A federal judge is currently examining a plea agreement between Boeing and prosecutors and has raised questions about how the Justice Department’s diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives might influence the selection of an independent monitor. This monitor will oversee Boeing for a three-year probation period following the company’s plea of guilty to a felony charge of defrauding the U.S. government.
U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor, who has a history of conservative rulings and was appointed by President George W. Bush in 2007, has directed the Justice Department to clarify its process for choosing the monitor and whether DEI factors will bias that selection. He has also inquired whether Boeing would adhere to its own DEI policies if it opposed a proposed monitor.
The appointment of an independent monitor is critical to ensure that Boeing adheres to compliance and safety measures as part of the agreement, reached after the company admitted to misleading federal regulators regarding pilot-training requirements for its 737 Max aircraft. The stipulations of the plea bargain include a hefty fine of $243.6 million and an investment of at least $455 million in compliance and safety programs.
O’Connor is known for siding with conservative viewpoints and has made previous headlines by overturning significant policies from Democratic administrations, including an attempt to dismantle the Affordable Care Act. Many conservative figures have made DEI a focal point of their political narrative, alleging that such policies compromise the quality of candidates in various sectors, including education and public safety.
The debate intensified after a door-plug incident during an Alaska Airlines flight raised safety concerns, leading to some individuals on social media attributing the issue to Boeing’s DEI initiatives. This argument has been employed by conservative critics, including Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, who campaigned against what he described as “woke” policies.
As part of the plea deal, Boeing’s deceptive practices that contributed to the deadly crashes of its 737 Max were under scrutiny. The crashes, which occurred in Indonesia in 2018 and Ethiopia in 2019, resulted in a total of 346 fatalities, underscoring the gravity of ensuring compliance and safety in aviation. While the Justice Department and Boeing are jointly seeking approval for the plea deal to replace a previous settlement that failed to address concerns about Boeing’s commitment to safety adequately, families of the victims are urging the judge to reject the agreement in favor of a more stringent trial.
Family members of the crash victims express skepticism about the deal, labeling it overly lenient. They oppose the selection process for the independent monitor, advocating that the judge alone should have the authority to appoint the individual responsible for overseeing Boeing’s adherence to safety regulations.
Nadia Milleron, whose daughter perished in the Ethiopian crash, reflected on the judge’s inquiries into DEI policies with confusion. She emphasized that the paramount issue should be safety, questioning the relevance of DEI in this context.
Experts posit that the independent monitor could significantly enhance safety protocols, provided they operate independently of the Justice Department and can directly report findings to the court. During a recent hearing, O’Connor engaged with representatives from both the government and Boeing on the monitor’s role, emphasizing the necessity of understanding DEI’s impact on safety and compliance efforts.
The judge has requested a written response from both Boeing and the Justice Department by October 25, to gauge how DEI principles are integrated into the monitoring process. The commitment of both parties to promote DEI, as noted by the judge, could serve to influence compliance and hiring practices.
The implications of O’Connor’s scrutiny of DEI are not entirely clear. Still, his focus may reflect a broader skepticism towards such policies rather than a tactical objection to the plea deal itself. Legal experts believe that the judge’s concerns might lead to delays in decision-making regarding the acceptance of the agreement, underscoring the complex intersection of corporate oversight and social policy within the legal system.
Both Boeing and the Department of Justice have stated their intention to submit written responses to the judge’s inquiries but have refrained from comments beyond that.