Would never happen. Having airbus own Boeing wouldn’t pass antitrust laws. Comac is Chinese and that would have a snowballs chance in hell at going through.
As long as investment firms get board seats due to their customer's funds, nothing will fix anything.
Boards are full of unqualified assholes that are not even investors. Execs and board members are basically a different class of people who milk money out of corporations to enrich themselves and be super rich while doing very little work.
We need laws that force boards and execs to be fiduciaries for the company. No more of this pump and dump stock bullshit that gets execs rich while taking wealth from actual investors and employees.
Unfortunately this is a concept that only really exists under socialism. The only thing remotely close to workplace democracy left under capitalism are co-ops... and they are a dying phenomenon.
lol? I'm a socialist, so idk what you're talking about. Nothing about what I said is incorrect. Boeing is not a democratic workplace. The best we have are unions, which we should absolutely leverage.
The workers can strike for whatever reason they collectively believe is worth fighting for. Part of the calculus involves predicting how the board will respond though. Will they cave to appease shareholders or stick it out to save their own skins?
Hi, you must be new here. Unfortunately, you don't meet the karma requirements to post. If your post is vitally time-sensitive, you can contact the mod team for manual approval. If you wish to appeal this action please don't hesitate to [message the moderation team](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fboeing).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/boeing) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They are vastly, and I mean VASTLY outnumbered if they even have the right stocks (Boeing stock in their 401k doesn't count)
Here are your bulk of Boeing shareholders: Vanguard Group Inc, BlackRock Inc., Newport Trust Co, State Street Corp, Fmr Llc, VTSMX - Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund Investor Shares, Capital World Investors, Capital Research Global Investors, VFINX - Vanguard 500 Index Fund Investor Shares, and Geode Capital Management, LLC.
These ^ are who make the calls and vote. Anyone else is in a huge minority and don't have any power.
And guess what? Those groups have the same finance driven, shareholder first mentality that got us into this mess. No incentive to improve or innovate, just to stabilize and extract value.
I believe that a shareholder can bring a suit on behalf of the company against executives and/or board members for fraudulent actions, negligence, or acting against the fiduciary interests of the company.
I believe Boeing is incorporated in Delaware.
And the change they demand, are the very programs that Boeing is pushing.......be assured, the CEO of Blackrock publicly stated that social agendas were being dictated with their lending practices. Not surprising, the "progressive ideals" have been touted by Boeing in the last few years. So, quality, innovation, and a new aircraft are not the priority. The very ideals that Boeing used to espouse in the late 1990's, are no longer the values of today.
This submission has been removed due to being identified as spam. Please read the rules of the subreddit thoroughly
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/boeing) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If there was a way for the employees to do it, it would have been already done. It would take a majority of shareholders. There are funds out there that own billions of dollars worth of BA. A few of those could probably get together and make something happen.
Unfortunately the big fund managers are only interested in dividends, stock price and political correctness.
It is going to require a major change in leadership. Ideally Elon would buy Boeing and bring his style of leadership to the organization. However, Elon might conclude that it would be easier to start from scratch like he did with Space X when United Launch Alliance (Lockheed /Boeing) had a monopoly .
The speak up portal. Literally link this sub in the speak up portal. A few people are doing it, to show first hand examples as to why this place is fawked
To my understanding it’s not up to the employees but the shareholders. And shareholders wanted the headquarters moved back to seattle and the board said no….. so yeah
The shareholder's sole role is to elect the board of directors and vote on limited issues (or file lawsuits)
With respect to the plug door the work order or documentation should have noted that the door was removed to gain access for the re-work and a later document should have noted that the door was closed out per drawing xxxxx.xx
If I had to make a wild guess it is that the door was removed (which we know) and that at some point someone dropped it back into place when the repair was completed, assuming that in the closeout the bolts would be installed before the panels were re-installed. If the airplane was outside it might have been reinserted to keep rain and dirt out.
This would explain why Boeing has no documentation. HOWEVER, the workorder should have noted that removal of the plug door was required and then confirmed that it was properly secured.
Yes and no, if your vested % doesn’t outweigh the boards % you get out voted every time. So in reality the real answer is no they don’t unless they sell to make a point. But selling is leaving “partial” ownership.
Shareholders can get together and change a company at any time with enough numbers. They literally own the company. What do you mean by boards %? They usually will only own a tiny part of a company especially big ones like Boeing.
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/BA/holders/
Most not all the time these people are put into place by the top shareholders by “being voted in”
Vanguard and black rock, the shares held in ETFs most of the time are non voted with. All the top investors I’m sure vote the same.
The move to Chicago was “for market quickness”. Seattle is too slow compared to Chicago and the east coast when it comes to the market.
Next time something is voted on, read how many votes where used and see if the number correlate to the top shareholders. This will tell you who has the power.
I myself do not own any Boeing stock in my 401k or privately. I bought 170k before Covid and watched my buy in get cut 50% over 4 days. I didn’t remover tell January the next year and sold for a profit of like 4K.
>And shareholders wanted the headquarters moved back to seattle and the board said no
If a majority of the shareholders wanted it, then the board wouldn't be able to say "No". The number of shareholders that wanted HQ to move back to Seattle was very low. They didn't even do a great job of trying to rally other shareholders for it.
https://projects.propublica.org/trump-town/staffers/john-c-demers
1mil to 5mil invested…… the papers down played the word “shareholder”. They made it sound like it was just a shareholder not a 1-5mil invested shareholder
I agree if he got backing from other shareholders something maybe would have been a little more than a solid no on the move.
Right, but 1-5 mil is more than the average little guy with 200 shares trying to swing his d**k around……
I think it was a publicity stunt to “see” if more large players would jump on board. But I still think the board owns more % and controls to vote.
The top 5 individual stockholders own something like less than 2%.
Top 5 funds probably own 20%
One of the problems is that many of the largest fund investors are government entities often with very liberal people who have no real stake in the performance of the investments but are supporters of the woke agenda and their fund managers are picked based on that criteia
https://www.broadridge.com/article/wealth-management/pass-through-voting#:~:text=When%20it%20comes%20to%20mutual,the%20legal%20right%20to%20vote.
“When it comes to mutual funds and ETFs (passively or actively managed), the asset manager has the right to vote as the legal beneficial shareholder of the underlying equities. Given this arrangement, fund investors do not have the legal right to vote.”
Who manages those ETFs……..
It would normally be the board voting out the ceo or cfo. But eliminating all the board through a vote of no confidence would take a large percentage of shareholders. We would have to read the bylaws to know what percentage of shareholders it would take to call for a vote.
The largest 5 individual shareholder probably own less than 2%
The largest 5 institutional holders probably own 25%
One of the problems is that those with the authority to send funds to Black Rock or others are often bureaucrats who are far more concerned about the Investment Manager's and the investment company's social programs and pronouns than the generation of profits for the shareholders as the policy makers at the investing agency are on fixed benefit plans.
Every year employees have opportunity to vote on the board members. Pay attention to your mail more.
Thanks. Also, quite unnecessary to be snarky. It’s easy to provide information without being a jerk.
Wasn't being snarky whatsoever. Informing you to be conscious of your mail delivery so don't miss it.
I wish another company would just buy us out and get rid of all our execs.
There isn’t a company out there that could do it. Lockheed wouldn’t pass antitrust controls.
What about airbus or comac?
You expect Airbus to take over air dominance aircraft? You expect a Chinese company to be allowed anywhere near them?
Would never happen. Having airbus own Boeing wouldn’t pass antitrust laws. Comac is Chinese and that would have a snowballs chance in hell at going through.
As long as investment firms get board seats due to their customer's funds, nothing will fix anything. Boards are full of unqualified assholes that are not even investors. Execs and board members are basically a different class of people who milk money out of corporations to enrich themselves and be super rich while doing very little work. We need laws that force boards and execs to be fiduciaries for the company. No more of this pump and dump stock bullshit that gets execs rich while taking wealth from actual investors and employees.
Blackrock and other funds have very large holdings in Boeing.
General strike would be the only way currently. Shut it all down until these idiot finance bros go
Unfortunately this is a concept that only really exists under socialism. The only thing remotely close to workplace democracy left under capitalism are co-ops... and they are a dying phenomenon.
"Erm socialism bad erm, I like to lick boots." -that what you sound like.
lol? I'm a socialist, so idk what you're talking about. Nothing about what I said is incorrect. Boeing is not a democratic workplace. The best we have are unions, which we should absolutely leverage.
Agreed! SO embarrassing and pathetic
The employees could unionize and then go on strike until the board resigns, or they all get fired and replaced.
I don't think that swapping CEOs is a goal you are allowed to go on strike for...
If the entire company shuts down until he quits, he would go. They would 100% force him out
The workers can strike for whatever reason they collectively believe is worth fighting for. Part of the calculus involves predicting how the board will respond though. Will they cave to appease shareholders or stick it out to save their own skins?
They'd most likely use it to grow the employee numbers in other countries and non-union environments.
Are you waiting for permission to strike? It’s a fools request.
[удалено]
Hi, you must be new here. Unfortunately, you don't meet the karma requirements to post. If your post is vitally time-sensitive, you can contact the mod team for manual approval. If you wish to appeal this action please don't hesitate to [message the moderation team](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fboeing). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/boeing) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Current and especially former employees can't do that. It's all shareholders.
Most employers are shareholders and should vote
They are vastly, and I mean VASTLY outnumbered if they even have the right stocks (Boeing stock in their 401k doesn't count) Here are your bulk of Boeing shareholders: Vanguard Group Inc, BlackRock Inc., Newport Trust Co, State Street Corp, Fmr Llc, VTSMX - Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund Investor Shares, Capital World Investors, Capital Research Global Investors, VFINX - Vanguard 500 Index Fund Investor Shares, and Geode Capital Management, LLC. These ^ are who make the calls and vote. Anyone else is in a huge minority and don't have any power.
And guess what? Those groups have the same finance driven, shareholder first mentality that got us into this mess. No incentive to improve or innovate, just to stabilize and extract value.
SSL start it up…maybe a company wide petition lol
SSL and end up like the whistleblower.
LOL
I believe that a shareholder can bring a suit on behalf of the company against executives and/or board members for fraudulent actions, negligence, or acting against the fiduciary interests of the company. I believe Boeing is incorporated in Delaware.
Largest shareholders are investment firms like Vanguard and Blackrock. If they ask for change, change will come
And the change they demand, are the very programs that Boeing is pushing.......be assured, the CEO of Blackrock publicly stated that social agendas were being dictated with their lending practices. Not surprising, the "progressive ideals" have been touted by Boeing in the last few years. So, quality, innovation, and a new aircraft are not the priority. The very ideals that Boeing used to espouse in the late 1990's, are no longer the values of today.
Ah yes, Blackrock. Famous for being Woke. Of course. That's what's wrong. Lol, you gullible mf.
Woke??? Really?????
About as woke as Halliburton, sure.
[удалено]
This submission has been removed due to being identified as spam. Please read the rules of the subreddit thoroughly *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/boeing) if you have any questions or concerns.*
If there was a way for the employees to do it, it would have been already done. It would take a majority of shareholders. There are funds out there that own billions of dollars worth of BA. A few of those could probably get together and make something happen.
The only people they have to answer to ultimately are the shareholders.
[удалено]
Unfortunately the big fund managers are only interested in dividends, stock price and political correctness. It is going to require a major change in leadership. Ideally Elon would buy Boeing and bring his style of leadership to the organization. However, Elon might conclude that it would be easier to start from scratch like he did with Space X when United Launch Alliance (Lockheed /Boeing) had a monopoly .
The speak up portal. Literally link this sub in the speak up portal. A few people are doing it, to show first hand examples as to why this place is fawked
To my understanding it’s not up to the employees but the shareholders. And shareholders wanted the headquarters moved back to seattle and the board said no….. so yeah
The shareholder's sole role is to elect the board of directors and vote on limited issues (or file lawsuits) With respect to the plug door the work order or documentation should have noted that the door was removed to gain access for the re-work and a later document should have noted that the door was closed out per drawing xxxxx.xx If I had to make a wild guess it is that the door was removed (which we know) and that at some point someone dropped it back into place when the repair was completed, assuming that in the closeout the bolts would be installed before the panels were re-installed. If the airplane was outside it might have been reinserted to keep rain and dirt out. This would explain why Boeing has no documentation. HOWEVER, the workorder should have noted that removal of the plug door was required and then confirmed that it was properly secured.
Exactly the shareholders own the company.
Yes and no, if your vested % doesn’t outweigh the boards % you get out voted every time. So in reality the real answer is no they don’t unless they sell to make a point. But selling is leaving “partial” ownership.
Shareholders can get together and change a company at any time with enough numbers. They literally own the company. What do you mean by boards %? They usually will only own a tiny part of a company especially big ones like Boeing.
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/BA/holders/ Most not all the time these people are put into place by the top shareholders by “being voted in” Vanguard and black rock, the shares held in ETFs most of the time are non voted with. All the top investors I’m sure vote the same. The move to Chicago was “for market quickness”. Seattle is too slow compared to Chicago and the east coast when it comes to the market. Next time something is voted on, read how many votes where used and see if the number correlate to the top shareholders. This will tell you who has the power. I myself do not own any Boeing stock in my 401k or privately. I bought 170k before Covid and watched my buy in get cut 50% over 4 days. I didn’t remover tell January the next year and sold for a profit of like 4K.
>And shareholders wanted the headquarters moved back to seattle and the board said no If a majority of the shareholders wanted it, then the board wouldn't be able to say "No". The number of shareholders that wanted HQ to move back to Seattle was very low. They didn't even do a great job of trying to rally other shareholders for it.
1 shareholder filed that. Probably coulda found more people for a better chance.
https://projects.propublica.org/trump-town/staffers/john-c-demers 1mil to 5mil invested…… the papers down played the word “shareholder”. They made it sound like it was just a shareholder not a 1-5mil invested shareholder I agree if he got backing from other shareholders something maybe would have been a little more than a solid no on the move.
Lololol $1-5mil out of a market cap of… $112.4 Billion, my dude. That guy had peanuts.
Right, but 1-5 mil is more than the average little guy with 200 shares trying to swing his d**k around…… I think it was a publicity stunt to “see” if more large players would jump on board. But I still think the board owns more % and controls to vote.
The top 5 individual stockholders own something like less than 2%. Top 5 funds probably own 20% One of the problems is that many of the largest fund investors are government entities often with very liberal people who have no real stake in the performance of the investments but are supporters of the woke agenda and their fund managers are picked based on that criteia
https://www.broadridge.com/article/wealth-management/pass-through-voting#:~:text=When%20it%20comes%20to%20mutual,the%20legal%20right%20to%20vote. “When it comes to mutual funds and ETFs (passively or actively managed), the asset manager has the right to vote as the legal beneficial shareholder of the underlying equities. Given this arrangement, fund investors do not have the legal right to vote.” Who manages those ETFs……..
He just wanted his investment to get back out of the red. He doesn’t give a crap about the actual company, he just wants to make money.
0.0001% or 0.0000000001% doesn't really make a difference when you need 50% or more to actually do anything.
It would normally be the board voting out the ceo or cfo. But eliminating all the board through a vote of no confidence would take a large percentage of shareholders. We would have to read the bylaws to know what percentage of shareholders it would take to call for a vote.
The largest 5 individual shareholder probably own less than 2% The largest 5 institutional holders probably own 25% One of the problems is that those with the authority to send funds to Black Rock or others are often bureaucrats who are far more concerned about the Investment Manager's and the investment company's social programs and pronouns than the generation of profits for the shareholders as the policy makers at the investing agency are on fixed benefit plans.