"It really feels like the people in power want to be kings. Historically, that doesn't work out for kings..."
  • luciferofastora@feddit.orgEnglish
    51·
    3 months ago

    Because the executives are carrying them out (or instructing others in carrying them out) and thus complicit. By rights, they should be objecting to those decisions and refusing to do (or order) unethical or unconscionable things.

    • PabloSexcrowbar@piefed.socialEnglish
      3·
      3 months ago

      Ok, let’s say a ceo objects to the boards instructions. They’ll fire that CEO and hire another one that’ll listen. The problem persists.

      • luciferofastora@feddit.orgEnglish
        1·
        3 months ago

        Then it would be the new CEO’s duty to likewise object to unethical instructions.

        Mind, I’m not saying the board shouldn’t be held responsible. I’m saying the CEO is still complicit, even if he’s “just following orders”.