This quote is also from my first report to the FAA local MIDO office, when I was naive and chose not to believe all those press reports about the FAA being the "handmaiden of the aviation industry" and a "tombstone agency." This quote is from the section of my report noted in the first quote below that I deleted to make that quote shorter and I stated that I may quote later. This quote from that section details my history as an inspector at Boeing, and some of the other corrupt Boeing QA supervisors I've worked for over the years:
(My QA supervisor) never told me that we were not going to have the meeting he had said we were going to have during that Friday meeting. Wednesday just came and went. On Thursday I submitted a vacation request slip to (my QA supervisor) for the next week off so I could finish this. He approved it. I had been doing research for this endeavor since the morning of 1/12/02, Saturday, in the spare time I had between inspections at work, and the same way every workday since. I worked on this on my home computer after work. You see, I never had that CAM meeting on Wednesday because I dodged a bullet that weekend.
What I did was not that much different than I always did. The only change I made was not to inspect per drawing on the larger jobs. I hadn’t really roller stamped as I was subtly instructed, although I guess I technically did. I knew I would never be able to bring myself to roller stamp like our experts on the subject, our leads, (name, of "my stamp has a Briggs and Stratton on it" fame) and (name). I knew the meeting only was delayed.
When it was found out how little I had "altered my inspection processes to meet the delivery schedule" in subsequent inspections, it would only take one complaint from shop, and I would be back on the CAM trail to termination. Although, as I said, I’m doing this mostly for the safety of the traveling public, I guess I still must hold out hope that, with your help, BCAG can be weaned off of it’s corrupt Quality System, and will be made to suckle up, however unwillingly, to the FAA-approved Quality System we should be working to, and inspectors like me can do our jobs well, and document discrepancies, without fearing reprisal and unemployment.
I think that in that Friday meeting, as complete as it was in describing the unwritten BCAG Quality System, (my QA supervisor) still left some things unsaid, "between the lines." He never told me not to write up discrepancies I had found. He only said inspecting the product was unnecessary. I think what he meant by "Not supporting the delivery schedule" really meant not the speed of my inspection, but the fact that I documented discrepancies that interfered with delivery of the product.
The only difference between the weekends of 10/14/01, where my performance was unsatisfactory from a "supporting the delivery schedule" standpoint, and 01/13/02, where my performance was satisfactory, was a minimal amount of drawing reading, and the fact that on the 10/14/01 747 RM245 POS 3 EBU I was working that weekend, I had written an NCR..., on .032" deep damage to the IDG (Integrated Drive Generator, a generator driven by the turbofan engine accessory gearbox, which supplies electrical power for the aircraft) sight glass housing that had to travel uncompleted to Everett, and I had written pickups (P/U...on O&IR...operation 080.00 leak test, P/U... on the ... functional test job, and P/U...on the...functional test job) stating that those jobs were traveling uncompleted to Everett, as QA witness of the those functional tests was required, and no mechanic was available to perform the test for QA.
I left those pickups on (th QA Lead's) desk that afternoon before I left, with a note stating why I had wrote the traveler pickups, along with a highlighted copy of the section of (the) Directive...that required manual tests to be witnessed. I found out later that he had roller stamped those pickups without inspection and that they didn’t travel to Everett. Of course, he never told me. I looked at the completed records because I thought that was what he would do.
Anyway, the engine on 01/13/02 had no such traveled functional tests, as I witnessed them, and I had found no tagable conditions. Maybe that’s why I got the kudos for the latest engine, and the opposite for the prior engine. I "supported the delivery schedule" by not writing up anything on the engine, and sending it to Everett without travelers. Oh, well, just a theory I guess, as I have no evidence for it, as (my QA supervisor) carefully skirted any mention of any directive not to write up any defects I found, unlike (my prior QA supervisor) had.
The Last Inspector