Only if the buck can run them down, when they can afford to outrun every worker between the buck and being held accountable for their decisions. Meta’s attempting to claim that leadership did not wield management authority to have torrenting occur because if the company is just operated by adhoc cowboy devops, then management is never held liable for mismanagement.
2024 - A CrowdStrike employee was pressured to push an update straight to prod. 90% of Windows installations were taken offline, but executives dodged any responsibility, and even got the shareholder lawsuit dismissed. Angry shareholders might have been told to blame the employee.
2015 - Volkswagen executives came up with "a rogue engineer" managed to make every VW diesel in the US violate emissions standards, while faking it during emissions testing.
It’s one of the generally stated justifications. It’s only partly understood, mostly because a lot of us with eyes see execs have no consequences for their demands and seeing the shit roll down hill.
And I’m even willing to include the fake “X executive has decided to move on to newer and greater things and we wish him well” lie to save face for firing an executive as consequences. I’m referring to the straight up, we’re blaming a peon, my income stays the same or goes up no consequences
Going to go out on a limb here, but isn't one of the generally understood justifications for exec pay being so high is that the buck stops with them?
Only if the buck can run them down, when they can afford to outrun every worker between the buck and being held accountable for their decisions. Meta’s attempting to claim that leadership did not wield management authority to have torrenting occur because if the company is just operated by adhoc cowboy devops, then management is never held liable for mismanagement.
2024 - A CrowdStrike employee was pressured to push an update straight to prod. 90% of Windows installations were taken offline, but executives dodged any responsibility, and even got the shareholder lawsuit dismissed. Angry shareholders might have been told to blame the employee.
2015 - Volkswagen executives came up with "a rogue engineer" managed to make every VW diesel in the US violate emissions standards, while faking it during emissions testing.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/10/volkswagen-pulls...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41015459
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19621840
I mean, it's not like you actually believe that, do you?
It’s one of the generally stated justifications. It’s only partly understood, mostly because a lot of us with eyes see execs have no consequences for their demands and seeing the shit roll down hill.
And I’m even willing to include the fake “X executive has decided to move on to newer and greater things and we wish him well” lie to save face for firing an executive as consequences. I’m referring to the straight up, we’re blaming a peon, my income stays the same or goes up no consequences
Not in recent US history, no
Classic CEO behavior