Boeing's engineering union alleges management retaliated against two engineers overseeing design work on behalf of the FAA.
  • dinckel@lemmy.worldEnglish
    77·
    7 months ago

    Just another proof that it doesn’t matter who you are, and what you do. Corporate America will fuck you over in every way it possibly can

  • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    68·
    7 months ago

    The retaliation isn’t even the story here. Interference with delegated FAA responsibilities is, and the FAA should be handling it. Any type of delegation interference is a serious issue.

    • roscoe@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      27·
      7 months ago

      Regulatory capture, it’s a problem through the government. Decades ago U.S. regulatory agencies were well respected around the world, to the point where if a U.S. body approved something, many other countries automatically followed. Now they’re a joke, taking orders from the industries they are supposed to oversee.

      • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        7·
        7 months ago

        I mean, yeah. But from someone in the industry, delegation is fucking huge and we wouldn’t fly without it.

        Take my words for what they’re worth: not much. I’ve been a delegated source inspector for GE and I’ve dealt with delegated FAA peeps and auditors. Delegation is a big deal. You basically don’t work for your employer while you’re in a delegated role. The idea of either interfering or retaliating for delegated authority is insane. Especially with FAA delegation.

      • Buddahriffic@lemmy.worldEnglish
        4·
        7 months ago

        Every time a regulator is hired by a company that they formerly regulated, there should be a full audit looking for any conflicts of interest in their entire time at the regulator. And charges on both sides of the bribery equation if any are found, including both the company itself and any employees, executives, and owners involved or who had knowledge of it and didn’t step forward.

        And if the company has policies that make it less likely that evidence is found, then go after everyone who was involved in making or approving those policies.

  • CrayonRosary@lemmy.worldEnglish
    53·
    7 months ago

    Without my glasses, I thought the thumbnail was some kind of ape. I blurred this screenshot a little to simulate.

  • FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.worldEnglish
    49·
    7 months ago

    Those poor executives had to endure a very uncomfortable conference call before getting on the party bus headed for the golf course. I know cause I book some of those rides and I can assure all you peasants that they’re VERY concerned about your rent.

    Starting to think it’s about time for all the families of folks killed by capitalist decisions to invest in pitchforks and request some of those stock buyback dividends live and in person.

      • Eldritch@lemmy.worldEnglish
        21·
        7 months ago

        I’m no fan of Marxist Leninists. But from their first sentence and by all the ones that followed. They were speaking more about corporate death penalty specifically. And they’re right.

        Short of running out of cash or other resources corporations are effectively immortal. There is no low they can stoop to that is too low. Shareholders and board members alike should be afraid of something other than not maximizing profits. And I’d argue, for egregious cases. There absolutely should be manslaughter charges for those involved. If not a death penalty.

      • nandeEbisu@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        7 months ago

        I mean this is criminal negligence that lead to many deaths. I’m not a fan of the death penalty but they should be held as liable as a drink driver or someone who skimps on building materials and kills someone when the building collapses.

      • WereduckEnglish
        3·
        7 months ago

        They are talking corporate death penalty (as evidenced by the rest of the comment), not literal killing of people. And they are correct.

    • Jrockwar@feddit.ukEnglish
      13·
      7 months ago

      I worked for Airbus for 3-4 years. I wasn’t wildly happy with how many things are done, but when I read news about Boeing I routinely think “woah, that’s wild”.

      I only get on a Boeing plane if there is no other option. It’s not a case of voting with your wallet in an “I won’t buy a phone without a headphone jack” situation, but a serious safety matter. Many of their decisions (particularly the MCAS / MAX8 fiasco) are absolutely insane. They might rectify whatever they want, but as semi-informed passengers I don’t see how we can trust that the current board is prioritising safety over shareholders…

      • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
        7·
        7 months ago

        To be fair I see this as mostly “voting with my wallet” at this point. Their safety statistics by the numbers are still incredibly good, but this rash of issues and the uncovering of sloppy safety practices in an industry that should be harnessing experience and technology to achieve mind-blowingly safe travel is inexcusable and revolting. They have proven they can’t simply be trusted, and from here on in I put any further blame on the US government as the clear answer here is much more stringent oversight and regulation.

        • GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.caEnglish
          5·
          7 months ago

          This is always the problem with laisse faire capitalism. People have shown time and again, they will do whatever they can to increase profits. If we don’t have regulations to stop them, and strictly enforce them, corners will be cut and profits will increase until people start dying in large numbers.

      • misanthropy@lemm.eeEnglish
        3·
        7 months ago

        I fly Boeing because if we crash and die my family gets paid

        If something happens where I don’t die, and I get to join a suit, either way I won’t have to work the next day so it’s cool