this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2026
1239 points (98.4% liked)

Work Reform

17598 readers
238 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] realitaetsverlust@piefed.zip -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That's where I will disagree a bit. "Owners" usually have a CEO or something similar to run the company in their stead. Imagine you employ someone, he fucks up big time and you go to prison, despite having done nothing wrong. That's horrendous. That's like hiring a tax accountant, he fucks up and you go to prison for it ... oh wait, that's how it works in many countries, but anyways, that's fucking shit and shouldn't be a thing.

If the owner has had any influence on the company that have led to this decision, he should absolutely get punished aswell. But if he had nothing to do with it, nah. I feel like that would be cruel and unjust.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

These guys are killing people. It's like employing a psychopathic security guard who shoots people at best, or playing dumb about hiring a hit man at worst. Insulating owners from the consequences of their choices has been horrendous.

The pic above is criminal negligence, and the CEO was hired to do it.

[–] realitaetsverlust@piefed.zip 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

and the CEO was hired to do it.

Yes, and the CEO is hired to keep an eye on everything that happens in the company. That's his job. Not the owners at this point. The owner doesn't tell the CEO to employ psychopathic people (unless he does excplicity, ofc). He tells the CEO: "Here's your monthly salary, don't fuck it up" and that's it. Every further responsibility is with the CEO.

Insulating owners from the consequences of their choices

But hiring the wrong people isn't the owners choice. The owner doesn't make any choices anymore, otherwise he would be the CEO and not employ someone to run the business in their stead.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Hiring the CEO is the owners choice. They're choosing to hire literal psychopaths. They have every resource to research this person first. It's incredibly charitable to even call them criminally negligent because they are not sorry at all.

[–] realitaetsverlust@piefed.zip -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I see that you're not trying to have a fair argument, you just want to hate. That's fine, but there's no point in having a genuine discussion with you about this topic. Have a nice day.

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago

If we're hurling insults, then it appears you're simping for your own oppressors.