5 ms·

the best thing is how the "company" (or corporation) is to blame. so none of the actual individual humans who did this is at fault here. at worst they would be

the best thing is how the "company" (or corporation) is to blame. so none of the actual individual humans who did this is at fault here. at worst they would be fired and go to work somewhere else. which is compeletely fine. and with a fine like that, this is just a "cost of doing business" for the corporation. maybe one day terribly criminal corporations should be forcefully disbanded as punishment.

rectang 7y ago
The rot is not excised from the company -- the corrupt processes, institutions, habits and culture which led to the fraud remain in place. The corporation does not go to jail and have its life ruined. The corporation encapsulates and protects the worst behaviors of the individuals behind its shield, giving them the opportunity to continue profiting from it unless there is enough direct evidence to convict them as individuals.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
_red 7y ago
This is completely inaccurate. Corporate liability protection only extends to civil financial issues, any real property crimes (ie. fraud, murder, etc) 'pierces the corporate veil' and ultimately are filed against the people who performed it.
- gpm 7y ago
  According to other comments here the company plead guilty to (criminal) fraud. So no it is not completely inaccurate.
  - _red 7y ago
    See here: https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/corporate-liability-for-criminal-acts.html https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/corporate-lia... "When a corporation is criminally liable, the responsibility also falls on individuals. The board of directors, officers, and other high-ranking officials will almost always be criminally liable as well (just look at the Enron fiasco). A individual can be held criminally liable for another employee's illegal act under the accomplice liability theory."
  - joering2 7y ago
    I think you missed the point. The "company" can plead anything you want to because noone has ever put a "company" behind the bars. "Companies" are fictitious entities.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
TallGuyShort 7y ago
In this case, another commenter suggests it's because of the number of people employed. But I don't see why they can't punish everyone proved to be personally responsible (and perhaps the leadership wants to move people who are suspected but can't be proved deserving of criminal charges). And then at worst the assets (including the supply chain, infrastructure and all the employees required to operate it all) can continue under different ownership, but maybe mostly new leadership, or whatever. Surely some impact to the innocent still, but not nearly as much and justice is still done as much as can be proved. I don't think this problem is unique to private corporations, though. If government projects blow through their budget and achieve almost nothing, they're usually able to get more funding, because if you don't give them more funding, "who would build the roads"? If an agency keeps having corruption issues, there's often a scapegoat or a review board put in place until the PR shitstorm blows over, and then nothing really changes. Very rarely will the general consensus be, "maybe giving people this much power and authority on this issue just does more harm than good".
jve 7y ago
Cost of doing business? See this: > ...also agreed to plead guilty to one count of mail fraud and is barred from U.S. federal government contracting Norsk Hydro just got new CEO. Immediatelly struck by virus, shutting down operations. Now this. From the article wording, looks like thay admit things. Good for them. But I can guess CEO todo list for this and next year.
nwallin 7y ago
> so none of the actual individual humans who did this is at fault here. at worst they would be fired and go to work somewhere else. From the actual criminal complaint: > Dennis Balius, the SPI testing lab supervisor, led a scheme to alter tests within SPI’s computerized systems and provide false certifications with the altered results to customers. Balius also instructed employees to violate other testing standards, such as increasing the speed of the testing machines or cutting samples in a manner that did not meet the required specifications. Balius pleaded guilty in July 2017 and was sentenced to three years in prison and ordered to pay over $170,000 in restitution. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/aluminum-extrusion-manufacturer-agrees-pay-over-46-million-defrauding-customers-including https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/aluminum-extrusion-manufactur...

rectang 7y ago

The rot is not excised from the company -- the corrupt processes, institutions, habits and culture which led to the fraud remain in place. The corporation does not go to jail and have its life ruined. The corporation encapsulates and protects the worst behaviors of the individuals behind its shield, giving them the opportunity to continue profiting from it unless there is enough direct evidence to convict them as individuals.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

_red 7y ago

This is completely inaccurate. Corporate liability protection only extends to civil financial issues, any real property crimes (ie. fraud, murder, etc) 'pierces the corporate veil' and ultimately are filed against the people who performed it.

gpm 7y ago
According to other comments here the company plead guilty to (criminal) fraud. So no it is not completely inaccurate.
- _red 7y ago
  See here: https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/corporate-liability-for-criminal-acts.html https://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/corporate-lia... "When a corporation is criminally liable, the responsibility also falls on individuals. The board of directors, officers, and other high-ranking officials will almost always be criminally liable as well (just look at the Enron fiasco). A individual can be held criminally liable for another employee's illegal act under the accomplice liability theory."
- joering2 7y ago
  I think you missed the point. The "company" can plead anything you want to because noone has ever put a "company" behind the bars. "Companies" are fictitious entities.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

TallGuyShort 7y ago

In this case, another commenter suggests it's because of the number of people employed. But I don't see why they can't punish everyone proved to be personally responsible (and perhaps the leadership wants to move people who are suspected but can't be proved deserving of criminal charges). And then at worst the assets (including the supply chain, infrastructure and all the employees required to operate it all) can continue under different ownership, but maybe mostly new leadership, or whatever. Surely some impact to the innocent still, but not nearly as much and justice is still done as much as can be proved. I don't think this problem is unique to private corporations, though. If government projects blow through their budget and achieve almost nothing, they're usually able to get more funding, because if you don't give them more funding, "who would build the roads"? If an agency keeps having corruption issues, there's often a scapegoat or a review board put in place until the PR shitstorm blows over, and then nothing really changes. Very rarely will the general consensus be, "maybe giving people this much power and authority on this issue just does more harm than good".

jve 7y ago

Cost of doing business? See this: > ...also agreed to plead guilty to one count of mail fraud and is barred from U.S. federal government contracting Norsk Hydro just got new CEO. Immediatelly struck by virus, shutting down operations. Now this. From the article wording, looks like thay admit things. Good for them. But I can guess CEO todo list for this and next year.

nwallin 7y ago

> so none of the actual individual humans who did this is at fault here. at worst they would be fired and go to work somewhere else. From the actual criminal complaint: > Dennis Balius, the SPI testing lab supervisor, led a scheme to alter tests within SPI’s computerized systems and provide false certifications with the altered results to customers. Balius also instructed employees to violate other testing standards, such as increasing the speed of the testing machines or cutting samples in a manner that did not meet the required specifications. Balius pleaded guilty in July 2017 and was sentenced to three years in prison and ordered to pay over $170,000 in restitution. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/aluminum-extrusion-manufacturer-agrees-pay-over-46-million-defrauding-customers-including https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/aluminum-extrusion-manufactur...