5 ms·

I agree with the way you read it entirely. They did not acknowledge and admit wrong doing. They disavowed responsibility and said "we are complying with public

I agree with the way you read it entirely. They did not acknowledge and admit wrong doing. They disavowed responsibility and said "we are complying with public pressure against our will". In other words, they don't understand what they did wrong, but people more powerful than them are forcing them to change. "We are being coerced into expending unnecessary resources." They think it is an engineering problem that can be solved by engineers and not a management problem that must be solved with a change of culture, namely a change to managements inability to take responsibility for the current state of Boeing. When this inevitably fails because the core problem (culture) is not acknowledged or addressed, the engineers will be blamed, and management will continue to avoid responsibility. The people most at fault for the state of Beoing will probably cash out with enough money to get spoon-fed caviar for the rest of their life while their progeny will never have to work a day in their life.

TaylorAlexander 3y ago
> They did not acknowledge and admit wrong doing. Of course not. Wouldn't it just open them up to legal liability and additional lawsuits if they admitted wrong doing? It seems like saying "we have updated our plan and will now focus on an engineered solution" is exactly the kind of language I would expect from a large corporation that has made such visible failures as to be very vulnerable to lawsuits. I am not even sure they might have current pending lawsuits against them right now which could be made worse if they admit wrongdoing.
- wokwokwok 3y ago
  ...mm... but they didnt say "we have updated our plan and will now focus on an engineered solution". That's not even a paraphrase of what they said. They said: > we are confident that the proposed time-limited exemption for that system follows established FAA processes When we know that: 1) The established FAA processes resulted in a variation of this aircraft that crashed. 2) The established FAA processes resulted in a variation of this aircraft that had part of the hull pop out mid-flight. 3) The established FAA processes resulted in Boeing doing their own certification of their own aircraft. We know also know: 4) They asked for a safety exemption for the new variation of this aircraft under the 'The established FAA processes'. slow clap... If we're talking about investor and consumer confidence and bland corporate HR talk, they could have phrased this in any number of other ways (like saying literally what you said) that didn't draw attention to the fact that they continue to de-prioritize safety. What they actually said does the opposite of the intended effect of 'we're focusing on safety' and instead says (to me at least) 'we continue to think we can ignore the FAA safety rules for our aircraft until a senate committee makes a fuss about it'.
  - hughesjj 3y ago
    > senate committee makes a fuss about it Well, time to do so I think. Good call. https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm Ah, happy to see Patty Murray is already on it, but wish she was doing more - https://www.murray.senate.gov/murray-statement-on-seattle-times-reporting-on-safety-lapses-at-boeing-profits-cant-come-before-safety/ https://www.murray.senate.gov/murray-statement-on-seattle-ti...
  - eastbound 3y ago
    The FAA is 10x more guilty than Boeing. Boeing is not ignoring them, Boeing has benefited from corrupting the FAA.
    - dmix 3y ago
      It's far from just the FAA in the US gov the enabled and encouraged Boeing's monopolistic behaviour. And not just in airplanes. I have a feeling they'd be much more concerned about not messing up and protecting their reputation if they weren't the only domestic player in town.
      - tracker1 3y ago
        Maybe time for airlines to start buying from Airbus if Boeing can't meet expectations of safety and quality. Cancelled orders should have the necessary affect on stock price to scare leadership in the right direction.
        adgjlsfhk1 3y ago
        they won't cancel many orders. Airbus has a huge backlog
  - mulmen 3y ago
    > while we are confident that the proposed time-limited exemption for that system follows established FAA processes to ensure safe operation, we will instead incorporate an engineering solution that will be completed during the certification process. Emphasis mine. Boeing literally said they won’t seek an exemption and will instead engineer a solution.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- dcow 3y ago
  When lives are at stake nobody wants corporate drivel.
ngcc_hk 3y ago
There is never enough money, that is why they are rich whilst you just have satisfied with caviars… especially for those who think they are good and right engineering solution and the money is theirs. You should be grateful instead … /sarcastic
leoh 3y ago
Seriously. If I or any of my peers at Google back in the day ever talked like this we’d get PIP’d.
- vineyardmike 3y ago
  Clearly you're not familiar with Sundar.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    I think that leoh was referring to "back in the day" before Google broke bad, well before Sundar.
Log_out_ 3y ago
Im not a stocktrader, but can one set an alarm watching large-scale investors devest? Even if it's just by not renewing investments and instead buying airbus?
euroderf 3y ago
> The people most at fault for the state of Beoing will probably cash out with enough money to get spoon-fed caviar for the rest of their life while their progeny will never have to work a day in their life. Your dissent from techno-neo-feudalism has been duly noted, and added to your Equifax file.
tracker1 3y ago
Because they're more concerned with bolstering b stock trades and executive payouts than actually delivering a good product. They continue to have massive layoffs and lean into outsourcing over preserving knowledge workers and draining those that know the hopes and why's of correct processes.

TaylorAlexander 3y ago

> They did not acknowledge and admit wrong doing. Of course not. Wouldn't it just open them up to legal liability and additional lawsuits if they admitted wrong doing? It seems like saying "we have updated our plan and will now focus on an engineered solution" is exactly the kind of language I would expect from a large corporation that has made such visible failures as to be very vulnerable to lawsuits. I am not even sure they might have current pending lawsuits against them right now which could be made worse if they admit wrongdoing.

wokwokwok 3y ago
...mm... but they didnt say "we have updated our plan and will now focus on an engineered solution". That's not even a paraphrase of what they said. They said: > we are confident that the proposed time-limited exemption for that system follows established FAA processes When we know that: 1) The established FAA processes resulted in a variation of this aircraft that crashed. 2) The established FAA processes resulted in a variation of this aircraft that had part of the hull pop out mid-flight. 3) The established FAA processes resulted in Boeing doing their own certification of their own aircraft. We know also know: 4) They asked for a safety exemption for the new variation of this aircraft under the 'The established FAA processes'. slow clap... If we're talking about investor and consumer confidence and bland corporate HR talk, they could have phrased this in any number of other ways (like saying literally what you said) that didn't draw attention to the fact that they continue to de-prioritize safety. What they actually said does the opposite of the intended effect of 'we're focusing on safety' and instead says (to me at least) 'we continue to think we can ignore the FAA safety rules for our aircraft until a senate committee makes a fuss about it'.
- hughesjj 3y ago
  > senate committee makes a fuss about it Well, time to do so I think. Good call. https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm Ah, happy to see Patty Murray is already on it, but wish she was doing more - https://www.murray.senate.gov/murray-statement-on-seattle-times-reporting-on-safety-lapses-at-boeing-profits-cant-come-before-safety/ https://www.murray.senate.gov/murray-statement-on-seattle-ti...
- eastbound 3y ago
  The FAA is 10x more guilty than Boeing. Boeing is not ignoring them, Boeing has benefited from corrupting the FAA.
  - dmix 3y ago
    It's far from just the FAA in the US gov the enabled and encouraged Boeing's monopolistic behaviour. And not just in airplanes. I have a feeling they'd be much more concerned about not messing up and protecting their reputation if they weren't the only domestic player in town.
    - tracker1 3y ago
      Maybe time for airlines to start buying from Airbus if Boeing can't meet expectations of safety and quality. Cancelled orders should have the necessary affect on stock price to scare leadership in the right direction.
      - adgjlsfhk1 3y ago
        they won't cancel many orders. Airbus has a huge backlog
- mulmen 3y ago
  > while we are confident that the proposed time-limited exemption for that system follows established FAA processes to ensure safe operation, we will instead incorporate an engineering solution that will be completed during the certification process. Emphasis mine. Boeing literally said they won’t seek an exemption and will instead engineer a solution.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
dcow 3y ago
When lives are at stake nobody wants corporate drivel.

ngcc_hk 3y ago

There is never enough money, that is why they are rich whilst you just have satisfied with caviars… especially for those who think they are good and right engineering solution and the money is theirs. You should be grateful instead … /sarcastic

leoh 3y ago

Seriously. If I or any of my peers at Google back in the day ever talked like this we’d get PIP’d.

vineyardmike 3y ago
Clearly you're not familiar with Sundar.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  I think that leoh was referring to "back in the day" before Google broke bad, well before Sundar.

Log_out_ 3y ago

Im not a stocktrader, but can one set an alarm watching large-scale investors devest? Even if it's just by not renewing investments and instead buying airbus?

euroderf 3y ago

> The people most at fault for the state of Beoing will probably cash out with enough money to get spoon-fed caviar for the rest of their life while their progeny will never have to work a day in their life. Your dissent from techno-neo-feudalism has been duly noted, and added to your Equifax file.

tracker1 3y ago

Because they're more concerned with bolstering b stock trades and executive payouts than actually delivering a good product. They continue to have massive layoffs and lean into outsourcing over preserving knowledge workers and draining those that know the hopes and why's of correct processes.