261–270 of 611 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can not punish someone for a crime they didn't commit and had no knowledge of. That is ridiculous and a perversion of justice.
Prime counterexample: Sarbanes-Oxley. Yes, you can punish people for failing to comply with legal obligations, even if they had no specific knowledge of the obligation not being met.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Actually, it's the same point. We are currently trying to punish entities (with fines), and it's ineffective. We should move back to punishing people more, and moving back the responsibility to people, instead of pretending companies are people, and therefore responsible.
But it's such a strange angle. Should we stop companies having bank accounts in order to do that? Who cares if they have a bank account?
- Make them more liable.
- Make the people behind them more liable.
- Give companies limitations. What would be the equivalent of jail for a company ? Unable to sale for x years ? How long a company should be able to exist ?
Right now there is way too much power and shielding at the same time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can not punish someone for a crime they didn't commit and had no knowledge of. That is ridiculous and a perversion of justice.
And the level of risk the CEO/C Suite would have to take on would be insane. Who would want to be in charge of an aerospace company if there was a real risk that you'd get charged with murder if you don't have an almost psychic insight into the technical decisions of your company? There'd be a filtering effect where the best and brightest avoid industries where we need them to be. That standard would likely reduce th…
You say this like it's crazy, but we literally already do this with Doctors and Surgeons, it's not as tricky as you make it sound.
There's no valid reason that CEO/C-Suite folks get to forever escape any responsibility and accountability.
"Whatever the reasons (market pressures, rushing processes, inadequate certifications, fear of being fired, or poor project management), Leveson’s insights are being ignored. For example, after the first fatal Boeing 737 Max flight, why was the entire fleet not grounded indefinitely? Or not grounded after an Indonesian safety committee report uncovered multiple failures? Or not grounded when an off-duty pilot helped…
Our governmental methods of punishment for corporations strike me as lacking. This seems similar to Wells Fargo, where ok, the company was fined, sued, made to pay restitution (somewhat) to victims. But underlying it all, the culture and incentives at the company that produced the situation didn't get fundamentally changed. Which often perpetuates across specific leaders, boards, and is a part of what a company is --…
Individuals need to be held accountable. Having the company plead guilty helps literally no one. Who were the relevant board members? The CEO? The COO. These people need to be charged.
Our governmental methods of punishment for corporations strike me as lacking. This seems similar to Wells Fargo, where ok, the company was fined, sued, made to pay restitution (somewhat) to victims. But underlying it all, the culture and incentives at the company that produced the situation didn't get fundamentally changed. Which often perpetuates across specific leaders, boards, and is a part of what a company is --…
You put in place an incentive to not do these things. Corporate executives and boards do these things because they're incentivized to do so through stock price-based compensation. Great risk should come with great reward. We no longer assign risk to most executives at publicly-traded, multinational corporations, but the reward is still great. I'll leave it to your imagination to figure out what the risk should be, bu…
In today's culture, I often hear C-suiters talking about how much "risk" they are taking, to justify their outrageous salaries and stock holdings, but I almost never see them pay much, in the way of penalties, except for the very smallest, most "raw" companies, where they have, literally, sunk their entire net worth into the endeavor.
It seems that, once a company has reached a certain threshold, the only real "risk" that executives experience, is that they'll only get a 5% bonus, instead of 30%. So, only $5M, as opposed to $30M.
AUTHORITEH: "Put out your hand!"
GUILTEH: "OK"
AUTHORITEH: "Bad Executive! Bad, bad, Executive! Don't let it happen again! See you at the party on Saturday?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that finding the people responsible can be extremely hard, so you have to go against the corporation itself. Punishing a corporation is easy, but the government hates doing it for obvious reasons. It means ruining something which is useful to you and punishing tens of thousands of completely innocent people, with inevitable layoffs. What Boeing really needs is a complete change in management culture, a…
This is such a "this looks tough, I don't feel like doing it" take. Who is responsible? As others have said, the structure of a corporation defines that. If person A has to do what person B says, then B is responsible. If B "didn't know", then B has been lacking. It also avoids sacking the "innocent people" and it sets an example for other companies. The greedy corporate culture really needs a bit of check-and-balanc…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The problem is that finding the people responsible can be extremely hard > What Boeing really needs is a complete change in management culture Who is ultimately responsible for management at a company though? The CEO and the other C-level people. This isn't really the daunting difficult problem you make it out to be: the buck stops at the C-suite. Who else could possibly be ultimately responsible??
You can not punish someone for a crime they didn't commit and had no knowledge of. That is ridiculous and a perversion of justice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The power of having a bank account, of moving funds around, of signing contracts, etc. Before that, companies had to have everything attached to a human, not the company. So the human was responsible. You are so used to it that you think it's normal, but it's not. It's a concept we have created: that companies can act in their own name, like they are actually something concrete. But when we did that, we failed to giv…
> The power of having a bank account, of moving funds around, of signing contracts, etc. I don't think companies can sign contracts. What is the power of having a bank account and moving funds around? It's still people deciding to do this, and doing it, just under a group name. What power? > Something that doesn't exist, a concept, enjoy many things a concrete human can do, but won't pay nearly the same consequences…