Despite some Turbulence, SPEEA Exec Sees Progress Under Boeing’s Ortberg

Why It Matters

Stabilizing Boeing’s labor environment is critical to maintaining production schedules, safety compliance, and investor confidence in a financially vulnerable aerospace giant.

Key Takeaways

• Boeing settled Spirit AeroSystems contract without a strike
• IAM 751 strike lasted 53 days, ending with concessions
• SPEEA alleges breach moving 300 Seattle engineers to Charleston
• Ortberg personally met SPEEA board, improving communication tone
• Pending SPEEA engineers contract could affect Boeing’s safety programs

Pulse Analysis

Kelly Ortberg entered Boeing at a turbulent time, inheriting a series of high‑profile labor disputes that threatened both output and morale. Within his first two years, the company negotiated a mixed bag of outcomes: a 53‑day strike by IAM 751 that concluded with most demands met, a smooth Teamsters agreement, and a protracted 100‑day walkout by IAM 837. These episodes underscore the CEO’s strategic priority of resetting the company’s relationship with its workforce, a move seen as essential for restoring confidence among investors and suppliers after years of financial strain.

The Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace (SPEEA) has emerged as a focal point for Boeing’s next labor challenge. While the union praised a recent contract at the newly acquired Spirit AeroSystems plant, it now confronts a contentious issue: the abrupt reassignment of roughly 300 engineering positions from Seattle to the 787 production line in Charleston, South Carolina. SPEEA argues this violates the Joint Workforce Committee provisions that require transparent staffing forecasts. Simultaneously, the union has raised alarms about alleged retaliation against Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) staff and a stalemate over the Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP) committee, which could have far‑reaching implications for safety oversight and regulatory compliance.

The resolution of these disputes will shape Boeing’s operational resilience and market perception. A stable SPEEA contract could safeguard critical engineering talent, ensuring continuity in aircraft development and safety reporting—areas under heightened scrutiny after recent production setbacks. Conversely, prolonged conflict may disrupt supply chains, delay deliveries, and erode confidence among airline customers and investors. Ortberg’s hands‑on approach, including personal meetings with union leaders, signals a willingness to engage, but the ultimate test will be translating improved dialogue into concrete, enforceable agreements that protect both worker interests and Boeing’s strategic objectives.

Despite some turbulence, SPEEA exec sees progress under Boeing’s Ortberg

Leeham News and Analysis · By Scott Hamilton · Feb. 10, 2026

When Kelly Ortberg became CEO of The Boeing Co. in August 2024, he said that one of his first tasks was to reset the testy labor relations with the unions.

The results so far have been mixed. Ortberg’s immediate labor‑contract challenge was with the powerful IAM 751 union. The contract for its 32,000 workers expired 34 days after Ortberg assumed office, and negotiations were underway. Union members went on a 53‑day strike before the financially ailing Boeing agreed to most of the demands.

Contract negotiations with a branch of the Teamsters union were concluded successfully without a strike. However, a different district of the IAM, 837 at the St. Louis defense plant, walked out for more than 100 days before a contract was accepted.

A new contract with the newly acquired Spirit AeroSystems plant in Wichita, KS, represented by the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace (SPEEA), was agreed without a strike. SPEEA praised the contract as achieving its goals.

Next up is the contract with Boeing’s engineers and technicians, also represented by SPEEA. This contract expires this fall. The union’s negotiating teams will be appointed this month. Procedural meetings with Boeing will begin afterward before proposals are exchanged and negotiations begin.

SPEEA has been at odds with Boeing before and after Ortberg’s appointment as CEO. Ray Goforth, executive director of the union, said in an interview with LNA last week that he’s seen improvements in its relationship with Boeing under Ortberg. But on the day of the interview, SPEEA accused Boeing of violating the current contract by reassigning up to 300 engineering jobs from the Seattle area to the 787 production facility in Charleston, SC.

---

Shifting jobs to Charleston

Boeing’s decision to shift the 787‑related engineering jobs to Charleston came as a surprise to the SPEEA representatives.

“As part of our collective bargaining agreements, we have a thing called the Joint Workforce Committee,” Goforth told LNA. “The entire purpose is for Boeing to give us projections for the next six months, here’s where we think we’re going to be staffing‑wise on these programs. The whole purpose is for them to give us these guidelines so that we can be prepared and can prepare our members.

We had our monthly workforce meeting on last Thursday [Jan. 29]. And they told us everything looks steady state. You shouldn’t expect any changes. Then the very next morning, they called our members who work on 787 and worked together and informed them that all their jobs were going to Charleston. That’s clearly a miss. We have this committee that’s set up for the sole purpose of having these discussions.”

“That committee also agrees to keep some information confidential to the extent that there might be some competitive advantage or something if the information gets out. So, did Boeing deliberately just waste our time by giving us false information? Or, did they just screw up?” Goforth recounted. “You don’t do something as consequential as this without lots of deep analysis about the impacts on the company, good and bad. So, it was quite disappointing. We have this workforce meeting on one day. They tell us not to expect anything. The next morning, our members are calling us saying, we just had this meeting. What the hell is going on?”

Apology and awaiting answers

Goforth said Boeing’s representatives were apologetic. They gave SPEEA a “hand‑waving” explanation that the move came as a surprise to them and that they were still trying to figure out who was affected and on what timescale.

He also raised concerns about pressure on Organization Designation Authorization (ODA) representatives—employees paid by Boeing who report to the FAA and are supposed to be independent. The day before the interview, Ortberg said a complaint had been filed by some ODAs with the union alleging retaliation and pressure from management.

“Right now, as we sit here, we have ODA unit members who are telling us that they are being retaliated against. I read a summary of one yesterday,” Goforth said. “I don’t know the veracity of that, but that’s why you have some kind of a process to investigate.”

The dispute also touches on the Aviation Safety Action Program (ASAP). SPEEA proposed that a three‑member committee (Boeing, SPEEA, FAA) review all safety‑related complaints. Boeing insists on vetting complaints before they reach the committee, a stance SPEEA says defeats the committee’s purpose. The two sides have been at an impasse for nearly two years.

On the other hand

Despite these hiccups, Goforth expressed optimism about attitude and procedural changes under Ortberg. The CEO didn’t meet with SPEEA officials until February—six months after he joined the company and three months after the IAM strike ended with a new contract.

Ortberg invited the SPEEA executive board to a meeting. “We’re waiting at the elevator bank to go up. In walks Ortberg. He recognized all the executive board members and greeted them by name while we were all waiting for the elevator to come. After making that very good introduction to people, he personally escorted us and brought people water and was very, very gracious. Then we had a long discussion about our concerns,” Goforth recalled.

“I think he took us seriously and made some commitments that he would task his people on solving some of our concerns. It wasn’t as smooth as maybe I would have hoped. But they started marching down the list of outstanding concerns,” or “irritants,” as Goforth called them, that he hopes will be resolved before contract negotiations begin in a few months.

Some irritants have been successfully resolved; others remain under evaluation. Goforth noted key changes in Boeing’s attitude:

“Boeing traditionally takes hard lines, whether they’re right or wrong. They take the same line, and they force you to go through the process. Now, on a number of issues, when we’ve been able to kind of make our case, they’ve said, you know what, you’re right. We’re just going to fix it.”

“On some issues that Boeing rejected, an explanation was forthcoming. SPEEA’s representatives may have been disappointed, but at least Boeing offered a description of why the complaint was rejected. That’s the kind of relationship that we should have.”

Room for optimism

“I feel pretty positive,” Goforth said. “What I’ve told different people from labor relations is that we never know which Boeing company we’re dealing with. That’s not a surprise to their suppliers. We never know whether it’s the Boeing company that just wants to destroy us.

A Boeing company that is indifferent to us is far preferable to one that actively wants to destroy us. And one that’s willing to work with us is far preferable to one that’s indifferent to us. Ortberg seems to have tasked his people with resolving concerns when they make sense.”

How this evolves into full‑blown contract negotiations remains to be seen.