[MUSIC]

Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, everyone. With all the breaking news yesterday, the two Trump legal decisions in different New York courtrooms, the US changing course and allowing a Gaza cease-fire resolution to pass at the UN Security Council, you might've missed this. The CEO of Boeing, Dave Calhoun announced his resignation. Now, if that sounds like a story just for the business shows, it is much more than that in this case, because this resignation flows from a basic and frightening question for travelers in the United States, and really the whole world, how safe is it right now to fly?

You probably heard about the horror story incident in January when a door flew off a Boeing plane after takeoff, and the only reason nobody died is said to be the lucky fact that no one was sitting in the window seat in that exit row at the moment. If a passenger was there, especially without a seatbelt on, it could have been fatal. Even more recently, just this month, another Boeing plane went into a nose dive on a flight between Australia and New Zealand. Maybe you heard about that. 50 people were injured in that incident. Two horrifying Boeing plane incidents so close together, and Boeing makes so many of the world's commercial jetliners.

Now, after the nose dive, Boeing then alerted airlines about another potential safety problem having to do with switches on the back of the pilot's seat. Earlier this month, a Boeing whistleblower on safety concerns, a former employee named John Barnett was found dead just before he was scheduled to give a deposition in a lawsuit against the company. Now, his death has been reported as from an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound, but it still has drawn even more attention to Boeing's quality control problems and to John Barnett's lawsuit alleging the company retaliated against him for pointing some of them out. CEO Calhoun seemed to be caught flatfooted and in corporate jargon knees back on January 10th, five days after the door incident when asked on CNBC what happened.

CNBC Host: How did an unsafe airplane fly in the first place?

Dave Calhoun: Because a quality escape occurred. Because a quality escape occurred.

CNBC Host: Can you explain what that means? What is a quality escape?

Dave Calhoun: I think that's the description of what people are finding in their inspections. Anything that could potentially contribute to an accident.

Brian Lehrer: A quality escape, anything that could potentially contribute to an accident. That was his explanation. That was embarrassing enough, maybe some of you saw this, that John Oliver used that clip on his show Last Week Tonight as part of a very funny but very scary takedown of Boeing's corporate culture. Yesterday, CEO Calhoun was more direct when he framed the challenge ahead for the company. He's answering a question here about why he's staying on as CEO all the way to the end of this year.

Dave Calhoun: We have another mountain to climb. Let's not avoid what happened with Alaska Air. Let's not avoid the call for action. Let's not avoid the changes that we have to make in our factory. Let's not avoid the need to slow down a bit and let the supply chain catch up. We got to get at that just like we got at the rest, and we will get through that. We will get through that, and I've committed myself to the board to do exactly that.

Brian Lehrer: Boeing CEO, Dave Calhoun yesterday on CNBC. Also, since people have short memories and the news cycle moves on, or we only pay attention to things that happen in the United States, some of you may remember that there were actual crashes of Boeing 737 MAX 8 jets in 2018 and 2019, one in Ethiopia, one in Indonesia that killed a reported total of 346 people. That fleet was grounded for nearly two years after that.

As the Washington Post reports, the US Justice Department concluded that Boeing employees concealed a critical safety flaw implicated in those crashes. Just how bad is this company? From the Captain Obvious department, here's what transportation secretary Pete Buttigieg just said on CNBC when they asked him about the January case of the door flying off.

Pete Buttigieg: What I'll say is that every plane that they deliver to an airline, every plane that goes into the skies needs to be 100% safe, and they need to be able to demonstrate that.

Brian Lehrer: Yes. Pete Buttigieg there. With us here, Lori Aratani, Washington Post reporter who covers transportation issues. Lori, thanks for coming on. Welcome to WNYC.

Lori Aratani: Thank you for inviting me, Brian.

Brian Lehrer: Can we start with the 2018 and 2019 crashes of the MAX 8s in Ethiopia and Indonesia? Imagine the news that would've made here if they happened in New York and California or in New Jersey and Arizona. What happened in those crashes?

Lori Aratani: Yes, indeed that is true. There were two fatal crashes that involved different versions of the Boeing 737 MAX. They were MAX 8s. What ultimately came out was there was a software system that Boeing had not fully disclosed to pilots that was forcing the nose down. What was interesting is that the first crash in Indonesia involved a carrier that had a spotty safety record. I don't know that it raised the alarms.

It was overseas that it might've, as you mentioned, if it happened in the US. The second crash just a few months later in March, that crash was in October 2018. The second crash in March 2019 certainly raised a lot of concern. What was interesting in that case was the pattern the two planes followed was eerily similar. China was the first country to ground the 737 MAX. The US was among the last to ground that. It was just devastating for the company and for the families that lost loved ones on those two flights.

Brian Lehrer: What was the concealment of a safety problem that you reported on?

Lori Aratani: It was a software system called MCAS. It was designed to help pilots in the event the plane was getting in danger, but it had not been disclosed, and so pilots had not received full training or weren't aware of how to counteract it when it happened. The planes were grounded as you mentioned, and Boeing was forced first to make changes to that software system. An investigation by lawmakers here in the US found that Boeing had not been truthful in the implications of that software assistant because it would've required additional training that might've been costly to airlines.

Their promise to some of the carriers was that we will put this new system on. It won't be additional training. Clearly, that was a mistake. There was some disclosures of text messages and emails by one of the test pilots that was charged with talking to airlines and customers about this system where he talked about Jedi mind tricking regulators. It was very damaging to Boeing. After this all happened, Boeing pledged to recommit to safety and transparency. Now we have this terrible accident in January, which fortunately, it was not fatal. I can't imagine how people on that plane, I'm sure it was absolutely terrifying.

That reignited this concern about whether or not Boeing had really made good on these pledges to commit to safety and quality in its manufacturing process. They had reached an agreement with the Department of Justice to avoid criminal prosecution. They paid a lot of money out, and they recommitted to safety, and clearly that is not happening at Boeing, which is where they are now. I think yesterday-- Go ahead, Brian.

Brian Lehrer: Just something that you just said, I'm sure a lot of our listeners were wondering. They avoided criminal prosecution after those 2018 and 2019 crashes despite what you were just describing. It sounds like such a blatant act of putting profits over people's safety and covering it up.

Lori Aratani: I think right now that agreement, it's now reopened. The Justice Department, there's a grand jury investigating whether or not-- It's ironic. It was a three-year agreement that was set to expire the day after this incident happened with the Alaska Airlines jet. Now the Justice Department, I understand, has six months to determine what happens. Whether or not they release Boeing and say that they fulfilled the conditions of that agreement or whether, or not they extend the conditions of that agreement, or whether or not Boeing could potentially face criminal prosecution. Those are all options that are now on the table. I think they have reopened as the Justice Department and officials are looking into Boeing's conduct and what happened and what led to this, as David Calhoun put it, quality escape.

Brian Lehrer: Was that as embarrassing for him broadly as it sounded like it should have been, or did John Oliver, they take a little snippet out of context to make a funny but serious point.

Lori Aratani: As you mentioned, your readers, readers might not necessarily think of the plane that they fly on, but Boeing has really become fodder for late-night comedians, social media. I believe Jimmy Fallon had a limerick about spring break travelers flying on a Boeing plane and having parts of that Boeing plane fly off. This is really a terrible thing for a company that has a storied American history. As you mentioned, it's raised concerns among some folks about whether or not it's safe to fly. You see all these other smaller incidents, but if they involve Boeing planes, they become magnified. There was a United plane that lost a tire as it took off. It makes flyers uneasy.

Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, FAA administrator Mike Whitaker, and Jennifer Homendy, who's the chair of the National Transportation Safety Board, who is investigating this Alaska Airlines accident from January 5th, have all taken steps to assure the public that it is safe to fly. I was at an event where Secretary Buttigieg said, "You're actually more in danger of driving to the airport than when you get on the actual airplane." I think about 118 people on average die each day in car crashes, but aviation, flying, air travel is something that really just garners a huge share of people's attention.

Brian Lehrer: The comparison, it's not even fair to make that comparison. We've talked on this show many times about risk perception, the psychology of how we perceive risk, and how people get white-knuckled on a routine basis when they take off in an airplane. A lot of people do, but not when they drive their own cars because the psychology is your own car is familiar to you, you think you're in control, but of course, car crashes, including fatal ones, are statistically so much more likely to happen, and in most cases, within 35 miles or so of home. Nevertheless, that doesn't excuse Boeing, and when it comes to commercial airliners because of the implications of mass defection from even flying, their safety record has to be close to 100%.

Lori Aratani: Indeed.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, we can take your calls for Washington Post transportation reporter Lori Aratani. Some of you're calling in already on the safety problems at Boeing, or related questions about airline safety right now. 212-433-WNYC, call or text 212-433-9692. We'll get to the Alaska Airlines incident. That's the door one, but I want to ask you first about the nose dive incident this month on a Boeing 787 Dreamliner. Remind our listeners what happened there and how 50 people wound up hurt.

Lori Aratani: This was a plane operated by a Chilean carrier LATAM. It was flying, I believe, between New Zealand and Australia. There have been different accounts of what may have happened, but one, I know that The Wall Street Journal had reported on was that a switch-- There's a switch that controls-- In your car, you have a switch that controls when your seat moves backwards and forward.

There's a similar switch on these models of the 787, and apparently, it somehow-- a flight attendant had come into to bring the captains, the pilots, some meals and had accidentally triggered the switch, which then caused the seat to go forward and forced the pilot to hit, and the plane went into a nose dive. Boeing, as you mentioned in your opening, had put out an alert about ensuring that there's a cover on that switch, and that cover was there.

I think investigators are still trying to figure out exactly what happened, but that's just one of those just very strange incidents. Boeing had previously warned airlines in 2017 about the switch and ensuring that the cover was on the switch. We haven't been able to get that warning, so we're not sure what led the plane maker to warn airlines to make sure that these switches are covered and that they can't be triggered.

Brian Lehrer: It was unclear to me from the reporting I had seen whether that problem with the switches on the pilot seat had anything to do with that nose dive. Is that the conclusion that there're coming to?

Lori Aratani: I think that there have been different accounts. I think I've been reading a lot of the same news accounts you have and doing our own independent reporting. What I read, the journal had reported that, yes, they believe that's what happened. The switch was triggered. The pilot seat went forward hitting the wheel that caused the plane to nose dive, and then that sudden nose dive caused people to fly out of their seats in a really, I'm sure scary moment.

Brian Lehrer: Listener writes this text message noting that those two fatal crashes happened in 2018 and 2019, which is during the Trump administration, and the listener asks, "What was the Trump administration's effect on the leniency toward Boeing and being one of the last countries to ground that jet?"

Lori Aratani: We had done some reporting that had indicated that the then CEO at Boeing had appealed to President Trump to not ground the airplane insisting that it was safe. Our reporting showed that Trump was very involved in that decision about whether those planes should keep flying. He was very involved in the decision when to ground those planes. Ultimately, he was the one who I believe made the announcement that they would ground the planes, but the US, I believe, was the last. I think Canada grounded it, and then the US announced they were grounding those planes.

Brian Lehrer: We're getting a call from Micah in Portland, Maine who says he hosts a podcast called Airplane Geeks, and he actually, I think, is going to argue that Boeing may not have been responsible for that Ethiopia crash, at least. Micah, you're on WNYC. Hello.

Micah: Hi. I'm part of the Airplane Geeks Podcast. We've been doing this for 14 years with a group of experts talking about aircraft and aviation. The Ethiopian crash, and this was not really reported very much, but in the Ethiopian crash, both the NTSB and the BEA, which is the French equivalent of the NTSB, found that it was pilot error, that it was not a Boeing issue in that case, because Boeing had already issued a notice and sent out information that the Ethiopian Airlines did have in terms of how to correct for the issue with MCAS.

Additionally, the pilots did not respond very well at all as they were flying. They kept the throttles at full and never reduced the throttles, and did not follow the procedures that was already issued by Boeing. Again, the fact that the NTSB and the BEA two completely independent agencies that did two separate investigations found this is not been really reported very well. In fact, The Washington Post had an editorial about this-- I'm sorry, it was The Wall Street Journal had an editorial about this last week about how it wasn't covered particularly well. It's one of the things that we've discussed on the show and it still isn't really particularly well known in that crash.

Brian Lehrer: What about, as you see it, Micah, the Indonesia crash, same model, same software problem just a few months apart?

Micah: Lion Air has always been known, as your guest has said, to not have the best safety record, and in fact, they were banned from flying in the USA for a while. That aircraft that crashed actually had a similar issue with MCAS the day before, and the pilots recovered from it. The day that the Lion Air crash did take place, the pilots did not recover from it, so there is a possibility that it was pilot error, but we don't know that one for sure, but-

Brian Lehrer: Micah, I'm going to--

Micah: -they were just flying just fine.

Brian Lehrer: Let me leave it there for time. I really appreciate your input. Thank you very, very much for that. Lori, of course, we don't want to oversimplify what happened in any case, if there is blame to go around or blame Boeing because they're a ripe target right now if something wasn't their fault. Are you familiar with the Airplane Geeks Podcast that the caller says he co-hosts or the arguments that he makes?

Lori Aratani: I am familiar with the podcast, and I am a big fan of the Geeks. I think they do great work and they give a lot of insight to a really interesting topic area. I'm not aware. I know that the NTSB and other agencies aided in the investigation, but my understanding was it was the Ethiopian authorities that were the lead agency in investigating that crash, as I think is per international protocol. I'm not aware of that, but I am intrigued and I will take a look at that Wall Street Journal editorial.

Brian Lehrer: Here's another inside view. I think that we're going to get from our next caller, Jan in Brooklyn, who says he's been the captain of a Boeing jet for a major US airline. Jan, you're on WNYC. Hi, there.

Jan: Hello, thanks for having me. Appreciate you taking my call. My thoughts on the issue are from the inside. As you mentioned I'm the captain of a Boeing 757/767 at a major US airline. Glad that you were able to put me on right after the previous caller, because, first of all, it's very sad to see some people, even in the industry, rallying around Boeing when there are clearly a fault for so many things in the past a couple of years, notably the loss of 346 lives.

From the MAX scandal, I think it's been very clear that that was not pilot error, and that was proven to be solely the fault of Boeing and their hiding of this new certification product in order to prevent the need for additional training. All that being said, my question is, what are the chances that Boeing will actually be held accountable for their actions and things won't get swept under the rug as they often are with corporations in America?

Before I allow the answer to come forth, I just wanted to mention, as someone in the industry who does fly Boeing, I do want to reassure passengers that it is extremely safe. Although there are some incidents still occurring as we're hearing, I was really happy to hear your risk comparison between driving and flying. We do want it to be as safe as possible, which is why I'm always happy when the spot light is put on the industry, but it is very, very safe. I'm always feeling safe and happy to be on an airplane, regardless of the manufacturer.

Brian Lehrer: Can I ask you a follow-up question? Because some listeners, hearing your whole phone call, might be confused, that on the one hand, it sounds like you're saying it's not safe to fly in Boeing planes because the companies are responsible, and then you turn around and say, don't worry, it is safe. Could you put those two together?

Jan: Sure. I think the 737 MAX at the time, when there were accidents internationally, luckily in the US, we didn't have any-- I do not think that at that time that plane was safe. Luckily, regulators, unfortunately a little too late in the US, did ground the aircraft. It took two years to fix, and now it is a safe aircraft. It's back and up and ready to go. The incidents that are occurring, of course, bring to light the possibility of greater issues of Boeing. I think it's a good thing because we're able to focus on it before anything gets to the next level.

Brian Lehrer: Captain Jan, thank you so much for calling with your insight and your question. Did you retain the question, Lori, about whether Boeing's going to be held accountable and anything's going to change?

Lori Aratani: Yes, I did. You're seeing a really more aggressive stance by the FAA, and I suppose you have to realize that this is also a different administration. Michael Whitaker, who was confirmed last October as FAA administrator, has really taken a lot of aggressive actions. The Department of Justice is reopening, they're interviewing witnesses that were involved in that Alaska Airlines accident from January. We'll have to see.

The FAA is committed to holding Boeing accountable. They've done several audits. There are several ongoing investigations. I know that the Hill is very active on this issue, and there are plans to have Boeing appear on the Hill. They did pass legislation to try and improve regulation and oversight of Boeing. We may see more of that depending on what comes out, and it'll be up to the Department of Justice to decide what actions they want to take here.

We've talked to experts who say it can be a difficult call. Boeing is such a huge employer and such a huge part of the US economy. On one hand, criminal prosecution could be a very bad thing, but again, they were given a deferred prosecution agreement after these two fatal crashes. It's starting to look like maybe they haven't taken all the actions and learned all the lessons. They didn't. It'll be a tough call for the Department of Justice to figure out how you hold a company as huge and is such a huge part of the economy in the US accountable.

Brian Lehrer: On the Alaska Airlines one, the door flying off case, it appears to be a problem with the way the door was bolted in, and I wonder two things. One, did they find something systemic that is a problem with the bolts on the doors on multiple Boeing planes, or the procedures used for securing them in general? Also, I see that the Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation of that incident. I would ask why criminal in this case. What would be a crime related to that rather than a mistake?

Lori Aratani: I will tell you I'm not a legal reporter, so this is not my area of expertise.

Brian Lehrer: Sure.

Lori Aratani: I understand in the case that the deferred prosecution agreement they brought in the two fatal crashes, I think one of the issues was fraud misrepresenting. I would be getting into very deep waters that I don't have a lot of expertise in to talk about that. I had another question, Brian, about the bolts and the door. You may recall that after this incident, the FAA immediately grounded all similar planes so that these bolts could be inspected. It could be ensured that the bolts were there at the time.

They didn't know what had happened on that Alaska Airlines flight, the situation with the bolts, but they wanted to make sure that any other planes that were flying were safe. They did inspections of those. Ultimately, the preliminary report by the NTSB, the National Transportation Safety Board, found that four bolts that are used to secure that part in place were missing. They're a little bit stymied in their investigation. Their understanding is the fuselage was manufactured-- the body of the plane was manufactured by Spirit Arrow Systems, which is a Boeing subcontractor there in Kansas. It was shipped to the factory in Renton for final assembly.

At some point, that fuselage arrived in Renton, and there were issues with the fuselage that required that that door plug be removed. It was removed, the issues with the fuselage were fixed, the door plug was replaced, but apparently, the bolts were not put in there. The NTSB is running into some trouble trying to figure out exactly what happened and who was involved because Boeing has said they can't find the paperwork. They're supposed to record when they do work on the planes, what happens, who's responsible, there is no paper trail.

The NTSB also asked for security footage, but the issue is the work was done on that plane last year, so the camera footage automatically overrides itself in 30 days, so there's not security footage. There is a gap in the investigation. The chair of the National Transportation Safety Board at a hearing before the Senate I think surprised a lot of people when she said Boeing CEO had pledged transparency and cooperation. Jennifer Homendy said, "Look, we're trying to get information from Boeing, and they are not providing it." I think within hours, some of the information that NTSB had been asking for, Boeing provided within hours of that hearing. There are gaps in the investigation.

I think Jennifer Homendy mentioned that they're finding that some people are reluctant to talk. They may be worried that they may face criminal charges if they were involved in this. The NTSB is trying its best to get answers, but the FAA has taken a really aggressive posture in trying to do its best to ensure that Boeing is following its own procedures. Boeing has admitted that its own audit, its own internal look post-accident has found that, no, it hasn't always followed its procedures. It's trying to follow its own procedures to make sure these aircraft are safe.

Brian Lehrer: We're almost out of time. A few listeners are texting us versions of this question. I'll read one of them. "What about the change in Boeing's management culture from engineers to business school graduates?" Was there such a change?

Lori Aratani: Yes. We've heard a lot. In the '90s, there was a merger between Boeing and McDonald Douglas. A lot of people pin that merger as the beginning of a culture that was-- Boeing was traditionally a culture that was engineers run by engineers. Once this merger happened, it became a culture that was more driven by the bottom line and by, as some people say, finance folks and beam counters.

It was more focused on profits and making money than it was on the engineering. There are a lot of calls now that Boeing really needs to go back to that engineering culture. I think a lot of your listeners clearly have followed this company for a while, so they're aware of that. That is a refrain that we have heard over and over again. We heard it in the wake of the two fatal crashes, and we are definitely hearing it now.

Brian Lehrer: To circle back to the most immediate news hook to close, the announcement of the resignation yesterday by Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun. When I was watching the interview of him on CNBC, I was surprised to hear that, given the context for all of this, everything we've been discussing in the last half hour, he said, basically in the clip we played, that he's staying on until the end of the year because he thinks he's the guy to stay and fix these problems.

One might assume that when a CEO resigns in an environment like this, it's more out of shame, it's more with his head between his tails. How does that go? Between his legs and his tail, however that expression goes. Instead, he announced his resignation, which signifies one thing in this environment after these recent incidents, but then said he's staying on till the end of the year because he's got work to do to fix it. Explain.

Lori Aratani: A lot of analysts were surprised by that. The prior CEO, Dennis Muilenburg, left pretty quickly. Dave Calhoun had been the former chairman of the Boeing Board of Directors. A lot of analysts were surprised by that. They had different theories. One may be that maybe the board hasn't lined up a successor, so there wasn't an obvious choice to replace David Calhoun. He is stepping down at the end of the year. They raise the possibility that perhaps that may come earlier if they find someone that can take over this job.

For now, indeed, a lot of commenters on our stories that we did at The Washington Post raise the same thing, that if other people make a mistake like that. Stan Deal, who ran the Boeing Commercial Airlines operation for Boeing is leaving the company right away. It is an interesting choice by the board that they've allowed Calhoun to stay on. Some analysts have told us they think it may be a question of succession. They were surprised by this and there's not an obvious candidate out there.

Brian Lehrer: That expression I was grasping for is with your tail between your legs. Later in the show, folks, we're going to have a guest who wrote a book about words and phrases in the English language. It's going to be really fun. Maybe tail between your legs will come up again later in the show. Lori Aratani, Washington Post reporter who covers transportation issues, thank you so much.

Lori Aratani: Thank you, Brian.

Copyright © 2024 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.