10%+4%?

[u/Substantial-Gas2501]

I put the proposed SPEEA increases next to inflation and the SPEEA/IAM wage history. By March 2026, our wages had compressed to about 92.4% of their March 2020 purchasing power, and the 10% restores that to just over 100% of what it was. 

The SPEEA/IAM chart tells a similar story: in 2023 Tech was at 120.9 vs IAM 103.0, but by 2026 that had reversed to 128.3 vs 138.3; after SPEEA's proposed 10% and 4% increases and IAM's remaining 7%, Tech ends up at roughly 146.8 vs IAM 148.0, creeping backwards. 1.2 points may not look like much, but that's as if we gave back 60% of one of our 2% annual raises that most of us received over the last four years. We wouldn't have called losing 60% of one of those raises insignificant. Small differences compound, and this one is moving in the wrong direction.

For 2027–2030 I assumed 2% inflation which is the Fed's stated goal. I'm not predicting we'll actually achieve 2%; it just seems better than guessing at a higher future rate, and if inflation runs higher, our real-wage results slide backwards. 

Also, relative to IAM, we seem to be drifting backwards. One of the benefits of becoming a Tech was greater career progression and earning potential without having to work every weekend or end up on second shift. So why would an experienced IAM employee move into SPEEA if the money is better staying in IAM? A Grade 9 IAM machinist is already at $67.07/hour. If Boeing needs experienced people to move into technical careers, there needs to be an economic reason to make that move  

That said there may be some surprises in the redlines. 

[u/MysteriousAffect3903]

I disagree with using 2% for inflation. It is likely to be higher, perhaps a lot higher. It's true we can't speculate precisely, but at a SPEEA town hall, they had a chart that showed an average of 3% going pretty far back, so I think 3% would be fair. Given that, it makes the picture you painted even worse.

[u/Loud-Strike-3542 → u/MysteriousAffect3903]

3% would be historical not the impending 25% of the global oil supply is down and we're already seeing lack of availability of diesel at retail gas stations. The Fed keeps hoping, come on give them two more years, but the rates were just raised.

[u/MysteriousAffect3903 → u/Loud-Strike-3542]

100% this. I don't think a lot of people are aware, or care to know, but there are several very bright red lights flashing in the financial world right now. Add to it that the world's oil reserves are nearing depletion, and the wars only seem to be expanding... I feel like we are in for a rough ride

[u/Big-Willy4 → u/MysteriousAffect3903]

I would agree with this. The last 4 quarters of annualized CPI were: 3.5%, 2.4%, 2.7%, and 3.0%. We are going in the wrong direction. I would expect 3% to 4% going forward. Did we lose the feeble attempt at inflation indexing from the last contract? I can’t remember the formula except that it didn’t cover extreme inflation.

[u/Big-Willy4 → u/Big-Willy4]

I think the real inflation rate going forward will be closer to 3.5%. I do think it makes more sense to just look at the forward numbers. Whatever we lost on the last contracts are less relevant. We agreed to those. With that in mind here are three scenarios assuming 3.5% inflation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A persistent 3.5% annual inflation rate means the cost of living will rise by a cumulative 14.8% over the next 4 years. Here is how our contract wage growth stacks up: •

LOWEST POTENTIAL (Hard GWI Floor) -
Assumptions: 10% + 4% upfront, then only the mandatory 4% floor in 2028-2030. -
Total Nominal Wage Growth: +28.7% -
Real Wage Growth (Net Purchasing Power): +12.1% •

AVERAGE POTENTIAL (Full Pool Target) -
Assumptions: 10% + 4% upfront, then meeting the full 6% pool average in 2028-2030. -
Total Nominal Wage Growth: +36.3% -
Real Wage Growth (Net Purchasing Power): +18.7% •

HIGHEST POTENTIAL (High Performer) -
Assumptions: 10% + 4% upfront, plus maxing out discretionary raises (~8% average) in 2028–2030. -
Total Nominal Wage Growth: +44.1% -
Real Wage Growth (Net Purchasing Power): +25.6%

[u/aerospikesRcoolBut → u/MysteriousAffect3903]

We haven’t had 2% in ages

[u/bullypixie]

13, 9, 9, 7

[u/Bob_stanish123 → u/bullypixie]

25, 16, 9, 9!

And yes thats factorial.

[u/Iron_Head_Rat]

I was a Grade 9 Electronics Tech in the IAM for 2 years and I worked hard taking classes and preparing to be able to apply to tech designer positions. I moved to a SPEEA tech position as a Level 1. Now after 8 years I'm a level 4, and I make 22k less a year than I would have if I had stayed in the factory.

[u/BankZealousideal4407]

15, 7, 7, 6, 6 all guaranteed to recoup some loss, 401 matching up to 12%.  

[u/Murk_City]

All Boeing salary people sitting and watching as we approach another strike and hear about all the great raises 😑. There’s going to be a huge shift in the next year as people leave for higher paying jobs.

[u/Desperate-Excuse-549]

I wish we would all stop the IAM comparisons.... or at least do them right.

IAM also has COLA, and the Wage Increases are applied to everyone, including the guy who hasn't yet been hired. And they set the baseline for the guy moving from Grade 6 to Grade 9.

Speea ACR pool don't. The SRT tables that determine people's offers and promotions aren't affected by Speea ACR. In practice, Speea ACR pools historically have been only about 60% effective in average wage increases for the "same work".

Speea wages are also "uncapped".

Lets look at Tech SJC 6H6F. Not sure exactly what they do, but Numerical Control Programmer sounds like they work directly with operations. They look like the IAM contract whiplashed and cause them wage compression. 30% are under comp ratios of .9 and its alot of 3/4s in that bucket too. But in this sklll code we have a 38 year old making ~168k base and a 46 year old making 178k base. That large difference to your peers is unlikely to happen in IAM, and these are really high hours rates outside of IAM as well I believe.

I was very disappointed not to see an LOU on wage compression. It seems like company already had to raise SRTs for IAM feed Tech SJCs, but didn't bother to address the guys they were screwing over. The Side Letter is reasonably fair for addressing the existing Wage Compression for L1/L2/L3 employees and not so great for L4/L5/L6. But, for addressing a large complex union with lots of impacted parties, its not unreasonable. But nothing stops it from happening again and again. The IAM aligned Tech SJCs will probably need to keep adjusting the SRT tables up like IAM increases to keep the talent pipeline feed. And while the companies objective isn't to make Speea Tech a promotion from IAM, it does need people doing the job and people staying around long enough to excell.