Lockheed Martin cutting 600 jobs after chopper axed

[babylonsister]

http://thehill.com/business--lobby/lockheed-martin-cutting-600-jobs-after-chopper-axed-2009-07-14.html

Lockheed Martin cutting 600 jobs after chopper axed
By Roxana Tiron
Posted: 07/14/09 02:47 PM


Lockheed Martin announced Tuesday it will lay off 600 people in the aftermath of the high-profile cancellation of the new presidential helicopter contract.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced already in April that the Obama administration wanted to cancel the new presidential helicopter program, known as the VH-71. Since then, the Navy, which managed the program, has moved ahead with the termination of the program under contract to Lockheed Martin and the British-Italian venture Agusta Westland.

The Obama administration decided to cancel the program after costs ballooned from any initially estimated $6.5 billion to $13 billion. Supporters of the program have argued that a constantly growing list of requirements from the Marine One Squadron, which flies the helicopter, led to the much higher costs and delays in the program.

In a statement issued Tuesday, Lockheed said that the 600 employees being laid off will receive 90 days of pay and benefits, as well as additional severance benefits. Most of the employees will be from Lockheed’s operations in Owego, N.Y., and some will likely be laid off from Patuxent River, Md.

“While this is a difficult step for our business, we must take this action now to ensure our compliance with the government’s direction to terminate the VH-71 program,” Lockheed Martin spokesman Troy Scully said in a statement. “Based on our business outlook, no further reductions are planned.”

[Snazzy]

1. same tug of war under Thatcher?

The Westland affair was a political scandal for the Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher in 1986. The argument was a result of differences of opinion within the government as to the future of the United Kingdom helicopter industry. The struggling Westland company, Britain's last helicopter manufacturer, was to be the subject of a rescue bid. While the Defence Secretary Michael Heseltine favoured a European solution, integrating Westland and British Aerospace (BAe) with Italian (Agusta) and French companies, the Prime Minister and the Trade and Industry Secretary Leon Brittan wanted to see Westland merge with Sikorsky, an American company. It resulted in Heseltine's resignation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westland_affair

That happened to pop up when I was following up on some thinking about the anthrax documentary someone had posted. Unrelated (though something with their research stopped in 1986--forget what), but interesting how many times I decide to look closer at bush malfeasance and end up on a page about Thatcher. I had been wondering why the incredibly inflated costs for Marine One contract, quid pro quo to the Euro companies perhaps? If so, who will get pissed at Obama for 86ing it I wonder.

[brendan120678]

2. I'd say the laid-off workers are probably...

pretty high-up on the list of people upset at the contract being canceled.

[Snazzy]

6. each chopper cost more than air force one

I don't know how that breaks down to local via Lockheed, but it was a fiasco.

Yeah, workers get screwed. That's a universal truth.

[nd2004]

3. Finally the Military Industrial Complex is suffering too

but that's ok. Those workers didn't vote for our President.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

5. That's a pretty ignorant statement.

I know for a fact that Lockheed uses Union Labor. (UAW)
I'm sure alot of them vote democratic.

[nd2004]

7. The UAW doesn't place the orders that gives them work...

so the Rethugs generally push the military agenda. Think it through Bozo.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

9. If a program gets cancelled, those are parts NOT being produced.

The engineers/managers give the floor workers (UAW) something to produce and floor production gives the comapany money to research and develop other programs.
Engineers/designers/management can all transfer programs somewhat easily and work on other things (fighter jets, missles, lasers, etc...) They can even move to internal research programs (non govn't funded).
The union members only produce stuff that is bought on contract. There's not much need for union production if deliverable items aren't purchased and contracts are dropped.

If the obama administration cancels a large program that was going to bring alot of work to the company, who do you think gets the brunt of layoffs?
Sure, both sides take hits, but I'm sure production labor takes the majority of cuts because they are less mobile within the company.

Of course, it all depends on the site's structure - whether the Union guys can support other programs from thier positions. Some businesses with lots of production capacity do alot of build-to-print orders for outside businesses.

[nd2004]

10. There has to be work to support both Union and white collar. However..

with more military cuts looming on the horizon, Lockheed (and
other Union military contractors)has a possibility of losing
more contracts in the near future. 600 jobs doesn't sound like
many, but what is not taken into consideration are the large
sub-contractors, many of which are unionized. Military
contractors the rely very heavily upon these subs, but we will
not see these lay-offs will not make headlines. 

The bottom line is that job losses of any number at this time
only contribute to the escalating unemployment figures. 

[dysfunctional press]

13. the bottom line is the bottom line

"The bottom line is that job losses of any number at this time only contribute to the escalating unemployment figures"

that doesn't mean that we should waste $13billion where it isn't needed, nor wanted.
it would be better to spend that money on more worthy projects that also employ people.

[brendan120678]

17. The Navy & Marines do think it is needed.

They'd rather the President of the United States not be riding around in helicopters that are outdated and pretty much ancient, in reality.

That's why they had the big competition in the first place.

Sikorsky and Lockheed Martin were competing to build the next-generation Marine Corps One. LM won the contract in January of 2005. However, due to constantly changing requirements from the Navy (every time a requirement changes, prices usually increase. That's a fact of Cost-Type contracts), and the lagging economy, the price skyrocketed.

[dysfunctional press]

18. the commander-in-chief doesn't think it's necessary- and he's the one who rides in it.

and especially in this economy- the money could be put to MUCH better use for more people and jobs.

[brendan120678]

20. No disrespect to President Obama...

but the steps necessary that the Secret Service and Department of Defense need to take to protect his health and welfare isn't his decision. It is the job of the Navy/Marine Corps to protect his life while he is aboard MC1. The Navy/Marine Corps feels that the current helicopters are inadequate and will not be effective in the near future.

[dysfunctional press]

26. the commander in chief of the armed services does not feel that the helicoptors are warranted.

and as such, the military doesn't feel that they are needed.

[brendan120678]

16. 600 jobs may not seem like much overall...

600 jobs may not seem like much overall, but 600 jobs at a facility that employs a total of 4,000 people where about 300 people have already been laid off because of the contract cancellation in the past three months, and in a town like Owego, NY (pop. 3,911)...it is a big deal.

Laying off close to 25% of your workforce isn't something to take lightly.

[brendan120678]

14. Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) and Senator

Schumer (D-NY) and former Senator Clinton (D-NY), as well as Rep. Murtha (D-PA) are all very big supporters of the Lockheed Martin HMX-1 helicopter replacement program.

[JBoy]

24. Here's a little tip: Don't call someone "Bozo" on your second post on DU.

Especially when your third post contradicts your first post.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

4. :(

n/t

[dysfunctional press]

8. if those are the only 600 jobs lost by cutting the program- it was worth the savings.

$21.66 million ought to buy more than one job.

[TWiley]

11. The auto industry lost about 600,000 jobs.

for comparison......

[FarCenter]

12. Lockheed in Owego, NY? Is that the old IBM Federal Systems Division?

Otherwise, seems like an odd place to build helicopters.

Probably avionics work in the division that Lockheed acquired from IBM. They apparently have about 4000 employees there. 225 will be laid off.

[brendan120678]

15. Yep - the old IBM Federal Systems.

It's now Lockheed Martin Systems Integration - Owego.

They were teaming with Augusta-Westland to build the airframe, and Bell Helicopter was going to build a few during increment 2 (which was previously put on stop-work), but Lockheed was responsible for every bit of avionics, communications, defense systems, and the "interior design" of the chopper.

Lockheed was in intense competition with Sikorsky for the HMX-1 helicopter replacement replacement program.
It was finally awarded in January of 2005.

However, due to changing demands and design from the Navy, and the bad economy which drive up prices of just about everything, the cost of the helicopter skyrocketed.

I believe that there were already a handful of choppers that were completely built that were undergoing the testing phases when the contract was cancelled.

[Stinky The Clown]

19. Good. And when the program restarts, keep it with 100% American Sikorsky.

[brendan120678]

21. No Sikorsky helicopter is made with 100% American parts. (nt)

[Stinky The Clown]

22. Nothing is 100%

Sikorsky is a 100% American company. The Lockheed joint venture was not.

[brendan120678]

23. Lockheed was the Prime Contractor...

they had a teaming agreement with A/W.

The US Government was not giving any money directly to A/W.

[Stinky The Clown]

25. Which proves what, exactly?

[brendan120678]

27. I was using my statement to refute yours....

You said, "Sikorsky is a 100% American company. The Lockheed joint venture was not."

I posed that there was no "Joint Venture." The contract was awarded to an American defense company who, as part of their bid strategy, decided to enter into a Teaming Agreement with A/W. Teaming Agreements and Joint Ventures are (in legal and business terms) entirely different things.

[Stinky The Clown]

28. Whatever ......

..... the facts remain that Sikorsky is a 100% American company. The Lockheed "team" was not. There were not to be some "parts" made elsewhere. the entire airframe was to made elsewhere.

But whatever .... take the last word. You seem to have some deep need for it.