[Justsignedup]

The solution to like 90% of all problems: The CEO is legally responsible for every illegal action taken by the company. This is also true for all managers down to the department that caused the illegal action.

That's it. Nothing else. You'll see a massive amount of bad behavior from companies instantly stop. When your neck is on the line, you won't do it. Or you'll quit.

However given history, this will never occur. Unfortunately thats now how we think of commerce, and so companies can try to act as they please with socialized risk and all gain.

[bragr]

>The CEO is legally responsible for every illegal action taken by the company.

You think CEO compensation is out of control now? Think about what you'd have to pay someone to be the CEO of any moderately large corporation if that were the case.

You think your boss is up your ass now? Think about what they'll be like when they are strictly liable for anything you do.

I'm not against more executive responsibility, but you have to consider the externalities of your policies.

[Spivak]

I think there's an easier solution that would be less disruptive. Create a legal designation of "executive" and require that every company have at least one (ie the CEO). Anyone in that class bears legal responsibility for the actions of the people they manage. If you follow the standard hierarchy for CFO, CTO then decisions that require specialized knowledge fall on them instead (e.g. if your CFO is committing tax fraud and you didn't know and it's not reasonable that you as the CEO would be able to recognize it then it's only the CFO's problem). Then instead of criminal liability if you're found doing something illegal you are barred from holding any executive position.

I think this puts the incentives in the right place, being able to tell your CEO "no, I'm not willing to risk my career for that" I think would be a powerful self-regulating force and also provide cover from who can't afford to say no from being thrown under the bus. It's essentially professional licensure but reversed.

[bragr]

>If you follow the standard hierarchy

Are you mandating that as part of the law? Otherwise you've just incentivized "creative" non-standard hierarchies. Again, externalities

[marcosdumay]

> You think CEO compensation is out of control now?

The other side of the coin of CEO compensation not being related to real-world concern is that CEO compensation isn't related to any real-world concern.

There is no reason to think it will increase or decrease due to such a change.

[ilyt]

Ok then lighter version of it - pay it off their compensation (including stock and everything else, not just money), up to 5 years backward.

So if the fuckup is big enough they now owe 5 years of their pay. Should be motivating enough.

[Justsignedup]

I'm good with the fallout from that. Everything will adjust.

[tehwebguy]

There isn’t some bug that can be fixed that would suddenly make this work. DAs, states attorneys and attorneys general have all the power in the world to make life hell for any company doing bad things. They just don’t want to.

Think about that and consider the cascading consequences you’d face for years in most states if you let your driver’s license expire and get pulled over.

[GolfPopper]

Make the board liable as well, under both civil and criminal law.

[WorldMaker]

Include any substantial shareholders, too. Say >= 25% ownership or >= $1,000,000 valuation.

Then recurse that if that shareholder is also corporate. Don't let them just bankrupt empty shell companies, hold the parent companies responsible too.

[treecrypto]

Wouldn't this make it possible for a disgruntled employee to do something illegal, and falsely claim they did it on the company's instructions?

[masfuerte]

The situation we have now is companies setting targets that can only be met by breaking the law and then acting innocent when the employees do. I don't know how we fix this.