3 ms·

> The panel expressed concern that the confusion might discourage employees from reporting what they see as safety problems. so who is opening bets that this w

> The panel expressed concern that the confusion might discourage employees from reporting what they see as safety problems. so who is opening bets that this was at least partially intentional? Quite often when there are overly complicated reporting pipelines and people not knowing how to use them is because the company doesn't want you to report because that leaves a paper trail which could screw them over if they ignore it and something goes wrong.

hinkley 3y ago
Dieselgate is an example of what happens when managers are rewarded for achieving goals they haven’t been given the resources to achieve. When you promote people for achieving the impossible without investigating how they achieved it, that’s how you end up with superfund sites, pollution, or giant safety recalls. They didn’t do what you asked. They found a way to cheat. And worse, their coworkers and reports know what they did, and see them getting rewarded. The “morally flexible” copy, and the boy scouts leave, or burn out.
- hef19898 3y ago
  Dieselgate started as far up the top of VWs fod chain as you can get: the CEO handpicked and protected by the god father himself, Ferdinand Piech. Well possible that Piech was involved in all of that as well. It started as a deliberate decision to limit AdBlue tank volume to safe money, and extend AdBlue usage to the point drivers didn't have to replenish themselves between inspections, which allowed VW to make more money on service. That cheating was not engineers cutting corners to please management, it was engineers at the very top of management deliberately ordering the organization to cheat.
  - hinkley 3y ago
    I think you have a different story. The TDIs involved with Dieselgate shipped with no adBlue tank. VW claimed to have some special process where they could catalyze the soot without the nitrogen supply to manage it. But that was all a lie. Adblue (the accepted solution) wasn't added until 2014 at the earliest. The naughtiest thing they did was that the vehicles detected if they were being run in inspection mode, and adjusted the fuel mixture to avoid exceeding particulate emissions. They may also not have been telling people to refill the tanks on cars that had them, but actively circumventing EEA/EPA compliance checks was what infuriated governments.
    - hef19898 3y ago
      The engines had AdBlue, tuey reduced AdBlue in the mix when not in inspection mode. Without AdBlue, there was no way to ever meet emission requirements.

hinkley 3y ago

Dieselgate is an example of what happens when managers are rewarded for achieving goals they haven’t been given the resources to achieve. When you promote people for achieving the impossible without investigating how they achieved it, that’s how you end up with superfund sites, pollution, or giant safety recalls. They didn’t do what you asked. They found a way to cheat. And worse, their coworkers and reports know what they did, and see them getting rewarded. The “morally flexible” copy, and the boy scouts leave, or burn out.

hef19898 3y ago
Dieselgate started as far up the top of VWs fod chain as you can get: the CEO handpicked and protected by the god father himself, Ferdinand Piech. Well possible that Piech was involved in all of that as well. It started as a deliberate decision to limit AdBlue tank volume to safe money, and extend AdBlue usage to the point drivers didn't have to replenish themselves between inspections, which allowed VW to make more money on service. That cheating was not engineers cutting corners to please management, it was engineers at the very top of management deliberately ordering the organization to cheat.
- hinkley 3y ago
  I think you have a different story. The TDIs involved with Dieselgate shipped with no adBlue tank. VW claimed to have some special process where they could catalyze the soot without the nitrogen supply to manage it. But that was all a lie. Adblue (the accepted solution) wasn't added until 2014 at the earliest. The naughtiest thing they did was that the vehicles detected if they were being run in inspection mode, and adjusted the fuel mixture to avoid exceeding particulate emissions. They may also not have been telling people to refill the tanks on cars that had them, but actively circumventing EEA/EPA compliance checks was what infuriated governments.
  - hef19898 3y ago
    The engines had AdBlue, tuey reduced AdBlue in the mix when not in inspection mode. Without AdBlue, there was no way to ever meet emission requirements.