logoalt Hacker News

Analemma_ • yesterday at 5:23 PM • 2 replies • view on HN

I mean it sounds like “board which does not actually have the legal ability to fire the CEO” is a fundamentally defective concept and shouldn’t be allowed to exist in the first place. But once it does and you are in that situation, I think you are obligated to make the best attempt you can at your nominal duties. I have no idea where you’re getting “malfeasance” from at this attempt.


Replies

tptacek • yesterday at 5:33 PM

Wordpress is a private company. This is a normal private-company structure.

I'm not suggesting the board actually did anything legally risky here. The standards for that in Delaware are high. But morally, it's much harder to defend, so long as they knew this is what the outcome would be --- which it seems like they kind of clearly did.

ragall • yesterday at 7:30 PM

The board does have the legal ability to fire the CEO, provided that it passes a very bar, such as being able to prove mental unfitness, etc... which wasn't the case here.

On the other hand, if you're arguing that a board should be able to fire the CEO without cause and have him barred for eternity, then you're arguing that majority shareholders shouldn't be allowed to serve as CEO - in a private company !! - which has been the basis of capitalism for ever. It would destroy the economy as we know it.

➕ show 1 reply