> Which is the same as killing the company. If the executives are going to be permanently jobless and destitute, then there's a strong temptation to try to cover things up, which is the worst case scenario for the Navy.

My response might be harsh but tough shit for the company. If the company made a choice to fraud the government, then they should be accountable for their decision. The board of directors is fully responsible for every action of their company including their employees actions as the employee are in capacity and representative of the company. If the employee went rogue/lazy then it is the company due diligence to ensure that every data is verified and correct as the company is still responsible for everything.

They simply can fire the employee and could keep fudging the data. Whelps the company did it again, gee whiz. They can fire the another employee and say it is all good. This mentality is why companies are pushing the boundaries with the governments and still can blame on their employee and get away from the accountability.

I think the point of the post above is that if a company faces a death-or-lie scenario, they're incentivized to put as much effort as possible into covering things up. Whereas if there's some leniency, they're more incentivized to cooperate and be forward about things.

In that case drop criminal charges left and right. It's still illegal to commit treason right?

We do drop criminal charges left and right in order to bring forth information. We have whistleblower protections; we have immunity in exchange for testimony.

The world isn’t black and white.

That level of accountability is very expensive however - you might find yourself wishing for the good old days when government toilet seats only cost $600.

> lazy rogue employee

Are we talking about the same individual? The one named in the article is "Director of Metallurgy". When you're in a position like that, you represent the company, especially for work orders.