「華人戴明學院」是戴明哲學的學習共同體 ,致力於淵博型智識系統的研究、推廣和運用。 The purpose of this blog is to advance the ideas and ideals of W. Edwards Deming.

2014年6月26日 星期四

品質眾生相(260-262 ):中華電信公司MOD失誤;韓亞航空事故主因在機組人員;山水米混米撤照 復照;


262

黃小姐表示,她趕緊檢查前幾個月帳單明細,果然發現都有一筆89元MOD平台服務費,但她都使用信用卡扣款繳費,對MOD服務也不了解,才一直沒發現,「如果沒發現,不就又要繼續白繳。」他們事後持續向中華電反映,業者雖願意退費,但照理說77個月費用共計6853元,中華電卻回覆,第一年收費有優惠,因此總計實收5788元,所以只能退5788元。她指出,中華電對所謂第一年優惠說明不清,無法接受中華電退費方案。 

業者認疏失願協商

對此,中華電信公司公共事務處表示,2007年施工人員在紙本工單註記「不裝MOD」,但於電腦系統誤選「正常竣工」選項,導致登載不符,員工未發現錯誤就把案件歸檔,若未經客戶申告,確實難發現此疏失,已補強複查機制,以杜絕類似案件發生,並與黃小姐協商賠償。



261

山水米混米被撤照 半年竟復照

2013年遭踢爆「拿低價越南米混充台灣米」的山水米米商泉順公司,由於連續違規4次,遭農委會下重手廢止糧商登記。但是山水米向行政院提出訴願成功,5月15日確定撤銷農委會的原來處分,恢復山水米的糧商登記。消基會痛批,訴願會打農委會一巴掌,也重擊消費者的信心。

260

NTSB認定韓亞航空事故主因在機組人員

Getty Images
2013年7月韓亞航空事故造成三名乘客死亡。

結束了11個月的調查後,美國調查人員在周二的聽証會上說,飛行員在監測飛行速度方面的失誤以及過分依賴其並不了解的自動化系統是造成2013年7月韓亞航空(Asiana Airlines Inc.)事故的原因。該航空公司一架噴氣式客機試圖在舊金山國際機場(San Francisco International Airport)降落時發生事故。

關於那起造成三名乘客死亡、49人重傷的空難的最後調查結果,美國國家運輸安全委員會(National Transportation Safety Board,簡稱:NTSB)認為,機組人員在飛機進場著陸期間犯了20多個不同的錯誤,並且未能就有關進場嚴重問題的可視和儀器警告做出反應。

NTSB官員稱,飛行員違反了韓亞航空飛機下降速度的強制規定程序,在飛機接近著陸跑道時也沒有按照規定進行口頭通訊,而且在意識到即將發生危險後等待了大約11秒鐘。這個等待時間過長,無法安全操縱飛機復飛和攀升。

NTSB官方報告還提到了糟糕的人工飛行技能、培訓不足以及對自動控制油門設計和操作的困惑也是造成事故的原因之一。該報告內容與之前的幾份聲明和前一次公開聽証會類似。

這項為期11個月的調查已促使國際社會開始認真反思駕駛員座艙的設計和駕駛員培訓。NTSB周二批準了40多項調查結果和建議。

Andy Pasztor

2014年6月18日 星期三

Five Years of Recalls: GM, Toyota, and Other Automakers ;通用再度召回Chevrolet Camaros 51.15萬輛; G.M. Inquiry Cites Years of Neglect Over Fatal Defect 調查報告稱通用汽車長期忽視致命缺陷

Which automaker leads the way in recalls?
This interactive chart allows you to compare each brand over the past five...
BUSINESSWEEK.COM|由 ARIANA GIORGI 上傳

2014年 06月 14日 10:34

通用再度召回問題汽車

用汽車公司(General Motors Co.)宣佈召回超過51.15萬輛雪佛蘭科邁羅(Chevrolet Camaros),因公司內部調查發現,問題汽車的遙控鑰匙出現晃動後點火開關可能脫離“行駛”檔。

通用汽車很快指出這批汽車的問題與此前該公司點火開關召回醜聞無關。該公司發現雪佛蘭科寶(Chevrolet Cobalts)和其他較舊的車款存在點火開關問題後,等待了11年時間才宣佈召回。

通用汽車發現,高個子司機在靠近方向盤時可能碰到遙控鑰匙,并導致點火開關脫位。通用汽車說,科邁羅點火開關的設計與科寶完全不同。

通用汽車認為共導致四人輕傷的三起車禍可能與科邁羅的問題有關。該公司將把科邁羅鑰匙的設計換成標準樣式。

此外,該公司還宣佈了另外三項召回,涉及約69,840輛汽車。

第一起是2004年-2011年款薩博(Saab)9-3敞篷車。上述車款主駕駛座安全帶收緊器自動張力系統的鋼索可能折斷。

通用還召回了約21,560輛2012年款雪佛蘭Sonic配六速自動變速箱和1.8升四缸發動機的緊湊型車。由於供應商質量問題,上述車款變速箱渦輪主軸可能裂開。

最後,該公司召回2014年款別克君越(Buick LaCrosse),主駕駛座門的一處鋼絲繩插接可能受到腐蝕并斷裂。

Jeff Bennett


調查報告稱通用汽車長期忽視致命缺陷


Fabrizio Costantini for The New York Times

密歇根州沃倫——一項針對通用汽車公司(General Motors)的大規模內部調查於周四發佈報告,指責公司在過去10年里一直未能修復某個致命性的安全缺陷,該缺陷引發了「慘重的後果」,包括導致至少13人死亡。
該報告由美國前檢察官安東·R·沃盧卡斯(Anton R. Valukas)撰寫,導致了15名通用員工被開除,其中包括負責法規事務的副總裁和一名負責產品責任案件的資深律師,並迫使該公司對車輛安全的處理做出了廣泛的變革。

報告事無巨細地描述了通用各部門員工多年以來玩忽職守的行為,哪怕有一大堆證據顯示,用戶的生命正處於危險之中,他們也不去修復缺陷和發佈召回令。
沃盧卡斯說,「雖說每個人都有責任修復這個問題,然而卻沒有一個人承擔起責任。」
在底特律郊區沃倫的一座規模龐大的通用技術中心,久經磨練的通用首席執行官瑪麗·T·芭拉(Mary T. Barra)在一場會議上對一千多名員工說,這份報告「極其棘手」。
「對我們這些為這間公司奉獻了畢生精力的員工而言,把我們的缺陷這樣刺眼地羅列出來,實在讓人痛不欲生。」在通用工作了30多年的芭拉說,「當我讀到這份報告時,我深感痛心和不安。」
然而,這份報告認定芭拉和她的法律總顧問邁克爾·米利金(Michael Millikin)等高級副手們,在被長期拖延的召回中沒做錯任何事。據沃盧克斯所述,也沒有跡象顯示開關問題被刻意掩蓋了。
「看上去是能用錢買到的最佳報告了。它免除了最高領導層的責任,否認了這是蓄意為之的不當行為,否認了企業的過失,」康涅狄格州的民主党參議員理乍得·布盧門撒爾(Richard Blumenthal)說。
在為期三個月的調查里,沃盧克斯查閱了數百萬份文件,採訪了至少230人,其中有許多人都和通用未能修復點火開關故障的失職行為有直接關係,該故障會導致車輛失去動力,無法打開安全氣囊。
自今年2月以來,通用已經召回了260萬輛雪佛蘭Cobalts汽車和其他小型車,目的是修復該缺陷,通用認定,到目前為止,有13起死亡和54起事故與該缺陷有關。
不過,芭拉承認,由於賠償專家肯尼斯·R·范伯格(Kenneth R. Feinberg)在為事故受害者及其家人準備一份關於通用如何進行賠償的資料,在接下里的幾周,死傷事故和碰撞事故的累計數量可能還會增加。
芭拉表示,這份報告已促使公司開除了15名員工,還有五人因此受到了紀律處分——這是極不尋常的,這個行業很少進行如此嚴厲的人員清洗。芭拉拒絕提供行動細節,不過她表示,這些離開公司的員工中,有一半以上都身居高位。
據一名了解此次裁員行動的人士透露,被裁員的有負責全球法規事務的副總裁邁克爾·J·魯濱遜(Michael J. Robinson)和負責產品相關訴訟的高級律師威廉·肯普(William Kemp)。
被解僱員工中還包括兩名安全主管蓋伊·肯特(Gay Kent)和卡門·貝納維德斯(Carmen Benavides),以及兩名中層工程師雷蒙德·德喬治(Raymond DeGiorgio)和加里·阿爾特曼(Gary Altman)。此前,這兩名工程師均因早期疏於解決這個開關問題而被停職。
「我從沒想把這個問題拋在腦後,」芭拉告訴員工,「我想讓這次痛苦的經歷留在我們共同的記憶里。」
有缺陷的開關——藏在被召回車輛的轉向柱裡面的一個小部件——已經給公司造成巨大的財務和聲譽損失。
自因開關問題而宣布召回以來,通用汽車又幾十次宣布召回車輛,以修復其整個產品系列中的車輛的各種問題。該公司已準備了17億美元(約合106億元人民幣)作為維修費,還任命了一名新高管負責車輛安全,並已經開始對工程部進行大範圍改組。
然而,通用汽車面前依然擺着一項最棘手的任務——得出有缺陷開關導致的具體傷亡人數,並賠償遇難者。
芭拉和另一名高管丹尼爾·安曼(Daniel Ammann)告訴記者,這些問題以及通用汽車支付給每位死傷者的金額,將由范伯格來決定。
范伯格周四表示,他希望在幾周時間內完成對賠償計劃的建議,並在8月準備好受理遇難者及其家屬提出的索賠。
「我已經起草了一些初步的賠償意見,計劃接下來幾周在私下裡讓律師、公益組織、通用汽車和其他對賠償計劃感興趣的人看看,」他說。
通用汽車尚未公布任何事故遇難者的姓名,稱是希望保護那些人的隱私。但部分遇難者家屬,以及撞車事故的受傷者已經站出來了。
2004年,坎迪絲·安德森(Candice Anderson)開着一輛安裝了有缺陷開關的土星Ion在德克薩斯州發生撞車,男友吉恩·埃里克森(Gene Erickson)喪命。
為了看芭拉在電視上的講話,安德森周四請了一天假。「很高興他們開始承擔責任了,」她說,「他們說這是他們的錯。」
但儘管沃盧卡斯對該公司的批評有深度,也有廣度,但通用汽車的部分批評人士對這份報告,以及芭拉的抱歉並不滿意。
「我不確定能不能相信通用汽車會對自己進行徹底的內部調查,」勞拉·克里斯蒂安(Laura Christian)說,「我希望司法部(Department of Justice)能揭開所有真相。」2005年,她的孩子在一輛Cobalt里遇難。
通用汽車還面臨著司法部、證券交易委員會(Securities and Exchange Commission)以及一個由州檢察長組成的組織的調查。


G.M. Inquiry Cites Years of Neglect Over Fatal Defect

The report, written by the former United States attorney Anton R. Valukas, set off the dismissal of 15 G.M. employees, including a vice president for regulatory affairs and a senior lawyer responsible for product liability cases, and forced broad changes in how the company handles vehicle safety.
  • 查看大图 The General Motors chief executive, Mary T. Barra, presents the findings of an internal investigation into the company’s faulty ignition switches.
    Reuters
    The General Motors chief executive, Mary T. Barra, presents the findings of an internal investigation into the company’s faulty ignition switches.

The report illustrates in unsparing detail how employees across departments neglected for years to repair a defect and issue a recall, despite a mountain of evidence that lives were at risk.
“Although everyone had responsibility to fix the problem, nobody took responsibility,” Mr. Valukas wrote.
A chastened Mary T. Barra, G.M.’s chief executive, described the report as “deeply troubling” in a meeting with more than 1,000 employees at the company’s sprawling technical center in the Detroit suburb of Warren.
“For those of us who have dedicated our lives to this company, it is enormously painful to have our shortcomings laid out so vividly,” said Ms. Barra, who has worked at G.M. for more than 30 years. “I was deeply saddened and disturbed as I read the report.”
Yet the report cleared Ms. Barra and her top lieutenants, like Michael Millikin, the general counsel, of any wrongdoing in the long-delayed recall. And there was no evidence of a deliberate cover-up of the switch problems, according to Mr. Valukas.
“It seems like the best report money can buy,” said Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, who had been highly critical of Ms. Barra at a hearing in April. “It absolves upper management, denies deliberate wrongdoing and dismisses corporate culpability.”
Mr. Valukas’s three-month investigation included a review of millions of documents and interviews with at least 230 people, many of whom were employees directly involved in G.M.’s failure to fix a faulty ignition switch that could cause vehicles to lose power and deactivate air bags.
Since February, G.M. has recalled 2.6 million Chevrolet Cobalts and other small cars to fix the defect, which the company so far links to 13 deaths and 54 accidents.
But Ms. Barra admitted that the tally of deaths, injuries and crashes could grow in the weeks ahead, as the compensation expert Kenneth R. Feinberg prepares a report on how G.M. will make restitution to accident victims and their families.
Ms. Barra said the company had dismissed 15 employees as a result of the report, and disciplined five others — highly unusual in an industry where such purges have been rare. She declined to provide details about the actions, but said that more than half of those who left the company held senior-level positions.
Among them were Michael J. Robinson, a vice president for global regulatory affairs, and William Kemp, a top lawyer who oversaw product-related litigation, according to a person briefed on the moves.
Those dismissed also included two safety executives, Gay Kent and Carmen Benavides, as well as two midlevel engineers, Raymond DeGiorgio and Gary Altman, both of whom had previously been suspended for neglecting to address the switch problem in its early stages.
“I never want to put this behind us,” Ms. Barra told employees. “I want to keep this painful experience in our collective memories.”
The defective switch — a tiny part hidden inside the steering column of the recalled vehicles — has already taken an immense toll on the company’s finances and reputation.
Since the switch recall, G.M. has issued dozens of additional recalls to fix various problems on vehicles throughout its product lineup. The company has set aside $1.7 billion to pay for the repairs, appointed a new executive to supervise vehicle safety and begun a wide-ranging shake-up of its engineering department.
Still, G.M.’s most delicate task lies ahead — arriving at the exact number of fatalities and injuries caused by the faulty switch, and compensating the victims.
Those decisions, Ms. Barra and another senior executive, Daniel Ammann, told reporters, would be left up to Mr. Feinberg, as well as the amount of money that G.M. would pay for individual deaths and injuries.
Mr. Feinberg said Thursday that he hoped to complete his recommendations for the compensation program within a few weeks, and to be prepared to receive claims from victims and their families in August.
“I have already drafted some preliminary compensation ideas and plan to share them in confidence over the next few weeks with lawyers, public interest groups, G.M. and others interested in the compensation program,” he said.
G.M. has not released the names of any accident victims, citing a desire to protect their privacy. But some family members of victims, as well as people injured in crashes, have spoken out.
Candice Anderson was driving a Saturn Ion equipped with a defective switch in 2004 when it crashed in Texas, killing her boyfriend, Gene Erickson.
Ms. Anderson took a day off work on Thursday to watch Ms. Barra’s remarks on television. “I’m glad they’re taking responsibility,” she said. “They’re saying it was their fault.”
But despite the depth and breadth of Mr. Valukas’s critique of the company, some of G.M.’s critics were not satisfied with the report, or with Ms. Barra’s apologies.
“I’m not sure I can trust G.M. to do a thorough internal investigation of itself,” said Laura Christian, birth mother of Amber Marie Rose, who died in a Cobalt in 2005. “I hope the Department of Justice is able to uncover the entire truth.”
G.M. still faces investigations by the Justice Department, the Securities and Exchange Commission and a group of state attorneys general.
Rebecca Ruiz contributed reporting from New York.

2014年6月11日 星期三

Toyota crisis deepens with recall of 2.2m further vehicles in US 安全氣囊有裂開四散的風險,可能引發火災或傷到人。










因為安全氣囊有爆炸疑慮,日本豐田汽車今宣布全球召回227萬問題車輛,其中65萬台為日本境內車輛。

豐田過去兩個月來已召回9百萬台汽車,其中包括Corolla、 Yaris及Noah等20種車款。豐田今天在提交給日本國土交通省的聲明中表示:「安全氣囊有裂開四散的風險,可能引發火災或傷到人。」

全球最大安全氣囊生產商高田去年傳出氣囊瑕疵後,豐田、本田與日產汽車去年已召修超過3百萬輛汽車。如今又傳出更多氣囊缺陷需要維修後,高田股價倒地不起。(國際中心/綜合外電報導)


 2011
田汽車公司(Toyota Motor Co., TM)週四表示﹐將再在美國市場召回2003年之後生產的共217萬輛汽車﹐以對各種可能引發汽車腳墊阻礙油門踏板的問題進行維修。

**

丰田在美再召回220万辆汽车

Toyota crisis deepens with recall of 2.2m further vehicles in US




Toyota announced another huge vehicle recall in the US on Thursday in response to regulatory concerns that it had not fixed defective floor mats that can jam accelerator pedals. 周四,丰田(Toyota)宣布再次在美国进行大规模车辆召回,以回应监管部门的担心——存在缺陷、有可能卡住油门踏板的地垫没有得到修复。
The Japanese group is recalling almost 2.2m Toyota and Lexus vehicles, bringing the number worldwide to almost 14m during the past 18 months. The recalls are one of the biggest crises ever faced by Toyota, the world’s biggest carmaker by sales, and have undermined its reputation for reliability. 这家日本汽车集团宣布召回约220万辆丰田与雷克萨斯(Lexus)汽车,至此,过去18个月里丰田在全球召回的车辆总数接近1400万辆。这些召回是丰田集团遭遇的历来最严重危机之一,损害了其以车辆可靠性著称的声誉。以销量计算,丰田是全球第一大汽车制造商。
The company has lost significant market share in the US, forcing it to raise discounts and other incentives over the past year. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reviewed more than 400,000 pages of Toyota documents to determine whether earlier recalls related to jammed accelerator pedals were adequate. 丰田集团在美国已经损失了可观的市场份额,迫使其在过去一年里提高折扣并采取其它促销手段。美国国家公路交通安全管理局(NHTSA)审查了超过40万页的丰田公司文件,以判断先前涉及油门踏板被卡的召回措施是否已经足够。
“As a result of the agency’s review, NHTSA asked Toyota to recall these additional vehicles, and now that the company has done so, our investigation is closed,” said David Strickland, the administration’s head. “根据审查结果,国家公路交通安全管理局要求丰田召回更多车辆。丰田公司已经宣布了召回,因此我们的调查也宣告结束,”国家公路交通安全管理局局长大卫•斯特里克兰(David Strickland)表示。
Toyota has paid a record $49m in fines to Washington in the past year for improperly notifying regulators of potential defects, including sticky accelerators. It also faces class-action lawsuits. 过去一年,丰田因未能迅速知会美国监管当局其汽车存在油门踏板复位缓慢等潜在缺陷,而被处以4900万美元的创纪录罚款。该公司还面临集体诉讼。

译者/管婧

2014年6月6日 星期五

A Flurry of Recalls at G.M./ The Price of the GM Recalls: Advice for Mary Barra; 我與通用汽車公司:global product integrity organization

 

 014年 06月 06日 08:12

通用汽車因點火開關問題解僱15人


用汽車公司(General Motors Co.)首席執行長巴拉(Mary Barra)解僱了15名員工。此前她表示有份異常嚴峻的報告讓她深感不安,該報告闡述了為何召回那些點火開關有缺陷的車輛花了通用汽車11年時間。

巴拉說,公司訓斥了另外五名與調查有關的員工。調查由美國前律師瓦盧卡斯(Anton Valukas)領導。點火開關失靈導致了諸多車禍和死亡事件。

通用汽車拒絕透露被解僱五人的姓名,僅證實稱其中包括工程師Raymond DeGiorgio和Gary Altman。巴拉說,這五人當中有超過一半為公司高管,但通用汽車法律總顧問Michael Millikin仍在公司效力。

巴 拉拒絕進一步披露為何DeGiorgio決定在2006年初更換點火開關,儘管他的上級知道開關存在問題,而且所有人都出於成本考慮決定再等一年再修正這 個問題。點火開關問題最初在2004年被發現,2005年通用汽車發佈了雪佛蘭科寶(Chevrolet Cobalt)。

Jeff Bennett / Mike Ramsey

承受安全問責壓力,通用接連召回故障汽車

2006年,在密歇根州奧賴恩鎮,一家通用汽車工廠外展示的龐蒂克G6車型。
Paul Sancya/Associated Press
2006年,在密歇根州奧賴恩鎮,一家通用汽車工廠外展示的龐蒂克G6車型。

周二,通用汽車(General Motors)又宣布了四起召回行動。今年迄今,通用汽車宣布召回了1350萬輛汽車,已是公司歷史上召回汽車最多的一年。
周二的召回行動涉及240萬輛轎車、卡車和運動型多功能 車。對於這家美國最大的汽車生產商來說,召回行動代表着非同尋常的巨大轉變。今年2月以來,該公司一直處於聯邦官員、汽車安全倡導人士和消費者的巨大壓力 之下,這是因為,在長達10年的時間裡,通用汽車都未能修復點火開關存在問題的車輛。通用汽車已經承認,這個缺陷與13人的死亡有關。
作為回應,公司已經在安全操作方面做出了大範圍調整,並且在更加積極地查找問題。公司今年召回汽車的累積數量,已遠遠大於去年召回的75.8萬輛,是去年國內銷量——近280萬輛——的四倍還多。目前,在任意時間點,美國的註冊汽車大約有2.5億輛。
不過,通用汽車最近在安全問題上採用的強勢出擊手法,並沒有讓一些最激烈的批評者感到滿意。
康涅狄格州的民主党參議員理乍得·布盧門撒爾(Richard Blumenthal)周二在採訪中說,「他們只是在控制損失,對因為他們長期掩蓋安全問題而引發的憤怒做出反應。」
由於通用汽車未能及時將汽車點火開關的缺陷告知政府官員,上周,美國交通部對其處以了3500萬美元(約合2.2億元人民幣)的罰款——已是法律允許的最高額度——並對其安全措施實施監管。
隨着州級和聯邦機構開展更多調查,這家汽車生產商目前迫切需要證明,自己提高了對汽車安全的重視程度。
通用汽車的首席執行官瑪麗·T·芭拉(Mary T. Barra)今年4月在國會的聽證會上說,公司打算迅速根除問題,對汽車進行修理。
「通用汽車的全體員工以及我本人都下定決心要設定新標杆,」芭拉說。
通用汽車已任命公司歷史上首位負責全球汽車安全事務的副總裁傑夫·博耶爾(Jeff Boyer)。公司還增加了35名產品調查員,研究保修索賠等數據,尋找以前可能未發現的汽車缺陷。
今年迄今,包括周二宣布的四起召回行動,通用汽車已經因為安全問題在美國發起29宗召回,涵蓋了十幾款車型和多種有缺陷的零部件。
對通用汽車來說,這是羞愧難當的經歷。2009年破產保護並獲得495億美元的聯邦救援款之後,通用汽車一直在宣傳公司的全面改進。
一些行業分析師稱,芭拉和公司承受的壓力起到了作用。
汽車業調研公司凱利藍皮書(Kelley Blue Book)的分析師埃里克·伊巴拉(Eric Ibara)說,「看到她兌現了證詞和新聞稿中的諾言,這讓人感到寬慰,但事實上,這反映了聯邦監管機構正在採取更強硬的立場。」
維修這些汽車需要很大一筆開銷。周二宣布召回的車輛需要2億美元的維修費,因此,通用汽車今年在安全措施上的總花費將達17億美元,會抹掉很大一部分利潤。 
此外,儘管通用汽車的銷量沒有受到多大影響,但其汽車質量的聲譽已經遭受重創。
就在最近這次召回行動的同時,布盧門撒爾和來自佛羅里達州的共和党參議員林賽·格雷厄姆(Lindsey Graham)推出了一份提案,目的是使企業更難以封鎖產品可靠性案件中的法庭記錄。
今年的召回規模打破了通用汽車公司之前的記錄——2004年的1070多萬輛。
通用汽車周二表示,最新一輪召回的汽車中包括1300萬輛大型運動型多功能車。這些車的前座安全帶長期使用後容易老化和斷裂。
存在問題的車型是2009至2014年款的別克昂科雷(Enclaves)、雪佛蘭Traverse和GMC Acadias,以及2009至2010年款的土星Outlooks。
通用汽車沒有披露是否知曉與該問題有關的事故或人員受傷情況,但它告訴經銷商,在維修完成之前,不得銷售這些型號的新車或二手車。
第二起召回則涉及超過100萬輛的2007至2008年款的中型車,包括雪佛蘭邁銳寶(Malibu)、邁銳寶Maxx(Malibu Maxx)和龐蒂克G6轎車。這些車型的電纜問題可能導致司機難以換擋。
通用汽車表示,已經得知18起事故和一人受傷與該問題有關。
另外兩起召回行動的規模更小,但涉及剛剛上市的幾款新車型。
通用汽車稱,正在召回1402輛2015年款的凱迪拉克凱雷德(Escalades)和凱雷德加長版(Escalade ESV)。這兩款車型存在一處焊接問題,可能導致事故發生時只有部分安全氣囊啟動。
通用汽車還表示,將召回58輛重型雪佛蘭西爾維拉多(Silverado)和GMC西拉(Sierra)皮卡。這是規模最小的召回行動之一。兩種車型來自2015年款的產品系列,車上一個發電機的緊固件可能會鬆動,進而帶來火災風險。
投資者也注意到了通用汽車的種種問題。當天,整體股市下跌不到1%,但通用汽車的股價下挫了將近3.5%,至每股33.07美元。
今年以來,通用汽車的股價已下滑了將近20%。
翻譯:王湛

 

A Flurry of Recalls at G.M. as Pressure Mounts

 

General Motors issued four new recalls on Tuesday, bringing its total for the year to 13.5 million, already the most in the company’s history.
The recalls — including 2.4 million cars, trucks and sport utility vehicles involved in Tuesday’s actions — represent an extraordinary about-face for the nation’s largest automaker. Since February, G.M. has been under intense pressure from federal officials, safety advocates and consumers for its decade-long failure to fix cars with a defective ignition switch that G.M. has linked to 13 deaths.
In response, it has made broad changes to its safety practices and more aggressively identified problems. Its mounting tally of safety actions has already far surpassed the 758,000 vehicles that the company recalled in the United States last year, and it is more than four times the nearly 2.8 million vehicles it sold domestically last year. At any given time, about 250 million cars are registered in America.
But the newly aggressive approach to safety has not mollified some of G.M.’s toughest critics.
“They are doing damage control and reacting to the outrage over their history of concealing safety issues,” Senator Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat from Connecticut, said in an interview on Tuesday.
Last week, the Transportation Department hit G.M. with a $35 million penalty, the maximum allowed under law, and imposed oversight of the automaker’s safety practices for neglecting to inform government officials of the ignition-switch defect in a timely manner.
And with more state and federal investigations underway, the automaker desperately needs to demonstrate that it is taking vehicle safety more seriously than in the past.
G.M.’s chief executive, Mary T. Barra, said during congressional hearings in April that the company was intent on swiftly rooting out problems with its vehicles and repairing them.
“All of our G.M. employees and I are determined to set a new standard,” Ms. Barra said.
G.M. has named the company’s first vice president in charge of global vehicle safety, Jeff Boyer. It has also added 35 product investigators to examine warranty claims and other data for vehicle defects that might not have been detected before.
So far this year, the company has issued 29 safety recalls in the United States, including the four announced on Tuesday, covering dozens of models and a wide range of defective parts.
It has been a humbling experience for a company that has promoted its overall improvements since going bankrupt and receiving a $49.5 billion federal bailout in 2009.
Industry analysts said the pressure on Ms. Barra and the company was having an effect.
“It is reassuring to see that her actions match her testimony and press releases, but the fact is that it is a reflection of a tougher stance being adopted by federal regulators,” said Eric Ibara, an analyst with the auto-research firm Kelley Blue Book.
The repair bills have been costly as well. The recalls announced on Tuesday, which required a $200 million charge, brought the overall expense of G.M.’s safety actions this year to $1.7 billion, wiping out much of its profit.
And while G.M.’s sales have not suffered, its reputation for vehicle quality has been badly tarnished.
The latest recall also came as Senator Blumenthal and Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of Florida, introduced legislation that would make it harder for corporations to seal court records in product-liability lawsuits.
This year’s recalls broke G.M.’s previous record for recalled cars, more than 10.7 million in 2004.
G.M. said on Tuesday that its latest round of recalls included 1.3 million large S.U.V.s that had front-seat safety belts that could wear out and break over time.
The vehicles with the problem are 2009-14 Buick Enclaves, Chevrolet Traverses and GMC Acadias, and 2009-10 Saturn Outlooks.
G.M. did not say whether it knew of accidents or injuries associated with the issue, but it has told its dealers they cannot sell new or used models of the vehicles until repairs are made.
Another recall covers more than a million midsize cars from the 2007-8 model years. The vehicles include the Chevrolet Malibu, Malibu Maxx and Pontiac G6 sedans, and the recall involves faulty cables that could make it difficult for drivers to shift gears.
G.M. said it was aware of 18 crashes and one injury related to the problem.
The two other recalls were smaller, but they involved new models that had only recently gone on sale.
G.M. said it was recalling 1,402 Cadillac Escalades and Escalade ESVs from the 2015 model year for a defective weld that could result in only partial deployment of air bags in an accident.
And in one of the smallest recalls on record, G.M. said it would recall 58 heavy-duty Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra pickups from its 2015 model lineup because fasteners attached to a generator could become loose and potentially cause fires.
The company’s troubles have not gone unnoticed by investors. On a day when the broader stock market fell less than 1 percent, G.M.’s shares fell nearly 3.5 percent, to $33.07 a share.
G.M.’s stock price has declined nearly 20 percent this year.

Whether General Motors should take its recalled cars off the road is up to federal transportation authorities, a judge has ruled, marking a victory for the company as it faces a legal battle related to the recall of 2.6 million vehicles over faulty ignition switches




A U.S. judge said Thursday that recalled General Motors cars can stay on the road, a major victory for the company as it faces an uphill legal battle related to 2.6 million vehicles recently recalled over malfunctioning ignition switches.
The decision came in a lawsuit brought against them by a couple seeking compensation for the lost value of their recalled 2006 Chevrolet Cobalt. Their Cobalt was recalled along with millions of other GM vehicles after it was discovered the cars’ ignition switches can be inadvertently set to “off” while the car is being operated, disabling power steering and other features. The ignition switch problem has been linked to at least 13 deaths.
The couples’ lawsuit demanded “park it now” notices for every vehicle included in the recall, which would’ve forced owners of the affected cars to keep their vehicles off the road. GM opposed issuing such notices, claiming the car is safe if nothing is attached to the keyin the ignition and arguing that taking all affected cars off the road would be a logistical nightmare.
The judge in the case ruled that determining whether the cars need to be taken off the road is up to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
Although the judge’s decision is a win for GM, it’s just one in a growing series of legal battles against the company for the ignition issue, which the company has reportedly known about for years.



Wide-Ranging Recall
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?


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


http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/price-gm-recalls-advice-mary-barra/
暫時找不到作者




The Price of the GM Recalls: Advice for Mary Barra

Mary-Barra

It is about as big a corporate crisis as anyone could imagine: a defective product that leads to deaths, denials and cover-ups, a sluggish corporate response to grieving families, and a government investigation that has raised its own questions of accountability. General Motors does not stand alone in the recall hall of shame, but a combination of its venerable brand and recent storyline — including a promising comeback from bankruptcy, now threatened — gives the revelations of the last few months a particularly powerful punch. What did GM know, who knew it and when?
As the wait for answers goes on, there is a company to run and a crisis to manage that could either cripple GM or empower it. Though several acts remain to be played out in this drama, experts in corporate governance and crisis management say that so far, GM and the woman in the hot seat, CEO Marry Barra, are doing a decent — but not stellar — job of managing the fallout.
“Mary Barra seems to fully embody the position of the CEO who is sorry. She recognizes that she has to pass on the [corporation’s] deepest regrets, and I think she’s been pretty convincing on that score,” says Wharton professor of legal studies and business ethics Amy Sepinwall. “Also notable, she wants us to understand that GM recognizes the error of its ways to the point where it’s not the same company in some meaningful sense. I think that is a powerful trope. We are inclined to forgive sinners when they have changed their character to the extent that it is almost a rupture in their identity.”

GM has recalled 2.6 million cars, mostly Chevrolet Cobalts and Saturn Ions, after revelations that a faulty ignition switch could shut down the engine, lock steering and power breaks, and disable airbags. The flaw has been linked to at least 13 deaths. Barra, who took the helm at GM in January and is the first female CEO of a major international automaker, was called before Congress to explain why the company spent a decade doing nothing about the problem. In one particularly shameful case, GM had threatened to go after a victim’s family for legal fees if they did not drop a lawsuit against the automaker, The New York Times reported.
It’s a critical moment because the recall scandal comes just as GM was coming back to life, says David Vinjamuri, author of the book, Accidental Branding. “They had finally started to get the bankruptcy behind them, they have had some very well reviewed products … [and] they seemed to be firing on all cylinders,” he notes. “This is really a potential inflection point where they show that they are a company that can break the mold” in terms of how they handle a crisis, “or fall back into an old pattern.” That old pattern, Vinjamuri adds, would be choosing “to minimize the cost of the crisis rather than maximizing the value of the brand long term.”
Echoes of Exploding Pintos
Lawrence G. Hrebiniak, emeritus professor of management at Wharton, points out that recalls, cover-ups and threatening behavior by GM carry some historical resonance. “If you look at the auto industry, they don’t come across as clear, decisive and positive. In 1965, Ralph Nader wrote Unsafe at Any Speed [which documented car manufacturers’ resistance to adopting safety equipment, such as seat belts]. The auto industry not only denied [these accusations], they went as far as digging up dirt on Nader rather than facing the problem head on,” he notes. “Nader won a ton of money in a judgment against GM. Shortly after that, there was the [controversy involving the Ford] Pinto and the exploding fuel tank. There is a history here.”
“Mary Barra seems to fully embody the position of the CEO who is sorry.”–Amy Sepinwall
In the case of the Pinto, in which a rear-impact collision could result in an exploding fuel tank, it was discovered that an $11 shield could have diminished risk. The more recent GM case centered on a 57-cent part inside the cars’ ignition switches. In both instances, it seems companies made a particularly cold-hearted calculation — that settlements to families of victims would cost less than a recall. “As consumers and concerned citizens, we think this is not the right way to proceed even if it turns out that the bottom line is enhanced by paying money out in liability payments,” says Sepinwall. “Liability of course never fully compensates the family for the loss that occurs. There is a moral cost to the tragedy, and there really is no price tag assigned to that.”
GM, however, will end up paying for its transgressions many times over, and, at least at this early stage, the Detroit-based automaker is doing many things right, according to veteran crisis management experts and observers. “I do have a lot of respect and admiration for [Barra],” says John Paul MacDuffie, a Wharton management professor and longtime auto industry researcher. “I think she probably is, more than anyone else within GM, the right person to get them out of this crisis.”
MacDuffie points out that Barra, a GM lifer, has real auto-industry credibility that other recent GM CEOs have lacked. “In several of her assignments before this, she was a voice for breaking from the old GM ways: [She worked] in manufacturing, in HR, in product development, and then [was appointed] CEO,” he notes. “In a company where a lot of CEOs came up through the financial side, she came up through the car side.” This means Barra has the potential for changing, in reality and perception, GM’s reputation for emphasizing cost cutting above all else, MacDuffie adds.
Hrebiniak, however, thinks Barra could be presenting a stronger, more positive case for the company. “I feel sorry for her. She is stepping into a mess,” he says. “But she is just not offering positives and not fighting some of the charges strongly enough.” Barra could have said, for instance, that starting this summer, all of GM’s cars will come with 4G technology that will automatically communicate more early-warning mechanical problems directly to the company, Hrebiniak suggests.
Still, some metrics show that GM’s image is holding up in spite of the controversy. March figures for the automaker’s U.S. sales showed a 4.1% year-to-year increase. Boston-based social media analytics firm Crimson Hexagon examined several million Twitter messages with the terms “GM” and “recall” sent between February 7 and April 1, well into coverage of the scandal. It shows 42% neutral tweets and 58% negative ones.
Tweets sorted simply for mention of GM brands overall did not show significantly negative drift as the scandal unfolded, Crimson Hexagon found. Between January 1 and February 7, 3.7 million tweets about GM and its sub-brands were 26% positive, 71% neutral and 3% negative. From February 7 to April 1, 5.3 million Tweets showed up as 24% positive, 72% neutral and 4% negative. “At the brand level, we don’t actually see much difference between the two time periods, which suggests that the recalls aren’t hurting the brand overall,” says Crimson Hexagon’s Elizabeth B. Breese, senior content and digital marketing strategist.
But these samplings dipped into public sentiment just as Barra’s testimony before Congress was getting underway on April 1 and 2. Days later, Saturday Night Live led off its weekly broadcast with a spoof on Barra’s performance, showing her trying to roll her chair out of hearings in a comically evasive routine.
“Knowing people are looking askance at the fox guarding the henhouse, they should invite someone from the outside … who can sit with the committee and examine the data.”–Lawrence Hrebiniak
Meanwhile, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) yesterday levied a $28,000 fine on GM because of what it said was the company’s failure to provide information the government had requested about the recall. That information had been due on April 3, according to press reports. At the same time, the NHTSA itself is under investigation by a congressional committee for what some allege was its delayed response to complaints from consumers about the ignition switch.
The Buzz in Competitors’ Showrooms
“You can bet salesmen in Ford, Honda and Kia showrooms, and the dozens of other competitors GM has, are making comments, and those comments are going to have some impact,” states Gene Grabowski, senior strategist at public relations/crisis management firm Levick.
Furthermore, GM has a significant disadvantage compared to the gold standard in crisis management. In 1982, a 12-year-old girl in Elk Grove Village, Ill., became the first victim of cyanide-laced extra-strength Tylenol capsules. Seven people died in that product tampering case, and the culprit was never caught. Johnson & Johnson responded almost immediately with a massive recall: 31 million bottles as part of a total effort costing well over $100 million. The financial losses, however, were only short-term. Market share recovered after a year, and the company emerged as a hero. How did they do it? “They said the value of life was a lot more important than the business case. This was quick, decisive and wonderful action,” says Hrebiniak.
A strategy of this kind, however, requires that the entire organization focus on the long-term reputation and health of the company. Says Vinjamuri: “The instinct of a large corporation is self-preservation, and at a large public company, the CEO tends to be judged by market valuation in the short term. The decisions [then-J&J CEO James E. Burke] made are not the ones the in-house counsel and CFO are going to tell [a CEO] to do today because it potentially has a very big, immediate and unknown financial liability when you admit liability and actively recall.”
GM, which has more than 200,000 employees around the world, also lacks one key advantage that Tylenol had — an outside perpetrator as culprit, rather than what is now perceived as inside callousness. Tylenol was responding to a crime committed by someone else. On the other hand, GM perhaps has an advantage in that J&J did not have a woman as CEO. “As a speculative matter, I might say that compassion sounds more genuine coming from a woman,” says Sepinwall, who carries the thought one step further: “I would be really troubled if the board of directors saw this was coming down the pike [while choosing a new leader] and felt it would be better to have a woman as CEO.”
According to Grabowski, Barra did a “credible” job in front of Congress, although he points out that one goal of such hearings is for politicians to gain points for being tough. She missed an important messaging opportunity by bringing the staff with her that she did, he adds. “There are these older white men all around her, and as she is speaking about the new GM, these old white guys are scowling. The optics were wrong. I was very surprised that, in 2014, they would have missed something as obvious as that.”
“The instinct of a large corporation is self-preservation, and at a large public company, the CEO tends to be judged by market valuation in the short term.”–David Vinjamuri
What Barra did do, though, is bring news — something seemingly concrete — for the media to put in their headlines and in the leads of their stories: She announced that GM had engaged Kenneth Feinberg, who specializes in administering disaster funds to victims, although she did not offer anything specific about whether GM will establish such a fund.
“That’s what we teach people to do who go before a hearing – to have a bold stroke, because that way you can report something rather than getting beat up, and it gives people on the panel a reason to praise you,” says Grabowski. “You make an announcement, you show a full page ad of something you are doing, or you form a new blue ribbon panel.”
Barra has been criticized for not revealing all the facts of what led to the problems with the cars. “I heard a lot of ‘we’re-investigating-it,’ but I didn’t get a lot of real answers,” one father of a victim told The New York Times. But there are likely legal reasons for not saying more. “It’s so easy to sit on the sidelines and judge people under these pressure situations,” Grabowski notes. “In nearly every case I have seen, the best you can do is emerge from the crisis with an understanding among consumers that you managed the crisis as best you could.”
To be in business in the 21st century, he adds, “is to live in crisis — consumers understand that. If the company manages this crisis well, there is a good opportunity to build its GM brand in the future. Companies have done this. They can leverage the crisis as a positive for their reputation.”
Undoing Wrongs by Doing Good
Projecting the right message and actually doing the right thing are usually one and the same. Making sure this kind of scandal never happens again means changing the prevailing corporate culture, says Eric W. Orts, a Wharton professor of legal studies and business ethics. “What you need to do is look at the actual incentive structure. If someone raises a significant safety issue, you need to reward [that person] for making an ethical decision even though it’s going to cost the company a little bit of money.”
A system that ensures anonymity within the company for reporting problems can also help, he notes. And although this would represent a major change, companies could consider restoring a responsible corporate officer doctrine, which would make members of the corporate board financially — and even criminally — liable for events that happen on their watch. “We don’t have that in the law right now, but it would certainly change the board’s attitude,” Orts points out. “You have this view that has taken over the world — if all a corporation should do is maximize value, then that’s what you are going to get.”
Experts say GM is moving in the right direction in some areas, such as meeting with families of victims and hiring Feinberg. The company has also brought aboard crisis management veteran Jeff Eller for advice. But there are other options open to the company that will help determine whether this ends up being a major collision, or just a particularly nasty speed bump. GM is conducting an internal investigation, but such endeavors may not carry much credibility if not handled correctly.
“There are these older white men all around [Barra], and as she is speaking about the new GM, these old white guys are scowling.”–Gene Grabowski
“Knowing people are looking askance at the fox guarding the henhouse, they should invite someone from the outside … who can sit with the committee and examine the data,” Hrebiniak says. “There needs to be a perception of legitimacy, that it’s not a cover-up. Structurally, it would be good to turn around and add one or two people to the committee who are outsiders.” The team is currently being led by Tony Valukas, chairman of law firm Jenner & Block and a former U.S. Attorney, and by GM’s own general counsel, Michael Millikin.
GM has indicated that although it may be shielded from liability for actions that occurred before its 2009 bankruptcy, it could choose to compensate all victims and their families. That is a potentially powerful action, according to Vinjamuri. “The most loyal customer isn’t someone who never had a problem,” he notes. “It is the person who had a problem who was surprised with a solution that exceeded [his or her] expectations. So the crisis represents an opportunity.” GM should be compensating pre-bankruptcy victims, he adds, “because it is the right thing to do [and] people will remember it.”
GM could find a different way to compensate victims, something with a more altruistic ring to it than just paying out cash, adds Sepinwall: “Sometimes companies will have scholarship funds, or in Philip Morris’s case, have public service messages aimed at discouraging kids from smoking — some effort that seeks to do good beyond the most immediate costs of the wrong-doing.”
The company might also take a page from Toyota, notes MacDuffie. Faced with product flaws, Toyota began in 2009 a series of recalls — so many, in fact, that it may have started to have a paradoxical effect on public perception. “There was a time when recalls had negative associations,” MacDuffie says. “But Toyota decided to get in front of potential recalls, and for a while it seemed there was a new Toyota recall every few weeks. In the end, there may have been some desensitizing, some reframing of what this means, that if Toyota is doing a recall, that’s a good thing.” Toyota also arranged to keep service centers open later and compensated those businesses for doing so – moves that meant a lot to dealers and customers, MacDuffie adds. “To anyone from the outside, it was a sign that Toyota was taking it seriously.” Toyota on April 9 announced that it was recalling more than six million vehicles worldwide for five different defects that impact 27 different Toyota models, in addition to the company-built Pontiac Vibe and Suburu Trezia. No deaths or crashes have been linked to the defects, the company said, but at least two fires were found to be related to a defective starter.
Of course, putting things right does not ensure brand value in perpetuity. For all the praise Tylenol garnered after the 1982 recall, it received just as much criticism more recently after a moldy smell turned out to emanate from rogue substances mixing with Tylenol in manufacturing plants, causing nausea, stomach pain and other health problems. Several rounds of recalls followed. “We have young children,” says Vinjamuri, “and a lot of parents say they don’t trust Tylenol. It was unthinkable that anyone would have said that 10 years ago.”

網誌存檔