• snooggums@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 hours ago

    If they are told they make more money harming you, CEOs literally have a legal responsibility to choose that option.

    No they fucking don’t.

    They choose to do so out of greediness the vast majority of the time, but it isn’t a legal obligation.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      And let’s not forget that most significant forms of “harm” are illegal in the first place. The comment above you makes it sound like any minute now, Nabisco might decide it’s more profitable for them to roll out to your house and kill you.

    • granolabar@kbin.melroy.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      You are actually not wrong but if they dont obey BoD, it is the shed.

      Bigger question here if this “simplification” is a valid tactic to communicate the message.

      Theoretically BoD could sue the CEO, but i dont think that ever happened in this context… Only in cases of fraud, ie stealing company assets