This is a classic workplace tension I've seen many times! Operations wants to keep production running at all costs, while engineering wants to prevent catastrophic failures. Here's how I'd approach it:

First, recognize that both sides have valid concerns. Operations is measured on uptime and output, so downtime feels like failure. Engineering is measured on reliability and safety, so unexpected breakdowns feel like failure.

The key is to move from emotional arguments to data-driven discussions. Start by gathering historical data: How many hours of downtime have we had from unexpected failures? What's the cost of emergency repairs vs. scheduled maintenance? How much production is actually lost during planned vs. unplanned downtime?

Then, propose a pilot program. Instead of arguing about philosophy, suggest testing both approaches on different equipment or during different shifts. Track the results objectively. This turns a political battle into an experiment.

Also, look for compromise solutions. Can preventive maintenance be done during natural breaks in production? Can you implement predictive maintenance that uses sensors to detect issues before they cause failures, minimizing downtime?

Finally, get leadership involved to align on business priorities. Are we optimizing for short-term output or long-term reliability? Once everyone agrees on the business goals, the technical approach becomes clearer.

Remember, this isn't about who's right - it's about what's best for the business. Frame it that way, and you'll navigate the politics much more effectively!