Darth Vader: “You are in command now, Admiral Plett”
Plett: (nervously) “Thank you, Lord Vader”
Boeing managed to wave enough money to entice Kelly Ortberg to be their new CEO. Surely UHC can do similar.
Ortberg knows he’s there to be the scapegoat. He’ll eat crow in front of the media and Congress. He’ll push layoffs and cost cutting and draw the ire of the unions. When he leaves, the next CEO will point the finger at Ortberg for any remaining problems. And he negotiated a salary to match.
No one shot the Boeing CEO yet.
Every Boeing issue in the history of flight combined haven’t shortened as many lives as insurance CEOs on any given week of the year.
Yeah there’s a mountain of difference between getting publicly chewed out and getting publicly executed
Yet
Ethiopians and Indonesians live too far to be a threat for Boeing senior executives and board of directors
“Golly gee, getting reprimanded that one time sure did stink. Oh well.”
He’ll push layoffs and cost cutting and draw the ire of the unions.
Nope they pay McKinsey to recommend it, then use the excuse that “as CEO I have to do what is best”
If you want to know more about McKinsey ask Pete Butteigig, he was one of their “whiz kids”.
No…greed will prevail
Now how they act might be a different story.
I think we need about two more within the next month to have an impact on CEO risk calculation. Of course the guy is definitely going to get caught if he strikes again.
Cops have one singular mission: protect rich folks. They will pull out stops we’ve never seen before to get this guy if he looks like he won’t stop on his own. He’ll probably get caught anyway, but if he’s smart he’ll take the W and disappear.
Of course, the most likely result isn’t a change of behavior, but having bodyguards be part of the standard CEO compensation package.
Leaders at Allied Universal, which provides security services for 80 percent of Fortune 500 companies, said their phones were “ringing off the hook” on Wednesday with potential clients. Allied covers a wide spectrum of services — including stationing guards outside offices, chauffeuring executives, surveilling their homes and tracking their families.
Protecting a chief executive full time costs roughly $250,000 a year, said Glen Kucera, who runs Allied’s enhanced protection services.
Protecting a chief executive full time cost roughly $250,000 a year
So it costs less than one major life saving surgery then.
$250k a year?
That’s it?
Sounds like it needs to get a bit more expensive.
If assassins started going after the guards, those guards might want more danger money.
For legal reasons, this is an observation not a suggestion.
If I ever wanted to ruin a megacorporation for ruining my life, I’d start going after the lowest wrung of the ladder. Give two warnings and then execute the plan on them. Non-fatal accidents and the like. Warn again. Move on to the next one. Warn them etc. Repeat as long as necessary. Never go for the higher ups that can afford security.
This will probably never happen to me, because I don’t live in the late stage capitalist hell-scape.
My hope is prospective school shooters see praise given to The Adjuster and change their MO so innocent children are spared.
That’s a great perspective! I love it.
1 is an off chance. Two more and their will legit be fear that the poor are rising up to eat the rich.
Imagine holding the title of “CEO of the healthcare company whose CEO got fucking iced last week”
They literally don’t care. They aren’t like us. They don’t care what working class people think. They don’t care if we suffer. They don’t care if they die. We aren’t worth anything to them beyond what they can extort from us.
“I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half.”
–Jay Gould
This statement reflects Gould’s view of exploiting divisions within the labor force to maintain control and suppress labor movements during the Gilded Age. Their attitude since then hasn’t changed, except to become even further entrenched in their apathetic greed.
There were 15 underlings hoping this would happen on a weekly basis for their shot.
To be fair, “president of the country whose president got iced last week” is a common enough job. In fact by murders per capita I heard US president is the most dangerous job in the world.
“In fact” and “I heard” don’t go well together in a sentence. Unless you’re saying it’s a fact that you’ve heard it of course.
Also, sorry for the pedantry.
Also, just to give a source, 8 US presidents have died during office, which results in a mortality rate of about 18%. That is of course way higher than any other job.
Fair point. I suppose internally I meant “in fact” as a shorthand for, “here’s an interesting thing that complements or counters what we were talking about,” and “I heard” to qualify my (lack of) certainty, without going into detail about where I got the information and quite how trustworthy it might or might not be. (Incidentally, it was on QI.)
Thanks for the source :-)
No, some other psychopath will just demand the company provide 24/7 private security and take the job with a raise. Then (likely he) will just kill more people to pay for it.
So many CEOs on LinkedIn calling for more security for executives. None of them have the self awareness to think “is my company doing anything that would warrant such a response?”. Maybe stop being evil fucks?
I’ll take the job. But, fair warning, a lot of people will receive free healthcare.
Yea… That is what is the most funny. A CEO that knows how to play his cards could easily turn the system around and still have a profit… Like of 30% instead of 98%…
Nah, money is money… but they’ll probably need to include a security detail in the package.
Passed on to the insurance premiums
No, and they will find ways to screw users more. Corpos are not anyone’s friends.
Countries have dead leaders that get replaced all the time, what makes corporations replacing CEOs any different?
Trouble? No, but they’ll raise the compensation to compensate for risk, which will only attract greedier more sadistic candidates.
Or…
They’ll hire a woman to clean up the mess (possibly at reduced compensation), because that’s the virtue signaling what corporations do when they are in a tight spot. Then, once she has turned things back around, they’ll swap a man back in and give him a bonus for all her hard work.
Companies have plans in place for continuance, so I’m sure they have a person that can take over in an event like this, even if it’s just temporary until the board of directors chooses a new ceo
This is correct. There’s absolutely a SVP/EVP or board member ready to take up an interim role while they work their way through the process of a new CEO.
Not if this was an isolated incident. If it turns out to be something else then maybe.
I sure as shit wouldn’t take that job.
I would, then I’d just shitpost on LinkedIn about not doing evil things until they fire me for not being evil.
Golden parachute here I come. Honestly, this was on them, they clearly don’t do enough background checks.
I love the idea of somehow becoming CEO of such a company, then working tirelessly to make it honest and transparent and good for both employees and customers.
Of course they’d never hire me, even if I was qualified.
Contrary to popular belief, CEOs aren’t necessary for a company to run, but they do maximize the profits while they’re there
They’ll just keep a security detail. It won’t even be a consideration. They’ll just do it, and not even care that it happened.
No, someone is jumping for joy at the promotion.
