Subject:
|
Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 27 Jan 2000 18:37:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2337 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Frank Filz wrote:
> >
> > The point I see constantly getting missed, and maybe I've not made it well
> > enough (Larry, help me if I'm confused here), is that while the CEO is
> > ultimately responsible, he also has the option of making an appropriate
> > response to whatever problem is at hand, and avoiding a personal lawsuit or
> > a criminal trial.
>
> I think you're doing fine. We seem to be getting forced into an invalid
> either-or trap.
>
> Your opposition is taking the "Either the CEO is personally liable for
> everything or no one is" tack, it seems to me. And that's just not so.
No, actually. Try "Either the CEO is personally liable for everything or the
company is." I have no problems with the concept of a group of people being
responsible, as a group, for what they do.
> Companies that make mistakes without being negligent, own up to it, and
> do everything they can to rectify them are going to do just fine in
> libertopia. Yes, they'll have to pay some damages but they've already
> shown (if we stick to the examples James posed) that they stand ready to
> do so.
>
> Putting the CEO in jail is a last resort that one uses to get the
> attention of a seriously malfeasant corporate administration.
And I would say that if you are dealing with a "seriously malfeasant corporate
administration" then all jailing a CEO is going to do is make them fire the
CEO, and keep on being malfeasant without him.
Now if you're advocating punishing the CEO when he doesn't enact the court-
ordered restitution, *THAT'S* a completely difference kettle of fish.
James
http://www.shades-of-night.com/lego/
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
| James Brown wrote in message ... (...) corporate (...) Well, you may ultimately have to jail more that the CEO. I wish I could remember more. I seem to remember a recent case where a company officer was jailed because the company wouldn't do what (...) (24 years ago, 27-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
| (...) I think you're doing fine. We seem to be getting forced into an invalid either-or trap. Your opposition is taking the "Either the CEO is personally liable for everything or no one is" tack, it seems to me. And that's just not so. Companies (...) (24 years ago, 27-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
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
