it merged with competitor mcdonald douglas.ith two very different business models. >> the merger was all about transforming our successful culture and business model into the same business model that mcdonald douglas used unsuccessfully. >> you basically shortchange engineering, stop doing product development - you run the business for crash. >> the new boeing moved the headquarters from seattle, the only home it knew, to chicago. it began slashing investment in research, in order to cut costs. and maximise wall street returns. >> i felt it was wrongs, i felt it was going to take the company in the wrong direction. and i thought that quality would suffer. and the integrity of the product would suffer. i feel that that legacy, history and competence has been hijacked by a bunch of corporate thugs. >> by 2003 it was time to launch a new plane. but boeing's new board was reluctant to invest the billions needed. >> the board made it clear they wanted the plane made for less money, they wanted it made for $5 billion. they wanted par

we certainly remember the airal jeer accident which was a mcdonald douglas aircraft similar in size. disappeared over north africa. again, like this situation, the pilot asked to deviate around severe weather. in that case the airal jeer case the aircraft broke up in flight and nobody survived. we don't know whether or not this aircraft was destroyed in flight or made it to the surface. and, you know we can only hope that we should be able to find it within a matter of certainly hours -- well probably a day or so. clearly surface vessels would be great. they also have radar. if the aircraft did make it to the surface intact and floating it should be detectible on maritime radar. but we're talking about probably a matter of days if it broke up. they'll be looking for debris obviously. >> and what kind of information can you get now? this is 738 local time. obviously the sun has gone down. it is dark. they will be using ships with the powerful lights. what kind of information can you learn? >> we'll send out a notice to mariners to everybody that is sailing. it may will be that not nec

isn't that the way it's always been, successful business -- >> mcdonald douglas, nfl, wall to wall unionunionization levels are down, not because workers are leaving the union, but because union jobs are being shipped overseas by these trade deals and because of employer avoidance of the laws that's supposed to keep workers free to join a union. >> it's not just a number, but the percent of workers as far as union participation is down, so you can't tell me, it's because workers have moved overseas, it's because they're leaving. >> i do worry about to the idea that these businesses they pay a lot of money for a mcdonald's franchise, and they are being attacked because the real target is the mcdonald's parent corporation. how does that work out for the worker? >> not at all, because when you pay workers a living wage, you get a stable motivated workforce, you're not continually having people leave, and retrain people. under george w. bush, found 30,000 workers a year were fired for trying to join or form a union. and that's under the nlrb. >> we're going to have to leave it here. but i th

mcdonald douglas-80. the pilot requested deviation in weather. the pilot broke apart and they lost everybody onboard. it's very difficult -- in certain parts of the world, i'm assuming that these pilots were relying on their onboard radar. we all know that air liners have a radar set aboard and of course we know that weather does present a real threat as in the air alger case in july but turbulence, the rain itself can affect the performance. you've got lightning and also hail. so if this guy -- this pilot, i'm assuming it's a guy, is asking to deviate around weather. he's probably seeing something on his onboard radar set. here is the problem with onboard radar. you only see the first curtain of water for those of us who have used this, you can't see what's behind the curtain if you can follow what i'm trying to say. sometimes you're not flying blind. the radar is very helpful but you're trying to figure out what altitude, what route will keep you away from the main rain which is what the radar is seeing but of course you also have turbulence, y

helpful to differentiate between the direct claim of discrimination versus proven through the mcdonald douglasframework. in order to have a direct claim, what you have got to show is the employer offers an accommodation to a significant class of employees and that accommodation fails the test i described earlier. we think that is most cases and the kinds of examples for example, you have two issues there. you cannot make a direct case. you may have an explanation for that accommodation that would take it outside of the source with no liability. and with respect to that there is a second point to be made that person may as will be in a different job category. >> but to give the start to examples of idiosyncratic when a pregnant woman says that is not the same thing that is the isolated examples that could be clearing in the discriminatory. >> i guess where i would say with the idiosyncratic difference to show the accommodation was granted not on the basis of criteria then to find there is no violation. >> i use that idiosyncratic example so what i use it to illustrate that employers have class'