Boeing Job Losses coming

Bsal

Boeing are said to be cutting upto 8,000 jobs this year despite record sales in 2015.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-boeing-redundancies-idUSKCN0WW0AF

arubex

Having worked for many years for a US-headquartered company I came to understand that they consider employees to be costs, rather than assets. And they don't think it's odd or wasteful to sack a lot of them to reduce costs and then hire them back when a new project starts. Or when they need to jiggle the books a bit to make costs look lower.

I had some co-workers laid-off when a project ended, they had to reapply to the company to move across the room to join another project! Madness, given the costs involved in running interviews and onboarding them as 'new' employees. But those costs were booked to the new project, so the PM of the old project was commended for cutting his costs...

J.pilkington

Press release references a320 v 737 as a big driver. At the end of the day this is the plane that funds much of the two manufactures ability to take a risk with their larger planes.

Related to this boeing is at a big disadvantage v Airbus with all their 737production happening in Seattle Renton (while they do have manufacturing facility in South Carolina it's for 787s). It's an expensive part of the US as the state is quite well off and the staff are very unionised. Whereas Airbus also produce a320s in cheaper locations such as China and Alabama (important as it partially insulates Airbus from use/eur foreign exchange movements).

The 737max was also a reactionary decision to the a320neo and it wasn't as simple to design as the a320neo due to issues around the larger engines not fitting into the existing wing design so they are already on the backfoot

Tenger

J.pilkington wrote: »

Press release references a320 v 737 as a big driver. At the end of the day this is the plane that funds much of the two manufactures ability to take a risk with their larger planes.

The 737max was also a reactionary decision to the a320neo and it wasn't as simple to design as the a320neo due to issues around the larger engines not fitting into the existing wing design so they are already on the backfoot

I would concur.

Boeing took a big hit with the B787, the B737 program had to support the company for a long time. While the B777 program is doing really well but the (looking good) A350 program will stop it completely dominating the large twin market.
The flagship B748i has flopped (granted it may break even financially but this is a moral flop for Boeing) Of course this was only an upgrade of -400 version so wasn't a huge financial investment for the company.
The B737 is at the very end of its design life, eking out the MAX tweaks is being forced on Boeing to compete with Airbus as they cannot afford a cleansheet gamble at this point. And Boeing is over a barrel in a way in that approx 1/4 of its B737 are being built for SouthWest/Ryanair.....this means that it is under pressure from both airlines over design and price.

B737 = B737 Classic's = B737NG = B737-700/800/900 = B737 MAX (Feel free to correct me if Im wrong on this one)

A320 has had a more incremental upgrade lifespan but if you fly on older A320's you can see the differences in the cabin and the internal fittings.
I may well be wrong here but I think that the A320neo matches up with B737-800/900 in design cycles terms.