[p_l]

The thing is, there's explicit regulations and playbooks which let you easily drive a quality control organization in airplane (or parts) manufacturing, maintenance, repair, and operations.

You're not going to look evil for firing someone who undercuts FAA regs on quality. Those same regs also do not care about how an applicant looks other than being able to do the job mentally and physically (I'd argue you could slip a non-human being into some roles if you could prove they can follow the regs!)

And FWIW, there is rather simple causal relationship between cost cutting and benefits for the top managers. And quality controls cost money. So does corporate culture that rewards quality.

Believe me, DEI or no DEI, every regulatory body in the world would stand up and support you if you show that someone didn't get a job or lost a job because they couldn't ensure the required quality is kept.

Especially when you consider that this is yet another SNAFU at Boeing involving quality, design, or actual production - and sometimes other companies dealing with the same supplier (Spirit) do not have the same issues. Despite sometimes having even more "social responsibility" rules over them (compared to, let's say Germany, DEI pushes in USA have no teeth)

[cubefox]

Regulations do not fully determine safety. The best regulations are not enough when your workforce contain a lot of low-skilled diversity hires. Ironically the FAA itself employes DEI since 2013:

https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/01/15/faa-dei-initiatives/

[p_l]

Ironically, the push for deregulation that twice had led to deadly accidents involving US-made planes, always came as policy decision from a Republican president - first Nixon, later Bush Jr.

And the regulation mean that Boeing can loose even the ability to sell what they have if they do not maintain quality as necessary.

[g-b-r]

Employs for what since Boeing self-checks itself??

[p_l]

Which is result of political policy pushed under Bush Junior, too!

[cubefox]

Which isn't relevant if you don't engage in tribalism.

[p_l]

And what, if not engagement in tribalism, is focusing on "DEI efforts" when we have explicit data that increased delegation of certification to vendors and related changes were official policy of specific US president?

Just like Turkish Airlines Flight 981 was indirectly, but very very strongly, related to policy set by another american president - it just happened that TAF 981 managed to crash before the president who set that policy left the office.

P.S. neither of american tribes are mine