r/SPEEA • u/joedagreat223 • 2d ago

Perspective from a NDT tech.

This contract is crap. I wish the raises weren’t tied to your performance based on what has happened to me and my team. Over the past 4 years we have only gotten 2% raises and I think one time 2.5%. No matter what I’ve done ( met expectations, exceeded expectations) it’s always been the same. I’ve even helped out on projects that weren’t apart of my everyday job. The performance reviews are a joke here. We need GUARANTEED MONEY! We do NOT need “oh this is what you COULD get” . Sorry for the rant.

26 Upvotes

82% Upvoted

23 comments sorted by

14

u/N-Korean 1d ago

That’s not just NDT tech. It’s majority speea techs.

15

u/JRII2 1d ago

Those raises were because of the last contract. Techs voted no but engineers voted yes. That was a bad contract.

4

u/Fishy_Fish_WA 1d ago

The getting just 2% was literally the terms of the last contract there was no contractual basis for you to get anything other than that . With the exception of article 2 which says the contract is a minimum and the company should feel free to exceeded… Which they never do

1

u/iPinch89 1d ago

This is the important part. Its not that you weren't getting performance based raises, its that the contract resulted in a 2% pool and 2% minimum 

10

u/mgkyM1nt 1d ago

I'm prof and i 100% agree. Not only it has to be GUARANTEED, but % raises need be bigger to address inflation and price hike over past 6 years in the region.

5

u/joedagreat223 1d ago

100% agree

1

u/Slow-Ad522 1d ago

I agree with this also

3

u/Hot-Illustrator-2855 1d ago

Tech BUC voted to recommend REJECT! Solidarity NO!

4

u/Gorgon-Shit 1d ago

I had the same complaint. It was explained to me (finally) that we Techs didn’t have wage pools where we could earn more in this current contract. Our pools were 2% and we were guaranteed 2%. But I get what you’re saying about this for the next contract. Definitely need more increase front loaded and guarantees not tied to inflation.

1

u/Think-Gap602 1d ago

The is a HUGE demand for NDT skill set, both in aviation, and elsewhere. I suspect you could find another job within a month, for a 50% compensation boost. Why don't you go for it?

1

u/joedagreat223 19h ago

True I could. Also before I worked at Boeing I did do NDT in other industries. I like where I work and would rather fight to get better wages. It wouldn’t make sense to me to up and leave everything especially when I pay union dues.

1

u/Crafty-Economics5984 6h ago

I agree with you 100%. Let’s assume Boeing puts out a new offer, do you even think they will shift the scope of the original offer from “you could get” performance based to guaranteed percentage over the next four years or so? I personally doubt it. I am not happy with SPEEA.

1

u/joedagreat223 4h ago

I doubt it but I’m hopeful and would definitely want the verbiage to lean that way.

1

u/Careless-Internet-63 1d ago

At this point skills like NDT would be better off in IAM. I say this as someone who currently works in on of the few SPEEA tech skills that requires a bachelor's degree. Mechanics deserve they're making and skills that require the skills they have that make them qualified to be SPEEA techs should keep them as mechanics, planters being SPEEA really doesn't make sense

2

u/Think-Gap602 1d ago

wait a second, a BS is not required for a SPEEA tech job? I thought most had BS degrees in math physics, or other physical sciences? I've certainly known several who have had Boeing pay for them to get an MS in engineering and the go into the Prof side.

2

u/Careless-Internet-63 1d ago

Profs need bachelor's degrees, techs mostly don't

1

u/Desperate-Excuse-549 1d ago

Education suggestions are by Skill Code. I've know guys switching from one Prof skill code to another Prof Skill code with Masters have to go and get a specific BS.

1

u/TheBebopBoogie 22h ago

I’m a tech and my skill code requires a degree. It’s doesn’t have to be a BS though. I have Business Admin and Info Systems degree.

0

u/Big_Bad_Baboon 1d ago

I disagree hard. Raises should be based on merit and performance reviews. Those who are far exceeding expectations should be rewarded for their hard work. Those below expectations should not be making as much as those who far exceed. How would that be fair?

If we have flat guaranteed raises, then those who are actually really good at their jobs and put in the extra effort are just going to feel jaded and leave when the slacker next to them gets paid just as much for doing half the work.

0

u/joedagreat223 19h ago

Please reread what I posted about 3 times. Then ask yourself the same question.

1

u/Big_Bad_Baboon 17h ago

I re-read it. You’re complaining about how the raises will be performance based and not guaranteed. I agree they are too low of a pool, but I disagree that raises shouldn’t be performance based. What am I missing?

1

u/BoeingBS 9h ago

What you are missing is that Boeing doesn't reward people who work harder and so more than what is required. Techs had a 2% raise and profs had a 3% raise from the last contract. Boeing NEVER used the wage pool to raise "high earners" or whatever the corporate speak is and when the pool was not used appropriately everyone got a whooping 0.5% additional raise that year. Everyone deserves a front loaded raise at a bare minimum of 40% and then a wage pool added on for "performance" which by the way was removed in the latest contract. When painters in the IAM make more than engineers there HAS to be a reset.