341–350 of 454 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Jack Welch protégé At this point pre-emptively firing any Jack Welch associated executive would probably be a good idea
Why stop there - the man was such poison, that such top-down layoff should include any private chefs, baristas or garbage guys that dealt with him.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The flight was operated under Delta by a subsidiary of Delta wholy owned by Delta. This would be like saying if all of the Youtube database was hacked, Google wasn't hacked. Google owns Youtube. Delta owns Comair.
Subsidiary or not, at least one source (wikipedia) thinks the distinction exists. You might argue that the distinction doesn't matter when it comes to assessing airline safety, but that's hardly grounds to accuse someone of "moving the goalposts". The goalposts might be arbitrary, but they weren't moved.
Comair started a regional airline. They partnered with Delta. Then Delta bought 20% of them in 1986 and the other 80% of them in 1999.
If you want to call that a meaningful distiction then I don't know what to say.
It's like claiming Instrgram is distinct from Meta because ??? I don't even know, they kept the name separate? WhatsApp is separate?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Boeing needs to dump the CEO and install someone from an engineering lineage if they want to build their reputation back. An engineering company run by a longtime manager with a background in accounting is in large part how Boeing got here. Fire the guy and get someone with a technical background in there.
Boeing apparently can't withstand the immense quarterly financial scrutiny it is under without making dangerous engineering trade offs. Time to take the company private?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Boeing needs to dump the CEO and install someone from an engineering lineage if they want to build their reputation back. An engineering company run by a longtime manager with a background in accounting is in large part how Boeing got here. Fire the guy and get someone with a technical background in there.
I don't buy the oft-repeated claim that you can re-make a company simply by replacing the CEO. I don't believe that CEOs in large companies have much influence on the company's direction, except in terms of decisions to downsize/outsource, how to use money, and who's on the board. There's only so much one person can do (and accordingly, I think all big-company CEOs are vastly overpaid). Moving the deckchairs in the b…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why stop there - the man was such poison, that such top-down layoff should include any private chefs, baristas or garbage guys that dealt with him.
That's a bit too much. Wouldn't it be better to each year rank all the executives by their proximity to Jack Welch, and then fire the worst 10%?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HR retaliates frequently
Then you man up and do the whistleblower thing. And you do it having established a written record with HR. The choice between keeping my job vs maiming / killing strangers due to my own negligence is a no-brainer for me.
This is to the point where, although it's irrational but I know statistically I'd be fine, I'd be scared to fly on any new generation Boeing.
It is irrational. Since November 2001, there has been one death aboard a major airline operating in the U.S.[1]. That was a Southwest flight where an entire engine self-destructed. It was an issue with the CFM engine, Not with anything Boeing did. You might choose to include one more. An Asiana flight tumbled end over end after arriving short at SFO. Everyone survived the crash, but a passenger was killed when an eme…
I do get the impression that the current Boeing CEO is attempting to turn the culture around, to a more "admit the problem and fix it" kind of attitude. The problem is that, if you are doing this after many years of "deny the problem and ship it", the number of apparent problems is actually going to go up for a while. I wonder if Boeing's customers and shareholders will have enough patience for him to complete the tr…
Unfortunately no. He now adopted the "admit the problem and fix it" attitude because he was "caught", before that was business as usual for Boeing. It was/is more a "don't ask, don't tell", dump the risk on other separate entities/companies and cross your fingers because we need to get those planes out of the assembly line as fast and cheaply as possible no matter what. Boeing is and has been under pressure, but it's…
And because once airlines have their fleets locked into a specific airplane brand, swapping it for the competition is almost impossible without crazy expense, so they coasted on this vendor lock in for decades knowing their existing customers have no choice but to keep buying their planes.
And also probably because "nobody ever got fired for buying Boeing".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whatever your opinion of Elon is, it’s extremely generous to say he comes from an engineering background and just flat-out wrong to say he comes from the type of traditional engineering background relevant to companies like Boeing (the PE type of engineering). If you approve of Elon as a leader, he is basically the embodiment of “you do not need to be an engineer to run a highly technical company”
I think describing Elon as a small-e engineer (not designing powertrains, but at least understanding them) is accurate, and saying that an an engineering-first mindset is important for companies like Boeing and SpaceX would ring true. Engineering background is different than engineering mindset.
If the anecdotes are accurate, and based on your own description, it seems Elon Musk is a CEO who makes an effort to thoroughly grasp the products his company develops. That's commendable. This doesn't necessarily make him even a small-e engineer, even in the context of the broader definitions used today. It certainly doesn't make him "someone of engineering lineage," as the original comment implied was essential for Boeing's success, or even "someone with an engineering background" like the comment I replied to.
It's also certainly not clear that Elon has an engineering-first mindset, nor that that would even be helpful for many of the businesses he runs. I can think of plenty of examples of Elon putting business above all else plenty of times, and I don't mean that as a dig: It's often the smart move for the monetary gain of all involved.
And just to be clear, this not a commentary at all on about whether Elon would be effective in running Boeing. To be blunt: I don't care about that conversation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why are you including only US airlines for comparing a plane model's safety? That seems very convenient 737 MAXs are not identical worldwide. There's a number of optional add-ons, which even discount US airlines will pay for, but emerging market discount airlines will not. Specifically for the 737 MAX crashes, it was from a faulty AoA sensor. Neither of the crashed planes had the AoA disagree alert option, but all…
A company reckless enough to make "no single point a failure" a pay-for optional feature is not a company whose planes I would like to fly on, regardless of where the company operating the plane is registered.