
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008101
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008102
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008103
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008104
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008105
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008106
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008107
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008108
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008109
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008110
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008111
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008112
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008113
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008114
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008115
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008116
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008117
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008118
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008119
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008120
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008121
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008122
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008123
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008124
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008125
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008126
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008127
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008128
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008129
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008130
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008131
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008132
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008133
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008134
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008135
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008136
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Estep, Susan C.
Kobe, James; Eskenazi, Martin; Jablonski, Colleen G.; Rooker, Karen; Sweeney, Brian;
Hayashi, Minoru N.
See attached. If you get a chance, please take a look at any cases pending deferral in your group and let me know if there
are any changes in status that I dont know about. There are several that have been lingering around with no updates for
NLRB-FOIA-00008137
Date:
ACTIVE C CASES
CATEGORY 3
FILED
ACTION
AGENT/SUPV
DUE
Non-responsive
CA-32431)
Boeing Company
3/26/10
5/14/10
Todd
CA-32811)
Boeing Company
11/1/10
12/20/10
Exemption 5
Related to 19-CA-32811 filed 11/1/10
Non-responsive
Page 1 of 38
NLRB-FOIA-00008138
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008139
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008140
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008141
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008142
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008143
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008144
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008145
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008146
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008147
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008148
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008149
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008150
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008151
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008152
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008153
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008154
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008155
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008156
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008157
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008158
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008159
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008160
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008161
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008162
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008163
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008164
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008165
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008166
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008167
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008168
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008169
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008170
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008171
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008172
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008173
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008174
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008175
K atz, Ju d y
From :
S ent:
To:
S u bject:
W illen , D eb ra L
approval
I just sent an article that states at the end that the surge line is not yet functioning. The article
O riginal M essage
From : K atz,Judy
S ubject: FW : seattletim es.com : B oein g 787s stack u p at P ain e Field aw aiting FA A approval
O riginal M essage
To : O m berg , B ob ; M attina, C eleste; K earn ey, B arry J.; S olom on , Lafe E .; K atz, Ju dy; Farrell,
E llen
S ubject: FW : seattletim es.com : B oein g 787s stack u p at P ain e Field aw aiting FA A approval
R ich
The edges of E verett's P aine Field airport are turning into an overflow airplane parking lot as
T O S U B S C R IB E T O T H E S E A T T L E T IM E S P R IN T E D IT IO N
H O W T O A D V E R T IS E W IT H T H E S E A T T L E T IM E S C O M P A N Y O N L IN E Fo r in fo rm atio n o n
advertising in this e-m ail new sletter, or other online m arketing platform s w ith The S eattle Tim es
T O A D V E R T IS E IN T H E S E A T T L E T IM E S P R IN T E D IT IO N P lease g o to
NLRB-FOIA-00008176
w w w .seattletim es.corn
NLRB-FOIA-00008177
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Garza, Jose; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also working to pull
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00008178
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Solomon, Lafe E.
To: Garza, Jose; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also working to pull
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00008179
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00008180
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Jose,
Ahearn, Richard L.
Tomorrow morning the region will supplement your list of documents below.
Rich
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
5)
6)
7)
8)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008181
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00008182
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Garza, Jose
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Just a heads up -- Rich may not attend our meeting today since he will be traveling to his resident office; however, his trial
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
5)
6)
7)
8)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
NLRB-FOIA-00008183
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00008184
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008185
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Cc: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Just a heads up -- Rich may not attend our meeting today since he will be traveling to his resident office; however, his trial
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
4)
5)
6)
NLRB-FOIA-00008186
7)
8)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00008187
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008188
C H A P T E R 5 . P R E T R IA L D IS C O V E R Y A N D D E P O S IT IO N S
5 -1 0 0 P re tria l D is c o v e ry
596-5250
E
m
h
a
rt
In
d
u
s
trie
s
v . N L R B ,
(1993) (and cited cases). N eith er the A ct, the U .S . C onstitution , no r th e A dm inistrative
N L R B v.
W a s h in g to n H e ig h ts ,
K e n ric h P e tro c h e m ic a ls , In c .
V . N L R B ,
893 F .2d 1468, 1483 (3rd C ir. 1990), cert. d en ied 498 U .S . 981 (1990).
5 -2 0 0 D e p o s itio n s
5 9 6 -5 6 5 0 -3 3 0 0
A lim ited "good cause" exception exists to perm it the taking of a deposition to preserve
the testim ony of one's ow n w itness at the discretion of the R egional D irector or the judge.
C)
...
35
NLRB-FOIA-00008189
Page 1 of1
F ro m :
K earney, B arry J.
S en t:
T o :
S u b ject: R E :
Exemption 5
T o : K earney, B arry J.
S u b je c t: R e:
Let's talk
Exemption 5
F ro m : K earney, B arry J.
S e n t: W ed M ay 04 08:08:39 2011
S u b je c t: R E:
T o : C leeland, N ancy; K earney, B arry 1; F arrell, E llen; S ophir, Jaym e; M attina, C eleste 3.; A bruzzo, Jennifer;
A h e a rn , R ich a rd L .; G a rza , Jo se
S u b je c t: Fw d:
5/4/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008190
P ag e 1 o f 2
F ro m :
S e n t:
T o :
K earney, B arry J.
N ow it's 2 45
F ro m : G arza, Jose
T o : G arza, Jose
S en t: F ri A pr 22 14:15:01 2011
O k,ju st g o t off the phone w ith our scheduler and w e are going to push the call back by 10 m inutes if
that w orks for you guys. T hat w ould m ean calling in at 2:45, rather than the original 2:35 plan. R ep.
Inslee has a 3 pm m eeting as w ell, so it w ill definitely w rap up by around 2:55. D oes that sound good?
T o : ffitch, E ric
T o : G arza, Jose
S e n t: F ri A pr 22 13:34:55 2011
N L R B A ttendees: L afe S olom on, G eneral C ounsel at N ational L abor R elations B oard; Jose G arza, S pecial C ounsel
4/22/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008191
B arry, in checking the front office voice m ail this m orning there w as a call for you
from A tty R ich ard H en k in ... he left a cell phone num ber privacy-cell phone number
U nfortunately, the call cam e in yesterday @ 11:48, but w asn't retrieved until now
NLRB-FOIA-00008192
Original Message
Subject: Boeing
Mr. Kearney,
I' v e c o n v e y e d y o u r m e e t i n g r e q u e s t t o B o e i n g r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s , a n d t h e y
are discussing it. I hope to let you know something on Monday.' I hope
Richard B. Hankins
T e l : 4 0 4 . 5 2 7 . 8 3 7 2 I F a x : 4 0 4 . 5 2 7 . 7 0 8 8 I
rhankins@mckennalong.com
C O N F ID E N T IA L IT Y N O T IC E :
the law firm of McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, and are
i n t e n d e d r e c i p i e n t i s s t r i c t l y p r o h i b i t e d . If y o u a r e n o t a
u s e o f t h e e - m a i l o r a t t a c h m e n t s . If y o u b e l i e v e y o u h a v e
attachments.
/6
K,Ita
rieue4
Ceretz"-V__
NLRB-FOIA-00008193
Page 1 of 1
From :
Sophir, Jaym e
S en t:
T o:
S u b ject: B oeing
F Y I D eb tells m e that the U nion is preparing another paper, w hich they hope to have to us before the
W ednesday m eeting, that w illinclude an inherently destructive argum ent and a sum m ary of the bargaining.
Jaym e S ophir
202-273-3837
12/13/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00008194
Page 1 of1
F ro m : W iIle n , D e b ra L
S e nt:
T u e sd a y, Ja n u a ry 1 1 , 2 0 1 1 1 :2 3 P M
T o:
C ontee, E rnestine R .; K earney, B arry J.; F arrell, E llen; S ophir, Jaynne; S zapiro, M iriam ; K atz, Judy,
T o : W illen, D ebra L
C c: D avid C am pbell
S u b je c t: JA M m eeting w ith A G C
M s W IIle n,
In re sponse to your em ail to D a ve C am pb ell, the follow ing p eople w ill be atte nd hg the m ee ting w ith A G C La fe
, C h risto p h e r C o rso n , G e n e ra l C o u n se l, IA M A W
, M a rk B lo n d in , IA M A e ro sp a ce C o o rd in a to r
P lease let us know if there is any m ore inform ation you need
S incerely,
S eattle, W A 98119
206-285-2828
1/11/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008195
Pag e 1 o f 1
F ro m :
S e n t:
T o :
K earney, B arry J.
S u b je c t: got your vm
G IB S O N D U N N
T el + 1 202.955.8573 F ax + 1 202.530.9559
2/16/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008196
Page 1 of1
K earney, B arry J
From
S en t
T o
K earney, B arry J
Barry
The Judge's office just forwarded me some times when the
W illiam J K ilberg
G IB S O N D U N N
G ib so n D u n n & C ru tch e r L L P
1 0 5 0 C o n n e cticu t A ve n u e N W W a sh in g to n D C 2 0 0 3 6 -5 3 0 6
T e l+ 1 2 0 2 9 5 5 8 5 7 3 F a x + 1 2 0 2 5 3 0 9 5 5 9
3/25/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008197
Page 1 of 1
K earney, B arry J
From
S en t
T o
Kearney, B arry J
S u b ject U pdate
W illia m J K ilb e rg
G IB S O N D U N N
....
4/1/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008198
Page 1 of 1
F ro m :
S en t:
T o :
K earney, B arry J.
S u b ject: R E : B oeing
W illiam J. K i!berg
G IB SO N D U N N
T el + 1 202.955.8573 F ax + 1 202.530.9559
S u b je c t: R E : B oeing
Bill
B arry
T o : K earney, B arry J.
S u b je c t: R E : B oeing
h e a r s o m e th in g , I w ill le t y o u k n o w . B ill
G IB SO N D U N N
T el + 1 202.955.8573 F ax + 1 202.530.9559
S u b je c t: B oeing
B ill
B arry
3/25/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008199
NL R B A cting G eneralC ounselL afe Solom on toda.'y issued a com plaint against the
second production line to a non-union facility in South C arolina for discrim inatory
reasons.
B oeing announced in 2007 that it planned to assem ble seven 787 D ream liner airplanes
per m onth in the Puget Sound area of W ashington state,w here its em ployees have long
T he com pany later said that it w ould create a second production line to assem ble an
additionalthree planes a m onth to address a grow ing backlog of orders.In O ctober 2009,
B oeing announced that it w ould locate that second line at the non-union facility.
In repeated statem ents to em ployees and the m edia,com pany executives cited the
som etim e in the future as the overriding factors in deciding to locate the second line in
charges filed by the M achinists union and found reasonable cause to believe that B oeing
had violated tw o sections of the NationalL abor R elations A ct because its statem ents
w ere coercive to em ployees and its actions w ere m otivated by a desire to retaliate for past
"A w orker's right to strike is a fundam entalright guaranteed by the NationalL abor
R elations A ct," M r.Solom on said."W e also recognize the rights of em ployers to m ake
business decisions based on their econom ic interests,but they m ust do so w ithin the law .
I have w orked w ith the parties to encourage settlem ent in the hope of avoiding costly
T o rem edy the alleged unfair labor practices,the A cting G eneralC ounselseeks an order
that w ould require B oeing to m aintain the second production line in W ashington state.
T he com plaint does not seek closure of the South C arolina facility,nor does it prohibit
A bsent a settlem ent betw een the parties,the next step in the process w illbe a hearing
before an NL R B adm inistrative law judge in Seattle,set for June 14,at w hich both
For m ore inform ation about the NationalL abor R elations B oard,please see our w ebsite
at w w w . n1 rb . g o v .
NLRB-FOIA-00008200
M achinists H ailN L R B C om plaint O ver B oeing South C arolina M ove - 21st C entury L ab...Page 1 of 1.
M a c h in is ts H a il N L R B C o m p la in t O v e r B o e in g S o u th C a ro lin a M o v e
W ashington,D .C ., A pril 20, 2011 T he International A ssociation of M achinists and A erospace W orkers (IA M ) today
w elcom ed the decision by the N ational L abor R elations B oard (N L R B ) to issue a com plaint charging the B oeing C om pany w ith
illegal retaliation against B oeing em ployees in the P uget S ound area. A ccording to the N L R B , B oeing's conduct w as
F O R IM M E D IA T E R E L E A S E
W ashington,D .C ., A pril 20, 2011 T he International A ssociation of M achinists and A erospace W orkers (IA M ) today
w elcom ed the decision by the N ational L abor R elations B oard (N L R B ) to issue a com plaint charging the B oeing C om pany w ith
illegal retaliation against B oeing em ployees in the P uget S ound area. A ccording to the N L R B , B oeing's conduct w as
T he N L R B 's com plaint is in response to an U nfair L abor P ractice charge filed by IA M D istrict 751, w hich represents m ore than
25,000 B oeing em ployees in W ashington state. T he IA M charge cites repeated statem ents by senior B oeing executives that
law ful, protected activity w as the "overriding" factor in the decision to locate a 787 assem bly line in S outh C arolina.
"B oeing's decision to build a 787 assem bly line in S outh C arolina sent a m essage that B oeing w orkers w ould suffer financial
harm for exercising their collective bargaining rights," said IA M V ice P resident R ich M ichalski. "F ederal labor law is clear: it's
T he decision by B oeing to locate a 787 assem bly line in S outh C arolina follow ed years of 787 production delays and an
extraordinary round of m id-contract talks in w hich the IA M proposed an 11-year agreem ent to provide B oeing w ith the labor
stability it claim ed w as necessary to keep 787 production in the P uget S ound area.
D espite the (A M offer, B oeing w alked aw ay from the talks and signed an agreem ent w ith S outh C arolina that included nearly
$900 m illion in incentives and tax relief in exchange for building a 787 line in N orth C harleston, S outh C arolina.
"B oeing's current m anagem ent needs to rethink its strategy of repeatedly alienating its m ost valuable asset: the highly-skilled
w orkers w ho build B oeing aircraft," said M ichalski. "W e w ill not allow our m em bers to be m ade scapegoats for any purpose."
T he IA M represents m ore than 35,000 B oeing w orkers and is am ong the largest industrial trade unions in N orth A m erica, w ith
nearly 700,000 active and retired m em bers in dozens of industries. F or m ore inform ation about the IA M , visit w w w .goiam .org .
4/20/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008201
P age 1 of 1
F rom :
A hearn, R ichard L.
Sent:
T o:
T o : C leeland, N ancy; S olom on, Lafe E .; A hearn, R ichard L.; M attina, C eleste J.; G arza, Jose
http://lgraham .senate.gov/public/index.cfm ?
D ate 04/20/2011
W A SH IN G T O N U .S . S enator Lindsey G raham (R -S outh C arolina) today m ade this statem ent on the N ational
"T his is one of the w orst exam ples of unelected bureaucrats doing the bidding of specialinterest groups that I've
ever seen In this case, the N LR B is doing the bidding of the unions at great cost to S outh C arolina and our
nation's econom y.
"It m akes perfect sense for a w orld-class com pany like B oeing to diversify their production capabilities. B oeing
m ade a solid business decision in com ing to S outh C arolina, and w e w elcom e them w ith open arm s. T hey could
have gone anyw here, but they knew that S outh C arolina w as a great place to do business. T heir decision to open
their new facility in N orth C harleston w illpay dividends for the com pany, its w orkers, and our state for m any years
"If successful, the N LR B com plaint w ould allow unions to hold a virtual'veto'over business decisions. Left to their
ow n devices, the N LR B w ould routinely punish right-to-w ork states that value and prom ote their pro-business
clim ates. T he current m akeup of the N LR B B oard has been skew ed against business. T his action w illnot be
allow ed to stand.
"I w ould be surprised if any court recognized the legitim acy of this com plaint. It's pretty easy to see that at its
heart, this is about union politics. A s S enator, I w illdo everything in m y pow er, including introducing legislation
cutting off funding for this w ild goose chase, to stop the N LR B 's frivolous com plaint."
114414#t
4/20/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008202
D eM int Statem ent on O bam a A dm inistration's M alicious A ttack A gainst R ight-T o-W ork ...Page 1 of 2
....
N ew s R o o m
G reenville, S .C .
U .S . S enator Jim D eM int (R -S outh C arolina), chairm an of the S enate S teering C om m ittee, released
the follow ing statem ent in opposition to the N ational L abor R elations B oard com plaint against the
B oeing C om pany. T he com plaint w as m ade based upon charges m ade by a labor union, the
International A ssociation of M achinists and A erospace W orkers (IA M ), against B oeing's 2009
decision to expand production facilities to S outh C arolina, a right-to-w ork state, instead of
'T his is nothing m ore than a political favor for the unions w ho are supporting P resident O bam a's re-
election cam paign. U nfortunately, it com es at the expense of hundreds of jobs in S outh C arolina
and thousands of jobs nationw ide. T here is no doubt that if the N ational L abor R elations B oard's
claim against B oeing m oves forw ard, it w ill have a chilling effect on job grow th in m y state and in
right-to-w ork states across the country. U sing the federal governm ent as political w eapon to protect
union bosses at the expense of A m erican jobs cannot be tolerated. I intend to use every tool at m y
disposal as a U nited S tates S enator to stop the P resident from carrying out this m alicious act."
###
iii-oki-iiiiik---0-iff:"F.:;
P rint T his
....
_..
I
. ..
ii '
04/20/11 -
C u rren t reco rd
04/14/11 -
R ep u b lican S en ators In trod u ce 'T erm L im its for A ll' C on stitu tion al A m en d m en t
04/13/11 -
D eM in t: D em ocrats S tu ck on S p en d in g, R ep u b lican s S u p p ort B alan ced B u d get
A m en d m en t
04/01/11 -
S en ate R ep u b lican s P u sh to R ep eal D od d -F ran k F in an cial T ak eover
The recent com plaint filed by the N ational Labor R elations B oard's general counsel
against B oeing's efforts to relocate its production facility from W ashington state to S outh
C arolina has unleashed a flurry of anger am ong big business interests ("The W hite
This outrage should instead be redirected at B oeing for explicitly and egregiously
breaking the law .It is illegalto retaliate against em ployees exercising their rights to form
a union or strike, and that is exactly w hat the cornpany did. The -com plaint issued w as
based on public com m ents from B oeing executives m aking clear their reasons for
The general counsel, in exercising his sw orn duty to uphold the N ational Labor
R elations A ct, had no choice but to issue a com plaint against the com pany's violation.
To not have done so w ould send the w rong signal to both A m erican em ployers and
D orian W arren
N ew Y o rk
NLRB-FOIA-00008204
com plaint issued A pril20 against the B oeing C om pany w ith the follow ing statem ent:
"C ontrary to certain public statem ents m ade in recent w eeks,there is nothing rem arkable
or unprecedented about the com plaint issued against the B oeing C om pany on A pril20.
T he com plaint involves m atters of fact and law that are not unique to this case,and w as
issued only after a thorough investigation in the field,a further round of review by
oralargum ents.O nly then did I authorize the com plaint alleging that certain statem ents
and decisions by B oeing officials w ere discrim inatory under our statute.
It is im portant to note that the issuance of a com plaint is just the beginning of a legal
process,w hich now m oves to a hearing before an adm inistrative law judge.T hat hearing,
scheduled for June 14 in Seattle,is the appropriate tim e and place to argue the m erits of
the com plaint.T he judge's decision can further be appealed to the B oard,and ultim ately
to the federalcourts.W e w ould hope that allinterested parties respect the legalprocess
M r.Solom on m ade the sam e point today in a brief w ritten response to a letter received
earlier this m onth from B oeing G eneralC ounselJ.M ichaelL uttig.A copy of that
response is attached.
NLRB-FOIA-00008205
site.com
P age 1 of 1
F rom :
A hearn, R ichard L.
S en t:
T o:
K earney, B arry J.; Farrell, E llen; M attina, C eleste J.; Todd, D ianne; Jablon ski, C olleen G .
A nother!
T o: A hearn,R ichard L.
S en t: S at D ec 11 14:17:11 2010
U n io n o p p o n e n t ta p p e d fo r la b o r c h ie f
B y JO H N O 'C O N N O R
G o v.-elect N ikki H aley h as m o ved to p ro tect B o ein g C o ., th e state's recen tly arrived aero sp ace g ian t, n o m in i
union-fighting attorney to head the agency that oversees business licensing, professional boards and the lab
enforcem ent.
H aley said she chose C harleston attorney C atherine Tem pleton w hose O gletree D eakins bio lists "union a%
g ain in g a fo o th o ld in th e 787 D ream lin er p lan t n o w u n d er co n stru ctio n . B o ein g execu tives said S o u th C aro lir
u n io n h isto ry w as a key facto r in th eir d ecisio n to o p en a n ew p lan t o u tsid e th eir lo n g -tim e h o m e in th e S eat
"I th in k w e're g o in g to h ave a u n io n fig h t as w e g o fo rw ard w ith B o ein g ," H aley said in an n o u n cin g T em p letc
nom ination.
R ead M o re...
12/13/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00008206
N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
1099 le S T R E E T N W
W A SH IN G T O N D C 20570
'\
U
lc
I
\ b k la
1+0 A I:o
w w w .n!rb.gov
M ay 9 , 2 0 1 1
T h e B o e in g C o m p a n y
1 0 0 N R ive rsid e M C 5 0 0 3 -6 0 2 7
C h ica g o , IL 6 0 6 0 6 -1 5 9 6
D e a r M r. L u ttig :
R e : T h e B o e in g C o m p a n y
C a se 1 9 -C A -3 2 4 3 1
T h is is in re sp o n se to yo u r M a y 3 le tte r to m e co n ce rn in g th e a b o ve
ca p tio n e d ca se .
Y o u r le tte r m a ke s ce rta in a sse rtio n s a n d a rg u m e n ts co n ce rn in g
fo ru m to te st th o se p o sitio n s a n d th e re le va n ce a n d p ro b a tive va lu e o f yo u r
S in c e e l
L a fe /E . S o lo m o n
A ctin g G e n e ra l C o u n se l
NLRB-FOIA-00008207
Page 1 of 1
W illen , D eb ra L
From :
Sent:
T o:
VVillen,D ebra L
C c:
Subject: IA M A W D istrict Lodge 751 v.B oeing,N LR B R egion 19 C ase N o.19-C A -32431
I am the paralegal assisting the attorneys representing the U nion in this m atter. Follow ing is
D avid C am pbell
S eattle, W A 98119-3971
(206) 285-2828 (p h o n e)
If w e can provide you w ith any additional inform ation on this m atter, please let m e know .
Ju d e B ryan , P araleg al I S ch w erin C am p b ell B arn ard Ig litzin & L avitt L L P I 18 W est M ercer S treet, S te. 400, S eattle, W A 98119-3971;
T h is co m m u n icatio n is in ten d ed fo r a sp ecific recip ien t an d n ay b e p ro tected b y th e atto rn ey clien t an d w o rk -p ro d u ct p riv ileg e
10/19/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00008208
P P '
com plaint issued A pril 20 against the B oeing C om pany w ith the follow ing statem ent:
"C ontrary to certain public statem ents m ade in recent w eeks,there is nothing rem arkable
or unprecedented about the com plaint issued against the B oeing C om pany on A pril 20.
T he com plaint involves m atters of fact and law that are not unique to this case,and w as
issued only after a thorough investigation in the field, a further careful review by
discuss the possibility of a settlem ent.O nly then did I authorize the com plaint alleging
that certain statem ents and decisions by B oeing officials w ere discrim inatory under our
statute.
It is im portant to note that the issuance of a com plaint is just the beginning of a legal
process,w hich now m oves to a hearing before an adm inistrative law judge.T hat hearing,
scheduled for June 14 in Seattle,is the appropriate tim e and place to argue the m erits of
the com plaint.T he judge's decision can further be appealed to the B oard, and ultim ately
to the federal courts.A t any point in this process,the parties could reach a settlem ent
agreem ent and w e rem ain w illing to participate in any such discussions at the request of
either or both parties. W e hope all interested parties respect the legal process, rather than
M r.Solom on m ade the sam e point today in a brief w ritten response to a letter received
earlier this m onth from B oeing G eneral C ounsel J. M ichael L uttig.A copy of that
response is attached.
NLRB-FOIA-00008209
P a g e 1 o f2
Fro m :
F erguson, John H
S e n t:
T o :
K earney, B arry J.
a ro u n d in th is a re a , a n d I n e e d to d ig d e e p e r
W hate ver S calia does w ill b e ugly, com bining M ilw aukee S prings ll m id contract re location bargainin g and the
hard nosed H K P orter/T W A /Lockou t cases p erspective that th e free p lay ofe conom ic w e apons n otion m a kes it
easy to und erstand w hy unio ns w ant to strike in sum m er an d em plo yers w ant to lockou t in w inte r and w h y the
other is see king hig her g ro und on w hich to figh t, h aving be en earlier bloo die d in th e valle y, is in the nature o f
e co n o m ic w a rfa re a n d o fn o co n ce rn to th e co u rts T
Exemption 5
T o : F erguson, John H .
B oeing doesn't at least for now contend that striking m akes for higher labor costs and that is w hy they are m oving
In fact it is ch eaper a nd m ore efficient to put the w ork in P uge t S oun d T hey contend that strikes m ake it harder
for them to deliver planes to their custom er and that is a sufficient business justification to m ove because the
U nion w on't agree now m id-co ntract to a 22 ye ar no strike pledg e W hat d o you th ink S calia w ill do w ith that'? D o
T o : K earney, B arry J.
Exemption 5
10 /7 /2 0 10
NLRB-FOIA-00008210
Page 2 of 2
Exemption 5
10/7/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00008211
Page 1 of 2
K ea rn ey , B a rry J .
F ro m :
S o lo m o n , L a fe E .
S e n t:
T h u rsd a y, M a y 0 5 , 2 0 1 1 1 1 :5 8 A M
T o :
G a rza , Jo se
C c:
Exemption 5
w ith o u t m e . I tru st m y te a m . M y o n ly q u e stio n
S e n t fro m m y B la ckB e rry W ire le ss H a n d h e ld
T o : S olo m on, La fe E .
S e n t: T h u M a y 0 5 1 1 :1 8 :0 7 2 0 1 1
B a rry a n d Je n n ife r,
D o yo u a n d th e re st o f /o u r te a m h a ve a fe w m in u te s to m e e t a b o u t th is? W e ca n g e t L a fe o n th e p h o n e d u rin g o r
a fte r if h e is a va ila b le .
T h a n k yo u ,
Jo se
T o : G arza, Jose
S e n t: T h u M a y 0 5 1 1 :1 2 :2 6 2 0 1 1
je n n ife r, ce le ste , a n d a b e a m .
T o : S olo m on, La fe E .
S en t: T hu M ay 05 1 1:06:1 0 201 1
Lafe,
T h a n k yo u ,
Jose
5/5/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008212
Page 2 of 2
C c: G arza, Jose; G ilroy, E d < E d.G ilroy@ m ail.house.gov > ; S erafin, K enneth < K enneth.S erafin@ m ail.house.gov > ;
N ew ell, B rian < B rian.N ew ell@ m ail.house.gov > ; P earce, K risann < K risann.P earce@ m ail.house.gov >
S en t: T hu M ay 05 11:00:51 2011
A ttached is a request for docum ents and com m unications relating to A pril 20, 2011 com plaint against T he
B oeing C orporation. W e look forw ard to your tim ely and com plete response.
M arvin E .K aplan
P rofession al S taff M em b er
W ashington, D .C . 20515
(202)225-4527
.
I.
rr
5/5/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008213
Fire on B oeing 787 D ream liner H alts Test Flights - N Y Tim es.com
Cr;he:New ilorkeintes
R ep rints
Page 1 of 3
P R IN T E R ..R IE N 3a F O P M A I
S R IS S A E O E Y
In T h eaters
N ow
B y C H R IS T O P H E R D R E W
B oeing halted test flights on W ednesday of its 787 D ream liner,a day after an onboard fire
forced an em ergency landing,reinforcing expectations that the long-aw aited plane faced m ore
delays.
Severalanalysts said they doubted that B oeing,w hich is counting on the jet to vault it past
A irbus in totalsales,w ould m eet its plan to deliver the first 787 by February.
T he plane,the first passenger jet m ade substantially w ith lightw eight carbon com posites that
are supposed to greatly cut fuelcosts,is already running nearly three years late.A nd given
other recent problem s w ith suppliers and a test engine,som e analysts said,B oeing m ight be
able to deliver only about tw o dozen of the planes next year,dow n from earlier estim ates of 40
to 50 or m ore.
"T here w illbe another delay," said R ichard L .A boulafia,vice president for analysis at the T eal
E ven if the fire had not occurred on the test plane,"there w ould still be another delay," he said.
B oeing said W ednesday that it w as evaluating w hat had gone w rong on the test flight and had
C om pany officials said sm oke entered the cabin from an electronics com partm ent in the rear of
http://w w w .nytim es.com /2010/11/1 1 /businessillboeing.htm l?_r= 1& src= busln& pagew an... 11/16/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00008214
Fire on B oeing 787 D ream liner H alts Test Flights - N Y Tim es.com
P age 2 of 3 .
B oeing has been counting heavily on the D ream liner,w hich has attracted m ore advance orders
847 than any plane in history.Its shares fell3.2 percent,to $67.037 a share,in trading on
W ednesday.
B oeing said in a statem ent that it appeared that a pow er controlpanelin the electronics
com partm ent w ould need to be replaced,and other repairs m ight be necessary.It said it w ould
take severaldays to analyze data from the test flight to determ ine the severity of the problem .
B oeing added that it "cannot determ ine the im pact of this event on the overallprogram
T he FederalA viation A dm inistration,w hich m ust certify new planes as safe,is also
H ans J.W eber,an independent safety consultant,said if the fire stem m ed from a flaw in basic
electricalcom ponents,the problem could be relatively easy to fix.B ut if it w ere linked to m ore
advanced electricalcontrols that help the D ream liner save fuel,that could require m ore tim e-
consum ing changes.T he plane's developm ent has been m arred by persistent problem s w ith
B oeing's far-flung supply netw ork.C om pany executives have acknow ledged that they farm ed
out too m uch design and production w ork and did not initially keep close enough tabs on
suppliers.
B ut even though they have m ade an all-out push to m eet their latest delivery schedule,m ore
A R olls-R oyce engine m eant to be used in one of the 787 test planes failed in a test plant in
B oeing cited that engine problem in saying it w ould push back delivery of the first D ream liner
for the fifth tim e,from late this year to February 2011. R olls-R oyce has said it is confident it can
R olls-R oyce also said this w eek that the problem on the engine for B oeing did not seem to be
related to the failure last w eek of another R olls-R oyce engine on an A irbus A 38c) jum bo jet.
T hat engine jettisoned debris w hile the plane,operated by Q antas A irw ays,w as in flight.
.. .
Fire on B oeing 787 D ream liner H alts Test Flights - N Y Tim es.com
Page 3 of 3
B oeing has had to tellsuppliers around the w orld to halt parts deliveries three tim es this year
because A lenia A eronautica,a unit of Finm eccanica of Italy,could not deliver the 787's
horizontaltails on tim e. The latest parts delay occurred in late O ctober.B oeing officials have
said that poor w orkm anship by A lenia and other suppliers forced B oeing to rew ork m any parts,
M r.A boulafia,the T ealG roup analyst,said he doubted that B oeing w ould be ready to deliver
the first D ream liner before the second quarter of 2011. R obertSpingarn,an analystatC redit
Suisse,said that before the fire broke out on the test plane,he had also concluded that the first
delivery w as notlikely untilA pril.W ith allthe rew orking of parts,he said,"the aircraft,at this
point,is being hand-built." H e said B oeing knew there w as "an im portant statem ent to be
B ut he said that B oeing stillhad so m any fixes to m ake on the next 2 0 to 2 5 planes that it w ould
R obertStallard,an analystw ith R B C C apitalM arkets,said in a research note earlier this w eek
that B oeing executives told him on M onday that assem bly of m any of the first 30 aircraft w ould
take longer than expected.M r.Stallard said he now expected B oeing to deliver only 24 of the
planes in 2011.
H e said B oeing's chief executive,W .Jam es M cN erney Jr.,w ho w as at the m eeting,believed that
the com pany w ould probably need to build 40 to 50 D ream liners before overcom ing allthe
potentialproblem s.
Still,investors have been patient w ith B oeing over the delays.It stillhas a tw o- to three-year
edge over A irbus in building m ore fuel-efficient carbon planes,and the dem and for new planes
Page 1 of 4
S earch:
C H A R L E S T O N R C G 1O N A L
USINESS JOURNAL
pp]
H O M E
C on tact U s
N E W S
A b ou t U s
N eed H elp ?
C O M M U N IT Y
SU B SC R IP T IO N S
E V E N T S
JO B S
G ot N ew s?
R E SO U R C E S
A D V E R T ISE
R SS
',414013131,;
cc, o tP A N Y M
11111=M ffill
'
E S I pkr, S l:D C IA .
T E S
r.
S C IL,171191ti..
E .V C N I P P A ILIU C T IO N
V IN S IA L L I:1 1 6 N
.7"-P . 6 4 3 .5 5 4 ".3 4 6 6 ,
V ID E O P P O U u e l IO N
S h areT h is
B y D an iel B rock
A B oein g C o. execu tive said T h u rsd ay th at th e co m p an y p lan s to m ake its S .C . operations the "cornerstone" of the plane-
m aker's future.
R ay C on n er, vice president and generalm anager of supply chain m anagem ent and operations for the
plane-m aker,said that B oeing's and the state's efforts to train w orkers here w illeventually "m ake
W ild D unes R esort,seem ed to support talk am ong industry experts w ho say that C harleston could
C onner,an industry veteran w ho started w ith B oeing in 1977 as a m echanic he describes him self as a "B oeing P uget
Page 2 of 4
"W hen Iw as first given the assignm ent," he said,"Iw as really excited about the opportunity to have a role in creating a new
B oeing,and that's really w hat w e're doing here,w e're creating a new B oeing."
That sentim ent w illcom e into focus over the next severalm onths,as B oeing com pletes its 787 D ream liner plant in N orth
C harleston and production begins in July 2011.The first w ide-body jets are scheduled to rollout of the $750 m illion facility
in 2012.
W hen the line is fully operational,three planes w illbe churned out each m onth.
"For the last 94 years,our com pany has been S eattle's m ost recognizable," C onner said."A nd every airplane,every
com m ercialairplane,that w e have delivered has com e out of one our hangars on the Puget S ound.In early 2012,that is no
A lthough the first D ream liners from that Puget Sound plant,in Everett,W ash. are supposed to be delivered in M arch,
a fire aboard a test flight M onday has indefinitely halted the testing program w hile the com pany investigates.
B oeing officials said that a pow er controlpanelfailure led to an insulation fire that caused "significant" dam age to the panel.
Further inspection w illtake severaldays.It rem ains unclear w hether significant dam age w as done to any adjacent structure
"W e just had a slight little m ishap the other day," C onner said during his speech."That's w hy w e flight-test,right?"
B oeing lost eight 787 sales this w eek,yet C onner said that 30% to 40% of the com pany's $321 billion backlog is tied to the
new plane,w hich is three years behind schedule after num erous setbacks.
A s for the w ork force in S outh C arolina,C onner said that som eone w ho starts as a new hire at the N orth C harleston plant
could one day run it or assum e an even larger role w ith B oeing.
. %
. 'S *
,R T
C om m ents:
Leave N ew C om m ent
N am e
Em ail
Page 3 of 4
C om m ents
S ubm it
y o u h a v en 't s,
even thought
Page 4 of 4
T R ID E N T
T E C H N IC A L
C O L L E G E
C o n tin u in g E d u ca tio n
and w astefulpackaging
400:
H o m e
asturbs
Page 1 of 4
C o n tact u s
Theaia-1
In te rn a tio n a l N e w s
& P re ss R e le a se s
1114
A ll th e n ew s
A d s b y G oogle
U nion
C om plaint
B oeing
F iling a C om plaint
B o e in g to F ig h t N L R B C o m p la in t B a c k e d b y U n io n
"
-
Tmo
o,,
" '"y.
'"*
'..:........*-
4=ma.
W orstD
octor
.11,2
,.,--
---V -,-- .
-.1'";!.1
rsousirt know
E ver!!!!!!!11111
1 11
-0
breR th
Sr'''f-1:13 L..0',.,'
,la
h e 's
u!=.-21
,t,thna ro'f,...nPi,.?"1,
ile.,'i:arl
IL.7.474-ar"Li
C ji,i
ftS,
Vi
:3
`",
t.
ril%
7_,It
....- ..,-
te t'f'.,"
* . -
--
S o u n d in stead o f C h arlesto n .
',,::: ' ''' ''.." " " . ''''''' '''''' " :.'
rep u tatio n co rn
actin g g en eral co u n sel, th e b o ard n o w w ill b eg in a fo rm al p ro ceed in g to h ear th e IA M 's alleg atio n s.
4/20/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008221
Page 2 of4
com pany announced plans to expand its m anufacturing capacity in the U nited S tates in S outh
C arolina.C onstruction of the factory is nearly com plete and the com pany has hired m ore than 1,000
new w orkers.Final assem bly of the first airplane is slated to begin in July.
B oeing has m ade it clear that none of the production jobs created in S outh C arolina has com e at the
expense of jobs in P uget S ound and that not a single union m em ber has been adversely affected.In
fact, IA M em ploym ent in P uget S ound has increased by approxim ately 2,000 w orkers since the
P rior to that decision,B oeing held extensive discussions w ith the IA M over the potentialplacem ent of
the new 787 production capacity in P uget S ound.Those discussions ended w ith B oeing unable to
reach agreem ent w ith union leadership on dem ands that w ould have ham pered the com pany's
com petitiveness in the increasingly com petitive globalm arket for large com m ercialairplanes.
Luttig said B oeing w as confident that the claim w ould be rejected by the federalcourts.H e also
em phasized that the com pany w illbegin assem bling 787s in S outh C arolina this sum m er,as planned.
"W e fully expect to com plete our new state-of-the-art facility in S outh C arolina in the w eeks ahead,
and w e w illbe producing 787s ? A m erica's next great export ? from our factories in both P uget S ound
C ontact:
T im N eale, 703-465-3220
SO U R C E B oeing
S h a re : a g il II.
N e w s fro m - 2 0 1 1 -0 4 -2 0 1 9 :4 8 :0 2 S e ctio n :
U S A .
C o m m en ts
B e th e firs t to c o m m e n t
A d d yo u r co m m en t
Y our nam e
C om m ent
E ve ry D a y is E a rth D a y fo r Y u le x
http://en.asturi.as/noticias/46877/boeing_fight_nlrb_com plaint_backed_by_union/
4/20/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008222
b.
R eprints
copies for distribution to your co lle a g u e s. d ie n ts o r cu sto m e rs here or L.se the "R eprints" tool
that appears next to any article V isit w w w .n ytre p rin ts.co m fin sa m p lu s a r-a additiona
Page 1 of 2
W IN N E R
SU N G A N C E
. . ,
It m ay be a difficult case to Prove,but the com plaint filed last m onth by the N ationalL abor
bargaining.
T he N .L .R .B .is accusing the com pany of setting up a nonunion production line in South
C arolina to retaliate against unionized w orkers in W ashington State for striking.T he board
w ants to force B oeing to m ake allof its new D ream liner jets in W ashington,rather than m ake
T he case hinges on proving B oeing's intent.It is illegalto retaliate against w orkers for striking
there have been four strikes at the W ashington facility since 1989 or threaten w orkers in
order to discourage strikes.B ut the com pany can decide to locate production in South C arolina
because it m akes business sense and m ay include "production stability" as a factor in its
d ecision . '
B oeing says it w ants to diversify its assem bly to m ake it less vulnerable to disruptions caused by
potentialfuture strikes.Further com plicating the N .L .R .B .'s case,B oeing says opening the line
T he N .L .R .B .'s action lands squarely on an am biguity in the nation's labor protections w hich
enshrine the right to collective bargaining yet allow com panies w ays to avoid it by going to
another state.
T oday,1 out of 13 private sector w orkers is in a union,dow n from about 1 in 4 in the early
1970s.M any forces are contributing to this erosion,including globalization and the decline of
m anufacturing.B ut one im portant force is the flight of com panies to "right-to-w ork" states
Page 2 of2
T he N .L .R .B .'s case rests on statem ents by B oeing officials that,it believes,prove retaliation.
O ne B oeing executive told T he Seattle T im es that the m ain reason to put the new line in South
C arolina w as "thatw e cannotafford to have a w ork stoppage,you know ,every three years."
A hearing before an adm inistrative law judge is scheduled for June.T he judge's decision can be
appealed to the fullboard,and the board's decision can be appealed in federalcourt.If the
N .L .R .B .'s position is upheld,this case could draw som e clearer lines on w hat businesses can
and cannot do to avoid dealing w ith unions.A t the very least,this case w illshed light on the
Ex-L O or B oard C hairm an: U nion-B acked C ase A gainst B oeing 'U nprecedented'- FoxN e... Page 1 of 2
Pont
C lo se
B y Judson B erger
T h e co m m e n ts T u e sd a y fro m P e te r S ch a u m b e r a d d to th e ro ilin g d e b a te o ve r
C a ro lin a
.'
'
'11
th e N L R B co u n se l o ffe re d "n o b a sis" fo r th e ce n tra l cla im th a t B o e in g re ta lia te d b y tra n sfe rrin g w o rk fro m W a sh in g to n to S o u th
C a ro lin a
"T h e w o rke rs d o n 't h a ve a n y cla im to th e w o rk," h e sa id "If th e w o rke rs d o n 't h a ve a n y cla im to th e w o rk, it w a sn 't re ta lia to ry to
o p e n a n e w se co n d p ro d u ctio n lin e
p ro ce ss
S o u th C a ro lin a R e p u b lica n la w m a ke rs w e re sim ila rly o u tra g e d o ve r th e co m p la in t S e n Jim D e M in t ca lle d it a "p o litica l fa vo r" fo r
"If su cce ssfu l, th e N L R B co m p la in t w o u ld a llo w u n io n s to h o ld a virtu a l 've to ' o ve r b u sin e ss d e cisio n s," h e sa id in a sta te m e n t
th e co m p a n y's o rig in a l co m m itm e n t "to th e sta te o f W a sh in g to n th a t it w o u ld b u ild th e D re a m lin e r a irp la n e s in th a t sta te " P lu s sh e
vio la te d fe d e ra l ru le s
% Ex-Labor B oard C hairm an:U nion-B acked C ase A gainstB oeing 'U nprecedented'- FoxN e...Page 2 of 2
"A w orker's right to strike is a fundam entalright guaranteed by the N ationalLabor R elations A ct," S olom on said in a statem ent "W e
also recognize the rights of em ployers to m ake business decisions based on their econom ic interests, but they m ust do so w ithin
S olom on noted that a settlem ent could stillbe reached P lus the N LR B stressed that the com plaint doesn't request that B oeing shut
dow n the S outh C arolina plant, how ever, it seeks to keep 787 production in W ashington
T he InternationalA ssociation of M achinists and A erospace W orkers, w hich initially filed the allegation against B oeing w ith the
N LR B in M arch of last year, said in a statem ent that the S outh C arolina decision w as aim ed at the union
"B oeing's decision to build a 787 assem bly line in S outh C arolina sent a m essage that B oeing w orkers w ould suffer financialharm
for exercising their collective bargaining rights," V ice P resident R ich M ichalskisaid "F ederallabor law is clear it's illegalto threaten
or penalize w orkers w ho engage in concerted activity, and it's illegalin all50 states"
A hearing in the case is now scheduled before an adm inistrative law Judge on June 14 in S eattle
T hat decision could then be voted on by the N ationalLabor R elations B oard itself A nd that decision could in turn be appealed to a
federalcircuit court
S chaum ber said the dispute could drag on for a w hile, but suggested the current m akeup of the board does not favor B oeing
"T his board view s its role as to prom ote unionization, and w ith that in m ind, that w illbe their focus in deciding this case," he said
P rint
C lose
.......
U R L
H om e U S 1 W orld P olitics H ealth 1 B usiness S ciT ech E ntertainm ent V ideo O pinion S ports Leisure
A dvertise litth U s T erm s of U se'P nvacy P olicy C ontact U s E m ailN ew sroom T opics
T his m aterial m ay nol be published broadcast, rew ritten, or redistnbuled O D 2011 F O X N ew s N etw ork L L C A ll lights reserved A ll m arket data delayed 20 m inutes
..
aeSeatitealm es
ght
W inner of E iz,
P ulitzer P rizes
O riginally published A pril 25, 2011 at 9:47 PM I P age m odified A pril 26, 2011 at 8:33 A M
Page 1 of 4
W hile B oeing m ay m eet its deadline to deliver the first 787 to A llN ippon A irw ays of Japan before Sept.
B y D om inic G ates
T op com m en ts
"It isn't going to happen," said one m echanic w orking on the airplanes."T here are too m any jobs
to be done."
O ne job taking w eeks per airplane is the painstaking rem oval of sealantfrom the interior of fuel
4/26/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008227
B usiness & T echnology I B oeing still struggling w ith 787 I Seattle T im es N ew spaper
Page 2 of 4
A nd because the com puterized system that provides m echanics w ith data on parts isn't operating
w ell,even sim pler m odifications take m uch longer than they should.
'
B oeing has leased extra space so it can w ork on m ultiple airplanes at the sam e tim e.
M anagers last w eek held all-hands m eetings aim ed at galvanizing the w ork force,and form ed
O n W ednesday,w hen B oeing releases its quarterly earnings results,executives no doubt w ill be
Six D ream liners are flying flight tests,w hile 29 m ore have rolled off the assem bly line and are
T hose planes aw ait thousands of incom plete assem bly jobs and m odifications necessary because
B oeing spokesw om an L oriG unter conceded M onday that the rew ork is a difficultchallenge,and
she acknow ledged the tw o specific problem s raised by 787 insiders: the w ing sealing and the
Still,she insisted,there is a "very specific airplane by airplane plan" for com pleting the rew ork.
"N othing w e've seen ...is raising red flags for us," she said.
In an effort to com e to grips w ith the extensive rew ork,B oeing is m odifying one D ream liner in
T exas,tw o m ore inside the m ain E verett assem bly plant,and five airplanes inside a large hangar
at the south end of Paine Field leased from m aintenance and repair com pany A viation T echnical
Services (A TS).
P lenty of headaches
"T hey are building airplanes in the final-assem bly process that then have to be rebuilt in the
Parts that don't fit,including doors and control surfaces on the w ings,still are arriving in E verett.
"T he w ings on the 787s aren'teven close to being ready," the engineer said.
T he em ployees spoke on condition of anonym ity because B oeing doesn't allow them to talk about
their w ork.
T he latest airplanes rolled out to the flight line from the factory w ith about 1,600 jobs incom plete.
It has been taking on average about a m onth to com plete 1,0o0 of these catch-up jobs,the 787
4/26/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008228
B usiness & T echnology I B oeing still struggling w ith 787 I Seattle T im es N ew spaper
Page 3 of 4
m echanic said.
"T hey are just digging the hole deeper every tim e they send one out w ith that m any jobs on it," he
said.
G unter said she didn't have the inform ation to com m ent on those num bers.
Sorting it all out is m ade m uch m ore difficult because of the balky com puterized system that
m anages all the data about specific parts.M echanics are spending hours trying to call up parts
inform ation and draw ings before perform ing any rew ork or m odification.
A nd individual jets have been rew orked so often that engineers have a hard tim e just figuring out
w hat is the particular configuration of parts and assem blies on a particular plane.
"Productivity has crashed," said another em ployee w ith know ledge of how the com puter system is
failing.
"A w orker spends four hours a day on the com puter just trying to pull up his w ork."
B oeing's G unter said the com pany is w orking to im prove the digital tools,w hich she adm itted
B ut she said that,even w ithout that,productivity has been im proving."O ur m echanics are doing a
A m ong the m ajor rew ork that m ust be done on every jet built so far is the laborious resealing of
the w ings.
T hat's currently being done on tw o jets destined for R oyal A ir M aroc of M orocco,inside an em pty
T he w ing seals are im portant not only to avoid fuel leaks but also to coat m etal fasteners so as to
not entirely
G unter said M itsubishi H eavy Industries (M H I), w hich builds the w ings in Japan, is
atfault.
"T he sealing thatw as done did not m eet our expectations," G unter said."W e w orked together
A t the root of the issue,she said,are "elem ents of both w orkm anship and design."
N othing new
She added that this is "nota new discovery" and already w as factored into the last schedule
revision in D ecem ber,w hich requires the first delivery by the end of Septem ber.
B ut first delivery m ay not m atter as m uch as the sm oothing of the production system ,said the
"T hey'll m ake som e deliveries," that person said,"B ut does the assem bly line w ork? A lm ost no
4/26/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008229
Page 4 of 4
A m ong severalpeople w ho w ork on or w ith the program ,the m ost optim istic projection w as that
Inside the A T S hangar,D ream liners N os.8 and 9 are being prepared to join the fleet of flight-test
These jets w illfly long flights to try to gain a certitication know n as ETO PS Extended-range
T w in-engine O perations w hich an airplane needs to fly m ore than an hour from the nearest
airport.
T hatplane is having its w ing tanks sealed there and also is being rew ired.W hen it's done,itw ill
M ore em ployees
B oeing has been hiring m echanics steadily to beef up its w ork force and by the sum m er plans to
have 1 ,2 0 0 people w orking atthe A TS hangar,w hich the w ork force has dubbed "Factory South."
"B oeing is throw ing m oney and bodies atthe problem ," the m echanic said.
4/26/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008230
P age 1 of 4
./...0 D a ily L a b o r R e p o rt
'\._ ,1
S o u rce : D a ily L a b o r R e p o rt: N e w s A rch ive > 2 0 1 1 > M a y > 0 5 /1 2 /2 0 1 1 > N e w s > N L R B : S e n a te P a n e l M e e ts
NLR B
9 2 D L R A -2
S e n a te P a n e l M e e ts to D is c u s s M id d le C la s s
B u t M o s tly F o c u s e s o n N L R B , B o e in g D is p u te
A p ril 2 0 co m p la in t a lle g in g th a t th e co m p a n y ille g a lly tra n sfe rre d je tlin e r p ro d u ctio n fro m W a sh in g to n
F o rm e r N L R B M e m b e r S a ra h M . F o x, n o w le g a l co u n se l fo r th e A F L -C IO , to ld th e co m m itte e th a t th e
O n e o f th o se "sm a rte r p o licy ch o ice s," H a rkin sa id , w o u ld b e to "re sto re th e vo ice o f w o rkin g
co m p a n ie s a b o u t w h e re to lo ca te fa cilitie s."
R e ic h , B o u s h e y S tre s s N e e d fo r V ia b le M id d le C la s s
5/13/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008231
Page 2 of 4
richer.
sin g le la rg e st co n ce rn is p o o r sa le s re ve n u e .
B o e in g L a w y e r C h a lle n g e s N L R B C o m p la in t
C a ro lin a , h e sa id .
sp ite ," th e la w ye r sa id .
ille g a l u n d e r th e N L R A .
to a ll."
F o rm e r N L R B M e m b e r S a y s C a s e N o t E x tra o rd in a ry
e n g a g e in strike s.
5/13/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008232
Page 3 of 4
p re ju d g e th e o u tco m e o f th e ca se .
N L R B P ro c e s s , E ffe c t o f C o m p la in t D e b a te d
co u n se l fo r h is re a ctio n .
"I d o n 't se e a vicio u s a tta ck o n th e N L R B ," L u ttig sa id . "O n th e fa cts h e re ," h e sa id , th e a ctin g g e n e ra l
p re va il in a co u rt re vie w o f a b o a rd o rd e r.
a t a h e a rin g , a n d L u ttig a g re e d th a t it w a s n o t im p ro p e r.
H a rk in Q u e s tio n s S e n a te H e a rin g B o e in g D is p u te
A m e rica n jo b s."
5/13/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008233
Page 4 of 4
e d p ie ce th a t B o e in g d o e s n o t in te n d to m o ve jo b s o u t o f th e U n ite d S ta te s.
U nited S tates.
B y Law rence E . D u b e
acce sse d at h ttp ://o p .b n a.co m /d Ircase s.n sf/r? O p e n = ld u e -8 g stk4 . T e stim o n y b y J. M ich ae l
L u ttig m ay b e acce sse d at h ttp ://o p .b n a.co m /d Ircase s.n sf/r? O p e n = ld u e -8 g stl6
. T e stim o n y b y
S arah F o x m ay b e acce sse d at h ttp ://o p .b n a.co m /d Ircase s.n sf/r? O p e n = ld u e -8 g stjf
IS S N 1 5 2 2 -5 9 6 8
5/13/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008234
Page 1 of 2
To:
A dd us to your A ddress B ook! A dd tom _harkin@ harkin.enew s.senate.gov to yo u r address book now to ensure your
M ay 10,2011
HEO EN A TE'
U n s u b s c rib e
E A L T 14, 'tD U C A T IO N ,L A 0q A A ID ,
S e n a to r T o m H a rk in (1 :1 -IA ), C h a irm a n
F O R IM M E D IA T E R E L E A SE
M ay 10,2011
U p d a te M y P ro file
OM M
h ttp ://h e lp .s e n a te .g o v
(202) 224-3254
W A SH IN G T O N Senate H ealth,E ducation,L abor and Pensions (H E L P) C om m ittee C hairm an T om H arkin (D -IA ) today
released the follow ing statem ent responding to the com m ents m ade by R epublican politicians at a press conference today
on the N ational L abor R elations B oard investigation of the B oeing C om pany. O n T hursday, H arkin w ill convene a H E L P
C om m ittee hearing to discuss w hy the m iddle class is increasingly slipping out of reach for A m ericans, at w hich the
"W hat w e are really w itnessing here is another exam ple of the R epublican assault on the m iddle class that has been
echoing across the country for m onths now . Instead of focusing on how w e can get A m ericans w orking again and get the
m iddle class back on its feet, R epublicans have chosen to spend their tim e attacking the handling of a routine unfair labor
practice charge. T his overly dram atic response and the disturbing m isinform ation they are peddling has needlessly
com plicated the legal process and distorted the public discussion of this case.
"T hese opponents of w orkers'rights have also m ischaracterized the fundam ental issue at stake, suggesting that this case
represents an assault on 'right to w ork'law s. T hat's just factually incorrect there is absolutely no w ay that the outcom e
"T his fight is about far m ore than just one group of w orkers in W ashington State. U nions are one of the few voices left in
our society speaking up for the little guy, and if w e let pow erful C E O s tram ple all over these rights w ithout consequences,
"T hat's w hat this all com es dow n to: pow erful corporate interests are pressuring public officials to interfere w ith an
independent agency, rather than let justice run its course. A nd w e 'should not tolerate this interference. Instead, w e should
turn our attention back to the issues that really m atter to A m erican fam ilies how w e can create jobs in W ashington,South
5/10/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008235
'
Page 2 of 2
###
5/10/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008236
H om e
N ew sroom
P ress R eleases
G alleries
atpz_ma_
Issu es
H ealth
E ducation
L abor
P ensions
nom inations
L egislation
A bout
Subcom m ittees
Internships
A ccessibility
C ontact
Senate C om m ittee on
P ensions
D em o crats b y
R an k
T om H arlan (IA)
B arbara A M ikulski (M D )
Jeff B ingam an (N M )
Patty M urray_(W A )
R obert P C asey, Jr (P A )
K ay R H agan (N C )
Jeff M erkley_(O R )
A lFranken (M N )
M ichael F B ennet (C O )
Sheldon W hitehouse (R I)
R ep u b lican s b y
R an k
M ichaelB E nzi (W Y )
H a rk in : A m erica can 't h ave a vib ran t ec o n o m y w ith o u t a vib ran t m id d le cla ss
L am ar A lexander (T A
R ichard B urr (N C )
Johnny lsakson (G A )
W A SH IN G T O N T hursday at 9:15 A .M .,Senator T om H arkin (D -IA ),C hairm an of the Senate H ealth,E ducation,L abor and P ensions
R and P aul (K Y )
O rrin G H atch (U T )
C om m ittee, w ill convene the first in a series of events to exam ine w hy the m iddle class is increasingly slipping out of reach for A m ericans A s
John M cC ain (A Z)
corporate profits reach record levels,and the gulf betw een w orkers' w ages and their bosses' salaries is larger than ever before,the C om m ittee
P at R oberts (K S)
w ill discuss the policy decisions that have played a role in the erosion of the m iddle class and w hat can be done to turn things around before
it'sL isa M urkow ski (A K )
too late
"T oday, the 'A m encan D ream ' is under attack It used to be that if you put in a hard day's w ork,you could cans good A m encan w ages,good
A m erican benefits,and give your kids a better life than you had," said H arkin "A m encans are w orking hard for less over the past 30 years,
real w ages have rem ained stagnant or even declined for all except the richest A m encans,w hile w orker productivity increased by 80 percent.
T oo m any people dism iss this disturbing trend as a sym ptom of the recession,rather than recognizing that this dram atic change in our econom y
"It's tune for W ashington to recognize that there can be no sustainable econom ic recovery if w e don't rebuild our m iddle class W e need to
m ake the econom y w ork for A m encan fam ilies again,and I hope this heanng can help bring focus to that discussion "
F ollow ing the hearing,testim ony and archived videos w ill be posted at
http //help senate govilleanngs/
H E A R IN G
T h e E n d an gered M id d le C lass: lath e A m erican D ream S lip p in g O u t of R each for A m erican F am ilies?
W IT N E S S E S :
R ob ert B . R eich , F orm er U S S ecretary of Labor and currentivC hancellor's P rofessor of P ublic P olicy, G oldm an S chool of P ublic P olicy,
M ich ael L u ttig, G eneralC ounseland E xecutive V ice P resident, B oeing C om pany
T IM E - 9 15 A M
'U S Senate C om m ittee on H ealth,E ducation,L abor,& Pensions: N ew sroom - Press R elea...Page 2 of 2
444
R ecen t N ew s
H arkin -A m encans w ith D isabilities L eaving L abor F orce at A larm ing R ate [C hairm an]
H arlan 'T he choice is to go forw ard,or be dragged backw ard [C hairm an]
Search
C om m ittee on H ealth.Education,Labor and Pensions -428 Senate D irksen O ffice B uilding W ashington,D C 20510
H om e I P ress R eleases I P hoto G allery I H eannos I H ealth I E ducation I L abor I P ensions I N om inations IlA gislation IA bout IR S S
II
Page 1 of 3
S ent:
To:
S o lo m on, Lafe E .; M attina, C eleste J.; K earney, B arry J.; G arza, Jose; C leeland, N an cy
S u b ject: F W : S en R E ID - M U S T K E E P IN D E P E N D E N T A G E N C IE S IN D E P E N D E N T - O P E R A T E F R E E L Y
A N D W IT H O U T P O L IT IC A L P R E S S U R E
T ;
Ei
11
D E M O C R A T IC P O L IC Y A N D
12
F or Im m ediate R elease
R E ID : W E M U ST K E E P IN D E P E N D E N T A G E N C IE S IN D E P E N D E N T ,A L L O W T H E M T O
O P E R A T E F R E E L Y A N D W IT H O U T P O L IT IC A L P R E SSU R E
W ashington, D .C . N evada Senator H arry R eid m ade the follow ing rem arks today regarding the
N ational Labor R elations B oard.B elow are his rem arks as prepared for delivery:
"In a partisan environm ent, there is the tem ptation turn every issue into a political issue. W e certainly
"T hat's regrettable, but far from unfam iliar. Politics play a role in our representative governm ent, of
course,and they alw ays have.T he Founders created a system of checks and balances three branches
of governm ent,for exam ple,and tw o cham bers of the C ongress precisely because they anticipated
"L ong after that system w as created,a new independent federal agency w as created in the sam e spirit of
checks and balances. T hat agency is the N ational L abor R elations B oard, and it acts as a check on
em ployers and em ployees alike.It safeguards em ployees'rights to unionize or not to unionize, if they
so choose. It m ediates allegations of unfair labor practices. A nd it does all this independent of any
5/11/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008239
Page 2 of 3
outside influence.
"T he acting general counsel of the N L R B is a m an w ho is as nonpartisan and independent as the agency
he w orks for.L ast m onth,he issued a com plaint against one of A m erica's largest com panies,B oeing.
T he com plaint alleges that after B oeing w orkers in som e states w ent on strike,the com pany retaliated by
opening a new production line in a non-union facility.T hat kind of retaliation,if that's w hat happened,
is illegal.
"T hat's just the background.I'm not here to judge the m erits of the case.In fact,I'm here to do the
exact opposite: to rem ind the Senate that prejudging the case is not our job.T hat w ould overstep long-
"L ately,though,som e of our R epublican colleagues have attacked the N L R B and tried to poison the
decision-m aking process.T hey are interfering w ith case pending before a legal body.
"For exam ple,every R epublican Senator on the H EL P C om m ittee the "L " in H EL P stands for labor,
of course sentthe acting generalcounsela letter defending B oeing.T he letter itself,sentsix w eeks
before a hearing even takes place,seem s questionable at best.B ut these 10 R epublicans w ent further:
they w ent out of their w ay to link their request to the acting general counsel's pending nom ination.
"T hat's not all.Eight state attorneys general,all R epublicans,also signed a letter to the acting general
counsel,calling on him to w ithdraw the com plaintagainstB oeing again,long before an adm inistrative
"I strongly encourage all of them to take a step back.W e all know R epublicans dislike organized labor.
W e know they disdain unions because unions dem and fairness and equality from the big businesses
"A nd let's be honest: R epublicans are threatened by unions.T hey're threatened because w hen a large,
organized group is so concerned w ith w orkers'rights,the m em bers of that group vote in large num bers.
A nd because R epublicans and the big businesses they defend so often try to take aw ay w orkers'rights,
"B ut this kind of interference is inappropriate.It is disgraceful and dangerous.W e w ouldn't allow
threats to prosecutors or U .S.A ttorneys,trying to stop them from m oving forw ard w ith charges they see
fit to bring to the courts.A nd w e shouldn't stand for this.It m ay not be illegal,but it's no better than
the retaliation and intim idation that is the fundam ental question in this case.It should stop.
"W e need agencies like the N L R B to be able to operate freely and w ithout political pressures.W e need
to keep our independent agencies independent.T his case is for them to decide,not us."
###
T o unsubscribe from the D PC C -PR ESS list,click the follow ing link:
5/11/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008240
P age 3 of3
N otice : T his m essa ge is intended for the addressee only and m ay contain privileged and/o r
confidential in form ation . U se or d issem inatio n by an yone o ther tha n the intende d recipien t is
prohibited.
5/11/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008241
---:-.---
1 ...f.N
'\, W V
Page 1 of 4
S o u rce : D a ily L a b o r R e p o rt: N e w s A rch ive > 2 0 1 1 > M a y > 0 5 /1 0 /2 0 1 1 > N e w s > N L R B : L a w m a ke rs,
B u sin e ss G ro u p s P a n S o lo m o n A n d W h ite H o u se R o le s in N L R B B o e in g C a se
NLR B
9 0 D L R A -1
L a w m a k e rs , B u s in e s s G ro u p s P a n S o lo m o n
A n d W h ite H o u s e R o le s in N L R B B o e in g C a s e
g e n e ra l co u n se l.
"W e a re d e m a n d in g th a t th e p re sid e n t re sp o n d to w h a t th e N L R B h a s d o n e , b e ca u se th is g o e s a g a in st
te rm a s N L R B g e n e ra l co u n se l.
p ra ctice ch a rg e " w ith a n "o ve rly d ra m a tic re sp o n se " a n d "d istu rb in g m isin fo rm a tio n " th a t h e sa id "h a s
sa m e a lle g a tio n (7 7 D L R A A -1 , 4 /2 1 /1 1 ).
w e w a n t to m a ke su re th a t it n e ve r to u ch e s a n o th e r sta te ."
5/11/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008242
Page 2 of 4
S o lo m o n ," H a le y sa id .
jo b s."
a sse m b ly lin e in S o u th C a ro lin a a fte r co n sid e rin g its o p tio n s, w h ich in clu d e d a n a ttra ctive p a cka g e o f
H ouse."
u n d e rm in e d H a le y's a b ility to re cru it b u sin e sse s to b u ild in S o u th C a ro lin a . "C le a rly," W ilso n sa id ,
A le x a n d e r N e a rin g F in a l D ra ft o f L e g is la tio n
S e n . L a m a r A le xa n d e r (R -T e n n .) sa id h e , G ra h a m , D e M in t, a n d P a u l a re co n tin u in g to w o rk o n
said.
w h a t w e w a n t."
5/11/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008243
Page 3 of 4
e m p lo ye r n o t to re lo ca te jo b s fro m o n e lo ca tio n to a n o th e r, h e sa id , a n d w o u ld g u a ra n te e a n
se n a to rs w h o m a y su p p o rt th e b ill.
B u s in e s s G ro u p s _ lo in in P ro te s t
b u t to e ve ry co m p a n y h e a d q u a rte re d in th e U n ite d S ta te s.
id e n tify.
h u m a n re so u rce o ffice rs o f m o re th a n 3 2 0 U .S . co m p a n ie s, sa id h is g ro u p h a s n o t se e n th e B o e in g
W h a t h a p p e n e d in th e ca se a g a in st B o e in g , Y a g e r sa id , is th a t th e co m p a n y h a s b e e n p e n a lize d fo r
G ra h a m
G ra h a m sa id th e re w a s n o p re ce d e n t fo r a ca se like th e o n e a g a in st B o e in g b e ca u se "n o b o d y in th e ir
H a rk in S e e s 'A s s a u lt o n th e M id d le C la s s .'
5/11/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008244
. . . .
Page 4 of 4
said.
le g a l co u n se l to th e A F L -C IO .
B y L a w re n ce E . D u b e
IS S N 1 5 2 2 -5 9 6 8
C o p yrig h t (c) 2 0 1 1 , T h e B u re a u o f N a tio n a l A ffa irs, In c.. R e p ro d u ctio n o r re d istrib u tio n , in w h o le o r in p a rt,
5/11/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008245
Labor N ew s
F O R IM M E D IA T E R E L E A S E : M ay 4, 2011
The B oeing C om pany has long been a top spender in the W ashington legislature to gain
W ash in g to n to in tim id ate an d co erce th e fed eral ag en cy in vestig atin g B o ein g 's u n law fu l
retaliating against its w orkers w ho engaged in collective activity by m oving part of their w ork on
the new 787 D ream liner to ano ther state. B oeing pub licly adm itted that its prim ary m o tive w as
law yer sent a 10-page public rant to the agency, attacking and dem anding that the agency's law
enforcem ent efforts be w ithdraw n. S uch a letter is highly unusual, as it seeks to underm ine the
A gency's authority to perform its statutory duties. Typically, em ployers charged by the A gency
m ake their defenses at a legalhearing,w hich has already been scheduled,and do not seek to take
T h en , ten U .S . S en ato rs frien d ly to B o ein g 's an ti-w o rker m essag e ch allen g ed th e ch ief
"In m y 28 years of practicing labor law , I have never seen an em ployer use these types of
o vertly p o litical tactics to avo id a leg al p ro ceed in g ," said D avid C am p b ell, IA M D istrict 751
law yer. "R ath er than face the m u sic at th e Ju ne 14 hearin g, the B oeing C o m pan y is ap paren tly
trying to kill the case politically. This tactic show s all too clearly how desperate the C om pany is
The N LR B 's case against B oeing rests upon B oeing's ow n adm issions that it sought to
avo id law fu l co llective activity in W ash in g to n state. W h ile B o ein g claim s th at it is free to take
NLRB-FOIA-00008246
w hatever action it thinks m ay be necessary to avoid collective bargaining and strike activity,that
is sim ply not the law .Just as the law prohibits discrim ination against w histleblow ers or w orkers
w ho take fam ily leave,A m erica's law s protect w orkers w ho engage in collective activity.
This case presents a sim ple issue: D o big com panies have to obey the law ? If em ployers
can retaliate against w orkers w ho exercise rights that are protected by law ,then those rights w ill
G eneralCounselreview ed this case for a year,found convincing m erit,and issued a com plaint.
The hearing should continue according to its rules like any law enforcem ent process.
If, as B o ein g claim s, th e case is frivo lo u s, it w ill h ave th e o p p o rtu n ity to p resen t its
argum ent before a judge on June 14 in S eattle.It can appealthe judge's decision to m em bers of
Instead of follow ing the rule of law ,B oeing is using its trem endous politicalclout to try
to stop the actions of an independent federallaw enforcem ent agency.S uch tactics m ight w ork
in corrupt nations w here m oney not the law rules,but should not here in A m erica.
##
NLRB-FOIA-00008247
Tile Post and C ourier - B oeing: L anding in the L ow country - C harleston SC - postandcour... Page 1 of :4
4 1 /J a C
rea lm
C o n n ect w ith u s: S u b scrib er R ew ard s I R ep ort N ew s I M ob ile I T ext A lerts I N ew s b y E -m ail I T w itter I R S S I M ed ia K it I E -E d ition I C on tact U s
C u sto m er C are
"S e a rc h l
,1 4 -
H om e
N ew s
vd ,:y
R o p E R su F R A rscis
II A l II IC A K I )
W a tch d o g S p o rts W ea th er B u sin ess M u ltim ed ia E n terta in m en t F ea tu res S u p p lem en ts B lo g s E d ito ria l C la ssified s
Please L og In or R egister
L atest n ew s
C om in g to C h arleston
G et to k n ow u s
10/28/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00008248
'
The Post and C ourier - B oeing: L anding in the L ow country - C harleston SC - postandcour...Page 2 of 4
W h at to d o
E A ST C O O PE R
D O W N TO W N
NO RTH
111:It
C O L N 1 1 1 -.5 ,S t C H A R L E S T O N .
M ore B oeing N ew s
OFF
11
V a ttiji U T P U R C H A S E '
fl
s L it4 D
w ew .bm i
2 0 5 7 8 0 0
418.4-3454
C harleston A rea
7 5 7 9 5 5 1
riiidiinc.m m
B luffton/H ilton H ead
""'""*"...tb o xisexxxxxx.xxxl"924m a
R ates
C h arlesto n C o u n ty tax
In fo rm atio n
C lassified s
Jo b s
R eal E state
C ars
E n tertain m en t
A rea s ch o o ls In fo rm a tio n
B erkeley C o u n ty S ch o o l
D istrict
C h arlesto n C o u n ty S ch o o l
D istrict
D o rch ester C o u n ty S ch o o l
D istrict 2
D o rch ester C o u n ty S ch o o l
D istrict 4
S ch o o l rep o rt card s
D ep t o f E d u catio n
- fro m th e S C
C h a rm in g In n s In c
C harleston,S C
(843)722-8680
10/28/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00008249
' T h e Post and C ourier - B oeing: L anding in the L ow country - C harleston SC - postandcour...Page 3 of 4
T
i
t .
.,
1
'...
F V E N 1S V E N U E S D IN IN G
E vents by day
28
29
30
Thu Fri
Sat
,.,
. B o ein g C o w ill m ark a co n stru ctio n trad itio n F rid ay w h en w o rk ers p u t in p lace th e last fin al p iece o f r..1
II1
structural steel on the aircraft assem bly plant the com pany is building at C harleston International A irport f..
r1
, I
-.R e a d M o re
31
Sun
2
M on
Tue
he g .concert,festival)
A ll
Events
Search '
6 pm B razilian Jiu-Jitsu
. I
7 pm S unset B lues and B B Q C ruise
I
7 pm T he R ed P arty at the O ld C ity Jail is...
' 1
.I
B o e in g te s tin g 7 8 7 s in S o u th w e s t, M o n ta n a , Ic e la n d
F rid ay , S ep t. 3 , 2 0 1 0
E V E R E T T , W ash B oeing C o. says four of its five 787 flight test planes are far from their S eattle base
-L
--
- -
-- -
S c F IN E P R O P E R TIE S .C O M
B o e in g lo s e s 2 6 je t o rd e rs
S atu rd ay , A u g 7 . 2 0 1 0
--
'
-- L
G e t y o u r
F IN E
P R O P E R TY
v id e o lis tin g o n
th e *I w e b s ite in
C h a rle s to n .
YO U D O V T P A I
L rV T IL 771L L IST IN G
SIL L C f
'!A il sid ed e W in be o f
'
-..-4;
S 7 S 0 ,0 0 0 & lia r
B o e in g w o rk w in g s it w a y to G re e n v ille a re a
M o n d ay , A u g 2 , 2 0 1 0
A N D E R S O N -- S outh C arolina's new B oeing assem bly facility is under construction in N orth C harleston,
but a lot of the w ork is going to com panies w ith G reenville connections
.R e a d M o re
a.
, w
...
T h u rsd ay , Ju ly 7 9 , 2 0 1 0
.1....;
., ..1
B o ein g :
are likely in its defense business because of expected governm ent spending cuts and
bargain hunting P rofits and revenue fell in B oeing's airplane and defense businesses
'R ead M o re
O rd e rs k ic k o ff a ir s h o w
F a rn b o ro u g h e ve n t a lre ad y ex ce ed e d so m e ex p ec ta tio n s
Tuesday. Ju ly 2 0 , 2 0 1 0
F A R N B O R O U G H , E ngland -- B oeing C o and E uropean arch nval A irbus racked up billions of dollars w orth
of aircraft sales at the F arnborough International A irshow on M onday, raising hopes that the aviation
industry has touched the bottom of a deep tw o-year dow nturn. -+ R ead_M ta:e
M o n d ay , Ju ly 1 9 . 2 0 1 0
S IM
fieciiim
7 8 7 d e liv e ry h its s n a g
S E A T T L E -- T he first delivery of B oeing's new but delayed 787 Jetliner m ight slip into
early 2011 because of inspections and instrum ent changes on the flight-test aircraft,
- --
- ------
to G reater C harleston'
1
'
!
l
!
!
S an d y B ray, R ealto r, C en tu ry
21 P rop erties P lu s
O w ned
S chool
w orth alm ost $13 billion at the start of the F arnborough International A irshow on
M onday, raising hopes that the aviation industry is on the w ay back up after a dire
!
tw o-year slum p M eanw hile, B oeing's new 787 D ream liner plane has m ade its m aiden
1
v o y ag e o u tsid e th e u n ited S tates, to u ch in g d o w n at th e air sh o w 'R ead
M o re
;
I
I
1
!
F rid ay , Ju ly 1 6 . 2 0 1 0
S p on sors
B uckshlre by K eybullders
C harleston
C o m p an y
D o u g S h o rter P ro p erty
M an agem en t
A partm ents
1
!
1
I
1
T h e T rad itio n A p artm en t
1
H om es
I W o o d field S t. Jam es
1 A p artm en ts
10/28/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00008250
- postandcour...Page
, W o o d fie ld S o u th P o in t
1 A p a rtm e n ts
i C h u rc h ill C o m m o n s
A p artm en ts
C astlew o o d T o w n h o u ses
O ak R id g e T o w n h o u ses
; R e a l E s ta te
E h w an P o in te
; T o w n h o m e s /S o u th e a s te m
R ecap italizatio n
."-
1V IO X 1C
J 011
1 th e co n ve rsa tio n
I.
countge. dctenninotirel2. I jeer. % enc. pep. 3. skull. knrrikihev:-
M N Post antieourier
, M o re o n p o stan d co u rien co m
Im p o rta n t L in ks
O h L a n e s , w e b lo g s I A re live s I S :e m a p
T h e :K in g stre e : N e w s K n g ske e , S C i A ike n S ta n d ird A ike n , S C 1 M o u ltrie N e w s M o u n t P e a sa n t 5 '2 I T h e Jo u m a Ja m e s sla n t' a n d F o lly B e a ch S C '
G o o se C re e k G a ze tte G o o se C re e K , S C
iD a n e C o u n ty E n te i e n s. (N C ) 1 T h e C le ft'm o ss C o u n e r - (N C )
Jse of this site signifies your agreem ent to the T erm s of service P rivacy policy qnd our P arental consent form (U pdated 2/9/20-37)
10/28/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00008251
Advice M em orandum
S.A.M.
FROM.
D A T E
April 11, 2011
Region 19
Division of Advice
Case 19-CA-32431
512-5006-5062
512-5006-5067
512-5036-8387
512-5036-8389
524-0167-1033
524-5029-5037
524-0167-1033
524-506
524-8307-1600
524-8307-5300
530-6050-0825-3300
530-6067-4011-4200
530-6067-4011-4600
530-6067-4011-7700
530-8054-7000
775-8731
collective-bargaining agreement.
NLRB-FOIA-00008252
Case 19-CA-32431
- 2 -
seven planes on the first line. Thus, the Region should seek
the first ten 787 aircraft that it produces each month and to
F A C T S
to subcontracting and of
to arbitration. ...
NLRB-FOIA-00008253
Case 19-CA-32431
- 3 -
Bo e i n g I n t r o d u c e s t h e 7 8 7 " D r e a m l i n e r "
That line opened in May 2007, with the capacity for producing
our customers and competing to win the new business that will
NLRB-FOIA-00008254
Case 19-CA-32431
- 4 -
noted that he and Carson grew up in and shared a love for the
the CEO was "sick and tired" of the union's strikes and was
Integrated Defense Systems CEO Jim Albaugh, and for the first
1 In his
that the
occurred
1989 (48
2
NLRB-FOIA-00008255
Case 19-CA-32431
- 5 -
bargaining agreement.
second line outside the Puget -Sound area unless it could reach
NLRB-FOIA-00008256
Case 19-CA-32431
- 6 -
to the employees stating that the mass layoffs that took place
assembly line. For example, The Post and the Courier reported
second 787 line but that it had not yet made a decision as to
only way Boeing would place the second line in Washington was
that this was not possible, but the Union would consider a
long-term agreement.
NLRB-FOIA-00008257
Case 19-CA-32431
do.
The Union lost the election in South Carolina eight days later
and wanted the Union's input within the next three to four
resolve economic issues for the long term rather than through
would get more. On October 15, for the first time, Boeing
said that it wanted a lower wage structure for new hires and a
NLRB-FOIA-00008258
Case 19-CA-32431
- 8 -
Carolina.
work; location of the second line in the Puget Sound area; and
was the Union's "last and final" offer, but the Union
NLRB-FOIA-00008259
Case 19-CA-32431
- 9 -
couple of weeks."
Conner stated that the Union's economic terms and demand for
and invest more than $750 million in the State within the next
NLRB-FOIA-00008260
Case 19-CA-32431
- 1 0 -
phased out once the South Carolina line was up and running.
issues and work stoppages." The memo further stated, "In the
units who produce parts for the 787 assembly line are likely
customers."
NLRB-FOIA-00008261
Case 19-CA-32431
- 1 1 -
The issue last fall was really about, you know, how
Charleston.
that the 2008 strike reduced its earnings by $1.8 million, far
NLRB-FOIA-00008262
Case 19-CA-32431
- 12 -
decision as follows:
And it was not the wages we're paying today. It was that
escalation of wages....
from the main assembly line. Once supply issues are resolved
ACTION
Sound unit employees that they could retain all of the 787
this interview.
NLRB-FOIA-00008263
Case 19-CA-32431
- 13 -
problems.
not be ready for production for two years because of the need
assemble in the Puget Sound area the first ten 787 aircraft
NLRB-FOIA-00008264
Case 19-CA-32431
- 14 -
plant. The employer also made clear that the plant's nonunion
activity. D12
The Board expressly distinguished an employer's
See NLRB v. Gissel Packing Co., 395 U.S. 575, 618 (1969).
Ibid.
18
11
12
NLRB-FOIA-00008265
Case 19-CA-32431
- 15 -
date." 13
employees that they will lose their jobs if they join a strike
13
14 See, e.g., Kroger Co., 311 NLRB 1187, 1200 (1993), affd.
NLRB 662, fn. 5 (1996), enf. denied 117 F.3d 627 (D.C. Cir.
1997).
15 Aelco Corp., 326 NLRB 1262, 1265 (1998). See also Dorsey
part 233 F.3d 831 (4 th Cir. 2000) (threat to close the plant if
16 311 NLRB at 1200. See also General Electric Co., 321 NLRB
17 See, e.g., Tawas Industries, 336 NLRB 318, 321 (2001) (no
466, 466 (2000) (no factual basis for statements about having
unionized).
18
NLRB-FOIA-00008266
Case 19-CA-32431
- 16 -
19
consequences").
20
22
23
NLRB-FOIA-00008267
Case 19-CA-32431
- 17 -
removed jobs from Puget Sound because employees had struck and
strikes 25
activity. 26
drove home the message: union activity could cost them their
question that the decision will direct work away from Puget
to employees.
24
25
NLRB-FOIA-00008268
Case 19-CA-32431
- 18 -
sourcing" program means that the Puget Sound and Portland unit
implemented.
retaliatory motive 28
27
28
Ibid.
See Adair Standish Corp., 290 NLRB 317, 318-19 (1988), enfd
29
NLRB-FOIA-00008269
Case 19-CA-32431
- 19 -
the fact that unit employees may not yet have experienced the
sub nom. O'Dovero v. NLRB, 193 F.3d 532 (D.C. Cir. 1999)
32
33
34 See Century Air Freight, 284 NLRB 730, 732 (1987) (employer
35 See Parexel International, LLC, 356 NLRB No. 82, slip op.
NLRB-FOIA-00008270
Case 19-CA-32431
- 20 -
activity.""
36
37
38
39
40
See ibid.
NLRB-FOIA-00008271
Case 19-CA-32431
- 21 -
substantial "42
striking.
See 295 NLRB 1095, 1095 (1989), enfd. 903 F.2d 396 (5 th Cir.
41
42
43
NLRB-FOIA-00008272
Case 19-CA-32431
-.22 -
employee rights . 47
economic weapon, and for the Union itself, and thereby hinder
44
8 3 5 , 8 6 3 64
(1999), enf. denied in pertinent part 233 F.3d 831
See 319 LRB 1253, 1269 (1995), enf. denied 115 F.3d 1045
45
46
NLRB-FOIA-00008273
Case 19-CA-32431
- 23 -
with the union. 48 The Board found that the employer's stated
Section 8(a)(3).
III. T h e U n i o n W a i v e d i t s R i g h t t o Ba r g a i n
48
48
NLRB-FOIA-00008274
Case 19-CA-32431
- 24 -
A.
M a n d a t o r y S u b j e c t o f Ba r g a i n i n g
50
51 303 NLRB 386, 391 (1991), enfd. sub nom. Food & Commercial
52
Ibid.
See, e.g., Titan Tire Corp., 333 NLRB 1156, 1164-65 (2001)
to other facilities).
53
(2000), revd. mem. 248 F.3d 1131 (3d Cir. 2000) ("We think it
employees").
54
NLRB-FOIA-00008275
Case 19-CA-32431
- 25 -
jobs. 57
the Employer cannot afford the rate at which unit wages are
55
See 321 NLRB 616, 617 (1996), enf. denied in relevant part
134 F.3d 125 (3d Cir. 1998). Accord Acme Die Casting, 315
57
58
59
NLRB-FOIA-00008276
Case 19-CA-32431
- 26 -
bargaining.
B. W a i v e r o f t h e R i g h t t o Ba r g a i n
This
'
1 / 6 4
60
61
62
waive the right to bargain about such changes for all time).
63
64
NLRB-FOIA-00008277
Case 19-CA-32431
- 27 -
contract."
right to of
work to a facility not covered by the
of
decision.
waiver but asserts instead that the Employer may not take
waiver; rather, the cases on which the Region and Union rely
8(a)(3) violation."
waiver are also unavailing. Thus, the Union asserts that the
65
Id. at 1260.
66
Id. at 1 2 6 2 .
67
See Reno Hilton, 326 NLRB 1421, 1430 (1998), enfd. 196 F.3d
protected activity").
68
NLRB-FOIA-00008278
Case 19-CA-32431
- 28 -
also lacks merit. While Boeing took the position that the
IV. T h e A p p r o p r i a t e R e m e d y
See St. Barnabas Medical Center, 341 NLRB 1325, 1325 (2004)
those negotiations).
70
See Boeing Co., 337 NLRB 758, 763 (2002) (employer did not
NLRB-FOIA-00008279
Case 19-CA-32431
- 29 -
7 2 See, e.g., Homer D. Bronson Co., 349 NLRB 512, 515 (2007),
L o g i s t i c s & Op e r a t i o n s ,
340 NLRB 255, 258 (2003), affd. 400
F.3d 920 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (employees will perceive that "the
the Act").
enfd. mem. 55 F3d 684 (D.C. Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516 U.S.
1093 (1996). See also, e.g., Homer D. Bronson Co., 349 NLRB
Texas Super Foods, 303 NLRB 209, 209 (1991) notice reading by
employees).
NLRB-FOIA-00008280
Case 19-CA-32431
- 30 -
B.J.K.
ROFs - 9
H:ADV.19-CA-3'2431.Response2.Boeingdlw
NLRB-FOIA-00008281
J M ic h a e l L u ttig
G criera. C
o L si
'h f.
'or
N
C h
C o m r4 ,
:-)rstr.l,M `.;
6 0 C `14';1 5 11)
11:":77
M ay 3.2011
W ashington.D .C .20570-0001
D ear M r.Solom on .
I w rite regarding statem ents in your com plaint and elsew here including
statem ents attributed to you in the N ew York Tim es on A pril 23--about B oeing's
decision to place its new 787 final assem bly line in South C arolina.A num ber of
these statem ents,w hich arc critical to your case against B oeing.fundam entally
m ischaracterizations,for the public record and also for purposes of the com plaint you
160,000 B oerne em ployees w orldw ide.A nd,of course.you have filed a com plaint
based upon these m isstatem ents that cannot be credibly m aintained under law .
Your Statem ent T hatB oeing "T ransfiuT ed" linion W ork
A s an initial m atter,repeated statem ents in the com plaint allege that B oeing
"rem oved w ork" from Puget Sound (16),"decided to transfer its second 787
sourcing supply program " to S outh C arolina (11,8(0 ). Y o u r A p ril 2 0 p res release
second line w ork in response to charges filed by the M achinists union and 1bund
reasonable cause to believe that B oeing had violated tw o sections of the N ational
A s you w ell know ,no w ork none at all w as "rem oved" or "transferred"
from Puget Sound. T he second line for the 787 is a new final assem bly line. A s it
did not previously exist in Puget Sound or elsew here,the second assem bly line could
not have been "rem oved" from ."transferred" or otherw ise -m oved" to South
C arolina.Sim ply put.the w ork that is and w ill be done at our C harleston,South
C arolina final assem bly facility is new w ork,required and added in response to the
historic custom er dem and for the 787.N o m em ber of the International A ssociation of
M achinists'union (1A M ) in Puget Sound has lost his or her job.or otherw ise suffered
NLRB-FOIA-00008282
any adverse em ploym entaction,as a resultof the placem entof this new w ork in the
Y our ow n R egionalD irector,w hose office you have tasked w ith prosecuting
this case,understands that,and has accurately and publicly described the m atter
differently than you.A s the Seattle T im es reported last year,"R ichard A beam .the
N L R B regionaldirector investigating the com plaint,said itw ould have been an easier
case for the union to argue if B oeing had m oved existing w ork from E verett,rather
arc already,via public statem ents.transform ing the theory of the com plaintto say
that,because B oeing com m itted to the State of W ashington thatitw ould build allof
thatB oeing is transferring w ork aw ay from union em ployees stem s from the
com pany's originalcom m itm ent`to the State of W ashington thatitw ould build the
T he prem ise underlying thatassertion thatB oeing com m itted to the State of
W ashington to build allof the C om pany's 787s in W ashington- -is false.B oeing did
notcom m itto the State of W ashington thatitw ould build allof its 787s in thatstate.
B om a honored ----and fully allof its contractualcom m itm ents to the State of
W ashington long before the decision to locate the C om pany's new production facility
in South C arolina.T he notion thatB oeing had som ehow com m itted to W ashington
State to build all787s in thatstate is neither m entioned nor even suggested either in
the IA M 's charge or in your recently tiled com plaint,and you never asserted that
B oeing had m ade such contractualcom m itm ents to the State of W ashington in the
severaldiscussions w e have had w ith you in the m onths preceding your filing of the
com plaint.H ad you done so.w e w ould have explained to you w hy such an
understanding w as plainly incorrect.I callupon you to quickly and fully correct the
record on this point.In addition to being w holly uninform ed,it creates the
im pression thatyou and your office are now in search of a theory thatw illsupporta
predeterm ined outcom e,even a theory thathas nothing to do w ith the N ationalL abor
R elations A ct.
suggesting thatB oeing broke com m itm ents to the State of W ashington,is had
enough.Far m ore egregious,how ever,are the statem ents that have been m ade
B oeing executives soughtto "punish" union em ployees and to "threaten" them for
NLRB-FOIA-00008283
their pastand possible future strikes,through the C om pany's statem ents and its
m essage that [the C om pany and its E xecutives] w ere doing this to p u n ish their
em ployees for having struck and having the pow er to strike in the future." (Steven
T im es,A pril 23,2010.em phasis added.) N either your com plaint nor the post-hoc
statem ents you and other officials of the N L R B have m ade since the filing of the
com plaintoffers a single B oeing statem ent letalone a "consistentm essage"- -that
stated thatB oeing "decided to locate its 787 D ream liner second line in South
C arolina because of pastU nitstrikes,and threatened the loss of future U nitw ork
sheet" thatquotes M r.A lbaugh as saying:"T he overriding factor [in transferring the
line] w as not the business clim ate.A nd it w as not the w ages w e're paying today.It
Itw ould.of course.have been entire!) perm issible under existing law tbr M r.
A lbaugh to have m ade a statem entthatthe C om pany considered the econom ic costs
of future strikes in its business decision to locate w ork in South C arolina or even
thatitw as the sole reason for such decision.B utM r.A lbautzh did noteven say either
W ellI think you can probably say thataboutallthe states in the country right
now w ith the econom y being w hat it is.B ut again,the overriding factor w as
notthe business clim ate and itw as notthe w ages w e're paying people today.
Itw as thatw e can'tafT hrd to have a w ork stoppage every three years.
W e
presentation of this quotation on its w ebsite--m ake clear that M r.A lbaugh w as
referencing tw o,rather than one,"overriding factors," only one of w hich is the risk of
a future strike.T hese are critical om issions that directly contradict your apparent
NLRB-FOIA-00008284
p art o f a "co n sisten t m essag e" th at B o ein g so u g h t to "p u n ish " its u n io n em p lo y ees.
n ew p ro d u ctio n lin e in P u g et S o u n d an d th at b o th th e co m p an y an d th e u n io n m ad e
"punishm ent" to the union for its past or future strike capability.
"m ad e an ex ten d ed statem en t reg ard in g 'd iv ersify in g [B o ein g 's] lab o r p o o l an d lab o r
happ en ing every three to fo ur y ears in P ug et S ound . (C o m p lain t !6 (a) (em p h asis
added).)
statem en ts. F irst, M r. M cN ern ey as not m aking an "extended statem ent" about w hy
passages you m isquote and m ischaracterize, he discussed the relative costs of a new
facility in a lo cation other than P uget S ou nd, versus the p otential costs associated
A n d M r. M cN erney did n ot even rem otely sug gest that w h at w ou ld later turn
facility o th er th an in P u g et S o u n d w o u ld o r m ig h t b e m ad e to p u n ish th e u n io n fo r
suggest, or im ply that any existing union w ork w as being transferred to C harleston.
the sw eeping statem ent you m ade to the N ew Y ork T im es ab o u t B o ein g 's "co n sisten t
m essag e" th at B o ein g arid its ex ecu tiv es so u g h t to "p u n ish " th e C o m p an y 's u n io n
em ployees.
NLRB-FOIA-00008285
sending an illegalm essage under the N L R A .as the com plaintincorrectly and
m isleadingly suggests.
N or do any of the other few statem ents you reference in your com plaint- --
w hich I attach to this letter rem otely suggestan intentto "punish" the C om pany's
unionized em ployees.Q uite the contrary: these statem ents show ,at m ost,that the
C om pany considered (am ong m ultiple other factors) the risk and potentialcosts of
future strikes in deciding w here to locate its new finalassem bly facility.1 hose have
placing the second line in PugetSound.A lthough those negotiations w ere not
represented by unions and those w ho are not.Y our statem ent im plies that B oeing's
m ostsenior executives acted outof personalspite and retribution tow ard its labor
em ployees,and the C om pany's shareholders.Y ou have no support for that statem ent
w hatsoeer.
"consistentm essage" thatthe C om pany intended to "punish" the union for its prior
strikes and its pow er to strike in the future,you had no choice butto issue a
com plaint.(Specifically.you said: "I can't not issue a com plaint in the face of such
evidence.") A m ong other reasons,that statem ent is puzzling,to say the least,in light
of the course of B oeing's discussions w ith you and your office concerning this m atter
over the past six m onths.In particular.it is hard to reconcile w ith w hat has been your
should be involved and thatyou w ould take no action on the m atter if B oeing agreed
thatitw ould notlay off any 787 em ployees in PugetSound during the duration of its
agreem entthatyou yourself soughtfrom B oeing atler your further discussions w ith
the com plainant.B ut the point is this: It is exceedingly difficult to understand how
you could have proposed and then agreed to such a resolution if,as Y ou now say.you
believed thatthe statem ents and actions by B oeing and its executives w ere so
NLRB-FOIA-00008286
egregious that the law literally com pelled a com plaint by the N L R B .O f course.the
Finally.there is the issue of your articulation of the rem edy soughtin this
com plaint.T he com plaintseeks an order directing B oeing to "have the [1A M )
operate [B oeing's] second line of 787 D ream liner aircraftassem bly production in the
State of W ashington." N otw ithstanding thatyou are seeking this rem edy,your office
has been atpains since tiling the com plaintto state publicly thatthis is notequivalent
B oeing's current plan is to produce a m axim um of ten 787s per m onth: seven in
Puget Sound,and three on the second line in C harleston.If the N L R B w ere to order
B oeing to produce outof PugetSound the three 787s per m onth thatare planned to he
assem bled in C harleston.thatw ould of course require the production of allof the
explained repeatedly to you and your staff in our extended discussions before you
* * * * * * *
R elations B oard itself in upcom ing proceedings.M r.Solom on.1 o the extentthey
qJ.114,44
Sincerely yours,
.1
.M ichael Luttig
T he B oeing C om pany
A ttachm ent
NLRB-FOIA-00008287
...T here w ould be execution challenges associated w ith thatchoice [of C harleston].
B utkeep in m ind thatw e've gota pretty good-sized operation dow n in C harleston today.
T he -- there w ould be som e duplication.W e w ould obviously w ork to m inim ize that.
B utI think having said allof that,diversifying our labor pooland labor relationship,has
som e benefits.I think the union IA M and the C om pany have had trouble figuring itout
A nd I've got to figure out a w ay to reduce that risk to the C om pany.A nd so som e of the
m ore than overcom e by strikes happening every -- every three or four years in Puget
Sound and the very negative financialim pactof the C om pany,our balance sheetw ould
be a lot stronger today had w e not had a strike last year.O ur custom ers w ould he a lot
happier today,had w e not had a strike last year.A nd the 787 program w ould be in better
shape had w e not.A nd so I don't blam e -- I don't blam e this totally on the union.W e
just haven't figured out a w ay,the m ix doesn't -- isn't w orking w ell,yet.So w e've either
labor base.
im proving our com petitiveness and reducing vulnerability to delivery disruptions due to a
hostof factors,from naturaldisasters to hom eland security issues and w ork stoppages.
W e're electing notto getinto how individualsites fared in specific areas of the
evaluation.
* * * * * * * *
Q 8: W e understand you w ere pushing the union for a no-strike agreem ent and cam e
close to getting a 10-year deal.O bviously you didn't reach an agreem ent.W as that the
A :
It w as an im portant part of our discussion w ith the union,but it w asn't the only
factor in our decision.In the final analysis,this cam e dow n to ensuring our long-term
agreem ent,w e feltour discussions w ith the IA M w ere productive and fecused on the
NLRB-FOIA-00008288
sustain a reliable,on-tim e flow of deliveries to our custom ers.W e look forw ard to
m oving forw ard w ith the IA M in a positive w ay to grow our business in an increasingly
* * * * * * * *
Q 26:Y ou say thathaving a second line in C harleston reduces risk,butif the lA M goes
on strike in the Puget Sound again they w ill haltyour production lines.W hat does a
A : G eographically diversifying final assem bly on the 787 w ill protect a portion of
stoppages due to labor disputes.H aving the second line w illalso give us assurance and
B oeing spokesm an Jim Proulx cited strikes in the PugetSound region as a m ajor factor in
the decision.W ith a second supplier for every part,B oeing potentially could continue
producing D ream liners in South C arolina even if the M achinists w enton strike here.
"R epeated labor disruptions have affected our perlbnnance in our custom ers'eyes,"
Proulx said."W e have to show our custom ers w e can be a reliable supplier to them ."
here," he added.
* * * * * * * *
"W e w illim m ediately begin identifying,selecting and contracting w ith suppliers to stand
Proulx said B oeing has notdeterm ined how m uch w ork w illbe replicated w ithin the
com pany in the new C harleston facility and how m uch m ay go to outside suppliers.
W hen B oeing broke ground on its C harleston assem bly line in N ovem ber,the com pany
disclosed extensive plans for other buildings at the facility.A m ong these is a "fin and
NLRB-FOIA-00008289
H e said the replication of parts sourcing also w ould "accom m odate the ram p-up" required
* * * * * * * *
"W e inform ed the (1A M ) of our plans to begin dualsourcing during the com pany/union
discussions preceding our decision to place the second 787 line in South C arolina,"
C onner's m essage to m anagers stated."W e rem ain com m itted to strengthening our
* * * * * * * *
capabilities,based on their ability to produce high-quality com ponents and atthe best
value."
"W e'llreview supplier expertise,and w e'll ensure thatthe right levelof training and
oversightis in place to m ake sure the perform ance standards are m et." he said.
"W e are notm oving any w ork thatB oeing em ployees are currently perform ing --- w e are
6(d)
*******
B oeing spokesm an Jim Proulx said itw as "too early" to tellif the new production w illbe
contracted outor done by B oeing itself atthe new South C arolina site.or elsew here in the
country.
this region.
"T here w ill be no jobs lost as part of this m ove.T heie are no plans to take this w ork
aw ay," he said.
NLRB-FOIA-00008290
6(e) -- Jim A lbaugh Interview w ith the Seattle Tim es, M arch 2,2010
W ellI think you can probably say thataboutallthe states in the country rightnow w ith
clim ate and it w as not the w ages w e're paying people today.It w as that w e can't aflbrd
to have a w ork stoppage every three years.W e can't afford to continue the rate of
escalation of w ages as w e have in the past.Y ou know ,those are the overriding factors.
A nd m y bias w as to stay here butw e could notgetthose tw o issues done despite the best
NLRB-FOIA-00008291
'.
1r
'
Pag e 1 o f 2
F rom :
A hearn, R ichard L .
S en t:
T u esd ay , M ay 0 3 , 2 0 1 1 3 :2 3 PM
T o:
K earney, B arry J.
S u b ject:
F ro m : C leeland, N ancy
S en t: T u esday , M ay 03 , 20 11 1 2:18 PM
T o : A hearn, R ichard L .
F rom a C ongressional Q uarterly reporter, in case this sheds any light on the am endm ent
S en t: T u esday , M ay 03 , 20 11 3 :12 PM
T o : C leeland, N ancy
H ere is a copy o f th e am en d m en t:
T hey say it "S trengthen the existing protection in the N ational L abor relations A ct of state right-to-w ork law to
p rev en t th e N L R B fro m m o v in g fo rw ard in th eir case ag ain st B o ein g o r attem p tin g a sim ilar strateg y ag ain st o th er
com panies. It updates the current law w ith the follow ing:
N othing in the A ct shall be construed to lim it the application of any S tate law that prohibits, or otherw ise places
S en t: T u esday , M ay 03 , 20 11 3 :05 PM
T o : L auren S m ith
H i L auren,
I realize I w as m istaken. I'd gotten the idea that this w as a national right to w ork bill from another reporter; it
turns out that's not w hat this is. W e're trying to figure out exactly w hat it w ould do.
S en t: T u esday , M ay 03 , 20 11 3 :03 PM
T o : C leeland, N ancy
5/3/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008292
Page 2 of 2
H ey N ancy -- T hanks for helping m e out w ith this. I really appreciate it!
F or the daily story about S ens. A lexander and G raham 's right-to-w ork legislation,I'd love to get a com m ent on the
ram ifications of the language,both for labor and for the N LR B . S om ething sim ilar to w hat w e talked about over
the phone: T hat this is an attem pt to m andate allstates adopt right-to-w ork policies. T hat this legislation is really
nothing new and has been introduced by the G O P m any tim es before.
T o give you a better sense of w hat I'm looking into for m y feature story: I'm w riting about the naturaloscillation of
the board and it's pro-union vs. pro-business decisions depending on w hich party is controlling the W hite H ouse.
M y argum ent is that the B oeing case provides am m unition to those that are trying to prove the N LR B has an
activist agenda,but in reality,the N LR B under O bam a is no m ore pro-union than it w as pro-business under the
previous B ush adm inistration. T he N LR B is also under m uch greater scrutiny on the w hole due to the larger labor
environm ent. I w ould love to get a com m ent about the naturalprogression of the board becom ing politicized,and
how it's historically seesaw ed betw een pro-union and pro-business decisions based on the adm inistration.
T hanks so m uch and please let m e know if you have any questions! I'm on m y celltoday: 617-633-0425
B est,
Lauren
Lauren S m ith
S taff W riter
(m ): 617-633-0425
C ongressionalQ uarterly
77 K S t.,N E
W ashington,D C 20002
n C o
t R O LL r:
C A LL
T his e-m ailm ay contain confidentialm aterialIf you are not an intended recipient,please notify the sender and delete allcopies It m ay also contain
personalview s w hich are not the view s of C Q R ollC allor its ow ner,T he E conom ist G roup W e m ay m onitor e-m ailto and from our netw ork I or
5/3/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008293
0:124
5/
A A N D L A A tl % 4 4 4 -4 1 K311i
t
11A 111235
C alendar N o.
A M E N D M E N T N O .
law s in effect.
IN T H E
S S .
T o rea
ib t
5. 41 5
5,
R eferi
th.ggc.0)
V *:dote ra-oloonao
V iz:
NLRB-FOIA-00008294
B A 111235
(b)A PPL IC A B IL IT Y O F R A IL W A Y L A B O R A C T T O
8
"SEC.209.EFFECT O N STATE RIG H T TO W O RK LAW S.
NLRB-FOIA-00008295
S.L.C.
B A I11235
C alendar N o.
A M E N D M E N T N O .
law s in effect.
S.493
and
ordered to be printed
V iz:
2
S E C . . P R O T E C T IO N O F R IG H T T O W O R K .
STA TE R IG H T TO
9 w ise places restraints upon, agreem ents betw een labor or-
NLRB-FOIA-00008296
,
i
BAI11235
S.L.C.
(b) A PPL IC A B IL IT Y O F R A IL W A Y L A B O R A C T T O
8
"SE C .209.E FFE C T O N ST A T E R IG H T T O W O R K L A W S.
NLRB-FOIA-00008297
U N IT E D ST A T E S D IST R IC T C O U R T
F O R T H E D IST R IC T O F SO U T H C A R O L IN A
C H A R L E ST O N D IV ISIO N
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A SSO CIA T IO N O F
M A CH IN IST S A N D A E R O SPA CE
W O R K E R S and SO U T H CA R O L IN A
A M E R ICA N FE D E R A T IO N O F L A B O R
A N D CO N G R E SS O F IN D U ST R IA L
O R G A N IZ A TIO N S,
C IV IL A C T IO N N O .
C O M P L A IN T
Plaintiffs,
V .
capacity as G O V E R N O R O F SO U TH
CA R O L IN A ,CA T H E R IN E T E M PL E T O N in
SO U T H CA R O L IN A D E PA R T M E N T O F
L A B O R ,L ICE N SIN G A N D R E G U L A T IO N ,
D efendants.
N A T U R E O F T H E CA SE
1.
T his suit challenges actions by the G overnor of South Carolina and the D irector
ofthe South Carolina D epartm entofLabor,Licensing and R egulation ("LLR ")w hich violate the
First and Fourteenth A m endm ents to the U nited States Constitution and the N ationalL abor
R elations A ct,29 U .S.C. 151-169 ("N L R A ").T he causes of action are brought pursuant to 42
U .S.C. 1983.
2.
D efendants G overnor and D irector have declared and are m aintaining a state
opposing the advocacy and associationalactivity of unions w ithin the state of South Carolina.
The G overnor and D irector are pursuing this policy by unlaw fully utilizing "increased regulatory
scrutiny" ofunion activities and threats to im m ediately activate the "punitive m achinery" ofstate
NLRB-FOIA-00008298
unions.
See,B lankenship v.M anchin,
471 F.3d 523 (4th Cir.2006).A dditionally D efendants
declared,and are m aintaining and enforcing,the stated policy in retaliation for the activities of
Plaintiffs,Plaintiffs'm em bers and their potential'm em bers in violation of the First and
3.
Plaintiffs seek a declaration ofrights pursuantto 28 U .S.C. 2201 and 2202 and
injunctive relief.
4.
is organized into seven territories.South Carolina is one offourteen states in the IA M A W 's
Southern T erritory,in w hich territory the U nion represents nearly 100,000 m em bers in 21
engaged in organizing and representationalunion activities w ithin the state ofSouth Carolina.
5.
O rganizations ("South Carolina A FL -CIO ")is a state labor federation located in the State of
South Carolina and is chartered by the A m erican Federation ofLabor and Congress ofIndustrial
through legislative and politicaladvocacy and assists its m em bers and the labor m ovem entin
organizing activities.
6.
D efendantN im rata "N ikki" H aley is the G overnor ofthe State ofSouth Carolina.
D uring the tim e period N ovem ber 2,2010,through m id-day January 12,2011,D efendantH aley
NLRB-FOIA-00008299
H ouse of R epresentatives from 2005 through N ovem ber 16,2010.A llactions by D efendant
H aley alleged herein w ere under color of state law for purposes of 42 U .S.C. 1983.
7.
D efendantCatherine Tem pleton is the D irector ofthe South Carolina D epartm ent
of L L R .A llactions by D efendant T em pleton alleged herein w ere under color of state law for
8.
9.
T his C ourt has jurisdiction over this suit under 28 U .S.C . 1343(a)(3) and 28
U .S.C . 1331,in that Plaintiffs'claim s arise under the N L R A ,29 U .S.C . 151-169,and the
Firstand Fourteenth A m endm ents ofthe Constitution ofthe U nited States,enforceable through
42 U .S.C. 1983.T his Court has jurisdiction to issue a declaratory judgm ent pursuant to 28
10.
28 U .S.C. 1391(b) and R ule 3.01 of the L ocalCivilR ules for the U .S.D istrict Court,D istrict
ofSouth Carolina.
FA CT S
11.
w ages,hours and w orking conditions of its m em bers,seeks to obtain job security and seeks
redress for w orkplace violations through grievance handling and the filing of unfair labor
12.
em ployees in the aerospace industry w orking w ithin the state of South C arolina,including,
NLRB-FOIA-00008300
Charleston.T he B oeing Com pany ("B oeing") fully acquired the V ought facility in July of 2009.
Septem ber of 2009 to decertify the union at B oeing's N orth C harleston plant.T he IA M A W
continues to be active in advocating for better w orking conditions and organizing w orkers atthe
form er V ought facility and other facilities in South C arolina,including those operated by
B oeing.
13.
Carolina,for better w orking conditions and for their organizing in labor unions.Italso assists its
Charleston.
14.
associates,defendantH aley announced and has established,m aintained and enforced the State's
policy and practice to suppress and to actively discourage and oppose w orkers'efforts to join a
union or support unions.H aley announced this state policy hostile to unions and union activity
in South C arolina because of the view points held and expressed by unions and w orkers
15.
In order to carry out the State's anti-union policy announced and established by
H aley,she further announced that the stated policy w ould be carried out through the South
NLRB-FOIA-00008301
16.
IA M A W particular,w ith hostile state action by the D epartm entofLLR ,and thatthe D epartm ent
17.
U pon inform ation and belief,by this statem ent,D efendantH aley w as referring to
her plans to thw art any efforts by plaintiff IA M A W to organize the form erly-unionized
em ployees at the B oeing plant and new w orkers added to the plant as a result of B oeing's
18.
Further,to carry out the State's anti-union policy announced and established by
D efendant H aley,she announced that the person she w as appointing as the head of the
T em pleton.D efendant H aley stated that she selected D efendant T em pleton to help her in
carrying out the state anti-union policy,and that she selected D efendant T em pleton to head the
.._
background m ade her w ell-suited to im plem entthe state policy offighting unions.
19.
A m ong the occasions on w hich D efendant H aley has announced this state anti-
union policy w as a press conference she held on D ecem ber 8,2010.A m ong the statem ents she
L L R is going to have a large role over the nextcouple ofyears,one being w ith the
unions,and thatis the factthatw e think w e are going to have a big union fight,as
w e go forw ard,w ith B oeing,and you are right now looking at the only fem ale in
the nation that has fought the largest U A W push that w e've been through,and so
she is ready for that,she is ready for the challenge,she know s w hat it takes to
cannotlose.
***
NLRB-FOIA-00008302
20.
H aley's press conference to announce her choice of D efendant T em pleton for L L R w hich w as
H aley's statem ents w ere w idely reported in the m edia.T rue and correct copies of published
21.
Follow ing the press conference,the D epartm ent of L L R posted a release on its
avoidance" experience.T he new s release posted on the State's w ebsite read in part:
T em pleton has been involved in union avoidance for the past 14 years.She has
T eam sters.In fact,her first cam paign w as the m ostnotorious U A W cam paign in
throughout the country on the E m ployee Free C hoice A ct.In addition to her
experience w ith the larger and older labor unions,she has specific know ledge
22.
state policy she had announced and established by nom inating D efendant T em pleton to be
23.
In addition to the w ebsite statem ent confirm ing that D efendant T em pleton w as
selected by D efendantH aley to help the D epartm entofLLR carry outthe G overnor's stated anti-
union policy,D efendant T em pleton on inform ation and belief also m ade statem ents at her
confirm ation hearing thatw ere consistentw ith D efendantH aley's threats againstunions.
24.
D efendants' statem ents and actions are no idle threats or m ere rhetoric.
D efendant H aley,D efendant T em pleton,and the D epartm ent of L L R have enorm ous pow er to
NLRB-FOIA-00008303
w ield the fullw eightofstate,law and the state governm entagainstplaintiffs,their m em bers and
associates.
25.
has broad authority to im plem ent and direct state policy and law .T hat authority includes the
pow er to carry outher threats using the punitive m achinery ofthe state governm entto carry out
26.
D efendant T em pleton likew ise has broad authority to im plem ent state policy and
law .A s D irector of L L R ,she is responsible for adm inistering and enforcing the state right-to-
w ork law and num erous other state labor and em ploym entlaw s and regulations thatcan directly
or indirectly affectw orkers'choice aboutw hether to join or supporta labor union.H er authority
extends to m ajor law enforcem entfunctions including entering w ork sites,and investigating and
27.
aforesaid pow ers of the D efendants and the D epartm ent of L L R are and w illbe utilized to
D efendant H aley has com m itted the State to w ielding its regulatory,investigative and
enforcem ent authority against speech and associationalactivities favoring unions carried out by
28.
em ployers,and B oeing in particular,in labor organizing cam paigns and labor disputes.
D efendant H aley declared a governm ental policy to refrain from neutrality as to labor
m anagem ent relations in the state of South Carolina.She declared a governm entalpolicy to
deliberately refuse to protectthe rights ofw orkers to join or supportunions as required by state
NLRB-FOIA-00008304
and federallaw .D efendantH aley declared and w illpursue a governm entalpolicy thatthreatens
through
adverse governm ent action and heightened scrutiny ofthe w orkplace and oforganizing
enforcem ent,w ould be,and is coercive and intim idating to the ordinary w orker of reasonable
29.
30.
extrem e.T he D efendants'actions,including the explicit and w ell-publicized threats and the
announcem entofthe reasons for T em pleton's appointm ent,w ould have,and have had a chilling
effecton constitutionally and statutorily protected speech and associationalactivity ofem ployees
31.
L L R and T em pleton w illfight the IA M A W at B oeing is a public announcem ent of state policy
that has and w illviolate the rights of em ployees at B oeing plants,and elsew here in South
activity.
NLRB-FOIA-00008305
32.
m em bers and potentialm em bers and allies of Plaintiffs and other labor unions everyw here
w ithin the state of South Carolina.E m ployees of reasonable firm ness have been increasingly
reluctant to talk to and m eet w ith each other or w ith union representatives about w orking
conditions and union association.T his has proved to be the case in IA M A W 's organizing efforts
at B oeing,its organizing efforts w ith regard to em ployees of com panies other than B oeing,and
w ith South Carolina A FL -CIO m em ber-unions other than IA M A W w ho have been seeking to
m eet w ith or organize w orkers in this state.In short,D efendants' conduct has had the
firm ness.
32.
counteract the anti-union policies and practices H aley and T em pleton have effectuated and w ill
harm to both the IA M A W and the South C arolina A FL -C IO ,and econom ic harm to them
33.
speech and associationalactivities of the Plaintiffs,their m em bers and potentialm em bers is not
34.
privileges and im m unities protected by the N LR A and the Firstand Fourteenth A m endm ents.
NLRB-FOIA-00008306
FIR ST CL A IM FO R R E L IE F
35.
36.
sector labor-m anagem ent relations in the U nited States.Section 7 of the N L R A ,29 U .S.C.
other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other m utualaid or
protection,and also the rightto refrain from any or allsuch activities.In Section 1 ofthe N L R A ,
nationalpolicy:
It is declared to be the policy of the U nited States to elim inate the causes of
certain substantialobstructions to the free flow of com m erce and to m itigate and
elim inate these obstructions w hen they have occurred by encouraging the practice
T hese federalstatutes preem pt the anti-union and anti-w orker policy established by D efendants
described above.
37.
protects em ployee and em ployer rights to resort to peacefulm eans of pressure on each other to
actions threaten the IA M A W ,the South Carolina A FL-CIO and its affiliates,and union m em bers
and potentialm em bers by inform ing them thatD efendants w illuse their public offices and state
resources,under color of state law ,to take hostile governm entalaction and heightened scrutiny
10
NLRB-FOIA-00008307
38.
B y publicly declaring the State of South C arolina's policy and plan to oppose
w orkers'efforts to organize unions and to advocate for better term s and conditions of w ork in
association w ith other w orkers,and by appointing T em pleton as the L L R D irector to help her
"fight the unions," D efendants H aley and T em pleton are acting under color of state law to
interfere w ith rights of unions,union m em bers and potentialunion m em bers guaranteed by the
39.
above occurred under color of state law and has caused and is causing the Plaintiffs and their
m em bers and potentialm em bers to be deprived of their rights,privileges and im m unities secured
by the N LR A .
SE CO N D CL A IM FO R R E L IE F
(V iolation of First A m endm ent of the.U .S.Constitution Free Speech and A ssociation)
40.
41.
Em ployees and their associations enjoy protection from state infringem entof their
FirstA m endm entrights to associate for m utualaid and protection and to prom ote unionization,
42.
aboutthe advantages and disadvantages of form ing or joining a labor organization are allform s
of association and speech entitled to protection .under the Firstand Fourteenth A m endm ents of
43.
speech and association activities thatfavor unions is threatening,coercive and intim idating to
11
NLRB-FOIA-00008308
em ployed by B oeing,w ho w ish to associate together as a union and w ho w ish to advocate for
44.
and free association rights of a reasonable em ployee of ordinary firm ness,including B oeing
45.
free speech and association rights guaranteed by the First A m endm ent to the U nited States
chilled reasonably firm em ployees'w illingness to assert their rights to organize,to bargain
collectively,and to discuss and associate w ith one another and w ith union organizers abouttheir
46.
m em bers protected by the FirstA m endm entoccurred under color of state law and has caused,
and is causing,the Plaintiffs and their m em bers and potentialm em bers to be deprived of their
T H IR D CL A IM FO R R E L IE F
47.
48.
rights to speak in favor of unions and to associate together in unions and in supportof unions.
B oeing C om pany and because of its efforts to organize w orkers in South C arolina.D efendants
12
NLRB-FOIA-00008309
constituentunions,including atB oeing,and because of its staunch supportfor the organizing and
49.
as setforth above occurred and is occurring under color of state law and has caused the Plaintiffs
and their m em bers and potentialm em bers to be deprived of their liberties protected by the First
FO U R T H CL A IM FO R R E L IE F
50.
51.
w hich concern them selves w ith w ages,hours and w orking conditions.D efendants intentionally
established a policy of hostility to and retaliation for the speech and associationalactivities of the
Plaintiffs and their m em bers because of the view pointthey espouse.O ther sim ilar associations
and businesses w hich engage in speech and associationalactivities concerning w ages,hours and
w orking conditions existin South C arolina.T hose associations and businesses have notbeen
targeted for hostile treatm entas a m atter of South C arolina's policy and practice.
52.
is occurring under color of state law and has caused the Plaintiffs and their m em bers and
potential m em bers to be deprived of their right to equal protection under the Fourteenth
A m endm ent.
13
NLRB-FOIA-00008310
FIFT H CL A IM FO R R E L IE F
53.
54.
Process Clause prevents governm entofficials from abusing their pow er,or em ploying itas an
instrum entofoppression.
55.
A prim ary purpose ofthe LLR D irector's job is to enforce state labor statutes such
as the right-to-w ork law .U nder S.C.Code 41-7-75,D efendant T em pleton "shall" ensure
com pliance w ith the law .This law prohibits persons from "com pel[ling]any person to...refrain
from joining or supporting any labor organization." S.C.Code 41-7-70.This statute defines a
56.
D efendants'actions alleged herein,taken under color ofstate law ,intim idate and
coerce w orkers so that they are com pelled to refrain from joining or supporting labor
organizations.These actions deny the liberty ofSouth Carolina w orkers w ithoutdue process.
D efendants'actions have and w illcontinue to deprive South Carolina w orkers oftheir liberty to
join and/or supportunions as m andated in South Carolina's R ightTo W ork A ct,S.C.Code 41-,
7-10 and 41-7-70,a liberty interest protected by the Fourteenth A m endm ent to the U nited
States Constitution.
IR R E PA R A B L E H A R M
57.
the Plaintiffs,Plaintiffs m em bers and potentialm em bers are suffering irreparable harm in
14
NLRB-FOIA-00008311
58.
Plaintiffs have no adequate rem edy atlaw for the violations alleged herein.
R E Q U E ST FO R R E L IE F
59.
W H ER EFO R E,Plaintiffs pray thatthis Courtaw ard the follow ing relief:
1.
A judgm ent pursuant to 28 U .S.C. 2201 and 2202 declaring that the policies,
through the agencies ofstate governm ent,and retaliation againstunions because oftheir
unions violate the Firstand Fourteenth A m endm ents to the U nited States Constitution,
statutory rights under the N LR A ,and deprive the Plaintiffs and union-represented and
and ofliberty w ithoutdue process in violation ofthe Fourteenth A m endm entto the U .S.
Constitution.
2.
A n order enjoining D efendants from interfering in any m anner w ith the exercise
3.
a.
m utualaid or protection;
b.
c.
m anagem entrelations betw een em ployers,w orkers and unions w ithin the
15.
NLRB-FOIA-00008312
d.
4.
1988(b).
5.
s/Arrnand Derfner
A rm and D erfner
Charleston,S.C.29402
843-723-9804
843-696-7935 cell
aderfnera,daw legal.com
(301) 967-4500
ccorsoncf4iam aw .org
Seattle,W A 98119-3971
barnard@ workerlaw.corn
16
NLRB-FOIA-00008313
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Attachments:
Estep, Susan C.
Kobe, James
OALIST.doc
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008314
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008315
Fn
Docket No.
Case Name
Date Filed
Overage
Category
non-responsive
6.
19-CA-32431
3/26/10
Boeing Company
present evidence.
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008316
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008317
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008318
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008319
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Kobe, James
Estep, Susan C.
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008
NLRB-FOIA-00008320
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008321
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008322
Non-responsive
36. 19-CA-
32811)
Boeing Company
issued on 8/31/10.
11/1/10
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008323
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008324
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008325
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008326
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008327
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Kobe, James
Estep, Susan C.
Jim Kobe
ARD, Region 19
206-220-6314
NLRB-FOIA-00008328
1.
2.
3.
Non-responsive
4.
NLRB-FOIA-00008329
Fn
Docket No.
Case Name
Date Filed
Overage
Category
5.
Non-responsive
Page 2
NLRB-FOIA-00008330
Fn
Docket No.
Case Name
Date Filed
Overage
Category
6.
Non-responsive
7.
Page 3
NLRB-FOIA-00008331
Fn
Docket No.
Case Name
Date Filed
Overage
Category
Non-responsive
8.
9.
19-CA-32811)
Boeing Company
11/1/10
Non-responsive
10.
Page 4
NLRB-FOIA-00008332
Fn
Docket No.
Case Name
Date Filed
Overage
Category
11.
12.
Non-responsive
13.
14.
Page 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008333
Fn
Docket No.
Case Name
Date Filed
Overage
Category
15.
16.
Non-responsive
17.
18.
19.
Page 6
NLRB-FOIA-00008334
Fn
Docket No.
Case Name
Date Filed
Overage
Category
20.
Non-responsive
21.
Page 7
NLRB-FOIA-00008335
Microsoft Outlook
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
image001.jpg
NLRB-FOIA-00008336
NLRB-FOIA-00008337
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Solomon, Lafe E.
Exemption 5
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Barry, are you available? If so, please bring Ellen and Jayme and others, if you deem it appropriate and they are
available.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00008338
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
NLRB-FOIA-00008339
Microsoft Outlook
Mattina, Celeste J.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 5
--------------------------
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Barry, are you available? If so, please bring Ellen and Jayme and others, if you deem it appropriate and they are
available.
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008340
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
NLRB-FOIA-00008341
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Contee, Ernestine R.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008342
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008343
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008344
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Contee, Ernestine R.
Fw:
--------------------------
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: RE:
With my section.
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008345
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008346
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008347
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008348
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008349
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008350
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008351
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008352
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Abruzzo, Jennifer; Farrell, Ellen; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
Sophir, Jayme
RE:
To: Farrell, Ellen; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
Subject: Re:
--------------------------
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
Subject: RE:
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: FW:
See attached for a modification of the second full paragraph on p.3 to include a reference to
Exemption 5
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008353
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
Attached is the whole draft response, including Richs 2 cents and Joses response to question 2.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008354
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008355
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008356
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen
klineandroeresponse.doc
While Ellen was sending her edits, I was about to send mine, so I incorporated hers into this one. My edits primarily deal
with
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008357
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008358
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008359
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008360
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008361
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008362
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008363
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008364
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008365
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008366
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Solomon, Lafe E.
Lafe,
Please find attached a draft response to the Issa request to participate in the South Carolina hearing. Also, we should
gather today to talk about the meeting with Mr. Kline. I am available at your convenience.
Thank you,
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00008367
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00008368
Exemption 5 deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00008369
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Thank you, Nancy. Attached please find a few minor suggestions to Nancys edits. I tried to incorporate Jennifers
Exemption 5
necessary?
Thanks!
Heres my attemptSorry I didnt put the changes in track, it got too confusing.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00008370
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008371
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008372
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
MotonBostick, Sylvia
Mattina, Celeste J.
NLRB-FOIA-00008373
NLRB-FOIA-00008374
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008375
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008376
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008377
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008378
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Cleeland, Nancy
openingIssa (2).doc
NLRB-FOIA-00008379
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008380
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008381
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008382
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008383
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008384
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008385
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
'lbkiernan@zuckerman.com'
'Schilling, Judith M.'; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.;
Ferguson, John H.
openingIssa615.doc
Leslie,
Take care,
Jennifer
NLRB-FOIA-00008386
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008387
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008388
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008389
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008390
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008391
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008392
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008393
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
openingIssa615short.doc
Heres a shortened draft version for Lafe to read at the hearing. Nancy, do you have edits to make it more lay person
friendly?
Hi Jennifer, can I please be on the distribution list for these drafts? Thank you.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.; Abruzzo, Jennifer
Cc: lbkiernan@zuckerman.com
To: 'lbkiernan@zuckerman.com'
Cc: 'Schilling, Judith M.'; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.
Leslie,
Take care,
Jennifer
NLRB-FOIA-00008394
NLRB-FOIA-00008395
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008396
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008397
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008398
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008399
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008400
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008401
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
openingIssa615short.doc
I made the same change here. I agree with Jen, the oral version should be lay person
friendly. Nancy, your input would be great. I will try to play with this also later this
afternoon.
Heres a shortened draft version for Lafe to read at the hearing. Nancy, do you have edits to make it more lay person
friendly?
Hi Jennifer, can I please be on the distribution list for these drafts? Thank you.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.; Abruzzo, Jennifer
Cc: lbkiernan@zuckerman.com
To: 'lbkiernan@zuckerman.com'
NLRB-FOIA-00008402
Cc: 'Schilling, Judith M.'; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.
Leslie,
Take care,
Jennifer
NLRB-FOIA-00008403
deliberative - Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008404
deliberative - Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008405
deliberative - Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008406
deliberative - Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008407
deliberative - Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008408
deliberative - Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008409
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
A...
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Heres a shortened draft version for Lafe to read at the hearing. Nancy, do you have edits to make it more lay person
friendly?
Hi Jennifer, can I please be on the distribution list for these drafts? Thank you.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Garza, Jose; Cleeland, Nancy; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.; Abruzzo, Jennifer
Cc: lbkiernan@zuckerman.com
NLRB-FOIA-00008410
deliberative - Exemption 5
To: 'lbkiernan@zuckerman.com'
Cc: 'Schilling, Judith M.'; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.
Leslie,
Take care,
Jennifer
NLRB-FOIA-00008411
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Ricci, Jane
3306913_2.DOC.doc
NLRB-FOIA-00008412
NLRB-FOIA-00008413
NLRB-FOIA-00008414
NLRB-FOIA-00008415
NLRB-FOIA-00008416
NLRB-FOIA-00008417
NLRB-FOIA-00008418
NLRB-FOIA-00008419
NLRB-FOIA-00008420
Microsoft Outlook
non-responsive
Per Regional Director Ahearns instructions, attached is a memo requesting guidance in the above case.
Tracking:
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008421
Read
Recipient
Fetterolf, Laura B.
Platt, Nancy
NLRB-FOIA-00008422
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008423
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008424
Microsoft Outlook
Exemption 5
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Moskowitz,
Cc: Pomerantz, Anne; Anzalone, Mara-Louise; Finch, Peter G.; Harvey, Rachel
My bad; please ignore the attachment; I only intended to transmit the message below and the attachment with respect to
Rich
a, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Sophir, Jayme
Cc: Pomerantz, Anne; Anzalone, Mara-Louise; Finch, Peter G.; Harvey, Rachel
Exemption 5
Rich
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008425
Exemption 5
9 1 5 Se co n d A ve n u e
T e l.: 2 0 6 .2 2 0 .6 2 85
Fax : 2 0 6 .2 2 0 .6 30 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008426
Microsoft Outlook
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Sophir, Jayme
Cc: Pomerantz, Anne; Anzalone, Mara-Louise; Finch, Peter G.; Harvey, Rachel
Exemption 5
In number 1,
Best regards,
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00008427
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008428
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008429
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008430
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008431
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008432
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008433
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008434
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ferguson, John H.
If it suits you,
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008435
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008436
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008437
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008438
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008439
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008440
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008441
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008442
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008443
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008444
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008445
Microsoft Outlook
non-responsive
If it suits you,
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008446
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008447
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008448
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008449
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008450
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008451
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008452
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008453
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008454
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008455
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008456
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.;
Issa response
NLRB-FOIA-00008457
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008458
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008459
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008460
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008461
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008462
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008463
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008464
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Moskowitz, Eric G.
Simms, Abby; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson,
FW : Issa response
Eric
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Tracking:
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008465
Recipient
Read
Simms, Abby
Mattina, Celeste J.
Garza, Jose
Kearney, Barry J.
Farrell, Ellen
Ferguson, John H.
Ahearn, Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00008466
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008467
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008468
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008469
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008470
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008471
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008472
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008473
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Moskowitz, Eric G.
FW : Issa response
Newest version
Eric
To: Simms, Abby; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Eric
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00008474
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008475
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008476
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008477
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008478
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008479
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008480
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008481
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Moskowitz, Eric G.
Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen;
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Tracking:
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008482
Read
Recipient
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.
Garza, Jose
Kearney, Barry J.
Farrell, Ellen
Ferguson, John H.
Ahearn, Richard L.
Simms, Abby
Bandini, Laura E.
Eskenazi, Mark G.
NLRB-FOIA-00008483
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008484
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008485
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008486
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008487
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008488
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008489
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008490
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008491
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008492
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008493
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008494
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008495
Microsoft Outlook
Mattina, Celeste J.
Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz,
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 5
--------------------------
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
Non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00008496
NLRB-FOIA-00008497
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Moskowitz, Eric G.
Ferguson, John H.
Importance:
High
John: this is my reaction to Jennifers edit/addition. Please let me know what you think before I send it to
everyone
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008498
Non-responsive
Eric Moskowitz
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
Non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008499
Nonresponsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Tracking:
3
NLRB-FOIA-00008500
Recipient
Read
Ferguson, John H.
NLRB-FOIA-00008501
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson,
Pomerantz, Anne
A couple suggestions:
Exemption 5
Rich
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Exemption 5
Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008502
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
. Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00008503
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme;
Pomerantz, Anne
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric
G.
A couple suggestions:
Exemption 5
Rich
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Exemption 5
Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008504
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
. Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00008505
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ferguson, John H.
Moskowitz, Eric G.
Issa response
Importance:
High
NLRB-FOIA-00008506
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008507
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008508
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008509
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008510
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008511
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008512
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008513
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Moskowitz, Eric G.
Ferguson, John H.
FW : Issa response
Importance:
High
non-responsive
Eric Moskowitz
202-273-2931
Importance: High
NLRB-FOIA-00008514
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008515
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008516
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008517
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008518
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008519
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008520
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008521
Microsoft Outlook
Farrell, Ellen
Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Sophir, Jayme;
Pomerantz, Anne
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.;
Moskowitz, Eric G.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric
G.
A couple suggestions:
Exemption 5
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00008522
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Exemption 5
Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008523
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00008524
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Re
Moskowitz, Eric G.
Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson,
section
non-responsive
Eric Moskowitz
202-273-2931
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Exemption 5
Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008525
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Tracking:
2
NLRB-FOIA-00008526
Recipient
Read
Garza, Jose
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.
Farrell, Ellen
Sophir, Jayme
Ferguson, John H.
Ahearn, Richard L.
Kearney, Barry J.
NLRB-FOIA-00008527
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008528
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008529
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008530
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008531
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008532
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008533
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008534
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ferguson, John H.
Moskowitz, Eric G.
FW : Issa response
Anne being a special lit alum commented on our section as well and made some suggestions below, some of which we
have already addressed but there are others that may be worth considering
To: Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008535
non-responsive
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.;
Moskowitz, Eric G.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric
G.
A couple suggestions:
Exemption 5
Rich
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Exemption 5
Otherwise, I think
NLRB-FOIA-00008536
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
NLRB-FOIA-00008537
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00008538
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ferguson, John H.
Moskowitz, Eric G.
FW : Issa response
Exemption 5
Anne being a special lit alum commented on our section as well and made some suggestions below, some of which we
have already addressed but there are others that may be worth considering
To: Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008539
non-responsive
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.;
Moskowitz, Eric G.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric
G.
A couple suggestions:
Exemption 5
Rich
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
2
NLRB-FOIA-00008540
Richard L.
Exemption 5
this letter is in pretty good shape.
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
. Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008541
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00008542
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Moskowitz, Eric G.
FW : Issa response
fyi
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn, Richard
Re
section
Non-responsive
Eric Moskowitz
202-273-2931
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Exemption 5
. Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00008543
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
Non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00008544
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008545
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008546
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008547
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008548
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008549
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008550
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008551
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Omberg, Bob
Katz, Judy
Boeing 19-CA-32431
Hi Rich & Anne I just left a message for Rich but am also writing this in case hes out in advance of the 2:00 (11:00
PDT) GC agenda this afternoon on the 787 work in South Carolina case, at which
Exemption 5
Thanks
Bob
Tracking:
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008552
Read
Recipient
Ahearn, Richard L.
Pomerantz, Anne
Katz, Judy
NLRB-FOIA-00008553
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
W illen, Debra L
Conner, the lead negotiator for Boeing, is having a dinner meeting with the IAM in Chicago Monday night. In order to
avoid a red eye into W ashington for the Tuesday meeting the meeting is being moved to Wednesday at 10. We will
receive their position paper mid day Tuesday. Look for it. Email to me, Ahearn, Lafe and Celeste. W e will discuss on the
13th
NLRB-FOIA-00008554
M s. W illen,
In response to your em ailto D ave C am pbell, the follow ing people w illbe attending the m eeting
P lease let us knoW if there is any m ore inform ation you need.
S incerely,
S eattle, W A 98119
206-285
NLRB-FOIA-00008555
Pie$ealitenties
ly D o m in ic G a te s
1 O ctober 20 09, B o eing p assed o ver E vere tt to pick N orth C ha rleston, S .C ., for a second 787 final asse m bly line.
he assem bly b uilding is n ow nea ring com p le tion an d B oeing w ill b e g in co n stru ctio n o f a jet-de livery cente r beside it in the com ing
veeks.
3oe ing says the fina l assem bly lin e w ill be productio n-ready b y July an d that the first S .C .-assem b led D ream lin er w ill be d elivered to
1 o ne build ing, B o eing curre ntly fabrica tes the rear fuse lage o f every 7 87. In anothe r, it asS e m bles the entire m id fuselag e section .
3oe ing C ha rle ston ha s abou t 3,00 0 em ployeeS an d that's set to rise to 6,400 by 20 16 w hen produ ction is ram p ed up .
fte r th e d e cisio n la st ye a r, D o u g K ig h t, th e n a B o e in g vice p re sid e n t w h o le d n e g o tia tio n s w ith th e In te rn a tio n a l A sso cia tio n o f
ilachin ists (IA M ) un io n, said B oeing w ill produce seven planes a m onth in E vere tt and three a m onth in C harlesto n by 20 13.
iow eve r, if dem a nd for the jet h olds an d produ ction at C harlesto n can b e sm oothed, it's likely th at the rate w ou ld be p ushed higher tc
NLRB-FOIA-00008556
A L P 'V 1 6 ,1 1 .1 1 .
M b ./ J U L & j
1 1
IV
A . U . a L L o s ,U .4.L 3 a . v ..
Ih r
by T H E A S S O C IA T E D P R E S S
January 18,2011
te xt size A
A A
a g a in o n T u e sd a y, m e a n in g th a t th e so o n e st it w ill
arrive is July.
T h e co m p a n y h a d m o st re ce n tly sa id th a t
ye a rs la te , bu t a n e le ctrica l fire o n a p la n e in
h a s be e n w id e ly a n ticip a te d .
E nlarge
a n d th e e n d o f S e p te m be r. T h e n e w sch e d u le h a s
be e n p a d d e d in th e e ve n t th a t a n yth in g e lse g o e s
w ro n g , th e co m p a n y sa id .
T h e co m p a n y sa id it w ill p ro vid e m o re in fo rm a tio n o n its fin a n cia l fo re ca st a n d d e live rie s d u rin g its
R elated N P R S tories
NLRB-FOIA-00008557
YripSeatiten ties
ly D o m in ic G a te s
;e a ttle T im e s a e ro sp a ce re p o rte r
ks B o e in g p re p a re s to a n n o u n ce ye t a n o th e r d e la y fo r th e 7 8 7 D re a m lin e r 5 0 a t
n o n th th a t h a s g ro u n d e d th e te st p la n e s.
!n gin e, h ave raise d red fla gs w ith avia tio n reg ula tors.
1/4 to p
ne t w ithou t fu rther proo f o f the plan e's reliab ility, it w on 't b e certified to fly th e long
tlean w hile, on the p ro duction side, o ne vete ran em p lo yee on the 7 87 said he's
M IK E S IE G E L / T H E S E A T T LE T IM E
'o deliver the 20 D re am liners b uilt since the six fligh t-test pla nes, m e chanics w ill
leavy conden sation dripping in side the jet's com posite plastic fuselage . Y et th at
ssue is piddling com pare d w ith th e m ajor fla w s that h ave bro ught a w ave of
.uccessive delays.
\\
\ \ \
M IK E S IE G E L / T H E S E A T T LE T IM E
V ith the D rea m lin er nea rly three ye ars overd ue a'" and a postpo nem ent of the
nid-F e bruary ta rg et for first delivery e xpected to be annou nced b y C hristm as 5 "
h e h e a d o f th e 7 8 7 p ro g ra m , S co tt F a n ch e r, co n ce d e d in a n in te rvie w th is p a st
veek that h e and his team have "a to ugh job in front of us."
M IK E S IE G E L / T H E S E A T T LE T IM E
us."
:o sts so a rin g
NLRB-FOIA-00008558
if the program 's state w ere interview ed for this story. A llw ere granted anonym ity
-Iecause B oeing doesn't perm it em ployees to speak publicly about its internal
,
roblem s.
3oeing has bet its future on the 787, w hich m ade its m aiden flight one year ago.
he com pany aim ed to reduce the cost and risk by O utsourcing an unprecedented
:'s the first new B oeing jet in m ore than 15 years, and the first airliner built largely
irders.
R IC A R D O S A N I O S / A l
'et the 787 has run into m ore trouble than any previous B oeing jet.
he com pany's originalinternaltarget for its ow n developm ent costs w as $5 billion. B ut w ith yet another delay, severalW allS treet
inalysts .estim ate that fixing the litany of m anufacturing problem s, plus paying penalties to suppliers and airlines, has piled on an
he 20 built but incom plete D ream liners sitting in E verett are em blem atic of allthat has gone w rong.
hey are so far from done that the totalnum ber of unfinished jobs exceeds 105,000.
;ounting further rew ork planned after som e of the jets are flow n to S an A ntonio, T exas, for refurbishm ent before delivery, the tally of
S om e jobs take a day, som e take w eeks," said a w orker dealing w ith the backlog.
3oeing is rew orking six partly finished jets at a tim e, tw o of them in an em pty bay inside the factory, tw o in a hangar at the south end
)f P aine F ield, and tw o m ore on the flight line. M echanics can com plete only about 500 jobs a m onth out on the field, and perhaps
,000 jobs a m onth on those inside the factory, the person said.
'hese jets have no seats or sidew alls, and m any interior system s are m issing or incom plete. P assenger doors are m issing.
A echanics installed tem porary air-conditioning units after those fitted initially kept failing.
lorizontaltails poorly built by A lenia in Italy are stillbeing rew orked. W ith the w orkm anship on the tails varying from one plane to the
iext, m echanics have to painstakingly custom ize the fixes plane by plane.
T hat headache at least produced one piece of good 787 new s for this region. A lenia w illstillbuild 787 tails, but as B oeing ram ps up
leyond seven planes a m onth, it plans to build the additionaltails in the P uget S ound area, possibly at its parts-m anufacturing plant
)espite the attention focused on achieving the first delivery, the m anufacturing quagm ire suggests that B oeing w illbe slow to deliver
H op p in g arou n d "
V ith its parked D ream liners m any m onths from com pletion, F ancher said B oeing is likely to skip over earlier planes that need m ore
vork and m ove up the delivery of som e later-built, m ore com pleted jets.
Y ou m ay see us hopping around a bit," he said, adding that it's a m atter of balancing the m ost efficient w ay to finish the w ork w ith thr
'he w orker dealing w ith the backlog puts it differently: "T hey've dug a hole so deep, they have no choice but to go around it and leavi
le hole there."
)n B oeing's 747, 767 and 737N G program s, parts shortages and late redesigns on early planes also stacked up dozens of
n o , + Is e . P in k +
In r .
D . if
+ h e .
la e n e L e s e 1 + k r .,
v Ii4 4 .....
r.lA rs a n ie ie . e s to e s e
IN ie g e tiC in n r s f v s .
rs i
NLRB-FOIA-00008559
A eanw -hile, the flight tests have brought new design problem s to light.
kfter runw ay tests in R osw ell, N .M ., in S eptem ber, four R olls-R oyce engines had to be sw apped out from the flight-test airplanes.
1ccording to a person fam iliar w ith the problem , m echanics discovered cracking of sm allblades called airfoils in one of the engine's
om pressors.
5E and R olls both provide 787 engines, but the R olls engine w illpow er M ost of the early D ream liners.
separate and m ore serious incident occurred a m onth earlier, W hen a R olls engine blew up on a ground test stand in E ngland,
not her person w ith know ledge of that event said an investigation afterw ard revealed that one of the engine shafts can, under certain
:onditions, turn too fast. T hat m ay not have caused the blow up, but it is out of com pliance w ith F A A regulations.
tolls is testing hardw are and softw are changes to solve the problem , though it hasn't w on approvalfrom the regulatory agencies.
;om pany spokesm an Josh R osenstock said R olls is convinced the engine w illpass m uster w ith the F A A in tim e for B oeing's delivery
chedule.
iow ever, the engine m odifications, plus an electricalsystem redesign needed as a result of the in-flight fire last m onth, w illadd to thE
:A A issu es
V orse, the engine and electricalissues have also raised crucialquestions late in the program about the plane's reliability, potentially
E arlier this m onth, John H ickey, the F A A 's deputy associate adm inistrator for aviation safety, visited S eattle and w arned 787
!xecutives that in the current state of the program , the jet cannot be certified for long-distance transocean and transpolar flights,
loeing designed and m arketed the 787 as an ultra-long-range jet, and its custom ers are counting on that capability from the m om ent
3ut the 787 w ouldn't be allow ed to fly m ore than 60 m inutes from the nearest airport w ithout the certification know n as E T O P S , for
E xtended-range T w in-engine O perationalP erform ance S tandards. T hat w ould drastically curtailthe use of the jet for m any airlines,
lickey, a form er B oeing engineer, put B oeing on notice that to get an early E T O P S rating the com pany w illhave to do m ore to
lem onstrate the plane's reliability, including specifically the reliability of the engine and electricalsystem s.
keam liner chief F ancher confirm ed the recent m eeting w ith the F A A over E T O P S and acknow ledged that engine and electrical
ystem reliability w ere discussed. B ut he said that such m eetings about the F A A 's certification requirem ents are "typical," and that
Iso draw ing separate F A A scrutiny is repeated poor-quality w orkm anship in the 787 fueltank, including issues w ith fasteners, said
hat problem reaches back into the 787 supply pipeline, w hich continues to stutter.
;u p p liers go slow
N ovem ber, for the fourth tim e this year, B oeing stopped m oving planes forw ard on its finalassem bly line and halted deliveries of
le m ajor sections to E verett. Just one airplane had com e off the line since the previous line stoppage in O ctober.
'ancher said the line halts are part of his "balancing act" to allow som e suppliers to catch up w ith others and to slow the flow onto
'eine F ield of new planes needing to have the latest fixes applied.
NLRB-FOIA-00008560
ancher cited "solid progress" at B oeing C harleston, w hich m akes the 787's rear end. H e conceded that A lenia of Italy "definitely
em ains a challenge."
he other partners and the final-assem bly team in E verett are "com ing dow n the learning curve nicely," he said.
;pirit A eroS ystem s of W ichita, K an., w hich m akes the D ream liner's forw ard section, has reassigned m ost of its 787 w ork force until
fork picks up again. A nd though in recent years B oeing's 787 em ployees have w orked through m ost of the C hristm as holidays to
:atch up, a w orker at B oeing C harleston said that plant this year w illlargely shut dow n its production lines.
he latest delay w illat least give engineers m ore tim e to test design fixes, including som e for less consequentialtroubles, not
incom m on on new jets, such as the m addening drip, drip, drip of "rain in the plane." O n 787 flight tests, drip trays padded w ith
'ancher said "a good design fix" to dehum idify the interior is being installed and w illbe tested w hen the D ream liners resum e flying.
:m ployees w orking on the 787 com plain about insufficient oversight of suppliers and a m anagem ent system that the senior engineer
T his program is not like anything w e've seen," said the veteran 787 em ployee. "It's a screw ed-up m ess."
'et.F ancher said the feedback he receives is that em ployees are "proud to be part of an adventure like this."
T his is a great airplane. It w illdeliver on the prom ises," F ancher said. "O ur job is to get it over the goalline."
NLRB-FOIA-00008561
...
W dstlaw .
Page 1
C .D .C alifornia.
B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D ,Petitioner,
V.
Q U A D R T E C H C O R PO R A T IO N ,R espondent.
N o.C V 00-11039 C M M A N X .
M otion granted.
W est H eadnotes
ceedings
C ases
am ended, 29 U .S .C .A . 160(j).
ceedings
U .S .C .A . 158(a)(1, 3).
158(a)(3).
NLRB-FOIA-00008562
Page 2 -
ing
29 U .S.C .A . 158(a)(5).
ceedings
R elief
I 58(a)(5).
C A ,for respondent.
O R D E R G R A N T IN G PR E L IM IN A R Y IN JU N C -
T IO N
M O R E N O ,D istrictJudge.
I. B ackground
pute.
NLRB-FOIA-00008563
Page 3
C ir.1998).
C A -34084.
proper.
II.Standard
w ill not succeed because the B oard takes too long ...
NLRB-FOIA-00008564
Page 4
public interest[.]"
Johnson v. C alifornia
ted).
T his C ourt w ill not sim ply sign off on the B oard's
theory." Id.
III. A nalysis
A . The M erits
123 T he N L R B
R elocate
tion.FI
L
3A n em ployer m ay not relocate a plant in or-
(N .D .N .Y .1998).
zation ..."
tively."
M icroim age D isplay D iv. O f
X idex C orp.v.N LR B ,
924 F.2d 245,250
(D .C .C ir.1991).
NLRB-FOIA-00008565
Page 5
471 (1977):
FN4
U .S.C .S 556(d).
K ennedy E xh.1.
NLRB-FOIA-00008566
Page 6
that it sim ply w ill not be able to bear the com petitive
NLRB,
4 5 2 U .S . 6 6 6 , 6 8 2 , 1 0 1 S .C t. 2 5 7 3 , 6 9
perilously inadequate. .
-1-\16T he Suprem e
ted).
NLRB-FOIA-00008567
Page 7
fs_1
S ection 8(a)(5) of the N L R A , 29 U .S .C .
injury is necessary.
B. B alancing E quities
of its suffering.
*1280 C onclusion
restrained from :
U nitis:
in the A ct.
NLRB-FOIA-00008568
Page 8
collective-bargaining representative.
tive;
as their representative;
C om pany;
tive;
union support;and
(b) W ithin tw enty (20) days from the date of this or-
NLRB-FOIA-00008569
Page 9
3.T hat this case rem ain on the docket of this C ourt,
IT IS SO O R D E R ED .
C .D .C al.,2000.
EN D O F D O C U M EN T
NLRB-FOIA-00008570
or
W estlaw ,
Page 1
T hird C ircuit.
A ppellant.
V.
N o.97-7542.
A rgued M ay 21,1998.
ion.
. W est H eadnotes
ceedings
C ited C ases
U .S .C .A . 160(j).
ceedings
C ases '
160(j).
ceedings
R elief
NLRB-FOIA-00008571
Page 2
160(j).
ceedings
C ases
ceedings
C ited C ases
ceedings
C ited C ases
ceedings
C ases
29 U .S .C .A . 160(j).
ceedings
C ited C ases
NLRB-FOIA-00008572
Page 3
ceedings
C ases
U .S.C .A . 160(j).
ceedings
C ases
ceedings
C ases
ceedings
ceedings
NLRB-FOIA-00008573
Page 4
U .S.C .A . 160(j).
A ppellant.
B efore: S L O V IT E R ; G R E E N B E R G and G IB -
ting by designation.
O PIN IO N O F T H E C O U R T
SL O V IT ER ,C ircuitJudge.
C ir.1984).
I.
although the exact dates are not alw ays clear.In Feb-
contract.
NLRB-FOIA-00008574
Page 5
B oard did not act on the request at that tim e.D orsey
terrible drain.
new jobs; (5) the sale of the plant w ould bring new
jobs to the region; and (6) the B oard could order D or-
proper."
ultim ate rem edial pow er." Lenape P roducts, 781 F.2d
NLRB-FOIA-00008575
Page 6
Vibra Screw ,
904 F .2d at 879. because, absent an
w ould render the B oard's ultim ate rem edial pow ers
Inc.v.N LR B ,
981 F.2d 1284 (D .C .C ir.1993) (court,
sey w ould elim inate that rem edy entirely.U nder the
court relied upon its belief that the B oard has the
land plant w as the proper rem edy for the unfair labor
sented nor has any evidence of the num ber of its for-
NLRB-FOIA-00008576
Page 7
w rongdoing em ployers").
D uring the oral argum ent counsel for the B oard ad-
102.94.
For the reasons set forth, w e w ill rem and this case
under 10(j).'
injunction.
G R E E N B E R G ,C ircuitJudge,concurring:
NLRB-FOIA-00008577
Page 8
C .A .3 (Pa.),1998.
EN D O F D O C U M EN T
NLRB-FOIA-00008578
W estam
Page 1
66 F.Supp.2d 346,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2112,161 L .R .k.M .(13N A ) 2119,137 L ab.C as.P 10,381,137 L ab.C as.P
10,387
N .D .N ew Y ork.
T IO N S B O A R D ,Petitioner,
V.
C A R R IE R C O R PO R A T IO N ,R espondent.
N o.99-C V -26.
Feb.5,1999.
M otion granted.
W est H eadnotes
ceedings
C ases
ceedings
C ases
29 U .S.C .A . 160(j).
ceedings
C ases
U .S.C .A . 160(j).
NLRB-FOIA-00008579
Page 2
66 F.Supp.2d 346,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2112,161 L .R .k.M .(B N A ) 2119,137 L ab.C as.P 10,381,137 L ab.C as.P
10,387
23 1H X II Labor R elations
ceedings
ceedings
C ases
U .S.C .A . 160(j).
ceedings
C ases
160(j).
ing
151 etseq.
C ases
151 etseq.
NLRB-FOIA-00008580
Page 3
66 F.Supp.2d 346,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2112,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2119,137 L ab.C as.P 10,381,137 L ab.C as.P
10,387
C ases
seq.
ing
seq.
ing
'1483(1)
fusal
C ited C ases
or L abor O rganizations
C ited C ases
ceedings
NLRB-FOIA-00008581
Page 4
66 F.Supp.2d 346,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2112,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2119,137 L ab.C as.P 10,381,137 L ab.C as.P
10,387
ceedings
yet com plete and thus status quo could still be pre-
160(j).
ceedings
R elief
U .S .C .A . 160(j).
ceedings
23111k1696(1) k. In G eneral.
ceedings
R elief
counsel),for Petitioner.
NLRB-FOIA-00008582
Page 5
66 F.Supp.2d 346,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2112,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2119,137 L ab.C as.P 10,381,137 L ab.C as.P
10,387
M E M O R A N D U M -D E C ISIO N A N D O R D E R
M O R D U E ,D istrictJudge.
IN T R O D U C T IO N
am icus curiae.
BA CK G RO U N D
I. The C harge
II.C om plaint
facility "by, but not lim ited to, acquiring real prop-
m ents on request.
III. P etition
NLRB-FOIA-00008583
Page 6
66 F.Supp.2d 346,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2112,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2119,137 L ab.C as.P 10,381,137 L ab.C as.P
10,387
A PPL IC A B L E L A W
R E A SO N A B L E C A U SE
NLRB-FOIA-00008584
Page 7
66 F.Supp.2d 346,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2112,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2119,137 L ab.C as.P 10,381,137 L ab.C as.P
10,387
em ploym ent.FI
'2 *351 T he union has been recognized
C arolina.
ees,nurses,draftspersons,research w ork-
finding that the union did not w aive its right to bar-
cert.denied,
502 U .S . 856, 112 S .C t. 168, 116
Technologies C orp.,
8 8 4 F .2 d 1 5 6 9 , 1 5 7 5 (2 d
C ir.1989).
v . U .S . P o stal S e m ,
8 F .3 d 8 3 2
NLRB-FOIA-00008585
Page 8
66 F.Supp.2d 346,161 L .R .R .IV I.(B N A ) 2112,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2119,137 L ab.C as.P 10,381,137 L ab.C as.P
10,387
328,n.14.
Inc.v.N .L.R.B.,
953 F.2d 594 (11th C ir.I992).Sup-
the union during the relevant tim es, and the corre-
petitioner.
JU ST A N D PR O PE R
fact.
NLRB-FOIA-00008586
Page 9
66 F.Supp.2d 346,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2112,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2119,137 L ab.C as.P 10,381,137 L ab.C as.P
10,387
com plaint.
(1991).
NLRB-FOIA-00008587
Page 10
66 F.Supp.2d 346,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2112,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2119,137 L ab.C as.P 10,381,137 L ab.C as.P
10,387
1999.
justand proper.
C ir.1997).
further
R espondent,its officers,representatives,agents,ser-
NLRB-FOIA-00008588
Page 11
66 F.Supp.2d '346,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2112,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2119,137 L ab.C as.P 10,381,137 L ab.C as.P
10,387
and
O R D ER E D thatR espondent:
IT IS SO O R D E R E D .
M O T IO N FO R R E C O N SID E R A T IO N ,M O D I-
FIC A T IO N A N D A L IM IT E D ST A Y
NLRB-FOIA-00008589
Page 12
66 F.Supp.2d 346,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2112,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2119,137 L ab.C as.P 10,381,137 L ab.C as.P
10,387
ordering paragraph.
e q u ip m e n t, in v e n to ry , ra w m a te ria ls, o r
em ployees.
NLRB-FOIA-00008590
Page 13
66 F.Supp.2d 346,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2112,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2119,137 L ab.C as.P 10,381,137 L ab.C as.P
10,387
1999 order.
solved.
NLRB-FOIA-00008591
Page 14
66 F.Supp.2d 346,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2112,161 L .R .R .M .(B N A ) 2119,137 L ab.C as.P 10,381,137 L ab.C as.P
10,387
A ccordingly,itis hereby
entirety.
IT IS SO O R D E R ED .
N .D .N .Y .,1999.
EN D O F D O C U M EN T
NLRB-FOIA-00008592
N O TIC E .-T his opinion is subject to form al revision before pubhcation in the
D E C IS IO N A N D O R D E R
B Y CH A IR M A N LIEB M A N A N D M EM B ER S B ECK ER
A N D PEA R CE
pany had violated S ection 8(a)(3), (5), and (1) of the A ct.
issues presented.
briefs, and the G eneral C ounsel and the U nion filed reply
briefs.I
The Board rejected the Respondent's answ ering briefas untim ely.
follow ing
FIN D IN G S O F FA CT
M cK in ley M in e an d th e Y o rk C an y o n M in e in N ew
industry.
A . Stipulated F acts
added.)
355 N L R B N o. 197
NLRB-FOIA-00008593
D E CISIO N S O F T H E N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
and July 19, 21, and 30, in order to place econom ic pres-
m ine is located.
and, therefore, that its 2005 am endm ent of the plan did
C .D iscussion
1089.
s argu-
par. 5(b) of the com plaint. H ow ever, pars. 5(a), (b), and (c) clearly
NLRB-FOIA-00008594
PIT T SB U R G & M ID W A Y CO A L M IN IN G CO .
conduct and that the R espondent did not m eet its burden
(2005);
W heeling-P ittsburgh Steel,
241 N L R B 1214,
1221 (1979), enfd. in rel. part 618 F .2d 1009 (3d C ir.
late the A ct. G iven the G eneral C ounsel's show ing, the
right.4
application.
Id. Plainly, how ever, the parties to a contract are free to,
w hole or in part.
NLRB-FOIA-00008595
D ECISIO N S O F TH E N A T IO N A L
reason it chooses.
3 0 0 0 v . P e a b o d y C o a l C o . M a rtw ic k M in e , C ase 8 8 -2 3 -9 1 -7 2 (A rb .
stated:
years, m em orial periods under this provision have been used to pro-
deem ed im portant by the International U nion, and have also been used
coal fields. T here is no lim itation in the contract w hich restricts the
In another aw ard, the arbitrator stated that the com pany took the po-
L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
tected.
A rc h o f W e s t V irg in ia v . M in e W o rk e rs L o c a l U n io n 5 9 5 8 , C A .
NLRB-FOIA-00008596
PIT T SB U R G & M ID W A Y CO A L M IN IN G CO .
the bonus plan did not violate the A ct because the action
tected rights.9
'U nder the bonus policy as it existed prior to the 2005 changes,em -
tional to the num ber of days they ceased w ork as a result of a m em orial
m orial day on a less than districtw ide basis forfeit their entire bonus for
w hether the m ine w here the em ployees are em ployed m eets its produc-
m em orial day, and em ployees did not suffer the consequent loss of
bonus paym ents does not,as R espondent argues,com pel a dism issal of
the com plaint. It is long settled that actual loss is not necessary to
Sec.7 rights.
action if they strike w ill increase its revenue, and m ay even intend to
served the right to am end its plan for unlaw ful reasons.
at 929-934.
presented for review ." T hat statem ent asked the B oard to
NLRB-FOIA-00008597
CO N CLU SIO N S O F LA W
duction w ork.
(b) Since 1988 and at all m aterial tim es, the U nion, by
(b) Since 1988 and at all m aterial tim es, the U nion, by
production w ork.
(b) Since 1988 and at all m aterial tim es, the U nion, by
NLRB-FOIA-00008598
PIT T SB U R G & M ID W A Y CO A L M IN IN G CO .
R EM ED Y
basis, w e shall order that it cease and desist and take cer-
1173 (1987).
O R D ER
cessors,and assigns,shall
interest.
m aterial.
NLRB-FOIA-00008599
com ply.
Chairm an
Craig B ecker,
M em ber
M em ber
(SEA L)
A PPE N D IX
PO STED BY O RD ER O F TH E
lated Federal labor law and has ordered us to post and obey
this notice.
FE D E R A L L A W G IV E S Y O U T H E R IG H T T O
your behalf
activities.
A ct.
TH E PITTSB U R G & M ID W A Y CO A L M IN IN G
CO M PA N Y
NLRB-FOIA-00008600
Microsoft Outlook
non-responsive
Per Regional Director Ahearns instructions, attached is a memo requesting guidance in the above case.
NLRB-FOIA-00008601
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008602
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008603
Microsoft Outlook
non-responsive
Per Regional Director Ahearns instructions, attached is a memo requesting guidance in the above case.
NLRB-FOIA-00008604
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008605
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008606
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Flanagan, Kevin P.
Ahearn, Richard L.
Platt, Nancy
Boeing
Hi Rich I left a message on Thursday regarding payment for the videos. Is that something the Region
__
Kevin P. Flanagan
Washington, DC 20570
e-mail: Kevin.Flanagan@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00008607
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Monday 9 am?
Colleen also brought up some concerns she had regarding the language of the proposed order that I
would like to discuss. Will there be time on Monday? Here is the draft proposed order language.
Thanks,
Dianne
Ex. 5 Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00008608
Ex. 5 Deliberative
Dianne/Colleen,
When you send me the Boeing memo to edit, please also send it to my home email, in case I have trouble accessing this
E.6 Privacy
Thanks much.
Anne
NLRB-FOIA-00008609
Anne P. Pomerantz
NLRB-FOIA-00008610
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Pomerantz, Anne
Posner, Charles
Charles,
Please see the attached for our Seattle-supervised cases. Linda will be submitting a separate log covering sub-Region
36. Thanks.
Anne
Cc: ML-HQ-GC Field RA's/ARD's; ML-HQ-Ops District 1; ML-HQ-Ops District 2; ML-HQ-Ops District 3; ML-HQ-Ops District
4; Siegel, Richard A.; Purcell, Anne G.; Davidson, Linda L.; Vance, Will J.; Cestare, Thomas W.
Non-responsive
Tracking:
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008611
Recipient
Read
Posner, Charles
Ahearn, Richard L.
Davidson, Linda L.
Mills, Kathlyn
NLRB-FOIA-00008612
Region 19
Number
Name of
Witness
Evidence Sought
Date
issued
issuance
Any petition to
revoke and/or
enforcement
proceedings
Case in
Compliance
Status (Yes
or No)
Regional
Determination
been reached)
Sub enfmt
action
initiated /
successful
Non-Responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008613
Non-Responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008614
Number
Name of
Witness
Evidence Sought
Date
issued
issuance
Any petition to
revoke and/or
enforcement
proceedings
Case in
Compliance
Status (Yes
or No)
Regional
Determination
been reached)
Sub enfmt
action
initiated /
successful
No
No
Advice
No
Non-Responsive
Boeing Company
CA-32431
Cust. of
Records
Non-Responsive
C:\IGCShared\in\499\1.doc
11/4/2011
Page 3
NLRB-FOIA-00008615
Non-Responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008616
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Connolly, Ryan E.
Pomerantz, Anne
Non-Responsive
Let me know if you want to talk this afternoon, after today I am out until next Tuesday. I can update you on what we are
Subject:
Non-Responsive
Subject:
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008617
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008618
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008619
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008620
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008621
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008622
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008623
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008624
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008625
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008626
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008627
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008628
Microsoft Outlook
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme;
Importance:
High
From:
Sent:
To:
Greetings all, Please review my latest revision, which attempts to incorporate comments from Celeste, Jennifer and
Exemption 5
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00008629
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00008630
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00008631
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00008632
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00008633
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00008634
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00008635
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00008636
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00008637
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00008638
Ex. 5 - Deliberative
NLRB-FOIA-00008639
Microsoft Outlook
Ahearn, Richard L.
Pomerantz, Anne; Anzalone, Mara-Louise; Finch, Peter G.; Jablonski, Colleen G.; Todd,
Dianne
FW : seattletimes.com: S.C. Gov. Haley: GOP candidates should talk about unions, NLRB
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
-----Original Message-----
From:
Subject: seattletimes.com: S.C. Gov. Haley: GOP candidates should talk about unions, NLRB
Exemption 6
http://www.seattletimes.com.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
S.C. Gov. Haley: GOP candidates should talk about unions, NLRB complaint against Boeing
South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley said Wednesday she wants Republican presidential hopefuls,
who will be debating in her state shortly, to address how they would deal with unions and a
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014893514_apscscgovernor1stldwritethru.html
======================================================================
HOW TO ADVERTISE WITH THE SEATTLE TIMES COMPANY ONLINE For information on advertising in this
e-mail newsletter, or other online marketing platforms with The Seattle Times Company, call
http://www.seattletimescompany.com/advertise
for information.
======================================================================
www.seattletimes.com
NLRB-FOIA-00008640
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Anzalone, Mara-Louise
Pomerantz, Anne
Finch, Peter G.
5-13.pdf
M-L.A.
NLRB-FOIA-00008641
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008642
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008643
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008644
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008645
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008646
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Anzalone, Mara-Louise
Finch, Peter G.
Boeing, 19-CA-32431
Mara-Louise Anzalone
Attorney
206.220.6315 (p)
206.220.6305 (f)
NLRB-FOIA-00008647
NA T IO NA L L A B O R R E L A T IO NS B O A R D
R egion 19
T elephone:
(206) 220-6315
Facsim ile:
(206) 220-6305
Seattle, W ashington
98174-1078
M ay 13, 2011
W ashington, D C 20036-5306
R e:
T he B oeing C om pany
D ear M r. K ilberg:
I enjoyed speaking w ith you and your trial team this w eek. I am pleased that w e all
anticipate an am iable and highly professional w orking relationship throughout this proceeding.
A s requested, attached for your review and com m ent is the w ritten draft Settlem ent
A greem ent and N otice to E m ployees that w e discussed. Iw ould like to reiterate that the A cting
G eneral C ounsel rem ains open to considering any thoughts and suggestions you w ould like to
m ake.
In addition, as discussed, the A cting G eneral C ounsel w ould be h appy to consider any
non-B oard settlem ent that is acceptable to both you and the C harging Party.
W e understand
that, given the direct and indirect costs to your client due to the breadth of this m atter, this m ay
be a preferable alternative.
To that end, itis the A cting G eneral C ounsel's continued hope that
the parties m ake a good-faith effort to explore a non-B oard resolution, and w e stand ready to
M ara-L ouise A n
ne
A ttachm ent:
Settlem ent A greem ent and N otice to E m ployees
NLRB-FOIA-00008648
I.st-C om plaint
U pdated V il
SE T T L E M E N T A G R E E M E N T
The undersigned C harged Party and the undersigned C harging Party, in settlem ent of the above m atter, and subject to the approval of the R egional
PO STING O F NO TIC E -
U pon approval of this A greem ent and receipt of the N otices from the R egion, w hich m ay include N otices in m ore
than one language as deem ed appropriate by the R egional D irector, the C harged Party w ill post im m ediately in conspicuous places in and about its
plant/office, including all places w here notices to em ployees/m em bers are custom arily posted, and m aintain for 60 consecutive days from the date of
posting, copies of the attached N otice (and versions in other languages as deem ed appropriate by the R egional D irector) m ade a part hereof, said
N otices to be signed by a responsible official of the C harged Party and the date of actual posting to be show n thereon. In the event this A greem ent is
in settlem ent of a charge against a union, the union w ill subm itforthw ith signed copies of said N otice to the R egional D irector w ho w ill forw ard
them to the em ployer w hose em ployees are involved herein, for posting, the em ployer w illing, in conspicuous places in and about the em ployer's
plant w here they shall be m aintained for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting. Further, in the event that the charged union m aintains such
bulletin boards at the facility of the em ployer w here the alleged unfair labor practices occurred, the union shall also post N otices on each such
In addition to physical posting of paper notices, notices shall be distributed electronically, such as by e-m ail, posting on an intranet or an internet site,
or o ther electronic m eans, if the C harged Party custom arily com m unicates w ith its em ployees or m em bers by such m eans. The electronic posting
shall rem ain posted for 60 consecutive days from the d ate it w as originally posted. The C harged Party w ill e-m ail the R egion's C om pliance O fficer
at w am es.loranp@ nlrb.gov w ith a link to the electronic posting location on the sam e day as the posting. In the event that passw ords or other log-on
inform ation is required to access the electronic p osting, the C harged Party agrees to provide such access inform ation to the R egion's C om pliance
O fficer. Ifthe N otice is distributed via e-m ail, the charged party w ill forw ard a copy ofthe e-m ail distributed to the R egional C om pliance O fficer.
C O M PLIA NC E W ITH N O T IC E -
The C harged Party w ill com ply w ith all the terins and provisions of said N otice.
B A C K P A Y ---W ithin 14 days from approval of this agreem ent the C harged Party w ill m ake w hole the em ployee(s) nam ed below by paym ent to
each of them of the am ount opposite each nam e. The C harged Party w ill m ake appropriate w ithholdings for each nam ed em ployee.
SC O P E O F T H E A G R E E M E N T - T his A greem ent settles only the allegations in the above-captioned case(s), and does notc onstitute a
settlem ent of any other case(s) or m atters. It does not preclude persons from filing charges, the G eneral C ounsel from prosecuting com plaints, or the
B oard and the courts from finding violations w ith respect to m atters w hich precede the date of the approval of this A greem ent regardless of w hether
such m atters are know n to the G eneral C ounsel or are readily discoverable. The G eneral C ounselreserves the right to u se the evidence o btained in
the investigation and prosecution of the above-captioned case(s) for any relevant purpose in the litigation of this or any other case(s), and a judge, the
B oard and the courts m ay m ake findings of fact and/or conclusions of law w ith respect to said evidence.
R E F U SA L T O ISSU E C O M P L A IN T - in the event the C harging Party fails o r refuses to becom e a party to this A greem ent, and if in the
R egional D irector's discretion it w ill effectuate the policies of the N ational Labor R elations A ct, the R egional D irector shall decline to issue a
C om plaint herein (or a new C om plaint if one has b een w ithdraw n pursuant to the term s of this A greem ent), and this A greem ent shall be betw een the
C harged Party and the undersigned R egional D irector. A review of such action m ay be obtained pursuant to Section 102.19 of the R ules and
R egulations of the B oard ifa request for sam e is filed w ithin 14 days thereof.This A greem ent shall be nulland void if the G eneral C ounseld oes not
sustain the R egional D irector's action in the event of a review . A pproval of this A greem ent by the R egional D irector shall constitute w ithdraw al of
any C om plaint(s) and N otice of H earing heretofore issued in the above captioned case(s), as w ell as any answ er(s) filed in response.
A U T H O R IZ A T IO N T O P R O V ID E C O M P L IA N C E IN F O R M A T IO N A N D N O T IC E S D IR E C T L Y T O C H A R G E D P A R T Y .
Counsel for the Charged P arty authorizes the Regional O ffice to forw ard the cover letter describing the g eneral expectations and
instructions to achieve com pliance, a conform ed settlem ent, original notices and a certification of posting directly to the Charged
Party. Ifsuch authorization is granted, Counsel w ill be sim ultaneously served w ith a courtesy copy ofthese docum ents.
N o
Y es
Initials
Initials
PER FO R M A N C E -
Perform ance by the C harged Party with the term s and provisions ofthis Agreem ent shallcom m ence im m ediately after the
Agreem ent is approved by the Regional Director, or if the Charging Party does not enter into this Agreem ent, perform ance shall com m ence
im m ediately upon receipt by the Charged Party ofnotice thatno review has been requested orthat the General Counsel hassustained the Regional
Director.
The Charged Party agrees thatin case ofnon-com pliance with any ofthe term s ofthis Settlem entAgreem ent by the Charged Party, and after 14 days
notice from the Regional Directorofthe National LaborRelations Board ofsuch non-com pliance withoutrem edy by the Charged Party,the Regional
Director will reissue the com plaint previously issued on [date] in the instant case(s).Thereafter, the General Counsel may file a m otion fordefault
judgm ent with the Board on the allegations ofthe com plaint. The Charged Party understands and agreesthat the allegations of the aforem entioned
com plaintwill be deem ed adm itted and its Answer to such com plaint will be considered withdrawn. The only issue that may be raised before the
Board iswhether the Charged Party defaulted on the term s ofthis Settlem entAgreem ent.The Board m ay then, withoutnecessity oftrial or any other
NLRB-FOIA-00008649
PL -C om plaint
U pdated 4/11
proceeding, find all allegations of the com plaint to be true and m ake findings of factand conclusions of law consistent w ith those allegations adverse
to the C harged Party on all issues raised by the pleadings. The B oard m ay then issue an order providing a fW I rem edy for the violations found as is
appropriate to rem edy such violations. The p arties further agree that a U .S. C ourt ofA ppeals Judgm ent m ay be entered enforcing the B oard order ex
parte,after service or attem pted service upon C harged Party[R espondent at the lastaddress provided to the G eneralC ounsel.
N O T IF IC A T IO N O F C O M P L IA N C E - The u ndersigned parties to this A greem ent w ill each notify the R egional D irector in w riting w hat
steps the C harged P arty has taken to com ply herew ith. Such notification shall be given w ithin 5 days, and again after 60 days, from the date of the
approval of this A greem ent. In the event the C harging Party does n ot enter into this A greem ent, initial notice shall be given w ithin 5 days after
notification from the R egional D irector that no review has been requested or that the G eneral C ounsel has sustained the R egional D irector.
C ontingent upon com pliance w ith the term s and provisions hereof, no further action shall be taken in the above captioned case(s).
D ate
W orkers
By:
D ate
D ate
A pproved By:
D ate
By:
NLRB-FOIA-00008650
N O T IC .
FO RM N LRB-4724
(11-02)
TO
POSTED PURSUANT TO
R E
APPROVED BY A R D
FE D E R A L LA W G IV E S Y O U T H E R IG H T T O :
A ct together w ithothor
C hoose not to engage in-any of these--pro.tected activities
W E W ILL NO T
that'
y lines..
W E W IL L N O T
W E W ILL NO T
establish additional
787 D ream liner
sourcing supply
lines that
re'rbsehted'2'em p!oyees
in 'retal,6tion
for' your U nion activities,
W E W ILL NO T
tell you that our decisions regarding the placem ent of additional
787 D ream liner assem bly lines are m otivated by your authorization
,of, participation in, or support for U nion activities, including past or,
W E W ILL NO T
tell you that our decisions regarding the placem ent of sourcing
supply lines
for: additional i'787 D ream liner
assem bly w ork are
W E W ILL NO T
im ply that our aw ard of additional or new 787 D ream liner assem bly
gain additional or new 787 D ream liner assem bly w ork because of
em ployees w ant union representation and it investigates and rem edies unfair labor practic
charge or election petition, you m ay speak confidentially to any agent w ith the B oard's R egioi
THIS NOTICE M UST REM AIN POSTED FOR 60 CONSECUTIVE DAYS FROM THE DATE OF POSTING AND I
THIS NOTICE OR COM PLIANCE W ITH ITS PROVISIONS MAY BE DIRECTED TO THE A BOVE REGIONAL O F
NLRB-FOIA-00008651
E S
E M PL O Y
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
M AL DIRECTOR OF THE
AGENCY OF THE
the
second
787
D ream liner
assem bly
-n6 in ''Everett,
1 y
T he B o6i6q'C om p"
V
(Em ployer)
By:
(Title)
D ate:
Seattle, W A
98174
force the N ational Labor R elations A ct. Itconducts secret-ballot elections to determ ine w hether
;by em ployers and unions. To find out m ore about your rights under the A ct and how to file a
IO ffice setforth below . Y ou m ay also obtain inform ation from the B oard's w ebsite: w w w .nlrb.gov.
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Anzalone, Mara-Louise
'campbell@workerlaw.com'; 'flora@workerlaw.com'
Boeing, 19-CA-32431
Please see attached, which we sent out today. I can get you up to speed on our latest discussions with Respondents counsel
on Monday at 10, as planned. However, if you want to speak earlier, please give me a call on my cell (360-434-2998).
Mara-Louise Anzalone
Attorney
206.220.6315 (p)
206.220.6305 (f)
NLRB-FOIA-00008653
NA T IO NA L L A B O R R E L A T IO NS B O A R D
R egion 19
T elephone:
(206) 220-6315
Facsim ile:
(206) 220-6305
Seattle, W ashington
98174-1078
M ay 13, 2011
W ashington, D C 20036-5306
R e:
T he B oeing C om pany
D ear M r. K ilberg:
I enjoyed speaking w ith you and your trial team this w eek. I am pleased that w e all
anticipate an am iable and highly professional w orking relationship throughout this proceeding.
A s requested, attached for your review and com m ent is the w ritten draft Settlem ent
A greem ent and N otice to E m ployees that w e discussed. Iw ould like to reiterate that the A cting
G eneral C ounsel rem ains open to considering any thoughts and suggestions you w ould like to
m ake.
In addition, as discussed, the A cting G eneral C ounsel w ould be h appy to consider any
non-B oard settlem ent that is acceptable to both you and the C harging Party.
W e understand
that, given the direct and indirect costs to your client due to the breadth of this m atter, this m ay
be a preferable alternative.
To that end, itis the A cting G eneral C ounsel's continued hope that
the parties m ake a good-faith effort to explore a non-B oard resolution, and w e stand ready to
M ara-L ouise A n
ne
A ttachm ent:
Settlem ent A greem ent and N otice to E m ployees
NLRB-FOIA-00008654
I.st-C om plaint
U pdated V il
SE T T L E M E N T A G R E E M E N T
The undersigned C harged Party and the undersigned C harging Party, in settlem ent of the above m atter, and subject to the approval of the R egional
PO STING O F NO TIC E -
U pon approval of this A greem ent and receipt of the N otices from the R egion, w hich m ay include N otices in m ore
than one language as deem ed appropriate by the R egional D irector, the C harged Party w ill post im m ediately in conspicuous places in and about its
plant/office, including all places w here notices to em ployees/m em bers are custom arily posted, and m aintain for 60 consecutive days from the date of
posting, copies of the attached N otice (and versions in other languages as deem ed appropriate by the R egional D irector) m ade a part hereof, said
N otices to be signed by a responsible official of the C harged Party and the date of actual posting to be show n thereon. In the event this A greem ent is
in settlem ent of a charge against a union, the union w ill subm itforthw ith signed copies of said N otice to the R egional D irector w ho w ill forw ard
them to the em ployer w hose em ployees are involved herein, for posting, the em ployer w illing, in conspicuous places in and about the em ployer's
plant w here they shall be m aintained for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting. Further, in the event that the charged union m aintains such
bulletin boards at the facility of the em ployer w here the alleged unfair labor practices occurred, the union shall also post N otices on each such
In addition to physical posting of paper notices, notices shall be distributed electronically, such as by e-m ail, posting on an intranet or an internet site,
or o ther electronic m eans, if the C harged Party custom arily com m unicates w ith its em ployees or m em bers by such m eans. The electronic posting
shall rem ain posted for 60 consecutive days from the d ate it w as originally posted. The C harged Party w ill e-m ail the R egion's C om pliance O fficer
at w am es.loranp@ nlrb.gov w ith a link to the electronic posting location on the sam e day as the posting. In the event that passw ords or other log-on
inform ation is required to access the electronic p osting, the C harged Party agrees to provide such access inform ation to the R egion's C om pliance
O fficer. Ifthe N otice is distributed via e-m ail, the charged party w ill forw ard a copy ofthe e-m ail distributed to the R egional C om pliance O fficer.
C O M PLIA NC E W ITH N O T IC E -
The C harged Party w ill com ply w ith all the terins and provisions of said N otice.
B A C K P A Y ---W ithin 14 days from approval of this agreem ent the C harged Party w ill m ake w hole the em ployee(s) nam ed below by paym ent to
each of them of the am ount opposite each nam e. The C harged Party w ill m ake appropriate w ithholdings for each nam ed em ployee.
SC O P E O F T H E A G R E E M E N T - T his A greem ent settles only the allegations in the above-captioned case(s), and does notc onstitute a
settlem ent of any other case(s) or m atters. It does not preclude persons from filing charges, the G eneral C ounsel from prosecuting com plaints, or the
B oard and the courts from finding violations w ith respect to m atters w hich precede the date of the approval of this A greem ent regardless of w hether
such m atters are know n to the G eneral C ounsel or are readily discoverable. The G eneral C ounselreserves the right to u se the evidence o btained in
the investigation and prosecution of the above-captioned case(s) for any relevant purpose in the litigation of this or any other case(s), and a judge, the
B oard and the courts m ay m ake findings of fact and/or conclusions of law w ith respect to said evidence.
R E F U SA L T O ISSU E C O M P L A IN T - in the event the C harging Party fails o r refuses to becom e a party to this A greem ent, and if in the
R egional D irector's discretion it w ill effectuate the policies of the N ational Labor R elations A ct, the R egional D irector shall decline to issue a
C om plaint herein (or a new C om plaint if one has b een w ithdraw n pursuant to the term s of this A greem ent), and this A greem ent shall be betw een the
C harged Party and the undersigned R egional D irector. A review of such action m ay be obtained pursuant to Section 102.19 of the R ules and
R egulations of the B oard ifa request for sam e is filed w ithin 14 days thereof.This A greem ent shall be nulland void if the G eneral C ounseld oes not
sustain the R egional D irector's action in the event of a review . A pproval of this A greem ent by the R egional D irector shall constitute w ithdraw al of
any C om plaint(s) and N otice of H earing heretofore issued in the above captioned case(s), as w ell as any answ er(s) filed in response.
A U T H O R IZ A T IO N T O P R O V ID E C O M P L IA N C E IN F O R M A T IO N A N D N O T IC E S D IR E C T L Y T O C H A R G E D P A R T Y .
Counsel for the Charged P arty authorizes the Regional O ffice to forw ard the cover letter describing the g eneral expectations and
instructions to achieve com pliance, a conform ed settlem ent, original notices and a certification of posting directly to the Charged
Party. Ifsuch authorization is granted, Counsel w ill be sim ultaneously served w ith a courtesy copy ofthese docum ents.
N o
Y es
Initials
Initials
PER FO R M A N C E -
Perform ance by the C harged Party with the term s and provisions ofthis Agreem ent shallcom m ence im m ediately after the
Agreem ent is approved by the Regional Director, or if the Charging Party does not enter into this Agreem ent, perform ance shall com m ence
im m ediately upon receipt by the Charged Party ofnotice thatno review has been requested orthat the General Counsel hassustained the Regional
Director.
The Charged Party agrees thatin case ofnon-com pliance with any ofthe term s ofthis Settlem entAgreem ent by the Charged Party, and after 14 days
notice from the Regional Directorofthe National LaborRelations Board ofsuch non-com pliance withoutrem edy by the Charged Party,the Regional
Director will reissue the com plaint previously issued on [date] in the instant case(s).Thereafter, the General Counsel may file a m otion fordefault
judgm ent with the Board on the allegations ofthe com plaint. The Charged Party understands and agreesthat the allegations of the aforem entioned
com plaintwill be deem ed adm itted and its Answer to such com plaint will be considered withdrawn. The only issue that may be raised before the
Board iswhether the Charged Party defaulted on the term s ofthis Settlem entAgreem ent.The Board m ay then, withoutnecessity oftrial or any other
NLRB-FOIA-00008655
PL -C om plaint
U pdated 4/11
proceeding, find all allegations of the com plaint to be true and m ake findings of factand conclusions of law consistent w ith those allegations adverse
to the C harged Party on all issues raised by the pleadings. The B oard m ay then issue an order providing a fW I rem edy for the violations found as is
appropriate to rem edy such violations. The p arties further agree that a U .S. C ourt ofA ppeals Judgm ent m ay be entered enforcing the B oard order ex
parte,after service or attem pted service upon C harged Party[R espondent at the lastaddress provided to the G eneralC ounsel.
N O T IF IC A T IO N O F C O M P L IA N C E - The u ndersigned parties to this A greem ent w ill each notify the R egional D irector in w riting w hat
steps the C harged P arty has taken to com ply herew ith. Such notification shall be given w ithin 5 days, and again after 60 days, from the date of the
approval of this A greem ent. In the event the C harging Party does n ot enter into this A greem ent, initial notice shall be given w ithin 5 days after
notification from the R egional D irector that no review has been requested or that the G eneral C ounsel has sustained the R egional D irector.
C ontingent upon com pliance w ith the term s and provisions hereof, no further action shall be taken in the above captioned case(s).
D ate
W orkers
By:
D ate
D ate
A pproved By:
D ate
By:
NLRB-FOIA-00008656
N O T IC .
FO RM N LRB-4724
(11-02)
TO
POSTED PURSUANT TO
R E
APPROVED BY A R D
FE D E R A L LA W G IV E S Y O U T H E R IG H T T O :
A ct together w ithothor
C hoose not to engage in-any of these--pro.tected activities
W E W ILL NO T
that'
y lines..
W E W IL L N O T
W E W ILL NO T
establish additional
787 D ream liner
sourcing supply
lines that
re'rbsehted'2'em p!oyees
in 'retal,6tion
for' your U nion activities,
W E W ILL NO T
tell you that our decisions regarding the placem ent of additional
787 D ream liner assem bly lines are m otivated by your authorization
,of, participation in, or support for U nion activities, including past or,
W E W ILL NO T
tell you that our decisions regarding the placem ent of sourcing
supply lines
for: additional i'787 D ream liner
assem bly w ork are
W E W ILL NO T
im ply that our aw ard of additional or new 787 D ream liner assem bly
gain additional or new 787 D ream liner assem bly w ork because of
em ployees w ant union representation and it investigates and rem edies unfair labor practic
charge or election petition, you m ay speak confidentially to any agent w ith the B oard's R egioi
THIS NOTICE M UST REM AIN POSTED FOR 60 CONSECUTIVE DAYS FROM THE DATE OF POSTING AND I
THIS NOTICE OR COM PLIANCE W ITH ITS PROVISIONS MAY BE DIRECTED TO THE A BOVE REGIONAL O F
NLRB-FOIA-00008657
E S
E M PL O Y
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
M AL DIRECTOR OF THE
AGENCY OF THE
the
second
787
D ream liner
assem bly
-n6 in ''Everett,
1 y
T he B o6i6q'C om p"
V
(Em ployer)
By:
(Title)
D ate:
Seattle, W A
98174
force the N ational Labor R elations A ct. Itconducts secret-ballot elections to determ ine w hether
;by em ployers and unions. To find out m ore about your rights under the A ct and how to file a
IO ffice setforth below . Y ou m ay also obtain inform ation from the B oard's w ebsite: w w w .nlrb.gov.
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen;
Exemption 5
Rich
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008659
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008660
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008661
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008662
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008663
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008664
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008665
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen;
3. All documents and communications that support the NLRB's position that work is being
4. Past precedent that supports a finding that Boeing violated Section 8(a)(3) and 8(a)(1) of the
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008666
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.;
My bad; please ignore the attachment; I only intended to transmit the message below and the attachment with respect to
Rich
a, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Sophir, Jayme
Cc: Pomerantz, Anne; Anzalone, Mara-Louise; Finch, Peter G.; Harvey, Rachel
Exemption 5
Rich
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008667
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008668
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen;
Exemption 5
In number 1,
Our reasoning re. # 3 and 4 were sent earlier.
Best regards,
Rich
NLRB-FOIA-00008669
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008670
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008671
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008672
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008673
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008674
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008675
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008676
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
See me please.
Thx.
To: Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen
Final version. Unless somebody expresses a reservation very soon, I will sign it and
NLRB-FOIA-00008677
NLRB-FOIA-00008678
NLRB-FOIA-00008679
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008680
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008681
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008682
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008683
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008684
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
FW : Issa response
To: Simms, Abby; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Eric
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00008685
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008686
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008687
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008688
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008689
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008690
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008691
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008692
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Pomerantz, Anne
--------------------------
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Exemption 5
. Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
. Im happy to discuss further.
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008693
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00008694
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008695
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008696
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008697
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008698
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008699
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008700
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Pomerantz, Anne
Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir,
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008701
To: Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.;
Moskowitz, Eric G.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric
G.
A couple suggestions:
Exemption 5
Rich
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Exemption 5
. Otherwise, I think
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
2
NLRB-FOIA-00008702
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn, Richard
L.
Exemption 5
Im happy to discuss further.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Attached are my edits to the section on state lawsuits that I think were agreed to today. I have made no changes to the
Boeing section.
non-responsive
Eric
202-273-2931
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Ferguson, John H.; Moskowitz, Eric G.; Ahearn,
Richard L.
Tracking:
3
NLRB-FOIA-00008703
Read
Recipient
Garza, Jose
Ahearn, Richard L.
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Mattina, Celeste J.
Farrell, Ellen
Sophir, Jayme
Ferguson, John H.
Moskowitz, Eric G.
NLRB-FOIA-00008704
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Rich
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
5)
6)
7)
8)
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008705
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00008706
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008707
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ahearn, Richard L.
Please call the trial team at 206 220 6347 for the 2 pm (EDST) call.
Rich
--------------------------
Cc: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Just a heads up -- Rich may not attend our meeting today since he will be traveling to his resident office; however, his trial
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
4)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
5)
6)
7)
8)
NLRB-FOIA-00008708
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00008709
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Ahearn, Richard L.
--------------------------
Cc: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Just a heads up -- Rich may not attend our meeting today since he will be traveling to his resident office; however, his trial
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
Also I have compiled several documents that have been filed or otherwise publically available for disclosure. They are:
1)
2)
3)
Boeing Resps Oppos to the Acting GCs Pet to Revoke w/o attached exhibits;
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
NLRB-FOIA-00008710
15) Boeings Opposition to the Acting General Counsels Motion to Strike Boeings Fourteenth Affirmative Defense;
Could you please help me identify what I am missing and send me anything else we could include? Thank you for you
help.
Jose
Exemption 5
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00008711
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008712
About
Conferences
Media Resources
Comments by Readers
Submit
RSS feed
Go to comments
Leave a comment
Email Subscription
Some media and a few politicians misinterpreted the study released yesterday by Washington
State, as well as not having correct what South Carolina is or isnt doing, to land production Line
email.
Sign me up!
The misinterpretation comes from headlines and conclusions that Washington wont offer new
incentives to Boeing to win Line 2. First, this ignores that new Boeing Commercial Aircraft CEO
Jim Albaugh told Gov. Christine Gregoire that Boeing isnt asking anything of the Statethat the
decision comes down to what accord might be reached with the IAM to remove the threat of
Associations
future strikes.
(Boeings response to the study also overlooked the fact that Albaugh said the company wasnt
Boeing SPEEA
Second, the Washington State Legislature is not in session until January. This means the
governor cant offer incentives unless she were to call a special sessionbut what is the point if
Boeings Albaugh says the issue is not between the State and Boeing but between Boeing and
the union?
Branch
With this being the case, what was the governor to do? Since Albaugh is new to BCA and new to
Washington (he was CEO of Boeings defense unit is St. Louis, MO) it makes sense to give him a
Aviation News-Commercial
report about Washingtons business climate vs. South Carolina, which is competing for Line 2. For
Albaugh, this will all be new information. Who knows if when the time comes for a decision and
some kind of agreement is reached with the IAM whether the decision might be so close that a
better understanding of the business climate for Albaughs recommendation might or might not
Aviation Now
As for what South Carolina is or is not offering, media here picked up on a story written by
media there quoting a legislator as saying the state is offering Boeing a deal it cant refuse.
Naturally we were curious, so we called the reporter who wrote the story and asked for details
Aviation Today
It turns out the legislator may have been talking to hear himself talk. The South Carolina
Legislature, like Washington, is adjourned until January and the State cant offer anything new
until thenjust like Washington. Boeing can only benefit from previously granted concessions,
just like Washington, and doesnt have anything new to consider, according to our discussion
Bill Virgin
Boeing Frontiers
(Subscription)
Flight Global
Finally, we have this thought on the whole union issue. Yes, the IAM local in Charleston voted to
decertify. But if Boeing puts Line 2 there, the IAM (or any other union) will be back in a year (the
minimum time until a new effort is permitted) to try and reorganize the workers. No union is
going to let any facility like this of any company like Boeing go forward without attempting to
MSNBC Aviation
organize. The odds may be against itlook at all the failed attempts at organizing Delta Air Lines
employees in Georgia, for examplebut to assume there will never be a union at Charleston is a
Aviation News-Defense
Share this:
StumbleUpon
Defense News
Defense Tech
Digg
Boeing
DOD Buzz
Leave a comment
Trackback
Trackbacks (1)
Comments (4)
Commentaries
AeroTurboPower
NLRB-FOIA-00008713
Reply | Quote
AirInsight Blog
AirInsight podcasts
Onemancrew
Sure Boeing isnt asking. It never asks. It lays out the oblique threat. It then
Aspire Aviation
Holly Hegemann
IAG Podcasts
It then fully expects riches to be tossed at its feet. Without anything being
given in return.
Jon Ostrower
And that ethod has worked famously well every time except with the IAM, who
Kieran Daly
seem unmoveable by such tactics. But on politicians, business leaders, and the
general public well, its a very effective gameplan, and a spectacle to observe
Mary Kirby
Plane Talking
Im sure there are a few Boeing execs a little stunned that it didnt work this
Boeing)
Richard Aboulafia
Steve Trimble
Uresh Sheth
As far as the unions go, I have called in all my favors and contacted every
Companies-Commercial
Boing isnt making any offers. There are no behind the scenes negotiations
Airbus
ongoing. Boeing expects they can break the unions nerve and have them come
Boeing
Bombardier
Boeing doesnt want one, and least not one that is has to make any
Embraer
compromises to attain.
Irkut
Anyway, If I read the labor laws correctly, there is nothing the Union leadership
can do without consent of the rank and file anyway, and the timelines seem far
to short to put new terms together and have any sort of vote on the matter.
Companies-Defense
Airbus Military
Reply | Quote
EADS
Northrop Grumman
Christopher
Dye
skeptical customers that they can max 787 production ASAP. If they dont, they
are likely to lose lots of orders, or worst case, the entire 787 program could
collapse.
These potential disasters are very real because a growing number of 787
customers are buying the A330 as interim lift, and more will do so the longer
Boeing delays giving a credible schedule for achieving max production and
volume deliveries. At some point, it will make economic sense for Airbus to offer
787 customers linked contracts between the A330 and the A350-800, if they
have not done so already; ie buy 330s now and keep them as long as you want,
Engines
CFM International
CFM LEAP-X
Engine Alliance
GE Engines
IAE Engines
PW PurePower Engine
Rolls-Royce
and then replace them with 358s in the middle of the next decade. These
max production dates because the airlines may not believe anything Boeing tells
them about the 787, while at least so far Airbus has not lied about the 350.
If their were any doubt that the 787 program is on the brink of disaster, they
disappeared when Boeing brought Albaugh to ComAirplanes. Why else bring him
from IDS, Boeings cash cow where he has been quite successful?
Thus, Boeing needs a second 787 production line ASAP (and to ramp up its
suppliers to do this), and avoid crippling strikes once that production level is
achieved. A Charleston facility makes sense because they can move very fast to
build, there is space to build (while there is a lot less in Seattle), and at least for
The problem is in Seattle, where there will be at least one 787 production line
for years, no matter what happens in South Carolina. The IAM does not seem to
Resources
AirInsight (Consulting)
AirInsight Reports/Studies
Twelves Unlimited
TV News Partner
grasp that the dominant issue here is to keep the 787s customers on board so
as to preserve the millions of jobs created by the planes huge backlog of about
Archives
830 planes and major potential for future production which will keep both lines
NLRB-FOIA-00008714
July 2011
humming for years to come. It is NOT about the normal cycle of labor contract
June 2011
May 2011
The union has legitimately blamed this mess entirely on Boeings unbelievable
April 2011
March 2011
about it. But blaming Boeing will not solve the problem Boeing have created
and assure jobs. The problem is to credibly assure airlines of a max production
schedule that will get them their planes at some time they can live with. To do
February 2011
January 2011
that the union must make some agreement not to strike, both in Seattle and in
December 2010
Charleston if the union gets certified there, and do it very quickly. Certainly
November 2010
there are fair ways to do this, but even if the onlly ways are unfair, it needs to
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
Reply | Quote
June 2010
Chris makes a good point: its long past time to stop pointing fingers of blame
leehamnet
(on both sides). Boeing officials have acknowledged they went too far on
May 2010
outsourcing and plan to bring some of this back in (though one can argue how
April 2010
much is enough, and Boeing hasnt said). This is a pretty good admission.
March 2010
February 2010
IAM made its point with its strike last year, but now what? We certainly havent
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
Reply | Quote
Christopher
entitled, Qantas Jetstar Opts for Higher Gross Weight A330s. The idea is that
Dye
this new model can do much of what the 787 was designed for.
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
Leave a Reply
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
Guest
Log In
Log In
Log In
April 2008
March 2008
Email (required)
(Not published)
Name (required)
February 2008
Website
14, 2011
Post Comment
2011
September 2009
NLRB-FOIA-00008715
10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Aug
13
Oct
Search
Twitter Updates
Top
NLRB-FOIA-00008716
Microsoft Outlook
Subject:
NLRB-FOIA-00008717
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Solomon, Lafe E.
RE: Boeing
Barry: I have heard back from the Judge's office; he would like to have a call either Monday or
Tuesday. Can you give me some times that work for Lafe? Bill
William J. Kilberg
GIBSON DUNN
WKilberg@gibsondunn.com www.gibsondunn.com
Bill
Is this call necessary? What ever they had to say to one another was said last Friday. I have communicated the Unions
Barry
NLRB-FOIA-00008718
Barry: I got your message; I still do not have an answer although I have reached out again. I
understand that the Judge was traveling and I do not know where he is today. As soon as I
William J. Kilberg
GIBSON DUNN
WKilberg@gibsondunn.com www.gibsondunn.com
Subject: Boeing
Bill
I just left you a voice mail message. What is the status of the call between the Judge and Lafe?
Barry
NLRB-FOIA-00008719
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Solomon, Lafe E.
Boeing
Ellen, W ould you please send electronically to Nancy the Boeing Advice memo and fact sheet?
Nancy, W e anticipate that Region 19 will issue complaint next week. We can talk about it, but
Thanks, Lafe
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008720
Microsoft Outlook
Cleeland, Nancy
Solomon, Lafe E.
RE: Boeing
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ok
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Subject: Boeing
Ellen, W ould you please send electronically to Nancy the Boeing Advice memo and fact sheet?
Nancy, W e anticipate that Region 19 will issue complaint next week. We can talk about it, but
Exemption 5
. Thanks, Lafe
NLRB-FOIA-00008721
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Farrell, Ellen
FW : Boeing
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Fair enough.
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00008722
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
Attached are the memo, which issued yesterday, and the fact sheet.
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: Boeing
Ellen, W ould you please send electronically to Nancy the Boeing Advice memo and fact sheet?
Nancy, W e anticipate that Region 19 will issue complaint next week. We can talk about it, but
Exemption 5
Thanks, Lafe
NLRB-FOIA-00008723
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Solomon, Lafe E.
RE: Boeing
I definitely think that the 5 of us should meet (including Celeste), and I think it would be a good idea to add Rich (and
maybe others in the Region). Would you set something up? Thanks, Lafe
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Fair enough.
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
Exemption 5
Ellen
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008724
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
Attached are the memo, which issued yesterday, and the fact sheet.
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: Boeing
Ellen, W ould you please send electronically to Nancy the Boeing Advice memo and fact sheet?
Nancy, W e anticipate that Region 19 will issue complaint next week. We can talk about it, but
Exemption 5
Thanks, Lafe
NLRB-FOIA-00008725
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Farrell, Ellen
RE: Boeing
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00008726
Fair enough.
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
2
NLRB-FOIA-00008727
Attached are the memo, which issued yesterday, and the fact sheet.
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: Boeing
Ellen, W ould you please send electronically to Nancy the Boeing Advice memo and fact sheet?
Nancy, W e anticipate that Region 19 will issue complaint next week. We can talk about it, but
Exemption 5
Thanks, Lafe
NLRB-FOIA-00008728
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Kearney, Barry J.; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Cleeland, Nancy; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
Jayme Sophir
202-273-3837
NLRB-FOIA-00008729
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme;
Boeingrelease.doc
Heres some suggested edits for the press release, which hopefully comport with the complaint, which I havent seen yet.
NLRB-FOIA-00008730
NLRB-FOIA-00008731
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ahearn, Richard L.
My suggestions in red.
-----Original Message-----
On the train home I read over the statement and thought there was one missing piece,
Exemption 5 deliberative
Here's the whole thing cut and pasted - what do you think?
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008732
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008733
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 6
Tuesday, April 26, 2011 3:26 PM
Solomon, Lafe E.
Lopatka Op-Ed
http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2011/apr/26/nlrb-complaint-defieslegal-and-business-logicby/
NLRB-FOIA-00008734
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Solomon, Lafe E.
Im afraid you cant get away from me. Two things for right now:
Sam Hananel of the AP is writing this morning about the Boeing letter and wants to know:
Exemption 5
The Financial Times and CQ Weekly are both working on bigger pieces about the NLRB in light of this complaint. Im
working on some suggested statements and will email or bring them by later if you are around.
Thanks
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00008735
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Solomon, Lafe E.
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00008736
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Solomon, Lafe E.
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00008737
Microsoft Outlook
Solomon, Lafe E.
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Exemption 5
--------------------------
Exemption 5
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Barry, are you available? If so, please bring Ellen and Jayme and others, if you deem it appropriate and they are
available.
To: Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
NLRB-FOIA-00008738
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose
NLRB-FOIA-00008739
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Garza, Jose
Fyi:
If you are having trouble viewing this message, you can view the message online.
Unsubscribe
Update My Profile
(202) 224-3254
WASHINGTONToday, Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA), Chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
Committee, spoke on the Senate floor to address recent attacks on the National Labor Relations Board regarding its
"Mr. President, recently, the National Labor Relations Board issued a complaint against the Boeing Company alleging that
the company violated the National Labor Relations Act. This routine administrative procedure set off a melodramatic
outcry from the business community. A headline on the Wall Street Journals editorial page called it The Death of Right
to Work. South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley declared that it was government-dictated economic larceny. The
senior Senator from Utah, Senator Hatch, warned that foot soldiers of a vast and permanent bureaucracy were trying to
implement a leftist agenda. You would think that capitalism itself was threatened.
"So instead of talking about how we can get Americans working again and get the middle class back on its feet, my
colleagues on the other side of the aisle have chosen to spend their time on the Senate floor attacking the handling of a
routine unfair labor practice charge. While I dont necessarily think debating this issue is the best use of the Senates time,
I feel compelled to respond because of the disturbing misinformation that has distorted the public discussion of this case.
"They say that a lie travels halfway around the world before the truth can put its boots on Id say in the Senate
misinformation travels even faster than that. So its time to set the record straight.
"Here are the facts in this case: Boeing recently decided to locate its production facility for new Dreamliner planes in
South Carolina. The NLRBs complaint alleges that this decision was unlawful retaliation against Boeing workers in
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008740
Washington State, who had previously gone on strike. According to the complaint, Boeing management repeatedly,
publicly stated that they were going to build their new planes in South Carolina rather than Washington because the
unionized workers in Washington went on strike too often. Arguably, this violates the National Labor Relations Act,
which prohibits retaliation against employees who stand up for their rights.
"I have no opinion about whether or not Boeing violated the NLRA. It is not my job to determine the merits of this case,
and, likewise, it is not the job of my colleagues in Congress. We do not know all the facts and have not studied all of the
cases interpreting the law. But I do believe that the case should be decided impartially and should not be derailed by
"Opponents of workers rights have said that this complaint was issued because President Obamas labor-friendly
appointees on the Board were doing political favors for their union friends. Nothing could be further from the truth.
"This case has been handled without favoritism or political interference. The facts in the case were investigated by
dedicated, strictly nonpartisan career employees of the National Labor Relations Board, and career attorneys reviewed the
legal precedent for the case. Because the case involved novel issues of law, the regional office consulted the Division of
Advice in Washington DC. These are attorneys who are scholars of the law and have studied the legislative intent and the
75 years of decisions by our courts interpreting the NLRA. They carefully reviewed the case and made their
"Prior to issuing the complaint, Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon a career employee who spent more than 30 years
working at the NLRB under both Republican and Democrat superiors made every effort to resolve the dispute. Solomon
and the NLRB spent months trying to encourage the two sides to settle the dispute. The parties were unable to come to an
agreement, so the General Counsel issued the complaint on April 20th. A hearing is scheduled for June 14th before an
Administrative Law Judge. Depending on the outcome, the case can be appealed to the National Labor Relations Board
and eventually the Federal courts. That is the process that has been laid out by our laws and, personally, I have faith in that
process. Our system is designed to ensure that the rule of law is applied impartially to all parties. This case has provoked
controversy, and powerful interests have a big stake in the outcome. This makes it all the more important that we protect
"The dramatic responses to the complaint have needlessly complicated the issue and the NLRBs process.
There have
been threats to the NLRB budget as well as attempts to link the fate of nominations pending before the Senate HELP
Committee to the outcome of the case. These actions threaten the integrity of our judicial and prosecutorial processes.
This case like any adjudication handled by an independent agency should be determined based on the facts and the law,
not politics.
"In addition to mischaracterizing the NLRBs handling of this case, opponents of workers rights have also
mischaracterized the fundamental issue at stake. Several public officials, including some of my Senate colleagues, have
suggested that this case represents an assault on right to work laws. Again, thats just factually incorrect. There is
absolutely no way that the outcome of this case could affect in any way the right to work laws of any state.
"This case is not about right to work laws its about workers rights. If, indeed, the NLRB General Counsel is able to
prove that Boeing retaliated against Washingtons workers because they stood up for themselves, thats a very serious
"This is about far more than just one group of workers in Washington State. Unions are one of the few voices left in our
society speaking up for the little guy, and the rights provided in the NLRA are one of the few tools that workers can use
stand up for fair treatment, including good American jobs that pay good American wages and benefits. If we let powerful
CEOs trample all over these rights without consequences, we might as well give up on having a middle class altogether.
"Thats what this all comes down to. What we are really witnessing here is another example of the Republican assault on
the middle class that has been echoing across the country for months now. Just as people are rising up in states across the
country to tell Governors and other elected leaders not to destroy their rights, we in this body also need to stand up and tell
powerful and politically connected corporate CEOs that they are not above our nations laws.
"Americans understand fairness, and they resent it when the wealthy and powerful manipulate the political system to reap
huge advantages at the expense of working people. Thats exactly whats happening in this case. Powerful corporate
interests are pressuring members of this body to interfere with an independent agency, rather than let justice run its course.
"Instead, we should turn our attention back to the issues that really matter to American families how we can create jobs
2
NLRB-FOIA-00008741
in Washington, South Carolina, Iowa, and across the country . . . how we can rebuild the middle class . . . and how we can
ensure that working hard and playing by the rules will help you build a better life for your family and your children. I plan
to spend a lot of time in the HELP Committee this year exploring these issues, and I hope my colleagues on both sides of
###
NLRB-FOIA-00008742
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Cleeland, Nancy
Solomon, Lafe E.
image001.jpg
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Subject: FW: ! Senators Alexander, Graham, DeMint Introduce Job Protection Act !
Nancy,
As I said, Id appreciate any response even of the no-comment variety just like to get NLRBs voice in the article.
(OF course, I would prefer something a bit better than no-comment, but..!)
Jim/
James Rosen
McClatchy Newspapers
To: undisclosed-recipients
Contact:
Bill preserves federal laws protection of state right-to-work laws; has 34 Senate Republican
sponsors
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008743
WASHINGTON U.S. Senators Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), and Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) today
introduced the Job Protection Act (S. 964), a bill to preserve federal laws existing protections of state right-to-work laws.
On April 20, the acting general counsel of the National Labor Relations Board moved to stop Boeing from building
airplanes at a nonunion plant in South Carolina, suggesting that unionized American company cannot expand its
operations into one of the 22 states with right-to-work laws, which protect a workers right to join or not join a union.
Alexander said: This is not just about South Carolina and its not just about making airplanes this is about jobs in
every state in the country, and whether or not manufacturers are going to be able to make in the United States what they
sell in the United States. I cant think of one single action the federal government would take that would make it harder to
create new jobs in Tennessee than this Boeing complaint, if its allowed to move forward.
Graham said: The NLRB is doing the bidding of the unions at a great cost to South Carolina and our nations economy.
I do not believe unelected bureaucracies should be allowed to go down the road the NLRB is charting. The foundation of
the NLRB complaint against Boeing would destroy the American business communitys ability to negotiate and make
rational business decisions. Our legislation prohibits the use of statements made during negotiations involving legitimate
business concerns to be used as a legal basis for a violation of the National Labor Relations Act. It is time for Congress
to speak out in a common-sense way against the outrageous and frivolous complaint by unelected bureaucrats at the
NLRB.
DeMint said: Right to work states are winning the future for America's economy, yet this administration seems intent on
stamping out this model of success. Right to work states have more business growth, more new jobs, and faster rising
incomes than forced-unionism states. What the NLRB has done in the Boeing case is a threat to workers and businesses in
every state. The NLRB is encouraging companies to take their jobs and investment overseas. This is a reprehensible act
and an obvious kickback to union bosses the President is depending on helping his reelection. Unless we pass this bill,
every worker and business in this nation is under the threat that if they don't do what union bosses want, this
administration will come after you. Businesses have the right to invest in any state in America and states shouldnt be
penalized for protecting the rights of their citizens not to be forced to pay union dues. Right to work states should be
applauded, not attacked, as they are attracting new investment and creating new jobs precisely because their policies
clarify that the NLRB would not be able to order an employer to relocate jobs from one location to another.
guarantee an employer the right to decide where to do business within the United States.
protect an employers free speech regarding the costs associated with having a unionized workforce without fear
###
NLRB-FOIA-00008744
NLRB-FOIA-00008745
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Solomon, Lafe E.
Hi Lafe,
Are we still on for the phone interview with National Journal at 10:30? 10-15 minutes max.
Also, Melanie Trottman of the Wall Street Journal is requesting a 15 minute interview, in person if possible. She asked for
11. What do you think? I told her you cant talk about the Boeing case because were done talking about it. This is what
she said:
But the feature Im planning to do is aimed at Tuesdays paper. Him talking more generally would be fine. He can decline
to comment about Boeing. I want to get into the agencys broad thinking (if in fact there is such a thing. He might say
theres no broad thinking and all of this is decided on a case by case basis.)
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00008746
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Solomon, Lafe E.
Kearney, Barry J.
Purcell, Anne G.
Thanks. I thought about it today because some on the right are tying the Dubuque memo to Boeing. I wonder what theyll
non-responsive
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008747
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Garza, Jose
Solomon, Lafe E.
Lafe,
Please find attached a draft response to the Issa request to participate in the South Carolina hearing. Also, we should
gather today to talk about the meeting with Mr. Kline. I am available at your convenience.
Thank you,
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00008748
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008749
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008750
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Solomon, Lafe E.
Non-responsive
Jen, Jose and I will finish the response to your invitation to the South Carolina hearing.
By the way, if you were going to go, it would have to be at your own expense You
NLRB-FOIA-00008751
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Cleeland, Nancy
Solomon, Lafe E.
This is great!
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00008752
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Solomon, Lafe E.
Mattina, Celeste J.
lbkiernan@zuckerman.com
Exemption 5
On Jun 10, 2011, at 12:31 PM, "Mattina, Celeste J." <celeste.mattina@nlrb.gov> wrote:
<image001.jpg>
Final? Please read it one more time and let me know if any further
NLRB-FOIA-00008753
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mattina, Celeste J.
Solomon, Lafe E.
lbkiernan@zuckerman.com
Cc: lbkiernan@zuckerman.com
Exemption 5
On Jun 10, 2011, at 12:31 PM, "Mattina, Celeste J." <celeste.mattina@nlrb.gov> wrote:
<image001.jpg>
Final? Please read it one more time and let me know if any further
NLRB-FOIA-00008754
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ferguson, John H.
openingIssa3.doc
NLRB-FOIA-00008755
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008756
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008757
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008758
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008759
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008760
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Abruzzo, Jennifer
Solomon, Lafe E.
OpeningIssafinal.doc
NLRB-FOIA-00008761
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008762
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008763
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008764
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008765
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Solomon, Lafe E.
To: Garza, Jose; Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.
Jose,
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Jennifer
To: Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.
Please find attached a rough draft of our response to the continuing draft production request. I am also working to pull
Jose P. Garza
202-273-0013
NLRB-FOIA-00008766
Microsoft Outlook
Sophir, Jayme
Karsh, Aaron
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
non-responsive
Deb has
done a draft of a GC memo in Boeing, but hasnt yet had her agenda with Barry, so I dont want to give it to her yet but its
possible shell have an agenda tomorrow and then have downtime waiting for a GC agenda and could do it. Lets just
hold onto it as a TBA case for a couple of days, and maybe shell be able to take it.
non-responsive
non-responsive
So, sure, let's assign this to one of the volunteers, if one is available.
, Deb is mired in Boeing, and
non-responsive
unavailable
is
then?
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00008767
non-responsive
non-responsive
Jayme Sophir
202-273-3837
Tracking:
2
NLRB-FOIA-00008768
Recipient
Delivery
Karsh, Aaron
NLRB-FOIA-00008769
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Farrell, Ellen
Sophir, Jayme
FW : Boeing
Jayme
-to bring you into to the loop re the press release discussion.
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
See if GC avaliable late morning and we will set up conference around GC schedule
--------------------------
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
NLRB-FOIA-00008770
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Fair enough.
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
Exemption 5
Ellen
NLRB-FOIA-00008771
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
Attached are the memo, which issued yesterday, and the fact sheet.
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: Boeing
Ellen, W ould you please send electronically to Nancy the Boeing Advice memo and fact sheet?
Nancy, W e anticipate that Region 19 will issue complaint next week. We can talk about it, but
Exemption 5
Thanks, Lafe
NLRB-FOIA-00008772
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sophir, Jayme
Farrell, Ellen
RE: Boeing
Thanks.
Jayme
-to bring you into to the loop re the press release discussion.
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
See if GC avaliable late morning and we will set up conference around GC schedule
--------------------------
Exemption 5
Ellen
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008773
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Fair enough.
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
2
NLRB-FOIA-00008774
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Exemption 5
Nancy Cleeland
(202) 273-0222
nancy.cleeland@nlrb.gov
Nancy
Attached are the memo, which issued yesterday, and the fact sheet.
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Subject: Boeing
Ellen, W ould you please send electronically to Nancy the Boeing Advice memo and fact sheet?
Nancy, W e anticipate that Region 19 will issue complaint next week. We can talk about it, but
Exemption 5
Thanks, Lafe
Tracking:
3
NLRB-FOIA-00008775
Recipient
Delivery
Farrell, Ellen
NLRB-FOIA-00008776
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Farrell, Ellen
Boeingpressrelease.jls.doc
Exemption 5
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Jayme Sophir
202-273-3837
NLRB-FOIA-00008777
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008778
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008779
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Kearney, Barry J.
Solomon, Lafe E.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Cleeland, Nancy; Ahearn, Richard L.
Boeingpressrelease.jls.doc
Exemption 5
Jayme Sophir
202-273-3837
NLRB-FOIA-00008780
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008781
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008782
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Cleeland, Nancy
Ahearn, Richard L.; Mattina, Celeste J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen;
boeingreleasefinal.doc
Attached is the latest, and perhaps final, version of the Boeing release with some nice additions by Rich and Celeste. Fact
sheet will be coming soon. We'll link to that in the release if it's ready. Thanks everyone.
NLRB-FOIA-00008783
NLRB-FOIA-00008784
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
Cleeland, Nancy
Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Ahearn, Richard L.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.;
Cleeland, Nancy
Hi all,
Here's a draft of the Fact Sheet. I will add the links later. Please take a look when you can. Thanks.
NLRB-FOIA-00008785
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008786
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008787
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008788
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Kearney, Barry J.
To: Abruzzo, Jennifer; Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Subject: RE:
Exemption 5
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Garza, Jose; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
Attached is the whole draft response, including Richs 2 cents and Joses response to question 2.
To: Mattina, Celeste J.; Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject: FW:
My 2 cents.
Rich
To: Garza, Jose; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.; Kearney, Barry J.; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Schiff, Robert
Subject:
Here it is.
NLRB-FOIA-00008789
To: Schiff, Robert; Garza, Jose; Abruzzo, Jennifer; Kearney, Barry J.; Ahearn, Richard L.
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008790
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008791
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008792
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008793
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008794
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008795
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008796
N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
N A ri, )N
1099 N th ST R E E T N W
W A SH IN G T O N D C 20570
A L
R o l,
X IiI A I IO N S R O A R .I1
w w w .nlrb.gov
M ay 9 , 2 0 1 1
T he B oeing C om pany
C h ica g o ,IL 6 0 6 0 6 -1 5 9 6
D ear M r. Luttig:
R e : T h e B o e in q C o m p a n y
captioned case.
statem ents in the press about this m atter. N eedless to say,I don't agree w ith
your contentions. T he re have been num erou s conversa tions b etw een m y office
and B oeing concerning the facts and the law surrounding the circum stances of
forum to test those positions and the relevance and probative value of your
------ assertions is -through -therdevelopm ent-o f a n -evidO litiary record -on W hich -a
h -
adm inistrative law judge can m ake a decision w hich can be review ed by the
B oard and ultim ately the C ourts. F inally,w hile our earlier efforts to resolve this
m atter w ere unsuccessful,I still rem ain open to a resolution betw een the parties.
S in ce e l
Lafe/E . S olom on
NLRB-FOIA-00008797
A L A N W IL S O N
ATTO R N EY G EN ER AL
A pril 28,2011
T oday,A ttorneys G eneral from across the country joined m e in sending the attached letter to L afe
Solom on, A cting G eneral C ounsel of the N ational L abor R elations B oard, regarding the N L R B 's com plaint
against B oeing.T his com plaint is an ill-conceived retaliatory action filed on behalf of the labor unions.
O ur letter calls on the N L R B to im m ediately w ithdraw their com plaint against B oeing and to cease their
A s stated in the letter, "the N L R B , through this single proceeding, attem pts to sound the death knell of
the right to w ork. A dditionally, this tenuous com plaint w ill reverberate throughout union and non-union states
alike, as international com panies w ill question the w isdom of locating in a country w here the federal
I sincerely hope that you w ill share our letter w ith your colleagues and w ill join us and in calling upon
M r.Solom on and the N L R B to stop their aggressive actions against South C arolina,our citizens,and our right-
to-w ork.
A s you are aw are,M r.Solom on previously threatened federal litigation against South C arolina,along
w ith A rizona, South D akota, and U tah over the constitutional am endm ents sim ilar to the one 86.2% of South
C arolina voters passed to ensure em ployees m aintained the right to a secret ballot in a union election.T his
w eek,the N L R B announced its intention to go forw ard w ith suits against A rizona and South D akota and that
lim ited resources curtailed its ability to bring action against S outh C arolina and U tah.
T hank you again for all you do for our state in W ashington and please keep m e and m y office inform ed
of actions in W ashington in support of our efforts to stop the N L R B 's attack on our right to w ork.
Sincerely,
J 4 ,fip
A lan W ilson
NLRB-FOIA-00008798
So p h ir, J a y m e
Fro m :
VVillen, D ebra L
S en t:
T u e sd a y, Ja n u a ry 1 1 , 2 0 1 1 1 :2 3 P M
T o :
C ontee, E rne stine R .; K earne y, B arry J.; F arrell, E llen ; S oph ir, Jaym e; S zapiro, M iriam ; K atz, Ju dy; O m b erg, B ob ;
A hearn, R ichard L.
T o : W illen, D ebra L
C c: D avid C am pbell
S u b je c t: IA M m eeting w ith A G C
M s. W illen,
In re sponse to your em ail to D a ve C am pb ell, the follow ing p eople w ill be atte nding the m ee ting w ith A G C Lafe S olom o n next
w eek.
S incerely,
S eattle, W A 98119
206-285-2828
1/12/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008799
B lo o m b erg
67
G O VER N M EN T
bw ,
:-A LZEM
W E LC O M E ,
K e lle n
neys ssi
set. A -44s,,
F ro m O b scu rity
ttlithlY hom e
o n t :.
Jen a 1 0 .
g:f.'
1 I:. n sti: in t
;B loom berg: - A ppearing ender threat of a subpoena :501 the only reason
'I A L E R T S
C E sh a R p e n s,
lit C L IP soA R o
S olom on has becom e a puolic enem y to business groups and their R oputhican 011100. especially after M s A pril 20
coinplaint saying B oeing built a nonunion asseninty plant thr its new 757 D ream ither in S enth C arolina in retaliation
fo r w o rk sto p p ag es b y u n ien s at its S eattle-area aro d u ctio n h u b . B o ein g , th e w o rld 's larg est aero sp ace ccn th an y , h as
w e a rs e sti
T h e H o u se O rersh o n t an d G o v ein m en t R efo rm C o m m ittee. h ead ed b y P .ep u b lian R ep resen tath e D arrell rasa o f
C alifornia ris holding tom orrow 's session in N orth C hariest:in. silo 01 105 plant T he hearing's S ee indicates the
reception S alom on m ay receive:ft:intern:dation T hrough R egulation: T he 4099'0 H alting P attern on F ree E nterprise.'
.
.
$ 3 - fo s s
. rester
'T h e co m m ittee h as m ad e it d ear th at ills th eir in ten tio n to su b p o en a m e it I d o n o t 'M o n ter:1 y ap p ear: S o o m o n
q u estio n in g 'an ag en c.r ad in g in its y d asiiiu d icial cap acity ab o u t its d ecisio n s in a p en d in g case:
C ritics say S oiorron is part of a pre-union lig by the N L R B . salon investigates unfair-labor charges by unions against
S olom on m ay be -the her to im posing big labor's entire agenda: the N ational R ight to W ork C .onuniffee, a group
b ased in S p in g tield , V irg in ia. th at o p p o ses req u irin g w alk ers to jo in u n ien s, said in a F arm s" statem en t.
S olom on, w ho has isarked aS an N L R B attorney under six presidents of both parties. said he has no axe to arind and
w as just doing his job to enforce falr-labor law s w hen ne N ed the B oeing com plaint, w hich S ill adm iritsirative
'C am e to M e ,
S t isn 't th at I had S o m e ag en da to go g et th is cam ,'S o lo m on said In a M ay E intem iew . 'T his case cam e to 1 00 , an d i
S o lom o n's ab be at the N U R E I is d eco ratenw ah w hite oron ics le grow s in M s ert h ours. T h ere's alsea y ello w lave
S olom on w ent to w ant for the N L R B th 1972 as a field investigator. H e m et his w ife 01 32 years, C am , w hen ohs
w elted at the agency. H e tenths N L R B just long enough to gel his law degree al T ulane U niversity in N ew O rleans
an d retu rn ed as a staff-attorney.
E ven eritiC 3 S at: S olom on nas a dry w it and a sharp legal m ind. "I'm fond of L ate:P eter S M aum ber, a form er S L O B
W e Im re, th e in d iv id u als
i . ..
a9sential to m aking m itaisl
e S : d e c ia io n s in th e m tn ta l.
M eet D C 's P o w er P lay ers e
so m e w o rts" S th au m b er said th an in terv iew .
recently.
S o lo m o n h as said h e 1 0 5 0 1 0 ream a setiern en t w ith B asin g for six rn m th s b efo re issu in g th e co m p lain t ag ain st th e
com pany.
H e w an ts B oeing to add three 757s a m on th, the nu m ber planned in S outh C arolina, rolls output in W ash ington state.
T hat w ould tree B oeing to use the southern facility, as long as A increases production, w hich the confoanylths
d iacu ssed d o in g .
com pany law rer.l. M ichael L ung, N o B oeing w orkern in W ashirnoton state idstjobs or had their w ages reduced,
'T he com plaint has raised fundam ental issues, and the acU on 115511 15 really unprecedented: R eath said in an
inteM ew .
B usiness sm iths nave criticized zither steps taken by S olom on. H e threatened in Janudry th sue
fo u r states o v er
co n stitu tio n al an ien d m en te-th at g u aran tee w o rk ers a S eel0 h aW in u n io n electicn s an d "elect fed eral ru les allo w in g
em ployers to accept union altorbup cants filed out by a inalont; O t w orkets. S oiornon's office N ed a reinptaint against
A rizona on M ay 0.
D BO X
actin g g en eral co u n sel o f M e N atio n ai L ater R elatio n s B o ard a y ear ag e w an e sh o ts after 3 9 y ears o f relativ e
anonym ity as a career em ployee w ith the federal agenon S olom on said.
*M e gone from one or tw o G oogle pages to hundreds.'S olom on, 61, S aid in an Interdew w ith P ..looinberg
G overnm ent 'N othing really prepared m sfor the nonlegal pans of this job. I never could have im agined any arrow ,
ever.'
Et
R E P ners
LA T E SO LO M O N
H O also banked 3 M oe again st A m erican M edical R esp on se. a C enn ecticn t am buiancs com pan y. fo r brin g a w o rker
Jp G e n e ra l C o e n :Ja r.
33dera
B om :
n e in 4 , 1 9 4 9 , H e le n a ,
A rk an sas
K aesdyr
C asiiiie: S S , an d -M IN 2 5
'E ducation:
U ntiersity, 1970
975
esariiirier
-d th e N L R B O b o e O r
03001
b o ard rh en taers .
O ffice of R epresentation
A nneals
s d u n e 2 0 1 9 : B eC en tes .
aC ting general.0eurtsei
W hy H e M atters:
dl M c N L R B . S olom on has
P eein g an d o th er
co m p an ies th at
R epublicans criticize as
H ow H p G ot H ere:
S o lem o n t9 b e g en era:
co u n ael an d m ad e th in
P en d in g S en ate ad io s
Q uote A bout
m arsilaii.B ab so n , a p artn er
at S eY faittiSt,.avv ILO in
h an d lin g ty s as w o O as can
n.th.u n 't d o n.
e.'
In H is O w n W ords
00 csntrevorsi: over !S O R B
st really : g o es P al an d
ten s. M ak er m y d ecisio n s_
nom ination es N L R B
,g en eral co u n sel:
bother roe.'
sp o k esw o m an . said in an e-m ail. H e also co u le retu rn to o ls p rev io u s 1 0 0 0 5 d irecto r 0 1 0 0 1 0 9 5 's o ffice S t
S olom on said he expects It w Ill all w orn out in the end, 30 00 assured his parents. w ho are In T heir 90s. 5 A rkansas:
1 w as getting so m any si-m alls from rhyferrely m em bers telling m ethat they w ere behind m eths! l diew rits them and
T o can ted th e rep o rters o rith ls sto ry S tep h an ie A rm o u r in W ash in g to n at san n o tin g tith eirib erg .n at H elix
T o canted the editor responsible for this story L arry S iebert at lifenertgZ ieentbsrginet.
B looniber
G O V E R N M E N T
=
NLRB-FOIA-00008800
G en eral C o u n sel
I.
T h e B o ein g C o m p an y
1 0 0 N R iv ersid e M C 5 0 0 3 -6 0 2 7
C h icag e, IL 6 0 6 0 6 -1 5 9 6
M ay 3,2011
APLAF ArIV 40
W ashington, D .C . 20570-0001
I w rite regarding statem ents in your com plaint and elsew here including
decision to place its new 787 final assem bly line in South C arolina. A num ber of
these statem ents, w hich are critical to your case against B oeing,fundam entally
m ischaracterizations, for the public record and also for purposes of the com plaint you
have filed. T hrough these m isquotations and rnischaracterizations, you have done a
gave disservice to T he B oeing C om pany, its executives and Shareholders, and to the
160,000 B oeing em ployees w orldw ide. A nd, of course, you have filed a com plaint
based upon these m isstatem ents that cannot be credibly m aintained under law .
A s an initial m atter, repeated statem ents in the com plaint allege that B oeing
"rem oved w ork" from Puget Sound (116),"decided to transfer its second 787
sourcing supply program " to South C arolina (118(0).Y our A pril 20 press release
second line w ork in response to charges filed by the M achinists union and tbund
reasonable cause to believe that B oeing had violated tw o sections of the N ational
from Puget Sound. T he second line for the 787 is a new final assem bly line. A s it
did not previously exist in Puget Sound or elsew here, the second assem bly line could
not have been "rem oved" from , "transferred" or otherw ise "m oved" to South
C arolina. Sim ply put, the w ork that is and w ill be done at our C harleston, South
C arolina final assem bly facility is new w ork, required and added in response to the
historic custom er dem and tbr the 787. N o m em ber of the International A ssociation of
M achinists'union (L A M ) in Puget Sound has lost his or her job, or otherw ise suffered
NLRB-FOIA-00008801
any adverse em ploym ent action,as a result of the placem ent of this new w ork in the
Y our ow n R egional D irector,w hose office you have tasked w ith prosecuting
this case,understands that,and has accurately and publicly described the m atter
differently than you.A s the Seattle T iM es reported last year,"R ichard A hearn,the
N L R B regional director investigating the com plaint,said it w ould have been an easier
case for the union to argue if B oeing had m oved existing w ork from E verett,rather
than placing new w ork in C harleston." D om inic G ates, M achinists .F ile U nfair Labor
are already,via public statem ents,transform ing the theory of the com plaint to say
that,because B oeing com m itted to the State of W ashington that it w ould build all of
spokesw om an,N ancy C leeland,apparently told a new s organization that "the charge
that B oeing is transferring w ork aw ay from union em ployees stem s from the
com pany's original com m itm ent 'to the State of W ashington that it w ould build the
T he prem ise underlying that assertion that B oeing com m itted to the State of
W ashington to build all of the C om pany's 787s in W ashington is false.B oeing did
not com m it to the State of W ashington that it w ould build all of its 787s in that state.
B oeing honored and fully all of its contractual com m itm ents to the State .of
W ashington long before the decision to locate the C om pany's new production facility
in South C arolina.T he notion that B oeing had som ehow com m itted to W ashington
State to build all 787s in that state is neither m entioned nor even suggested either in
the I.A .M 's charge or in your recently tiled com plaint,and you never asserted that
B oeing had m ade such contractual com m itm ents to the State of W ashington in the
several discussions w e have had w ith you in the m onths preceding your tiling of the
com plaint.H ad you done so,w e w ould have explained toyou w hy such an
understanding w as plainly incorrect.I call upon you to quickly and fully correct the
record on this point.In addition to being W holly uninform ed,it creates the
im pression that you and your office are now in search of a theory that.-w ill support a
predeterm inedoutcom e,even a theory that has nothing to do w ith the 'N ational L abor
R elations A ct.
suggesting that B oeing broke com m itm ents to the State of W ashington,is had
enough.Far m ore egregious,how ever,are the statem ents that have been m ade
B oeing executives sought to "punish" union em ployees and to "threaten" them for
NLRB-FOIA-00008802
their past and possible future strikes,through the C om pany's statem ents and its
m essage that [the C om pany and its E xecutives] w ere doing this to punish their
em ployees for having struck and having the pow er to strike in the future." (Steven
T im es,A pril 23,2010,em phasis added.) 'N either your com plaint nor the post-hoc
statem ents you and other officials of the N L R B have m ade since the filing of the
com plaint offers a single B oeing statem ent let alone a "consistent m essage" that
stated that B oeing "decided to locate its 787 D ream liner second line in South
C arolina because of past U nit strikes,and threatened the loss of future U nit w ork
M arch 2,2010 interview of M r.A lbaugh by the Seattle T im es,but does not purport to
sheet" that quotes M r.A lbaugh as saying: "T he overriding factor [in transferring the
line] w as not the business clim ate.A nd it w as not the w ages w e're paying today.It
w as that w e cannot afford to have a w ork stoppage,you know ,every three years.-
It w ould,of course,have been entirely perm issible under existing law for M r.
A lbaugh to have m ade a statem ent that the C om pany considered the econom ic costs
of future strikes in its business decision to locate w ork in South C arolina or even
that it w as the sole reason for such decision.B ut M r.A lba -ugh did not even say either
W ell I think you can probably say that about all the states in the country right
now w ith the econom y being w hat it is.B ut again,the overriding factor w as
not the business clim ate and it w as not the w ages w e're paying people today.
can't afford to continue the rate of escalation of w ages as w e have in the past.
You know ,those are the overriding ./actors.A nd m y bias w as to stay here but
presentation of this quotation on its w ebsite m ake clear that M r.A lbaugh w as
referencing tw o,rather than one,"overriding factors," only one of w hich is the risk of
a future strike.T hese are critical om issions that directly contradict your apparent
NLRB-FOIA-00008803
part of a "consistent m essage" that B oeing sought to "punish" its union em ployees.
M r.A lbaugh expresses his "bias" in favor of Puget Sound and lauds the good-faith
efforts of both sides.H e explains that the com pany's preference w as to locate the
new production line in Puget Sound and that both the com pany and the union m ade
good-faith efforts to accom plish that shared objective.T hus,w hen not m isquoted,it
"punishm ent" to the union for its past or future strike capability.
C hairm an and C hief E xecutive O fficer,as a threat to punish union em ployees is but
another exam ple of m ischaracterization.T he com plaint alleges that M r.M cN erney
- "m ade an extended statem ent regarding 'diversifying [B oeing's} labor pool and labor
relationship,'and m oving the 787 D ream liner w ork to South C arolina due to 'strikes
happening every three to four years in Puget Sound." (C om plaint 6(a) (em phasis
added).)
statem ents.First,M r.M cN erney w as not m aking an "extended statem ent" about w hy
decision to locate the new final assem bly line in South C arolina had not even been
m ade at the tim e M r.M cN em ey's statem ents w ere m ade.Second,M r.M cN erney
answ ered only the question as to com Parative costs that w as asked.T hus,in the
passages you m isquote and m ischaracterize,he discussed the relative costs of a new
facility in a location other than Puget Sound,versus the potential costs associated
w ith "strikes happening every three to four years in Puget Sound." H e did not say,as
you allege through the com plaint's m isquotation,that B oeing selected C harleston
A nd M r.M cN erney did not even rem otely suggest that w hat w ould later turn
out to be the decision to open a new line in C harleston w as in retaliation for such
strikes,as you w ould have to establish to obtain the rem edies you seek in your
com plaint. H e did not say,he did not suggest, and he did not im ply in any respect
that B oeing intended to punish union em ployees or that a decision to locate a new
facility other than in Puget Sound w ould or m ight be m ade to punish the union for
past strikes or because of their pow er to strike in the future.N either did he say,
suggest,or im ply that any existing union w ork w as being transferred to C harleston.
H is answ er cannot be cited in support of the legal theories in the com plaint,m uch less
the sw eeping statem ent you m ade to the New York Tim es about B oeing's "consistent
m essage" that B oeing and its executives sought to "punish" the C om pany's union
em ployees.
B oeing's intranet w ebsite for all em ployees," m uch less posted for the purpose of
NLRB-FOIA-00008804
sending an illegal m essage under the N L R A ,as the com plaint incorrectly and
m isleadingly suggests.
N or do any of the other few statem ents you reference in your com plaint
w hich I attach to this letter rem otely suggest an intent to "punish" the C om pany's
unionized.em ployees.Q uite the contrary:.these statem ents show ,at m ost,that the
C om pany considered (am ong m ultiple other factors) the risk and potential costs of
future strikes in deciding w here to locate its new final assem bly facility.T hose have
been deem ed perm issible considerations by an unbroken line of Suprem e C ourt and
N L R B precedent for 45 years.N ot only that,but,as you know ,B oeing reached out to
the IA M in an effort to secure a long-term agreem ent that w ould have resulted in
placing the second line in Puget Sound.A lthough those negotiations w ere not
successful,that effort alone defeats your w holly unsupported claim that B oeing
represented by -unions and those w ho are not.Y our statem ent im plies that B oeing's
m ost senior executives acted out of personal spite and retribution tow ard its labor
em ployees,and the C om pany's shareholders.Y ou have no support for that statem ent
w hatsoever.
Y our Statem entT hatB oeing's Statem ents And Actions W ere So D em onstrably
Y ou also told the New York Tim es that,given the C om pany's so-called
"consistent m essage" that the C om pany intended to "punish" the union for its prior
strikes and its pow er to strike in the future,you had no choice but to issue a
com plaint.(Specifically,you said: "I can't not issue a com plaint in the face of such
evidence.") A m ong other reasons,that statem ent is puzzling,to say the least,in light
of the course of B oeing's discussions w ith you and your office concerning this m atter
over the past six m onths.In particular,it is hard to reconcile w ith w hat has been your
repeated statem ent that you did not believe this w as a m atter in w hich the N L R B
should be involved and that you w ould take no action on the m atter if-B oeing agreed
that it w ould not lay off any 787 em ployees in Puget Sound during the duration of its
W e of course understand that you reversed your position and abandoned the
agreem ent that you yourself sought from B oeing after your further discussions w ith
the com plainant.B ut the point is this: It is exceedingly difficult to understand how
you could have proposed and then agreed to such a resolution il as you now say,you
believed that the statem ents and actions by B oeing and its executives w ere so
NLRB-FOIA-00008805
egregious that the law literally com pelled a com plaint by the N L R B .O f course,the
Finally,there is the issue of your articulation of the rem edy sought in this
com plaint.T he com plaint seeks an order directing B oeing to "have the [IA M ]
operate [B oeing's] second line of 787 D ream liner aircraft assem bly production in the
State of W ashington." N otw ithstanding that you are seeking this rem edy,your office
has been at pains since filing the com plaint to state publicly that this is not equivalent
B oeing's current plan is to produce a m axim um of ten 787s per m onth: seven in
Puget Sound,and three on the second line in C harleston.If the N L R B w ere to order
B oeing to produce out of Puget Sound the three 787s per m onth that are planned to be
assem bled in C harleston,that w ould of course require the production of all of the
explained repeatedly to you and your staff in our extended discussions .before you
* * * * * *
before the A dm inistrative L aw Judge,and ultim ately,before the 'N ational L abor
R elations B oard itself in upcom ing proceedings,M r.Solom on.T o the extent they
reflect m isunderstandings of the facts on your part,w e w ould expect your prom pt
Sincerely yours,
.1 1 3 0 11fof
T he B oeing C om pany
A ttachm ent.
NLRB-FOIA-00008806
....T here w ould be execution challenges associated w ith thatchoice [of C harleston].
B ut keep in m ind that w e've got a pretty good-sized operation dow n in C harleston today.
T he -- there w ould be som e duplication.W e w ould obviously w ork to m inim ize that.
B ut I think having said all of that,diversifying our labor pool and labor relationship,has
som e benefits.I think the union 1A M and the C om pany have had trouble figuring it out
betw een them selves over the last few contract discussions.
A nd I've got to figure out a w ay to reduce that risk to the C om pany.A nd so som e of the
m ore than overcom e by strikes happening every -- every three or four years in Puget
Sound and the very negative financial im pact of the C om pany,our balance sheet w ould
be a lot stronger today had w e not had a strike last year.O ur custom ers w ould be a lot
happier today,had w e not had a strike last year.A nd the 787 program w ould be in better
shape had w e not.A nd so I don't blam e -- I don't blam e this totally on the union.W e
just haven't figured out a w ay,the m ix doesn't -- isn't w orking w ell,yet.So w e've either
got to satisfactory satisfy ourselves the m ix isn't different or w e have to diversify our
labor base,
im proving our com petitiveness and reducing vulnerability to delivery disruptions due to a
host of factors,from natural disasters to hom eland security issues and w ork stoppages.
W e're electing not to get into how individual sites fared in specific areas of the
evaluation.
* * * * * * * *
Q 8: W e understand you w ere pushing the union for a no-strike agreem ent and cam e
close to getting a 10-year deal.O bviously you didn't reach an agreem ent.W as that the
A : It w as an im portant part of our discussion w ith the union,but it w asn't the only
factor in our decision.In the final analysis,this cam e dow n to ensuring our long-term
global com petitiveness and diversifying the com pany to protect against the risk of
production disruptions that can occur for a variety of reasons,from natural disasters,to
agreem ent,w e feltour discussions w ith the TA M w ere productive and focused on the
NLRB-FOIA-00008807
sustain a reliable,on-tim e flow of deliveries to our custom ers.W e look forw ard to
m oving forw ard w ith the IA M in a positive w ay to grow our business in an increasingly
* * * * * * * *
Q 26:Y ou say thathaving a second line in C harleston reduces risk,butif the [A M goes
A : G eographically diversifying final assem bly on the 787 w ill protect a portion of
stoppages due to labor disputes.H aving the second line w illalso give us assurance and
6(c) -
S e a ttle tim e s article,D ecem ber 7,2009
B oeing spokesm an Jim Proulx cited strikes in the PugetSound region as a m ajor factor in
the decision.W ith a second supplier for every part,B oeing potentially could continue
producing D ream liners in South C arolina even if the M achinists w enton strike here.
"R epeated labor disruptions have affected our perform ance in our custom ers'eyes,"
Proulx said."W e have to show our custom ers w e can be a reliable supplier to them ."
The second production line "has to be able to go on regardless of w hat's happening over
here," he added.
* * * * * * * *
"W e w illim m ediately begin identifying,selecting and contracting w ith suppliers to stand
Proulx said B oeing has notdeterm ined how m uch w ork w illbe replicated w ithin the
com pany in the new C harleston facility and how m uch m ay go to outside suppliers.
W hen B oeing broke ground on its C harleston assem bly line in N ovem ber,the com pany
disclosed extensive plans for other buildings atthe facility.A m ong these is a "fin and
NLRB-FOIA-00008808
H e said the replication of parts sourcing also w ould "accom m odate the ram p-up" required
* * * * * * * *
"W e inform ed the (JA M ) of our plans to begin dualsourcing during the com pany/union
discussions preceding our decision to place the second 787 line in South C arolina,"
C onner's m essage to m anagers stated."W e rem ain com m itted to strengthening our
* * * * * * * *
capabilities,based on their ability to produce high-quality com ponents and atthe best
value."
oversightis in place to m ake sure the perform ance standards are m et," he said.
"W e are notm oving any w ork thatB oeing em ployees are currently perform ing w e are
6(d) -
P ugetSound B usiness JournalA rticle,D ecem ber 8,2009
* * * * * * * *
B oeing spokesm an Jim Proulx said itw as "too early" to tellif the new production w illbe
contracted outor done by B oeing itself atthe new South C arolina site,or elsew here in the
country.
this region.
"T here w illbe no jobs lostas partof this m ove.T here are no plans to take this w ork
aw ay," he said.
NLRB-FOIA-00008809
6(e) -- Jim A lbaugh Interview w ith the Seattle Tim es, M arch 2,2010
W ell 1 think you can probably say that aboutall the states in the country rightnow w ith
the econom y being w hat it is.B ut again,the overriding factor w as not the business
clim ate and it w as not the w ages w e're paying people today.It w as that w e can't afford
to have a w ork stoppage every three years.W e can't afford to continue the rate of
escalation of w ages as w e have in the past.Y ou know ,those are the overriding factors.
A nd m y bias w as to stay here but w e could not get those tw o issues done despite the best
efforts of the U nion and the best efforts of the com pany.
NLRB-FOIA-00008810
Page 1 of 4
R eprints
B oein g L ab or D isp u te Is M ak in g N ew
B y STE V E N G R E E N H O U SE
pride of S outh C arolina, the biggest single investm ent ever m ade in a state that is far m ore
associated w ith old-line textile m ills than state-of-the-art m anufacturing. In just a few w eeks,
1,000 w orkers w ill begin assem bling the first of w hat they hope w ill be hundreds of 787
D ream liners.
T hat is, unless the federal governm ent takes it all aw ay.
In a case that has enraged S outh C arolinians and becom e a cause clbre am ong R epublican
law m akers and presidential hopefuls, the N ational L abor R elations B oard has accused B oeing
of illegally setting up shop in S outh C arolina because of past strikes by the unionized w orkers at
its m ain m anufacturing base in the S eattle area. T he board is asking a judge to order B oeing to
m ove the D ream liner production and the associated jobs to W ashington S tate.
C om panies can generally m ove a plant anyw here they choose, although federal law bars them
from doing so if a m ove involves punishing em ployees for exercising their federally protected
right to unionize or strike. O n several occasions, B oeing executives m entioned past strikes as a
reason for the m ove to S outh C arolina m ost directly, w hen one told the S eattle T im es that the
"overriding factor" in the decision w as "w e can't afford to have a w ork stoppage every three
y ears." ,
T he unusual legal action, filed in A pril at the behest of B oeing's principal union, has grow n into
a political conflagration, fanned by deep resentm ents betw een N orth and S outh, D em ocrats and
R epublicans, union and nonunion w orkers, and fans and foes of B ig G overnm ent.
Page 2 of 4
R epublican presidential candidates have denounced the case as a sym bol of President O bam a's
liberal agenda because he appointed the labor board's top officials.T his w eek,M itt R om ney
called the labor board's case a job killer.N ew t G ingrich has proposed term inating the board's
funding,and T im Paw lenty said the case evokes "the Soviet U nion circa 1970s."
A t a tim e of great econom ic anxiety,the case raises questions about the federal governm ent's
role in prom oting or im peding corporate investm ent and job creation.
-\ Facing so m uch heat,M r.O bam a said on W ednesday that he did not w ant to discuss details of
H ow ever,"as a general proposition,com panies need to have the freedom to relocate," he said.
"W e can't afford to have labor and m anagem ent fighting all the tim e,at a tim e w hen w e're
com peting against G erm any and C hina and other countries that w ant to sell goods all around
the w orld."
B usiness and governm ent leaders in the South argue that the labor board is underm ining
B oeing's com petitive advantage,and they are particularly incensed that officials seem to be
"T his is a huge issue because econom ic developm ent in the South has really been accelerated by
the grow th of nonunion plants," said M erle B lack,a political science professor at E m ory
U niversity."T his case directly threatens the Southern m odel of econom ic developm ent."
For South C arolina,the B oeing plant m eans far m ore than just the thousands of jobs it w ill
create directly and indirectly.B oeing is a m arquee com pany,and state leaders hope its presence
w ill help erase South C arolina's lingering im age as an industrial backw ater.
"B oeing w as a dream com e true for South C arolina," said G ov.N ikki R .H aley in an interview .
"T hey cam e in and brought the hope of the A m erican dream to this state to create real,good-
quality jobs."
c
"E verybody I talk to here is excited aboutthis plant," said one w orker,W ayne G ravot.O n a
recent day at the plant,w hich is the size of 12 footballfields,he and five co-w orkers w ere
practicing drilling through carbon fiber a lightw eight com posite m aterial,as hard as m etal,
http://w w w .nytim es.com '20 1 1 /07/01 /business/O lboeing.htm l?_r=1 & ref=todayspaper& page...7/1/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008812
Page 3 of 4
long ago,he w as laid off from a m edical devices com pany and he does not w ant to end up
T he outcom e of the case m ay not be certain for years,as it w inds through N .L .R .B .proceedings
and likely court appeals.If B oeing loses,it could be ordered to m ove its three-a-m onth
D ream liner assem bly line from South C arolina to W ashington State.
A s M s.H aley and South C arolina's m em bers of C ongress see it,federal bureaucrats have no
right to snatch aw ay the state's prize or tell a global com pany w here to locate a factory.
L ike m any R epublicans,M s.H aley holds President O bam a responsible."H e didn't just slap
South C arolina,he slapped a great com pany that chose to do business here," she said."T he
president talks about doing som ething to create jobs that's the last thing he's doing here."
B oard officials say that they have never discussed the case w ith the W hite H ouse.
Increasing the sense of disbelief for m any here in South C arolina,the board filed the case just as
T he case stem s from a com plaint the International A ssociation of M achinists and A erospace
E ngineers filed last year,asserting that B oeing w as illegally retaliating against its m em bers in
W ashington State for exercising their right to strike.T hose w orkers have gone on strike five
C hristopher C orson,the m achinists'general counsel,said,"B oeing broke the law ,and there are
B oeing officials deny violating any labor law s,saying that the m ain reason they chose South
C arolina w as to low er production costs.O n T hursday,an adm inistrative law judge in Seattle
C onnie K elliher,a spokesw om an for the m achinists,said the union w as not seeking to shut
dow n the South C arolina plant.In its settlem ent negotiations w ith B oeing,the union has
suggested that the com pany keep the plant operating by m oving som e outsourced parts
Page 4 of 4
production from other countries to South C arolina an idea that B oeing and industry analysts
consider unrealistic.
For the m achinists, the stakes are high. T hey fear that if D ream liner production is allow ed to go
forw ard in South C arolina,then m uch of B oeing's future expansion w ill take place there.
For South C arolina, battered by the closing of textile m ills and furniture factories, the plant is
equally vital.
"T hese things com e along at best once a decade," said D ouglas P.W oodw ard,an econom ics
professor at the U niversity of South C arolina. "It's as big as anything that's happened to South
Indeed, B M W opened near Spartanburg in 1994, w ith 1 ,2 0 0 w orkers. Since then, em ploym ent
has expanded to 7,000, and officials say the factory has produced
2 1 ,0 0 0 spinoff jobs.South
"If B oeing takes off,South C arolina w ill soar w ith it," Professor W oodw ard said.
http ://w w w .nytim es.com /2011/07/01/busine ss/O lb o eing.htm l?_r=1 & ref=to daysp ap er& p age ...7/1/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008814
S o p h ir, d aym e
F ro m :
Kearney, B arry J.
S e n t:
T o :
F ro m : A hearn, R ichard L.
T o : C leeland, N ancy
A dd us to your A ddress B ook! A dd tom _harkingharkin.enew s.senate.goy to your address book now to ensure your
M ay 10,2011
S e n a to r T o m H a rk in (II-IA ), C h a irm a n
FO R IM M E D IA T E R E L E A SE
M ay 10,2011
U n s u b s c rib e
U p d a te M y P ro file
h ttp ://h e lp .s e n a te .g o v
(202) 224-3254
W A SH IN G T O N Senate H ealth,E ducation,L abor and Pensions (H E L P) C om m ittee C hairm an T om 1-larkin (D -IA ) today
released the follow ing statem ent responding to the com m ents m ade by R epublican politicians at a press conference today
on the N ational L abor R elations B oard investigation of the B oeing C om pany. O n T hursday,H arkin w ill convene a H E L P
C om m ittee hearing to discuss w hy the m iddle class is increasingly slipping out of reach for A m ericans,at w hich the
"W hat w e are really w itnessing here is another exam ple of the R epublican assault on the m iddle class that has been
echoing across the country for m onths now . Instead of focusing on how w e can get A m ericans w orking again and get the
m iddle class back on its feet,R epublicans have chosen to spend their tim e attacking the handling of a routine unfair labor
practice charge. T his overly dram atic response and the disturbing m isinform ation they are peddling has needlessly
com plicated the legal process and distorted the public discussion of this case.
"T hese opponents of w orkers'rights have also m ischaracterized the fundam ental issue at stake, suggesting that this case
represents an assault on 'right to w ork'law s. T hat's just factually incorrect there is absolutely no w ay that the outcom e
5/10/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008815
"T his fight is about far m ore than just one group of w orkers in W ashington State.U nions are one of the few voices left in
our society speaking up for the little guy,and if w e let pow erful C E O s tram ple all over these rights w ithout consequences,
"T hat's w hat this all com es dow n to: pow erful corporate interests are pressuring public officials to interfere w ith an
independent agency,rather than let justice run its course.A nd w e should not tolerate this interference.Instead,w e should
turn our attention back to the issues thatreally m atter to A m erican fam ilies how w e can create jobs in W ashington,South
###
H E L P C o m m itte e W e b s ite
A b o u t C h a irm a n
H arkin
5/10/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008816
D E M O C R A T S,SE N A T E G O V
E N E SP#0
tLcit
Latest N
N ew sro o m
M ay 1 1,20 11
W ashington, D .C . N evada Senator H arry R eid m ade the follow ing rem arks
today regarding the N ational Labor R elations B oard. B elow are his rem arks as
"In a partisan environm ent,there is the tem ptation turn every issue into a political
"T hat's regrettable, butfar from unfam iliar.Politics play a role in our
exam ple,and tw o cham bers of the C ongress precisely because they anticipated
created in the sam e spiritof checks and balances.T hatagency is the N ational
Itm ediates allegations of unfair labor practices.A nd itdoes all this independent
independentas the agency he w orks for.L astm onth,he issued a com plaint
after B oeing w orkers in som e states w enton strike,the com pany retaliated by
ew s.
D em ocrat
,s.
U rge.
bil'C eos TO
in s te a d ' '
M ustK eep
IndependeritA gencies
;:polit.icaj P ressure
ti',L
ette :
r, R eid A nd :
'M en en d ei U rg e S en ate
R epublidans T o C osponsor
D eficit
B y E nding W asteful
H arielciiitST o B ig O il
C om panies
im rnigretion R eform
T helB order
M ore N ew s...
g j Like
tK
,pm -I EN
T ,P R O T EC TIO N
A FFO PD A U L C L IA R C A C 1
Rectivery
"T hat's justthe background. I'm nothere to judge the m erits of the case. In fact,
I'm here to do the exactopposite: to rem ind the Senate thatprejudging the case is
notour job.T hatw ould overstep long-established boundaries and w eaken our
tried to poison the decision-m aking process.T hey are interfering w ith case
"For exam ple,every R epublican Senator on the H E L P C om m ittee the "L " in
I
II
T o d a y -in th e S e n a te
M ay 11,2011:
NLRB-FOIA-00008817
w entoutof their w ay to link their requestto the acting general counsel's pending
B oeing again,long before an adm inistrative judge has the opportunity to review
the case.
"I strongly encourage all of them to take a step back.W e all know R epublicans
dislike organized labor.W e know they disdain unions because unions dem and
fairness and equality from the big businesses R epublicans so often shield atall
costs.
m em bers of thatgroup vote in large num bers.A nd because R epublicans and the
from m oving forw ard w ith charges they see fitto bring to the courts.A nclw e
and intim idation thatis the fundam ental question in this case.Itshould stop.
"W e need agencies like the N L R B to be able to operate freely and w ithout
:, , S enat
on cbrifirm ation O f the A llen
nom ination.
S enate Jobs
D esk::E m p lo y m en t
E m p lo y m en t,B u lletin
:
P lace y o u r re s u m e in th e
D em o cratic R esu rn e B an k
NLRB-FOIA-00008818
B o e in g 's la b o u r p ro b le m s
M o v in g fa c to rie s to fle e u n io n s
A p r 2 5 th 2 0 1 1 , 1 4 :1 6 b y M .S .
u n io n s to s ig n a c o n tra c t in w h ic h a n y o n e w h o w o rk s a t th e c o m p a n y h a s to jo in th e u n io n . T h a t
m a n a g e m e n t.
la b o u r la w to fle e y o u r u n io n . If it d id v io la te la b o u r la w , th e n B o e in g m a d e a b a d d e c is io n a n d
NLRB-FOIA-00008819
a b o u t w h a t th e ru le s o f th e g a m e o u g h t to b e , in o rd e r to d e live r va lu e to th e e co n o m y a n d to
so cie ty.
p rice s. It's a ve ry p o o r p re ce d e n t to se t:
d e cisio n a s to w h e th e r to p ro d u ce in P u g e t S o u n d o r S o u th C a ro lin a w o u ld h a ve n o th in g
th e o n ly th in g th e w o rke rs in P u g e t S o u n d w o u ld h a ve to w o rry a b o u t is w h e th e r th e ir d e m a n d s
co n d e m n e d a s "re strictio n s o n ca p ita l flo w ". T h e issu e isn 't fre e d o m o f ca p ita l. T h e issu e is
R e la te d ite m s
NLRB-FOIA-00008820
T ra p e : B o e in g , B o e in g , g o n e
T h e sp a ce sh u ttle : T h e
D iffe re n ce E n g in e : H o u sto n , w e
h a ve a p ro b le m ...
v la g g a rd s
A ircra ft fa tig u e : E xa m in in g
S o u th w e st's fu se la g e ru p tu re
o n fo r d e ca d e s
E n g in e : O ld b e fo re th e ir tim e
is fa ir?
T S A se cu rity p ro ce d u re s: A
g o o d re a so n to a vo id
co m p la in in g a b o u t a irp o rt
se cu rity
sa vin g s
T h e Q & A : D in a w M e n g e stu ,
n o ve list
M o re re la te d to p ic s : L a b o u r la w
CO
C rim e a n d p u n ish m e n t: A
re viva l o f flo g g in g ?
T h e w e e k a h e a d : T w e n ty-five
ye a rs o n
Law
h e e rv
\\
'& \\
NLRB-FOIA-00008821
The N ational L abor R elations B oard w as m erely doing its job w hen it charged B oeing w ith m aking an illegal transfer of w ork to South C arolina for
a second 787 production line,w rites guest colum nist Jeff Johnson,president of the W ashington State L abor C ouncil.
Jeff Johnson
TH E N ational L abor R elations B oard com plaint against B oeing has caused quite a stir.
A ccording to the N L R B charge, B oeing chose to set up its second 787 production line in
strikes against the com pany and the possibility the union could go on strike again.
?` T o p co m m en ts
O n A pril 24, The Seattle Tim es editorialized against the N L R B action ["Feds shouldn't
reverse B oeing's S.C . decision'] claim ing both the union and the com pany are grow n-
ups and both know their rights. A ccording to The Tim es, the union has a right to strike
and the com pany has the right to build production facilities anyw here it w ants w ithin
t( Jeff Johns.O
n is entitled to express his opinion
by B ealC at) R
e a d
o r e
'
B oth sides do have rights, but only one side, B oeing, violated the law . B oeing com m itted
an unfair labor practice not by putting its factory in South C arolina, a right-to-w ork
state; it broke the law w hen it m ade it clear to em ployees it w as relocating because of
strikes. This action created a chilling effect on its em ployees as w ell as the state of
W ashington.
decision. The N L R B is sim ply doing its job, defending the rights of w orkers to
collectively bargain and to act in concerted activity. W ere B oeing's actions to go unchecked, com panies w ould be free to coerce and
intim idate w orkers, their unions and states into deals that prim arily profit the com pany. This w ould m ake a m ockery of the fundam ental
Y et instead of sim ply having its day in court, B oeing is trying to use its trem endous political clout to stop the actions of this independent
federal law -enforcem ent agency. It is trying to w in politically because it cannot w in its case in a court.
The W ashington State L abor C ouncil, A FL -C IO , L A M , SPE E A and the m any other unions that represent w orkers at B oeing w ant the
com pany to expand production in W ashington state. W e w ant to design and produce the 787 and the next generation of 737s here. W e have
the m ost skilled m achinists and engineers, the best aerospace apprenticeship program and a great public infrastructure to support the
aerospace industry. B ut w e w ant the com pany to treat its w orkers and the state fairly and to obey the law .
D uring the past to years w e have dem onstrated w hat w e can accom plish w hen w e w ork together. O rganized labor has w orked w ith our
congressional delegation, B oeing and others to w in the A ir Force tanker deal. The recent tanker announcem ent is recognition of the
com m itm ent our state, our w orkers and our unions have m ade to B oeing and the aerospace industry. W hat w e expect from the com pany is a
com m itm ent to locate design and production w ork in W ashington state. W e expect B oeing to stop the coercive w ork and political threats
The N ational L abor R elations B oard issued the com plaint against B oeing after a careful investigation, providing B oeing w ith every
opportunity to defend itself. It even granted B oeing's num erous requests for delay. In the end, the B oard decided it w as com pelled to act in
the face of B oeing's adm ission that its m ove w as m otivated by its desire to avoid law ful collective bargaining.
B oeing claim s that no current em ployees in the Puget Sound have been harm ed by m oving w ork to the second line and that em ploym ent in
W ashington state has increased. The truth is, every job on the unlaw ful second line in S outh C arolina displaces good m iddle-class, union
jobs in W ashington, and our com m unities and the state lose desperately needed revenue and econom ic activity.
B oeing adm itted to retaliating against the union and in so doing m ade an illegal transfer of w ork. R ather than blam ing the N L R B for doing
NLRB-FOIA-00008822
its job,w e should all be asking w hy B oeing proceeded so recklessly w ith so m uch at stake.B oeing,grow up and face your responsibilities.
A titim itta id g
nw jot
FIN D TH EJO B YO U
DESERVE.
NLRB-FOIA-00008823
In th is S e c tio n
H o m e B o e in g C o m p la in t F a c t S h e e t
H om e
R ig h ts W e P ro te ct
a g a in s t th e B o e in g C o m p a n y a lle g in g th a t it v io la te d fe d e ra l la b o r la w b y d e c id in g to tra n s fe ta s e c o n d
in
S C H ,01
W hatW e D o
C a se s & D e cisio n s
W h o W e A re
a d m in is tra tiv e la w ju d g e .
C lic k h e re to s e e a n e w s re le a s e a b o u t th e c o m p la in t, a n d h e re to s e e a c o p y o f th e fu ll c o m p la in t. .
N e w s & M e d ia
P u b lica tio n s
R e s o u rc e s
T h e C h a rg e a n d C o m p la in t
T h e N L R B P ro ce ss
M yN LR B
F ind a C ase
u n io n fa c ility .
F ile C a se D o cu m e n ts
G ra p h s & D a ta
e m p lo y e e s in th e P u g e t S o u n d a re a o f W a s h in g to n , w h e re th e p la n e s a re a s s e m b le d , s in c e 1 9 3 6 , a n d in
F in d Y o u r R e g io n a l O ffice
F A Q s
F o rm s
N a tio n a l L a b o r R e la tio n s A ct (N L R A )
R e la te d A g e n cie s
T h e c o m p la in t is s u e d b y th e A c tin g G e n e ra l C o u n s e l (1 9 -C A -3 2 4 3 1 ) a lle g e s th a t B o e in g v io la te d tw o
to e m p lo y e e s a n d th e m e d ia . F o r e x a m p le , a s e n io r B o e in g o ffic ia l
sa id in a v id e o ta p e d in te rv ie w w ith th e
S e a ttle T im e s n e w sp a p e r: " T h e o v e rrid in g fa c to r (in tra n sfe rrin g th e lin e ) w a s n o t th e b u sin e ss c lim a te .
k n o w , e v e ry th re e ye a rs ."
e m p lo y e e s b y S e c tio n 7 o f th e A c t."
b a rg a in in g a g re e m e n t w ith B o e in g .
T h e L a w a n d S u p p o rtin g C a s e s
R IG H T S O F E M P LO Y E E S
NLRB-FOIA-00008824
veA he:
R IG H T T O S T R IK E
N othing In this A ct S hairlaire'construeck so as e ith e r to in te rfe re w ith .i0 E fr-riP e ci% p r d im in ish
C a s e s :
O n th e 8 (a )(1 ) ch a rg e :
sp e e ch u n d e r th e N L R A in N L R B v. G isse l P a ckin g C o rp ., 3 9 5 U S 5 7 5 , 6 1 8 (1 9 6 9 ).
sp e cu la tive fu tu re d a te ."
u n io n iza tio n o r strike d isru p tio n s w ith o u t a n y fa ctu a l b a sis. In co n tra st, th e B o a rd h a s fo u n d th a t e m p lo ye rs
1 0 7 4 , 1 0 7 5 -7 6 (2 0 0 4 )
O n th e 8 (a )(3 ) ch a rg e :
e m p lo ye e s w h o w e re like ly to strike , is th e kin d o f co e rcive d iscrim in a tio n th a t...d isco u ra g e s...p ro te cte d
N e x t S te p s
a n d a rg u e in fa vo r o f th e ir p o sitio n . T h e d e cisio n o f th e ju d g e m a y b e a p p e a le d to th e B o a rd in W a sh in g to n
NLRB-FOIA-00008825
L ab or. H ealth an d H u m an
S ervices. an d E ducation
gtatc of M ontana
C h a irm a n
L egislative B ran ch
owe ofReprelientatibecs
June 6,2011
1099 14thStreet,N .W .
W ashington,D .C .20570
As C hairm an ofthe L abor,-H ealth and H um an Services,E ducation and R elated Agencies
Appropriations Subcom m ittee,I take m y oversight responsibilities very seriously.And w hile that
m ost often involves m atters of a fiscalnature,it is also m y role to vigorously address any
im propriety and to preventany abuse of authority or policy overreach from occurring w ithin any
I am w riting regarding the N ationalL abor R elations B oard's ("N L R B ")actions in response to a
decision by T he B oeing C om pany ("B oeing") to locate its new 787 D ream liner m anufacturing
econom ic com petitiveness for its globalcustom er base,create jobs and an econom ic boom to a
state thathas nearly 10% unem ploym ent,and m aintain its status as a w orld leader in the
aerospace industry.B oeing has a strong record of providing good-paying jobs for Am erican
w orkers,including in m y hom e-state of M ontana,and for helping keep Am erica safe.T his is
exactly the type of private enterprise expansion our econom y needs to drive itself through a still-
sluggish recovery.
I believe the N L R B 's decision to issue a com plaint against B oeing in this m atter represents a
com plete breach of the Federalgovernm ent's role in regulating private industry and thatthe
rem edy cited therein is extraordinary and unprecedented.T he rem edy provided for in this
com plaint w ould require B oeing to m ove the second m anufacturing line to the state of
W ashington.Itis m ore than troubling to m e thatany agentof the Federalgovernm entw ould
have the audacity to seek to overturn legitim ate,core business decisions of a private enterprise.
Should you succeed in this com plaint,not only w ould B oeing have to abandon the over $1
billion it has currently spent on this facility over the last 17 m onths,it w ould also surely need to
spend considerably m ore to build new capacity in W ashington.T he lost investm ent and delay in
tim e w ould significantly im pair the com pany's ability to m eet custom er dem ands and
(202) 225-3211
(406) 256-1019
H elen a, M T 59601
(406) 443-7878
S u ite 2
(406) 543-9550
S u ite 16
(406) 454-1066
reh b erg.h ou se.gov w w w .fa ca b o o k .co m /d en n y .reh b erg .m t w w w .tw itter.co m /d en n y reh b erg
NLRB-FOIA-00008826
Y our com plaint,M r.Solom on,strikes atthe heartofBoeing's respected business m odel,and is
reportedly already having a chilling effecton entity's w ho are considering constructing new
facilities in the U nited States.Ata tim e w hen this econom y needs allthe investm entitcan get,
this draconian rem edy sends exactly the w rong m essage to allbusinesses:large and sm all,and
com plaintissued againstthe Boeing C om pany on April20...M lle com plaintinvolves m atters of
factand law thatare notunique to this case....".I do find this com plaintrem arkable,and I am
seriously concerned w ith the use ofagency resources to pursue such an extraordinary and
unusualrem edy given the detrim entaleconom ic im pactitis certain to cause.Atthe very least,
Therefore,I am requesting exam ples ofother com plaints w here the O ffice ofG eneralC ounsel
1. Based upon an entity's decision regarding w here to locate new w ork or a new
production/m anufacturing line,rather than the transfer ofexisting w ork (w hich is the case
w ith Boeing),and
2. M ade in absence ofthe entity being form ally accused or cited for taking adverse actions
againstunion em ployees.
Please also provide inform ation regarding the resolution ofsuch cases,including finalrem edies,
ifany.
Thank you very m uch for your tim ely response to m y request.
Sincerely,
D enny R ehberg
Chairm an
NLRB-FOIA-00008827
tic 20513
M ay 1 3 , 2 0 1 1
L afe E . S o lo m o n
1099
14th
S treet..N .W .
W ash in g to n . D .C . 2 0 :5 7 0
W e h av e clo sely m o n ito red th e activ ities at y o u r o ffice Ib r sev eral m o n th s an d h av e b eco m e
S in ce .
(N L R B ) to O v erru le th e 2 0 0 7 d ecisio n s in
G rosven or R esin., and
S i. G e ttrg e W a re h o u se .
fed eral law su it th at w o u ld in v alid ate am en d m en ts to th eir state co n stitu tio n s g u aran teein g secret
b allo t electio n s in u n io n rep resen tatio n cam p aig n s. T h ese actio n s rep resen t a p attern o f
b u reau cratic activ ism th at calls in to q u estio n th e cib jectiv ity an d cred ib ility o f y o u r o ffice.
C o rp o ratio n (B o ein g ). A lth o u g h th e facts id le ease are still in d isp u te. it ap p ears n o u n io n
e m p lo ye e al th e P u g et so u n d facility h as lo st h is o r h er jo b
as a resu lt o f B o ein g 's d ecisio n to
case ex ten d b ey o n d one sp ecific state an d w ill in stead h av e a lastin g im p act o n jo b creato rs
U n ited S tates.
NLRB-FOIA-00008828
S incerely.
../
R e p ..lo e W ilso n
,-
/-"/
':-
. "
0 ( ) V ( ..) I
1
C oiv
d
y
fI
-,..)
// (-I
1fi
..:
..../I
..
LITXX
). V irg in ia F o xx
e lo
R e p .'rim W lb e F g
R ep. Todd
R okita
R e p .K risti N o e m
(f.).
f,
.;//
A ? '
R e p . M ike K e lly .1 1
NLRB-FOIA-00008829
O N E .H U N D R E D 'T W E L F T H C O N G R E S S
D A R R E L L E . 154.. C A L IF O R N IA
cH ronm A N
:N tR A T IA
ug.t:
JO H N L . M IC A . F L O R ID A
T O D D R U S S E L L P L A T T S , P E N N S Y L V A N IA .
M IC H A E L R . T U R N E R . O H IO
P A T R IC K M cH E N R N O R IN C A R O L IN A
JIM JO R D A N . O H IO
JA S O N C IIA F F E Z. U T A H
c o v v r. M A C K .F L O R ID A
T im W A L P E R G . M IC H IG A N
JA M E S L A N aorto. O K L A H O M A
J u S lu i A m A sn , M IC H IG A N
A N N M A R IE B U E R K L E . N E W Y O R K
F A L iL A . G O S K R , D .D .S ., A M Z O N A
P A U L R :L A R R A D O H . ID A H O
P A T R IC K M E E H A N . P E N N S Y L V A N IA
S C O T T D E S JA M M S . M .O .. T E N N E S S E E
JO E W A L S H . 1 1 .1 1 = 7 5
I R E Y G O W D Y , S O U T H C A R O L IN A
D E N tliS A . R O S S , F L O R ID A
F R A N K C . M A N T A . N E W H A M P S H IR E
SL A K E F A R M M O L D . T E X A S
M IK E K E E E Y ,P E N N SY L V A N IA
lipuffe ofRepreoentatibeO
C O M M IT T E E O N O V E R S IG H T A N D G O V E R N M E N T R E F O R M
S T A F F ()M I C (O F (
2157 R A Y B U R N H O U S E O F F IC E B U IL D IN G
W A S H IN G T O N , D C 2 0 5 1 5 -6 1 4 3
ii..02j225-50t1
ijin 7 A S K )S i.1
!A M .:25-5C M
E LIJA H E
IIN C S . M A R T IA L :0
R A N K IN G M IN O R IT Y M E M B E R
Y O !...'S . N E W y o (ie.
C A R O L V N P . !A A L O N E , .N E W Y O R K .
E LE A N O R
. . !E l
N o n T O N
D !:: T R A C T L O L U M R IA
0E 770I5 j. K L F C :N IC H . 0,110
$717F tii:7:
.1 5 7 co o ? e rt.
E !E R A I I E C O .:N C .; I r,
M IK E C ILE II.P.E
LIN O !!!
D A N N Y K D A L IS . IL L IN E /IS
F iR U C E L . D R A M :,. IO W A
JO H N A . Y A R L IO III. K E N T U C K Y
C H R IS T O P H E R S . M U R P H Y , C O
N E C I (C U T
JA C K IE S P E IE R . C A L IF O R M A
ed...
M ay 12,2011
Lafe E .Solom on
W ashington,D .C .20570-0001
legalactions taken by the O ffice of G eneralC ounselof the N ationalLabor R elations B oard
W orkers ("1A M ") charged'that the B oeing C om pany ("B oeing" or "R espondent") engaged in
unfair labor practices under the N ationalLabor R elations A ct (the "A ct").
2 O n A pril 20,2011,
after an investigation into the IA M 's charges,you,as A cting G eneralC ounselof the N LR B ,
issued a C om plaint and N otice of H earing against B oeing pursuant to 10(b) of the A ct and
representative ("U nit") of B oeing's production and m aintenance em ployees in W ashington State
and Portland,O regon! T he m ost recent collective bargaining agreem ent betw een B oeing and
the 1A M has been in effect since N ovem ber 2,2008,and is effective untilSeptem ber 8,2012.4 j
T he B oard's C om plaint arises from B oeing's transfer of its second 787 D ream liner
production line of three planes per m onth from the U nit to its non-union site in N orth C harleston,
South C arolina in O ctober of 2009.5T he B oard charged B oeing w ith "interfering w ith,
the hire or tenure or term s or conditions of em ploym ent of its em ployees," and engaging "in
IB oeing and International A ssociation of M achinists and A erospace W orkers D istrict Lodge 751,
affiliated w ith
Internallonal A ssociation of M achinists and A erospace W orkers, before the N ationalLabor R elations B oard,R egion
2 29 U .
S .C . 151 et seq.
Id.
s Id.at 5.
NLRB-FOIA-00008830
M ay 12.2011
Page 2
unfair labor practices affecting com m erce" therefore violating 8(a)(3) and (1) and 2(6) and
(7) of
A ct.6 T he B oard found that.B oeing
w ould rem ove or had rem oved w ork from the U nit because em ployees had struck and
R espondent threatened or im pliedly threatened that the U nit w ould lose additional w ork in the
B oeing has responded thatithe .B oard's C om plaintis legally frivolous adding thatthe
one thousand jobs B oeing created in South C arolina.have not 'com e at the expense of jobs in the
State of W ashington.8 Furtherm ore,B oeing's South C arolina facility,w hich it announced plans
Peter Schaum ber,the form er chairm an of the B oard,has .described the 'B oard's m ove as
unprecedented." I Schaum ber has argued "[t]he w orkers don't have any claim to the w ork....
If the w orkers don't have any claim to the w ork,it w asn't retaliatory to open a new second
A letter from nine state A ttorneys G eneral including A lan W ilson,the A ttorney G eneral
of South C arolina called on the B oard to w ithdraw its com plaintagainstB oeing,describing it
as "an assaultupon the constitutional right to free speech,and the ability of our states to create
action seeks to destroy our citizens' right to w ork.It is South C arolina and B oeing today,but
w ill be any of our states,w ith our right to w ork guarantees,tom orrow ....[t]his unparalleled and
overreaching action seeks to drive & stake through the heart of the free enterprise system ."
I3
Second,w e note that you have directed the N L R B to file law suits against the states of
A rizona and South D akota. i4 W e understand that the N L R B seeks to invalidate constitutional
am endm ents passed by these states protecting w orkers'rights to secret ballot elections.T he
N L R B is apparently seeking to adm inistratively im pose card check, I5 now that efforts to pass
Id . at 7.
Id. at 4.
Id.
a va ila b le
Im
pfiboeing.
m
ediaroom
.
com
/index.
php?s=
43&
item
=
1714
at
3 PR ESS
F oxN E w S ,
"
" Id .
14 L etter, L ate S olom on, A cting G eneral C ounsel, N L R B , to A ttorney G enerals of A rizona, S outh D akota, U tah, and
i Judson
15 S ee E ditorial, B a ck D o o r C a rd C h e ck,
push the N L R B to im plem ent card check through the adjudicator) ,process).
NLRB-FOIA-00008831
M ay 12,2011
Page 3
card-check legislation have failed to gain support in C ongress. 16 Y ou are currently challenging
the authority of states to protect w orkers'rights to secret-ballot elections before their jobs can be
unionized.Y ou seek to invalidate constitutional am endm ents passed in A rizona and South
D akota protecting w orkers'rights to secret ballot elections reserving the right to also sue the
states of U tah and South C arolina.In a letter you w rote to these states'A ttorneys G eneral,you
claim that the state law s are "preem pted by operation of the.N L R A (29 U .S.C .151,et seq.) and
the Suprem acy C lause of the U nited States C onstitution (U .S.C onst.A rt IV ,cl.2)." I7
A ccording to one critic of card check,the N L R B 's actions reflect the B oard's
determ ination "to accom plish card check by backdoor m eans against the w ishes of the A m erican
people and C ongress." 18 L atelast year,the D em ocratic m ajority on the B oard "indicated its
interest in overturning a B ush-eraT uling allow ing som e w orkers to challenge a card-check
certification agreed to by a com pany and m ajority of its w orkers." I9 M arshall B abson,a
m anagem ent law yer appointed to a D em ocratic seat on the N L R B by form er President R onald
R eagan,described the N L R B 's actions as "a perversion of w hat adm inistrative law is supposed
to be."2
T he C om m ittee is carefully evaluating labor policy given the current econom ic clim ate.
T he N L R B 's recent actions to address labor activity are likely to im pact A m erica's econom ic
recovery.T hey also raise issues of great public im portance.In light of these concerns,the
C om m ittee seeks inform ation regarding the N L R B 's com m unications and policies.T he
C om m ittee requests that you provide the follow ing docum ents and inform ation for the tim e
1) A lldocum ents and com m unications referring or relating to the O ffice of G eneral
C oinseL linyohgatizi of B oeing,iticlaffirC but not lim ited to all com m unications
betw een the O ffice of G eneral C ounsel and the N ational L abor R elations B oard.
.
.,.
2) A ll docum ents-,including em ails.and call logs,and com m unications betw een anyone in
the O ffice of G eneral C ounsel or the N ational L abor R elations B oard and the
3) A lldocum ents,including em ails and calllogs, and .com m unications betw een the O ffice
o.f G eneral C ounsel or the N ational L abm itelations B oard and any
1 S am H ananel, F eds threaten to sue slates over union law s, A P ,(Jan.14,2011), (m ailable at
18 H ananel, supra note 15, (quoting P hilK erpen, V ice P resident for P olicy. A m ericans for P rosperity).
NLRB-FOIA-00008832
M r.Lafe E.Solom on
M ay 12,2011
Page 4
Please provide the requested docum ents and inform ation as soon as possible,butno later
than 5:00 p.m .on M ay 27,2011.W hen producing docum ents to the C om m ittee,please deliver
production sets to the M ajority Staff in room 2157 of the R ayburn H ouse O ffice B uilding and the
M inority Staff in R oom 2471 of the R ayburn H ouse O ffice B uilding.The C om m ittee prefers,if
com m ittee of the H ouse of R epresentatives and m ay at"any tim e" investigate "any m atter" as set
forth in H ouse R ule X .A n attachm entto this letter provides additionalinform ation about
If you have any questions aboutthis request,please contactK rishna M oore or D aniel
Epstein of the C om m ittee Staff at202-225-5074.Thank you for your attention to this m atter.
Sincerely,
D arrellIssa
C hairm an
C om m ittee on O versightand
T rey G ody
C hairm an
D ennis R oss
C hairm an
Enclosure
Subcom m ittee on H ealth C are,D istrictof C olum bia,C ensus and the N ationalA rchives
NLRB-FOIA-00008833
CH AIRM AN
R A N K IN G M IN O R ITY M EM BER
O N E H U N D R E D T W E LFT H C O N G R E SS
li)oucle ofiSepregeittatibtg
C O M M IT T E E O N O V E R S IG H T A N D G O V E R N M E N T R E F O R M
W A S H IN G T O N , D C 20515-6143
I.In com plying w ith this request,you should produce allresponsive docum ents thatare
produce docum ents thatyou have a legalrightto obtain,thatyou have a rightto copy
or to w hich you have access,as w ellas docum ents thatyou have placed in the
been,or is also know n by any other nam e than thatherein denoted,the requestshall
4.
D ocum ents produced in electronic form atshould also be organized,identified,and
indexed electronically.
standards:
(a) The production should consistofsingle page Tagged Im age File ("TIF"),files
file defining the fields and character lengths ofthe load file.
(b) D ocum entnum bers in the load file should m atch docum entBates num bers and
(c) Ifthe production is com pleted through a series ofm ultiple partialproductions,
NLRB-FOIA-00008834
6.
D ocum ents produced to the C om m ittee should include an index describing the
contents of the production. T o the extent m ore than one C D . hard drive, m em ory
stick, thum b drive, box or folder is produced, each C D , hard drive, m em ory stick,
thum b drive, box or folder should contain an index describing its contents.
7.
D ocum ents produced in response to-this request shall be produced together w ith
copies of file labels, dividers or identifying m arkers w ith w hich they w ere associated
8. \\T hen you produce docum ents, you should identify the paragraph in the C om m ittee's
9.
It shall not be a basis for refusal to. produce docum ents that any other person or entity
10. If any of the requested inform ation is only reasonably available in m achine-readable
form (such as on a com puterserver, hard drive, or com puter backup tape), you should
. consult w ith the C om m ittee staff to determ ine the appropriate form at in w hich to
11. If com pliance w ith the request cannot be m ade in full, com pliance shall be m ade to
the extent possible and shall include an explanation of w hy full com pliance is not
possible.
12. In the event that a .docum ent is w ithheld on the basis of privilege, provide a privilege
log containing the follow ing inform ation concerning any such .docum ent: (a) the
privilege asserted; (b) the type of docum ent; (c) the general subject m atter; (d) the
date, author and addressee; and (e) the relationship of the author and addressee to
each other.
13. If any docum ent responsive to this request w as, but no longer is, in your possession,
custody, O r contrO l, identify the docum ent (stating its date, author, subject and
recipients) and explain the circum stances under w hich the docum ent ceased to be in
14. If a date or other descriptive detail set forth in this request referring to a docum ent is
otherw ise apparent from the context of the request, you should produce all docum ents
w hich w ould be responsive as if the date or other descriptive detail w ere correct.
15. T he tim e period covered by this request is included in the attached request. T o the
extent a tim e .period.is not specified, produce relevant docum ents from January 1,
16. T his request is continuing in nature and applies to any new ly-discovered inform ation.
A ny record, docum ent, com pilation of data or inform ation, not produced because it
has not been located or discovered by the return date, shall be produced im m ediately
NLRB-FOIA-00008835
18. T w o sets of docum ents shall be delivered, one set to the M ajority S taff and one set to
the M inority S taff W hen docum ents are produced to the C om m ittee, production sets
shall bedelivered to the M ajority S taff in R oom 2157of the R ayburn H ouse O ffice
B uilding and the M inority S taff iii R oom 2471of the R ayburn H ouse O ffice B uilding.
19. U pon com pletion of the docum ent production, you should subm it a.w ritten
certification, signed byou or your counsel, stating that: (I) a diligent search has
been com pleted of all docum ents in your possession, custody, or control w hich
reasonably could contain responsive docum ents; and (2) all docum ents located during
D efinitions
I. T he term "docum ent" m eans any w ritten, recorded, or graphic m atternf any nature
w hatsoever, regardless of how recorded, and w hether original or copy, including, but
not lim ited to, the follow ing: m em oranda, reports, expense reports, books, m anuals,
confirm ations, telegram s, receipts, appraisals. pam phlets. m agazines, new spapers,
prospectuses, inter-office and intra-oftice com m unications, electronic m ail (e-m ail).
other com m unication, bulletins, printed m atter, com puter printouts, teletypes,
invoices, transcripts, diaries, analyses, returns, sum m aries, m inutes, bills, accounts,
circulars, financial statem ents, review s, opinions, oilers ;studies and investigations,
questionnaires and surveys, and w ork sheets (and all drafts, prelim inary versions,
foregoing,:as w ell as any attachm ents or appendices thereto), and graphic or oral
charts, graphs ., m icrofiche, m icrofilm , videotape, recordings and m otion pictures). and
w ithout lim itation, tapes, cassettes, disks, and recordings) and other w ritten, printed,
otherw ise. A docum ent bearing any notation not a part of the original text is to be
considered a separate docum ent. A draft or non-identical copy is a separate docum ent
1 .
of inform ation, regardless of m eans utilized, w hether oral, electronic, by docum ent or
otherw ise, and w hether in a m eeting, by telephone, facsim ile, em ail, regular m ail,
3. T he term s "and" and "or" shall be construed broadly and either conjunctively or
disjunctively to bring w ithin the scope of this request any inform ation w hich m ight
NLRB-FOIA-00008836
otherw ise be construed to be outside its scope. T he singular includes plural num ber,
and vice versa. T he m asculine includes the fem inine and neuter genders.
4.
T he term s "person" or "persons" m ean natural persons, firm s, partnerships,
proprietorships, syndicates, or other legal, business or governm ent entities, and all
5.
T he term "identify," w hen used in a question aboutindividuals, m eans to provide the
follow ing inform ation: (a) the individual's com plete nam e and title; and (b) the
6.
T he term "referring or relating," w ith respect to any given subject, m eans anything
that constitutes, contains, em bodies, reflects, identifies, states, refers to, deals w ith or
NLRB-FOIA-00008837
M A IL441'Y M E M B E R S :
4 ,
ttfil)
J0 1 1 K L IN E . M IN N E S O T A . C h a irm a n
T H O M A S E . P E T R I, W IS C O N S IN
H O W A R D P . "B U C K " M cK E O N . C A L IF O R N IA
JU D Y B R IG E R T . IL L IN O IS
T O D D R U S S E L L P L A IT S . P E N N S Y L V A N IA
JO E W IL S O N . S O U T H C A R O L IN A
V IR G IN IA F O X X . N O R T H C A R O L IN A
!ILIN C .A N H U N T E R . C A L IF O R N IA
D A V ID P . R O E , T E N N E S S E E
G L E N N T H O M P S O N . P E N N S Y L V A N IA
D M W A L S E R , M IC H IG A N
S C O T T O rsJA R LA IS . T E N N E S S E E
R IC H A R D L H A N N A , N E W Y O R K
T O D D R O M IA . IN D IA N A
L A R R Y B U C S H O N . IN D IA N A
T R E Y D O W D Y . S O U T H C A R O L IN A
L O U B A R L E T T A . P E N N S Y L V A N IA
K R IS T I L H O E K S O U T H D A K O T A
M A R T H A R O S Y .A LA B A M A
JO S E P H J IIE C K . N E V A D A
D E N N IS A . R O S S , F LO R ID A
M IK E K E L L Y . P E N N S Y L V A N IA
'V a ca n t,
C O M M IT T E E O N E D U C A T IO N
A N D TH E W O R K FO R CE
U .S . H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N T A T IV E S
2181 R A Y B U R N H O U S E O F F IC E B U ILD IN G
W A S H IN G T O N , D C 205 15-610 0
M IN O R IT Y M E M T 3F F IS .
G E O R G E M ILLE R . C A LIF O R N IA
S n n in r D e m o crm ic M a n th e r
D A LE E . K ILD E E . M IC H IG A N . V ic ,: C h a irm a
D O N A LD M . P A Y N E .. N E W JE R S E Y
R O B E R T E . A N D R E W S . N E W JI:F iS E Y
LY N N C . W O O LS E Y . C A L 'F O R A IA
R U B E N H IA 0 .1 0 S A . T E X A S
C A R O LY N M r.C A R T H Y . N E W Y O R K
JO H N F . T IE R N E Y . M A S S A C IIL,S E T T K
D E N N IS .1. K O C IN IC H . O H IO
D A V ID W U . O R E G O N
R U S H D . H O LE . N E W JE R S E Y
S U S A N A . D A V IS . C A L IF O R N IA
P A U L M . G R IJA L V A , A R IZ O N A
T IM O T IT Y H . B IS H O P . N E W Y O R K
D A V ID LO E B S A C K . IO W A
M A Z IE K . H IR O N O . H A W A II
M ay 5,2011t
L afe E .Solom on
1099 14
th
Street,N .W .
W ashington,D .C .20570
T he N ationalL abor R elations B oard's (N L R B ) recent action against T he B oeing C om pany is deeply
troubling.A lthough the facts of the case are stillin dispute,its eventualoutcom e could have significant
consequences for job-creators and w orkers. In light of the potentialim pact on the nation's w orkforce,
apparent inconsistencies surrounding the N L R B 's -A pril20,2011 com plaint m erit further explanation.
A s you are aw are,on M arch 26,2010,the InternationalA ssociation of M achinists and A erospace
W orkers D istrict L odge N o. 751 filed a charge w ith the N L R B claim ing B oeing violated sections 80(3)
and 8(a)(1) of the N ationalL abor R elations A ct (N L R A ). C entralto the charge is B oeing's decision to
locate a second 787 D ream liner assem bly line in C harleston,South C arolina.T he com plaint references
alleged statem ents m ade by B oeing officials betw een O ctober 2009 and M arch 2010 that w ork stoppages
W hen asked about the charge in June 2010, the N L R B regionaldirector R ichard A hearn told The Seattle
_
an easier case for the union to argue_10i
Tim es
it w ould have been
H
e
w
as
al
so
unable to point to any "bright line"
w
ork
in
C
harl
eston.
"'
E verett,rather than
acm new
2
ru e to determ ine w hether the com pany's actions violated the law . Finally, the regionaldirector stated
M ore than 10 m onths later on A pril20,2011,M r.A hearn issued a com plaint.In contrast to previous
Tit
-117trttre-regianal
statem ents, he now alleges B oeing "transferred" w ork from W ashington.4 A ccor
G ates,D om inic, M achinists file unfair labor charge against B oeing over C harleston,T he Seattle T im es,June 4,2010.
2
Id.
3 Id.
C om plaint and N otice of H earing: The B oeing C om pany and international A ssociation of M achinists and A erospace W orkers
4
D istrict Lodge 751, C ase 19-C A -32431,Page 5.
NLRB-FOIA-00008838
M ay 5,2011
Page 2
director,the transfer of the assem bly line in conjunction w ith alleged com m ents M ade by com pany
W hile w e understand thatno union em ployee atthe PugetSound facility has losthis or her job or been
extraordinary rem edy thatrequires B oeing to relocate its operations across the country.
6 This w ould have
a detrim entalim pacton the econom y and w orkers of South C arolina,as w ellas have a chilling effect
The pivotin position by N LR B officials,as w ellas the unusualtim ing,raises serious concerns that
- onal
-
inquiry.T o better understand the appropriateness and evolution of this com plaint,
w rrai
i-gessi
provide the follow ing no later than M ay 19,2011:
1.A descrition of w hattranspired betw een June 2010 and A pril2011 thatled the N L R B to alter its
3. A ll docum ents and com m unications that supriott the N LR B 's position thatw ork is being,
Thank you for your cooperation in this m atter.If you have any questions regarding this request,please
Sincerely,
Joh line
C hairm an
ilR oe,M .D .
C hairm an
and Pensions
cc:The H onorable G eorge M iller,Senior D em ocratic M em ber,Education and the W orkforce C om m ittee
cc:The H onorable R obertA ndrew s,Senior D em ocratic M em ber,Subcom m ittee on H ealth,Em ploym ent,
Labor,and Pensions
5
6
1d. at6.
1d at7-8.
NLRB-FOIA-00008839
M ay 5,2011
Page 3
1. In com plying w ith this request,you should produce allresponsive docum ents that are in your
possession,custody,or control,w hether held by you or your past or present agents,em ployees,
and representatives acting on your behalf.Y ou should also produce docum ents thatyou have a.
legalright to obtain,that you have a right to copy or to w hich you have access,as w ellas
docum ents thatyou have placed in the tem porary possession,custody,or controlofany third
party.R equested records.docum ents,-data or inform ation should notbe destroyed,m odified,.
2.
In the eventthatany entity,organization or individualdenoted in this requesthas been,or is also
know n by any other nam e than thatherein denoted,the requestshallbe read also to include that
alternative identification.
3.
T he C om m ittee's preference is to receive docum ents in electronic form .(i.e.,C D ,m em ory stick,
4.
D ocum ents produced in electronic form at should also be organized,identified,and indexed
electronically.
5.
E lectronic docum entproductions should be prepared according to the follow ing standards:
(a) T he production should consist of single page T agged Im age File ("T IP),files
(b).D ocum ent num bers in the load file should m atch docum ent B ates num bers and T IF file
nam es.
(c) If the production is com pleted through a series of m ultiple partialproductions,field nam es
6.
D ocum ents produced to the C om m ittee should include an index describing the contents of the
production.T o the extentm ore than one CD,. hard drive,m em ory stick,thum b drive,box or folder
7.
D ocum ents produced in response to this requestshallbe produced together w ith
copies of'file
labels,dividers or identifying m arkers w ith w hich they w ere associated w hen they w ere requested.
8.
W hen you produce docum ents,you should identify the paragraph in the C om m ittee's requestto
9.
Itshallnotbe a basis far refusalto produce docum ents thatany other person or entity also
NLRB-FOIA-00008840
M ay 5,2011
Page 4
10.If any of the requested inform ation is only reasonably available in m achine-readable form (such as
on a com puter server,hard drive,or com puter backup tape),you should consult w ith the
C om m ittee staff to determ ine the appropriate form at in w hich to produce the inform ation.
bs..t=
ingsL
possible and stiallinc1i_
12.In the eventthata docum entis 'w ithheld O n the basis of privilege,prO vidta privilege log
containing the follow ing inform ation concerning any such docum ent: (a) the privilege asserted;(b)
the type of docum ent; (c) the generalsubject m atter; (d) the date,author and addressee; and (e) the
13.If any docum ent responsive to this request w as,but no longer is,in your possession.custody,or
control,identify the docum ent (stating its date,author,subject and recipients) and explain the
circum stances under w hich the docum ent ceased to be in your possession,custody,or control.
14.If a date or other descriptive detailset forth in this request referring to a docum ent is inaccurate,
but the actualdate or other descriptive detailis know n to you or is otherw ise apparent from the
context of the request,you should produce alldocum ents w hich w ould be responsive as if the date
15.T he tim e period covered by this request is included in the attached request.T o the extent a tim e
period is not specified,Produce relevant docum ents from January 1,2009 to the present.
16.T his request is continuing in natur nd applies to any new ly-discovered inform ation.A ny record,
docum ent,com pi ation of data or inform ation,not produced because it has not been located or
discovery.
.-
17.A lldocum ents shallbe B ates-stam ped sequentially and produced sequentially..
18.T w o sets of docum ents should be delivered,one set to the M ajority Staff in R oom 2181
of the
R ayburn H ouse O ffice B uilding and one set to the M inority Staff in R oom 2101 of the R ayburn
19.U pon com pletion of the docum ent production,you should subm it a w ritten certification,signed by
you or your counsel,stating that: (1) a diligent search has been com pleted of alldocum ents in your
possession,custody,or controlw hich reasonably could contain responsive docum ents; and (2) all
docum ents located during the search that are responsive have been produced to the C om m ittee.
NLRB-FOIA-00008841
"4
M ay 5,2011
Page 5
D efinitions
I.T he term "docum ent" m eans any w ritten,recorded,or graphic m atter of any nature w hatsoever,
regardless of how recorded,and w hether originalor copy,including,but not lim ited to,the
w____a_papso,
orkii
of the foregoing,as w ellas any attachm ents or appendices thereto),and graphic or oralrecords or
recordings) and other w ritten,printed,typed,or other graphic or recorded m atter of any kind or
videotape or otherw ise.A docum ent bearing any notation not a part of the originaltext is to be
considered a separate docum ent.A draft or non-identicalcopy is a separate docum ent w ithin the
2.
T he term "com m unication" m eans each m anner or m eans of disclosure or exchange of
inform ation,regardless of m eans utilized,w hether oral,electronic,by docum ent or otherw ise,and
3.
T he term s "and" and "or" shallbe construed broadly and either conjunctively or disjunctively,to
bring w ithin the scope of this request any inform ation w hich m ight otherw ise be construed to: be
outside its scope.T he singular includes pluralnum ber,and vice versa.T he m asculine includes the
4.
T he term s "person" or "persons" m ean naturalpersons,'firm s,partnerships,associations,
5.
T he term "identify," w hen used in a question about individuals,m eans to provide the follow ing
inform ation: (a) the individual's com plete nam e and title; and (b) the individual's business address
6.
T he term "referring or relating," w ith respect to any given subject,m eans anything that constitutes,
NLRB-FOIA-00008842
nM 1
ST A T E M E N T O F
L A FE E .SO L O M O N
A C T IN G G E N E R A L C O U N SE L
N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
B E FO R E T H E
C O M M IT T E E O N O V E R SIG H T A N D G O V E R N M E N T R E FO R M
U N IT E D ST A T E D H O U SE O F R E PR E SE N T A T IV E S
N O R T H C H A R L E ST O N ,SO U T H C A R O L IN A
JU N E 17,2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008843
I appear before you today as the A cting G eneralC ounselofthe N ationalL abor R elations
the 38 years before m y appointm ent,I have served as a career civilservantin m any
I w ould like to startby acknow ledging thatw orkers in N orth C harleston are feeling
vulnerable and anxious because they are uncertain as to w hatim pactany finaldecision
m ay have on their em ploym ent w ith B oeing.T hese are difficult econom ic tim es,and I
truly regret the anxiety this case has caused them and their fam ilies.T he issuance of the
protected by the N ationalL abor R elations A ct,w ithout fearing discrim ination.B oeing
has every rightto m anufacture planes in South C arolina,or anyw here else,for that
m atter,as long as those decisions are based on legitim ate business considerations.
T his com plaint w as issued only after the parties failed to inform ally resolve this dispute.
I personally m etw ith the parties and I tried for three m onths to facilitate a settlem entof
the case.I rem ain open to playing a constructive role in assisting the parties to settle this
dispute w ithoutthe costs and uncertainties associated w ith extended litigation.I believe
that,given the parties'longstanding bargaining relationship,a settlem entw ould serve the
NLRB-FOIA-00008844
interests ofthe parties and the w orkers and w ould prom ote industrialpeace.In the
absence of a m utually acceptable settlem ent,how ever,both B oeing and the M achinists
U nion have a legalrightto presenttheir evidence and argum ents in a trialand to have
I w ould like to begin by describing briefly the relevantregulatory fram ew ork and the role
of the O ffice of G eneralC ounselw ithin that fram ew ork.T he N ationalL abor R elations
A ctdivides responsibility over private-sector labor relations betw een the N ationalL abor
R elations B oard and the G eneralC ounselof the B oard.T he B oard adjudicates cases in
T he O ffice of the G eneralC ounselw as created by the T aft-H artley A m endm ents of 1947.
behalfofthe B oard,w ith respectto the investigation and prosecution ofunfair labor
practice com plaints.In order to ensure that the new ly-established G eneralC ounselof the
N L R B w ould have both the independence and resources necessary to m ake final,
unreview able decisions in typically heated labor and m anagem ent controversies,Section
3(d) also provided that,w ith the exception of adm inistrative law judges and legal
allattorneys em ployed by the B oard" and w ould have generalsupervision "over the
NLRB-FOIA-00008845
investigated to determ ine w hether there is reasonable cause to believe that,under the
B oard's precedents,an unfair labor practice has been com m itted.Fairness to the parties
and sound developm ent of the law w eighs in favor of presenting these types of cases to
E ffectof the D iscretionary Pow er of the G eneralC ounselon the D evelopm entof the
if! turned a blind eye to evidence that an unfair labor practice m ay have occurred.I took
an oath to enforce the N ationalL abor R elations A ctand to protectw orkers from unlaw ful
conduct.
T he G eneralC ounsel's concern w ith fairness to the parties does not end w ith the issuance
of the com plaint.T he Suprem e C ourt has recognized that the A ct and the B oard's rules
NLRB-FOIA-00008846
independentofthe B oard to handle prosecutions, not m erely the filing of com plaints."
com plaintand the charging party is notperm itted to pursue alternative theories ofa
proceedings,the G eneralC ounselis responsible to ensure that the prosecution of the case
is justified by the facts and law .A s such,it rem ains open to the G eneralC ounselto m ake
concessions on issues of fact or law and to pursue settlem ent discussions w ith the charged
For allthese reasons,the actualfairness ofthe proceedings before the B oard --and,
equally im portant,the perception thatthe B oard's adm inistrative processes are fair --
vitally depends on the public and the parties retaining the confidence thatthe G eneral
C ounselis carrying out his prosecutorialresponsibilities on the basis of the facts and law
in the case,and is not m aking decisions on the basis of politicalor other m atters not
the B oeing litigation and in strategic decisions necessary for the prosecution of this case.
M y obligation to protect the independence of the O ffice of the G eneralC ounseland the
NLRB-FOIA-00008847
integrity of the enforcem ent process restricts m y ability to offer insight into the decision-
m aking here.I hope you w illshare m y com m itm ent that these proceedings not be
prosecutorialdecisions in this case,w hich have been and w illcontinue to be m ade based
on the law and the m erits and in a m anner w hich protects the due process rights ofthe
litigants.
I com e here voluntarily out of respect for the oversight role of C ongress.I w illdo m y
bestto answ er your questions,consistentw ith m y obligations to the parties and to the
A m erican public w ith respect to the ongoing B oeing case.T he adjudicatory process m ust
be fair and im partialso thatthe parties'due process rights,w hich are guaranteed by the
fundam entalprinciples.
NLRB-FOIA-00008848
,0
oL L A R s
VA
R E A L W O R L D
E C O N O M IC S
:D O N A T E
to
T his article is from D o llars & S en se: R eal W orld E cono m ics, available at
http://w w w .dollarsandsense.org/archives/2011/0911eidelson.htm l
C onflicting D ream s
1.10..on
B o ein g m ak es th e fu tu re. T h at's th e recu rrin g m essag e o f B o ein g 's "F u tu re o f F lig h t" to u r, w h ich b rin g s v isito rs fro m aro u n d th e w o rld
th ro u g h its E v erett facto ry in W ash in g to n S tate. T h e to u r b eg in s w ith a sig n an n o u n cin g th at B o ein g w ill "sh ap e th e fu tu re," an d th en carries y o u
' N o w B o ein g is in a h ig h -p ro file leg al b attle w ith n atio n al im p licatio n s. It's th e latest ro u n d in a d ecad es-lo n g lab o r stru g g le. A t stak e: D o
w o rk ers at B o ein g g et to sh ap e th eir o w n fu tu re, an d B o ein g 's? O r d o th ey ju st h av e to em b race o r rath er, su b m it to th e co rp o ratio n 's p lan ?
T h e N atio n al L ab o r R elatio n s B o ard case ag ain st B o ein g d rew n atio n al h ead lin es th is su m m er, an d it w ill ag ain as th e case w in d s th ro u g h th e
b o ard 's p ro cess an d R ep u b lican s seize m o re o p p o rtu n ities to b ash P resid en t O b am a fo r ap p o in tin g b o ard m em b ers w h o m ay actu ally en fo rce lab o r
law ag ain st em p lo y ers. T h o u g h sev eral m ed ia o u tlets h av e ru n w ith R ep u b lican claim s th at th e case is an effo rt to p u n ish S o u th C aro lin ian s tb r th eir
state's rig h t-to -w o rk law , it's actu ally ab o u t B o ein g 's alleg ed effo rt to p u n ish its P u g et S o u n d w o rk ers fo r strik in g b y m o v in g w o rk to S o u th
C aro lin a. T h e N L R B 's G en eral C o u n sel issu ed th e co m p lain t (ro u g h ly co m p arab le to an in d ictm en t) after B o ein g ex ecu tiv es p u b licly an d
rep eated ly d eclared th at th ey w o u ld b e p ro d u cin g a n ew lin e o f D ream lin er aircraft in S o u th C aro lin a b ecau se P u g et S o u n d w o rk ers k ep t g o in g o n
strike fou r tim es since 1 98 9. T he N atio nal L ab or R elation s A ct pro tects the rig ht of w ork ers to strik e w ith ou t actual o r th reaten ed retaliatio n.
L ast m o n th I w en t to P u g et S o u n d to h ear d irectly fro m w o rk ers th ere w h y th ey 'v e ch o sen tim e an d ag ain to strik e.
T h e In tern atio n al A sso ciatio n o f M ach in ists rep resen ts 2 9 ,0 0 0 w o rk ers at B o ein g 's P u g et S o u n d p lan ts in R en to n , S eattle, an d E v erett.
A
dozen of them told m e how strikes have allow ed them to achieve and sustain their standard of living.
S afety an d S an e S ch ed u lin g
W orkers w ent on strike in .1989 to w in protections for safety and restrictions on ov ertim e. John Jorgenson, w ho just retired from B oeing
a fte r
4 5 y ears, is o n e o f six em p lo y ees in h is b u ild in g w h o w ere d iag n o sed w ith k id n ey can cer, w h ich h e b lam es in p art o n th e ch em icals th ey w o rk ed
w ith before the 1989 strike. T he strike w on new protective gear and the elim ination of dozens of chem icals judged unsafe.
Jo rg en so n say s ex cessiv e o v ertim e is o n e reaso n th at so m an y B o ein g w o rk ers fro m th e p re-1 9 8 9 p erio d are n o w d iv o rced , h im self in clu d ed .
H e rem em b ers w o rk in g elev en h o u rs a d ay w ith o u t a d ay o ff fo r 1 6 w eek s. H e w o u ld w o rry ab o u t fallin g asleep at w o rk o r w h ile d riv in g h o m e.
B rian P ellan d , w h o started w o rk at B o ein g in 1 9 8 8 , say s h e h ard ly saw h is k id s in h is first y ear o n th e jo b . "Y o u 're alw ay s lo o k in g at th e fu tu re,"
P ellan d say s, "an d y o u th in k y o u 're alw ay s g o in g to h av e tim e." B u t ev en tu ally th e m an d ato ry o v ertim e left h im feelin g "d ead b eat" an d "n u m b ."
th eir liv es. W ith o u t th e strik e, h e say s, "I w o u ld n 't k n o w th em . T h ey w o u ld n 't k n o w m e."
W h en I ask ed Jo rg en so n w h at h is life w o u ld b e lik e w ith o u t th at strik e, h e said "I'd p ro b ab ly still h av e to w o rk ," d esp ite th e b ack in ju ries th at
put him out on m edical leave for the final six m onths prior to his retirem ent at age 65. B efore he could describe w hat that w ould be like, his
w ife cut
h im o ff. "I d o n 't th in k so , Jo h n . I th in k w ith all th o se ch em icals an d th e stu ff y o u w ere ex p o sed to ... y o u w o u ld n 't b e h ere."
T h o u g h w o rkers h ave w o n ad d itio n al im p ro vem en ts o ver th e p ast tw o d ecad es, th e d o zen em p lo yees I sp o ke to all d escrib ed th e strikes sin ce
1989 p rim arily as d efen sive actio n s aim ed at sim p ly m ain tain in g w h at h ad b een w o n b efo re. T h at in clu d es ro b u st p en sio n s an d an affo rd ab le fam ily
(R each ed b y p h o n e, B o ein g lab o r relatio n s sp o kesp erso n T im H ealy said th at b o th sid es sh are resp o n sib ility fo r th e freq u en cy o f strikes.)'
T h e B o ein g m ed ical co verag e p ays fo r p rescrip tio n m ed icin e fo r 15-year em p lo yee Jaso n R ed ru p 's step so n , w h o 's h ad a liver tran sp lan t.
W ith o u t B o ein g b en efits, R ed ru p said , "It w o u ld b an kru p t m e." T h en h e p au sed , co n tem p latin g w h at w o u ld h ap p en n ext. "H e'd b e d ead ."
B o b M erritt, a 32-year em p lo yee, d escrib ed ru sh in g h is d au g h ter to th e em erg en cy ro o m after sh e co llap sed o n th e vo lleyb all co u rt. A s h e
d ro ve, h e w atch ed h er fin g ers b all u p as sh e lay in a fetal p o sitio n in th e b ack seat. "T alk ab o u t scared ," h e says. "W e g o t h er in [th e E R ] an d I
flash ed m y h ealth card d am n rig h t I got that insurance." H e q u estio n ed w h eth er h is d au g h ter, w h o fu lly reco vered , w o u ld h ave g o tten ad eq u ate
T h e strikes h ave also g iven w o rkers co n fid en ce th at th eir co n tract can b e en fo rced . P ellan d b elieves th at w ith o u t th e cred ib ility th e u n io n h as
estab lish ed th ro u g h strikin g , B o ein g w o u ld h ave fo u n d an excu se to fire h im . T w en ty years ag o , w o rkin g u n d er p ressu re o n a w in g lin e, P ellan d
slip p ed o n leakin g o il an d b ad ly sp rain ed h is th u m b . H is d o cto r sen t h im b ack to w o rk w ith in stru ctio n s n o t to g rasp w ith h is rig h t h an d fo r tw o
w eeks. W ith a m ix o f an g er an d em b arrassm en t, h e d escrib ed h is m an ag er an n o u n cin g at a m o rn in g crew m eetin g , "O h B rian , h e's g o t so m e p u ssy
resffictio n h e can 't d o h is jo b ." "T h at ch an g ed m e fo r life," said P ellan d . W ith o u t strikes, h e said , "th ey'd th ro w m e aw ay," an d th e u n io n w o u ld
D ave S w an n , w h o w as h ired in 1989, says th e co n tract lan g u ag e an d clo u t w o n th ro u g h th e strikes created o p p o rtu n ities fo r h im to
advance at
B o ein g d esp ite m an ag em en t racism . G ro w in g u p , S w an n w as o n e o f th ree o r fo u r A frican -A m erican stu d en ts b u ssed in to a m ajo rity w h ite sch o o l
NLRB-FOIA-00008849
A C h an ged M em b ersh ip
The strikes w ere transform ative experiences.For Jorgenson,the scariestw as in 1977,w hen he w as recently m arried to his firstw ife and
m aking house paym ents.H e says he w entinto the strike unsure "w hether I'm going to have a job or not." H e rem em bers m anagers sw erving their
cars tow ards picketing strikers on their w ay into w ork,and then taking photos ofpicketers from inside the plant.
Jorgenson joined a group calling itselfthe "EverettR aiders" thatw orked to discourage replacem entw orkers and keep the spirits ofthe other
strikers up.H e com pared going through a strike together to going through a w ar."Y ou're notreally going to deserteach other,and you're a lot
m ore w illing to endure the pain ofgoing through allofit.A nd itis painful." The percentage ofthe w orkforce on strike w entup during the course of
the strike rather than dow n.By the end,he felt"pretty pow erful," and w hen he w entback to w ork,co-w orkers told him he had helped give them the
W ilson "Fergie" Ferguson,a m ilitary veteran w ho plays Santa atunion C hristm as parties,says going on strike for the firsttim e in 1977
"scared the shitoutofm e." But"anger trum ps fear every tim e.I'm scared untilyou piss m e off."
Pelland says ifhe had crossed the picketline,"a partofm e w ould have died,and I w ouldn'tbe w ho I am ." H aving been guided through the
1989 strike by the veterans,by the tim e ofthe 2008 strike Pelland w as seeking outnew er em ployees on the picketline."C an I talk to you about
how the com pany bluffs?" he w ould ask them ."W e hold a straightflush and the com pany's alw ays bluffing."
Severalw orkers m entioned they w ere struck by the degree ofsupportfrom the com m unity.Tw enty-five-year em ployee D iana Loggins
w as
m oved in 1989 w hen her m ailm an,seeing the strike stickers on her car,w ould say,"H ang in there,you're on strike for us." Jorgenson says Boeing
provides m ostofthe m iddle-class jobs in PugetSound.Boeing w orkers m ake significantcontributions to the localtax base and the dem and
for
localbusinesses.The other m ajor private em ployer in the area is M icrosoft,w hose educationalrequirem ents leave its jobs outofreach for m any.
A H istory of R etaliation
N one ofthe dozen w orkers I m etw ith doubted thatBoeing w as retaliating for PugetSound strikes by locating production ofits new
D ream liner line in South C arolina.For these w orkers,threats to shiftproduction are m ore ofthe sam e.W hat's new is thatthis tim e,Boeing is
actually m aking good on its threatto build com m ercialairplanes outside ofPugetSound.
Severalw orkers said they've heard m anagers threaten to shutdow n or transfer production during pastcontractfights.Pelland says prior to
"every strike" he's heard m anagers threaten to m ove lines ofairplanes outofstate.H e says friends ofhis in m anagem enttold him they w ere
specifically instructed to w arn w orkers that"they could take their business som ew here else." M errittsays co-w orkers inform ed him thatm anagers
told them ,"W e're pretty sick ofthis you keep striking,w e'llm ove your jobs."
D uring the 2002 contractfight,Jorgenson w as pulled into a m eeting w hee'e m anagers tried to convince him and other shop stew ards to support
the com pany's offer.Jorgenson says a m anager told them thatifthe w orkers voted to strike,a Sonic C ruiser line .planned for Everettw ould be built
som ew here else instead.Jorgenson and other stew ards did their bestanyw ay to round up the tw o-thirds supportthe union requires to authorize a
strike.Butw ith the airline industry stillrecovering from 9/11,they felljustshort.Thatm eantm anagem ent's finaloffer w as accepted,including
w eakened subcontracting protections and language thatprevented the union from filing charges over pastthreats.Fifteen-year em ployee Paul
V eltkam p thinks thatafter m anagers "m anaged to scare justenough people" to vote againststriking in 2002,they convinced them selves they w ere
"vote-counting w izards" w ho could getw orkers to agree to m ore concessions in subsequentcontracts.Butafter Boeing lostthe 2005 and 2008
strikes,says V eltkam p,now the com pany is "trying som ething else,a differentkind ofthreat."
Som e w orkers said their co-w orkers have been intim idated by m anagers telling reporters thatBoeing denied PugetSound the second line of
airliners because ofstrikes.V eltkam p,a shop stew ard,says he w as approached by em ployees holding up new spapers and telling him thatin
the
2012 contractnegotiations "w e're justgoing to have to give them w hatthey w ant." H ow ever,he says,"W e don'tstay scared for long."
Boeing spokesperson H ealy said the lesson PugetSound em ployees should take from the choice ofSouth C arolina is that"w e need to be
com petitive," and added thatBoeing w ould "talk to our unionized em ployees here" aboutpaying a greater share ofhealth care costs in their next
contract.
D ifferen t D ream s
M achinists U nion m em bers atBoeing are defending a dream too few A m erican w orkers have in place or see in reach:W ork hard,and don't
lie paycheck to paycheck.G etsick,and don'tw orry w hether you can afford a doctor's visit.Putin enough decades,and expecta com fortable
retirem ent.They didn'tjustw in thatdream through the beneficence oftheir bosses or the w orthiness oftheir w ork (though the particulars ofthe
industry m ake strikers less vulnerable to perm anentreplacem ent).Itw as birthed and m aintained through strikes.Four tim es over the past22 years,
D ave Sw ann proudly relates thathis great-grandfather w as a porter,"one ofthe highest-paid jobs an A frican-A m erican could have back in
those days ...Everybody cam e to their house to eat,because he w as in the union and they m ade good m oney." H is grandfather w as a longshorem an
and his father,like him ,w as a M achinists m em ber atBoeing."I feelthreatened," he says,because ifhis sons can'tland their dream jobs of
m oviem aker and sportscaster,he w ants union jobs atBoeing to be there for their w hole lives."It's a hurting feeling,because you w antto see your
Boeing has its ow n dream s.Take its tour and you'llhear abouta future offaster,sm oother production.W hen allthe pieces are in place.
m y
tour guide said,parts w illarrive from severalsources and becom e a D ream liner in three days. -M ostofthe people w ho w illride on this plane. - a
Bob M errittdescribes the attitude he gets now from the com pany:"W e w antour airplanes to be plug and play,w e w antour w orkers to be plug
and play." Pelland says Boeing is trying to becom e "a Lego building com pany" m ore focused on assem bling parts than creating them ."They're
NLRB-FOIA-00008850
sending a m essage to their custom ers and their shareholders that they're done w ith us," said R edrup. H e says B oeing is trying "to break our
stranglehold on their production system " just as G eneral M otors did to the U A W half a century ago. "T hey've got to deal w ith the w orkers, and
they don't like that. If they can't housebreak us, they gotta find a w ay to get aw ay from us."
N ow B oeing is at the center of a national controversy over how robust the right to strike should be. T he w orkers I spoke to w ere divided over
w hether the com pany had arrogantly stum bled into legal danger or intentionally set out to see w hat they could get aw ay w ith. It's good to see that,
under .the O bam a-era labor board, publicly declaring you are denying production of a line of airplanes to a group of w orkers because they keep
going on strike at least earns you a labor board com plaint (O bam a has been at pains to keep his distance from the case).
R eached by phone, B oeing governm ent operations spokesperson T im N eale m aintained that m anagem ent has "been honest about the fact that
strikes have harm ed the com pany and that w e as a com pany very m uch are looking for production stability," but insisted B oeing hasn't broken the
law . Its R epublican defenders claim that the com plaint signifies a shift tow ard S oviet-style central planning or C hicago-style m achinations. L int it's
the prospect of an acquittal or a m anagem ent-friendly settlem ent that w ould signal a further departure from the stated purpose and prom ise of
the N ational L abor R elations A ct, w hich set forth as its intent the prom otion of collective bargaining and enshrined a right to collective action
A nd if B oeing does pay a heavy price for telling its em ployees that their collective action cost them an expansion of their plant, it w on't take a
high-priced anti-union consultant to interpret the lesson for other com panies: D on't be so obvious. A ll too often, em ployers get aw ay w ith anti-
union retaliation w hen they don't go bragging about it in the new spaper.
S o w hatever the result, the B oeing case is less a story about the potency of current labor law than about the pow er of the strike on the onQ hand
and the threat of retaliation on the other. It's the story of w orkers w ho have refused to believe that they should cede a hard-w on package of m iddle-
class w ages and w orkplace protections in the face of a m ajor com pany's m ulti-year effort to persuade or intim idate them into backing dow n. N ow ,
after decades during w hich P uget S ound has been the only place B oeing assem bles com m ercial aircraft, w orkers are right to recognize that the
pow er to m ove w ork elsew here has becom e a pow erful w eapon in m anagem ent's arsenal.
B oeing w orkers expect to have to strike every few years until they retire. O ne can im agine new attacks from B oeing spurring them to level
-age
their solidarity in other w ays as w ell, be it international coordination, secondary picketing, or directing their political m obilization (w hich has
successfully helped the com pany w in tax breaks) tow ards dem anding that the U .S . governm ent, a m ajor B oeing custom er, insist on better behavior.
A s B oeing and the M achinists both look to the future, their struggle across decades show s both the enduring pow er of collective action and the still-
unm et challenge that capital m obility poses for the labor m ovem ent.
S uccessive generations of B oeing w orkers have figured out that it's better to shape the future than to passively accept it. M eanw hile, B oeing
and its peers are w orking to foist their ow n dream s on the rest of us som etim es loudly, often not. M y "F uture of F light" tour guide boasted about
the w ays the D ream liner represents a new achievem ent in illusion. S cientific innovations in m aterials and lighting m ean that passengers w on't reel
the altitude, the hum idity, or the tim e difference as B oeing's airplane takes them som ew here new . "B y the tim e you get there," he said, "w e can
trick your body to m ake you think you've.already been there a long tim e." It w as easy to forget he w as referring to an airplane.
JO S H E ID E LS O N is a freelance w riter based in P hiladelphia. H e received his M A in politicalscience from Y ale and w orked as a union organi:er for five years. H is w ,'I'c,,e is
D id you fin d th is article u sefu l? P lease con sid er su p p ortin g ou r w ork b y d on atin g or su b scrib in g.
Eft
NLRB-FOIA-00008851
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Szapiro, Miriam
Boeing Co.
I just spoke with Eric Moskowitz and Special Lit is taking the lead on this case.
Exemption 5
He will keep us updated.
Tracking:
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008852
Recipient
Read
Karsh, Aaron
Sophir, Jayme
NLRB-FOIA-00008853
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Szapiro, Miriam
Its on deferral.
I just spoke with Eric Moskowitz and Special Lit is taking the lead on this case.
Exemption 5
He will keep us updated.
NLRB-FOIA-00008854
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Karsh, Aaron
Its on deferral.
I just spoke with Eric Moskowitz and Special Lit is taking the lead on this case.
Exemption 5
He will keep us updated.
NLRB-FOIA-00008855
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sophir, Jayme
FW : Boeing Co.
Its on deferral.
I just spoke with Eric Moskowitz and Special Lit is taking the lead on this case.
Exemption 5
He will keep us updated.
NLRB-FOIA-00008856
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Szapiro, Miriam
Allen, Constance
Constance, please close Boeing Co. in Advice, effective May 28, at which date Special Litigation informed us that it had
Its on deferral.
I just spoke with Eric Moskowitz and Special Lit is taking the lead on this case.
Exemption 5
e will keep us updated.
Tracking:
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008857
Read
Recipient
Allen, Constance
Sophir, Jayme
Kearney, Barry J.
Karsh, Aaron
NLRB-FOIA-00008858
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Karsh, Aaron
Szapiro, Miriam
Could you also check up within a day to see that the case has closed? Thanks.
Constance, please close Boeing Co. in Advice, effective May 28, at which date Special Litigation informed us that it had
Its on deferral.
I just spoke with Eric Moskowitz and Special Lit is taking the lead on this case.
Exemption 5
He will keep us updated.
NLRB-FOIA-00008859
NLRB-FOIA-00008860
Microsoft Outlook
Szapiro, Miriam
W illen, Debra L
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hi Deb, did you pass this to Barry yet? if not, it would be better to let me look at it
Exemption 5
n any event, I'm going to look at it now and we can talk about it tomorrow. I
admit that
Exemption 5
________________________________________
Hi Lynn --
Please substitute the attached version of the Boeing GC memo for what is there now on the H
drive at
H:ADV.19-CA-32431.GCAgenda.Boeing.dlw
Thanks!!
NLRB-FOIA-00008861
Microsoft Outlook
W illen, Debra L
Szapiro, Miriam
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
At about 4:30 I called and asked him if he wanted it for the bus ride home.
it.
He didn't want
He said we were fine now and he would look at it after you had a chance to see it.
He
________________________________________
Hi Deb, did you pass this to Barry yet? if not, it would be better to let me look at it
Exemption 5
n any event, I'm going to look at it now and we can talk about it tomorrow. I
admit that
Exemption 5
________________________________________
Hi Lynn --
Please substitute the attached version of the Boeing GC memo for what is there now on the H
drive at
H:ADV.19-CA-32431.GCAgenda.Boeing.dlw
Thanks!!
NLRB-FOIA-00008862
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Szapiro, Miriam
W illen, Debra L
boeing
ADV.19-CA-32431.Response.Boeing.dlw.doc
Exemption 5
improvement, let me know, or just fix it on the draft. I also changed court to lower cap because we usually save the cap for
the S.Ct., but if you think thats wrong (a la Blue Book etc), go ahead and return to caps.
NLRB-FOIA-00008863
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008864
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008865
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008866
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008867
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008868
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008869
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008870
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008871
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008872
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008873
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008874
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008875
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008876
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008877
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008878
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008879
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008880
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008881
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008882
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008883
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008884
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008885
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008886
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008887
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008888
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008889
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008890
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008891
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008892
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008893
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008894
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008895
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008896
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008897
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008898
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008899
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008900
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008901
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008902
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008903
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008904
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008905
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008906
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008907
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008908
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008909
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008910
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008911
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008912
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008913
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008914
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
W illen, Debra L
Szapiro, Miriam
RE: boeing
Miriam --
You can go ahead and "accept" them for me and pass to Barry.
Thanks, Deb
________________________________________
Subject: boeing
know, or just fix it on the draft. I also changed court to lower cap because we usually save
the cap for the S.Ct., but if you think thats wrong (a la Blue Book etc), go ahead and
return to caps.
NLRB-FOIA-00008915
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Szapiro, Miriam
W illen, Debra L
RE: draft
Great do you want to email it to Barry and tell him you also left a hard copy in his mailbox? Hes telecommuting.
Shall I print out for Barry and/or e-mail it to him since he is telecommuting today?
Subject: draft
Hi, I accepted almost everything there was to accept, mad a couple more possible changes, so check and make sure they
Tracking:
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008916
Recipient
Read
Willen, Debra L
NLRB-FOIA-00008917
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
W illen, Debra L
Szapiro, Miriam
RE: draft
Will do.
Great do you want to email it to Barry and tell him you also left a hard copy in his mailbox? Hes telecommuting.
Shall I print out for Barry and/or e-mail it to him since he is telecommuting today?
Subject: draft
Hi, I accepted almost everything there was to accept, mad a couple more possible changes, so check and make sure they
NLRB-FOIA-00008918
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Farrell, Ellen
Szapiro, Miriam
Thanks
Ellen
Ellen Farrell
202-273-3810
Ellen.Farrell@nlrb.gov
Miriam Szapiro
Supervisory attorney
202-273-0998
Miriam.Szapiro@nlrb.gov
Cc: Mattina, Celeste J.; Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Katz, Judy; Szapiro, Miriam; Omberg, Bob;
Baniszewski, Joseph
I am attaching our Fact Sheet and the latest version of our Advice Memorandum
Exemption 5
Thanks,
Deb Willen
NLRB-FOIA-00008919
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
W illen, Debra L
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7368778n&tag=contentMain;contentBody
Sandy saw this last night and said it was a fairly balanced report on the Boeing case. Im having trouble watching it here.
NLRB-FOIA-00008920
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Szapiro, Miriam
W illen, Debra L
Miriam Szapiro
Supervisory attorney
202-273-0998
Miriam.Szapiro@nlrb.gov
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Szapiro, Miriam
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7368778n&tag=contentMain;contentBody
Sandy saw this last night and said it was a fairly balanced report on the Boeing case. Im having trouble watching it here.
NLRB-FOIA-00008921
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Szapiro, Miriam
W illen, Debra L
Miriam Szapiro
Supervisory attorney
202-273-0998
Miriam.Szapiro@nlrb.gov
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Szapiro, Miriam
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7368778n&tag=contentMain;contentBody
Sandy saw this last night and said it was a fairly balanced report on the Boeing case. Im having trouble watching it here.
Tracking:
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008922
Recipient
Read
Willen, Debra L
NLRB-FOIA-00008923
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
W illen, Debra L
Szapiro, Miriam
Yeah I managed to see it (video kept pausing and then restarting). It was okay, not great. Wished they had featured an
Miriam Szapiro
Supervisory attorney
202-273-0998
Miriam.Szapiro@nlrb.gov
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Szapiro, Miriam
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7368778n&tag=contentMain;contentBody
Sandy saw this last night and said it was a fairly balanced report on the Boeing case. Im having trouble watching it here.
NLRB-FOIA-00008924
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Szapiro, Miriam
W illen, Debra L
Yeah, exactly. They began and ended w/ that woman; also, as usual, they made it sound like these were all new jobs (not
that people already were working on them in Washington would no longer be doing them).. So it became union vs.
employees.
Miriam Szapiro
Supervisory attorney
202-273-0998
Miriam.Szapiro@nlrb.gov
Yeah I managed to see it (video kept pausing and then restarting). It was okay, not great. Wished they had featured an
Miriam Szapiro
Supervisory attorney
202-273-0998
Miriam.Szapiro@nlrb.gov
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Szapiro, Miriam
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7368778n&tag=contentMain;contentBody
Sandy saw this last night and said it was a fairly balanced report on the Boeing case. Im having trouble watching it here.
Tracking:
1
NLRB-FOIA-00008925
Recipient
Read
Willen, Debra L
NLRB-FOIA-00008926
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
W illen, Debra L
Szapiro, Miriam
Yeah, exactly. They began and ended w/ that woman; also, as usual, they made it sound like these were all new jobs (not
that people already were working on them in Washington would no longer be doing them).. So it became union vs.
employees.
Miriam Szapiro
Supervisory attorney
202-273-0998
Miriam.Szapiro@nlrb.gov
Yeah I managed to see it (video kept pausing and then restarting). It was okay, not great. Wished they had featured an
Miriam Szapiro
Supervisory attorney
202-273-0998
Miriam.Szapiro@nlrb.gov
To: Kearney, Barry J.; Farrell, Ellen; Sophir, Jayme; Szapiro, Miriam
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7368778n&tag=contentMain;contentBody
Sandy saw this last night and said it was a fairly balanced report on the Boeing case. Im having trouble watching it here.
NLRB-FOIA-00008927
N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
1099 IL O ST R E E T N W
W A SH IN G T O N D C 20570
N A
O N A I. IA I:011
w w w .n lrb .g o v
IO N 'S IS O A llp
M ay 9,2011
C h icag o , IL 60606-1596
D ear M r.Luttig:
R e: T h e B o ein g C o m p an y
captioned case.
statem ents in the press about this m atter. N eedless to say, I don't agree w ith
your contentions. There have been num erous conversations betw een m y office
and B oeing concerning the facts and the law surrounding the circum stances of
this case so that each party is aw are of the other's position. The appropriate
forum to test those positions and the relevance and probative value of your
adm inistrative law judge can m ake a decision w hich can be review ed by the
B oard and ultim ately the C ourts. Finally, w hile our earlier efforts to resolve this
m atter w ere unsuccessful, I still rem ain open to a resolution betw een the parties.
S in celel
Lafe/E . Solom on
NLRB-FOIA-00008928
0 0
.. II
d o r G ra h a m P re s s R e le a s e s
: 04/20/2011
G ra h a m o n N L R B C o m p la in t a g a in s t B o e in g
SH IN G T O N U .S . S enator Lindsey G raham (R -S outh C arolina) today m ade this statem ent on the N ationalLabor R elations B oard
s is one of the w orst exam ples of unelected bureaucrats doing the bidding of specialinterest groups that I've ever seen. In this cas
N LR B is doing the bidding of the unions at great cost to S outh C arolina and our nation's econom y.
lakes perfect sense for a w orld-class com pany like B oeing to diversify their production capabilities. B oeing m ade a solid business
sion in com ing to S outh C arolina, and w e w elcom e them w ith open arm s. T hey could have gone anyw here, but they knew that S ol
A na w as a great place to do business. T heir decision to open their new facility in N orth C harleston w illpay dividends for the
ipany, its w orkers, and our state for m any years to com e. It's a decision that w illstand the test of tim e.
uccessful, the N LR B com plaint w ould allow unions to hold a virtual'veto'over business decisions. Left to their ow n devices, the N L
Id routinely punish right-to-w ork states that value and prom ote their pro-business clim ates. T he current m akeup of the N LR B B ow l
)uld be surprised if any court recognized the legitim acy of this com plaint. It's pretty easy to see that at its heart, this is about union
.ics. A s S enator, I w illdo everything in m y pow er, including introducing legislation cutting off funding for this w ild goose chase, to
E
tt#
Y ou w illneed to have R ealO ne P layer installed on your com puter to be able to listen or w atch the clips above. R ealO ne P layer is free
softw are that lets you play audio and video files. D ow nload R ealO ne P layer
NLRB-FOIA-00008929
U N IT E D S T A T E S O F A M E R IC A
B E F O R E T H E N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
R E G IO N 19
T H E B O E IN G C O M P A N Y
and
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A S S O C IA T IO N O F
M A C H IN IS T S A N D A E R O S P A C E W O R K E R S
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A S S O C IA T IO N O F
M A C H IN IS T S A N D A E R O S P A C E W O R K E R S
C O M P L A IN T A N D N O T IC E O F H E A R IN G
Lodge N o. 751 ("Local 751" or the "U nion"), affiliated w ith International A ssociation of
M ach in ists an d A ero sp ace W o rkers ("IA M "), h as ch arg ed in C ase 19-C A -32431 th at
Th e B oein g C om pany ("R espond ent" or "B o eing"), h as b een engaging in unfair labor
practices as set forth in the N ational Labor R elations A ct (the "A ct"), 29 U .S .C . 151 et
seq.
B a s e d th e re o n , th e A c tin g G e n e ra l C o u n s e l o f th e N a tio n a l L a b o r
R elations B oard (the "B oard"), by the undersigned, pursuant to 10(b) of the A ct and
1.
The C harge w as filed by the U nion on M arch 26, 2010, and w as served on
NLRB-FOIA-00008930
2.
(a)
areas.
(b )
(c)
above in paragraph 2(a),both sold and shipped from ,and purchased and received at,
the facility goods valued in excess of $50,000 directly to and from points outside the
State of W ashington.
(d )
com m erce w ithin the m eaning of 2(2),(6) and (7) of the A ct.
3.
The Union is, and has been at all m aterial tim es, a labor organization
4.
A t allm aterialtim es the follow ing individuals held the positions set forth
opposite their respective nam es and have been supervisors w ithin the m eaning of
-2 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008931
2(11) of the A ct,and/or agents w ithin the m eaning of 2(13) of the A ct,acting on
behalfof R espondent:
ScottC arson
R ay C onner
C om m ercialA irplanes
Scott Fancher
Program
Fred K iga
R elations
D oug K ight
C om m ercialA irplanes
Jim M cN em ey
Jim Proulx
B oeing spokesm an
P at S hanahan
A irplane Program s
Jim A lbaugh
G en e W o lo sh yn
5.
(a)
the collective bargaining agreem ent described below in paragraph 5(c),including, inter
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining w ithin the m eaning of 9(b) of the
(b )
the collective bargaining agreem ent described below in paragraph 5(c),including, inter
-3 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008932
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining w ithin the m eaning of 9(b)
(c)
S ince at least 1975 and at allm aterialtim es,the IA M has been the
designated exclusive collective bargaining representative of the P uget S ound Unit and
(d )
6.
O n or about the dates and by the m anner noted below ,R espondent m ade
coercive statem ents to its em ployees that it w ould rem ove or had rem oved w ork from
threatened that the Unit w ould lose additionalw ork in the event of future strikes:
callthat w as posted on B oeing's intranet w ebsite for allem ployees and reported in the
S eattle P ost Intelligencer A erospace N ew s and quoted in the S eattle Tim es,m ade an
exten d ed statem en t reg ard in g "d iversifyin g [R esp o n d en t's] lab o r p o o l an d lab o r
relationship," and m oving the 787 D ream liner w ork to S outh C arolina due to "strikes
-4 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008933
(b )
entitled "787 Second Line,Q uestions and A nsw ers for M anagers," inform ed em ployees,
am ong other things,that its decision to locate the second 787 D ream liner line in S outh
(c)
the Seattle Tim es,attributed R espondent's 787 D ream liner production decision to use a
"dual-sourcing" system and to contract w ith separate suppliers for the S outh C arolina
(d )
to use a "dual-sourcing" system and to contract w ith separate suppliers for the S outh
(e)
Tim es reporter,stated that R espondent decided to locate its 787 D ream liner second line
in S outh C arolina because of past Unit strikes,and threatened the loss of future Unit
7.
(a)
but no later than O ctober 28, 2009, R espondent decided to transfer its second 787
D ream liner production line of 3 planes per m onth from the Unit to its non-union site in
-5 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008934
(b )
7(a) because the Unit em ployees assisted and/O r supported the Union by, inter alia,
concerted activities.
(c)
8.
(a)
but no later than D ecem ber 3,2009,R espondent decided to transfer a sourcing supply
program for its 787 D ream liner production line from the Unit to its non-union facility in
(b )
8(a) because the U nit em ployees assisted and/or supported the Union by, inter O a,
concerted activities.
(c)
com bined w ith the conduct described above in paragraphs 6 and 7(a),is also inherently
-6 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008935
9.
10.
been discrim inating in regard to the hire or tenure or term s or conditions of em ploym ent
11.
has engaged in unfair labor practices affecting com m erce w ithin the m eaning of 2(6)
12.
A s part of the rem edy for the unfair labor practices alleged herein, the
officials of R espondent alleged to have com m itted the violations enum erated above in
paragraph 6 read,or that a designated B oard agent read in the presence of a high level
B oeing official, an y notice that issu es in this m atter, an d requirin g R espond ent to
13.
(a)
A s part of the rem edy for the unfair labor practices alleged above in
-7 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008936
to have the Unit operate its second line of 787 D ream liner aircraft assem bly production
in the S tate of W ashington,utilizing supply lines m aintained by the Unit in the S eattle,
(b)
requested by the A cting G eneralC ounseldoes not seek to prohibit R espondent from
m aking non-discrim inatory decisions w ith respect to w here w ork w illbe perform ed,
including non-discrim inatory decisions w ith respect to w ork at its N orth C harleston,
S outh C arolina,facility.
A N SW E R R E Q U IR E M E N T
B oard's R ules and R egulations,it m ust file an answ er to this C om plaint.The answ er
before M ay 3, 2011. Unless filed electronically in a pdf form at,R espondent should file
an originaland four copies of the answ er w ith this office and serve a copy of the answ er
the A gency's w ebsite. In order to file an answ er electronically, access the A gency's
N um ber, and follow the detailed instructions. The responsibility for the receipt and
usability of the answ er rests exclusively upon the sender. Unless notification on the
continuous period of m ore than 2 hours after 12:00 noon (E astern Tim e) on the due
-8 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008937
date for filing,a failure to tim ely file the answ er w illnot be excused on the basis that the
transm ission could not be accom plished because the A gency's w ebsite w as off-line or
unavailable for som e other reason.The B oard's R ules and R egulations require that an
a pdf docum ent containing the required signature,no paper copies of the docum ent
need to be transm itted to the R egionalO ffice.H ow ever,if the electronic version of an
answ er to a com plaint is not a pdf file containing the required signature,then the E-filing
rules require that such answ er containing the required signature be subm itted to the
R egional O ffice by traditional m eans w ithin three (3) business days after the date of
electronic filing.
S ervice of the answ er on each of the other parties m ust be accom plished
filed or if an answ er is filed untim ely,the B oard m ay find,pursuant to M otion for D efault
N O T IC E O F H E A R IN G
N ationalLabor R elations B oard.A t the hearing,R espondent and any other party to this
proceeding have the right to appear and present testim ony regarding the allegations in
-9 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008938
-1 0 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008939
=A.
B ill K ilberg
Partner
F : +1202.530.9559
W ashington,D .C .O ffice
W ashington,D C 20036-5306
U SA
W illiam J.K ilberg is a Partner w ith G ibson,D unn & C rutcher.H e is a m em ber of the E xecutive C om m ittee
of the Firm ,has served on the Firm 's five-m em ber M anagem ent C om m ittee (2002-2009),and has served as
Partner-in-C harge of the W ashington office (1990-1995).H e is the m ost senior partner in the L abor &
M r.K ilberg counsels and represents clients in allaspects of em ployee relations,labor relations,and
em ployee com pensation and benefits.H e has appeared num erous tim es in trialcourts on behalf of
em ployers in class and collective actions under the m yriad of em ploym ent law s,including E R ISA ,T itle V II of
the C ivilR ights A ct,and the-Fair L abor Standards A ct.H e has argued m any significant m atters before eight
U nited States C ourts of A ppeals and has successfully argued tw o cases before the Suprem e C ourt, Egelhoff v.
com m ittees,the D epartm ents of L abor,Justice,and the T reasury,the E E O C ,the IR S,the N L R B,and the
PBG C .
In 1973,M r.K ilberg w as appointed by the President and confirm ed by the Senate as the Solicitor for the U .S.
D epartm ent of L abor,a position he held until1977.H e also has served as A ssociate Solicitor of L abor for
L abor R elations and C ivilR ights,G eneralC ounselof the FederalM ediation and C onciliation Service,and as
a W hite H ouse Fellow and SpecialA ssistant to Secretary of L abor G eorge P.Shultz.A t the tim e of his
appointm ent as Solicitor of L abor,M r.K ilberg w as the youngest person ever to be appointed to a sub-
C abinet post in the U nited States governm ent.M r.K ilberg w as President of the W hite H ouse Fellow s
A ssociation in 1982-83,and w as appointed by President R eagan in 1982 to the C om m ission on W hite H ouse
Fellow ships.
M r.K ilberg w as elected a Fellow in the charter classes of the C ollege of L abor and E m ploym ent L aw yers,and
the A m erican C ollege of E m ployee Benefits C ounsel.H e is a m em ber of the Board of the C ollege of L abor
and E m ploym ent L aw yers,the A dvisory Board of the A m erican E m ploym ent L aw C ouncil,the L egal
A dvisory C ouncilof the N ationalL egalC enter for the Public Interest,and of the E R ISA R oundtable.H e
serves as an O fficer of the L abor and E m ploym ent C om m ittee of the Federalist Society.
In June 2 0 1 0 , M r.K ilberg w as nam ed am ong the loo M ost Pow erfulE m ploym ent A ttorneys in the nation by
the 500 leading law yers in the nation,describing him as "the labor law yer of choice for corporate A m erica,"
and "one of the m ost esteem ed em ploym ent law yers in the land."
C ham bers & Partners U SA -A m erica's
in E m ployee Benefits & E xecutive C om pensation and L abor and E m ploym ent in the D istrict of C olum bia.In
2009, W ashingtonian M agazine nam ed M r.K ilberg as one of the T op L aw yers in L abor and E m ploym ent.
H e w as identified as the Best E m ploym ent L itigator in the W ashington-m etropolitan area in 2005 by the
W ashington B usiness Journal and as one of 100 "superlaw yers" by the W ashington Post.LegalTim es
has
characterized M r.K ilberg as one of the "T w elve L eading L abor & E m ploym ent L itigators in the D .C .A rea".
NLRB-FOIA-00008940
M r.K ilberg served as Editor-in-C hief of the Em ployee R elations Law Journal
from 1986 to 2003.H e has
published m any articles on em ploym ent and benefits issues,and often appears as a speaker on em ploym ent
and em ployee benefits issues atB ar and other professionalevents.H e is co-author of the m onographs "Saga
of R eform :R egulation of W orker O vertim e," published by the N ationalLegalC enter for the Public Interest
and "T he B attle O ver M andated B enefits," published by the H R Policy A ssociation.
H e is co-author of the
books "E m ployer's R ights and R esponsibilities:L egalD ilem m as in the C hanging W orkplace," and "Pitfalls
for Japanese E m ployers in the U nited States," published in Japanese and the chapter on E R ISA litigation in
U nited Latin A m erican C itizens (LU LA C ) A w ard for O utstanding Service to the Spanish-speaking
com m unity,the D .C .C ham ber of C om m erce A rthur Flem m ing A w ard for E xceptionalPublic Service,and the
Schoolof Industrialand L abor R elations atC ornellU niversity Judge W illiam B .G roatA lum niA w ard for
O utstanding C ontributions to the Field of Industrial& L abor R elations.In 2007 M r.K ilberg delivered the
inauguralD onald S.Shire L ecture atthe U nited States D epartm entof L abor.
M r.K ilberg graduated in 1966 from C ornellU niversity,w hich he attended on a scholarship from L ocal3,
InternationalB rotherhood of E lectricalW orkers,and received his law degree in 1969 from H arvard L aw
School.
P au l B lan k en stein
T :+1 202.955.8693
F: +1202.530.9532
W ashington,D .C .O ffice
W ashington,D C 20036-5306
U SA
Paul B lankenstein is of counsel in the W ashington,D .C .office of G ibson,D unn & C rutcher,w here his
practice focuses on com plex com m ercial litigation,including cases involving E m ployee R etirem ent Incom e
M r. B lankenstein has handled num erous em ploym ent benefit cases, ranging from potential claim s of
w ithdraw al liability under the M ultiem ployer Pension Protection A ct,to breach of fiduciary duty cases,
E R ISA preem ption cases,as w ell as cases involving benefit claim s.M r.B lankenstein w as part of the team
that successfully challenged the M aryland and Suffolk C ounty, N .Y . health benefit law s on E R ISA
preem ption grounds.H e has been involved w ith 401(k) stock drop and excessive fee cases.H e w as a key
m em ber of the team that successfully defended a m ajor financial m anagem ent and advisory com pany in the
W orldcom ER ISA
case and in the R C N ER ISA Litigation.
In addition, M r. B lankenstein played an
im portantrole in achieving a favorable settlem entfor C incinnatiB ellInc.in the In re B roadw ing Inc.ER ISA
Litigation.
C urrently, he is representing the C om puter Services C orporation, the various officers and
directors of K B H om e,the B oeing C orporation and the Janus C apital G roup in the E R ISA track of the
In re
branded retailer and w holesaler of high-quality doughnuts, in a recently settled E R M A 401(k) case.
M r.B lankenstein w as ranked as one of the top E R ISA litigation attorneys in the nation by Cham bers U SA
H e has also been recognized as one of the best E R ISA litigation law yers in the countryby the
Best
served for 12 years in the C ivilD ivision of the D epartm entof Justice as both a T rialand A ppellate A ttorney.
In those capacities,he handled m any significant cases involving governm ent regulatory program s.A s the
C ivil D ivision's A ppellate L itigation C ounsel,M r.B lankenstein w as personally responsible for handling the
2010.
M r. B lankenstein received his undergraduate degree from the C ity C ollege of N ew Y ork in 1969, and
graduated cum laude in 1973 from B rooklyn Law School,w here he w as an Editor of the Law R eview
NLRB-FOIA-00008941
M att M cG ill
Partner
m m egiii@ gibE,ondurin.coin
T : +1202.887.3680
F: +1 202.530.9662
W ashington,D .C .O ffice
M atthew D .M cG illis a partner in the W ashington,D .C .office ofG ibson,D unn & C rutcher.H e practices in
the firm 's Litigation D epartm entand its A ppellate and C onstitutionalLaw and IntellectualProperty practice
groups.
M r.M cG illrecently w as nam ed a national R ising Star by Law 360, w hich identified him as one of 10
appellate law yers under 40 to w atch.In the five years since he joined the firm ,he has participated in
thirteen cases before the Suprem e C ourt of the U nited States,drafting the w inning briefs in ten of those
cases.T hose ten Suprem e C ourt victories,w hich span a w ide range of substantive areas of law ,include
earthquake," this decision overruled tw o Suprem e C ourt precedents and established the First A m endm ent
right of corporations to spend generaltreasury funds on speech activities to influence the outcom es of
elections.
to take up the case over the opposition of both environm entalists and the Solicitor G eneral,M r.M cG ill's
briefs convinced the Suprem e C ourt to reverse a N inth C ircuit decision that invalidated a C lean W ater A ct
criticalperm it and jeopardized m ine operator C oeur A laska's $330,000,000 investm ent in an A laskan gold
m ine.
R iegelv.M edtronic,Inc.
(2008) T his decision,w hich,as the N ew York Tim es
reported,has had "huge
im plications for the health care-technology industry," held thatfederallaw preem pts m any state-law product
liability claim s against m edicaldevices m anufacturers,foreclosing scores of products liability cases across
the country.
increased certain defendants'dam ages exposure in patent infringem ent cases by extending U .S.patent law
to reach softw are developers'foreign sales.T he victory, N ew York Tim es observed,has "save[d][M icrosoft]
billions ofdollars."
M r.M cG illalso has filed num erous am icus curiae briefs on behalfofclients in cases raising im portantissues
O utside the Suprem e C ourt,M r.M cG ill's practice focuses on cases involving noveland com plex questions of
constitutionalchallenge to C alifornia's Proposition 8,w hich prohibits sam e-sex couples from m arrying.In
the patentarea,M r.M cG illcurrently advises M icrosoftin tw o appeals involving nine-figure verdicts against
M r.M cG illalso m aintains an active pro bono practice.M ost recently,he briefed and argued a case in the
Suprem e C ourtofV irginia on behalfofthe adoptive fam ily ofa 4-year-old girland w on a unanim ous ruling
NLRB-FOIA-00008942
Prior to joining G ibson D unn,M r.M cG illserved as a Bristow Fellow in the O ffice ofthe Solicitor G eneralat
the U .S.D epartm entofJustice and clerked for the H on.Joseph M .M cL aughlin ofthe U .S.C ourtofA ppeals
for the Second C ircuitand the H on.John G .R oberts,Jr.ofthe U .S.C ourtofA ppeals for the D .C .C ircuit.
M r.M cG illearned a Bachelor ofA rts degree, m agna cum laude, from D artm outh C ollege in 1996.In 2 0 0 0 ,
he graduated from Stanford L aw School,w here he w as elected to the O rder of the C oif.M r.M cG illis
licensed to practice in N ew Y ork and the D istrict of C olum bia and he has been adm itted to practice before
the Suprem e C ourt of the U nited States,the U nited States C ourts of A ppeals for the First,Second,Fifth,
N inth,E leventh,D istrict of C olum bia,and FederalC ircuits,and the U nited States D istrict C ourt for the
C hris M artin
Partner
cjm artin@
sibsonduilli.00131
T : +1 650.849.5305
F: +1650.849.5005
C h ristop h er J. M artin is a p artn er in th e P alo A lto office of G ib son , D u n n & C ru tch er.
A m em ber of the firm 's L abor D epartm ent,M r.M artin has extensive experience in representing em ployers
in a w ide range of em ploym ent issues,including traditionallabor m atters arising under the N ationalL abor
R elations A ct,w age/hour and A D A class action litigation in federal and state courts,em ploym ent
discrim ination and state w rongfuldischarge actions.M r.M artin represents large,publicly-traded
com panies w ith m anufacturing operations in the San Francisco Bay A rea,as w ellas sm aller,em erging high-
t e c h
n
o
l o
g
y
c o
m
p
a
n
i e s .
M r.M artin graduated PhiBeta K appa w ith a bachelor of arts degree in E nglish in 1973 from Stanford
of
Law.
UCLA
School
1978
from
the
graduated
in
and
U niversity
M r.M artin is a fellow ofthe C ollege ofL abor and E m ploym entL aw yers.H e is also involved w ith the L abor
L aw Subsection of the Santa C lara C ounty Bar A ssociation,the L abor and E m ploym ent L aw Section of the
State Bar of C alifornia,and the L abor and E m ploym ent L aw Section of the A m erican Bar A ssociation.M r.
M artin has served on the faculty of the N ationalE m ploym ent L aw Institute and the Institute for A pplied
M r.M artin has w ritten and lectured extensively in the area of labor relations and em ploym ent law .H e is a
m em ber ofthe C alifornia Em ploym entLaw C ounciland the Law yers C om m ittee ofthe Em ployers'G roup.
NLRB-FOIA-00008943
P artner - A tlanta
rhankins@ m ckennalong.com
D ow nload vC ai"d
S uite 5300
A tlanta,G A 30308-3265
TE L: 404.527.8372
FA X : 404.527.4198
E xperience
Form ore than 20 years,R ichard H ankins has advised U .S.corporations w ith regard to a w ide variety of
com plex laborrelations m atters,such as large-scale union organizing and decertification cam paigns,strikes
and secondary boycotts,union jurisdictionaldisputes,and successorem ployerclaim s.H e w orks closely w ith
m anagem ent on laborrelations strategies related to new facilities,plant closings and consolidations,as w ell
M r.H ankins w as lead counselin w hat is believed to be the largest successfuldecertification cam paign in
U .S.history.H e has successfully argued num erous traditionallaborcases before U .S.C ircuit C ourts of
A ppeal,has appeared before m ore than 15 R egions of the N ationalLaborR elations B oard,and has spoken
M r.H ankins has been active on behalf of the business com m unity during the debate overthe Em ployee
Free C hoice A ct.H e has w ritten about and been interview ed by num erous m edia outlets in connection w ith
the bill,and has m et w ith key governm ent officials to present m anagem ent perspectives.
In addition to his w ork in labor-m anagem ent relations,M r.H ankins handles w age and hourm atters,
em ploym ent discrim ination claim s,and restrictive covenant cases.H e w as a C ontributing Editoron the
C ham bers U SA rates M r.H ankins as a leading G eorgia Laborand Em ploym ent law yer.H e has also been
M r.H ankins co-edits the blog Labor R elations Today, dedicated to tracking key legislative,executive and
adm inistrative regulatory developm ents thatsignificantly im pacthow em ployers interactw ith theirem ployees
and laborunions.
NLRB-FOIA-00008944
E d u catio n
A d m itted
G eorgia
NLRB-FOIA-00008945
has done.
NLRB-FOIA-00008946
to bargain collectively
of collective bargaining
law ju d ge in S eattle o n Ju ne 1 4.
T am er v. N L R B , ju d g es o n th e g enerally
NLRB-FOIA-00008947
I'
w as no t "sufficient to establish a
reaso n w h y R ep u b licans
m o re d ifficu lt, th e
S o u th and p arts o f th e R o ck y
av o id u nio nizatio n. T h at h as h ad a p ro fo u nd
p o litical im p act.
that m attered.
John B .Judis
NLRB-FOIA-00008948
Ea p i ro ,
M iriam
o m : W ille n , D e b ra L
ant:
):
York Tim es
20,2011
T EV EN G R EEN H O U S E
hat m ay be the strongest signalyet of the new pro-labor orientation of the N ationalL abor R elations B oard under President O bam a,the agency fik
to bring an airplane production line back to its unionized facilities in W ashington State instead of m ovi,
com plaint,the labor board said that B oeing's decision to transfer a second production line for its new 787 D ream liner passenger plane to South
aina w as m otivated by an unlaw fuldesire to retaliate against union w orkers for their past strikes in W ashington and to discourage future strikes.'1
cy's acting generalcounsel,L afe Solom on,said it w as illegalfor com panies to take actions in retaliation against w orkers for exercising the right to
e.
ough m anufacturers have long m oved plants to nonunion states,the board noted that B oeing officials had,in internaldocum ents and new s
view s,specifically cited the strikes and potentialfuture strikes as a reason for their 2009 decision to expand in South C arolina.
ng said it w ould "vigorously contest" the labor board's com plaint."T his claim is legally frivolous and represents a radicaldeparture from both
R .B .and Suprem e C ourt precedent," said J.M ichaelL uttig,a B oeing executive vice president and its generalcounsel."B oeing has every right undi
federallaw and its collective bargaining agreem ent to build additionalU .S.production capacity outside of the Puget Sound region."
highly unusualfor the federalgovernm ent to seek to reverse a corporate decision as im portant as the location of plant.
w er since a D em ocratic m ajority took controlof the five-m em ber board after M r.O bam a's election,the board has signaled that it w ould seek to ac
ire liberal,pro-union tilt after years of pro-em ployer decisions under President B ush.
ough the board has not yet issued m any m ajor decisions reversing B ush-era policies,it has begun requiring private sector em ployers to post a noti
it w orkers'right to unionize,and M r.Solom on has begun m oving m ore aggressively to w in reinstatem ent of union supporters fired illegally by
statem ent W ednesday,M r.Solom on said: "A w orker's right to strike is a fundam entalright guaranteed by the N ationalL abor R elations A ct.W e al
gnize the rights of em ployers to m ake business decisions based on their econom ic interests,but they m ust do so w ithin the law ."
h C arolina's tw o senators,both R epublicans,L indsey G raham and Jim D eM int,denounced the board's m ove."T his is nothing m ore than a politic
rfor the unions w ho are supporting President O bam a's re-election cam paign," M r.D eM int said.
labor board said that in 2007,B oeing announced plans to create a second production line that w ould m ake three 787 D ream liner planes a m onth i
/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008949
er 2009,B oeing said it w ould locate its second line atanew ,nonunion plantin South C arolina.
N .L .R .B .asserted thaton num erous occasions B oeing officials had com m unicated an unlaw fulm otive for transferring the production line,includi
iterview w ith The Seattle Tim es in w hich a B oeing executive said,"The overriding factor w as notthe business clim ate.A nd itw as notthe w ages w c
rig today.Itw as thatw e cannotafford to have a w ork stoppage,you know ,every three years."
Solom on broughtthe com plaintafter a union representing m any of B oeing's W ashington w orkers,the InternationalA ssociation of M achinists an
A pace W orkers,com plained thatB oeing had decided to m ove production to South C arolina largely in retaliation for a 58-day strike in 2008.
ing's decision to build a 787 assem bly line in South C arolina senta m essage thatB oeing w orkers w ould suffer financialharm for exercising their
ctive bargaining rights," said the union's vice president,R ich M ichalski.
Solom on said thatif he failed to settle the dispute,an adm inistrative judge w ould begin hearing the case on June 14 in Seattle.M r.Solom on said h
notseeking to close the South C arolina factory or prohibitB oeing from assem bling planes there.
ng criticized the tim ing of the N .L .R .B .'s com plaint,saying itcam e w hen construction of the factory in N orth C harleston,S.C .,w as nearly com plet.
ng said on W ednesday thatnone of the production jobs in South C arolina had com e atthe expense of jobs in W ashington.Itnoted thatits unioniz
2 ,0 0 0
com pany also said it had decided to expand in South C arolina in part to protect business continuity and to reduce the dam age to its finances and
C ircular 230 D isclosure: T o com ply w ith certain U .S.T reasury regulations,w e inform you .
by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding any penalties that m ay be im posed on such
)ayer by the Internal R evenue Service.In addition,if any such tax advice is used or referred
y other parties in prom oting,m arketing or recom m ending any partnership or other entity,
.stm ent plan or arrangem ent,then (i) the advice should be construed as w ritten in connection
the prom otion or m arketing by others of the transaction(s) or m atter(s) addressed in this
im unication and (ii) the taxpayer should seek advice based on the taxpayer's particular
************************************************************************************************
s e-m ail is sent by a law firm and m ay contain inform ation that is privileged or confidential.
ou are not the intended recipient,please delete the e-m ail and any attachm ents and notify us
lediately.
/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008950
D ow Jones R eprints: T his copy is for your persolial, non..com m e:oial ose only. Y u older presentalice..ready copies
for distribution lo your coileagnes, clients or
O rder R eprints tool al tile bottom of any article or visit w w w .cfireprints.com
Page 1 of 2
C L IS iO IT IV S .
u se the
THEWALLSTREETJOURNAL.
. W S .L o o m
M A N A G EM EN T
JU N E 2 0 , 2 0 1 1 , 1 2 :2 7 P .M . E T
By PE TER S A N D ER S
L E B O U R G E T ,France B oeing C o.C hairm an and C hief E xecutive Jim M cN erney said he is confident that the
com pany w ill prevail in its legal battle w ith the U .S.N ational L abor R elations B oard over the com pany's decision to
"W e're in a strong position and are absolutely confident that w e w ill prevail in term s of the law ," he said M onday in an
interview at the Paris A ir Show ."B ut it has the potential to drag out for years."
T he tw o sides m et at a hearing in Seattle last w eek.A dm inistrative L aw Judge C lifford A nderson quickly urged both
sides to w ork hard to reach a settlem ent but nothing w as im m ediately resolved.
"T here is alw ays a possibility of som e settlem ent," M r.M cN erney said but added that he w on't com prom ise the best
interests of his shareholders.N or w ill he com prom ise on the "principles involved" that he said enable com panies to
"A ll of the [settlem ent] ideas that have been floated so far com prom ise on those principles," he said.
For B oeing,w hich is w orking to ram p up production on its forthcom ing 787 D ream liner,the new factory in South
C arolina is integral to those plans.T he prim ary D ream liner assem bly line is in E verett,W ash.,north of Seattle,w ithin
B oeing's m ain w ide-body-jet factory.T hat factory em ploys union w orkers from the International A ssociation of
B oeing's South C arolina factory uses nonunion w orkers and is slated to build three D ream liners a m onth by late 2013.
T he N L R B in its com plaint said B oeing decided to locate the second D ream liner assem bly line in South C arolina in
retaliation for a three-m onth strike in late 2008 that crippled the com pany's production lines.
B oeing has said that it didn't take any union jobs from the Puget Sound area w hen it chose to open the South C arolina
facility,but sim ply added new ones in that state. T he com pany pointed to union jobs created in Puget Sound in recent
T he C hicago-based com pany w ill need to m ake m ajor business decisions in the com ing m onths as it decides the future
of the best-selling 737 single-aisle jet and the successful 777 long-distance m odel.B oeing is leaning tow ard building an
all-new sm all jet to replace the 737,an expensive undertaking that w ould require a significant increase in its w ork force
and the construction of at least one new factory.B oeing executives have said it is too early in the process to m ake
6/20/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00008951
Page 2 of 2
M r.M cN erney said the N L R B case w ould have no im pacton B oeing's strategic plans."W e are confidentenough of our
position that itw on't influence our decisions atall," he said.B oeing hasn't said w here it w ould build a new plane if it
Jim A lbaugh,president and chief executive of B oeing's com m ercial-airplane unit,said M onday thatbecause of its
highly-skilled w ork force,W ashington is "clearly atthe top of the listof places w e look at" w hen considering new
projects.M r.A lbaugh w as appearing afa new s briefing w ith W ashington G ov.C hristihe G regoire.
T his copy is for your personal, non-com m ercialuse only. D istribution and use of this m aterialare governed by our S ubscriber A greem ent and by copyright
law . F or non-personaluse or to order m ultiple copies, please contact D ow Jones R eprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit
w w w .djreprints.com
6/20/201'1
NLRB-FOIA-00008952
P R O M O T IN G E T H IC S IN P U B L IC L IF E
f
N atiG al Legaland Policy C enter
C arl H o ro w itz
le N ationalL abor R elations B oard m ust have a broad definition of "coercion" w hen it com es to em ployers.
'ith unions,the standard seem s a lot narrow er.O n A pril20,the board filed a 10-page com plaint (see pdf D i)
,ainst B oeing alleging the com pany's decision in 2009 to relocate its second assem bly plant in South C arolina
presented illegalretaliation against em ployees belonging to the InternationalA ssociation of M achinists &
D rospace W orkers (JA M ).A s a rem edy,the N L R B is seeking a judicialorder for the com pany to shift all
oduction of its planned 787 D ream liner com m ercialjet back to its originalfacility in W ashington State.T he
predictably,is delighted.B oeing and South C arolina officials are furious.T hat South C arolina,unlike
"ashington,is a R ight to W ork state has m ore than a little to do w ith the unfolding dram a.
ack on M arch 26,2010,the M achinists filed a com plaint[2 ] against B oeing w ith the N ationalL abor R elations
)ard.T he union claim ed the C hicago-based com pany,in m oving its finalassem bly plant for its 787 D ream lin
w ide-body,tw in-engine jet aircraft to a facility near C harleston,South C arolina,illegally had "retaliated"
;ainst the JA M for four separate strikes the union conducted over the course of 1989-2008.Instead of expanding its existing production facility in
terett,W ashington,located about 25 m iles north of Seattle,B oeing instead chose a site at C harleston A irport near C harleston,S.C .A fter conducting
investigation,N L R B A cting G eneralC ounselL afe Solom on found "reasonable cause" to believe that the com pany violated tw o sections of the
ationalL abor R elations A ct.First,the m ove allegedly w as m otivated by a desire "to retaliate for past strikes and chillfuture strike activity." Second,
3eing officials had m ade "coercive statem ents" to union em ployees relating to the m ove.
n w hat basis did the N L R B arrive at this conclusion? T he board cited internaldocum ents and new s interview s.B ut the interview s,at least,hardly
ake for scandal.In one supposedly dam ning instance,Jim A lbaugh,C E O of B oeing C om m ercialA irplanes,told the Seattle T im es (M arch 2,2010)
at w hile W ashington State rem ained his "preferred location" for building com m ercialaircraft,he w ould view South C arolina as a better alternative
'less the union "m oderates its future w age dem ands and avoids strikes." B oeing had especially good reason to fear strikes.T he last one,in 2008,
;ted alm ost tw o m onths and cost the com pany nearly $2 billion in lost revenue.T o com pensate,m anagem ent w anted w orkers to contribute m ore
w ard health insurance,forgo defined-benefit pension plans and agree to m ore outsourcing.A lbaugh stated: "T he overriding factor w as not the
Isiness clim ate.A nd it w as not the w ages w e are paying today.It w as that w e can't afford to have a w ork stoppage every three years.A nd w e can't
ford to continue the rate of escalation of w ages." B oeing C E O and C hairm an Jim M cN erney also engaged in "retaliation" by referring in a quarterly
m ing conference appearing on the B oeing w ebsite to diversifying [R espondent's] labor pooland labor relationship" and m oving 787 D ream liner
oduction to South C arolina due to "strikes happening every three to four years in Puget Sound." It's hard to see such statem ents as coercive.
eanw hile,South C arolina already had beckoned.A s a R ight to W ork state,w orkers there don't have to w orry about losing their jobs if they don't pa)
lion dues or agency fees.T he com pany had its eyes set on a site in N orth C harleston previously occupied by V ought A ircraft Industries Inc.In 2009,
3eing paid $750 m illion for the com plex,w hich it planned to retrofit for 787 D ream liner production at the rate of 10 planes a m onth.W ith orders
lling in since 2004,the State of South C arolina sw eetened the deal,adding nearly $900 m illion in tax relief and other incentives.T est flights began i
acem ber 2009; com m ercialproduction is expected to begin next year - the com pany hopes.
aluctant to leave its E verett w ork force high and dry,B oeing m ade a finalcontract offer that included a "no-strike" clause.T he m ove,m anagem ent
nphasized,w ould not replace W ashington State operations.Indeed,it w ould lead to m ore hiring in W ashington as w ellas South C arolina.T he
achinists,unim pressed,responded w ith a proposed 11-year agreem ent that w ould require the com pany to place allfuture com m ercialaircraft
oduction in the Puget Sound area; rem ain neutralin allunion organizing cam paigns; and reserve a seat on the its executive board for a union
presentative.A fter lengthy secret talks [4 ], B oeing said "no." Soon after,in O ctober 2009,it signed an agreem ent w ith South C arolina.
le InternationalA ssociation of M achinists,w hich represents som e 35,000 B oeing w orkers around the U .S.,25,000 in W ashington State,felt double-
ossed.Severalm onths later,the Seattle-based JA M D istrict L odge 751 filed an U nfair L abor Practice charge against the com pany,claim ing senior
)eing executives had used coercion against law fulunion activity."B oeing's decision to build a 787 assem bly line in South C arolina sent a m essage
at B oeing w orkers w ould suffer financialharm for exercising their collective bargaining rights," said IA M V ice President R ich M ichalski[5] upon
:aring the new s of the N L R B action."Federallabor law is clear: It's illegalto threaten or penalize w orkers w ho engage in concerted activity." D istric
;1 President T om W roblew ski[6 ] likew ise stated: "H ad w e allow ed B oeing to break the law and go unchecked in their actions,it w ould have given th
een light for corporate A m erica to discrim inate against union m em bers and w ould have becom e m anagem ent's new strategic tem plate to attack
nployees."
'hat union officials conveniently overlook,how ever,is that after the purchase of the N orth C harleston facility,union w orkers there voted 199-68 to
:certify the IA M as their bargaining representative shortly after the announcem ent of the m ove.A pparently,that sort of "concerted activity" isn't
NLRB-FOIA-00008953
cep tab le to M ach in ist ch ieftain s. F o llo w in g th e v o te, th e u n io n tiled a law su it ag ain st n ew S o u th C aro lin a R ep u b lican G o v ern o r N ik k i H aley ,
aim in g sh e h ad "v io lated U .S . lab o r law s an d th e C o n stitu tio n ." JA M S o u th ern T errito ry V ice P resid en t B ob M artinez [2 ] ex p lain ed th e u n io n 's
L sitio n : "G o v . H aley p laced h er h an d o n a B ib le an d sw o re to d efen d th e C o n stitu tio n o f th e U n ited S tates. [M u t h er stated in ten tio n is to activ ely
p o se w o rk ers in S o u th C aro lin a w h o w ish to ex ercise th eir leg al rig h t to jo in a u n io n ." M artin ez can 't seem to g et o v er th e fact th at w o rk ers in S o u th
le N atio n al L ab o r R elatio n s B o ard , an d n o t fo r th e first tim e, ap p ears eag er to b eco m e a u n io n m o u th p iece. "A w o rk er's rig h t to strik e is a
n d am en tal rig h t g u aran teed b y th e N atio n al L ab o r R elatio n s A ct," n o ted N L R B A ctin g G en eral C o u n sel L afe S o lo m o n in a statem en t released in
L n ju n ctio n w ith th e filin g o f th e A p ril 2 0 co m p lain t. "W e also reco g n ize th e rig h ts o f em p lo y ers to m ak e b u sin ess d ecisio n s b ased o n th eir eco n o m ic
terests, b u t th ey m u st d o so w ith in th e law ." B u t h o w h as B o ein g , b y try in g to av o id strik es, b ro k en th e law ? If u n io n s h av e th e rig h t to o rg an ize o r
th e N L R B , cu rren tly w ith fo u r m em b ers - th ree D em o crats an d o n e R ep u b lican (th e n o m in ee fo r th e fifth slo t, R ep u b lican T eren ce F ly n n , aw aits
:n ate ap p ro v al) - is so ex ercised b y B o ein g 's alleg ed u n io n -b u stin g tactics, w h y d id it w ait a y ear an d a h alf to file its co m p lain t ag ain st B o ein g ? It
L uld be that until M arch 2010, the board for 27 m onths had operated w ith only tw o m em bers [L ob W ilm a L iebm an and P eter S chaum ber, respectively,
em o crat an d a R ep u b lican . V icto ry fo r th e IA M u n d er th ese co n d itio n s, in o th er w o rd s, w as u n lik ely . W ith a p ro -u n io n m ajo rity in p lace, A ctin g
)ein g is an y th in g b u t h ap p y ab o u t th e N L R B law su it. "T h is claim is leg ally friv o lo u s an d rep resen ts a rad ical d ep artu re fro m b o th N L R B an d
ip rem e C o u rt p reced en t," said th e co m p an y 's g en eral co u n sel, J. M ich ael L u ttig . S o u th C aro lin a elected o fficials are esp ecially in cen sed . A tto rn ey
m eral A lan W ilso n recen tly n o ted th at th e co m p lain t ag ain st B o ein g w ill h u rt th e ab ility o f h is an d o th er states to create jo b s.
E ight other state
torneys general concurred w ith W ilson [I 1 ] in a p rep ared statem en t o n A p ril 2 8 . "T h is is n o th in g m o re th an a p o litical fav o r fo r th e u n io n s w h o are
p p o rtin g P resid en t O b am a's re-electio n cam p aig n ," rem arked S en. Jim D eM int, R -S .C . [2 ] "U n fo rtu n ately , it co m es at th e ex p en se o f h u n d red s o f jo b
S o u th C aro lin a an d th o u san d s o f jo b s n atio n w id e." F ellow S outh C arolina R epublican S enator L indsey G raham stated [121: "If successful, the N L R B
m p lain t w o u ld allo w u n io n s to h o ld a v irtu al 'v eto 'o v er b u sin ess d ecisio n s. L eft to th eir o w n d ev ices, th e N L R B w o u ld ro u tin ely p u n ish R ig h t to
3vem or H aley m ay b e th e m o st o u tsp o k en o f all. L ay in g o u t h er p o sitio n in a g u est ed ito rial, "O bam a's S ilence on B oeing Is U nacceptable,"
L pearing in th e A pril 29 W all S treet Journal, she w rote:
[1 3 ]
S o u th C aro lin a is a rig h t-to -w o rk state, an d w e're p ro u d th at w ith in o u r b o rd ers w o rk ers can n o t b e req u ired to jo in a lab o r u n io n as a
co n d itio n o f em p lo y m en t. W e d o n 't n eed u n io n s p lay in g m id d lem an b etw een o u r co m p an ies an d o u r em p lo y ees. W e d o n 't w an t th em
fo rcefu lly in serted in to o u r p ro m isin g b u sin ess clim ate. A n d w e w ill n o t stan d fo r th em in tim id atin g S o u th C aro lin ian s.
ask ed th e co u rts to in terv en e an d fo rce B o ein g to sto p p ro d u ctio n in S o u th C aro lin a. T h e N L R B w an ts B o ein g to p ro d u ce th e p lan es o n ly
in W ash in g to n S tate, w h ere its w o rk ers m u st b elo n g to th e In tern atio n al A sso ciatio n o f M ach in ists an d A ero sp ace W o rk ers.
aley w en t o n to call th e actio n s b y th e N L R B "n o th in g less th an a d irect assau lt o n th e 2 2 rig h t-to -w o rk states acro ss A m erica."
iv o cates fo r each sid e w ill g et to sq u are o ff startin g th is Ju n e 1 4 in th e Jam es C . S an d H earin g R o o m in th e Jack so n F ed eral B u ild in g in S eattle
T o re an N L R B A d m in istrativ e L aw Ju d g e. B o ein g n o d o u b t w ill g iv e its all; p u llin g o u t o f S o u th C aro lin a w o u ld in cu r serio u s lo sses. B y M arch o f
is y ear, fu lly 8 3 5 o rd ers fro m a co m b in ed 5 6 cu sto m ers h ad p o u red in , d esp ite v ario u s p ro ject d elay s. T h e 7 8 7 D ream lin er is th e aircraft b u ild er's
arq u ee c o m m e rc ia l p ro d u ct, a lo g ica l s u cc es so r to its less fu e l-e ffic ien t 74 7-40 0 an d 76 7 m o d e ls. T h e J ap a n e se a re d ee p ly e n m es h e d in th e p ro je ct a :
a ll, p ro v id in g a 3 5 -p e rc e n t w o rk sh are an d a first-tim e-ev er p articip atio n in w in g p ro d u ctio n . A u n io n v icto ry , ev en w ith o u t th e w ag e an d b en efit
iere is a certain m easu re o fro u g h ju stice in all th is. B o ein g u n w ittin g ly h as b eco m e an IA M targ et d u e to its cap itu latio n to u n io n p o w er in th e p ast.
-ik e ag ain st B o ein g b y th e S o ciety o f P ro fessio n al E n g in eerin g E m p lo y ees in A ero sp ace b ack in early 2 0 0 0 , fo r ex am p le, resu lted in m an ag em en t
p itu latin g o n sev eral k ey issu es in o rd er to settle after 4 0 d ay s; th e w alk o u t cau sed B o ein g to m iss at least 1 5 aircraft d eliv eries an d so m e g o v ern m et
L n tracts. A n d th e co m p an y su ccu m b ed o n m ajo r issu es d u rin g a fo u r-w eek strik e b y th e M ach in ists in 2 0 0 5 , w h ich resu lted in o v erw h elm in g u n io n
L p ro v al o f a th ree-y ear co n tract - an d an o th er JA M strik e in 2 0 0 8 . B o ein g is a co m p an y th at h as v irtu ally en sh rin ed racial, ethnic and gender diversit3
ck lessn ess. T h e case sh o u ld stan d as a lesso n to all co m p an ies: U n io n s an d th eir p o litical allies d o n 't b eco m e "n icer" after th ey cau se a co rp o rate
elated:
[1 5 ]
[1 6 ]
iprem e C ourt R ules against T w o-M em ber N L R B : D ecision M ay R eopen D isputes rug
NLRB-FOIA-00008954
A .
H a le y U n io n C o rru p tio n U p d a te
nks:
2] http://scgop.com /nIrb-action-against-boeing-should-end/
5] http://n1pc.org/stories/2011/01/24/w ill-nlrb-create-stealth-pro-union-legislation
7] http://n1pc.org/stories/2010/03/10/northrop-drops-tanker-bid-n1pc-exposed-boeing-scandal
3] http://n1pc.org/stories/2009/04/24/boeing-shareholder-proposal-targets-golden-parachutes
NLRB-FOIA-00008955
Labor N ew s
F O R IM M E D IA T E R E L E A S E : M ay 4, 2011
The B oeing C om pany has long been a top spender in the W ashington legislature to .gain
W ash in g to n to in tim id ate an d co erce th e fed eral ag en cy in vestig atin g B o ein g 's u n law fu l
retaliating against its w orkers w ho engaged in collective activity by m oving part of their w ork on
the new 787 D ream liner to ano ther state. B oeing pub licly adm itted that its prim ary m o tive w as
law yer sent a 10-page public rant to the agency, attacking and dem anding that the agency's law
enforcem ent efforts be w ithdraw n. S uch a letter is highly unusual, as it seeks to underm ine the
A gency's authority to perform its statutory duties. Typically, em ployers charged by the A gency
m ake their defenses at a legalhearing,w hich has already been scheduled,and do not seek to take
T h en , ten U .S . S en ato rs frien d ly to B o ein g 's an ti-w o rker m essag e ch allen g ed th e ch ief
"In m y 2 8 years of practicing labor law , I have never seen an em ployer use these types of
o vertly p o litical tactics to avo id a leg al p ro ceed in g ," said D avid C am p b ell, IA M D istrict 751
law yer. "R ath er than face the m u sic at th e Ju ne 14 hearin g, the B oeing C o m pan y is ap paren tly
trying to kill the case politically. This tactic show s all too clearly how desperate the C om pany is
The N LR B 's case against B oeing rests upon B oeing's ow n adm issions that it sought to
avo id law fu l co llective activity in W ash in g to n state. W h ile B o ein g claim s th at it is free to take
NLRB-FOIA-00008956
46,
-
w hatever action itthinks m ay be necessary to avoid collective bargaining and strike activity,that
is sim ply not the law .Just as the law prohibits discrim ination against w histleblow ers oew orkers
w ho take fam ily leave,A m erica's law s protect w orkers w ho engage in collective activity.
T his case presents a sim ple issue: D o big com panies have to obey the law ? If em ployers
can retaliate againstw orkers w ho exercise rights thatare protected by law ,then those rights w ill
G eneralC ounselreview ed this case for a year,found convincing m erit,and issued a com plaint.
The hearing should continue according to its rules like any law enforcem entprocess.
If,as B oeing claim s,the case is frivolous,it w illhave the opportunity to present its
argum ent before a judge on June 14 in Seattle.It can appealthe judge's decision to m em bers of
Instead of follow ing the rule of law ,B oeing is using its trem endous politicalclout to try
to stop the actions of an independent federallaw enforcem ent agency.Such tactics m ight w ork
##
NLRB-FOIA-00008957
ifk r
alm ost clockw ork: A s a new presidential election cycle w inds around,the early prim ary state of South C arolina provide
ether it's a debate about w here the C onfederate battle flag should fly or the "real" m eaning of secession the nation
is,alm ost to the day that South C arolina com m em orated the 150th anniversary of the first shot of the C ivil W ar,the fede
ernm ent lobbed a grenade into the Palm etto State,challenging a private industry's right to conduct business there.
ssue is w hether B oeing,w hich is slated to open a plant this sum m er in N orth C harleston and create thousands of jobs,
CE
L ily do so.T he N ational L abor R elations B oard (N L R B ) contends in a com plaint recently filed against B oeing that the
Ipany can't open its plant in "right to w ork" South C arolina because the m ove is allegedly m otivated by an attem pt to av
n though it is perfectly logical that businesses prefer nonunionized w orkforces, it is technically illegal to m ake business
isions in retaliation against union w orkers. U nionized w orkers in the com pany's E verett, W ash., facility have gone on st
does this m ean that B oeing's decision to locate a second production line in another state constitutes retaliation?
m idation? O r is it m erely a good business decision based on several factors,including a better clim ate and a m ore tax-
en it com es to red-m eat issues around w hich conservatives can coalesce, you couldn't do m uch better than unions vs.
'ate industry,especially in historically anti-union South C arolina.T he N L R B just tossed a K obe tenderloin to the G O P.
:ing history aside for the m om ent,this battle sim plifies and clarifies the stakes in the private-vs.-public debate and m ay
ce it easier for fence-straddlers to pick a political side.O ther related issues have been som ew hat less clear-cut for all but
ideologically corseted.
V isconsin,for instance,w here unions and G O P G ov.Scott W alker have battled over w hether state w orkers should have
ective bargaining pow ers beyond w age negotiations,a fair determ ination could seem elusive at tim es.Shouldn't w orker;
e the right to negotiate as a team ? T he governor's position w as that the state couldn't afford to m eet public-em ployee un
.ics of the N L R B com plaint claim that the O bam a adm inistration is m erely m assaging the union vote.C ritics of B oeing
E
com pany's business decision as intim idating to its other w orkers,w ho m ay fear their jobs are at risk and their bargainini
key question isn't w hether B oeing executives are trying to avoid strikes and m axim ize productivity and profits. O f coui
'are. T he m ore com pelling concern is w hether unions should be allow ed essentially to veto w here a com pany locates an
ducts business.
laps the question w ill have to be answ ered by the courts, but South C arolinians, including G ov. N ikki H aley (R ) and
)ublican Sens.L indsey G raham and Jim D eM int,prom ise a fight.In the interim ,a couple of facts are w orth considering:
!,2,000 jobs have been added to the E verett plant since the South C arolina project w as announced,so job security seem s
L nonissue.T w o,given that the South C arolina plant has been w ell underw ay for a couple of years,the tim ing of the N L I
.
.
inw hile,one couldn't find a m ore personal issue to bestir local passions in a state that boasts politics as blood sport.Fed
"outside agitators" telling locals w hat to do and stealing jobs in the process? See: Fort Sum ter.O bviously this skirm ish
sn't com pare to slavery or Jim C row ,the end of w hieh did require outside "interference." B ut even today,it doesn't take
lublican candidates w ill have no trouble picking the right side of this argum ent,and D em ocrats w ill be hard-pressed to
ose such an anti-business posture.A ny politician w ould be m istaken to ignore the stakes.B y any other nam e,this is civi
rzleenparker@ washpost.com
NLRB-FOIA-00008959
A L A N W IL S O N
ATTO R N EY G EN ER AL
A pril 28,2011
1099 14
th Street,N W ,Suite 8600
W ashington,D C 20570
A s A ttorneys G eneral of our respective states,w e call upon you,as A cting G eneral
C ounsel of the N ational L abor R elations B oard ("N L R B "),to w ithdraw im m ediately the
com plaint num bered 19-C A -32431 against B oeing.T his com plaint represents an assault upon the
constitutional right of free speech,and the ability of our states to create jobs and recruit industry.
Y our ill-conceived retaliatory action seeks to destroy our citizens'right to w ork.It is South
C arolina and B oeing today,but w ill be any of our states,w ith our right to w ork guarantees,
tom orrow .
constitutionally enforceable through our states'right to w ork law s. $ee R etail C lerks Int'l v.
Scherm erhorn,375 U .S.96 (1963).Such law s are designed to elim inate union affiliation as a
criterion for em ploym ent.H ow ever,the N L R B ,through this single proceeding,attem pts to
sound the death knell of the right to w ork.A dditionally,this tenuous com plaint w ill reverberate
throughout union and non-union states alike,as international com panies w ill question the
w isdom of locating in a country w here the federal governm ent interferes in industry w ithout
cause or justification.
Furtherm ore,this com plaint disrupts,and m ay w ell elim inate,the production of B oeing
787 D ream liners in South C arolina.In fact,B oeing has expanded its operations to m eet product
dem and in South C arolina,w hile adding new jobs in W ashington State.T he com plaint charges -
B oeing w ith the com m ission of an unfair labor practice,but appears to do so w ithout legal and
factual foundation.T his unparalleled and overreaching action seeks to drive a stake through the
heart of the free enterprise system .T he statem ents of B oeing officials cited in your com plaint are
the innocent exercise of the com pany's.right of free speech.T he Suprem e C ourt long ago m ade
it clear that the N L R A does not lim it,and the First A m endm ent protects,the em ployer's right to
express view s on labor policies or problem s. N .L .R .B .v.V a.E lectric and P ow er,314 U S 469,
NLRB-FOIA-00008960
April27,2011
Page 2
477 (1941).As the C ourt recently reiterated in C itizens U nited v.FE C ,130 S.C t.876,899-90
(2010),a corporation is nota second class citizen in term s ofFirstAm endm entprotection.
O ur states are struggling to em erge from one ofthe w orsteconom ic collapses since the
bureaucracy on behalfofunions w illnotcreate a single new job or putone unem ployed person
back to w ork.
The only justification for the N LR B's unprecedented retaliatory action is to aid union
survival.Y our action seriously underm ines our citizens'rightto w ork as w ellas their ability to
bullying and federalcoercion.W e thus callupon you to cease this attack on our rightto w ork,
Sincerely,
0 1 6 4 0
a llt if f P
Alan W ilson
Attorney G eneral
NLRB-FOIA-00008961
A pril27,2011
Page 3
C t)
trA 4.
K en C uccinelli
A ttorney G eneral
Jon C .B runing
A ttorney G eneral
State of N ebraska
Pov6hock,
A ttorney G eneral
State of G eorgia
Pam B ondi
A ttorney G eneral
State of Florida
E .ScottPruitt
A ttorney G eneral
State of O klahom a
/ e---
T om H orne
A ttorney G eneral
State of A rizona
Ae_r
G reg A bbott
A ttorney G eneral
State of Texas
LaPet
L uther Strange
A ttorney G eneral
State of A labam a
NLRB-FOIA-00008962
.U N IT E D S T A T E S O F A M E R IC A
B E F O R E T H E N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
R E G IO N 19
T H E B O E IN G C O M P A N Y
and
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A S S O C IA T IO N O F
M A C H IN IS T S A N D A E R O S P A C E W O R K E R S
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A S S O C IA T IO N O F
M A C H IN IS T S A N D A E R O S P A C E W O R K E R S
C O M P L A IN T A N D N O T IC E O F H E A R IN G
Lodge N o.751 ("Local 751" O r the "U nion"), affiliated w ith International A ssociation of
M ach in ists an d A ero sp ace W o rkers ("IA M "), h as ch arg ed in C ase 19-C A -32431 th at
Th e B oein g C om pany ("R espond ent" or "B o eing"), h as b een engaging in unfair labor
practices as set forth in the N ational Labor R elations A ct (the "A ct"), 29 U .S .C . 151 et
seq.
B a s e d th e re o n , th e A c tin g G e n e ra l C o u n s e l o f th e N a tio n a l L a b o r
R elations B oard (the "B oard"), by the undersigned, pursuant to 10(b) of the A ct and
1.
The C harge w as filed by the U nion on M arch 26, 2010, and w as served on
NLRB-FOIA-00008963
2.
(a)
areas.
(b )
(c)
above in paragraph 2(a),both sold and shipped from ,and purchased and received at,
the facility goods valued in excess of $50,000 directly to and from points outside the
State of W ashington.
(d )
com m erce w ithin the m eaning of 2(2),(6) and (7) of the A ct.
3.
The U nion is, and has been at all m aterial tim es, a labor organization
4.
A t allm aterialtim es the follow ing individuals held the positions set forth
opposite their respective nam es and have been supervisors w ithin the m eaning of
-2 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008964
2(11) of the A ct,and/or agents w ithin the m eaning of 2(13) of the A ct,acting on
behalf of R espondent:
Jim A lbaugh
ScottC arson
R ay C onner
C om m ercialA irplanes
Scott Fancher
Program
Fred K iga
Relations
D oug K ight
C om m ercialA irplanes
Jim M cN em ey
Jim Proulx
B oeing spokesm an
Pat Shanahan
A irplane Program s
G en e W o lo sh yn
5.
(a)
. f " ...
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining w ithin the m eaning of 9(b) of the
.e
(b )
-3 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008965
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining w ithin the m eaning of 9(b)
(c)
S ince at least 1975 and at allm aterialtim es,the IA M has been the
designated exclusive collective bargaining representative of the P uget S ound U nit and
the P ortland U nit (collectively,the "U nit") and recognized as such representative by
(d )
6.
O n or about the dates and by the m anner noted below ,R espondent m ade
coercive statem ents to its em ployees that it w ould rem ove or had rem oved w ork from
threatened that the U nit w ould lose additionalw ork in the event of future strikes:
7'
callthat w as posted on B oeing's intranet w ebsite for allem ployees and reported in the
S eattle P ost Intelligencer A erospace N ew s and quoted in the S eattle.Tim es,m ade an
exten d ed statem en t reg ard in g "d iversifyin g [R esp o n d en t's] lab o r p o o l an d lab o r
relationship," and m oving the 787 D ream liner w ork to S outh C arolina due to "strikes
T N .
-4 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008966
(b )
entitled "787 Second Line,Q uestions and A nsw ers for M anagers," inform ed em ployees,
am ong other things,that its decision to locate the second 787 D ream liner line in South
(c)
the Seattle Tim es,attributed R espondent's 787 D ream liner production decision to use a
"dual-sourcing" system and to contract w ith separate suppliers for the S outh C arolina
(d )
to use a "dual-sourcing" system and to contract w ith separate suppliers for the S outh
(e)
Tim es reporter,stated that R espondent decided to locate its 787 D ream liner second line
in S outh C arolina because of past U nit strikes,and threatened the loss of future U nit
7.
(a)
but no later than O ctober 28, 2009, R espondent decided to transfer its second 787
D ream liner production line of 3 planes per m onth from the U nit to its non-union site in
-5 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008967
(b)
7(a) because the U nit em ployees assisted and/or supported the U nion by, inter alia,
concerted activities.
(c)
8.
(a)
but no later than D ecem ber 3,2009,R espondent decided to transfer a sourcing supply
program for its 787 D ream liner production line from the U nit to its non-union facility in
(b )
8(a) because the U nit em ployees assisted and/or supported the U nion by,
inter alia,
concerted activities.
(c)
com bined w ith the conduct described above in paragraphs 6 and 7(a),is also inherently
-6 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008968
9.
10.
been discrim inating in regard to the hire or tenure or term s or conditions of em ploym ent
17)
11.
has engaged in unfair labor practices affecting com m erce w ithin the m eaning of 2(6)
12.
A s part of the rem edy for the unfair labor practices alleged herein, the
A cting G eneral C ou nsel seeks an O rder requiring eith er that o ne o f the high level
officials of R espondent alleged to have com m itted the violations enum erated above in
paragraph 6 read,or that a designated B oard agent read in the presence of a high level
B oeing official, an y notice that issu es in this m atter, an d requirin g R espond ent to
13.
(a)
A s part of the rem edy for the unfair labor practices alleged above in
-7 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008969
to have the U nit operate its second line of 787 D ream liner aircraft assem bly production
in the S tate of W ashington,utilizing supply lines m aintained by the U nit in the S eattle,
(b)
requested by the A cting G eneralC ounseldoes not seek to prohibit R espondent from
m aking non-discrim inatory decisions w ith respect to w here w ork w illbe perform ed,
including non-discrim inatory decisions w ith respect to w ork at its N orth C harleston,
S outh C arolina,facility.
A N SW E R R E Q U IR E M E N T
B oard's R ules and R egulations,it m ust file an answ er to this C om plaint.The answ er
before M ay 3, 2011. U nless filed electronically in a pdf form at,R espondent should file
an originaland four copies of the answ er w ith this office and serve a copy of the answ er
the A gency's w ebsite.In order to file an answ er electronically, access .the A gency's
N um ber, and follow the detailed instructions.The responsibility for the receipt and
usability of the answ er rests exclusively upon the sender.U nless notification on the
continuous period of m ore than 2 hours after 12:00 noon (E astern Tim e) on the due
-8 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008970
et.
date for filing,a failure to tim ely file the answ er w illnot be excused on the basis that the
transm ission could not be accom plished because the A gency's w ebsite w as off-line or
unavailable for som e other reason.The B oard's R ules and R egulations require that an
a pdf docum ent containing the required signature,no paper copies of the docum ent
need to be transm itted to the R egionalO ffice.H ow ever,if the electronic version of an
z .
answ er to a com plaint is not a pdf file containing the required signature,then the E-filing
rules require that such answ er containing the required signature be subm itted to the
R egionalO ffice by traditionalm eans w ithin three (3) .business days after the date of
electronic filing.
zrr
S ervice of the answ er on each of the other parties m ust be accom plished
filed or if an answ er is filed untim ely,the B oard m ay find,pursuant to M otion for D efault
N O T IC E O F H E A R IN G
N ationalLabor R elations B oard.A t the hearing,R espondent and any other party to this
proceeding have the right to appear and present testim ony regarding the allegations in
- 9 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008971
10 -
NLRB-FOIA-00008972
Pag e 1 of1
A llen , C o n stan ce
(1 (1)1LsIA)
From :
A lbertsen, M ary
S ent:
T o:.
C c:
Subject:
A ttach m en ts: A D V .19-C A -32431.B oeing.R equest for A dvice and A uth to S eek 10(j) Inj R elief.pdf
A ttached please find a R equest for A dvice and A uthorization to S eek S ection 10(j)Injunctive R elief in the above
case.
R egion 19 - S eattle, W A
(206) 220-6318
9/1/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00008973
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008974
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008975
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008976
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008977
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008978
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008979
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008980
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008981
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008982
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008983
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008984
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008985
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008986
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008987
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008988
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008989
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008990
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008991
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008992
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008993
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008994
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008995
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008996
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008997
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008998
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00008999
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009000
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009001
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009002
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009003
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009004
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009005
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009006
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009007
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009008
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009009
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009010
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009011
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009012
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009013
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009014
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009015
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009016
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009017
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009018
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009019
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009020
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009021
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009022
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009023
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009024
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009025
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009026
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009027
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009028
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009029
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009030
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009031
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009032
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009033
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009034
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009035
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009036
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009037
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009038
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009039
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009040
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009041
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009042
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009043
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009044
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009045
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009046
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009047
Ft'
G E N E R A L C O U N SE L 'S A G E N D A
D IV ISIO N O F A D V IC E
I.
2. T he B oeing C om pany
non-responsive
W illen
Szapiro
D ist IV
NLRB-FOIA-00009048
non-responsive
NLRB-FOIA-00009049
O FFIC E O F T H E G E N E R A L C O U N SE L
A dvice M em orandum
DATE:
Ta
FROM:
Division of Advice
SUBJECT:
Case 19-CA-32431
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009050
*;
ca6e ,19-CA-32431
- 2 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009051
.Ca'se 119-CA-32431
- 3 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009052
,Calse 119-CA-32431
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009053
"
,Ca.se 119-CA-32431
- 5 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009054
(Case 119-CA-32431
- 6 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009055
gage ,19-CA-32431
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009056
,Cabe 19-CA-32431
- 8 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009057
4.
,Cae.19-CA-32431
- 9 -
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009058
Ca.e 19-CA-32431
- 1 0 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009059
z,
,Cae.19-CA-32431
- 1 1 - .
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009060
,Cae .19-CA-32431
- 12 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009061
'
1C.ae.19-CA-32431
- 13 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009062
f2 a e ,19-CA-32431
- 14 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009063
,Case,19-CA-32431
- 15 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009064
,Case ,19-CA-32431
- 16 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009065
Cae ,19-CA-32431
- 17 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009066
Case 19-CA-32431
- 18 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009067
,Ca s e ,19-CA-32431
- 19 -
Exemption 5
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009068
,Case,19-CA-32431
- 20 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009069
* ,Cae,19-CA-32431
- 21 .-
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009070
,Ca'se,19-CA-32431
- 22 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009071
,Cae,19-CA-32431
- 23 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009072
,Case,19-CA-32431
- 24 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009073
.Case,19-CA-32431
- 25 -
Exemption 5
NLRB-FOIA-00009074
!.%
..
k r':
. :.:
11,o.
S ktit 111
% % el
iti.7,tt..
I..
iF
4 .E r.,
fr!
K t:
United,4:otates m att
C O M M IT T E E O N H E A L T H . E D U C A T IO N
L A B O R . A N D P E N S IO N S
w A sH iN ica O N , D C e'IlS ri
rA rr
M ay 3,2011
M r.Lafe S olom on
1099 14th S t. N W
W ashington, D C 20570-0001
W e are w riting to express our strong concerns about your A pril20 1h com plaint filed
against The B oeing C om pany. The com plaint alleged that B oeing's decision to open a
new production line for construction in S outh C arolina constituted an unfair labor
practice. W e strongly disagree. A nd w e are troubled about the chilling effect that your
W e have a duty to ensure that the N ational Labor R elations A ct ("the A ct") is being
enforced in a fair m anner. In this and other decisions,w e believe that you have ignored
the proper balance-setforth in -the A ct betw een -the em ployees'right td -collectiV ely --
bargain and the em ployers'right to due process. W e question the legal reasoning and
m otive behind the com plaint,as w ellas the proposed rem edy to force B oeing to m ove
It is clear that B oeing's legitim ate business decision had no adverse im pact on the
P uget S ound w orkforce indeed, 2,000 additional jobs have been created there since
the product forthcom ing from this production line,the desire to ensure continuity of
W e are also concerned about the tim ing of your announcem ent. B oeing announced its
H ow ever,your office w aited untilA pril2011 to file the com plaint,just three m onths
before the new production line is scheduled to begin in July 2011.This com plaint has
the potential to elim inate thousands of new ly created and W ell-com pensated jobs in
S outh C arolina.It w ill have a negative effect on im portant decisions m ade by A m erican
businesses every day regarding w ho to em ploy and w here to expand, and negate the
NLRB-FOIA-00009075
everything w e can to m ake it easier for folks to bring .products to m arket and to start and
expand new businesses and to grow and hire new W orkers." W e (agree w ith the
W hile w e understand the -com plaint process is stillin the early stages,there is a need
,/for the B oard to explain the reasoning in this case to C ongress.A s your nom ination is
brought before our C om m ittee,w e w illbe asking for a greater explanation of your
actions.
Sincerely,
J.;
Senator M ichaelB .
ZI
dW n it.4 A V C 1)(4,44,4,A
NLRB-FOIA-00009076
4-
UN IT E D ST A T E S O F A M E R IC A
B E FO R E T H E N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
R E G IO N 19
T H E B O E IN G C O M PA N Y
and
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A SSO C IA T IO N O F
M A C H IN IST S A N D A E R O SPA C E
W O R K E R S D IST R IC T L O D G E 751,affiliated
w ith
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A SSO C IA T IO N O F
M A C H IN IST S A N D A E R O SPA C E
W O R K E R S
A N SW E R
A nsw er to the C om plaint and N otice of H earing ("C om plaint") filed by the A cting G eneral
G E N E R A L D E N IA L
E xcept as otherw ise expressly stated herein,B oeing denies each and every allegation
violated the N ationalL abor R elations A ct ("N L R A ") in any of the m anners alleged in the
C om plaint or in any other m anner.Pursuant to Section 102.20 of the B oard's rules,averm ents in
the C om plaint to w hich no responsive pleading is required shallbe deem ed as denied.B oeing
expressly reserves the right to seek to am end and/or supplem ent its A nsw er as m ay be necessary.
NLRB-FOIA-00009077
D E FE N SE S
assigned to itas to any elem entofthe claim s alleged in the C om plaint,B oeing asserts the
1.
The C om plaintand each purported claim for reliefstated therein failto allege
2.
statem ents under Section 8(c)ofthe N LR A and under the FirstA m endm entto the United States
3.
B oeing's decision to place the second 787 assem bly line in N orth C harleston w as
based upon a num ber ofvaried factors,including a favorable business environm entin South
w ellas to protectthe stability ofthe 787's globalproduction system .In any event,even
ascribing an intentto Boeing thatitplaced the second line in N orth C harleston so as to m itigate
the harm fuleconom ic effects ofan anticipated future strike w ould notbe evidence thatthe
decision to place the second assem bly line in N orth C harleston w as designed to retaliate against
the IA M for past strikes.N evertheless,B oeing w ould have m ade the sam e decisions w ith
respectto the placem entofthe second assem bly line in N orth C harleston even ifithad nottaken
into consideration the dam aging im pactoffuture strikes on the production of787s.
4.
transfer ofw ork,w hich allegations B oeing expressly denies,the InternationalA ssociation of
NLRB-FOIA-00009078
5.
the hire,w ages,tenure,or term s or conditions ofem ploym entofany Unitm em ber.
6.
under the N LR A because, inter alia,in its collective bargaining agreem entw ith Boeing,the JA M
expressly agreed thatBoeing has the rightto place w ork in any location ofits choice w ithoutthe
need to bargain w ith the IA M ,and because an intentto m itigate the adverse econom ic im pactof
an anticipated future strike is notinherently destructive ofprotected em ployee rights under the
N L R A .
7.
restrained,or coerced em ployees represented by the JA M in the exercise oftheir rights protected
by the N LR A .
8.
The rem edy requested in the C om plaintis im perm issibly punitive and w ould
cause an undue hardship on B oeing,its em ployees,and the State ofSouth C arolina.M oreover,
none ofthe com plained ofactions caused any hardship on any B oeing em ployees or the State of
W ashington.
9.
10.
NLRB-FOIA-00009079
p .
11.
12.
Paragraph 13(b) w ould effectively cause B oeing to close its assem bly facility in N orth
C harleston,South C arolina.
13.
Som e or allof the claim s asserted in the C om plaintare barred by the six m onth
14.
did notlaw fully hold the office of A cting G eneralC ounselatthe tim e he directed thatthe
C om plaintbe filed..
Pream ble:B oeing denies the allegations contained in the pream ble,exceptto adm itthat
D istrictL odge 751,affiliated w ith the InternationalA ssociation of M achinists and A erospace
W orkers ("IA M ") has charged in case 19-C A -32431 thatB oeing has engaged in certain unfair
labor practices prohibited by the N L R A ,and thatthe A cting G eneralC ounselof the N LR B has
issued this C om plaintand N otice of H earing based upon the IA M 's charge.
I.
B oeing lacks inform ation and know ledge sufficientto form a belief as to the
2.
NLRB-FOIA-00009080
lasttw elve m onths its business operations resulted in gross revenues in excess of$500,000.
the lasttw elve m onths itreceived,shipped,sold and/or purchase goods atits facilities in the
State ofW ashington valued in excess of$50,000 from places outside ofthe State ofW ashington.
(d) Boeing denies the allegations ofParagraph 2(d),exceptto adm itthatitis and
3.
4.
required.A s to the rem aining allegations in Paragraph 4,Boeing adm its thatthe
R aym ond L.C onner:V ice Presidentand G eneralM anager ofSupply C hain
Frederick C .K iga:V ice President,State and LocalG overnm entR elations and
A irplanes
NLRB-FOIA-00009081
D ouglas P.K ight:V ice President,H um an R esources,B oeing C om m ercial
A irplanes
5.
production and m aintenance em ployees in W ashington State constituted a "Unit" for collective
bargaining purposes.
production and m aintenance em ployees in the Portland,O regon area constitute a "Unit" for
6.
that,it"rem oved" or "had rem oved w ork" from its facilities in Everett,W ashington or Portland,
O regon because Unitem ployees had struck Boeing,and also specifically denies thatitthreatened
or im pliedly threatened thatthose facilities w ould lose additionalw ork in the eventoffuture Unit
NLRB-FOIA-00009082
O ctober 21,2009;and Boeing specifically denies thatM r.M cN erney m ade an "extended
statem ent" or any statem entaboutm oving 787 D ream liner w ork to South C arolina due to
"strikes happening every three or four years in PugetSound." Boeing adm its thatthe referenced
new spaper articles appeared in The Seattle Post-Intelligencer and The Seattle Tim es.
(b) Boeing denies the allegations ofParagraph 6(b),and further states thatthe
referenced new spaper article appeared in The Seattle Tim es on D ecem ber 7,2009.
referenced new spaper article appeared in The PugetSound B usiness Journal on D ecem ber 8,
2009.
(e) Boeing denies the allegations ofParagraph 6(e),exceptto adm itthata Seattle
Tim es reporter conducted a video-taped interview ofM r.A lbaugh and thatthe tape speaks for
itself.
7.
(a)B oeing denies the allegations ofParagraph 7(a),and specifically denies thatit
transferred the "second 787 D ream liner" assem bly line from its facility in Everett,W ashington to
O ctober 28,2009,B oeing announced thatitw ould place a new second assem bly line for the 787
NLRB-FOIA-00009083
(a)B oeing denies the allegations ofParagraph 8(a),and specifically denies thatit
8 .
transferred a sourcing supply program for the 787 D ream liner assem bly line from its facilities in
9.
10.
11.
12.
A cting G eneralC ounselis entitled to,or thatthe Board can order the rem edy requested in
Paragraph 12.
13.
relates the rem edy soughtby the A cting G eneralC ounseland,accordingly,no response is
thatthe A cting G eneralC ounselis entitled to the rem edy,or thatthe Board can order the rem edy
m erely describes w hatthe A cting G eneralC ounselsays is notpartofthe rem edy he is seeking.
G eneralC ounselhas correctly stated thatthe rem edy soughtin Paragraph 13(a)w illnot
NLRB-FOIA-00009084
Boeing reserves the rightto raise any additionaldefenses notasserted herein ofw hich
D ated:M ay 4,2011
Telephone:202.955.8500
Facsim ile:202.467.0539
M C K EN N A LO N G & A LD R ID G E
T elephone:404.527-4000
NLRB-FOIA-00009085
R EG IO N 19
TH E BO EIN G C O M PA N Y
and
M A C H IN ISTS A N D A ER O SPA C E
W O R K ER S D ISTR IC T LO D G E 751,affiliated
w ith
M A C H IN ISTS A N D A ER O SPA C E
W O R K ER S
C E R T IFIC A T E O F SE R V IC E
R egionalD irector
M ara-Louise A nzalone
10
NLRB-FOIA-00009086
D avid C am pbell
C ounselfor IA M
inierf.D avis
W ashington,D .C .20036-5303
D D avis@ G ibsondunn.com
NLRB-FOIA-00009087
Microsoft Outlook
Todd, Dianne
Carrie Fassler
6, 7(C), 7(D)
Boeing ULP
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Attachments:
6, 7(C), 7(D)
Hi Dianne,
6, 7(C)
had not, so
6, 7(C), 7(D)
for your review, and I will bring copies of the referenced exhibits
later than 1:30, and
6, 7(C), 7(D)
6, 7(C), 7(D)
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns about this approach.
Thanks,
Carson
The September 2009 meeting with employees where Doug Kight made comments about a second line;
6, 7(C), 7(D)
Whether employees received the October 28, 2009 memo issued to managers
6, 7(C), 7(D)
6, 7(C), 7(D)
6, 7(C), 7(D)
Carson Glickman-Flora | Schwerin Campbell Barnard Iglitzin & Lavitt, LLP | 206.285.2828 | www.workerlaw.com
This communication is intended for a specific recipient and may be protected by the attorney-client and work-product privilege.
If you receive this message in error, please permanently delete it and notify the sender.
NLRB-FOIA-00009088
6, 7(C), 7(D)
NLRB-FOIA-00009089
6, 7(C), 7(D)
NLRB-FOIA-00009090
6, 7(C), 7(D)
NLRB-FOIA-00009091
6, 7(C), 7(D)
NLRB-FOIA-00009092
6, 7(C), 7(D)
NLRB-FOIA-00009093
6, 7(C), 7(D)
NLRB-FOIA-00009094
Microsoft Outlook
Todd, Dianne
'Carson Glickman-Flora'
6, 7(C), 7(D)
RE: Boeing ULP -
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Thanks Carson, Ill be ready at 1:30. Just to clarify, you plan to accompany the witnesses but not sit
6, 7(C), 7(D)
Hi Dianne,
6, 7(C)
had not, so
6, 7(C), 7(D)
for your review, and I will bring copies of the referenced exhibits
later than 1:30, and
6, 7(C), 7(D)
6, 7(C), 7(D)
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns about this approach.
Thanks,
Carson
The September 2009 meeting with employees where Doug Kight made comments about a second line;
6, 7(C), 7(D)
Whether employees received the October 28, 2009 memo issued to managers
6, 7(C), 7(D)
6, 7(C), 7(D)
NLRB-FOIA-00009095
6, 7(C), 7(D)
Carson Glickman-Flora | Schwerin Campbell Barnard Iglitzin & Lavitt, LLP | 206.285.2828 | www.workerlaw.com
This communication is intended for a specific recipient and may be protected by the attorney-client and work-product privilege.
If you receive this message in error, please permanently delete it and notify the sender.
NLRB-FOIA-00009096
Microsoft Outlook
Todd, Dianne
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Thats right.
Carson Glickman-Flora | Schwerin Campbell Barnard Iglitzin & Lavitt, LLP | 206.285.2828 | www.workerlaw.com
This communication is intended for a specific recipient and may be protected by the attorney-client and work-product privilege.
If you receive this message in error, please permanently delete it and notify the sender.
Thanks Carson, Ill be ready at 1:30. Just to clarify, you plan to accompany the witnesses but not sit
Hi Dianne,
had not, so
Exemption 6, 7(c)
for your review, and I will bring copies of the referenced exhibits Ex. 6, 7(C), 7(D) will be there hopefully no
Thanks,
Carson
The September 2009 meeting with employees where Doug Kight made comments about a second line;
Whether employees received the October 28, 2009 memo issued to managers
NLRB-FOIA-00009097
Carson Glickman-Flora | Schwerin Campbell Barnard Iglitzin & Lavitt, LLP | 206.285.2828 | www.workerlaw.com
This communication is intended for a specific recipient and may be protected by the attorney-client and work-product privilege.
If you receive this message in error, please permanently delete it and notify the sender.
NLRB-FOIA-00009098
Microsoft Outlook
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Todd, Dianne
I spoke with Boeing attorney Drew Lunt this morning and he informed me that Boeing did not want to
submit information on this case prior to the meeting with the General Counsel on the Advice case (19-
CA-32431).
Non-responsive
Non-responsive
Dianne
NLRB-FOIA-00009099
Page 1 of 1
W illen , D eb ra L
S ent:
Tuesday,S eptem ber 21, 2010 2:26 PM
To:
W iIlen,D ebra L
C c:
D ear M s. W illen:
I am the paralegal assisting the attorneys representing the U nion in this m atter. Follow ing is
D avid C am pbell
S eattle, W A 98119-3971
(206) 285-2828 (p h o n e)
If w e can provide you w ith any additional inform ation on this m atter,please let m e know .
Ju d e B ryan , Paraleg al
IS ch w erin C am p b ell B arn ard lg litzin & L evitt L L P 118 W est M ercer S treet, S te. 400, S eattle, W A 98119-3971;
T h is co m m u n icatio n is in ten d ed fo r a sp ecific recip ien t an d m ay b e p ro tected b y th e atto rn ey clien t an d w o rk -p ro d u ct p riv ileg e.
If y o u receiv e th is m essag e in erro r :p lease p erm an en tly d elete it an d n o tify th e sen d er.
11/16/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00009100
N A T IOth
N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
N A I.I ()N M .
H O U
M il A F IO N S R C A Il1
1099 14 ST R E E T N W
W A SH IN G T O N D C 20570
w w w .nlrb.gov
1 (I
M ay 9, 2011
C h icag o , IL 60606-1596
D ear M r.Luttig:
R e: T h e B o ein g C o m p an y
captioned case.
statem ents in the press about this m atter. N eedless to say, I don't agree w ith
your contentions. There have been num erous conversations betw een m y office
and B oeing concerning the facts and the law surrounding the circum stances of
this case so that each party is aw are of the other's position.. The appropriate
forum to test those positions and the relevance and probative value of your
___
dr j h
adm inistrative law judge can m ake a decision w hich can be review ed by the
B oard and ultim ately the C ourts. Finally, w hile our earlier efforts to resolve this
m atter w ere unsuccessful,I still rem ain open to a resolution betw een the parties.
Sinoegel
Lafe/E . S olom on
NLRB-FOIA-00009101
P age 1 of 1
cutailfr4P3
W illen , D eb ra L
From :
S ent:
To:
W illen, D ebra L
C c:
D avid C am pbell
M s.VVillen,
In response to your em ailto D ave C am pbell, the follow ing people w illbe attending the m eeting w ith A G C Lafe
P lease let us know if there is any m ore inform ation you need.
S incerely,
S eattle, W A 98119
206-285-2828
1/14/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009102
;OF
A L A N W IL S O N
ATTO R N EY G EN ER AL
A pril28,2011
T oday,A ttorneys G eneral from across the country joined m e in sending the attached letter to L afe
Solom on,A cting G eneral C ounsel of the N ational L abor R elations B oard,regarding the N L R B 's com plaint
against B oeing.T his com plaint is an ill-conceived retaliatory action filed on behalf of the labor unions.
O ur letter calls on the N L R B to im m ediately w ithdraw their com plaint against B oeing and to cease their
A s stated in the letter,"the N L R B ,through this single proceeding,attem pts to sound the death knell of
the right to w ork.A dditionally,this tenuous com plaint w ill reverberate throughout union and non-union states
alike,as international com panies w ill question the w isdom of locating in a country w here the federal
I sincerely hope that you w ill share our letter w ith your colleagues and w ill join us and in calling upon
M r.Solom on and the N L R B to stop their aggressive actions against South C arolina,our citizens,and our right-
to-w ork.
A s you are aw are,M r.Solom on previously threatened federal litigation against South C arolina,along
w ith A rizona,South D akota,and U tah over the constitutional am endm ents sim ilar to the one 86.2% of South
C arolina voters passed to ensure em ployees m aintained the right to a secret ballot in a union election.T his
w eek,the N L R B announced its intention to go forw ard w ith suits against A rizona and South D akota and that
lim ited resources curtailed its ability to bring action against South C arolina and U tah..
T hank you again for all you do for our state in W ashington and please keep m e and m y office inform ed
of actions in W ashington in support of our efforts to stop the N L R B 's attack on our right to w ork.
Sincerely,
Cilmo
:fiad2D
A lan W ilson
NLRB-FOIA-00009103
Page 1 of 1
A cting G eneral C ounsel L afe .Solom on releases statem ent on B oeing com plaint
W ille n , D e b ra L
F ro m : N L R B U p d a te s
S ent:
W illen, D ebra L
To:
S ubject: A cting G eneralC ounsel Lafe S olom on releases statem ent on B oeing com plaint
C ontact:
202-273-1991
p u tlkin fo g n irb .g o
w iw n lrb .g o v
A c tin g G e n e ra l C o u n s e l L a fe S o lo m o n re le a s e s s ta te m e n t o n B o e in g c o m p la in t
N LR B A cting G eneralC ounselLafe S olom on today responded to inquiries regarding a com plaint issued A pril20 against the
"C ontrary to certain public statem ents m ade in recent w eeks,there is nothing rem arkable or unprecedented about the com plaint
issued against the B oeing C om pany on A pril20.The com plaint involves m atters of fact and law that are not unique to this case,
and it w as issued only after a thorough investigation in the field,a further carefulreview by our attorneys in W ashington,and an
invitation by m e to the parties to present their case and discuss the possibility of a settlem ent.O nly then did Iauthorize the
com plaint alleging that certain statem ents and decisions by B oeing officials w ere discrim inatory under our statute.
It is im portant to note that'the issuance of a com plaint is just the beginning of a legalprocess,w hich now m oves to a hearing
before an adm inistrative law judge.That hearing,scheduled for June 14 in S eattle,is the appropriate tim e and place to argue the
m erits of the com plaint.The judge's decision can further be appealed to the B oard,and ultim ately to the federalcourts.A t any
point in this process,the parties could reach a settlem ent agreem ent and w e rem ain w illing to participate in any such discussions
at the request of either or both parties.W e hope allinterested parties respect the legalprocess,rather than trying to litigate this
M r.S olom on m ade the sam e point today in a V W _ w ritten resporise.to a letter received earlier this m onth from B oeing G eneral
C ounselJ.M ichaelLuttig.
For m ore inform ation about the N LR B ,please see our w ebsite at N r.6.y.w m jcb..gov.Click bere..W eign_up_for...enallslelivery_of new s
Q uestions? contact.U s
S TA Y C O N N E C T E D :
S U B S C R IB E R S E R V IC E S :
SH A R E
G ovD efivery. Inc. sending on behalf of N ationalLabor R elations B oard 1099 14th S treet, N W
govoEuVERY'
'
5/9/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009104
N ew sm ax - PrintT em plate
Page 1 of 1
N ew sm ax
B y: H iram R elin er
S outh C arolina S en. Jim D eM int said T hursday the N ationalLabor R elations
B oard (N LR B ) com plaint against B oeing for violating federallaw show s the
O bam a adm inistration is against right-to-w ork states and "is acting like a
bunch of thugs."
r,A rl, open an assem bly line for its 787 D ream liner
N LR B com plaint.
"I thought I'd seen it all, but now the adm inistration is acting like a bunch of
thugs," D eM int told F ox N ew s'N ealC avuto T hursday. "T hey are really trying
to bully and intim idate not just B oeing they are attacking every right-to-
w ork state, and in effect w arning every em ployer in the country, if they
happen to decide to m ove to a state w here w orkers are free not to join a
union, that they are going to be harassed and harangued by the N ational
"T he president has packed this board w ith union guys and now he's going to
try to, I guess, curry union favor before the next election," D eM int continued.
"I'd just thought I'd seen it all I really can't believe they're doing som ething
like this attacking a m ajor em ployer w hen [the president] said they're
C avuto noted the W hite H ouse said it is not involved and it is N LR B issue.
to.
"A nd, frankly, he's the one w ho packed this board, he's the one w ho's
very m uch like som e of the other agencies attacking, intim idating, bullying
"B ut this is the w orst of the w orst," he added. "Like you said [B oeing]
announced this tw o years ago, but they are forcing B oeing to spend m illions
of dollars in legalcosts to try and defend their right they didn't m ove a
facility, this is a new one, they've added jobs in W ashington [state] since they
5/9/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009105
Page 1 of1
W illen , D eb ra L
F rom :
S o p h ir, Ja ym e
S en t:
W e d n e sd a y, A p ril 2 0 , 2 0 1 1 3 :4 1 P M
T o:
W ille n , D e b ra L
S en t: W e d n e sd a y, A p ril 2 0 , 2 0 1 1 3 :0 8 P M
so p le a se le t m e kn o w if yo u w o n 't b e a ro u n d .,
S en t: W e d n e sd a y, A p ril 2 0 , 2 0 1 1 3 :0 0 P M
h ttp ://lg ra h a m .se n a te .g o v/p u b lic/in d e x.cfm ? F u se A ctio n = P re ssR o o m .P re ssR e le a se s& C o n te n tR e co rd _ id = 7 4 1 7 9 e 31-
8 0 2 a -2 3 a d -4 e 6 e -3 b 1 3 9 4 7 3 8 c8 d
D ate: 04/20/2011
L a b o r R e la tio n s B o a rd (N L R B ) co m p la in t a g a in st B o e in g .
econom y.
.
th e ir n e w fa cility in N o rth C h a rle sto n w ill p a y d ivid e n d s fo r th e co m p a n y, its w o rke rs, a n d o u r sta te fo r m a n y ye a rs to
allo w ed to stan d.
#####
5/9/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009106
H e a lth A le rt
H e a lth N O W
t,
itW ffio r s N O W
dpuN O W
' lo b L in t, R e a l E v ta te
M id la n d s M a rk e tp la c tiO W ,
'
agen cy w ill lead efforts to figh t u n ion s, p articu larly at B oein g's n ew N orth C h arleston p lan t.
H aley said W ed n esd ay th e state D ep artm en t of L ab or, L icen sin g an d R egU lation w ill p lay a b ig role in k eep in g
u n io n s o u t o f th e B o ein g C o . p la n t th a t a ssem b les th e co m p a n y 's n ew 7 8 7 D rea m lin er. H a ley n o tes d irecto r
n om in ee C ath erin e T em p leton , a law yer w h o h as sp ecialized In u n ion figh ts, h as fou gh t U n ited A u to W ork er
T h e In tern ation al A ssociation of M ach in ists says it h asn 't given u p on organ izin g th e N orth C h arleston p lan t.
W o rk ers th ere v o ted a g a in st u n io n rep resen ta tio n in S ep tem b er 2 0 0 9 . " L a st I ch eck ed , th e rig h t to o rg a n ize w a s
p rotected u n d er fed eral law ," said F ran k L ark in , a sp ok esm an for th e U p p er M arlb oro, M d .-b ased u n ion .
S ou th C arolin a's an ti-u n ion rep u tation w as k ey to last year's d ecision b y C h icago-b ased B oein g to exp an d its
B efore B oein g's b oard d ecid ed to exp an d th e N orth C h arleston op eration , it u sed th e th reat of th e p lan t in
b argain in g w ith th e m ach in ists u n ion . T h e u n ion w aged an eigh t-w eek strik e last year th a t sh u t d ow n th e
layer of b u reau cracy in ," T em p leton said . " W e w ill d o everyth in g w e can to w ork w ith B oein g an d m ak e su re th at
th eir w ork force is tak en care of, th at th ey ru n efficien tly an d th at w e d on 't ad d an yth in g u n n ecessarily."
O gletree D eak in s)
H aley said T em p leton w ill also lead stream lin in g efforts at th e agen cy, in clu d in g red u cin g th e tim e it tak es to get
p ro fessio n a l a n d b u sin ess-rela ted licen ses. " W e'v e g o t slo w n ess. W e'v e g o t reg u la to ry issu es th a t a re n o t w o rk in g
T em p leton is th e secon d C ab in et n om in ee th at th e state S en ate w ill con sid er for con firm ation after it retu rn s in Jan u ary. O n M on d ay, H aley said
B M W execu tiv e an d fo rm er n ew sp ap er ed ito r B ob b y H itt w a s h er ch o ice for state co m m erce secreta ry, ov erseein g eco n om ic d ev elop m en t effo rts
at th e C om m erce D ep artm en t.
R ep u b lican H aley tak es office in Jan u ary rep lacin g ou tgoin g G O P G ov. M ark S an ford , w h o leaves office u n d er th e states tw o term lim it.
GN I
W IM P Insurauce)
dikW o R L D I'q u w
12/9/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00009107
G IB SO N D U N N
w kilbergO gibsondunn.com F a x 2 0 2 .5 3 0 .9 5 5 9
T el 202.955.8500 w w w .gibsondunn.com
NLRB-FOIA-00009108
R ichard B .H ankins
M eK enna L ong
& A ldridge.
A ttorneys at L aw
S u ite 5300
A tlanta, G A 30308
404.527.8372
F ax: 404.527.7088
rhankins@ m ckennalong.com
w w w .m ckennalong.com
NLRB-FOIA-00009109
.E-r couivgji4s
P age 1 of 1
W illen,D ebra L
Sent:
To:
Szapiro,M iriam
From uibson,uunn:
BillKillberg
From A tlanta:
R ichard H ankins
From B oeing:
11/16/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00009110
N L R B issues com plaint against B oeing C om pany for unlaw fully transferring w ork to a no...Page 1 of 2
W illen,D ebra L
From : N L R B Updates
Sent:
W ednesday,A pril20,2011 2:46 P M
VVillen,D ebra L
To:
Subject:N LR B issues com plaint against B oeing C om pany for unlaw fully transferring w ork to a non-union
facility
A pril 20,2011
C ontact:
202-273-1991
publicinfo@ nlrb.gov
w w w .nlrb.gov
N L R B issues com plaint against B oeing C om pany for unlaw fully transferring w ork to a non-union
facility
N L R B A cting G eneral C ounsel L afe Solom on today issued a com plaint against the B oeing C om pany
alleging that it violated federal labor law by deciding to transfer a second production line to a non-union
B oeing announced in 2007 that it planned to assem ble seven 787 D ream liner airplanes per m onth in the
Puget Sound area of W ashington state,w here its em ployees have long been represented by the
International A ssociation of M achinists and A erospace W orkers.T he com pany later said that it w ould
create a second production line to assem ble an additional three planes a m onth to address a grow ing -
backlog of orders.In O ctober 2009,B oeing announced that it w ould locate that second line at the non-
union facility.
In repeated statem ents to em ployees and the m edia,com pany executives cited the unionized em ployees'
past strike activity and the possibility of strikes occurring som etim e in the future as the overriding
T he N L R B launched an investigation of the transfer of second line w ork in response to charges filed by
the M achinists union and found reasonable cause to believe that B oeing had violated tw o sections of the
N ational L abor R elations A ct because its statem ents w ere coercive to em ployees and its actions w ere
m otivated by a desire to retaliate for past strikes and chill future strike activity.
"A w orker's right to strike is a fundam ental right guaranteed by the N ational L abor R elations A ct," M r.
Solom on said."W e also recognize the rights of em ployers to m ake business decisions based on their
econom ic interests,but they m ust do so w ithin the law .I have w orked w ith the parties to encourage
settlem ent in the hope of avoiding costly litigation,and m y door rem ains open to that possibility."
T o rem edy the alleged unfair labor practices,the A cting G eneral C ounsel seeks an order that w ould
require B oeing to m aintain the second production line in W ashington state.T he com plaint does not seek
closure of the South C arolina facility,nor does it prohibit B oeing from assem bling planes there.
A bsent a settlem ent betw een the parties,the next step in the process w ill be a hearing before an N L R B
5/2/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009111
N L R B issues com plaint against B oeing C om pany for unlaw fully transferring w ork to a no...Page 2 of 2
adm inistrative law judge in Seattle,set for June 14,at w hich both parties w ill have an opportunity to
For m ore inform ation about the N ational L abor R elations B oard,please see our w ebsite at
w w w .nlrb.gov.
Q uestions? C ontactU s
S TA Y C O N N E C TE D :
tp l
--
v iv
S U B S C R IB E R S E R V IC E S :
M anage P referenceiI
U nsubscribe I H e lp
;11 SH A R E.
..
G ovD elivery. Inc. sending on behalf of N ationalLabor R elations B oard 100 14th S treet,
govonIVERY
5/2/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009112
Page 1 of 2
/.
W illen,D ebra L
S ent:
To:
W illen, D ebra L
S u bject: N Y T im es coverage
N ew Y ork T im es
A pril 20,2011
By
siEyeticB gEviip.usg
In w hat m ay be the strongest signal yet of the new pro-labor orientation of the N ational L abor R elationsloand under Pre4i4ent.f)bam a,the agency
filed a com plaint W ednesday seeking to force B oeing to bring an airplane production line back to its unionized facilities in W ashington State instead of
In its com plaint,the labor board said that B oeing's decision to transfer a second production line for its new 787 D rearnliner passenger plane to South
C arolina w as m otivated by an unlaw ful desire to retaliate against union w orkers for their past strikes in W ashington and to discourage future strikes.
T he agency's acting general counsel,L afe Solom on,said it w as illegal for com panies to take actions in retaliation against w orkers for exercising the
right to strike.
A lthough m anufacturers have long m oved plants to nonunion states,the board noted that B oeing officials had,in internal docum ents and new s
interview s,specifically cited the strikes and potential future strikes as a reason for their
2 0 0 9 decision to expand in South C arolina.
B oeing said it w ould "vigorously contest" the labor board's com plaint."T his claim is legally frivolous and represents a radical departure from both
N .L .R .B .and Suprem e C ourt precedent," said J.M ichael L uttig,a B oeing executive vice president and its general counsel."B oeing has every right
under both federal law and its collective bargaining agreem ent to build additional U .S.production capacity outside of the Puget Sound region."
It is highly unusual for the federal governm ent to seek to reverse a corporate decision as im portant as the location of plant.
B ut ever since a D em ocratic m ajority took control of the five-m em ber board after M r.O bam a's election,the board has signaled that it w ould seek to
adopt a m ore liberal,pro-union tilt after years of pro-em ployer decisions under President B ush.
A lthough the board has not yet issued m any m ajor decisions reversing B ush-era policies,it has begun requiring private sector em ployers to post a
notice about w orkers'right to unionize,and M r.Solom on has begun m oving m ore aggressively to w in reinstatem ent of union supporters fired illegally
In a statem ent W ednesday,M r.Solom on said: "A w orker's right to strike is a fundam ental right guaranteed by the N ational L abor R elations A ct.W e
also recognize the rights of em ployers to m ake business decisions based on their econom ic interests,but they m ust do so w ithin the law ."
South C arolina's tw o senators,both R epublicans,L indsey G rO arn and Jim D eM ins,denounced the board's m ove."T his is nothing m ore than a
political favor for the unions w ho are supporting President O bam a's re-election cam paign," M r.D eM int said.
T he labor board said that in 2007,B oeing announced plans to create a second production line that w ould m ake three 787 D ream liner planes a m onth
in the Puget Sound area to address a grow ing backlog of orders.T hat w as to be in addition to a line already m aking seven D ream liners a m onth there.
In O ctober.2009,B oeing said it w ould locate its second line at a new ,nonunion plant in South C arolina.
T he N .L .R .B .asserted that on num erous occasions B oeing officials had com m unicated an unlaw ful m otive for transferring the production line,
including an interview w ith T he Seattle T im es in w hich a B oeing executive said,"T he overriding factor w as not the business clim ate.A nd it w as not the
w ages w e're paying today.It w as that w e cannot afford to have a w ork stoppage,you know ,every three years."
5/9/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009113
Page 2 of 2
M r. S olom on brought the com plaint after a union representing m any of B oeing's W ashington w orkers, the Internatirm alA m pla.110n...91.M A chinig
AP TO R M W Q rkers., com plained that B oeing had decided to m ove production to S outh C arolina largely in retaliation for a 58-day strike in 2008.
"B oeing's decision to build a 787 assem bly line in S outh C arolina sent a m essage that B oeing w orkers w ould suffer financial harm for exercising their
collective bargaining rights," said the union's vice president, R ich M ichalski.
M r. S olom on said that if he failed to settle the dispute, an adm inistrative judge w ould begin hearing the case on June 14 in S eattle. M r. S olom on said he
w as not seeking to close the S outh C arolina factory or prohibit B oeing from assem bling planes there.
B oeing criticized the tim ing of the N .L .R .B .'s com plaint, saying it cam e w hen construction of the factory in N orth C harleston, S .C ., w as nearly com plete
B oeing said on W ednesday that none of the production jobs in S outh C arolina had com e at the expense ofjobs in W ash ington. It noted th at its
unionized em ploym ent in the Puget S ound area had increased by 2 ,0 0 0 since it anno unced its decision to expand in S outh C aro lina.
T he com pany also said it had decided to expand in S outh C arolina in part to protect business continuity and to reduce the dam age to its finances and
IR S C ircular 230 D isclosure:To com ply w ith certain U .S.Treasury regulations,w e inform you
used,by any taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding any penalties thatm ay be im posed on such
taxpayer by the InternalR evenue Service.In addition,if any such tax advice is used or referred
to by other parties in prom oting,m arketing or recom m ending any partnership or other entity,
investm entplan or arrangem ent,then (i) the advice should be construed as w ritten in connection
w ith the prom otion or m arketing by others of the transaction(s) or m atter(s) addressed in this
com m unication and (ii) the taxpayer should seek advice based on the taxpayer's particular
****************************************************************************************************
This e-m ailis sentby a law firm and m ay contain inform ation thatis privileged or confidential.
If you are notthe intended recipient,please delete the e-m ailand any attachm ents and notify us
im m ediately.
* * * * * * * * *
* * *
* * * * *****
** * * * * * * * *
* * **
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
5/9/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009114
.Page 1 of 5
O n A pril 20, 2011, the A cting G eneral C ounsel of the N ational Labor
R elations B oard issued a com plaint against the B oeing C om pany alleging
facility in S outh C arolina for discrim inatory reasons. A hearing has been set
for June 14, 2011 in S eattle before an adm inistrative law judge.
C lick h ere to see a n ew s release m about the com plaint, and h ere to see a
T h e C h arg e an d C o m p lain t
alleging that the B oeing C om pany had engaged in m ultiple unfair labor
practices related to its decision to place a second production line for the 787
and to chill future strike activity, w hich is protected under the N ational Labor
R elations A ct.
The union also charged that the com pany violated the N ational Labor
em ployees in the Puget S ound area of W ashington, w here the planes are
http://w w w .nlrb.gov/print/443
5/9/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009115
Boeing C om plaintFactSheet
Page 2 of 5
parties in efforts to facilitate a settlem ent agreem ent.The overw helm ing
The com plaint issued by the A cting G eneralC ounsel (19-C A -32431 [41)
for past strike activity and to chillfuture strike activity by its union em ployees.
The investigation found that B oeing officials com m unicated the unlaw ful
m otivation in m ultiple statem ents to em ployees and the m edia.For exam ple,
new spaper: "The overriding factor (in transferring the line) w as not the
business clim ate.A nd it w as not the w ages w e're paying today..It w as that
The com plaint also alleges that B oeing's actions w ere "inherently destructive
The investigation did not find m erit to the union's charge that B oeing failed to
bargain in good faith over its decision regarding the second line.A lthough a
bargaining,in this case,the union had w aived its right to bargain on the
R IG H TS O F E M PLO Y E E S
http://vvw w .nlrb.gov/print/443
5/9/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009116
Boeing C om plaintFactSheet
Page 3 of 5
activities...
R IG H T TO S TR IK E
interfere w ith or im pede or dim inish in any w ay the right to strike or to affect
(3) by discrim ination in regard to hire or tenure of em ploym ent or any term or
labor organization
C ases:
The U .S .S uprem e C ourt delineated the line betw een protected em ployer
speech versus unlaw fulem ployer speech under the N LR A in N LR B v.G issel
R elations B oard applied the G isseltest to set aside an election because the
production line for a new m otor there.In its decision,the B oard distinguished
im m inent strike from threats to transfer w ork "m erely because of the
S ince then,the B oard has repeatedly held that an em ployer violates section
8(a)(1) by threatening that em ployees w illlose their jobs if they join a strike,
http://w w w .nlrb.gov/print/443
5/9/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009117
Boeing C om plaintFactSheet
Page 4 of 5
em ployers m ay law fully relate concerns raised by custom ers (C urw ood.Inc.,
strikers w hen there w as no legitim ate business justification for perm anently
(1989),w here potentialstrikers w ere targeted for layoffs,the B oard held that
N ext S teps
It is im portant to note that the com plaint states allegations by the A cting
G eneralC ounselthat the em ployer has com m itted unfair labor practices.
The B oard has m ade no findings on these allegations.The next step in the
http://w w w .nlrb.gov/print/443
5/9/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009118
U N ITE D S TA TE S O F A M E R IC A
B E FO R E TH E N A TIO N A L LA B O R R E LA TIO N S B O A R D
R E G IO N 19
TH E B O E IN G C O M P A N Y
and
IN TE R N A TIO N A L A S S O C IA TIO N O F
M A C H IN IS TS A N D A E R O S P A C E W O R K E R S
IN TE R N A TIO N A L A S S O C IA TIO N O F
M A C H IN IS TS A N D A E R O S P A C E W O R K E R S
. C O M P L A IN T A N D N O T IC E O F H E A R IN G
Lodge N o. 751 ("Local 751" or the "Union"), affiliated w ith International A ssociation of
M achinists and A erospace W orkers ("IA M "), has charged in C ase 19-C A -32431 that
The B oeing C om pany ("R espondent" or "B oeing"), has been engaging in unfair labor
practices as set forth in the N ationalLabor R elations A ct (the "A ct"),29 U.S .C . 151 et
seq.
R elations B oard (the "B oard"),by the undersigned,pursuant to 10(b) of the A ct and
102.15 of the B oard's R ules and R egulations, issues this C om plain t an d N otice of
1.
NLRB-FOIA-00009119
2.
(a)
in C hicago, Illinois, m anufactures and produces m ilitary and com m ercial aircraft at
areas.
(b )
(c)
above in paragraph 2(a),both sold and shipped from ,and purchased and received at,
the facility goods valued in excess of $50,000 directly to and from points outside the
State of W ashington.
(d )
com m erce w ithin the m eaning of 2(2),(6) and (7) of the A ct.
3.
4.
A t allm aterialtim es the follow ing individuals held the positions set forth
op posite their respective nam es and h ave been su pervisors w ithin the m eaning o f
-2 -
NLRB-FOIA-00009120
2(11) of the A ct, and/or agents w ithin the m eaning of 2(13) of the A ct, acting on
behalf of R espondent:
Jim A lbaugh
Scott C arson
R ay C onner
C om m ercialA irplanes
Scott Fancher
Program
Fred K iga
R elations
D oug K ight
C om m ercialA irplanes
Jim M cN erney
Jim Proulx
B oeing spokesm an
P at S hanahan
G en e W o lo sh yn
A irplane Program s
5.
(a)
the collective bargaining agreem ent described below in paragraph 5(c),including, inter
appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining w ithin the m eaning of 9(b) of the
(b )
-3 -
NLRB-FOIA-00009121
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining w ithin the m eaning of 9(b)
(C)
S ince at least 1975 and at allm aterialtim es,the IA M has been the
designated exclusive collective bargaining representative of the P uget S ound Unit and
(d)
6.
O n or about the dates and by the m anner noted below ,R espondent m ade
coercive statem ents to its em ployees that it w ould rem ove or had rem oved w ork from
the U nit because em ployees had struck and R espondent threatened or im pliedly
threatened that the Unit w ould lose additionalw ork in the event of future strikes:
callthat w as posted on B oeing's intranet w ebsite for allem ployees and reported in the
S eattle P ost Intelligencer A erospace N ew s and quoted in the S eattle Tim es,m ade an
extended statem ent regarding "diversifying [R espondent's] labor pool and labor
relationship," and m oving the 787 D ream liner w ork to S outh C arolina due to "strikes
-4 -
NLRB-FOIA-00009122
(b )
entitled "787 S econd Line,Q uestions and A nsw ers for M anagers," inform ed em ployees,
am ong other things,that its decision to locate the second 787 D ream liner lihe in S outh
(c)
the S eattle Tim es,attributed R espondent's 787 D ream liner production decision to use a
"dual-sourcing" system and to contract w ith separate suppliers for the S outh C arolina
1/4
(d)
to use a "dual-sourcing" system and to contract w ith separate suppliers for the S outh
(e)
Tim es reporter,stated that R espondent decided to locate its 787 D ream liner second line
in S outh C arolina because of past Unit strikes,and threatened the loss of future Unit
7.
(a)
bu t no later than O ctob er 28, 2009, R espond ent d ecid ed to transfer its seco nd 787
D ream liner production line of 3 planes per m onth from the Unit to its non-union site in
-5 -
NLRB-FOIA-00009123
(b )
7(a) because the Unit em ployees assisted and/or supported the Union by,
inter alia,
and/or other em ployees from engaging in these or other union and/or protected,
concerted activities.
(c)
8.
(a)
but no later than D ecem ber 3,2009,R espondent decided to transfer a sourcing supply
program for its 787 D ream liner production line from the Unit to its non-union facility in
(b )
8(a) because the Unit em ployees assisted and/or supported the Union by,
inter alia,
and/or other em ployees from engaging in these or other union and/or protected,
concerted activities.
(c)
com bined w ith the conduct described above in paragraphs 6 and 7(a),is also inherently
-6 -
NLRB-FOIA-00009124
9.
interfering w ith, restraining, and coercing em ployees in the exercise of the rights
10.
been discrim inating in regard to the hire or tenure or term s or conditions of em ploym ent
11.
has engaged in unfair labor practices affecting com m erce w ithin the m eaning of 2(6)
12.
A s part of the rem edy for the unfair labor practices alleged herein,the
A cting G eneral C ounsel seeks an O rder requiring either that one of the high level
officials of R espondent alleged to have com m itted the violations enum erated above in
paragraph 6 read,or that a designated B oard agent read in the presence of a high level
B oeing official, any notice that issues in this m atter, and requiring R espondent to
13.
(a)
A s part of the rem edy for the unfair labor practices alleged above in
-7 -
NLRB-FOIA-00009125
to have the Unit operate its second line of 787 D ream liner aircraft assem bly production
in the State of W ashington,utilizing supply lines m aintained by the Unit in the Seattle,
(b)
requested by the A cting G eneralC ounseldoes not seek to prohibit R espondent from
m aking non-discrim inatory decisions w ith respect to w here w ork w illbe perform ed,
including non-discrim inatory decisions w ith respect to w ork at its N orth C harleston,
South C arolina,facility.
A N SW E R R E Q U IR E M E N T
B oard's R ules and R egulations,it m ust file an answ er to this C om plaint.The answ er
b efore M ay 3, 2011. Unless filed electronically in a pdf form at,R espondent should file
an originaland four copies of the answ er w ith this office and serve a copy of the answ er
N um ber,and follow the detailed instructions.The responsibility for the receipt and
usability of the answ er rests exclusively upon the sender.Unless notification on the
continuous period of m ore than 2 hours after 12:00 noon (E astern Tim e) on the due
-8 -
NLRB-FOIA-00009126
date for filing,a failure to tim ely file the answ er w illnot be excused on the basis that the
transm ission could not be accom plished because the A gency's w ebsite w as off-line or
unavailable for som e other reason.The B oard's R ules and R egulations require that an
by the party if not represented.S ee 102.21.If the answ er being filed electronically is
a pdf docum ent containing the required signature,no paper copies of the docum ent
need to be transm itted to the R egionalO ffice.H ow ever,if the electronic version of an
answ er to a com plaint is not a pdf file containing the required signature,then the E-filing
rules require that such answ er containing the required signature be subm itted to the
R egionalO ffice by traditionalm eans w ithin three (3) business days after the date of
electronic filing.
Service of the answ er on each of the other parties m ust be accom plished
filed or if an answ er is filed untim ely,the B oard m ay find,pursuant to M otion for D efault
N O TIC E O F H E A R IN G
N ationalLabor R elations B oard.A t the hearing,R espondent and any other party to this
proceeding have the right to appear and present testim ony regarding the allegations in
-9 -
NLRB-FOIA-00009127
this com plaint. The procedures to be follow ed at the hearing are described in the
10-
NLRB-FOIA-00009128
J. M ichael t.uttig
V ico.President &
E xc
Cr..,..eral C r:tim e!
M C 5003.6027
M ay 3.2011
ASP AR SP AW
W ashington, D .C . 20570-0001
I w rite regarding statem ents in your com plaint and elsew here--including
statem ents attributed to you in the :V ew York M ilos on A pril 23 about B oeinies
decision to place its new 787 final assem bly line in South C arolina. A num ber of
these statem ents, w hich are critical to your ease against B oeing,fundam entally
m ischaracterizations, for the public record and also for purposes of the com plaint you
grave disservice to T he B oeing C om pany. its executives and shareholders, and to the
160.000 t3ocing em ployees w orldivide. A nd, of course. you have tiled a com plaint
based upon these m isstatem ents that cannot be credibly m aintained under law .
A s an initial m atter, repeatedstatem ents in the com plaint allege, that B oeing
"rem oved w ork" from Puget Sound (1i6), -decided to lrons.fer its second 787
D ream liner production line" to South C arolina (17(4), and "decided to m -m sfer a
sourcing supply program " to S outh C arolina (W O ). Y our A pril 20 press release
m akes the sam e assertion: "T he N L R B launched an investigation of the tra n skr of
second line w ork in response to charges tiled by he N rktelltiliStS union and found
reasonable cause to believe that B oeing had violated tw o sections orthe N ational
front Puget Sound. T he second line for the 787 is a new final assem bly line. A s it
did 1101 previously exist in Puget Sound or elsew here,the second assem bly line could
not have been -rem oved" from , -transferred" or otherw ise "m oved - to South
C arolina. Sim ply put, the w ork that is and w ill be done at our C harleston, Sm ith
C arolina linal'assem bly facility is new w ork, required and added in response to the
historic custom er dem and for the 787. N o m em ber of the International A ssociation of
M achinists'union (1A M ) in Puget Sound has lost his or her job,or otherw ise SU frerC d--....
NLRB-FOIA-00009129
d ifferen tly th an y o u . A s th e S eattle T im es rep o rted last y ear, "R ich ard A b eam , th e
9firiZ A L L 7 P tid a
co m p lain t. H ad y o u d o n e so , w e w o u ld h av e ex p lain ed to y o u w h y su ch an
R elatio n s A ct.
B o ein g ex ecu tiv es so u g h t to "p u n ish " u n io n em p lo y ees an d to "th reaten " th em fo r
NLRB-FOIA-00009130
T im es. A p ril 2 3 . 2 0 1 .0 .
com plaint offers a single B oeing statem ent-....let alone a "consistent m essage"---.that
B o ein g acted to "p u n ish " its em p lo y ees, an d , n eed less to say , y o u o ffer n o ev id en ce
slated th at B o ein g "d ecid ed to lo cate its 7 8 7 D ream lin er seco n d lin e in S o u th
o p p o rtu n ities b ecau se o f su ch strik es." (C o m p lain t 41i6 te).) T h e co m p lain t cites a
L
ifb.e.o k:/iiode ;-14.4
hitni.,
It w o u ld , o f co u rse. h av e b een en tirely lp erm issib le u n d er ex istin g law k w M r.
w e could not get those tw o issues done de.S pile the best e ffo rts q f th e U n io n
T h e italicized sen ten ces--w h ich w ere d elib erately o m itted fro m y o u r o ffice's
referen cin g tw o , rath er th an o n e, "o v errid in g factors," only one of w h ich is th e risk o f'
th eo ry o f th is case.
NLRB-FOIA-00009131
M r. A lbaugh expresses his "bias" in favor of P uget S ound and lauds the good-faith
efforts of both sides. H e explains that the com pany's prelbrence w as to locate the
new production line in P uget S ound and that both the. com pany and the union m ade
good-faith eltbrts to accom plish that shared objective. T hus,w hen not m isquoted,it
is not even arguable that M r. A lbaugh's statem ent constitutes a "m essage" of
"punishm ent" to the union tbr its past or future strike capability.
C hairm an and C hief E xecutive O fficer. as a threat to punish union em ployees is but
"m ade an extended statem ent regarding .d ive rsifyin g [B o e in g 's .]labor pooland labor
relationship,and m oving the 787 D ream liner w ork to S outh C arolina d u e w 'strikes
happening every three to four years in P uget S ound.'" (C om plaint ',M O (em phasis
added).)
statem ents. F irst,M r. M cN erney w as not m aking an "extended statem ent" about A tth .ti
decision to locale the new finalassem bly line in S outh C arolina had not even been
m ade at the tim e M r. M cN erney's statem ents w ere m ade. S econd,M r. M cN erney
answ ered only the question as to com parative costs that w as asked. T hus,in the
facility in a location other than P uget S ound. versus the potentialc.osts associated
w ith "strikes happening every three to tO ur years in P uget S ound." H e did not say,as
you allege through the com plaint's m isquotation,that B oeing selected C harleston
A nd M r. M cN erney did not even rem otely suggest that w hat w ould later turn
strikes,as you w ould have to establish to obtain the rem edies you seek in your
com plaint. H e did not say,he did not suggest,and he did not im ply in any respect
that B oeing intended to punish union em ployees or that a decision to locate a new
facility other than in P uget S ound w ould or m ight be m ade to punish the union for
past strikes or because of their pow er to strike in the future. N either did he say,
suggest;or im ply that any existing union w ork w as being transferred to C harleston.
H is answ er cannot be cited in support of the legaltheories in the com plaint. m uch less
the sw eeping statem ent you m ade to the N ew Y or4 T im es about B oeing's "consistent
m essage" that B oeing and its executives sought to "punish" the C om pany's union
em ployees.
B oeing's intranet w ebsitc for allem plo .eS ,.. m uch less posted for the purpose of
NLRB-FOIA-00009132
m islead in g ly su g g ests.
w h ich I attach to th is letter rem o tely su g g est an in ten t to "p u n ish " th e C o m p an y 's
C o m p an y co n sid ered (am o n g m u ltip le o th er facto rs) th e risk an d p o ten tial co sts o f
ex ecu tiv es sen t a "co n sisten t m essag e" th at B o ein g 's d ecisio n w as in ten d ed to
d ecisio n to "p u n ish " its em p lo y ees, is a v ery serio u s--in d eed , in ten tio n ally
.
p ro v o cativ e alleg atio n ag ain ,st B o ein g 's lead ers. T h o se lead ers are d eep ly
co m m itted to all o f th e m en an d w o m en w h o w o rk fo r th e C o m p an y , th o se
m o st sen io r ex ecu tiv es acted o u t o f p erso n al sp ite an d retrib u tio n to w ard its lab o r
w h atso ev er.
"co n sisten t m essag e" th at th e C o m p an y in ten d ed to "p u n ish " th e u n io n Ib r its p rio r
o f th e co
o v er le p ast six m o n tl
NLRB-FOIA-00009133
egregious that the law literally com pelled a com plaint by the N L R B .01course,the
Finally.there is the issue of your articulation of the rem edy sought in this
com plaint.T he com plaint seeks an order directing B oeing to -have the [IA M
operate [B oeing's] second line of 787 D ream liner aircraft assem bly production in the
State of W ashington.''N otw ithstanding that you are seeking this rem edy,your office
has been at pains since M ine the com plaint to state publicly that this is not equivalent
to an order that B oeing "close its operations in South carolina. - F act C heck,
available atw w .oirb.o(iv (post of A pril 26,201 I .W e and the public w ould be
B oeing's current plan is to produce a m axim um often 787s per m onth: seven in
B oeing to produce out of Puget Sound the three 787s per m onth that are planned to be
assem bled in C harleston.that w ould of course require the production of all of the
explained repeatedly to you and your staff in our extended discussions belbre you -
* * * * *
R elations B oard itself in upcom ing proceedings,M r.Solom on.T o the extent they
reflect m isunderstandings of the facts on your part,w e w ould expect your prom pt
Sincerely yours.
:.P1444
J.M ichaelLuttie,
G enera! C ounsel
T he B oeing C om pany
A ttachm ent
NLRB-FOIA-00009134
l'h ere w o u ld b e ex ecu tio n ch allem zes asso ciated w ith th at ch o ice [o f C h arlesto n ].
m o d est in efficien cies, fir ex am p le, asso ciated w ith a m o v e to C h arlesto n , are certain ly
sh ap e h ad w e not
A n d so I d o n 't b lam e -, I d o n 't b lam e th is to tally o n th e u n io n . W e
ju st h av en 't fig u red o u t a w ay , th e m ix d o esn 't -- isn 't w o rk in g w ell, y et. S o w e'v e eith er
labor base.
6(b)
- "7 8 7 S eco n d L in e Q u estio n s an d A n sw ers," 1 0 /2 8 /0 9
Q 3 : W as o n e site a h ig h er co st th an th e o th er?
A:
A ll th in g s tak en in to acco u n t, th is d ecisio n w ill p ro v id e eco n o m ic ad v an tag es b y
host of'factors,from naturaldisasters to hom eland security issues and w ork stoppages.
W e're electing not to get into how individualsites hared in specific areas o f th e
evaluati(m i.
* * * * * * * *
A :
It w as an im p o rtan t p art o f o u r d iscu ssio n w ith th e u n io n , b u t it w asn 't th e o n ly
p ro d u ctio n d isru p tio n s th at can occur ibr a variety of reasons, from natural disasters, to
hom eland security threats, to w ork stoppages. W hile w e didn't reach a long-term
agreem ent, w e felt our discussions w ith the IA M w ere productive and fficused on the
NLRB-FOIA-00009135
right things -- global com petitiveness (including em erging com petitors),and w ays to
sustain a reliable,on-tim e flow ofdeliveries to our custom ers.W e look forw ard to
m oving tbrw ard w ith the 1A M in a positive w ay to grow our business in an increasingly
* * * * *
Q 26: Y ou say that havint a second line in C harleston reduces risk,but if the lA N T W es
on strike in the Puget Sound again they w ill halt your production lines.W hat does a
A :
G eographically diversifying final assem bly on the 787 w ill protect a portion of
deliveries against disruption.from both natural and m an-m ade events,including w ork
stoppages due to labor disputes.H aving the second line w ill also give us assurance and
B oeing spokesm an Jim Proulx cited strikes in the Puget Sound region as a m ajor factor in
the decision.W ith a second supplier tbr every part,B oeing potentially could continue
producing D ream liners in South C arolina even if the M achinists w ent on strike here.
"R epeated labor disruptions have affected our perform ance in our custom ers eyes,"
Proulx said."W e have to show our custom ers w e can be a reliable supplier to them ."
here," he added.
* * * * * * *
"W e w ill im m ediately begin identifying,selecting and contracting w ith suppliers to stand
H ouk said B oeing has not determ ined how m uch w ork w ill be replicated w ithin the
com pany in the new C harleston facility and how m uch m ay go to outside suppliers.
W hen B oeing broke ground on its C harleston assem bly line in N ovem ber,the com pany
disclosed extensive plans for other buildings at the facility.A m ong these is a "fin and
rudder shop," w hich suggests the tail tin m ay he built at B oeing C harleston.
NLRB-FOIA-00009136
H e said th e rep licatio n o f p arts so u rcin g also w o u ld "acco m m o d ate th e ram p -u p " req u ired
* * * * * * * *
d iscu ssio n s p reced in g o u r d ecisio n to p lace th e seco n d 7 8 7 lin e in S o u th C aro lin a,"
* * * * * * * *
B o ein g 's P ro u lx said p o ten tial ex tern al su p p liers are b ein g assessed "b ased o n
v alu e."
"W e'll rev iew su p p lier ex p ertise, an d w e'll en su re th at th e rig h t lev el o f train in g an d
6 (d )-
P ugel S ound
"D u al-so u rcin g an d co -p ro d u ctio n w ill allo w u s to m ain tain p ro d u ctio n stab ility an d b e a
* * * * * * *
B o ein g sp o k esm an Jim P ro u lx said it w as "to o early " to tell if th e n ew p ro d u ctio n w ill b e
country.
aw ay ," h e said .
NLRB-FOIA-00009137
6(e) -- Jim A lbaugh Interview w ith the Seattle Tim es, M arch 2,2010
W ell I think you can probably say thataboutall the states in the country right now w ith
the econom y being w hat it is.B ut again,the overriding factor w as not the business
to have a w ork stoppage every three years.W e can't alford to continue the rate of
.escalation of w ages as w e have in the past.Y ou know ,those are the overriding factors.
. A nd m y bias w as to stay here but w e could not get those tw o issues done despite the best
efforts ofthe U nion and the best eflbrts of the com pany.
NLRB-FOIA-00009138
A L A N W IL SO N
G ENERAL
ATTO R N EY
A pril28,2011
1099 14
th Street,N W ,Suite 8600
W ashington,D C 20570
A s A ttorneys G eneral of our respective states,w e call upon you,as A cting G eneral
C ounsel of the N ational L abor R elations B oard ("N L R B "),to w ithdraw im m ediately the
com plaint num bered 19-C A -32431 against B oeing.T his com plaint represents an assault upon the
constitutional right of free speech,and the ability of our states to create jobs and recruit industry.
Y our ill-conceived retaliatory action seeks to destroy our citizens'right to w ork.It is South
C arolina and B oeing today,but w ill be any of our states,w ith our right to w ork guarantees,
tom orrow .
constitutionally enforceable through our states'right to w ork law s.$ee R etail C lerks Intl v.
Scherm erhorn,375 U .S.96 (1963).Such law s are designed to elim inate union affiliation as a
criterion for em ploym ent.H ow ever,the N L R B ,through this single proceeding,attem pts to
sound the death knell of the right to w ork.A dditionally,this tenuous com plaint w ill reverberate
throughout union and non-union states alike,as international com panies w ill question the
w isdom of locating in a country w here the federal governm ent interferes in industry w ithout
cause or justification.
Furtherm ore,this com plaint disrupts,and m ay w ell elim inate,the production of B oeing
787 D ream liners in South C arolina.In fact,B oeing has expanded its operations to m eet product
dem and in South C arolina,w hile adding new jobs in W ashington State.T he com plaint charges
B oeing w ith the com m ission of an unfair labor practice,but appears to do so w ithout legal and
factual foundation.T his unparalleled and overreaching action seeks to drive a stake through the
heart of the free enterprise system .T he statem ents of B oeing officials cited in your com plaint are
the innocent exercise of the com pany's right of free speech.T he Suprem e C ourt long ago m ade
it clear that the N L R A does not lim it,and the First A m endm ent protects,the em ployer's right to
express view s on labor policies or problem s. N .L .R .B .v.V a.E lectric and Pow er, 314 U S 469,
NLRB-FOIA-00009139
H on.Lafe E.Solom on
April27,2011
Page 2
477 (1941).A s the C ourtrecently reiterated in C itizens U nited v.FE C , 130 S.C t.876,899-90
(2010),a corporation is nota second class citizen in term s of FirstA m endm entprotection.
O ur states are struggling to em erge from one of the w orsteconom ic collapses since the
bureaucracy on behalf of unions w illnotcreate a single new job or putone unem ployed person
back to w ork.
The only justification for the N LR B 's unprecedented retaliatory action is to aid union
survival.Y our action seriously underm ines our citizens'rightto w ork as w ellas their ability to
bullying and federalcoercion.W e thus callupon you to cease this attack on our rightto w ork,
Sincerely,
Q U AD
Alan W ilson
Attorney G eneral
NLRB-FOIA-00009140
H on.Lafe E.Solom on
April27,2011
Page 3
K en C uccinelli
Attorney G eneral
Jon C .B runing
Attorney G eneral
State of N ebraska
Attorney G eneral
State of G eorgia
O ilv 4 11
Pam B ondi
Attorney G eneral
State of Florida
E.ScottPruitt
Attorney G eneral
State of O klahom a
Tom H orne
Attorney G eneral
State of Arizona
G reg A bbott
A ttorney G eneral
State of Texas
LU364e
Luther Strange
A ttorney G eneral
State of A labam a
NLRB-FOIA-00009141
gtFIC E O F T H E G E N E R A L C O U N SE L
FORDISTRIBUTION-
DATE
April 11, 2011
TO:
Region 19
FIUM
Division of Advice
SU B JEC T:
Case 19-CA-32431
512-5006-5062
512-5006-5067
512-5036-8387
512-5036-8389
524-0167-1033
524-5029-5037
524-0167-1033
524-5060
524-8307-1600
524-8307-5300
530-6050-0825-3300
530-6067-4011-4200
530-6067-4011-4600
530-6067-4011-7700
530-8054-7000
775-8731
collective-bargaining agreement.
NLRB-FOIA-00009142
Case 19-CA-32431
seven planes on the first line. Thus, the Region should seek
the first ten 787 aircraft that it produces each month and to
FA C T S
to arbitration. ...
NLRB-FOIA-00009143
Case 19-CA-32431
That line opened in May 2007, with the capacity for producing
T h e 2 0 0 8 S t r i k e a n d I t s Af t e r m a t h
our customers and competing to win the new business that will
NLRB-FOIA-00009144
Case 19-CA-32431
- 4
noted that he and Carson grew up in and shared a love for the
the CEO was "sick and tired" of the union's strikes and was
Integrated Defense Systems CEO Jim Albaugh, and for the first
M a n a g e m e n t & O p e r a t i o n s R a y C o n n e r . I A M representatives
1 In his
that the
occurred
1989 (48
NLRB-FOIA-00009145
Case 19-CA-32431
bargaining agreement.
second line outside the Puget Sound area unless it could reach
NLRB-FOIA-00009146
Case 19-CA-32431
to the employees stating that the mass layoffs that took place
second 787 line but that it had not yet made a decision as to
only way Boeing would place the second line in Washington was
that this was not possible, but the Union would consider a
long-term agreement.
NLRB-FOIA-00009147
Case 19-CA-32431
do.
The Union lost the election in South Carolina eight days later
and wanted the Union's input within the next three to four
resolve economic issues for the long term rather than throu'jh
would get more. On October 15, for the first time, Boeing
said that it wanted a lower wage structure for new hires and a
NLRB-FOIA-00009148
Case 19-CA-32431
Carolina.
work; location of the second line in the Puget Sound area; and
was the Union's "last and final" offer, but the Union
NLRB-FOIA-00009149
Case 19-CA-32431
couple of weeks."
Conner stated that the Union's economic terms and demand for
and invest more than $750 million in the State within the next
NLRB-FOIA-00009150
Case 19-CA-32431
- o
phased out once the South Carolina line was up and running.
issues and work stoppages." The memo further stated, "In the
units who produce parts for the 787 assembly line are likely
customers."
NLRB-FOIA-00009151
Case 19-CA-32431
11
The issue last fall was really .about, you know, how
Charleston.
that the 2008 strike reduced its earnings by $1.8 million, far
NLRB-FOIA-00009152
Case 19-CA-32431
- 12 -
decision as follows:
And it was not the wages we're paying today. It was that
escalation of wages....
from the main assembly line. Once supply issues are resolved
AC T I O N
Sound unit employees that they could retain all of the 787
this interview.
NLRB-FOIA-00009153
Case 19-CA-32431
- 13 -
problems.
not be ready for production for two years because of the need
activity.
We would also argue, in the alternative, that
assemble in the Puget Sound area the first ten 787 aircraft
NLRB-FOIA-00009154
Case 19-CA-32431
- 14 -
I. T h e E m p l o y e r V i o l a t e d S e c t i o n 8 ( a ) ( 1 )
plant. The employer also made clear that the plant's nonunion
activity. 12
The Board expressly distinguished an employer's
5 See NLRB v. Gissel Packing Co., 395 U.S. 575, 618 (1969).
6 Ibid.
r-
NLRB-FOIA-00009155
Case 19-CA-32431
- 15
date. "13
employees that they will lose their jobs if they join a strike
13
14 See, e.g., Kroger Co., 311 NLRB 1187, 1200 (1993), affd.
mem. 50 F.3d 1037 (11 t1 Cir. 1995); General Electric Co., 321
NLRB 662, fn. 5 (1996), enf. denied 117 F.3d 627 (D.C. Cir.
1997).
15 Aelco Corp., 326 NLRB 1262, 1265 (1998). See also Dorsey
16 311 NLRB at 1200. See also General Electric Co., 321 NLRB
17 See, e.g., Tawas Industries, 336 NLRB 318, 321 (2001) (no
466, 466 (2000) (no factual basis for statements about having
unionized).
18
NLRB-FOIA-00009156
Case 19-CA-32431
- 16 -
20
consequences").
NLRB-FOIA-00009157
- Case 19-CA-32431
- 17 -
removed jobs from Puget Sound because employees had struck and
strikes. 25
activity. 26
drove home the message: union activity could cost them their
question that the decision will direct work away from Puget
to employees.
24
NLRB-FOIA-00009158
Case 19-CA-32431
- 18 -
sourcing" program means that the Puget Sound and Portland unit
implemented.
retaliatory motive. 28
28 Ibid.
29 See Adair Standish Corp., 290 NLRB 317, 318-19 (1988), enfd
30 S e e i d . a t 3 1 9 .
NLRB-FOIA-00009159
Case 19-CA-32431
- 19 -
the fact that unit employees may not yet have experienced the
sub nom. O'Dovero v. NLRB, 193 F.3d 532 (D.C. Cir. 1999)
32
33
34 See Century Air Freight, 284 NLRB 730, 732 (1987) (employer
35 See Parexel International, LLC, 356 NLRB No. 82, slip op.
NLRB-FOIA-00009160
Case 19-CA-32431
20 -
activity. "36
36
37
38
39
40 See ibid.
NLRB-FOIA-00009161
Case 19-CA-32431
- 21 -
'substantial." 42
striking.
41 See 295 NLRB 1095, 1095 (1989), enfd. 903 F.2d 396 (5 th Cir.
43 See
NLRB-FOIA-00009162
Case 19-CA-32431
- 22 -
intent. ,44 I n
International Paper Co., the Board set forth
employee rights. 47
Paper.
First, the harm to employees' Section 7 rights was
economic weapon, and for the Union itself, and thereby hinder
228, 231 (1963). See also Dorsey Trailers, Inc., 327 NLRB
835, 863-64 (1999), enf. denied in pertinent part 233 F.3d 831
See 319 LRB 1253, 1269 (1995), enf. denied 115 F.3d 1045
45
46
NLRB-FOIA-00009163
Case 19-CA-32431
- 23 -
with the union. 48 The Board found that the employer's stated
Section 8(a)(3).
III. T h e U n i o n W a i v e d i t s R i g h t t o B a r g a i n
48 S e e
NLRB-FOIA-00009164
Case 19-CA-32431
- 24 -
A. M a n d a t o r y S u b j e c t o f B a r g a i n i n g
51 303 NLRB 386, 391 (1991), enfd. sub nom. Food & Commercial
52 Ibid.
53 See, e.g., Titan Tire Corp., 333 NLRB 1156, 1164-65 (2001)
to other facilities).
(2000), revd. mem. 248 F.3d 1131 (3d Cir. 2000) ("We think it
employees").
NLRB-FOIA-00009165
Case 19-CA-32431
- 25 -
jobs. 57
the Employer cannot afford the rate at which unit wages are
57 See 321 NLRB 616, 617 (1996), enf. denied in relevant part
134 F.3d 125 (3d Cir. 1998). Accord Acme Die Casting, 315
NLRB-FOIA-00009166
Case 19-CA-32431
- 26 -
60
61
waive the right to bargain about such changes for all time).
63
64
NLRB-FOIA-00009167
Case 19-CA-32431
- 27 -
contract."
offloading decision.
waiver but asserts instead that the Employer may not take
waiver; rather, the cases on which the Region and Union rely
8(a)(3) violation."
waiver are also unavailing. Thus, the Union asserts that the
65 Id. at 1260.
66 Id. at 1262.
68 See Reno Hilton, 326 NLRB 1421, 1430 (1998), enfd. 196 F.3d
(USA) Mineral Sands, Inc. v. NLRB, 281 F.3d 442, 450 (4 th Cir.
protected activity").
NLRB-FOIA-00009168
Case 19-CA-32431
- 28 -
also lacks merit. While Boeing took the position that the
IV. T h e Ap p r o p r i a t e R e m e d y
See St. Barnabas Medical Center, 341 NLRB 1325, 1325 (2004)
those negotiations).
70
See Boeing Co., 337 NLRB 758, 763 (2002) (employer did not
NLRB-FOIA-00009169
Case 19-CA-32431
- 29 -
72 See, e.g., Homer D. Bronson Co., 349 NLRB 512, 515 (2007),
Logistics & Operations, 340 NLRB 255; 258 (2003), affd. 400
F.3d 920 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (employees will perceive that "the
the Act").
enfd. mem. 55 F3d 684 (D.C. Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516 U.S.
1093 (1996). See also, e.g., Homer D. Bronson Co., 349 NLRB
Texas Super Foods, 303 NLRB 209, 209 (1991) notice reading by
employees).
NLRB-FOIA-00009170
Case 19-CA-32431
- 30 -
B.
ROFs - 9
H:ADV.19 - CA-32431.Response2.Boeing.dlw
NLRB-FOIA-00009171
L (A ) (162-"U
N a tio n a l L a b o r R e la tio n s B o a rd
oll'FIC E O F T H E G E N E R A L C O U N SE L
S .A .N dvice M em orandum
FORBISTRIBUTifiN-
D A T E :
A p r il 1 1 , 2 0 1 1
TO :
Region 19
FR O M :
Division of Advice
SU BJEC T:
Case 19-CA-32431
512-5006-5062
512-5006-5067
512-5036-8387
512-5036-8389
524-0167-1033
524-5029-5037
524-0167-1033
524-5060
524-8307-1600
524-8307-5300
530-6050-0825-3300
530-6067-4011-4200
530-6067-4011-4600
530-6067-4011-7700
530-8054-7000
775-8731
collective-bargaining agreement.
NLRB-FOIA-00009172
Case 19-CA-32431
seven planes on the first line. Thus, the Region should seek
the first ten 787 aircraft that it produces each month and to
F A C T S
Company facility .
to- another - a a p a h 9 . facility rio-t covered by
to arbitration. ...
NLRB-FOIA-00009173
Case 19-CA-32431
-3
That line opened in May 2007, with the capacity for producing
our customers and competing to win the new business that will
NLRB-FOIA-00009174
%.
Case 19-CA-32431
noted that he and Carson grew up in and shared a love for the
Nor -E hwest; Kiga then said that they would "hate to lose a -
the CEO was "sick and tired" of the union's strikes and was
Integrated Defense Systems CEO Jim Albaugh, and for the first
occurred, in 1948 (140 days), 1965 (19 days), 1977 (45 days),
1'989 (48 days), 1995 (69 days), and 2005 (28 days).
NLRB-FOIA-00009175
Case 19-CA-32431
bargaining agreement.
second line outside the Puget Sound area unless it could reach
Boeing denied the Union access to the employees .in the North
NLRB-FOIA-00009176
Case 19-CA-32431
to the employees stating that the mass layoffs that took place
assembly line. For example, The Post and the Courier reported
second 787 line but that it had not yet made a decision as to
only way Boeing would place the second line in Washington was
that this was not possible, but the Union would consider a
long-term agreement. -
Jo urnal- characterized - th-i-s- vote- as- " t t - wild- card"- Th- Bbeing'- -
NLRB-FOIA-00009177
Case 19-CA-32431
do.
The Union lost the election in South Carolina eight days later
and wanted the Union's input within the next three to four
---
resolve economic issues for the long term rather than through
_wanted,---and-
f f e f f : - -
would get more. On October 15, for the first time, Boeing
said that it wanted a lower wage structure for new hires and a
NLRB-FOIA-00009178
Case 19-CA-32431
Carolina.
work; location of the second line in the' Puget Sound area; and
x,,month- advance -notice -and- good- faith- bargaining -ov -el- ahy -
was the Union's "last and final" offer, but the Union
NLRB-FOIA-00009179
Case 19-CA-32431
couple of weeks."
Conner stated that the Union's economic terms and demand for
and invest more than $750 million in the State within the next
NLRB-FOIA-00009180
Case 19-CA-32431
10
Bo e i n g A n n o u n c e s i t s D e c i s i o n s t o L o c a t e t h e S e c o n d L i n e i n
phased out once the South Carolina line was up and running.
issues and work stoppages." The memo further stated, "In the
- ---final -analysis-,--this-came-down-to-ensuring-our-lon-g-reltC-----
_ .
contract_separate-
- --
line.
As a result, employees in the Puget Sound and Portland
units who produce parts for the 787 assembly line are likely
Journal o n D e c e m b e r 8 d i s c u s s e d t h i s a n n o u n c e m e n t . T h e
customers."
NLRB-FOIA-00009181
Case 19-CA-32431
- 11
The issue last fall was really about, you know, how
Charleston.
that the 2008 strike reduced its 'earnings by $1.8 million, far
NLRB-FOIA-00009182
Case 19-CA-32431
- 12 -
decision as follows:
And it was not the wages we're paying today. It was that
escalation of wages....
from the main assembly line. Once supply issues are resolved
ACTION
This-case- involves-Boeingf-s,transfer_of.
___emplayeeson
Sound unit employees that they could retain all of the 787
this interview.
NLRB-FOIA-00009183
Case 19-CA-32431
- 13 -
problems.
not be ready for production for two years because of the need
6 5 -
assemble in the Puget Sound area the first ten 787 aircraft
NLRB-FOIA-00009184
Case 19-CA-32431
- 14
plant. The employer also made clear that the plant's nonunion
activity. 12
The Board expressly distinguished an employer's
Ibid.
NLRB-FOIA-00009185
Case 19-CA-32431
- 15 -
date." 13
employees that they will lose their jobs if they join a strike
14 See, e.g., Kroger Co., 311 NLRB 1187, 1200 (1993), affd.
mem. 50 F.3d 1037 .(11'h Cir. 1995); General Electric Co., 321
NLRB 662, fn. 5 (1996), enf. denied 117 F.3d 627 (D.C. Cir.
1997).
15 Aelco Corp., 326 NLRB 1262, 1265 (1998). See also Dorsey
'part -233 F.3d 831 (4 th Cir. 2000) (threat to close the plant if
16 311 NLRB at 1200. See also General Electric Co., 321 NLRB
17 See, e.g., Tawas Industries, 336 NLRB 318, 321 (2001) (no
466, 466 (2000) (no factual basis for statements about having
unionized).
NLRB-FOIA-00009186
Case 1.9-CA-32431
- 16 -
. . .
NLRB --aC-Ir37":
20
consequences").
S e a ttle T im e s.
NLRB-FOIA-00009187
- 17 -
removed jobs from Puget Sound because employees had struck and
strikes. 25
activity. 26
drove home the message: union activity could cost them their
II.
question that the decision will direct work away from Puget
to employees.
NLRB-FOIA-00009188
Case 19-CA-32431
sourcing" program means that the Puget Sound and Portland unit
implemented.
retaliatory motive. 28
employer. may-
..new_work_from_Standi.sh." and_therefox_e_misplated_Section_8(a113L.
28 Ibid.
29 See Adair Standish Corp., 290 NLRB 317, 318-19 (1988), enfd
NLRB-FOIA-00009189
Case 19-CA-32431
- 19 -
the fact that unit employees may not yet have experienced the
sub nom. O'Dovero v. NLRB, 193 F.3d 532 (DC. Cir. .1999)
34 See Century Air Freight, 284 NLRB 730, 732 (1987) (employer
35 See Parexel International, LLC, 356 NLRB No. 82, slip op.
NLRB-FOIA-00009190
Case 19-CA-32431
- 20 -
activity." 38
36
Ibid..(citation omitted).
37
38
39
40 See ibid.
NLRB-FOIA-00009191
Case 19-CA-32431
- 21 -
substantial. "42
Union'_s_effort.a to_negotiate_a_long=term_no_strike-agreement___
striking.
_ _ _also
. . . _ .conclude
_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . .that
. _ _ _ _Boeing's
_ _ . _ _ _ _
conduct was
_ .
_ _ _ .
_We
destructive of employee interests." 43 Conduct is "inherently
See 295 NLRB 1095, 1095 (1989), enfd. 903 F.2d 396 (5 th Cir.
41
42
See NLRB v. Great Dane Trailers, Inc., 388 U.S. 26, 33'
43
NLRB-FOIA-00009192
Case 19-CA-32431
- 22 -
intent. /44
In International Paper Co., the Board set forth
employee rights. 47
economic weapon, and for the Union itself, and thereby hinder
228, 231 (1963). See also Dorsey Trailers, Inc., 327 NLRB
835; 863-64 - (1999) -, enf-.---denied - in- pertiment-p art- 2-3-3- FT3d- 831---
(4 th
Cir. 2000).
44
See 319 LRB 1253, 1269 (1995), enf. denied 115 F.3d 1045
45
46
NLRB-FOIA-00009193
Case 19-CA-32431
- 23 -
with the union. 48 The Board found that the employer's stated
.Accordingly,__Boeing's
South_Carolina employees
pronouncements emphasizing
Section 8(a)(3).
III. T h e U n i o n W a i v e d i t s R i g h t t o Ba r g a i n
NLRB-FOIA-00009194
Case 19-CA-32431
- 24 -
A.
M a n d a t o r y S u b j e c t o f Ba r g a i n i n g
51 303 NLRB 386, 391 (1991), enfd. sub nom. Food & Commercial
53 See, e.g., Titan Tire Corp., 333 NLRB 1156, 1164-65 (2001)
to other facilities).
(2000), revd. mem. 248 F.3d 1131 (3d Cir. 2000) ("We think it
employees").
NLRB-FOIA-00009195
Case 19-CA-32431
- 25 -
jobs. 57
unit employees.
-The decision did not involve a basic change
the Employer cannot afford the rate at which unit wages are
___ _ _concessions
_ . .
_
55 See 355 NLRB No. 140 (2010), incorporating by reference the
57 See 321 NLRB 616, 617 (1996), enf. denied in relevant part
134 F.3d 125 (3d Cir. 1998). Accord Acme Die Casting, 315
NLRB-FOIA-00009196
Case 19-CA-32431
- 26 -
bargaining.
B. W a i v e r o f t h e R i g h t t o Ba r g a i n
waIver-of-right-to-bargad-n-about
waive the right to bargain about such changes for all time).
NLRB-FOIA-00009197
Case 19-CA-32431
- 27 -
contract."
offloading decision.
waiver but asserts instead that the Employer may not take
waiver; rather, the cases on which the Region and Union rely
8(a)(3) violation."
waiver are also unavailing. Thus, the Union asserts that the
negotiattons_for
il.e.14___CQntn3gt-
Howyer,_ during_ those mid-
65 Id. at 1260.
66 Id. at 1262.
67
S e e A l l i s o n C o r p . , 3 3 0 N L RB a t 1 3 6 5 .
See Reno Hilton, 326 NLRB 1421, 1430 (1998), enfd. 196 F.3d
(USA) Mineral Sands, Inc. v. NLRB, 281 F.3d 442, 450 (4 th Cir.
protected activity").
88
NLRB-FOIA-00009198
Case 19-CA-32431
- 28 -
also lacks merit. While Boeing took the position that the
IV. T h e A p p r o p r i a t e R e m e d y
--69-
those negotiations).
70
See Boeing Co., 337 NLRB 758, 763 (2002) (employer did not
NLRB-FOIA-00009199
Case 19-CA-32431
29 -
72 See, e.g., Homer D. Bronson Co., 349 NLRB 512, 515 (2007),
F.3d 920 (D.C. Cir. 2005) (employees will perceive that "the
the Act").
enfd. mem. 55 F3d 684 (D.C. Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516 U.S.
1093 (1996). See also, e.g., Homer D. Bronson Co., 349 NLRB
Texas Super Foods, 303 NLRB 209, 209 (1991) notice reading by
employees).
NLRB-FOIA-00009200
Case 19-CA-32431
- 30 -
B.
ROFs - 9
H:ADV.19-CA-32431.Response2.Boeing.dlw
NLRB-FOIA-00009201
Labor N ew s
F O R IM M E D IA T E R E L E A S E : M ay 4, 2011
W ash in g to n to in tim id ate an d co erce th e fed eral ag en cy in vestig atin g B o ein g 's u n law fu l
retaliatin g against its w orkers w ho engaged in collective activity b y m ovin g part o f th eir w o rk o n
th e n ew 787 D ream lin er to an o th er state. B o ein g p u b licly ad m itted th at its p rim ary m o tive w as
Y esterday, in an unprecedented attack on a federal law enforcem ent agency, B oeing's top
law yer sent a 10-page pu blic rant to the agency, attackin g and d em anding that the agency's law
m ake their defenses at a legal hearing, w hich has already been scheduled, and do not seek to take
T h en , ten U .S . S en ato rs frien d ly to B o ein g 's an ti-w o rker m essag e ch allen g ed th e ch ief
agen cy w ith n o ties to organ ized lab or, is u p for con firm ation in th e U .S . S en ate later th is year.
" In m y 28 years of practicing labor law , I have never seen an em ployer use these types of
o vertly p o litical tactics to avo id a leg al p ro ceed in g ," said D avid C am p b ell, IA M D istrict 751
law yer. "R ath er th an face th e m u sic at th e Ju n e 14 h earin g , th e B o ein g C o m p an y is ap p aren tly
tryin g to kill the case po litically. This tactic show s all too clearly how d esperate the C om p any is
Th e N LR B 's case again st B oeing rests upon B o eing's ow n adm issions that it so ught to
avo id law fu l co llective activity in W ash in g to n state. W h ile B o ein g claim s th at it is free to take
NLRB-FOIA-00009202
w hatever action it thinks m ay be necessary to avoid collective bargaining and strike activity, that
is sim ply not the law . Just as the law prohibits discrim ination against w histleblow ers or w orkers
w ho take fam ily leave, A m erica's law s protect w orkers w ho engage in collective activity.
can retaliate against w orkers w ho exercise rights that are protected by law , then those rights w ill
G eneral C ounsel review ed this case for a year, found convincing m erit, and issued a com plaint.
T he hearing should continue according to its rules like any law enforcem ent process.
If, as B o ein g claim s, th e case is friv o lo u s, it w ill h av e th e o p p o rtu n ity to p resen t its
the N ational L abor R elations B oard. If it is still unsatisfied, it can appeal to the federal courts.
In stead o f fo llo w in g th e ru le o f law , B o ein g is u sin g its trem en d o u s p o litical clo u t to try
in corrupt nations w here m oney not the law rules, but should not here in A m erica.
##
NLRB-FOIA-00009203
N ikki H aley: O bam a's Silence on B oeing Is U nacceptable - W SJ.com #printM ode
Page 1 of 2
1E : D ow Jones R eprints: T his copy is for your personal. non-com m ercial use only. T o oilier presentation ready copies for distribution to your colieagues. clients or custom ers, use the
THEWALLSTREETJOURNAL.
M im i*
O P IN IO N
A P R IL 29. 2011
The president's appointees have m oved to block the com pany from building planes in m y state.H e ow es us an
explanation.
B y N IK K I H A L E Y
In O ctober 2009, B oeing, long one of the best corporations in A m erica, m ade an announcem ent that changed the
econom ic outlook of South C arolina forever: T he com pany's second line of 787 D ream liners w ould be produced in
N orth C harleston.
In choosing to m anufacture in m y state,B oeing w as exercising its right as a free enterprise in a free nation to conduct
business w herever it believed w ould best serve both the bottom line and the em ployees of its com pany.T his is not a
B oeing has since poured billions of dollars into a new ,state-of-the art
A tlantic coast.It has created thousands of good jobs and joined the
that have found a hom e, and a partner,in the Palm etto State.
planes.
(2/24/201.1)
84
(7/18/2010)
clients w ho w ill see D ream liners rolling off the N orth C harleston line
at the rate of 10 a m onth,starting w ith the first one next year.B ut,as
is often the case,a w in for people and businesses is a loss for the labor
to stay afloat.
South C arolina is a right-to-w ork state, and w e're proud that w ithin
betw een our com panies and our em ployees. W e don't w ant them
forcefully inserted into our prom ising business clim ate.A nd w e w ill
T hat is apparently too m uch for President O bam a and his union-beholden appointees at the N ational L abor R elations
B oard,w ho have asked the courts to intervene and force B oeing to stop production in South C arolina.T he N L R B w ants
B oeing to produce the planes only in W ashington state,w here its w orkers m ust belong to the International A ssociation
L et's be clear: B oeing is a great corporate citizen in W ashington and in South C arolina.T he com pany chose to com e to
N ikkiH aley:O bam a's Silence on B oeing Is U nacceptable - W SJ.com #printM ode
Page 2 of 2
our state because the costof doing business is low ,our job training and w ork force are strong,and our ports are
trem endous.T he fact that w e are a right-to-w ork state is an added bonus.
O bam a's silence is not acceptable notto m e,and certainly notto the
the greatest econom ic developm ent success our state has seen in
A FP /G etty Im ages
state.
T he nation deserves an explanation as to w hy the president's appointees are doing the m achinist union's dirty w ork on
T his copy is for your personal, non-com m ercialuse only. D istribution and use of this m aterialare governed by our S ubscriber A greem ent and by copyright
law . F or non-personaluse or to order m ultiple copies, please contact D ow Jones R eprints at 1-800-843-0008 or visit
w w w .djreprints.com
In te rn a tio n a l N e w s
& P re ss R e le a se s
1::...)
Page 1 of 4
E A sgtifid.2 pusonaiizath,
A d s b y G o o g le
N LR B
U nion
D oing
C harleston S C M ap
0 El
B o e in g to F ig h t N L R B C o m p la in t B a c k e d b y U n io n
ions:
..:justfort1-.1:!
ublic se cto l
Vt.norp:.
r>
T h e B o e in g C o m p a n y sa id it w ill vig o ro u sly
co n te st a co m p la in t b ro u g h t b e fo re th e
N a tio n a l L a b o r R e la tio n s B o a rd (N L R B )
to d a y b y th e le a d e rsh ip o f th e In te rn a tio n a l
a n d se e ks to fo rce B o e in g to p la ce its
s e c o n d 7 8 7 fin a l a s s e m b ly lin e in P u g e t
N L R B a n d S u p re m e C o u rt p re ce d e n t," sa id
h a s e ve ry rig h t u n d e r b o th fe d e ra l la w a n d
ca
p
a
ci
ty
o
u
tsi
d
e
o
f
th
e
P
u
g
e
t
S
o
u n d re g io n ."
a d d itio n a l U .S . p ro d u c tio n
th e
3M
http://en.asturi.as/noticias/46877/boeing_fight_nlrb_com plaint_backed_by_union/
5/9/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009206
Page 2 of 4
co m p an y an n o u n ced p lan s to exp an d its m an u factu rin g cap acity in th e U n ited S tates in S o u th
P rio r to th at d ecisio n , B o ein g h eld exten sive d iscu ssio n s w ith th e IA M o ver th e p o ten tial p lacem en t o f
co m p etitiven ess in th e in creasin g ly co m p etitive g lo b al m arket fo r larg e co m m ercial airp lan es.
L u ttig said B o ein g w as co n fid en t th at th e claim w o u ld b e rejected b y th e fed eral co u rts. H e also
"W e fu lly exp ect to co m p lete o u r n ew state-o f-th e-art facility in S o u th C aro lin a in th e w eeks ah ead ,
an d w e w ill b e p ro d u cin g 787s ? A m erica's n ext g reat exp o rt ? fro m o u r facto ries in b o th P u g et S o u n d
C ontact:
T im N eale, 703-465-3220
S O U R C E B oeing
S h a re : a P a
N e w s fro m - 2 0 1 1 -0 4 -2 0 1 9 :4 8 :0 2 S e ctio n : U S A .
C o m m en ts
B e th e fir s t to :cortirneht.(,
A d d y o u r co m m e n t
Y our nam e
C om m ent
e n s .r . 1 6 1 1 -k I
http://en.asturi.as/noticias/46877/boeing_fight_nlrb_com plaint_backed_by_union/
5/9/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009207
Page 1 of 2
The airplane-m aker's vice president and generalm anager of supply chain m anagem ent and
operations said Thursday that Boeing's and the state's efforts to train w orkers here w ill"m ake
By D anielBrock
A Boeing C o.executive said Thursday that the com pany plans to m ake its S .C .operations the "cornerstone" of
R ay C onner,vice president and generalm anager of supply chain m anagem ent and
operations for the plane-m aker,said that Boeing's and the state's efforts to train w orkers
here w illeventually "m ake S outh C arolina one of the great,great aerospace regions in the
w orld."
C onner's com m ents,during a speech at the S .C .C ham ber of C om m erce's 31st annual
sum m it at the W ild D unes R esort,seem ed to support talk am ong industry experts w ho say
C onner,an industry veteran w ho started w ith Boeing in 1977 as a m echanic he describes him self as a "Boeing
"W hen Iw as first given the assignm ent," he said,"Iw as really excited about the opportunity to have a role in
creating a new Boeing,and that's really w hat w e're doing here,w e're creating a new Boeing."
11/18/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00009208
Page 2 of 2
That sentim ent w illcom e into focus over the next severalm onths,as Boeing com pletes its 787 D ream liner plant
in N orth C harleston and production begins in July 2011.The first w ide-body jets are scheduled to rollout of the
W hen the line is fully operational,three planes w illbe churned out each m onth.
"For the last 94 years,our com pany has been Seattle's m ost recognizable," C onner said."A nd every airplane,
every com m ercialairplane,that w e have delivered has com e out of one our hangars on the Puget Sound.In early
A lthough the first D ream liners from that Puget Sound ,plant,in Everett,W ash. are supposed to be delivered
in M arch,a fire aboard a test flight M onday has indefinitely halted the testing program w hile the com pany
investigates.
Boeing officials said thata pow er controlpanelfailure led to an insulation fire thatcaused "significant" dam age to
the panel.Further inspection w illtake severaldays.It rem ains unclear w hether significant dam age w as done to
any adjacent structure or system s,or w hether the incident w illcause delivery delays,officials said.
"W e justhad a slightlittle m ishap the other day," C onner said during his speech."That's w hy w e flight-test,right?"
Boeing lost eight 787 sales this w eek,yet C onner said that 30% to 40% of the com pany's $321 billion backlog is
tied to the new plane,w hich is three years behind schedule after num erous setbacks.
A s for the w ork force in South C arolina,C onner said that som eone w ho starts as a new hire at the N orth
C harleston plant could one day run it or assum e an even larger role w ith Boeing.
"Ithappens," he said.
P rint
11/18/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00009209
rH O M
E P A G E
EE_ Ix _
I
T O D A Y 'S P A P E R L V ID E O 1
M O ST P O P U L A R I T IM E S T O P IC S
4 1 I:_
inn
Page 1 of 4
. .
B u s in e s s D a y
1 N G D IR E C T
.
'W O R L D U .S . :N .Y . / R E G IO N I B U SIN E SS T E C H N O L O G Y SC IE N C E
H E A L T H S P O R T S O P IN IO N A R T S ' S T Y L E T R A V E L J O B S R E A L
EstATg.
ii,A U T O S
S eaton ;
G lo b a l I D e a lB o o k I M a rk e ts I E c o n o m y E n e rg y I M e d li P e rs o n a l T e c h
Y our M o n ey . :.
sm aii:B usoesk.
B oeing 787
The B oein g 787 D ream liner that m ade an em ergency landing at Laredo International A irport in Texas
By C H R IST O P H E R D R E W
El
RECO M M END
T W IT T E R
C S IG N IN T O E .
M A IL
IR P R IN T
A d d to P o rtfo lio
B oeing C o
R olls-R oyce P lc
E l C red it Su isse G ro u p A .G
G o to your Portfolio a
787 by February.
le i R E P R IN T S
.
.
SN A R E
crIO M
ACADEM Y AW AR00
T he plane,the first passenger jet m ade substantially w ith lightw eight carbon
com posites that are supposed to greatly cut fuelcosts,is already running
nearly three years late.A nd given other recent problem s w ith suppliers and a
test engine,som e analysts said,B oeing m ight be able to deliver only about tw o
W h a t's P o p u la r N o w
III
11/16/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00009210
Page 2 of4
m ore.
E ven if the fire had not occurred on the test plane,"there w ould stillbe
B oeing said W ednesday that it w as evaluating w hat had gone w rong on the
test flight and had suspended flights for its six test planes.
B oeing has been counting heavily on the D ream liner,w hich has attracted
m ore advance orders 847 than any plane in history.Its shares fell3.2
B oeing said in a statem ent that it appeared that a pow er controlpanelin the
electronics com partm ent w ould need to be replaced,and other repairs m ight
be necessary.It said it w ould take severaldays to analyze data from the test
E -M A IL E D S L O G G E D I
V IE W E D ierity of the problem .B oeing added that it "cannot
the D ream liner save fuel,that could require m ore tim e-consum ing changes.
B oeing's far-flung supply netw ork.C om pany executives have acknow ledged
that they farm ed out too m uch design and production w ork and did not
B ut even though they have m ade an all-out push to m eet their latest delivery
schedule,m ore problem s have cropped up over the last severalm onths.
6.
A s Studios C utB ack,Investors See O pening
7.
B ucks:3 C reditC ards W ithoutForeign
Exchange Fees
! 8.
V oices of Foreclosure Speak D aily A bout
A R olls-R oyce engine m eant to be used in one of the 787 test planes failed in a
!
test plant in B ritain in A ugust,spew ing out debris.
B oeing cited that engine problem in saying it w ould push back delivery of the
first D ream liner for the fifth tim e,from late this year to February 2011. R olls-
R oyce has said it is confident it can fix the engine by that date."
B onds
Joblessness
R olls-R oyce also said this w eek that the problem on the engine for B oeing did
not seem to be related to the failure last w eek of another R olls-R oyce engine
on an A irbus A 38o jum bo jet.T hat engine jettisoned debris w hile the plane,
11/16/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00009211
Page 3 of 4
Boeing has had to tellsuppliers around the w orld to haltparts deliveries three
A lenia and other suppliers forced Boeing to rew ork m any parts,further
ready to deliver the firstD ream liner before the second quarter of 2011. R obert
planes thatitw ould be hard pressed to deliver m ore than 27 planes nextyear.
I earlier this w eek thatBoeing executives told him on M onday thatassem bly of
m any ofthe first30 aircraftw ould take longer than expected.M r.Stallard
planes,and the dem and for new planes is strong as airlines em erge from the
recession.
E l S IG N IN T O E -
M AIL
la P R IN T
alk I
R E PR IN T S
B oeing C o
i IN S ID E N Y T IM E S .C O M
B O O K S a
! N .Y .! R E G IO N
O PIN IO N
1 SPO R T S s
L41.
1 O PIN IO N I
ISC IE N C E I
O p-Ed:Left,
11/16/2010
NLRB-FOIA-00009212
524
D E C IS IO N S O F T H E N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
tional U nion,A F L -C IO
C IO .
C a se s 7 -C A -4 0 7 5 9 , 7 -C A -4 0 9 4 3 , a n d 7 -
C A -4 0 9 4 4
Jan u ary 2 1 , 2 0 0 0
O R D E R D E N Y IN G M O T IO N S
B Y C H A IR M A N T R U E S D A L E A N D M E M B E R S FO X
A N D H U R TG EN
O n Ju ly 1 9 , 1 9 9 9 , in C a se s 7 -C A -4 0 7 5 9 , 7 -C A -
4 0 9 4 3 , a n d 7 -C A -4 0 9 4 4 , th e G e n e ra l C o u n se l o f th e
sp o n d en ts.
C o u n se l file d a re sp o n se .
O n Ju ly 1 3 , 1 9 9 5 , six u n io n s re p re se n tin g a p p ro x i-
N ew sp ap er A g en cy (D N A ), th e D etro it N ew s, an d th e
1 9 9 7 , w h en th e u n io n s m ad e an u n co n d itio n al o ffer to
B e tw e e n Ja n u a ry 2 4 , 1 9 9 6 , a n d O c to b e r 6 , 1 9 9 7 , th e
17, 1999,
th e c o u rse o f th e h e a rin g in th e fo re g o in g p ro c e e d in g
n o tin g th a t th e re h a d a lre a d y b e e n n u m e ro u s a m e n d -
d id n o t p a ss o n w h e th e r th e a lle g a tio n s so u g h t to b e
(1 9 8 8 ).
330 N L R B N o.81
NLRB-FOIA-00009213
D E T R O IT N E W S P A P E R S
B oard w ill look at w hether the otherw ise untim ely alle-
trict court seeking to enjoin the prosecution ol'the instant unfair labor
of the instant com plaint and notice of hearing is contrary, to the ex-
the district court issued an order canceling the injunction hearing and
abeyance until the B oard had m ade its determ ination concerning juris-
d ic tio n .
5 S ec. 10(b) provides in pertinent part that "no com plaint shall issue
based upon any unfair labor practice occurring m ore than six m onths
prior to the filing, of the charge w ith the B oard and the service of a copy
thereof upon the person against w hom such charge is m ade ...."
I0(b). T he S uprem e C ourt has held that the B oard can issue com plaints
as those set up in the charge" and that S ec. I0(b) does not preclude the
B oard from "dealing adequately w ith unfair labor practices w hich are
related to those alleged in the charge and w hich grow out of them w hile
.
to r. In c. (W a rre n ) v. N L R B ,
145 F .3d 834, 844 (6th C ir. 1998); F P C
525
nam ely that the discharges w ere all law fully based on
38079 etal.
1 7 0 v. N L R B , 9 9 3 F .2 d 9 9 0 (1 st C ir. 1 9 9 3 ); an d N L R B v. O ve rn ite
com plaint violates the policy against piecem eal litigation, w e also reject
the G eneral C ounsel, accepts all factual allegations as true, and deter-
m ines w hether the G eneral C ounsel can prove an set of facts in sup-
M otions for dism issal, how ever, does not preclude the R espondents
from raising their 10(b) argum ents betbre the adm inistrative law judge
that both the allegations of the instant com plaint and the underlying
R oss S tores, the com plaint allegations at issue'involve the sam e sec-
tions of the A ct as the tim ely filed charges as w ell as the sam e types of
duct). F or these reasons, and those set forth above, M em ber H urtgen
agrees that the R espondents have not established, at this juncture, that
NLRB-FOIA-00009214
526
D EC ISIO N S O F TH E N A TIO N A L
LA B O R R ELA TIO N S B O A R D
N L R B 1 2 2 5 , 1 2 2 6 (1 9 9 7 ). S u ch a ru le w o u ld im p ro p erly
o f a ch arg e.
H a rriso n S te e l C a stin g s C o .,
2 5 5 N L R B
S e rv ic e E m p lo y e e s L o c a l 8 7
in d iffe re n t c a se s.
(1 9 7 2 ), an d
P e yto n P a ckin g C o .,
1 2 9 N L R B 1 3 5 8
previously litigated.
instant com plaint w ill result in undue delay and prejudice to the R e-
M arem outo C orp., 249 N L R B 216,217 (1980).W e also note the G en-
eral C ounsel's assertion that the R espondents have know n about the
M arch 1998 w hen the U nions requested the R egion to review additional
obtain those docum ents through enforcem ent rem edies,the disparate
c o p y o f th e a m e n d e d c h a rg e in C a se 7 -C A -4 0 7 5 9 ,
9 th e R e g io n a l O ffic e se rv e d a n o th e r c o p y o f th e
in ch arg e n u m b ers 7 -C A -4 0 7 5 9 , 7 -C A -4 0 9 4 4 an d 7 -
C A -4 0 9 4 3 ."
In su m , w e fin d th at th e R esp o n d en ts h av e n o t d em o n -
O R DER
C A -4 0 9 4 3 , an d 7 -C A -4 0 9 4 4 are rem an d ed to th e R e-
O rder.
tees:51 alleged discrim inatees listed on the attachm entto the original
NLRB-FOIA-00009215
(AA /11,Tefiukt-sUAPS
3001010
NLRB-FOIA-00009216
Page 1 of 9
78 S.C t.99
3 5 5 U .S . 4 1 , 7 8 S .C t. 9 9 , 4 1 L .R .R .M . (B N A ) 2 0 8 9 , 9 F a ir E m p l.P ra c.C a s. (B N A ) 4 3 9 , 1
E m p l. P ra c. D ec. P 9 6 5 6 , 2 L .E d .2 d 8 0 , 3 3 L a b .C a s. P 7 1 ,0 7 7
V .
N o. 7.
A rg u ed O ct. 2 1 , 1 9 5 7 .
D ecid ed N o v . 1 8 ,1 .9 5 7 .
A p p eals for th e F ifth C ircu it, 229 F .2d 436, affirm ed . T h e p lain tiffs b rou gh t certiorari.
T h e S u p rem e C ou rt, M r. Ju stice B lack , h eld th at com p lain t, filed b y N egro railw ay
[1]
c--231H . L ab or an d E m p loym en t
c-231H X II L ab or R elation s
R ep resen tation
[2] 'L .!) K eyC ite C itin g R eferen ces for th is H ead n ote
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?m t=L a.borA ndE m ploym ent& utid= 1& ... 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009217
Page 2 of 9
78 S.C t.99
.o-170B k 459 k . L ab or relation s an d stan d ard s; em p loyers' liab ility. M ost C ited
C ases
W h ere case raised an im p ortan t q u estion con cern in g p rotection of em p loyee righ ts
et seq . a s a m en d ed 4 5 U .S .C .A . 1 5 1 et seq .
[.3
v-231H L ab or an d E m p loym en t
statu tory righ t n ot to b e u n fairly d iscrim in ated again st b y agen t in b argain in g in volved
L ab or A ct, givin g ju risd iction to railroad ad ju stm en t b oard in d isp u te b etw een
U .S.C .A
1 5 3 , su b d . 1 (i).
1H L ab or an d E m p loym en t
R ep resen tation
In action b y N egro railw ay em p loyees again st th eir railw ay u n ion to en force th eir
statu tory righ t n ot to b e u n law fu lly d iscrim in ated again st b y th e u n ion in b argain in g,
4 5 U .S .C .A . 1 5 1 et seq .
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?m t=LaborA ndEm ploym ent& utid=1& ..
.6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009218
78 S.C t.99
Page 3 of 9
A com p lain t sh ou ld n ot b e d ism issed for failu re to state a claim u n less it ap p ears
b eyon d d ou b t th at th e p lain tiff can p rove n o set of facts in su p p ort of h is claim w h ich
c-231H L ab or an d E m p loym en t
t.,..231H X II L ab or R elation s
R ep resen tation
(..-2311-1k 1219
A ction s for B reach of D u ty
C om p lain t, filed b y N egro railw ay em p loyees again st th eir u n ion , su fficien tly alleged
b reach of u n ion 's statu tory d u ty to rep resen t fairly an d w ith ou t h ostile d iscrim in ation
u n ion fair n otice of its b asis. F ed .R u les C iv.P roc. ru le 8(.a) (2), 28 U .S .C .A .
[7 ] 1
K eyC ite C itin g R eferen ces for th is H ead n ote
r.231H X II L ab or R elation s
R ep resen tation
'
[8]
c-231H L ab or an d E m p loym en t
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?m t=L aborA ndE m ploym ent& utid=1& ..
. 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009219
78 S .C t.99
P age 4 of9
:--2 3 1 H X II L a b o r R e la tio n s
R epresentation
c7 = 2 3 1 H k1 2 0 9 (1 ) k. In g e n e ra l. M o st C ite d C a se s
(F o rm e rly 2 3 2 A k2 1 9 L a b o r R e la tio n s)
N e g ro m e m b e rs o f u n io n . R a ilw a y L a b o r A ct, 1 e t se q . a s a m e n d e d 4 5 U .S .C .A . 1 5 1
et seq.
[9]
K e yC ite C itin g R e fe re n ce s fo r th is H e a d n o te
(.2 3 1 H X II L a b o r R e la tio n s
R e p re se n ta tio n
c-2 3 1 H k1 2 0 9 (1 ) k. In g e n e ra l. M o st C ite d C a se s
(F o rm e rly 2 3 2 A k2 1 9 L a b o r R e la tio n s)
e m p lo ye e s ju st b e ca u se th e y a re N e g ro e s. R a ilw a y L a b o r A ct, 1 e t se q . a s. a m e n d e d
4 5 U .S .C .A . 1 5 1 e t se q .
[10]
K e yC ite C itin g R e fe re n ce s fo r th is H e a d n o te
c--1 7
0 A F e d e ra l C ivil P ro ce d u re
c-1 7 0 A V II P le a d in g s a n d M o tio n s
0 A V II(A ). P le a d in g s in G e n e ra l
<,.,,1 7 0 A k6 2 3 k. N a tu re a n d p u rp o se . M o st C ite d C a se s
U n d e r th e fe d e ra l ru le s, th e p u rp o se o f p le a d in g is to fa cilita te a p ro p e r d e cisio n o n
U .S .C .A .
M r. E d w a rd J. H icke y, Jr., W a sh in g to n , D .C ., fo r re sp o n d e n t.
https://w eb2.w est1aw .com /resu1t/docum enttext.aspx?m t=LaborA ndE m pl0ym ent& utid=1& ..
. 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009220
Page 5 of 9
78 S.C t..99
of cases b egin n in g w ith S teele v. L ou isville & N ash ville R . C o., 323 U .S . 192, 65
discrim ination .F 2
FN 1. 4 4 S ta t. 5 7 7 , a s a m en d ed , 4 5 U .S .C . s 1 5 1 et seq ., 4 5 U .S .C .A . s 1 5 1
et seq ,
FN 2. T u n stall v. B roth erh ood of L ocom otive F irem en & E n gin em en , 323 U .S .
210,._65
2 3 2 , 7 0 S .C t. 1 4 ,9 4 L .E d . 22; B rotherhood
...
8 9 2 , 7 6 S .C t. 1 5 2 , 1 0 0 L .E d . 7 8 5 .
m em b ers of th e B roth erh ood of R ailw ay an d S team sh ip C lerk s, p etition ers h ere, on
b eh alf of th em selves an d oth er N egro em p loyees sim ilarly situ ated again st th e
B roth erh ood , its L ocal U n ion N o. 28 an d certain officers of b oth . In su m m ary, th e
com p lain t *4 3 m ad e th e follow iiig allegation s relevan t to ou r d ecision : P etition ers w ere
A ct for th e b argain in g u n it to w h ich p etition ers b elon ged . A con tract existed b etw een
p rotection from d isch arge an d loss of sen iority. In M ay 1954, th e R ailroad p u rp orted to
ab olish 45 job s h eld b y p etition ers or oth er N egroes all of w h om w ere eith er d isch arged
as th e N egroes w ere ou sted , excep t for a few in stan ces w h ere N egroes w ere reh ired to
fill th eir old job s b u t w ith loss of sen iority. D esp ite rep eated p leas b y p etition ers, th e
d iscrim in atory d isch arges an d refu sed to give th em p rotection com p arab le to th at given
gen eral to rep resen t N egro em p loyees **1 0 / eq u ally an d in good faith . It ch arged
th at su ch d iscrim in ation con stitu ted a violation of p etition ers' righ t u n d er th e R ailw ay
L ab or A ct to fair rep resen tation from th eir b argain in g agen t. A n d it con clu d ed b y ask in g
grou n d s: (1) th e N ation al R ailroad A d ju stm en t B oard h ad exclu sive ju risd iction over
w as an in d isp en sab le p arty d efen d an t; an d (3) th e com p lain t failed to state a claim
u p on w h ich relief cou ld b e given . T h e D istrict C ou rt gran ted th e m otion to d ism iss
h old in g th at C on gress h ad given th e A d ju stm en t B oard exclu sive ju risd iction over
*4 4
th e con troversy. T h e C ou rt of A p p eals for th e F ifth C ircu it, ap p aren tly relyin g on th e
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /resu1t/docum enttext.aspx?m t=L aborA ndE m pl0ym ent& utid=1& ..
. 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009221
Page 6 of 9
78 S.C t.99
[3]
W e h o ld th at it w as erro r fo r th e co u rts b elo w to d ism iss th e co m p lain t fo r
"
co n ferred exclu sive ju risd ictio n o n th e A d ju stm en t B o ard b ecau se th e case,in th eir
ag reem en t. B u t s 3 F irst (i) b y its o w n term s ap p lies o n ly to 'd isp u tes b etw een an
d iscrim in atio n . F u rth erm o re,th e co n tract b etw een th e B ro th erh o o d an d th e R ailro ad
w ill b e,at m o st,o n ly in cid en tally in vo lved in reso lvin g th is co n tro versy b etw een
F N 3. In fu ll,s 3 F irst (i) read s:'T h e d isp u tes b etw een an em p lo yee o r g ro u p
ho w the **1 0 2 R ailro ad 's rig h ts o r in terests w ill b e affected b y th is actio n to en fo rce '
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?m t=L aborA ndE m ploym ent& utid=1& ..
. 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009222
78 S.C t.99
Page 7 of 9
th e d u ty o f th e b arg ain in g rep resen tative to rep resen t p etitio n ers fairly. T h is is n o t a
n o p ro sp ect th at an y w ill o r can b e g ran ted w h ich w ill b in d it. If an issu e d o es d evelo p
[5]
[6] :-...4[7] 2.1 T u rn in g to resp o n d en ts'fin al g ro u n d ,W e h o ld th at u n d er th e
g en eral p rin cip les laid d o w n in th e S teele,G rah am ,an d H o w ard cases th e co m p lain t
h im to relief.FN5 H ere,th e co m p lain t alleg ed ,in p art,th at p etitio n ers w ere d isch arg ed
g rievan ces all b ecau se th ey w ere N eg ro es. If th ese alleg atio n s are p ro ven th ere h as
h eld in S teele an d su b seq u en t cases th at d iscrim in atio n in rep resen tatio n b ecau se o f
rep resen tative can n o m o re u n fairly d iscrim in ate in carryin g o u t th ese fu n ctio n s th an it
its face yet ad m in istered in su ch a w ay,w ith th e active o r tacit co n sen t o f th e u n io n ,as
to b e flag ran tly d iscrim in ato ry ag ain st so m e m em b ers o f th e b arg ain in g u n it.
S ee,e.g .,L eim er v. S tate M u tu al L ife A ssu r. C o ..,8 C ir.,108 F .2d 302;.
232.
A .L .R . 1165.
[a]Z[9]
*4 7
ag g rieved em p lo yees can file th eir o w n g rievan ces w ith th e A d ju stm en t B o ard o r su e
th e em p lo yer fo r b reach o f co n tract. G ran tin g th is,it still fu rn ish es n o san ctio n fo r th e
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.asPx?m t=L aborA ndE m ploym ent& utid=1& ..
. 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009223
Page 8 of 9
78 S.C t.99
U n io n 's alleg ed d iscrim in atio n in refu sin g to rep resen t p etitio n ers. T h e R ailw ay L ab o r
rep resen tative in n eg o tiatin g w ith th e em p lo yer o r in p resen tin g th eir g rievan ces to
[10] 1...4 T h e resp o n d en ts also arg u e th at th e co m p lain t failed to set fo rth sp ecific
facts to su p p o rt its g en eral alleg atro n s o f d iscrim in atio n an d th at its d ism issal is
claim 'F-N 5 th at w ill g ive th e d efen d an t fair n o tice o f w h at th e p lain tiff's claim is an d th e
d em o n strate th is. S u ch sim p lified 'n o tice p lead in g 'is m ad e p o ssib le b y th e lib eral
d
o
su b stan tial ju stice,' w e h ave n o d o u b t th at
t
o
'all p lead in g s sh all b e so co n stru ed as
p etitio n ers'co m p lain t ad eq u ately set fo rth a claim an d g ave th e resp o n d en ts fair n o tice
,F
"
F N 8_. R u le 8(a)(2),28 U .S .C .A .
It is so o rd ered .
U .S . 1957.
C O N L E Y v. G IB S O N
https://w eb2.w est1aw .com /resu1t/docum enttext.aspx?m t=LaborA ndEm pl0ym ent8cutid=1& ..
.6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009224
1.1110/S.10.
195/1= p9n7puoutiC oidtuH puvioqul.nui,xdspixanuoulnooppinsaytuon
AC1 /M
0 f1
III
d iscu ss th e an titru st p rin cip les im p licated b y th e com p lain t. H ere' too w e b egin b y
" reco g n ized fo r th e first tim e a n im p lied p riv a te a ctio n fo r d a m a g es a g a in st fed era l
B eca u se im p lied ca u ses o f a ctio n a re d isfa v o red , th e C o u rt h a s b een relu cta n tto
exten d B ive n s liab ility " to an y n ew con text or n ew ca teg o ry o f d efen d a n ts." 5 3 4 U .S .,
a t 6 8 , 12 2 S .C t. 5 15 . S ee a lso W ilkie , 5 5 1 U .S ., a t 5 4 9 -5 5 0 , 12 7 S .C t. 2 5 8 8 . T h a t
relu cta n ce m ig h t w ell h a v e d isp o sed o f resp o n d en t's F irst A m en d m en t cla im o f relig io u s
d iscrim in ation . F or w h ile w e h ave allow ed a B ive n s a ctio n to red ress a v io la tio n o f th e
re sp o n d e a t su p e rio r. Iq b a l b rief 4 6 (" [I]t is u n d isp u ted th a t su p erv iso ry & y e n s liability
(1978) (fin d in g n o vicariou s liab ility for a m u n icip al " p erson " u n d er 42 U .S .C .- 1983);
s)Y8g es% sn A 9 /5 V IR M -d e rtn sr0 1121f9 A 9 , 3 L .E d . 329 (.1812 ) (a fed eral official's
liab ility " w ill on ly resu lt from h is ow n n eglect in n ot p rop erly su p erin ten d in ggye .-7.--w 6 -
S.C t.1286,3 L .E d.203 (1888) ("A public offi& eistottuladjathrvg/M R F iV iptA tithW arls@ P Itifit110P v
B ive n s an d 1 .
d efen d an t, th rO u gl1S glofgial3sn seyviaq irtgiN id u alA zq p (p p liip arip p ialtivi)ttigsgartgh ttgA rt.
(L S6T
'O ) 1IV ellIIN eff1lieC E 4galr1tt9IN R O W -1& grW E IsU R b itItk 3llA k iq 9.9iiii O It L S 6T
con stitu tion al p rovision at issu e. W h ere th e claim is in vid iou s d iscrim in ation in
con traven tion of th e F irst an d F ifth A i.fiR ek A tiM ,)N R IK IN S A P P A 11411cIN K ttilitetIk taP 9
p lain tiff m u st p lead an d p rove th at th e d efen d an t acted w ith d iscrim in atory p u rp ose.
W e , '044:9
61iR IA :A db2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?ss=C N T & m t=L aborA ndE m ploym ent...666W 294 1
NLRB-FOIA-00009225
ii9 w o i4 iT t.p p rryluaubcoldw g puw ocigl.m ii,xdsi.ioloojm a!A aidpinsayam o.m upsam .rogne25(0
4itibsftb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?ss=C N T & m t=L aborA ndE m ploym ent..
. 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009226
Page 3 of 6
p lead s facts th at are "m erely co n sisten t w ith " a d efen d an t's liab ility, it "sto p s sh o rt
o f th e lin e b etw een p o ssib ility an d p lau sib ility o f 'en titlem en t to relief.'"
Id ., at 557,
leg al co n clu sio n s. T h read b are recitals o f th e elem en ts o f a cau se o f actio n , su p p o rted
co u ch ed as a factu al alleg atio n " (in tern al q u o tatio n m arks o m itted )). R u le 8 m arks a
ju d icial exp erien ce an d co m m o n sen se. 490F .3d , at 157-158. B u t w h ere th e w ell-
(2)-.
n o t en titled to th e assu m p tio n .o f tru th . W h ile leg al co n clu sio n s can p ro vid e th e
C o p p e rw e ld C o rp . v. In d e rie n d e n ce T u b e C o rp ., 4 6 7 U .S . 7 5 2 , 7 7 5 ,._ 10 4 S .C t. 2 7 3 1, 8 1
L .E d .2d 628 (1984), th e p lain tiffs in T vvom bly flatly p lead ed th at th e d efen d an ts h a[d ]
en tered in to a co n tract, com b in ation or con sp iracy to p reven t com p etitive en try ...
and
(in tern al q u o tatio n m arks o m itted ). T h e co m p lain t also alleg ed th at th e d efen d an ts'
"p arallel co u rse o f co n d u ct ... to p reven t co m p etitio n " an d in flate p rices w as in d icative
n o ted th at th e p lain tiffs' assertio n o f an u n law fu l ag reem en t w as a "'leg al co n clu sio n ' "
ad d ressed th e "n u b " o f th e p lain tiffs'co m p lain t-th e w ell-p lead ed , n o n co n clu so ry factu al
alleg atio n o f p arallel b eh avio r-to d eterm in e w h eth er it g ave rise to a "p lau sib le
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?ss=C N T & m t=L aborA ndE m ploym ent..
. 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009227
Page 4 of 6
com p atib le w ith , b u t in d eed w as m ore lik ely exp lain ed b y, law fu l, u n ch oreograp h ed
free-m ark et b eh avior. Id ., at 567 127 S .C t. 1955. B ecau se th e w ell-p lead ed fact of
p arallel con d u ct, accep ted as tru e, d id n ot p lau sib ly su ggest an u n law fu l agreem en t,
[14]
U nder T w o m b ly 's con stru ction of R u le 8, w e con clu d e th at resp on d en t's
com p lain t *1951 h as n ot " n u d ged [h is] claim s" of in vid iou s d iscrim in ation " across th e
en titled to th e assu m p tion of tru th . R esp on d en t p lead s th at p etition ers " k n ew of,
con d on ed , an d w illfu lly an d m aliciou sly agreed to su b ject [h im ]" to h arsh coh d ition s of
con fin em en t " as a m atter of p olicy, solely on accou n t of [h is] religion , race, an d /or
for C ert. 173a-174a. T h e com p lain t alleges th at A sh croft w as th e " p rin cip al arch itect"
ad op tin g an d execu tin g it, id.,11 11, at 157a. T h ese b are a ssertion s, m u ch lik e th e
p lead in g of con sp iracy in T w o m b ly, am ou n t:to n oth in g m ore th an a " form u laic
recitation of th e elem en ts" of a con stitu tion al d iscrim in ation claim , 550 U .S ., at 555,
127 S .C t. 1955, n arilely, th at p etition ers ad op ted a p olicy" 'b ecau se of,' n ot m erely 'in
d o n ot so ch aracterize th em an y m ore th an th e C ou rt in
T w o m b ly rejected th e
p lain tiffs' exp ress allegation of a " 'con tract, com b in ation or con sp iracy to p reven t
ch im erical to b e m ain tain ed . It is th e con clu sory n atu re of resp on d en t's allegation s,
rath er th an th eir extravagan tly fan cifu l n atu re, th at d isen titles th em to th e
W e n ext con sid er th e factu al allegation s in resp on d en t's com p lain t to d eterm in e if
th ey p lau sib ly su ggest an en titlem en t to relief. T h e com p lain t alleges th at " th e [F B I],
47, A p p . to P et. for C ert. 164a. It fu rth er claim s th at " [t]h e p olicy of h old in g p ost-
S ep tem b er-11th d etain ees in h igh ly restrictive con d ition s of con fin em en t u n til th ey
d iscu ssion s in th e w eek s after S ep tem b er 11, 2001." Id ., 11 69, at 168a. T ak en as tru e,
th ese allegation s are con sisten t W ith p etition ers' p u rp osefu lly d esign atin g d etain ees " of
h igh in terest" b ecau se of th eir race, religion , or n ation al origin . B u t given m ore lik ely
grou p . A l Q aed a w as h ead ed b y an oth er A rab M u slim -O sam a b in L ad en -an d com p osed
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?ss=C N T & m t=L aborA ndE m ploym ent..
. 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009228
Page 5 of 6
leg itim ate p o licy d irectin g law en fo rcem en t to arrest an d d etain in d ivid u als b ecau se o f
th eir su sp ected lin k to th e attacks w o u ld p ro d u ce a d isp arate, in cid en tal im p act o n A rab
M u slim s. O n th e facts resp o n d en t alleg es th e arrests M u eller o versaw w ere likely law fu l
an d ju stified b y h is n o n d iscrim in ato ry in ten t to d etain alien s w h o w ere illeg ally p resen t
terro rist acts. A s b etw een th at "o b vio u s altern ative exp lan atio n " fo r th e arrests,
resp o n d en t*1952 asks u s to in fer, d iscrim in atio n is n o t a p lau sib le co n clu sio n .
B u t even if th e co m p lain t's w ell-p lead ed facts g ive rise to a p lau sib le in feren ce th at
co m p lain t ch allen g es n eith er th e co n stitu tio n ality o f h is arrest n o r h is in itial d eten tio n
in th e M D C . R esp o n d en t's co n stitu tio n al claim s ag ain st p etitio n ers rest so lely o n th eir
th at p etitio n ers p u rp o sefu lly ad o p ted a p o licy o f classifyin g p o st-S ep tem b er-11
d etain ees as "o f h ig h in terest" b ecau se o f th eir race, relig io n , o r n atio n al o rig in .
d efen d an ts, w h o are n o t b efo re u s, m ay h ave lab eled h im a p erso n o f "o f h ig h in terest"
fo r im p erm issib le reaso n s, h is o n ly factu al alleg atio n ag ain st p etitio n ers accu ses th em
S ep tem b er-11 d etain ees u n til th ey w ere" 'cleared ' b y th e F B I." Ib id . A ccep tin g th e
vio late p etitio n ers'co n stitu tio n al o b lig atio n s. H e w o u ld n eed to alleg e m o re b y w ay o f
factu al co n ten t to "n u d g [e]" h is claim o f p u rp o sefu l d iscrim in atio n "acro ss th e lin e fro m
a t 5 7 0 , 12 7 S .C t. 19 5 5 .
T o b e su re, resp o n d en t can attem p t to d raw certain co n trasts b etw een th e p lead in g s
127 S .C t. 1955, w h ereas h ere th e co m p lain t alleg es d iscrete w ro n g s-fo r in stan ce,
b eatin g s-b y lo w er level G o vern m en t acto rs. T h e alleg atio n s h ere, if tru e, an d if
p etitio n ers'p art. D esp ite th ese d istin ctio n s, resp o n d en t's p lead in g s d o n o t su ffice to
th e co rp o rate d efen d an t, h ere, as w e h ave n o ted , p etitio n ers can n o t b e h eld liab le
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?ss=C N T 8cm t=L aborA ndE m ploym ent..
. 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009229
Page 6 of 6
sufficiency of respondent's com plaint against the defendants w ho are not before us.
R espondent's account of his prison ordeal alleges serious official m isconduct that w e
need no t ad dress here. O ur decision is lim ited to th e determ ination that resp ondent's
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?ss=C N T& m t=LaborA ndEm ploym ent.. . 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009230
....
rs,
C o n ley v . G ib so n
[7] IL I [8 ] .J [9]
T h -is
m u st p lead in ord er to state a claim u n d ell-.51196 7f.the *5 5 5 S h erm an A ct. F ed eral R u le
sh ow in g th at th e p leid eIrs en titlettto relref;" -irro-rd -er-to-" give-th e--d efen d an t fair n otice
(4 )(6 ) m o tio n to d ism iss d o es n o t n eed d eta iled fa ctu a l a lleg a tio n s,
ib id .; S an ju an v.
a s tru e a leg a l co n clu sio n co u ch ed a s a fa ctu a l a lleg a tio n " ). F a ctu a l a lleg a tio n s m u st b e
en ou g h to raise a righ t to relief ab o ve th e-sp ecu lativ e level, see 5 C . W rig h t & A . M iller,.
fa cts th a t m erely crea tes a su sp icio n [o f] a leg a lly co g n iza b le rig h t o f a ctio n " ),
FN 3 o n
5 3 4 U .S . 5 0 6 , 5 0 8 , n . 1,12 2
4
9
0 U .S . 3 19 ,3 2 7 , 10 9 S .C t.
N
ei
tzke
V
.
W
i
l
l
iam
s,
S .C t. 9 9 2 , 15 2 L .E d .2 d 1 (2 0 0 2 );
18 2 7 , 10 4 L .E d .2 d 3 3 8 (19 8 9 ) (" R u le 12 (b )(6 .) d o es n o t co u n ten a n ce ... d ism issa ls
F ed era l R u les so m eh o w d isp en sed w ith th e p lea d in g o f fa cts a lto g eth er. S ee
post, at 1979 (op in ion of S T E V E N S , I.) (p lead in g stan d ard of F ed eral R u les
(R u le 8 (a ) " co n tem p la te[s] th e sta tem en t o f circu m sta n ces, o ccu rren ces,
..
,....
[-12] I:1_
, [13 ] .., In a p p ly in g th ese g en era l sta n d a rd s to a 1 cla im , w e
h o ld th a t sta tin g )su ch a cla im req u ires a co m p la in t w ith en o u g h fa ctu a l m a tter (ta k en
sim p ly ca lls fo r en o u g h fa ct to ra ise a rea so n a b le ex p ecta tio n th a t d isco v ery w ill rev ea l
, .
Page 2 of 8
in d ep en d en t actio n .
A reed a & H o ven kam p ifi 1425,at 167-185 (d isc iu ssin g "p arallel b eh avio r th at
co n sp iracy. B rief fo r R esp o n d en ts 37; see also R ep ly B rief fo r P etitio n ers 12.
"p lain statem en t" p o ssess en o u g h h eft to "sh o [w ] th at th e p lead er is en titled to relief."
d efen d an t's co m m ercial effo rts stays in n eu tral territo ry. A n alleg atio n o f p arallel
sto p s sh o rt o f th e lin e b etw een p o ssib ility an d p lau sib ility o f "en title[m en t] to relief."
("[T ]erm s like 'co n sp iracy,' o r even 'ag reem en t,' are b o rd er-lin e: th ey m ig h t w ell b e
su fficien t in co n ju n ctio n w ith a m o re sp ecific alleg atio n -fo r exam p le,id en tifyin g a
th e factu al. H ere it lies b etw een th e factu ally n eu tral an d th e factu ally
su g g estive. E ach m u st b e cro ssed to en ter th e realm o f p lau sib le liab ility.
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.asPx?ss=C N T 8cm t=L aborA ndE m ploym ent..
. 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009232
Page 3 of 8
(2.005), w h en w e exp lain ed th at som eth in g b eyon d th e m ere p ossib ility of loss
cau sation m u st b e *5 5 8 alleged , lest a p lain tiff w ith " 'a largely grou n d less claim ' " 'b e
rep resen tin g an in terro rem in crem en t of th e settlem en t valu e.' " Id ., a t 3 4 7 , 12 5 S .C t.
cou ld n ot raise a claim of en titlem en t to relief, " 'th is b asic d eficien cy sh ou ld ... b e
th e cou rt.'" 5 W righ t & M iller 1216, at 233-234 (q u otin g D aves v. H aw aiian D red g in g
C o ., 114 F .S u .p p . 643, 645 (D .1-law aii 1953)); see also D u ra, su p ra, a t 3 4 6 , 12 5
(N .D .III.2003.) (P osn er, J., sittin g b y d esign ation ) (" [S ]om e th resh old of p lau sib ility
U .S . 4 6 4 , 4 7 3 , 8 2 S .C t. 4 8 6 , 7 L .E d .2 d 4 5 8 .(19 6 2 ), b u t q u ite a n o th er to fo rg et th a t
p roceed in g to an titru st d iscovery can b e exp en sive. A s w e in d icated over 20 years ago
103 S .C t. 897,74 L .E d .2d 723 (1983), " a d istrict cou rt m u st retain th e p ow er to in sist
con troversy to p roceed ." S ee also C ar_ C arriers, In c. v. F o rd M o to r C o ., 745 F .2d 1101,
in creasin g caseload of th e fed eral cou rts cou n sel again st sen d in g th e p arties in to
d iscovery w h en th ere is n o reason ab le lik elih ood th at th e p lain tiffs can con stru ct a
claim from th e even ts related in th e com p lain t" ); N ote, M od elin _g th e E ffect of O n e-W ay
18 8 7 ,18 9 8 :18 9 9 ...(20_03).(d iscu ssin g th e u n u su ally h igh cost of d iscovery in an titru st
exten sive scop e of d iscovery in an titru st cases); M em oran d u m from P au l V . N iem eyer,
p resen t case: p lain tiffs rep resen t a p u tative class of at least 90 p ercen t of all
su b scrib ers to local telep h on e or h igh -sp eed In tern et service in th e con tin en tal U n ited
th ou sa n d s of em p loyees gen eratin g ream s an d gig ab ytes of b u sin ess record s) for .
u n sp ecified (if an y) in stan ces of an titru st violation s th at alleged ly occu rred over a
grou n d less, b e w eed ed ou t early in th e d iscovery p rocessIh rou gh " carefu l case
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?ss=C N T & m t=L aborA ndE m ploym ent.. . 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009233
Page 4 of 8
E asterb ro o k,D isco very as A b u se,69 B .U .L .R ev. 635,638 (1989) ("Ju d g es can d o little
stag e," m u ch less "lu cid in stru ctio n s to ju ries," p o st, at 1975; th e th reat o f d isco very
th at th e [d isco very] p ro cess w ill reveal relevan t evid en ce' "to su p p o rt a 1 claim .
d isco very w o u ld b e " ' "p h ased "' "an d "lim ited to th e existen ce o f th e
trim b ack excessive d em an d s,th erefo re,h ave b een ,an d are d o o m ed to b e,
w e can n o t d efin e; w e can n o t d efin e 'ab u sive'd isco very excep t in th eo ry,
because-in p ractice w e lack essen tial in fo rm atio n ." E asterb ro o k,D isco very as
**1 9 6 8 [14] L d . P lain tiffs d o n o t,o f co u rse,d isp u te th e req u irem en t o f p lau sib ility
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?ss=C N T & m t=L aborA ndE m ploym ent..
. 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009234
Page 5 of 8
E n terp rises,
M o n sa n to , and M a tsu sh ita , an d th eir m ain argu m en t again st th e
p lau sib ility stan d ard at th e p lead in g stage is its osten sib le *5 6 1 con flict w ith an early
b u t of " th e accep ted ru le th at a com p lain t sh ou ld n ot b e d ism issed for failu re to state a
claim u n less it ap p ears b eyon d d ou b t th at th e p lain tiff can p rove n o set of facts in
a t 4 5 -4 6 ,7 8 S .C t. 9 9 .
th is " n o set of facts" lan gu age can b e read in isolation as sayin g th at an y statem en t
revealin g th e th eory of th e claim w ill su ffice u n less its factu al im p ossib ility m ay b e
stan d ard , see 425 F .3d ,.at 106, 114 (in vok in g C onley's " n o set of facts" lan gu age in
T h ea tre E n terp rises (w h ich u p h eld a d en ial of a d irected verd ict for p lain tiff
C o . v. Z en ith R a d io C o rp ., 4 7 5 U .S . 5 7 4 , 10 6 S .C t. .3 4 8 ,
9 L .E d .2d 538
action .
..
'
con clu sory statem en t of claim w ou ld su rvive a m otion to d ism iss w h en ever th e
p lead in gs left op en th e p ossib ility th at a p lain tiff m igh t later estab lish som e " set of .
fou n d th e p rosp ect of u n earth in g d irect evid en ce of con sp iracy su fficien t to p reclu d e
d ism issal, even th ou gh th e com p lain t **1 9 6 9 d oes n ot set forth a sin gle *5 6 2 fact in
S .C t. 1627 (q u otin g B lu e C h ip S ta m p s, 4 2 1 U .S ., a t 7 4 1, 9 5 S .C t. 19 17 ); M r.
S eein g th is, a good m an y ju d ges an d com m en tators h ave b alk ed at tak in g th e literal
term s of th e C on/ay p assage as a p lead in g stan d ard . S ee, e.g ., C a r C a rriers, 745
at 1106 (" C onley h as n ever b een in terp reted literally" ) an d , " [i]n p ractice, a
com p lain t ... m u st con tain eith er d irect or in feren tial allegation s resp ectin g all th e
th eory" (in tern al q u otation m ark s om itted ; em p h asis an d om ission in origin al);
A scon
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttextaspx?ss=C N T8unt=LaborA ndEm ploym ent..
. 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009235
Page 6 of 8
C onley's " n o set of facts" lan gu age an d its ack n ow led gm en t th at a p lain tiff m u st
p rovid e th e " grou n d s" on w h ich h is claim rests); O 'B rien v. D iG razia, 544 F .2d 543,.
546, n . 3 (C .A .1 1976) (" [W ]h en a p lain tiff ... su p p lies facts to su p p ort h is claim , w e d o
m igh t tu rn a frivolou s claim of u n con stitu tion al ... action in to a su b stan tial on e" );
O 'B rien's an alysis); H azard , F rom W h om N o S ecrets A re H id ,_76 T ex. L .R ev. 1665,.
R evival of F act P lead in g U n d er th e F ed eral R u les of C ivil P roced u re, 86 C olu m . L .R ev.
433, 463-465..(1986). (n otin g ten sion b etw een C onley an d su b seq u en t u n d erstan d in gs
of R u le 8).
C onley's " n o set of facts" lan gu age h as b een q u estion ed , criticized , an d exp lain ed aw ay
of th e op in ion 's p reced in g su m m ary of th e com p lain t's*563 con crete allegation s, w h ich
S ee S anjuan, 40 F .3d ,..at 251 (on ce a claim for relief h as b een stated , a p lain tiff
" receives th e b en efit of im agin ation , so lon g as th e h yp oth eses are con sisten t w ith th e
FNB. B ecau se C onley's " 'n o set of facts' " lan gu age w as on e of ou r earliest
A lth ou gh w e h ave n ot p reviou sly exp lain ed th e circu m stan ces an d rejected
p rocess w ill reveal relevan t evid en ce' " to su p p ort th e claim (q u otin g m ue
L .E d .2d 539 (1975)); (alteration in D u ra )); A sso cia ted G en . C o n tra cto rs o f
C a l In c. v. C a rp en ters, 4 5 9 U .S . 5 19 , 5 2 6 , 10 3 S .C t. 8 9 7 , 7 4 L .E d .2 d 7 2 3
1983) ("It is n ot ... p rop er to assu m e th at [th e p lain tiff] can p rove facts
383., 81 S .C t. 632,
5 L .E d .2d 620 (1961) (" In th e ab sen ce of ... an allegation
[th at th e arrest w as m ad e w ith ou t p rob ab le cau se] th e cou rts b elow cou ld
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?ss=C N T 8ant=L aborA ndE m ploym ent.. . 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009236
IN
Page 7 of 8
G overn m en t h igh ligh t th e p rob lem s stem m in g from a literal in terp retation of
C P P leY 's " n o set of facts" lan gu age an d seek clarification of th e stan d ard .
B rief for P etition ers 27-28; B rief for U n ited S tates as A m icu s C u ria e 22-25;
see also B rief for R esp on d en ts 17 (d escrib in g " [p ]etition ers an d th eir am ici"
as m ou n tin g an " attack on C onley's 'n o set of facts' stan d ard " ).
1940s, w h ich alleged ly gave rise to C onley's " n o set of facts" lan gu age.
com p lain t m u st allege facts su ggestive of illegal con d u ct. S ee, e.g ., L eim er
C o llieries, In c. v. S h o b er,
130 F .2d 631, 635 (C .A .3 1942) (" N o m atter h ow
R ath er, th ese cases stan d for th e u n ob jection ab le p rop osition th at, w h en a
d istrict cou rt's assessm en t th at th e p lain tiff w ill fail to fin d evid en tiary
L .E d .2d 90..(1974) (a d istrict cou rt w eigh in g a m otion to d ism iss ask s " n ot
*5 6 4 **1 9 7 0 III
[15] i W h en w e look for p lau sib ility in th is com p lain t, w e agree w ith th e D istrict
C ou rt th at p lain tiffs' claim of con sp iracy in restrain t of trad e com es u p sh ort. T o b egin
w ith , th e com p lain t leaves n o d ou b t th at p lain tiffs rest th eir 1 claim on d escrip tion s of
IL E C s. S upra, at 1962 - 1963. A lth ou gh in form a few stray statem en ts sp eak d irectly
on fair read in g th ese are m erely legal con clu sion s restin g on th e p rior
of agreem en t,
allegation s. T h u s, th e com p lain t*565 first tak es accou n t of th e alleged " ab sen ce of an y
m ean in gfu l com p etition b etw een [th e IL E C s] in on e an oth er's m ark ets," " th e p arallel
cou rse of con d u ct th at each [IL E C ] en gaged in to p reven t com p etition from C L E C s,"
" an d th e oth er facts an d m ark et circu m stan ces alleged [earlier]" ; " in ligh t of" th ese,
th e com p lain t con clu d es " th at [th e IL E C s] h ave en tered in to a con tract, com b in ation or
con sp iracy to p reven t com p etitive en try in to th eir ....m ark ets an d h ave agreed n ot to
-9
littps://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?ss=C N T& m t=LaborA ndEm ploym ent..
. 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009237
Page 8 of 8
https://w eb2.w estlaw .com /result/docum enttext.aspx?ss=C N T& m t=LaborA ndEm ploym ent..
. 6/15/2011
NLRB-FOIA-00009238
M IN O R ITY M EM B ER S:
M A .IO R IT Y M E M B E R S :
G E O R G E M ILL E R , C A LIF O R N IA
JO H N K L IN E . M IN N E S O T A . C h a irm a n
S e n io r D u rn o crctic M a m h a r
TH O M A S E . P E TR I, W IS C O N S IN
H O W A R D P . -B U C K " M G IC E O N , CAL IF O R M A
JU D Y D IG G E R ?, ILLIN O ,S
T o n n R U S S E LL P LA TTE . P E N N S Y LV A N IA
JO E W ILS O N . S O U TH C A R O L IN A
V IR G IN IA R M . N O R T H C A R O L IN A
D U N C A N H U N T E R , C A LIF O R N IA
D A V ID P . R O E , T E N N E S S E E
G L E N N T H O M P S O N , P E N N S Y L V A N IA
TIM W A L B E R G , M IC H IG A N
S C O T r D E sJA R LA iS . TE N N E S S E E
R IC H A R D L. H A N N A . N E W Y O R K
TO D D R O K IT A , IN D IA N A
C O M M IT T E E O N E D U C A T IO N
A N D TH E W O R K FO R C E
L A R R Y a u csn o N , IN O :A N A
T R E Y G O W D Y , S O U T H C A R O LIN A
LO U B A R I E T T A . P E N N S Y L V A N IA
K 815 riL. N IG Im . S C P IN D A K O T A
M A R N A R O B Y .A LA B A M A
JO S E P H .1. hE C K . N E V A D A
D E N N IS A . R o ss. R O R ID A
M IK E K E L L Y , P E N N S Y L V A N IA
(V a ca n t]
U .S . H O U S E O F R E P R E S E N TA TIV E S
2181 R A Y B U R N H O U S E C O M E B U IL D IN G
W A S H IN G T O N , D C 2 0 5 1 5 -6 1 0 0
D A L E S . K IL D E E . M IC H ;G A N , V isa C h a irm ,
D O N A I [T M . P A Y N E , N E W JE R S E Y
R O B E R T E . A N D R E W S , N E W jE R S E Y
L Y N N C . W O O L S E Y . C A L IF O R M A
R U B E N H IN O JO S A . T E X A S
C A R O L Y N M cC A R T H Y . N E W Y O R K
JO H N F . T IE R N E Y , P A A S S A C IILS E T T S
D E N N IS .1. K U C IN IC H . O H IO
D A V ID W U , O R E G O N
n u s H D . H O LY . N E W JE R S E Y
S U S A N A , D A V IS . C A L IF O R N IA
P A U L M . G R U A L V A , A R IZ O N A
T IM E IT IC Y H . B IS :10P . N eve Y O R K
D A V ID L O E B S A C K , IO W A
M A Z IE K . H IT IO N O , H A W A II
M ay 5,2011
L afe E .Solom on
W ashington,D .C .20570
T he N ational L abor R elations B oard's (N L R B ) recent action against T he B oeing C om pany is deeply
troubling.A lthough the facts of the case are still in dispute,its eventual outcom e could have significant
consequences for job-creators and w orkers ;In light of the potential im pact on the nation's w orkforce,
apparent inconsistencies surrounding the N L R B 's A ril 20, 2011 com plaint m erit further explanation.
A s you are aw are,on M arch 26,2010,the International A ssociation of M achinists and A erospace
W orkers D istrict L odge N o.751 filed a charge w ith the N L R B claim ing B oeing violated sections 8(a)(3)
and 8(a)(1) of the N ational L abor R elations A ct (N L R A ). C entral to the charge is B oeing's decision to
locate a second 787 D ream liner assem bly line in C harleston,South C arolina.T he com plaint references
alleged statem ents m ade by B oeing officials betw een O ctober 2009 and M arch 2010 that w ork stoppages
W hen asked about the charge in June 2010, the N L R B regional director R ichard A hearn told The Seattle
Tim es "it w ould have been an easier case for the union'to argue if B oeing had m oved existing w ork from
E verett, rather than placing new w ork in C harleston." H e w as also unable to point to any "bright line"
rule to determ ine w hether the com pany's actions violated the law . 2Finally, the regional director stated
M ore than 10 m onths later on A pril 20, 2011, M r. A hearn issued a com plaint. In contrast to previous
G ates, D om inic, M achinists .file unfair labor charge against B oeing over Charleston, The S eattle Tim es, June 4, 2010.
Id.
Com plaint and N otice of H earing: The B oeing Com pany and International A ssociation of M achinists and A erospace W orkers
3 Id
NLRB-FOIA-00009239
M ay 5,2011
Page 2
director,the transfer of the assem bly line in conjunction w ith alleged com m ents m ade by com pany
W hile w e understand that no union em ployee at the PugetSound facility has losthis or her job or been
extraordinary rem edy that requires B oeing to relocate its operations across the country.
6 T his w ould have
a detrim ental im pact on the econom y and w orkers of South C arolina,as w ell as have a chilling effect
T he pivot in position by N L R B officials,as w ell as the unusual tim ing,raises serious concerns that
w arrant congressional inquiry.T o better understand the appropriateness and evolution of this com plaint,
1. A description of w hat transpired betw een June 2010 and A pril 2011 that led the N L R B to alter its
2.
A ll docum ents and com m unications betw een the N L R B R egion 19 office and the N L R B N ational
3.
A ll docum ents and com m unications that support the N L R B 's position that w ork is being
4.
Past precedentthat supports a finding that B oeing violated sections 8(a)(3) and 8(a)(1) of the
T hank you for your cooperation in this m atter.If you have any questions regarding this request,please
Sincerely,
Jo h rlin e
C h irm an
."'A il R oe,M .D .
C hairm an
and Pensions
cc: T he H onorable G eorge M iller,Senior D em ocratic M em ber,E ducation and the W orkforce C om m ittee
cc:T he H onorable R obert A ndrew s,Senior D em ocratic M em ber,Subcom m ittee on H ealth,E m ploym ent,
L abor,and Pensions
5
6
1d. at 6.
1d. at 7-8.
NLRB-FOIA-00009240
M ay 5,2011
Page 3
1. In com plying w ith this request,you should produce all responsive docum ents that are in your
possession,custody,or control,w hether held by you or your past or present agents,em ployees,
and representatives acting on your behalf.Y ou should also produce docum ents that you have a
legal rightto obtain,thatyou have a right to copy or to w hich you have access,as w ell as
docum ents that you have placed in the tem porary possession,custody,or control of any third.
party.R equested records.docum ents,- data or inform ation should notbe destroyed,m odified,.
2.
In the eventthat any entity,organization or individual denoted in this requesthas been,or is also
know n by any other nam e than that herein denoted,the request shall be read also to include that
alternative identification.
3. T he C om m ittee's preference is to receive docum ents in electronic form (i.c.,C D ,m em ory stick,
4.
D ocum ents produced in electronic form at should also be organized,identified,and indexed
electronically.
5. E lectronic docum ent productions should be prepared according to the follow ing standards:
(a) T he production should consist of single page T agged Im age File ("TIT"), .files
(b).D ocum ent num bers in the load file should m atch docum ent B ates num bers and -11F file
nam es.
(c) If the production is com pleted through a series of m ultiple partial productions,field nam es
6.
D ocum ents produced to the C om m ittee should include an index describing the contents of the
production.T o the extent m ore than one CD,. hard drive,m em ory stick,thum b drive,box or folder
7.
D ocum ents produced in response to this request shall be produced together w ith copies of file
labels.dividers or identifying m arkers w ith w hich they w ere associated w hen they w ere requested.
8.
W hen you produce docum ents,you should identify the paragraph in the C om m ittee's request to
9.
It shall not be a basis for refusal to produce docum ents that any other person or entity also
NLRB-FOIA-00009241
M ay 5,2011
Page 4
10.If any of the requested inform ation is only reasonably available in m achine-readable form (such as
on a com puter server,hard drive,or com puter backup tape),you should consult w ith the
C om m ittee staff to determ ine the appropriate Ibrinat in w hich to produce the inform ation.
11.If com pliance w ith the request cannot be m ade in full,com pliance shall be m ade.to the extent
possible and shall include an explanation of w hy full com pliance is not possible.
12.In the event that a docum ent is w ithheld cin the basis of privilege,provide a privilege log
containing the follow ing inform ation concerning any such docum ent: (a) the privilege asserted; (b)
the type of docum ent; (c) the general subject m atter; (d) the date,author and addressee; and (e) the
13.If any docum ent responsive to this request w as,but no longer is,in your possession,custody,.or
control,identify the docum ent (stating its date,author,subject and recipients) and explain the
circum stances under w hich the docum ent ceased to be in your possession,custody,or control.
14.If a date or other descriptive detail setforth in this requestreferring to a .docum ent is inaccurate,
but the actual date or other descriptive detail is know n to you or is otherw ise apparent from the
context of the request,you should produce all docum ents w hich w ould be responsive as if the date
15.T he tim e period covered by this request is included in the attached request.T o the extent a tim e
period is not specified,Produce relevant docum ents from January 1,2009 to the present.
16.This request is continuing in nature and applies to any new ly-discovered inform ation.A ny record,
docum ent,com pilation of data or inform ation,not produced because it has not been located or
discovery.
17.A ll docum ents shall be B ates-stam ped sequentially and produced sequentially.
18.T w o sets of docum ents should be delivered,one set to the M ajority Staff in R oom .2181 of the
R ayburn H ouse O ffice B uilding and one set to the M inority Staff in R oom 2101 of the R ayburn
19.U pon com pletion of the docum ent production,you should subm it a w ritten certification,signed by
you or your counsel,stating that: (1) a diligent search has been com pleted of all docum ents in your
possession,custody,or control w hich reasonably could contain responsive docum ents; and (2) all
docum ents located during the search that are responsive have been produced to the C om m itte:e.
NLRB-FOIA-00009242
M ay 5,2011
Page 5
D efinitions
1.T he term "docum ent" m eans any w ritten,recorded,or graphic m atter of any nature w hatsoever,
regardless of how recorded,and w hether original or copy.including,but not lim ited to,the
of the foregoing,as w ell as any attachm ents or appendices thereto),and graphic or oral records or
recordings) and other w ritten,printed,typed,or other graphic or recorded m atter of any kind or
videotape or otherw ise.A docum ent bearing any notation not a part of the original text is to be
considered a separate docum ent.A draft or non-identical copy is a separate docum ent w ithin the
2.T he term "com m unication" m eans each m anner or m eans of disclosure or exchange of
inform ation,regardless of m eans utilized,w hether oral,electronic,by docum ent or otherw ise,and
3.T he term s "and" and "or" shall be construed broadly and either conjunctively or disjunctively to
bring w ithin the scope of this request any inform ation w hich m ight otherw ise be construed to be
outside its scope.T he singular includes plural num ber,and vice versa.T he m asculine includes the
5.
T he term "identify," w hen used in a question about individuals,m eans to provide the follow ing
inform ation: (a) the individual's com plete nam e and title; and (b) the individual's business address
6.
T he term "referring or relating," w ith respect to any given subject,m eans anything that constitutes,
NLRB-FOIA-00009243
IM IIM A S
A 1..i.
A I:IA N . :A ...V
P :IL Y A :4J
rM A il
Z !....
(:A } .1 .1 .. In :IIN S Y L V A N IA
riA .G .V .i.N O R
cA N kirin
OCILTII..11
tur.04.
v E v al,..T.C IA
AIM ::
W u,
!.
k rn i o ci ;
()M A W .4 1 : E te. 1 .1 A ll
.1 n r!N
IN A
f.:S r
:W I III. S I A f.i.
D IIII.l' 11.111
S T A rr
/e..51er
I:1 1 4 r,
C O M M IT T E E O N H E A L T H . E D U C A T IO N ,
L A B O R . A N D P E N S IO N S
W A S H IN G T O N , D C 2 0 5 1 0 -6 3 0 0
on
M ay 3, 2011
M r.Lafe S olom on
W ashington, D C 20570-0001
against The B oeing C om pany.The com plaint alleged that B oeing's decision to open a
new production line for construction in S outh C arolina constituted an unfair labor
practice.W e stronglydisagree.A nd,.w e are troubled, about the chilling effect that your
W e have a duty to ensure that the N ationalLabor R elations A ct ("the A ct") is being
enforced in a fair m anner.In this and other decisions,w e believe that you have ignored
the proper balance set forth in the A ct betw een the em ployees'right to collectively
bargain and the em ployers'right to due process.W e question the legal reasoning and
m otive behind the com plaint,as w ellas the proposed rem edy to force B oeing to m ove
It is clear that B oeing's legitim ate business decision had no adverse im pact on the
P uget S ound w orkforce indeed,2,000 additionaljobs have been 'created there since
the product forthcom ing from this production line,the desire to ensure continuity of
W e are also concerned about the tim ing of your announcem ent.B oeing announced its
H ow ever,your office w aited untilA pril2011 to file-the com plaint,just three m onths
before the new production line is scheduled to begin in July 2011.This com plaint has
the potentialto elim inate thousands of new ly created and w ell-com pensated jobs in
S outh C arolina.It w ill have a negative effect on im portant decisions m ade by A m erican
businesses every day regarding w ho to em ploy and w here to expand, and negate the
NLRB-FOIA-00009244
everything w e can to m ake it easier for folks to bring products to m arket and to start and
expand new businesses and to grow and hire new viibrkers." W e agree w ith the
W hile w e understand the com plaint process is stillin the early stages,there is a need
,/for the B oard to explain the reasoning in this case to C ongress.A s your nom ination is
brought before our C om m ittee,w e w illbe asking for a greater explanation of your
actions.
.
Sincerely;
NLRB-FOIA-00009245
U N IT E D ST A T E S O F A M E R IC A
B E FO R E T H E N A T IO N A L L A B O R R E L A T IO N S B O A R D
R E G IO N 19
T H E B O E IN G C O M PA N Y
and
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A SSO C IA T IO N O F
M A C H IN IST S A N D A E R O SPA C E
W O R K E R S D IST R IC T L O D G E 751,affiliated
w ith
IN T E R N A T IO N A L A SSO C IA T IO N O F
M A C H IN IST S A N D A E R O SPA C E
W O R K ER S
A N SW E R
A nsw er to the C om plaint and N otice of H earing ("C om plaint") filed by the A cting G eneral
G E N E R A L D E N IA L
E xcept as otherw ise expressly stated herein,B oeing denies each and every allegation
violated the N ational L abor R elations A ct ("N L R A ") in any of the m anners alleged in the
C om plaint or in any other m anner.Pursuant to Section 102.20 of the B oard's rules,averm ents in
the C om plaint to w hich no responsive pleading is required shall be deem ed as denied.B oeing
expressly reserves the right to seek to am end and/or supplem ent its A nsw er as m ay be necessary.
NLRB-FOIA-00009246
D E FE N S E S
W ithout assum ing any burden of proof, persuasion or production not otherw ise legally
assigned to it as to any elem ent of the claim s alleged in the C om plaint, B oeing asserts the
I.
T he C om plaint and each purported claim for relief stated therein fail to allege
2.
statem ents under S ection 8(c) of the N L R A and under the F irst A m endm ent to the U nited S tates
C onstitution and are not adm issible to show any violation of the N L R A .
3.
B oeing's decision to place the second 787 assem bly line in N orth C harleston w as
based upon a num ber of varied factors, including a favorable business environm ent in S outh
C arolina for m anufacturing com panies like B oeing; significant financial incentives from the
S tate of S outh C arolina; achieving geographic diversity of its com m ercial airline operations; as
w ell as to protect the stability of the 787's global production system . In any event, even
ascribing an intent to B oeing that it placed the second line in N orth C harleston so as to M itigate
the harm ful econom ic effects of an anticipated future strike w ould not be evidence that the
decision to place the second assem bly line in N orth C harleston w as designed to retaliate against
the IA M for past strikes. N evertheless, B oeing w ould have m ade the sam e decisions w ith
respect to the placem ent of the second assem bly line in N orth C harleston even if it had not taken
into consideration the dam aging im pact of future strikes on the production of 787s.
4.
E ven if the actions described in the C om plaint had constituted m ovem ent or
transfer of w ork, w hich allegations B oeing expressly denies, the International A ssociation of
M achinists and A erospace W orkers D istrict L odge 751, affiliated w ith International A ssociation
NLRB-FOIA-00009247
5.
the hire,w ages,tenure,or term s or conditions of em ploym entof any U nit.m em ber.
6.
under the N LR A because, inter alia,in its collective bargaining agreem entw ith B oeing,the IA M
expressly agreed thatB oeing has the rightto place w ork in any location of its choice w ithoutthe
need to bargain w ith the IA M ,and because an intentto m itigate the adverse econom ic im pactof
an anticipated future strike is notinherently destructive of protected em ployee rights under the
N LR A .
7.
restrained,or coerced em ployees represented by the [A M in the exercise of their rights protected
by the N LR A .
8.
The rem edy requested in the C om plaintis im perm issibly punitive and w ould
cause an undue hardship on B oeing,its em ployees,and the State of South C arolina.M oreover,
none of the com plained of actions caused any hardship on any B oeing em ployees or the State of
W ashington.
9.
The rem edy requested in Paragraph 13(a) of the C om plaintis im perm issibly
10.
NLRB-FOIA-00009248
The rem edy requested in Paragraph 13(a) of the C om plaintis im perm issible
11.
12.
Paragraph 13(b) w ould effectively cause B oeing to close its assem bly facility in N orth
C harleston,South C arolina.
13.
Som e or allof the claim s asserted in the C om plaintare barred by the six m onth
14.
The C om plaintis ultra vires because the A cting G eneralC ounselof the N LR B
did notlaw fully hold the office of A cting G eneralC ounselatthe tim e he directed thatthe
C om plaintbe filed.
Pream ble:B oeing denies the allegations contained in the pream ble,exceptto adm itthat
W orkers ("1A M ") has charged in case 19-C A -32431 thatB oeing has engaged in certain unfair
labor practices prohibited by the N LR A ,and thatthe A cting G eneralC ounselof the N LR B has
issued this C om plaintand N otice of H earing based upon the IA M 's charge.
1.
B oeing lacks inform ation and know ledge sufficientto form a belief as to the
2.
NLRB-FOIA-00009249
(b) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 2(b),exceptto adm itthatin the
lasttw elve m onths its business operations resulted in gross revenues in excess of $500,000.
the lasttw elve m onths itreceived,shipped,sold and/or purchase goods atits facilities in the
State-of W ashington valued in excess of $50,000 from places outside of the State of W ashington.
(d) B oeing denies the allegations of Paragraph 2(d),exceptto adm itthatitis and
3.
4.
required.A s to the rem aining allegations in Paragraph 4,B oeing adm its thatthe
R aym ond L.C onner:V ice Presidentand G eneralM anager of Supply C hain
Frederick C .K i6:V ice President,State and L ocalG overnm entR elations and
G lobalC orporate C itizenship for the N orthw estR egion,B oeing C om m ercial
A irplanes
NLRB-FOIA-00009250
D ouglas P . K ight: V ice P resident, H um an R esources, B oeing C om m ercial
A irplanes
P atrick ("P at") S hanahan: V ide P resident and G eneral M anager .,A irplane
5.
(a) T he allegations contained in P aragraph 5(a) state legal conclusions for w hich
no response is required, but to the extent a response is required, B oeing adm its that the
production and m aintenance em ployees in W ashington S tate constituted a "U nit" for collective
bargaining purposes.
(b)
T he allegations contained in P aragraph 5(b) state legal conclusions for w hich
no response is required, but to the extent a response is required, B oeing adm its that the
production and m aintenance em ployees in the P ortland, O regon area constitute a "U nit" for
(c)
B oeing adm its the allegations of P aragraph 5(c).
(d)
B oeing adm its the allegations of P aragraph 5(d).
6.
that, it "rem oved" or "had rem oved w ork" from its facilities in E verett, W ashington or P ortland,
O regon because U nit em ployees had struck B oeing, and also specifically denies that it threatened
or im pliedly threatened that those facilities w ould lose additional w ork in the event of future U nit
NLRB-FOIA-00009251
's
(a) B oeing denies the allegations of P aragraph 6(a), except to adm it that its
O ctober 21, 2009; and B oeing specifically denies that M r. M cN erney m ade an "extended
statem ent" or any statem ent about m oving 787 D ream liner w ork to S outh C arolina due to
"strikes happening every three or four years in P uget S ound." B oeing adm its that the referenced
new spaper articles appeared in The Seattle Post-Intelligencer and The Seattle Tim es.
(b)
B oeing denies the allegations of P aragraph 6(b), and further states that the
(c)
B oeing denies the allegations of P aragraph 6(c), except to adm it that the .
referenced new spaper article appeared in The Seattle Tim es on D ecem ber 7, 2009.
(d)
B oeing denies the allegations of P aragraph 6(d), except to adm it that the
referenced new spaper article appeared in The PugetSound Business Journal on D ecem ber 8,
2009.
(e)
B oeing denies the allegations of P aragraph 6(e), except to adm it that a S eattle
T im es reporter conducted a video-taped interview of M r. A lbaugh and that the tape speaks for
itself.
7.
(a) B oeing denies the allegations of P aragraph 7(a), and specifically denies that it
transferred the "second 787 D ream liner" assem bly line from its facility in E verett, W ashington to
a facility to be constructed in N orth C harleston, S outh C arolina, and except to state that on
O ctober 28, 2009, B oeing announced that it w ould place a new second assem bly line for the 787
(b)
B oeing denies the allegations of P aragraph 7(b).
(c)
B oeing denies the allegations of P aragraph 7(c).
NLRB-FOIA-00009252
8.
(a) B oeing denies the allegations of P aragraph 8(a), and specifically denies that it
transferred a sourcing supply program for the 787 D ream liner assem bly line from its facilities in
(b)
B oeing denies the allegations of P aragraph 8(b).
(c)
B oeing denies the allegations of P aragraph 8(c).
9.
10.
11.
12.
P aragraph 12 does not allege facts for w hich an answ er is required, but relates the
rem edy sought by the A cting G eneral C ounsel and, accordingly, no response is required.
H ow ever, to the extent that a response m ay be deem ed to be necessary, B oeing denies that the
A cting G eneral C ounsel is entitled to, or that the B oard can order the rem edy requested in
P aragraph 12.
13.
(a) P aragraph 13(a) does not allege facts for w hich an answ er is required, but
relates the rem edy sought by the A cting G eneral C ounsel and, accordingly, no response is
required. H ow ever, to the extent that a response m ay be deem ed to be necessary, B oeing denies
that the A cting G eneral C ounsel is entitled to the rem edy, or that the B oard can order the rem edy
(b) P aragraph 13(b) does not allege facts for w hich an answ er is required but
m erely describes w hat the A cting G eneral C ounsel says is not part of the rem edy he is seeking.
T o the extent that a response m ay be deem ed to be necessary, B oeing denies that the A cting
G eneral C ounsel has correctly stated that the rem edy sought in P aragraph 13(a) w ill not
effectively cause B oeing's assem bly facility in N orth C harleston to shut dow n.
NLRB-FOIA-00009253
Boeing reserves the rightto raise any additionaldefenses notasserted herein ofw hich
D ated:M ay 4,2011
T elephone:202.955.8500
Facsim ile:202.467.0539
M C K EN N A LO N G & A LD R ID GE
T elephone: 404.527-4000
NLRB-FOIA-00009254
R EGIO N 19
TH E BO EIN G C O M PA N Y
and
M A C H IN ISTS A N D A ER O SPA C E
W O R K ER S D ISTR IC T LO D GE 751,affiliated
w ith
M A C H IN ISTS A N D A ER O SPA C E
W O R K ER S
C E R T IFIC A T E O F SE R V IC E
R egionalD irector
M ara-Louise A nzalone
10
NLRB-FOIA-00009255
D avid C am pbell
C ounselfor IA M
inierr.D avis
W ashington,D .C .20036-5303
D D avis@ Gibsondunn.com
NLRB-FOIA-00009256