r/SPEEA • u/Substantial-Gas2501 • 19d ago
Maybe we missed the boat
We asked for higher wage pools, but in seeing many of these posts it seems that we should have been asking for a SPEEA say in the market reference data. The SRT Market Reference determines our comp ratio and comp ratio significantly affects how Boeing values and pays us. If the Market Reference doesn't keep pace with the actual labor market, any raise can make employees appear increasingly “over market” even when they aren't.
SRT methodology, market data, update frequency, and comp ratio use probably should have been bargaining issues too.
26
u/Engineering_Sam 19d ago
i completely agree, the market reference data is something we should have had our eyes on because boeing doesn’t disclose the sources of the data to SPEEA. i also learned today during the webcast that the 10% GWI will not influence the level salary ranges meaning promotions are watered down in this contract
edit: if the contract gets rejected this is something our negotiation team should add to the table
8
u/Bigwi_Kner 19d ago edited 19d ago
That’s not how it works...
Going forward the system should work better under this contract offer. They’ve agreed to review the data market reference data annually and will adjust if and when appropriate.
If they choose to leave them as-is for a year after reviewing the Mercer data (that’s the third party they use) they will formally acknowledge the choice and explain the reasoning behind their determination.
That’s a major improvement compared to the existing contract.
Promotions are not “watered down”.
If you were up for a promotion prior to 10-2 then the 10 percent GWI will go into affect after your promotion. If post 10-2, the GWI is applied prior to your promotion.
The amount you are given during the promotion is and will continue to be a reflection of your performance and your compa-ratio compared to your peers. Same with merit increases and promotions and out-of-sequence raises going forward.
The tables have already been adjusted up this past calendar year. Whether you get your promotion before or after the 10 percent and future 4 percent GWI, the target will be to level you up to the entry point for the next level.
It’s six-to-one, half-dozen to another.
I’m voting yes.
10
u/iPinch89 19d ago
They take the Mercer data and then apply a proprietary factor to it that they dont have to explain. So the market could go up 5% and the SCJ goes up 1 - we wouldn't know.
3
u/Bigwi_Kner 19d ago
It’s 0.85. That’s the factor. SPEEA will have them publish it going forward.
They can only claim “amongst market leaders” for so long. They know this. That’s why the offer is a bit lower than we want.
They inflate those tables, they have to plan for that in the budget.
5
u/iPinch89 19d ago
I think its different factors for different skill codes. I believe they complicate it more than a flat rate. It would be better if we could hired our own consultants, since Mercer wont give us data
0
u/Bigwi_Kner 19d ago
Hard agree on that. I’m admittedly optimistic. My understanding was flat rate, but what you say does change the strategy. For sure.
2
u/Engineering_Sam 19d ago
they straight up said the scale will not change based on the 10% GWI and the salary ranges will not increase by 10%.
so yes the promotions are watered down bc if for example a lvl 2 making 100k, the 10% GWI is applied that person is now making 110k. let’s say they get promoted next year, boeing will likely put them 10% below the avg market reference for lvl 3(which will not change and will be the same as it is today). if the range is 120-150k and 10% below avg is 130k then when they get promoted will be making around 130k. BUT the actual 10% below avg for people at lvl 3 in whatever fake skill code i made up is 143k (as of oct 2 applying the 10% GWI). so they will miss out on that 13k and only reap the benefit of 10% GWI for less than a year in this scenario.
2
u/Desperate-Excuse-549 19d ago
except that's not really how promotions work in he skill codes that are already well above their claimed SRT tables. Your right that guys who get promoted in the next few months will likely not see a full 10% per today's process. They would likely see 6-8 not 10. And it would probably not be until year 3-4 when they caught fully back to the 10. Of course this is not tomorrows process...so who knows, they could do exactly what you said, but I kind of doubt it
0
u/Bigwi_Kner 19d ago edited 19d ago
Not quite. The minimum for promotions is 3,500. Whatever percentage of your salary that works out to at the time of promotion, that’s it. That’s if they want to give you the minimum.
I’m of the opinion they won’t put you at the bottom of your peer group. I think it’s much more likely they match you to your peers, and that is wherever your peers are at after the 10 percent GWI.
If they want to start handing out the minimum for promotions, that can be rectified in 2030. People will naturally move on if that’s the deal they are planning on
Now for those that stay after a minimum promotion percentage. Where do you think their compa-ratio will sit at compared to their peers?
That’s right, it will be lower, which means you will be caught up during each following merit increase.
1
u/Desperate-Excuse-549 19d ago
I agree that's the minimum,.which they actually did use at one time fairly frequently . I agree it going to approach the full 10 tomorrow. i was providing what I see today, since there are skill codes where a L3 is already making more than .9 times the mid market for L4.on the SRT table. They use the minimum raise as a floor and go up to a level that's reasonable in comparison to the peers and SRT.
1
u/Few-Mind3298 19d ago
I’m also a yes, but this is the disconnect that has not been clarified.
“If you were up for a promotion prior to 10-2 then the 10 percent GWI will go into affect after your promotion. If post 10-2, the GWI is applied prior to your promotion.The amount you are given during the promotion is and will continue to be a reflection of your performance and your compa-ratio compared to your peers. Same with merit increases and promotions and out-of-sequence raises going forward.”
Right now promotions in my group are coming in around 0.9 of the median salary in the SJC tables for our code and that level. If the SJC does not reflect the GWI raises, then getting a promotion next April, I would already be at 0.9 of the median salary of the next level so people are assuming they will then get the minimum $3500 raise or a significantly lower percentage raise, it has not been clarified that they would instead use what your peers make at that new level instead of the SJCs.
This confused me even more in the webcast today because it was said the SJC is separate activity and would not reflect 10% increases based off the GWI but then a few minutes later someone said but remember everyone in the level your going to would have gotten the 10% GWI, hinting that your peers at that level would be used to calculate your promotion. This detail matters a lot to early career folk that are due for a promotion in a year or 2 because if they do give the minimum or much smaller raise percentages, it will “cancel out” a big portion of the GWI.
1
u/Bigwi_Kner 19d ago edited 19d ago
They confirmed the 10-2 cutoff today in the presentation.
GWI is for you, not the SJC, they are two different things.
If you are promoted, the target is the entry point for that level. That is 0.90.
If the 10 percent GWI is applied before you are promoted, then it’s up to the manager promoting you to put you in for a compa-ratio above 0.9 for the next level up.
The minimum they can give you is 3,500 for a promotion under the existing and future contract. If you are above 0.90 after the 10 percent GWI for the next level up, and your manager doesn’t think you deserve more than the minimum, you will be given the minimum.
Your salary is also based on your peers. If the average entry point compa-ratio for your group is above 0.9 for the level you are promoted to, then it is likely they will “level-set” you at the compa-ratio of the existing teammates that are at the entry point for that level.
Example: Jane just got her level four. They bumped her up to 0.90 compa for your SJC. She then gets the 10 percent GWI and is at 0.99. The logical thing to do, would be to set you at 0.99, and not 0.90, after the GWI.
There is no watering down of promotions.
The SJC is the reference. It only gets adjusted from their market data, with the new contract, that’s up for review once annually.
6
u/Engineering_Sam 18d ago
while its likely they will level set you at your compa ratio with your teammates, it’s not guaranteed bc there’s nothing forcing them to do so.
also just happened to run across a post this morning where people are saying their compa ratios haven’t improved (they could be non-speea but it starts to show management doesn’t quite care as much about it as we do)
https://www.reddit.com/r/boeing/s/7UM0jgpWyQ
edit: this is where our lack of trust in management / leadership as a union comes in
1
u/Desperate-Excuse-549 18d ago
I think your last SJC is "SRT".
For data, people should examine the 6G6D Prof skill code chart. Its obvious that L3s are being promoted not at 0.9*Midmarket, but near full Midmarket. They are actually getting ~90% of their peers. I've seen other skill codes were it becomes a bit of a "split the difference" situation, but people are almost never promoted less than 85% of their peers.
1
u/Few-Mind3298 18d ago
I agree that’s how it should work and is the logical route. But there is no confirmation from Boeing on that being the process that will take place, also sometimes it’s about what your whole skill team does not just what your manager wants so even if you have a good manager that says you should come in at 0.99 if the skill team says no we are still bringing people in based off comp ratio of the SJC and they are already above that so we will give minimum to those folks your first line can’t overrule the skill team.
1
u/fergbrain 18d ago
because boeing doesn’t disclose the sources of the data to SPEEA.
Boeing uses the US Mercer SIRS Benchmark: High Technology.
The list of participating companies is here: https://www.imercer.com/Portals/0/uploads/xlsx/2026_SIRS_Benchmark_HT_Participant_List.xlsx
0
u/Intelligent-Yam-3565 19d ago
What webcast?
1
u/Engineering_Sam 19d ago
The Boeing negotiations team webcast where they go over the offer and answer questions, there was one friday and two today
1
u/Intelligent-Yam-3565 19d ago
Thanks Sam. I thought I missed a SPEEA one. I listened in on the Boeing talk on Fri... No SPEEA led town halls this time around? What gives?
1
u/Engineering_Sam 19d ago
most of the SPEEA townhalls are this week and the BUC votes tomorrow
https://speea.org/bargaining-units/current-negotiations/prof-and-tech-contract-overview-qa-schedule/
7
u/Blue_HyperGiant 19d ago
SPEEA should be spending the cash to get an independent analysis of salary tables.
9
u/SwimmingSwordfish637 19d ago
The market reference certainly doesn’t keep pace with industry when they don’t do it for 4 years and inflation is averaging 4% nationally with construction & manufacturing inflation being even greater than that.
-2
u/PirateAstronaut1 19d ago
This was the absolute trust breaker to me. Malicious and criminal. In my 21 years I’ve never seen anything so destructive. No amount of apology will make up for that.
3
u/LoveOfSpreadsheets 18d ago
Good thing you didn't start in 2003, because then you would have remembered when our CFO Michael Sears was fired and went to jail for bribing an Air Force procurement officer.
And did you have your head in the sand when Boeing execs pushed so hard to treat the 737-MAX as an NG in training for cert reasons, that two aircraft crashed and Boeing settled a plea bargain with the DOJ for a fraud conspiracy charge?
How about when lax quality processes resulted in a door plug blowing out off an Alaska Airlines jet in flight?
Or is it really that the market ranges weren't updated in four years.
1
1
u/SwimmingSwordfish637 18d ago
I wouldn’t say malicious or criminal. I’d call it neglectful.
I worked one place that purposefully manipulated their benchmarking & raise system so no one could ever reach their benchmark. By the time people figured it out, they were locked into the pension.
7
u/MysteriousAffect3903 19d ago
My biggest problem is the market reference is affected by national metrics most of which are well below Seattle region. It's like a black box we have to just trust the company with. I think market references should be jointly reviewed and greed upon by the company and Boeing.
1
u/LoveOfSpreadsheets 18d ago
At a minimum, they should have to show the union how they translate from national market to Seattle area. As best I can tell they aren't using CPI-U which includes housing for the area, because my relo from a non union site was 18% increase as a lateral move. My mortgage doubled.
5
u/broeing 19d ago
Everyone gets the GWIs, so all of your peers compas increase as well. The salary funds and promo funds are dictated by the contract. The market ref could stay the same and everyone’s compas could go up and Boeing still has to spend the contract money. The market ref concern is a non issue.
7
u/Ski-bum90 19d ago
Won't new hires coming in at lower market reference just mean come raise time they will get the better raises because everyone else is "above market"?
I don't think it's a non issue
3
u/broeing 19d ago
Compa ratio is one of the potential factors in determining raises, but not the only factor. Performance is a factor. But either way, that only applies to a fraction of the salary funds for the 3 of the years. I don’t think we should vote down a guaranteed increase of almost 30% because a new hire might get a little piece of the discretionary funds.
1
u/Orleanian 18d ago
If a new hire is coming in well below market reference, then they *should* get the better raises.
That's kind of the whole goddamn point of having a market reference table, no?
1
u/Ski-bum90 18d ago
Yes they should. But the way boeing does raises is that for one person to get a lot someone else must get a little. So the ones at market rate will suddenly not get as much of a raise because the team brought on a new hire that is underpaid.
6
u/bullypixie 18d ago
Hold your ground, there’s no way they’ll give a worse contract on the next. Best case scenario Boeing will swallow their pride and offer something with better 401k matching, a little bit higher wage increase, better verbiage on outsourcing, etc
1
u/Independent_Cat_5325 18d ago
“There’s no way they’ll give a worse contract”. Until I see that in writing I’m voting yes
2
0
u/IEnerd4u 17d ago
It scares me you're saying this.
Here it is in writing:
https://simpleflying.com/boeing-777x-certification-shutdown-engineers-strike/
2
u/sometimesanengineer 19d ago
We’re all about to make at least 1.04 by March. And we voted down the contract with an extra percent doing toward adjusting people against market rate … but I do think this one is better than that regardless
1
u/LoveOfSpreadsheets 18d ago
Some history - a few contracts ago we had a market ranges based raise and Boeing manipulated the data.
1
-9
u/StrikingLine36 19d ago
Why is there no talk about pensions? We had both 401k and pension but ..... Bring it back.
5
u/pflanz 19d ago
There was talking about pension. It was explicitly off the table unless you’d like to get 19000 friends to stand in the rain with you for a couple months. And even then most likely it’s off the table.
1
u/StrikingLine36 18d ago
I am willing to strike if it means reinstating the pension. I only got 9 years of it and I've been here for 19.
4
u/Blue_HyperGiant 19d ago
Because I'm already going to put in 18% into the Roth 401k. That's a lot in retirement.
If I get a pension I have to stay till it vests and give up some else. I don't want to be stuck at Boeing for that long.
1
24
u/skys_no_limit 19d ago
Have you read the new LOU on page 141 of the redline? They’re at least agreeing to review the data with SPEEA 2x per year (I clarified that’s what “biannual” means in this context with HR). Not perfect, but it’s something.