The phrase Phyrric Victory comes to mind.....

http://www.courant.com/business/hc-pratttrialdecision.artfeb06,0,1810189.story

A federal judge on Friday forbade Pratt & Whitney from closing its Cheshire factory and a smaller East Hartford unit before December 2010 as planned, bringing to a climax a labor drama that erupted last summer and delivering at least temporary relief for hundreds of workers who may have faced a winter of joblessness. In an 84-page decision issued after 8 p.m., U.S. District Judge Janet C. Hall ruled that Pratt violated an existing labor agreement with the union by failing to consider alternatives to closing the plants in good faith. "Pratt pursued its long-term interests, and only gave consideration to the goal of preserving the work [in Connecticut] to the extent that this goal overlapped with its own," Hall wrote in her decision in the Machinists union's lawsuit seeking to derail the plant closures. Hall repeatedly noted Pratt and its corporate parent, United Technologies Corp., failed to "make every reasonable effort" to keep the jobs in the state, as it was required to do by contract. Workers and union officials rejoiced in the news and announced a press conference at 10 a.m. today at the Machinists union hall in East Hartford. "It was worth the wait," said James Parent, a top Machinists union official in the state who testified in the five-day trial. "They can't move the work. That's the victory. It keeps Cheshire open. And it keeps CARO open." CARO is the East Hartford airfoil unit. Pratt issued a statement late Friday night saying it respects the court's ruling but disagreed with it and would "consider our options, including an appeal." "We believe we upheld our contractual obligations to act in good faith and made every reasonable effort to keep this work in Connecticut," the statement continued. "The fact remains that we face a declining aerospace market, a shifting customer base, and a significant and permanent volume drop at these two facilities. To keep the company competitive and retain high-technology jobs in the state, we need the flexibility to react to these changing market conditions." The ruling does not necessarily protect all approximately 1,000 workers at the two manufacturing operations, and it does not protect any of them beyond the end of December, when their contract expires. Pratt is expected to lay off some workers at the plants this year due to declining work orders. And it could decide to shut down both operations later. In their own statement, the Machinists acknowledged this and said they would begin preparing for the next stage of their battle for their jobs. "Today's ruling stops the company's immediate plans to move the affected work to Georgia, Singapore and Japan," the union said. "But the collective bargaining agreement the court today upheld expires on December 10, 2010. The Machinists Union and its members will be gearing up for whatever fight is necessary to preserve these jobs and expand opportunities in the next contract." Pratt is scheduled to negotiate a new labor contract with the Machinists this fall. The workers in Cheshire and the East Hartford airfoil unit still remaining then will vote on whether to accept it, or reject it and strike. The workers did not have the option to strike as they negotiated alternatives to closing Cheshire and the airfoil unit last summer. Among other things, Hall — who ruled for the union in a similar dispute a decade ago — found the company demanded unreasonable concessions from the union in order to keep the work in Connecticut. She also said the company then failed to attribute sufficient financial value to alternatives the union and, separately, the state of Connecticut, offered."That Pratt undertook such a narrow-minded approach indicates that it was not, in fact, making 'every reasonable effort' to preserve work in Connecticut," she wrote. She also ruled that the company did not negotiate in good faith with the state of Connecticut, which offered the company $100 million over five years to keep the operations open. Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, who supported the union in its lawsuit, issued a statement Friday night in which he said, "Pratt virtually invited this result by making the negotiation process a sham and a charade." Last July, Pratt said it was considering closing the Cheshire factory and the East Hartford unit. After talking with union and state officials, Pratt said in September it would do so, with layoffs starting early this year. The Machinists quickly filed suit to block the move, arguing that the company failed to make "every reasonable effort" to keep the work in the state, as required by an existing labor contract. Hall decided that was true. "Although Pratt did not make 'every reasonable effort' to preserve bargaining unit work," she wrote, "... the record demonstrates a very strong effort by Pratt to make the appearance of making 'every reasonable effort.'"

I just do not understand how a group of workers can be so hostile to the place that pays their bills in a down economy. It just don't make no sense.

They just sealed the deal that the plant will close in December when the contract runs out. I wonder if the state will still pay the $100 Million over 5 years to Pratt? Or at least $20 Million for this year.

Sucks yo lose your job, but it seems in this case they are willing to hurt the company for their own short term benefit.

Kind of reminds me of Boeing and the new plant they are building in Charleston, SC. Some of the unions are killing themselves and making their companies move to right to work states and other countries. Good for us and Mexico, but not so good for the union states.

I'm with you, I don't get it either. They are letting short term goals outweigh the long term survival of the company and the union.

Pratt is the last air-related major factory in the whole area, I belive. (Unless you count Grumman's ghost here on LI, Which is now Northrop-Grumman)

That would force alot of older workers move to other parts of the country, and really hurt Hartford. It might be the same-ol-same-ol sob story we've heard a lot, but you gotta wonder how many people who work there are old Pan-am, Grumman, Honeywell, etc guys. Basically people who have been shafted over and over again in the last 20 years.

I guess what I am trying to say, is I'd fight too.

I personally do not belive that federal gov't should get involved in any buisness, but if its decided that its a breach of contract, to me its kosher. That and we all know its .gov over-interaction (meddling?) that is helping these company down the crapper anyhow....

TJ wrote: Sucks yo lose your job, but it seems in this case they are willing to hurt the company for their own short term benefit.

Do any workers that are to be terminated gave a damn about the company after they are gone?

If leadership hadn't made up their mind to leave there before, they've probably made up their mind now. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

With 10% unemployment in the nation.... How many machinists from the rest of the nation would head to Hartford if Pratt threw out the union in December and put out a massive search for people? Why do the folks in the Union believe what they do is so unique and special, that it cannot be replaced?

Actually Sikorsky is about 30 minutes away and there are a few others around. Pratt is certainly the largest.

Greg, Taxes and EPA restrictions are king. There's got to be no doubt. There is a reason why NY, CT, MA, CA and NJ are all losing their buisness jobs in this fashon. Hell, the co I work for touts itself as a New York airline. Yet, slowy, but sure as hell its moving what it can to FLA, and Salt Lake.

Ig- right, Sikorsky. A lot of their stuff is specialized, but its true I forgot about them.

What depressing is that a 1000 employee factory is probably the biggest for the avi industry in the whole tri-state, maybe more.

BobOfTheFuture wrote: Ig- right, Sikorsky. A lot of their stuff is specialized, but its true I forgot about them.

Yeah, but they are cranking and hiring people like crazy. The war has been good for them......

In reply to ignorant:

When I was looking, for about 2 years ending Dec 2008, all I ever saw them hiring was engineers, If i remember right. A guy with an A/P and bench exp couldnt get a thing. I'm a newbie in compairison, but I heard similar stories from older guys with 20 years exp starting at Grumman.

In reply to BobOfTheFuture:

Taxes and state emissions (as EPA would apply to other states too, though not other countries) may be king, but you must admit, a lawsuit probably doesn't buy them much for the negotiating table in December.

In reply to GregTivo:

Agreed. And EPA wasnt the right thing to say. Its more local enviroment restrictions. I mis-stated myself.

BobOfTheFuture wrote:

TJ wrote: Sucks yo lose your job, but it seems in this case they are willing to hurt the company for their own short term benefit.

Do any workers that are to be terminated gave a damn about the company after they are gone?

No, probably not. But while they are employees they should understand that without the company they have no job, so on some level you have to think what's best for the company even it may not be best for you personally in the short term.

The decision mentioned a decade earlier... yes, the union stopped P&W from closing those plants...for a year or so. They're gone now. Cheshire and CARO will be gone soon as well.

I've been really happy with the way P&W has handled the downturn. They have made significant efforts to avoid layoffs wherever possible. It seems the management really does understand the true cost of losing skilled people at all levels, and is trying to cut costs in any other way possible. Pratt didn't just say, "We're closing your plant. Goodbye." They've already relocated a number of the workers who were there to more profitable areas of the company.

I worked as a contractor for Pratt as well as a a third party designer. The unions at Pratt are destroying the company from within. I've seen too many employees reading newspapers, books, playing games directly in front of management and engineers. The union protects them and the rules prevent management from getting rid of workers who blatantly goof off during working hours.

This extends to the engineering and white collar work force as well. I saw one senior engineer playing solitaire for several hours straight (sat down the cube hall from me) and he did not even try to hide it.

Don't get me wrong. There were plenty of employees, union and non-union, who continue work hard, but there are also so many lazy folks who aren't even trying to hide their laziness it is disturbing.

ya I'd say the lawsuit probably precludes any real negotiations on Pratts part come Dec.... the only way they'll stay there is if the union comes to them with some HUGE concessions... and they've already proved that concessions that might keep the company there are what they consider to be unreasonable...

to bad the union didn't have the right to strike as they negotiated alternatives to closing Cheshire and the airfoil unit last summer, (at least as far as the company's concerned).... if they had gone out on strike the co. could have just drug their feet at the bargaining table 'til the contract ran out and then said ... oh by the way.... good by....

• Pyrrhic. I only know because I had to google it.

And people wonder why all the manufacturing is going overseas...

I'll second what senador said. After 20 years of working within a union workplace, I was almost glad when they farmed the work out and I got a settlement. I could never imagine a more soul-destroying, creatively bankrupt environment. Unqualified people were the norm, rather than the exception, since hiring was done from within and was often inter-departmental transfers. Not only were there numerous workers who spent most of the day goofing off, there were many who didn't show up, or took off for several hours per day. Anyone who complained, or focussed on the job, was an outcast. Now that I'm out of that poisonous environment, I keep questioning my judgment in staying so long -- I can only say that the benefits and having seniority/pension became a sort of trap. I'm far happier now, relying on my own skills --- if I don't produce the very best work that I'm capable of, I won't make money. Seems like a fair concept to me.

Lesley wrote: -- I can only say that the benefits and having seniority/pension became a sort of trap.

tr00f

A bud down here works for SPAWAR and every time he tries to move on they offer him a raise. He refers to that as 'golden handcuffs'.

I think part of what you are seeing is a lot of frustration in that generation of workers. When they started working the took jobs that would support their families and allow them to at some point retire with a pension and social security and live comfortably. There have been paying for the previous generations to do so and now that they are nearing the age they can collect it is being taken away from them. I know both my father and father-in-law feel that way to an extent. My FIL went to work for BASF right out of high school and after 30+ years the state of New York sent them to Mexico. At 50 he stated working for the state as an $8/hr clerk.

My father owned a 7up route for 20 yrs. The bottling company went Bankrupt and the Fed gov't decided that rather than letting them sell to a person that was going to keep them in business they should let the local Pepsi bottler have the rights. After that he spent 13 years with a frozen food company that moved to PA because they it was too expensive to stay in NY. Now he's making $14/hr driving a bus which he will probably do the reat of his life.

They are tired of chasing jobs, and they feel that their kids and grandkids are just going to get screwed harder as time goes on. I know it's their fault for not getting MBA's and realizing that they are all replaceable parts but without them you would be able to go home and touch yourself thinking about how much better their Asian counterparts are at making your various widgets.

Lesley wrote: If I don't produce the very best work that I'm capable of, I won't make money. Seems like a fair concept to me.

quote of the millenium.

The union is crushing the manufacturing industry in America, and all the strike happy idiots in line behind them are soaking the money up in the unions wake. Eventually the well will run dry, then what?

And before everyone gets ZOMG flame happy, My father worked for the UAW at General Electric in Ohio for 14 years when I was a kid, and was forced to strike twice by the union, and hated every second of it. He told me tons of stories similar to the time he was written up for cleaning the lens of the flourecent light over his bench so he could see his work and do a better job. That was an electricians job, and by doing it, my father was "stealing money" from that electrician. But when you tried to get the electrician out, there would be a 2 day wait to get it done, and to have the electrician do it required a union rep to oversee the lens cleaning. If the electrician showed on the second day to do the work, but the rep was busy (playing cards) and didnt show, the electrician only had to wait 5 minutes before he could leave and reschedule...2 days later. So my father would have to wait a month to have someone else wipe the inside of the light cover over his bench, when he could do it in 10 minutes on the spot. That kind of bureaucratic bloated wasteful e36m3-ty practice is whats murdering heavy industry in this country...well that and most companies willingness to ship the job to a company in Xiangua China with 12 year olds strapped to mills, but I'll leave corporate mismanagement and profiteering for another flounder

Why do the people in NY and other states keep electing the very people/unions who drive their jobs elsewhere. That's the part I don't get. Business=Jobs. Drive out business=drive out jobs.

I tend to fall into the unions are bad camp, but two things to consider:

1. If we didn't have them at all would we still be uncompetitive with a factory full of 12 year old in Xiangua?

2. If we didn't have them would our workers be making the same wages as a 12 year old in Xiangua?

My own experiences with Unions are make up a very small part of my working life, but I have witnessed things like 4cf talked about above. It was frustrating to work in such a place where getting the job done quickly and safely were not the primary objectives.