3 ms·
I don't see the distinction. What sbest for shareholders may well not be best for the employees of the company... but that's just how it is. Companies are run t
by Panzer04 3y ago
I don't see the distinction. What sbest for shareholders may well not be best for the employees of the company... but that's just how it is. Companies are run to benefit the capital that funded them, employees are just an expense.
- TedDoesntTalk 3y agoRead up on “fiduciary responsibility”. It has nothing to do with “employees of the company” or “to the benefit of the capital that funded them.” Fiduciary responsibility is every board member’s responsibility and is legally binding (documents are signed stating as such when one becomes a board member). There are probably law suits pending against board members because they broke this responsibility.
- JumpCrisscross 3y ago> Fiduciary responsibility is every board member’s responsibility and is legally binding Fiduciaries are entrusted by a third party. The third party, for corporate boards, is the shareholders. Boards aren't obligated to maximize profits; that's a myth. But they do have a fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders. It's their company.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]