sub
Well-Known Member
It's not the person who made the mistake this week that should be fired. It is the person who made the series of mistakes 2 years ago that made today's problems possible that should be fired.That's a great way to make sure you can never keep good employees. Firing someone for making an honest mistake is a great way to make sure you have no employees or worse ones than the one you got rid of. No one else is going to wind up working for you either because they will quit after getting burned out worrying constantly about being fired for the first slip up they make.
If this was willful and deliberate then yes fire that person. If the person responsible for this has a documented history of carelessness then yeah fired them. What you really should want is Wassym to figure out a policy and put a procedure in place to make sure this never happens again. Maybe separate the completed updates to a dedicated terminal and only update from there, or to develop updates on a virtual server and only move them to the real one after testing is done. Whatever, I'm not a developer so I couldn't say exactly.
What I do know is this, people make mistakes. The job of good management is to write policy and train staff on procedures so that these mistakes never happen again. That way next time the ONLY way to push a bad update would be by disregarding safeguards and that would justify insta-firing someone.
I'm not mad that someone upload the wrong file, or someone making a type-o in their coding. I am mad that Rivian doesn't have a process that prevents those sort of mistakes from disabling thousands of customer vehicles. It shouldn't be possible for anyone at Rivian, even RJ, to go live with an update that isn't tested. Not just via a policy, the server software should refuse to deliver it to customer vehicles until the server has verified that it was able to successfully deliver and install the update to a certain number of company test vehicles. And vehicles should be able to automatically recover from a failed update by reverting to a backup.
I would be shocked if this sort of problem was not anticipated long ago and some manager rejected it as too much time/effort to address. That's the person who should be fired.
Sponsored
Last edited:
