Submarine designers say they'll strike on May 18 if contract deal isn't reached

ABC News - May 2nd, 2025

Around 2,500 workers at the Electric Boat shipyard in Groton, Connecticut, are poised to strike on May 18 if a new contract agreement isn't reached with the submarine builder. The union, represented by the Marine Draftsmen’s Association-United Auto Workers of America, Local 571, announced the strike plan during a rally attended by 300 union members. The workers are critical in designing the U.S. Navy's nuclear submarine fleet, and the strike threat follows a recent $12.4 billion contract awarded to Electric Boat's parent company, General Dynamics, by the U.S. Navy for the construction of Virginia class submarines. The union has demanded higher wages, restored pension benefits, cost of living adjustments, and profit sharing, with the current contract having expired on April 4.

The potential strike underscores broader tensions between labor and management, as the union seeks to push back against what it describes as corporate greed. This development comes at a critical time, given the significance of submarine construction to national security. General Dynamics has prepared a business continuity plan to mitigate the impact of a potential work stoppage, emphasizing their commitment to maintaining submarine production. The outcome of this dispute could have significant implications for the defense industry and labor relations within the sector, as well as for the economic wellbeing of the workers involved and the strategic interests of the U.S. military.

Labor Strike U.S. Navy Electric Boat General Dynamics Uaw Local 571 Submarine Construction Contract Negotiations Worker Pay And Benefits

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

6.4

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The article provides a timely and generally accurate account of the potential strike at the Electric Boat shipyard, focusing on the union's demands and the company's response. While it effectively conveys the urgency and significance of the situation, the article would benefit from a more balanced presentation of perspectives, particularly from the company's side. The lack of diverse sources and detailed explanations of key claims limits the article's depth and reliability. Despite these shortcomings, the article addresses a topic of significant public interest and has the potential to engage readers interested in labor relations and national security. Enhancing the article's transparency and source quality would improve its overall quality and impact.

Accuracy

The story provides a generally accurate account of the upcoming strike at the Electric Boat shipyard, detailing the union's demands and the company's response. Key facts, such as the strike date of May 18 and the union's demands for higher wages and pension restoration, are consistent with external reports. However, there are discrepancies in the exact strike date, with one source citing May 19. Additionally, while the story mentions a 23.3% wage increase offer from EB, this figure isn't corroborated by external sources. The story accurately reports on the $12.4 billion Navy contract, though it doesn't verify the claim that this includes worker pay improvements.

Balance

The article primarily focuses on the union's perspective, emphasizing their demands and the potential strike. While it includes a brief mention of the company's preparedness for a strike and their previous offer, it lacks detailed commentary from the company or third-party analysts. This imbalance could lead to a perceived bias towards the union's viewpoint. Including more perspectives from the company or neutral parties would provide a more balanced view of the situation.

Clarity

The article is well-structured and uses clear language to convey the main points. It logically progresses from the strike announcement to the background of the contract negotiations and the Navy's recent contract with General Dynamics. The tone is neutral, and the information is presented in a straightforward manner, making it accessible to readers. However, some details, such as the company's response and the impact of the Navy contract, could be more thoroughly explained to enhance understanding.

Source quality

The article relies on statements from union leaders and a local newspaper, which are credible sources for the union's perspective. However, it lacks direct quotes or detailed responses from Electric Boat or General Dynamics representatives. The absence of diverse sources, particularly from the company's side, limits the article's reliability and depth. Including more authoritative sources or expert opinions would enhance the article's credibility.

Transparency

The article clearly states the union's demands and the potential consequences of a strike. However, it does not provide detailed explanations of its sources or the basis for some claims, such as the specific terms of the expired contract offer. Greater transparency regarding the sources of information and potential biases would improve the article's trustworthiness. Additionally, more context on the negotiation history and the impact of the Navy contract on worker pay would provide a clearer picture.