Slashdot Mirror
Larry Ellison Rips HP Board a New One
theodp writes "No stranger himself to sexual harassment allegations, Oracle CEO Larry Ellison has denounced HP's directors for forcing the resignation of HP CEO Mark Hurd. 'The HP board just made the worst personnel decision since the idiots on the Apple board fired Steve Jobs many years ago,' Ellison wrote. For now, it seems that Rupert Murdoch is also standing by Hurd, who sits on News Corp's Board of Directors and its Corporate Governance Committee. Less likely to survive the scandal is Hurd's relationship with HP General Counsel Mike Holston, who accepted Hurd's signed separation agreement after leading an investigation into Hurd's actions, which Holston told the NY Times 'showed a profound lack of judgment.' Quite a change from just last year, when Hurd and Holston teamed up to get their daughters' elite prep school a state-of-the-art HP Data Center."
According to one of my old classmates who works at HP, they've either been keeping everything really quiet, or there is no evidence. He is betting on the latter. This may just be a case of slander/libel. It does not take much for a woman to accuse a man of a crime that he did not commit and get him into heaps of trouble for it.
Happened to me in the 90s and on a much smaller scale. I was accused of groping a woman, and when the cop arrived, she couldn't even keep her story straight. The cop tried to convince her how to best make up her story in front of my face. I was arrested. When we went to court, I provided microcassette audio and a transcript of what had happened. Cop was fired, and they tried the woman for perjury. Still made my life a nightmare.
Mark violated other company policies and chose the better path. There are many other people who can fill the shoes of the CEO at HP. Mark's departure strengthened the HP brand and that is very valuable.
From http://bit.ly/98DlLO
"The investigation discovered that Hurd had a "close personal relationship" with a marketing contractor that he did not disclose to the board, Mike Holston, HP's general counsel said. The consultant does not wish to be named, he said.
It also revealed that there were numerous instances where the contractor was paid or reimbursed without performing work. There were also inaccurate expense reports from Hurd meant to hide his personal relationship with the contractor, Holston said. That evidence pointed to "a profound lack of judgment" by Hurd, he said."
Basically, a bunch of overpaid CEOs are shocked and appalled that one of their own could be fired for cause, when they regularly dismiss thousands of employees without cause in order to appease the gods of Wall Street, thus maintaining the value of their stock options.
Really, is anyone surprised that this is Larry Ellison's reaction? (Regardless of the actual details of the allegations or truth of them.)
He's the kind of guy (the bit about him in the Washington Post article linked in TFA speaks to this somewhat, if you're not familiar) who thinks of executives as a kind of new aristocracy, able to do whatever they want and sleep with whichever female employees they want without limit or accountability.
People rag on the quirks tech CEOs like Ballmer and Jobs (and some of it's deserved and/or funny), but Ellison is a honest-to-god king of the douchebags.
Exactly - there's always a presumption of guilt for the man.
I'd hate to be a celebrity or some kind of professional athlete in this respect. You would think they'd all be afraid to talk with strangers in public or date women innocently, for fear of those people all looking for a payday any way they could get it.
Why is it okay for a CEO to steal $20k, but not okay for a peon to do the same?
For the same reason it is okay for a large failed business to recieve billions in taxpayer support under the Bush/Obama bailout plan but not okay for anyone with an underwater mortgage to walk away from it.
One law for the ultra-rich, one law for the rest. Welcome to America.
Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
All good points, but what about the 3rd case where neither are able to give consent? Does the lack of ability to give consent mean they also aren't capable of seeing consent can't be given by the other? When both were drunk, can a man counter-charge rape on the girl if the girl charges rape against him?
Philosophically, this is a more interesting scenario.
Bullshit. Rape has been a hanging/death penalty/imprisonment level offense in the west for a very long time now. The only difference is that before the Enlightenment it was viewed as more a crime against a husband or father than a crime against the woman herself. In the early 20th century in the U.S., a woman's accusation of rape could and would get you very much killed very quickly (if you were lucky, they wouldn't burn you alive or torture you first), especially if you were black or an outsider.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.