Yesterday, Tuesday, was when the trial of me by misinformation began.
The day didn't start well, as a combination of me leaving later than usual and unbelievably heavy traffic when most people should have already been at work (no, the recession hasn't hit this area yet) resulted in me being over fifteen minutes late to court. Unlike other days when things didn't get under way until a half hour after the 9:00 AM starting time, they were waiting for me to arrive to get started.
I got admonished by the judge to be on time or there was the jail option to ensure I was there on time. I apologized to the judge for my tardiness. It's things like these that make you wonder whether "innocent until proven guilty" is really what is practiced in court.
At about 10:00 AM the jury was finalized--14 jurors with two of them unknowing alternates (so they will pay attention to the trial).
Then Scott Peterson, the Senior Deputy Attorney likely the next in line to the Republican dynasty of King County Prosecutors once Dan Satterberg dies or is removed from office for some other reason, began his opening statement full of mistruths.
He cast me as a "slow and methodical" worker, somehow inferring I wasn't doing my job well, when the opposite was true. Yes, I was slower than other inspectors who rollerstamped to a greater degree than I was forced to, but that is just the law of mature--it takes more time to do something and stamp the paperwork to indicate you did it than not doing the work and just stamping the paper off.
And for just doing my job to a minimal level not even close to the level of what inspectors were supposed to do per the FAA approved quality system I am branded as "slow and methodical." No doubt Boeing told him to say that to discredit me as some kind of incompetent worker when the opposite was true, and all of the good inspectors came to me to avail themselves of my expertise because they knew I knew how we were supposed to inspect as opposed to how our Leads and QA Management wanted us to inspect.
That really shows how twisted the justice system is and how far Boeing's "quality system" has devolved--when you don't join in wholeheartedly with the fraud of the rollerstamping inspectors who just pretend to inspect the airplane before they falsify paperwork stating they did, the Senior Deputy Prosecutor of the King County Fraud Department accuses you of being "slow and methodical" for not joining fully in that fraud. No wonder he and Dan Satterberg have totally ignored Boeing actually breaking the law multiple times, and have even gone on the offense for Boeing in trying to prevent any evidence of Boeing crimes from being discussed during the trial.
He also bald faced lied when he stated that I "spent several hours each day he should have been working navigating file shares." Wrong! I did my research for my report on Boeing/FAA fraud to the DOT OIG only when there absolutely wasn't any other work to do. More lies he apparently took straight from lying Boeing Management with no corroboration, who have a vested interest (keeping themselves from being on trial for felonies like me) in making me look as bad as possible at my job.
He also inferred that I was asking for money to keep quiet about Boeing's law breaking, which is also diametrically opposed to the truth. Apparently he misreads everything to mean what he wants it to mean, rather than what it plainly means to any unbiased person.
He then tried to trump up my computer knowledge level way beyond what it is. This was another lie in order to falsely convict me on Boeing's unwarranted charges. But the truth won't get him his unjust conviction, so he had to fabricate evidence to make me seem like an Edward Snowden.
In fact, any Boeing employee could access the exact same information I did with very minimal computer knowledge, including the same information that Alan Mulally's Leadership Team poured over every week behind closed doors in the Mount Saint Helens Conference Room at BCA Headquarters in Renton, Washington.
In fact, employees like me could see such information on any Boeing internal or external computer, well before Mulally or his Leadership Team even saw it. That is the truth. All an employee needed was the organization number they wanted to "surf" the files of for legitimate curiosity of company processes purposes (or for collecting the evidence of Boeing and FAA Management fraud purposes like me). That info is available to anyone in the Boeing employee directory on every computer. Then all any employee had to do was enter that organization number in the company intranet Shares Query System, which then would list the shares assigned to that Boeing organization. Then, all an employee had to do was to browse to that share on the network and click on it. If that folder didn't open you weren't authorized to see the contents of that share, and you went to another share of interest if you wanted to.
I was always doing this in my spare time, as I knew my corrupt QA Management couldn't Corrective Action Memo me to terminate me for not rollerstamping if I only read company related information in my free time at work between inspections. If I was a rollerstamping inspector, I could surf any non-company site on the internet and I would never get in trouble, as performing criminal acts for Boeing Management came with freedoms that employees that followed the FAA required Boeing Quality System weren't allowed.
When Boeing found out I was leaking some of the non-competition sensitive data that any other Boeing employee had access to to Dominic Gates of The Seattle Times in preparation for having them print "my story" (my story of Boeing/FAA fraud negating the quality and safety of Boeing airplanes), they got upset. Rightly so. The information I had given to Dominic in addition to "my story" could easily put some of them in prison. So they had to discredit me and put me in prison first to set an example for other employees tempted to tell on their frauds to the public and/or the relevant authorities.
Back to the day's happenings:
At about 11:00 AM my attorney, Ramona Brandes, began our opening statement. I think she did very well. At least she didn't lie about anything like the prosecutor did. She said I was not the most "succinct writer," which is perhaps an understatement. She made it clear that they were accusing me of "hacking" Boeing's computer system when I did nothing of the sort, and I had only accessed areas of the computer system I had permissions to access. She said I was no "white knight." Ain't that the truth. Although I wished I could save the public from the dangers to them from Boeing's fraudulent "quality assurance" activities, the public needed someone who gave more to it than I did, even though I did little else for a few years but try to go through all the proper channels to get Boeing and FAA fraud ended. I'm human. Perhaps if you were trying to protect the lives of the public from a megalith corporation you too might make some well meaning mistakes as well.
Then, my last supervisor at Boeing took the stand. Even though I knew just how corrupt he was, I was happy that he did not seem to testify at all times to what they had scripted him to. A big deal was made about the two times out of thousands of writeups of discrepancies by me when he questioned whether they were just "flaws" and not "defects." QA professionals will laugh, but that is truly how far they had to dig to get negative stuff to testify about against me.
He said that I was "kind of a loner" which was a bogus comment. I got along very well with my coworkers, and joked and talked with them any chance I could. Of course, I did do more actual work than other inspectors who spent more time bullshitting than working, but that doesn't make me a "loner."
My former supervisor proved today what I knew was still the case--things are as bad in QA at Boeing as they ever were. Boeing still has not reformed their quality system into the minimal state where at least the Quality Supervisors, like my former boss testifying was, actually knew what their real job functions were in Quality.
He showed the same care less attitude about his real job duties that I witnessed in him and multiple other QA supervisors. He actually testified that he didn't check whether his inspectors were doing their jobs as he hadn't gotten enough complaints from customers to make him concerned enough to do so. Yep, the old rollerstamping quality system is still in full swing at Boeing, and QA supervisors are intentionally asleep at the wheel of their actual FAA required duties, which say nothing about how much product has to be pushed out of the door uninspected.
Then Marie T. Farrelly was called to testify by the prosecutor (she is the Boeing "fixer" that I blogged of earlier). I had only talked to her on the phone and emailed her before, and maybe saw one picture of her.
She was much tinier and more frail than I imagined. I had thought of her as a more robust, fighter type woman.
The prosecutor and her tried to use a few sentences out of a many page letter to Doug Bain, former Chief Counsel to Boeing, to try to show that I was threatening to go to the press with Boeing's QA fraud if I wasn't paid off. Nothing could be further from the truth, yet they knowingly tried to parlay that falsehhood to the jury.
On cross examination, my lawyer finally put the letter in context, and got Farrelly to admit that the letter really showed that I did not want to be paid off to "go away," and that I required that Boeing fix the items I reported to the FAA themselves, including corrupt Boeing QA Management, with me agreeing to testify if need be against such managers in court for Boeing at any time if they pressed charges against anyone as a result of their investigation. "He wanted to ensure his allegations were investigated," she admitted.
That was pretty much it for her, besides some talk about the bogus audit of just my work area she had done after my last conversation with her.
Then Anthony Maus came to the stand, a "Senior Manager of Corporate Security" who's comment in my 2006 interview with him that "Boeing is the most arrogant company on the face of the planet" is still one of my favorite quotes about Boeing.
I'll cover what he stated later. He takes the stand again today.
A comment on this blog entry from GFS:
Boeing Whistleblower, Gerald Eastman, went to court this week to fight for his freedom. It appears the Boeing Company is highly concerned about having this case be legitimately treated like the whistleblower case that it is. Whistleblowers have some rights; whistleblowers have laws and protections and are not to be subjected to retaliation and acts of retribution, which Mr. Eastman most clearly has had to endure. The Boeing Company is trying to define Mr. Eastman as a common criminal rather than the whistleblower with laws and protections behind him that he has a right to expect will be respected. And Boeing has the influence to take the ridiculous and improbable and make it happen. A very cozy relationship between Boeing and the King County Prosecutor's Office appears to be making this case quite odoriferous. So far the quickly appointed judge has disallowed all of the evidence and circumstances portraying the bigger picture and true motivation behind Mr. Eastman’s case, helping Boeing to trivialize and minimize it's importance for the good of the whole, and try to bury it (and Mr. Eastman) under a cloud of smog.
It appears the lead prosecutor owes Boeing a great deal due to donations made to his election campaign funds. This should be investigated as a BIG conflict of interest. Quid Pro Quo arrangements are not on the list of approved relationships between industry and government, particularly oversight and law enforcement.
The judge also ruled not to allow Sarbanes-Oxley protections as well, violating Mr. Eastman's rights, as a whistleblower. Boeing has listed tens of charges, hoping to make some stick. Insiders say that the company is using him as their BIG example to further terrify their own employees and dissuade them from talking to anyone, even government investigators who are trying to investigate various charges of wrong doing in any of the many open investigations being conducted by a number of three and four letter acronym agencies at this time.
There are reasons why a whistleblower might end up on Boeing's hit list. What if as a loyal employee you realize some things are going very wrong, so wrong in fact that the public's safety is at risk. What if you go up every level in your own corporate command chain trying to get the company to fix the problems and clean up their act but are met with disdain, hostility, and are ignored at best, and attacked and set up to be destroyed at worst. What if seeing there is no hope even at the highest levels in your company for justice and responsible action? Then you go to the government oversight agencies, like Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). What if they also turn a deaf ear and are so caught up in a corrupt and cozy relationship with your employer that there is no hope for justice and a resolution there either? Then you go to the FAA's oversight agency/watchdog, Department of Transportation Office of Inspector General. And if you also encounter cover-ups and refusal to take serious matters seriously due to political contamination of the oversight process? (Recall the whole Attorney General mess recently and perpetually in the news?) Then you may resort in desperation to going to the media. Someone who works for a different defense contractor once told me that the only way to get them (the company) to take any kind of positive action to clean up corruption in their own nest was to embarrass the heck out of them.
It seems Boeing has a lot of influence, too much influence. Some quality investigation is warranted. And this railroad ride, the retaliation against Boeing Whistleblower, Gerald Eastman, must be stopped. If there is anyone still clean and with enough integrity left, they should be thoroughly investigating this, looking deeper into the business practices of The Boeing Company, and its relationships with government oversight agencies and it’s revolving door participants. And that is scrutiny The Boeing Company most certainly does not want.
Find out what is really going on by visiting Mr. Eastman's site:
And whistleblower support sites such as:
Not much to report from the trial by Boeing of me from yesterday, as almost the whole day was spent in jury selection.
I did learn an interesting fact, however, about Vanessa Lee, the lead Boeing Legal Attorney representing and reporting back to Boeing Legal and Boeing Executive Management progress and strategy in the trial.
I learned that she is "under immense pressure" by Boeing to secure my (unjust) conviction. So much so that pressure has taken its toll on her emotionally.
She was the Boeing Legal attorney that has been involved in trying to secure my demise from the outset, having me followed home and who knows what else before I was arrested and my house ransacked for evidence to "hang" me with.
Also, Peter Conte, head purveyor of only positive news and twister of the truth into something different for Boeing, showed up at the trial in street clothes as opposed to his Armani suit befitting a Boeing Executive of his pay grade, which shows the importance of this trial, as Boeing's lead spinner is now in attendance.
That's it for now.
A response to a comment on this blog post:
Wrong. No pedestal. No ego. Look at my website and you'll find detailed info on wrongdoing, not "Boeing Sucks." Of course I don't understand all of the things going on in the world. That's why I'm where I am today. I trusted too many powerful people to do their jobs. Naive, I was. Hell, I may make the same mistake and trust the wrong people again at my peril. I'm far from perfect. Your motto (and many other deluded people) seems to be "it's all good." I heard that frequently at Boeing. Many people get through the day that way. It's not the ethical or brave thing to do, but it's certainly the easiest way to work in a corrupt workplace. Then there's the "if you can't beat them (get them thrown in jail for their corruption), then join them" ethic. That explains some of those who still defend Boeing after perusing my site--especially the ones that work at Boeing and know the corruption I detail is endemic. They somehow feel I am attacking their paycheck or Sharevalue payout by telling the truth, so they lash out. Where you are on that spectrum I do not know. If you can't judge others correctly, I doubt you could be trusted to judge yourself. I have pointed out positives as well as negatives about the justice system I've been placed in. No, the world is not totally black and white.
The Last Inspector
I haven’t traveled by railroad since so long ago I don’t know when it was, but last week I rode uninterrupted all week long on a train in which I was the sole occupant with a destination as predetermined as any scheduled Amtrak service—with this unstoppable train’s destination in effect set to the edge of a cliff of a deep, deep chasm by Boeing, the King County Prosecutor Boeing largely financed in last November’s election, and a compliant (thus far) King County Superior Court system.
Railroaded. There is no other way to describe last week’s sequence of events in pre-trial hearings. The trial later this week is scheduled with its all but certain and similarly predetermined ending, all to please corrupt Boeing Management and the Boeing Legal attorneys who really should be on this train. Albeit, I would support at least granting them a fair trial despite the vastly greater crimes they committed than I am being railroaded for supposedly committing if they were brought to justice. That would be opposed to the unfair trial they are ensuring for me with money funneled to the King County Prosecutor’s successful (because of it) campaign. Boeing executives are plotting strategy against me in closed door meetings at Boeing’s Headquarters, taking precious time away from their own continuing and complex fraudulent activities, and communicating via Blackberry device to and from the King County Prosecutor's Office to ensure the train they put me on isn’t detoured in any way.
This railroading started in earnest Monday at a hearing before Superior Court Judge Carey where my attorney tried to stop the railroading before it began. She asked for just a week’s continuance until we could finally get the information requested from my seized computer. We needed it for my defense, and we were promised it by Friday of last week by the prosecutor, so we at least had the weekend to review it and incorporate it in my defense before trial. The prosecution and Seattle Police Department failed to produce the information required for my defense despite almost the full week’s time to do so, under the guise that the terms we wanted to search my computer for were crashing the police database of what was on my computer. They tried to search for all of the 56 search terms we requested at the same time, which “crashed” their database, they said. Both my attorney and I, not as computer savvy as them by far, wondered why they couldn’t search for each term separately, and maybe get us at least some of the requested information. The answer seemed clear—it was just an excuse to withhold the information from us needed for my defense.
The prosecution’s case is based on information they supposedly found on my computer that supposedly relates to information found in articles in the Seattle Times. While they are using such information they supposedly gleaned from my computer to prosecute me, they are not willing to let me access my own files on my computer in order to prepare a defense to those charges, yet another reason I have been in effect placed on a train with sabotaged brakes by the “working together” team of the King County Prosecutor and Boeing. The preset destination of that "train" is my doom. They are doing this in order to “kill the messenger” of Boeing’s vastly greater and numerous crimes against myriad innocent commercial airplane travelers and against our nation’s security itself.
The prosecutor argued to judge Carey that, even if there was proof on my computer that Boeing was violating laws and regulations by intentionally placing airline passengers at greater risk of death for more bottom line dollars by not doing required inspections, then that would not prevent him from convicting me on the (relatively very petty) charges against me. The judge seemed to agree, and abetted the prosecutor’s “don’t give a damn” attitude about airline passenger safety and Boeing’s breaking of laws and regulations that placed everyone at much greater risk, and kept the train I was on running to its predetermined destination despite the noted withholding of essential information and the time to review it in order for us to present our defense. These retaliatory and trumped up charges and the refusal to us of the information and time to mount a defense make the term “malicious prosecution” inadequate to describe the situation. The judge denied our motion for continuance for a week and placed the case on the trial schedule as a priority for the next judge available for a trial to take.
I then left, as my attorney said it would likely be the next day at the earliest when a judge could be found for such a long case. However, just a few hours later my attorney called me an told me to be back at the courthouse ASAP, as a judge had already been assigned to the case! By the time I got there, the pre-trial motion part of my persecution had already begun.
The judge assigned to the case was Monica J. Benton, who I just this weekend learned was appointed by Democratic Governor Christine Gregoire, which was a shocking revelation after watching her rule against the well reasoned motions backed by numerous case law precedents all week.
My attorney would present detailed and very relevant case law and arguments to justify our motions, then the prosecutor would give some inane interpretation of cases almost totally unrelated to the issue at hand and then present his obviously highly biased personal opinion (not reasoned legal argument based on the facts) of that case and how it should negate our motion, then the judge would rule against us (and the law) and for his personally and intentionally twisted opinions of vaguely related cases, every time.
It was disillusioning, to say the least. First I see wholesale corruption placing lives at risk at Boeing, then I find out the enabling corruption in FAA management that intentionally rollerstamps its oversight role of Boeing as “it’s all good” without any real oversight of Boeing at all. Then I find out the enabling DOT OIG will not act against Boeing or FAA management itself, no matter the merits of the case. Then I find out that my own county justice system is highly biased, and next to impossible to get a fair trial in.
My attorney told me, after I indicated to her my dismay at her (what I saw to be “slam dunk” legal argument based) motions all getting ruled against by the judge, that people new to the justice system there are shocked, like I was, when they find out how biased the whole court system is against the defendant. I couldn’t have agreed more with her on that point.
One of the days the prosecutor even had the gall to ask the judge to admonish (or a similar term) my attorney for stating to the Seattle Post-Intelligencer that, “Boeing is a very big presence here in this part of the country. I think that the prosecutor is under a lot of pressure from Boeing," to which any reasoned person would say “duh” to, however the prosecutor feigned outrage at such a suggestion that he was somehow under pressure from Boeing despite having practically been living with two or three Boeing Legal attorneys and one attorney hired by Boeing from an outside law firm for the past nearly two years, and especially the past few weeks.
At least the judge didn’t bite on that one. My attorney and the Deputy Prosecutor had seemed to be getting along well with each other during various hearings, probably due to my attorney’s belief that being adversarial when not before a judge is not in the client’s best interest, however this undeserved jab by him in an effort to prejudice the judge may change things.
But the most damaging thing that occurred last week in the many rulings against us by a biased court system was the motion the judge granted taking away our right to argue a necessity defense for my actions. Of course, the only reason I ever contacted the press was to go public with my story after all other avenues had failed. I knew many lives would be placed at greater and greater risk as time went on if Boeing’s fraud in quality assurance management was permitted to continue unabated. However that sole reason for my actions will not be allowed to be presented in my defense due to the judge’s ruling.
Interestingly, this again hinged on what was obviously a bogus and biased argument by the Deputy Prosecutor. He cited a case about an elk that had charged a person who shot it outside of hunting season. The court found that he acted on necessity even though he broke the law, and could not be charged. The Deputy Prosecutor then (intentionally?) misquoted the case and stated the case made it clear that a necessity defense could only be presented if I was being compelled to commit a crime “by a force of nature” such as the charging elk. He again reiterated that even if my allegations of rollerstamping at Boeing are true, then that doesn’t deter him in any way from charging me with the crimes they chose to charge me with. My attorney correctly quoted the case law and stated that in addition to “force of nature,” “the pressure of circumstance,” as was the case in my situation, was also permitted as a necessity defense.
The judge then said case law did support a “pressure of circumstance” necessity defense, but then she ruled against us because I wasn’t “personally endangered!”
Quite unbelievable, isn’t it? I could only defend myself with the necessity defense if I was defending myself from danger. I couldn’t do so to protect the millions of lives Boeing had intentionally placed in danger in order to reap greater profit margins while Death also reaped greater returns. That’s justice for you. Or, more aptly, injustice.
So, I guess the moral is that you had better not intervene and try to save anyone from harm by another person, lest you hurt the perpetrator while saving someone’s life and end up doing time for that, while the attacker walks free to hurt, maim, and kill again.
Doesn’t sound logical to me, but that appears to be the law of this State, anyway. It’s a big disincentive for people to do the right thing, which is no doubt what Boeing and the Deputy Prosecutor are trying to ensure by my trial. "Do gooders" beware, as unethical companies and prosecutors have free reign, at least in King County.
Due to the current King County Prosecutor impersonating a just deceased and respected Republican King County Prosecutor, as well as donations and the running of his campaign by Boeing’s chief outside law firm, the current Republican King County Prosecutor was elected last November, a mistake by an electorate that obviously didn’t know the man at all. Who could blame them as he was doing his best to impersonate his dead boss to gain his job, running on his bosses’ accomplishments and not his own. The deceased former King County Prosecutor, Norm Maleng, was perhaps the only Republican in King County government (which are few) that was well respected. Indeed, Mr. Maleng’s death hurt the King County Prosecutor’s Office immensely, allowing the current King County Prosecutor to gain office by what was so blatant an impersonation of Mr. Maleng it could be charged, I believe, as a case of identity theft.
What has resulted is a fascist prosecutors office that ignores purposely and openly crimes by corporations and white collar criminals, while holding those “little guys” not well connected to it to the law. It is no accident, perhaps, that the current King County Prosecutor touted as an accomplishment his running an organization of young Republican boys/men, the nearest thing I’ve heard to similar groups Adolph Hitler founded. Not to say that the group has the beliefs of the Nazis outside the general Republican belief that fascism is good (government controlled by and ran for corporations rather than the people) and socialism like social security is bad. So the King County Prosecutor’s Office being run out of “Boeing’s pants” is no great surprise.
If my predetermined conviction does any good, it will be in exposing these “working together” crooks for what they really are, and for what a justice system they promise to put in place in the future if left in power, ala George Orwell’s “1984” justice system.
We lost all the battles last week, despite having the law behind us. The prosecutor won his arguments solely by saying, “I believe,” then stating how the case law really meant the opposite of what it actually meant. Too bad the judge for the most part bought it.
We did win a few small points. While we sought substantive relief before trial in reducing the number of charges due to overlap and other legal precedents, the judge allowed us to argue that point to a jury only following my predetermined conviction. Never mind that the jury would be prejudiced by the number of charges against me during the trial itself, making a conviction more likely, as that is the destination already chosen for this “railroad” I am on.
Another interesting fact is that the prosecutor sought to further suck up to Boeing by protecting Boeing from another one of their crimes—Sarbanes Oxley violations. The prosecutor presented a motion to exclude any testimony about violations of the SOX laws by Boeing by Boeing not protecting their financial data from access and manipulation as required. My attorney is working on our response to that motion.
And yet another interesting fact is that the “star” Boeing witness against me, Mike Bair, failed former head of the 787 Program and still on Boeing’s payroll for reasons unknown, stated in his interview with my attorney that the leak to the Seattle Times of Boeing Commercial Airplanes CEO’s recommendation to the Boeing’s Board of Directors of Everett as winner of the site selection contest for the final assembly site of the 787 had pressured the board to go with that selection, although he also said it could have made them go the other way, I guess for spite purposes. He called the leak “a brush with death.” What isn’t known is why he testified about that leak as I am not charged with that leak to the press. Perhaps it is just because he, just as Boeing’s Corporate Security Manager said to me during my interview the day after I was released from jail after my arrest, believes I was the source of that leak, and forced Boeing’s Board to select Everett with all of its “union problems” over the Board’s preferred site for final assembly of South Carolina. I detail Boeing’s belief I forced them to site the 787 in Washington State on my website. Bair’s interview only confirms their belief that that is the case, which is not the true reason they are retaliating against me via these unfounded charges.
And lastly, another main reason the "train" to my inevitable conviction was not delayed by the judge was the fact that the Prosecutor thought a fair trial for me was of less importance than some Boeing Executives' vacation plans. The prosecutor told the judge that the county "would begin to lose witnesses on March 28th" as the reason we couldn't delay the trial for another week as we had requested because we had no time to finish discovery and prepare for trial before then. The reason the county would "lose witnesses starting on March 28th? "Numerous" Boeing executives, including former Vice President and General Manager of the 787 Program, Mike Bair, would have to delay their travel plans and vacations to Cabo so that they could testify if the trial was delayed.
Really? My Constitutional rights to a fair trial are trumped by Boeing Executives' vacation schedules?
Sadly, that is the truth. The prospect of a one percenter delaying one of their many vacations during the year for a few days does in fact cancel out my Constitutional right to a fair trial, apparently because I am from a lower caste than the powers that be in the corrupt Boeing Executive Suite.
The Last Inspector
Truly sad news Friday. Even I wanted Boeing to win the KC-X competition, if controls were put in place to protect the warfighter and taxpayer from continuing Boeing Management fraud.
It is rightly just, then that the stock "tanks" today, after the tanker loss, fittingly negating the value of Boeing mismanagement stock options upon whose value they commit much of the fraud I witnessed. Hopefully employees will not be affected to any extent by such a loss to the stock price. Hopefully most Boeing employees did what I did, which was to never put any 401K money in Boeing stock and always sell Sharevalue shares at the earliest opportunity. I did so because I, just as most Boeing employees should have experienced and acted accordingly, knew how really badly the company was run internally and a few of the skeletons Boeing management was hiding in the closet as far as the fraud I witnessed as I was threatened with my job if I too did not engage in it.
Regardless of what has been said of why Boeing lost, I believe strongly that what the Air Force knew independent of any external source of Boeing management's continuing "ethical" problems half a decade past the Druyun/Boeing scandal that made Boeing the most risky proposal before it.
Indeed, the workers at Boeing are blameless in this loss. Boeing management is solely responsible for this loss for many reasons. Boeing would have likely won the original tanker contract if Boeing top management had not decided to ensure it was iced by bribing the top Air Force procurement official with favors for her and her family. That directly led to this "recompete" in which the political climate and Boeing management's public reputation are very different than what they were before the Druyun/Boeing scandal. Boeing management mistruths (intentional or unintentional) told to the press and investor community about the state of the 787 program didn't help either.
People should realize, even though the outcome is unpalatable to any American who wants to protect American jobs and our ability to produce our own aircraft in times of war, that there was a competition held between two different contractors. Due to that very fact that a competition was held meant that Boeing could lose it, especially since the post-Druyun reforms at the Air Force, which "took," as opposed to the "reforms" in Boeing management, which never ended Boeing Management corruption as this site proves.
One thing this loss proves is clear: The majority of employees at Boeing who thought we shouldn't have to sign a yearly "Code of Conduct" because of the illegal and unethical actions of our management were right. It was simply an effort by Boeing management to spread the blame away from where it laid--at their feet. This and other meaningless actions in response to the Druyun/Boeing scandal led to the still largely unreformed corrupt management team in place at Boeing today, some of whose unethical and illegal continuing actions are detailed on this site.
It is this unreformed Boeing management team and their enablers in the Boeing Legal and Office of Internal Governance departments (that should be instead disabling such management corruption) that are to blame for the tanker loss and Boeing being seen as the highest risk company to do business with.
So, if you are a Boeing worker like I was, when you go to work on Monday you won't have far to look for who really is to blame for the loss of the tanker contract. You won't have to look across the ocean to another country. Or even out of state. You only have to look at your Boeing manager--they are the group of people that failed you--yet again--by their search of ever greater "value" to their bottom lines by any means, legally, ethically, or not.
They outsourced your jobs on legacy programs and the 787 to maximize their bottom lines and take away from yours. The result of their war on their own employees has backfired, as any rational management would have known.
Almost every employee is counting the hours, minutes, and/or seconds to retirement, hating how they are really treated by management as a disposable and unwanted commodity, wondering if Boeing management's next attempt to maximize their bottom lines will take away their job as well.
Ironically, Boeing management was being two-faced on this contract, which didn't help its credibility with the Air Force either. Boeing did exactly what Northrop did on the 787 program--Northrop Grumman outsourced most of the work overseas--bringing in airplane sections built overseas to a Southern state whose work force is more adept at picking banjo next to river banks rather than anything remotely as complex as building airplanes--much less large and complex military airplanes, even though they will "only" be "snapping together" the airplane sections and performing testing and delivery.
Perhaps this is in a way yet another rebuke, similar to the 787 delay debacles, to Boeing management by way of the Air Force for for the war Boeing has waged against its own employees. Maybe someone at the Air Force thought this was poetic justice for the noted outsourcing weakening our country much more than the Northrop Grumman outsourcing can ever do due to the many fewer planes whose work will be outsourced on the tanker program compared to the outsourcing by Boeing mismanagement on the 3500 or so projected 787s and other programs, both legacy and future, on which outsourcing will be used more and more as time goes on. Ironic, don't ya think?
How does Boeing go forward and win the next major contracts? The answer is obvious--remove the source of the risk that the Air Force found unacceptable in the tanker competition, and the sole reason for the loss of the tanker contract--get a new management team. Not just a few new faces in Chicago like in past Boeing Management produced debacles, but any manager in any way tainted by corruption must go in order for Boeing to win again. That's a hell of a lot of managers, and many first lines as well, as I can attest.
I feel just as any employee does in this devastating loss. Even I, one of Boeing's most informed whistleblowers, advocated a Boeing win on this contract, if the proper controls were put in place, which I was confident was possible. It is sad our government has changed our procurement rules to allow apparently unlimited foreign content.
Our state officials may protest in Congress, but some of them know full well just how bad Boeing management still is and how they still use any means--ethical and legal or not--to meet financial targets.
Corrupt and incompetent Boeing Management has long been the nemesis of the company's reputation and of its own workers. A new management team could fix that. Perhaps this loss, if it has a silver lining, will be the catalyst that makes that happen sooner rather than later. The joy Boeing workers would have expressed hearing of a win instead of the loss of the tanker contract would be greatly exceeded by news of such a management change to a management that is not at war with its own workers and country, except when they bid on military programs.
The Last Inspector