Three-dozen Boeing workers provide first-person accounts of working at the company in “Emerging from Turbulence: Boeing and Stories of the American Workplace Today.” Also, the SEC’s suit against developer Lobsang Dargey draws national attention.
The old heritage Boeing Co. is dead, and local employees are struggling to come to terms with the colder corporation in its place, according to candid interviews in a new book.
“Emerging from Turbulence: Boeing and Stories of the American Workplace Today” explores the attitudes of both Boeing veterans, for whom the merger with McDonnell Douglas remains a raw wound, and younger employees who know only the current reality.
The book, by University of Puget Sound professors Leon Grunberg and Sarah Moore, maps in detail how things have changed at Boeing and what it’s like to work there today.
In hourslong interviews, 36 Boeing employees — engineers, machinists, technical and business staff, each granted anonymity in order to speak freely — provided frank, emotional, first-person accounts of their work lives.
Most Read Business Stories
- What you need to do to get your government stimulus check
- How to talk to your landlord about rent if coronavirus closures have affected your paycheck
- Puget Sound housing market was among nation's strongest at the start of 2020. Then coronavirus came.
- Hourly Amazon workers, fearing coronavirus risks, wonder why they must staff empty office buildings
- Inside the ‘incredibly challenging’ effort by GM and Ventec to make more ventilators for coronavirus fight
One 48-year-old machinist with 25 years at Boeing sounds like a dream employee. A driven, high-end machinist collaborating with engineers inside the Seattle development center, he loves his work.
“Some people actually enjoy building stuff and making stuff,” he said. “You’ve got to experience every single bit of your life, every moment you can, and enjoy it.”
Yet even he found his faith dented by Boeing’s outsourcing of skilled work and its shortchanging of the workforce.
“The company doesn’t realize just how important it is having people that want to do something … be engaged employees,” he said. “It’s really sad.”
The book features a series of interviews exploring in depth the engagement of three cohorts of Boeing workers: those recently retired, veterans still working there and relatively new hires.
The 36 selected for publication were drawn from 80 in-person interviews. Those in turn were drawn mostly from employees who participated in an earlier 10-year survey of worker attitudes that in 2010 produced the book “Turbulence: Boeing and the State of American Workers and Managers.”
This new book serves as an in-their-own-words sequel that brings us up to date, with the latest interviews completed in 2014.
Authors Grunberg and Moore lay out the broader economic factors beyond the 1997 McDonnell Douglas merger that have played a role in the changes at Boeing.
They suggest that the dramatic shift in the jetmaker’s corporate culture — a focus on cost-cutting and bottom-line profits, a hard line with unions, outsourcing of work and a steely approach to layoffs and work transfers — reflects parallel changes across corporate America that have deeply affected how all workers think about their jobs.
Among Boeing employees, the retirees interviewed have the rosiest memories of their work lives. They are uniformly proud of having worked for Boeing.
Yet they also have an unblinkered view that the merger changed everything fast.
A retired 30-year employee, a business-operations consultant, unsentimentally describes Boeing’s management structure at the time of the merger as “collegial, bloated, flaccid.”
“When the McDonnell Douglas guys came in, they just went through them like a knife through butter,” he said. “Just cut their throats, hung them out to dry.”
Older workers who were still at the company when interviewed were very critical of company actions and had clearly grown more distant and emotionally detached from Boeing.
One 47-year-old, with two decades at Boeing, said working on the 787 Dreamliner “wasted seven years of my life.”
He complained of having to repeatedly fix and rework engineering initially done in Boeing’s Moscow design center.
“I used to be a Boeing engineer. Now I’m an engineer who works at Boeing,” he said.
The newer hires display generally more positive attitudes, shaped by “a youthful mindset” and the absence of nostalgia for a vanished past.
They appreciate that Boeing provides great pay and benefits compared to what their friends get working elsewhere and tend to accept that cost-cutting is necessary.
A mechanic, 30, said, “I have never been so grateful to work for a company.”
“I wish we still had our pension,” he added, but “it’s still a pretty good deal.”
Yet despite this relative satisfaction with their jobs, often the younger employees and particularly young engineers express no great loyalty to Boeing nor admiration for the management structure they encounter.
Some complain of a “bland corporate environment” producing work lives that are “uninteresting, inefficient and slow.”
One 30-year-old stress engineer says he’s looking for another job, fed up with the low morale around him and the low expectations.
Grunberg and Moore write that they “detect a gradual but unmistakable turn away from the company across time and across generations.”
Retirees and long-serving current employees are “deeply emotionally connected to Boeing,” with feelings that include both nostalgia for the workplace of their past and “powerful criticism of the postmerger business philosophy.”
The new cohort of younger employees has “a thinner and more instrumental attachment” to Boeing, they write.
Boeing executives eager to inspire an engaged workforce might want to set aside their management books to study closely this account of what their employees think and feel.
— Dominic Gates: firstname.lastname@example.org
Industry group wants voice in visa-fraud case against Dargey
The federal fraud lawsuit against Everett-based Path America developer Lobsang Dargey could damage immigrants’ chances of getting visas and diminish the flow of billions of dollars of foreign direct investment to the U.S., says a national trade group that seeks to be heard in the case.
Invest in the USA (IIUSA), a D.C.-based group, asked the court’s permission Thursday to file an amicus brief in the case. It said it’s concerned about the fate of immigrants who each invested $500,000 in Path America’s projects in Everett and Seattle in hopes of becoming permanent U.S. residents by obtaining an EB-5 visa.
Work on the two projects ground to a halt in late August when the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) sued Path America and Dargey, its founder, alleging the Bellevue resident had diverted more than $17 million of investor funds for his own use or unauthorized projects. Dargey lost control of Path America on Oct. 22 when U.S. District Court Judge James Robart put the company in receivership.
Of the 250 Chinese nationals who invested in Path America’s projects, the 170 who contributed capital to the just-begun Potala Tower in Seattle are most exposed, though several have asked the court for refunds.
In court briefs, SEC lawyers cast doubt on Potala Tower’s viability. Path America told investors that the project would cost $188 million, with $122 million in funds from EB-5 investors, $30 million from Path America and $36 million in construction loans.
So far Path America has raised $85 million in EB-5 funds for the project, $37 million shy of its target. Moreover, the SEC alleges, Dargey misappropriated about $35 million from the Potala Tower account, including a $15.8 million personal loan.
Voya Retirement Insurance and Annuity Co. has committed to lending the tower project $66 million, and a Shanghai firm has invested $30 million for a 20 percent equity stake in it. But that may not be enough to finish the project, the SEC alleges.
In response, Dargey attorney Daniel Dunne said the tower can be finished given that Dargey and Path America are committed to “repayment of all funds borrowed from the Tower project.”
The national trade group says killing the project would end the Chinese immigrants’ quest for permanent U.S. residency and have ripple effects on IIUSA’s 270 member firms, which raise capital from foreign investors through EB-5.
“Since 2008 the program has generated $11.92 billion in foreign direct investment that stimulates U.S. economic growth, providing hundreds of thousands of jobs to U.S. nationals,” according to IIUSA.
After the SEC sued a Chicago EB-5 promoter in 2013, the pace of EB-5 investor applications to the federal immigration agency slowed considerably, and picked up only after immigrant investors in that deal received refunds, IIUSA says.
In the Path America case, however, construction began and investors’ funds are tied up already.
IIUSA said it has no stake in the SEC’s civil-fraud case against Dargey, who rose from an obscure immigrant to well-to-do developer in barely a decade.
Because the number of Chinese EB-5 applicants vastly outstrips the number of visas allotted, Path America’s Chinese investors can’t start over without facing a yearslong delay.
How the court treats the investors’ interests could have broad implications for the EB-5 program, IIUSA said.
“If this reputation is tarnished even slightly, IIUSA’s members will face significant decline [in] investor confidence, which in turn diminishes the program’s capacity to create jobs, improve the economy and expand the United States’ tax base.”
— Sanjay Bhatt: email@example.com