GM(like NASA) throws it's employee's under the bus in failure...
 

Seems like GM has to throw the lead engineer of the switch in question under the bus since management didn't follow through on what to do when the problem was reported many years ago. Of course, I have never heard of any engineer providing a press conference to report faulty products...that's left to the risk-analysis people and PR(as in BS "reporting")

NASA back when the Challenger blew up. "don't launch the Shuttle as ambient temp MUST be equal or greater than 53F"~ Morton Thiokol and NASA engineers.

And WHAT was the ambient temperature when the Shuttle left the pad...38F...and the rush to get Christie into space for the PR BS machine was a national disgrace, and NASA engineers where thrown under the bus...NOW we will build a seal so good we could launch the Shuttle out of liquid nitrogen.

Human nature is in team success...we wrap our arms around ourselves and congratulate ME...in failure...let's start pointing fingers.

Yep.

The "Cover Your Ass" method of production wastes a lot of effort. Human nature is to accept all the credit and deflect any blame to the "other guy"

18 people are dead because they engineered a POS.

Management didn't engineer it, management didn't design it, management didn't manufacture it, management didn't assemble it.

Yet management always gets the blame and the axe. Sure sometimes one of em covers up after the fact and then they deserve to loose their heads.
But it's good to see the blame where it belongs.

I'm an engineer and in my career I've met some really piss-poor engineers who manage to skate through life being totally incompetent, the other engineers just work harder to pick up the slack.
I'd bet the same is true at GM, prolly more so.

GM dismisses 15 in wake of 'deeply troubling' recall report | Fox News

But management IS responsible for QA/QC. As someone in management, I've always been taught (and believed) that everything that happens, or fails to happen, is my fault. My job is to support my team and ensure they perform at the highest level. If they fail, it's because I failed them.

I've been looking for separation information and can't find any. I say this because I used work for GM and wouldn't be surprised if there is a severance package involved.

It's very sad for the families involved. I feel horrible every time I read a story hurting families involving a company I used to work for.

It's really sad with GM.....the dollar is THE ruler!

NRD

There is plenty of blame to go around.

An engineer and team was assigned to design the ignition system. Since this was going on selected models, there must have been some requirements for the design: price point, volume, type, features, etc. I'm sure prototypes were made and testing was done by another team. Once the development, testing, marketing, sales and whoever else was on this part - all had to sign off on it. Purchasing gets involved and sends out RFQs (request for quote) to vendors - I'm sure there were many vendors competing for the business. All need to be Tier suppliers approved by GM. Who ever got selected (I'm sure this was not made internally) signed a 5 yr contact, with a % price reduction of each year of the contract.

Now the Tier supplier maybe outsourcing some of the subcomponents to other vendors. The Tier vendor is responsible for quality, delivery and handles all complaints.


If there is a quality complaint, the burden is on the supplier. If the supplier can prove they have supplied product per the requirements, they aren't at fault. But this was different - this is a consumer issue. I'm sure a team was formed to investigate the complaints. Everything gets reviewed from the very beginning. Whatever decision was made as to what to do/how to handle this issue, it is out of the original engineer and his teams hands. This issue went up several high levels with the one thing in mind as to never let it get to the very top. This had to get very gamy when the complaints kept coming in. It got to the point, where the damage control failed - the only other option is to come clean.

There is always someone to "fall on the sword". That is just how it works. I have seen it time and time again.

More than 74 and perhaps far more. Worse yet, GM top brass even bullschitz covers the number of the related deaths.

Exclusive: At least 74 dead in crashes similar to those GM linked to faulty switches | Reuters


(Reuters) - At least 74 people have died in General Motors cars in accidents with some key similarities to those that GM has linked to 13 deaths involving defective ignition switches, a Reuters analysis of government fatal-crash data has determined. Such accidents also occurred at a higher rate in the GM cars than in top competitors’ models, the analysis showed.

Reuters searched the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS), a national database of crash information submitted by local law-enforcement agencies, for single-car frontal collisions where no front air bags deployed and the driver or front-seat passenger was killed.

The news agency compared the incidence of this kind of deadly accident in the Chevrolet Cobalt and the Saturn Ion, the highest-profile cars in GM's recall of 2.6 million cars with defective switches, against the records of three popular small-car competitors: Ford Focus, Honda Civic and Toyota Corolla.

The analysis found that the frequency of such accidents in the Ion was nearly six times that of the Corolla and twice that of the Focus. The Ion had 5.9 such fatal crashes per 100,000 cars sold, followed by the Cobalt, with 4.1, the Ford Focus with 2.9, the Civic with 1.6, and the Corolla with 1.0.

It is not clear how many of the deadly accidents identified by Reuters involved defective ignition switches, because crash reports typically do not include that data. That leaves open the possibility that air bags may have failed to deploy in some of the GM crashes for reasons other than faulty switches.

GM, which has offered few details of the fatal crashes related to faulty switches, told Reuters it derived the tally of 13 deaths from claims and lawsuits filed against the automaker. GM checked those claims and lawsuits against other sources available to it, including vehicle data recorders recovered from some crashes.

The Reuters analysis relied on the FARS database, which encompasses a much wider universe of accidents. GM declined to say whether it had used information from the federal database.

Reuters disclosed its findings in detail to GM and federal regulators at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

GM declined to comment on Reuters’ findings or methodology, responding only that: “Our focus is on doing the right thing for customers — fixing the recalled vehicles as quickly as possible, addressing our civic and legal responsibilities and setting a new industry standard for safety.”

NHTSA Acting Administrator David Friedman told Reuters: “The final death toll associated with this safety defect is not known to NHTSA, but we believe it’s likely that more than 13 lives were lost.”

Toyota and Honda declined to comment. Ford said it took issue with the Reuters findings concerning the Focus, but didn’t specify its reasons.

GM engineers first encountered problems with the switches in 2001, a year before the first Ion went into production. The faulty GM ignition switches could cause engines to shut off while driving, leading to a sudden loss of power steering and power brakes, and the failure of air bags to deploy in a crash.

Managers subsequently considered, then rejected several proposals to repair or replace the switches because of the extra cost, GM told NHTSA and congressional investigators.

The automaker did not begin recalling the cars until February 2014, after a two-and-a-half-year internal investigation. Eventually, GM recalled every Ion and Cobalt built from model years 2003 to 2010. Reuters used those model years for its analysis.

Using the FARS database of crashes reported to U.S. safety regulators between 2003 and 2012, Reuters identified 45 front-seat fatalities in the Cobalt and 29 in the Ion. In similar crashes, there were 44 fatalities in the Ford Focus, 41 in the Honda Civic and 24 in the Toyota Corolla.

Reuters found the Focus had 43 fatal accidents, the Cobalt had 42, the Civic had 39, the Ion had 28 and the Corolla had 24. While the raw crash numbers appear comparable, the rate of deadly crashes was higher in the two GM models, as the Ford, Honda and Toyota models sold in substantially greater numbers.

The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, a non-profit safety research group connected with the U.S. insurance industry, reviewed the Reuters analysis.

David Zuby, executive vice president and chief research officer, said: “Your crash rates suggest that Cobalt and Ion are less crashworthy than the other models for which you’ve computed similar statistics,” and are similar to those in a 2011 IIHS analysis.

Zuby added that there were several limitations to the analysis, noting that “while your analysis does focus on circumstances that are similar to the cases involving GM air bags that failed to deploy because of the ignition switch problem, it cannot be said definitively that the ignition switch problem” caused 74 deaths.

It is possible, Zuby said, that limitations in the data examined by Reuters may overstate the number of deaths attributable to air bag non-deployment in the car models examined.

Those limitations include the fact that there are other reasons why air bags may not deploy in a frontal crash, such as a car sliding under a truck.

Air bag defects unrelated to the ignition switch could cause a failure to deploy, he said, and air bags are designed not to deploy in some situations, such as where the passenger is a child. Zuby also noted that an Insurance Institute study showed the FARS database overstated the problem of air bag non-deployments.

That means the number of fatalities from the Reuters analysis is probably inflated, he said. However, the problems would not affect one model more than another, he added.

At the same time, there are other ways in which the Reuters tally may undercount switch-related fatalities in the GM models. The FARS crash data runs only through 2012, and Reuters did not include two fatalities of backseat passengers.

The fatalities entered in the FARS database and reviewed by Reuters do not include at least five of the 13 deaths acknowledged by GM. One died in 2013, past the range of the current FARS data, and two died in a multi-car accident.

Another, Amber Marie Rose, was killed in the July 2005 single-car crash of her 2005 Cobalt in Maryland. GM has confirmed that Rose is among the 13 victims, and investigators hired by NHTSA said her air bag did not deploy. But the FARS data indicates that the air bag did deploy and her death isn’t included in the Reuters count.

If I recall correctly, these incidents occurred when people had a bunch of crap hanging from their key chains. Typical of many women, and many kids, to hang every key they own on one chain, along with other crap (my kid has his beer bottle opener on his)...

I know I have seen language in some of the owner's manuals for my cars that tells you this is a bad idea, which I have agreed with for decades (I hang nothing on my keys, not even a key fob), so should we put a little of the responsibilty onto the drivers? I know that isn't PC in our society, but it's how I see things.

JR

yes, but management is the one who makes the decision, the safe, more expensive design, or the unsafe, cheaper design.

and they choose the later, every day.

Yes, but with most cars, you don't hang a bunch of crap on your key chain because they weigh can damage the ignition switch over time...not pull it out of sync and kill you.

I have 3 key chains that I use (almost) daily. My Audi key (which IS the fob); my Nissan key (key + fob--2 parts); and a key chain for my office crap and house keys. Whatever car I happen to be driving, the keys to my other "stuff" get tossed in the center console, and wait there until they're needed.

Quote:

Deep within the company, engineers and others believed the ignition switch problem was an inconvenience, a “customer satisfaction” issue rather than a safety problem. Engineers believed that cars could still be steered when the engines shut off, even though the loss of power steering could cause drivers to lose control.

How does the key turning off kill you? Please explain how a competent driver dies in this scenario. Yes, the airbags are no longer functional. How do you crash in the first place simply because you have no power steering and reduced braking?

Perhaps this was the logic employed at GM?

How many broken serpentine belts kill people?

Wheels lock up, steering doesn't work, brakes don't work...

I actually had it happen to me in my Nissan (cam sensor went bad); the car shut off while I was cruising home (AZ) from California, in "light" traffic--at speed. My car's a manual, so I just popped it in neutral and fired it back up and continued on my way. Took about 3 seconds, I'd say.

Dunno if you could do the same with an auto, though...

No, no and no. All wrong.

The answer is that a competent driver probably would not have had difficulty dealing with the situation, but that assumes JQ Public knows what he/she is doing, which is usually not the case.

Always blame the party with the deepest pockets.

JR

So, in your automatic vehicles, when power is not applied, your brakes and steering still work fine? I know they won't budge in my automatics without power applied...

Steering lock (mechanical) is tied to 'park', not to the 'key' on any car I've driven.

Traveling 'at speed' without power steering is not a big issue. If you have a clue about what's going on you probably won't crash.

I have a hard time seeing the vast majority of these deaths as anything other than poorly trained drivers being caught in a difficult situation.

No doubt there are some instances where an accident was almost unavoidable, but I suspect they are the minority.

You can still steer and brake. The effort to do so is higher.

The same thing happens any time the engine shuts off. Out of gas? Same problem... Lose your accessory drive belt/s? Same problem. Etc.

There have been individual defects that killed a lot more people but this one gets a bunch of attention. Hell, 300+ people die every year from slipping and falling in the bathtub.

JR

The problem seemed to be caused by someone bumping a long keychain with their knee, or a bump jarring the car when a heavy key chain was present. In at least one of the deaths, I think a young lady crashed (not the fault of the key, per se) but the key problem rendered the airbag useless, which was seen as responsible for her death. Or, something like that.

JR

The only caveat to your comment is that in these scenarios you have an airbag. And the lawyers have zeroed in on that fact.

I think the engineers were right in some respects. For properly trained drivers in 99% of these cases it's just an annoying occurence, not a life and death situation. But given millions of cars and millions of miles daily deaths (how many remains to be proven) were likely if not inevitable.

I own many cars that never had an airbag. None of them have killed me yet. I must be super lucky.

I'm also not a lawyer.

JR