4 ms·

Paying fine doesn't seem enough. Someone needs to go to jail.

ccleve 4y ago
Precisely. Nothing happens until the individuals responsible pay a penalty. If an exec knowingly, or through negligence, causes a person to be arrested, that person needs to pay up personally. If they did it to protect their own position, then jail time is appropriate. Falsely reporting a crime is a crime.
- bombcar 4y ago
  Qualified immunity makes some sort of sense for actual cops, perhaps, but makes absolutely ZERO sense for a corporation and its executives.
  - adql 4y ago
    Should be on the CEO's head unless they can prove it was someone's malicious action without their knowledge. At least that would partially exclude the ridiculous compensation
  - gnicholas 4y ago
    Just to be clear, corporations and executives do not get qualified immunity. They just get to pay with someone else's money (insurance, or shareholders) instead of their own. I don't know why judges don't insist on jail time for someone in these situations. It might not make sense for a mistake that happened once, but after they knew it was happening and didn't fix their systems, the behavior was knowingly reckless.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      They get an effective form of “qualified immunity” even if it’s not codified. Any individual doing what Hertz is doing would be facing prison time.
chickenpotpie 4y ago
I hate this ridiculously unfair double standard. If someone costs a company money, we ruin their life. If a company ruins someone's life, we charge the company money. If a cashier at a fast food restaurant takes $30 from the register, they go to jail. If a company steals millions from their workers paychecks, we slap them with a tiny fine.
- encryptluks2 4y ago
  Until we can get money out of politics nothing will change.
- avgDev 4y ago
  In my opinion, which may be unpopular, a CEO who earns many times more than a regular employee should ensure that there are policies in place that prevent a regular employee or the "system" ruining a customers life. They should be held individually responsible if it can be proved in court that they ignored the issues.
  - nickff 4y ago
    Should the president of the USA be held responsible for some department of the US government ruining a citizen's life (which happens all the time)? What about a state governor, should they be responsible for all the state's agencies? How about a mayor whose police force or other department acts poorly?
    - KerrAvon 4y ago
      I can't tell if this is sarcasm, so I will answer without sarcasm: Yes, they should be held responsible (for some value of "responsible"). It is ultimately their responsibility, which goes along with the power they wield. It's what they signed up for. And this doesn't absolve the people who directly caused the issue. You want leadership to focus on ensuring that their delegates are competent and not corrupt. There are some shades of gray here, of course. In the US, these leadership positions don't have absolute power. It isn't necessarily their *fault*. But it is absolutely their *responsibility*.
bena 4y ago
Dissolution of the company's charter. You fuck up someone's life bad enough and often enough, you just don't get to be a company anymore.
smsm42 4y ago
Maybe there's a way to trick them into renting a Hertz car...

Precisely. Nothing happens until the individuals responsible pay a penalty. If an exec knowingly, or through negligence, causes a person to be arrested, that person needs to pay up personally. If they did it to protect their own position, then jail time is appropriate. Falsely reporting a crime is a crime.

bombcar 4y ago
Qualified immunity makes some sort of sense for actual cops, perhaps, but makes absolutely ZERO sense for a corporation and its executives.
- adql 4y ago
  Should be on the CEO's head unless they can prove it was someone's malicious action without their knowledge. At least that would partially exclude the ridiculous compensation
- gnicholas 4y ago
  Just to be clear, corporations and executives do not get qualified immunity. They just get to pay with someone else's money (insurance, or shareholders) instead of their own. I don't know why judges don't insist on jail time for someone in these situations. It might not make sense for a mistake that happened once, but after they knew it was happening and didn't fix their systems, the behavior was knowingly reckless.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    They get an effective form of “qualified immunity” even if it’s not codified. Any individual doing what Hertz is doing would be facing prison time.

chickenpotpie 4y ago

I hate this ridiculously unfair double standard. If someone costs a company money, we ruin their life. If a company ruins someone's life, we charge the company money. If a cashier at a fast food restaurant takes $30 from the register, they go to jail. If a company steals millions from their workers paychecks, we slap them with a tiny fine.

encryptluks2 4y ago
Until we can get money out of politics nothing will change.
avgDev 4y ago
In my opinion, which may be unpopular, a CEO who earns many times more than a regular employee should ensure that there are policies in place that prevent a regular employee or the "system" ruining a customers life. They should be held individually responsible if it can be proved in court that they ignored the issues.
- nickff 4y ago
  Should the president of the USA be held responsible for some department of the US government ruining a citizen's life (which happens all the time)? What about a state governor, should they be responsible for all the state's agencies? How about a mayor whose police force or other department acts poorly?
  - KerrAvon 4y ago
    I can't tell if this is sarcasm, so I will answer without sarcasm: Yes, they should be held responsible (for some value of "responsible"). It is ultimately their responsibility, which goes along with the power they wield. It's what they signed up for. And this doesn't absolve the people who directly caused the issue. You want leadership to focus on ensuring that their delegates are competent and not corrupt. There are some shades of gray here, of course. In the US, these leadership positions don't have absolute power. It isn't necessarily their *fault*. But it is absolutely their *responsibility*.

bena 4y ago

Dissolution of the company's charter. You fuck up someone's life bad enough and often enough, you just don't get to be a company anymore.

smsm42 4y ago

Maybe there's a way to trick them into renting a Hertz car...