My apologies. I intended to respond to Dikdik's comment and accidently responded to your post about Dikdik's comment instead. Read Dikdik's comment to see why I commented as I did.

You obviously do not understand how large, world-class corporations must operate. The "direction for the actions" does not come from the Board. Board member responsibility is established in law. The board meets for a few hours quarterly and reviews program and financial data. It then discusses and votes on major policy proposals brought forth by senior management--things like starting or closing a product line, building a new plant or selling/closing an existing one, major outsourcing or insourcing decisions, changes to pension plans, hiring or firing senior executives etc. It isn't and can't possibly be involved in the day-to-day engineering, manufacturing, purchasing, sales, or administration operations. Between the Board and the first line worker are several layers of management who must daily implement the generalized policies through development of detailed guidelines and job instructions. Every level of management has its specific responsibilities for everything under its control, to include safety.

I'm glad that Canadian construction safety "suddenly" increased when managers became responsible. They should have been accountable all along.

Your original post only mentioned board members, so I responded to that. Do you intend to create separate posts for each type of job among the tens of thousands of people involved in the production of a large commercial aircraft?

Your point assumes that Board members deliberately violate the law, a fact not in evidence. You also assume that there is a perfectly obvious simple solution to every problem, which is just not the case in highly competitive, very technologically complex reality.

Every major company has to be concerned about liability, because their very size makes them prime targets for greedy litigators. But being sued when not at fault is just as bad as being sued when at fault. Today the cost of litigation is so astronomical, most suits result in some sort of settlement. If you doubt that, just look at your insurance bills. Are they going up or going down?

FYI, Boeing's headquarters is in Arlington Virginia, not Chicago.

Regardless of headquarters location, every business corporation MUST make a profit. That profit is demanded by the investors who put up the capital to create and operate the business. If the company doesn't make a profit, it goes out of business. So, profit is essential just to stay in business.

The idea that a business simply chooses between doing quality work and making a profit is a silly daydream. It isn't an either/or. Companies that make junk products in aviation don't survive. Boeing was forced to find ways to streamline operations in order to survive the cut-throat cost-competition from government-subsidized Airbus. But safety was NEVER disregarded.

Research and development of new manufacturing technologies and new materials changed manufacturing processes significantly and were more economical. Eliminating unprofitable product lines [e.g., the MacDonald Douglas MD-90 (AKA Boeing 717), Boeing 727 and 757, certain satellite programs, and the digital video transmission business] along with eliminating the thousands of job redundancies that resulted from major mergers with North American, Hughes Aerospace, and MacDonald Douglas were other sources of cost reductions. And all along the way, Boeing's unions won industry leading wages.

You have no idea how many thousands of people were involved in creating the tens of thousands of pages written to describe all the training, operating, and maintaining instructions for Boeing aircraft. Yes, there can and will always be improvements. But there is a point at which humans cannot absorb and remember everything. And there is no set of perfect instructions that can prevent any possible source of human error.

Full disclosure. I support the wonderful work that St. Jude's does. You don't have to if you don't want to. But, St. Jude's is perfectly happy with contributions by checks, and I have done that.

Like everyone else, charities prefer credit card payments because it reduces administrative accounting costs. I don't have a problem with that because it makes more money available for the primary goals. So, I also contribute by credit card as well.

Yes. I do not believe all taxpayers should pay for you to receive ad-free entertainment. If you want ad-free entertainment, you should pay for it yourself.

So, if the money can't be sent to a US bank (as I believe it can), move back to the UK to live. You made the choice. If you don't like the consequences, you can change the decision.

It certainly does. IMHO PBS should get no taxpayer funding at all. If PBS provides a useful and valuable service, it is able to support itself with commercial ads alone--just like the 15,000 other radio station and 1,700 TV stations have to do.

And you can't switch to an Oregon bank, because....

The switch is completely covered by a lid cover that has to be lifted upward in order to press the switch. (See photo)
The lid is to be closed except for intentionally moving the seat (backward in order to get into the seat, or to move the seat forward when no one is occupying the seat.) But pilots are responsible for performing prescribed procedures, like closing the lid, and airline maintenance is responsible for keeping the lid in serviceable condition. Boeing issued a notice reminding crews of that in 2017.

And yet PBS already gets taxpayer funding from the government!

Maybe it's climate change.

Thank you!