PsychoDad
18th Sep 2001, 06:32
Yesterday, following an investigation into the SAS / Maersk Air scandal the entire board with SAS resigned. In short the investigation found that the board members were not in the know of the cartel formed by SAS and Maersk Air. However, in their capacity as board memebers they should have more aware of what was happening in the company and was thus found "guilty" of negligence.
A question beckons here. If a) the board did know of the scandal, naturally they should resign at once when the scandal broke, but did not. If b) they did not know anything, but should have, they should have resigned at once too. But rather typically of the arrogance surronding much of the SAS hiracrecy in Stockholm, the board chose to hang on to their chairs for as long as possible, only resigning after a report publicly made them look like complete idiots.
And, in the end, who will be paying for their errors ? Yes indeed, the employees if or when furloughs are being published as a result of falling yields, load factors or whatever.
PS
A vice-president of SAS did indeed resign after much political pressure, but only to take up the CEO position with Austrian Airlines :eek:
A question beckons here. If a) the board did know of the scandal, naturally they should resign at once when the scandal broke, but did not. If b) they did not know anything, but should have, they should have resigned at once too. But rather typically of the arrogance surronding much of the SAS hiracrecy in Stockholm, the board chose to hang on to their chairs for as long as possible, only resigning after a report publicly made them look like complete idiots.
And, in the end, who will be paying for their errors ? Yes indeed, the employees if or when furloughs are being published as a result of falling yields, load factors or whatever.
PS
A vice-president of SAS did indeed resign after much political pressure, but only to take up the CEO position with Austrian Airlines :eek: