Darth Vader: “You are in command now, Admiral Plett”

Plett: (nervously) “Thank you, Lord Vader”

  • Vanth@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    108
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    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.

    • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      ·
      5 days ago

      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.

      • trailee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        5 days ago

        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.

        NYT article

        • skulblaka
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          5 days ago

          Protecting a chief executive full time cost roughly $250,000 a year

          So it costs less than one major life saving surgery then.

          • palordrolap@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            14
            ·
            5 days ago

            If assassins started going after the guards, those guards might want more danger money.

            For legal reasons, this is an observation not a suggestion.

            • rammer@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              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.

      • formergijoe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 days ago

        My hope is prospective school shooters see praise given to The Adjuster and change their MO so innocent children are spared.

  • roofuskit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    5 days ago

    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.

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      5 days ago

      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?

  • starman2112
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    5 days ago

    Imagine holding the title of “CEO of the healthcare company whose CEO got fucking iced last week”

    • AwkwardLookMonkeyPuppet@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      5 days ago

      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.

    • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      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.

      • Batadon@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        “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.

        • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          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 :-)

    • EvilZ@thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      5 days ago

      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%…

  • 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

    • Shard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      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.

    • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      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.

      • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        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.

  • xmunk
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    5 days ago

    Nah, money is money… but they’ll probably need to include a security detail in the package.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    There will always be people who overestimate the rewards and underestimate the risks of an undertaking.

  • MyTurtleSwimsUpsideDown@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    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.

  • kn0wmad1c@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    5 days ago

    Contrary to popular belief, CEOs aren’t necessary for a company to run, but they do maximize the profits while they’re there