Ryanair CEO's Rebuke Of Boeing Was The LAST STRAW That Led Boeing To Finally Make Leadership Changes
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 май 2024
- BOEING SHAKEUP! Who's in? Who's Out? Will it even work? Take a look deep inside Boeing and find out exactly how and what finally led to Boeing making drastic leadership changes. But is it Too little, too late?
#boeing #boeing737 #ryanair #ryanairlanding #NTSB #FAA #southwestairlines #jetblueairways #alaskaairlines #alaska #BoeingCEO
patreon.com/maximusaviation74...
Support The Channel Buy Me A Coffee
www.buymeacoffee.com/maximusa...
CHAPTERS:
0:00 - The Axe Falls
1:25 - Boeing Succession
2:00 - How Many Straws Does It Take?
2:58 - The "Stench Of Mendacity" And The New FBI Investigation
4:53 - Ryanairs Michael O'Leary "The Straw That BROKE Boeing"
8:00 - The Board Forced To Take Action
8:25 - Airline CEO's Unite
8:57 - Who's In And Who's Out? Meet The Future CEO Of Boeing!
Maximus Merch
Hats, Mugs, Hoodies, and T-shirts
teespring.com/stores/maximus-...
Premium Polo Shirts, Mugs, Phone Cases, and more
shop.spreadshirt.com/maximus-...
For Business Inquiries Email: aviationmaximus@gmail.com
Copyright Disclaimer. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statutes that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
Promoting a Non-Engineer to CEO will only continue to exacerbate boeing's problems. Enough with Financial people...well, stupid chases stupid.
Dennis Muilenburg was an engineer. He had a degree in aeronautics and aerospace.
Called modern stupid business practices. Irritating
not necessarily !
Correct. Another bean counter
@@KaptnKork Yup, another bean counter. IF the promote her to be CEO then they have obviously not learned anything... 🙄
They replaced the old clowns with a new set of clowns. Yeah, that should fix the company 😆🤣
You are spot on there!
Well, the doors DO fall off clown cars, so yeah...
Airbus clowns too
Everyone saying they should return to engineering roots. Looks like they’ve listened, doesn’t it?
@@nickolliver3021 Based on your amazing aerospace engineering excellence? Or just your obvious 'Murka is gud, the EU is badddd" "belief system?
New CEO should have at least an undergrad degree in engineering.
you can practically buy those in USA not worth the paper.
Agreed.
And a license or designation from the FAA.
What, GED earned while in prison is not good enough??
Oh, my gawd!!! ANOTHER BEAN COUNTER!!! Uneffing believable.
The new CEO needs to come from outside Boeing and have an aviation/engineering background. Stephanie Pope sounds like another Boeing bean counter.
She was Chief Operating Officer and it is the operational part that is effed.
IF they put her in as CEO it will be obvious that they have learned nothing. And it really looks like they haven't learned anything. Just some high profile moves as a smokescreen to hopefully mollify everyone while they continue to do business as usual. 🙄
That, right there. Couldn't agree more.@@verttikoo2052
She has strong background in Accounting... just what they (do not) need
@@panoshountis1516 You couldn't make it up could you?
When Ryan Air thinks you are bad at your job, it's time for self reflection
Ryan Air is very good at its job. It doesn't promise much, just cheap, reliable transport, but they do what they promise.
Aimless slagging off of Ryanair is a sure marker of total aviation ignorance.
I was expecting that ignorant comment. You should try harder @Adiscretefirm.
So goes the joke, take a hard look at Ryan Air and you won't be laughing. Always delivers exactly what is promised.
@@peterrollinson-lorimer then why are their customer satisfaction ratings consistently low and their reviews mediocre?
An Engineer can get a MBA. An accountant rarely gets an Engineering degree .
Just what Boeing needs yet another bean counter at the top of the tree FFS!
Yep
Another bean counter is sure to boost confidence in Boeing. WTF are they thinking?
I think the solution is for Boeing to quit the aviation industry and, instead, go into the cultivation and marketing of beans. There they might usefully employ a bean counter.
Another accountant. So carry on the same road to disaster.
They’re doing the same thing and expecting a different result. Crazy.
@@jennifergriffin3690Either that or they think we’re all stupid.
Boeing take a tip: CEO of Airbus, Guillaume Faury, is an aeronautical engineer who started his career in helicopter design and R&D. Info courtesy of Wikipedia.
“Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.”
We won’t get fooled again.😂
Meet the new boss, selected by the old boss … proof nothing will change
Aye, selected and groomed by the old boss. New face, same management style. They must think we’re all stupid.
Nice! We gont get fooled again.
@@mikoto7693 That's fine, because we think they're all stupid.
Putting a business major in the CEO role tends to indicate, to me, that we will see more of same going forward. Boeing needs a person with a MUCH broader system-of-systems mindset.
They’re doing the same thing and hoping for another result.
They do not seem to have learned anything.
Here’s a crazy, revolutionary idea. Turn the position of CEO into a three person job! Have the bean counter, an aircraft engineer and QA safety expert share the job with a 2/3 voting system for middle-to-big decisions!
Combine the knowledge and expertise from the three most important areas in aircraft manufacturing with equal power at the top. Get the best of both worlds.
Just what they need-- an ACCOUNTANT. Glynne Shotwell was an accomplished engineer before she joined SpaceX.
She`s burnt up all her reputation for what ?
@@MyKharli Has she? Seems to me that company's working like a well-oiled machine. Nobody else in the history of spaceflight has so many successful flights at such a high frequency.
@@MyKharli yep, total waste of talent.
I mean, what kind of fool gives up everything to run the most successful rocket company ever that lifts more tonnage to orbit than the rest of the world combined.
She is obviously an idiot.
@@KaiHenningsendepends on which part of the company’s operations - the falcon 9 was and continues to be one of the most successful rocketry programs in history but starship has been a shitshow and starlink has cost tens of billions of dollars to build out a ridiculously huge satellite constellation with a dubious plan to profitability
Boeing doesn't need a number cruncher at the helm, it needs someone who knows and understands how safe aeroplanes need to be built
Honestly I think it needs both. With equal power and authority to utilise the best of both worlds in a healthy balance.
Hmmmm ... so an MBA and bean counter will fix an engineering company. Seems to me that is the root case of the failure to begin with. Also emblematic and systemic in western companies. But i am just an old fart so what do i know.
I would say you know more than them.
Aye, probably more than them. Look, I’m not unreasonable-running a business as big as Boeing probably does require some bean counters. But would it be so crazy to balance the bean counters with aircraft engineers and safety/QA experts? Surely making the best use of knowledge from all areas is better than giving the bean counters all the authority.
Why are you calling them an engineering company?
Don’t these clowns ever learn that they haven’t resolved any of the problems at Boeing and until they appoint management with a aircraft engineering background it’s going to be the same problems repeating themselves. ✈️😡
If a new management does better, than they will look bad. They would want to prevent that from happening.
So sad, Dave Calhoun was the best CEO Airbus ever had
Awesome! 😂
Why isn’t this guy fired immediately like the rest? These quality issues are his fault as well as CEO.
@@larryo6874 So he has enough time to make sure nothing changes that would make him look like the culprit.
Engineers never made any money, but accountants never made anything. Putting an accountant as CEO is a sure way to keep the status quo in quality at Boeing.
Exactly. Boeing needs both, and balance of both with equal power and authority to utilise the best of both worlds.
Another bean counter. Nothing will change.
Engineering problems are caused by lawyers and accountants.
Running a hose to a dumpster fire only works if you turn the water on.
Boeing made a horrible mistake when the company bought McDonnell Douglas.
It wasn’t the purchase of McDonnell-Douglas that was the mistake, but rather the promotions of the McDonnell-Douglas management instead of the preexisting Boeing management into the company’s leadership ranks . Boeing’s engineering culture should have taken precedence over the bean counters.
You mean when McDonnell Douglas let themselves getting bought by Boeing so that they could make a hostile reverse takeover of Boeing? 😂😂
You’re another genius. McDonnell Douglas bought Boeing. John McDonnell owns 51% of Boeing Stock.
Really it was the other way around McDonnell Douglas bought Boeing with Boeing's money.
Honestly I think Boeing might have a better chance of survival if the next CEO also had a masters in engineering and/or has manufacturing quality control background, in addition to the typical MBA/accounting credentials.
They need both skillsets. A power structure that has an equal balance of engineering, QA and bean counters. There has to be a middle ground where safe, reliable aircraft can be manufactured awhile turning out a decent profit. They did it before the McDouglas merger, Airbus does it, Embraer does it. Dozens of smaller aircraft type manufacturers does it.
Boeing should be capable of it.
As Einstein said “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them” Someone please tell Boeing!
Boeing needs another bookkeeper in charge like the need another hole in 737.
It seems that engineering aluminium cylinders to go brrrrooooom in the sky is such an easy thing that Boeing doesn't appear to need a single aviation engineer in one of the top spots.
Of course, Boeing made its entire reputation by having aerospace engineers dominating the boardroom, so the job's obviously been done, so for the past few decades the engineers could take a break, put their feet up... and watch the financial wizzes tank the whole company.
If only I could say I was surprised. Having a degree in economics myself, I am all too familiar with how economists view mundanities like engineering.
Well said! As a sheetmetal mech with an Airframes cert worked at Douglas and MRO's, mechs are treated like fast food workers with little to no pay increase to stay once they get trained. AAR Duluth we went through aprox 350 entry level mechs local to the area who left for better pay over 4 to 5 year span. Even doing interiors, lavs and galley removals and install is very technical job that should be given a decent wage.
This explains the cyclical nature of aviation industry. However, they often forget that knowledge retention is key for the business survival.
@@markwheat2668Even the people who clean the aircraft need a decent wage. We wander and drive around a dangerous environment where merely walking or driving into the wrong place at the wrong time while not paying attention can be the last thing we ever do. We’re using an array of potentially harmful chemicals-either to us or to the aircraft if we use the wrong chemical in the wrong place. And memorise a bunch of things in short order. 😆 Nothing about airliners is simple-not even cleaning them.
The folk who actually install things like the galleys and lavatories, and the ones who maintain them need to be paid better than “decently” in my opinion. If my job requires days of training, days of testing and at least a couple weeks of supervised on-the-job training and testing to ensure the new aircraft cleaner is doing the work safely and competently, then the folk doing the technical work of installing or maintaining the aircraft should be paid *well*. It’s probably not the kind of job where you can get anyone of basic intelligence off the street and get them fully trained in 2-3 weeks.
I might be biased but I tend to reckon that everyone who works Airside except the pilots are pretty underpaid given the amount of responsibility they have. “Don’t endanger hundreds of people by accidentally damaging that airplane and not report it.” “Don’t endanger potentially hundreds of lives by spotting that potential damage or defect but trust someone else to notice and report it.” And of course. “Protect your country from terrorists by questioning/reporting an employee who isn’t displaying their ID or anyone in plain clothing not in the “passenger areas.” But they’re still only paid minimum wage or slightly above it despite the level of responsibility. I imagine it’s similar for the manufacturing side of aviation.
@@mikoto7693 I totally agree! Working as a contractor even with 20 years experience I got to wash A320's for months then interiors until an opening on the sheetmetal crew.
You have a great atitude and my hat is off to you the way you are paying attention to the aircraft and being in the moment! Go for avionics look into the military Navy and Marines give you a broader education in a given job but not as nice living quarters as the chair force. The people in aviation can make the low pay bare able. There is still a shortage of mechs so now is a good time to move up even consider being a pilot! JS Firm is a popular website for aviation work, all the contract companies have jobs there! Keep em flying!
@@markwheat2668 Thank you, I’m afraid I’m a bit old to join the military and couldn’t afford to do flying lessons. That being said I could look into the manufacturing side. I never really thought about it before so thanks for giving me that idea.
I don’t know why I latched onto that part of the training-that anyone even cleaners or rampers (I do both) can spot something wrong or “feels off” and get the aircraft grounded for the ten-twenty minutes needed to get a mechanic to check it and it doesn’t matter if we’re wrong. Maybe I was awed thinking of the responsibility given.
In two years I only invoked it once. I’m an AvGeek so I like looking at the aircraft. Everyone else in the van is on their phones, I’m looking at the apron/ramp go by. Never found it boring. It’s unfortunate that I didn’t discover that I really find aviation fascinating until well into adulthood.
Anyway we’re trundling past this 737 max 8 on our way back to base/HQ when I notice a tiny bit of wet patch under the no2 engine. I think it’s a bit weird because the weather is hot and dry, it’s been parked awhile and it’s not dripping from melting ice like normal. Just in the that one spot.
It piques my curiosity so I tell everyone else to carry on and I’ll catch them in a few minutes. I wander over and take a closer look. No ice or water anywhere and I eventually trace the tiny drip drip from one of the cowling seams. I confess that by now my instincts were saying “it’s not meant to be like this” but I want verification.
So I go and inspect the engine on the other side. No drip nor wet patch below. Since I always carry disposable gloves-a lot of them-I put on a pair and touch the pod. Normal temperature-it hasn’t been flying recently. I touch the fuselage on my way back to the no2 engine plus that pod. Normal temperature.
Finally I catch a couple drops in my hand and cautiously sniff it. Definitely not water, definitely smells industrial but not jet fuel which was a mild shame because I love the smell of jet fuel. It’s an oddity of mine, along with petrol, creosote and even diesel to a lesser extent. Conclusion. It’s got a very slow oil or hydraulic fluid leak. Probably the former but I don’t know much about jet engine design.
Either way the next course of action is clear. I should report it, so I call the mechanics work phone and do so. A couple minutes later they arrive and start doing their thing. Yup, oil leak. I know they would have found it anyway or the pilot doing the walkaround would plus it would show up on the engine readings when they turned it on. But it made me feel better to report it and the mechanics seemed grateful.
11:29 "Accelerate deliveries"? Haven't the workers been saying the whole problem is unrealistic delivery schedules?
It became too much mcdonnel douglas leadership & too little boeing...
McDonnell is the poison bill. They first merged with the Douglas and ruined it. Next was Boeing.
I dont think Boeing is going anywhere soon... But I think that they will either go bankrupt trying to get back to their former glory... Or scale back their commercial business drastically. And rely on their government contracts. Becoming a defense contractor. Because lets face it... They Effed up.
More or less my opinion. Boeing isn’t going anywhere. It might scale down the commercial side-or that part might crumble entirely and it’ll become a solely military and government contractor.
Boeing want (need) engineers at the highest levels of leadership. People who know what quality really means. People who've built an aircraft and know how a Boeing used to be built .Sales and finance should stick to sales and finance........
Basically yeah, Boeing needs to balance out the bean counters with aircraft engineers and QA/safety experts with equal power and authority.
The planned / rumoured changes are not going to help Boeing.
The middle management across the enterprise need serious scrutiny and challenging.
The Boeing scapegoat "their supply chain problems" I'm guessing are BS and just a blame shift. I'm wondering if Boeing has competence issues with it's people that manage the supply chain rather than its suppliers.
Boeing announced today that every 3rd airplane has a random sized spanner wrench included for free! However, bolts are not included.
As the astronauts say "there is no situation so bad that you cannot make it worse". Stephanie Pope is certainly a refreshingly different look, but a BA in accounting, the kiss-of-death MBA, and a CV on which EVERY previous job title has the 'F' word in it? If your sausage factory has a problem with bad hygiene, it just might be a good idea to put someone with a background in biology in charge?
What a mess for our country’s top exporter
Profit above everything. The fundamental working principle of USA businesses.
The new CEO at Boeing must have an aerospace engineering background, with an understanding of manufacturing processes, or else the same mistakes will be repeated.
As was said in the comments thread and I wanted to bring this up here. Muilenburg was an engineer and Boeing didn't change. You need to change the cost cutting culture to a safety culture and that doesn't require an engineer. Just someone who is willing to fire lots of people to fix the issues. They need to fire the middle managers that have been using fear tactics against workers who spoke up. They need to replace upper management and force Boeing to re-locate their headquarters back to Seattle so they can see the planes being built and force them to walk through their plants.
And they need to re-hire the 900 safety personal that they let go and enforce a culture where people can speak up and bring an open work environment. Fear, intimidation in an Aerospace company was a disaster in the making.
Btw I spat my drink out when you said "Buttery smooth landing" Good one.
Pretty much. They need to rebalance their middle and upper management power structure to include aircraft engineers and safety/QA personnel. An equal balance of power and authority to make the best use of both worlds. Of course you need bean counters to help run a business as big as Boeing but they need to be checked and balanced with making sure that aircraft are manufactured safely, reliably with proper QA controls.
It has to be a balance between the different needs and responsibilities of such a business.
Must admit, it's genius to deliver the jets with extra tools for whenever something fails. 10/10 best draw today.
Yes good sales thinking😀
No different to the days when your car came with a tool kit 😂
What I do not see (and they are important) is for someone with an engineering background climbing up the top job or any consideration of moving the HQ back to Seattle to be on top of things on the production floor rather than being in DC for lobbying.
Oh dear, Boeing have done it again. Token Woman appointment who is not an engineer. That's going to work well.
I don't trust Stephanie Pope. She is a beancounter too. What does she understand about high tech mechanics as in a plane? Does she see what risks there are with faulty systems? I think that she rose through the ranks because she is a top costcutter. Sorry, I can't trust her. This time the new CEO of Boeing should be an engineer.
Did you notice the year she entered Boeing? She's totally a McDonnel-Douglas typ accountant, lol
@@user-yi3yx2fn7g Most of the Boeing Legacy competent managers are gone. They won’t mix with McDD zombies. Sad to see the original Boeing Co destroyed by these McDD leadership.
@@coolblue1812 I know and that infuriates me!! Like, I'm in Europe and sure we have Airbus and so on, but hell, even the Airbus exec people will respect Boeing and its heritage of amazing innovation!
Move everything back to Seattle. Cut the execs. Re-hire good engineers. Drop the corpse of the 737.
Do you know who else got bankrupt while just updating their old crappy airframes (while NOT telling customers about their updates)? McD did that. They were so tight lipped about their newest noise abatment kit that SAS flight 751 happened. Everyone survived but the airplane was in three pieces.
Seriously? A beancounter? That's not going to fix safety. Heck, that won't even fix the work order system that refuses to tell us who touched that door plug and neglected to re-install the retention bolts. Nor is a beancounter going to fix the tools/parts tracking systems such that wrenches and rivets could leave the factory in disguise as FOD. I remember the signs inside MD-80/90 ass'y at DAC in Long Beach: "NO FOD!"
O'leary is a me, me, me kinda guy. As long as Ryanair gets its planes in 2024, he really couldn't give a damn.
But he wants planes that work, not junk that crashes.
He is a good CEO compared to the imbeciles at Boeing.
He has created great shareholder value versus Boeing C Suites.
Boeing needs a clean sweep with the immediate firing of all the C Suite, eg based on incompetence and misconduct with the loss of all share options and bonuses etc and paying back of all bonuses and share options to the last 5 years.
@@user-tt6il2up4oI hate to say it about O’Leary, but you’re right. He might be a bit of an @r$e, but he’s a decent CEO. Ryanair might be a low budget airline with a serious cheapskate mentality but it’s highly successful with a good safety record.
Not a single hull loss, even if they do indirectly encourage their pilots to land hard. Compared to the morons running Boeing O’Leary is a competent CEO. Of course he has a “me me me” attitude and he wants those 737 frankenmaxes delivered on time, but…
Yeah he wants aircraft that fly safely and reliably instead of poorly made junk that falls apart or crashes. But he’s also a cheapskate who wants value for whenever he’s forced to part with some money. I think from his perspective he’s very unhappy when he has to part with millions of pounds to buy an expensive aircraft and it comes shoddily built with random tools where they shouldn’t be and with other pieces missing.
Funny thing is, even if I don’t like him, I can’t actually blame him for that.
Landing on or near the touch down markers is not hard landing, it is professional excellence, every extra foot down the runway eats into the critically evaluated stopping performance and safety margins. Ryanair planes land more fully loaded than most because their seats are filled, why do you think that is?
An accountant in charge of a company which is mainly engineering based, that's another failure having a money/cost driven rather than engineering excellence driven CEO
First move, close Chicago and move management to the manufacturing site, then hopefully putting Seatle back into its rightful place. Get a real engineer / manufacturer in charge of production. And so on, in other words get Boeing back to where it belongs, a leading and successful aviation company.
This is what Boeing needs. Shareholders need more money though. Always consider the stock market!!
(This is why capitalism never benefits the average worker.)
Oh, but unless Seattle gives Boeing some juicy tax breaks for moving back to Seattle, an accountant/MBA will decide which city gives them the best deal. They have squeezed as much money out of Chicago as they can, so in the words of Flip or Flop, time to find another city to flip. Maybe they could move headquarters to Wichita to oversee the soon to be acquired Spirit Aerospace
Seattle and Washington are very hostile to business.
They will never move corporate back there. It would be cheaper to move to a state that does not hate business.
Anytime you move an engineering/tech company’s CFO to a CEO’s role the company will decline. The vision has to look further than the P&L and Bal Sheet. The CEO is responsible for far more than that. The CEO has to have a vision for the Port the ship is to sail to, the skill to steer the ship to avoid the rocks and make use of fair winds, and the detailed knowledge of how the ship operates so efficiencies are gained from effectiveness, not from cost cutting, and finally, the CEO has to envision a Mission Statement that they believe in and can inspire the oarsmen to take them their, not because they are told to, but because they 109% buy into the CEO’s mission.
Anyone that rockets up through the ranks is always suspect. The have always been given a leg up and have rarely spent enough time learning the ropes. Expect more trouble.
Likely a brown-noser or worse.
Clint Eastwood said it perfectly in a Dirty Harry movie: “Stylish”. Management changes in Boeing or any large corporation for that matter won’t change anything until the people in the office know how to get their hands dirty.
Nothing like putting an accountant in charge of a corporation which has production and quality and engineering failures
Women with this much power scare the hell out of me.
Thanks for your work Maximus
I thought that the problem was that the accountants had taken control from the engineers, this just sets it in stone!
Replacing one bean counter with another is not going to save Boeing. Leading bean counters are the problem, not the solution.
Until Boeing's entire management reads up on, and understands "quality engineering", there's little hope. They could start by reading up on Wiener's Laws, particularly number 29: Whenever you solve a problem you usually create one. You can only hope that the one you created is less critical than the one you eliminated.
Boeing needs to understand that you have to keep in regular contact with subcontractors (not just at management level) and visit them regularly to ensure that they understand your requirements fully and have robust systems and processes in place that have been audited (by Boeing) and found to comply with all applicable requirements. I do begin to wonder if Boeing actually has a Quality Department.....
Another great presentation although maybe the background noise should be suppressed screams. I’m an ex engineer but I don’t entirely buy the engineers good, everybody else bad. The two best bosses I ever had were an accountant by training and an ex brigadier general. They shared characteristics. They listened, they questioned, they talked to everybody, they articulated the needs of the business so everybody understood, they walked the job and they had a moral compass.
I’m sorry about Boeing, it’s like seeing a racehorse badly injured by sheer negligence. I have no sympathy for the chancers and “ executives” whose principal skill was enriching themselves, sometimes at the cost of lives.
As ever with any enquiry, I’d really want to know two things. Did they know about these defects? If they didn’t know why not? If they did know what did they do about it and if not, why not.
An accountant with a moral compass! Thinking about that one Bill.
I make that four things, not two, that you want to know. You could be in the running for CEO-ship
Maximus, excellent, from choice of music to facts. Fantastic
They need to channel T. A. Wilson- bring engineers, not bean counters!
How can people too incompetent to build planes be considered competent to select their new leadership. I predict a very bad future for this company I once loved.
Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.
While it may be hard to make things worse, it's not out of the real of possibilities. But let's give Pope the benefit of doubt, although Boeing needs something far more another pennywise beancounter.
Dennis Muilenburg was an engineer and what did he do. Pope has no choice but to get the company back to it once was. If she fails Boeing as a commercial plane maker is done. I'm a big Boeing fan and I hope she gets the job done.
What the hell she knows about quality assurance, the root cause of Boeing’s main current dilemma? On top of it, she’s part of old Boeing with inherent toxic culture and sop, greed.
This is a fine example of the modern failing of management thinking they can manage anything and everything regardless of how different the real world operations of the company are. Managers used to work their way up and this means that they at east had time to understand the general ethos and operations of a company. Now they just parachute in with a degree, do the Dilbert two years and move on. Having seemingly not learned anything..
Just what Boeing needs another ACCOUNTANT to run Boeing. I am so optimistic.
Wait... Boeing does not have a COO? You know, someone who's day to day job is to ensure process quality? That explains a lot
spanners are for nuts and bolts, wrenches are a plumbers tool for pipe fittings
Unless Boeing goes private or is nationalized, it is doomed to failure. Greed (a national symptom) will undo it. They didn't clean the entire executive suite or fire the entire board. And if they don't get an engineering CEO from the outside, that'll seal it. So incredible frustrating and disheartening to see them shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic.
Calhoun is allowed to pick his successor and being given a golden handshake … proof nothing will change
It’s too little too late.
It’s the right move, but the fact that these steps (and more) weren’t carried out months ago compounds the problem.
The entire board and top management needs to go.
Perhaps a rota where all of senior management in turn have to be present aboard each aircraft for their test flights. Might concentrate the mind.
This is a great example for how to beef up your resume when job hunting. Reading through the biographies is a lesson in buzz words and company jargon without telling you about the person or what they can actually do for Boeing. The company knows exactly what went wrong, but they keep doing the same thing over and over expecting a different result. What was that the definition of again?
saying Ryanair is famous for their 'buttery smooth landings' whilst showing a video of an aircraft (not showing which airline it belongs to) making a dangerous cross wind landing is really cheap. You could have said "Ryanair has never had a fatal crash. It has an excellent safety record. In its 37 years of existence, there have been zero passenger or crew member fatalities...."
Have you ever flown with Ryanair?
@@michaelalexander2306 Millions of people have, they are the biggest carrier in Europe with several subsidiaries. American customers would love Ryanair prices.
If the traveling public are already afraid to fly on a Boeing aircraft and the people who assemble them have reservations and question the quality then this shakeup at the senior management is akin to rearranging the chairs on the Titanic. This ship is going down and no bean counter will have the skill set to right this ship.
Titanic 2.0
Great stuff. Just so you know, the difference between a spanner and a wrench is that a spanner is a solid, single size device, so you need a spanner for each size of bolt or nut. A wrench can adjust the size of its grip to work on many different sizes of bolt or nut. In common usage, though, the terms are interchangeable.
Or, here’s a thought, don’t let an MBA become CEO. Let an engineer become CEO.
A masterpiece of investigative journalism Max! And an enjoyable watch... as always.
💰🕶✈ *Dude..... you get an A+ for creativity and humor !* _buttery smooth landings_ ....
I liked Calhoun. I think his "slow down and get it right" and not get any further extended financially were what Boeing needed. Until the entire culture of Boeing changes, things will stay the same regardless of who's in char.
Industry veteran engineer here. Let me assure you, no matter what they do with the fucking C-suite shitstains, Boeing planes won't be safer than they are today for at least half a decade (and that's being very optimistic). Don't believe me ? Look-up the average time it takes to design any airliner and bear in mind that starting from scratch is always faster than making an old design safer, in case the 737 Max story didn't make that clear for you. I shit on business people; never trust them or their smiles, contrary to what they might claim, some problems cannot be fixed overnight no matter who you hire and how many of them there are. Fly Airbus until a new Boeing *design* (not a refresh, not an update) comes out and only after it has had a few thousand successful flights. That's if you value your life, of course. As we've heard from a Boeing employee, he's still fly Boeing but he has something of a deathwish.
9:24 "Pope also leads Boeing's focus on supply chain, quality, and manufacturing." Seriously? And she got the job?
As for O'Leary being the last straw....he just happened to be passing when the axes fell. He is only interested in getting his next batch of 737s...and to suggest they should arrive quickly, misses the whole point of Boeing's problems.
These new managers are not going to change Boeing's *CULTURE* they're just new faces.
If Stefanie Pope isn't an Engineer, they haven't changed a thing!
As has been proven by numerous companies taken over by bean counters who subsequently tanked their company, if you concentrate on cutting expenses to maximize profit over all else, you simply hasten the loss of massive profits when your customers flee. It just took longer because Boeing is part of a duopoly with Airbus.
Placing a woman wont fix the base problem, She is NOT AN ENGINEER. She is coming from the same club, THE MONEY CLUB.
The issue is not “a woman” but that specific woman. There are plenty of women with engineering degrees. I should know - I am one.
@@molybdomancer195 Sorry if I was misinterpreted here, I don't mind if it is a woman at the helm, my main concern is she or he must be an engineer, not another accountant or finance person. Boeing won't be back to its quality roots if there is not an engineer at command. Madness is defined as keep doing the same thing expecting a different result. What Boeing is doing with this move is "Hey, lets place a woman as a CEO, this will apiece the perception" but the base problem is she is not an engineer.
Total board has to be replaced. They are each complicit for all the troubles in Boeing.
You know things are bad when Ryanair turns against you.
5 AM at the mango farm. Gonna have another cup of coffee as I can see the news will never change.
Yeah, looks good, what Boeing definitely needs now is another accountant with an MBA running the show 👍. What could possibly go wrong!? 🤔
The missing seat handles - is stuff that's visible as you walk around the plane.
If they are making mistakes and not catching them on stuff that's visible, how are you ever going to trust them on stuff (like bolts) that's behind parts of the structure of the plane.
The board should have brought in actual QUALITY engineers, not just any aerodynamicist or structures engineer! Quality is a science in its own right, at the conjunction of hard and human sciences. MBAs and CFOs should get to work FOR the quality improvement director teams, not the other way around.
And you wonder what the problem is, Michael O’Leary ‘accelerate delivery to customers’, that and shareholder profits is what is getting them to ignore the really important issues for an aircraft company, quality and safety.
I caught that, too. Speed up production of faulty planes, bottom line again!
Calling the change irrelevant , is a very polite way of putting it.
When the NYT features your company on the front page of the Sunday edition, in a story above the fold, and that story is discussing all the problems your company is having, well, you know your company is in trouble. :)
About time! Aussie Bob
They have to get away from chasing the stock price, until then nothing changes.
Greed beyond belief
Government needs to stop the Boeing stock buybacks! They are just as responsible because they allow them this
Is it even possible to save Boeing at this stage? One of the biggest problems they have is that they're undermanned. The workers on the assembly lines and in QC simply don't have the time to do their jobs properly. Hiring and training new workers is going to be expensive and it's not done over night. Then they also have to ensure their subcontractors are up to the new quality standards. That means they'll have to be prepared to pay more for the parts they buy. As if that wasn't enough, there's bound to be serious production delays while Boeing restructures their operation. I don't know but I take it for granted that the customers will demand and receive serious compensations for late delivery and I wouldn't be at all surprised that Boeing will loose money on every sale for the next few years.
Boeing has been running at a loss for four years in a row now so their reserves must be rather depleted and it's hard to see how they can raise fresh money. If you are a bank or an investor, would you lend them money or buy their stock?
Thank you
How do you expect them to install bolts when they gave the customer the spanners?
The head is lopped yet the weeds still exist, this changes nothing there are too many planes in service waiting to fail. Cheers MAX.
For decades, I worked with Boeing PL's that all had a box containing the sentence, "Today's quality is tomorrow's reputation." I guess that was for subtier suppliers.
You could say that Boeing has gone the same way as America, 'not nearly as good as it used to be'.
Engineers use spanners, ( perfect measurements ), farmers and plumbers use wrenches, ( anything goes ) so if criticising Boeing perhaps O'Leary did find wrenches onboard!!! Oh, and us Brits also use the term 'spanner' for a plonker, ( another Brit term for a thicko ), making sense?
How many Bean Counters does it take to screw in a light bulb? Trick question; Bean Counters can’t do it. To a Bean Counter everything looks like a bean
Boeing needs a CEO who knows the real reason for Boeing’s being, making safe, secure, advanced aircrafts. They do that and confidence then profits follow.
They should make each and every worker from top to bottom responsible for their work and sign off on them.