GM Corporate Culture Silenced Whistleblower Over Fuel-Leak Recall

Cameron Aubernon
by Cameron Aubernon

To say General Motors has a failure to communicate among itself and with the outside is an understatement that grows with each passing day, especially in light of how it treated a whistleblower in 2003 over its handling of a recall regarding fuel leaks in the automaker’s line of compact SUVs.

Bloomberg Businessweek recounts the story of GM employee Courtland Kelley, who began his career out of community college in 1983, then became a safety inspector five years later for what would become GM’s Global Delivery Survey, auditing vehicles in rail yards for minor problems before leaving for the showroom floor. The survey would grow in scope over time under the hand of Bill McAleer, reporting more serious safety issues such as tie rods falling off, improperly attached brakes and, in the case of the Chevrolet TrailBlazer/GMC Envoy/Oldsmobile Bravada, fuel leaks.

Unfortunately for both McAleer and Kelley on separate occasions, GM not only didn’t consider the seriousness of their findings beyond a small recall of the affected SUVs — made only after a GM exec experienced the leak first-hand on the highway — but made every effort to silence them when they sought whistleblower protection in their individual suits against the automaker for corporate negligence. McAleer was laid-off from GM in 2004, while Kelley was eventually placed in a dead-end position meant to keep him from finding “every problem that GM might have.”

Prior to this final reassignment, Kelley was made brand quality manager and given a fellow employee named Steven Oakley to handle GM’s compact offerings at the time, the Chevrolet Cavalier and Pontiac Sunfire. Oakley took his place in 2004 in time for the growing concerns over the Cobalt’s ignition switch. On three occasions, he told the team led by independent investigator Anton Valukas “that he felt pressure to describe something as a convenience issue rather than a safety problem,” citing the fate of his predecessor at the hands of the company’s senior execs. Oakley attempted to address the Cobalt’s issues in a draft of a service bulletin, using language that was verbotten by GM’s product investigators.

As for Kelley, GM claimed in statement made to the publication that they would “reexamine [his] employment claims as well as the safety concerns that he has, and that’s part of our redoubled effort to ensure customer safety.”

Cameron Aubernon
Cameron Aubernon

Seattle-based writer, blogger, and photographer for many a publication. Born in Louisville. Raised in Kansas. Where I lay my head is home.

More by Cameron Aubernon

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 23 comments
  • APaGttH APaGttH on Jun 18, 2014

    Weren't Ford Explorers rolling over and killing their drivers and occupants in 2003 and Ford was dragging every foot possible and blaming everyone else at the time. I mean I get it. It sucks. It's inexcusable. But this is 11 years and a bailout and a bankruptcy ago. Many of the cast of characters involved in this are gone. Heck, many of the vehicles in question here have quietly gone to the crusher at this point. I guess people can wrap themselves in the warm fuzzy blanket of schadenfreude of digging up bones on issues from over a decade ago and somehow trying to pin them on a new CEO, who by all outward appearances is handling the situation better than any of her predecessors, and is also navigating the corporate and Capitol Hill politics along the way. Mary Barra was handed a big stinking bag of you know what and more skeletons in the closet than the swimming pool in the end scene of Poltergeist...but it's kind of odd for the "I told you so" crowd to be patting themselves on the back on stuff that is a decade plus old - and that the old management made every attempt to sweep under the rug. Technically, and by bankruptcy law let's remember - GM could stick two middle fingers in the air and say, "not our problem, that was the old GM." If you don't think that happens in massive liability cases, your either blind or naivete. Look at how many companies wormed their way out of asbestos liability and toxic waste dumps - for one tiny example.

    • Budda-Boom Budda-Boom on Jun 18, 2014

      Actually it was the entire first generation of Ford Explorers. 1991-2001...and 2-doors/SportTracs were worse than the 4-doors. From 2002 forward they had IRS and were safe. Wife just bought an '11 Equinox LTZ and we're very impressed. Similar to comments I've heard from others about GM vehicles of the last 5-6 years. Vastly improved from the days when ex-Proctor & Gamble people were running amok in the Tubes.

  • JEFFSHADOW JEFFSHADOW on Jun 18, 2014

    My 2006 Buick Rainier CXL is built upon the GMT 360 platform and has the 4.2 I6 with AWD. What to say, it's another fantastic GM vehicle from Pennsylvania enjoying the California climate! Essentially Buick got the Bravada/Rainier after GM axed Oldsmobile. 39,000 miles in 8 years and no problems at all.

    • PrincipalDan PrincipalDan on Jun 18, 2014

      Least ticked vehicle in America Buick Rainier. Of course that has more to do with the average demographic than being invisible to cops, although I was sorely tempted to purchase a V8 AWD Rainier and test out that theory of police invisibility.

  • Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh A prelude is a bad idea. There is already Acura with all the weird sport trims. This will not make back it's R&D money.
  • Analoggrotto I don't see a red car here, how blazing stupid are you people?
  • Redapple2 Love the wheels
  • Redapple2 Good luck to them. They used to make great cars. 510. 240Z, Sentra SE-R. Maxima. Frontier.
  • Joe65688619 Under Ghosn they went through the same short-term bottom-line thinking that GM did in the 80s/90s, and they have not recovered say, to their heyday in the 50s and 60s in terms of market share and innovation. Poor design decisions (a CVT in their front-wheel drive "4-Door Sports Car", model overlap in a poorly performing segment (they never needed the Altima AND the Maxima...what they needed was one vehicle with different drivetrain, including hybrid, to compete with the Accord/Camry, and decontenting their vehicles: My 2012 QX56 (I know, not a Nissan, but the same holds for the Armada) had power rear windows in the cargo area that could vent, a glass hatch on the back door that could be opened separate from the whole liftgate (in such a tall vehicle, kinda essential if you have it in a garage and want to load the trunk without having to open the garage door to make room for the lift gate), a nice driver's side folding armrest, and a few other quality-of-life details absent from my 2018 QX80. In a competitive market this attention to detai is can be the differentiator that sell cars. Now they are caught in the middle of the market, competing more with Hyundai and Kia and selling discounted vehicles near the same price points, but losing money on them. They invested also invested a lot in niche platforms. The Leaf was one of the first full EVs, but never really evolved. They misjudged the market - luxury EVs are selling, small budget models not so much. Variable compression engines offering little in terms of real-world power or tech, let a lot of complexity that is leading to higher failure rates. Aside from the Z and GT-R (low volume models), not much forced induction (whether your a fan or not, look at what Honda did with the CR-V and Acura RDX - same chassis, slap a turbo on it, make it nicer inside, and now you can sell it as a semi-premium brand with higher markup). That said, I do believe they retain the technical and engineering capability to do far better. About time management realized they need to make smarter investments and understand their markets better.
Next