Wide-Ranging Recall
今年2月以來，通用汽車公司因多種問題在全球範圍內累計召回700萬輛汽車，其中包括點火開關、剎車和其他問題。
通用汽車首席執行長Mary Barra稱，計劃在其產品開發團隊中設立一個名為global product integrity organization 的部門，該部門將涵蓋公司不久前成立的產品安全部門。
*****
Henry Ford is rightly credited with inventing the assembly line—and with it mass production. But it was his great rival at General Motors (GM), Alfred Sloan, who really invented modern professional management. Sloan organised his company into divisions that specialised in cars “for every purse and purpose” and he fashioned a managerial class that turned GM into the world’s biggest company. His 1964 book, My Years with General Motors, is a cool explanation of how he did it (“management has been my specialisation,” he wrote flatly). It is a book that puts subsequent business autobiographies to shame.
今天讀
My Years with General Motors By Alfred Sloan 我與通用汽車公司 台北：協志，1971
第18章海外的活動有併吞Opel公司的詳細決策分析
By BILL VLASIC
The departures of General Motors’ chief spokesman and head Washington adviser, and its top human resources executive are the first major changes in the automaker’s senior management since a recall in February.
這種事， Alfred Sloan 會如何處理？
通
用汽車公司(General Motors Co.)首席執行長Mary Barra稱，該公司計劃在其產品開發團隊中設立一個全球產品整合部門 ( 這翻譯有點問題： global product integrity organization) ，這一部門將涵蓋該公司不久前成立的產品安全部門。今年2月以來，通用汽車公司因多種問題在全球範圍內累計召回700萬輛汽車，其中包括點火開關、剎車和其他問題。
通用汽車首席執行長Mary Barra稱，計劃在其產品開發團隊中設立一個名為global product integrity organization 的部門，該部門將涵蓋公司不久前成立的產品安全部門。
*****
Henry Ford is rightly credited with inventing the assembly line—and with it mass production. But it was his great rival at General Motors (GM), Alfred Sloan, who really invented modern professional management. Sloan organised his company into divisions that specialised in cars “for every purse and purpose” and he fashioned a managerial class that turned GM into the world’s biggest company. His 1964 book, My Years with General Motors, is a cool explanation of how he did it (“management has been my specialisation,” he wrote flatly). It is a book that puts subsequent business autobiographies to shame.
今天讀
GM's Opel Accelerates Its Path to Profitability1
My Years with General Motors By Alfred Sloan 我與通用汽車公司 台北：協志，1971
第18章海外的活動有併吞Opel公司的詳細決策分析
點火開關隱患讓通用公司啟動大規模召回
BILL VLASIC
馬克·胡德分析了雪佛蘭Cobalt車上的點火開關，他發現，通用公司在2006年和2007年改變了開關設計。
Meggan Haller for The New York Times
底特律——在2005款雪佛蘭Cobalt型汽車兩英寸長的點火開關里，藏著馬克·胡德(Mark Hood)想要尋找的線索。
胡德是佛羅里達州的一名工程師。 2012年秋天，他曾給這個裝置拍了照片，用X光進行探查，並拆解了它。他把全部精力都放在了這個用塑料和金屬製成的、控制點火的小開關上。但在測試了幾個小時後，胡德仍然無法解釋布魯克·梅爾頓(Brooke Melton)的Cobalt汽車突然熄火的原因。 2010年在喬治亞州發生的那場交通事故奪去了梅爾頓的生命。
這對她的家人來說是一次重大打擊。為了起訴通用汽車(General Motors)，他們聘請了胡德。
然後，他從當地的通用汽車特許經銷商那里花30美元買來了一個點火開關，謎底很快解開了。胡德是通用公司以外第一個弄清楚這個問題的人，該公司自己也承認這一點。此前的10年，通用汽車公司對這個問題一直心知肚明。該問題目前與13人的死亡有關。
這個發現既細微，又至關重要：即使新的開關擁有相同的型號——10392423號，胡德仍然發現了兩個開關之間的巨大區別。舊開關上有一個很小的金屬柱塞，新開關的要更長一些。新點火開關上的彈簧也更緊。最重要的是，打開和關閉新點火開關需要更大的力。
“開關的扭矩大幅增加了，”胡德說，“我們進行了多次測量。兩個開關的差別很大。”
由此開始的發現後來促使通用汽車在全球召回了260萬輛Cobalt車型和其他型號的汽車，引發了該公司歷史上最嚴重的安全危機之一。
胡德意識到，通用汽車以及製造了這個零件的供應商德爾福(Delphi)在2006年或2007年初的某個時間悄悄地改變了這個開關的設計，改變之後，不知情的司機就不太可能撞到點火開關鑰匙，進而導致汽車切斷引擎動力，使氣囊失效。這個改變如此不留痕跡，以至於通用汽車去年甚至聘請了外部顧問，讓他們幫助找到哪些年的Cobalt車型使用的是舊開關。
如今，這個修改背後的細節已經成為判定這家汽車製造商是否刻意隱瞞安全缺陷的關鍵所在。下週，通用汽車的首席執行官瑪麗·T·芭拉(Mary T. Barra)和美國汽車安全監管當局的最高官員戴維·弗里德曼(David Friedman)將就引發了大範圍車輛召回的一系列事件在參眾兩院作證。
在解開失靈開關謎團的過程中，胡德在梅爾頓案中的發現成為了一個轉折點，引發了第一批通用工程師的證詞，這些證詞證實，多年以來，通用汽車公司一直在對Cobalt的點火問題進行內部研究。通用汽車去年在梅爾頓家人提出的過失致死訴訟中與對方達成和解。
梅爾頓家人的代理律師蘭斯·庫珀(Lance Cooper)說，“他們顯然更換了開關，我們已經向通用汽車證明了這一點。”
胡德得出結論的過程並非一帆風順。在2011年接手這個任務之後，庫珀首先聘請了一名技工，調查車禍是否與動力轉向問題有關。通用汽車當時因為這一問題召回了一批汽車。
但汽車黑匣子中的數據指向了點火問題，於是，胡德接到了分析這些數據的任務。胡德是一名資深的調查員，他的調查對象包括飛機、汽車、火車和醫療設備的工程設計。
胡德把注意力集中到了點火開關的工作原理上。他得知位於一端的這個小型塑料金屬元件，控制著車內引擎是處於開、關狀態，還是處於輔助狀態。在輔助狀態下，收音機等某些電子設備仍可運轉。
胡德在認定梅爾頓車上的原部件和商店買來的替代部件並不相同之後，就立刻開始搜索廢車場，他從Cobalts車上獲取了更多點火開關，總共有18個。
2013年4月，庫珀開始從通用的工程師那裡獲得證詞，截至那時，胡德已極為詳細地記錄下了點火開關的變化，以至於該公司都無從逃避事實。
在一份證詞中，庫珀和Cobalt車型的點火開關首席工程師雷蒙德·德喬治(Raymond DeGiorgio)就原始開關和替換件之間的差異展開了正面交鋒。德喬治說，他看到了二者之間的差異，不過他無法解釋，為何部件發生了變化，相應的標號卻沒有做出改動。
他說，“我並不了解制動柱塞開關的變化。我們肯定沒有批准對製動柱塞開關的更改。”
不過，在今年2月向聯邦當局提交的召回文件中，通用表示，某個未透露姓名的工程師實際上已在2006年4月簽署了一份文件，批准了德爾福公司所建議的點火開關設計改動。
在同一份提交文件中，通用還承認，胡德對點火開關的核查是一名局外人首次對點火開關變動做出了“觀察和記錄”。
政府調查人員已要求通用提供記錄了點火開關變動的所有文件，並要求通用澄清是哪名內部人士批准了這些變動。
對像Cobalt這樣高銷量的車型來說，基本零件發生變動非比尋常，通用和德爾福之間有關點火開關的聯絡記錄，可以被視作證據，證明前者已經知道原始部件存在缺陷。
此外，不是只有Cobalt車型才裝配了有缺陷的點火開關。除了2005年到2007年款的Cobalt之外，通用還召回了2007年款的Pontiac G5，2003年到2007年款的土星Ion(Saturn Ion)；2006年到2007年款的雪佛蘭HHR和Pontiac Solstice； 2007年款的土星天空(Saturn Sky)。上週五，通用又在召回令裡添加了之後出廠的97.1萬輛Cobalt汽車和其他汽車。週五晚間，通用承認，在加拿大還有一樁和點火開關有關的死亡事故，該公司隨後把與點火開關缺陷有關的死亡事故數從12宗提升到了13宗。
胡德的調查還可能有助於車主向通用提出集體訴訟，此類訴訟將覆蓋所有Cobalt車主和召回令涉及的其他車型的車主。
在位於墨西哥的德爾福公司某工廠，經過改良的新型點火開關目前已經恢復生產。芭拉說，工人們在兩班倒地生產這種開關，以求能在4月初準備好第一批貨。
通用已經表示，會為車主免費拆卸老開關和更換新開關。在公司網站上發布的一段視頻中，芭拉對顧客們說，在此期間，只要點火鑰匙上不附帶任何物體，那麼將被召回的車輛就可以安全地行駛。
從梅爾頓車上回收的點火總成上拆下開關的那一刻，將讓胡德難以忘懷。他隨後用從店裡買來的部件換下了被拆下的點火開關，他意識到，之後整個總成的運轉順當多了。
他說，“我感到滿意，因為我在為梅爾頓一家工作。我的調查沒法令他們的女兒死而復生，可是它讓我們更透徹地了解到問題所在，這也許能挽救其他人的生命。”
翻譯：王湛、張薇
点火开关隐患让通用公司启动大规模召回
马克·胡德分析了雪佛兰Cobalt车上的点火开关，他发现，通用公司在2006年和2007年改变了开关设计。
GM misled grieving families on lethal car flaw
It had known about faulty switch in cars
NEW YORK — It was nearly five years ago that any doubts were laid to rest among engineers at General Motors about a dangerous and faulty ignition switch. At a meeting on May 15, 2009, they learned that data in the black boxes of Chevrolet Cobalts confirmed a potentially fatal defect existed in hundreds of thousands of cars.
But in the months and years that followed, as an expanding trove of internal documents and studies mounted, GM told the families of accident victims and other customers that it did not have enough evidence of any defect in their cars, interviews, letters, and legal documents show. Last month, GM recalled 1.6 million Cobalts and other small cars, saying that if the switch was bumped or weighed down it could shut off the engine’s power and disable air bags.
In one case, GM threatened to come after the family of an accident victim for reimbursement of legal fees if the family did not withdraw its lawsuit. In another instance, it dismissed a family with a terse, formulaic letter, saying there was no basis for claims.
“We sent the paperwork for the car to them and they said there’s nothing to this,” said Neil Kosilla, whose 23-year-old daughter, Amy, died in a Cobalt accident in March 2010 after the air bags failed to deploy. “They said we had nothing.”
Since the engineers’ meeting in May 2009, at least 23 fatal crashes have involved the recalled models, resulting in 26 deaths. GM reported the accidents to the government under a system called Early Warning Reporting, which requires automakers to disclose claims they receive blaming vehicle defects for serious injuries or deaths.
A New York Times review of 19 of those accidents — victims were identified through interviews with survivors, family members, lawyers, and law enforcement officials — found that GM pushed back against families in at least two of the accidents, and reached settlements that required the victims to keep the discussions confidential.
In other cases, GM ignored repeated calls, families said.
“We did call GM,” said Leslie Dueno, whose 18-year-old son, Christopher Hamberg, was killed June 12, 2009 — not quite a month after the critical May 15 meeting of GM engineers about the ignition data — while driving his 2007 Cobalt home before dawn in Houston. He lost control at 45 miles per hour and hit a curb, then a tree, the police report said. “Nobody ever called me. They never followed up. Ever.”
Last month’s recalls of the Cobalt and five other models encompassed model years 2003 through 2007. GM faces numerous inquiries, including one by the Justice Department, looking into the company’s disclosures in its 2009 bankruptcy filing, as well as what it told regulators.
“We are conducting an unsparing, comprehensive review of the circumstances leading to the ignition switch recall,” GM said Monday. “As part of that review we are examining previous claims and our response to them. If anything changes as a result of our review, we will promptly bring that to the attention of regulators.”
The company has said it has evidence of 12 deaths tied to the switch problem, but it has declined to give details other than to say they all occurred in 2009 or earlier. It says it has no conclusive evidence of more recent deaths tied to the switch.
“We are doing our best to get this right, which means reviewing the data with care,” the company said in its statement. “Not every Cobalt accident is a result of a faulty ignition switch. Accident claims and EWR” — Early Warning Reporting — “data are unique with their own set of facts and other relevant factors. It is wrong to use this information on a speculative basis. Each requires additional analysis and this will be a part of our review.”
It was unclear how many of the 26 deaths since the 2009 meeting were related to the faulty ignition, but some appeared to fit patterns that reflected the problem, such as an inexplicable loss of control or air bags that did not deploy. In some cases, the drivers had put themselves at risk, including having high blood-alcohol levels or texting.
Still, by the time Benjamin Hair, 20, crashed into a tree in Charlottesville, Va., on Dec. 13, 2009, while driving a Pontiac G5 home that Sunday morning, GM had conducted five internal studies about the ignition problem, company records indicate.
Though Hair was wearing his seat belt, he died after the car’s air bags failed to deploy.
“The police couldn’t tell us what caused the accident,” said Brenda, his mother. The Hairs contacted GM for answers, providing accident reports but no vehicle data, because the car’s black box had been destroyed. “They came back and said they’d presented it to their board of engineers, and they couldn’t say it was related” to a defect, Brenda Hair said.
By then, employees who knew about the switch problems ranged across the company, from its legal offices at headquarters in Detroit to its test tracks and research labs outside the city. GM lawyers had known of one fatal Cobalt accident in 2005, and had settled or worked on several cases. GM’s sales department had issued two service bulletins to dealers related to faulty switches, advising them to tell customers to drive without heavy key chains that could jostle the ignition and shut down the car.
In fall 2013, months after an eighth internal study on the ignition issue had been issued, GM moved to cut off the flow of damaging depositions related to one accident by settling a wrongful-death suit. The suit had been brought by the family of Jennifer Brooke Melton, 29, who lost control of her 2005 Cobalt on a Georgia highway in March 2010 when the key moved to the accessory position, shutting down power and air bags.
During the depositions, Lance Cooper, a lawyer for the Melton family, deposed Victor Hakim, a senior manager at GM. Cooper read more than 80 customer complaints into the official record that were filed with GM beginning in 2005 about Cobalts that unexpectedly stopped and stalled. GM settled the case on Sept. 13.
That same month, lawyers representing GM wrote to the lawyer in another wrongful-death case demanding that the lawsuit be withdrawn. The family of Allen Ray Floyd had sued GM after Floyd lost control of a 2006 Cobalt in daylight near Loris, S.C. Two weeks earlier, his sister had lost control of the same vehicle on the same road; she had it towed. The company contended the suit was “frivolous” because the accident occurred on July 3, 2009, a week before the company’s bankruptcy agreement took effect.
沒有留言:
張貼留言