Subject:
|
Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 26 Jan 2000 20:53:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2400 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
> James Brown wrote in message ...
> > How do you justify person X being responsible for person Y's actions?
> > Boiled down, that's exactly what you are claiming here.
> >
> > To put it another way, you are saying that lacking evidence to the
> > contrary, the CEO of any given corporation is guilty of any crimes commited
> > by anyone in that organization. That places the burden of proof in the wrong
> > direction - Guilt is assumed, and people have to prove their innocence. How
> > does that jive with "people are essentially good"?
>
> First off, the CEO is only responsible for the activities of his employees
> which are reasonably related to their job. If one of your employees is
> beating his wife at home, the CEO is not responsible.
I didn't mention that aspect, I took it as a given. Sorry.
> If the employee just left a company party drunk, the CEO is probably
> responsible (this will hinge on how the company was involved in promoting the
> party, a bunch of guys who exchange e-mails at work to go out to a bar after
> work doesn't count, if the secretary invites you to the boss's house, I would
> say that is a work related function).
Yoiks! So if I go to my boss' house, tanked to the gills but very good at
hiding it, he's responsible when I kill someone on the way home?
Maybe I'm reading this completely wrong, but this is how it comes across: "If
we can't actually find out who's fault this is, we'll blame that guy."
> If the CEO is not responsible for EVERYTHING done by the company, what the
> heck is he responsible for?
Anything he can be proven to have a hand in.
> Now in many cases, the employee will be able to be held fully responsible,
> and there won't be much for the CEO to worry about.
>
> Also the EXTENT to which the CEO is held responsible will depend on
> circumstances. We aren't going to be charging the CEO with murder just
> because an employee blew his stack and shot someone in the office. But if it
> turns out the company didn't do it's usual background check, or the company
> ignored several obvious warning signals, or anything else which hints that
> the company should have been able to prevent the murder, then the company
> (and ultimately the CEO) is going to face the possibility of a civil
> judgement (and if the situation was extreme, possibly even a criminal
> judgement).
And again, I don't have a problem with people getting charged with things they
are SHOWN to be responsible for. What I hear people saying is (in relation to
the above) "we have investigating this employee snapping, and can find no
single discernable cause, therefore, it's the CEO's fault."
> Perhaps it would be easier if we dealt with some scenarios. Why don't you
> lay out a scenario which you feel you can justify why the CEO should not be
> responsible (and you believe after reading the above, that I will unjustly
> hold the CEO responsible), and lets see if we agree with you. You might even
> try several. Note that you will need to give a fair amount of detail (try
> not to assume too much - note that in my examples above, I have probably
> assumed too much, so feel free to debate those scenarios also).
I put together some case studies, but in the interests of not offending Cnews,
I'll start a new thread with them.
James
http://www.shades-of-night.com/lego/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
| James Brown wrote in message ... (...) are (...) Boiled (...) contrary, (...) in (...) direction - (...) First off, the CEO is only responsible for the activities of his employees which are reasonably related to their job. If one of your employees (...) (25 years ago, 26-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
