Timeline
Around 3,200 members of District 837 began their strike on August 4 outside of Boeing production facilities in three cities: St. Louis and St. Charles in Missouri, and Mascoutah in Illinois. [5] Soon after, Dan Gillian, vice president of Boeing's Air Dominance division [note 2] and St. Louis senior site executive, expressed disappointment and claimed that the contract from August 3 "featured 40 percent average wage growth", [5] [7] but striking employees stated that this was false and that many workers would only gain a net 12% wage increase at the end of the four-year period instead of the listed 20%. [10] Additionally, the contract contained several downsides for long-time workers: for half of the years, they would receive lump-sum bonuses in place of wage increases, and a contract from 2014 designed to lower pay raises during high inflation ensured that veteran machinists would not see any increase in wage at all for several years. [11]
As the strike entered its second week, the picketing campaign intensified, with thousands of workers filling the sidewalks in protest outside of the St. Louis facility. [12] Union leadership also reached out to U.S government officials from the Missouri congressional delegation for support; by the next week, U.S. representatives Wesley Bell and Nikki Budzinski [note 3] were pressuring Boeing to continue talks with District 837. [14] [15]
Throughout the strike, all three primary facilities have remained open, with Boeing still being able to deliver jets and test flights. Boeing stated that District 837 members only composed 20% of all employees in the region. [11] [16] Additionally, Boeing is less economically strained than during the strikes last year because the strike is affecting lower-rate aircraft production (as compared to the Boeing 737 production line that was stalled in 2024), production that is also being partially financed by the United States government; this leeway has allowed the company to avoid contract negotiations, hire replacement workers, and attempt to outlast the striking workers. [17] Still, even with the aid of temporary workers, aircraft production has slowed, [18] and a prolonged strike could potentially create delivery delays and hamper Boeing's profit margins. [11] [16]
On September 4, Boeing announced that it would be hiring permanent replacements for the striking workers' positions. Gillian stated that District 837 was being too demanding, and that this alienated the company, thus necessitating bringing in replacements as "...taking the next step in our contingency plan.” [19] Gillian also claimed that the contract from August 3 was the best ever offered to District 837, and thus Boeing would only be willing to make minor changes to the agreement without changing the general layout. [19] The international president of the IAM, Brian Bryant, criticized the replacements as Boeing "...doubling down on its mismanagement..."; [20] he additionally called out Boeing's removal of the $5,000 signing bonuses from the contract as disrespectful towards the striking workers. [19] [21] Doubts were expressed among union members as to whether Boeing would be able to suitably replace the 3,200 workers, with one mechanic believing the move to be a dividing tactic. [22]
On September 10, District 837 and Boeing reached a tentative agreement that was to be voted on two days later. This new contract, compared to the one from August 3, would last a year longer and raise the wage boost from 20% to 24%. The contract also re-introduced signing bonuses that were originally scrapped by Boeing post-August 3, although they were $1,000 lower than before. [16] [23] On September 12, District 837 members turned down the agreement, with about 57% of the striking force voting against it. Downsides for long-time workers were cited as the primary issue once again: it would take fifteen years instead of the regular five to seven for the wage increase to be complete, and lump-sum payments were still present. The length of the strike became a financial burden for some union members, with one stating that he voted for the agreement because “I've been without a paycheck for two months, and it's really starting to weigh on me." Ultimately, the contract was declined; as one worker put it: “The younger crowd realized that it wasn't in everyone's best interest, so we all stuck together, showed solidarity.” [24] [25]
Several days after rejecting Boeing's third contract offer, District 837 announced it would vote on a new, union-created contract. This contract added several benefits on top of the preexisting offered contract: a guaranteed 20% wage increase, $10,000 signing bonuses, consistent wage growth for longstanding employees, better 401(k) benefits, and a return to the four-year timeline. [26] [27] [28] According to IAM, this new contract improved upon the company-created offer by bringing the signing bonuses to a similar level as the $12,000 bonuses gained by Seattle-based workers in 2024, along with tackling the grievances held by veteran workers. [27] [3] The contract was subsequently approved by District 837 membership. [3] Gillian stated that Boeing would not accept the union-proposed contract, called the effort a "publicity stunt", and said that the contract "isn't real". [28] [3] IAM representative Jody Bennett responded, saying, "Boeing’s attempt to dismiss the IAM District 837 membership-ratified proposal, overwhelmingly approved by the striking men and women on the shop floor, as ‘not real’ is both insulting and dishonest." [29]
On September 24, Boeing announced that the task of upgrading F/A-18 Super Hornet jets would be moved away from the St. Louis facility. IAM representative Tom Boelling called the move "deeply disappointing", although Gillian did not officially note the strike as a reason, instead claiming that the move was being done to make room for the F-47 sixth generation fighter jet program. [1] [30]
In part due to pressure from the Congressional Labor Caucus and other figures of government, Boeing accepted restarting negotiations with District 837, and both parties released a joint statement on September 25 in which they agreed to negotiate with the aid of a federal mediator. [31] Negotiations began on September 29; however, by the end of the day talks had already fallen apart. Boeing continued to push the same contract that District 837 had rejected on September 12, but union representatives stated that they were not willing to “re-vote a rejected offer.” [32]
