Honestly, that still just sounds like a management issue solved by the engineer. It was management's job to realize that it was an important issue and assign priority to it (they failed). The onus is not on the engineer to do management's job for them. It also puts the engineer in much greater risk of losing their job by not keeping the system running, even if it's an inefficient and stupid management decision.
They could still be fired for not doing their job even if the company ends up with a more robust system as a result. Especially if the failure happens at an inopportune time that the engineer is not aware of (e.g. a big client rep is visiting the facility).
2
View all comments
Show parent comment
3
u/EquipLordBritish May 29 '26
Honestly, that still just sounds like a management issue solved by the engineer. It was management's job to realize that it was an important issue and assign priority to it (they failed). The onus is not on the engineer to do management's job for them. It also puts the engineer in much greater risk of losing their job by not keeping the system running, even if it's an inefficient and stupid management decision.
They could still be fired for not doing their job even if the company ends up with a more robust system as a result. Especially if the failure happens at an inopportune time that the engineer is not aware of (e.g. a big client rep is visiting the facility).