Live data from Hacker News

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

cnbc.com

321–330 of 611 posts

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

#321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually in most places, technically as president/CEO of a firm you are already liable for any criminal conduct by your firm/employees-on-the-job. The corporate lawyers should have clearly warned them about this already. Additionally, any criminal lawyer should have warned Boeing people it is often around a 10 year jail term for criminal negligence. Unless the president/CEO can prove they enforced policy to mitigate…

> technically as president/CEO of a firm you are already liable for any criminal conduct by your firm/employees-on-the-job. Citation needed. Limited liability is at the foundation of the very concept of incorporation.

The intention is to limit the liability of investors, not those in control of the company.

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

#322
Public sentiment is very much against Boeing right now, especially their current executives, oddly enough (since the previous ones were overseeing things when MCAS was created). But are there arguments for the other side on any of these incidents, and have they been explored completely?

For example…

Is Boeing really at fault for the MCAS related crashes? Both happened at airlines from the developing world, where the pilot requirements (for hours of experience) is a lot lower than for airlines from the developed world. I recall reading that pilots from airlines in the US had also encountered MCAS in real flights but knew how to deal with the condition just using their basic piloting knowledge, by lowering flaps or turning the stabilizer trim off. MCAS activation is obvious because the trim wheels in the cockpit spin with its activation - so a pilot who doesn’t want trim can just flip the switch for them.

Another possibility: is regulation at fault? Recertification is expensive, and the associated training costs are expensive. I believe it caused Boeing to not seek to classify the 737 Max as a new aircraft and downplay changes like MCAS. Could an easier certification process have caused Boeing to be more transparent about changes with this plane?

MCAS itself activates only at high angles of attack and was put in to meet some of the standards of certification, not because there was a “real” problem, by my understanding. It had to do with the new engines’ cover, which does help with fuel efficiency, but changes the plane’s aerodynamics and so Boeing compensated using this system to automatically trim. Could different standards have caused Boeing to not create this system?

Are unions at fault? Boeing has immense cost pressures from all sides, and I’ve heard many stories of inefficiency, avoidable costs, and painful politics at their plants due to union rules. These pressures indirectly may cause the company to cut corners elsewhere.

I would be curious what HN thinks of these possibilities. There are probably other such theories as well. I’m not saying Boeing did nothing wrong, but that the public and media rarely gets complex stories right. It’s easier to latch onto simpler or more emotional explanations. But what’s actually true and how do you hand out blame?

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

#323
post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But who is to prosecute this? If the prosecution and the defendant have already cut a deal, and therefore neither party wants a trial, what is that trial going to look like? They might simply agree to not bring up certain facts or make certain arguments. What the families want is a different prosecutor, one that will do what they want them to do. But prosecutors work for and represent the government, not victims.

Prosecutors are not supposed to drop the ball intentionally if the judge rejects the deal. They are supposed to work the case. Practically, their career would be affected by it too.

There are nuances between jurisdictions, but while a US judge can reject a plea deal they generally cannot reject a guilty plea. A judge cannot force a trial between parties that don't want one. And a trial isn't really possible where the parties agree the facts. The judge can certainly impose a sentence different than that which was agreed between the parties, but any such punishment would have to be based on the agreed facts/charges/pleadings. If the prosecution decides to only charge a lesser offense, the judge's power would be limited to the maximum penalty associated with those reduced charges.

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

#324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You put in place an incentive to not do these things. Corporate executives and boards do these things because they're incentivized to do so through stock price-based compensation. Great risk should come with great reward. We no longer assign risk to most executives at publicly-traded, multinational corporations, but the reward is still great. I'll leave it to your imagination to figure out what the risk should be, bu…

> Great risk should come with great reward. In today's culture, I often hear C-suiters talking about how much "risk" they are taking, to justify their outrageous salaries and stock holdings, but I almost never see them pay much, in the way of penalties, except for the very smallest, most "raw" companies, where they have, literally, sunk their entire net worth into the endeavor. It seems that, once a company has reach…

Additionally, even when they fail spectacularly, they often get golden parachute payments in the 10's of millions of dollars.

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

#325
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has propped up Boeing, because it's primarily a military contractor.

People keep saying this but it borders on conspiracy talk. The Air Force leadership has been pissed off at Boeing for well over a decade. Every project they've been given has turned into a clusterfuck even moreso than average. They fortunately had the foresight to not give them any cost-plus contracts, so at least it's Boeing eating most of the cost overruns rather than the Air Force, but the point remains that Boein…

The military isn't the problem, it's that the military has no other options.

Who else are they going to buy planes to bomb different-colored countries with? SpaceX? Airbus? It is to laugh.

When you get a company that is too big to fail, it rests directly on the government for not identifying and solving the issue earlier.

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

#326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually in most places, technically as president/CEO of a firm you are already liable for any criminal conduct by your firm/employees-on-the-job. The corporate lawyers should have clearly warned them about this already. Additionally, any criminal lawyer should have warned Boeing people it is often around a 10 year jail term for criminal negligence. Unless the president/CEO can prove they enforced policy to mitigate…

> technically as president/CEO of a firm you are already liable for any criminal conduct by your firm/employees-on-the-job. Citation needed. Limited liability is at the foundation of the very concept of incorporation.

Limited liability only protects the shareholders. It exists because shareholders have no control over the corporation. It does not protect agents of the corporation, such as management, because they do have control of the corporation.

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

#327

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…

For spilling a hot coffee cup you get $ 2.7 million worth of punitive damages. But for killing more than 200 people and trying to hide the evidence, we'll charge you 200 million and call it a day. That's less per person than the price of a hot-coffee spill.

> For spilling a hot coffee cup you get $ 2.7 million worth of punitive damages

Dude it literally melted her labia together. She deserved that 2.7 million and only got a small portion of it.

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

#328
post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prosecutors are not supposed to drop the ball intentionally if the judge rejects the deal. They are supposed to work the case. Practically, their career would be affected by it too.

There are nuances between jurisdictions, but while a US judge can reject a plea deal they generally cannot reject a guilty plea. A judge cannot force a trial between parties that don't want one. And a trial isn't really possible where the parties agree the facts. The judge can certainly impose a sentence different than that which was agreed between the parties, but any such punishment would have to be based on the ag…

Hunter Biden’s guilty plea got rejected.

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

#329
post #143

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.

And the level of risk the CEO/C Suite would have to take on would be insane. Who would want to be in charge of an aerospace company if there was a real risk that you'd get charged with murder if you don't have an almost psychic insight into the technical decisions of your company? There'd be a filtering effect where the best and brightest avoid industries where we need them to be. That standard would likely reduce th…

Will that make the best and brightest avoid it, or the worst, cheatingest, and laziest?
Post reply on HN