Boeing Strips Health Benefits from Striking Workers: The Case for Medicare for All

Boeing has terminated health insurance benefits for approximately 33,000 employees on strike, starting this past Tuesday. This action has ignited criticism from progressive leaders who argue it underscores the urgent need for a nationwide healthcare system in the U.S.

The affected employees, primarily based in Washington state and represented by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM), initiated their strike on September 13. Boeing disclosed on its website that their health benefits would cease at the end of September 30.

“This act of greed by Boeing is yet another clear reason why we need Medicare for All,” Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) stated on social media. “As is the case in other developed nations, we must ensure every individual has access to healthcare as a fundamental right, not merely an employment perk. This should be true whether a person is on strike or not.”

Sara Nelson, the international president of the Association of Flight Attendants-CWA (AFA-CWA), expressed her views online, arguing, “Healthcare should never be contingent upon one’s job status.”

“Moreover, shame on Boeing for this decision!” she added.

Union members protest in Renton, Washington on September 26, 2024. (Photo: Taylor Garland)

Several corporations have faced accusations of withdrawing healthcare benefits as a method to undermine strikes. Notably, General Motors in 2019, Warrior Met Coal in 2021, and John Deere, which threatened similar actions during its 2021 strike.

In response, House Democrats in 2022 attempted to pass legislation that would ban such practices, but the bill failed to become law.

However, Washington state, controlled by Democrats, passed a law this year offering limited support to striking workers. This legislation permits workers engaged in labor disputes to enroll in subsidized healthcare via the state’s exchange system.

The striking Boeing employees have vowed to continue their fight despite the loss of their health benefits.

“I’m 50 years old and have been employed since I was 16,” Robert Silverman told a local reporter from the picket line. “I’ve been saving for a long time, and from the beginning, we were informed to prepare for such situations.”

The termination of healthcare followed intense negotiations. On September 8, Boeing and IAM reached a preliminary agreement that might have averted the strike, but the proposal was overwhelmingly rejected by the 33,000 workers, leading to their decision to strike.

The ongoing strike has halted Boeing’s production of commercial airplanes, although the majority of its 170,000 employees are not participating in the strike, allowing other production areas to continue.

The main issues in the negotiations include salary increases and retirement benefits. The initial deal proposed a 25% salary increase over four years, but the workers demanded a 40% increase. On September 23, Boeing made a 30% increase offer, which they termed as their “best and final” proposal, but it was rejected by IAM, particularly due to the manner it was communicated—through media rather than directly to the union.

Prior to the strike, Boeing was already experiencing turmoil due to recent scandals, raising significant concerns about its commitment to safety.

Progressives and advocates for the working class have long criticized Boeing’s management for its apparent greed. “Boeing could have accepted federal assistance during Covid to maintain its workforce but refused because of conditions like prohibiting stock buybacks and limiting executive pay,” Nelson told Common Dreams.

Nelson also linked the union’s campaign for fair compensation and benefits to efforts to enhance safety measures.

“Machinists are not only advocating for quality union jobs; they are also championing our safety,” she remarked. “We support them fully. This strike is our best opportunity to rehabilitate Boeing and restore its reputation as a leader in engineering and maintenance excellence.”

Despite these incidents, the movement for Medicare for All in the U.S. continues at a subdued pace, even though Vice President Kamala Harris, the 2024 Democratic presidential nominee, previously co-sponsored Medicare for All legislation as a senator but has not included it in her current platform.