On Sun, 23 Jun 1996, Alan Hannan wrote:
> I understand! I feel the same way. I forbid any of my response team to
> drive, for fear they'll be in an accident and not be able to
> respond!
I'm sure that the shareholder fallout from that part of the incident would
be much, much easier to handle than from a drug bust, however. If it were
a big enough incident, the difference could be in tens of cents/share,
depending on who your investors are (esp. with large right-wing
institutional investors), and what else is going on in the
world at the time.
There is also the possibility of not necessarily successful "due care"
suits from said shareholders, due to drug screening being a fairly
standard industry practice (due, it must be pointed out because of federal
mandates more than paranoid fears).
'course if you hire them dead, it's much easier, then they can't get into
trouble at all, and if the employement contracts are written correctly,
the shareholders can go after them instead :)
Paul.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul D. Robertson "My statements in this message are personal opinions
proberts @
clark .
net which may have no basis whatsoever in fact."
PSB#9280
References:
|
|
