My Photo
Blog powered by Typepad

May 2005

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31        

« Note to Business Week: Bloggers Aren't Immune from Libel Law | Main | A Bubble Tale to Make You Angry »

March 08, 2005



The CEO's conduct amounted to a fireable offense under the company's code of conduct and the terms and conditions of his employment contract.

Whatever the totality of the reasons for the firing, THIS was the grounds that cost the company the least in payments upon the CEO's departure.

You have to be quite narrow minded and wearing blinders (if not downright PURITANICAL) to believe the Board didn't have a multitude of good business reasons for firing him, which didn't add up to "cause" and hence would have been much more costly.

June S.

I divorced my husband a few years ago because he had an affair with a woman he worked with. Now she works for him and they still have a relationship but are not married. Coincidentally, his department (he works for a well-known automotive company) is now under heavy investigation for misspent monies by supplier. As Joe I. compared the probability of ..personal ethics vs. business ethics......could there be a correlation?

Cranky Observer

> Had this not been the issue, I'd agree with you - there's no
> indication that the relationship affected performance at all,
> nor was she a direct report.

Well, everyone in the organization is a direct report to the CEO.

But if you read the more detailed reports found on the aerospace web sites, you will find that the Board stated it did not fire him for having an affair, nor even having an affair with an employee, but for "errors of judgement" found while investigating the affair. We don't know what those errors are, but presumably the Board thought they were firable.


beltonen logo

melodias para moviles nokia

Richard Silverstein

Dan: Don't you prune your trackback & comment spam, Dan?

I've just posted a new trackback to this post since someone tried to get to it with the old permalink you list in my March 9, 2005 trackback. You may delete that one & I hope display the new one which has the new permalink (linked also to this comment) for my new WordPress blog.

The comments to this entry are closed.