Boeing — From Market Giant to Corporate Rubbish
Controversies, Poor Production Quality, and Recurring Accidents
A Brief Introduction
Boeing faces a series of controversies in 2024, notably regarding issues related to production quality and a string of accidents involving its aircraft. Reports of manufacturing problems such as fuselage cracks and electrical and software issues have been frequent. Additionally, recent accidents involving Boeing models have raised concerns about the safety of the company’s planes.
One particularly alarming aspect was the deaths of two former Boeing employees, John Barnett and Joshua Dean, who had reported flaws within the company. These deaths raised questions about possible retaliation and sparked debates about Boeing’s corporate culture.
As a result, multiple investigations are underway to examine the allegations against Boeing and to determine the causes of the accidents. These controversies have had a significant impact on the company’s reputation, undermining public trust and resulting in financial losses, litigation, and increasing pressure for Boeing to elevate its safety standards.
Case Development
2018
But before we delve into the 2024 controversy, it’s essential to understand that it’s not an isolated case. In 2018 and 2019, two fatal accidents involving the Boeing 737 MAX, operated by airlines Lion Air and Ethiopian Airlines, resulted in the tragic deaths of 346 people. Investigations revealed flaws in the Maneuvering Characteristics Augmentation System (MCAS), which erroneously pushed the plane’s nose down, culminating in the accidents.
Boeing faced criticism for negligence regarding safety, for pushing for rushed certifications, and for withholding information from regulators. As a result, the company had to make modifications to the 737 MAX and ground its flights for 20 months until it was deemed safe again. Relatives of the victims and Boeing shareholders filed lawsuits against the company, seeking significant financial compensation.
Furthermore, other controversies have arisen. The 787 Dreamliner, for example, faced a series of quality issues, including fuselage cracks, electrical system failures, and oxygen supply problems. Boeing is also involved in a long-standing trade dispute with Airbus at the World Trade Organization (WTO), accusing each other of receiving illegal subsidies. The company also faced criticism for succumbing to pressure from the U.S. government to cancel orders from Iranian airline Iran Air due to sanctions.
2019
In 2019, Boeing faced significant issues related to the Boeing 737 NG, with the discovery of structural cracks in the wings of some aircraft. This led to extensive inspection and repair of several aircraft worldwide.
Additionally, the company was subject to various regulatory investigations regarding the 737 MAX accidents and other safety concerns. Regulatory agencies such as the Federal Aviation Administration of the United States (FAA), and investigative bodies such as the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, launched detailed scrutiny of Boeing’s practices.
These events resulted in a series of lawsuits filed by families of the victims of the 737 MAX accidents and other affected parties. These lawsuits sought compensation for damages and losses arising from the accidents and other aircraft safety-related issues.
Others
The cases mentioned so far represent just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the challenges faced by Boeing. If we decide to delve deeper, we will find a wide range of incidents, from minor mishaps to major disasters that have shaped the company’s history long before 2018.
Over decades, Boeing has faced a series of incidents, both in its commercial aircraft and military activities. From quality and maintenance issues to safety and market competition, the company has faced challenges of all shapes and sizes.
Among the major accidents that have marked the company’s history are those resulting in significant loss of lives and aircraft, such as the United Airlines Flight 232 crash in 1989, involving a DC-10, and the tragic incident with TWA Flight 800 in 1996, involving a 747.
Additionally, there are countless minor incidents that, while perhaps not receiving as much media attention, still had an impact on Boeing’s reputation and operations. From recalls and regulatory investigations to quality and safety issues in different aircraft models, the company has faced a series of challenges throughout its history.
I only bring up the most recent ones to maintain the article’s focus and avoid adding too much information that might be seen as irrelevant to the current case. However, it’s important to recognize that these recent incidents are just part of a broader pattern of challenges Boeing has faced over the years.
2024 — Recent Cases Alaska
An Alaska Airlines Boeing aircraft lost a door in January due to the absence of four screws. The Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 Max 9 aircraft that experienced issues during the flight was missing four screws, according to a preliminary report released today by the U.S. transportation safety agency (NTSB). According to the NTSB, four screws were missing from the aircraft, which, shortly after takeoff on January 5 while flying with 117 people on board at an altitude of approximately 16,000 feet, lost a door, forcing the aircraft to make an emergency landing after departing from Portland, Oregon. This door served to block an exit and was not intended to be opened, as this model already has sufficient emergency exits in this configuration.
The panel lacked four installed screws because apparently they had not been replaced at the Boeing factory in Renton, Washington State, concluded this federal agency, responsible for investigating transportation accidents. The report does not detail who removed the screws and which part of the company was responsible for replacing them. As proof of the panel’s condition, the NTSB provided a photograph of it, in which the absence of three of the four screws can be observed. The area where the fourth screw should be is covered.
Due to the incident with the Alaska Airlines aircraft, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) ordered the grounding of all Boeing 737s. The FAA had already committed five years ago to increase supervision of that aircraft manufacturer, following two fatal accidents involving Boeing Max planes.
In this context, the American aerospace manufacturer has accumulated five years of losses, first due to the 737 Max crisis and then due to the economic crisis stemming from the covid-19 pandemic, to which was recently added the ‘jolt’ with the 737 Max 9.
United States, Canada, and Turkey
Three Boeing aircraft were recently involved in three separate incidents. The first incident occurred this Tuesday when an Air France Boeing 787–900 traveling from Paris to Seattle (USA) had to make an emergency landing in the Canadian city of Iqaluit, in the Arctic region of the country, after a burnt smell was detected in the cabin. Air France said in a statement that the plane was carrying 272 people (260 passengers and 12 crew members) and was forced to make an emergency landing around 12 p.m. local time (5 p.m. Lisbon time). The French airline sent a replacement plane from Montreal this Wednesday to transport passengers to New York and from there continue the journey to the final destination in Seattle, while investigating the causes of the burnt smell.
Also this Wednesday, an Alaska Airlines Boeing 737–900 flying to Seattle from Cincinnati made another emergency landing shortly after takeoff, after one of its two engines failed, according to reports from local media. Seattle’s Kiro7 television station said the plane landed safely in Cincinnati and no one was injured.
The third incident also occurred this Wednesday when a Boeing 763 cargo plane from American logistics company FedEx, coming from Paris, landed nose-down in Istanbul, without causing casualties. Turkish authorities said an apparent hydraulic failure prevented the front landing gear from deploying.
Spirit AeroSystems and Boeing
The cases occur in the same week that a former inspector reported the departure of parts with dozens of defects from the Spirit AeroSystems factory in Kansas to Boeing. Santiago Paredes reported, in an interview with the BBC, that he found up to 200 defects in some of the parts sent by Spirit, which remains Boeing’s largest supplier. The company refutes the allegations. The former employee stated that there were “many missing parts” in the orders and that he was criticized for being a “hindrance,” for reporting flaws in the production of equipment, particularly in the fuselages — the main body of the aircraft.
On May 6, it was reported that U.S. federal authorities are investigating Boeing after the aircraft manufacturer admitted in April that it “may not have completed” inspections on the assembly of some 787 Dreamliner aircraft. The investigation began after a former company employee, engineer Sam Salehpour, reported that the 787 Dreamliner’s fuselage is poorly assembled and at risk of breaking in-flight. Prior to the complaint, the aircraft manufacturer was already deeply embroiled in a crisis due to serious quality issues with its 737 MAX aircraft, which are also being investigated by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
The Death of Whistleblowers
The recent deaths of two Boeing whistleblowers, John Barnett and Joshua Dean, within just two months, have raised serious concerns and sparked controversy regarding the company. Both had made public allegations about safety flaws in Boeing aircraft before their unexpected deaths.
John Barnett, a former Spirit AeroSystems employee, a Boeing supplier, was found dead at his home on March 9, 2024. Barnett had reported quality issues in the production of components for the 737 MAX, the aircraft involved in two fatal accidents in 2018 and 2019. The circumstances surrounding his death were considered suspicious, with speculation about the possibility of suicide or homicide. The cause of death was officially determined to be suicide by firearm, according to local authorities. However, Barnett’s family and friends raised suspicions that his death may have been a homicide or the result of retaliation by Boeing due to his allegations against the company. Investigations into Barnett’s death are still ongoing, and no definitive conclusion has been released so far.
Joshua Dean, also a former Spirit AeroSystems employee, passed away on May 30, 2024, allegedly due to an MRSA infection. Initially, the cause of death was reported as pneumonia and MRSA infection, a bacteria resistant to antibiotics. However, Dean’s family questioned this version, claiming he was healthy before being hospitalized and that there were other factors involved in his death. A post-mortem CT scan revealed that Dean had suffered a stroke. The circumstances of Dean’s death are still being investigated, and the family awaits a full autopsy to determine the exact cause of death. Dean had also warned about safety flaws in the production of components for the 737 MAX and claimed to have been targeted for retaliation by the company due to his allegations.
It is important to highlight that the deaths of Barnett and Dean occurred within a short period of time and after both had made public allegations against Boeing. Furthermore, the fact that investigations remain open even after official disclosures, shows that things are not exactly right.
This controversy is marked by important points, such as the lack of clarity regarding the circumstances of Barnett and Dean’s deaths, the alleged history of retaliation by Boeing against employees who report safety issues, and reports of a culture of fear and silence within the company, where employees fear negative consequences for reporting irregularities.
10 New Whistleblowers
The news that the committee tasked with investigating Boeing has received 10 more whistleblowers after the deaths of John Barnett and Joshua Dean is both concerning and encouraging.
Concern arises from the high number of new whistleblowers, suggesting that the problems at Boeing may be more extensive and serious than previously thought. The death of two whistleblowers in such a short period raises serious questions about the company’s organizational culture and the safety of employees who decide to report irregularities. There is also the fear that the company may attempt to silence these new whistleblowers, which could further hinder ongoing investigations and safety in the aerospace sector.
However, there are reasons for optimism. The increase in the number of whistleblowers indicates that more people are willing to speak out against Boeing’s failures, even aware of the risks involved. This provides the investigating committee with more information and witnesses to support its inquiry, which can result in significant discoveries. Furthermore, pressure from the media and public opinion may force Boeing to take firmer measures to improve its safety culture and protect its employees.
Some important points remain highlighted: the identity of the new whistleblowers and the content of their allegations have not yet been disclosed, nor have the specific aspects of Boeing that will be investigated based on this new information by the committee. However, it is possible that the company will be compelled to implement substantial changes in its safety culture, production processes, and approach to whistleblowers.
And Airbus?
The theory that Airbus is collaborating in independent investigations into Boeing has generated intense speculation, dividing opinions.
In favor of this theory, it is argued that the fierce rivalry between Airbus and Boeing in the aerospace market may be driving Airbus to explore the opportunity to undermine Boeing’s reputation, creating space to consolidate its own position as a global leader. Furthermore, Airbus’s history of criticizing Boeing for safety flaws and quality issues suggests that participation in the investigations may be interpreted as a way to reinforce these criticisms and further weaken the competitor.
There is also the perspective that even if Airbus does not achieve a direct competitive advantage with this collaboration, the investigations may reveal systemic flaws in the aerospace industry as a whole, which would indirectly benefit Airbus.
These arguments highlight the complexity of the relationships between the two aviation giants and suggest that there is more at stake than simply a search for truth and safety in the aerospace sector.
Boeing’s Protectionism
In the corridors of the aviation world, few companies are as emblematic and controversial as Boeing. A history filled with innovation, glory, and, more recently, controversies. What has sustained this aerospace giant amidst turbulent times? Many argue that it is the relentless protectionism of the United States government that keeps it virtually untouched, while other companies in similar circumstances would have faced devastating financial consequences.
In a scenario where global competition is fierce and margins for error are minimal, Boeing has faced a series of challenges in recent years. From the tragic accidents involving the 737 MAX to allegations of safety and quality failures in its aircraft, the company has seen its reputation shaken and its finances impacted. However, despite these setbacks, Boeing continues to sail, seemingly unscathed.
The key to understanding this phenomenon lies in the intricate relationship between Boeing and the U.S. government. As a company with such deep influence and a history so intertwined with the economic and political fabric of the country, Boeing benefits from governmental support that goes beyond what many international competitors can imagine.
The U.S. government has been an avid advocate for Boeing on various fronts. From lucrative contracts with the Pentagon to financial support in times of crisis, the company receives preferential treatment that many interpret as a shield against failure. In other words, if Boeing were a company from any other country, the consequences of its mistakes could have been much more severe.
Looking back, it is difficult to ignore the historical examples that corroborate this idea. When Airbus faced similar difficulties, the repercussions were more immediate and stringent. However, Boeing seems to navigate calmer waters, protected by the umbrella of the American government.
An Author’s Comment
If we look at the global aviation landscape, the disparity in treatment between companies like Boeing and other giants in the sector is remarkable. Take, for example, Embraer, a Brazilian aerospace powerhouse known for its innovation and quality. If a company like Embraer faced the same level of allegations and controversies that plagued Boeing, the consequences would likely be much more drastic. In an environment where tolerance for mistakes is minimal and accountability is rigorously enforced, it is possible that a company like Embraer would have already been wiped out of the market, leaving behind only a vague vestige of its existence.
And with that, I conclude, the world, under the influence of the United States, reveals itself to be extremely unfair, and that depresses me.
