4 ms·

On one hand I can't blame any engineer that wants to flee, but on the other Boeing really can't afford any more brain drain. We are already seeing the results

On one hand I can't blame any engineer that wants to flee, but on the other Boeing really can't afford any more brain drain. We are already seeing the results of years of forcing experienced but well paid engineers out and outsourcing their jobs. Planes literally falling out of the sky, but some nice fat executive bonuses.

wetpaws 2y ago
Why it should be the engineers problem?
- onepointsixC 2y ago
  It isn’t. But Boeing failing and turning the commercial airline market into an Airbus monopoly is bad.
  - wetpaws 2y ago
    [dead]
deepsun 2y ago
That is a feature of capitalism and effective market. If a company falls a little bit below competition -- market forces it do dive even deeper, die quicker. I'm not saying it's good or bad. I've seen communism, and it's much worse to help failing companies -- they tend to fail even more instead of improving. The problem now is that international market is not really fair, trade treaties help too little.
- noisy_boy 2y ago
  > If a company falls a little bit below competition -- market forces it do dive even deeper, die quicker. Feature of nature too, the jungle forces the weak to die quicker. One more argument for companies != people: we will be a lot more ok for this to happen to companies vs it happening to people.
  - salawat 2y ago
    Solution: for e supremacy of compliance with regulations over fiscal performance. You have to be able to check all of the boxes reliably before we can talk about innovating or optimizing.
  - mensetmanusman 2y ago
    Companies = people + assets + organizing structure
- weaksauce 2y ago
  boeing isn’t a company the us government will let fail. it’s too important to have as a domestic ability.
  - UberFly 2y ago
    This is true and I wonder if it's going to put them even more into a zombie state of existence. Their bad business practices will keep getting bailed out and they'll never really improve until a better company comes along.
- LargeWu 2y ago
  The problem is that the "competition" aspect assumes low barriers to entry. We're not talking about the corner diner or a bank or even a large insurance company. There's very little substitute for what Boeing does, and the barriers to entry for new competition are (quite literally?) astronomical. Boeing can't just be replaced; even to allow it to fail would be a major problem for the western economy.
gosub100 2y ago
Pivoting to a remote-first culture would be a great start. Tons of talented engineers angry about RTO to draw from.
- wannacboatmovie 2y ago
  Why would a manufacturing company - who is clearly having manufacturing problems - pivot to a remote-first culture? What problem would that solve? It's hard to build airplanes in your driveway, but I can't say that I've tried. That door-blowing-off thing wasn't a design issue. "It's hard to forget to install the bolts when you're working from home" is a bit of a logical fallacy.
MPSFounder 2y ago
Anecdotal, but out of my graduating class in chemical engineering from a University in Seattle, the top 20 students went into tech and finance. The worst performing students (by academic metrics) went to Boeing. Over time, I expect decisions to be made by engineers which are not stand outs. Coupled with the MBA trainwreck prioritizing profits and cost cutting, I expect Boeing has a very rough patch ahead.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- Der_Einzige 2y ago
  I always wonder who these folks who graduate with excellent STEM degrees are who can't land a job. I had a similar experience with my graduating class in undergrad computer science at a no-name state university. Of the graduating class (significantly smaller than when we started), I don't know of a single person who couldn't find some kind of gainful tech related employment - including the few folks who somehow could not code! by the end of our program. My experience is circa 2014, so only shortly after the great recession. Where are these people who just can't get any kind of work with real CS degrees? Even the many hardcore cheaters I know of found ways into the FAANG (some have been promoted several times now too!)
  - spratzt 2y ago
    I suggest you come over to the UK. I know several guys with postgraduate STEM degrees and 10 years of development experience who can’t even get interviews. It’s very bad here.
    - ghaff 2y ago
      Things are a bit sketchy at the moment. Had a recent get-together including a former co-worker who was an obvious hire-this-person. They got hit in a layoff and they're still essentially out of work after a year.
    - gopher_space 2y ago
infamouscow 2y ago
There is literally nothing actually preventing Boeing from: 1. Firing 100% of management between CEO and lowest level supervisors that make things happen. All of middle management should go. 2. Promote supervisors into middle management. 3. Promote ground level employees into supervisor roles. 4. When human problems happen (and they will), spare no expense with resources and training. Remember, the reason for firing management is because they had the interpersonal talent, but fundamentally lack aeronautical talent. Interpersonal talent is of minimal value at Boeing.
- misiek08 2y ago
  3. Never do this! Good engineer should get paid better over time and do good engineering. Being for a long time in a role doesn’t make you better at different ones like supervising from engineering. Few bigger companies in EU wasted a lot of tech talents this way and people most often leave job after being leaders for a moment.

wetpaws 2y ago

Why it should be the engineers problem?

onepointsixC 2y ago
It isn’t. But Boeing failing and turning the commercial airline market into an Airbus monopoly is bad.
- wetpaws 2y ago
  [dead]

deepsun 2y ago

That is a feature of capitalism and effective market. If a company falls a little bit below competition -- market forces it do dive even deeper, die quicker. I'm not saying it's good or bad. I've seen communism, and it's much worse to help failing companies -- they tend to fail even more instead of improving. The problem now is that international market is not really fair, trade treaties help too little.

noisy_boy 2y ago
> If a company falls a little bit below competition -- market forces it do dive even deeper, die quicker. Feature of nature too, the jungle forces the weak to die quicker. One more argument for companies != people: we will be a lot more ok for this to happen to companies vs it happening to people.
- salawat 2y ago
  Solution: for e supremacy of compliance with regulations over fiscal performance. You have to be able to check all of the boxes reliably before we can talk about innovating or optimizing.
- mensetmanusman 2y ago
  Companies = people + assets + organizing structure
weaksauce 2y ago
boeing isn’t a company the us government will let fail. it’s too important to have as a domestic ability.
- UberFly 2y ago
  This is true and I wonder if it's going to put them even more into a zombie state of existence. Their bad business practices will keep getting bailed out and they'll never really improve until a better company comes along.
LargeWu 2y ago
The problem is that the "competition" aspect assumes low barriers to entry. We're not talking about the corner diner or a bank or even a large insurance company. There's very little substitute for what Boeing does, and the barriers to entry for new competition are (quite literally?) astronomical. Boeing can't just be replaced; even to allow it to fail would be a major problem for the western economy.

gosub100 2y ago

Pivoting to a remote-first culture would be a great start. Tons of talented engineers angry about RTO to draw from.

wannacboatmovie 2y ago
Why would a manufacturing company - who is clearly having manufacturing problems - pivot to a remote-first culture? What problem would that solve? It's hard to build airplanes in your driveway, but I can't say that I've tried. That door-blowing-off thing wasn't a design issue. "It's hard to forget to install the bolts when you're working from home" is a bit of a logical fallacy.

MPSFounder 2y ago

Anecdotal, but out of my graduating class in chemical engineering from a University in Seattle, the top 20 students went into tech and finance. The worst performing students (by academic metrics) went to Boeing. Over time, I expect decisions to be made by engineers which are not stand outs. Coupled with the MBA trainwreck prioritizing profits and cost cutting, I expect Boeing has a very rough patch ahead.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
Der_Einzige 2y ago
I always wonder who these folks who graduate with excellent STEM degrees are who can't land a job. I had a similar experience with my graduating class in undergrad computer science at a no-name state university. Of the graduating class (significantly smaller than when we started), I don't know of a single person who couldn't find some kind of gainful tech related employment - including the few folks who somehow could not code! by the end of our program. My experience is circa 2014, so only shortly after the great recession. Where are these people who just can't get any kind of work with real CS degrees? Even the many hardcore cheaters I know of found ways into the FAANG (some have been promoted several times now too!)
- spratzt 2y ago
  I suggest you come over to the UK. I know several guys with postgraduate STEM degrees and 10 years of development experience who can’t even get interviews. It’s very bad here.
  - ghaff 2y ago
    Things are a bit sketchy at the moment. Had a recent get-together including a former co-worker who was an obvious hire-this-person. They got hit in a layoff and they're still essentially out of work after a year.
  - gopher_space 2y ago

infamouscow 2y ago

There is literally nothing actually preventing Boeing from: 1. Firing 100% of management between CEO and lowest level supervisors that make things happen. All of middle management should go. 2. Promote supervisors into middle management. 3. Promote ground level employees into supervisor roles. 4. When human problems happen (and they will), spare no expense with resources and training. Remember, the reason for firing management is because they had the interpersonal talent, but fundamentally lack aeronautical talent. Interpersonal talent is of minimal value at Boeing.

misiek08 2y ago
3. Never do this! Good engineer should get paid better over time and do good engineering. Being for a long time in a role doesn’t make you better at different ones like supervising from engineering. Few bigger companies in EU wasted a lot of tech talents this way and people most often leave job after being leaders for a moment.