Originally Posted by
yoko1
For the record, the airlines clearly communicated that pilot training costs would be part of their purchasing decision. Boeing (and Airbus) want to sell airplanes. Airlines want to operate them as cheaply as they can. The same motivations to drive down costs that influenced the decisions at Boeing which resulted in the MCAS debacle are the same motivations that existed at the airlines to drive down their labor costs whether by arbitrage (i.e. outsourcing, union busting, short-term "independent contractor" employment agreements), lobbying for rules that allow for lower experience levels, minimizing investment in training, etc. All aided and abetted by regulatory agencies that are more beholden to the industries they regulate than the traveling public. So when a poorly designed aircraft intersects with a poorly prepared crew, why should we be surprised that the result is tragedy?
One of society's problems besides the Peter Principle is the fact that almost everything is built or operated by the lowest bidder. Running any corporate operation is kind of like surfing on a wave... too far in either direction, you will fall (fail). An airline that spends too much will fail in its business, but the airline that spends too little will potentially fail for other reasons (accidents, regulatory fines, poor customer service etc.). It is difficult to consistently maintain the sweet spot on the wave!