Perth / Western Australia

So, my point is a question about whether employees hiding behind the 'corporate veil' of legal protection who have taken actions to the detriment of others aren't held to account the same way they should be, if they had taken those actions in their personal lives.

Workers who take positive actions, or what could loosely be described as not negative in the aggregate, in their professional lives are often, not always, recognised for their actions in the form of pay, bonuses, time off, promotions, public endorsements such as local business awards and more.

While the positive work they have performed for a company is retained and owned by the company, the reputation and rewards for that work go with them personally.

What i'm questioning is whether the protection of the corporate veil has gone so far that the approbium for negative actions isn't attached to individuals personally. And whether that is a detriment to our society.

IT could work as an example, in the privacy space. There have been some questionable ethical actions there. Problem is, as you rightly say the massive changes, largely positive, to our society by IT has sort of swamped these negative actions for the majority of people.