SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Mainstream Politics and Economics -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: i-node who wrote (50095)8/2/2013 7:24:51 PM
From: Broken_Clock  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 85487
 
"It is kind of useless to discuss this stuff with you because you're always going to favor unions and hate on the CEO, no matter what. Sometimes bankruptcy occurs because of no one thing; and in all cases, the idea is to find a way to make the business viable again. If that can't be worked out, a liquidation is probably in order."

evasive with super spin an obfuscation as always

You can't comment on the examples I gave in the linked article, but they must be the exception because the CEO's never do wrong.

I've never heard of a major CEO being held personally liable in a BK.
However, the history of mega corporations is rife with instances of CEO's taking the company into BK just to screw the workers.



To: i-node who wrote (50095)8/2/2013 7:34:10 PM
From: Broken_Clock  Respond to of 85487
 
dealbook.nytimes.com
Despite Worries, Serving at the Top Carries Little RiskBY STEVEN M. DAVIDOFF

Harry Campbell
They are paid millions, but some complain that it’s no longer worth it.

These men and women argue that, as corporate directors and officers, they have too much chance of liability for a company’s operations. Because of this, they claim, the risks of serving as a director or officer have become too great, and it will become harder to recruit and retain competent directors and officers. But the truth is that they have about the same chance of being held liable for their poor management of a public firm as they have of being struck by lightning.



To: i-node who wrote (50095)8/2/2013 7:37:23 PM
From: Broken_Clock  Respond to of 85487
 
vjel.org

I. INTRODUCTION

The law treats a corporation as though it were a person, offering it nearly all of the same rights as a human being. [2]Although a corporation has a legal existence, an important distinction between a corporation and a human being is that the corporation lacks a commensurate physical existence. [3] The effect of this lack of a physical existence is that a corporation becomes a shape-shifter, able to change and discard legal personas with an ease that no human, no matter how clever, can match.

Because corporations are creatures of the law, the only thing that can prevent them from changing legal personas is the law. Yet, the law increasingly has turned its back to this responsibility. When corporations are faced with the prospect of substantial liabilities, they are able to use the law to avoid their duties through clever legal maneuvering. This article explores how corporations are able to manipulate the law in order to avoid liability for their actions. Specifically, Section II of this article examines the actions of one corporation- W.R. Grace & Co. ("Grace")- in an effort to understand just how corporations are using the law to avoid liability. Section III examines corporate law in a broader context, discussing the aspects of the law which have developed to protect creditors and the reasons why current legal protections are insufficient. Section IV provides a range of solutions to the current laws with an eye towards protecting involuntary creditors and assigning responsibility. These solutions include, among others, changes to the current laws regarding limited liability, corporate powers, and the "piercing the corporate veil" doctrine. Finally, Section V concludes with a vision of the law which burdens corporations with responsibilities commensurate with their rights.