20 ms·

Boeing CEO admits it's retaliated against whistleblowers

59 points by intunderflow 2y ago

aaron695 2y ago
[dead]
grecy 2y ago
Surely this is a very serious crime and people need to go to jail. but sadly, crickets.
- andrewflnr 2y ago
  The admission occurred in the context of a congressional hearing, which means things are already happening.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
- sam_goody 2y ago
  From the point of view of the company, it is indeed a very serious crime - "it" being admitting publicly that the company had retaliated. Generally they are careful not to admit anything that can be used against them, or which can cause the stock's shares to slide. There must have been such serious and well documented retaliations, that he felt he could not deny it. I know I a being cynical, but looking at the fast and loose the way they have played with people's lives invites such an attitude.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
  What do you mean crickets? It just happened. Stop being so cynical.
mypastself 2y ago
So, according to the actual statement, the perpetrators were employees who were subsequently disciplined or fired. There’s no indication that the practice was company policy, encouraged, or even tolerated by the management. The headline is clickbait.
- Frieren 2y ago
  > There’s no indication that the practice was company policy, encouraged, or even tolerated by the management. The headline is clickbait. The CEO just needs to do nothing for this to happen. I have attended many "anti-bulling" trainings. They are mostly there for legal reasons, so the company can say that they "do not encourage or tolerate bullying". But then they promote bullies and punish victims systematically. CEOs are the most smarter capable people until you look for responsibilities. Then they know nothing and have no impact on anything.
  - mypastself 2y ago
    I obviously have no insight into whether or not the company engaged in whistleblower retaliation or intimidation practices. But that is a different argument from whether or not the headline accurately interpreted the statement.
- lovethevoid 2y ago
  Why would a company ever make that policy? It’s as dumb as making it a policy to not hire women. You always want to create separation, so that only the “bad apples” are blamed.
  - mypastself 2y ago
    Is there any indication in the quoted statement that the retaliations were initiated or supported by the company management? If not, the headline remains inaccurate.
    - lovethevoid 2y ago
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
ChrisArchitect 2y ago
[dupe] More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40723545 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40723545

59 points by intunderflow 2y ago

aaron695 2y ago

[dead]

grecy 2y ago

Surely this is a very serious crime and people need to go to jail. but sadly, crickets.

andrewflnr 2y ago
The admission occurred in the context of a congressional hearing, which means things are already happening.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
sam_goody 2y ago
From the point of view of the company, it is indeed a very serious crime - "it" being admitting publicly that the company had retaliated. Generally they are careful not to admit anything that can be used against them, or which can cause the stock's shares to slide. There must have been such serious and well documented retaliations, that he felt he could not deny it. I know I a being cynical, but looking at the fast and loose the way they have played with people's lives invites such an attitude.
2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
What do you mean crickets? It just happened. Stop being so cynical.

mypastself 2y ago

So, according to the actual statement, the perpetrators were employees who were subsequently disciplined or fired. There’s no indication that the practice was company policy, encouraged, or even tolerated by the management. The headline is clickbait.

Frieren 2y ago
> There’s no indication that the practice was company policy, encouraged, or even tolerated by the management. The headline is clickbait. The CEO just needs to do nothing for this to happen. I have attended many "anti-bulling" trainings. They are mostly there for legal reasons, so the company can say that they "do not encourage or tolerate bullying". But then they promote bullies and punish victims systematically. CEOs are the most smarter capable people until you look for responsibilities. Then they know nothing and have no impact on anything.
- mypastself 2y ago
  I obviously have no insight into whether or not the company engaged in whistleblower retaliation or intimidation practices. But that is a different argument from whether or not the headline accurately interpreted the statement.
lovethevoid 2y ago
Why would a company ever make that policy? It’s as dumb as making it a policy to not hire women. You always want to create separation, so that only the “bad apples” are blamed.
- mypastself 2y ago
  Is there any indication in the quoted statement that the retaliations were initiated or supported by the company management? If not, the headline remains inaccurate.
  - lovethevoid 2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

ChrisArchitect 2y ago

[dupe] More discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40723545 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40723545