Hacker News Reader

Comment by pandaman | Hacker News Reader

If the CEO has to work for the shareholders benefit even outside the work then what about the rank-and-file? Should not all the Amazon employees be forced to shop only at amazon.com and WFM? Should not all Microsoft employees use only Microsoft software? Should all Google employees use Pixel phones and Netflix employees fired for subscribing to competitor streaming services or buying movie tickets?

I think your expectations of loyalty might be a bit exaggerated. A job is a job. Whether as a CEO or as a warehouse picker, it's not one's life.

View on HN

That you, Steve Ballmer? (He used to get very upset when Microsoft employees used iPhones, apparently).

But no, _employees_ of a company do not have the same fiduciary duties towards a company that its officers do.

Officers are employees too. At what level do you make distinction?

All officers are employees, but not all employees are officers. C-suite employees are all officers at least. I’m not sure how far below that it expands.

So it's just the name of the position? Somebody with a title of "chief nutritional officer" has to live for the employer and somebody doing the same job with the title of "associate project manager" doing the same job of ordering lunches can have a life?

I mean, nothing stops you from making it into job requirements in your company, but, apparently, this is not a requirement at Tesla...

> I mean, nothing stops you from making it into job requirements in your company

What, nothing stops you making director-style fiduciary responsibility a job requirement for normal employees in your company? I'd, er, check with a lawyer before you try that one.

You might want to check with a lawyer or, at least, with Google, what does "fiduciary responsibly" mean.

> C-suite employees are all officers at least.

I'm not sure that's always or even often true, despite the 'O' in the name. You're generally mostly talking about the CEO plus directors.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com