Back to Squawk list
  • 34

Former Boeing engineers say relentless cost-cutting sacrificed safety

The failures of the 737 Max appear to be the result of an emphasis on speed, cost, and above all shareholder value. ( More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

bentwing60 20
The predicate of the banner statement is, of course, "and above all shareholder value". The takeover of corporate leadership at Boeing by the soy boy mba wharton crowd heralded the corporate office move to chicago in 2001 and the Charlotte plant opening in 2011 to thwart the union influence that wanted to keep Boeing, "Boeing". The soy boys farmed out everything possible on the 787 "for cost" to the extent that they built more than a couple of over weight, non conforming to type data airplanes that were considered production airplanes that they donated where ever they could because they couldn't deliver them! Gotta get em off the ramp, they don't add to the corporate halo. So when you realize that a large part of the soy boy management compensation in relatively modern history is company stock, why is the outcome with the "Max" a big surprise! "and above all shareholder value". That's the stock price! And guess who the newest board of directors member is?

She more or less aligned her power as the S.C. governor with the Department of Labor against the unions and for the benefit of Boeing when the controversy was front page. the result, a $315,000 dollar a year board seat for a management, soy boy compliant vote that knows nothing about aviation, other how than to buckle the seat belt on a corporate jet. the swamp is alive and well.

Disclaimer! Not a union fan at all as a result of the subornation of the original intent of union participation as a voice for the worker, as opposed to it's current indentured servitude role to union leadership itself and to the swamp. Got some first hand experience. History, not a mystery.
Very well said, I’ve been in Aviation both maintenance and piloting since the early 70’s. After the Lion Air crash when I saw the acronym MCAS then saw what the letters stood for, Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System I knew Boeing had jumped the shark.
What kind of sociopathic mind comes up with that title for a system essential to safe operation of the aircraft, not to mention only one AOA sensor feeding the system and a disagreement light and AOA Indicator on the PFD’s being options carrying an extra charge.
AND makes it rely on a SINGLE SENSOR! And then, for sizable chunks of money, a purchaser can buy 'the rest of the safety bits', and allow the plain to warn the pilots there is a problem.

That's damned stunning. I can't think of an analogous situation... Buying a car without a gas gauge? That's still not enough...
They pay them corporate stock because it's taxed at a ridiculous 15%! And it could be lower by now. One of the 'ideas' that Congress had for the 'Great trump Tax Cuts' was to ELIMINATE the capital gains tax. That would mean that corporate stock buybacks would become even more rampant than they are now, and the shift to producing 'shareholder value' would fully negate the idea of producing a quality product. And with all that cash, the 'investor class' will buy more and more politicians and control even more parts of the government. The idea that Boeing was able to basically approve their own designs should be a damned warning screamed from the highest mountains!

You have corporations regulating their regulators. You have heads and lobbyists of the very industries being placed in their industry regulatory agencies. You have a Kangaroo Government, run for, and by, corporate greed. Where 'share holder value' trumps everything.

Look at that baby stroller that the CPSC refused to recall. Their basic reason, reading between the lines, was 'it will hurt investor value' to recall all of them. We are losing control of our government faster and faster people...

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

djames225 8
Nothing racist about it at all! The original voice of the union WAS for the worker, now it is for their own pocketbooks...sure they help in certain areas, but are more of a hindrance anymore.
Glad you make a lot of money...meaning your product is more expensive which means that, now, the next person must make more money to pay for it so their product is now more expensive...and the chain continues down the line!
I was in a union, and back then it kept jobs secure, good pension plan implimented by company and union, and allowed us to live with the cost of living. A good company can do that all on it's own.

Your comments "because I can guess what’s coming out of your speakers on the way to work." "sorry to distract you from your insane Asian bashing." could be considered racist!
btweston -7
Why don’t you tell me what “Soy boy” means?

Wow. Listen to yourself.
djames225 7
It's soy boy bot "Soy boy" The origin of the term derives from the negative effects soy consumption has been proven to have on the male physique and libido. NOTHING AT ALL is mentioned as Asian because soy can be had in many parts of the world!

Maybe you should listen to yourself, first!
lynx318 2
'Soy boy' is another term for hipster SJW. Try using the internet, not abusing it.
bentwing60 1
the sad part about a dim bulb is that it takes so long to go out, yet illuminates little!

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

rugbydoc 11
btweston- do you EVER add anything of value to this forum? I'm speaking from the vantage point of an overly passive forum observer...although I would bet your personal views on the "value" you add differ from mine.

I've never posted before (that I recall) yet every time I read posts authored by you they are littered with offensive rants, typically of a personal bent, in spite of the fact you clearly have an aviation background / cache of knowledge that could alternatively lend itself to a positive response. Do you really need to continue to push this AVIATION forum into something other than what it is intended....meeting of enthusiasts who share aviation-based ideas and thoughts? Why do you have to tweak everything in your favor? I have to wonder why FlightAware doesn't make use of site moderators.

Let's get back on track. Please consider an active discussion of what really matters, and leave the rest at the doorway. Can you agree to do that? I get the sense you know quite a bit about the relevant subject matter. I'd love to hear about it, as would others, I'm sure.

Years ago I really enjoyed the "conversations" that were [reasonably] influenced by preacher1. Since then, my admittedly voyeuristic activity has led me to conclude the attitudes allowed / encouraged / not called out on this forum are far more on the fringe than ever before. Maybe it's the world we live in.

Please accept apologies for the length of this response, and thanks go to those who took time from their day to read this. Have a great weekend.
jwmson 5
Fire Mullenburg or make him resign.
teufel wolf -1
He is only doing what is best for shareholder equity. This is what the voters want. This what the christian god wants, since corporations are god's chosen people.
zennermd 4
That is Lean Six Sigma at its best.....
George Cottay 2
This issue goes to the heart of Boeing and many other corporations. Classic capitalism holds that shareholder profit is necessary for the business to do its work. The work is the desired end.

"Shareholders would henceforth come first at Boeing. The important thing was not to get “overly focused on the box,” Hopkins said in a 2000 interview with Bloomberg. “The box”—the plane itself—“is obviously important, but customers are assuming the box is of great quality.” This was heresy to engineers, to whom the box was everything."
I'm sure the people on the two planes died horrific deaths. All for 'shareholder value'.

This 60 Minutes Australia video is stunning. None the less for their CEO defending the plane, and shareholder value...
I watched the first 2:50 of the video. The man in the left seat ignores the spinning trim wheel. A pilot would recognize that the trim was running away, turn it off, trim the airplane manually, and continue safely to his destination. Boeing stepped on their d--- by trying to hide the MCAS system. A description of its operation should have been included in the AFM. The abnormal checklist should have included some reference to the MCAS system. Obviously there would be a memory item.
sharon bias 2
Great video article from Australian 60 Minutes. Too bad US news couldn't or wouldn't cover this subject.
lynx318 1
Too bad I couldn't read the article, subscriber pays site .... again.
Truth, justice, and the American way.
dav555 1
It's too bad that some folks want to turn every conversation into a political debate or use the discussion to express their left-leaning/anti-business ideology.

The bottom-line IMO: it's always about the money, whether it be in a small business, large corporation, the government, or among individuals.

Boeing should and likely will be punished for this mistake that cost lives, and they did indeed make a mistake. Whether it rises to the level of a criminal act will be up to prosecutors, but hopefully Boeing will be held accountable for this as they must pay a price.

They are already paying a price in the form of grounding of the 737 MAX, cancelled and delayed orders, reduced stock valuation, and overall damage to their reputation.

What should come out of this tragedy, IMO, is increased oversight by the FAA and others, and big changes in Boeing's executive and management staff and overall company culture, i.e. some of the jokers in charge should be fired and replaced with competent folks who actually care about the quality and safety of their aircraft.
The demise of Boeing. This non-union approach killed them.
Patti Wolfe -2
This is a must share! Information on Boeing is not being covered by the media. Let your friends know..
Randy Marco 2
WRONG... it's been & being covered, apparently you don't know how to use the interwebs, like the 40% supporting "individual 1"!


Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!
This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.