I long for the day that ANYTHING close to this happens in the USA
I guess youâve good news, then.
Across the Atlantic, two former VW engineers â Oliver Schmidt and James Robert Liang â are already serving prison sentences in the U.S. Schmidt, who once led VWâs environmental office in the U.S., was sentenced to seven years after initially denying guilt but later reaching a plea deal. Liang received 40 months after cooperating with prosecutors.
frezik@midwest.social
on 26 May 17:42
nextcollapse
To salvage the argument, itâs quite possible this would have been different if they were from GM rather than VW.
sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
on 26 May 18:11
nextcollapse
I am surprised VW clowns got the prison tbh but i am sure there is a reason why it actually happened here.
System fucked up lol
CosmoNova@lemmy.world
on 26 May 18:35
nextcollapse
It most likely wouldâve. Just look how quickly US courts started to turn Monsanto into shreds the very second Bayer bought it. Theyâre after that so called stupid German money. Wouldnât work if it was American money.
The court sent the former head of diesel engine development behind bars for four years and six months, and the former head of powertrain electronics to two years and seven months. Two others â Volkswagenâs former development director and a former department head â received suspended sentences, according to Der Spiegel and Deutsche Welle reports from the Braunschweig courtroom.
The (now ex-) CEO of VW, Winterkorn, is a fugitive from justice in US â the reason he isnât in prison in the US is because heâs hiding in Germany, and Germany doesnât extradite its nationals. IIRC from memory back during the incident, heâs facing a total of over two hundred years in potential sentence from the charges, though some of that would probably run in parallel, were he convicted, and I assume that in practice, thereâd be some sort of plea deal.
EDIT: Maybe it was over one hundred, not two hundred. I distinctly remember trying to figure out whether the sentences could run in parallel when reading an article about it at the time. In practice, heâd probably plea bargain it down, but there also is no parole for federal sentences in the US, so he wouldnât be getting out early, either.
EDIT2: Also, because heâs a fugitive and itâs a federal crime:
No statute of limitations shall extend to any person fleeing from justice.
So I expect that heâs probably going to stay in Germany for the rest of his life, unless he can find some other location that wouldnât extradite him (Russia?)
This is the most unbelievable part: a us court held management responsible for criminal behavior? Did that not pay their fines? Did no one have a spare jet to offer?
MajesticElevator@lemmy.zip
on 26 May 17:41
nextcollapse
When you donât read the article ^
magnetosphere@fedia.io
on 26 May 17:53
nextcollapse
While I see your point, itâs important to note that the people jailed in the US were called âengineersâ, not âexecutivesâ.
SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
on 26 May 17:54
nextcollapse
I donât know if theyâd have many, but Iâd expect them to have at least a few. North America is a major market.
SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
on 26 May 18:04
collapse
Their subsidiary companies do, but VW is a German company, the âexecutivesâ are ALL gonna be there dude⊠and those US execs would be doing what THEIR oversea âexecutivesâ want them to, so thereâs still people above those who may be overseas. So calling them âexecutivesâ would be wrong since there is people above them still.
The point is, your ânoteâ doesnât matter mate.
prototypez9er@lemmynsfw.com
on 26 May 18:09
nextcollapse
Even if itâs not VW executives it would be nice to see any executives actually face jail here in the US.
masterofn001@lemmy.ca
on 26 May 18:20
nextcollapse
Every multinational corp has execs for each region.
President and VP of insert region operation is a common title given to EXECS of foreign corps.
SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
on 26 May 20:35
collapse
Yes, what do you think subsidiary means�
These engineers clearly held executive roles, they just werenât with the Volkswagen (germany) so they would have had to clarify their subsidiary. For journalism this was the correct wording. If they wanted to call them execs, it would have had to go into detail about Volkswagen (Us particular division and reasons)
If youâre talking about Fritolays, you donât just go and say execs when talking about âlaysâ or âDoritosâ subsidiaries, you would use âengineersâ or whatever other work they held to simplify it.
Itâs an unnecessary distinction for non mutually exclusive exclusive terms, to use âexecutivesâ would lead to more confusion and that would be shit journalismâŠ.
Itâs an article about the German Volkswagen, why are you assuming itâs about the multinational subsidiary? You can be an engineer for Volkswagen, and their subsidiary, but that requires explaining if you want to call them that. Which is totally unnecessary since the article wasnât about them.
Oh. Youâre only counting GERMAN execs as executives. Okay.
SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
on 26 May 20:34
collapse
Yes⊠the article is about the German company dudeâŠâŠ not the âVolkswagen groupâ and not âVolkswagen internationalâ or whatever includes their multinational groups. To assume otherwise is just weird, they never mentioned anything but their German company.
Terms arenât mutually exclusive⊠you donât think those engineers held executive roles? They just werenât executives of Volkswagen.
They would have had to say executives of Volkswagen (insert whatever specifics of the subsidiary), for it to be the correct term. Engineers is simpler and easier and is the proper way to express the situation.
Your âpointâ muddies the water and needs to bring on multiple additional pieces of information, which would also need to be described. Most people would know these engineers held executives roles, with some part farther down the âexecutiveâ chain.
You can be an engineer for Volkswagen, while also being the executive for Volkswagen US NW division, but itâs irrelevant to the article and requires more completely unnecessary information, so in the effort of good journalism and brevityâŠ.
You can be both. Schmidt was general manager of VWâs U.S. Environment and Engineering Office.
As much as I like to see consequences, I would rather have just seen a very large fine put toward environmental purposes than prison time. Save prison for people who pose a direct danger to the public.
magnetosphere@fedia.io
on 26 May 18:27
nextcollapse
I would agree, but with one significant condition:
the fine would have to be large enough to be an effective punishment, and serve as a deterrent. A company as valuable as VW would have to pay an enormous fine.
homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world
on 26 May 18:47
collapse
For funsies the justice department fined Meta fifty million dollars. Meta made that back by the time your eyes got to the end of this sentence.
But their scam did pose a direct health danger to society. If there are never consequences for executives, they wonât care if the company loses some money (or go bankrupt), they land another job elsewhere and live on.
MajesticElevator@lemmy.zip
on 27 May 06:47
collapse
The fallout forced CEO Martin Winterkorn to resign, although he denied wrongdoing. U.S. authorities issued an arrest warrant for Winterkorn in 2018, but Germany does not extradite its nationals.
Nah, I get what youâre saying, but weâre used to engineers and regular workers getting arrested here. Weâve got one of the most⊠comprehensive?.. prison systems in the world. Itâs just so rare to find executives and anyone making over $300k suffer any real consequences.
TrojanRoomCoffeePot@lemmy.world
on 26 May 17:56
nextcollapse
Why aim low, why not public flogging, and pillories?
I mean my own counterargument to it as that no state should have the power to execute people, and if it should it shouldnât use it on criminals, and if it should it shouldnât use it on financial crimes. Yeah $12bil is a lot, and I am absolutely in favor of hard time as a punishment for financial crimes, but I donât think seriously think anyone should die over it.
I would present a counterargument to that, as all states in the world ultimately have this power, only the circumstances differ. I mean, grab a gun and try to shoot at armed police anywhere in the world. You will be killed, and nobody can sue the state or the police who shot you for unjustly executing you. Killing you is always fair to protect other people from being killed.
From there, we are arguing whether states should be able to kill in cold blood, which is a different conversation, and my opinion is that we should keep making penalties for âfinancial crimesâ, which usually kill more people than any mass shooter or serial killer could, harsher and harsher until there is a clearly visible deterrent effect.
The case of the lady in Vietnam is not even a direct âcold bloodâ case by the way, as the state agreed to spare her if she puts at least most of the money back, which means that lives lost because of the absence of that money might be spared. In my view, this is analogous to shooting at an active shooter, and an okay thing to do. Lives are being saved by doing this.
I was making an argument about should, not does, and executing people is rather different than shooting someone in defense of yourself/others.
I agree that financial crimes should have harsh penalties, just not death. The problem is that we donât generally apply penalties to this type of crime at all; fining a company $500mil after they made $40bil or whatever by circumventing laws/regulations is not a penalty, itâs the cost of doing business.
That is a very good argument, however these financial crimes are on the one hand much more trackable than direct violent crime and can affect more people.
My opinion is that we shouldnât execute serial killers who kill dozens of people, because usually itâs hard to prove beyond doubt to the point such an irrevocable act can be taken and the process takes very long and is very expensive and is not that useful as a deterrent since these people are usually mentally ill in the first place.
But with the Boeing CEO whose actions caused several plane crashes, itâs pretty easy to prove since instructions had to come from somewhere and the buck stops at the top, it has deterrent value, just look at UnitedHealth, and the crime is much more severe than that of a serial killer, as most serial killers donât kill multiple hundreds of people.
jordanlund@lemmy.world
on 26 May 17:42
nextcollapse
âA good startâŠâ
magnetosphere@fedia.io
on 26 May 17:55
nextcollapse
Iâm used to executives being above the law. I had to read the article to be sure the title wasnât clickbait.
oh thatâs easy. the VW execs were under the jurisdiction of a country that gives a fuck and knows what the consecuences of unchecked greed are. the bankers were under the jurisdiction of a country that thinks maybe a little bit of fascism wouldnât be so bad, all things considered
It took 10 years? Well even longer because they figured something was wrong before it came public.
The court sent the former head of diesel engine development behind bars for four years and six months, and the former head of powertrain electronics to two years and seven months.
The fallout forced CEO Martin Winterkorn to resign, although he denied wrongdoing. U.S. authorities issued an arrest warrant for Winterkorn in 2018, but Germany does not extradite its nationals. His trial in Germany was paused in 2021 due to health issues, but he remains a key figure under investigation.
Dont know much about anything but it would not surprise me if it was some Bosch engineers who originaally hinted all those engineers of what could be done with their systems if they just listen some states of other car systems. Afterall, itâs their injection systems etc. almost every diesel manuf used/uses.
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
on 27 May 07:25
collapse
That wouldnât even need to be malicious, but it definitely could be.
I could see a selling point being, oh ya you can monitor the system and then adjust things for more power, but itâll be dirtier.
And then at that point itâs up to the OEM to keep it within regulations, but they could offer different power modes within limits.
Then everyoneâs like oh this would make cheating so easy!
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
on 27 May 08:32
collapse
You are genuinely the first other person Iâve ever seen online who seems aware that this was an industry-wide thing, not a VW thing.
NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
on 27 May 14:58
collapse
You barely saw it in the news compared to VW as well. Even if an article would bring it up, itâd usually be headlines with VW in some way or another.
Itâs a shame so many of our choices for cars out there are run by bad people at the top đ
(To note : a few high positioned people got sent to prison over the years, but I donât know enough about this particular case to know what really happened.)
Before this, I afraid Justin Trudeau was privileged elite, born with a silver spoon in his mouth.
After what he did to Jody Wilson-Raybould, I knew Justin Trudeau was a out of touch tone deaf, nepo baby. Truly he was never able to relate to us Canadian ânormiesâ.
TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
on 26 May 21:11
nextcollapse
The dieselgate scandal is why I am so disappointed when I heard that Volkswagen outsold Tesla in Europe for the number one spot since the start of the year. I have been hoping it would a more scrupulous company (and non-Chinese EV manufacturer) that took the number one spot for European EV cars sold.
qjkxbmwvz@startrek.website
on 26 May 21:27
nextcollapse
I think you mean more scrupulous, not less.
TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
on 26 May 21:39
collapse
You are right. I just corrected my comment.
unskilled5117@feddit.org
on 26 May 22:23
nextcollapse
Most people donât know that it wasnât just VW. Sadly I donât think you will find any moral acting car manufacturer out there.
Automakers who have been caught using a defeat device within a diesel vehicle, in a similar manner to Volkswagen include: Jeep and Ram under FCA[391] (now a part of Stellantis), Opel[392] (when under GM), and Mercedes-Benz.[393]
While not all using defeat devices, diesel vehicles built by a wide range of carmakers, including Volvo, Renault, Mercedes, Jeep, Hyundai, Citroen, BMW, Mazda, Fiat, Ford and Peugeot[48][49] had independent tests carried out by ADAC that proved that, under normal driving conditions, many diesel vehicles exceeded legal European emission limits for nitrogen oxide (NOx), some by more than 10 times, and one by 14 times.[49]
Beyond exclusively diesel or passenger vehicles, automakers such as: Hino[414] (subsidiary of Toyota), Hyundai and Kia,[415] Nissan,[416] Mazda, Yamaha Motors, Suzuki,[417] Subaru,[418] and others have been proven to be falsifying fuel economy or emissions on non-diesel powered and/or commercial vehicles.
Volkswagen was definitely had the loudest outrage but as you mention, anyone making a diesel was doing the same thing.
And to your point about morals, yeah most corporations have no idea what morals are, and some might say thatâs their right as a company to just focus on money, damn everyone and everything else, your health, the environment not if it interferes with my corporations profit margin.
Social contract whatâs that about.
sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
on 26 May 22:27
nextcollapse
being "scrupulous" is bad business tbh
until the law and regulatory frameworks enable good business we will keep getting more of these parasites.
Even without diselgate vw group cars are just poorly engineered rebadges. If not dieselgate, jail them for the hitler engine.
TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
on 27 May 08:30
collapse
If it makes you feel any better, all brands had illegally high emissions. People only tie it to VW so much because they were the first to be tested, and they owned up to it, meaning media could call them out on it without fear of libel.
They only owned up after lying and obfuscating for years. California said they work with manufacturers when they are out of compliance, but brought their lawsuit because VW wouldnât cooperate
uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone
on 26 May 22:20
nextcollapse
BMW and VW are the same beasts they were when they were backers of NSDAP in Germany.
Between the VW emissions cheating and BMWâs subscription car features, it seems their attitude towards commerce has not changed a jot.
I am sure some of their owners are of that same mind set but come on here... this is bread and butter white collar crime, Nazi Germany era war crimes. No need to conflate the two. Both can be true independently of each other.
theotherbelow@lemmynsfw.com
on 26 May 22:22
nextcollapse
Neat! Punishing conspiracy and engineered lying is a good thing!
anonymous1979@lemmy.ca
on 27 May 00:40
nextcollapse
This! Finally! This will make other execs scratch themselves behind the ears and consider their life choices. Fines for the company they work for wonât, as these same execs just budget these fines into the crimes theyâre planning to commit.
Fuck these frauds, hope they stay in for years.
Also, continue doing this, jail all the execs that break the law.
DrunkEngineer@lemmy.world
on 27 May 03:04
collapse
Despite what the headline says, no execs went to jail. The two who were punished with jail terms were middle management.
Martin Winterkorn, the CEO, will probably avoid any serious consequences.
sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
on 27 May 03:09
nextcollapse
Sounds about right
Katana314@lemmy.world
on 27 May 03:10
nextcollapse
I only have cursory knowledge of this incident, but: Itâs possible that was the right outcome. A lot of middle managers do some heinous shit, and then report only positive news to upper management with a âDonât worry about itâ attitude.
We all know thereâs also evil CEOs in the world as well, but maybe the investigation found this wasnât one of them. 'Course, maybe they were just better at keeping plausible deniability.
DrunkEngineer@lemmy.world
on 27 May 03:39
nextcollapse
The Board had discussions about how to stonewall California. US prosecutors have filed charges against the CEO but Germany wonât extradite.
I mean, apart from the apparent guilt, do you think any country would simply hand over its prominent nationals? If there were a case against an US CEO in Germany, hell would freeze over before extradition.
DrunkEngineer@lemmy.world
on 27 May 16:17
collapse
The point is that the US has gathered enough evidence to get indictments against them. Germany has access to that same evidence and has very similar laws that were violated â but has done basically nothing.
I understand the point, and for the record I also believe those responsible should be held accountable personally. The difficult thing is simply the international character of the crimes committed. If these things are illegal in Germany, perhaps they should be tried under German law and courts.
But I also recognise thatâs probably not going to happen due to the people accused having too much (political/soft) power. Itâs a real dilemma when weâre talking about white collar crime.
Say for example, I do something right now in my home country, which is illegal for me to do in, say Madagascar, but is legal where I live. The thing Iâm doing, Iâm doing from my office in my home country. The effect is in Madagascar - is it then reasonable for Madagascar to ask my home country for extradition?
Itâs absolutely not the same as whatâs happened, but Iâm taking it to an extreme to make a point. International laws are really difficult, especially when extradition of nationals is at play⊠not to invalidate the fact that these people did something very wrong by the way!
Of course Germany wonât extradite we donât extradite nationals to non-EU countries. It can even happen that we donât extradite Americans to the US because they can demonstrate that theyâre likely to face torture in the US, such as isolation cells.
But they have to be rich, right? Iâm interested in the criteria.
What about a nation that supports a company who produces goods that allow the company to make profit, and the production of the goods harms peopleâs lives (e.g. pollution or poor working conditions in the production country). Somebody should police that nation. Maybe bomb the nation?
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
on 27 May 15:20
collapse
In that case the people in charge of both the nation and the corporation need to be removed. The nation can redeem itself once the greed poisoned leaders are dealt with.
But if the citizens didnât fund the companyâs greed, they wouldnât exist. Plenty of examples of things people donât need that they continue to buy, and support unethical business operations leading to harm.
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
on 28 May 04:36
collapse
Thatâs some capitalism = commerce bullshit. Capitalism only perverts commerce to its own end of allowing a single person to âownâ everything. Commerce existed for over 10,000 years before capitalism existed, and the father of capitalism, Adam Smith, even said that once capitalism has achieved its goals, which we did in the late 1800s according to Adam Smith, that it would be absolutely imperative to transition to a more âsocially equitableâ [sic] and âsustainableâ form of commerce under a direct democratic framework.
Try using some actual facts rather than feelings in your next reply, also actually read The Theory of Moral Sentiments, and Wealth of Nations. If you are actually literate, you should be able to plow through both texts in two two to three hour readings.
This comment is so pretentious and yet so dumb. Nice job. Capitalism only works if people are spending money. Fact. Thereâs no getting around that. If people elect to spend money on goods they donât need from companies they know are harming people then they are responsible. Should they not be âLuigied?â
AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
on 28 May 14:19
collapse
No facts, just bluster. You need to read the source material.
Capitalism has served its purpose. Adam Smith would be screaming for revolution. Commerce exists without capitalism. Itâs long since past time for capitalism to be relegated to the dustbin of history.
Four former Volkswagen managers have been convicted of fraud for their roles in the so-called Dieselgate scandal, which erupted when U.S. regulators discovered that the company had installed software to cheat emissions tests on millions of VW, Audi, and Porsche vehicles worldwide.
The court sent the former head of diesel engine development behind bars for four years and six months, and the former head of powertrain electronics to two years and seven months. Two others â Volkswagenâs former development director and a former department head â received suspended sentences, according to Der Spiegel and Deutsche Welle reports from the Braunschweig courtroom.
The verdict follows nearly four years of proceedings and adds to the mounting legal troubles for Volkswagen. Prosecutors had asked for prison terms of two to four years, while the defense argued the men were scapegoats. Appeals remain possible.
After being caught cheating in 2015, the company admitted to installing software in its diesel engines that activated emissions controls only during laboratory testing, allowing the vehicles to meet U.S. standards while in real-world driving, the vehicles emitted up to 40 times more pollutants.
The fallout forced CEO Martin Winterkorn to resign, although he denied wrongdoing. U.S. authorities issued an arrest warrant for Winterkorn in 2018, but Germany does not extradite its nationals. His trial in Germany was paused in 2021 due to health issues, but he remains a key figure under investigation.
Meanwhile, the arrest of Audiâs then-CEO Rupert Stadler in 2018 marked a dramatic shift, as German prosecutors expanded their probe into current executives. Stadler was accused of continuing to sell cars with illegal software even after the scandal broke.
Across the Atlantic, two former VW engineers â Oliver Schmidt and James Robert Liang â are already serving prison sentences in the U.S. Schmidt, who once led VWâs environmental office in the U.S., was sentenced to seven years after initially denying guilt but later reaching a plea deal. Liang received 40 months after cooperating with prosecutors.
Currently, German authorities are investigating up to 40 executives and engineers across Volkswagen, Audi, and Porsche, with parallel cases against Daimler (Mercedes) and BMW under way.
OCCRP previously reported on Volkswagenâs 2017 U.S. guilty plea and multibillion-dollar settlement.
The Dieselgate saga has so far cost VW an estimated âŹ33 billion ($37.5 billion) and the legal and financial fallout is far from over.
Thousands of European customers continue to press for compensation, while investigators on both sides of the Atlantic keep pushing for accountability at the highest levels.
Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
on 27 May 07:37
collapse
defense argued the men were scapegoats.
If you are at the top of an organisation then you can you be a scapegoat? You are literally in charge. Your only chance is if an employee committed fraud and deliberately hid something from you.
Head of department is middle management. Middle management is certainly the most vulnerable position in situations like this.
The top manager got a nice compensation and very high pension (according to German media ~âŹ1.3 million per year), while the owners (Piech/Porsche family) still earn billions every year.
Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
on 27 May 09:37
collapse
Top managers do seem to be targeted.
CEO Martin Winterkornâs trial in Germany was paused in 2021 due to health issues, but he remains a key figure under investigation.
The arrest of Audiâs then-CEO Rupert Stadler in 2018 marked a dramatic shift into current executives.
Owners responsibility is interesting. I think the concept of limited liability protects them, but should it? If they actively influenced the policy I donât think it should (but proving that is difficult).
FireWire400@lemmy.world
on 27 May 05:26
nextcollapse
Good. Finally theyâre facing some actual consequences for their actions.
If only also the politicians that decided what the limits should be without any consideration for the real world would face the consequencesâŠ
Not that the VW guys did the right thing, but what other option they had ? Close down and go home ?
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
on 27 May 08:14
nextcollapse
I disagree. VW could have crashed their diesel production in favor of hybrids and EVs. Theyâre playing late to the game catch up now and may not survive at all. Putting off something you know is coming - the end of diesel vehicle prevalence - through deception YOU KNOW WILL RESULT IN MILLIONS OF VEHICLES CONTRIBUTING WORSE EMISSIONS BUT BEING REGARDED AS BETTER - thatâs fucking heinous and criminal.
Oh maybe you have an extra biosphere we can slap on to the one being wrecked by CO2? No?
Anyone who knew the truth is complicit in that destruction and weâre only beginning to quantify the harm.
Fine, but aside the fact that everyone lied in this matter, why we should spare the ones that make an absurd law with no ties to the real world and only fueled by ideology ? I repeat, I donât think that what VW did was right.
VW could have crashed their diesel production in favor of hybrids and EVs.
The hybrids maybe, but that not really solve the problem, even the first hybrids from Toyota had a 1.5 liter gasoline engine.
For a full EVs we are just now at a point where they start to become usable. And the reason is that you need a whole infrastructure around the EV cars, just think about chargers, additional space there to put them, place where you cannot put them and so on.
Theyâre playing late to the game catch up now and may not survive at all.
I agree on that.
Putting off something you know is coming - the end of diesel vehicle prevalence - through deception YOU KNOW WILL RESULT IN MILLIONS OF VEHICLES CONTRIBUTING WORSE EMISSIONS BUT BEING REGARDED AS BETTER - thatâs fucking heinous and criminal.
Well, from a technical point of view, the diesel engine is cleaner in some way and dirtier in other so I would say that the diesel is not better but also not worse. It only produce a different type of emissions.
And, by the way, the emissionâs limits for a diesel engine in the Euro-X normatives are always way lower then the ones for the gasoline.
Oh maybe you have an extra biosphere we can slap on to the one being wrecked by CO2? No?
Of course not. But on the other hand I am not stupid enough to adhere blindly to an ideology.
Anyone who knew the truth is complicit in that destruction and weâre only beginning to quantify the harm.
So the politicians are the first you need to jail.
mojofrododojo@lemmy.world
on 27 May 15:02
collapse
Of course not. But on the other hand I am not stupid enough to adhere blindly to an ideology.
So how we can call what is behind the âban this and thatâ mentality which is without any real study about the consequences and without any suggestion for alternatives ? Pre-intentional stupidity ?
Look, I am fully aware that what VW (and everyone else) did was a crime and I agree that they must pay. On the oher hand I also fully understand that you cannot change the reality only because you write a law to change it, in this case all the Euro-x normatives about emission levels.
Do you think that it is a silly idelogy to ask that also the people that make silly decision that they will not suffer are asked to pay for the consequences ? Fine, think this way.
Do we really lost the concept that one can agree with something but also see what the problems of that thing are ?
Yes, VW could have switched to hydrid or EV but not in the timeframe they are given.
Not to consider that switching the entire production to hybrid and EV without the necessary infrastructure to use them in the real world is useless, you simply build cars that nobody will buy.
Sirius006@sh.itjust.works
on 28 May 17:24
collapse
Tokyo banned diesel motors in the late 90s. As far as I know that didnât kill Toyota.
At the same time European car makers started to lobby for particle filters that were supposed to solve everything. The politics who where naive enough to believe them do share responsibility, but not as much as the european auto industry that created this whole situation.
Also, you implies that laws are made by politicians without any intervention of the industries whatsoever. I think you know that it is not how it works.
I⊠I thought a middle manager is any manager whoâs not the very lowest manager, and not the CEO? As in, any manager who has managers above and below them?
Machinist@lemmy.world
on 27 May 12:31
nextcollapse
I thought middle management was the guy in between the crew and upper management?
Absolute shit stressful job, btw. Never doing that shit again. If you have a heart, that job will kill it.
colourlessidea@sopuli.xyz
on 27 May 12:40
collapse
Good question - I also donât know how clear those definitions are. In my head all managers that are under department heads would be middle, and department heads + C-suite would be upper/senior management. And the subset of upper management that is C-level is, well, C-level.
RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
on 27 May 16:33
collapse
Think of them more like division heads. Not quite a regular middle manager, but not C-suite.
8000gnat@reddthat.com
on 27 May 16:58
nextcollapse
One insanity in the following years was how they thought people still wanted their next generation diesel.
Iâve been working for them in the 2010s with the department to organise the staff car fleet. We ordered many electric vehicles years ahead from production and planned it all around electric vehicles: Charging stations, operating distance, some hybrids for long distance, software to calculate trips etc.
Then a few months before we needed them, they said: We overproduced on the latest diesel generation and canât keep up with the demand for electric vehicles, so we have to sell the ones you ordered. You can either go with a Tesla (for official Volkswagen business trips!) or have the diesel for free.
It felt like there was a hysteria: Decision makers got it in their heads that the âhypeâ for electric vehicles was ideology-driven and not something people with buying power actually wanted today or in the near future. Bit like the republican administration thinking that âwokeâ is our main problem. Meanwhile, huge research and development departments did come up with the electric vehicles they sell today (and fully working hydrogen prototypes you wonât see in a store, just to be safe) and must have been quite frustrated that so few were produced.
This sounds like actual impactful consequences and accountability for the rich exploitative asshole executives actually responsible? Did I forget to wake up in the morning?
threaded - newest
:)))))
I long for the day that ANYTHING close to this happens in the USA
why do you hate success?
Success = falsifying emissions tests.
that's how real people get ahead in life while the peasants work
lol which group do you identify as?
the temporarily embarrassed billionaires, obviously
any day now! I will ascendant đ€Ą
I know! Letâs elect a demented rapist who has no idea how anything works or even how to finish a thought! Weâll be rich immediately!
Poeâs law applies here. Remember to use your sarcasm HTML tag!
I guess youâve good news, then.
To salvage the argument, itâs quite possible this would have been different if they were from GM rather than VW.
I am surprised VW clowns got the prison tbh but i am sure there is a reason why it actually happened here.
System fucked up lol
It most likely wouldâve. Just look how quickly US courts started to turn Monsanto into shreds the very second Bayer bought it. Theyâre after that so called stupid German money. Wouldnât work if it was American money.
I dunno, VW is about as American as GM.
Yeah, unless they are Chief Engineers, these two are just people who got caught in the churn.
Wake me up when the President of US Operations gets sentenced to prison. Hell, Iâll even be okay with club Fed.
They are like the one guy who went to jail for the 08 financial crisis
Not CEOs
Neither were the people in Germany.
The (now ex-) CEO of VW, Winterkorn, is a fugitive from justice in US â the reason he isnât in prison in the US is because heâs hiding in Germany, and Germany doesnât extradite its nationals. IIRC from memory back during the incident, heâs facing a total of over two hundred years in potential sentence from the charges, though some of that would probably run in parallel, were he convicted, and I assume that in practice, thereâd be some sort of plea deal.
EDIT: Maybe it was over one hundred, not two hundred. I distinctly remember trying to figure out whether the sentences could run in parallel when reading an article about it at the time. In practice, heâd probably plea bargain it down, but there also is no parole for federal sentences in the US, so he wouldnât be getting out early, either.
EDIT2: Also, because heâs a fugitive and itâs a federal crime:
www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/3290
So I expect that heâs probably going to stay in Germany for the rest of his life, unless he can find some other location that wouldnât extradite him (Russia?)
According to Wikipedia, he should have a criminal trial in Germany starting this year, so itâs possible he will still get sentenced there as well.
Saudi Arabia might take him. Hell, they put up Idi Amin for the remainder of his syphilis-scarred life.
This is the most unbelievable part: a us court held management responsible for criminal behavior? Did that not pay their fines? Did no one have a spare jet to offer?
When you donât read the article ^
While I see your point, itâs important to note that the people jailed in the US were called âengineersâ, not âexecutivesâ.
Would VW have many overseas âexecutivesâ?
I donât know if theyâd have many, but Iâd expect them to have at least a few. North America is a major market.
Their subsidiary companies do, but VW is a German company, the âexecutivesâ are ALL gonna be there dude⊠and those US execs would be doing what THEIR oversea âexecutivesâ want them to, so thereâs still people above those who may be overseas. So calling them âexecutivesâ would be wrong since there is people above them still.
The point is, your ânoteâ doesnât matter mate.
Even if itâs not VW executives it would be nice to see any executives actually face jail here in the US.
Every multinational corp has execs for each region.
President and VP of insert region operation is a common title given to EXECS of foreign corps.
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.ca/pictrs/image/16c83e70-7a8b-4f4b-aac7-717b079d2418.png">
Yes, what do you think subsidiary means�
These engineers clearly held executive roles, they just werenât with the Volkswagen (germany) so they would have had to clarify their subsidiary. For journalism this was the correct wording. If they wanted to call them execs, it would have had to go into detail about Volkswagen (Us particular division and reasons)
If youâre talking about Fritolays, you donât just go and say execs when talking about âlaysâ or âDoritosâ subsidiaries, you would use âengineersâ or whatever other work they held to simplify it.
Itâs an unnecessary distinction for non mutually exclusive exclusive terms, to use âexecutivesâ would lead to more confusion and that would be shit journalismâŠ.
Itâs an article about the German Volkswagen, why are you assuming itâs about the multinational subsidiary? You can be an engineer for Volkswagen, and their subsidiary, but that requires explaining if you want to call them that. Which is totally unnecessary since the article wasnât about them.
Oh. Youâre only counting GERMAN execs as executives. Okay.
Yes⊠the article is about the German company dudeâŠâŠ not the âVolkswagen groupâ and not âVolkswagen internationalâ or whatever includes their multinational groups. To assume otherwise is just weird, they never mentioned anything but their German company.
Terms arenât mutually exclusive⊠you donât think those engineers held executive roles? They just werenât executives of Volkswagen.
They would have had to say executives of Volkswagen (insert whatever specifics of the subsidiary), for it to be the correct term. Engineers is simpler and easier and is the proper way to express the situation.
Your âpointâ muddies the water and needs to bring on multiple additional pieces of information, which would also need to be described. Most people would know these engineers held executives roles, with some part farther down the âexecutiveâ chain.
You can be an engineer for Volkswagen, while also being the executive for Volkswagen US NW division, but itâs irrelevant to the article and requires more completely unnecessary information, so in the effort of good journalism and brevityâŠ.
Great, fine, whatever, bye
You can be both. Schmidt was general manager of VWâs U.S. Environment and Engineering Office.
As much as I like to see consequences, I would rather have just seen a very large fine put toward environmental purposes than prison time. Save prison for people who pose a direct danger to the public.
I would agree, but with one significant condition:
the fine would have to be large enough to be an effective punishment, and serve as a deterrent. A company as valuable as VW would have to pay an enormous fine.
For funsies the justice department fined Meta fifty million dollars. Meta made that back by the time your eyes got to the end of this sentence.
<coughs out a bunch of diesel emissions> "hear hear!"
But their scam did pose a direct health danger to society. If there are never consequences for executives, they wonât care if the company loses some money (or go bankrupt), they land another job elsewhere and live on.
Unless I misunderstood something?
Nah, I get what youâre saying, but weâre used to engineers and regular workers getting arrested here. Weâve got one of the most⊠comprehensive?.. prison systems in the world. Itâs just so rare to find executives and anyone making over $300k suffer any real consequences.
Why aim low, why not public flogging, and pillories?
How about we donât bring back corporal punishment. I get the sentiment, but iâd rather our justice system didnât turn into a torture system.
Seems like it also doesnât happen in Germany, as the post title doesnât match the article.
The two people sent to jail are middle managers (Head of XY), not executives.
Good
This is the way.
No, this is the way. But the above article is a good start.
I would love to see counterarguments to this instead of just downvotes
I mean my own counterargument to it as that no state should have the power to execute people, and if it should it shouldnât use it on criminals, and if it should it shouldnât use it on financial crimes. Yeah $12bil is a lot, and I am absolutely in favor of hard time as a punishment for financial crimes, but I donât think seriously think anyone should die over it.
I would present a counterargument to that, as all states in the world ultimately have this power, only the circumstances differ. I mean, grab a gun and try to shoot at armed police anywhere in the world. You will be killed, and nobody can sue the state or the police who shot you for unjustly executing you. Killing you is always fair to protect other people from being killed.
From there, we are arguing whether states should be able to kill in cold blood, which is a different conversation, and my opinion is that we should keep making penalties for âfinancial crimesâ, which usually kill more people than any mass shooter or serial killer could, harsher and harsher until there is a clearly visible deterrent effect.
The case of the lady in Vietnam is not even a direct âcold bloodâ case by the way, as the state agreed to spare her if she puts at least most of the money back, which means that lives lost because of the absence of that money might be spared. In my view, this is analogous to shooting at an active shooter, and an okay thing to do. Lives are being saved by doing this.
I was making an argument about should, not does, and executing people is rather different than shooting someone in defense of yourself/others.
I agree that financial crimes should have harsh penalties, just not death. The problem is that we donât generally apply penalties to this type of crime at all; fining a company $500mil after they made $40bil or whatever by circumventing laws/regulations is not a penalty, itâs the cost of doing business.
Death penalties should never be used since you can never be 100% sure of a crime. Otherwise you will get innocents executed.
Even CEOs can be scapegoats.
That is a very good argument, however these financial crimes are on the one hand much more trackable than direct violent crime and can affect more people.
My opinion is that we shouldnât execute serial killers who kill dozens of people, because usually itâs hard to prove beyond doubt to the point such an irrevocable act can be taken and the process takes very long and is very expensive and is not that useful as a deterrent since these people are usually mentally ill in the first place.
But with the Boeing CEO whose actions caused several plane crashes, itâs pretty easy to prove since instructions had to come from somewhere and the buck stops at the top, it has deterrent value, just look at UnitedHealth, and the crime is much more severe than that of a serial killer, as most serial killers donât kill multiple hundreds of people.
âA good startâŠâ
Iâm used to executives being above the law. I had to read the article to be sure the title wasnât clickbait.
It is very puzzling, isnât it? Why VW execs are put in jail and banking execs that created a global recession get off scot free?
.
oh thatâs easy. the VW execs were under the jurisdiction of a country that gives a fuck and knows what the consecuences of unchecked greed are. the bankers were under the jurisdiction of a country that thinks maybe a little bit of fascism wouldnât be so bad, all things considered
Except, as noted above, they were jailed in US too.
Because that act didnât hurt an American company
They are, the post title is false. The people going to jail are middle managers
That's all Folks! [Looney Toons music plays]
It took 10 years? Well even longer because they figured something was wrong before it came public.
Not so fast! The judgment isnât final yet. Plus some trials are still pending. Also the CEO seems to be too sick for trial.
To be fair. There are trials. It is not great but it could be worse. Imagine people could be deported and sent to prison for alleged crimes. Or soâŠ
This was my first thought as well.
Sounds like execs are familiar with milking the legal process regardless of nationality or prosecuting nation.
Itâs almost like execs are an international . . . cabal . . . of extremely rich white men who make decisions that only serve them.
But of course thatâs just a conspiracy theory.
well I guess there are some places where the law does not always serve the rich, that is mildly good news
Rich people going to jail what fantasy is this. And i can i live there
Its finally happening
Itâs amazing what you can find if you donât just look at memes - www.forbes.com.au/âŠ/billionaires-behind-bars/
Good. I still refuse to consider VW cars over this. Maybe once everyone has received their prison sentences, Iâll reconsider.
It wasnât just VW. It was like a dozen of the major brands all doing it in some way or another.
E.g BMW was involved as well.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_emissions_scandal
Dont know much about anything but it would not surprise me if it was some Bosch engineers who originaally hinted all those engineers of what could be done with their systems if they just listen some states of other car systems. Afterall, itâs their injection systems etc. almost every diesel manuf used/uses.
That wouldnât even need to be malicious, but it definitely could be.
I could see a selling point being, oh ya you can monitor the system and then adjust things for more power, but itâll be dirtier.
And then at that point itâs up to the OEM to keep it within regulations, but they could offer different power modes within limits.
Then everyoneâs like oh this would make cheating so easy!
You are genuinely the first other person Iâve ever seen online who seems aware that this was an industry-wide thing, not a VW thing.
You barely saw it in the news compared to VW as well. Even if an article would bring it up, itâd usually be headlines with VW in some way or another.
Itâs a shame so many of our choices for cars out there are run by bad people at the top đ
What âethicalâ car brand do you buy then?
In Canada we were told that putting execs in jail would âhurt jobsâ and we had to pass a law that said they just get a fine instead.
The execs in question were caught selling hookers to Qaddafiâs son.
Do you have any more info on that particular story? Research purposes.
Search for SNC-Lavalin + Saadi Gadhafi, youâll get a lot of hits, for many different things. SNC-Lavalin was such a corrupt firm. Still are, most likely, though they changed name to AtkinsRĂ©alis.
(To note : a few high positioned people got sent to prison over the years, but I donât know enough about this particular case to know what really happened.)
hold on... i thought they were paying bribes to justin's fam. but they were also engage is sex trafficking?
learn something new every day
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SNC-Lavalin_affair
Wiki does not mention any sex trafficking.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AE7gbw0vb_g
Before this, I afraid Justin Trudeau was privileged elite, born with a silver spoon in his mouth.
After what he did to Jody Wilson-Raybould, I knew Justin Trudeau was a out of touch tone deaf, nepo baby. Truly he was never able to relate to us Canadian ânormiesâ.
The dieselgate scandal is why I am so disappointed when I heard that Volkswagen outsold Tesla in Europe for the number one spot since the start of the year. I have been hoping it would a more scrupulous company (and non-Chinese EV manufacturer) that took the number one spot for European EV cars sold.
I think you mean more scrupulous, not less.
You are right. I just corrected my comment.
Most people donât know that it wasnât just VW. Sadly I donât think you will find any moral acting car manufacturer out there.
Soure (Wikipedia)
Volkswagen was definitely had the loudest outrage but as you mention, anyone making a diesel was doing the same thing.
And to your point about morals, yeah most corporations have no idea what morals are, and some might say thatâs their right as a company to just focus on money, damn everyone and everything else, your health, the environment not if it interferes with my corporations profit margin.
Social contract whatâs that about.
being "scrupulous" is bad business tbh
until the law and regulatory frameworks enable good business we will keep getting more of these parasites.
Even without diselgate vw group cars are just poorly engineered rebadges. If not dieselgate, jail them for the hitler engine.
If it makes you feel any better, all brands had illegally high emissions. People only tie it to VW so much because they were the first to be tested, and they owned up to it, meaning media could call them out on it without fear of libel.
VW wasnât even close to the worst offender.
<img alt="" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/34/Nitrogen_oxide_on-road_emissions_by_manufacturer_and_capacity.svg/1280px-Nitrogen_oxide_on-road_emissions_by_manufacturer_and_capacity.svg.png">
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_emissions_scandal
They only owned up after lying and obfuscating for years. California said they work with manufacturers when they are out of compliance, but brought their lawsuit because VW wouldnât cooperate
BMW and VW are the same beasts they were when they were backers of NSDAP in Germany.
Between the VW emissions cheating and BMWâs subscription car features, it seems their attitude towards commerce has not changed a jot.
I am sure some of their owners are of that same mind set but come on here... this is bread and butter white collar crime, Nazi Germany era war crimes. No need to conflate the two. Both can be true independently of each other.
Neat! Punishing conspiracy and engineered lying is a good thing!
This! Finally! This will make other execs scratch themselves behind the ears and consider their life choices. Fines for the company they work for wonât, as these same execs just budget these fines into the crimes theyâre planning to commit.
Fuck these frauds, hope they stay in for years.
Also, continue doing this, jail all the execs that break the law.
Despite what the headline says, no execs went to jail. The two who were punished with jail terms were middle management.
Martin Winterkorn, the CEO, will probably avoid any serious consequences.
Sounds about right
I only have cursory knowledge of this incident, but: Itâs possible that was the right outcome. A lot of middle managers do some heinous shit, and then report only positive news to upper management with a âDonât worry about itâ attitude.
We all know thereâs also evil CEOs in the world as well, but maybe the investigation found this wasnât one of them. 'Course, maybe they were just better at keeping plausible deniability.
The Board had discussions about how to stonewall California. US prosecutors have filed charges against the CEO but Germany wonât extradite.
They are all guilty as fuck.
I mean, apart from the apparent guilt, do you think any country would simply hand over its prominent nationals? If there were a case against an US CEO in Germany, hell would freeze over before extradition.
The point is that the US has gathered enough evidence to get indictments against them. Germany has access to that same evidence and has very similar laws that were violated â but has done basically nothing.
I understand the point, and for the record I also believe those responsible should be held accountable personally. The difficult thing is simply the international character of the crimes committed. If these things are illegal in Germany, perhaps they should be tried under German law and courts.
But I also recognise thatâs probably not going to happen due to the people accused having too much (political/soft) power. Itâs a real dilemma when weâre talking about white collar crime.
Say for example, I do something right now in my home country, which is illegal for me to do in, say Madagascar, but is legal where I live. The thing Iâm doing, Iâm doing from my office in my home country. The effect is in Madagascar - is it then reasonable for Madagascar to ask my home country for extradition?
Itâs absolutely not the same as whatâs happened, but Iâm taking it to an extreme to make a point. International laws are really difficult, especially when extradition of nationals is at play⊠not to invalidate the fact that these people did something very wrong by the way!
Of course Germany wonât extradite we donât extradite nationals to non-EU countries. It can even happen that we donât extradite Americans to the US because they can demonstrate that theyâre likely to face torture in the US, such as isolation cells.
The US really like their prisoners, donât they.
They demand extraditing of prisoners from other countries, but wonât ever extradite to other countries themselves.
Yeah, the second one. Itâs the ones prepared to do shit like that who get promoted in the first place.
.
Damn, assassination for air pollution is new for me.
The rich choose to exert violence on everyone else daily. This is community defense.
Lying about emissions is violence? Like chemical warfare?
Profit over people is violence. If a single person is harmed by your lie, that is violence against humanity.
But they have to be rich, right? Iâm interested in the criteria.
What about a nation that supports a company who produces goods that allow the company to make profit, and the production of the goods harms peopleâs lives (e.g. pollution or poor working conditions in the production country). Somebody should police that nation. Maybe bomb the nation?
In that case the people in charge of both the nation and the corporation need to be removed. The nation can redeem itself once the greed poisoned leaders are dealt with.
But if the citizens didnât fund the companyâs greed, they wouldnât exist. Plenty of examples of things people donât need that they continue to buy, and support unethical business operations leading to harm.
Thatâs some capitalism = commerce bullshit. Capitalism only perverts commerce to its own end of allowing a single person to âownâ everything. Commerce existed for over 10,000 years before capitalism existed, and the father of capitalism, Adam Smith, even said that once capitalism has achieved its goals, which we did in the late 1800s according to Adam Smith, that it would be absolutely imperative to transition to a more âsocially equitableâ [sic] and âsustainableâ form of commerce under a direct democratic framework.
Try using some actual facts rather than feelings in your next reply, also actually read The Theory of Moral Sentiments, and Wealth of Nations. If you are actually literate, you should be able to plow through both texts in two two to three hour readings.
This comment is so pretentious and yet so dumb. Nice job. Capitalism only works if people are spending money. Fact. Thereâs no getting around that. If people elect to spend money on goods they donât need from companies they know are harming people then they are responsible. Should they not be âLuigied?â
No facts, just bluster. You need to read the source material.
Capitalism has served its purpose. Adam Smith would be screaming for revolution. Commerce exists without capitalism. Itâs long since past time for capitalism to be relegated to the dustbin of history.
Also dumb means mute, not ignorant.
Apparently reading doesnât make you smart or enable you to engage in meaningful discourse.
You should check out Antisocial, Borderline, Narcissistic and Histrionic Workbook by Daniel Fox
psychiatry.org/âŠ/what-is-narcissistic-personalityâŠ
No meaningful discourse to be had with brainwashed capitalist scum.
Was this really that hard? If money can buy justice then there is no justice.
Checking in from the US: Now youâre getting it.
GefĂ€ngnisvergnĂŒgen
Anyone have a link without the anti GDRP cookie trackers?
content itself lemmy.world/post/30292632/17298348
Thanks!
Thatâs all we need! We will take back control, restore law and order!
US Republicans be like âANTI-BUSINESS! Enjoying communism?â
Iâm getting a paywall or adblock block or something. Anyone have a less problematic link to the article?
Here you go:
Four former Volkswagen managers have been convicted of fraud for their roles in the so-called Dieselgate scandal, which erupted when U.S. regulators discovered that the company had installed software to cheat emissions tests on millions of VW, Audi, and Porsche vehicles worldwide.
The court sent the former head of diesel engine development behind bars for four years and six months, and the former head of powertrain electronics to two years and seven months. Two others â Volkswagenâs former development director and a former department head â received suspended sentences, according to Der Spiegel and Deutsche Welle reports from the Braunschweig courtroom.
The verdict follows nearly four years of proceedings and adds to the mounting legal troubles for Volkswagen. Prosecutors had asked for prison terms of two to four years, while the defense argued the men were scapegoats. Appeals remain possible.
After being caught cheating in 2015, the company admitted to installing software in its diesel engines that activated emissions controls only during laboratory testing, allowing the vehicles to meet U.S. standards while in real-world driving, the vehicles emitted up to 40 times more pollutants.
The fallout forced CEO Martin Winterkorn to resign, although he denied wrongdoing. U.S. authorities issued an arrest warrant for Winterkorn in 2018, but Germany does not extradite its nationals. His trial in Germany was paused in 2021 due to health issues, but he remains a key figure under investigation.
Meanwhile, the arrest of Audiâs then-CEO Rupert Stadler in 2018 marked a dramatic shift, as German prosecutors expanded their probe into current executives. Stadler was accused of continuing to sell cars with illegal software even after the scandal broke.
Across the Atlantic, two former VW engineers â Oliver Schmidt and James Robert Liang â are already serving prison sentences in the U.S. Schmidt, who once led VWâs environmental office in the U.S., was sentenced to seven years after initially denying guilt but later reaching a plea deal. Liang received 40 months after cooperating with prosecutors.
Currently, German authorities are investigating up to 40 executives and engineers across Volkswagen, Audi, and Porsche, with parallel cases against Daimler (Mercedes) and BMW under way.
OCCRP previously reported on Volkswagenâs 2017 U.S. guilty plea and multibillion-dollar settlement.
The Dieselgate saga has so far cost VW an estimated âŹ33 billion ($37.5 billion) and the legal and financial fallout is far from over.
Thousands of European customers continue to press for compensation, while investigators on both sides of the Atlantic keep pushing for accountability at the highest levels.
If you are at the top of an organisation then you can you be a scapegoat? You are literally in charge. Your only chance is if an employee committed fraud and deliberately hid something from you.
Head of department is middle management. Middle management is certainly the most vulnerable position in situations like this.
The top manager got a nice compensation and very high pension (according to German media ~âŹ1.3 million per year), while the owners (Piech/Porsche family) still earn billions every year.
Top managers do seem to be targeted.
Owners responsibility is interesting. I think the concept of limited liability protects them, but should it? If they actively influenced the policy I donât think it should (but proving that is difficult).
Good. Finally theyâre facing some actual consequences for their actions.
If only also the politicians that decided what the limits should be without any consideration for the real world would face the consequencesâŠ
Not that the VW guys did the right thing, but what other option they had ? Close down and go home ?
I disagree. VW could have crashed their diesel production in favor of hybrids and EVs. Theyâre playing late to the game catch up now and may not survive at all. Putting off something you know is coming - the end of diesel vehicle prevalence - through deception YOU KNOW WILL RESULT IN MILLIONS OF VEHICLES CONTRIBUTING WORSE EMISSIONS BUT BEING REGARDED AS BETTER - thatâs fucking heinous and criminal.
Oh maybe you have an extra biosphere we can slap on to the one being wrecked by CO2? No?
Anyone who knew the truth is complicit in that destruction and weâre only beginning to quantify the harm.
Fine, but aside the fact that everyone lied in this matter, why we should spare the ones that make an absurd law with no ties to the real world and only fueled by ideology ? I repeat, I donât think that what VW did was right.
The hybrids maybe, but that not really solve the problem, even the first hybrids from Toyota had a 1.5 liter gasoline engine.
For a full EVs we are just now at a point where they start to become usable. And the reason is that you need a whole infrastructure around the EV cars, just think about chargers, additional space there to put them, place where you cannot put them and so on.
I agree on that.
Well, from a technical point of view, the diesel engine is cleaner in some way and dirtier in other so I would say that the diesel is not better but also not worse. It only produce a different type of emissions.
And, by the way, the emissionâs limits for a diesel engine in the Euro-X normatives are always way lower then the ones for the gasoline.
Of course not. But on the other hand I am not stupid enough to adhere blindly to an ideology.
So the politicians are the first you need to jail.
ah yes, the silly ideology of breathing.
So how we can call what is behind the âban this and thatâ mentality which is without any real study about the consequences and without any suggestion for alternatives ? Pre-intentional stupidity ?
Look, I am fully aware that what VW (and everyone else) did was a crime and I agree that they must pay. On the oher hand I also fully understand that you cannot change the reality only because you write a law to change it, in this case all the Euro-x normatives about emission levels.
Do you think that it is a silly idelogy to ask that also the people that make silly decision that they will not suffer are asked to pay for the consequences ? Fine, think this way.
Do we really lost the concept that one can agree with something but also see what the problems of that thing are ?
Yes, VW could have switched to hydrid or EV but not in the timeframe they are given.
Not to consider that switching the entire production to hybrid and EV without the necessary infrastructure to use them in the real world is useless, you simply build cars that nobody will buy.
Tokyo banned diesel motors in the late 90s. As far as I know that didnât kill Toyota.
At the same time European car makers started to lobby for particle filters that were supposed to solve everything. The politics who where naive enough to believe them do share responsibility, but not as much as the european auto industry that created this whole situation.
Also, you implies that laws are made by politicians without any intervention of the industries whatsoever. I think you know that it is not how it works.
The real world consequences of keeping fossil fuel cars is much higher than banning all of them.
Is that why my VWAGY and VWAPY have been slowly recovering from their late 2024 slump? Because the old managers were crooks but theyâre out now?
Man, what a wild world.
This thing happened 2009-> and they got caught around 2015. Justice system is slow.
Ah, right then, the European stock market continues to shift up and down beyond any comprehensible logic. I am saying this unironically.
oh no, my VW stocks đ„Č
Before anyone becomes too happy: the postâs title is inaccurate, the two people sent to jail are only middle managers:
<img alt="" src="https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/b6190b51-1174-4a5b-8739-bebf920d9ae4.jpeg">
Whatâs Volkswagenâs org structure like? I wouldnât normally expect a department head to be middle management.
I mean the diesel engine department would probably be quite big for a company like Volkswagen. Each engine type has a team of engineers and a manager.
I⊠I thought a middle manager is any manager whoâs not the very lowest manager, and not the CEO? As in, any manager who has managers above and below them?
I thought middle management was the guy in between the crew and upper management?
Absolute shit stressful job, btw. Never doing that shit again. If you have a heart, that job will kill it.
Good question - I also donât know how clear those definitions are. In my head all managers that are under department heads would be middle, and department heads + C-suite would be upper/senior management. And the subset of upper management that is C-level is, well, C-level.
Think of them more like division heads. Not quite a regular middle manager, but not C-suite.
deleted my happy post bc of this
.
One insanity in the following years was how they thought people still wanted their next generation diesel.
Iâve been working for them in the 2010s with the department to organise the staff car fleet. We ordered many electric vehicles years ahead from production and planned it all around electric vehicles: Charging stations, operating distance, some hybrids for long distance, software to calculate trips etc.
Then a few months before we needed them, they said: We overproduced on the latest diesel generation and canât keep up with the demand for electric vehicles, so we have to sell the ones you ordered. You can either go with a Tesla (for official Volkswagen business trips!) or have the diesel for free.
It felt like there was a hysteria: Decision makers got it in their heads that the âhypeâ for electric vehicles was ideology-driven and not something people with buying power actually wanted today or in the near future. Bit like the republican administration thinking that âwokeâ is our main problem. Meanwhile, huge research and development departments did come up with the electric vehicles they sell today (and fully working hydrogen prototypes you wonât see in a store, just to be safe) and must have been quite frustrated that so few were produced.
.
This sounds like actual impactful consequences and accountability for the rich exploitative asshole executives actually responsible? Did I forget to wake up in the morning?
Letâs go Germany!! Shouldnât be the election to the rule