Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the problem of all the employees (and potentially customers) of the company being plundered. They have no say in the matter, and given that the lender can probably absorb the loss without, you know, missing mortgage payments or losing health insurance, I would absolutely argue it's not just their problem. You can certainly hold the opinion that "it's just business" but it feels like an unnecessary part of busine…
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of the US employment model. Businesses can do all sorts of dumb things that end up making them unable to continue to invest in employees. The check against that is the greedy owners. Regulations designed to ensure businesses never take risky bets lest they have to lay people off would be a nightmare of unintended consequences and surely in aggregate hurt employment.
I was just responding to OP who said that PE plundering via debt loading is only the lender's problem when things don't work out, and I assert that it is not.
Employees often pay a much more impactful price when PE-driven cuts occur (whether by design or because the plan failed).