03-17-2019, 09:25 AM
(03-16-2019, 11:59 PM)trainspotter139 Wrote:(03-16-2019, 06:17 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: I want to say that if they had been more open about sharing information in general, this wouldn’t be an issue. Unfortunately, I don’t actually believe that. Muckrakers ’gonna muckrake.
This kind of information is always advised to remain private even after a negotiated settlement is reached as releasing it can undercut legal cases. However, what usually ends up happening in vehicle procurement disputes for late deliveries is the compensation is paid in additional vehicles and the spare parts to go with them so I don't necessarily expect any money to be changing hands.
By “in general” I meant about progress all along — e.g. if they had actually done what they said they would do and provide a monthly update on vehicle status, and if they actually shared anything about what specifically was happening in testing (not to mention the various minor fixes that have been done in the last year or so). Not necessarily details about disputes with suppliers.
But as I said, I don’t really believe that appropriate openness would have headed off all the attempts to construct scandal.