Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 611 posts

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#101

Post by akira2501 »

supernova87a wrote: post #25

Our governmental methods of punishment for corporations strike me as lacking. This seems similar to Wells Fargo, where ok, the company was fined, sued, made to pay restitution (somewhat) to victims. But underlying it all, the culture and incentives at the company that produced the situation didn't get fundamentally changed. Which often perpetuates across specific leaders, boards, and is a part of what a company is --…

> You have to dismantle a company before it changes these kinds of deep-rooted issues?

We used to have a law that two different types of banking institutions could not be owned and housed inside the same entity. So, effectively, and based on history, yes. You absolutely do need to do that.

> That is hard to achieve.

Not particularly. Congress has broad and sweeping powers. They just don't use them.

> Who's going to change the evaluation procedures that HR has in place to measure what rating or bonus you get this year?

These are publicly traded companies. In the case of Boeing, more than half is owned by institutions and not individuals, and these institutions are known to have questionable practices in all sorts of industries. Again, the solution seems annoyingly simple.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#102

Post by constantcrying »

sudosysgen wrote: post #96
constantcrying wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because that would be a perversion of justice. You can not pay someone to take on criminal liability for crimes they didn't commit and could not have any knowledge of. Just imagine what precedent this would set if it was allowed. If courts would accept that criminal liability can be transferred in exchange of cash, how would the justice system look like? "Culture" is completely ephemeral and having a court of law det…

The responsibility doesn't come from the money, it comes from being the Chief Executive, with nearly unlimited operational authority. The money would be compensation for liability that would be inherent to their position.

Criminal liability can not be transferred. The idea would be rejected by every sane court as it is a perversion of justice and sets unimaginably bad precedent.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#103

Post by dvhh »

justinclift wrote: post #31

Seems an extremely soft ball approach: • Under the deal, Boeing agreed to pay a $243.6 million fine and for an third-party monitor to be installed to monitor the company’s compliance. ~$240M seems pretty low for an industry where billions are commonly thrown about. • The deal spares Boeing from a trial just as the planemaker is trying to turn a corner in its safety and manufacturing crises. Sparing them from a trial…

I think someone else was fined 355~450 millions for fraud recently

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#104

Post by abenga »

constantcrying wrote: post #77
lordnacho wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, this is key. I don't see why the system shouldn't be set up that way. Company does something criminal, now boss is considered a criminal.

That is a perversion of justice. You can not transfer criminal liability for money. Your employees can be criminals regardless of culture. The precedent this would set is ridiculous.

Who should be responsible for a company's crimes if not the people who make decisions in the company? If we want companies to have legal personhood, how about they suffer the same perils of breaking the law (prison time, etc)? Fines are just a price we set on breaking the law.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#105

Post by constantcrying »

michaelt wrote: post #88
constantcrying wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can not punish someone for a crime they didn't commit and had no knowledge of. That is ridiculous and a perversion of justice.

If the ship's captain was asleep in a drunken stupor while the 17 year old helmsman crashed the ship into an iceberg, should the captain go unpunished? I feel that punishing sobriety and rewarding drunkenness is probably not a good idea, if we want to avoid our ships hitting icebergs.

Bad analogies won't help anyone. Did the CEO believe his people were incompetent to develop and verify the software?

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#106

Post by computerex »

keiferski wrote: post #99

The people saying “send the CEO to jail” or “make the board liable” are vastly oversimplifying the complexity of the issue here, which is about how to enforce regulations and standards without torpedoing your economy. One of the single most important reasons why the US has such a successful business culture is because of its approach to liability - virtually all business debt can be erased in a bankruptcy, and the en…

Maybe something needs to change because America's "strong business culture" seems to only benefit the presently wealthy get wealthier at the expense of the working class.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#107

Post by akira2501 »

MangoCoffee wrote: post #32
supernova87a wrote: post #25

Our governmental methods of punishment for corporations strike me as lacking. This seems similar to Wells Fargo, where ok, the company was fined, sued, made to pay restitution (somewhat) to victims. But underlying it all, the culture and incentives at the company that produced the situation didn't get fundamentally changed. Which often perpetuates across specific leaders, boards, and is a part of what a company is --…

The U.S. is not going to shut down Boeing. How many jobs would be lost if that happened, especially in this economy? The fine is quite low.

> The U.S. is not going to shut down Boeing.

It's a monopoly. Just break it up.

> How many jobs would be lost if that happened

"We don't negotiate with [economic] terrorists."

> especially in this economy?

$77b annual revenue. Positive quarterly growth rate the last 8 out of 12 quarters. Two global wars we refuse to negotiate peace in and Boeing is a major weapons supplier.

Then again, if you kill and scare enough people with faulty planes, the state of the economy will be immaterial to what will happen to your interests.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#108

Post by constantcrying »

abenga wrote: post #104
constantcrying wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a perversion of justice. You can not transfer criminal liability for money. Your employees can be criminals regardless of culture. The precedent this would set is ridiculous.

Who should be responsible for a company's crimes if not the people who make decisions in the company? If we want companies to have legal personhood, how about they suffer the same perils of breaking the law (prison time, etc)? Fines are just a price we set on breaking the law.

>Who should be responsible for a company's crimes if not the people who make decisions in the company?

The person committing that crime.

>If we want companies to have legal personhood, how about they suffer the same perils of breaking the law (prison time, etc)?

Companies can not be put to jail.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#109

Post by fransje26 »

gomijacogeo wrote: post #46

A truly fitting punishment would be that Boeing is prohibited from piggybacking certification of any further 737 variants.

Not really, unfortunately. It's the 4th generation of 737, with 4 layers of control systems coexisting (and sometimes working against each other).

Slapping a 5th layer on top of the current crud for a new version is simply not realistic. Removing layers to allow for a new version is also not realistic, as the certification requirements would be pretty close to those of a clean-sheet aircraft.

So in conclusion, Boeing got away with certifying an aircraft that should never have been certified in the first place, and will reap the financial benefits of it. Minus some minor compensation to airlines and victims.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#110

Post by doctor_eval »

constantcrying wrote: post #100
doctor_eval wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There were two crashes. The CEO most certainly should have known about the problems after the first one. It’s the CEO’s job to ensure that sufficient measures are in place to prevent failure. They should not be punished for accidents; they should be punished if the accidents were reasonably predictable. Which was most certainly the case when they decided to the redundant AoA sensor an optional extra.

>There were two crashes. The CEO most certainly should have known about the problems after the first one. Then drag him to court for that. But this is totally different to charging him with the crimes of other people he couldn't have known about.

What are you talking about?

From [1] in 2021:

> The airplane manufacturer broke the agreement by “failing to design, implement, and enforce a compliance and ethics program to prevent and detect violations of the U.S. fraud laws throughout its operations,” the DOJ said.

He’s not being held responsible for the crime, he’s being held responsible for looking the other way.

The CEO is 100% responsible for designing programs to ensure that the business operates within the parameters of the law.

What else do you think their job is?

[1] https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/07/doj-fines-boeing-over-2point...

Post reply on HN