Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Tuesday December 17 2019, @08:01PM   Printer-friendly
from the Stop-the-Bleeding dept.

https://www.npr.org/2019/12/17/788775642/boeing-will-temporarily-stop-making-its-737-max-jetliners

Production will stop in January. The jets were grounded after two crashes that killed nearly 350 people. Despite being grounded, Boeing continued cranking the planes out at its factory near Seattle.

(The interview had more good information, but at time of submission, the transcript wasn't available. There may be better articles out there.)

There are. Here's one:

Boeing will suspend 737 Max production in January at CNBC:

Boeing is planning to suspend production of its beleaguered 737 Max planes next month, the company said Monday, a drastic step after the Federal Aviation Administration said its review of the planes would continue into next year, dashing the manufacturer's forecast.

Boeing's decision to temporarily shut down production, made after months of a cash-draining global grounding of its best-selling aircraft, worsens one of the most severe crises in the history of the century-old manufacturer. It is ramping up pressure on CEO Dennis Muilenburg, whom the board stripped of his chairmanship in October as the crisis wore on.

The measure is set to ripple through the aerospace giant's supply chain and broader economy. It also presents further problems for airlines, which have lost hundreds of millions of dollars and canceled thousands of flights without the fuel-efficient planes in their fleets.

Boeing said it does not plan to lay off or furlough workers at the Renton, Washington, factory where the 737 Max is produced during the production pause. Some of the 12,000 workers there will be temporarily reassigned.

Previously:


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Informative) by SpockLogic on Tuesday December 17 2019, @08:50PM (7 children)

    by SpockLogic (2762) on Tuesday December 17 2019, @08:50PM (#933404)

    ... because management wanted bonuses rather than safe aircraft.

    Yet no one has been indicted, tried or jailed. Start with the chairman, board of directors and senior management and lets begin with say, felony murder. Should get their fucking attention.

    --
    Overreacting is one thing, sticking your head up your ass hoping the problem goes away is another - edIII
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=1, Informative=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Informative' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by Sulla on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:02PM (6 children)

    by Sulla (5173) on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:02PM (#933408) Journal

    Corporate Jail

    1. All assets frozen
    2. Debt owed to the company and debt payments they owe are put on hold
    3. Liable for Employee wages while frozen, except CEO and Board of Directors
    4. Haven't decided if in the case of manufacturing work can continue, can probably depend on industry

    How will a bank feel about not receiving their Line of Credit payments for three, six, twelve months? This would make your creditors in the corporate environment forced into the role of a watchdog against company misconduct

    Sarbanes-Oxley's goal was to hold the CEO and CFO accountable for certain finance errors, but the result was just putting fall guys in that position and focusing the real power elsewhere. The above would perform the same function, but make it harder to shift blame within the company or set up a fall guy. I suppose shell corporations could be used to hide these kind of things, I need to look into the various laws put in place after Enron to see what is there to prevent this that is already on the books.

    --
    Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:44PM (4 children)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday December 17 2019, @09:44PM (#933432) Journal

      Corporate Jail

      You kidding, right? Or else you are having the wettest dream of your last decade.

      Let me put it in the context: we are speaking about Boeing, the second largest defense contractor in the world in 2011 [wikipedia.org] and the fifth largest in 2017 [wikipedia.org] - a prominent figure in the MIC.

      The same company that gets away with milking the Americans double the initially contracted cost in SLS core stage, bringing the cost to $8.9 billion [nasa.gov] - you can't do that without having enough politicians in your pocket. His Orangeness himself didn't dare to utter a word against them, even if they are squandering away his "get to the Moon and raise a starshit troopers army" dream.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 1) by Sulla on Tuesday December 17 2019, @10:46PM (3 children)

        by Sulla (5173) on Tuesday December 17 2019, @10:46PM (#933470) Journal

        Then, as the people, buy your own politicians. Crowdsource lobbying.

        https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/recips.php?cycle=2018&id=d000000100 [opensecrets.org]

        --
        Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
        • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday December 17 2019, @11:29PM (2 children)

          by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday December 17 2019, @11:29PM (#933477) Journal

          Do you really want it? Really-really?

          Because if this become legal, your democracy will become (again [wikipedia.org]), "one dollar, one vote". Which has the consequence of "no dollar, no vote".
          Guess who's gonna win?

          --
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
          • (Score: 1) by Sulla on Tuesday December 17 2019, @11:54PM (1 child)

            by Sulla (5173) on Tuesday December 17 2019, @11:54PM (#933487) Journal

            It is already legal and to some extent done by PACs, the difference between this and PACs is that PACs support the candidate without giving them money directly where as I am suggesting using PAC (or something similar) to make direct contribution for cause. Currently any single person or PAC or Corp can donate their limit toward a cause directly to an elected official's campaign, they are already buying votes. Be they corporate like Boeing or private like Koch or Soros. All you are doing different is a group of non-wealthy people are getting together to pool their money and pay a politician for a specific issue. If me and five people want our congressmen to be aggressive toward Boeing, nothing stops us from each pooling 2k and sending it to her with a letter telling them how important you feel X issue is.

            So your complaints are valid, but what you are complaining about we already have

            --
            Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
            • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Wednesday December 18 2019, @12:18AM

              by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Wednesday December 18 2019, @12:18AM (#933496) Journal

              It is already legal and to some extent done by PACs.
              ...
              So your complaints are valid, but what you are complaining about we already have

              And you are so happy with it that you want more of the same?
              Instead of getting away from the "corporation buying voting influence", you maybe want to take one more step into the insanity and get to, e.g., "corporations casting votes" as a preliminary step towards "wealth/class based suffrage"**?

              ---
              ** (you already have a bit of that: it's highly unlikely that the US homeless can actually cast votes [howstuffworks.com], even if they are theoretically entitled. So, one only needs to get enough Americans homeless and the defacto "wealth based suffrage" is done without modifications of the current laws).

              --
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 20 2019, @10:53AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 20 2019, @10:53AM (#934601)

      Why punish the whole company and all employees when only a minority are responsible?

      Just start throwing people into prison and don't be surprised when you start to find out who else is really responsible.

      Sarbanes-Oxley's goal was to hold the CEO and CFO accountable

      but the result was just putting fall guys in that position and focusing the real power elsewhere.

      Are those "fall guys" really ending up in prison though?
      http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/2012/07/27/sarbanes-oxleys-lost-promise-why-ceos-havent-been-prosecuted/ [reuters.com]

      Just throw into prison the ones that you have evidence on. More evidence may "magically" start surfacing when those heading to prison are trying to reduce their jail times...

      Fines and "Corporate Jail" won't do shit as long as the culprits can keep their $$$$$$$ and get new jobs.