I didn't 'not acknowledge' anything. I simply pointed out what to me seems to be the most reasonable explanation.
I didn't present a complete analysis of the problem. And even if you do take into account 'power dynamics' to jump from that to 'therefore union' would not be correct. Company culture on how errors get handled is likely more important.
A Union worker might be safer from being fired, but that doesn't mean is actually listen to when he speaks up. A company with a strong union culture of workers vs might be separable exactly that.
To me this feel like point to the issue that you like. I'm simply saying that the the better explanation is that one place is the historic home of the company the other is a cheap manufacturing location.
Consider if SpaceX started producing rocket and rocket engine in South Carolina. Would you not consider it likely that the quality there would be worse then in Hawthorne? SpaceX employs are not unionized.
Now on the other hand, what if you had the workers in Hawthorne be non unionized and those in South Carolina be unionized. Would you expect the quality of the rockets/engines from South Carolina to be higher?
I certainty wouldn't bet on that. I much rather have non-unionized workers at a historic company head quarters where the whole engineering sits in a region with likely a 10x higher density of engineering talent and a 10x higher approval as a relocation destination then a far away manufacturing center selected for cheap land and labor.
The same goes for Boeing as well. If you told me I had to make 10000 flights in plane built by the unionized workers from South Carolina and the now no longer unionized workers in Washington. I would still pick the Washington plane every single time.
This is totally outside of if it would be a good idea for the South Catalina workers to unitized and if that might have a improved effect on quality. I think that reasonable argument, but to me its a far smaller factor.
I didn't present a complete analysis of the problem. And even if you do take into account 'power dynamics' to jump from that to 'therefore union' would not be correct. Company culture on how errors get handled is likely more important.
A Union worker might be safer from being fired, but that doesn't mean is actually listen to when he speaks up. A company with a strong union culture of workers vs might be separable exactly that.
To me this feel like point to the issue that you like. I'm simply saying that the the better explanation is that one place is the historic home of the company the other is a cheap manufacturing location.
Consider if SpaceX started producing rocket and rocket engine in South Carolina. Would you not consider it likely that the quality there would be worse then in Hawthorne? SpaceX employs are not unionized.
Now on the other hand, what if you had the workers in Hawthorne be non unionized and those in South Carolina be unionized. Would you expect the quality of the rockets/engines from South Carolina to be higher?
I certainty wouldn't bet on that. I much rather have non-unionized workers at a historic company head quarters where the whole engineering sits in a region with likely a 10x higher density of engineering talent and a 10x higher approval as a relocation destination then a far away manufacturing center selected for cheap land and labor.
The same goes for Boeing as well. If you told me I had to make 10000 flights in plane built by the unionized workers from South Carolina and the now no longer unionized workers in Washington. I would still pick the Washington plane every single time.
This is totally outside of if it would be a good idea for the South Catalina workers to unitized and if that might have a improved effect on quality. I think that reasonable argument, but to me its a far smaller factor.