Class-action lawsuit reveals spirit aerosystems alerted to quality failures just weeks before aircraft incident

In a startling revelation, the manufacturer responsible for the door plug that blew out mid-air on an Alaska Airlines plane had been forewarned about ‘excessive defects’ just weeks before the incident, according to a class-action lawsuit filed against Spirit AeroSystems.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) swiftly grounded all 171 737 MAX 9 planes operated by US airlines following the alarming incident on 5th January, where a door plug blowout resulted in a gaping hole mid-flight. The aircraft, en route from Oregon, had to make an emergency return due to the sudden pressure drop.

A class-action lawsuit filed on 19th December, just weeks before the incident, accused Spirit AeroSystems of ‘sustained quality failures’ in its products. The suit, representing investors and incorporating employee claims, detailed ‘widespread’ problems within the company, including ‘foreign object debris,’ ‘missing fasteners,’ ‘peeling paint,’ and ‘poor skin quality.’

The lawsuit alleged that Spirit AeroSystems prioritized ‘production numbers and short-term financial outcomes over product quality,’ leading to a culture of ‘constant quality failures.’ An email cited in the complaint had flagged an ‘excessive amount of defects.’

While the specific issues raised in the lawsuit did not pertain to door plugs, it shed light on severe and persistent quality failures at Spirit AeroSystems. Boeing had reportedly placed the company on probation for multiple years due to these concerns.

Spirit AeroSystems responded to the lawsuit, stating, “Spirit strongly disagrees with the assertions made by plaintiffs in the amended complaint and intends to vigorously defend against the claims.”

Boeing, which has not directly addressed the lawsuit, reiterated its commitment to ensuring that every Boeing airplane meets design specifications and adheres to the highest safety and quality standards.

As investigations into the Alaska Airlines incident unfold, the lawsuit adds another layer to the ongoing scrutiny of manufacturing practices within the aerospace industry.