[generatorguy]

The EASA says there is “still no appropriate response to Angle of Attack integrity issues.”

I can’t believe they haven’t got a plan yet!

[fmajid]

Or to the Boeing and FAA integrity issues, for that matter.

[dvdbloc]

I wish we had a graph of their attrition rate since the incidents occurred

[appleflaxen]

Whose attrition rate? The EASA? Boeing?

[ClumsyPilot]

Boeing I guess, maybe FAA. Why would ESA loose people from this?

[Retric]

EASA rubber stamping the FAA’s rubber stamping of Boeing is still EASA making a mistake just as much as it’s the FAA’s mistake. This has become a major public issue, bet the problems started when the aircraft entered service.

[throwaway5752]

It's nowhere near as big of a mistake on the EASA's part. You don't understand how international regulatory and standards bodies interact with each other.

There are explicit agreements between the EASA and FAA in order to reduce duplicated work (https://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=88965)

This is extremely bad. It it will be bad for any US regulated product used in EU markets like food, medical devices and equipment, pharmaceuticals, among others.

[Retric]

These agreements don’t require EASA to accept everything FAA does.

From your link: each entity performs a “validation” of certification activities.