Agree this goes way beyond imperfect software design, a poor user interfacing and lack of training. In this case, it appears that there was a deliberate attempt to save money at the expense of safety. Boeing felt intense competitive pressure to get the new aircraft to market fast. When testing revealed an issue meeting certification standards, they developed a fix but did not tell airline pilots about it. In mitigating one risk, they created another far greater risk. Pilots were put in a position where the flight systems were overriding their actions and judgment. Beyond all of this, there is an industry issue. When the regulators gets too close to the industry, there are bound to be huge problems. In this case, problems that cost lives and have seriously damaged consumer confidence. Even after two major crashes (that we are aware of), Boeing executives continued to push to keep the planes in the air, calling the US president to act in their behalf. In my view, this behavior is criminal and there is a serious issue with values and business ethics that the company must address.
Unfortunately, the U.S. does not consistently track pregnancy and childbirth-related deaths or routinely examine the circumstances surrounding them. Without comprehensive data to shed light on the tragedy of maternal mortality, progress will be challenging.
The National Portrait Gallery in London announced it will not accept a $1.3 million donation from the Sackler family. The decision is in response to the growing criticism of the family’s ownership of OxyContin-maker Purdue Pharma, which is at the heart of the opioid crisis in the U.S. The gallery is the first major art institution to turn down the Sackler family’s charitable giving, a move that signals values-based judgment in accepting donations. Could this be the start of a new trend?