Re:Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't appl...
by mikestew on Tuesday November 20, 2018 @11:03AM
(#18494816)
Seems you & all the fellow downvoters've mistaken my statement of fact for a statement of moral obligation...
Nope, it's the calling of statements "facts" when they are quite arguable nothing of the sort. Moral obligation was not at issue here.
Re:Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't appl...
by Devils_Avocado on Tuesday November 20, 2018 @11:30AM
(#18495092)
Read a S&P500/FTSE100's Directors' contract, then get back to me...
Re:Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't appl...
by mikestew on Tuesday November 20, 2018 @11:39AM
(#18495177)
Assigning me homework rarely wins the argument, and it's an argument I have no interest in winning in the first place. I was merely pointing out the error of your analysis.
Re:Google says its sex misconduct policy change doesn't appl...
by pytester on Tuesday November 20, 2018 @11:10AM
(#18494904)
>Company agents are employed by shareholders to maximise returns on invested capital.
Myth: https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2014/01/myth-maximizing-shar...
Seems you & all the fellow downvoters've mistaken my statement of fact for a statement of moral obligation...
Company agents are employed by shareholders to maximise returns on invested capital. It's literally in their contracts: "you get paid X for improving metric Y by Z".